@LunarCitizens@NASA@SpaceX Pretty sure SpaceX only got about $2.9 B for Artemis III (now IV). There's a follow-on contract for the second lunar mission but they won't be able to earn any of that until after the first mission.
@Phrankensteyn@brickmack They are typically 4 degrees apart to prevent frequency interference. ITU mandates a minimum of 0.1 degrees, or about 73 km.
They *do* allow co-location within an orbital slot. You could put 50 satellites within 150 km.
I think you might have com issues with that.
@Phrankensteyn@brickmack There is a lot of orbital space in the proposed LEO orbits.
There is limited space in geostationary orbit and you have to negotiate for each of the slots where you want to operate. Most of the open ones are over the pacific ocean - maybe you could use those.
IMO, nobody outside Blue has the detailed information to make a realistic estimate. I agree with @SciGuySpace that it seems aggressive, but beyond that, I have no opinion.
But I hate the "we will fly by the end of the year" statement. Just add a "we hope" to the front of that...
Some LC-36 updates. Now that we’ve had access to the pad and integration facility we can share a bit of good news. The propellant farm, oxygen, liquid hydrogen and LNG tanks are all in good shape. This is good luck because these are very long lead items. The water tower is also good. The big support tower is damaged, but it can be repaired in place rather than torn down and replaced. The booster “Never Tell Me The Odds” and the three GS-2s that were onsite in the integration facility also look good.
I’ve seen some speculation that we might move directly to the 9x4 configuration, but we won’t do that. Rate manufacturing of 7x2 is going well, and we’re going to continue that at pace as planned and store the stages for use. In addition, we had already been working for some time on eliminating our transporter-erector in favor of an alternative vertical conop, and we’ll now go directly to that; so we don’t need a new transporter-erector.
We will fly again before the end of this year. Gradatim Ferociter.
@SpaceInMiBrain@SciGuySpace Any thing 6 months from now is NET for pretty much everybody, but in most cases I think there's an actual schedule someplace that has that number on it.
This one has a ton of uncertainty built into it, and it builds on the NG yearly predictions which are laughable.
I asked Grok to make the best comparison possible between starship, new glenn, and neutron.
I think this is pretty close to perfect. No, I did not specify any of the text.
@peterrhague My map of Europe looks a bit like that. Visited Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, France, Lichtenstein, Czech Republic, Austria, Italy, Spain.
Visited England but did not leave Heathrow...
@Mallchad@JoelSercel SpaceX developed Stargaze, which uses the star trackers on starlink satellites. That likely outperforms ground based radar significantly.
@JoelSercel The small stuff likely isn't tracked by any ground stations. Most of it's likely tracked by Stargaze. Starlink did 300,000 avoidance maneuvers in 2025, or about 3 per month per satellite.
@JoelSercel I'm almost done with a 6-part video series on orbital debris. There are way more than 100 derelict satellites and stages. There are - by my count - about 535 rocket bodies in highly elliptical orbits.
But the real problem is the small stuff - 1 to 10 cm.
Grok, make me a picture comparing starship, new glenn, and neutron, but make it as wrong as possible.
Thinking about your request...
Can you make it 50% less wrong?
I try to apply this approach to my videos and elsewhere in my life...
“The goal of thinking scientifically is not simply to be right. It's to be less wrong over time. Science is a process built around that principle.”
https://t.co/yRoOT3tbCU