@@ericstyles3724 "Not at all, they travel well beyond the reaches of earths megnetosphere (...)" Thanks for the reply. I guess, my question was most about circuitry and instruments during launch - think about a major solar flare in Earth's direction, barely deflected by a diminishing Magnetosphere e.g. due to wandering magnetic poles in a worst case scenario...
Actually the US does not even have the money to waste on stupid wars... The only thing the US does have is debts, and no means to pay them. $36 trillion at the current moment and a extra trillion on debts is added each hundred days.
Just so everyone is aware, there is an open letter to Congress going around urging them to refuse the cancellation of VIPER. Congress still has the ability to do this, as they're still in the process of writing a bill for NASA's budget. It'll be shown to them as early as Thursday, so we need all the signatures we can get. not sure if I'm allowed to send links here, so to avoid the risk of this comment being deleted im not going to, but the letter is made by NASAWatch and the article about it is called "An Open Letter To Congress Opposing VIPER Cancellation That You Can Sign", so if you search that up you'll be able to sign it
@@NicholasKoeppel no, viper would provide a ton of new information we do not already have its goal is to find water ice on the moon. We know it’s there, but we don’t know where it is or where the best places to get it are. That’s what VIPER was going to find out.
@@MersageSWi’m pretty sure it’d just get deleted, i tried in other comment sections and my replies just vanished i put the title of the website that has it in the comment though
Don't worry, China will not only land humans, but will establish a permanent base. We can't manage a moon base, but hey, we've got 800 military bases in foreign lands. 'Murica!
I think apart from the money first give by NASA, all the extra money over budget was out of Boeing. Still probably wasn’t worth the investment given the current state of things.
@@jrodthegreat1 unfortunately that’s not how nasa’s budget works it’s not just “here’s 20 billion dollars this year go crazy” specific money is set aside for specific projects the money for VIPER and the money for Starliner aren’t the same pool of money, you can’t use one for the other
Boeing is well known for issues, they wouldn't exist without government bailouts and protecting,, been an issue from the start, terrible fuckin company, would you expect anything else from a government subsidy, nah
@@blueballoon5052the better question is what do you even get out of going back? Literally NOTHING. Maybe that's why we ain't gone back. High high high risk with nothing to show for it. Only recently have we had even genuine ideas about some kind of moon base which is the new reason for wanting to go to the moon, as the moon could potentially be used to aid or launch from more efficiently. Beyond that.... There's virtually no benefit whatsoever from going to the moon aside from kudo points. So you're willing to spend billions for kudo points?
With the way it's been going that might be for the best. At the current rate of progress, private expeditions could be ready to launch humans to and from the surface before NASA even has the spacesuit designed.
@@Gurumeierhans Yup, but he's not the worst, those are the guys saying, "we just found a new Earth", ......and it's only 387 light years away from our Earth!! ;D LOL
Exactly. The simple, sad truth is that the people who knew how to do it are dead and the current NASA personnel doesn’t know how to do it. The knowledge got lost.
They were motivated back then. Nobody wants to risk their careers or reputation on risky moon missions. We still need to go back or be left behind! Besides, I left some socks there and I want them back.
@@philiplongee1149 yup, what you said, and before you go back, check between the washer and dryer, that's where most of my "lost socks" have been found!! LOL ;D
@@ronschlorff7089I’ll ask Buzz or Charlie Duke or even Harry Schmidt if he remembers where he last saw them. Probably still covered in moon dust. So hard to clean. One pair of socks for a man One giant pile of laundry for mankind.😂
@@PhilipLongee-vw8jf LOL. right, my dear wife took over laundry duties here cuz she has something she calls "separating" clothes before you wash them!! Cheers from AZ where it looks like Mars but feels like Mercury now!! :D
China has visited the moon South Pole twice and we are struggling to deliver a block of concrete? China will have a moon base built before we figure out what gender we are….
@@viarnay that's irrelevant. In russia and china men are in charge now. In USSR there were women in workforce and in everything due to shortages of men after WWII (stalingrad didn't help). Now you have women and simps in NASA screwing up everything
Either way, the budget for Viper is ludicrous. It shouldn't cost that much to construct a Rover or Lander. Perhaps, it's time NASA started looking for other contractors.
Are there any other options? They can't outsource it to India, and they aren't built in sufficient numbers to make scale savings. I think they just need to get better at estimating cost in the first place.
@@frjoethesecond When it pertains to building the Rover itself, it's simply an aluminum chassis, all terrain titanium wheels, a pair of electric motors, batteries, power generator, sensors, scientific equipment, and insulation. Most parts can be off the shelf purchased components. At the most, you'll need a custom chassis, power generator, insulation cover, and do slight modifications to off the shelf components to reinforce them. The Rover shouldn't cost more than 5 to 10 million. At this point, it seems NASA needs to be drastically reformed to purge it of its incompetence and irresponsible use of funds.
@@frjoethesecond Of course there are other options. What kind of defeatist attitude is that? Both China and India built and landed rovers on the moon for a fraction of the cost, but for some magical reason America can't without spending over half a billion dollars? Ridiculous. This is a management problem. Too many cooks in the kitchen. NASA spends and wastes too much.
When I think about it, the Chinese appear to be much better at making things cost. So it appears they are now leading the space race because they have the know how, the desire, the ability to make stuff at price and the systems to get to the moon already.
We've all seen how well things work out for Boeing on their aircraft when they start removing quality checks, that's probably the only ride into space Iwould turn down if offered.
Right, when the famous Boeing B-17 American bomber was manufactured, which helped win the war in Europe in the forties, the only women on the assembly lines were real girls like "Rosie the riveter"!! And they often hid "certain" pictures of themselves in the planes, where the crews could find them, adding some "encouragement" to the men to come home safely. Today, who knows, who the hell knows is doing the ass-embly and "quality checks"! LOL ;D
Bill Nelson was the sellout politician who forced SLS to be an old recycled overpriced garbage, and the fact that Biden is the one that out him on as deputy admin means he's the most crooked for the position.
US government: Our intel shows there’s a crater inside a crater inside a crater within the city of Khan Younis, we have an unprecedented opportunity to drop a 2,000 pound bomb on it to make the 1st crater inside a crater inside a crater inside a crater!!! Sorry NASA, no moon for you! NASA: But we already built the rover! We should just launch it, especially as China and India are running circles around us in the modern space race! US government: Sucks to suck, crater inside a crater inside a crater inside a crater time!
