Musk’s Behavior Triggers NASA Safety Review of SpaceX & Boeing
Elon Musk (Credit: SpaceX)
The Washington Post reports NASA safety reviews of its two commercial crew providers was triggered by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s use of drugs and alcohol.
The review, to begin next year, would look at both Boeing and SpaceX, the companies under contract to fly NASA’s astronauts, and examine “everything and anything that could impact safety” as the companies prepare to fly humans for the first time, William Gerstenmaier, NASA’s associate administrator for human exploration, said in an interview with The Washington Post.
The review was prompted by the recent behavior of SpaceX’s founder, Elon Musk, according to three officials with knowledge of the probe, after he took a hit of marijuana and sipped whiskey on a podcast streamed on the Internet. That rankled some at NASA’s highest levels and prompted the agency to take a close look at the culture of the companies, the people said.
NASA spokesman Bob Jacobs declined to comment on what prompted the review. But in a statement, he said it would “ensure the companies are meeting NASA’s requirements for workplace safety, including the adherence to a drug-free environment.”
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in an interview that the agency wants to make sure the public has confidence in its human-spaceflight program, especially as the companies are getting closer to their first flights, scheduled for next year.
There has been a lot of gnashing of teeth among Musk supporters since the reviews were revealed yesterday. A few things to keep in mind:
- Federal contracts have anti-drug workplace provisions in them. While it is legal to use marijuana in California, where Musk smoked it, the drug is still illegal under federal law.
- There have been public allegations that Musk’s drug use goes far beyond pot to include LSD, cocaine and ecstasy. (For the Azealia Banks/Grimes lost weekend saga, see this story.) Musk, in fact, joked about using crack cocaine in order to work long hours without sleeping. He has also admitted to using Ambien, a legal prescription drug, in order to sleep.
- Claims of him using LSD, cocaine and ecstasy are unverified. But, it’s a good bet that NASA is aware of the claims and that it has concerns about them, even if the space agency doesn’t say so publicly.
- Musk’s behavior this year has been erratic. He has gotten into Twitter fights with journalists and others, accused a diver involved in the Thai cave rescue of being a pedophile, and claimed he had funding to take Tesla Motors private when he had, at best, a verbal commitment but nothing in writing. The latter claim earned him a three-year ban in serving as Tesla chairman and $40 million in fins for him and the company.
Oh, and one more thing: yes, Russian quality control has been lacking recently, what with the Soyuz abort and the hole drilled in the side of the orbital module. NASA has (a) no choice but to keep using the Soyuz right now, and (b) limited influence over another nation’s space program.
NASA does have control over commercial crew, for which it is paying the vast majority of the cost. So, it is moving to try to improve quality control where it can do so.
My guess is that although federal contracts have anti-drug provisions, the government probably overlooks a lot of things as long as it doesn’t become a public or obvious problem. Musk’s behavior seems to have crossed a line.
NASA’s safety reviews seem like yet another self inflicted wound for Musk and SpaceX. He hasn’t done Boeing any favors, either Both companies have to deal with reviews while trying to launch two flight tests each of their commercial crew spacecraft to the International Space Station.
Perhaps these reviews will be a waste of time. Maybe they will find problems that when corrected will lead to improvements in both programs. Time will tell.
121 responses to “Musk’s Behavior Triggers NASA Safety Review of SpaceX & Boeing”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
…Perhaps these reviews will be a waste of time. Maybe they will find problems that when corrected will lead to improvements in both programs. Time will tell..
Exactly. Also…since congress loves to dictate how they run their agency…maybe NASA could do the same kind of anal probe on them and their staffs.
The only way these “investigations” won’t be a waste of time is if their result follows the thinking of Abraham Lincoln who, when informed that Gen. Ulysses S. Grant drank whiskey, is alleged to have replied, “Find out what kind of whiskey he drinks and send a barrel to each of my other generals.” Musk. Dope. SLS-Orion Management.
High Elon Musk still wipes the floor with the competition!
Send some trees to the JWST folks while you’re at it.
Lincoln sent a govt official out to Grant’s HQ in the west nominally to straighten out some paperwork problem. He was really there to check up on Grant’s drinking. If the general had been out of control and unable to command, Lincoln would have demoted or fired him.
Instead, he got promoted. Results count with some people.
Funny thing about the Musk critics, they often claim Musk being away to let Shotwell run the show HELPS SpaceX stay on track. Conversely the claim here is that if Musk is unavailable at all, the entire CC program falls apart. Here is another one: “Musk is pushing too hard asking too much too quickly”. This is not the behavior of pot heads, drunks or people tripping on LSD all the time. This leaves sleeping pills prescribed to countless millions of Americans and the rantings of Banks who is bat-$h!t crazy.
Pick one, but arguing both simultaneously is disingenuous, as is bringing dr prescribed sleeping medication used my millions and probably many execs with crazy schedules.
