 Hey everyone, welcome to the show. We're still waiting on Jerry to show up. Oop. Hang on. I'm gonna hit the... Thanks, Dada. My name is Jamie Higginbotham. I'm currently joined by Ryan... Ryan, I can never say your last name. Kateen? Katten? Yes. Katon. You know, I always feel... I always seem to get it right the first time, and I never think it's right. I was going to have you start with Falcon Heavy and Starship stuff, but since I can't talk about that and I feel like it would be really weird for me just to, like, do this just partway through, why don't we go ahead and start with me misspelling Boeing in the title to Boeing and talking about, you know, Starliner's currently 1.1... This was an article in Ars Technica, I believe it was Eric Berger. Boeing has now lost 1.1 billion, with a B, dollars on Starliner. Mostly because it's not... Well, I say this, but I feel like it's because it's not a cost-plus contract and I'm not sure Boeing knows how to do aerospace that isn't cost-plus? Question mark? I mean, maybe, maybe not. In a lot of this is just the extended delays with Starliner. The thing about this, back in the day when NASA was announcing this program, right, the, what was this, CCDev, Boeing was the preferred favorite. Everyone thought they were going to launch first. And certainly this is not a race, right? Like, we want to make sure that everything is safe. Like, you don't race to space. I say that, but Apollo. I guess space has always been a race, hasn't it? Okay, well, maybe you shouldn't. You want to do it safely, right? And it was like, there was little doubt in anyone's minds that Boeing was going to make it first. And in fact, they got an extra several billion dollars for schedule assurance. That skeletal assurance, let's just be clear here. SpaceX is about to launch its 7 operational mission and 8th overall crew mission, operational crew mission, right? So 7 operational crew missions to station. 8 total crew missions, because there was also a demonstration mission too that sent crew up there for NASA. In the amount of time that Boeing has sent, goose egg. So I guess my question for the chat room and for just kind of like opening up the floor is, is there a point in time that we think that Boeing is just going to nope out and be like, you know what, because it's not a cost plus contract. I believe, you know, Boeing gets paid on milestones, right? So they reach a certain milestone, they get a payment. They reach another milestone, they get a payment. And so Boeing is set to get a pretty large payment when they send humans to the International Space Station. But there is a cost, you know, risk reward analysis that you can do here. And you could say, you know, it's going to cost us so much more at this point to actually make this thing operational. Let's just kill the program. Now, I don't know the contract. I don't know if they're allowed, but like, is there a possibility where Boeing's going to nope out of this thing? They've already lost 1.1 billion. And actually, the whole overall department, hey, I took a note of this somewhere. Yeah, Boeing's Defense, Space and Security Program reported a loss of 527, we're just going to call this, they reported a loss of half a billion dollars for quarter two this year. That's just this quarter. If they continue that, assuming that Q1 was to say, like if we extrapolate that out to all quarters, that is 2 billion dollars in loss just for Boeing's Defense, Space and Security Operations Program. Right? Like, there's got to be a point where you nope out and just go, eh, I'm not going to do this anymore. And that's, by the way, I'm sorry to keep just going, but like, that's, like, we also have to consider, like, there were these late-breaking issues with Starliner, right? There were the soft links on the lines that connect the parachutes. Actually, this was, when was this? This was like early June, something like that. I've lost track of time, I'm sorry. But like, this was not that long ago. Like, a month, two months ago, they found these issues with the links and the parachutes. But then they also found that P-213 glass, I'm sorry, it was cloth tape that they had wrapped things around that was flammable. It's like, they were on the verge of launching this thing. But what are the ramifications of them not fulfilling their terms of the contract? Do they have to give that money back? Great question. So, you know what? And I regret getting rid of the dada bubble that we had in the member show, we had a little dada bubble that we could put in between the two of us. So it's just this floating head that shows up, like, right over here. And I wish we could have done that. But anyhow, I don't believe they have to give any money back because they did technically meet the milestones in which they were paid, right? So it's not like, so they won't get the money for making it to Space Station until they make it to Space Station. But then on the way to Space Station, it's like, okay, NASA says, all right, you need to prove that you can fire your abort engines, right? And then, you know, show us that you've got a safe abort system. And then, you know, Boeing or SpaceX or whomever would do that and then NASA would go, cool, here's $100 million, thank you for doing that. And they'd go, okay, now we need you to prove that you've got, you know, good life support systems on board. And so then, you know, they'd send it up into Space with no humans on board. They'd prove good life support. They'd go, cool, here's a half billion dollars, thank you for doing that. And they'd done those milestones. So, like, that's money in the bank that they would be able to keep. I would assume. Again, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know the contract. I'm making wild assumptions here. So keep that in mind. But, you know, they have not made the money sending humans to Space Station or the operational contract of this vehicle, right? So it's not just like, hey, they make the Space Station, they get one check. Then it's every time they make it to Space Station, they get a check for that. So they could look at this and go, no, no, no. The upside is far greater than the downside. We're going to make way more. And I think someone in the chat room earlier wrote, like, it's got, you know, a potential $8 billion upside. But that's $8 billion revenue, not profit. Keep that in mind, right? So they're already $1.1 billion in the hole. There's a tipping point here, right? Like, also Jared, a wild Jared has joined the room. Hi, Jared. Good to see you. Good morning, everybody. Actually, good wherever you are to everybody. Yeah, yeah. It's evening for Ryan. So, Jared, I don't know how much