Podcasts about Saturn V

Brian Cox and Robin Ince referee as Saturn and Jupiter square up to each other in a planetary face off. Representing team Saturn is space physicist Professor Michele Dougherty, and in the opposite corner is Dr Paul Abel on Team Jupiter. Katherine Parkinson judges this cosmic contest, casting the final vote to decide who will be awarded the coveted Kuiper Belt. It is not all about looks of course, but it is a significant factor in a first impression. Both Saturn and Jupiter score highly in this department, boasting magnificent icy rings and colourful stripes respectively. But what lies beneath their aesthetically pleasing exteriors? How do the planets compare on the inside? The gas giants have been subjects of investigation for many years, with historic missions like Galileo and Cassini uncovering their secrets. But they aren't alone, each planet is surrounded by its own mini solar system of moons, which get space scientists just as excited as their parent planets do. Both Jupiter and Saturn have moons which are hot contenders in the search for extra-terrestrial life and our panel discuss the future plans to explore them.Producer: Melanie Brown Exec Producer: Sasha Feachem Researcher: Olivia Jani

After everything learned through Mercury and Gemini culminated in the seventeen Apollo missions. The first ten were all testing and rehearsals, but the whole program, and a whole era was characterised by Apollo 11, the first time humans set foot on the moon. Along with the triumph, there was tragedy and a very near miss, and one of the most underrated aspects of NASA's space program - the lunar roving vehicles that let the astronauts explore more than seven kilometres from the Lunar Module.This really was one of the most remarkable endeavours of science, engineering and teamwork. Let's dive in.Follow Cosmic Coffee Time on X for some special content      X.com/CosmicCoffTimeEmail us!cosmiccoffeetime@gmail.comYou can request a topic for the show! Or even just say hi!We'd love to hear from you.

Send us a textDo you know the story of Yvonne Clark? She was a pioneering African-American problem-solving mechanical engineer who worked on the Saturn V rocket boosters and moon boxes for astronauts. For 55 years, she taught mechanical engineering at Tennessee State University, where her story captivated her student (and later picture book biographer) Allen R. Wells. Discover how the remarkable legacy of engineer Yvonne Clark is inspiring the next generation through a gorgeous new children's book, Yvonne Clark and Her Engineering Spark. Author/engineer Allen R. Wells and illustrator DeAndra Hodge help me delve into the world of STEM, storytelling, and the transformative power of diversity and inclusivity in literature. Join us in celebrating the legacy of Yvonne Clark and the power of storytelling to inspire future generations. Chapters:1:03: Who Was Hidden Figure Yvonne Clark? Learn about this pioneering mechanical engineer in Yvonne Clark and Her Engineering Spark, a must-have book for STEM and STEAM educators. 7:50: Engineering + Artistry = Engineering Spark 14:10: Adventures in Learning 22:11: Incorporating STEAM Into Inclusive and Diverse Children's Literature Links:Order Yvonne Clark and Her Engineering Spark Follow Allen R. Wells on [Instagram/Bluesky/LinkedIn]Follow DeAndra Hodge on [Instagram/Bluesky/LinkedIn]Learn more about Yvonne Clark in Scientific American, Lost Women of Science, Society of Women Engineers, and Vanderbilt UniversitySupport the showSubscribe & Follow: Stay updated with our latest episodes and follow us on Instagram, LinkedIn, and the Adventures in Learning website. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts! *Disclosure: I am a Bookshop.org. affiliate.

Episode: 1326 Lift-off: Reflections on the launch of NASA Flight STS-91.  Today, we all count 3-2-1.

Welcome to Episode 149 Sponsored by CultTVMan and Sean's Custom Model ToolsRecorded on Jan 6th 2025HostsStuartTerryGeoffThanks to our latest Patreon and Buy Me a Coffee Supporters:Check out our What We Like page for lists of what we like.***************************************LATEST NEWSMid Michigan Model Makers presents the 4M Mayhem ***************************************MAILBAGWe want to hear from you! Let us know if you have any comments or suggestions scalemodelpodcast@gmail.com.***************************************LATEST HOBBY ANNOUNCEMENTSTamiya 2025 Catalog is outICM 2025 Catalog has been releasedAcademy 2025Arma Hobby 2025 Release PlanTrumpeter 2025-2026 - catalogueHasegawa 2025 Airfix 2025 Range Launch scheduled for Jan 14th.1/48 & 1/32 - North American XF-108 Rapier 3D printed kits by Flying S Models - 3D renders1/48 & 1/72 - Consolidated B-32 Dominator 3D printed kits by One Man Model - expected in 2025What's new at Scalemates.com ***************************************SPONSOR AD #1Cult TV Man***************************************WHAT'S ON THE BENCHStuart - Revell 1/24 Land Rover Series III LWB station wagon. Picked this up at Heritagecon last year. My Dad has a short wheelbase model and I'm doing it as a tribute build to him. Many sprues and much priming and painting.I gave my airbrushes a good deep clean over the holidays. One of my Badger airbrushes needs a good service. Badger offers a lifetime labor warranty on their airbrushes so I'm packing the 155 and my 105 for a well-deserved service. I've heard good things in the past from people who have used this service. These two brushes have served me for over 10+ years.Also picked up a Trumpeter 1/48 Westland Whirlwind and a 1/76 Nutrocker from an estate sale at the LHS.Geoff - still focused on home renovations, but I did do a little work on the IBG kit. (IAR 80) Finally went to our local hobby shop and met the new owner today, and picked up a stash kit - an old resin kit of the Martian war machine from the 1953 version of War of the Worlds!Terry - Work continues on the Moosaroo, the subject is coming along nicely and I need to start working on the diorama portion. The Wave Destroid Phalanx is moving along, with decals and some weathering. I'll need to touch up some of the decals over the highly raised detail. My club, the Techmages, has started a BTS challenge, and I have plenty to finish up. I finally bought the old Grenadier (1993) Wyvern which has been staring at me from the high shelf in Games Plus. Beautifully cast, as were all the Grenadier miniatures.[foogallery id="3864"]***************************************SPONSOR AD #2Seans Custom Model Tools***************************************WHAT WE ARE READINGStuart - The Lord of the Rings - Return of the King. Every few years I re-read Tolkien's classic trilogy.Geoff - finished The Apollo Murders by Cmdr Chris Hatfield. Lots of fun and detail for space junkies. Also knee deep in “A Man on the Moon” by Andrew Chakin - a very deep dive into the lives of the Apollo astronauts and their personal experiences of their work. Very good.Terry - Reading Stephen Baxter's Voyage, first of his alternate history series about going to Mars with Saturn V-era technology. It's an interesting exploration of what could have happened, while most of the world's events remain the same. It's a big book, and follows a few people in two timelines, one on the Mars mission and one on the events which led to it. THE LAST WORDFor more modelling podcast goodness, check out other modelling podcasts at modelpodcasts.comPlease leave us a positive review if you enjoy what we're doing!Check us out: FaceBook, YouTube, and our very own websiteWe also have merchandise now. Check it out on Redbubble 

Mr. Harbinger could not quite believe in the Mouth. But poor Mr. Harbinger—or Darwin, if you prefer—are gone to other times. Or Darwin, If You prefer by Mel Hunter. That's next on The Lost Sci-Fi Podcast.If you are a regular listener of the podcast you know we love to discover interesting stories by authors you have never heard of, and that's exactly what we have for you today. Here's what Fantastic Universe had to say, “Mr. Hunter's superb art work has appeared on a baker's dozen science fiction magazine covers during the past year, but incredible as it may seem with this story we introduce him to the reading public for the first time as a science fiction writer. We say incredible, because this is not a beginner's story. It is sparkling, sophisticated, erudite—the work of a craftsman.”This is the first time we have come across an illustrator turned author. And here's the amazing thing, he wasn't any old illustrator, Mel Hunter was a very accomplished illustrator producing illustrations for famous science fiction authors Isaac Asimov and Robert A. Heinlein, as well as a technical and scientific illustrator for The Pentagon, Hayden Planetarium in Boston, and the Massachusetts Audubon Society.Hunter was born in 1927 in Oak Park, Illinois and he taught himself book and magazine illustration. He was nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Professional Artist in 1960, 1961 and 1962. He became a technical illustrator at Northrop Aircraft where he painted illustrations of advanced aircraft and simulated combat scenarios.His love of air and space took him from California's desert runways to Florida's seacoast launchpads to illustrate every variety of jet-age aircraft and space-age rocket imaginable—from the X-15 to Saturn V. He died in 2004 and according to his final wish, his cremated remains were launched into space on May 22, 2012.Savor this story, immerse yourself in it, and listen to it as many times as your heart desires—for it stands alone, as the singular science fiction story ever penned by Mel Hunter. From Fantastic Universe Magazine in September 1954, this truly amazing story can be found on page 39, Or Darwin, If You prefer by Mel Hunter…Next on The Lost Sci-Fi Podcast, I bought the door–even though the auctioneer warned of evil. The Artist and the Door by Dorothy Quick.☕ Buy Me a Coffee https://www.buymeacoffee.com/scottsV===========================

After circling the Moon ten times on Christmas Eve, it was time for Apollo 8 to come home.

Maddie was born and raised in Brevard County, Florida, about 30 minutes from Kennedy Space Center. From a young age Maddie remembers visiting the space center with her grandfather, who was a Radio Frequency Engineer for General Electric in the 1960s on the Saturn V program.  Though exposed to it from a young age, Maddie was not initially interested in aerospace. She attended Edgewood Jr/Sr High School in Merritt Island, Florida, where she developed a strong passion for the arts and was avid participant in theatre, choir, and drawing/painting. Though her passions were centralized around the arts, Maddie always had an affinity for math and science. After high school, she enrolled as a Civil Engineering student at the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida as a means to merge her artistic creativity with her passion for STEM. Maddie's introduction into the aerospace industry came with her first internship in Civil Engineering, where she was hired as a Civil Engineering Intern at RS&H, a national architecture and engineering firm with a vast range of engineering contracts supporting many different industries. Maddie worked at RS&H's aerospace and defense office in Merritt Island, where she worked on a wide variety of projects across Kennedy Space Center, including designs supporting NASA's SLS Rocket. It was through this internship that Maddie discovered a deep passion for all things space. In her junior year of college, Maddie was hired as a Civil Engineering Intern once again, but this time working for United Launch Alliance's Engineering & Infrastructure team at Cape Canaveral Space Force Base. In this role, she worked on projects supporting the maintenance of facility infrastructure for Atlas and Delta rockets, while also supporting the development of new site infrastructure to support the new Vulcan rocket. Maddie adored working in the launch environment and was able to expand her launch site knowledge with a second United Launch Alliance internship at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California the following year. Similar to her previous internship, she supported the Engineering & Infrastructure team in development of new site infrastructure for the Vulcan Program. Maddie graduated from the University of South Florida in December of 2021 with her bachelor's in civil engineering, and in January of 2022 began work as a Structural Engineer for ULA's Engineering & Infrastructure team in Cape Canaveral. She spent two and a half years gaining valuable, hands-on experience in analysis and design engineering continuing to develop and maintain launch pads and integration facilities on both coasts in support of the Atlas, Delta, and Vulcan programs. In March of this year, Maddie decided to take her United Launch Alliance career in a new direction when she accepted a new role as a Strength Analyst Engineer here in Denver working exclusively on analysis for the future upgrades to the Vulcan rocket.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/ryan-m-seely/support

Host | Matthew S WilliamsOn ITSPmagazine  

“When those rockets light, the air just vibrates. You feel the sound permeating your body in waves… It's magical.”NASA has been pushing the boundaries of space exploration for decades, and today, the Artemis program is the next giant leap. With a mission to return humans to the moon and venture even further into space, NASA is embracing cutting-edge digital engineering to make this vision a reality.In this episode, NASA give us very special access behind the scenes at Kennedy Space Center. Meet Terry Hill (NASA's Digital Engineering Program Manager),Trish Nicoli (NASA's Digital Engineering Deputy Program Manager) and Christal Jolly (Core Stage Operations Manager) as they guide us around three of the most iconic sites in the history of space exploration.Discover how tools like CAD models, simulation, and digital twins are revolutionizing the way rockets are designed, tested, and launched. From inside the massive VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building), built to assemble the Saturn V rockets; to the mammoth crawler that transports spacecraft and launch tower to the iconic launchpad that's been re-designed to accommodate Artemis, NASA's most powerful Space Launch System to date.Find out more about NASA's Artemis program here.Explore PTC's technology here.Your host is Paul Haimes from industrial software company PTC.Episodes are released bi-weekly. Follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter for updates.This is an 18Sixty production for PTC. Executive producer is Jacqui Cook. Sound design and editing by Sara Joyner. Location recording by Gareth Evans. Music by Rowan Bishop.Image: NASA