I have been unable to find any evidence to support your claim. Do you have a link? The alleged timing of this alleged mission would be of particular interest as Grant’s Civil War career was fairly meteoric, rising from an obscure Capt. to a famous and celebrated Maj. Gen. in less than ten months.
That Grant was a drinker is hardly controversial. He had to resign his original commission while still a captain over public drunkenness. He indulged in occasional bouts of binge drinking for the rest of his life. These occurred during periods of inactivity when he was away from his family and/or had no close associate present who would check his drinking. When either was present, Grant didn’t drink to excess.
Rejoining the Army after the outbreak of the Civil War, Grant did well training recruits and was quickly promoted two ranks past his rank at the time of his resignation. Lincoln promoted Grant to Brigadier General not long after Grant had been given his first field command in July 1861. Gen. Fremont was also a supporter and made Grant one of his key subordinates. Grant next came to Lincoln’s attention based on an aggressive assault he made on a Confederate post in Missouri in Nov. 1861. Grant was next responsible for two of the rare Union victories in the first year of the war, taking Forts Henry and Donelson in Feb. 1862. Lincoln promoted Grant to Major General at this point.
Having gotten onto the DC “radar,” at some point between mid-1861 and early 1862, Grant would have quickly become the target of less militarily successful peers and other would-be “courtiers.” If there was actually anyone sent west to check on Grant, it would, one presumes, almost certainly have been somewhere during this interval. After the victories at Henry and Donelson it seems quite unlikely that Lincoln would have endorsed any expedition based solely on Grant’s alleged drinking.
Grant was quite busy and in active command right through most of the Civil War. Grant was engaged and sober when in active combat command. The drinking had mainly been associated with his periods of garrison duty before the Civil War. I don’t find it very credible that Lincoln, or even a Lincoln subordinate, would have sent anyone to check on Grant’s drinking after Feb. 1862.
I saw the 60 Minutes special last night. Musk looks a bit addled.
But BFR will have more Metal in it–so that’s good.
He isn’t going to die on Mars though. That Tesla plant is what is going to kill him.
He did acknowledge that it was his mistake to rely too much on automation.
A lot of libertarians talk about how greens are Malthusian Miserablists, how some look at humans as a virus on the body of the planet in the same way others looked at certain groups as a virus on the Volk.
Yet businessmen and libertarian conservatives make the same mistake that Simon accused Ehrlich of doing–of treating the masses-specifically labor–as a problem.
Labor is a resource. Keep them happy–pay a living wage–and folks will take pride in what they do.
It’s just a stupid reckless behavior by CEO to even give your detractors an opportunity to launch this.
Also perhaps wheres smoke, there’s fire.
I don’t expect that these investigations will turn up anything and NASA still announced the date for the first Dragon 2 launch today. I also don’t think Musk’s personal habits will influence the outcome. Still, all of the Musk acolytes commenting above have heaped scorn on NASA and SLS while failing to say a word about the fact that what Musk did was flat out stupid. Hey Elon, if you want to drink alcohol and smoke weed at least have the sense not to do it in front of a camera.
Also perhaps wheres smoke, there’s fire.
Pure speculation, with no basis in performance to date.
Sure
https://www.youtube.com/wat…
as whacky as Musks performance was…this thing by the NASA admnistrator is an affront to safety…it is stupid
It’s beyond stupid. It would be stupid to subject SpaceX employees to this type of bureacratic harassment because of a joke their CEO did on TV. But why throw Boeing into the mix as well? What I see are frighten bureacrats trying to preserve the old world they are comfortable living in, a world of view graphs and decade long programs that only repeat what NASA did earlier, instead of embracing the potential of the new technology they are producing. I am beginning to wonder if NASA, or at least the HSF part of NASA, is worth salvaging…
Holy carp they threw it at Boeing too. Okay, well I was wrong on that one. Well, you guys wanted this NASA administrator. You deserve what comes of it. I still think it’ll be pretty much nothing.
no I did not want this child.
Child is right, a person is not ready to lead an organization like NASA in their 40’s. Too little experience. This is a job for someone in the second half of their 50’s or better yet into their 60’s.
the impressive thing about this administration is that “truth” has no place in it…and when Truth is gone well any reality is possible. the entire administration is one lie after another. I expect Jimbo to be no different
Typical in a government predicated on the concept of the great man in place of a great system. The real surprise to me is the simultaneous rise of ‘great man’ politics and large swats of people latching onto cults of personality world wide. As a teen I became very much a ugly American looking down on other nations who suffered under leaders like Trump. I took pride in our imposing of governments on vanquished nations that made it difficult for politicians like Trump to rise to the fore. The US is becoming those third world nations I used to look down upon with it’s run away presidency, and unwillingness to invest in itself, and flash pan economic theory.
when answers are hard, because all the easy ones have been passed by; we love people who claim that they have an easy one
That was certainly true during the Obama administration. Pretty much everything that was wrong was blamed on:
1) America in general.
