Podcasts about New Glenn

Have we finally found the source of ultra-high energy cosmic rays? Our first look at the Sun's south pole, New Glenn slips again, what kind of damage would rockets do to the ozone layer? And in Space Bites+, a pair of quasars that dominated Cosmic Noon.

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,America is embarking upon a New Space Age, with companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin ready to partner with NASA to take Americans to a new frontier — possibly as far as Mars. Lately, however, the world is witnessing uncertainty surrounding NASA leadership and even an odd feud between SpaceX boss Elon Musk and the White House. At a critical time for US space competition, let's hope key players can stick the landing.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I chat with James Meigs about the SLS rocket, NASA reforms, and the evolving private sector landscape.Meigs is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He is a contributing editor of City Journal and writer of the Tech Commentary column at Commentary magazine. He is also the former editor of Popular Mechanics.Meigs is the author of a recent report from the Manhattan Institute, U.S. Space Policy: The Next Frontier.In This Episode* So long, Jared Isaacman (1:29)* Public sector priorities (5:36)* Supporting the space ecosystem (11:52)* A new role for NASA (17:27)* American space leadership (21:17)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. So long, Jared Isaacman (1:29)The withdrawal of Jared Isaacman . . . has really been met with total dismay in the space community. Everyone felt like he was the right kind of change agent for the agency that desperately needs reform, but not destruction.Pethokoukis: We're going to talk a lot about your great space policy report, which you wrote before the withdrawal of President Trump's NASA nominee, Jared Isaacman.What do you think of that? Does that change your conclusions? Good move, bad move? Just sort of your general thoughts apart from the surprising nature of it.Meigs: I worked sort of on and off for about a year on this report for the Manhattan Institute about recommendations for space policy, and it just came out a couple of months ago and already it's a different world. So much has happened. The withdrawal of Jared Isaacman — or the yanking of his nomination — has really been met with total dismay in the space community. Everyone felt like he was the right kind of change agent for the agency that desperately needs reform, but not destruction.Now, it remains to be seen what happens in terms of his replacement, but it certainly pulled the rug out from under the idea that NASA could be reformed and yet stay on track for some ambitious goals. I'm trying to be cautiously optimistic that some of these things will happen, but my sense is that the White House is not particularly interested in space.Interestingly, Musk wasn't really that involved in his role of DOGE and stuff. He didn't spend that much time on NASA. He wasn't micromanaging NASA policy, and I don't think Isaacman would've been just a mouthpiece for Musk either. He showed a sense of independence. So it remains to be seen, but my recommendations . . . and I share this with a lot of people advocating reform, is that NASA more or less needs to get out of the rocket-building business, and the Space Launch System, this big overpriced rocket they've been working on for years — we may need to fly it two more times to get us back to the moon, but after that, that thing should be retired. If there's a way to retire it sooner, that would be great. At more than $4 billion a launch, it's simply not affordable, and NASA will not be an agency that can routinely send people into space if we're relying on that white elephant.To me what was exciting about Isaacman was his genuine enthusiasm about space. It seemed like he understood that NASA needed reform and changes to the budget, but that the result would be an agency that still does big things. Is there a fear that his replacement won't be interested in NASA creative destruction, just destruction?We don't know for sure, but the budget that's been proposed is pretty draconian, cutting NASA's funding by about a quarter and recommending particularly heavy cuts in the science missions, which would require cutting short some existing missions that are underway and not moving ahead with other planned missions.There is room for saving in some of these things. I advocate a more nimble approach to NASA's big science missions. Instead of sending one $4 billion rover to Mars every 20 years, once launch costs come down, how about we send ten little ones and if a couple of them don't make it, we could still be getting much more science done for the same price or less. So that's the kind of thing Isaacman was talking about, and that's the kind of thing that will be made possible as launch costs continue to fall, as you've written about, Jim. So it requires a new way of thinking at NASA. It requires a more entrepreneurial spirit and it remains to be seen whether another administrator can bring that along the way. We were hoping that Isaacman would.Public sector priorities (5:36)Congress has never deviated from focusing more on keeping these projects alive than on whether these projects achieve their goals.It seems to me that there are only two reasons, at this point, to be in favor of the SLS rocket. One: There's a political pork jobs aspect. And the other is that it's important to beat China to the moon, which the Artemis program is meant to do. Does that seem accurate?Pretty much, yeah. You can be for beating China the moon and still be against the SLS rocket, you kind of just grit your teeth and say, okay, we've got to fly it two more times because it would be hard to cobble together, in the timeframe available, a different approach — but not impossible. There are other heavy lift rockets. Once you can refuel in orbit and do other things, there's a lot of ways to get a heavy payload into orbit. When I started my report, it looked like SLS was the only game in town, but that's really not the case. There are other options.The Starship has to quit blowing up.I would've loved to have seen the last couple of Starship missions be a little more successful. That's unfortunate. The pork part of SLS just can't be underestimated. From the get go, going way back to when the Space Shuttle was retired in 2011, and even before to when after the Columbia Space Shuttle disaster — that's the second disaster — there was a really big effort to figure out how to replace the space shuttle, what would come next. There was a strong movement in Congress at that time to say, “Well, whatever you build, whatever you do, all the factories that are involved in working on the Space Shuttle, all of the huge workforces in NASA that work on the space shuttle, all of this manpower has to be retained.” And Congress talked a lot about keeping the experience, the expertise, the talent going.I can see some legitimacy to that argument, but if you looked at the world that way, then you would always focus on keeping the jobs of the past viable instead of the jobs of the future: What are we going to do with the blacksmiths who shoe horses? If we lose all this technological capability of shoeing horses . . . we'd better not bring in all these cars! That's an exaggeration, but as a result, first they aim to replace the Space Shuttle with a rocket called Constellation that would recycle some of the Shuttle components. And then eventually they realized that that was just too bloated, too expensive. That got canceled during the Obama administration replaced with the Space Launch System, which is supposed to be cheaper, more efficient, able to be built in a reasonable amount of time.It wound up being just as bloated and also technologically backward. They're still keeping technology from the Shuttle era. The solid fuel engines, which, as we recall from the first Shuttle disaster, were problematic, and the Shuttle main engine design as well. So when SLS flies with humans on board for the first time, supposedly next year, it'll be using technology that was designed before any of the astronauts were even born.In this day and age, that's kind of mind-blowing, and it will retain these enormous workforces in these plants that happen to be located in states with powerful lawmakers. So there's an incredible incentive to just keep it all going, not to let things change, not to let anything be retired, and to keep that money flowing to contractors, to workers and to individual states. Congress has never deviated from focusing more on keeping these projects alive than on whether these projects achieve their goals.I've seen a video of congressional hearings from 15 years ago, and the hostility toward the idea of there being a private-sector alternative to NASA, now it seems almost inexplicable seeing that even some of these people were Republicans from Texas.Seeing where we are now, it's just amazing because now that we have the private sector, we're seeing innovation, we're seeing the drop in launch costs, the reusability — just a completely different world than what existed 15, 16, 17 years ago.I don't think people really realize how revolutionary NASA's commercial programs were. They really sort of snuck them in quietly at first, starting as far back as 2005, a small program to help companies develop their own space transportation systems that could deliver cargo to the International Space Station.SpaceX was initially not necessarily considered a leader in that. It was a little startup company nobody took very seriously, but they wound up doing the best job. Then later they also led the race to be the first to deliver astronauts to the International Space Station, saved NASA billions of dollars, and helped launch this private-industry revolution in space that we're seeing today that's really exciting.It's easy to say, “Oh, NASA's just this old sclerotic bureaucracy,” and there's some truth to that, but NASA has always had a lot of innovative people, and a lot of the pressure of the push to move to this commercial approach where NASA essentially charters a rocket the way you would charter a fishing boat rather than trying to build and own its own equipment. That's the key distinction. You've got to give them credit for that and you also have to give SpaceX enormous credit for endless technological innovation that has brought down these prices.So I totally agree, it's inconceivable to think of trying to run NASA today without their commercial partners. Of course, we'd like to see more than just SpaceX in there. That's been a surprise to people. In a weird way, SpaceX's success is a problem because you want an ecosystem of competitors that NASA can choose from, not just one dominant supplier.Supporting the space ecosystem (11:52)There's a reason that the private space industry is booming in the US much more than elsewhere in the world. But I think they could do better and I'd like to see reform there.Other than the technical difficulty of the task, is there something government could be doing or not doing, perhaps on the regulatory side, to encourage a more sort of a bigger, more vibrant space ecosystem.In my Manhattan Institute report, I recommend some changes, particularly, the FAA needs to continue reforming its launch regulations. They're more restrictive and take longer than they should. I think they're making some progress. They recently authorized more launches of the experimental SpaceX Starship, but it shouldn't take months to go through the paperwork to authorize the launch of a new spacecraft.I think the US, we're currently better than most countries in terms of allowing private space. There's a reason that the private space industry is booming in the US much more than elsewhere in the world. But I think they could do better and I'd like to see reform there.I also think NASA needs to continue its efforts to work with a wide range of vendors in this commercial paradigm and accept that a lot of them might not pan out. We've seen a really neat NASA program to help a lot of different companies, but a lot of startups have been involved in trying to build and land small rovers on the moon. Well, a lot of them have crashed.Not an easy task apparently.No. When I used to be editor of Popular Mechanics magazine, one of the great things I got to do was hang out with Buzz Aldrin, and Buzz Aldrin talking about landing on the moon — now, looking back, you realize just how insanely risky that was. You see all these rovers designed today with all the modern technology failing to land a much smaller, lighter object safely on the moon, and you just think, “Wow, that was an incredible accomplishment.” And you have so much admiration for the guts of the guys who did it.As they always say, space is hard, and I think NASA working with commercial vendors to help them, give them some seed money, help them get started, pay them a set fee for the mission that you're asking for, but also build into your planning — just the way an entrepreneur would — that some product launches aren't going to work, some ideas are going to fail, sometimes you're going to have to start over. That's just part of the process, and if you're not spending ridiculous amounts of money, that's okay.When we talk about vendors, who are we talking about? When we talk about this ecosystem as it currently exists, what do these companies do besides SpaceX?The big one that everybody always mentions first, of course, is Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos's startup that's been around as long as SpaceX, but just moved much more slowly. Partly because when it first started up, it was almost as much of a think tank to explore different ideas about space and less of a scrappy startup trying to just make money by launching satellites for paying customers as soon as possible. That was Musk's model. But they've finally launched. They've launched a bunch of suborbital flights, you've seen where they carry various celebrities and stuff up to the edge of space for a few minutes and they come right back down. That's been a chance for them to test out their engines, which have seemed solid and reliable, but they've finally done one mission with their New Glenn rocket. Like SpaceX, it's a reusable rocket which can launch pretty heavy payloads. Once that gets proven and they've had a few more launches under their belt, should be an important part of this ecosystem.But you've got other companies, you've got Stoke Aerospace, you've got Firefly . . . You've got a few companies that are in the launch business, so they want to compete with SpaceX to launch mostly satellites for paying customers, also cargo for payloads for governments. And then you have a lot of other companies that are doing various kinds of space services and they're not necessarily going to try to be in the launch business per se. We don't need 40 different companies doing launches with different engines, different designs, different fuels, and stuff like that. Eight or 10 might be great, six might be great. We'll see how the market sorts out.But then if you look at the development of the auto industry, it started with probably hundreds of little small shops, hand-building cars, but by the mid-century it had settled down to a few big companies through consolidation. And instead of hundreds of engine designs that were given 1950, there were probably in the US, I don't know, 12 engine designs or something like that. Stuff got standardized — we'll see the same thing happen in space — but you also saw an enormous ecosystem of companies building batteries, tires, transmissions, parts, wipers, all sorts of little things and servicing in an industry to service the automobile. Now, rockets are a lot more centralized and high-tech, but you're going to see something like that in the space economy, and it's already happening.A new role for NASA (17:27)I think NASA should get more ambitious in deep-space flight, both crewed and uncrewed.What do you see NASA should be doing? We don't want them designing rockets anymore, so what should they do? What does that portfolio look like?That's an excellent question. I think that we are in this pivotal time when, because of the success of SpaceX, and hopefully soon other vendors, they can relieve themselves of that responsibility to build their own rockets. That gets out of a lot of the problems of Congress meddling to maximize pork flowing to their states and all of that kind of stuff. So that's a positive in itself.Perhaps a bug rather than a feature for Congress.Right, but it also means that technology will move much, much faster as private companies are innovating and competing with each other. That gives NASA an opportunity. What should they do with it? I think NASA should get more ambitious in deep-space flight, both crewed and uncrewed. Because it'll get much cheaper to get cargo into orbit to get payload up there, as I said, they can launch more science missions, and then when it comes to human missions, I like the overall plan of Artemis. The details were really pulled together during the first Trump administration, which had a really good space policy overall, which is to return to the moon, set up a permanent or long-term habitation on the moon. The way NASA sketches it out, not all the burden is carried by NASA.They envision — or did envision — a kind of ecosystem on the moon where you might have private vendors there providing services. You might have a company that mines ice and makes oxygen, and fuel, and water for the residents of these space stations. You might have somebody else building habitation that could be used by visiting scientists who are not NASA astronauts, but also used by NASA.There's all this possibility to combine what NASA does with the private sector, and what NASA should always do is be focused on the stuff the private sector can't yet do. That would be the deep-space probes. That would be sending astronauts on the most daring non-routine missions. As the private sector develops the ability to do some of those things, then NASA can move on to the next thing. That's one set of goals.Another set of goals is to do the research into technologies, things that are hard for the private sector to undertake. In particular, things like new propulsion for deep-space travel. There's a couple of different designs for nuclear rocket engines that I think are really promising, super efficient. Sadly, under the current budget cuts that are proposed at NASA, that's one of the programs that's being cut, and if you really want to do deep space travel routinely, ultimately, chemical fuels, they're not impossible, but they're not as feasible because you've got to get all that heavy — whatever your fuel is, methane or whatever it is — up into either into orbit or you've got to manufacture it on the moon or somewhere. The energy density of plutonium or uranium is just so much higher and it just allows you to do so much more with lighter weight. So I'd like to see them research those kinds of things that no individual private company could really afford to do at this point, and then when the technology is more mature, hand it off to the private sector.American space leadership (21:17)Exploration's never been totally safe, and if people want to take risks on behalf of a spirit of adventure and on behalf of humanity at large, I say we let them.If things go well —reforms, funding, lower launch costs — what does America's role in space look like in 10 to 15 years, and what's your concern if things go a darker route, like cutting nuclear engine research you were just talking about?I'll sketch out the bright scenario. This is very up your alley, Jim.Yeah, I viewed this as a good thing, so you tell me what it is.In 15 years I would love to see a small permanent colony at the south pole of the moon where you can harvest ice from the craters and maybe you'd have some habitation there, maybe even a little bit of space tourism starting up. People turn up their nose at space tourism, but it's a great way to help fund really important research. Remember the Golden Age of Exploration, James Cook and Darwin, those expeditions were self-funded. They were funded by rich people. If rich people want to go to space, I say I'm all for it.So a little base on the moon, important research going on, we're learning how to have people live on a foreign body, NASA is gathering tons of information and training for the next goal, which I think is even more important: I do agree we should get people to Mars. I don't think we should bypass the moon to get to Mars, I don't think that's feasible, that's what Elon Musk keeps suggesting. I think it's too soon for that. We want to learn about how people handle living off-planet for a long period of time closer to home — and how to mine ice and how to do all these things — closer to home, three or four days away, not months and months away. If something goes wrong, they'll be a lot more accessible.But I'd like to see, by then, some Mars missions and maybe an attempt to start the first long-term habitation of Mars. I don't think we're going to see that in 10 years, but I think that's a great goal, and I don't think it's a goal that taxpayers should be expected to fund 100 percent. I think by then we should see even more partnerships where the private companies that really want to do this — and I'm looking at Elon Musk because he's been talking about it for 20 years — they should shoulder a lot of the costs of that. If they see a benefit in that, they should also bear some of the costs. So that's the bright scenario.Along with that, all kinds of stuff going on in low-earth orbit: manufacturing drugs, seeing if you can harness solar energy, private space stations, better communications, and a robust science program exploring deep space with unmanned spacecraft. I'd like to see all of that. I think that could be done for a reasonable amount of money with the proper planning.The darker scenario is that we've just had too much chaos and indecision in NASA for years. We think of NASA as being this agency of great exploration, but they've done very little for 20 years . . . I take that back — NASA's uncrewed space program has had a lot of successes. It's done some great stuff. But when it comes to manned space flight, it's pretty much just been the International Space Station, and I think we've gotten most of the benefit out of that. They're planning to retire that in 2030. So then what happens? After we retired the Space Shuttle, space practically went into a very low-growth period. We haven't had a human being outside of low-earth orbit since Apollo, and that's embarrassing, frankly. We should be much more ambitious.I'm afraid we're entering a period where, without strong leadership and without a strong focus on really grand goals, then Congress will reassert its desire to use NASA as a piggy bank for their states and districts and aerospace manufacturers will build the stuff they're asked to build, but nothing will move very quickly. That's the worst-case scenario. We'll see, but right now, with all of the kind of disorder in Washington, I think we are in a period where we should be concerned.Can America still call itself the world's space leader if its role is mainly launching things into Earth orbit, with private companies running space stations for activities like drug testing or movie production if, meanwhile, China is building space stations and establishing a presence on the Moon? In that scenario, doesn't it seem like China is the world's leader in space?That's a real issue. China has a coherent nationalistic plan for space, and they are pursuing it, they're pouring a lot of resources into it, and they're making a lot of headway. As always, when China rolls out its new, cutting-edge technology, it usually looks a lot like something originally built in the US, and they're certainly following SpaceX's model as closely as they can in terms of reusable rockets right now.China wants to get to the moon. They see this as a space race the way the Soviets saw a space race. It's a battle for national prestige. One thing that worries me, is under the Artemis plan during the first Trump administration, there was also something called the Artemis Accords — it still exists — which is an international agreement among countries to A) join in where they can if they want, with various American initiatives. So we've got partners that we're planning to build different parts of the Artemis program, including a space station around the moon called Gateway, which actually isn't the greatest idea, but the European Space Agency and others were involved in helping build it.But also, all these countries, more than 50 countries have signed on to these aspirational goals of the Artemis Accords, which are: freedom of navigation, shared use of space, going for purposes of peaceful exploration, being transparent about what you're doing in space so that other countries can see it, avoiding generating more space junk, space debris, which is a huge problem with all the stuff we've got up there now, including a lot of old decrepit satellites and rocket bodies. So committing to not just leaving your upper-stage rocket bodies drifting around in space. A lot of different good goals, and the fact that all these countries wanted to join in on this shows America's preeminence. But if we back away, or become chaotic, or start disrespecting those allies who've signed on, they're going to look for another partner in space and China is going to roll out the red carpet for them.You get a phone call from SpaceX. They've made some great leap forwards. That Starship, it's ready to go to Mars. They're going to create a human habitation out there. They need a journalist. By the way, it's a one-way trip. Do you go?I don't go to Mars. I've got family here. That comes first for me. But I know some people want to do that, and I think that we should celebrate that. The space journalist Rand Simberg wrote a book years ago called Safe Is Not An Option — that we should not be too hung up on trying to make space exploration totally safe. Exploration's never been totally safe, and if people want to take risks on behalf of a spirit of adventure and on behalf of humanity at large, I say we let them. So maybe that first trip to Mars is a one-way trip, or at least a one-way for a couple of years until more flights become feasible and more back-and-forth return flights become something that can be done routinely. It doesn't really appeal to me, but it'll appeal to somebody, and I'm glad we have those kinds of people in our society.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* Trump economy shows surprising resilience despite tariff impacts - Wapo* Supply Chains Become New Battleground in the Global Trade War - WSJ* This A.I. Company Wants to Take Your Job - NYT* The Mirage of Geoeconomics - PS* Japan urged to use gloomier population forecasts after plunge in births - FT* Europe's nuclear fusion potential draws record investment round - FT▶ Business* How Disney's AI lawsuit could shift the future of entertainment - Wapo* Meta plans big bet on AI's secret ingredient: human brains - FT* Nvidia and Perplexity Team Up in European AI Push - WSJ* CRMArena-Pro: Holistic Assessment of LLM Agents Across Diverse Business Scenarios and Interactions - Arxiv* Fervo Snags $206 Million for Cape Station Geothermal - Heatmap* BYD launches cut-price EVs in Europe amid global price war - Semafor▶ Policy/Politics* The right refuses to take AI seriously - Vox* The Gig Economy Benefits Freelance Workers—Until Regulation Steps In - AEI* The war is on for Congress' AI law ban - The Verge* Disney and Universal Sue AI Company Midjourney for Copyright Infringement - Wired* Big Tech Is Finally Losing - NYT Opinion* American Science's Culture Has Contributed to the Grave Threat It Now Faces - Real Clear Science▶ AI/Digital* New Apple study challenges whether AI models truly “reason” through problems - Ars* The problem of AI chatbots telling people what they want to hear - FT* With the launch of o3-pro, let's talk about what AI “reasoning” actually does - Ars* ‘This is coming for everyone': A new kind of AI bot takes over the web - Wapo* Europe's AI computing shortage ‘will be resolved' soon, says Nvidia chief - FT* We're Not Ready for the AI Power Surge - Free Press▶ Biotech/Health* Pancreatic cancer vaccine eradicates trace of disease in early trials - New Atlas* World first: brain implant lets man speak with expression — and sing - Nature* The Alzheimer's drug pipeline is healthier than you might think - The Economist▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Big Tech Cares About Clean Energy Tax Credits — But Maybe Not Enough - Heatmap* Nvidia ‘Climate in a Bottle' Opens a View Into Earth's Future. What Will We Do With It? - WSJ* Oil's Lost Decade Is About to Be Repeated - Bberg Opinion* How the Pentagon Secretly Sparked America's Clean Energy Boom - The Debrief▶ Space/Transportation* Musk-Trump feud is a wake-up call on space - FT* Trump's 2026 budget cuts would force the world's most powerful solar telescope to close - Space▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* ‘Invasive Species'? Japan's Growing Pains on Immigration - Bberg Opinion* Incredible Testimonies - Aeon* How and When Was the Wheel Invented? - Real Clear Science▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Trump's "beautiful" bill wrecks our energy future - Slow Boring* DOGE Looked Broken Before the Trump-Musk Breakup - The Dispatch* Steve Teles on abundance: prehistory, present, and future - The Permanent Problem* Is Macroeconomics a Mature Science? - Conversable EconomistFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