I would go back in a nanosecond but unfortunately all the data of building rockets and how to do it was destroyed and it’s a painful process to build it from scratch again. Let that sink in for a moment
Here's a question, how can something, that is done, complete, finished, with absolutely nothing more to do, cost $100 million more, just because it will not be launched? How could you "save money" by not launching a craft that has already cost $500 million? Lastly, why in the Wide, Wide, World of Sports, would you launch a craft, designed to carry a rover, WHICH IS READY TO GO, with a "concrete block" rather than the actual payload, WHICH IS READY TO GO? Only Government!
We can’t land ppl on the moon. Never could. It becomes more obvious every year. 50 years of technological progress but our capabilities reduce. Ppl are easily fooled.
Not only is a Dragon destroying the station, but it's targetting the Japanese module. I suppose it was only a matter of time before science resulted in a kaijuu destroying Japanese structures. Just wasn't expecting it'd be in space.
Sounds to me like the lunar rover mission just became a covert mission. They're not delivering a cement block to the moon, that would be silly. They're delivering the rover and doing something they don't want us to know about.
We should also keep in mind that China has met or exceeded all the timeline goals they had set forth years earlier when the CCP ramped up their space prgram in the early 2000's.
Sounds like "DeJa'Vu all over again" (credit: Yogi Berra); that is what was reported about the USSR in the mid-1960's, maybe it will turn out differently this time!! ;D
No reason to be scared. We will always be a few years away from returning to the moon. It’s been the case for the past 25 years and will continue for the next 25 years. It is really difficult for ppl to acknowledge that they were lied to and fooled
@@1237barca yup, it's just like heavy weight boxers, who had great knockout records, once they retire, there is no really good reason to get back in the ring again. Let some other guys give it a try. But their record will stand, and they will always be champions of their sport!! LOL ;D
@@ronschlorff7089 and for some reason no other country can get in the ring either. Only the Nixon administration. Some ppl will believe anything as long as it is part of the official narrative
Somebody has to pay for the cost overruns of the SLS. The Artemis/SLS can not even get into a proper lunar orbit and return. It can only achieve HRHO, a sort of combined lunar/ earth, orbit. I expect the SLS will eat many more science missions in the future.
The week-long orbit is unacceptable. Any number of descent vehicle anomalies could force abort to Earth scenarios, whereas Apollo flights had opportunities to land every couple of hours. Apollo 16 (and I think 14, too) had such issues, and they simply worked the problem and tried again on the next pass. That's only one of several reasons I doubt the seriousness of Artemis in terms of delivering humans to the surface.
@@Atheist7 Yes, a $500M Brick...and if it wasn't for the competition we had with the Russians there's a very good chance my father wouldn't have been on the design team at Grumman Aerospace/Bethpage NY building the LEM/Lunar Excursion Module...and I wouldn't have been sitting on the floor of my parents house watching "bags of mostly water" walking around the moon...on an old black/white TV. Those were the days...
Personally, I would more than TRIPLE the NASA budget if it was my choice. That being said, I’m sick of people only complaining about the other side of this coin when in truth NASA themselves carry a lion’s share of the blame for this constant BS. They CONSISTENTLY have been going far over budget on almost every project they touch since inception, to the point that they can absolutely not feign an honest mistake. They need to learn how to work with the budget they have, even if it sucks, and stop overpromising seven ways to Sunday. It’s ridiculous and it’s disrespectful to the taxpayer. I wouldn’t even know where to start on a list of projects and missions they‘ve blown smoke up everyone’s asses on as far as timelines and budget constraints go.
Sounds like the problem is the result of the way NASA manages people. If a project is delayed, they just pay people to sit on theirs hands waiting for others to complete their part of a complex systems. A commercial company uses contract people to handle various parts of a system and does not pay people to just wait. The market absorbs the cost of delay rather than the company.
@@echelonrank3927 Actually cool. To be born on Earth and die on Mars another planet, history making for one of us f'ing stupid little monkeys anyway, right? You and I will be "worm food" or ashes soon anyway, so sleep well tonight, since your little completely worthless life is Totally Meaningless in the great scheme of things!!!!! LOL ;D
The caledar changes every day... N.A.S.A. will never change, it may be time for them to be more like the FAA, an oversight agency. Example, Artemis program is already outdated and they still needs another few years before it can actually be implemented.
SLR and Starliner were greenlit by NASA for the same purpose. To delay our space progam missions to the moon. To be sure we waste as much time and money as possible. Next, just like the 8 times before, they will say, "sorry, no moon mission till 2028, than 2031 or 2. lol. Trillions given to them since the Bush Administration and what do we have to show for it. Two cancelled moon missions, and Artemis will be cancelled, rest assued. While China and Russia beat us back to the moon, NASA will say, "whats the point in rushing now?". lol Just wait.
NASA wouldn't have issues if Congress didn't treat them like a scapegoat constantly shrinking their already small budget and then surprised when NASA makes cuts.
Very true. By now the lunar suit design should be pretty much finalized, but we hear nothing. Without clear goals and incentives to reach them, vendors end up driving the mission design, making the systems they know how to build mission critical. That is how we got stuck with Lunar Gateway.
i am struggling with the concrete block, if they are going to send something as a test then why not something that might be useful to a future mission, supplies for a manned mission or building a structure or something.
I think SpaceX stands a good chance of a Starship human Moon landing before China in 2029, if they can get a docked Crew Dragon to fly from Lunar Orbit back to Earth.
The fact a "dragon" will attatch itself to the ISS, slumber for some time, and awaken for the prophesized destruction of it after all human life has abandoned the station sounds like some Tolkein type stuff
There's one insidious effect of this decision. It discourages adequate testing and safety, since the procedure and any potential findings could cause delays that lead to budget overruns that trigger this kind of termination.
Exactly. It seems stupid that they are cancelling the already-nearly-ready rover and yet still sending the lander. It's like flying a chartered airplane after all of the passengers have called and said they won't be showing up.
Its like training for years to run a marathon, then you finally are doing it, 100 year away from the finish line... You said nah I think it's not worth it, I'm going home.
You heard correctly... We do not have the technology in 2024 to send a living person through the Van Allen Belts or on to the surface of the moon. We never did...
Did NASA ask the people running the mission if they could meet the deadline or reduce the costs or did they just make their own estimate and unilaterally decide to cancel it?
Instead of send a cement block to the Moon, couldn't they come up with some form of less elaborate rover to do some useful data gathering, instead of no data collection from a cement block???????