Host | Matthew S WilliamsOn ITSPmagazine  

On October 13, SpaceX and Elon Musk successfully launched their Starship rocket into low-Earth orbit. Then, in a milestone moment for space technology, they successfully captured the rocket's Super Heavy booster with “chopstick” arms on the launch tower upon reentry, marking the first time a booster was ever caught in mid-air.The achievement is a mind-blowing feat of human engineering — one that hasn't gotten nearly the recognition that it deserves. Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk with must-read space journalist Eric Berger about the role of SpaceX in the new, 21st-century Space Race, the significance of the company's achievements, and our potential to become a spacefaring, inter-planetary species.Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Techica, and is the author of both Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days that Launched SpaceX and his most recent excellent book, Reentry: SpaceX, Elon Musk, and the Reusable Rockets that Launched a Second Space Age.In This Episode* Starship's big reentry (1:43)* Race (back) to the moon (8:54)* Why Starship? (11:48)* The Mars-shot (18:37)* Elon in the political area (22:10)* Understanding SpaceX (24:06)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationStarship's big reentry (1:43)James Pethokoukis: After the launch tower caught that booster stage of the rocket, I saw someone on Twitter a day later say, “Hey, do you guys remember over the weekend when SpaceX sent a Statue-of-Liberty-sized object to space and then caught it when it came back down? That was amazing!”So two things: First, as a space guy, what was your reaction? Two, beyond the sheer coolness of it, why was this an important thing to happen?It seemed inconceivable a few years ago, but now, all of a sudden, it's the future of rocketry, just like that.Eric Berger: Just from a space perspective, it's epic to see, to use your adjectives, the Statue of Liberty comparison. I mean, it's a small skyscraper, but they essentially launch that thing to space at thousands of miles per hour, then it slows down, it comes back right where it took off from, hovers, and it falls precisely into these two arms that are designed to catch it. The cool thing is that we'd never seen anything like that before. It seemed inconceivable a few years ago, but now, all of a sudden, it's the future of rocketry, just like that.the significance of this, of course, is SpaceX has shown that with the reusability of the Falcon 9 rocket, it can really change the economics of launch. This year they've launched 101 times. No country had ever done that many launches before in a year. They're going to launch 95 percent of all the mass into orbit this year with primarily the Falcon 9 Rocket, and all that's because the first stage is entirely reusable, they're flying them more than 20 times now, and so they're just taking that and scaling it.What was amazing about the tower catch this weekend was the fact that it really removes the need for landing legs. You may think, “Well, what's the big deal about that?” Well, there's a lot of mass involved with those landing legs: You need powerful actuators to drive them, you need hydraulic fluid, and that's a lot of dead mass in the vehicle. Also, it's not insignificant to transport the rocket from wherever it lands, either on a boat or on land, to the factory and to refurbish the rocket and launch again. Ideally, with this step, they're eliminating days from that process of reuse and ideally, in the future, they're literally going to be catching the rocket, setting it back on the launch mount and then potentially flying again.So it's not just the Starship, right? So for the other launches, is this is going to become the landing procedure?No, it will be just for Starship. They will continue to fly Falcon 9 as is. That's a mature product, everyone's pretty comfortable with that vehicle. But, look, other companies have tried different things. When Rocket Lab was trying to reuse its small Electron vehicle, its plan was to have the first stage come back under a parachute and then basically swoop in with a helicopter and catch it so that the rocket didn't fall into the ocean. That ended up not working.It seems very whimsical.Well, it made sense from an engineering standpoint, but it was a lot more difficult to snag the rocket than they ended up finding out. So, up until now, the only way to get a rocket back vertically was on a drone ship or landing straight up, and so this is a brand new thing, and it just creates more efficiencies in the launch system.What is the direction now, as far as launch costs and the continued decline of launch costs if this will be the new landing procedure for Starship?It's impossible to say that, of course. We can look to a Falcon 9 for an analog. SpaceX sales started out selling Falcon 9 for $60 million, it's upped that price to about $67 or $68 million — still the lowest-cost medium-lift launch vehicle in the world, but that's the price you or I or NASA would pay for a rocket. Internally, the estimate is that they're re-flying those vehicles for about $15 million. So, in effect, SpaceX has taken the cost of the lowest-price vehicle on the market and divided it by four, basically.Starship, of course, can lift much more payload to orbit than Falcon 9. By some measures, five to 10 times as much, eventually. And so if they can get the cost down, if they can make the first and second stage reusable, I think you're talking about them bringing the cost down potentially another order of magnitude, but they've got a lot of work to get there.I think the second most common comment I saw on social media — the first one being like, “This is amazing, I'm crying, this is so cool” — the second one is, “Why is NASA not using this Starship to get to the moon?” It seems like progress is being made quickly, and you mentioned the costs, I think people are just befuddled. It's a question you must get a lot.The reality is that if we want to go to the moon before 2030, we probably need to do it with a combination of NASA's Space Launch System rocket and Starship. It's a complicated answer, but the reality is that NASA, in conjunction with Congress, has basically, over the last quarter of a century, pivoted away from reusable launch vehicles, and at one point in the early 2000s, they were actually funding three different reusable launch vehicles. The most famous of those, of course, was the Space Shuttle. It stopped funding the Space Shuttle in 2011 and it went back to developing this large, expendable rocket called the Space Launch System. That was the tried and true pathway, and no one really had faith in what SpaceX is doing. And so now here we are, almost 15 years later, and SpaceX has gone out and proved it with the Falcon 9, the Falcon Heavy, and now Starship.The reality is that if we want to go to the moon before 2030, we probably need to do it with a combination of NASA's Space Launch System rocket and Starship. In 2021, NASA did select Starship as its lunar lander. So Starship is a critical part of the architecture. Probably the most challenging part, actually, is getting down to the lunar surface and then getting back up reliably. And so Starship plays a key role, and I just really think that it's inevitable that Starship and potentially Blue Origin's architecture will be how humans get to the moon and back, but we're kind of in an interim period right now.Is it just sort of too late to switch?Yeah, it is. It's too late to switch. You could conceive of scenarios in which humans launch in Crew Dragon, transfer over to a Starship, and then come back in Crew Dragon, but even then you've got some challenges. And the problem — problem is the wrong word, but one of the major issues with Starship is that it has no redundancy when you come back and land. It has got to nail the landing or people inside of it die. So you're going to want to see hundreds of Starship launches and many, many successful landings in a row before you put people on the vehicle. And to have the idea of launching humans from Earth to the moon at this point, we're pretty far from that. I would think a decade from now, at least, and by then China will be on the moon. And so it's really a matter of, do you want to sort of continue to delay the human return of the moon, or do you want to take the tools that you have now and make your best run for it?Race (back) to the moon (8:54)Since you brought it up, are we going to beat China to the moon with the SLS?Very much an open question. The SLS Rocket is basically ready. In its current form, it performed very well during Artemis I. It's obviously super expensive. You may have seen the Europa Clipper launch on Monday of this week, that launched on a Falcon Heavy. For almost a decade, Congress mandated NASA that it launched on the SLS rocket, and that would've cost 10 times as much. NASA paid about $200 million for the Clipper launch on Falcon Heavy, SLS would've been in excess of $2 billion, so it's a very expensive rocket, but it does work, it worked well during Artemis I. The best way we have right now, Jim, to get astronauts from Earth out to lunar orbit is SLS and the Orion deep spacecraft vehicle. That will change over time, but I think if we want to put humans on the moon this decade, that's probably the best way to do it.Is it going to be a close call? I don't want to overemphasize the competition aspect, but I guess I would like to see America do it first.It's going to be close. NASA's current date is 2026 for the Artemis III moon landing. There's no way that happens. I think 2028 is a realistic no-earlier-than date, and the reality is SpaceX has to make a lot of progress on Starship. What they did this past weekend was a great step. I think the key thing about the fact of this weekend's launch is that it was a success. There were no anomalies, there's going to be no investigation, so SpaceX is going to launch again. As long as they continue to have success, then they can start popping these off and get to some of the really key tests like the in-space propellant transfer tests, which they hope to do sometime next year.[W]hen you're on the moon, there's no launch tower, there's no launch crew, you've just got the astronauts inside Starship, and if that vehicle doesn't take off on the moon, the crew's going to die. So it's got to work.What Starship will do is it'll launch into low-earth orbit, and then it'll be refueled, and it'll go to the moon, and you need lots of launches to refuel it. And then really the key test, I think, is landing on the moon, because the South Pole is pretty craterous, you've got to have high confidence in where you land, and then the big challenge is getting back up to lunar orbit safely.Think about it: When you watch any rocket launch, you see this very detailed, very intricate launch tower with all these umbilicals, and all of these cables, and power, and telemetry, and stuff, and humans are looking at all this data, and if there's any problem, they abort, right? Well, when you're on the moon, there's no launch tower, there's no launch crew, you've just got the astronauts inside Starship, and if that vehicle doesn't take off on the moon, the crew's going to die. So it's got to work. And so that's really a big part of the challenge, as well, is getting all that to work. So I think 2028, for all that to come together, is a realistic no-earlier-than date, and China's pretty consistently said 2030, and they're starting to show off some hardware, they recently demonstrated that suggests they have a chance to make 2030.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedWhy Starship? (11:48)What is the commercial case for Starship, assuming that these next launches continue to go off well? What is it supposed to be doing here on Earth and in Earth orbit?The next big race is to deliver internet, not to a dish that you set up, but actually to your mobile phone. It's called direct-to-cell, and you need much bigger satellites for this. And so SpaceX needs the Starship to launch these satellites, so that will really be the commercial use case for Starship in the near term.Its primary function, and I think the most important function for SpaceX in the near term, is launching these much larger Starlink satellites. I think it's been pretty well proven that there's a large demand for broadband internet from low-earth orbit. Starlink has now up to four million customers and they're actually signing almost at an exponential rate. Then growth, the business is profitable. So that's been super impressive. The next big race is to deliver internet, not to a dish that you set up, but actually to your mobile phone. It's called direct-to-cell, and you need much bigger satellites for this. So SpaceX needs the Starship to launch these satellites, so that will really be the commercial use case for Starship in the near term.I think once the vehicle starts flying reliably, we're going to see where the commercial customers go because we've never really been in a launch environment where you're not really constrained by mass and, more importantly, by volume. You can just build bigger, less-efficient things. Instead of hyper-managing your satellite to be small, and light, and compact, you can kind of make trades where maybe you have a lower-cost vehicle that's bigger. The capability of Starship with its voluminous payload fairing and being able to lift a hundred or more tons to low-earth orbit for low cost — entirely new regime. And so I think it's a case of Field of Dreams, “If you build it, they will come,” and in the near term, Starship will be the business case, and longer-term we'll see some unique opportunities.You've been covering this for quite a while, documenting, books, including your most recent book. Really an amazing ride as a space journalist for you here.I've been covering space now for two decades, and really with a focus on commercial space over the last decade because I think that's where a lot of the excitement and innovation is coming from. But the reality is that you've got this whole ecosystem of companies, but the 800-pound gorilla is SpaceX. They're the company that has consistently had success. They are the only provider of crew transportation services for NASA, still, even five years after their initial success, and they're the only provider right now that's launching cargo missions to the space station. They've got huge Starlink satellites, constellation. As a journalist, you really want to understand the biggest, most dominating force in the industry, and that's clearly SpaceX, and so that's why I've chosen to dedicate a lot of time to really understand where they started out and how they got to where they are, which is at the top of the heap.The story that you lay out in your book, which came out last month — Reentry: SpaceX, Elon Musk, and the Reusable Rockets that Launched a Second Space Age — to me, it's still a story people mostly don't know, and one that I think a lot of non-space reporters don't understand. What are some common misunderstandings that you come across that make you feel like you need to tell this story?I think, until recently, one of the things that people might say about SpaceX is, “Well, what's the big deal? NASA's launched humans to orbit in the past, NASA's launched cargo, they had a reusable space vehicle in the Space Shuttle.” What's different is that SpaceX is doing this at scale, and they're building for a long-term plan that is sustainable.I'll give you an example: The Space Shuttle was reusable. Everything was reusable except the external tank. However, you needed a standing army of thousands of people to pour over the Space Shuttle after it came back from space to make sure that all of its tiles and every piece of equipment was safe. Now, when it was originally sold to Congress back in the 1970s, the program manager for the space shuttle, George Mueller said that the goal was to get the cost of payload-to-orbit for the Space Shuttle down to $25 a pound, which sounded great because then they were saying dozens of people could fly on the vehicle at a time. Well, of course, at the end of the day, it only ever flew at a maximum of seven people, and the cost of payload-to-orbit was $25,000. So yes, it was reusable, but it was the kind of thing that was super expensive and you couldn't fly very often. You could do limited things.It's really the first vehicle we ever developed to go to Mars. SpaceX is doing some of the same things that NASA did, but it's doing them better, faster, and a lot cheaper.SpaceX is proposing kind of an order-of-magnitude change. We went to the moon in the 1960s with the Lunar Module, and everyone remembers it carried two astronauts down to the lunar surface. And that whole thing launched on a giant stack, the Saturn V rocket. So if you were to take the Lunar Module and replace the astronauts and just use it to deliver cargo to the moon, it could take five tons down to the lunar surface. Starship, in a reusable mode, can take a hundred tons. If you send an expendable version of Starship, it's 200 tons. And oh, by the way, even if you're not bringing that Starship back, you're getting the whole first stage back anyway.And so that's really the promise here, is you're building a sustainable system in space where it doesn't cost you $6 billion to go to the moon, it costs you half a billion dollars or to go to the moon, and you can then go on and do other things, you can fill your Starship up with methane repellent and go further. It's really the first vehicle we ever developed to go to Mars. SpaceX is doing some of the same things that NASA did, but it's doing them better, faster, and a lot cheaper.That $25-a-pound number you gave for Space Shuttle, where are we with SpaceX? Where is SpaceX, or where are they and what's their goal in that context?They're getting down in a couple of thousand dollars a pound with a Falcon 9, and the idea is, potentially, with Starship, you get down to hundreds of dollars a pound or less. They have a big challenge too, right? They're using tiles on Starship as well. They showed some of them off during the webcast this weekend, and I think we have yet to have any kind of information on how reusable, or how rapidly reusable Starship will be, and we'll have to see.The Mars-shot (18:37)To the extent the public understands this company — this is my understanding — the point here is to build Starship, to further this satellite business, and then that satellite business will fund the eventual Mars mission and the Mars colonization. I think that's the public perception of what is happening with this business. How accurate is that? Is that how you look at it? I mean, that's how I look at it from my uninformed or less-informed view, but is that really what we're talking about here?Yeah, fundamentally, I think that is accurate. There is no business case right now to go to Mars. AT&T is not going to pay $5 billion to put an AT&T logo on a Starship and send a crew to Mars. There are no resources right now that we really can conceive of on Mars that would be profitable for humans to go get and bring back to Earth. So then the question is: How do you pay for it?Financially, the business case for Mars is not entirely clear, so you've got to figure out some way to pay for it. That was one reason why Elon Musk ultimately went with Starlink. That would pay for the Mars vision.Even when settlers went to the New World in the 1500s, 1600s, in United States, they were exporting tobacco and other products back to Europe, and there's no tobacco that we know of on Mars, right? Financially, the business case for Mars is not entirely clear, so you've got to figure out some way to pay for it. That was one reason why Elon Musk ultimately went with Starlink. That would pay for the Mars vision.I think that's still fundamentally the case. It's effectively going to be paying for the entire development of Starship, and then if it becomes highly profitable, SpaceX is not a public company, so they can take those revenues and do whatever they want with them, and Elon has said again and again that his vision is to settle Mars, and he's building the rockets to do it, and he's trying to find the funding through Starlink to accomplish it. That is the vision. We don't know how it's all going to play out, but I think you're fundamentally correct with that.I think when he mentions Mars, there are some people that just give it a roll of the eye. It just sounds too science fictional, despite the progress being made toward accomplishing that. It sounds like you do not roll your eyes at that.Well, it's interesting. He first really talked publicly about this in 2016, eight years ago, back when there was no Starship, back when they just were coming off their second Falcon 9 failure in about a year, and you kind of did roll your eyes at it then . . . And then they got the Falcon 9 flying and they started re-flying it and re-flying it. They did Falcon Heavy, and then they started building Starship hardware, and then they started launching Starship, and now they're starting to land Starship, and this is real hardware.And yes, to be clear, they have a long, long way to go and a lot of technical challenges to overcome, and you need more than just a rocket in a spaceship to get to Mars, you need a lot of other stuff, too: biological, regulatory, there's a lot of work to go, but they are putting down the railroad tracks that will eventually open that up to settlement.So I would not roll my eyes. This is certainly the only credible chance, I think, for humans to go to Mars in our lifetimes, and if those early missions are successful, you could envision settlements being built there.Elon in the political arena (22:10)Given SpaceX's accomplishments and their lead, is that company politics-proof? Obviously there's always going to be controversy about Elon, and Twitter, and who he gives money to, and things he says, but does any of that really matter for SpaceX?I think it does. We've already seen a couple examples of it, especially with Elon's very public entree into presidential politics over the last several months. I think that does matter. In his fight with Brazil over what he termed as free speech, they were confiscating Starlink, and so they were trying to shut Starlink down in their country, and that directly affects SpaceX. In California, over the last week we have seen a commission vote to try to limit the number of launches Falcon 9 launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base, and they clearly did that because they were uncomfortable with Elon's behavior publicly. So yeah, this is going to bleed over.Now, in the near term, there will be limited impacts because the US Department of Defense clearly needs SpaceX rockets. They need SpaceX's Starlink, they use a branded version of it called Starshield for military communications. The launch and Starlink capabilities are essential for the military. NASA is even more reliant on SpaceX for the International Space Station and beyond; the entire moon program runs through Starship, so it's not going to change in the near term, but longer term you could see this having impacts, and it's not clear to me exactly what those would be — I don't think you could really nationalize SpaceX, and I think if you did try to nationalize SpaceX, you would sort of destroy its magic, but I do think there will ultimately be consequences for the Elon's political activity.Understanding SpaceX (24:06)About Reentry, is there a particular story in there that you think just really encapsulates, if you want to understand SpaceX, and what it's doing, and where it's come from, this story kind of gets at it?The point of the book was to tell the story behind the story. A lot of people knew, generally, what SpaceX has accomplished over the last decade, or the last 15 years, but this really takes you behind the scenes and tells the stories of the people who actually did it.It's a company that's moving so fast forward that, like I said, there are all these challenges they're facing and they're just tackling them one-by-one as they go along.I think one of the best stories of the book is just how they were making this up as they went along. The very first time they were going to try to land on the barge was in January of 2015, the drone ship landing, and the night before that barge was going to set out to sea, the guy who had developed the barge realized that, wait a minute, if we come back with a rocket this week, we have nowhere to put it in the port of Jacksonville, because they were staging out of Jacksonville at the time. And there had been this whole discussion at SpaceX about where to put these pedestals, but no one had actually done it. That night, he and another engineer stayed up all night drinking red wine and CADing out designs for the pedestals, and they met the concrete pores the next morning and just built these pedestals within 24 hours. It's a company that's moving so fast forward that, like I said, there are all these challenges they're facing and they're just tackling them one-by-one as they go along.Elon has spoken about there's sort of this window of opportunity open for space. In the United States, at least, it was open and then it kind of closed. We stopped leaving Earth orbit for a while, we couldn't even get our people into Earth orbit; we had to use another country's rockets.Is this window — whether for space commerce, space exploration — is it sort of permanently open? Are we beyond the point where things can close — because satellites are so important, and because of geopolitics, that window is open and it's staying open for us to go through.I think he's talking about the window for settlement of Mars and making humans a multi-planetary species. And when he talks about the window closing, I think he means a lot of different things: One, the era of cheaper money could end — and that clearly did happen, right? We've seen interest rates go way up and it's been much more difficult to raise money, although SpaceX has been able to still do that because of their success. I think he's thinking about his own mortality. I believe he's thinking about a major global war that would focus all of our technological efforts here on planet Earth trying to destroy one another. I think he's thinking about nuclear weapons — just all the things that could bring human progress to a screeching halt, and he's saying, “Look, the window may be 100 years or it may be 20 years.” So he's like, “We should seize the opportunity right now when we have it.”Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Micro Reads▶ Economics* Larry Summers on the Economics of AI - Conversable Economist* Landing Softly Is Just the Beginning - San Francisco Fed* More Babies Aren't the Only Solution to Falling Birthrates - NYT Opinion* Generative AI at work: Survey evidence from three Central Banks - SSRN▶ Business* Nvidia Chief Makes Case for AI-First Companies - WSJ* Apple Intelligence Isn't Very Smart Yet—and Apple's OK With That - WSJ* Andreessen Horowitz Backs Infinitus to Bring AI to Medical Calls - Bberg* Breaking Up Google Is a Fool's Game - WSJ Opinion▶ Policy/Politics* The US is the world's science superpower — but for how long? - Nature* Can A.I. Be Blamed for a Teen's Suicide? - NYT* Former OpenAI Researcher Says Company Broke Copyright Law - NYT* The tragedy of a 50-50 America - FT Opinion* Both Harris and Trump pose problems for U.S. energy producers. - AEI* Why Harris and Trump Are Pandering to Crypto Plutocrats - NYT Opinion* Trump's Tariffs and Economic Risk - WSJ Opinion* China asks: what is an e-bike? - FT Opinion* This Startup Shows Why the U.S. CHIPS Act Is Needed - Spectrum▶ AI/Digital* Big frontier AI systems will emerge from global, distributed efforts, not just big tech: Meta's Yann LeCun - Techcircle* Does ChatGPT Have a Poetic Style? - arXiv▶ Biotech/Health* Danes to Use New Nvidia AI Supercomputer for Drug Discovery - Bberg▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Averting Climate Catastrophe Requires Economic Growth - PS* The Energy Transition We Really Should Be Focusing On - RealClearScience* To Fight Climate Change, Clean Up Carbon Markets - Bberg Opinion* A Mexican Electric Car? Only If Private Firms Lead the Way - Bberg Opinion▶ Robotics/AVs* Crop-spraying robot is designed to reduce emissions and use less herbicide - Atlas▶ Space/Transportation* Beetlejuice, Betelgeuse, Betelbuddy? Astronomers Find Something Unexpected Orbiting Infamous “Doomed Star” - Debrief▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* Meet Hollywood's AI Doomsayer: Joseph Gordon-Levitt - WSJ* Here's What the Regenerative Cities of Tomorrow Could Look Like - Wired* Archimedes Rediscovered: Technology and Ancient History - JSTOR Daily* Energy expert Vaclav Smil on how to feed the world without trashing it - NS▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Yes, You're Still Imagining a Migrant Crime Spree - Alex Nowrasteh's Immigration Insights and Other Deep Dives* How long can we sustain economic growth? - Noahpinion* What is Anthropic's AI Computer Use? - AI Supremacy* An AI intern in your pocket - Exponential View* Industrial Policy's Inescapable Uncertainty Problem - The Dispatch* NEPA Nightmares IV: Tule Wind - Breakthrough Journal* When you give a Claude a mouse - One Useful Thing* Larry Summers on the Economics of AI - 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