you've got. So basically I'm discussing, like, how far do we think Boeing is going to go with Starliner? Like, they have, by the way, for the record, they have given no indications that they are going to cancel this program. I'm just looking at this. I'm looking at this from, like, a business bend of, like, you know, would I keep this thing going? Maybe. Maybe. But like, I don't know, starting to lose a lot of money. Yeah, they are losing a lot of money, but also I feel like Boeing kind of has no choice with their, you know, commercial crew services that they have to offer. So they're going to try to do everything they can to get other people to want to do it. That's why they're trying to work with Amazon with Orbital Reef and just basically, I would imagine trying to shop Starliner wherever they can to whoever they can and see if they can get some people that want to fly their astronauts or payloads on board a bit possibly. But has that been successful, though? What's up? Has that been successful? Like, have people actually gone, yeah, this is a thing we want to do? Has that been, have they been able to show a financially viable product here? I don't think so, but I also don't feel like Boeing is going to allow Starliner to fail in their own eyes. They, with recent problems that they've had with things like the 737 MAX and other stuff, they're looking for a comeback. And as far as they're concerned, it doesn't matter whether Starliner is bleeding out money, they need something that makes them look good. The problem is that Starliner's done a lot of stuff that hasn't made them look good. Oh, you know, it's kind of cutting off your nose despite your face in this, but more of a positive way of trying to do that in a positive way, but ending up screwing up really badly. But also, I just don't see Boeing dropping Starliner simply because of, I don't want to call it corporate ego, but, you know, since the 90s, Boeing, since the 90s and the acquisition of McDonald's, Boeing has just kind of lost its mojo into them. It doesn't matter whether it's going to be losing money at this point. It doesn't matter whether it's going to be having a ST, having a spacecraft, because they try to, the space shuttle will allow any time that they could as this delightful Boeing product, even though it was a North American Rockwell product, and they just bought their, you know, right. They got the rights with it when the companies purchased each other. But yeah, no, they've already dropped the money into it, so there's no way that Boeing is going to be like, oh, well, you know, I guess we're just going to there's too much pride in those divisions for them to just simply walk away from it like that. I hear you, but pride doesn't make money, right? No, it doesn't. There's a point where the bean counters are going to be like, hey, guys, no, we can't afford to do this. And, you know, again, let me just reiterate, like that whole division has lost half a billion dollars quarter to this year. Yeah, and I would say that if the bean counters were focused on the Starliner program, then how the heck did Starliner even get past its first flight? So I figure at this point, you know, if we're still talking about Starliner and flying Starliner, and we've already had one... I don't want to call it like a... Okay, so first flight, we can say first flight Starliner was a failure in the objectives, the main objective it was supposed to meet, but many other objectives were passed successfully. And then the second flight finally got what the first flight should have done. Hang on, Jared, I got to push back a little bit. When you're in a test regime and it's a non-operational vehicle, it's hard to call any test in which you get data a failure, I would argue, right? Now, had that been an operational vehicle, absolutely on board, but it is not an operational vehicle yet, right? And they gathered data and they used that data to actually push the vehicle to the next step. So I'm not sure... I have a hard time calling any test regime in which you get data a failure. So, yeah, they got data, but they didn't do their most important test regime, which was rendezvous and docking operations at the space station and seeing how Starliner would be at the space station when it's docked there and actually working. So to me, that makes it a bit of a... To me, that makes it a primary objective failure. So there were a lot of tests, you know, on the way and on the way back that worked out like they should have, but really what Starliner was there to do, which was to prove that it could get a crew to the International Space Station safely and on its own, it didn't really do a fantastic job of that at all. I mean, right out of the gate, mission clock isn't set to the correct time, right? So we're just... What are we even doing right out of the gate with something like that? So, no. Yeah. That first flight of Starliner is mixed to me in terms of how I would describe whether it was a success or a failure. A lot of things worked, but the really big one didn't. Yeah, I think we're going to fundamentally disagree here in that I don't think it's possible to actually have a true failure in a test regime unless the only real way in my mind is to actually have a failure in a test is to get no data from it whatsoever, right? Like, now you've really failed, right? Because you lost your vehicle and you have no idea why you lost your vehicle, so how do you improve on it, right? So, the thing is when you're testing, the whole point of testing is you don't know what you don't know. And so, yeah, you're right. They screwed up the time. They didn't know that they had done that. They didn't, like, it was this... If I may equate this to an early, before I worked there, SpaceX launch, right? Falcon 1 Flight 3, I believe it was. Yeah, Flight 3, right? The engine, like, was still... There was still a little bit of thrust off the first-stage engines, so the two stages collided with each other. It was one line of code that they needed to do to fix that flight. So, yeah, was that flight a failure in that they did not reach their main test objective? They didn't make it to orbit. That was their main test objective. But they learned exactly what they needed to do to make orbit. So, on a non-operational rocket, like, they figured out, oh, hey, we need to change this one line of code. I would argue that wasn't actually a failure. It was a successful test. Anyhow, sorry. We're going down a rabbit hole here. I'm so sorry. Yeah, man, thanks. I was going to say, but, hey, wait a second. Wait a second. Wait a second. Like, hey, weren't they carrying a payload on Flight 3? Like, an actual payload? I