Author: Robert Zimmerman
June 4, 2025 Quick space links
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- New paper speculates alternative to the Big Bang
Fun stuff only a tiny bit different than fantasy. The author does however provide a nice summary of some of the basic problems with the Big Bang theory itself, problems that until recently it was generally considered inappropriate for any cosmologist to mention.
- Video of the launch and recovery of Space Epoch’s XZY-1 grasshopper rocket during its test flight May 29, 2025
As usual for these kinds of promo pieces, the video includes epic music.
- X user notes that China has not released a single picture of its Tianwen-2 asteroid probe, now on its way
Makes me wonder if the spacecraft looks too much like someone else’s (such as Osiris-Rex or Hayabusa-2), thus indicating its design was stolen, and China wants to hide this fact.
- Firefly touts the successful full duration static fire test of the Miranda engine it is developing for the first stages of both the Antares and Eclipse rockets
The video is quite impressive. This engines does appear powerful. Seven will be mounted at the base of Eclipse.
- Arsonists on trial in the UK for setting fire to a business supplying Starlink terminals to the Ukraine
The accused apparently were hired by the military Wagner Group that Russia used to pay to fight in the Ukraine.
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- New paper speculates alternative to the Big Bang
Fun stuff only a tiny bit different than fantasy. The author does however provide a nice summary of some of the basic problems with the Big Bang theory itself, problems that until recently it was generally considered inappropriate for any cosmologist to mention.
- Video of the launch and recovery of Space Epoch’s XZY-1 grasshopper rocket during its test flight May 29, 2025
As usual for these kinds of promo pieces, the video includes epic music.
- X user notes that China has not released a single picture of its Tianwen-2 asteroid probe, now on its way
Makes me wonder if the spacecraft looks too much like someone else’s (such as Osiris-Rex or Hayabusa-2), thus indicating its design was stolen, and China wants to hide this fact.
- Firefly touts the successful full duration static fire test of the Miranda engine it is developing for the first stages of both the Antares and Eclipse rockets
The video is quite impressive. This engines does appear powerful. Seven will be mounted at the base of Eclipse.
- Arsonists on trial in the UK for setting fire to a business supplying Starlink terminals to the Ukraine
The accused apparently were hired by the military Wagner Group that Russia used to pay to fight in the Ukraine.
Two giant clusters of galaxies on target for second collision
Click for full image.
Using telescopes both on Earth and in space, astronomers now think two giant clusters of galaxies that had collided previously have now stopping flying from each other and are on target for second collision.
The annotated image to the right shows what we can see today. The two blue blobs near the center are the two galaxy clusters.
The galaxy cluster PSZ2 G181.06+48.47 (PSZ2 G181 for short) is about 2.8 billion light-years from Earth. Previously, radio observations from the LOw Frequency ARray (LOFAR), an antenna network in the Netherlands, spotted parentheses-shaped structures on the outside of the system. In this new composite image, X-rays from Chandra (represented in purple) and ESA’s XMM-Newton (blue) have been combined with LOFAR data (red) and an optical image from the Pan-STARRS telescope of the stars in the field of view.
These structures are probably shock fronts — similar to those created by jets that have broken the sound barrier — likely caused by disruption of gas from the initial collision about a billion years ago. Since the collision they have continued traveling outwards and are currently separated by about 11 million light-years, the largest separation of these kinds of structures that astronomers have ever seen.
Now, data from NASA’s Chandra and ESA’s XMM-Newton, a mission with NASA contributions, is providing evidence that PSZ2 G181 is poised for another collision. Having a first pass at ramming each other, the two clusters have slowed down and begun heading back toward a second crash.
When such giant object collide what really interacts the most is the gas and dust between the stars. The motions of the stars and galaxies of course get distorted by the pull of gravity, but there are almost never any crashes.
Click for full image.
Using telescopes both on Earth and in space, astronomers now think two giant clusters of galaxies that had collided previously have now stopping flying from each other and are on target for second collision.
The annotated image to the right shows what we can see today. The two blue blobs near the center are the two galaxy clusters.
The galaxy cluster PSZ2 G181.06+48.47 (PSZ2 G181 for short) is about 2.8 billion light-years from Earth. Previously, radio observations from the LOw Frequency ARray (LOFAR), an antenna network in the Netherlands, spotted parentheses-shaped structures on the outside of the system. In this new composite image, X-rays from Chandra (represented in purple) and ESA’s XMM-Newton (blue) have been combined with LOFAR data (red) and an optical image from the Pan-STARRS telescope of the stars in the field of view.
These structures are probably shock fronts — similar to those created by jets that have broken the sound barrier — likely caused by disruption of gas from the initial collision about a billion years ago. Since the collision they have continued traveling outwards and are currently separated by about 11 million light-years, the largest separation of these kinds of structures that astronomers have ever seen.
Now, data from NASA’s Chandra and ESA’s XMM-Newton, a mission with NASA contributions, is providing evidence that PSZ2 G181 is poised for another collision. Having a first pass at ramming each other, the two clusters have slowed down and begun heading back toward a second crash.
When such giant object collide what really interacts the most is the gas and dust between the stars. The motions of the stars and galaxies of course get distorted by the pull of gravity, but there are almost never any crashes.
Understanding Trump’s proposed NASA cuts, in the larger context of the overall federal budget
U.S. debt as of June 4, 2025. Click for original.
For my entire life it has always been the same: Whenever any politician or elected official proposes any cuts to the federal budget, and most especially when those cuts are aimed at a popular government agency like NASA, the news reports in the mainstream press are uniformly hostile.
Trump’s proposal to cut NASA’s budget by 24% in 2026 has been no different. Here are just a few headlines:
- Ars Technica: Some parts of Trump’s proposed budget for NASA are literally draconian
- Sky & Telescope: Proposed NASA Budget Would Gut Space Science, Jobs
- New York Times: Scientific Discoveries, and Dreams, in the Balance
- Mother Jones: Donald Trump’s Proposed Budget Would Gut American Science
- Science: Dozens of active and planned NASA spacecraft killed in Trump budget request
- Space News: NASA budget would cancel dozens of science missions, lay off thousands
This list is only a sampling, but they are typical of almost all the reporting now and that always happens when big cuts are proposed in any government program. The spin is always the same: “These cuts are horrible, their acceptance would be the act of a barbarian, and by doing so will certainly cause the fall of civilization!”
Above all, the focus is always on the cuts themselves, and never on the larger picture.
I am not going to do that. I have reviewed in detail the proposed cuts to NASA, and am now going to take a detailed look, but will do so by considering the larger context of the overall federal budget and the need to get its spending under control.
And out of control that budget is, as indicated by the screen capture above of today’s US Debt Clock. The United States is bankrupt. If we don’t gain some control over federal spending in a very near future some very bad things are going to happen, and soon. And those bad things will likely shut down luxury items like NASA entirely, not just impose some cuts to its overall budget.
All Trump is doing is attempting a first stab at this problem. The real question is whether he has made a rational and reasonable attempt, or whether it should be revised in some manner.
This is the perspective I bring to this issue. I just wish others would do the same.
» Read more
Japanese lunar lander startup Ispace signs deal to build lander for ESA
Landing sites for both Firefly’s Blue Ghost and
Ispace’s Resilience
The Japanese lunar lander startup Ispace — about to attempt its second unmanned lunar landing — has now signed a $3 millionj contract with the European Space Agency (ESA) to begin design and construction of its proposed Magpie lander.
The agreement comes in the context of the Small Missions for Exploration initiative launched by ESA. This initiative called for innovative and short-term mission ideas for lunar exploration. ispace’s MAGPIE concept was selected and awarded a pre-phase A contract on Dec. 12, 2024. Under the Phase 1 extension agreement, ispace-EUROPE will collaborate with ESA on the implementation of the lunar exploration mission. In aggregate, the value of the contracts for the two phases is €2,695,000 (approximately ¥437 million JPY).
