How did he bend the knee? We don't even know what charity got the money, only that it didn't go to the ludicrous UN food charity that claimed 2 percent of his wealth would be able to 'solve world hunger.'

He's not particularly partisan/conservative/liberal I don't think in his giving, nor does he use it 'brilliantly' as a political operation a la Soros/Gates. Hopefully it went to help real people in need.

nortex97 said:

---

How did he bend the knee? We don't even know what charity got the money, only that it didn't go to the ludicrous UN food charity that claimed 2 percent of his wealth would be able to 'solve world hunger.'

He's not particularly partisan/conservative/liberal I don't think in his giving, nor does he use it 'brilliantly' as a political operation a la Soros/Gates. Hopefully it went to help real people in need.

---

Just that there's been complaints from reporters and the UN food charity BS you mentioned that he should give to charities. People see a guy like Elon Musk and demand that his hard earned money go to this or that charity.

I think it's pretty ridiculous for people (Like Warren who gripes that Elon pays zero taxes) to be complaining about guy who's paid more taxes than anyone ever in the US, who's solving problems in multiple industries that benefit people and our country already. What do these reporters (and Sen. Warren) do to help anyone?

I'm also tired of the sentiment that rich people "owe us", or owe the poor. Most work hard for their money. If they want to donate some of their money to charities, fine. That's great. But people have no business trying to guilt them into donating.

Hopefully the charity was Canadian Truckers. That would be awesome.

I don't disagree with any of that.

I do appreciate when the wealthiest folks among us work to better their fellow man, which is a time honored tradition in America going back at least to Andrew Carnegie. But, that faith/hope is not a mandate/duty, imho, and it is problematic especially when it is demanded politically to be essentially distributed as a hand out to the poor vs. help to move 'up the ladder' if they choose. I'd reference here just Carnegies' libraries etc.

I also think it would be funny/clever if her were to donate to, for instance, a charity for hungry children on mars. At least, I'd laugh. Or truckers globally who are unemployed/indigent due to totalitarian healthcare requirements. Just spitballing funny stuff he could (but almost certainly won't) do.

I think that his companies do build products that could help many people. It doesn't always have to be a direct monetary donation.

Saw this interesting NSF video on goings-on at Canaveral. Thought you guys might be interested.

Pretty cool, thx.

Here is a kind of related video complete with…well perhaps inappropriate music but some good visualizations of possible plans:

I wonder how awkward it is on the ISS right now with the soviets fixin to roll tanks on Ukraine.

Ooh space shootout imminent. We talking 'For All Mankind' space marines or 'Armageddon' chainguns and nukes?

Decay said:

---

Ooh space shootout imminent. We talking 'For All Mankind' space marines or 'Armageddon' chainguns and nukes?

---

HALO or go home.

The space Nerf war videos are gonna be epic!

BREAKING: Elon Musk’s SpaceX to split its private stock 10-for-1.

With SpaceX valued at $560 a share during its most recent sale, the split reduces SpaceX’s common stock to $56 a share, according to a company-wide email obtained by CNBC. @spacex https://t.co/E16qQtj7em

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) February 18, 2022

Jock 07 said:

---

I wonder how awkward it is on the ISS right now with the soviets fixin to roll tanks on Ukraine.

---

Sounds like the movie 2010

IPO Starlink within 6 months of the first successful Starship Starlink launch.

Nah, Starlink at that point can be milked further once it turns a positive cash flow from operations. SpaceX has absolutely limitless access to capital as it wants it right now, no need to sell the golden cow at this point.

will25u said:

---

BREAKING: Elon Musk’s SpaceX to split its private stock 10-for-1.

With SpaceX valued at $560 a share during its most recent sale, the split reduces SpaceX’s common stock to $56 a share, according to a company-wide email obtained by CNBC. @spacex https://t.co/E16qQtj7em

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) February 18, 2022

---

What's the purpose of a stock split for a privately held company? To remain private they have to have fewer than 2k shareholders. Anyone invited to invest or critical employees earning shares will not be doing so in denominations of $50.

It's not publicly traded but there are a bunch of (institutional and private) shareholders; it means future shareholders will be buying smaller portions, and the prices won't approach Berkshire Hathaway per share for either new sales or current holders when they do sell some off.

Basically, keeping it easy to raise more cash via equity sales, though.

Cool pic of re-entry burn on an F9: think about how awesome this will look for a SH booster.

Probably some new money wants to move in and they want to do a liquidity event for some employees to sell some of their shares, easier to sell a smaller amount and have some left over versus how chunky the allocations were before the split.

The actual Hubble replacement, a mechanical sibling to the old Hubble, that was donated to NASA by the NRO, will probably go up on a falcon heavy in 5 or so years.

Quote:

---

WFIRST was made possible when the US National Reconaissance Office (NRO) chose to donate one of twoHubble-class spy telescopes it had merely sitting around and gathering dust to NASA in the mid-2010s. From a mechanical perspective, the telescope will be very similar to Hubble. However, in the decades since HST's launch, electronics and sensor technology have dramatically improved, allowing NASA to pack instruments capable of simultaneously imaging 100 times the field of view HST is capable of into a similar package.

Additionally, instead of the Hubble's primary focus on ultraviolet and visible wavelengths, the Roman Space Telescope will observed in infrared wavelengths, making it a perfect complement to the brand-new James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which is also exclusively focused on the infrared spectrum. Combined, they could operate hand in hand, with NGRST acting like a surveyor or scout and JWST enabling a much closer look at noteworthy discoveries. Additionally, thanks to the inclusion of an unprecedentedly capable in-space coronagraph instrument, NGRST will be able to block out the light of stars, making it a game-changing tool for exoplanet discovery exoplanets that JWST may then be able to image in even more detail with its much larger mirror.