2) White people.
3) The Rich.
silly. Obama and his crowd were not perfect but they tried to fix somethings…Trump is the most narcistic nutty, self loving person I have seen in my life and his supporters are less as well
Yes, Obama and his gang of idiots came uncomfortably close to “fixing” the entire American economy – “fix” in the same sense as “spay or neuter.” Even after undoing only the worst of said damage, Mr. Trump and company have restored the American economy’s ability to self-reproduce.
If you think Barack Obama was not a textbook narcissist, you weren’t paying any real attention. His favorite chin-jutting pose was eerily reminiscent of Benito Mussolini. Or perhaps you were just one more drone in his army of worshipful admirers who wouldn’t have seen the similarity. Every person the Democratic Party has run for President since 1992, in fact, has been a raving, malignant narcissist.
The Trumps are more similar to the Clintons and Obamas than any party would care to admit. They’re all cut from the same cloth.
Yes, Trump is a raving narcissist. So far, though, he doesn’t seem to imagine himself the reincarnation of the Sun King no matter how loudly the Liars Chorus of prog squealers proclaim it so. So he’s not a malignant narcissist as both Clintons and both Obamas are.
And, unlike Obama, who was notably stiff and standoffish anytime he got into a crowd of ordinary people who weren’t all pre-cleared butt-kissers, Trump seems to like ordinary people.
Except that the real cult of personality was the one that surrounded “The Lightworker” Barack Hussein Obama for eight years. That was also a time of pervasive banana republic-esque rule by decree in Washington DC. Mr. Trump, unlike Mr. Obama, is not routinely operating via extra-legal means.
I guess you’ve been sleeping the past week. One wonders how you get an Attorney General into office without a vote from the Senate? Or all these decrees that keep failing judicial review. And yes you can invoke DACA and things like it from the previous administration and yes, I’d agree with you, but at least that actually skirted close enough to existing law to survive judicial review. Of course you might be one of those Trump foamers who don’t understand that the Judicial branch is a co equal branch of government. Perhaps you’re like the current faux Atty Gen who thinks The Judiciary a jr member of the government and subordinate to the executive.
Acting Attorneys General are hardly unprecedented. There is such a person every time there is a change of party in the White House as the incumbent resigns effective at noon on inauguration day. The acting AG is usually also someone of the defeated party who caretakes until formally replaced by the nominee of the new President. In Trump’s case, that person was Sally Yates who distinguished herself by continuing to behave as though Obama was still President, thereby getting herself canned early and replaced by a Republican seat-filler until Jeff Sessions was confirmed. So now we have another Acting AG. Ho hum. Some constitutional crisis.
As for “decrees that keep failing judicial review,” Trump pretty routinely loses lawsuits about his executive orders in lower courts still packed with leftover progs – especially when the litigants are able to jurisdiction-shop. These initial setbacks are invariably defeated at either the appellate or Supreme Court level. In no case I can recall has Trump actually moved to override, in any way, any of these nuisance lower-court verdicts, though, in view of the eventual reversals of such heel-dragging litigation, he’d probably be justified in doing so by now given how many supporting data points have accumulated.
And can you cite me any instances in which the Trump administration has asserted the right not to enforce a federal law simply because it doesn’t like said law? Obama did this dozens of times, especially anent DACA. DACA pretty much takes pinking shears to U.S. immigration law. Funny how quiet all you currently outraged progs were when actual usurpations of the rule of law were going on. But then that was your guy wasn’t it, so that’s very different.
The “truth” is whatever advances the progressive cause. The truth – no quote marks – is what’s real. The Trump administration, to its credit, operates on the basis that what constitutes reality is not subject to either plebiscite nor social construction as progressives believe.
the trump people operate on whatever constitutes reality, is the crap that they spew. dont be goofy
Don’t be ungrammatical. And would it violate some prog sense of entitlement or courtesy that you maybe offer some example of said alleged “crap?” Blanket invective may pass for argument on the left these days but it cuts no ice with me.
when asked what he was thankful for his response was something along the lines of “how strong I have made this country”
cringeworthy in itself.
Yes, the truth often seems to induce cringing among progs. Sunlight. Vampires. Barack Obama, had he been honest, would have answered the same question, “how weak I have made this country.”
truth and Trump lol…when one lies about basic things like crowd size…everything else is just part of the act
Perhaps Trump’s exaggeration of his inaugural crowd size was just a matter of him observing a venerable Washington tradition. Crowd size lying is certainly a venerable lefty trope. MSM coverage of the so-called “Million Man March” comes to mind. MSM outlets routinely use angles and cropping to make tiny “crowds” of prog protestors look huge. The actual size of right-wing gatherings, though, are routinely lied about or simply not reported at all. There’s an enormous March for Life that takes place in DC every year, for instance, though if you are a watcher or reader of left-wing MSM outlets you could be forgiven for ignorance about this as it is never reported on at all in such venues.
that was a lie, not an exaggeration…and it was and is the mostimportant lie he told…because it signaled that Trump would lie about things which could be proven without a doubt…so he would lie about anything
and he continues that. he is lying about the caravan, the Saudi affair, his interaction with Daniels…everything there is little he tells the truth on.
