WTP Space @wtpspace

Ship 41 moved to the launch pad at Starbase

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

We have established a Lunar Programs division. By leveraging our commercial space station and satellite development capabilities, we are creating a scalable path toward lunar infrastructure to advance NASA’s vision for a permanent Moon Base. vast.news/4d1qWL9

BREAKING: NASA chief Jared Isaacman says SpaceX is incredible and the United States would be seriously challenged in space without SpaceX. “They’re our most important launch partner. We can’t send astronauts to and from the space station without them... We are fortunate.”

The All-In Podcast @theallinpod

2 weeks ago

All-In Summit: NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman A New Era for NASA and American Space Exploration (0:00) NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman lays out the state and future of NASA (17:59) Moon base, creating new space industries, NASA's next chapter (23:29) How to make Mars

38 147 799 1.0M 237

I think Phil's argument is that NASA should rethink which LEO capabilities it truly needs to provide or certify after ISS. Administrator Isaacman's response raises the question underneath it: what happens when the commercial market we are designing around is not actually large enough to support the capabilities we expect it to? I think that question goes beyond crew vehicles—and directly to how we are approaching the post-ISS architecture itself. Jared is right: calling something “commercial” does not create a market. Someone still has to pay, private capital needs a return, and we cannot assume that customers will materialize. But that logic has an important consequence: If the market is uncertain, we should be especially careful about prescribing the architecture before the market has revealed what it actually needs. A space station is an architecture. A crew vehicle is an architecture. Neither is the market. The market is the demand for outcomes: human spaceflight, research, manufacturing, national participation, training, technology development, and other activities customers are actually willing to fund. Yet much of the post-ISS discussion effectively begins with: We need commercial space stations. How do we create enough demand to support them? That reverses the commercial question. It should be: Here is a customer, an objective, and a willingness to pay. What is the lowest-cost, lowest-complexity architecture capable of delivering that outcome? Sometimes the answer may be a permanent station. Sometimes it may be a free-flyer, an autonomous platform, a temporary destination, or something the industry has not yet conceived. NASA built the ISS, crew/cargo vehicles, and the surrounding operational model to satisfy government objectives with government economics. Those were extraordinary achievements. But successfully commercializing LEO does not necessarily mean reproducing that architecture with private logos on it. Jared’s strongest point is that we should be “grounded in reality rather than pretending a market already exists when it does not.” I would extend that one step further: We should not pretend the market has already chosen an architecture when it has not. Maybe the central question of the post-ISS era isn't: 'How do we commercialize space stations?' It is: 'What architecture will the commercial market actually choose?' The market should choose the architecture—not the other way around. When viewed through that lens, the rapid emergence of autonomous orbital free-flyers is a great example, and it suggests the market is already beginning to make choices—and may actually be moving faster than the post-ISS strategy is adapting. This reinforces the larger point: commercial space should not be defined by preserving the architecture of the last era, but by allowing real demand to shape the architecture of the next one. That is how the commercial space economy of the next era emerges—not as we assumed it would, but as the market actually shapes it.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman @NASAAdmin

4 weeks ago

@NASAWatch Few thoughts in response: 1) NASA has not given up on LEO. Within weeks of being on the job, I publicly addressed the Starliner situation and the role NASA played in it, and we have since taken a very active role with Boeing in implementing the investigation recommendations and

113 314 3K 388K 658

Over 600 autonomous rocket landings so far

X Freeze @XFreeze

4 weeks ago

Most people don’t realize how insanely autonomous Falcon 9 already is Once Falcon 9 lifts off, almost the entire mission is executed by the rocket itself And the crazy part is This autonomy does not depend on generative AI It comes from brutally refined flight software,

239 510 3K 3.5M 210

Phil is asking whether NASA should rethink how it acquires transportation, crew capability, and research in LEO. Jared’s response raises the harder question underneath it: what happens when the commercial market we are designing around is not actually large enough to support the capabilities we expect it to? I think that question goes beyond crew vehicles—and directly to how we are approaching the post-ISS architecture itself. Jared is right: calling something “commercial” does not create a market. Someone still has to pay, private capital needs a credible return, and NASA cannot simply assume that customers will materialize. But that logic has an important consequence: If the market is uncertain, we should be especially careful about prescribing the architecture before the market has revealed what it actually needs. A space station is an architecture. A crew vehicle is an architecture. Neither is the market. The market is the demand for outcomes: human spaceflight, research, manufacturing, national participation, training, exploration preparation, technology development, and other activities customers are actually willing to fund. Yet much of the post-ISS discussion effectively begins with: We need commercial space stations. How do we create enough demand to support them? That reverses the commercial question. It should be: Here is a customer, an objective, and a willingness to pay. What is the lowest-cost, lowest-complexity architecture capable of delivering that outcome? Sometimes the answer may be a permanent station. Sometimes it may be a free-flyer, an autonomous platform, a temporary destination, a transportation vehicle that also provides the mission infrastructure—or something the industry has not yet conceived. NASA built the ISS, crew vehicles, and the surrounding operational model to satisfy government objectives with government economics. Those were extraordinary achievements. But successfully commercializing LEO does not necessarily mean reproducing that architecture with private logos on it. Jared’s strongest point is that we should be “grounded in reality rather than pretending a market already exists when it does not.” I would extend that one step further: We should not pretend the market has already chosen an architecture when it has not. Maybe the central question of the post-ISS era is not how do we commercialize the space station? It is what architecture will the commercial market actually choose? The market should choose the architecture—not the other way around. That is how we move from preserving the shape of the last era to building the commercial space economy of the next one.