The company already has contracts for future landers with both NASA and Japan’s space agency JAXA. It appears these space agencies consider the company’s engineering to be acceptable, even though its only attempt to land on the Moon, Hakuto-R1, crashed in 2023 when its software shut the engines down prematurely, three kilometers above the surface.
Ispace’s second lander, Resilience, is presently in lunar orbit and is now targeting a landing attempt tomorrow, June 5, 2025, at 3:17 pm (Eastern). The map to the right shows the landing zone, in Mare Frigoris in the high northern latitudes of the near side of the Moon.
This contract by ESA also illustrates Europea’s increasing shift to the capitalism model. Rather than design and build the lander itself, ESA is buying this product from the private sector. It will likely get what wants sooner and for far less money.
Landing sites for both Firefly’s Blue Ghost and
Ispace’s Resilience
The Japanese lunar lander startup Ispace — about to attempt its second unmanned lunar landing — has now signed a $3 millionj contract with the European Space Agency (ESA) to begin design and construction of its proposed Magpie lander.
The agreement comes in the context of the Small Missions for Exploration initiative launched by ESA. This initiative called for innovative and short-term mission ideas for lunar exploration. ispace’s MAGPIE concept was selected and awarded a pre-phase A contract on Dec. 12, 2024. Under the Phase 1 extension agreement, ispace-EUROPE will collaborate with ESA on the implementation of the lunar exploration mission. In aggregate, the value of the contracts for the two phases is €2,695,000 (approximately ¥437 million JPY).
The company already has contracts for future landers with both NASA and Japan’s space agency JAXA. It appears these space agencies consider the company’s engineering to be acceptable, even though its only attempt to land on the Moon, Hakuto-R1, crashed in 2023 when its software shut the engines down prematurely, three kilometers above the surface.
Ispace’s second lander, Resilience, is presently in lunar orbit and is now targeting a landing attempt tomorrow, June 5, 2025, at 3:17 pm (Eastern). The map to the right shows the landing zone, in Mare Frigoris in the high northern latitudes of the near side of the Moon.
This contract by ESA also illustrates Europea’s increasing shift to the capitalism model. Rather than design and build the lander itself, ESA is buying this product from the private sector. It will likely get what wants sooner and for far less money.
Orbital tug startup Impulse raises $300 million in private investment capital
Following several large contract announcements in recent weeks, the orbital tug startup Impulse has now raised an additional $300 million in private investment capital, in addition to the $150 million it raised last year.
Impulse plans to use the funding for several initiatives. One is to scale up production of its Mira and Helios vehicles to better meet demand for them. The company says it has more than 30 signed contracts for those vehicles, a backlog worth nearly $200 million. Romo said the company is seeing increasing demand for Mira, the smaller of the two vehicles, for defense applications.
The company was founded by Tom Mueller, who was one of the principal engineers during SpaceX’s development of the Falcon 9. Mira is the smaller of the two tugs, and has flown one demo mission. The larger Helios tug has not yet flown, but the company recently won a contract with the satellite company SES to use it.
The company has also said it is developing its own rocket, but I suspect its first launch that will come later.
Following several large contract announcements in recent weeks, the orbital tug startup Impulse has now raised an additional $300 million in private investment capital, in addition to the $150 million it raised last year.
Impulse plans to use the funding for several initiatives. One is to scale up production of its Mira and Helios vehicles to better meet demand for them. The company says it has more than 30 signed contracts for those vehicles, a backlog worth nearly $200 million. Romo said the company is seeing increasing demand for Mira, the smaller of the two vehicles, for defense applications.
The company was founded by Tom Mueller, who was one of the principal engineers during SpaceX’s development of the Falcon 9. Mira is the smaller of the two tugs, and has flown one demo mission. The larger Helios tug has not yet flown, but the company recently won a contract with the satellite company SES to use it.
The company has also said it is developing its own rocket, but I suspect its first launch that will come later.
Axiom’s fourth commercial passenger flight to ISS delayed another two days
NASA, Axiom, and SpaceX yesterday announced that the launch of Axiom’s fourth commercial passenger flight to ISS, dubbed Ax-4, has been delayed two days to June 10, 2025.
NASA, Axiom Space, and SpaceX are targeting no earlier than 8:22 a.m. EDT on Tuesday, June 10, for launch of the fourth private astronaut mission to the International Space Station, Axiom Mission 4. This shift allows teams to account for predicted inclement weather during the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft transport in addition to completing final processing of the spacecraft ahead of launch.
The Dragon capsule for this mission is new, and there had been delays in getting it built. Though weather is likely the biggest reason for this delay, it also sounds as if SpaceX has needed just a little bit of extra time to finalize the capsule’s construction.
The mission will fly one Axiom astronaut plus three passengers, each a government astronaut from India, Poland, and Hungary. It will spend about a week docked at ISS.
NASA, Axiom, and SpaceX yesterday announced that the launch of Axiom’s fourth commercial passenger flight to ISS, dubbed Ax-4, has been delayed two days to June 10, 2025.
NASA, Axiom Space, and SpaceX are targeting no earlier than 8:22 a.m. EDT on Tuesday, June 10, for launch of the fourth private astronaut mission to the International Space Station, Axiom Mission 4. This shift allows teams to account for predicted inclement weather during the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft transport in addition to completing final processing of the spacecraft ahead of launch.
The Dragon capsule for this mission is new, and there had been delays in getting it built. Though weather is likely the biggest reason for this delay, it also sounds as if SpaceX has needed just a little bit of extra time to finalize the capsule’s construction.
The mission will fly one Axiom astronaut plus three passengers, each a government astronaut from India, Poland, and Hungary. It will spend about a week docked at ISS.
Voyager announces first public stock offering, valued at $1.6 billion
The Starlab design in 2025. Click
for original image.
The space station startup Voyager Technologies yesterday announced its first public stock offering, with the hope of raising almost $400 million in investment capital.
Underwriters have a 30-day option to purchase up to 1.65 million additional Class A shares, on top of the 11 million initially offered, which are expected to be priced between $26 and $29 each. If fully subscribed at the top end of the range, the IPO could raise as much as $367 million in gross proceeds.
Voyager plans to build the Starlab space station, launched as a single large module by SpaceX’s Starship/Superheavy rocket, but so far has cut no metal, focusing its work entirely on designs. It has also signed deals with several foreign companies in Europe and Japan as well as the European Space Agency, positioning itself as providing the international community a station to replace ISS when it is gone.
At the moment however I rank Starlab fourth among the four commercial space stations under development, mostly because it has built nothing. Hopefully the funds raised by this stock offering will allow it to start some construction work.
- Haven-1, being built by Vast, with no NASA funds. The company is moving fast, with Haven-1 to launch and be occupied in 2026 for an estimated 30 days total. It hopes this actual hardware and manned mission will put it in the lead to win NASA’s phase 2 contract, from which it will build its much larger mult-module Haven-2 station..
- Axiom, being built by Axiom, has launched three tourist flights to ISS, with a fourth scheduled for early June, carrying passengers from India, Hungary, and Poland. Though there have been rumors it has cash flow issues, development of its first module has been proceeding more or less as planned.
- Orbital Reef, being built by a consortium led by Blue Origin and Sierra Space. Overall, Blue Origin has built almost nothing, while Sierra Space has successfully tested its inflatable modules, including a full scale version, and appears ready to start building its module for launch.