don't remember. I don't remember. If they were carrying an actual payload, that meant that there was faith in the rocket that it would actually be able to get that payload there. Then, to me, not being able to deliver that payload, that's a failure on it. I don't think that's quite how non-operational rockets work. Because when you've got a non-operational rocket, there's always a chance of success. And so sometimes some of these fun little companies that do, like, ashes to space, like, send your relatives ashes to space and things like that, they'll sometimes, because you can book it for way, way less money on a flight that has a high probability of not making it to orbit, sorry, did you say patches? Yeah, exactly. Thanks, Dada. I want the floating Dada right here. So, tomorrow, as an example, tomorrow we were able to forward to send our patches, in fact, they're right here. They're right here. They're literally... Rocket-flown patches. It's XOS Aerospace. Oh, you can't see them. These, wait, wait, wait, these, right here, flew in a rocket, intended to go to space. And the only way we would be able to afford to fly something like this, fly it to space, is on an experimental spacecraft that, like, they told us out of the gate, they're like, this ain't making it to space. Like, it's highly unlikely we're going to make it to space. And we're like, it's fun, let's do it, right? So, there's a difference in payload. If the payload had... You're right, Jared. If we had expected to get the payload to space and it was like, you know, a full-on, not kidding around satellite, that's a very different thing. Well, there were full-on satellites on board of Falcon 1 for Flight 3. There was an Air Force satellite and there were two national satellites. Then maybe I'm full of shit. All right, so, Dana brought up a comment for us. From a European perspective, Boeing right now is a failed company in all of its fields. That's a bit aggressive. They are not a national... They are not national endeavor, but a cash-grabber exploiting weaknesses of an American political system. Maybe, around the room. I mean, you can kind of throw the aircraft program into it, which is a point I was going to bring up. The aircraft program, they have many more customers than just NASA, but the 777X was meant to be already in operation. You know, the 737 MAX, that had to go a bit of a hiccup. And like the 737 MAX 7 I still don't think is flying yet. So, you know, they're having a lot of hiccups in everything aerospace that they're doing at the moment. The only aircraft they've managed to get off the production line so far is the 737 MAX 8 and MAX 9. But their aircraft division is different than their aerospace division, is it not? Like, aircrafts don't fall under... It's different, but it's the same company. It's under the same name. Sure. Okay. I mean, yeah. I mean, to Jared's point, I feel like when the McDonald Douglas management came in, I think they took over most aspects of Boeing. Did they not? Including aerospace and... So, like, that feels like the thing that kind of broke them. And like, when you look at the... So, the point of this, like, we veered way off. The point of this is how much longer before Boeing calls it quits? Jared, you're saying they won't. Was it you that you think it's a point of pride and they're not going to call it quits? And someone else early in the chat room said it was... They worth 66, let's see if I can find it, because there's a search. That's so cool that I can do that. You can search for comments in the system, and I found that comment from way back earlier in like two seconds. Boeing made $66 billion last year, $1 billion on the sheet for Starline is nothing. Right? Like... Who cares? Who cares? Exactly. Who cares? So, maybe... We'll eat a billion dollars if it gets us good PR. Yeah, but if it gets us good PR. But I just want to add, the critical part is that it has to work for you to get good PR. Yeah, it's not been doing so good. I mean, at the very least, you need to execute, right? Even if you fail, you've tried and you've done a good job at a boy, but you have to execute. You can't just not. Yeah. Well... And something else I'd bring up is Mr. Wolff said 15 minutes ago that NASA will keep throwing money at them because they have too much heritage and they own... The United States Congress is a thing that has to be dealt with and although Boeing is meant to be this new space contract for Starline or whatever, Boeing has been a significant part of the American Space Program since its inception, essentially. So, you know, they are a heritage company that has always been around and, you know, I guess you could also throw in that they have some... They have to do it because... Government pressure, I don't know. Alright, so, Ryan, you say yes. They're going to keep going. Jared, you say yes. They're going to keep going. Yeah. So, now I ask the question to the chat room, whether you're watching live or on demand, what do you think? Do you think they're going to keep going and or is there a cut-off point, right? Now, I'm not saying that this would happen, but let's go to the worst-case scenario in which two years from now, Starliner still has not flown. They just keep finding issue after issue after issue. Then, do you think that they're going to keep going? Now, let me extend that again. Five years from now, they still haven't gone, right? Like, where... there's a line. There's a line here somewhere? No, there is, right? There's a point in time where they're just going to go, no. Where... I guess my question is, where is that line? And NASA's space flight has entered the room. Scrap it and go, Dream Chaser. I think we are all stand for, like, Dream Chaser. Like, I think all of us, from the moment we saw the concept art for Dream Chaser, we were like, that. We all... The world wants that. So, I just... How hard are we going to laugh when Dream Chaser launches before Starliner does? You know, I'm not going to laugh. I'm going to cheer my fool head off. I am beyond excited. You can see me getting giddy on camera. I am so excited for Dream Chaser. I will laugh maniacally like the villain I should be at times with this kind of thing. So, yeah, that would be hilarious if that ends up happening. I think we've driven this one home. So, I'm just curious to know, where does everyone think the line is, right? Because there's a line. So, actually, let me ask around the room. Jared, where's the line? When do you think NASA would call it quits? Or do you think 10 years from now, they still haven't flown? They'll keep trying. So, the line to me is not specifically an amount of time, or a predetermined amount of time. The