Vi er blevet inspireret af den seneste Starship-test til at se nærmere på de helt store raketter, fra Saturn V og frem. Efter mange år med rumfærger og mindre raketter er der nu for alvor ved at være konkurrence på markedet for raketter over 100 meter… I de korte nyheder ser vi på ESAs idé om at ville reparere satellitter, på kommunikationsnetværket Moonlight, og på flotte nye data fra Euclid-missionen. Endelig skal vi selvfølgelig gætte en rumlyd! Lyt med

【欢迎订阅】每天早上5:30，准时更新。【阅读原文】标题:Elon Musk's SpaceX has achieved something extraordinaryIf SpaceX can land and reuse the most powerful rocket ever madewhat can't it do?正文：The launch was remarkable: a booster rocket with twice the power of the Apollo programme's Saturn V lancing into the early-morning sky on a tight, bright column of blue-tinged flame. But that wonder has been seen four times before. It was the landing of the booster stage of SpaceX's fifth Starship test flight which was truly extraordinary.知识点：remarkable adj. /rɪˈmɑːrkəbl/unusual or surprising in a way that causes people to take notice⾮凡的；奇异的；显著的；引⼈注⽬的• a remarkable achievement/career/talent⾮凡的成就╱事业╱才能• She was a truly remarkable woman.她是⼀位真正⾮同凡响的⼥⼈。获取外刊的完整原文以及精讲笔记，请关注微信公众号「早安英文」，回复“外刊”即可。更多有意思的英语干货等着你！【节目介绍】《早安英文-每日外刊精读》，带你精读最新外刊，了解国际最热事件：分析语法结构，拆解长难句，最接地气的翻译，还有重点词汇讲解。所有选题均来自于《经济学人》《纽约时报》《华尔街日报》《华盛顿邮报》《大西洋月刊》《科学杂志》《国家地理》等国际一线外刊。【适合谁听】1、关注时事热点新闻，想要学习最新最潮流英文表达的英文学习者2、任何想通过地道英文提高听、说、读、写能力的英文学习者3、想快速掌握表达，有出国学习和旅游计划的英语爱好者4、参加各类英语考试的应试者（如大学英语四六级、托福雅思、考研等）【你将获得】1、超过1000篇外刊精读课程，拓展丰富语言表达和文化背景2、逐词、逐句精确讲解，系统掌握英语词汇、听力、阅读和语法3、每期内附学习笔记，包含全文注释、长难句解析、疑难语法点等，帮助扫除阅读障碍。

SpaceX logra capturar su cohete Super Heavy en el aire por primera vez.   SpaceX ha logrado una hazaña histórica en su quinta prueba del cohete Starship, recuperando por primera vez la etapa Super Heavy al capturarla con brazos mecánicos en la torre de lanzamiento "Mechazilla".Comenta con tu opinión y no olvides seguir nuestro pódcast en Spotify.Este cohete de 122 metros de altura despegó el domingo desde Starbase, Texas, alcanzando velocidades supersónicas. Tras la separación de la etapa superior, el cohete regresó a la plataforma de lanzamiento donde fue atrapado de manera exitosa. Este logro marca un paso decisivo en la visión de Elon Musk para reutilizar cohetes de manera rápida y eficiente, con miras a futuros viajes a la Luna y Marte. ¿Qué implicaciones tendrá este avance para la exploración espacial y la reducción de costos?  Un giro clave para la reutilización rápida y eficiente de cohetes.   El 13 de octubre de 2024, SpaceX realizó su quinta prueba del cohete Starship desde su base en Texas. Este cohete, con 33 motores Raptor, generó 7,700 toneladas de empuje, el doble de la potencia del Saturn V. Tras alcanzar una velocidad de 5,300 kilómetros por hora, la etapa Super Heavy se separó y, en una maniobra sin precedentes, fue capturada en el aire por los brazos mecánicos de la torre de lanzamiento "Mechazilla". Esta hazaña se logró después de un frenado supersónico y la activación de 13 motores que controlaron el descenso del cohete, una demostración de ingeniería que marca un hito en la historia espacial.  La reutilización de cohetes representa uno de los mayores desafíos tecnológicos en los vuelos espaciales. Hasta ahora, SpaceX había logrado aterrizar sus cohetes en plataformas flotantes o en tierra, pero la captura aérea de un cohete es un avance sin precedentes. Esto reducirá el desgaste de los componentes y facilitará un regreso más rápido al espacio, algo esencial para misiones frecuentes y de bajo costo. Sin embargo, este éxito no elimina todas las dificultades. Aún queda por resolver el desafío de reabastecer estos cohetes en órbita y perfeccionar la resistencia térmica para los reingresos atmosféricos, ambos esenciales para futuras misiones a la Luna y Marte.   Este hito recuerda logros previos de SpaceX, como la reutilización del cohete Falcon 9, aunque la captura aérea del Super Heavy representa un avance técnico sin comparación. Este éxito también es clave para las misiones lunares del programa Artemis de la NASA, que cuenta con Starship para aterrizar en la Luna. La compañía ya está trabajando en versiones avanzadas del cohete, diseñadas para transportar hasta 100 toneladas de carga a la órbita. La reutilización total de Starship será fundamental para cumplir con los plazos y objetivos, tanto para las misiones lunares como para los ambiciosos planes de Elon Musk de colonizar Marte.   Este logro de SpaceX implica que el tiempo de preparación entre misiones será considerablemente menor, abaratando el costo de cada lanzamiento. Con la capacidad de transportar 100 toneladas de carga a la órbita, Starship abre nuevas posibilidades para misiones científicas y comerciales. Además, la recuperación precisa y en tiempo récord del Super Heavy permitirá una mayor frecuencia de vuelos. Ahora, SpaceX se enfrenta al reto de refinar la tecnología para realizar misiones más largas, incluyendo el reabastecimiento de combustible en el espacio, un elemento esencial para viajes a Marte. Este tipo de avance acelerará también las investigaciones sobre cómo hacer sostenibles los asentamientos fuera de la Tierra.   SpaceX ha alcanzado un hito en la reutilización de cohetes, al capturar el Super Heavy en el aire por primera vez. ¿Será este el comienzo de un cambio radical en los viajes espaciales? Comparte tu opinión y no olvides seguir nuestro pódcast en Spotify.Bibliografía:Ars TechnicaFox BusinessBloombergSpace.comThe New York TimesConviértete en un seguidor de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/flash-diario-de-el-siglo-21-es-hoy--5835407/support.

In the Shadow of Dora: A Novel of the Holocaust and the Apollo Program (Stephen F. Austin UP, 2020) spans two very different decades from the Nazi concentration camp of Dora-Mittelbau to the coast of central Florida in the late 1960s; the book tells the story of the real life intersections between the horror of the Third Reich's V-2 rocket program and the wonderment of the Apollo missions. Eli Hessel, a brilliant young Jewish mathematician, finds himself deep beneath a mountain where he is forced to build Nazi rockets. When he is finally freed from this secret underground concentration camp, he immigrates to New York, studies astrophysics, and is recruited by NASA to help build the largest rocket ever to rise above a launch pad: the Saturn V. To his shock, though, he will be under the command of former Nazi scientists Wernher von Braun and Arthur Rudolph, both of who were at Dora. As America turns to the moon and cheers for rockets that lance the sky, Eli is swallowed up by the past and must cope with memories he thought were safely buried. This is a novel that asks questions about memory, morality, technology, and how the past influences the present. If we clamp down images of horror, will they always ignite and rise up on us? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In the Shadow of Dora: A Novel of the Holocaust and the Apollo Program (Stephen F. Austin UP, 2020) spans two very different decades from the Nazi concentration camp of Dora-Mittelbau to the coast of central Florida in the late 1960s; the book tells the story of the real life intersections between the horror of the Third Reich's V-2 rocket program and the wonderment of the Apollo missions. Eli Hessel, a brilliant young Jewish mathematician, finds himself deep beneath a mountain where he is forced to build Nazi rockets. When he is finally freed from this secret underground concentration camp, he immigrates to New York, studies astrophysics, and is recruited by NASA to help build the largest rocket ever to rise above a launch pad: the Saturn V. To his shock, though, he will be under the command of former Nazi scientists Wernher von Braun and Arthur Rudolph, both of who were at Dora. As America turns to the moon and cheers for rockets that lance the sky, Eli is swallowed up by the past and must cope with memories he thought were safely buried. This is a novel that asks questions about memory, morality, technology, and how the past influences the present. If we clamp down images of horror, will they always ignite and rise up on us? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literature

In the Shadow of Dora: A Novel of the Holocaust and the Apollo Program (Stephen F. Austin UP, 2020) spans two very different decades from the Nazi concentration camp of Dora-Mittelbau to the coast of central Florida in the late 1960s; the book tells the story of the real life intersections between the horror of the Third Reich's V-2 rocket program and the wonderment of the Apollo missions. Eli Hessel, a brilliant young Jewish mathematician, finds himself deep beneath a mountain where he is forced to build Nazi rockets. When he is finally freed from this secret underground concentration camp, he immigrates to New York, studies astrophysics, and is recruited by NASA to help build the largest rocket ever to rise above a launch pad: the Saturn V. To his shock, though, he will be under the command of former Nazi scientists Wernher von Braun and Arthur Rudolph, both of who were at Dora. As America turns to the moon and cheers for rockets that lance the sky, Eli is swallowed up by the past and must cope with memories he thought were safely buried. This is a novel that asks questions about memory, morality, technology, and how the past influences the present. If we clamp down images of horror, will they always ignite and rise up on us? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/historical-fiction