Why does everyone want them to land on the moon? To gather more rocks? To say whoopee we did it again? Unless they plan on building a base and staying I really don't see the point in wasting billions of dollars. Maybe they don't either. Good for them!
Boots on the ground should be the focus. Robotics aren't as expensive if your operators are on site and can perform repairs. We don't need to have every inch of the moon explored in order to send human explorers. Wtf?
its even cheaper to buy a container load of boots from china and fire it at the moon or better yet just send pictures of robots to the moon. a dollar saved is a dollar earned.
@@stevenobrien557 For one SLS is obsolete I'm not sure it ever should have existed in the first place. The Falcon Heavy (FH) could easily have taken the place of what the SLS is doing now and soon Starship will take the place of FH. The problem is NASA as a government agency isn't as comfortable taking risks as an individual company on things like Starship. NASA wants redundancy but redundancy comes at a heavy price (as seen with SLS and the Boeing Starliner).
Perhaps a solution here is to rewrite the contract for VIPER as a fixed firm price contract? This would avoid further cost overruns and show if the contractor really believes they can perform under a budget ceiling. It seems the FFP approach worked well in crewed flight for the development of Dragon, although not so much for Starliner despite their higher budget.
These "cost overruns" should not be allowed in NASA contracts. If anything, civilian contractors should be fined for delays and rewarded for bringing projects in on time and under budget.
I find it strange you can be a moon landing denier but believe we can get into space no problem. Like, we got the hardest part which is leaving earth. Landing on the moon itself would be the next hardest part but it's not that hard either. We literally landed on a moving asteroid without serious issue. We surely would have no issues landing on the moon. So not sure why it's so unbelievable that we could and have been to the moon.
@@Nuke-MarsX oh, they can absolutely go to Mars first. In fact, there’s a fairly large controversy over whether it’s worth going back to the moon first or not. Ultimately it was decided that going directly to Mars would be like a repeat of Apollo. We got the land mark without putting in the infrastructure to KEEP going.
@@WildWombats they don’t believe that happened either though. They think it’s impossible to get past the Van Allen Belts, even though it’s not difficult.
Space race, as an american gen z I wanna ask if you are excited for the DRACO project to send the first nuclear thermal rocket to be tested in space? Its a way to keep up with china but if the U.S. wants to keep up the best way is to nstionalize industries and such like china but of course with the neo libe'rial capitalist country my country is its gonna be very hard and take actual political will to change it but as a socialist its unlikely to see those changes. America is all about cutting costs.
DRACO is really cool. If we're going to have a serious talk about flying people to Mars, then we need to have nuclear thermal propulsion. Like you say, the problem is mostly on the government - projects like this will take a decade or more to complete, but when congress changes hands every two years, there is no hope of sustaining any major infrastructure plan for the necessary amount of time. Unless someone/some force can change that. Run for office young man!
@@TheSpaceRaceYT If we really wanted a serious conversation about getting anywhere in space, it isn't with conventional rocket propulsion or nuclear. It's anti-gravity and torsion field dynamics. The Air Force was testing these out 70 years ago and everything we don't talk about publicly. Promise you it isn't sci-fi. If we have it, we wouldn't say anything about. The money has to keep flowing with the current systems now. But we are told, when and where we would ever land on the moon and delay after delay should drop a huge hint.
No, the modules have a life span due to thermanl cycling of the pressure structure. beyond 2030, the chance a module springs a spontaneous leak grows mildly exponentially. However, it could serve as a guinea pig for monitoring orbital debris damage, if they could boost the orbit to one with higher debris density.
Now there's an idea. But the modules probably won't survive a landing on the moon. I imagine they are not structurally sound enough to handle the G-forces. Would be an interesting experiment though, even if it doesn't survive.
What's wrong with you... stop applying logic, common sense, and rationality to this problem... This is N.A.S.A. we're talking about here, it's our money that pays for the expenses. N.A.S.A. is like a 10 year old, all they know is that they don't have any bills to pay🤔😉
Because we're broke, as a nation. I hate to say it but get reasy for taxes to go up, inflation to continue to up, and quality of life to go down while science research is told to tighten their belts.
That's NASA's goal! lol Give out contracts for projects and missions that they will lobby extra money for, than years go by, cancel said projects and missions and repeat the entire process again and again and again.
@@gwhite7136you know nothing about NASA’s budget parameters. If. Congress would let NASA dictate its own budgets and remove petty politics by finally just canceling SLS then they’d have more freedom to do the missions they want.
@@RuralJuror420 Are you insane? We've tried that in the Bush, Clinton, Obama and Trump era's. lol You think the SLS isn't upt here yet because they didn't have the money? LOL Bahahahhah. It's been outdated for years now and it's stilll not up. lol. Never meant to go. Sir, NASA is Congress! lol Wake up! Look whose running it?? Why would they cancel what is known as a money pit? They have multiple programs designed to syphon money into them and you never think to ask where it all goes??? WE are talking trillions over decades, gone, poof, end result is still more delays, cancellations and money for new project and missions that will go the same way. To the trash heap of cancellation lol. I been around longer than half a century watching and best believe I know the cycle. Your seeming more of it and you still think they want to get to the moon? LOL
I am apparently a financially ignorant person because I don't understand why delaying the launch of a payload would add 200 million dollars to the price tag. Is it sitting there sucking up billions of kilowatt hours of electricity while waiting? If it is ready to go why is it costing more just to sit there for another year?
__ English major here. I literally thought the dummy payloads thing was a joke, but this morning I'm back skimming through and it looks like the comments are sort of engineering types who all already know about dummy payloads. Is there, like, a UA-cam or something that explains dummy payloads?
It’s when instead of sending the actual payload, you send a non-functional version with the same mass/size. Usually to test the system before actually being used in missions.
Seems like they should have to justify waiting a year costing $200 million over the known budget which should already include the price of testing and certification.
Part of the cost is because they have to keep all of the workers on staff during the intervening time because they can not simply dismiss them with no further pay and then bring them back when needed. The moment the staff are taken off of the payroll, they will seek other employment and will be unlikely to come back to the employer who kicked them out. How many hundreds of people are working on this project?
i don't know why these gov't contracts that are so lucrative apparently, don't have a clause that if the timeline isn't met according to original contract, all money spent by taxpayer is recovered from the contractor for breach of contract. Seems like that would put a damper on the profiteering and malfeasance going on in the gov't contractor industries.
Sign up for the weekly Space Race newsletter here: www.thespacerace.news/subscribe
How would space weather - in particular a declining terrestrial magnetosphere - affect lunar missions or space launches in general ?