line to me ends up being the ability to pick another established operator. Somebody that already has another vehicle that's up and running and able to take over what Starliner would be doing. Because the whole critical key of having Boeing and SpaceX is that you have that redundancy. That way, if a Falcon 9 blows up, because we've had two of them blow up in its history. So, regardless of weather, regardless of the fact that it has flown successfully in flight since 2015 and been okay on the pad since 2016, as Dana once told me, you're only good until you're not. And it just all takes is one for things to go wrong. And if something goes wrong, that grounds that rocket, that grounds that spacecraft, and if you only have one, then you have no capability of being able to rotate crews or bring crews back or other things like that. And that's a really big problem. That's one of those things when people are always saying, just hand it to SpaceX, just hand it to Boeing, just hand it to Blue. Well, nobody says just hand it to Blue. Wait, hang on. Let's pin that because questions about Blue but continue. But no, they absolutely will not be a predetermined amount of time. It will be a matter of access. Can we still have access to the International Space Station? If another player comes along and is able to pull that off with a different vehicle, then yes. But as far as I know in terms of crew and launching crew to the International Space Station outside of other foreign entities and maybe ones that were not exactly the most friendly with anymore because certain good reasons. Yeah, turns out I think NASA's just going to basically have to stay that course and be beholden to what Congress wants them to do and the lawyers in charge of the money are saying stick with Boeing so I actually don't see them dropping Boeing at any point. Unless there is some sort of absolutely catastrophic failure during the mission, then I could see them chucking Boeing out the window. But Jerry, you're looking at this backwards. NASA dropping Boeing. What about Boeing just going, we're not going to build it? No, because they're going to continue to get money regardless of whether they've made a crop up. This is not a cost plus contract. No, this is not a cost plus contract. There will be I just know there's going to be more missions coming on it. They're going to get more. But if they can't fly the mission, they can't make the money. So you can give them a thousand missions right now. They cannot execute on those missions right now. So, Neat? I do not see anybody in this situation stopping. So it's just going to go. Fair enough. Your vote. Your vote is Never. Never. Ryan, where do you think the line is? Well, it depends what they want to do with orbital reef and private space stations and whatnot, but I feel like the line may be when the ISS is clearly at the end of its lifespan and NASA no longer has a desire for it. Boeing may just go, you know what, this was our intended purpose. Let's just call it a day. I also think that when Dream Chaser starts knocking around, it may get a little more. I don't know whether they'll immediately pull it or switch or whatever happens, but the pressure will definitely add up and I feel like the likelihood of something happening in the relation of Starliner being canceled, I feel like that likelihood will increase once Dream Chaser starts flying. Yeah, I think and NASA space flight also says, very similar. I think when Dream Chaser cargo starts flying, that could then be incentive for NASA to be like, okay, well, you know, this remember, Dream Chaser was designed as a crew vehicle first and then they kind of retrofitted it to become a cargo vehicle. So not to say that there's not still a ton of work that would need to be done to re-retrofit, unretrofit, convert it back to crew, but like, maybe they could do that faster than Boeing can get Starliner going. Well, hey guys, what's that latest comment? I believe the situation in Ukraine gave Starliner a new lease on life since NASA can't 100% rely on Soyuz. Yeah, but again, so maybe but that requires that NASA like, maybe Boeing is trying to move this to a cost plus contract? Still can't fly the vehicle though. Boeing absolutely. The political situation, you can't fly the vehicle. But Boeing absolutely has the political chops to be able to pull it off. I could, it would be, I don't want to say it would be a piece of cake for Boeing to come in and convince the right people, senators and otherwise to turn their contract into a cost plus one, but I mean they're Boeing, they got tons of money. They can yield that in the influence that they want. Yeah, and I think this is a very valid point from Northernchev, contract or not Boeing will be given more, will be given, stress will be given more money, right? Yeah, I think a lot of people forget that there's a major political aspect in spaceflight. Like it's a critical key to making sure that your company survives in aerospace. It's having a good understanding of the field of political play. Let's see, hang on, there was a I missed the original comment. Oh, here we go. Bennett says, aren't Dream Chaser crew and cargo two very different vehicles in NASA's spaceflight? She says, just add windows and life support. Yeah, piece of cake. No, no, no, they developed crew first. So for the cargo, they just removed the windows and the life support. Just put them back. Just put them back. All right. And then there's this constant like I don't I'm pretty sure Ryan started it somehow like off to the side, but there's this whole areas one ex debate going on in the chat room as well. So that's I don't know how nothing they're going off on themselves. I mean I can't control them. I can't control them being being correct, but there is one exit. Oh, right, right. Is correct the word you were looking for? I'm not sure. Quickly moving on, I will just add that on that point with Soyuz, NASA still wants to put an American on Soyuz in September, Laurel O'Hara will be flying on MS-24 Soyuz MS-24. So, you know, the political situation isn't great right now between the West and Russia. Let's put it that way. However, NASA still, NASA as an agency still wants to put Americans on Soyuz for the purposes of redundancy. Whether you agree with that or not, that is something they want to do and both Cosmos are putting their Cosmonauts on SpaceX crew vehicles on NASA commercial crew missions. So whether you agree with it or not, it is still happening. Yeah, I mean, fair data fair data. But then I mean, that is Yeah, we could, I feel like we could just go on for an hour, round in circles on this particular topic, right? Cause like there is no right answer, we