NASA perdería 41 misiones científicas si se aprueba el presupuesto de Trump  La propuesta de Trump reduciría el presupuesto de la NASA un 25 %, eliminando misiones a Marte, Venus, la Tierra y el espacio profundo.     Por Félix Riaño @LocutorCo  La NASA está a punto de enfrentar el mayor recorte de presupuesto en su historia si se aprueba la propuesta del expresidente Donald Trump para el año fiscal 2026. La medida implicaría una reducción de 24.800 a 18.800 millones de dólares, lo que representa un recorte del 25 %. Eso dejaría a la agencia en su nivel más bajo de financiación desde hace décadas, ya ajustado a inflación. Se cancelarían más de 40 misiones científicas, incluyendo observatorios de asteroides, sondas a Marte y programas de monitoreo climático desde el espacio. ¿Estamos viendo el fin de una era en la exploración espacial estadounidense?  Trump también amenaza con romper contratos con SpaceX.  El 30 de mayo, la NASA recibió la versión detallada del presupuesto 2026 propuesto por Trump. Desde principios de mayo ya se conocía que se avecinaban tiempos difíciles. La propuesta apunta a recortar casi a la mitad el presupuesto para ciencias espaciales. Misiones emblemáticas como Mars Sample Return, MAVEN, DAVINCI y VERITAS quedarían sin financiación. Incluso los observatorios Voyager, que llevan más de 45 años enviando datos desde los bordes del sistema solar, perderían su presupuesto y quedarían flotando sin dirección. Esta no es solo una decisión económica: es una redefinición del propósito de la agencia, centrado exclusivamente en una carrera por llegar antes a Marte que China.  Los recortes afectarían colaboraciones internacionales clave. La misión ExoMars, liderada por la Agencia Espacial Europea y apoyada por la NASA, quedaría huérfana de apoyo estadounidense. También se eliminaría el respaldo a la estación lunar Gateway, poniendo en riesgo la participación europea en futuros viajes a la Luna. Las misiones de observación de la Tierra, fundamentales para monitorear el cambio climático, sufrirían una reducción del 53 %. Incluso se eliminarían misiones ya operativas, como el orbitador MAVEN o el observatorio de rayos X Chandra. El daño va más allá de la ciencia: se perderían miles de empleos entre personal civil y contratistas. Y lo más preocupante: una vez apagados, muchos de estos proyectos no podrán reiniciarse.  Algunos senadores republicanos ya están actuando para evitar estos recortes. Desde el comité de Comercio, Espacio y Transporte, liderado por Ted Cruz, se propone devolver miles de millones al presupuesto de la NASA, principalmente para proteger el programa Artemis. Esta defensa, sin embargo, prioriza los vuelos tripulados a la Luna, no las misiones científicas. Se busca prolongar la vida útil del cohete SLS, aunque la Casa Blanca prefiere reemplazarlo con vehículos más baratos como el Starship de SpaceX o el New Glenn de Blue Origin. Pero los desarrollos de esas empresas aún enfrentan fallos técnicos. La tensión entre Trump y Elon Musk también complica el panorama, con amenazas de romper contratos federales con SpaceX.  Las misiones que podrían cancelarse incluyen VERITAS y DAVINCI, ambas destinadas a estudiar Venus con gran detalle. OSIRIS-APEX, continuación del exitoso OSIRIS-REx, perdería la oportunidad de estudiar el asteroide Apophis en 2029, cuando pase a solo 32.000 kilómetros de la Tierra. También se recortarían fondos a LISA, un proyecto conjunto con Europa para detectar ondas gravitacionales en el espacio. Y el telescopio Chandra, lanzado en 1999, dejaría de recibir mantenimiento pese a seguir enviando datos valiosos. El presupuesto propuesto justifica estos recortes con el argumento de que los 7 mil millones anuales que NASA destina a ciencia son “insostenibles”. Pero la comunidad científica advierte que se trata de un golpe sin precedentes a décadas de avances y cooperación internacional.  Si se aprueba el presupuesto, la NASA dejaría de ser una agencia científica y pasaría a ser solo una agencia de vuelos tripulados. ¿Es ese el camino que queremos para la exploración espacial? Puedes escuchar más en el pódcast Flash Diario en Spotify. Bibliografía The Economist - 4 de junio de 2025Wall Street Journal - 5 de junio de 2025BBC News - 6 de junio de 2025Washington Post - 8 de junio de 2025Conviértete en un seguidor de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/flash-diario-de-el-siglo-21-es-hoy--5835407/support.

From the inaugural launch of Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket to plans for SpaceX's Starship to lift once off again, it's been a busy year for commercial space. Plus, one engineer is making a sweat shield to protect spacecraft when re-entering Earth's atmosphere.

The Kerbal Space Program is a fun game, but also an incredible tool for simulating a realistic space exploration program. According to a new paper, people playing the game can help develop innovative ideas that can turn into real missions, especially with the development and integration of reusable rockets like Starship and New Glenn.

Luego ya os explico qué ha pasado. Vamos a ponernos al día con lo que ha ocurrido estos meses.

Astronomy Daily | Space News: S04E79In this captivating episode of Astronomy Daily, host Anna takes you on an exhilarating journey through the latest developments in space exploration and astronomical research. From SpaceX's ongoing Starship challenges to the groundbreaking SphereX mission, this episode is filled with cosmic insights that will inspire your curiosity.Highlights:- SpaceX's Starship Investigations: Explore the latest updates on SpaceX's Starship program as the FAA closes one investigation while keeping another open. We delve into the implications of the recent test flight failures and the corrective actions SpaceX is implementing to move forward.- Blue Origin's New Glenn Progress: Learn about Blue Origin's completed investigation into the New Glenn rocket's failed landing attempt. Discover the corrective measures being taken as the company prepares for its next launch, aiming to enhance the rocket's reusability and reliability.- NASA's SphereX Mission Launch: Marvel at the first images captured by NASA's SphereX mission, a revolutionary observatory designed to map the entire celestial sky. We discuss its unique capabilities and the scientific questions it aims to address during its mission.- Historic Fram 2 Mission: Join us as we celebrate SpaceX's Fram 2 mission, which successfully sent the first humans to orbit Earth's poles. Discover the significance of this mission and the groundbreaking scientific experiments being conducted by its crew.- Astronauts Return from ISS: Catch up with NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams as they readjust to life on Earth after an extended stay aboard the International Space Station due to Boeing's Starliner issues. Hear their reflections on their unique experiences in space.For more cosmic updates, visit our website at astronomydaily.io. Join our community on social media by searching for #AstroDailyPod on Facebook, X, YouTubeMusic, TikTok, and our new Instagram account! Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.Thank you for tuning in. This is Anna signing off. Until next time, keep looking up and stay curious about the wonders of our universe.00:00 - Welcome to Astronomy Daily01:05 - SpaceX Starship investigation updates10:30 - Blue Origin's New Glenn investigation results17:00 - SphereX mission's first images22:15 - Overview of the Fram 2 mission27:30 - Astronauts' return from ISS✍️ Episode ReferencesSpaceX Starship Updates[NASA](https://www.nasa.gov)Blue Origin New Glenn Investigation[Blue Origin](https://www.blueorigin.com)SphereX Mission Details[NASA SphereX](https://www.nasa.gov/spherex)Fram 2 Mission Overview[SpaceX](https://www.spacex.com)Astronauts' ISS Mission[NASA Astronauts](https://www.nasa.gov/astronauts)Astronomy Daily[Astronomy Daily](http://www.astronomydaily.io/)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/astronomy-daily-space-news--5648921/support.

