May 1, 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.
- Claiming budget uncertainty, NASA delays by a year deadline for relatively small astrophysics mission proposals
There are budget uncertainties, but I have no doubt this decision is mostly aimed at ginning up opposition to any cuts at NASA at all. It’s an old NASA tactic: Threaten cuts in a broad indiscriminate manner to get Congress and the President to retreat from any cuts. Today’s specific decision tells me we really need a new hard-nosed administrator at NASA who won’t let lower management play these games. Whether Isaacman is that man however remains unknown.
- Rocket startup Stoke Space touts static fire tests of two of its engines, both running above 100%
The company had hoped to do its first launch this year, but that will likely slip to 2026, mostly because of environmental red tape at its launch site in Florida.
- India’s space agency touts its astronaut flying on the fourth Axiom tourist mission to ISS
Launch is now scheduled for May 29, 2025.
Readers!
My annual February birthday fund-raising drive for Behind the Black is now over. Thank you to everyone who donated or subscribed. While not a record-setter, the donations were more than sufficient and slightly above average.
As I have said many times before, I can’t express what it means to me to get such support, especially as no one is required to pay anything to read my work. Thank you all again!
For those readers who like my work here at Behind the Black and haven't contributed so far, please consider donating or subscribing. My analysis of space, politics, and culture, taken from the perspective of an historian, is almost always on the money and ahead of the game. For example, in 2020 I correctly predicted that the COVID panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Every one of those 2020 conclusions has turned out right.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
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.
- Claiming budget uncertainty, NASA delays by a year deadline for relatively small astrophysics mission proposals
There are budget uncertainties, but I have no doubt this decision is mostly aimed at ginning up opposition to any cuts at NASA at all. It’s an old NASA tactic: Threaten cuts in a broad indiscriminate manner to get Congress and the President to retreat from any cuts. Today’s specific decision tells me we really need a new hard-nosed administrator at NASA who won’t let lower management play these games. Whether Isaacman is that man however remains unknown.
- Rocket startup Stoke Space touts static fire tests of two of its engines, both running above 100%
The company had hoped to do its first launch this year, but that will likely slip to 2026, mostly because of environmental red tape at its launch site in Florida.
- India’s space agency touts its astronaut flying on the fourth Axiom tourist mission to ISS
Launch is now scheduled for May 29, 2025.
Readers!
My annual February birthday fund-raising drive for Behind the Black is now over. Thank you to everyone who donated or subscribed. While not a record-setter, the donations were more than sufficient and slightly above average.
As I have said many times before, I can’t express what it means to me to get such support, especially as no one is required to pay anything to read my work. Thank you all again!
For those readers who like my work here at Behind the Black and haven't contributed so far, please consider donating or subscribing. My analysis of space, politics, and culture, taken from the perspective of an historian, is almost always on the money and ahead of the game. For example, in 2020 I correctly predicted that the COVID panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Every one of those 2020 conclusions has turned out right.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
Has anyone read anything about Starship and what must be an extensive rethink/ redesign effort?
Philbert Desenex: See this March report for a pessimistic update. More recent updates (which I can’t locate at the moment) say the test flight is targeting the end of this month.
Second week of May is the current expected date for the next test. There are a lot of fixes and improvements in this one, but it’s by no means a major redesign. Part of the problem with the last flight is that they didn’t, because this is still V2 and they didn’t want to redesign ahead of the next version, which will indeed be extensively revised based on what they’re learning.
It’s been rumored that unnamed “higher ups” were not amused that ITF 8 failed the same way 7 did, and were quite clear that 9 better not so do so.
Re-think and redesign have been, and will continue to be, everyday activities on the Starship project.
Static fire tests of two of its engines, both running above 100%!!!!!!!!
I believe there are, about, oh, I don’t know, a million books, movies, and shows that stress “it is not advisable to run engines above 100%.”
Oh, shoot. I just remembered. Sometimes they test to failure.
Shuttle routinely ran at 108%. The orbiter came in heavier than designed, but the engines had the margin. It just meant that they needed to be worked over after every flight. Often “100%” is just the design target, and has very little to do with what the engine is actually capable of. A lot of military airplanes, they had settings for “max power”, and “max military power”, which was basically “yeah, this is fine, but you better have a reason for it, because your crew chief is going to be very mad at you when you land.”
Ain’t no sunk cost fallacies at SpaceX.
The Wall Street Journal @WSJ
“Frustrated by Boeing’s massive delays in delivering a new Air Force One, President Trump has commissioned a smaller defense contractor to ready an interim presidential plane by year’s end”
From wsj.com
6:33 PM · May 1, 2025
https://x.com/WSJ/status/1918116561480466763
More info
“President Trump Tired of Waiting, Air Force One Revamp”
https://100percentfedup.com/president-trump-tired-waiting-air-force-one-revamp/
David Eastman wrote: “Shuttle routinely ran at 108%. The orbiter came in heavier than designed, but the engines had the margin.”
The Shuttle would run higher than “rated” thrust. NASA is big on derating its hardware, so 108% was not necessarily higher than the tested thrust. And, yes, running the engines that high did seem to create a higher maintenance cost.
New book coming about for-profit spaceflight
https://link.springer.com/book/9783031894138
By one of the regulars at the Secret Projects Forum
In other news—a polymer that is self healing on a large scale is proffered:
https://phys.org/news/2025-05-polymer-quality-scale.html
I am worried about Starship
SuperHeavy static tests seem fine—perhaps having many engines so close acts as reinforcements.
A smaller number of engines more widely spaced allows damaging harmonics?