don't know, we don't know the contracts and there's a whole bunch of politics at play here and also who's to say that by the end of this year they won't fly, right? And once they can fly humans and they got these things worked out like, you should be barring unexpected issues. This becomes an operational vehicle at that point. They can just start sending crews to station and they've got guarantee contracts for sending crews to station. So this thing just starts making money from that moment forward and to Ryan's point earlier, like it doesn't just have to be making money with NASA on crews to space station. There are alternate projects in which they can use this as a profit center for Boeing. So I don't I'm not sure it actually makes sense for them to cancel anything at this juncture. I think my, where I was just going mentally is like, okay, but as I mentioned, like there's a line somewhere where they're like, no, we're not going to do this anymore. And I'm just like, I wonder how close to that line they are right now. None of us can know, but like yeah, go ahead. Go ahead, Jared. Sorry. Oh, yeah, I was just going to kind of piggyback on the idea of the fact that you don't necessarily have to have like an established customer or something with that. I mean, Sierra Nevada was was actually like seriously working with the United Nations Office of Outer Space in order to have in order to actually fly a mission for the United Nations. So like, you don't necessarily have to work with traditional groups in order to have a mission blown on a Starliner, right? I mean, SpaceX is a great example of that, right? With inspiration for that. That was definitely not a traditional group of people flying a spacecraft, right? I would even reckon the Axiom missions in terms of we're pushing it. No, no, this it updates once in an hour. This one says we don't make mistakes. We have happy accidents. A little Bob Ross. We got a little Bob Ross in the show. Yeah. Maybe that maybe that's a quote from Boeing. It's a happy accident. Certainly is no. Alright, why don't we why don't we I put a pin in Blue Origin, but I think before we come back to Blue Origin, let's talk about Falcon Heavy. Like the part of the reason I had to cancel last week show is because I was I was knee deep in working on some control room upgrades that were not going well. And so we had been working for the last two weeks. Day and night weekends just constantly straight trying to get that primary video control room back online, which we did. You'll note that like Falcon Heavy webcast. Yeah, exactly. So on that note, I'll turn it over to Jared and Ryan and do this. Brilliant. So Falcon Heavy was launched again finally. I want to launch more than it does. It's been launching a lot compared to like 2020 but you know, still you to see. So Echo Star 24 was launched on Falcon Heavy. It's the heaviest commercial satellite ever to be taken to Geo nine metric tons, which is just a mind boggling way to think about especially for a commercial satellite. And because of that, originally I'm going to get a double drone ship landing for the first time which I'm sure all the fleet lovers would have loved to see. I'm still not sure how close the drone ships was actually be and whether we'd be able to see them landing side by side or anything like that. But unfortunately due to the immense number of Starlink launches that are going up, the fleet was busy. So they took a little bit of performance out of the first stage and then returned to the launch site and, you know, it's just it was a kind of cloudy but it allowed us to get a wonderful look at the a wonderful look at the frame going out at the bottom of the vehicle as it ascended up into space. And yeah, it's just it's such a it's such a unique vehicle with the ability to take all three cores back down. It's just, you know, Falcon nine is a cool rocket. Falcon Heavy just adds that little bit of extra spice on top. Jared, I'm not sure what you thought of this right. I am always always in love with really big rockets and also like brute force solutions to things. So strapping three cores together. And I know I know it's a lot more complicated than just strapping three rockets together. So I don't you guys in the comments don't have to tell me that but things like that and having witnessed heavy launches before here on the west coast with Delta for heavy space. Hurry up. Space set for Falcon Heavy here on the west coast. Never forgiving you for not doing the Falcon Heavy test flight like you said to it. Yeah, it was fantastic and I absolutely love booster separation at night because you get that interaction between the exhaust plumes center core with the center core throttling up and then the boosters coming off and beginning their boost back and I having seen a jellyfish space jellyfish in person they are absolutely amazing to witness and it's just mind blowing to see that every time like that shot right there was just absolutely stunning so I have no idea how or who could have helped make a shot like that happen but it was it was just oh man it was so good with that there. I also think that interesting thing is that there has been some small evolution with Falcon Heavy which has also translated to some of the Falcon 9 missions as well like the Great Stripe in order if I recall the Great Stripe is there to keep the RP1 warm during these long coast phases there's a great stripe on the second stage if I'm recalling it's all for thermal management but five hour coast missions that just gives them more options. Yeah and I think that really that kind of adds some flavor and some characters of the launch vehicle as well because you get to see them in ways they look different you get to end up you could tell what it's going to be doing based upon how it looks it kind of starts to remind me of back in the day like the late odds the early 2010s when the NRO launches were happening and people were trying to guess what they were so you would look at the rocket configuration you'd look at the how many boosters is it launching which payload ferrying is it launching with is it the 4.2 or 5.4 or things like that and it's just really there's just so much going on in a Falcon Heavy launch that I really, really like it I love the Delta IV Heavy any rocket that likes itself on fire in order to actually work is an amazing thing but oh my gosh the double booster landing that was so cool that was so what was so cool I loved on the SpaceX broadcast one of the boosters you could see the booster landing from the camera on the booster and that just like blew my mind because I was like yeah that's what's happening and then that shot right there in