This week we talk about the Falcon 9, the Saturn V, and NASA's bureaucracy.We also discuss Boeing's mishaps, the Scout system, and the Zenit 2.Recommended Book: What's Our Problem? by Tim UrbanTranscriptIn 1961, the cost to launch a kilogram of something into low Earth orbit—and a kilogram is about 2.2 pounds, and this figure is adjusted for inflation—was about $118,500, using the Scout, or Solid Controlled Orbital Utility Test system of rockets, which were developed by the US government in collaboration with LTV Aerospace.This price tag dropped substantially just a handful of years later in 1967 with the launch of the Saturn V, which was a staggeringly large launch vehicle, for the time but also to this day, with a carrying capacity of more than 300,000 pounds, which is more than 136,000 kg, and a height of 363 feet, which is around 111 meters and is about as tall as a 36-story building and 60 feet taller than the Statue of Liberty.Because of that size, the Saturn V was able to get stuff, and people, into orbit and beyond—this was the vehicle that got humans to the Moon—at a dramatically reduced cost, compared to other options at the time, typically weighing in at something like $5,400 per kg; and again, that's compared to $118,500 per kg just 6 years earlier, with the Scout platform.So one of the key approaches to reducing the cost of lifting stuff out of Earth's gravity well so it could be shuffled around in space, in some rare cases beyond Earth orbit, but usually to somewhere within that orbit, as is the case with satellites and space stations, has been to just lift more stuff all at once. And in this context, using the currently available and time-tested methods for chucking things into space, at least, that means using larger rockets, or big rocket arrays composed of many smaller rockets, which then boost a huge vehicle out of Earth's gravity well, usually by utilizing several stages which can burn up some volume of fuel before breaking off the spacecraft, which reduces the amount of weight it's carrying and allows secondary and in some cases tertiary boosters to then kick in and burn their own fuel.The Soviet Union briefly managed to usurp the Saturn V's record for being the cheapest rocket platform in the mid-1980s with its Zenit 2 medium-sized rocket, but the Zenit 2 was notoriously fault-ridden and it suffered a large number of errors and explosions, which made it less than ideal for most use-cases.The Long March 3B, built by the Chinese in the mid-1990s got close to the Saturn V's cost-efficiency record, managing about $6,200 per kg, but it wasn't until 2010 that a true usurper to that cost-efficiency crown arrived on the scene in the shape of the Falcon 9, built by US-based private space company SpaceX.The Falcon 9 was also notable, in part, because it was partially reusable from the beginning: it had a somewhat rocky start, and if the US government hadn't been there to keep giving SpaceX contracts as it worked through its early glitches, the Falcon 9 may not have survived to become the industry-changing product that it eventually became, but once it got its legs under it and stopped blowing up all the time, the Falcon 9 showed itself capable of carrying payloads of around 15,000 pounds, which is just over 7000 kgs into orbit using a two-stage setup, and remarkably, and this also took a little while to master, but SpaceX did eventually make it common enough to be an everyday thing, the Falcon 9's booster, which decouples from the rocket after the first stage of the launch, can land, vertically, intact and ready for refurbishment.That means these components, which are incredibly expensive, could be reused rather than discarded, as had been the case with every other rocket throughout history. And again, while it took SpaceX some time to figure out how to make that work, they've reached a point, today, where at least one booster has been used 22 times, which represents an astonishing savings for the company, which it's then able to pass on to its customers, which in turn allows it to outcompete pretty much everyone else operating in the private space industry, as of the second-half of 2024.The cost to lift stuff into orbit using a Falcon 9 is consequently something like $2,700 per kg, about half of what the Saturn V could claim for the same.SpaceX is not the only company using reusable spacecraft, though.Probably the most well-known reusable spacecraft was NASA's Space Shuttle, which was built by Rockwell International and flown from the early 1980s until 2011, when the last shuttle was retired.These craft were just orbiters, not really capable of sending anyone or anything beyond low Earth orbit, and many space industry experts and researchers consider them to be a failure, the consequence of bureaucratic expediency and NASA budget cuts, rather than solid engineering or made-for-purpose utility—but they did come to symbolize the post-Space Race era in many ways, as while the Soviet, and then the successor Russian space program continued to launch rockets in a more conventional fashion, we didn't really see much innovation in this industry until SpaceX came along and started making their reusable components, dramatically cutting costs and demonstrating that rockets capable of carrying a lot of stuff and people could be made and flown at a relatively low cost, and we thus might be standing at the precipice of a new space race sparked by private companies and cash-strapped government agencies that can, despite that relatively lack of resources, compared to the first space race, at least, can still get quite a bit done because of those plummeting expenses.What I'd like to talk about today is a reusable spacecraft being made by another well-known aerospace company, but one that has had a really bad decade or so, and which is now suffering the consequences of what seems to have been a generation of bad decisions.—Boeing is a storied, sprawling corporation that builds everything from passenger jets to missiles and satellites.It's one of the US government's primary defense contractors, and it makes about half of all the commercial airliners on the planet.Boeing has also, in recent years, been at the center of a series of scandals, most of them tied to products that don't work as anticipated, and in some cases which have failed to work in truly alarming, dangerous, and even deadly ways.I did a bonus episode on Boeing back in January of this year, so I won't go too deep into the company's history or wave of recent problems, but the short version is that although Boeing has worked cheek-to-jowl with the US and its allies' militaries since around WWII, and was already dominating aspects of the burgeoning airline industry several decades before that, it merged with a defense contractor called McDonnell Douglas in the late-1990s, and in the early 2000s it began to reorganize its corporate setup in such a way that financial incentives began to influence its decision-making more than engineering necessities.In other words, the folks in charge of Boeing made a lot of money for themselves and for many of their shareholders, but those same decisions led to a lot of inefficiencies and a drop in effectiveness and reliability throughout their project portfolio, optimizing for the size of their bank account and market cap, rather than the quality of their products, basically.Consequently, their renowned jetliners, weapons offerings, and space products began to experience small and irregular, but then more sizable and damaging flaws and disruptions, probably the most public of which was the collection of issues built into their 737 MAX line of jets, two of which crashed in 2018 and 2019, killing 346 people and resulting in the grounding of 387 of their aircraft.A slew of defects were identified across the MAX line by 2020, and an investigation by the US House found that employee concerns, reported to upper-management, went ignored or unaddressed, reinforcing the sense that the corporate higher-ups were disconnected from the engineering component of the company, and that they were fixated almost entirely on profits and their own compensation, rather than the quality of what they were making.All of which helps explain what's happening with one of Boeing's key new offerings, a partially reusable spacecraft platform called the Starliner.The Starliner went into early development in 2010, when NASA asked companies like Boeing to submit proposals for a Commercial Crew Program that would allow the agency to offload some of its human spaceflight responsibilities to private companies in the coming decades.One of the contract winners was SpaceX's Crew Dragon platform, but Boeing also won a contract with its Starliner offering in 2014, which it planned to start testing in 2017, though that plan was delayed, the first unmanned Orbital Flight Test arriving nearly 3 years later, at the tail-end of 2019, and even then, the craft experienced all sorts of technical issues along the way, including weak parachute systems, flammable tape, and valves that kept getting stuck.It was two more years before the company launched the second test flight, and there were more delays leading up to the Starliner's first Crew Flight Test, during which it would carry actual humans for the first time.That human-carrying flight launched on June 5 of 2024, and it carried two astronauts to the International Space Station—though it experienced thruster malfunctions on the way up, as it approached the ISS, and after several months of investigation, the Starliner capsule still attached to the Station all that time, it was determined that it was too risky for those two astronauts to return to Earth in the Starliner.That brings us to where we are now, a situation in which there are two astronauts aboard the ISS, in low Earth orbit, who were meant to stay for just over a week, but who will now remain there, stranded in space, for a total of around eight months, as NASA decided that it wasn't worth the risk putting them on the Starliner again until they could figure out what went wrong, so they'll be bringing Starliner back to earth, remotely, unmanned, and the stranded astronauts will return to Earth on a SpaceX Crew Dragon craft that is scheduled to arrived in September of this year, and which will return to Earth six months in the future; that craft was originally intended to have four astronauts aboard when it docks with the ISS, but two of those astronauts will be bumped so there will be room for the two who are stranded when it returns, next year.All of which is incredibly embarrassing for Boeing, which again, has already had a truly horrible double-handful of years, reputationally, and which now has stranded astronauts in space because of flaws in its multi-billion-dollar spacecraft, and those astronauts will now need to be rescued, by a proven and reliable craft built by its main in-space competitor, SpaceX.One of the key criticisms of NASA and the way it's operated over the past several decades, from the shuttle era onward, essentially, is that it's really great at creating jobs and honorable-sounding positions for bureaucrats, and for getting government money into parts of the country that otherwise wouldn't have such money, because that spending can be funneled to manufacturing hubs that otherwise don't have much to manufacture, but it's not great at doing space stuff, and hasn't been for a while; that's the general sense amongst many in this industry and connected industries, at least.This general state of affairs allowed SpaceX to become a huge player in the global launch industry—the dominant player, arguably, by many metrics—because it invested a bunch of money to make reusable spacecraft components, and has used that advantage to claim a bunch of customers from less-reliable and more expensive competitors, and then it used that money to fund increasingly efficient and effective products, and side-projects like the satellite-based internet platform, Starlink.This has been enabled, in part, by government contracts, but while Boeing and its fellow defense contractors, which have long been tight-knit with the US and other governments, have used such money to keep their stock prices high and to invest in lobbyists and similar relationship-reinforcing assets, SpaceX and a few similar companies have been stepping in, doing pretty much everything better, and have thus gobbled up not just the client base of these older entities, but also significantly degraded their reputations by showing how things could be done if they were to invest differently and focus on engineering quality over financial machinations; Boeing arguably should have been the one to develop the Falcon 9 system, but instead an outsider had to step in and make that happen, because of how the incentives in the space launch world work.One of the big concerns, now, is that Boeing will retreat from its contract with NASA, leaving the agency with fewer options in terms of ISS resupply and astronaut trips, but also in terms of longer-term plans like returning to the Moon and exploring the rest of the solar system.Lacking industry competition, NASA could become more and more reliant on just one player, or just a few, and that's arguably what led to the current situation with Boeing—its higher-ups knew they would get billions from the government on a regular basis whatever they did, no matter how flawed their products and delayed their timelines, and that led to a slow accretion of bad habits and perverse incentives.There's a chance the same could happen to SpaceX and other such entities, over time, if they're able to kill off enough of their competition so that they become the de facto, go to option, rather than the best among many choices, which they arguably are for most such purposes at the moment.And because Boeing seems unlikely to be able to fulfill its contract with NASA, which will necessitate flying six more Starliner missions to the ISS, before the International Space Station is retired in 2030, this raises the question of whether the company will move forward with the reportedly expensive investments that will be necessary to get its Starliner program up to snuff.It's already on the hook for about $1.6 billion just to pay for various delays and cost overruns the project has accrued up till this point, and that doesn't include all the other investments that might need to be made to fulfill that contract, so they could look at the short-term money side of this and say, basically, we're ceding this aspect of the aerospace world to younger, hungrier companies, and we'll just keep on collecting the reliable dollars we know we'll get from the US military each year, no questions asked.We could then see Boeing leave the race for what looks to be the next space-related government contract bonanza, which will probably be related to NASA's smaller, more modular space station ambitions; the ISS may get a second-wind and be maintained past 2030, but either way NASA is keen to hire private companies to launch larger craft into low Earth orbit for long-term habitation, supplies and crew for these mini space-stations shuttled back and forth by companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin, the latter of which is a direct competitor to SpaceX owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.Boeing has been tapped by Blue Origin to help keep their in-orbit assets supplied under that new paradigm, but it could be that they show themselves incapable of safely and reliably doing so, and that could open up more opportunities for other, smaller entities in this space, if they can figure out how to compete with the increasingly dominant SpaceX, but it could, again, also result in a new monopoly or monopsony controlled by just a few companies, which then over time will have to fight the urge to succumb to the save perverse incentives that seem to be weighing on Boeing.Show Noteshttps://www.npr.org/2024/03/20/1239132703/boeing-timeline-737-max-9-controversy-door-plughttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starlinerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeinghttps://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/after-latest-starliner-setback-will-boeing-ever-deliver-on-its-crew-contract/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/24/science/nasa-boeing-starliner-astronauts.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_(rocket_family)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_Vhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenit-2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_March_3Bhttps://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cost-space-launches-low-earth-orbithttps://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/history/saturn-v-rocket.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_orbiterhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reusable_spacecrafthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceplanehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBm9bh7-Mio From Aug 26, 2022. As this podcast is from 2 years ago, all the information is somewhat dated…  OK, OK, a lot dated. - Rich NASA TV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg Your guide to the inaugural Artemis moon launch! On 29th August, 2022, NASA is launching Artemis 1 to the Moon in a test run before humans follow in 2024+.    This will be the launch of the largest rocket to ever go to space. Larger than the Saturn V that took people to the Moon in 1969-1972. It's going to be quite a spectacle, so find out what NASA has planned and the NASA TV events you can watch to get the best out of this historic occasion.   We've added a new way to donate to 365 Days of Astronomy to support editing, hosting, and production costs.  Just visit: https://www.patreon.com/365DaysOfAstronomy and donate as much as you can! Share the podcast with your friends and send the Patreon link to them too!  Every bit helps! Thank you! ------------------------------------ Do go visit http://www.redbubble.com/people/CosmoQuestX/shop for cool Astronomy Cast and CosmoQuest t-shirts, coffee mugs and other awesomeness! http://cosmoquest.org/Donate This show is made possible through your donations.  Thank you! (Haven't donated? It's not too late! Just click!) ------------------------------------ The 365 Days of Astronomy Podcast is produced by the Planetary Science Institute. http://www.psi.edu Visit us on the web at 365DaysOfAstronomy.org or email us at info@365DaysOfAstronomy.org.