@@christophmahlerNot at all, they travel well beyond the reaches of earths megnetosphere & van Allen belts.
@@ericstyles3724
"Not at all, they travel well beyond the reaches of earths megnetosphere (...)"
Thanks for the reply.
I guess, my question was most about circuitry and instruments during launch - think about a major solar flare in Earth's direction, barely deflected by a diminishing Magnetosphere e.g. due to wandering magnetic poles in a worst case scenario...
We can waste billions on stupid wars but can't get a lander to the moon.
Actually the US does not even have the money to waste on stupid wars... The only thing the US does have is debts, and no means to pay them. $36 trillion at the current moment and a extra trillion on debts is added each hundred days.
We probably already terraformed mars in 2001 if war never exists
Ironic since our technology problably wouldn't be so advanced if it wasn't for wars. Damned if you do, damned if you dont.
Late stage capitalism
One Congressman said it is good value for tax money spent. About $500,000 per Russian Soldier killed :(
Just so everyone is aware, there is an open letter to Congress going around urging them to refuse the cancellation of VIPER. Congress still has the ability to do this, as they're still in the process of writing a bill for NASA's budget. It'll be shown to them as early as Thursday, so we need all the signatures we can get.
not sure if I'm allowed to send links here, so to avoid the risk of this comment being deleted im not going to, but the letter is made by NASAWatch and the article about it is called "An Open Letter To Congress Opposing VIPER Cancellation That You Can Sign", so if you search that up you'll be able to sign it
i signed it also watched your vid for it. it’s very good i love your vids man
@@Kyplanet893signed! Love your videos
@@NicholasKoeppel no, viper would provide a ton of new information we do not already have
its goal is to find water ice on the moon. We know it’s there, but we don’t know where it is or where the best places to get it are. That’s what VIPER was going to find out.
Adding a link to the letter to sign would be helpful
@@MersageSWi’m pretty sure it’d just get deleted, i tried in other comment sections and my replies just vanished
i put the title of the website that has it in the comment though
The problem is not money. The problem is the abuse of money!
The money, and also how they operate.
That’s what happens when anything govt runned ends up becoming.
It goes deeper than that. Social engineering is the poison of western civilization.
I kiss and hug mine every day. I never abuse it.
I kiss and hug mine every day. I never abuse it.
Don't worry, China will not only land humans, but will establish a permanent base. We can't manage a moon base, but hey, we've got 800 military bases in foreign lands. 'Murica!
They can afford it
Dont even mention those bastards
Our military bases aren’t why we can’t do this. Its our slow bureaucratic system
Lol. Worse. They also bring the Russians and nuclear technology with them.
no they won't, man cannot survive beyond low earth orbit.
I’d be willing to bet if the Boeing starliner wasn’t such a failure…a very expensive failure…. There would be money left for this mission
I think apart from the money first give by NASA, all the extra money over budget was out of Boeing. Still probably wasn’t worth the investment given the current state of things.
It was a political gift to Boeing anyway, and was never really needed anyway. Another jobs program! for the state!
GO BOEING!!! They were mentioned AGAIN at the end of this video as being a part of Artemis 2. Hope it works!!!
@@jrodthegreat1 unfortunately that’s not how nasa’s budget works
it’s not just “here’s 20 billion dollars this year go crazy” specific money is set aside for specific projects
the money for VIPER and the money for Starliner aren’t the same pool of money, you can’t use one for the other
Boeing is well known for issues, they wouldn't exist without government bailouts and protecting,, been an issue from the start, terrible fuckin company, would you expect anything else from a government subsidy, nah
I am beginning to think NASA doesn't want to go to the moon; they are just pretending to go to the moon.
Hmmm. I wonder why that would be
Every day that we can’t make it back to the moon make it seem ever so slightly more plausible that we never even went.
@@blueballoon5052 exactly. Basic logic. After 100 years, how obvious will it be? Well it has already been 50.
we so didn’t
@@blueballoon5052the better question is what do you even get out of going back? Literally NOTHING. Maybe that's why we ain't gone back. High high high risk with nothing to show for it. Only recently have we had even genuine ideas about some kind of moon base which is the new reason for wanting to go to the moon, as the moon could potentially be used to aid or launch from more efficiently. Beyond that.... There's virtually no benefit whatsoever from going to the moon aside from kudo points. So you're willing to spend billions for kudo points?
Dear China. Enjoy your new Moon.!
They earned it!!
China will grow larger! The Red Moon is rising!
@@johnsmith1953xNo, the US sabotaged itself
😅😅
That thumbnail made me think they cancelled the Artemis program 😭
Please don't jinx it
With the way it's been going that might be for the best. At the current rate of progress, private expeditions could be ready to launch humans to and from the surface before NASA even has the spacesuit designed.
Not yet, not yet.
Guess why he uses such clickbaity shid
@@Gurumeierhans Yup, but he's not the worst, those are the guys saying, "we just found a new Earth", ......and it's only 387 light years away from our Earth!! ;D LOL
We are a country in decline. We landed many men on the moon between 1969-1973 and haven’t been back since. Now we can’t even get a rover there.
It was a good movie that’s all it was .
12 men so far, and it was 69-72.
@@Batman111-q3r Wrong
Exactly. The simple, sad truth is that the people who knew how to do it are dead and the current NASA personnel doesn’t know how to do it. The knowledge got lost.
@@Batman111-q3rRight!
I recently started working for Axiom space, and we just got a contract for a lunar rover...
Not surprising, Axiom gets all the cool stuff - space station, Moon suits, lunar rover...
I’m an aerospace engineering student and Axiom would be a dream job for me 🙂
Are you in Houston, @artificiallyflavord5588?
And..... you're FIRED!
Glad to hear!!
So, let me get this straight.....
We've put "bags of mostly water" on the moon in 1969...........
And n.a.s.a. will put A BRICK on the moon in 2025.
yup, but those "bags of water" had the "right stuff" then, many years ago! ;D
They were motivated back then. Nobody wants to risk their careers or reputation on risky moon missions. We still need to go back or be left behind! Besides, I left some socks there and I want them back.
@@philiplongee1149 yup, what you said, and before you go back, check between the washer and dryer, that's where most of my "lost socks" have been found!! LOL ;D
@@ronschlorff7089I’ll ask Buzz or Charlie Duke or even Harry Schmidt if he remembers where he last saw them. Probably still covered in moon dust. So hard to clean.