the upper right corner that was a perfect shot just like watching one booster come down and land and then a couple seconds later here comes the second booster come down and land and just like great and then this shot this one I was excited to see again as well because I feel like they just don't show everyone at Hawthorne enough anymore like those are the folks that make the rocket those are those are the important folks so I wished it there would be more of the Hawthorne views with that so I got I'm super excited that we actually got that that couple seconds of acknowledgement for the folks that work behind the scenes to make all this happen and I wish there was a lot more focus on that but I mean you know I'm just happy to watch the big rocket go up and do what it was supposed to do yeah and I don't have the tweet pulled up but there's also there was also a tweet from NASA Marshall maybe I forgot but NASA account with the new longer Falcon coming into the vacuum chamber for testing and this is going to be needed for space force missions and gateway missions and things like that so the long faring is real it's in testing and it's going to be launching at some point over the next few years fingers crossed and yeah we'll definitely know kind of what size of payload will be inside when they have that brand longer faring on top I mean if you thought the faring was already long it's going to get a little bit more lopsided with the massive tool faring on top of the vehicle yeah in fact I've got it here if you want to take a look at it it's from the NASA launch services provider NASA underscore LSP where they've got that long faring and they're doing what they call shielding effectiveness testing basically they're figuring out frequencies from radio and other stuff making sure that the payload faring does a good job in not messing that up and they got a really big chamber where they test all of that in because it has to fit inside of that but yeah that was going on at NASA Glenn so very very exciting to see that that's right everybody the space long faring is real and it's going to carry your really big payloads for you and there's a lot of people at the National Reconnaissance Office who are very happy right now yeah and I'll also move on to something just to keep Jamie quiet for a little bit longer let's talk about Starship because the other day we got this full power test of the day luge system the new steel plane which is apparently meant to solve everyone's problems I mean this slow-mo shot just looks absolutely kind of mesmerizing the water just just appears out of nowhere and it's so powerful and you can see where that should that's going to apparently stop the booster from ripping concrete up and I don't know throwing it at vans or something like that so yeah this was really exciting to see and also really gout the gout part wasn't from the water coming out of the plate the gout part was from the tank farm of the of the water getting pushed through because this may look just like oh it's like a sprinkler at the water park but it isn't, this is huge this is a huge daily system and really you can see there over on the left it's reaching several levels up on the tower and on the right it's going over the berm into the tank farm this water and nitrogen mix is just going everywhere which is the idea you want to be able to absorb as much energy as possible from the from the bottom of the booster but yeah it was really cool to see this because this should fingers crossed make the turnaround time from flight 2 to flight 3 even shorter because a lot of the a lot of the research and development that could have gone into fixing the problems from the flight of flight 1 has had to go into fixing the pad from flight 1 because the vehicle was reusable or was designed to be reusable but the pad most certainly wasn't it had a lot of research and development that had to go in to fix this pad and Jared you said potentially kind of, I think it was kind of tongue in cheek but you think worst case scenario Boca might even be toast after that first flight our first show back after the flight you said it could be toast and it's clearly not toast yeah well thankfully it's not and as I will frequently so I am always happy to both be publicly proven wrong and acknowledge that I'm wrong about things publicly as well so very much I was wrong about SpaceX potentially saying we're done with Boca, we're just going to move on to Florida so I guess we'll get some more flights out of that and I do want to also put myself back on the line here because in looking at the deluge system it's definitely better than say concrete sitting underneath the pad so I want to preface it by saying it is a significant improvement and better than nothing and I am excited to see whether it is going to work or not but I'm also trying to keep a very healthy skepticism about it because it is a bit different from other pad deluge systems that have been used before most pad, I mean every pad deluge system that I've ever seen the deluge is not coming from underneath the rocket it's coming from the side of the rocket areas where the exhaust will not be immediately impinging or pressing into the area where the water for thermal and acoustical dampening is coming from this is the first time I can think of a water deluge system actually coming in from where that exhaust where extreme temperatures and pressures are going to be occurring that so if anybody can do their homework there's two groups that I can think of who I will always say if anybody can do their homework with and it's JPL and SpaceX so if anybody can get it right I'm sure SpaceX can but at the same time I also don't know if the old Richard Feynman line which is for nature cannot be fooled so we have to make sure that this actually sort of works in the realm of things like physics and other stuff like that so I'm really really excited about this because if you Flight 1 had a lot of unknowns for Starship and now Flight 2 is also going to have even more unknowns for me because of things like pad deluge and other stuff like that so overall I'm really excited about it I want it to work obviously but also at the same time I am reminding myself that these are really actually genuinely new engineering solutions so we'll get to see whether it's going to work or not and if I'm wrong if I'm wrong I'm wrong and I'm always happy to admit I'm wrong and Chris brings up a good point which we're also going to get hot staging which is another thing that is in my opinion more realistic than doing a 360 degree flip to yeet the Starship off the booster but it's also a bit of an unknown I hadn't even heard of the 360 degree