The church celebrates the ascension of Jesus this week (As well as Mother's Day!). So we turn to Acts Chapter one where the resurrected Jesus ascends upon a cloud into heaven. But there is a lot more going on than just on the literal level. Ascensions are common in religious mythology, but for Christians this symbolically portrays that Jesus is now fully exalted and that everything he taught and did is of eternal importance

Project Apollo was a feat of human achievement akin to, and arguably greater than, the discovery of the New World. From 1962 to 1972, NASA conducted 17 crewed missions, six of which placed men on the surface of the moon. Since the Nixon administration put an end to Project Apollo, our extraterrestrial ambitions seem to have stalled along with our sense of national optimism. But is the American spirit of adventure, heroism, and willingness to take extraordinary risk a thing of the pastToday on the podcast, I talk with Charles Murray about what made Apollo extraordinary and whether we in the 21st century have the will to do extraordinary things. Murray is the co-author with Catherine Bly Cox of Apollo: The Race to the Moon, first published in 1989 and republished in 2004. He is also my colleague here at AEI.In This Episode* Going to the moon (1:35)* Support for the program (7:40)* Gene Kranz (9:31)* An Apollo 12 story (12:06)* An Apollo 11 story (17:58)* Apollo in the media (21:36)* Perspectives on space flight (24:50)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationGoing to the moon (1:35)Pethokoukis: When I look at the delays with the new NASA go-to-the-moon rocket, and even if you look at the history of SpaceX and their current Starship project, these are not easy machines for mankind to build. And it seems to me that, going back to the 1960s, Apollo must have been at absolutely the far frontier of what humanity was capable of back then, and sometimes I cannot almost believe it worked. Were the Apollo people—the engineers—were they surprised it worked?Murray: There were a lot of people who, they first heard the Kennedy speech saying, “We want to go to the moon and bring a man safely back by the end of the decade,” they were aghast. I mean, come on! In 1961, when Kennedy made that speech, we had a grand total of 15 minutes of manned space flight under our belt with a red stone rocket with 78,000 pounds of thrust. Eight years and eight weeks later, about the same amount of time since Donald Trump was elected to now, we had landed on the moon with a rocket that had 7.6 million pounds of thrust, compared to the 78,000, and using technology that had had to be invented essentially from scratch, all in eight years. All of Cape Canaveral, those huge buildings down there, all that goes up during that time.Well, I'm not going to go through the whole list of things, but if you want to realize how incredibly hard to believe it is now that we did it, consider the computer system that we used to go to the moon. Jerry Bostick, who was one of the flight dynamics officers, was telling me a few months ago about how excited they were just before the first landing when they got an upgrade to their computer system for the whole Houston Center. It had one megabyte of memory, and this was, to them, all the memory they could ever possibly want. One megabyte.We'll never use it all! We'll never use all this, it's a luxury!So Jim, I guess I'm saying a couple of things. One is, to the young'ins out there today, you have no idea what we used to be able to do. We used to be able to work miracles, and it was those guys who did it.Was the Kennedy speech, was it at Rice University?No, “go to the moon” was before Congress.He gave another speech at Rice where he was started to list all the things that they needed to do to get to the moon. And it wasn't just, “We have these rockets and we need to make a bigger one,” but there was so many technologies that needed to be developed over the course of the decade, I can't help but think a president today saying, “We're going to do this and we have a laundry list of things we don't know how to do, but we're going to figure them out…” It would've been called pie-in-the-sky, or something like that.By the way, in order to do this, we did things which today would be unthinkable. You would have contracts for important equipment; the whole cycle for the contract acquisition process would be a matter of weeks. The request for proposals would go out; six weeks later, they would've gotten the proposals in, they would've made a decision, and they'd be spending the money on what they were going to do. That kind of thing doesn't get done.But I'll tell you though, the ballsiest thing that happened in the program, among the people on the ground — I mean the ballsiest thing of all was getting on top of that rocket and being blasted into space — but on the ground it was called the “all up” decision. “All up” refers to the testing of the Saturn V, the launch vehicle, this monstrous thing, which basically is standing a Navy destroyer on end and blasting it into space. And usually, historically, when you test those things, you test Stage One, and if that works, then you add the second stage and then you add the third stage. And the man who was running the Apollo program at that time, a guy named Miller, made the decision they were going to do All Up on the first test. They were going to have all three stages, and they were going to go with it, and it worked, which nobody believed was possible. And then after only a few more launches, they put a man on that thing and it went. Decisions were made during that program that were like wartime decisions in terms of the risk that people were willing to take.One thing that surprises me is just how much that Kennedy timeline seemed to drive things. Apollo seven, I think it was October '68, and that was the first manned flight? And then like two months later, Apollo 8, we are whipping those guys around the moon! That seems like a rather accelerated timeline to me!The decision to go to the moon on Apollo 8 was very scary to the people who first heard about it. And, by the way, if they'd had the same problem on Apollo 8 that they'd had on Apollo 13, the astronauts would've died, because on Apollo 8 you did not have the lunar module with them, which is how they got back. So they pulled it off, but it was genuinely, authentically risky. But, on the other hand, if they wanted to get to the moon by the end of 1969, that's the kind of chance you had to take.Support for the Program (7:40)How enthusiastic was the public that the program could have withstood another accident? Another accident before 11 that would've cost lives, or even been as scary as Apollo 13 — would we have said, let's not do it, or we're rushing this too much? I think about that a lot now because we talk about this new space age, I'm wondering how people today would react.In January, 1967, three astronauts were killed on the pad at Cape Canaveral when the spacecraft burned up on the ground. And the support for the program continued. But what's astonishing there is that they were flying again with manned vehicles in September 1967. . . No, it was a year and 10 months, basically, between this fire, this devastating fire, a complete redesign of the spacecraft, and they got up again.I think that it's fair to say that, through Apollo 11, the public was enthusiastic about the program. It's amazingly how quickly the interest fell off after the successful landing; so that by the time Apollo 13 was launched, the news programs were no longer covering it very carefully, until the accident occurred. And by the time of Apollo 16, 17, everybody was bored with the program.Speaking of Apollo 13, to what extent did that play a role in Nixon's decision to basically end the Apollo program, to cut its budget, to treat it like it was another program, ultimately, which led to its end? Did that affect Nixon's decision making, that close call, do you think?No. The public support for the program had waned, political support had waned. The Apollo 13 story energized people for a while in terms of interest, but it didn't play a role. Gene Kranz (9:31)500 years after Columbus discovering the New World, we talk about Columbus. And I would think that 500 years from now, we'll talk about Neil Armstrong. But will we also talk about Gene Kranz? Who is Gene Kranz and why should we talk about him 500 years from now?Gene Kranz, also known as General Savage within NASA, was a flight director and he was the man who was on the flight director's console when the accident on 13 occurred, by the way. But his main claim to fame is that he was one of — well, he was also on the flight director's desk when we landed. And what you have to understand, Jim, is the astronauts did not run these missions. I'm not dissing the astronauts, but all of the decisions . . . they couldn't make those decisions because they didn't have the information to make the decisions. These life-and-death decisions had to be made on the ground, and the flight director was the autocrat of the mission control, and not just the autocrat in terms of his power, he was also the guy who was going to get stuck with all the responsibility if there was a mistake. If they made a mistake that killed the astronauts, that flight director could count on testifying before Congressional committees and going down in history as an idiot.Somebody like Gene Kranz, and the other flight director, Glynn Lunney during that era, who was also on the controls during the Apollo 13 problems, they were in their mid-thirties, and they were running the show for one of the historic events in human civilization. They deserve to be remembered, and they have a chance to be, because I have written one thing in my life that people will still be reading 500 years from now — not very many people, but some will — and that's the book about Apollo that Catherine, my wife, and I wrote. And the reason I'm absolutely confident that they're going to be reading about it is because — historians, anyway, historians will — because of what you just said. There are wars that get forgotten, there are all sorts of events that get forgotten, but we remember the Trojan War, we remember Hastings, we remember Columbus discovering America. . . We will remember for a thousand years to come, let alone 500, the century in which we first left Earth. An Apollo 12 story (12:06)If you just give me a story or two that you'd like to tell about Apollo that maybe the average person may have never heard of, but you find . . . I'm sure there's a hundred of these. Is there one or two that you think the audience might find interesting?The only thing is it gets a little bit nerdy, but a lot about Apollo gets nerdy. On Apollo 12, the second mission, the launch vehicle lifts off and into the launch phase, about a minute in, it gets hit by lightning — twice. Huge bolts of lightning run through the entire spacecraft. This is not something it was designed for. And so they get up to orbit. All of the alarms are going off at once inside the cabin of the spacecraft. Nobody has the least idea what's happened because they don't know that they got hit by lightning, all they know is nothing is working.A man named John Aaron is sitting in the control room at the EECOM's desk, which is the acronym for the systems guide who monitored all the systems, including electrical systems, and he's looking at his console and he's seeing a weird pattern of numbers that makes no sense at all, and then he remembers 15 months earlier, he'd just been watching the monitor during a test at Cape Canaveral, he wasn't even supposed to be following this launch test, he was just doing it to keep his hand in, and so forth, and something happened whereby there was a strange pattern of numbers that appeared on John Aaron's screen then. And so he called Cape Canaveral and said, what happened? Because I've never seen that before. And finally the Cape admitted that somebody had accidentally turned a switch called the SCE switch off.Okay, so here is John Aaron. Apollo 12 has gone completely haywire. The spacecraft is not under the control of the astronauts, they don't know what's happened. Everybody's trying to figure out what to do.John Aaron remembers . . . I'm starting to get choked up just because that he could do that at a moment of such incredible stress. And he just says to the flight director, “Try turning SCE to auxiliary.” And the flight director had never even heard of SCE, but he just . . . Trust made that whole system run. He passes that on to the crew. The crew turns that switch, and, all at once, they get interpretable data back again.That's the first part of the story. That was an absolutely heroic call of extraordinary ability for him to do that. The second thing that happens at that point is they have completely lost their guidance platform, so they have to get that backup from scratch, and they've also had this gigantic volts of electricity that's run through every system in the spacecraft and they have three orbits of the earth before they have to have what was called trans lunar injection: go onto the moon. That's a couple of hours' worth.Well, what is the safe thing to do? The safe thing to do is: “This is not the right time to go to the moon with a spacecraft that's been damaged this way.” These guys at mission control run through a whole series of checks that they're sort of making up on the fly because they've never encountered this situation before, and everything seems to check out. And so, at the end of a couple of orbits, they just say, “We're going to go to the moon.” And the flight director can make that decision. Catherine and I spent a lot of time trying to track down the anguished calls going back and forth from Washington to Houston, and by the higher ups, “Should we do this?” There were none. The flight director said, “We're going,” and they went. To me, that is an example of a kind of spirit of adventure, for lack of a better word, that was extraordinary. Decisions made by guys in their thirties that were just accepted as, “This is what we're going to do.”By the way, Gene Kranz, I was interviewing him for the book, and I was raising this story with him. (This will conclude my monologue.) I was raising this story with him and I was saying, “Just extraordinary that you could make that decision.” And he said, “No, not really. We checked it out. The spacecraft looked like it was good.” This was only a year or two after the Challenger disaster that I was conducting this interview. And I said to Gene, “Gene, if we had a similar kind of thing happen today, would NASA ever permit that decision to be made?” And Gene glared at me. And believe me, when Gene Kranz glares at you, you quail at your seat. And then he broke into laughter because there was not a chance in hell that the NASA of 1988 would do what the NASA of 1969 did.An Apollo 11 story (17:58)If all you know about Apollo 11 is what you learned in high school, or maybe you saw a documentary somewhere, and — just because I've heard you speak before, and I've heard Gene Kranz speak—what don't people know about Apollo 11? There were — I imagine with all these flights — a lot of decisions that needed to be made probably with not a lot of time, encountering new situations — after all, no one had done this before. Whereas, I think if you just watch a news report, you think that once the rocket's up in the air, the next thing that happens is Neil Armstrong lands it on the moon and everyone's just kind of on cruise control for the next couple of days, and boy, it certainly doesn't seem like that.For those of us who were listening to the landing, and I'm old enough to have done that, there was a little thing called—because you could listen to the last few minutes, you could listen to what was going on between the spacecraft and mission control, and you hear Buzz Aldrin say, “Program Alarm 1301 . . .  Program Alarm 1301 . . .” and you can't…   well, you can reconstruct it later, and there's about a seven-second delay between him saying that and a voice saying, “We're a go on that.” That seven seconds, you had a person in the back room that was supporting, who then informed this 26-year-old flight controller that they had looked at that possibility and they could still land despite it. The 26-year-old had to trust the guy in the back room because the 26-year-old didn't know, himself, that that was the case. He trusts him, he tells the flight director Gene Kranz, and they say, “Go.” Again: Decision made in seven seconds. Life and death. Taking a risk instead of taking the safe way out.Sometimes I think that that risk-taking ethos didn't end with Apollo, but maybe, in some ways, it hasn't been as strong since. Is there a scenario where we fly those canceled Apollo flights that we never flew, and then, I know there were other plans of what to do after Apollo, which we didn't do. Is there a scenario where the space race doesn't end, we keep racing? Even if we're only really racing against ourselves.I mean we've got . . . it's Artemis, right? That's the new launch vehicle that we're going to go back to the moon in, and there are these plans that somehow seem to never get done at the time they're supposed to get done, but I imagine we will have some similar kind of flights going on. It's very hard to see a sustained effort at this point. It's very hard to see grandiose effort at this point. The argument of, “Why are we spending all this money on manned space flight?” in one sense, I sympathize with because it is true that most of the things we do could be done by instruments, could be done by drones, we don't actually have to be there. On the other hand, unless we're willing to spread our wings and raise our aspirations again, we're just going to be stuck for a long time without making much more progress. So I guess what I'm edging around to is, in this era, in this ethos, I don't see much happening done by the government. The Elon Musks of the world may get us to places that the government wouldn't ever go. That's my most realistic hope.Apollo in the Media (21:36)If I could just give you a couple of films about the space program and you just… thought you liked it, you thought it captured something, or you thought it was way off, just let just shoot a couple at you. The obvious one is The Right Stuff—based on the Tom Wolfe book, of course.The Right Stuff was very accurate about the astronauts' mentality. It was very inaccurate about the relationship between the engineers and the astronauts. It presents the engineers as constantly getting the astronauts way, and being kind of doofuses. That was unfair. But if you want to understand how the astronauts worked, great movieApollo 13, perhaps the most well-known.Extremely accurate. Extremely accurate portrayal of the events. There are certain things I wish they could include, but it's just a movie, so they couldn't include everything. The only real inaccuracy that bothered me was it showed the consoles of the flight controllers with colored graphics on them. They didn't have colored graphics during Apollo! They had columns of white numbers on a black background that were just kind of scrolling through and changing all the time, and that's all. But apparently, when their technical advisor pointed that out to Ron Howard, Ron said, “There are some things that an audience just won't accept, but they would not accept.”That was the leap! First Man with Ryan Gosling portraying Neil Armstrong.I'll tell you: First place, good movie—Excellent, I think.Yeah, and the people who knew Armstrong say to me, it's pretty good at capturing Armstrong, who himself was a very impressive guy. This conceit in the movie that he has this little trinket he drops on the moon, that was completely made up and it's not true to life. But I'll tell you what they tell me was true to life that surprised me was how violently they were shaken up during the launch phase. And I said, “Is that the way it was, routinely?” And they said, yeah, it was a very rough ride that those guys had. And the movie does an excellent job of conveying something that somebody who'd spent a lot of time studying the Apollo program didn't know.I don't know if you've seen the Apple series For All Mankind by Ronald D. Moore, which is based on the premise I raised earlier that Apollo didn't end, we just kept up the Space Race and we kept advancing off to building moon colonies and off to Mars. Have you seen that? And what do you think about it if you have? I don't know that you have.I did not watch it. I have a problem with a lot of these things because I have my own image of the Apollo Program, and it drives me nuts if somebody does something that is egregiously wrong. I went to see Apollo 13 and I'm glad I did it because it was so accurate, but I probably should look at For All Mankind.Very reverential. A very pro-space show, to be sure. Have you seen the Apollo 11 documentary that's come out in the past five years? It was on the big screen, it was at theaters, it was a lot of footage they had people had not seen before, they found some old canisters somewhere of film. I don't know if you've seen this. I think it's just called Apollo 11.No, I haven't seen that. That sounds like something that I ought to look at.Perspectives on space flight (24:50)My listeners love when I read . . . Because you mentioned the idea of: Why do we go to space? If it's merely about exploration, I suppose we could just send robots and maybe eventually the robots will get better. So I want to just briefly read two different views of why we go to space.Why should human beings explore space? Because space offers transcendence from which only human beings can benefit. The James Webb Space Telescope cannot articulate awe. A robot cannot go into the deep and come back with soulful renewal. To fully appreciate space, we need people to go there and embrace it for what it fully is. Space is not merely for humans, nor is space merely for space. Space is for divine communion.That's one view.The second one is from Ayn Rand, who attended the Apollo 11 moon launch. This is what Ayn Rand wrote in 1969:The next four days were torn out of the world's usual context, like a breathing spell with a sweep of clean air piercing mankind's lethargic suffocation. For thirty years or longer, the newspapers had featured nothing but disasters, catastrophes, betrayals, the shrinking stature of man, the sordid mess of a collapsing civilization; their voice had become a long, sustained whine, the megaphone a failure, like the sound of the Oriental bazaar where leprous beggars, of spirit or matter, compete for attention by displaying their sores. Now, for once, the newspapers were announcing a human achievement, were reporting on a human triumph, were reminding us that man still exists and functions as a man. Those four days conveyed the sense that we were watching a magnificent work of art—a play dramatizing a single theme: the efficacy of man's mind.Is the answer for why we go to space, can it be found in either of those readings?They're going to be found in both. I am a sucker for heroism, whether it's in war or in any other arena, and space offers a kind of celebration of the human spirit that is only found in endeavors that involve both great effort and also great risk. And the other aspect of transcendence, I'm also a sucker for saying the world is not only more complicated than we know, but more complicated than we can imagine. The universe is more complicated than we can imagine. And I resonate to the sentiment in the first quote.Faster, 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