One pair of socks for a man
One giant pile of laundry for mankind.😂
@@PhilipLongee-vw8jf LOL. right, my dear wife took over laundry duties here cuz she has something she calls "separating" clothes before you wash them!! Cheers from AZ where it looks like Mars but feels like Mercury now!! :D
China has visited the moon South Pole twice and we are struggling to deliver a block of concrete? China will have a moon base built before we figure out what gender we are….
It's not looking great
China uses USSR updated technology how many times soviet technology put an astronaut on the Moon?
Yeah Congress are numbskulls when it comes to space exploration.
@@viarnay that's irrelevant. In russia and china men are in charge now. In USSR there were women in workforce and in everything due to shortages of men after WWII (stalingrad didn't help). Now you have women and simps in NASA screwing up everything
@@TheSpaceRaceYT at least let someone get to the Moon
Either way, the budget for Viper is ludicrous. It shouldn't cost that much to construct a Rover or Lander. Perhaps, it's time NASA started looking for other contractors.
💯
Are there any other options? They can't outsource it to India, and they aren't built in sufficient numbers to make scale savings.
I think they just need to get better at estimating cost in the first place.
@@frjoethesecond When it pertains to building the Rover itself, it's simply an aluminum chassis, all terrain titanium wheels, a pair of electric motors, batteries, power generator, sensors, scientific equipment, and insulation. Most parts can be off the shelf purchased components. At the most, you'll need a custom chassis, power generator, insulation cover, and do slight modifications to off the shelf components to reinforce them. The Rover shouldn't cost more than 5 to 10 million. At this point, it seems NASA needs to be drastically reformed to purge it of its incompetence and irresponsible use of funds.
retrofit a golf cart
@@frjoethesecond Of course there are other options. What kind of defeatist attitude is that? Both China and India built and landed rovers on the moon for a fraction of the cost, but for some magical reason America can't without spending over half a billion dollars? Ridiculous. This is a management problem. Too many cooks in the kitchen. NASA spends and wastes too much.
When I think about it, the Chinese appear to be much better at making things cost. So it appears they are now leading the space race because they have the know how, the desire, the ability to make stuff at price and the systems to get to the moon already.
The mission costs less then 1% of what the US government is giving to Ukraine
1000 overseas Spy and Military bases. That create zero ,!
Well preventing a WW3 is more pressing than Moon mission
@@0Letten0
Human progression > a war won’t get better because the US’s deep pockets
@@0Letten0also the fact that we arent sending “money” per say we are sending old equipment.
@@emilioportillo7429Uh, no. We are sending money to them too. Try again.
Ukraine needs to surrender.
We've all seen how well things work out for Boeing on their aircraft when they start removing quality checks, that's probably the only ride into space Iwould turn down if offered.
Right, when the famous Boeing B-17 American bomber was manufactured, which helped win the war in Europe in the forties, the only women on the assembly lines were real girls like "Rosie the riveter"!! And they often hid "certain" pictures of themselves in the planes, where the crews could find them, adding some "encouragement" to the men to come home safely. Today, who knows, who the hell knows is doing the ass-embly and "quality checks"! LOL ;D
You would think NASA has given up on their charter. Sounds like they need to get rid of Bill Nelson and Boeing to fix most of the problems
it's an "easy fix" in November folks!! ;D
Bill Nelson was the sellout politician who forced SLS to be an old recycled overpriced garbage, and the fact that Biden is the one that out him on as deputy admin means he's the most crooked for the position.
It's Racketeering ....simple
We need a little less Racketeering and a little more Rocketeering...
Like... Say... SpaceX.
Bait and switch. Over promise and never deliver. Get on the band wagon but don't expect a horse to take it anywhere.🎉 💰🗼⚰️🪦
God dam well said !!!
@@PrinceAlhorian I like that, is it called alliteration or onomatopoeia? I get those mixed up! ;D
@@ronschlorff7089 Alliteration, but I got the idea from Elvis. "A little less conversation a little more action."
US government: Our intel shows there’s a crater inside a crater inside a crater within the city of Khan Younis, we have an unprecedented opportunity to drop a 2,000 pound bomb on it to make the 1st crater inside a crater inside a crater inside a crater!!! Sorry NASA, no moon for you!
NASA: But we already built the rover! We should just launch it, especially as China and India are running circles around us in the modern space race!
US government: Sucks to suck, crater inside a crater inside a crater inside a crater time!
How ridiculous. We sent humans to the moon 6 times with 1960’s tech and now we can’t get a lander rover there on budget or on schedule? 😂
The hollywood directors wanted too much money.
as a wise hockey coach once said, "fucking embarrassing"
I would go back in a nanosecond but unfortunately all the data of building rockets and how to do it was destroyed and it’s a painful process to build it from scratch again. Let that sink in for a moment
Here's a question, how can something, that is done, complete, finished, with absolutely nothing more to do, cost $100 million more, just because it will not be launched? How could you "save money" by not launching a craft that has already cost $500 million? Lastly, why in the Wide, Wide, World of Sports, would you launch a craft, designed to carry a rover, WHICH IS READY TO GO, with a "concrete block" rather than the actual payload, WHICH IS READY TO GO? Only Government!
We can’t land ppl on the moon. Never could. It becomes more obvious every year. 50 years of technological progress but our capabilities reduce. Ppl are easily fooled.
Not only is a Dragon destroying the station, but it's targetting the Japanese module. I suppose it was only a matter of time before science resulted in a kaijuu destroying Japanese structures. Just wasn't expecting it'd be in space.
God f***, of course, they would do this nasa needs a bigger budget
If you give women bigger budget they will find new "necessary" crap to spend it on. And the simps there are just cheering them on
@@precisionleadthrowing4628 well said.
@@precisionleadthrowing4628wtf does that have to do with nasa lol, meanwhile trillion per year for "defense" contractors😂
@@precisionleadthrowing4628it’s not the fault of women, SpaceX Women make great Savings , it’s NASA and their dated methods and bad Management …
@leight420 yes and a lot of billions go no where and are lost because their unaccounted for!
Sounds to me like the lunar rover mission just became a covert mission. They're not delivering a cement block to the moon, that would be silly. They're delivering the rover and doing something they don't want us to know about.
NASA needs a reboot!
Needs to be grounded. Permanently. It has become an employment agency
They need to collaborate with Hollywood again if we want to see ppl walking on the moon
Redo operation paperclip?
@@Jpear197 I thing they've already tried that.
The may have to open the box of rubber bands.