- Starlab, being built by a consortium led by Voyager Space, Airbus, and Northrop Grumman, with an extensive partnership agreement with the European Space Agency. It recently had its station design approved by NASA, but it has built nothing. This might change once it obtains several hundred million dollars from its initial public offering of stock.
The Starlab design in 2025. Click
for original image.
The space station startup Voyager Technologies yesterday announced its first public stock offering, with the hope of raising almost $400 million in investment capital.
Underwriters have a 30-day option to purchase up to 1.65 million additional Class A shares, on top of the 11 million initially offered, which are expected to be priced between $26 and $29 each. If fully subscribed at the top end of the range, the IPO could raise as much as $367 million in gross proceeds.
Voyager plans to build the Starlab space station, launched as a single large module by SpaceX’s Starship/Superheavy rocket, but so far has cut no metal, focusing its work entirely on designs. It has also signed deals with several foreign companies in Europe and Japan as well as the European Space Agency, positioning itself as providing the international community a station to replace ISS when it is gone.
At the moment however I rank Starlab fourth among the four commercial space stations under development, mostly because it has built nothing. Hopefully the funds raised by this stock offering will allow it to start some construction work.
- Haven-1, being built by Vast, with no NASA funds. The company is moving fast, with Haven-1 to launch and be occupied in 2026 for an estimated 30 days total. It hopes this actual hardware and manned mission will put it in the lead to win NASA’s phase 2 contract, from which it will build its much larger mult-module Haven-2 station..
- Axiom, being built by Axiom, has launched three tourist flights to ISS, with a fourth scheduled for early June, carrying passengers from India, Hungary, and Poland. Though there have been rumors it has cash flow issues, development of its first module has been proceeding more or less as planned.
- Orbital Reef, being built by a consortium led by Blue Origin and Sierra Space. Overall, Blue Origin has built almost nothing, while Sierra Space has successfully tested its inflatable modules, including a full scale version, and appears ready to start building its module for launch.
- Starlab, being built by a consortium led by Voyager Space, Airbus, and Northrop Grumman, with an extensive partnership agreement with the European Space Agency. It recently had its station design approved by NASA, but it has built nothing. This might change once it obtains several hundred million dollars from its initial public offering of stock.
Proposed commercial spaceport in Nova Scotia gets launch customer
The proposed commercial spaceport in Nova Scotia, operated by Maritime Launch Services, announced this week that it has signed a contract with a Netherlands rocket startup, T-Minus, whereby the latter will do two suborbital launches of its new Barracuda sounding rocket.
On 3 June 2023, Maritime Launch Services, a Canadian commercial launch facility operator, announced that it had signed an agreement with T-Minus Engineering for the launch of two Barracuda rockets. According to the press release, the two launches will carry various scientific and educational payloads for several customers, whose names were not disclosed. The launches are expected to take place from Spaceport Nova Scotia in October 2025.
The viability of both the rocket startup and spaceport are open to question. T-Minus was founded in 2011, and has apparently done little in that time period. It claims it is flown this rocket many times, but if so there is little solid information confirming this fact. Most of its business appears to have been flying very small sounding rockets for European defense agencies.
Maritime Launch Services first proposed this spaceport in 2017, but has seen only one student suborbital launch in that time. Its original plan was to offer both the launchpad and rocket to satellite manufacturers. The rocket however was Ukrainian-built, and when Russia invaded the Ukraine that rocket was no longer available. Furthermore, red tape in Canada stalled launch approvals for years.
Recently the spaceport has been marketing itself to multiple rocket companies, announced a number of deals with unnamed startups or named startups that haven’t flown anything yet. It has also signed a partnership deal with the space station company (Voyager), apparently to bring some real technical expertise to the operation.
Nothing real at this spaceport however has actually yet occurred. Whether this new deal is real will have to wait for something to happen.
The proposed commercial spaceport in Nova Scotia, operated by Maritime Launch Services, announced this week that it has signed a contract with a Netherlands rocket startup, T-Minus, whereby the latter will do two suborbital launches of its new Barracuda sounding rocket.
On 3 June 2023, Maritime Launch Services, a Canadian commercial launch facility operator, announced that it had signed an agreement with T-Minus Engineering for the launch of two Barracuda rockets. According to the press release, the two launches will carry various scientific and educational payloads for several customers, whose names were not disclosed. The launches are expected to take place from Spaceport Nova Scotia in October 2025.
The viability of both the rocket startup and spaceport are open to question. T-Minus was founded in 2011, and has apparently done little in that time period. It claims it is flown this rocket many times, but if so there is little solid information confirming this fact. Most of its business appears to have been flying very small sounding rockets for European defense agencies.
Maritime Launch Services first proposed this spaceport in 2017, but has seen only one student suborbital launch in that time. Its original plan was to offer both the launchpad and rocket to satellite manufacturers. The rocket however was Ukrainian-built, and when Russia invaded the Ukraine that rocket was no longer available. Furthermore, red tape in Canada stalled launch approvals for years.
Recently the spaceport has been marketing itself to multiple rocket companies, announced a number of deals with unnamed startups or named startups that haven’t flown anything yet. It has also signed a partnership deal with the space station company (Voyager), apparently to bring some real technical expertise to the operation.
Nothing real at this spaceport however has actually yet occurred. Whether this new deal is real will have to wait for something to happen.
Joe Bonamassa – Drive
June 3, 2025 Quick space links
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- Vast touts completion of second major weld (of ten) for the primary hull of its Haven-1 space module
Time is pressing if they want to launch on schedule in 2026.
- Firefly releases four-camera video taken during Blue Ghost’s lunar landing in March
The video is quite beautiful.
- Graphic showing images of all eight Chinese pseudo-company prototypes testing vertical rocket landings
This shows in graphic form the summary of this Chinese effort that I posted on May 29, 2025. There is also a ninth company attempting the same work. It must be underlined that the Chinese government demands that these companies share their results. There is no such thing as propriety data under its totalitarian rule.
- On this day in 2003 Europe’s Mars Express orbiter was launched
It is still operating in orbit around Mars.
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- Vast touts completion of second major weld (of ten) for the primary hull of its Haven-1 space module
Time is pressing if they want to launch on schedule in 2026.
- Firefly releases four-camera video taken during Blue Ghost’s lunar landing in March
The video is quite beautiful.
- Graphic showing images of all eight Chinese pseudo-company prototypes testing vertical rocket landings
This shows in graphic form the summary of this Chinese effort that I posted on May 29, 2025. There is also a ninth company attempting the same work. It must be underlined that the Chinese government demands that these companies share their results. There is no such thing as propriety data under its totalitarian rule.
- On this day in 2003 Europe’s Mars Express orbiter was launched
It is still operating in orbit around Mars.
Sunspot update: The Sun confounds the predictions again!
It is time for my monthly update of the Sun’s ongoing sunspot activity, using the update that NOAA posts each month to its own graph of sunspot activity but annotated by me with extra information to illustrate the larger scientific context.
The activity in May was shocking in that it completely contradicted all expectations by everyone in the solar science community, with the Sun’s sunspot count changing in a way that was somewhat unprecedented. The graph below makes this very clear:
New ground-based images of the Sun’s surface
Click for original image.
Cool image time! The picture to the right, cropped, reduced, and sharpened to post here, was taken using the Inouye Solar Telescope in Hawaii. It shows the granule surface of the Sun at very high resolution, resolving objects as small as 12 miles across.
The team used the Inouye’s Visible Broadband Imager (VBI) instrument operating in the G-band, a specific range of visible light especially useful for studying the Sun because it highlights areas with strong magnetic activity, making features like sunspots and fine-scale structures like the ones in the study easier to see. The setup allows researchers to observe the solar photosphere at an impressive spatial resolution better than 0.03 arcseconds (i.e., about 20 kilometers on the Sun). This is the sharpest ever achieved in solar astronomy.