What lies has Trump told about the caravan? Or about the Saudi assassination?
About the caravan Trump has said it’s mostly young men and that many are criminals. The first point has been widely acknowledged even by MSM outlets which seem to have been unable to find any clever camera angles with which to support their original line of crap about the caravan being mostly women and children. As to the second point, the Mexicans – who certainly can’t be credibly accused of being Trump apologists – have been saying the same thing in recent days. One can, I suppose, argue endlessly about just how large the percentage of criminal single males is in the caravan, but the idea it’s anywhere close to zero is simply unsupportable.
About the Saudi assassination, Trump has acknowledged the essentials of the case, but also says he isn’t going to impose draconian sanctions on the Saudi government as a result. He has, pretty much, said that the Saudis are SOB’s, but they’re our SOB’s, at least for now. Whatever else such a policy may be, it isn’t a lie.
About Daniels, nothing Mr. Trump says, true or false, is of any relevance to the governance of the nation. Democrats, in any case, have been asserting a Presidential Right to Lie About Sex since at least 1998 – arguably, even since 1960. At least Mr. Trump didn’t do any lying under oath about such matters as one other American President did.
About the caravan Trump has said it’s mostly young men and that many are criminals
a lie
Or about the Saudi assassination?
endless lies. the Saudis and the Child king did it and he knows it
“About Daniels, nothing Mr. Trump says, true or false, is of any relevance to the governance of the natio”
then why lie about it
As previously noted, no lies. The “caravan” is mostly military-age males. Mr. Trump’s statements that many are criminals is strongly backed – now – by Mexican authorities. The Mexicans should know. As the caravan has been unable to invade the U.S. it has settled for preying on the local Mexicans in places along its route of march.
The Mexican government was initially supportive of the caravan as it saw allowing it free passage as a way to mess with the Trump administration – of which, let us once again recall, the Mexican government is no fan. But it turns out the caravan consists of quite a sizable number of rapists, thieves and miscellaneous dacoits.
As Trump’s resolute border defense now makes it seem the U.S. is never to receive any of these caravan-related “blessings,” the Mexican government is now doing an about face. Given the attitude of the Mexican government toward illegal immigrants into Mexico, I suspect things are about to get ugly. Given all the cartel-led violence in Mexico in recent years, the Mexican standard of “ugly” is strictly NC-17.
Of course Trump knows the Saudis did it. That’s not in serious dispute by anyone. But Trump isn’t going to come down on the Saudis with hob-nailed boots as the progs all want. That isn’t a lie, it’s just failure to comply with proggy demands. The Iranians killed hundreds of American troops during Obama’s administration and it didn’t prevent him from keeping his nose firmly pushed up the mullahs’ backsides. Both are instances of realpolitik, though I would argue that the Obama variant was never based very much in reality.
As for Daniels, why did Clinton lie about Lewinsky, et al? There ya go.
they are not our SOB’s they are his…and they own him
No, the Saudis own the Bushes. Russia is supposed to own Trump – though what the heck they’re supposed to have used to buy him is something of a mystery as the whole place is poor as a churchmouse. Keep your proggy stories straight.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Tom Paine was only 47 years old when he took over as NASA administrator in October, 1968.
George Low was 44.
Bill Graham was 47.
Bridenstine is certainly on the young side, but there is plenty of precedent for a forty-something running NASA.
Yes of course I’m just saying what I’d prefer as an elderly individual based on the leadership I’ve worked under. I much prefer 60+. Senior leadership should be senior. Sometimes you luck out with kids running the show.
I think the real answer is: “It depends.”
There is certainly precedent for big tech development projects working well under younger leadership – it is impressive, for example, just how young not only front line engineers but even middle and upper levels of management on Project Apollo were. Chris Kraft was still in his 30’s when he established NASA Mission Control. George Low was only 32(!) when he took over as Chief of NASA Manned Space Flight, and only 40 when he took over as head of Apollo Spacecraft Program Office (ASPO).
But I think it depends on the nature of the project, and the quality of the individuals in question.
I want a young firebrand for commercial space…
NASA Administrators are Executive Branch officials. But, as a practical matter, they take a lot more orders from Congress than from the President. Mr. Bridenstine’s age has nothing to do with this. Charlie Bolden and any of his predecessors, if given the same orders, would have done the same thing. Bridenstine has recently expressed some concern anent NASA’s future budgets. Making an enemy of Sen. Shelby isn’t a good way to look after the overall NASA budget. It’s a dysfunctional system we have, but it is the system we have and there is limited maneuvering room when one vengeful old man holds the reins.