flip until after the test flight I didn't realize that was the thing and when I heard about it for the first time I was literally like what? that sounds like an excuse to make it oh yeah it was supposed to fly that way yeah actually I guess it was actually supposed to fly that way so yeah and GTH is asking do we think that they'll static fire with the daily I certainly think so that's the point of the daily system they need the data from it so they can kill off two birds with one stone static fire the booster, test your daily system or mix this together in the middle to hopefully not have concrete flying everywhere yes and also there's a comment earlier where did it go Bennett asking was it pieces of the pad or pieces of Starship that prompted the ecological complaint because avoiding that would have been great for both the area and the schedule and I think you're referring to the potential lawsuit or lawsuit that's currently going on I haven't looked into it in depth I'm not a lawyer but from what I've seen it seems like there's a lot of kind of complaints being brought up that either don't have any foundation or just kind of pointless or useless or just at least in my opinion it seems kind of stupid to try and prevent them from doing any more research and development because if you don't like the fact that concrete went everywhere they've tried to build a solution for it if you're not going to get them tested for the solution how do you know it's not going to happen again so that's my opinion on anyways to me I also don't have an opinion on it either simply because I don't have enough information I don't have too much one of the really difficult problems I have found in trying to read up about SpaceX and environmental stuff going on down in Boca Chica is that it often seems that whoever is the news provider of it will also inject their bias into it pretty tough or pretty viciously so you'll find something either with a significant environmentalist slant or something with a significant SpaceX slant and it's really like that's just not what a like I don't really want to read that I want to kind of know what is going on just straight up like I'm not interested in in developing the bias and it's I just have not I have not found anything or anyone covering it that has not injected a tremendous amount of bias into their coverage for it so it's just I wish there was something that would just cover it like NASA space flight you guys should like environmental lawyer or something and work together I don't know so well as Chris says there are many holes in the lawsuit basic factors and yeah it seems at least in my opinion if there are basic facts that are incorrect it seems kind of like what's the point is there even any kind of challenge might be a boring vid and that's why I say that no Chris I wasn't you give people like me to watch it and Hooperble said no one sued Aries1x that's true yet another let's chop another one up for Aries1x right there Aries1x yeah and just back yep that's about to say I think I think that pretty much covers our spacex discussion for this week yeah I felt like you guys were starting to stall well saying that Aries1x just spitting facts about Aries1x as soon as you start talking Aries1x I have to jump in and be like nope nope nope nope nope nope alright I think Jared we didn't do your story I was like that's the show yeah thanks for that going on there what you got this week for us Jared I wanted to talk a little bit about our friends down in New Zealand Rocket Lab because they're busy right they're doing their own thing with their own rocket Electron and they're also trying to do what I think is a good thing which is set up their rockets to be essentially reusable so just on their most recent launch baby come back home named so because they are working to get their first stages of Electron back home so that way they can bring them back in get them ready to fly again and then fly them and of course this is this is how tomorrow one one of our multiple bets that we have made with Peter Beck at Rocket Lab so so if you want to look into that of tomorrow ancient history but it's got to be in one of our shows I've got two I've got two here the first one was actually there are three tomorrow versus Rocket Labs on this one for best the first one was they're absolutely going to go for reusability the second one was once they announced reusability and they were going to use helicopters it was no you're not I was like yeah it ain't going to work because like everyone tries it everyone thinks it's a good idea and it never works so like that was number two and the number three is flying meat bags into space I was like yeah yeah they'll eventually start flying crew so those are the three those were the three I think there's four they said they weren't going to go after a bigger rocket as well oh that's right that's right and they did the direct quote from Peter Beck was marine assets suck and now their entire reusability plan for electron and neutron is to use marine assets so I mean like it's the biggest U-turn of them all to think well so first a couple of notes being able to go oh hey just kidding wrong we're going to do that is a sign of I think a very powerful good leader right because you got to be willing to go yeah no the data is showing somewhere else second he's not wrong marine assets suck like they really they're really expensive and they're hard to maintain and the ocean wants to eat everything right like marine assets do suck but also trying to catch helicopters with trying to catch helicopters trying to catch rockets with helicopters also kind of sucks it's not I think I have a solution there what if you put wings on it and brought it back to land well that and that's another one where you remember oh I can't I can't but remember I can't can't someone else has to extrapolate Ryan's comment yeah anyway I'm not even gonna touch it but yeah just you know they're steadily making progress towards reusability which is great that is I felt like you know like you seriously are either developing reusability or you're just not and Bennett is bringing up a good point which is trying to catch helicopters with rockets would be something to see thanks Bennett I would pay a lot of money to see that that would definitely be entertaining but it was just also really cool that rocket lab like actually put this video out for everybody to take a look at in case you like have ever wondered what does it look like to be a stage coming back you know that's that's sort of like through the top cam that they have there and the yeah it was it was just really really cool and I appreciate the transparency that