The scientists then used computer simulations to confirm that the smallest features, curtains of plasma raising along the walls of the granules, are linked to fluctuations in the Sun’s magnetic field.
As interesting and cutting edge this research is, the language of the press release seems more aimed at touting this telescope then describing new science. Practically every sentence uses words like “unmatched,” “unparalleled,” “unique,” and “unprecedented” (multiple times), and then ended with this quote:
“This is just one of many firsts for the Inouye, demonstrating how it continues to push the of solar research,” says NSO [National Solar Observatory] Associate Director for the NSF [National Science Foundation’s] Inouye Solar Telescope, Dr. David Boboltz. “It also underscores Inouye’s vital role in understanding the small-scale physics that drive space weather events that impact our increasingly technological society here on Earth.”
I have noticed this phenomenon recently in many government press releases. It appears that the releases issued in the past month have become less about real research and are more designed to lobby the public against any possible budget cuts proposed by the Trump administration.
Click for original image.
Cool image time! The picture to the right, cropped, reduced, and sharpened to post here, was taken using the Inouye Solar Telescope in Hawaii. It shows the granule surface of the Sun at very high resolution, resolving objects as small as 12 miles across.
The team used the Inouye’s Visible Broadband Imager (VBI) instrument operating in the G-band, a specific range of visible light especially useful for studying the Sun because it highlights areas with strong magnetic activity, making features like sunspots and fine-scale structures like the ones in the study easier to see. The setup allows researchers to observe the solar photosphere at an impressive spatial resolution better than 0.03 arcseconds (i.e., about 20 kilometers on the Sun). This is the sharpest ever achieved in solar astronomy.
The scientists then used computer simulations to confirm that the smallest features, curtains of plasma raising along the walls of the granules, are linked to fluctuations in the Sun’s magnetic field.
As interesting and cutting edge this research is, the language of the press release seems more aimed at touting this telescope then describing new science. Practically every sentence uses words like “unmatched,” “unparalleled,” “unique,” and “unprecedented” (multiple times), and then ended with this quote:
“This is just one of many firsts for the Inouye, demonstrating how it continues to push the of solar research,” says NSO [National Solar Observatory] Associate Director for the NSF [National Science Foundation’s] Inouye Solar Telescope, Dr. David Boboltz. “It also underscores Inouye’s vital role in understanding the small-scale physics that drive space weather events that impact our increasingly technological society here on Earth.”
I have noticed this phenomenon recently in many government press releases. It appears that the releases issued in the past month have become less about real research and are more designed to lobby the public against any possible budget cuts proposed by the Trump administration.
Two launches today by American companies
The beat goes on: Two different American rocket companies today completed successful launches.
First, Rocket Lab placed a BlackSky high resolution Earth imaging satellite into orbit, its Electron rocket lifting off from one of its two launchpads in New Zealand. This was the second of four launches that BlackSky has purchased from Rocket Lab.
Next, SpaceX continued its unrelenting launch pace, placing 23 Starlink satellites into orbit (with 13 having phone-to-satellite capabilities), its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral. The first stage completed its 21st flight, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic.
The leaders in the 2025 launch race:
68 SpaceX
32 China
7 Rocket Lab
6 Russia
SpaceX now leads the rest of the world in successful launches, 68 to 52.
The beat goes on: Two different American rocket companies today completed successful launches.
First, Rocket Lab placed a BlackSky high resolution Earth imaging satellite into orbit, its Electron rocket lifting off from one of its two launchpads in New Zealand. This was the second of four launches that BlackSky has purchased from Rocket Lab.
Next, SpaceX continued its unrelenting launch pace, placing 23 Starlink satellites into orbit (with 13 having phone-to-satellite capabilities), its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral. The first stage completed its 21st flight, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic.
The leaders in the 2025 launch race:
68 SpaceX
32 China
7 Rocket Lab
6 Russia
SpaceX now leads the rest of the world in successful launches, 68 to 52.
Jerry Lee Lewis – What I say
An evening pause: Let’s start the week with some boogie-woogie. Performed live 1983.
Hat tip Judd Clark.
June 2, 2025 Quick space links
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- Ispace update: All is well with its Resilience lunar lander, still scheduled to land on June 5, 2025
The picture of the company’s Tenacious rover is cool: It looks like a Conestoga wagon.
- Picture of offshore engine test stand for Space Pioneer’s Tianlong-3 rocket
This is the same Chinese pseudo-company that had its rocket break free and launch itself during a staric fire engine test in 2024. I wonder if the Chinese government ordered it to build this offshore test stand after that incident.
- Long tweet detailing why Europe’s government Starlink constellation, IRIS2, is “dead in the water”
The bottom line is that Germany and Italy want nothing to do with these government projects that cost too much and never get built on time, no matter how much France whines.
- On this day in 1966 Surveyor-1 became the first spacecraft to gently soft land on the Moon
The Soviets had placed Luna 9 on the Moon in January 1966, but it didn’t soft land, it used giant airbags to protect it when it crashed on the surface, which once deflated allowed the spacecraft to operate three days. For a picture of Surveyor-1 from orbit, taken by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, go here.
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- Ispace update: All is well with its Resilience lunar lander, still scheduled to land on June 5, 2025
The picture of the company’s Tenacious rover is cool: It looks like a Conestoga wagon.
- Picture of offshore engine test stand for Space Pioneer’s Tianlong-3 rocket
This is the same Chinese pseudo-company that had its rocket break free and launch itself during a staric fire engine test in 2024. I wonder if the Chinese government ordered it to build this offshore test stand after that incident.
- Long tweet detailing why Europe’s government Starlink constellation, IRIS2, is “dead in the water”
The bottom line is that Germany and Italy want nothing to do with these government projects that cost too much and never get built on time, no matter how much France whines.
- On this day in 1966 Surveyor-1 became the first spacecraft to gently soft land on the Moon
The Soviets had placed Luna 9 on the Moon in January 1966, but it didn’t soft land, it used giant airbags to protect it when it crashed on the surface, which once deflated allowed the spacecraft to operate three days. For a picture of Surveyor-1 from orbit, taken by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, go here.
Texas legislature gives Starbase power to close Boca Chica beaches
The Texas legislature this week approved language that now gives the new government of Starbase the power to close the road to Boca Chica’s beaches, taking that power from the local county.
House Bill 5246 revises the power and duties of the Texas Space Commission and the Texas Aerospace Research and Space Economy Consortium. A conference committee report of the bill added a section that allows the Space Commission to coordinate with a city to temporarily close a highway or venue for public safety purposes.
In South Texas, that will give the Starbase city commissioners the authority to approve those closures which would affect State Highway 4, a road that runs through Starbase and leads to the beach, as well as the beach itself.
As is usual for the particular news outlet at the link, it magnifies the opposition to SpaceX, amplifying the size of the several tiny leftist activist organizations that have been trying to shut down SpaceX at Boca Chica since the day Elon Musk announced he was now voting Republican. In reality, that opposition is nil. The region is thrilled by the wealth and jobs that SpaceX is bringing to the area, and is willing do help it grow in all ways. This action by the state legislature only reflects that support.
I must also note that the opposition in the legislature came entirely from the Democratic Party, once again taking the 20% side of an 80-20 issue.
Hat tip to radio host Robert Pratt of Pratt on Texas.
The Texas legislature this week approved language that now gives the new government of Starbase the power to close the road to Boca Chica’s beaches, taking that power from the local county.
House Bill 5246 revises the power and duties of the Texas Space Commission and the Texas Aerospace Research and Space Economy Consortium. A conference committee report of the bill added a section that allows the Space Commission to coordinate with a city to temporarily close a highway or venue for public safety purposes.