55 years and several technological leaps forward and we still cannot land a man on the moon.
smh
Told ya!!
"The private sector has not lived up to expectations" I'm shocked.
Bullshit, SpaceX is doing fine, Its the offshored corporation in bed with the government that's failing to deliver
We should also keep in mind that China has met or exceeded all the timeline goals they had set forth years earlier when the CCP ramped up their space prgram in the early 2000's.
Sounds like "DeJa'Vu all over again" (credit: Yogi Berra); that is what was reported about the USSR in the mid-1960's, maybe it will turn out differently this time!! ;D
The title scared me for a second
more like annoyed! ;D
No reason to be scared. We will always be a few years away from returning to the moon. It’s been the case for the past 25 years and will continue for the next 25 years. It is really difficult for ppl to acknowledge that they were lied to and fooled
@@1237barca yup, it's just like heavy weight boxers, who had great knockout records, once they retire, there is no really good reason to get back in the ring again. Let some other guys give it a try. But their record will stand, and they will always be champions of their sport!! LOL ;D
@@ronschlorff7089 and for some reason no other country can get in the ring either. Only the Nixon administration. Some ppl will believe anything as long as it is part of the official narrative
Nixon was a dick@@1237barca
I highly doubt their ambitions of beating China to the moon considering they can't even keep a deadline for a rover landing lol 😂
Somebody has to pay for the cost overruns of the SLS. The Artemis/SLS can not even get into a proper lunar orbit and return. It can only achieve HRHO, a sort of combined lunar/ earth, orbit. I expect the SLS will eat many more science missions in the future.
@@user-fr3hy9uh6y So true!!
In 1969 the Apollo service module could do it!!! 55 years later we can’t!!! 😡🤔🤫
@@alangable9555 That was 1968, but in any event the priority levels are wildly different.
The week-long orbit is unacceptable. Any number of descent vehicle anomalies could force abort to Earth scenarios, whereas Apollo flights had opportunities to land every couple of hours. Apollo 16 (and I think 14, too) had such issues, and they simply worked the problem and tried again on the next pass. That's only one of several reasons I doubt the seriousness of Artemis in terms of delivering humans to the surface.
@@marcmcreynolds2827 1968-1972 yes…..
Shoutout to Chandrayaan3 for doing it under $75 million
Outsource NASA to ISRO 👻 😜
This wouldn't happen in China.
NASA needs a house cleaning of people.
Bill Nelson first and foremost.
Its like sand at the beach you remove a bunch and it fills back in with the same shit.
Meanwhile china :
yup, they are as great a coopetitor today as the Soviets were in the 60's! We need that, must have it, should want it, very badly!! ;D
Has china landed a person on the moon yet? Then they are 55 years behind the US. You have to believe that if you believe we landed on the moon
CGI/ ADULT CARTOONS
The current total US National Dept is $35T...but we can spend $500M to land rocks.
So, let me get this straight.....
We've put "bags of mostly water" on the moon in 1969...........
And n.a.s.a. will put A BRICK on the moon in 2025.
@@Atheist7 Yes, a $500M Brick...and if it wasn't for the competition we had with the Russians there's a very good chance my father wouldn't have been on the design team at Grumman Aerospace/Bethpage NY building the LEM/Lunar Excursion Module...and I wouldn't have been sitting on the floor of my parents house watching "bags of mostly water" walking around the moon...on an old black/white TV. Those were the days...
@@mboiko 😲
What do you mean by bags of mostly water?
@@ArayanSaleem Meaning humans...
Personally, I would more than TRIPLE the NASA budget if it was my choice.
That being said, I’m sick of people only complaining about the other side of this coin when in truth NASA themselves carry a lion’s share of the blame for this constant BS.
They CONSISTENTLY have been going far over budget on almost every project they touch since inception, to the point that they can absolutely not feign an honest mistake.
They need to learn how to work with the budget they have, even if it sucks, and stop overpromising seven ways to Sunday. It’s ridiculous and it’s disrespectful to the taxpayer.
I wouldn’t even know where to start on a list of projects and missions they‘ve blown smoke up everyone’s asses on as far as timelines and budget constraints go.
Nasa couldn't pour sand out boot if directions were wrote on heel.
just call the project "aid for Ukraine" and bring it to congress again, it'll get approved in no time.
The last Ukraine aid bill took a very long time to get approved. You used a horrible example.
"Aid for Israel" will be even faster
You seem to be good friends with Musk... 🤡
Congress needs to fix this problem - now. If NASA cannot convince Congress to act, we should cancel NASA.
Sounds like the problem is the result of the way NASA manages people. If a project is delayed, they just pay people to sit on theirs hands waiting for others to complete their part of a complex systems. A commercial company uses contract people to handle various parts of a system and does not pay people to just wait. The market absorbs the cost of delay rather than the company.
Nice to see a face to the channel. Love you guys
First time seeing your face man, have a subscriber of your tesla space channel for about 4-5 years now thumbs up for you
If I was in charge of the space program we would have people on Mars already!!
Send your resume to Trump if he wins, for NASA chief, otherwise, you can forgetaboutit, and that's for everyone who is a space exploration fan!! LOL
sure. dead ones
@@echelonrank3927 Actually cool. To be born on Earth and die on Mars another planet, history making for one of us f'ing stupid little monkeys anyway, right? You and I will be "worm food" or ashes soon anyway, so sleep well tonight, since your little completely worthless life is Totally Meaningless in the great scheme of things!!!!! LOL ;D
If I was in charge, we would have people on the sun already . . .
@@rogerfaint499 ha ha , absolute gold 👍
The caledar changes every day... N.A.S.A. will never change, it may be time for them to be more like the FAA, an oversight agency.
Example, Artemis program is already outdated and they still needs another few years before it can actually be implemented.
I agree
SLR and Starliner were greenlit by NASA for the same purpose. To delay our space progam missions to the moon. To be sure we waste as much time and money as possible. Next, just like the 8 times before, they will say, "sorry, no moon mission till 2028, than 2031 or 2. lol. Trillions given to them since the Bush Administration and what do we have to show for it. Two cancelled moon missions, and Artemis will be cancelled, rest assued. While China and Russia beat us back to the moon, NASA will say, "whats the point in rushing now?". lol Just wait.
NASA wouldn't have issues if Congress didn't treat them like a scapegoat constantly shrinking their already small budget and then surprised when NASA makes cuts.