The space business landscape is changing. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin are moving at breakneck speed toward goals Americans have dreamed of since the 1960s. At the same time, a whole host of smaller startups are arriving on the scene, ready to tackle everything from asteroid mining to next-gen satellites to improved lunar missions.Today on Faster, Please — The Podcast, I'm talking with Matt Weinzierl about what research developments and market breakthroughs are allowing these companies to thrive.Weinzierl is the senior associate dean and chair of the MBA program at Harvard Business School. He is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. Weinzierl is the co-author of a new book with Brendan Rosseau, Space to Grow: Unlocking the Final Economic Frontier.In This Episode* Decentralizing space (1:54)* Blue Origin vs. SpaceX (4:50)* Lowering launch costs (9:24)* Expanding space entrepreneurship (14:42)* Space sector sustainability (20:06)* The role of Artemis (22:45)* Challenges to success (25:28)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Decentralizing space (1:54). . . we had this amazing success in the '60s with the Apollo mission . . but it was obviously a very government-led, centralized program and that got us in the mode of thinking that's how you did space.You're telling a story about space transitioning from government-led to market-driven, but I wonder if you could just explain that point because it's not a story about privatization, it's a story about decentralization, correct?It really is, I think the most important thing for listeners to grab onto. In fact, I teach a course at Harvard Business School on this topic, and I've been teaching it now for a few years, and I say to my students, “What's the reason we're here? Why are we talking about space at HBS?” and it's precisely about what you just asked.So maybe the catchiest way to phrase this for folks, there was one of the early folks at SpaceX, Jim Cantrell, he was one of the earliest employees. He has this amazing quote from the early 2000s where he says, “The Great American Space Enterprise, which defeated Communism in defense of Capitalism, was and is operating on a Soviet economic model.” And he was basically speaking to the fact that we had this amazing success in the '60s with the Apollo mission and going to the moon and it truly was an amazing achievement, but it was obviously a very government-led, centralized program and that got us in the mode of thinking that's how you did space. And so for the next 50 years, basically we did space in that way run from the center, not really using market forces.What changed in various ways was that in the early 2000s we decided that model had kind of run its course and the weaknesses were too big and so it was time to bring market forces in. And that doesn't mean that we were getting rid of the government role in space. Just like you said, the government will always play a vital role in space for various reasons, national security among them, but it is decentralizing it in a way to bring the power of the market to bear.Maybe the low point — and that low point, that crisis, maybe created an opportunity — was the end of the Space Shuttle program. Was that an important inflection point?It's definitely one that I think most people in the sector look to as being . . . there's the expression “never waste a crisis,” and I think that that's essentially what happened. The Shuttle was an amazing engineering achievement, nobody really doubts that, and what NASA was trying to do with it and with their contractors was incredibly hard. So it's easy to kind of get too negative on that era, but it is also true that the Shuttle never really performed the way people hoped, it never flew as often, it was much more costly, and then in 2003 there was the second Shuttle tragedy.When that happened, I think everybody felt like, "This just isn't the future." So we need something else, and the Shuttle program was put on a cancellation path by the end of that decade. That really did force this reckoning with the fact that the American space sector, which had put men on the moon and brought them back safely in 1969, launching all sorts of dreams about space colonies and hotels, now, 40 years later, it was going to be unable to even put a person into orbit on its own rockets. We were going to be renting rockets from the Russians. That was really a moment of soul searching, I guess is one way you think about it in the sector.Blue Origin vs. SpaceX (4:50)I guess the big lesson . . . is that competition really does matter in space just like in any other business.I think naturally we would lead into talking about SpaceX, which we certainly will do, but the main competitor, Blue Origin, the Jeff Bezos company, which seems to be moving forward, but it's definitely seemed to have adopted a very different kind of strategy. It seems to me different than the SpaceX strategy, which really is kind of a “move fast, break things, build them back up and try to launch again” while Blue Origin is far more methodical. Am I right in that, is that eventually going to work?Blue Origin is a fascinating company. In fact, we actually opened the book — the book is a series, basically, of stories that we tell about companies, and people, and government programs, sprinkled in with some economics because we can't resist. We're trying to structure it for folks, but we start with the story of Blue Origin because it really is fascinating. It illustrates some really fundamental aspects of the sector these days.To your specific question, we can talk more about Blue in many of its aspects. The motto of Blue from its beginning has been this Latin phrase, gradatim ferociter or, “step-by-step, ferociously,” and Bezos in the earliest days, they even have a tortoise on their company shield, so to speak, to signal this tortoise and the hair metaphor or fable. From the earliest days the idea was, “Look, we're going to just methodically work our way up to these grand visions of building infrastructure for space,” eventually in the service of having, as they always said, millions of people living and working in space.Now there's various ways to interpret the intervening 20 years that we've had, or 25 now since they were founded. One interpretation says, well, that's a nice story, but in fact they made some decisions that caused them to move more slowly than even they would've wanted to. So they didn't continue working as closely with NASA as, say, for instance SpaceX did. They relied really almost exclusively on funding from Bezos himself issuing a lot of other contracts they could have gotten, and that sort of reduced the amount of external discipline and market competition that they were facing. And then they made some other steps along the way, and so now they're trying to reignite and move faster, and they did launch New Glenn, their orbital rocket, recently. So they're back in the game and they're coming back. That's one story.Another story is, well yes, they've made decisions that at the time didn't seem to move as fast as they wanted, but they made those decisions intentionally. This is a strategy we will see pay off pretty well in the long run. I think that the jury is very much still out, but I guess the big lesson for your listeners and for me and hopefully for others in the sector, is that competition really does matter in space just like in any other business. To the extent that Blue didn't move as fast because they didn't face as much competition, that's an interesting lesson for the private sector. And to the extent that now they're in the game nipping at the heels of SpaceX, that's good for everybody, even for SpaceX, I think, to have them in the game.Do you think they're nipping at the heels?Well, yeah, I was just thinking as I said that, that might have been a little optimistic. It really does depend how you look at it. SpaceX is remarkably dominant in the commercial space sector, there's no question there. They launch 100 times a year plus and they are . . . the latest statistic I have in 2023, they launched more than 80 percent of all the mass launched off the surface of Earth, so they run more than half the satellites that are operational in space. They are incredibly dominant such that concerns about monopoly are quite present in the sector these days. We can talk about that.I think “nipping at the heels” might be a little generous, although there are areas in which SpaceX still does have real competition. The national security launch sector, ULA (United Launch Alliance) is still the majority launcher of national security missions and Blue is looking to also get into the national security launch market. With Amazon's satellite constellation, Kuiper, starting to come into the launch cadence over the next couple of years, they will have demand for lots of launch outside of SpaceX and that will start to increase the frequency with which Blue Origin and ULA also launch. So I think there is reason to believe that people in the sector will have more options, even for the heavy-lift launch vehicles.Lowering launch costs (9:24)[SpaceX] brought the cost of getting a kilogram of mass into orbit down by 90 percent in less than, really 10 or 15 years, which had been a stagnant number for going on four or five decades.People in Silicon Valley like talking about disruption and disruptors. It's hard to think of a company that is more deserving, or A CEO more deserving than Elon Musk and SpaceX. Tell me how disruptive that company has been to how we think about space and the economic potential of space.We open our chapter in the book on SpaceX by saying we believe it'll go down as one of the most important companies in the history of humanity, and I really do believe that. I don't think you have to be a space enthusiast, necessarily, to believe it. The simplest way to summarize that is that they brought the cost of getting a kilogram of mass into orbit down by 90 percent in less than, really 10 or 15 years, which had been a stagnant number for going on four or five decades. It had hovered around — depending on the data point you look at — around $30,000 a kilogram to low earth orbit, and once SpaceX got Falcon 9 flying, it was down to $3,000. That's just an amazing reduction.What's also amazing about it is they didn't stop there. As soon as they had that, they decided that one of the ways to make the business model work was to reinvent satellite internet. So in a sector that had just over a decade ago only 1000 operational satellites up in space, now we have 10,000, 6,000 plus of which are SpaceX's Starlink, just an incredibly fast-growing transformational technology in orbit.And then they went on to disrupt their own disruption by creating a rocket called Starship, which is just absolutely massive in a way that's hard to even imagine, and that, if it fulfills the promise that I think everyone hopes it will, will bring launch costs down, if you can believe it, by another 90 percent, so a total of 99 percent down to, say, $300 a kilogram. Now you may not have to pass those cost savings on to the customers because they don't have a lot of competition, but it's just amazingWhat's possible with those launch costs in that vicinity? Sometimes, when I try to describe it, I'm like, well, imagine all your 1960s space dreams and what was the missing ingredient? The missing ingredient was the economics and those launch costs. Now plug in those launch costs and lots of crazy things that seem science-fictional may become science-factual. Maybe give me just a sense of what's possible.Well first tell me, Jim, which of the '60s space dreams are you most excited about?It's hard for me, it's like which of my seven kids do I love more? I love the idea of people living in space, of there being industry in space. I like the idea of there being space-based solar power, lunar mining, asteroid mining, the whole kit and caboodle.You've gone through the list. I think we're all excited about those things. And just in case it's not obvious to your listeners, the reason I think you asked that question is that, of course, the launch cost is the gateway to doing anything in space. That's why everyone in the industry makes such a big deal out of it. Once you have that, it seems like the possibilities for business cases really do expand.Now, of course, we have to be careful. It's easy to get overhyped. It's still very expensive to do all the things you just mentioned in space, even if you can get there cheaply. Once you put humans in the mix, humans are very hard to keep alive in space. Space is a very dangerous place for lots of reasons. Even when there aren't humans in space, operating in space, even autonomously, is obviously quite hard, whether it's asteroid mining or other things. It's not as though, all of a sudden, all of our biggest dreams are immediately going to be realized. I do think that part of what's so exciting, part of the reason we wrote the book, is that there is a new renaissance of enthusiasm of startups building a bit on the SpaceX model of having a big dream, being really cost-conscious as you build it, moving fast and experimenting and iterating, who are going after some of these dreams you mentioned..So whether it's an asteroid mining company — actually, in my course later this week, we're having Matt Gialich, who's the CEO of AstroForge, and they're trying to reboot the asteroid mining industry. He's coming in to talk to our students. Or whether it's lunar mining, we have Rob Meyerson who ran Blue Origin for more than a decade, now he's started up a company that's going to mine Helium 3 on the moon; or whether you're talking about commercial space stations, which could eventually house tourists, manufacturing, R&D, a whole new push to bring the cost savings from the launch sector into the destinations sector, which we really haven't had.We've had the International Space Station for 20 plus years, but it wasn't really designed for commercial activity from the start and costs are pretty high. So there is this amazing flowering, and we'll see. I guess I would say that, in the short run, if you're trying to build a business in space, it's still mostly about satellites. It's still mostly about data to and from space. But as we look out further, we all hope that those bigger dreams are becoming more of a reality.Expanding space entrepreneurship (14:42)The laws of supply and demand do not depend on gravity.To me, it is such an exciting story and the story of these companies, they're just great stories to me. They're still, I think, pretty unknown. SpaceX, if you read the books that have been published, very harrowing, the whole thing could have collapsed quite easily. Still today, when the media covers — I think they're finally getting better —that anytime there'd be a SpaceX rocket blow up, they're like, “Oh, that's it! Musk doesn't know what he's doing!” But actually, that's the business, is to iterate, launch again, if it blows up, figure out what went wrong, use the data, fix it, try again. It's taken a long time.To the extent people or the media think about it, maybe 90 percent of the thought is about SpaceX, a little bit about Blue Origin, but, as you mentioned, there is this, no pun intended, constellation of other companies which have grown up, which have somewhat been enabled by the launch costs. Which one? Give me one of those that you think people should know about.There's so many actually, very much to your point. We wrote the book partly to give folks inside the industry a view they might not have had, which is, I'm an economist. We thought there was room to just show people how an economist thinks through this amazing change that's happening.Economics is not earthbound! It extends above the surface of the planet!The laws of supply and demand do not depend on gravity. We've learned that. But we also wrote the book for a couple other groups of people. One, people who are kind of on the margins of space, so their business isn't necessarily involved in space, but once they know all the activity that's happening, including the companies you're hinting at there, they might think, “Wait a minute, maybe my business, or I personally, could actually use some of the new capabilities in space to drive my mission forward to have an impact through my organization or myself.” And then of course the broader population of people who are just excited and want to learn more about what's going on and read some great stories.But I'll give you two companies, maybe three because I can't help myself. One is Firefly, which just landed successfully on the moon . . . 