Ten days ago, their Saturn V rocket had blasted Bean and his crew mates out of earth's gravitational pull. Now their home planet was pulling them back at more than 24,000 miles per hour, twelve times faster than a high-speed rifle bullet. “Boy,” said Bean, “we are really hauling!” Homepage with pictures

 A speech by Ed Hiserodt, science writer for "The New American." Edward Franklin Hiserodt III, born in Memphis, Tenn., on November 6, 1939. Edward Franklin Hiserodt III "slipped the surly bonds of earth," the afternoon of November 28, in his bed, reading a good book. He was the only son and eldest child of Edward F. Hiserodt, Jr. and Mary Louise Rapp Hiserodt, who also raised a daughter, Martha Louise Hiserodt Johnson, all of whom preceded him in death. Known as "Eddie" by family and "Ed" by his many friends, he is survived by his wife, Kaye Denise Corder Hiserodt; and children, Scott, Benjamin (Julie), Jennifer Cormier (Paul), Jill Snyder (Edward), Stuart, and Philip (Leanne), Alex Maitland (Rebecca); grandchildren, Jeremy (41) and Alecia (36), Bahram (36) and Arian (34) Banki, Kyle (31) and James (27) Maitland, Clay (29) and Regan (27) Etheridge, Harrison (21), Sola (20), and Rocket (13) Snyder, Wilder (8) and Ridgely (5) Hiserodt. Ed's undying loyalty to the Crimson Tide began with his college career at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa where he joined Sigma Chi Fraternity and went on to earn a B.S. in Aerospace Engineering in 1962. After graduating and earning a private pilot's license that year, he worked in a number of engineering capacities, including as a NASA contractor on the Saturn V project in Huntsville, from 1962-1966, and as an electrical manufacturer's representative for Ransom Sales in Memphis. In 1970, he moved to Little Rock, Ark., and in 1983, founded Controls & Power, an engineering representative firm for electrical control manufacturers, of which he was president for the remainder of his life. Ed prided himself on achieving his bucket list items of owning his own plane and making a hole-in-one. But he never got around to climbing Mount Everest (too much trouble). Passion for liberty was his raison d'etre, and he lived a life supporting those causes that restore and safeguard the freedoms we inherited from those who died to ensure we would have them. A life member of The John Birch Society and former chairman of the American Conservative Union, his special interest rested in promoting nuclear energy and exposing the myth of so-called "renewables." As such, he was a member of the Society for Accurate Radiation Information and Environmentalists for Nuclear Power. A long-time contributor to The New American Magazine on science and energy issues, in 2005, he penned his magnum opus, "Under Exposed: What if Radiation is Actually Good for You?", currently in its second printing of the English edition, and which has also been translated into Dutch and French.

Why can't Starship reach the Moon without refuelling? How big can black holes get? What space station will replace the ISS? How big do Lagrange points get? Answering all these questions and more in this week's Q&A show.

Why can't Starship reach the Moon without refuelling? How big can black holes get? What space station will replace the ISS? How big do Lagrange points get? Answering all these questions and more in this week's Q&A show.

In 1967, the very first Saturn V rocket was launched. It was the largest rocket ever built.  55 years later, it is still the largest rocket ever launched. However, it might not hold that distinction for much longer. There is a new rocket in town and it might soon displace the Saturn V, and in the process, revolutionize space flight. Learn more about Starship and how it might totally transform the entire space industry on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily Sponsors BetterHelp Visit BetterHelp.com/everywhere today to get 10% off your first month ButcherBox Sign up today at butcherbox.com/daily and use code daily to choose your free steak for a year and get $20 off."  Subscribe to the podcast!  https://link.chtbl.com/EverythingEverywhere?sid=ShowNotes -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Peter Bennett & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back roommates! We are back to talk about episode 2 "He built the Saturn V" Watch out Werner, that last step is a doozy....

On December 21, 1968, a Saturn V rocket was launched from Florida that did something that had never been done before. It took three men outside of the orbit of the Earth.  They didn't just leave the Earth's orbit; they orbited the moon, and while they were in the orbit of the moon, they sent a message to Earth, which was the most widely listened to broadcast in human history up to that point.  Learn more about the Apollo 8 mission and how it changed history on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Sponsors BetterHelp Visit BetterHelp.com/everywhere today to get 10% off your first month ButcherBox Sign up today at butcherbox.com/daily and use code daily to choose your free steak for a year and get $20 off."  Subscribe to the podcast!  https://link.chtbl.com/EverythingEverywhere?sid=ShowNotes -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Peter Bennett & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With the world watching the Apollo 8 astronauts became the first humans to orbit another world.

The Space News Podcast.SpaceTime 20231211 Series 26 Episode 148*A new possible explanation for the Hubble tensionEver since its creation in a big bang 13.82 billion years ago the universe has been expanding. But that rate of expansion has been an ongoing area of debate with different measurement techniques giving contradictory values and different results. *The satellite discovered by the Lucy mission gets a nameThe satellite discovered during the first asteroid encounter of NASA's Lucy mission has now been given an official name – Selam – which means peace in the Ethiopian language Amharic. The tiny moon was discovered orbiting the asteroid Dinkinesh during Lucy's fly by last month. *Starship's second flight explodes in mid airSpaceX are describing the second test flight of its Starship Superheavy rocket as a success even though both stages suffered catastrophic failures during the flight. The 121 metre tall vehicle is the biggest and most powerful rocket ever built producing some 16.7 million pounds of thrust -- more than double that of the Saturn V rockets used to send Apollo astronauts to the Moon. *The Science ReportScientists have confirmed that 2023 will be the warmest year since records began.Organ donations from older people may accelerate aging in younger recipients.Australia's magic mushrooms could help breed tomorrow's 'designer shrooms. Skeptics guide to Faith HealersThis week's guests include:Professor Adam Riess is a Physics Nobel Laureate at John Hopkins UniversityEarthCARE's Mission and Optical Payload Manager Kotska WallaceDr Nick Lomb Consultant Curator of astronomy at the Powerhouse Museum's Sydney Observatory and honorary Professor with the University of Southern Queensland And our regular guests:Alex Zaharov-Reutt from techadvice.lifeTim Mendham from Australian SkepticsListen to SpaceTime on your favorite podcast app with our universal listen link: https://spacetimewithstuartgary.com/listen and access show links via https://linktr.ee/biteszHQ Premium version now available via Spotify and Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts visit our HQ at https://bitesz.com Your support is needed...**Support SpaceTime with Stuart Gary: Be Part of Our Cosmic Journey!** SpaceTime is fueled by passion, not big corporations or grants. We're on a mission to become 100% listener-supported, allowing us to focus solely on bringing you riveting space stories without the interruption of ads.

With so much focus on new heavy lift vehicles at the moment, we wanted to talk about the iconic Saturn V, so we asked John Duncan, founder of ApolloSaturn.com to join us to talk about this iconic rocket.100 Patreons By Show 200: https://www.patreon.com/SpaceandthingsJohn Duncan:http://www.apollosaturn.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/apollosaturncom/ Full show notes: https://spaceandthingspodcast.com/Show notes include links to all articles mentioned and full details of our guests and links to what caught our eye this week.Image Credits: NASASpace and Things:X: https://www.twitter.com/spaceandthings1Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/spaceandthingspodcastFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/spaceandthingspodcast/Merch and Info: https://www.spaceandthingspodcast.comPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/SpaceandthingsBusiness Enquiries: info@andthingsproductions.comSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/spaceandthings. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

People will try to describe the experience you have at the Sphere but let's start with saying it unlike anything you've experienced before.  It doesn't matter if you see the film or a live act, this will be different.  Which is exactly what Madison Square Garden Company was going for with the Sphere.  You'll find a lot of comparisons to IMAX, Disney's Soaring Attraction, 360 theaters but that's only because how else do you describe something never done before.  The Sphere is one of those rare attractions that lives up to the hype, not only breaking the technological ceiling set before it but creating a new form of entertainment.  Let's discuss some of the ways its unlike anything you've seen before.   First, the Sphere is located behind the Venetian convention center.  It's the largest spherical building ever constructed at 366 feet tall and 516 feet wide.  The exterior also features 580,000 square feet of LED displays, making it the largest LED display in history.  It cost approx. $2.3 billion to build and took 4 years to bring to life.  Construction started in 2018 with a planned opening in 2021 but had to put the project on hold in 2020 due to supply complications brought on by the COVID pandemic.  When progress resumed, materials and technology costs had increased causing the originally projected $1.2 billion dollar price tag to almost double by the time it was completed.   The Sphere is the most expensive music and entertainment venue in history.  It seats 18,600 and with standing room accommodations that can handle up to 20,000.  10,000 of those seats have haptic technology incorporated into the seats.  They work in conjunction with 4d features like scent and wind.  At 160,000 square feet, the 16k resolution wraparound LED screen is the largest and highest-resolution LED screen in the world.  The sound system comprises of 1,600 speakers installed behind the LED panels.   The experience starts the moment you enter the venue.  The atrium is large enough to fit the statue of liberty or the Saturn V rocket.  Inside, you'll find five humanoid robots throughout the venue introducing you to the Sphere as well as interacting with patrons.  While the technology is impressive, personally, I would best describe them as borderline creepy.  That said, they are powered by AI and have the ability to react to those that interact with them.   The Sphere isn't designed to host things like professional sporting events typically presented in the round.  However, it would fit well with events like boxing, MMA, WWE, esports or even award ceremonies in addition to concerts and films. Today, we are going to discuss both the film and the concert experience.   The Film   Darren Aronofsky, probably best known for the films like Requiem for a Dream, Black Swan and The Whale, is the director of the first film ever captured in 18k.  It's called “Postcards from earth” and tells the story of a dystopian earth that humans have had to evacuate due to all the damage done to it. It follows 2 humans waking up from cryo-sleep after their journey to another planet that can sustain life. Darren uses this narrative to showcase what sort of film experience only the Sphere can offer. It can probably be best described as a love letter to the planet featuring some of the most breathtaking scenes ever captured on film. The film is 50 minutes long and ticket prices start at $89, increasing based on the better the seat location.   The Show   So a few of things to get out of the way: First, I know this is a divisive band. People seem to love them or hate them. I happen to be in the “love them” camp, and I don't really care if you're in the “hate them” camp.  Music opinions are entirely subjective and no one is going to change anyone's mind.  With that in mind, I'd like to ask those that aren't interested to simply move on instead of voicing your distaste. It's not that you can't have an opinion, it's just that I don't like K-pop, but I don't mention that I don't like K-pop everytime the subject comes up. What I'm saying is don't yuck someone else's yum, okay?  Also, if you think U2 is the worst ever for putting a free album on your iPhone several years ago, but you continue to buy all things Apple, your opinion has no weight here. Second, I recognize that this isn't 360 Vegas Album reviews, and I'll try to keep that in mind as I discuss this show, but the Achtung Baby album is the center of this show, and it's the genesis of my love for this band, so forgive me if I spend too much time discussing the virtues and nuance of the album. And finally, I'm not going to have too much to say about the experience at the venue.  Our seats were general admission, so we were standing room on the floor. They brought us in a separate entrance from everyone else who had seats, and we never saw the lobby or any of the concession areas.  I wish I could comment more on the rest of the facility, but my experience doesn't allow that.   Allright, so back to point 1.  “Achtung Baby” made me a U2 fan.  I came out at a time when I was looking for my own music and not just listening to the music my parents listened to.  I always thought it was a brave album: U2 had won two Grammys for The Joshua Tree and came back four years later with Achtung Baby as if to say, “Glad you liked that, now here's something completely different.” It's an album about conflict and resolution; a result of recording in Berlin after the reunification, and during the time guitarist The Edge was going through a rocky divorce. I also think it's a very “Vegas” album.  It's dark, it's sexy, and it's full of temptation references. There's an arc through the album, and you can argue that it tells the story of a night out that goes a little too far, and the reconciliation that comes with the sunrise. So all of that is to say that when I found out my favorite band would be performing my favorite album in my favorite city, I packed up my favorite person and made for the promised land.   Again, our tickets were General Admission, which is standing room only on the venue floor.  We've done this once before; more than ten years ago. I waited in line all day to get us “close” to the stage, and always felt as though it was a one-time thing.  When we bought General Admission tickets for this event, I made it clear to my wife that I was not going to spend a day in Vegas waiting in line. Thankfully, the event attempts to address this, somewhat successfully. If you have General Admission tickets, you can arrive at the Sphere between 8 am and 1 pm the day of the event to get a numbered wristband. Then you return to the venue around 5 pm, and they let you in based on the number on your wristband.  It's not a perfect system, though. We drove to the Sphere to pick up our wristbands, and they didn't allow parking on the property for wristband pickup. So we had to park on a crowded side street and walk around a bunch of F1 fencing and bleachers to get to the part of the venue that was distributing wristbands. I understand charging for parking when there's an event, but not even letting someone park to run in and get a wristband for 2 minutes is bonkers. We stayed at the Wynn the night of the show, so we walked to the event in the evening. Getting there is easy, and there are signs through the Venetian directing you there. I thought we were going to end up taking the new pedestrian bridge that crosses over Koval from Venetian to the Sphere, but here again, they directed GA ticketholders out of the Venetian convention center building along Sands Avenue, where we had to cross Koval via the crosswalk. Then we had to walk along the north side of the building and enter via the “East VIP entrance.”   Here is another complaint about the venue. They have got to streamline their entrance procedures. I think about a venue like T-Mobile Arena, which has similar capacity to the Sphere. It takes less than 5 minutes to scan your ticket, pass through security, and be inside that place. Sphere needs more doors, and more Security people at the door to make that process a little smoother.   Once inside, we were directed down very dark, moody hallways toward the GA area. We stopped to use the restroom along the way, and I found the restrooms to be suitably massive. Excellent capacity for restrooms only intended for the GA crowd.  There was also a bar/lounge, but we didn't really check it out.   Upon entering the GA floor, we ran into a wall of people.  I had seen in videos from previous shows that it seemed as though the stage left side had fewer people than stage right, and they literally dumped us out on the stage right side. We pushed our way over to the stage left side, and so despite getting there long after we should have with our wristbands we ended up about 10 people back from the stage. Not bad.   We sat on the floor because it was still about an hour and a half before the band was to take the stage.  I was pleasantly surprised to see a whole herd of cocktail waitresses walking the GA floor and taking drink orders. I have never seen that on a General Admission floor before. Around 7:30 or so, a DJ started playing. He was DJing from this modified car that slowly moved around the GA floor. When I heard the band chose a DJ for the opening act, I was really hoping that it wouldn't be “oonce-oonce club music,” and it turns out that I had nothing to worry about.  This guy knew his audience, and was playing rock and pop hits from the 80's and 90's.  The crowd was really getting into it and singing along with songs like “Livin on a Prayer.” It was a great fit.   At about 8:40, the lights went down and the crowd got loud.  Slowly, the band took the stage. Bono started singing a sort of short acapella song that I have not heard before, then the drums kicked in and the band launched into Zoo Station, the opening track of Achtung Baby. I don't want to spoil what happens, but I'll say that the way the band uses the screen here to kick off the show is really cool. If you think you might want to see the show, I'd recommend staying spoiler-free about the intro. It's really fun.   The band played 7-8 tracks from Achtung Baby. They did not play them in exact album order, but in this first section, they played songs from the first 2/3rds of the album. Then they shifted gears a little and played a few other songs, mostly acoustic. This was the day after the Hamas attack on Israel, so this was mentioned, followed by I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Pride (In the Name of Love), and MLK.   Then Bono announced it was “time to wake the Baby up,” and the band went on to finish Achtung Baby.  This was probably my favorite part of the show for a couple reasons: 1) It's later in the show, so fewer people had posted photos and videos of this portion, so there were more surprises and 2) it's really the emotional emotional climax of the album, so I've always felt those songs hit pretty hard.   After finishing the 2nd Achtung Baby section, the band said goodnight, but of course returned for their encore. The encore was kind of a greatest rocking hits section, where they did songs like Elevation, Vertigo, Where the Streets Have No Name, Beautiful Day, and of course, their new Vegas anthem Atomic City.  I won't spoil Atomic City either, but it had some of my favorite visuals of the show.   Let's talk about some of the visuals. We were concerned that where we were sitting, we would be so close to the screen that we couldn't appreciate the whole thing.  There were times that we found ourselves looking around and above to take everything in, but I don't think we missed out on anything by being so close. There was another concern about getting dizzy. Some people get Vertigo (ha!) in Imax theaters, and the Sphere is like Imax on steroids. We only felt a little dizzy at one point, and that was during “Even Better Than The Real Thing.” So during this song, it has maybe the most impressive and complicated graphics of the entire show. They are structured like a moving monument to Elvis and Vegas, and they slowly and steadily move downward. I was looking up at these graphics and following them down with my eyes. When my eyes got to the fixed point of the stage, it felt like the stage was tilting up from the back and we were about to all fall over. They don't really use any flying or moving visuals that might convey motion from the viewer's point of view, so there weren't any other times I felt dizzy or motion-sick.   At the end of the day, I think if you don't like the band - if they just rub you wrong no matter what they do - you're probably going to stay away, and that's fine. If you like a few of their songs and want to see a rock concert unlike anything else you've seen, it's worth checking out. And if you call yourself a fan, then you really shouldn't miss out on this experience. I think a band or artist could be intimidated by this venue and this space, it would be easy to be afraid of being upstaged by the visuals and the scale of everything, but I think U2 is the perfect group to launch this facility. 25 years ago they were touring with (what was at the time) the biggest video screen in the world, so these are guys who know how to utilize large scale visuals in their shows and embrace the technology.