The Boeing thing was just so it doesn’t look like they’re singling out SpaceX.
Meanwhile, Boeing, who’s culture is much more closely aligned with nasa, should be able to proceed relatively smoothly through the review, while SpaceX, with its long working hours (set up as a criterion in the review outline), is headed directly for a clash and attendant delays.
Slow down SpaceX quite a bit, slow down Boeing a little, then SpaceX doesn’t finish ahead of Boeing and neither finishes far ahead of the Orion/SLS unmanned test launch (the real reason for the review)
NASA just announced the two test flights for SpaceX .. this is not going to effect the launched jan 7th or in june.
Yeah, because no one at NASA or its contractors ever worked long hours during Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo. SMH.
A young, vibrant, energized workforce who’s willing to put in the effort it takes is a feature, not a bug.
there are three possibilities.
1. its legit…they picked up something on some safety audits or got some complaints and are proceeding on those.
2. its preventive in that they got some whifs of something from their folks there
or 3 its punitive in that Shelby or someone got tired of the SLS blowback and wanted something to stick a fork in commercial crew like SLS has been fork stuck (coupled with Nelson and Culberson gone)…so they reached out and tweaked the toy administrator and here we are.
My tendency is to go with 3 since the period between the musk pod cast and the action is so long. NASA is use to a certain level of safety incompetence but this is just to “wellcoincident”
Having said that. Musk was stupid to do what he did…and without a doubt working conditions at SpaceX are well what we would call “ryanairish”
Sessions is anti pot and owns private prison stock .. the more pot heads he can get locked up the more money he makes.
I dont think its him
I don’t think anyone at Ryan Air gets stock options.
If you think it is unfair to SpaceX employees, then the CEO needs to set a better example, and stop acting like a child. There is a reason he is not allowed to be CEO of Tesla. Perhaps the same thing should happen at SpaceX. Promote Shotwell to CEO / President, and make them hire a full time babysitter for the petulant CTO.
At NSF, there is substantial comment that this investigation is to placate the 4th most powerful man in the US government, the Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senator Richard Shelby. Apparently Shelby heard of last week’s remark by NASA Associate Administrator Jurczyck, that once Super Heavy/Starship, and New Glenn, and perhaps New Armstrong, are established operationally, then NASA can walk away from SLS. The Senator’s response was described as “thermonuclear”.
If NASA were interested in this subject, themselves, then they would *never* have given the Falcon 9 its tier 3 rating last week. This investigation will let the man with his hand on NASA’s throat cool down a bit, as he see’s Commercial Crew delayed, again. The agency cost of political hierarchy rears its head to display its malignant potency, yet again.
Maybe Commercial Crew will be delayed long enough that NASA will declare an emergency and use the SLS/Orion for ISS crew rotation. At least they won’t have to worry anymore about getting a proper upper stage for it. Meanwhile Starliner will be taking artists around the Moon, something that NASA once did.
Starliner? Nope BFS.
Actually I meant Starship…
Starliner is the old recycled OSP LEO only entry Boeing first offered NASA in 2004.
Wow, that whole thread is pretty salty, especially given what a salute-the-flag crowd hangs out there. Personally, I think Elon needs to go back on Joe Rogan to rip some bong hits. “Clearly there’s no rush on Commercial Crew. We’ll take all the time that’s needed. Extra time, even. It’s best to be safe.”
Meanwhile, the federal government says the Model 3 is the safest car on the planet, despite its penchant for accelerating through stationary objects. “Once we eliminate that kamikaze maneuver, it will be even safer.”
Actually the evidence is the other way, especially since you are never alone in a Tesla.
https://cleantechnica.com/2…
“At an intersection with coastal highway 101, they were rammed from
behind by a Dodge sedan. According to police, the hulking gasmobile was
traveling at about 40 mph when it struck the rear of the Tesla. Levey
and his wife were uninjured. Then something totally unexpected happened. His cell phone rang. It was Tesla calling.”
“It turned out to be Tesla Roadside Assistance, and their first question
was ‘Our computers show that you suffered a major impact. Are you guys
okay? Were you in an accident?’ and I cannot tell you how comforting
that was.”
“There’s more to this story. “The next day, when I got home from Vancouver, I got another call from the head of safety engineering, and he wanted to find out how we were. He also wanted to find out ‘What can we do to make this car safer? What can we do to give an even greater measure of safety to the occupants?’ and that was mind-blowing.”
When was the last time Ford or Toyota called to see if YOU were alright after an accident. Indeed, were they even aware you were in one?