In South Texas, that will give the Starbase city commissioners the authority to approve those closures which would affect State Highway 4, a road that runs through Starbase and leads to the beach, as well as the beach itself.
As is usual for the particular news outlet at the link, it magnifies the opposition to SpaceX, amplifying the size of the several tiny leftist activist organizations that have been trying to shut down SpaceX at Boca Chica since the day Elon Musk announced he was now voting Republican. In reality, that opposition is nil. The region is thrilled by the wealth and jobs that SpaceX is bringing to the area, and is willing do help it grow in all ways. This action by the state legislature only reflects that support.
I must also note that the opposition in the legislature came entirely from the Democratic Party, once again taking the 20% side of an 80-20 issue.
Hat tip to radio host Robert Pratt of Pratt on Texas.
Trump’s NASA budget cuts and rejection of Jared Isaacman for NASA administrator signal a very bright future for American space
To most Americans interested in space exploration, my headline above must seem extremely counter-intuitive. For decades Americans have seen NASA as our space program, with any cuts at NASA seen as hindering that effort. Similarly, Isaacman, a businessman and private astronaut who has personally paid for two flights in space, had initially been nominated by Trump to become NASA administrator expressly because of that commercial space background. For Trump to reject such a person now seems at the surface incredibly damaging to NASA’s recent effort to work with the private sector.
All of that seems true, but it really is not. Both of these actions by Trump are simply what may be the last acts in the major change that has been engulfing the American space industry now for the past decade.
Jared Isaacman
Jared Isaacman during his spacewalk in September 2024
First, let’s consider Isaacman. Before Trump had nominated him for NASA administrator, he had been a free American doing exactly what he wanted to do. As a very wealthy and successful businessman, he had decided to use that wealth to not only fly in space — fulfilling a personal dream — but to also use those flights to raise money for St. Jude’s Children’s hospital, whose work he considered priceless and wanted supported. He ended up flying two space missions, becoming the first private citizen to do a spacewalk, while also raising more than $200 million for St. Jude’s.
Isaacman’s second flight was also the first in what he hoped would be his own long term manned space program, which he dubbed Polaris. The first mission did this spacewalk from a SpaceX capsule. The second would hopefully do a repair mission to Hubble, or if rejected by NASA some other work in orbit. And the third would fly in SpaceX’s Starship around the Moon.
As this program was funded entirely by Isaacman and used no government funds, it was generally free from criticism. If anything, Americans hailed it as ambitious and courageous. He was following his own American dream, and doing it on his own dime.
This history however made him appear on the surface to be a perfect choice for NASA administrator under Trump, especially in a time where America’s space effort is shifting more and more to the private sector.
Everything changed however once Trump nominated him. He had to suspend his private Polaris program. He had to kow-tow to politicians, telling them what they wanted to hear. And he was no longer his own boss.
» Read more
Proposed Australian spaceport changes name
Proposed Australian spaceports.
Click for original image.
A proposed Australian spaceport company that was previously called Equatorial Launch Australia and was forced to shift its location because of red tape has apparently changed its name to Space Centre Australia and named its proposed spaceport the Atakani Space Centre.
It is also possible there was a major shake-up in management, but this is unclear from available sources.
The map to the right shows the location where Atakani is planned, on Cape York in Queensland. Previously this company hoped to build the spaceport to the west in the Northern Territory, but local bureaucracy made that impossible.
Right now the company hopes to open for launches by 2029.
Proposed Australian spaceports.
Click for original image.
A proposed Australian spaceport company that was previously called Equatorial Launch Australia and was forced to shift its location because of red tape has apparently changed its name to Space Centre Australia and named its proposed spaceport the Atakani Space Centre.
It is also possible there was a major shake-up in management, but this is unclear from available sources.
The map to the right shows the location where Atakani is planned, on Cape York in Queensland. Previously this company hoped to build the spaceport to the west in the Northern Territory, but local bureaucracy made that impossible.
Right now the company hopes to open for launches by 2029.
New calculations suggest Andromeda might not collide with Milky Way
The uncertainty of science: Scientists using new data from the Hubble Space Telescope as well as Europe’s Gaia space telescope, combined with many computer models, have determined that the 2012 prediction that the Andromeda galaxy would collide with Milky Way in five billion years was much more uncertain. From the abstract of the paper:
[W]e consider the latest and most accurate observations by the Gaia and Hubble space telescopes, along with recent consensus mass estimates, to derive possible future scenarios and identify the main sources of uncertainty in the evolution of the Local Group over the next 10 billion years. We found that the next most massive Local Group member galaxies — namely, M33 and the Large Magellanic Cloud—distinctly and radically affect the Milky Way — Andromeda orbit. Although including M33 increases the merger probability, the orbit of the Large Magellanic Cloud runs perpendicular to the Milky Way–Andromeda orbit and makes their merger less probable.
In the full system, we found that uncertainties in the present positions, motions and masses of all galaxies leave room for drastically different outcomes and a probability of close to 50% that there will be no Milky Way–Andromeda merger during the next 10 billion years. Based on the best available data, the fate of our Galaxy is still completely open.
The press release at the first link above makes it sounds as the previous prediction of a collision had been fully accepted as certain by the entire astronomical community, and that is balder-dash. It was simply the best guess at the time, highly uncertain. This new prediction — that we really don’t know what will happen based on the data available — is simply the newest best guess.
This new analysis however is certainly more robust and honest.
The uncertainty of science: Scientists using new data from the Hubble Space Telescope as well as Europe’s Gaia space telescope, combined with many computer models, have determined that the 2012 prediction that the Andromeda galaxy would collide with Milky Way in five billion years was much more uncertain. From the abstract of the paper:
[W]e consider the latest and most accurate observations by the Gaia and Hubble space telescopes, along with recent consensus mass estimates, to derive possible future scenarios and identify the main sources of uncertainty in the evolution of the Local Group over the next 10 billion years. We found that the next most massive Local Group member galaxies — namely, M33 and the Large Magellanic Cloud—distinctly and radically affect the Milky Way — Andromeda orbit. Although including M33 increases the merger probability, the orbit of the Large Magellanic Cloud runs perpendicular to the Milky Way–Andromeda orbit and makes their merger less probable.
In the full system, we found that uncertainties in the present positions, motions and masses of all galaxies leave room for drastically different outcomes and a probability of close to 50% that there will be no Milky Way–Andromeda merger during the next 10 billion years. Based on the best available data, the fate of our Galaxy is still completely open.
The press release at the first link above makes it sounds as the previous prediction of a collision had been fully accepted as certain by the entire astronomical community, and that is balder-dash. It was simply the best guess at the time, highly uncertain. This new prediction — that we really don’t know what will happen based on the data available — is simply the newest best guess.
This new analysis however is certainly more robust and honest.
Trump is withdrawing Jared Isaacman’s nomination for NASA administrator
Jared Isaacman
According to numerous reports in various news outlets today and first revealed at Semafor, President Trump has informed Jared Isaacman that he is withdrawing his nomination for NASA administrator.
The White House is pulling the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be the next NASA administrator, just days before he was set to receive a confirmation vote in the Senate, according to three people familiar with the matter and confirmed by the administration.
It must be emphasized that many of these stories speculate absurdly about the reasons for this decision, such as the Washington Post suggestion, underlined by conservative reporter Laura Loomer, that it was Isaacman’s links with Elon Musk that caused this decision, implying that Trump as problems with Musk, something that seems blatantly wrong based on Trump’s positive and many public expressions of support for Musk.