24 hours ago maybe? What a great story. It's now the second lander that's successfully landed, this one fully successfully after Intuitive Machines was a little bit tipped over, but that's a great example of how this model that includes more of a role for the commercial sector succeeds not all the time — the first lunar lander in the program that was supporting these didn't quite succeed — but try, try again. That's the beauty of markets, they find a way often and you can't exactly predict how they're going to work out. But that was a huge success story and so I'm very excited about what that means for our activity on the moon.Another really fascinating company is called K2. A lot of your listeners who follow space will have heard of it. It's two brothers who basically realized that, with the drop in launch costs being promised by Starship, the premium on building lightweight small satellites is kind of going away. We can go back to building big satellites again and maybe we don't need to always make the sacrifices that engineers have had to make to bring the mass down. So they're building much bigger satellites and that can potentially really increase the capabilities even still at low cost. So that's really exciting.Finally, I'll just mention Varda, which is a really fun and exciting startup that is doing manufacturing in automated capsules right now of pharmaceutical ingredients. What I love about them, very much to your point about these startups that are just flowering because of lower launch costs, they're not positioning themselves really as a space company. They're positioning themselves as a manufacturing company that happens to use microgravity to do it cheaper. So you don't have to be a space enthusiast to want your supply chain to be cheaper and they're part of that.Do you feel like we have a better idea of why there should be commercial space stations, or again, is that still in the entrepreneurial process of figuring it out? Once they're up there, business cases will emerge?I was just having a conversation about that this morning, actually, with some folks in the sector because there is a wide range of views about that. It is, as you were sort of implying, a bit of a chicken-and-the-egg problem, it's hard to know until you have a space station what you might do with it, what business cases might result. On the other hand, it's hard to invest in a space station if you don't know what the business case is for doing it. So it is a bit tricky.I tend to actually be slightly on the optimistic end of the spectrum, perhaps just because, as an economist, I think you are trained to know that the market can't be predicted and that at some level that is the beauty of the market. If we drive down costs, there's a ton of smart entrepreneurs out there who I think will be looking very hard to find value that they can create for people, and I'm still optimistic we'll be surprised.If I had to make the other side of the case, I would say that we've been dreaming about using microgravity for many decades, the ISS has been trying, and there hasn't been a killer app quite found yet. So it is very true that there are reasons to be skeptical despite my optimism.Space sector sustainability (20:06)Space does face a sort of structural problem with investing. The venture capital industry is not really built for the time horizons and the level of fundamental uncertainty that we're talking about with space.It's also a sector that's gone through a lot of booms and busts. That certainly has been the case with the idea of asteroid mining among other things. What do you see as the sustainability? I sort of remember Musk talking about there was this kind of “open window to space,” and I don't know what he thought opened that window, maybe it was low interest rates? What is the sustainability of the financial case for this entire sector going forward?It is true that the low interest rate environment of the early 2020s was really supportive to space in a way that. Again, opinions vary on whether it was so hot that it ended up actually hurting the sector by creating too much hype, and then some people lost their shirts, and so there was some bad taste in the mouth there. On the other hand, it got a lot of cash to a lot of companies that are trying to make really hard things happen. Space does face a sort of structural problem with investing. The venture capital industry is not really built for the time horizons and the level of fundamental uncertainty that we're talking about with space. We don't really know what the market is yet. We don't really know how long it's going to take to develop. So that's I think why you see some of these more exotic financing models in space, whether it's the billionaires or the so-called SPAC boom of the early 2020s, which was an alternative way for some space companies to go public and raise a big pile of cash. So I think people are trying to solve for how to get over what might be an uncomfortably long time before the kind of sustainable model that you're talking about is realized.Now, skeptics will say, “Well, maybe that's just because there is no sustainable model. We're hoping and hoping, but it's going to take 500 years.” I'm a little more optimistic than that for reasons we've talked about, but I think one part we haven't really mentioned, or at least not gone into that yet, which is reassuring to investors that I talked to and increasingly maybe an important piece of the puzzle, is the demand from the public sector, which remains quite robust, especially from the national security side. A lot of startups these days, even when capital markets are a bit tighter, they can rely on some relatively stable financing from the national security side, and I think that will always be there in space. There will always be a demand for robust, innovative technologies and capabilities in space that will help sustain the sector even through tough times.The role of Artemis (22:45)Artemis is a really good example of the US space enterprise, broadly speaking, trying to find its way into this new era, given all the political and other constraints that are, of course, going to impinge on a giant government program. I can imagine a scenario where most of this book is about NASA, and Artemis, and what comes after Artemis, and you devote one chapter to the weird kind of private-sector startups, but actually it's just the opposite. The story here is about what's going on with the private sector working with NASA and Artemis seems like this weird kind of throwback to old Apollo-style way of doing things. Is Artemis an important technology for the future of space or is it really the last gasp of an old model?It's a very timely question because obviously with all the change going on in Washington and especially with Elon's role —Certainly you always hear rumors that they'll cancel it. I don't know if that's going to happen, but I certainly see speculations pop-up in the Wall Street Journal or the Financial Times from time to time.Exactly, and you probably see debates in Congress where you see some Congress-people resistant to canceling some contracts and debates about the space launch system, the SLS rocket, which I think nobody denies is sort of an older model of how we're going to get to space. On the other hand, it's an incredibly powerful rocket that can actually get us to the moon right now.There's a lot of debate going on right now. The way I think about it is that Artemis is a really good example of the US space enterprise, broadly speaking, trying to find its way into this new era, given all the political and other constraints that are, of course, going to impinge on a giant government program. It's a mix of the old and the new. It's got some pieces like SLS or Gateway, which is a sort of station orbiting the moon to provide a platform for various activities that feel very much like the model from the 1980s: Shuttle and International Space Station.Then it's got pieces that feel very much like the more modern commercial space era with the commercial lunar payload services clips contracts that we were briefly talking about before, and with some of the other pieces that are — whether it's the lander that's also using commercial contracts, whether it's those pieces that are trying to bring in the new. How will it all shake out? My guess is that we are moving, I think inexorably, towards the model that really does tap into the best of the private sector, as well as of the public, and so I think we'll move gradually towards a more commercial approach, even to achieving the sort of public goods missions on the moon — but it'll take a little bit of time because people are naturally risk averse.Challenges to success (25:28)We're going to have some setbacks, some things aren't going to go well with this new model. There's going to be, I'm sure, some calls for pulling back on the commercial side of things, and I think that would be a real lost opportunity. . .How do we not screw this up? How do we not end up undermining this momentum? If you want to tell me what we can do, that's great, but I'm also worried about us making a mistake?There are threats to our ability to do this successfully. I'll just name two which are top of mind. One is space debris. That comes up in virtually every conversation I have. Especially with the increasing number of satellites, increasing number of actors in space, you do have to worry that we might lose control of that environment. Again, I am on the relatively more optimistic end of the spectrum for reasons we explain in the book, and I think the bottom line there is: The stakes are pretty high for everybody who's operating up there to not screw that part up, so I hope we'll get past it, but some people are quite worried.The second, honestly, is national security. Space has always been a beacon, we hope, of transcending our geopolitical rivalries, not just extending them up there. We're in a difficult time, so I think there is some risk that space will not remain as peaceful as it has — and that could very much short-circuit the kind of growth that we're talking about. Sadly, that would be very ironic because the economic opportunities that we have up there to create benefit for everybody on Earth and are part of what hopefully would bring people together across borders up in space. It's one of those places where we can cooperate for the common good.How could we screw this up? I think it's not always going to be smooth sailing. We're going to have some setbacks, some things aren't going to go well with this new model. There's going to be, I'm sure, some calls for pulling back on the commercial side of things, and I think that would be a real lost opportunity. I hope that we can push our way through, even though it might be a little less clearly charted.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* The Case Against Tariffs Is Getting Stronger - Bberg Opinion* NYC's Congestion Pricing Is Good for the US - Bberg Opinion* Musk and DOGE Are Doing It Wrong - Project Syndicate▶ Business* With GPT-4.5, OpenAI Trips Over Its Own AGI Ambitions - Wired* Google is adding more AI Overviews and a new ‘AI Mode' to Search - Verge* Home Depot Turns to AI to Answer Online Shoppers' Questions - Bberg▶ Policy/Politics* Trump Set to Meet With Technology Leaders Early Next Week - Bberg* EU Lawmakers Push Back on U.S. Criticism of Tech Antitrust Regulation - WSJ* China aims to recruit top US scientists as Trump tries to kill the CHIPS Act - Ars* Rebuilding the Transatlantic Tech Alliance: Why Innovation, Not Regulation, Should Guide the Way - AEI* A New Way of Thinking About the N.I.H. - NYT Opinion▶ AI/Digital* You knew it was coming: Google begins testing AI-only search results - Ars* Are Large Language Models Ready for Business Integration? A Study on Generative AI Adoption - Arxiv* Turing Award Goes to 2 Pioneers of Artificial Intelligence - NYT* ChatGPT for President! Presupposed content in politicians versus GPT-generated texts - Arxiv* Chat-GPT4 Does Enhance Creativity. But Human Ego Can Hamper its Potential - SSRN▶ Biotech/Health* Alzheimer's could be treated by enhancing the brain's own immune cells - NA* Will NIH Cuts Boost Public Health—or Destroy It? - Free Press▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* Many Chinese See a Cultural Revolution in America - NYT▶ Substacks/Newsletters* On the US AI Safety Institute - Hyperdimensional* What is Vibe Coding? - AI Supremacy* In defense of Gemini - Strange Loop Canon* Economic Uncertainty in the US Economy - Conversable EconomistFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Hoy repasamos la actualidad tecnológica y científica en un momento muy convulso de la política internacional. Hablaremos de la guerra de la inteligencia artificial, de peleas de ultraricos, y de competencia en el sector espacial. Y como no, hablaremos del fin del mundo y de un asteroide que se acerca peligrosamente a la Tierra. También tendremos tiempo para hablar de cómo la sociedad está dejándose llevar por sus instintos primarios, y de cómo no pensamos suficiente tiempo en la información que consumimos. Noticias 2024 YR4, el asteroide que podría chocar con la Tierra en 2032  OpenAI and SoftBank are starting a $500 billion AI data center company  EU mobilizes $200 billion in AI race against US and China  Elon Musk just offered to buy OpenAI for $97.4 billion  Sam Altman dismisses Elon Musk's bid to buy OpenAI in letter to staff  Primer lanzamiento del cohete New Glenn de Blue Origin: SpaceX ya tiene competencia  Música del episodio Introducción: Safe and Warm in Hunter's Arms - Roller Genoa Cierre: Inspiring Course Of Life - Alex Che Puedes encontrarnos en Mastodon y apoyarnos escuchando nuestro podcast en Podimo o haciéndote fan en iVoox. Si quiere