Certainly, that is a heart warming anecdote, but I don’t see how it constitutes evidence that is the other way. My assertion was that the Model 3 is the safest car on the planet, and that it will be even safer once it ceases to accelerate through stationary objects at highway speeds. I was not kidding. It is the safest car on the road. It does occasionally accelerate through stationary objects at highway speeds. Through the magic of large numbers, these two truths are not mutually exclusive.
The Tesla autopilot is a safer driver than any human, but when it does occasionally kill its passengers, it may well do so in a way that appears to us humans to be criminally inept, like powering its way into the rear of a stalled tractor trailer while traveling on a dry, well maintained road under conditions of excellent visibility. That’s gonna piss some people off when it happens, but the National Transportation Safety Board is going to look at the large numbers, shrug its shoulders (when the families of the deceased aren’t looking), say as little as possible, and walk away. At least, that is what it has done so far. In the intermediate term, auto insurance companies are dead men walking. But who will cry for them?
But Emmet that is only if you let it do the driving for you. Just evolution moving forward by eliminating those who show poor judgement by thinking its more important to do what they are doing than watching the road.
Sure. Whatever. That may be why it’s happening. A counter argument could be made, is being made. If left to its own devices, the car will occasionally plow into stationary objects. Yes, Tesla says, “don’t leave the car to its own devices.” OK. I’ll just sit here, with my hands on the wheel, paying attention, but doing nothing. Surely that will work. Surely my mind won’t wander, and the minds of all the other Tesla drivers won’t wander, if we all just try a bit harder to behave as we should. Or, alternately, Tesla will improve the autopilot, eliminating the issue entirely.
But this doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter why it’s happening. Why it’s happening is beside the point. The fact is, it’s happening and the car is safer anyway.
And at some point in the near term, Tesla is going to to say, “leave the car to its own devices. It’s better if you don’t interfere with the operation of the vehicle.” That’s coming. And after that happens, Teslas will still crash, albeit very rarely. The rate of crashes and injuries and deaths will plummet, but still occur, and it will be very tough to take when it’s your loved one who is killed by a machine that is sold at a profit by some super rich guy who is currently sojourning on Mars. Blood money! Some primates will react badly. But most will never have the experience.
Long term, the government will say, “it is illegal to manually operate your vehicle in the city,” and crashes will continue to occur, at ever diminishing rates. Then it will become illegal to manually operate cars anywhere, because why should we let you kill other people? At that point, at least when it comes to driving, the machines will be in charge.
This is not a new feature, and is definitely not something unique to Tesla. GM OnStar has been available what seems like forever, and even before that I remember working on a system for Diamler to tie the car’s emergency sensors to the cell phone in order to call for help. This was when bag phones were state of the art.
DOD & Commercial launches are exempt from this politically motivated inspection process by Shelby.
Quite correct. That makes his wrath ever more finely focused on just where he *can* make his power felt. The very idea, that a NASA hierarch is, somehow, not thinking he needs to be careful of what his congressional overlord wants to hear, is enraging to a man whose life and breath is the expression of that power.
Hmmm… Elon Musk appeared on a podcast for an interview, where he was presumed to be “at ease” rather than being “official.” He sipped some whiskey, and when “reminded” that marijuana usage was now legal in California he took a puff or two of pot.
We’re all agreed that this is TYPICAL behavior for SpaceX employees. Ten thousand people, and they’re all tossing down belts of booze and sucking in some pot, for the eight hours or more that they’re at work. Probably all Democrats!
Absolutely. It’s SCIENCE, right? It’s proven. We all know it!
Or maybe it’s people in NASA headquarters, SLS supporters, SpaceX cynics, or at least Washington DC residents conscious of the US President’s mid west evangelical backers, trying to draw a wide clear line between themselves as Good People in government and Evil People doing Sinful Things that Proper God Fearing Republicans DESPISE!.
What do you think? And isn’t it wonderful to live in the 21st Century where science and statistics and provable facts rule over our old fashioned ignorance and prejudices!
This is more about Shelby trying to save his states largest pork barrel project from its largest threats; Super Heavy and Starship..
no. Super heavy and STarship are fiction
Yeah. Remember when Falcon Heavy was fiction? Remember when landing boosters on their tails on bobbing platforms in the middle of the ocean was fiction? Ah, the good old days.
nothing unique about FalconH…we have done core with side boosters for decades…
We haven’t been landing the cores and side boosters for decades.
Yes we have. They disassemble on impact with the ocean. Saves time tearing them down.
Heh.
“nothing unique about FalconH” – except for the fact that both side boosters landed back at Cape Canaveral and they almost landed the core on an autonomous drone ship (had it not been for a lack of ignightor fluid to restart the Merlin engines to be used for the final landing burn).
Yeah, nothing special except for the “firsts” on this flight that were accomplished by SpaceX.