The Semafor story however indicated the most likely reason for this decision, by quoting one White House spokeswoman:
“It’s essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s America First agenda and a replacement will be announced directly by President Trump soon,” said Liz Huston, a spokesperson for the White House.
This statement confirms something I sensed in March, before anyone else. I noted Isaacman’s past support for Democratic Party candidates and his apparent support in his companies for DEI, and wondered if the delay in getting him confirmed was due to headwinds in the White House and Republican Party over these issues. As I noted then:
These facts suggest to me that within both the Trump administration and among Republican in the Senate there are now second thoughts about Isaacman. Trump’s experience in his first administration, with federal appointees constantly sabotaging his efforts behind his back, has made him very determined to only bring people into his second administration he is certain to trust. Isaacman’s long support for the Democratic Party as well as DEI could be the reason the administration is delaying his confirmation.
More recently Isaacman has publicly expressed some concerns about the budget cuts at NASA proposed by the White House. Those tweets could have been the final blow to his nomination.
For Isaacman, this simply means that he can resume his own private Polaris space program, and align it with Musk’s parallel private Starship program to send humans to Mars, with both entirely without any government funding.
Jared Isaacman
According to numerous reports in various news outlets today and first revealed at Semafor, President Trump has informed Jared Isaacman that he is withdrawing his nomination for NASA administrator.
The White House is pulling the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be the next NASA administrator, just days before he was set to receive a confirmation vote in the Senate, according to three people familiar with the matter and confirmed by the administration.
It must be emphasized that many of these stories speculate absurdly about the reasons for this decision, such as the Washington Post suggestion, underlined by conservative reporter Laura Loomer, that it was Isaacman’s links with Elon Musk that caused this decision, implying that Trump as problems with Musk, something that seems blatantly wrong based on Trump’s positive and many public expressions of support for Musk.
The Semafor story however indicated the most likely reason for this decision, by quoting one White House spokeswoman:
“It’s essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s America First agenda and a replacement will be announced directly by President Trump soon,” said Liz Huston, a spokesperson for the White House.
This statement confirms something I sensed in March, before anyone else. I noted Isaacman’s past support for Democratic Party candidates and his apparent support in his companies for DEI, and wondered if the delay in getting him confirmed was due to headwinds in the White House and Republican Party over these issues. As I noted then:
These facts suggest to me that within both the Trump administration and among Republican in the Senate there are now second thoughts about Isaacman. Trump’s experience in his first administration, with federal appointees constantly sabotaging his efforts behind his back, has made him very determined to only bring people into his second administration he is certain to trust. Isaacman’s long support for the Democratic Party as well as DEI could be the reason the administration is delaying his confirmation.
More recently Isaacman has publicly expressed some concerns about the budget cuts at NASA proposed by the White House. Those tweets could have been the final blow to his nomination.
For Isaacman, this simply means that he can resume his own private Polaris space program, and align it with Musk’s parallel private Starship program to send humans to Mars, with both entirely without any government funding.
SpaceX launches 27 more Starlink satellites
SpaceX today successfully launched another 27 Starlink satellites, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Vandenberg in California.
The first stage completed its 25th flight, landing on a drone ship in the Pacific.
The leaders in the 2025 launch race:
67 SpaceX
32 China
6 Rocket Lab
6 Russia
SpaceX now leads the rest of the world in successful launches, 67 to 51.
SpaceX today successfully launched another 27 Starlink satellites, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Vandenberg in California.
The first stage completed its 25th flight, landing on a drone ship in the Pacific.
The leaders in the 2025 launch race:
67 SpaceX
32 China
6 Rocket Lab
6 Russia
SpaceX now leads the rest of the world in successful launches, 67 to 51.
Trump budget proposes putting a final end to the delayed and blocked Thirty Meter Telescope
There is a lot more to report, and I will do so in a day or so, but I thought it worthwhile to quickly note the the proposed science cuts in the proposed Trump budget for 2026 includes the elimination of all funds for Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) in Hawaii.
In the budget request, NSF [National Science Foundation]… says it will back only one of the two $3 billion optical telescopes that the astrophysics community wants to build. That honor goes to the Giant Magellan Telescope already under construction in Chile. Its competitor, the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT), “will not advance to the Final Design Phase and will not receive additional commitment of funds from NSF,” according to the budget request.
The NSF has never had enough money to finance both telescopes. The fact that TMT has been blocked for more than a decade by DEI protesters in Hawaii, with the aid of the state government (controlled entirely by Democrats), makes funding it pointless, and a waste of the taxpayers’ money. It long past time to pull the plug.
As I say, there is a lot more details to report in this budget proposal, including its effort to slash a lot of science government spending, but that will have to wait for later essays. I can promise you one thing, however: I will not do what the rest of the press does, and write a knee-jerk propaganda piece in support of that spending. The science mafia at NASA and the NSF and other agencies has funded a lot of junk in the last few decades. It is time for a reckoning.
There is a lot more to report, and I will do so in a day or so, but I thought it worthwhile to quickly note the the proposed science cuts in the proposed Trump budget for 2026 includes the elimination of all funds for Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) in Hawaii.
In the budget request, NSF [National Science Foundation]… says it will back only one of the two $3 billion optical telescopes that the astrophysics community wants to build. That honor goes to the Giant Magellan Telescope already under construction in Chile. Its competitor, the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT), “will not advance to the Final Design Phase and will not receive additional commitment of funds from NSF,” according to the budget request.
The NSF has never had enough money to finance both telescopes. The fact that TMT has been blocked for more than a decade by DEI protesters in Hawaii, with the aid of the state government (controlled entirely by Democrats), makes funding it pointless, and a waste of the taxpayers’ money. It long past time to pull the plug.
As I say, there is a lot more details to report in this budget proposal, including its effort to slash a lot of science government spending, but that will have to wait for later essays. I can promise you one thing, however: I will not do what the rest of the press does, and write a knee-jerk propaganda piece in support of that spending. The science mafia at NASA and the NSF and other agencies has funded a lot of junk in the last few decades. It is time for a reckoning.
In demanding an investigation by SpaceX into the Starship failure on this week’s test flight, the FAA puffs up its chest and pounds it like a chimpanzee
My heart be still: As reported in numerous propaganda media outlets today, the FAA has announced that it is demanding an investigation by SpaceX into the fuel leaks that caused Starship to tumble and then burn up in an uncontrolled manner as it came down in its designated landing zone in the Indian Ocean. From the FAA’s statement:
The FAA is requiring SpaceX to conduct a mishap investigation for the Starship Flight 9 mission that launched on May 27 from Starbase, Texas. All Starship vehicle and Super Heavy booster debris landed within the designated hazard areas. There are no reports of public injury or damage to public property. The mishap investigation is focused only on the loss of the Starship vehicle which did not complete its launch or reentry as planned.
This FAA demand for an investigation is meaningless and not news, because SpaceX doesn’t need the FAA to require it. Does anything think SpaceX wasn’t going to do an investigation without an order from the FAA?
Nor will the FAA’s demand change anything. Once SpaceX completes and submits its investigation, the FAA will approve it immediately. No one at the FAA is qualified to question it. The FAA might participate in that investigation as an outside observer and add some value, but in the end the investigation and subsequent actions are entirely in SpaceX’s hands.
The FAA also admits that even though Starship came back out of orbit in an uncontrolled manner, breaking up over the Indian Ocean, it did so exactly as the mission’s contingency plans intended. No one was hurt. Nothing was damaged on the ground. And all the debris fell within the designated landing zone. From the FAA’s legal perspective, there is nothing to investigate, since its only responsibility is to limit harm to the public. SpaceX did what was requested, most admirably. The FAA admits as much in not requiring a mishap investigation of the Superheavy failure.