Astronomy Daily - The Podcast: S04E39In this episode of Astronomy Daily, host Anna takes you on an exhilarating exploration of the latest happenings in the world of space exploration. From Blue Origin's ambitious new rocket plans to the thrilling journey of ispace's Resilience lunar lander, this episode is packed with captivating stories that will fuel your cosmic curiosity.Highlights:- Blue Origin's New Glenn Rocket Update: Discover the latest developments regarding Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket as the company prepares for its second launch. Learn about the challenges faced during the first flight and the significant restructuring within the company aimed at improving efficiency and focus.- Ispace's Resilience Lunar Lander: Follow the exciting progress of ispace's Resilience lander as it approaches a historic moon landing attempt. Understand the innovative fuel-saving trajectory it is taking and the scientific payloads it carries, including the Micro Rover.- James Webb Space Telescope's Role in Asteroid Tracking: Delve into how the James Webb Space Telescope is set to play a crucial role in assessing the potential impact risk of asteroid 2024 YR4, which has raised concerns among astronomers worldwide.- SpaceX's Starship Preparations: Get the latest on SpaceX's preparations for their eighth Starship test flight, including successful engine tests and modifications that are being made in anticipation of the upcoming launch.- Remarkable Spacecraft Resurrections: Be inspired by incredible stories of spacecraft that have defied the odds and returned from the brink of oblivion, showcasing the resilience of technology and the spirit of exploration.For more cosmic updates, visit our website at astronomydaily.io. Join our community on social media by searching for #AstroDailyPod on Facebook, X, YouTubeMusic, and TikTok. Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.Thank you for tuning in. This is Anna signing off. Until next time, keep looking up and stay curious about the wonders of our universe.00:00 - Welcome back to Astronomy Daily01:02 - Blue Origin's New Glenn updates05:30 - Ispace's Resilience lunar lander progress10:15 - James Webb Telescope and asteroid 2024 YR414:00 - SpaceX's Starship preparations18:20 - Stories of spacecraft resurrections25:00 - Conclusion and upcoming content✍️ Episode ReferencesBlue Origin's New Glenn Rocket[Blue Origin](https://www.blueorigin.com)Ispace's Resilience Lunar Lander[Ispace](https://www.ispace-inc.com)James Webb Space Telescope Insights[James Webb](https://www.nasa.gov/webb)SpaceX's Starship Updates[SpaceX](https://www.spacex.com)Spacecraft Resurrections Stories[Spacecraft Resurrections](https://www.nasa.gov)Astronomy Daily[Astronomy Daily](http://www.astronomydaily.io)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/astronomy-daily-space-news-discoveries--5648921/support.

Which NIAC project would be the best to bring to life? Are there really more stars than grains of sand on Earth? Is the solar eclipse going away from us? What's on my shelf behind me? Answering all these questions and more in this Q&A.

Which NIAC project would be the best to bring to life? Are there really more stars than grains of sand on Earth? Is the solar eclipse going away from us? What's on my shelf behind me? Answering all these questions and more in this Q&A.