Very true. By now the lunar suit design should be pretty much finalized, but we hear nothing. Without clear goals and incentives to reach them, vendors end up driving the mission design, making the systems they know how to build mission critical. That is how we got stuck with Lunar Gateway.
i am struggling with the concrete block, if they are going to send something as a test then why not something that might be useful to a future mission, supplies for a manned mission or building a structure or something.
Artemis is a communication program while nasa forgot how to communicate inside
Have no fear, SPACEX will colonize the moon within the next few years, while NASA will continue being the VIDEO TAPE CREW FOR SPACEX!
China: "We got this.!"
I think SpaceX stands a good chance of a Starship human Moon landing before China in 2029, if they can get a docked Crew Dragon to fly from Lunar Orbit back to Earth.
The fact a "dragon" will attatch itself to the ISS, slumber for some time, and awaken for the prophesized destruction of it after all human life has abandoned the station sounds like some Tolkein type stuff
The Aliens do not want us on the observatory that is disguised as a Moon!
True. Unless we're the aliens and one day we're going to put one golf-cart too many up there.
No, it's an egg.
Thanks for the update!
I’m enjoying your channel. Solid work and interesting. Keep going. Earned a sub
Bro I thought they cancelled the Artemis Program 😭
So hard to go to the moon...despite we already did it couple of decades ago...allegedly.
Dont get me wrong, i believe that we went to the moon but stuff like this makes me question if any of the space footage is even real.
At this rate NASA can just wait till 2026 and beg CNSA for the South Pole moon samples from the upcoming Chang'e 6 mission 😂
Well.... chang'e-6 has already returned and NASA is actually begging for samples now......
There's one insidious effect of this decision. It discourages adequate testing and safety, since the procedure and any potential findings could cause delays that lead to budget overruns that trigger this kind of termination.
If they are sending the lander, can't they just put the rover anyway?
Exactly. It seems stupid that they are cancelling the already-nearly-ready rover and yet still sending the lander. It's like flying a chartered airplane after all of the passengers have called and said they won't be showing up.
Its like training for years to run a marathon, then you finally are doing it, 100 year away from the finish line... You said nah I think it's not worth it, I'm going home.
What?
"We want to send robots, to see what we are dealing with, before we send people." What??!?
You heard correctly...
We do not have the technology in 2024 to send a living person through the Van Allen Belts or on to the surface of the moon.
We never did...
Did NASA ask the people running the mission if they could meet the deadline or reduce the costs or did they just make their own estimate and unilaterally decide to cancel it?
Just give SpaceX the order.
because they go to the moon all the time
@@MoheeheekoThey could start today and be there WAY before NASA.
First they need a working Starship. They're on it. Hey.... I learned they could get literally FREE methane right there in Texas
@@WayLeft Order as in Purchase Order given specifications. NASA will predictably go far over budget and time.
@shelbyseelbach9568 what do you think starship is for? They are trying. NASA has gotten hardware to the moon TWICE in recent memory.
Instead of send a cement block to the Moon, couldn't they come up with some form of less elaborate rover to do some useful data gathering, instead of no data collection from a cement block???????
Thank you. So much!
I am so happy that our generation will be able to experience the moon landing in 4k.
They have already built it and still sending a dummy payload to land? Why not just send it there?
Why does everyone want them to land on the moon? To gather more rocks? To say whoopee we did it again? Unless they plan on building a base and staying I really don't see the point in wasting billions of dollars. Maybe they don't either. Good for them!
Boeing streamlined the process by firing the engineers and quality control inspectors and using the savings for stock buybacks.
Boots on the ground should be the focus. Robotics aren't as expensive if your operators are on site and can perform repairs. We don't need to have every inch of the moon explored in order to send human explorers. Wtf?
Ppl can’t survive the journey. Should be pretty obvious now that nobody has been for 50 years
its even cheaper to buy a container load of boots from china and fire it at the moon or better yet just send pictures of robots to the moon.
a dollar saved is a dollar earned.
Give NASA 2-times the budget dammit.
Give NASA the Military budget!
What They Need Is Penaltys For Going Over Budget And This Wouldnt happen [Not Saying I Disagree But Stating Another Opinion]
OK, so what gets cut?
The problem is not money, the problem is that NASA is infested with women.
@@stevenobrien557 For one SLS is obsolete I'm not sure it ever should have existed in the first place. The Falcon Heavy (FH) could easily have taken the place of what the SLS is doing now and soon Starship will take the place of FH.
The problem is NASA as a government agency isn't as comfortable taking risks as an individual company on things like Starship. NASA wants redundancy but redundancy comes at a heavy price (as seen with SLS and the Boeing Starliner).
I dont believe anything that nasa tells us.
Like ;
They "lost" the technology to go back to the moon. 😂😂😂
I mean, why go back to the moon if we already know what's there?
Plus we've already been there SIX TIMES.
Perhaps a solution here is to rewrite the contract for VIPER as a fixed firm price contract? This would avoid further cost overruns and show if the contractor really believes they can perform under a budget ceiling. It seems the FFP approach worked well in crewed flight for the development of Dragon, although not so much for Starliner despite their higher budget.
Nonetheless, they’ve never been there for starters
Yes they have.
Six times.
It's been a long time, perhaps not even that.
These "cost overruns" should not be allowed in NASA contracts. If anything, civilian contractors should be fined for delays and rewarded for bringing projects in on time and under budget.
Sigh… WTF?! Are you TRYING to encourage the moon landing deniers? You KNOW they’re going to assume you’re saying that they canceled Artemis.
still, its easier to believe that man walked on the moon than it is to believe man will walk on the moon LOL
@@echelonrank3927 spacex will do it someday no matter if nasa helps or not, starship cant go to mars without going to moon first
I find it strange you can be a moon landing denier but believe we can get into space no problem. Like, we got the hardest part which is leaving earth. Landing on the moon itself would be the next hardest part but it's not that hard either. We literally landed on a moving asteroid without serious issue. We surely would have no issues landing on the moon. So not sure why it's so unbelievable that we could and have been to the moon.
@@Nuke-MarsX oh, they can absolutely go to Mars first. In fact, there’s a fairly large controversy over whether it’s worth going back to the moon first or not. Ultimately it was decided that going directly to Mars would be like a repeat of Apollo. We got the land mark without putting in the infrastructure to KEEP going.
@@WildWombats they don’t believe that happened either though. They think it’s impossible to get past the Van Allen Belts, even though it’s not difficult.
Hundreds of billions can be spent on wars that stagnate human progress, but spending money on human progress, now that is just crazy.