The telescope must first be built and then make it to orbit, however. Expected to weight at least 4.2 tons (~9250 lb) and designed to operate at the L2 Sun-Earth Lagrange point hundreds of thousands of miles from our planet, only large American rockets are an option for the $4.3 billion Roman Space Telescope's launch. After a recent delay, that launch has slipped to no later than May 2027. However, NASA appeared to be in the final stages of selecting a launch provider as of [url=https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/blackout_notice_nasa_launch_services_ii_roman_space_telescope_mission.pdf]late last month [PDF][/url], meaning that the space agency may not be able to take advantage of potential launch options planned to debut over the next few years.

---

Just finished reading Eric Berger's book Liftoff.

I enjoyed the story of the first years of SpaceX told not only thru Musk, but also by several of his principal employees. Good quick and informative read.

With this Russian aggression, all I can think about is how close we were to making life multi-planetary. I sure hope this doesn't change the world in such a way that we are forced to forget about the inspirational stuff...

I'm probably being a little over dramatic.

Where the hell are our rods from god?

OnlyForNow said:

---

Where the hell are our rods from god?

---

The more I learn about orbital mechanics the less those make sense. You'd have to strike stationary, preplanned targets with a long lead time. You're not defending anything with a technology like that if it does exist. You'd probably need a powered or steered descent or a very powerful mass driver in orbit, and all of that would be pretty heavy which means you're not sneaking it into other missions or launching it without people knowing easily.

Realistically, our crazy long bomber sorties with B2s or B52s, cruise missiles, or in-theater forces are still the best way to reach strategic targets quickly. ICBM are of course the fastest but we all know what happens if you launch those.

The head of Russia's space agency: "If [the U.S.] blocks cooperation with us, who will save the ISS from an uncontrolled descent out of orbit and a fall on the United States or"—continued in his next tweet—"Europe?"

"The ISS doesn't fly over Russia, so all the risks are yours." https://t.co/LSU1F4GnL8

— Marina Koren (@marinakoren) February 24, 2022

Decay said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Where the hell are our rods from god?

---

The more I learn about orbital mechanics the less those make sense. You'd have to strike stationary, preplanned targets with a long lead time. You're not defending anything with a technology like that if it does exist. You'd probably need a powered or steered descent or a very powerful mass driver in orbit, and all of that would be pretty heavy which means you're not sneaking it into other missions or launching it without people knowing easily.

Realistically, our crazy long bomber sorties with B2s or B52s, cruise missiles, or in-theater forces are still the best way to reach strategic targets quickly. ICBM are of course the fastest but we all know what happens if you launch those.

---

I think they could still be useful. Placed in geo, they could reach higher latitudes with a modest booster. Not Arctic latitudes, but still meaningful cross range.

But there wouldn't be very many of them.

Tungsten rods the size of a telephone pole would weigh about 10 tons each. Placing them in Geo would basically require 1 delta heavy launch per rod. Maybe two per DH if they use slightly smaller telephone poles than I calculated.

If they exist, I would expect two magazines, one to cover China/N Korea, and another covering Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan/Russia.

lb3 said:

---

Decay said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Where the hell are our rods from god?

---

The more I learn about orbital mechanics the less those make sense. You'd have to strike stationary, preplanned targets with a long lead time. You're not defending anything with a technology like that if it does exist. You'd probably need a powered or steered descent or a very powerful mass driver in orbit, and all of that would be pretty heavy which means you're not sneaking it into other missions or launching it without people knowing easily.

Realistically, our crazy long bomber sorties with B2s or B52s, cruise missiles, or in-theater forces are still the best way to reach strategic targets quickly. ICBM are of course the fastest but we all know what happens if you launch those.

---

I think they could still be useful. Placed in geo, they could reach higher latitudes with a modest booster. Not Arctic latitudes, but still meaningful cross range.

But there wouldn't be very many of them.

Tungsten rods the size of a telephone pole would weigh about 10 tons each. Placing them in Geo would basically require 1 delta heavy launch per rod. Maybe two per DH if they use slightly smaller telephone poles than I calculated.

If they exist, I would expect two magazines, one to cover China/N Korea, and another covering Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan/Russia.

---

Is it possible to have them floating out in space without everyone knowing?

Geo is 22k miles up so it's hard to image them. The radio telemetry would give their location away but it would take another satellite to image them to know what is is they actually are. Only a few countries have the resources to accomplish that.

https://newatlas.com/darpa-seeks-ideas-super-telscope-rfi/37451/

Didn't we just have an incident where China was using satellites to rendezvous and survey other satellites?

I don't know what kind of things are reasonable (countermeasures? Camouflage?) or legal. For one thing weapons are totally banned in space but I'd be very curious how you enforce that without... Weapons...

Decay said:

---

Didn't For one thing weapons are totally banned in space but I'd be very curious how you enforce that without... Weapons...

---

Not totally, just WMDs

PJYoung said:

---

The head of Russia's space agency: "If [the U.S.] blocks cooperation with us, who will save the ISS from an uncontrolled descent out of orbit and a fall on the United States or"—continued in his next tweet—"Europe?"

"The ISS doesn't fly over Russia, so all the risks are yours." https://t.co/LSU1F4GnL8

— Marina Koren (@marinakoren) February 24, 2022

---

Yeah, it could happen. It would result in an extra couple billion to Boeing to just get the damn starliner to orbit, but maybe it would also accelerate the Dream Chaser. All challenges for can be solved with money, which I imagine Biden would be happy to print/borrow from China.