Vi åbner sæson 2025 med at se på et udvalg af de mange ting der er sket siden vores seneste episoder tilbage i december. Det handler bla. om Blue Origins opsendelse af kæmperaketten New Glenn, om truende asteroider, og om masser af missioner til Månen - og så undgår vi nok heller ikke lige at vende hvad der er sket i de hektiske dage siden Trump satte sig tilbage i det Ovale Kontor... Tina er vendt tilbage fra forlænget ferie med jetlag, og Anders er ramt af årets vinterforkølelse – men RumNyt skal launches uanset hvad. God fornøjelse

This week on Planetary Radio, we celebrate the enduring legacy of Ed Stone, the longtime project scientist for NASA’s Voyager mission and former director of JPL. Mat Kaplan, senior communications advisor at The Planetary Society, takes us to the unveiling of the Dr. Edward Stone Voyager Exploration Trail at JPL, where we hear from past and present JPL leaders, Voyager mission team members, and Ed Stone’s family. Plus, we kick off the episode with the much-anticipated launch of Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket and wrap up with What’s Up, as Bruce Betts explores the rare planetary configuration that made Voyager’s Grand Tour possible. Discover more at: https://www.planetary.org/planetary-radio/2025-ed-stone-trailSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this week's Defense & Aerospace Report Business Roundtable, sponsored by Bell, Dr. “Rocket” Ron Epstein of Bank of America Securities, Sash Tusa of the independent equity research firm Agency Partners, and Richard Aboulafia of the AeroDynamic advisory consultancy join host Vago Muradian to discuss a strong week on Wall Street as investors work to determine the impact of Donald Trump's policies a week into his second administration, from widely expected tax cuts, defense spending increases and war on migrants to what higher tariffs, trade wars and rising tensions with allies will mean including the president's “aggressive” conversation over gaining ownership of Greenland with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederickson; as some worry Trump's rhetoric could undermine US weapons sales worldwide Poland's Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz urges allies to curry favor with Trump by buying more US weapons; NATO considers sharing highly classified capability assessments with industry to speed weapons development; Boeing preannounces another $4 billion in losses as it prepares to report earnings; what Embraer's next jetliner should look like; update on Blue Origin's New Glenn and SpaceX's Starship programs; and the industry-wide impacts of California's devastating fires.

This episode of Space Nuts is brought to you by Incogni where it's all about your data protection made easy. Check out details and get the special Space Nuts listener discount by visiting incogni.com/spacenutsSpace Nuts Episode #489: Meteorite Madness, Space Treaties, and Cosmic ConnectionsJoin Andrew Dunkley and Professor Jonti Horner as they explore a whirlwind of cosmic topics in this exciting episode of Space Nuts. From a meteorite striking a Canadian doorstep to a deep dive into space treaties and panspermia, this episode is packed with fascinating insights and discussions that will leave you pondering the mysteries of the universe.Episode Highlights:- Meteorite Strike: Discover the incredible story of a meteorite captured on a doorbell camera as it strikes a home in Canada. Jonti shares the details of the event, the type of meteorite involved, and the unique audio captured during the impact.- Space Treaties and Ownership: Andrew and Jonti discuss the implications of Donald Trump's inauguration speech regarding the U.S. claim to Mars. Explore the 1967 Space Treaty that prohibits ownership of celestial bodies and the challenges of enforcing such agreements in today's commercial space era.- Panspermia Possibilities: Delve into the intriguing concept of panspermia, which suggests that life could be transferred between planets via meteorites. Jonti explains new research proposing that life in Venus's atmosphere might have originated from Earth, raising questions about our understanding of life in the solar system.- SpaceX and Blue Origin Launches: Get the latest updates on recent rocket launches, including SpaceX's Starship test flight and Blue Origin's New Glenn. Learn about the successes and challenges faced by these companies as they continue to push the boundaries of space exploration.For more Space Nuts, including our continually updating newsfeed and to listen to all our episodes, visit our website. Follow us on social media at SpaceNutsPod on Facebook, X, YouTube Music, YouTube Music Music, Tumblr, Instagram, and TikTok. We love engaging with our community, so be sure to drop us a message or comment on your favorite platform.For more Space and Astronomy News Podcasts, visit our HQ at www.bitesz.com.For your daily space and astronomy news updates, subscibe to the Astronomy Daily Podcast - available wherever you get your podcasts. For more details, visit www.asronomydaily.ioIf you'd like to help support Space Nuts and join our growing family of insiders for commercial-free episodes and more, visit spacenutspodcast.com/about.Stay curious, keep looking up, and join us next time for more stellar insights and cosmic wonders. Until then, clear skies and happy stargazing.00:00 - Andrew Dunkley introduces the episode's topics02:15 - Discussion on the meteorite strike in Canada06:50 - Analysis of Donald Trump's comments on space ownership12:30 - Explanation of the Space Treaty and its implications18:45 - Exploration of panspermia and its relevance to Venus25:10 - Updates on SpaceX and Blue Origin launches30:00 - Closing thoughts and upcoming celestial events✍️ Episode ReferencesSpace Treaty 1967https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_TreatyPanspermia Theoryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PanspermiaSpaceX Starshiphttps://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/Blue Origin New Glennhttps://www.blueorigin.com/new-glennBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts--2631155/support.

Blue Origin flew New Glenn successfully for the first time, and SpaceX flew Starship for the seventh time. Both featured failures at different points of the flight, with the impacts on Starship being significantly bigger than those on New Glenn.This episode of Main Engine Cut Off is brought to you by 32 executive producers—Frank, Lee, Joel, Theo and Violet, Harrison, Josh from Impulse, Matt, Warren, Will and Lars from Agile, Donald, Russell, Kris, Fred, Better Every Day Studios, Pat from KC, Joakim, Steve, Tim Dodd (the Everyday Astronaut!), Ryan, Pat, David, Stealth Julian, Bob, The Astrogators at SEE, Jan, Joonas, and four anonymous—and hundreds of supporters.TopicsNew Glenn reaches orbit on first launch - SpaceNewsFAA requires mishap investigation for failed New Glenn landing - SpaceNewsStarship's Seventh Flight Test - SpaceX - LaunchesStarship upper stage lost on seventh test flight - SpaceNewsFAA investigating Starship debris reports - SpaceNewsThe ShowLike the show? Support the show on Patreon or Substack!Email your thoughts, comments, and questions to anthony@mainenginecutoff.comFollow @WeHaveMECOFollow @meco@spacey.space on MastodonListen to MECO HeadlinesListen to Off-NominalJoin the Off-Nominal DiscordSubscribe on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Pocket Casts, Spotify, Google Play, Stitcher, TuneIn or elsewhereSubscribe to the Main Engine Cut Off NewsletterArtwork photo by SpaceXWork with me and my design and development agency: Pine Works

SpaceTime Series 28 Episode 09Starship's Fiery End and Blue Origin's New Glenn DebutSpaceX's Starship experienced a dramatic explosion during its seventh test flight, marking both success and setback. While the super heavy booster was successfully caught by the launch tower's chopstick arms, the Starship upper stage exploded during ascent. Despite the fiery end, the mission demonstrated significant advancements in booster recovery technology.Blue Origin's New Glenn Maiden FlightBlue Origin's New Glenn mega rocket has completed its first flight, successfully reaching orbit. However, the mission wasn't flawless, as the first stage booster failed to land on a pre-positioned barge in the Atlantic Ocean. The mission's payload, a prototype for the Blue Ring orbital vehicle, was successfully deployed, marking a significant milestone for Blue Origin.Mysterious Stellar Pulsations ExplainedAstronomers have pinpointed the source of mysterious long-period radio transients, linking them to a binary star system comprising a white dwarf and a red dwarf. This discovery, made using data from the Murchison Wide Field Array and the Meerkat telescope, offers new insights into these enigmatic astrophysical events.00:00 Space Time Starship destroyed in spectacular explosion during its seventh test flight00:48 Super heavy booster successfully caught by launch tower's chopsticks during textbook landing07:09 Debris spotted streaking over Caribbean Sea after SpaceX Falcon 7 launch11:05 Blue Origin's new Glenn has successfully undertaken its maiden flight16:55 Astronomers have discovered the source of mysterious extreme astrophysical event20:50 Long period radio transients are mysterious new class of repeating radio source in space29:08 Long period radio transients may be caused by binary M dwarf white dwarf systems32:12 New study warns shallow groundwater is projected to warm by 3.5 degrees Celsius by 209934:29 All the hype about mysterious drones over New Jersey disappeared after LA wildfireswww.spacetimewithstuartgary.comwww.bitesz.com

Timestamps: 0:00 have u tried flex tape 0:07 Nintendo Switch 2 reveal 1:34 TikTok ban law upheld 3:21 Intel Arc B570, RX 9070 leaks 5:36 QUICK BITS INTRO 5:46 Win11 forced updates, Copilot 6:30 Starship splodes, New Glenn orbits 7:14 Apple pauses AI notification summaries 7:39 California battery power plant fire 8:02 SUPER OZEMPIC News Sources: https://lmg.gg/p0lLf Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode, in the wake of Blue Origin's maiden launch of New Glenn and SpaceX's fascinating Starship Flight 7 it's time to take a step back and tell the tale of Two Heavy Lift Rockets. After a decade of space progress from both companies, they each took different engineering approaches to building a rocket. Depending on when you look at their progress, it might feel like one approach is better than the other.  But is there a real answer to the “right approach” to building a rocket? Or is success only measured by how well that rocket flies and sends payloads into orbit? The race between the Tortoise (Blue Origin) & the Hare (SpaceX) is in full swing now that New Glenn is orbital. Is there an end to the race? We hope not anytime soon - and that the American Space Program continues to grow thanks to these two innovative companies and the thousands of people that make it happen behind the scenes. This was a hard episode to put together, especially given the timing. While I think it came out better than it would have been originally, we hope it shares a glimpse of the next 5-10 years, the challenges these companies will face, and how painful yet beautiful the quest of reaching the final frontier really is. Alex G. Orphanos Timestamps: 00:00 SpaceX vs. Blue Origin: A Tale of Two Heavy Lift Rockets 05:51 SpaceX's Evolution From Falcon 9 to Starship 09:11 Blue Origin's Strategic Approach with BE-4 11:59 Starship's Flight 7 Anomaly and Its Impact on SpaceX 16:35 The Future of Starship and New Glenn 19:06 Final Thoughts on a Tale of Two Heavy Lift Rockets Keywords: SpaceX vs Blue Origin, heavy lift rockets, Starship issues, New Glenn launch, engineering decisions, reusable rockets, American space program, human space progress, New Year resolutions, Magic Mind, rocket development, Falcon nine, BE-4 engine, orbital dominance, space industry  --------------------------  Here's to building a fantastic future - and continued progress in Space (and humanity)!  Spread Love, Spread Science  Alex G. Orphanos  We'd like to thank our sponsors:  AG3D Printing  Follow us: @todayinspacepod on Instagram/Twitter @todayinspace on TikTok /TodayInSpacePodcast on Facebook  Support the podcast: • Buy a 3D printed gift from our shop - ag3dprinting.etsy.com • Get a free quote on your next 3D printing project at ag3d-printing.com • Donate at todayinspace.net #spacecraft #technology #aerospace #spacetechnology #engineer #stem #artemis #astronaut #spacewalk #crewdragon #falcon9 #elonmusk #starship #superheavybooster #blueorigin #newglenn #rocket #jaredisaacman #nasahistory #spaceshuttle