That the propaganda press is trying to make a big deal about this is a joke. These press reports are merely more propaganda attempting to pump up the importance of government power while denigrating anything to do with Elon Musk.
My heart be still: As reported in numerous propaganda media outlets today, the FAA has announced that it is demanding an investigation by SpaceX into the fuel leaks that caused Starship to tumble and then burn up in an uncontrolled manner as it came down in its designated landing zone in the Indian Ocean. From the FAA’s statement:
The FAA is requiring SpaceX to conduct a mishap investigation for the Starship Flight 9 mission that launched on May 27 from Starbase, Texas. All Starship vehicle and Super Heavy booster debris landed within the designated hazard areas. There are no reports of public injury or damage to public property. The mishap investigation is focused only on the loss of the Starship vehicle which did not complete its launch or reentry as planned.
This FAA demand for an investigation is meaningless and not news, because SpaceX doesn’t need the FAA to require it. Does anything think SpaceX wasn’t going to do an investigation without an order from the FAA?
Nor will the FAA’s demand change anything. Once SpaceX completes and submits its investigation, the FAA will approve it immediately. No one at the FAA is qualified to question it. The FAA might participate in that investigation as an outside observer and add some value, but in the end the investigation and subsequent actions are entirely in SpaceX’s hands.
The FAA also admits that even though Starship came back out of orbit in an uncontrolled manner, breaking up over the Indian Ocean, it did so exactly as the mission’s contingency plans intended. No one was hurt. Nothing was damaged on the ground. And all the debris fell within the designated landing zone. From the FAA’s legal perspective, there is nothing to investigate, since its only responsibility is to limit harm to the public. SpaceX did what was requested, most admirably. The FAA admits as much in not requiring a mishap investigation of the Superheavy failure.
That the propaganda press is trying to make a big deal about this is a joke. These press reports are merely more propaganda attempting to pump up the importance of government power while denigrating anything to do with Elon Musk.
Judge rules that SpaceX’s lawsuit against the California Coastal Commission can go forward
A federal judge yesterday ruled that SpaceX’s lawsuit against the California Coastal Commission for its actions attempting to block Falcon 9 launches at Vandenberg because a majority of the commissioners don’t like Elon Musk’s politics can now go forward.
U.S. District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr., a Donald Trump appointee, denied in part California’s request to dismiss the case at a hearing Friday in Los Angeles federal court. In a tentative decision, which wasn’t made publicly available, the judge rejected the state’s argument that four of SpaceX’s claims for declaratory relief weren’t “ripe” because the commission hadn’t enforced a threatened requirement for SpaceX to obtain a coastal development permit for the expanded launch schedule. “The tentative doesn’t find that the evidence is compelling, but that it is sufficient at this stage,” the judge said at the hearing.
This same judge had earlier ruled in favor of the coastal commission, noting that the commission has no real power to limit SpaceX operations at the military base and thus the company could not demonstrate harm. SpaceX amended its complaint to emphasize the harm caused to Musk’s free speech rights, and this was sufficient for the judge to change his ruling in favor of SpaceX.
This ruling doesn’t mean SpaceX and Musk have won. It means the judge considers their case sufficient for it to the lawsuit to proceed.
SpaceX’s complaint stems from an insane October 2024 hearing before the commission, where multiple commissioners came out against a SpaceX request to increase its launches at Vandenberg not because it might harm the environment but because Elon Musk now supported Donald Trump.
Their actions that day were a clear abuse of power for political reasons, and a clear violation of Elon Musk’s right to free speech.
A federal judge yesterday ruled that SpaceX’s lawsuit against the California Coastal Commission for its actions attempting to block Falcon 9 launches at Vandenberg because a majority of the commissioners don’t like Elon Musk’s politics can now go forward.
U.S. District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr., a Donald Trump appointee, denied in part California’s request to dismiss the case at a hearing Friday in Los Angeles federal court. In a tentative decision, which wasn’t made publicly available, the judge rejected the state’s argument that four of SpaceX’s claims for declaratory relief weren’t “ripe” because the commission hadn’t enforced a threatened requirement for SpaceX to obtain a coastal development permit for the expanded launch schedule. “The tentative doesn’t find that the evidence is compelling, but that it is sufficient at this stage,” the judge said at the hearing.
This same judge had earlier ruled in favor of the coastal commission, noting that the commission has no real power to limit SpaceX operations at the military base and thus the company could not demonstrate harm. SpaceX amended its complaint to emphasize the harm caused to Musk’s free speech rights, and this was sufficient for the judge to change his ruling in favor of SpaceX.
This ruling doesn’t mean SpaceX and Musk have won. It means the judge considers their case sufficient for it to the lawsuit to proceed.
SpaceX’s complaint stems from an insane October 2024 hearing before the commission, where multiple commissioners came out against a SpaceX request to increase its launches at Vandenberg not because it might harm the environment but because Elon Musk now supported Donald Trump.
Their actions that day were a clear abuse of power for political reasons, and a clear violation of Elon Musk’s right to free speech.
May 30, 2025 Zimmerman/Batchelor podcast
Embedded below the fold in two parts.
To listen to all of John Batchelor’s podcasts, go here.
» Read more
Embedded below the fold in two parts.
To listen to all of John Batchelor’s podcasts, go here.
» Read more
The Highway Man – Driving the world’s longest overwater Bridge
An evening pause: If you haven’t done crossed the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway in Louisiana, than this video will allow you to experience it.
And a drive like this is a great way to start the weekend.
Hat tip Wayne DeVette.
May 30, 2025 Quick space links
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- Another Chinese pseudo-company, Astronstone, raises money, proposes copycat rocket
More here. As noted at the first link, the design appears to be a steal of the rocket being built by another Chinese pseudo-company, Space Epoch. This is not surprising, as the Chinese government requires its fake companies to share all data with the government and other companies. The only design difference is that Astronstone is stealing SpaceX’s chopstick launch tower design for its rocket’s landing.
- Pictures of Space Epoch’s recovered YXZ-1 grasshopper test stage after its soft vertical splashdown in the ocean
There are dents and some damage, but overall the rocket’s condition looks good. A vertical touch down on land would probably have been less harmful than falling over into the ocean.
- Sources claim Russia will begin deploying its own “Starlink constellation” by the end of this year
The sources say each launch will place 16 satellites in orbit. We shall see. The Russians have not met any schedule even close now for decades, often missing proposed targets by decades.
- On this day in 1971, Mariner 9 was launched, becoming upon arrival the first successful Martian orbiter
It arrived during a global dust storm, waited it out, and eventually discovered that Mars was not like the Moon as suggested by earlier fly-by missions, but had giant volcanoes, canyons, and many meandering channels suggestive of flowing water.
Courtesy of BtB’s stringer Jay. This post is also an open thread. I welcome my readers to post any comments or additional links relating to any space issues, even if unrelated to the links below.
- Another Chinese pseudo-company, Astronstone, raises money, proposes copycat rocket
More here. As noted at the first link, the design appears to be a steal of the rocket being built by another Chinese pseudo-company, Space Epoch. This is not surprising, as the Chinese government requires its fake companies to share all data with the government and other companies. The only design difference is that Astronstone is stealing SpaceX’s chopstick launch tower design for its rocket’s landing.
- Pictures of Space Epoch’s recovered YXZ-1 grasshopper test stage after its soft vertical splashdown in the ocean
There are dents and some damage, but overall the rocket’s condition looks good. A vertical touch down on land would probably have been less harmful than falling over into the ocean.
- Sources claim Russia will begin deploying its own “Starlink constellation” by the end of this year
The sources say each launch will place 16 satellites in orbit. We shall see. The Russians have not met any schedule even close now for decades, often missing proposed targets by decades.