rocket lab is doing with this they're definitely not hiding anything they're showing that this is a really difficult thing to pull off and yeah it is there's really no easy way to do this but it is are we looking at here is that the drug that like that's the initial drug right yeah that's the drug through the interstage looking up towards the sky that's the drug of the of the power shape is that is that but that looks like a line that's also twisted is that am I not understanding correctly like what's that flappy line I'm a backup line yeah I think that flappy line may also be a part of the deployment system so it's one of those that I imagine would probably rip itself or something like that so it's probably you know obviously we just escalating as to what it is but I don't I don't think it actually has anything to do with the the actual heritage itself yeah yeah looks pretty good actually taking a little bit of time briefing there and then there we go yeah but they got there right like look they got there yeah and that's good parachutes are hard so in case anybody wanted to know they are really difficult parachutes are gorgeous when they work oh they really are you're not like there's something just majestic about them because like you just got this object flow they just kind of like float and kind of like subtly collide into each other and kind of I don't know there's something about that you're they're just majestic absolutely data yeah someone's gone tried oh yeah I was just gonna say like it's it's great to see them and they're the physics of parachutes is is ridiculous so I was just gonna say someone's whose job is to work in spacewalk media I absolutely adore the amount of stuff that Rocket Lab provide they unlike a certain aerospace company with an X in its name they regularly update their flicker with only photos but also some wonderful clean feed videos which are really nice to use on whatever content we make so you know I I have no fact here but I have a feeling that a certain aerospace company with an X in its name stopped using its flicker as soon as a certain CEO bought another social media platform but I have no facts to back that up it's just maybe it's just a wild coincidence but there you go my opinions are on the table that's all I've got that parachute's pretty we're gonna go it's spinning time the only other notes because adding on to Jared rocket laboratory story I keep in mind they did just try to do I believe it was their 40th launch of an electron this was yesterday or the day before and there was a rare what is now a rare rocket lab abort like the engines fired and then it like T-minus 2 seconds hard cutoff which also like it's just it's kind of showing the systems working right so that's it's kind of one of those like if you're outside of aerospace looking in you can look at that and be like oh they failed their launch it's like no no no they stopped because like they they detected a problem and that's what's supposed to happen and it's just it was kind of weird I haven't seen electron like abort on the pad in a really long time I thought it was a Steven Loan is the same 30 I thought it was the 40th launch 4-0 it was the 40th and Peter Beck treated shortly after saying that a low igniter pressure on one engine it did not pass its go test and an auto abort was called it's not uncommon to see low pressures now and again just have to just haven't seen it so I need to an abort for a while my bet is a tricky pressure transducer the team will sort it quickly yep so good good on them so also I will say that at the pad abort just like the calmness of the launch control room where it's just like yep we abort a T-minus 2 seconds all pad operators move to whatever I don't know what their architecture is at rocket lab it was just very smooth and crisp and understood and well we heard it was like they've kind of come into their own right it you could tell there wasn't really panic or chaos at least not in the voice of that particular controller it was just like yep here we are this is what we need to and yeah I mean it just not to say they're growing up because like I feel like that's not really fair to the company but clearly like they've definitely got their operations in order at least that's how it felt from the outside looking yeah people always complain about scrubs but scrubs are just the sign that this is a company that knows what they're doing so if you can catch your problem and prevent it from happening in the air if your problems are happening on the ground and not in the air then you seem to be doing something right so well everyone this was a fun and delightful show I was glad to be back I thank you so much and I'll talk as much as I can talk about why we were off last week and also want to thank all of the citizens of tomorrow who helped make these shows go and if you are a citizen of tomorrow we're about to go into our members only show right after this one so make sure that you go over and check out the link that shows you like in the chat or I'm sorry go to YouTube and then click on the link for the member show it will take us a minute or two to actually get into the show and earlier today during this show I put a pin in blue origin and I was like we'll loop back around to that and we will in the member show so I think I want to talk a little bit about like right exactly see what I did there I would talk a little bit about like how because we were really beaten on Boeing here but like what is blue origin brought to the table and you know if we're going to be talking about blue origin I feel like dream chaser is also another really great thing to be chatting about so that those two items and then as much as I'm allowed or as much as I can I'll talk a little bit about why we were off last week and like what I've been working on at company X I can't go into extreme detail but like I can give a few hints and whatnot so thank you all so much for watching that is our show this week I'm excited to join you oh wait I will be in New York next week so this will be an interesting one New York folks, New York team what are you doing here hey are you going to the hotel again you're going to look at the planes and have a drink while you're doing I am not going to the TWA hotel this one I'll tell you you know what I'll also tell you about I do love that TWA hotel it's why I got the best of words all right we'll talk about my New York trip as well in the members only show if you'd like to become a member youtube.com slash tmro slash member I think I don't know it was in the slide do you see it? something like slash join thank you hit the join button thank you so much see you next week bye