La Agencia Espacial Europea pretende llevar astronautas a nuestro satélite y al planeta Rojo, y seguir colaborando con las principales agencias internacionales en la colonización y conquista de otros mundos, empresas en las que cada vez será mayor la iniciativa privada. Hemos hablado con José Manuel Sánchez Martínez, responsable del Programa de Exploración Humana y Robótica de la Agencia Espacial Europea. Hemos informado del lanzamiento de los módulos lunares de aterrizaje Blue Ghost 1, de la norteamericana Firefly Aerospace, y Resilience, de la japonesa IspaceSpace; del lanzamiento del cohete New Glenn de la empresa Blue Origin; del éxito del Experimento de Acoplamiento Espacial realizado por la Organización de Investigación Espacial de la India y del fin de las observaciones científicas de la misión europea Gaia. Verónica Fuentes nos ha informado de un extenso estudio de dieta y salud realizado en EEUU con más de 130 000 participantes, que concluye que consumir carne roja --sobre todo si es procesada--, acelera el deterioro cognitivo y eleva el riesgo de enfermedades como el alzhéimer. Con Humberto Bustince hemos analizado las complicaciones que tendrá la próxima entrada en vigor del artículo 5 de la Ley Europea de IA, referido a las prácticas prohibidas. -Bernardo Herradón nos ha hablado de la evolución de las baterías en los últimos años y los distintos tipos que existen. -Nuestra compañera Paula Aller nos ha hablado del podcast de RNE Audio “SAPIENSANTES”, que ha ideado junto a la divulgadora científica Javiera Torres para divulgar la ciencia y fomentar el espíritu crítico en los más pequeños. Escuchar audio

"PREVIEW: BLUE ORIGIN: Colleague Bob Zimmerman of BehindtheBlack.com welcomes the news of the successful launch of the New Glenn booster, adding more commercial competition to LEO and the Earth-Moon system. More later. 1939

The Gaia mission is over, New Glenn gets to orbit, SpaceX catches SuperHeavy but loses Starship, and we finally get an explanation for little red dots.

The Gaia mission is over, New Glenn gets to orbit, SpaceX catches SuperHeavy but loses Starship, and we finally get an explanation for little red dots.

2025 is the year that introduces the Great Lunar Armada! A small fleet of private and publicly-funded orbiters, landers, and rovers are heading off to explore Luna Incognita this year, and it will only speed up after that. We also look at the recent Starship test flight number seven—which ended in the total loss of the Starship upper stage—and the inaugural flight of Blue Origin's New Glenn mega-rocket, which flew successfully but did not manage to land on the recovery ship. Plus, our usual space dad joke and an update on the LA fires' impact on NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and how you can help. Headlines: • SpaceX's Starship test flight experiences partial success with booster catch but an explosive ending for the upper stage • Blue Origin successfully launches its New Glenn rocket, marking a major milestone for the company • India demonstrates automated docking capability in space with the SPADEX mission, crucial for future lunar exploration plans • Wildfires in Los Angeles cause extensive damage, impacting the community around NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Main Topic: The Great Lunar Armada • Overview of recent lunar missions launched by private companies and national space agencies • Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost lander, carrying various scientific payloads, aims to study the lunar surface and test new technologies • ispace's Hakuto-R mission, featuring a lunar lander and rover, will explore the moon and test in-situ resource utilization techniques • Intuitive Machines' Nova-C lander, equipped with a drill and other scientific instruments, targets the lunar south pole • Retrospective on previous private lunar missions, including SpaceIL's Beresheet lander and the defunct Google Lunar XPrize • China's steady progress in lunar exploration, with plans for the International Lunar Research Station in collaboration with Russia • Russia's setbacks and reduced budget for lunar missions and the failed mission of Luna 25 • India's advancements in space technology and plans for a robotic lunar sample return mission • The crew express excitement about the rapid pace of lunar exploration and the potential for groundbreaking discoveries in the near future Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit

2025 is the year that introduces the Great Lunar Armada! A small fleet of private and publicly-funded orbiters, landers, and rovers are heading off to explore Luna Incognita this year, and it will only speed up after that. We also look at the recent Starship test flight number seven—which ended in the total loss of the Starship upper stage—and the inaugural flight of Blue Origin's New Glenn mega-rocket, which flew successfully but did not manage to land on the recovery ship. Plus, our usual space dad joke and an update on the LA fires' impact on NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and how you can help. Headlines: • SpaceX's Starship test flight experiences partial success with booster catch but an explosive ending for the upper stage • Blue Origin successfully launches its New Glenn rocket, marking a major milestone for the company • India demonstrates automated docking capability in space with the SPADEX mission, crucial for future lunar exploration plans • Wildfires in Los Angeles cause extensive damage, impacting the community around NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Main Topic: The Great Lunar Armada • Overview of recent lunar missions launched by private companies and national space agencies • Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost lander, carrying various scientific payloads, aims to study the lunar surface and test new technologies • ispace's Hakuto-R mission, featuring a lunar lander and rover, will explore the moon and test in-situ resource utilization techniques • Intuitive Machines' Nova-C lander, equipped with a drill and other scientific instruments, targets the lunar south pole • Retrospective on previous private lunar missions, including SpaceIL's Beresheet lander and the defunct Google Lunar XPrize • China's steady progress in lunar exploration, with plans for the International Lunar Research Station in collaboration with Russia • Russia's setbacks and reduced budget for lunar missions and the failed mission of Luna 25 • India's advancements in space technology and plans for a robotic lunar sample return mission • The crew express excitement about the rapid pace of lunar exploration and the potential for groundbreaking discoveries in the near future Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit

In our news wrap Thursday, Blue Origin sent its first rocket into orbit with a successful test of the uncrewed New Glenn system, Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed state Attorney General Ashley Moody to fill Marco Rubio's Senate seat, Rudy Giuliani reached a settlement with former election workers he defamed, baseball announcer Bob Uecker died at 90 and visionary filmmaker David Lynch died at 78. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Burnie and Ashley discuss Blue Origin, the New Glenn rocket, the Daredevil trailer, Atomic Blonde, Oldboy, The Punisher, and Severance Season 2. Support our podcast at: https://www.patreon.com/morningsomewhere For the link dump visit: http://www.morningsomewhere.com For merch, check out: http://store.morningsomewhere.com

Blue Origin finally launches its New Glenn rocket after multiple failed attempts. Watch the supercut of Mission NG-1 as it lifts off from Launch Complex 36 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida.

Blue Origin's New Glenn lifts off to orbit for its inaugural flight. India completes its SpaDeX in-space docking mission. Rocket Factory Augsburg (RFA) has received a UK launch license, and more. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Our guest today is Dr. Harold Hess, CEO and Co-Founder of Eduralock. You can connect with Harold on LinkedIn, and find out more about Enduralock at SpaceCom. Selected Reading New Glenn NG-1 Mission Updates- Blue Origin ‘Key to space ambitions': India succeeds in historic space docking mission- Al Jazeera RFA receives launch licence from the UK- Rocket Factory Augsburg Stoke Space Announces $260 Million in New Investment- Business Wire Nasdaq Grants Momentus Inc. Continued Listing- Business Wire K2 Space Names John Plumb, Former Pentagon Space Policy Chief, as New Head of Strategy Voyager Technologies Ushers in a New Era of Innovation and Leadership in Defense and Space UK and Ukraine sign landmark 100 Year Partnership to deepen security ties and strengthen partnership for future generations - GOV.UK Sierra Space's Resilient GPS Satellite Program Reaches Key Milestone- Business Wire Successful Launch, Communications and Control of Xplore's Hyperspectral Satellite Moon selected as historical preservation site to protect lunar heritage- Space T-Minus Crew Survey We want to hear from you! Please complete our 4 question survey. It'll help us get better and deliver you the most mission-critical space intel every day. Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Want to join us for an interview? Please send your pitch to space-editor@n2k.com and include your name, affiliation, and topic proposal. T-Minus is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

(00:45) Davide Frattini racconta le difficoltà dell'ultimo momento che hanno complicato la chiusura dell'accordo con Hamas per il cessate il fuoco.(07:20) Viviana Mazza spiega qual è stato il ruolo degli Stati Uniti nella trattativa, con cui terminano i 4 anni del presidente democratico.(14:35) Michela Rovelli parla del successo del lancio di New Glenn, con cui il fondatore di Amazon vuole fare concorrenza a SpaceX di Elon Musk.I link di corriere.it:La crisi notturna tra Netanyahu e il ministro Smotrich: le tensioni nel governo di Israele dopo l'annuncio del cessate il fuoco a GazaLa Striscia di Gaza del futuro nel discorso d'addio di BlinkenBezos lancia con successo il nuovo razzo New Glenn. I complimenti (ironici?) di Musk

Lorenzen, Dirk www.deutschlandfunk.de, Forschung aktuell

New Glenn and Starship scheduled to  launch within hours. Bob Zimmerman BehindtheBlack.cnn 1951

GOOD EVENING: The show begins in he markets, watching the jobs strength and eagle-eyed fofr new inflation 1904 NYC # CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR ## FIRST HOUR **9:00-9:15** #Markets: No cuts predicted - Liz Peek, The Hill, Fox News and Fox Business **9:15-9:30** #POTUS: Biden poorly regarded by Gallup | #Markets - Liz Peek, The Hill, Fox News and Fox Business **9:30-9:45** #LondonCalling: Musk vs Starmer - @JosephSternberg @WSJOpinion **9:45-10:00** #LondonCalling: Musk vs Farage - @JosephSternberg @WSJOpinion ## SECOND HOUR **10:00-10:15** #StateThinking: Venezuela unsolved by Biden administration - @MaryKissel, Former Senior Adviser to the Secretary of State, Executive VP Stephens Inc. **10:15-10:30** #StateThinking: Iran unsolved by Biden Administration - @MaryKissel, Former Senior Adviser to the Secretary of State, Executive VP Stephens Inc. **10:30-10:45** #POTUS: Trials of Donald Trump: Smith report; Marchan sentencing - @AndrewCMcCarthy @NRO - @ThadMcCotter @theamgreatness **10:45-11:00** #POTUS: Continuation ## THIRD HOUR **11:00-11:15** #PacificWatch: Santa Ana wind gusting to 72 mph: long night ahead - @JCBliss **11:15-11:30** #PacificWatch: Politics of the fires: Newsom announces a Marshall Plan - @JCBliss **11:30-11:45** New Glenn and Starship to launch within hours - Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com **11:45-12:00** #MOON: Intuitive Machine miscalculation - Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com ## FOURTH HOUR **12:00-12:15** #POTUS: The Trump "Wolf Warrior" Style: NATO, Jerusalem, Abraham Accords - Gregory Copley, Defense & Foreign Affairs **12:15-12:30** #POTUS: Continuation **12:30-12:45** #POTUS: Continuation **12:45-1:00** #KingCharlesReport: Princess of Wales "in remission." King to Auschwitz.