- On this day in 1971, Mariner 9 was launched, becoming upon arrival the first successful Martian orbiter
It arrived during a global dust storm, waited it out, and eventually discovered that Mars was not like the Moon as suggested by earlier fly-by missions, but had giant volcanoes, canyons, and many meandering channels suggestive of flowing water.
Webb spots a new record-setting galaxy, only 280 million years after the Big Bang
The galaxy MoM z14, as seen in the infrared
by Webb. Click for original image.
The uncertainty of science: Using the Webb Space Telescope, astronomers have now identified a galaxy that formed only 280 million years after the Big Bang, far earlier than their theories of the origins of the universe had predicted.
“The broader story here is that JWST was not expected to find any galaxies this early in the history of the universe, at least not at this stage of the mission,” van Dokkum said. “There are, very roughly, over 100 more relatively bright galaxies in the very early universe than were expected based on pre-JWST observations.”
The data suggests MoM z14 is 50 times smaller than the Milky Way, contains nitrogen and carbon, and appears to be forming stars. The data also found little neutral hydrogen surrounding the galaxy, which also contradicts those same cosmological theories. According to those theories, the early universe should be filled with neutral hydrogen.
The nitrogen and oxygen are also there earlier than expected, and suggest there will be more such galaxies, including some even closer to the Big Bang.
Hat tip BtB’s stringer Jay.
The galaxy MoM z14, as seen in the infrared
by Webb. Click for original image.
The uncertainty of science: Using the Webb Space Telescope, astronomers have now identified a galaxy that formed only 280 million years after the Big Bang, far earlier than their theories of the origins of the universe had predicted.
“The broader story here is that JWST was not expected to find any galaxies this early in the history of the universe, at least not at this stage of the mission,” van Dokkum said. “There are, very roughly, over 100 more relatively bright galaxies in the very early universe than were expected based on pre-JWST observations.”
The data suggests MoM z14 is 50 times smaller than the Milky Way, contains nitrogen and carbon, and appears to be forming stars. The data also found little neutral hydrogen surrounding the galaxy, which also contradicts those same cosmological theories. According to those theories, the early universe should be filled with neutral hydrogen.
The nitrogen and oxygen are also there earlier than expected, and suggest there will be more such galaxies, including some even closer to the Big Bang.
Hat tip BtB’s stringer Jay.
Supreme Court unanimously rules the federal government’s regulatory overuse of environmental impact statements is wrong
In a ruling that will have wide-ranging impacts across multiple industries, including rocketry, the Supreme Court yesterday ruled 8-0 that the mission creep expansion of federal government’s regulatory use of environmental impact statements (EIS) to hinder all new construction projects is incorrect and must stop.
The case involved a planned railroad in Utah, that had gotten all its permits for construction, including approval of its environmental impact statement, but was then stymied by lawsuits by political activist groups that claimed the impact statement, issued under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), had not considered the impact of the industries the railroads would serve, including impacts far from the railroad’s location itself.
This is a perfect example of the broad expansion of NEPA that has been imposed in the last two decades by federal bureaucracy working hand-in-glove with these leftist political groups.
The Supreme Court, including all of the Democratic Party appointees, said enough!
In its majority opinion, authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the Court clarified that under NEPA the STB “did not need to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the separate upstream and downstream projects.” The Court concluded that the “proper judicial approach for NEPA cases is straightforward: Courts should review an agency’s EIS to check that it addresses the environmental effects of the project at hand. The EIS need not address the effects of separate projects.”
This statement “is particularly significant for infrastructure projects, such as pipelines or transmission lines, and should help reduce NEPA’s burdens (at least at the margins),” wrote Jonathan Adler, a law professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in The Volokh Conspiracy. “The opinion will also likely hamper any future efforts, perhaps by Democratic administrations, to expand or restore more fulsome (and burdensome) NEPA requirements.”
The article notes (and confirms) what I have been writing now for the past five years in connection with the FAA’s demand that rocket companies require new impact statements every time they revise their operations, even when those changes are relatively minor.
This point could reduce one of the largest delays caused by NEPA: litigation. Since its passage in 1969, NEPA has been weaponized by environmental groups to stunt disfavored projects—which has disproportionately impacted clean energy projects. On average, these challenges delay a permitted project’s start time by 4.2 years, according to The Breakthrough Institute.
The increased threat of litigation has forced federal agencies to better cover their bases, leading to longer and more expensive environmental reviews. With courts deferring more to agency decisions, litigation could be settled more quickly.
This ruling is an excellent move in the right direction, but no one should assume it will be followed honestly by the next Democrat who sits in the White House. Just as Biden expanded red tape by simple forcing the FAA to slow-walk its launch licensing process, future presidents could do the same.
Nor should be expect the lawsuits by these luddite leftists to cease. They will find other legal challenges and will push those instead.
The real solution is to reduce the bureaucracy’s size entirely, so there won’t be paper-pushers for these petty dictators to utilize for their authoritarian purposes. Eliminating or simplifying these environmental regulations would help as well, giving the activists fewer handles on which to hang their lawsuits.
In a ruling that will have wide-ranging impacts across multiple industries, including rocketry, the Supreme Court yesterday ruled 8-0 that the mission creep expansion of federal government’s regulatory use of environmental impact statements (EIS) to hinder all new construction projects is incorrect and must stop.
The case involved a planned railroad in Utah, that had gotten all its permits for construction, including approval of its environmental impact statement, but was then stymied by lawsuits by political activist groups that claimed the impact statement, issued under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), had not considered the impact of the industries the railroads would serve, including impacts far from the railroad’s location itself.
This is a perfect example of the broad expansion of NEPA that has been imposed in the last two decades by federal bureaucracy working hand-in-glove with these leftist political groups.
The Supreme Court, including all of the Democratic Party appointees, said enough!
In its majority opinion, authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the Court clarified that under NEPA the STB “did not need to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the separate upstream and downstream projects.” The Court concluded that the “proper judicial approach for NEPA cases is straightforward: Courts should review an agency’s EIS to check that it addresses the environmental effects of the project at hand. The EIS need not address the effects of separate projects.”
This statement “is particularly significant for infrastructure projects, such as pipelines or transmission lines, and should help reduce NEPA’s burdens (at least at the margins),” wrote Jonathan Adler, a law professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in The Volokh Conspiracy. “The opinion will also likely hamper any future efforts, perhaps by Democratic administrations, to expand or restore more fulsome (and burdensome) NEPA requirements.”
The article notes (and confirms) what I have been writing now for the past five years in connection with the FAA’s demand that rocket companies require new impact statements every time they revise their operations, even when those changes are relatively minor.
This point could reduce one of the largest delays caused by NEPA: litigation. Since its passage in 1969, NEPA has been weaponized by environmental groups to stunt disfavored projects—which has disproportionately impacted clean energy projects. On average, these challenges delay a permitted project’s start time by 4.2 years, according to The Breakthrough Institute.
The increased threat of litigation has forced federal agencies to better cover their bases, leading to longer and more expensive environmental reviews. With courts deferring more to agency decisions, litigation could be settled more quickly.
This ruling is an excellent move in the right direction, but no one should assume it will be followed honestly by the next Democrat who sits in the White House. Just as Biden expanded red tape by simple forcing the FAA to slow-walk its launch licensing process, future presidents could do the same.
Nor should be expect the lawsuits by these luddite leftists to cease. They will find other legal challenges and will push those instead.
The real solution is to reduce the bureaucracy’s size entirely, so there won’t be paper-pushers for these petty dictators to utilize for their authoritarian purposes. Eliminating or simplifying these environmental regulations would help as well, giving the activists fewer handles on which to hang their lawsuits.