There are two things that make Falcon Heavy unique:
1. It wasn’t funded by the government.
2. It can lift more than any other rocket currently flying.
everyone has their own metrics. mine would be that it was developed to meet a specific market. and it all depends on what mode it is flown in as to number 2. if you save the parts…its not all that much better in life than the Delta IV heavy…but quite a bit better in price
And it will stay that way for maybe another couple years until SH-Starship continues the FH tradition anent your point 1 and surpasses its older stablemate anent your point 2. It’s not a fluke if you can do it twice in a row.
Pulling together the money for the rocket-that cannot-be-named-well will be more of a challenge. This latest funding round seems to have underperformed, if passing references in the media are to be believed. Fingers crossed.
There are plenty of media types very willing to spin anything to Musk’s disadvantage. That’s why it’s important to know what a given scribbler’s agenda is – and they all have agendas.
Elon as a trillonaire!!!
Lookout naysayers
https://www.google.com/amp/…
“nothing unique about FalconH[eavy}”
Name another rocket that can lift 30 t to LEO and land any stage(s) for reuse.
Super Heavy and Starship are just as fictional as, say, SLS Block 1B (let alone Block 2).
yes
No.
Super Heavy, so far as we know, is “fictional” except for its engines. Starship has its engines and some other bits in existence. SLS Block 1, at this point, seems to have a few more of its bits in existence, but Starship should easily overtake it in the next few months. Given that there are now to be three or four SLS BLock 1’s produced, it is not obvious that any of the bits of an SLS Block 1B exist – possibly some SRB cases. There are no bits of an SLS Block 2 yet extant.
Mr. Oler’s assertion of fictional status for Super Heavy and Starship is pretty much a case of asking, “Who are you going to believe; me or your lying eyes?”
“Who are you going to believe; me or your lying eyes?”
“Just remember, what you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”
— Donald Trump, July 25, 2018
That comment was made anent himself and the MSM. In that context, it is quite true.
So musk spent millions on a factory .. millions on tools and dies… millions on engineers .. millions on tanks he ALREADY PRODUCED…
all to create a fiction? ALL those MILLIONS are being spent everyday .. just to create a F#)_$*# illusion . a fiction? That he SECRETLY is not actually building anything .. just creating what you say
fiction?
sheesh
I am just going by what he is saying
I guess your hearing works about as well as Quentin Tarantino’s did in From Dusk Till Dawn.
And don’t forget that they have submitted their license applications to test it.
And just what are the side boosters being test fired in Texas? Holographic images?
they have nothing to do with BFR dear moon or whatever its being called today
Musk is running into trouble with BFR, he is not getting the money he needs, the USAF has rejected it and he doesnt have a clue how to get the second stage back…yawh
Nope, they are for the upgraded FH you say doesn’t exist. Both are Block 5 versions with 10% of the performance of the Block 2’s used on the original FH launch.
the fan boys on NASAspaceflight.com say they are for BFR or whatever we are calling the first stage now. you will never find a post where I say upgraded FH does not exist…all you will find me saying is that FH is the company future not F9…sorry you are talking about the wrong thing
So just what is the Super Heavy you are referring to. And Teslarti reports the side boosters are for the next FH flight.
https://www.teslarati.com/s…
SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy side booster arrives in Texas for hot-fire testing
by Eric Ralph
Posted on November 18, 2018
“Among countless other changes, Falcon 9 Block 5 features a ~10% thrust
increase, an almost clean-slate avionics refresh, and major structural
upgrades throughout the booster.”
I guess I am confused and confusing everyone with Musk nomenclature…but I “thought” he was now referring to BFR/BFS as super heavy and starship or something like that.
this is what the fan boys/girls think on NSF that is going on at BC
there is no doubt that Musk is moving on FH as in my view it is the future of his company…
and with that goodnight…up to fly to London and back tomorrow 🙂
Some more of that proggy “truth” I guess.
no truth is truth. I know thats not popular in the admnistration but it is real 🙂
Yes, truth is truth. It’s just that the intersection between truth and what you typically have to say about Elon Musk or Donald J. Trump is nearly an empty set.
Yeah, those carbon fiber parts being built in California are fiction. As are the Raptor engine tests happening in McGregor, Texas. As is the fiction of the methane handling equipment being installed at the launch site under construction in Boca Chica, Texas.
Yeah, it’s all fiction. /s
One can reasonably argue about how far along Super Heavy and Starship are in their development cycle, but they’re not at all fiction.
they are barely past the “start” in the development process. 10 plus years away and it will be a much smaller vehicle by then
“10 plus years away” – I’ll buy you the beverage of your choice if it takes more than 5 years for Starship to orbit the earth.
As for the size of Starship, they’re already producing carbon fiber tank/structural components. The diameter of the thing has already been decided. So by your reasoning, Starship is going to be really stubby in its final form.
you and others make way to much of the very few parts “made” none of them will ever fly in space…Musk has no design for the second stage whatever he is calling it
You remind me of that scene from Jumbo where Jimmy Durante says, “What elephant?”
