Image (Credit): The arrow indicates the impact site for ispace’s Resilience lunar lander, as seen by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera on June 11, 2025. (NASA/Goddard/Arizona State University)
It doesn’t look like much, but NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter recently spotted the small crater made by the crashed ispace lunar lander named Resilience. The Japanese lander crashed on the Moon’s surface earlier this month after the company’s second try at a lunar landing.
The Moon is littered with debris and pockmarks from various successful and failed missions. The Apollo crew alone left enormous amounts of trash, debris, and space equipment scattered around the Moon. The Russians also left quite a bit of space equipment on the Moon many years ago, as well as its most recent Luna-25 mission, which crash-landed.
We can only hope that the Artemis mission will soon enough be adding to the equipment on the Moon without the drama of crash landings.
Image (Credit): The explosion of a Starship rocket during testing at the Brownsville, Texas Starbase on June 18, 2025. (LabPadre Space)
As shown in the image above, SpaceX lost one of its Starships yesterday in a massive explosion at the Brownsville, Texas Starbase, making the Moon and Mars seem even farther away. Fortunately, no one was injured during this failed test firing of the Starship 36 rocket engines.
We should expect some problems along the way, but the trend is going backwards for Mr. Musk.
Engineering teams are actively investigating the incident and will follow established procedures to determine root cause. Initial analysis indicates the potential failure of a pressurized tank known as a COPV, or composite overwrapped pressure vessel, containing gaseous nitrogen in Starship’s nosecone area, but the full data review is ongoing. There is no commonality between the COPVs used on Starship and SpaceX’s Falcon rockets.
Image (Credit): Falcon 9 rocket on the lauch pad with Axiom Space’s Axiom Mission 4. (SpaceX)
“NASA and Axiom Space are postponing the launch of Axiom Mission 4 to the International Space Station. As part of an ongoing investigation, NASA is working with Roscosmos to understand a new pressure signature, after the recent post-repair effort in the aft most segment of the International Space Station’s Zvezda service module.”
–Statement by NASA regarding an leak in the Russian section of the International Space Station (ISS) that has yet to be resolved. This may slow down some of the space tourism to the site, such as the already delayed Axiom Mission, but it is more important to get this right rather than risk additional lives on the station. Axiom Space stated that the launch of the mission will be no earlier than June 19.
Image (Credit): Boeing’s Starliner safely on the ground last September after returning from the ISS without its crew. (Boeing)
It was this time last year – June 5th to be exact – that Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft was launched aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket towards the International Space Station (ISS). Hopes were high, but then things started to unravel.
NASA is saying very little. A USA Today story from last week stated the newspaper was told that NASA
…is assessing the earliest potential for a Starliner flight to the International Space Station in early 2026.
Boeing is staying pretty quiet on its Starliner mission update website. It has not posted anything on this page since September 7, 2024.
NASA was a little more open about events back in March, posting that the crew certification of the Starliner system was still underway, and stating:
Our investment in commercial crew transportation capabilities is providing the needed flexibility to operate in space as safely as possible and respond to changes quickly when they arise. NASA is seeing the commitment from Boeing to adding the Starliner system to the nation’s crew transportation base.
We may need a few more statements from NASA addressing this “needed flexibility,” while also offering up alternatives to the SpaceX monopoly. That is, an alternative that does not include the Russians saving us, though it could come to that in an emergency.
According to the Washington Post, the leaders at NASA and the Department of Defense (DOD) have finally figured out that Mr. Musk is a potential threat to our space program and national security. Now where did they get that idea?
NASA and Pentagon officials moved swiftly this past week to urge competitors to Elon Musk’s SpaceX to more quickly develop alternative rockets and spacecraft after President Donald Trump threatened to cancel Space X’s contracts and Musk’s defiant response.
Why did it take so long? And maybe instead of nagging SpaceX’s competitors, NASA and the DOD need to do more.
Boeing’s Starliner may need some propping up at the moment as an alternative to getting humans to the International Space Station (ISS), and other parties that can assist with the ISS and military satellite launches may need help as well.
Such careful planning should have been done long ago. Compromising NASA is one thing, but putting our nation’s defense in the hands of one unreliable man was foolish from the start. David killed the Goliath represented by the large aerospace companies, but now David has gone mad. Great plan, everyone.
It may be time to consider nationalizing SpaceX if it become an Achilles heel to our nation, particularly if Mr. Musk decides to take all of his marbles and go home (or simply loses all of his marbles).
This reminds me of Russia where President Putin put so much power into the hands of one of his warlords only to see that warlord turn his weapons on Moscow.
I expect things will settle down, but the risk remains. It is time for NASA and DOD to make some clear plans to expand the procurement base and rapidly fund alternatives to SpaceX.
As far as the future of NASA, which is the focus of this website, this is another wrench in the machinery. The White House budget already guts much of NASA’s programs, leaving most of the focus on Artemis, which needs a SpaceX Human Landing System, and Mars, which has been pushed to the front of the line only because of Musk’s influence at the White House.
So now what?
It seems Mr. Musk is not the only party undergoing a rapid unscheduled disassembly.
Our Awesome Universe 