"PREVIEW: NEW GLENN: Colleague Bob Zimmerman compares the SpaceX Falcon Heavy booster to the Blue Origin New Glenn booster. More tonight." 1953

Blue Origin's New Glenn scrubbed during its debut launch due to technical issues. The India Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has been forced to abort its in-space docking (SpaDeX) mission for a third time. Modern Technology Solutions Inc (MTSI) has been selected for another US Department of Defense (DoD) contract worth up to $100 million, and more. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Our guest today is Dr. George Nield, Chair of the Global Spaceport Alliance You can connect with George on LinkedIn, and learn more about the GSA Spaceport Summit on their website. Selected Reading New Glenn NG-1 Mission Updates- Blue Origin Isro aborted SpaDeX docking after satellites triggered safe mode in space - India Today Contracts For Jan. 10, 2025 NASA Awards 2025 Innovative Technology Concept Studies EgSA Launches AfDev-Sat Training Programme with Engineers from 20 African Countries - Space in Africa Redwire Successfully Delivers Fourth Pair of Roll-Out Solar Array Wings for ISS Power- Business Wire Bezos sees no threat from Musk-Trump ties in space race- Reuters From Earth-Like to Extreme: New Study Explores Venus's Atmospheric Evolution T-Minus Crew Survey We want to hear from you! Please complete our 4 question survey. It'll help us get better and deliver you the most mission-critical space intel every day. Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Want to join us for an interview? Please send your pitch to space-editor@n2k.com and include your name, affiliation, and topic proposal. T-Minus is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A decade in the making, standing at 32-stories tall and packing more than twice the thrust of SpaceX's Falcon 9, Blue Origin's heavy lift rocket will be launching uncrewed from Florida's space coast with a launch window opening at 1 ET. The mission is ambitious: New Glenn will fly another company creation - a prototype of the blue ring space tug - to orbit and designed to be partially reusable. On the eve of the launch, Blue Origin CEO Dave Limp talks to Morgan Brennan about what's at stake, how he sees Competition evolving with market dominating rival SpaceX , and how the Bezos' funded company is becoming a self-sustaining business.

BLUE ORIGIN'S NEW GLENN ENTERS THE LISTS IN TIME FOR SPACEX STARSHIP/SUPERHEAVY TEST 7:   3/4: Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days That Launched SpaceX  by  Eric Berger  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Liftoff-Desperate-Early-Launched-SpaceX/dp/0062979973/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= In Liftoff, Eric Berger, senior space editor at Ars Technica, takes readers inside the wild early days that made SpaceX. Focusing on the company's first four launches of the Falcon 1 rocket, he charts the bumpy journey from scrappy underdog to aerospace pioneer. We travel from company headquarters in El Segundo, to the isolated Texas ranchland where they performed engine tests, to Kwajalein, the tiny atoll in the Pacific where SpaceX launched the Falcon 1. Berger has reported on SpaceX for more than a decade, enjoying unparalleled journalistic access to the company's inner workings. Liftoff is the culmination of these efforts, drawing upon exclusive interviews with dozens of former and current engineers, designers, mechanics, and executives, including Elon Musk. The enigmatic Musk, who founded the company with the dream of one day settling Mars, is the fuel that propels the book, with his daring vision for the future of space. 1953

BLUE ORIGIN'S NEW GLENN ENTERS THE LISTS IN TIME FOR SPACEX STARSHIP/SUPERHEAVY TEST 7:   4/4: Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days That Launched SpaceX  by  Eric Berger  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Liftoff-Desperate-Early-Launched-SpaceX/dp/0062979973/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= In Liftoff, Eric Berger, senior space editor at Ars Technica, takes readers inside the wild early days that made SpaceX. Focusing on the company's first four launches of the Falcon 1 rocket, he charts the bumpy journey from scrappy underdog to aerospace pioneer. We travel from company headquarters in El Segundo, to the isolated Texas ranchland where they performed engine tests, to Kwajalein, the tiny atoll in the Pacific where SpaceX launched the Falcon 1. Berger has reported on SpaceX for more than a decade, enjoying unparalleled journalistic access to the company's inner workings. Liftoff is the culmination of these efforts, drawing upon exclusive interviews with dozens of former and current engineers, designers, mechanics, and executives, including Elon Musk. The enigmatic Musk, who founded the company with the dream of one day settling Mars, is the fuel that propels the book, with his daring vision for the future of space. 1951

BLUE ORIGIN'S NEW GLENN ENTERS THE LISTS IN TIME FOR SPACEX STARSHIP/SUPERHEAVY TEST 7:  1 /4: Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days That Launched SpaceX  by  Eric Berger  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Liftoff-Desperate-Early-Launched-SpaceX/dp/0062979973/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= In Liftoff, Eric Berger, senior space editor at Ars Technica, takes readers inside the wild early days that made SpaceX. Focusing on the company's first four launches of the Falcon 1 rocket, he charts the bumpy journey from scrappy underdog to aerospace pioneer. We travel from company headquarters in El Segundo, to the isolated Texas ranchland where they performed engine tests, to Kwajalein, the tiny atoll in the Pacific where SpaceX launched the Falcon 1. Berger has reported on SpaceX for more than a decade, enjoying unparalleled journalistic access to the company's inner workings. Liftoff is the culmination of these efforts, drawing upon exclusive interviews with dozens of former and current engineers, designers, mechanics, and executives, including Elon Musk. The enigmatic Musk, who founded the company with the dream of one day settling Mars, is the fuel that propels the book, with his daring vision for the future of space. 1960 GALAXY MAGAZINE

BLUE ORIGIN'S NEW GLENN ENTERS THE LISTS IN TIME FOR SPACEX STARSHIP/SUPERHEAVY TEST 7:   2/4: Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days That Launched SpaceX  by  Eric Berger  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Liftoff-Desperate-Early-Launched-SpaceX/dp/0062979973/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= In Liftoff, Eric Berger, senior space editor at Ars Technica, takes readers inside the wild early days that made SpaceX. Focusing on the company's first four launches of the Falcon 1 rocket, he charts the bumpy journey from scrappy underdog to aerospace pioneer. We travel from company headquarters in El Segundo, to the isolated Texas ranchland where they performed engine tests, to Kwajalein, the tiny atoll in the Pacific where SpaceX launched the Falcon 1. Berger has reported on SpaceX for more than a decade, enjoying unparalleled journalistic access to the company's inner workings. Liftoff is the culmination of these efforts, drawing upon exclusive interviews with dozens of former and current engineers, designers, mechanics, and executives, including Elon Musk. The enigmatic Musk, who founded the company with the dream of one day settling Mars, is the fuel that propels the book, with his daring vision for the future of space. 1958

John and I welcomed Doug Messier back to Hotel Mars to discuss the upcoming launch of Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket from the Cape plus the seventh test flight for Starship from the Boca launch site. Doug also talked about the two companies, Mr. Musk, and more. Read the full summary of both parts of this program at www.thespaceshow.com when it becomes available and for this date, Wednesday, 1-8-25.

Space Nuts Episode 484: Unveiling Moon Mysteries, Fermi Paradox Insights, and Mars Terraforming Challenges - A Holiday Special EpisodeJoin Andrew Dunkley and Professor Fred Watson as they delve into the fascinating realms of lunar exploration, the enigmatic Fermi Paradox, and the challenges of terraforming Mars in this captivating episode of Space Nuts. Packed with scientific insights and thought-provoking discussions, this episode promises to ignite your curiosity about the cosmos.Episode Highlights:- Unsealing Apollo's Secrets: Discover the intriguing story behind the recently opened lunar sample from the Apollo 17 mission. Learn why scientists waited 50 years to examine this precious material and what it could reveal about landslides on the Moon and its geological mysteries.- Fermi Paradox Explored: Dive into the Fermi Paradox with a listener's question about the formation of life and elements beyond iron. Explore the possibilities of why we haven't encountered extraterrestrial civilizations and the implications for our place in the universe.- Terraforming Mars: Engage in a speculative discussion about the feasibility of reactivating Mars' core to sustain an atmosphere. Explore the challenges of creating a habitable environment on the Red Planet and the limitations posed by its size and magnetic field.- Space News with Anna: Get the latest updates on SpaceX's upcoming Starship test flight and Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket debut. Learn about the exciting advancements in satellite deployment and the future of heavy-lift launch vehicles.For more Space Nuts, including our continually updating newsfeed and to listen to all our episodes, visit our website. Follow us on social media at SpaceNutsPod on Facebook, X, YouTube Music Music, Tumblr, Instagram, and TikTok. We love engaging with our community, so be sure to drop us a message or comment on your favourite platform.For more Space and Astronomy News Podcasts, visit our HQ at www.bitesz.com.If you'd like to help support Space Nuts and join our growing family of insiders for commercial-free episodes and more, visit spacenutspodcast.com/aboutStay curious, keep looking up, and join us next time for more stellar insights and cosmic wonders. Until then, clear skies and happy stargazing.00:00 - Andrew Dunkley welcomes Professor Fred Watson to Space Nuts02:13 - Apollo astronauts brought back 2,196 samples from the moon in 1960s09:41 - The Moon is once again drawing a lot of attention with ambitious plans12:38 - If you want to become a patron of our podcast, you can do so online13:59 - Question comes from Simon from Newcastle about the formation of elements and Fermi paradox15:33 - The Fermi paradox is about where is everybody in the universe22:16 - Without an active core Mars will not be able to sustain an atmosphere28:26 - SpaceX is gearing up for their seventh Starship test flight on January 1030:17 - Blue Origin preparing to launch their first New Glenn rocket on January 6th32:38 - Space Nuts is a twice weekly podcast from Bitesz. com✍️ Episode ReferencesNASAhttps://www.nasa.govApollo 17 missionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_17Artemis missionhttps://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/SpaceX Starshiphttps://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/Blue Origin New Glennhttps://www.blueorigin.com/new-glenn/James Webb Space Telescopehttps://www.jwst.nasa.govEnrico Fermihttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_FermiGalileo's experimenthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo%27s_Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_experimentAstronomy Dailyhttps://www.astronomydaily.ioBitesz.comhttps://www.bitesz.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts--2631155/support.

On episode 142 we're talking about 2025 in space! It's going to be an exciting year, kicking off with the first launch attempt for Blue Origin's New Glenn heavy booster and another test flight of Starship. Then we'll see a new asteroid sampling mission from China, the first test flight of Blue Origin's Blue Moon lander to the moon, and the launch of the first-ever private robotic mission to Venus by Rocket Lab. There's a lot more in store, to be sure to join us for this jam-packed episode! Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit

Blue Origin's New Glenn is scheduled for its inaugural launch as early as 1am Monday, January 6. The European Space Agency just added a 23rd member state with Slovenia joining the alliance. Russia reached a major milestone with its 2000th launch of a rocket from the "R-7" family of boosters, and more. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Elysia Segal from NASASpaceflight.com brings us the Space Traffic Report. Selected Reading Blue Origin counts down to inaugural launch of New Glenn rocket- Fox Weather Slovenia full member of European Space Agency Russia just launched the 2,000th Semyorka rocket—it's both a triumph and tragedy - Ars Technica Eutelsat Statement on OneWeb Temporary Outage- Business Wire Varda Space Industries on LinkedIn: Happy new year, happy new license! We are pleased to announce that Varda… Supercharged auroras possible this weekend as colossal 'hole' in the sun spews solar wind toward Earth T-Minus Crew Survey We want to hear from you! Please complete our 4 question survey. It'll help us get better and deliver you the most mission-critical space intel every day. Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Want to join us for an interview? Please send your pitch to space-editor@n2k.com and include your name, affiliation, and topic proposal. T-Minus is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices