How true that is! It is how we got Challenger and Columbia. They both worked, until they didn’t. The problems were known but ignored, or at least not fixed.

From the Thales Alenia statement:

As an example, a metallurgical behavior of this kind occurred decades ago during the manufacture of elements for the International Space Station (ISS). The ISS’s pressurized modules have proved to be highly performant, and continue to operate reliably, exceeding their expected lifespan.

Thales did not say whether they performed any corrective action or whether they flew corroded modules to the ISS. This is a scary thought. The same ‘good enough’ attitude seems to be working again at NASA as well as at Thales Alenia Space. Just because they have been delivering corroded products to NASA for decades — and that NASA has been flying it — does not mean that corrosion is acceptable. In fact, I sincerely hope that NASA took corrective action on the corroded portions before flying the modules. Either way, Thales Alenia is now showing the same lazy-fair attitude that brought us Challenger and Columbia. ‘Nothing went wrong. yet, so it must be OK.’

American OldSpace companies have known the dangers of corrosion for decades, and I don’t think any of them would be stupid enough to deliver — much less fly — corroded parts. At least, nowhere that I worked took corrosion lightly. Even if it worked this time, there was no assurance it would work next time, and if it was on a long-term mission, there was no assurance that if it worked today then it would continue working in the near or distant future.

I swear, I am getting upset at what I hear is happening in my industry. Are we handing out trophies, these days, for participation or for quality workmanship and actual success?

That something meets a nominal goal doesn’t mean that it was safe (which itself is a sliding scale, not either/or), reliable, or perfected. This is true for all complex machines. Calling it a ‘tactic’ when someone criticizes what you support says nothing about the validity of someone’s argument. The ISS, Integrity, and now the Gateway modules all have significant issues, and ignoring them to impugn honest men like Charlie or Casey reflects poorly on you. ‘It worked’ is not good enough to quiet legitimate debate.

I thought the corrosion issue might have been just another tactic to go after anything OldSpace.

With those ISS modules fine and Integrity safely back, Camarda is now going after NSF….I guess Handmer stuck his head out…saw his shadow, and went back inside.

https://x.com/AndrewParsonson/status/2048709985492754586

Most of the word count is discussing the modules they built for the ISS back in the day, and how they ran into some similar issues with those, too, and yet here we are today, decades later, and the modules are still functional. Or something like that. No real detail provided on just exactly what the “metallurgical behavior” in question actually was. But, read it for yourself.

“That’s my theme music. Every good hero should have some.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz-KwtKRBUY

All: If you take a look at my space station rankings posted today, you will note that I have shifted Axiom below Starlab. Even though I still consider the first three station projects essentially tied, the rumored corrosion on Axiom’s modules threatens that station significantly.

I think there are hurt feelings at Thales Alenia, which has seen its stock hammered over the last two weeks. Indeed, it’s lost all of its 2026 gains now.

But if they really had justice on their side, why are they taking nearly a week to issue a formal response to Isaacman’s claims? Even Parsonson admits that such a delay in saying anything is a “public relations disaster.”

I don’t think this was the primary reason why Isaacman’s team decided to kill and repurpose Gateway. But Thales Alenia didn’t do themselves any favors by this screw up, either. The fact that it has apparently now happened on three different pressurized modules is an especially bad look.

SLS, not so long ago, was the power we NewSpacers were speaking the truth to. But the delays continued, Shelby retired, Trump came back, Jared is now NASA Admin and SLS is forced to rely on its merits – which turn out to be very few. Quit playing the victim here.

Richard M,

Like legacy contractors on this side of the pond, the Euros are long accustomed to being coddled, cosseted and indulged by NASA. Those days are over and throwing tantrums will yield no positive returns.

George C,

Didn’t know about the specifics of the situation you describe, but pedos always scheme to get at kids and one of the historical routes they have always taken is to get on-staff of any government program involving kids.

1. The ESA is unhappy because they don’t think the corrosion is the main reason he killed Gateway, but they think he implied it was:

https://europeanspaceflight.com/esa-sheds-light-on-nasa-administrators-claims-on-gateway-modules/

2. Andrew Parsonson of European Spaceflight is unhappy because he thinks it was the “wrong form and forum” for Isaacman to talk about it.

3. Isaacman fired back:
https://x.com/i/status/2048085214568820911

Call me a biased American, but I think Jared has the better argument.

You can see my earlier disturbing post about (before it was called STEP) outreach. I was also first hand familiar with US Department of Agriculture programs such as 4-H Summary Camp, and the type of people sometimes recruited into Camp counselor jobs when there was extra federal money to throw around. Some recruited were criminals that had other people punching their time cards for their other gov-jobs-programs job(s) and who were quite inappropriate in behaviors toward the 4-H kids in the camp, even putting a kid into the hospital due to injuries caused by the counselors.

Perhaps I am overly imaginative. Activities can be scored while performing them. Never imagined “Theme from Chariots of Fire”? Never thought of “Eye of the Tiger”? Maybe it’s just oxygen-deprivation while cycling.

Isaacman illustrates that money buys freedom. This concept is valid from at every economic level. Only the richest societies, have the freedom to support the seeds of their own destruction,

No, it isn’t, but what sent America to the Moon — and it wasn’t technically the Moon, but just cislunar space, if we are being honest! — doesn’t have the capability to do anything more than it did, either.

It’s basically a 21st century version of Zond. Only more reliable, with a couple extra seats and a walk-in toilet.

Indeed, it was that service module from Europe that gave Integrity that last little thump…fitting, since an OMS engine also got orbiters to LEO similarly.

Starship may well be what helps industrialize space

But not today

One thing a lot of this footage brings home is just how much V3 really is a new rocket. It looks superficially similar to V1 and V2, but they have changed *so much*, and not just the Raptors. And that goes for the new launch pad and GSE design, too. And it’s all happened in such a short period of time.

All of which is very important to what Jared Isaacman wants to do in the next three years.

Oh, I am sure the impending IPO is not a coincidence for the timing here…. :)

Still, while it is not really a technical video, they did show and reveal things I was not expecting. They’re still willing to show their setbacks and failures up close. They could have avoided even discussing their testing hiccups and RUDs and a certain rock tornado, but they put ’em all right in there. A lot of factory interior glimpses of what it looks like now that would bear slow motion examination that I’m sure is already underway by certain Youtubers….

But yeah, music aside (and at least it was not TOO intrusive), it was blessedly free of the kind of nonsense we have to put up with in Blue Origin and NASA videos and broadcasts.

I feel optimistic about Flight 12.

Richard M: Just finished watching it. Fun but not as informative as I would have liked. It is mostly a sales pitch, but done well with no giggling female anchors blathering about how excited they are. :)

The music score in all these videos from everyone bugs me, though I know it is now common practice and necessary in many ways. Life however does not have a music score.

https://www.spacex.com/content/starship/test-like-you-fly

I think back to just how amateurish NASA’s Artemis II coverage was by comparison. Yet one more way in which SpaceX is simply playing on a different level.

After all, if there won’t be any missions, why would anyone be inspired? Without missions, what’s the point? Without missions, who would be inspired to be an astronaut?

Wait until people start buying products that were made in space. Then we will see interest in space and inspiration to work in the space industry. The space industry will become tangible rather than an abstract concept that affects other people.
____________
F wrote: “Very little scientific benefit came of Artemis-2, but it did seem to wake up the general public on NASA-related issues.”

This could be true. However, the same people who talked to me about Artemis II, this past month or so, are the same ones who talk to me about Starship and some other space news. They all remember Apollo and the Moon landings. The younger people I know do not talk to me about space topics, outside of SpaceX.

What reassures me is that these people also knew about the questionable heat shield and that its reliability was seriously questioned. These people also hoped that the shield would hold throughout reentry.
_____________
Richard M,
Well, that certainly explains the corrosion issue.

We all must remember that material selection is important. Handling and treatment are also high priority.

It seems that too many companies have relied upon this one source, and that source turned out to not have the experience needed to do the job properly.

I”m not certain what the solution has been determined to be, but some corrosion problems can be solved. I once had an assembly brazed by dipping in sodium (yes, that is how they did it, and if you are asking how the whole thing didn’t corrode, I’m not sure myself), and one spot on the brazement developed a little corrosion (are questions answered?). The brazed surfaces were large enough that we could grind out the corrosion and re-treat the surface. Problem solved. Assembly flown.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/04/well-this-is-embarrassing-the-lunar-gateways-primary-modules-are-corroded/

But, wait, there’s more:

“I can confirm that the Axiom-1 module, also manufactured by Thales Alenia, has experienced a similar corrosion issue. Axiom still hopes to launch the module in 2028.”

https://x.com/i/status/2047710860055888211

Oh dear.

The really wild thing is that Lori Garver has the exact opposite reaction: she opposed the science directorate cuts, or most of ’em, but actually thinks the STEM program is a lame waste of money, for the same reason you do: she thinks that the best way NASA can inspire kids is to actually fly missions.

Alas, too few people on either side of the aisle on the Hill share that viewpoint.

It’s a great point, Bob, and of all the commentary I have read on Isaacman’s appearance, you’re the only person to make it.

Yeah. Gateway’s dead.

The NSF had special summer camps and other outreach to promote under-represented groups into sciences in the 1970s. I have no idea how those programs recruited the employees involved, or the standards for supervision, but horrible, even criminal things were done to some of the participants, things I learned directly from some participants, but about which I was too young to process what to do about it., and it involved people that were in a position to retaliate. Ultimately I think these programs did more harm than good because it ruined the lives of people who were already interested in the sciences anyway. I once tried to get Grace Hopper to talk about this subject. But I digress. A lot of these problems are as old as the invention of alcohol thousands of years ago.

As far as NASA “science goals” go. There is a lot of duplication of effort, and a lack of bold proposals.

This be America under Trump’s leadership.

https://x.com/DanScavino/status/2047267672816054443
1 minute

And, crucially, he is entirely indifferent to Trump’s attempted budget cuts. The Congresscritters want a bigger NASA budget more than he does. That means they have zero leverage in terms of threatening their own budget cuts – the usual method by which Congresscritters attempt to coerce executive branch administrators.

I have no idea to what extent, if any, Trump’s second attempt at significant NASA budget cuts was coordinated with Isaacman, but either way, he is using that proposal to completely eliminate any ground for any nouveau-would-be-Shelby to stand on in attempting to browbeat him into going along with some parochial boondoggle or other.

I think we can say we are witnessing a master class in institutional reform here. May it continue.

Maybe with enough lunar success, the White House will look on NASA’s science goals more kindly.

Very little scientific benefit came of Artemis-2, but it did seem to wake up the general public on NASA-related issues.

Are you certain? Let’s check back in six months from now, my guess is that nothing will have changed. If it turns out otherwise, I would be pleasantly surprised.

Robert,

As a result, there was little pushback from Congress during this hearing over Isaacman’s major reshaping of Artemis. And though it is very likely they will restore most of Trump’s cuts, it is also very likely Isaacman will convince them to give him more flexibility on how to use the money.

We can only hope, he’s the first administrator willing to buck the status quo in a long time.