On this Thanksgiving week episode, we're breaking down Starship's latest test flight - IFT2 and comparing it to the first integrated test flight (a.k.a. IFT1). We think there are four major WINS for SpaceX, NASA, and humanity after IFT2's successful test launch. There is ALOT of work before humans can launch onboard, but IFT1 and IFT2 were only 6 months apart and they had to rebuild the pad. With a great looking launchpad post-launch, we expect LOTS of progress in 2024 for Starship!  This episode is for folks of all levels of space nerdom, whether you're waiting for updates on Starship daily, or just finding out about the world most powerful rocket ever made...there's something for everyone. It's a true historic moment in space history that won't be fully appreciated (even by the most hardcore) for how special this moment is until the future. With a rocket system that has TWICE the thrust of the Saturn V - we're thankful for the balance between NASA & SpaceX (and the FAA) that this rocket is being developed! We'd love to know what you think and if you have any questions - so email us at todayinspacepodcast@gmail.com! SOURCES: IFT2 - SpaceX Recap https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1725852544587727145?s=20 IFT1 - Recap - SpaceX https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_krgcofiM6M Booster Static Fire https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1696221858134405371?s=20 https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1695159123019698498?s=20 Starship 29 Static Fire https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1673509777819967488?s=20 Iterative Test of one Raptor with a water cooled plate https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1659599720761950208?s=20 Dr. Phil Metzger Research Thread on Starship's Volcanic Debris Potential https://x.com/DrPhiltill/status/1725539289667092524?s=20 --------------------------  Spread Love, Spread Science Alex G. Orphanos We'd like to thank our sponsors: • Magic Mind - Use code TODAYINSPACE20 for 20% off! https://www.magicmind.com/todayinspace • AG3D Printing Follow us: @todayinspacepod on Instagram/Twitter @todayinspace on TikTok /TodayInSpacePodcast on Facebook Support the podcast:  • Try Magic Mind - Go to https://www.magicmind.com/todayinspace Use code TODAYINSPACE20 for 20% off! • 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 #3dprinting #3dprinted #3dscanning #maker #space #rocket #podcast #spacex #moon #science #nasa #spacetravel #spaceexploration #solarsystem #spacecraft #technology #carlsagan #aerospace #spacetechnology #engineer #stem #interstellar  

Check out Volcanica Coffee's over 150 different coffees at https://lmg.gg/volcanica and use code LINUS15 for 15% off! Help out an animal in need! Check out CUDDLY at https://lmg.gg/cuddly Get $5 off your Magic Spoon order with code WAN at https://lmg.gg/magicspoon Timestamps (Courtesy of NoKi1119) Note: Timing may be off due to sponsor change: 0:00 Chapters 1:40 Intro 2:03 Topic #1 - Windows 12: "Subscription" Edition 30:44 Topic #2 - Linus's phone poll, LG Wing is the most voted 33:50 Linus tries to fixate the poll, Dan on fixing Linus's Z Fold 3 36:26 What phone Luke should get, discussing Google & Pixel, less technophiles 41:56 LTT's premium ChromeOS video idea, "year of the Linux desktop" 46:30 Dad Luke's funny PC story, phone offer, why the Pro? What bundle? 58:04 Topic #3 - Secret Shopper 3 update 59:00 Merch Messages #1 ft. Company phone plan, Dan's response, "liability" comment 1:02:48 LTTStore's new SC long-sleeve shirt ft. Tatjana is off probation 1:05:42 LTTStore's pre-order bread plushie 1:06:32 FailedPlanes bonus bin pins 1:08:48 LTT has been added to YT's affiliate program 1:11:30 Do you do late night videos when you're not planning a WAN Show? 1:17:17 How does Linus deal with being tech cursed? ft. Linus' LAN party 1:24:28 Would you ever do a retro LAN with 90's era machines? 1:27:02 Topic #4 - Epic Games to change UE's licensing for non-game development 1:40:36 Sponsors 1:44:46 Linus explains pool thoughts, Luke's washed AirPods, footages on Z Fold 1:49:16 Rules for those asking Dan, Luke the manager of Dan 1:51:58 Merch Messages #2 2:11:03 Topic #5 - Apple Watch Series 0 is now obsolete 2:17:58 Topic #6 - Integrated SSDs in a GPU concept 2:21:08 Linus tries to find his M.2 carrier board, showcases it 2:25:26 Topic #7 - YouTube changing ads on the mobile app 2:27:01 Linus wants creator's thoughts on this 2:27:44 Topic #8 - 23andMe's user data stolen, for sale 2:28:50 Attack targets Ashkenazi Jews, Linus is angry at his mother 2:30:36 Linus reads out his email he sent to his mother in 2019 2:32:44 Reddit post on 23andMe refusing to delete data 2:34:10 Linus on how this impacts insurance, Luke reads the article on it 2:37:56 Topic #9 - TikTok's deepfake of MrBeast used to scam users 2:40:20 Other deepfaked figures, watermarks, how do we protect users? 2:41:33 Merch Messages #3 ft. WAN Show After Dark, revenue on the bread 3:03:23 Is Linus a backer of the Nofio, a wireless adapter for Valve Index? 3:05:13 What would happen if YouTube decided to delete the old stuff? 3:06:51 What's the most a company tried to make you pay for something dumb? 3:10:00 Tips and tricks for organizing a LAN? 3:11:29 How are the hardware upgrades for LTT going with Luke? 3:12:24 Would you get Samsung's new "The Wall"? 3:13:39 Who were the first ten hires of LMG, and who is still around? 3:16:48 Fake images on Samsung's 130" TV & Freestyle projector articles 3:26:18 Is it acceptable that Cities: Skylines II rolled back console preorders? 3:28:10 What tech tips do you have on making entertaining educational content? 3:29:07 Is there any reason you don't do more LTTStore long-sleeves? 3:29:36 Do you think Starfield was a success or a failure? ft. Screaming Dan 3:31:38 Why did Linus go to Alabama to discuss Saturn V instead of alternatives? 3:32:37 Did you do the backpack pulling thing? 3:33:18 Problem with Samsung's wearables that Linus found? 3:34:55 Can Luke upload his Starfield VODs on YouTube? 3:35:44 News on LTT backpack carabiners? 3:37:18 Ever thought of having a sous chef for the company? 3:39:59 Does WGoA's agreement change your position on AI replacing creative work? 3:46:31 How to avoid getting scammed when engaging with suppliers on Alibaba? 3:48:08 How would Luke rate the 3D down jacket for winter? 3:49:37 How do I run dual GPUs - do they have to be the same model? 3:50:32 Have you ever used PCI-E to Fiber? 3:50:44 FMK - Intel, AMD, ARM 3:54:08 Raiding UFD Tech 3:54:47 Outro

From the Kennedy Space Center to Apollo Mission Control to SpaceX's Starbase, Rod and Tariq discuss the coolest space places on Earth for you to visit. Some are grand, a few are funky, but they are all great places to enjoy the finest moments in space exploration... and there are some hidden gems you shouldn't miss! Join us for this first installment of the Greatest Space Places, Phase One: USA! Headlines: Virgin Galactic's fourth commercial spaceflight launches first Pakistani woman astronaut Namira Salim. Salim flew with two other passengers on the successful suborbital flight. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at the International Astronautical Congress, gives an update on Starship development. Musk says there is a "decent chance" Starship could reach orbit this year if engines fire properly. Also discussed upgrades to increase lift capacity. Fashion brand Prada partners with spacesuit maker Axiom Space to design stylish spacesuits for NASA's Artemis moon missions. Prada will apply expertise in materials science and textiles. Strange press release claims discovery of alien life, but only offers blurry photo of a dog staring at a wall as proof. Self-published book also promoted. Main Topic: Favorite Space Places Kennedy Space Center in Florida has both a visitor complex and active facilities. Highlights include the Space Shuttle Atlantis exhibit, Saturn V Center, Apollo-era launch pads, and bus tours to see current operations. Johnson Space Center in Houston is home to historic Mission Control and astronaut training facilities. Nearby Space Center Houston houses space artifacts like the Saturn V rocket. The National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC contains extensive aviation and space history exhibits, including the original Wright Flyer, Mercury and Gemini capsules, and a Skylab module you can enter. SpaceX's Starbase test facility in South Texas allows the public to view Starship development up close from nearby roads. Launch attempts draw big crowds for a party-like atmosphere. Other favorites highlighted: the Udvar-Hazy Center near Washington Dulles Airport, California Science Center, Wallops Flight Facility, Kansas Cosmosphere, and more. There are many unique sites around the country for space fans to explore. Image Source: Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsor: bitwarden.com/twit

From the Kennedy Space Center to Apollo Mission Control to SpaceX's Starbase, Rod and Tariq discuss the coolest space places on Earth for you to visit. Some are grand, a few are funky, but they are all great places to enjoy the finest moments in space exploration... and there are some hidden gems you shouldn't miss! Join us for this first installment of the Greatest Space Places, Phase One: USA! Headlines: Virgin Galactic's fourth commercial spaceflight launches first Pakistani woman astronaut Namira Salim. Salim flew with two other passengers on the successful suborbital flight. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at the International Astronautical Congress, gives an update on Starship development. Musk says there is a "decent chance" Starship could reach orbit this year if engines fire properly. Also discussed upgrades to increase lift capacity. Fashion brand Prada partners with spacesuit maker Axiom Space to design stylish spacesuits for NASA's Artemis moon missions. Prada will apply expertise in materials science and textiles. Strange press release claims discovery of alien life, but only offers blurry photo of a dog staring at a wall as proof. Self-published book also promoted. Main Topic: Favorite Space Places Kennedy Space Center in Florida has both a visitor complex and active facilities. Highlights include the Space Shuttle Atlantis exhibit, Saturn V Center, Apollo-era launch pads, and bus tours to see current operations. Johnson Space Center in Houston is home to historic Mission Control and astronaut training facilities. Nearby Space Center Houston houses space artifacts like the Saturn V rocket. The National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC contains extensive aviation and space history exhibits, including the original Wright Flyer, Mercury and Gemini capsules, and a Skylab module you can enter. SpaceX's Starbase test facility in South Texas allows the public to view Starship development up close from nearby roads. Launch attempts draw big crowds for a party-like atmosphere. Other favorites highlighted: the Udvar-Hazy Center near Washington Dulles Airport, California Science Center, Wallops Flight Facility, Kansas Cosmosphere, and more. There are many unique sites around the country for space fans to explore. Image Source: Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsor: bitwarden.com/twit

From the Kennedy Space Center to Apollo Mission Control to SpaceX's Starbase, Rod and Tariq discuss the coolest space places on Earth for you to visit. Some are grand, a few are funky, but they are all great places to enjoy the finest moments in space exploration... and there are some hidden gems you shouldn't miss! Join us for this first installment of the Greatest Space Places, Phase One: USA! Headlines: Virgin Galactic's fourth commercial spaceflight launches first Pakistani woman astronaut Namira Salim. Salim flew with two other passengers on the successful suborbital flight. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at the International Astronautical Congress, gives an update on Starship development. Musk says there is a "decent chance" Starship could reach orbit this year if engines fire properly. Also discussed upgrades to increase lift capacity. Fashion brand Prada partners with spacesuit maker Axiom Space to design stylish spacesuits for NASA's Artemis moon missions. Prada will apply expertise in materials science and textiles. Strange press release claims discovery of alien life, but only offers blurry photo of a dog staring at a wall as proof. Self-published book also promoted. Main Topic: Favorite Space Places Kennedy Space Center in Florida has both a visitor complex and active facilities. Highlights include the Space Shuttle Atlantis exhibit, Saturn V Center, Apollo-era launch pads, and bus tours to see current operations. Johnson Space Center in Houston is home to historic Mission Control and astronaut training facilities. Nearby Space Center Houston houses space artifacts like the Saturn V rocket. The National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC contains extensive aviation and space history exhibits, including the original Wright Flyer, Mercury and Gemini capsules, and a Skylab module you can enter. SpaceX's Starbase test facility in South Texas allows the public to view Starship development up close from nearby roads. Launch attempts draw big crowds for a party-like atmosphere. Other favorites highlighted: the Udvar-Hazy Center near Washington Dulles Airport, California Science Center, Wallops Flight Facility, Kansas Cosmosphere, and more. There are many unique sites around the country for space fans to explore. Image Source: Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsor: bitwarden.com/twit

From the Kennedy Space Center to Apollo Mission Control to SpaceX's Starbase, Rod and Tariq discuss the coolest space places on Earth for you to visit. Some are grand, a few are funky, but they are all great places to enjoy the finest moments in space exploration... and there are some hidden gems you shouldn't miss! Join us for this first installment of the Greatest Space Places, Phase One: USA! Headlines: Virgin Galactic's fourth commercial spaceflight launches first Pakistani woman astronaut Namira Salim. Salim flew with two other passengers on the successful suborbital flight. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at the International Astronautical Congress, gives an update on Starship development. Musk says there is a "decent chance" Starship could reach orbit this year if engines fire properly. Also discussed upgrades to increase lift capacity. Fashion brand Prada partners with spacesuit maker Axiom Space to design stylish spacesuits for NASA's Artemis moon missions. Prada will apply expertise in materials science and textiles. Strange press release claims discovery of alien life, but only offers blurry photo of a dog staring at a wall as proof. Self-published book also promoted. Main Topic: Favorite Space Places Kennedy Space Center in Florida has both a visitor complex and active facilities. Highlights include the Space Shuttle Atlantis exhibit, Saturn V Center, Apollo-era launch pads, and bus tours to see current operations. Johnson Space Center in Houston is home to historic Mission Control and astronaut training facilities. Nearby Space Center Houston houses space artifacts like the Saturn V rocket. The National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC contains extensive aviation and space history exhibits, including the original Wright Flyer, Mercury and Gemini capsules, and a Skylab module you can enter. SpaceX's Starbase test facility in South Texas allows the public to view Starship development up close from nearby roads. Launch attempts draw big crowds for a party-like atmosphere. Other favorites highlighted: the Udvar-Hazy Center near Washington Dulles Airport, California Science Center, Wallops Flight Facility, Kansas Cosmosphere, and more. There are many unique sites around the country for space fans to explore. Image Source: Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsor: bitwarden.com/twit

The Saturn V's control system was housed inside and also referred to as the Instrument Unit (IU). Marshall Space Flight Centers Astrionics Laboratory categorized the IU as the “brain” and “nerve center” of Saturn V. Homepage with Pics

[A écouter aussi pour réviser le Bac ou le Brevet] Écoutez l'histoire de la mission spatiale de la NASA : Apollo 13, racontée par l'historienne Virginie Girod, dans un récit inédit en deux épisodes. En plein cœur de la conquête spatiale, les Etats-Unis lancent le 11 avril 1970, la fusée Saturn V en direction du sol lunaire. La mission spatiale Apollo 13 a pour but d'étudier la surface, la géologie du site de Far Mauro, et de recueillir des échantillons du sol pour améliorer notre connaissance de cet astre. A bord trois astronautes : Jim Lowell, Jack Swigert et Fred Haise, bien décidés à poursuivre l'exploration de la lune, entrepris lors des deux précédentes missions Apollo. Une mission qui ne se déroulera pas comme prévu …. Prenez de la hauteur, direction l'espace à la découverte de l'une des missions les plus célèbres du XXe siècle. 'Au Cœur de l'Histoire' est un podcast Europe 1 Studio.Avec les archives d'Europe 1 et de la Nasa. Merci au service Documentation et Patrimoine d'Europe 1'Au cœur de l'Histoire' s'adresse aux passionnés d'histoire mais aussi à ceux qui cherchent à apprendre l'Histoire facilement. Que vous souhaitiez renforcer votre culture générale, ou réviser une leçon d'histoire vue en cours sans passer par les manuels scolaires, ce podcast est fait pour vous.Pour aider les élèves en préparation du brevet ou du bac d'Histoire-Géographie, 'Au cœur de l'Histoire' aborde à travers les destins de divers personnages les grands chapitres du programme scolaire de Troisième ainsi que du programme scolaire de Terminale : Révolution française ; Première Guerre mondiale ; régimes totalitaires dans l'Europe de l'entre-deux-guerres ; Seconde Guerre mondiale, Régime de Vichy, Collaboration et Résistance ; création de l'Union Européenne…Plus vivants que les fiches de révision, les récits historiques de Virginie Girod vous permettront de mémoriser par l'écoute les enjeux des conflits qui ont marqué la France et l'Europe et d'avoir en tête des exemples de personnages qui y sont reliés. Sujets abordés : NASA - Espace - Mission spatiale - Apollo 13 – Etats-Unis - Lune – Accident 'Au cœur de l'histoire' est un podcast Europe 1 Studio. Ecriture et présentation : Virginie Girod - Production : Adèle Humbert - Direction artistique : Adèle Humbert et Julien Tharaud - Réalisation : Clément Ibrahim - Musique originale : Julien Tharaud - Musiques additionnelles : Julien Tharaud et Sébastien Guidis - Communication : Kelly Decroix - Diffusion et rédaction : Eloise Bertil - Visuel : Sidonie Mangin

Hoje é dia do "Influencers da Ciência", um Spin-Off do podcast "Intervalo de Confiança". Neste programa trazemos o nome de Influencers que de fato trouxeram algo de positivo para a sociedade, aqueles que expandiram as fronteiras do conhecimento científico e hoje permitiram o desenvolvimento de diversas áreas.Nesse episódio, Sofia Massaro nos traz a vida e obra de uma importante matemática e física americana que venceu o machismo e racismo da primeira metade do Século XX no segregado Estados Unidos para se tornar uma importante engenheira da NASA, responsável, entre outras coisas, por calcular a tragetória do fogete Saturn V, que levou a humanidade à Lua. De tão importante, a sede da NASA foi renomeado em sua homenagem.A Pauta foi escrita por Sofia Massaro. A edição foi feita por Leo Oliveira e a vitrine do episódio feita por Júlia Frois em colaboração com as Inteligências Artificiais Dall-E, da OpenAI e MidJourney. A coordenação de redação é de Tatiane do Vale e a gerência financeira é de Kézia Nogueira. As vinhetas de todos os episódios foram compostas por Rafael Chino e Leo Oliveira.Visite nosso site em: https://intervalodeconfianca.com.br 

Neil and Andrew talk with guest Randy Walsh about his research into the Apollo Moon missions and approaches the idea of the alleged hoax from the view point of his career of a professional pilot. He also discusses the strange research he found concerning the lack of safe testing of the F1 engines on the Saturn V rocket. Also discussed are Neil's research into military training films and how the British Intelligence allegedly stole a film from the Russians. Also discussed is the idea of aliens on the moon, the Kennedy assignation, Greys, Reptilians and Simon Parkes!This show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/4541473/advertisement

May of 2023 was the fiftieth anniversary of the launch of Skylab. The US Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama, is celebrating with the Summer of Skylab – a series of presentations, educational panels, and celebrity events taking place through November. This special episode features retired NASA engineer Kenny Mitchell. Mitchell worked at the Marshall Space Flight Center on the development of the Saturn V rocket and developed Environmental Control and Life Support Systems for Skylab.

On this episode, we review the SpaceX Starship's 1st fully integrated test flight! A highly entertaining test flight that was doomed to explode by design (or RUD, as SpaceX loves to say). This test flight took many by surprise as the joy of a successful failure was confusing to most. The iterative process has many failures before success, and that's part of the journey of progress. We review WHAT the test flight was, WHY Starship is important, and HOW this test was a successful failure for SpaceX and all of humanity. We close with Space Storytime about the only comparable heavy rocket to Starship in history - the Soviet N1, and how its chief designer Sergei Korolev worked himself to death trying to compete with the USA's Saturn V rocket.  What do YOU think? Let us know in the comments! Big Quesions/Thoughts for this episode: What was the test supposed to prove? Why were so many people confused by "success" with a rocket blowing up? How does the Starship system help NASA? How does it help humanity travel the solar system? How is Starship going to deal with the same challenges the N1 dealt with that led to its failure? We'd love to know your thoughts and questions! Email us at todayinspacepodcast@gmail.com SOURCES: Starship Test Flight (SpaceX Broadcast) Start at 44:40) https://www.youtube.com/live/-1wcilQ58hI?feature=share https://www.nasa.gov/feature/50-years-ago-soviet-s-moon-rocket-s-rollout-to-pad-affects-apollo-plans https://web.archive.org/web/20190804104053/https://www.energia.ru/en/history/systems/vehicles/vehicle_n1-l3_e.html (not sure if true) https://web.archive.org/web/20161031200800/http://www.starbase1.co.uk/pages/n1-project-history.html https://www.russianspaceweb.com/n1.html https://web.archive.org/web/20020612070438/http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/n1.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Korolev  -------------------------- 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: Caldera Lab Manscaped AG3D Printing Follow us: @todayinspacepod on Instagram/Twitter @todayinspace on TikTok /TodayInSpacePodcast on Facebook  Support the podcast: • Get 20% OFF at Caldera Lab - use code SPACE or go to calderalab.com/SPACE • Get 20% OFF@manscaped + Free Shipping with promo code SPACE at MANSCAPED.com! #ad #manscapedpod #sponsored • 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 #space #rocket #podcast #people #spacex #moon #science #3dprinting #nasa #tothemoon #spacetravel #spaceexploration #solarsystem #spacecraft #technology #carlsagan #aerospace #spacetechnology #engineer #alien #stem #listenable #iss #alienlife #astronomy #astrophysics

Have your grown-ups send your question to FoundinSpacePodcast@gmail.com

[A écouter aussi pour réviser le Bac ou le Brevet] Écoutez l'histoire de la mission spatiale de la NASA : Apollo 13, racontée par l'historienne Virginie Girod, dans un récit inédit en deux épisodes. En plein cœur de la conquête spatiale, les Etats-Unis lancent le 11 avril 1970, la fusée Saturn V en direction du sol lunaire. La mission spatiale Apollo 13 a pour but d'étudier la surface, la géologie du site de Far Mauro, et de recueillir des échantillons du sol pour améliorer notre connaissance de cet astre. A bord trois astronautes : Jim Lowell, Jack Swigert et Fred Haise, bien décidés à poursuivre l'exploration de la lune, entrepris lors des deux précédentes missions Apollo. Une mission qui ne se déroulera pas comme prévu …. Prenez de la hauteur, direction l'espace à la découverte de l'une des missions les plus célèbres du XXe siècle. "Au Cœur de l'Histoire" est un podcast Europe 1 Studio.Avec les archives d'Europe 1 et de la Nasa. Merci au service Documentation et Patrimoine d'Europe 1"Au cœur de l'Histoire" s'adresse aux passionnés d'histoire mais aussi à ceux qui cherchent à apprendre l'Histoire facilement. Que vous souhaitiez renforcer votre culture générale, ou réviser une leçon d'histoire vue en cours sans passer par les manuels scolaires, ce podcast est fait pour vous.Pour aider les élèves en préparation du brevet ou du bac d'Histoire-Géographie, "Au cœur de l'Histoire" aborde à travers les destins de divers personnages les grands chapitres du programme scolaire de Troisième ainsi que du programme scolaire de Terminale : Révolution française ; Première Guerre mondiale ; régimes totalitaires dans l'Europe de l'entre-deux-guerres ; Seconde Guerre mondiale, Régime de Vichy, Collaboration et Résistance ; création de l'Union Européenne…Plus vivants que les fiches de révision, les récits historiques de Virginie Girod vous permettront de mémoriser par l'écoute les enjeux des conflits qui ont marqué la France et l'Europe et d'avoir en tête des exemples de personnages qui y sont reliés. Sujets abordés : NASA - Espace - Mission spatiale - Apollo 13 – Etats-Unis - Lune – Accident -   "Au cœur de l'histoire" est un podcast Europe 1 Studio. Ecriture et présentation : Virginie Girod - Production : Camille Bichler- Direction artistique : Adèle Humbert et Julien Tharaud - Réalisation : Clément Ibrahim - Musique originale : Julien Tharaud - Musiques additionnelles : Julien Tharaud et Sébastien Guidis - Communication : Kelly Decroix - Visuel : Sidonie Mangin- Archives : Europe 1, NasaMerci au service Documentation et Patrimoine d'Europe 1    Archives :- Europe 1, Gilles Schneider, 16 avril 1970- Nasa, documents issus des missions Apollo 11 et Apollo 13

Welcome to March 21st, 2023 on the National Day Calendar. Today we celebrate colorful history and the voice that launched our greatest missions.  It's likely that somewhere along the way you've noticed two spellings for the word "color", one ending in "or" (the American version) and one ending in "our" (the UK version). Both are correct so why are there two ways to spell "color"? In the early 1800's the United States was just out of the Revolutionary War and Noah Webster decided American English should use shorter, more logical spellings to differentiate ourselves from the British. He dropped the "u" in many words such as flavor, honor and color. He also changed "re" to "er" as in center, changed double "L's" to single and even proposed spelling "soup" with two "o's"! Not all his ideas took hold. On International Colour Day celebrate our British heritage with a "u". One of the most famous voices in the world belonged to Jack King. You may not know the name, but likely you've heard of him. Jack was responsible for one of the best-known countdowns in history—the launch of Apollo 11. As people everywhere watched the Saturn V rocket take off into space en route to the Moon, it was Jack King that calmly narrated the entire event. He was the voice of many NASA countdowns, but perhaps none more important than that one in 1969. On National Countdown Day, you can start a countdown of your own…easy as 123…or should we say 3-2-1. I'm Anna Devere and I'm Marlo Anderson. Thanks for joining us as we Celebrate Every Day. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The ascent of the Eagle was strikingly swift compared with the liftoff of the huge Saturn V rocket from Cape Canaveral. Of course for the Moon launch, there was no atmosphere resisting Eagle, and there was only one-sixth gravity to overcome. Homepage with Pics

German police conducted raids all across the country on Wednesday, making arrests, and attempting to dismantle a plot aimed at overthrowing the government. And, 50 years ago, the Apollo 17 Saturn V moon rocket crew took what would become one of the most iconic images from space: a photo of planet Earth — “the blue marble.” Former astronaut Mae Jemison reflects on it. Also, Peru's Congress has vowed to impeach President Pedro Castillo just hours after he announced he would dissolve the body. Plus, Taiwanese citizens react to the tumultuous protests in China over the strict “zero-COVID” policy that led to extensive lockdowns.  The World is committed to telling stories that might otherwise go untold, but our listener-funded newsroom can't run without your support. Will you give today to keep our newsroom running strong and help us earn a $67,000 match?