Define fly? These parts could certainly fly in sub-orbital hops of the spaceship to get a feel for the GNC/Pressurization System/Raptor Clustering….
As a prominent writer on another site pointed out, of the last two rockets NASA launched its astronauts on, one had a hole in it and the other blew up. As response, they’ve signed up to, without conducting their own investigation, fly their astronaut on it just 2 months later.
What’s the drinking culture at Roscosmos? What’s the state of maintenance of the working areas, the employee contentment and dedication to the mission? But their rockets are safe to fly on.
The real problem is that SpaceX is about to go from making NASA look good through their foresight in partnering with, nurturing and mentoring SpaceX, to making NASA look bad by blowing past them
The working areas look like garbage dumps because there is no budget to clean them up.. as was reported
The real Iron Man…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…
After the CRS F9-Dragon1 flight was a loss, NASA investigated. They said in their report that SpaceX did not do acceptance testing on the struts. The way that the spear builder bent his shafts he got from his supplier must have done a million years ago. They also said that they were not using work platforms when inside working on the 2nd stage. They were standing on already installed components. They may have been standing on the helium tank. I don’t know if a heel or knee could push in the carbon fiber enough to cause the dents in the liner of the Amos explosion. I guess when NASA is in plant, they don’t do things like that as they did not catch it before the CRS loss. NASA sure can choose the wrong people with 2 CRS explosions. They must just let their contractors do whatever they want and never say no., No problems since, so whatever they are doing now is working. I think a safety inspection is needed. BTW Musk wants to make Tequila. The rights owners did not like the name he wanted to call it. They may include Boeing because of the CST-100 test stand problem.
Evidence? Or just stories that the SLS supporters are spreading to kill CCP and take over?
You can believe NASA or not. Perhaps they say in the report where they got the info. With everyone with cell phones NASA cannot make a surprise inspection. They need webcams so they can watch what they are doing. Like watching your Tesla being built.Please tell me where if you can get the report and read it. I think I got it from an article someone wrote. Spaceflightnow or NASASpaceflight. Do a search and if my memory is wrong I will admit it. Maybe they are lying. I don’t think NASA ever released the report. Maybe FOIA would work.
With the StarShip name maybe Musk is selling to Textron. Like he did with PayPal. Enough money to do his Mars plans.
I still don’t trust F9. The family rocket I suggested would be better. Dragon1 I trust and 2 will work or you may be right and use Orion Lite. I think there is a law saying use SLS to go to ISS. Just use 1 segment RSRM Castor 30XL and Orion LIte. Should be a lot cheaper and maybe that would satisfy SLS people. Don’t have to worry about Nelson objecting anymore.
So basically there is no evidence to support what you wrote… Its just hearsay. And there is zero evidence Elon Musk has any plans to sell out to old space. Sounds like more wishful thinking on the part of old space.
The law you reference is Section 117 of the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 that designated the SLS as the legal replacement of the Space Shuttle, exempting it from commercial competition and allowing the NASA Administrator to use it any way they wish as long as they inform Congress of their reasons for doing so.
https://www.congress.gov/bi…
You really need to get your thoughts together before submitting them. Also, a bit of back ground reading about the myriad of subjects that you brought up would help immensely.
Just a thought, but it may be that Elon Musk wants to rid himself of the NASA tar baby given the pain its been with the Dragon2. In any case he is moving forward with his own HSF program, the Starship.
https://www.teslarati.com/s…
SpaceX seeks licenses for BFR spaceship prototype hop test campaign
By Eric Ralph
Posted on November 22, 2018
The pictures of the facilities being built for it are impressive. It will be more impressive when the videos come out of its first flights.
Musk’s behavior didn’t trigger this review. That was a misdirection designed to draw fire away from NASA’s Mr. Jurczyk’s remarks about SLS eventually being replaced by new soon to be built private launchers. It wouldn’t surprise me if Shelby or someone in his advisory group didn’t bring up Elon’s appearance on Rogan’s show to falsely mislead speculation. What is the point? ASAP & NASA is already exhausting themselves with safety reviews of all aspects of of each company’s CCP efforts. So, NASA should be able to print out extra copies of the safety reviews that it & ASAP has and send it to the Alabama mafia’s boss in the Senate. Shouldn’t affect launch dates at all. Just my opinion.
It would be nice were this so, but I doubt it. I think Sen. Shelby has passed the word that there will be something found to hang up SpaceX and he won’t be at all fussy about whatever it is his numerous inside men at NASA decide it should be. Boeing will be put through a Potemkin Village “investigation” and nothing will come of it. The object of this witch hunt is obviously to jam up Musk and SpaceX. One hopes the Demo 1 date having been set, there will be no screwing about with that, but until Demo 1 actually flies, we won’t know. The Demo 2 flight with crew is notionally set for June. Lots of time between now and then to “find” some more “votes” as it were.