Celebrating five years on the public market with a landmark moment at the NYSE. 🗽 Earlier this week, Redwire Chairman & CEO Pete Cannito rang the @NYSE opening bell as we marked a major milestone in Redwire’s journey. The ceremony commemorated Redwire’s fifth year as a publicly traded company, highlighting Redwire’s exciting expansion from a pure-play space infrastructure company to an agile, multi-domain space and defense tech powerhouse that is supporting a variety of programs both in the U.S. and internationally. On NYSE Live, Pete highlighted how our strategic growth—including our recent acquisition of Edge Autonomy—is positioning Redwire for its next phase of innovation. Check out our recap blog for behind‑the‑scenes moments from our NYSE visit 👉rdw.com/newsroom/the-n…

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

The President of the United States called into the NASA press conference after the historic Roman Telescope launch. There is a reason nearly 70% of Americans support NASA's return to the Moon, compared with just 35% during the Kennedy era. The world’s most accomplished space agency, backed by @POTUS, bipartisan support in Congress, and an extraordinary workforce, can absolutely achieve the near impossible. We are returning astronauts to the Moon, building the base, getting underway on nuclear power in space, with many more exciting missions like Roman to follow!

Made on Earth by humans

SpaceX @SpaceX

a month ago

Falcon Heavy's two side boosters land at LZ-2 and LZ-40

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

434 1K 11K 5.4M 362

Amazing!

Redwire @Redwire

2 months ago

Scaling the Future of Pharmaceutical Development in Space. 💊 🚀 Today Redwire's SpaceMD announced its first commercial mission on @SpaceX Starfall Spacecraft, accelerating our ability to deliver pharmaceutical, biotech and other in-space microgravity manufacturing

11 72 473 60K 43

"University of Texas grad student William Jo used a special physics simulation to model the collision. His team predicted that the debris column will have a central ejecta spike reaching between 47 miles and over 60 miles high." nypost.com/2026/07/31/sci…

Hot staging

The National Space Society Urges Greater Commercial Flexibility and Independence in NASA’s CLD Draft RFP. The NSS raises an important opportunity for NASA’s CLD strategy: serve as a strong anchor customer while giving industry the flexibility to innovate. In a fully developed commercial market, companies could simply pursue customer demand independent of NASA. The fact that NASA’s requirements remain so influential shows that the market is still being created. Meanwhile, the time required to bring CLDs into orbit is already encouraging alternative architectures Independent of NASA—including autonomous research vehicles—to address emerging demand. Greater flexibility now could help industry discover which architectures and business models can ultimately support a genuinely independent commercial LEO economy—and expand opportunities for commercial astronauts. einnews.com/article/927712… via @ein_news

Congratulations @Redwire

Redwire @Redwire

2 months ago

“Redwire’s grand opening is a testament to Indiana’s pro-business, pro-innovation environment,” said Indiana @GovBraun. “With this growth in Southern Indiana, Hoosiers will continue to be at the forefront of the economy of the future, advancing human spaceflight and leveraging

3 8 163 6K 2

Voyager is an implementation partner for @ReditusSpace’s ENOS autonomous, reusable reentry vehicle. We’ll guide customers through payload dev, hardware qualification and mission integration. No matter the platform, our mission management service is station-agnostic and mission-ready.​ Read more: reditus.space/news/voyagerpa… $VOYG #AcceleratingtheAdvantage #MissionReady

Is NASA unintentionally regulating yesterday's architecture while tomorrow's market is already taking shape? As autonomous platforms continue to expand the range of missions once envisioned for commercial space stations, NASA's thousands of requirements risk making commercial space stations increasingly difficult and expensive to develop. NASA says it wants a commercial low Earth orbit economy, yet its draft RFP reportedly imposes more than 3,000 requirements while funding remains uncertain—a combination that could make commercialization far more difficult than intended. arstechnica.com/space/2026/07/…

Met a guy making $1.2 million a year as a prompt engineer. I asked him how he learned prompting so well. He sent me the exact video that that got him in. Anthropic's 2 hour prompting course. You won't find anything better about prompting Claude than this video. I watched it last night. Halfway through, I realized I have been prompting Claude completely wrong for years. Bookmark this and read the article below. • 00:00 - the prompting playbook • 33:30 - prompting class 1 • 1:01:16 - prompting class 2 • 1:26:10 - prompting class 3

Roan @RohOnChain

3 months ago

x.com/i/article/2073…

48 120 772 2.0M 3K

BREAKING 🚨: NASA chief Jared Isaacman met with Roscosmos head Dmitry Bakanov in Kazakhstan today, ahead of tomorrow's Soyuz MS-29 launch The two are discussing extending US-Russia cooperation aboard the ISS through the station's final years