Space race, as an american gen z I wanna ask if you are excited for the DRACO project to send the first nuclear thermal rocket to be tested in space? Its a way to keep up with china but if the U.S. wants to keep up the best way is to nstionalize industries and such like china but of course with the neo libe'rial capitalist country my country is its gonna be very hard and take actual political will to change it but as a socialist its unlikely to see those changes. America is all about cutting costs.
DRACO is really cool. If we're going to have a serious talk about flying people to Mars, then we need to have nuclear thermal propulsion. Like you say, the problem is mostly on the government - projects like this will take a decade or more to complete, but when congress changes hands every two years, there is no hope of sustaining any major infrastructure plan for the necessary amount of time. Unless someone/some force can change that. Run for office young man!
@@TheSpaceRaceYT If we really wanted a serious conversation about getting anywhere in space, it isn't with conventional rocket propulsion or nuclear. It's anti-gravity and torsion field dynamics. The Air Force was testing these out 70 years ago and everything we don't talk about publicly. Promise you it isn't sci-fi. If we have it, we wouldn't say anything about. The money has to keep flowing with the current systems now. But we are told, when and where we would ever land on the moon and delay after delay should drop a huge hint.
@@TheSpaceRaceYT absolutely
@TheSpaceRaceYT I can understand however while I don't plan to go into politics I'll always keep an eye out
@@TheSpaceRaceYT I don't however plan to go to nasa
Crazy, I still have VHS tape recordings of live NASA tv when they built the ISS...now to see it get destroyed as well...all in my lifetime, is crazy
Here’s how to cut costs: Instead of dumping the ISS in the ocean, use the modules to construct a moon station, saving costs on both ends.
No, the modules have a life span due to thermanl cycling of the pressure structure. beyond 2030, the chance a module springs a spontaneous leak grows mildly exponentially. However, it could serve as a guinea pig for monitoring orbital debris damage, if they could boost the orbit to one with higher debris density.
Now there's an idea. But the modules probably won't survive a landing on the moon. I imagine they are not structurally sound enough to handle the G-forces. Would be an interesting experiment though, even if it doesn't survive.
What's wrong with you... stop applying logic, common sense, and rationality to this problem...
This is N.A.S.A. we're talking about here, it's our money that pays for the expenses.
N.A.S.A. is like a 10 year old, all they know is that they don't have any bills to pay🤔😉
@@patpozzuto4809 Totally offtopic dude
Can anyone explain why it's "not surprising" the project cost went from 250 million in 2019 to 433 million in 2022?
Well done crew!!!
Because we're broke, as a nation. I hate to say it but get reasy for taxes to go up, inflation to continue to up, and quality of life to go down while science research is told to tighten their belts.
thats dissapointing....
pretty much...
For the cost of one armored Tank they cancel the mission , I think , unfortunately , its got more to do with world events right now .
Congratulations to China who will land on the moon well before NASA
That's NASA's goal! lol Give out contracts for projects and missions that they will lobby extra money for, than years go by, cancel said projects and missions and repeat the entire process again and again and again.
Sorry to break the news, but NASA already landed people on the moon in 1969. China will need a time machine to be first at anything.
Friendly reminder NASA has already landed on the moon DECADES before China. Google “NASA Apollo Moon Landings” for more details.
@@gwhite7136you know nothing about NASA’s budget parameters. If. Congress would let NASA dictate its own budgets and remove petty politics by finally just canceling SLS then they’d have more freedom to do the missions they want.
@@RuralJuror420 Are you insane? We've tried that in the Bush, Clinton, Obama and Trump era's. lol You think the SLS isn't upt here yet because they didn't have the money? LOL Bahahahhah. It's been outdated for years now and it's stilll not up. lol. Never meant to go. Sir, NASA is Congress! lol Wake up! Look whose running it?? Why would they cancel what is known as a money pit? They have multiple programs designed to syphon money into them and you never think to ask where it all goes??? WE are talking trillions over decades, gone, poof, end result is still more delays, cancellations and money for new project and missions that will go the same way. To the trash heap of cancellation lol. I been around longer than half a century watching and best believe I know the cycle. Your seeming more of it and you still think they want to get to the moon? LOL
I am apparently a financially ignorant person because I don't understand why delaying the launch of a payload would add 200 million dollars to the price tag. Is it sitting there sucking up billions of kilowatt hours of electricity while waiting? If it is ready to go why is it costing more just to sit there for another year?
How are we going to land on the moon stanley kubrick’s dead. Maybe James Cameron 😂
Why would we want another very expensive box of moon rocks? Kurt Vonnegut said "bad ideas can make you crazy". This is a very bad idea.
Joke. After all the 'Apollo landings' they would now plan only to send robots?
"Perplexing Apollo Questions for NASA" at principia-scientific > inadequate fuel, no airlocks, no docking ports
They NEVER did anyway and there's no point in trying again!
Grow up!
they could have done it before the current tech bloatware age kicked in
__
English major here. I literally thought the dummy payloads thing was a joke, but this morning I'm back skimming through and it looks like the comments are sort of engineering types who all already know about dummy payloads. Is there, like, a UA-cam or something that explains dummy payloads?
It’s when instead of sending the actual payload, you send a non-functional version with the same mass/size. Usually to test the system before actually being used in missions.
Welp what can I say? NASAs integrity continues to implode and the wheels of fate keeps turning
Blame congress and the politicians.
@@_starfiend true fount of all evil 😔
Told ya the 1969 moonlanding never happened. Its 55 years later and we still cant go to the moon.
The whole world is laughing at the United States
Not really.
Seems like they should have to justify waiting a year costing $200 million over the known budget which should already include the price of testing and certification.
Part of the cost is because they have to keep all of the workers on staff during the intervening time because they can not simply dismiss them with no further pay and then bring them back when needed. The moment the staff are taken off of the payroll, they will seek other employment and will be unlikely to come back to the employer who kicked them out. How many hundreds of people are working on this project?
Imagine if the Ukraine money went to NASA instead.
what the hell is nasa going to do with 40-year-old missiles and vans?
@@reardenbentley9622 I don't know how you got "missiles and vans" out of "money". Quite the brain you have there.
i don't know why these gov't contracts that are so lucrative apparently, don't have a clause that if the timeline isn't met according to original contract, all money spent by taxpayer is recovered from the contractor for breach of contract. Seems like that would put a damper on the profiteering and malfeasance going on in the gov't contractor industries.
Didn't do it the first time anyway....
💀