Comments on: May 7, 2025 Zimmerman/Batchelor podcast

By: Edward

Edward — Sat, 10 May 2025 04:29:10 +0000

Robert,
Ted Cruz was relatively new to DC in 2016 and was more like Senator Smith in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington than like Senator Paine. With some apparent exceptions, as people spend more time in DC, they tend to drift toward the direction of the Paine character. At the time, Cruz was one of two people I thought would be good as president, but I have doubts that he would be good now. There has always been a corrupting influence in DC, which was evident by the time of the Credit Mobilier scandal in the 1860s (yes, that is the 19th century).

The major difference between the Senate and the House is that the Senate is intended to be more thoughtful and careful about what it is doing. Cruz should be aware of the hazards of a manned Artemis II flight. He should be wary of a catastrophic mission. What would he say if Artemis II failed or perhaps nearly killed its crew? What would be his reaction in the hearings, in that case?

Testing the life support system when the safety of Earth is days away is so much worse than testing it in low Earth orbit when safety is only hours away. It is the same as flying the Apollo 8 mission before the Apollo 7 manned test flight.

If they are going to test the faulty heat shield with a crew aboard, then maybe they should have put a crew aboard the first Orion test flight (EFT-1, a decade ago) and gotten the manned test over with back then.

Beating the Chinese™ has already been done in 1969. Putting the first woman or the first person of color on the Moon is not a real priority, as they will happen soon enough in the natural course of events. What we should pursue now is a lunar base that we can affordably keep permanently manned and that provides a useful service. Maybe we don’t need that now, but sometime in the not too distant future, and if that can be a commercial base, built with investor money rather than tax money, then so much the better, as the commercial space company building and running it would have a profitable purpose for the base in order to attract investors.

By: Robert Zimmerman

Robert Zimmerman — Sat, 10 May 2025 02:31:14 +0000

In reply to Edward.

Edward: Congressional demands are powerful, but it will still be up to Isaacman to decide whether to fly the next mission manned. I strongly believe there is a good chance it will fly unmanned, which will make having the landing flight manned more uncertain.

Regardless, Cruz is proving himself to be a real hack in this matter, willing to risk lives for a empty symbolic gesture that will really accomplish nothing. He had been my choice for president in the 2016 campaign, but more and more I think Trump’s description of him then (“Lyin’ Ted”) was actually far more accurate than I believed at the time.

By: Edward

Edward — Sat, 10 May 2025 01:16:23 +0000

Robert,
Of course flying Artemis II and III are political. Ted Cruz made that especially clear with his graphic during Isaacman’s senate interrogation and with his statement that he wants his daughters to experience the knowledge that a woman has walked on the Moon. SLS-Orion is their toy, and Artemis gives their toy a purpose.

Cruz wants us back on the Moon before the Chinese get their men there, and right now there is no alternate method outside of Artemis. Congress will not kill Artemis right now, so there is no reason for Trump to antagonize them. He clearly intends to keep them happy until the first woman (per Cruz’s insistence) walks on the Moon or until there is a faster alternative for accomplishing that task.

Musk and DOGE can make recommendations, such as retire ISS early, but no one is required to act on any recommendation. Musk’s, SpaceX’s, and DOGE’s influences are limited.