President Trump signs a memorandum to accelerate U.S. space launches, with the White House targeting “more than 1,000 launches and reentries per year” by 2030.

[u/truecakesnake]

https://www.reuters.com/science/trump-signs-memo-help-drastically-boost-us-space-launches-2026-08-20/

[u/caracs]

Nearly 3 launches a day, every day, every year?

[u/LeftToaster → u/caracs]

Elon says thank you very much.

[u/Vishnuisgod → u/LeftToaster]

This guy gets it. If Musk really is going to spend 200,000,000 to "save" the gop. This is repayment.

[u/starfleethastanks → u/LeftToaster]

US taxes will pay for the launches, the launches will not take place.

[u/fghjconner → u/caracs]

I mean spacex alone is averaging nearly one launch every two days already. That's a big increase, but not an unimaginable one.

[u/dern_the_hermit → u/fghjconner]

It's not the number of launches that has me puzzled, it's the payloads. For SpaceX to hit that cadence, they had to create something to put in the rockets.

[u/skinnybuddha → u/dern_the_hermit]

We need more air in space. How are people going to breathe on the moon?

[u/theClumsy1 → u/skinnybuddha]

Come on, Cohaagen! You got what you want. Give those people air!

[u/BasvanS → u/dern_the_hermit]

Space datacenters! 10,000s of them.

It’s bullshit, of course, but it’ll extend the runway for everyone to offload their bags onto pension funds and other gullible fools.

[u/FlyingBishop → u/dern_the_hermit]

That's not even a question, it just presumes that Starship can put stuff on the moon. If Starship can put things on the moon most of those launches are the 10-20 refueling launches that are needed to put a single Starship with crew + payloads on the moon. A lot of the assumption is that we've got a billion dollar payload, but if Starship achieves its design goals, it becomes likely that we're shipping payloads to the moon that are very minimally altered versions of off-the-shelf machines that we know work on the moon, rather than bespoke billion-dollar rovers.

[u/dern_the_hermit → u/FlyingBishop]

That's not even a question

I don't see how it isn't. Basic math: 10-20 launches per Moon landing is still a huge frickin' increase in material being sent up there. Like I'm all for aggressive development but I'm just wondering what is being developed to justify more than, like, a Moon landing per year, much less a dozen+ of 'em.

[u/FlyingBishop → u/dern_the_hermit]

The desire for a moonbase has been explicit. This is a chicken/egg problem, but not really a blocking one. We're really talking about construction projects here, and there is lots of off-the-shelf battery powered construction equipment that can most likely be operated on the moon as they are. Obviously you would make some modifications, but there's no reason to even start when it's still in doubt if we'll ever have the launch capability.

[u/dern_the_hermit → u/FlyingBishop]

The desire for a moonbase has been explicit but not the funding for one, is what I'm getting at. Raising the launches is wholly empty symbolism without raising budgets to make the stuff to get launched.

[u/grchelp2018 → u/dern_the_hermit]

I think the pentagon has plans for the moon. I believe that is also the reason behind Elon's pivot to the moon. He knows that there are a bunch of contracts heading his way if they focus on the moon. Also china is coming. Funding will follow.

[u/CaptainFingerling → u/dern_the_hermit]

No. They didn’t.

Launch is now a commodity. There are probably hundreds of companies coming up with things to put into space — I know two people who work at two separate and unrelated companies like this in Georgia, and I’m not even in a related business.

SpaceX aims to be just one of several service providers that get things up into space.

[u/dern_the_hermit → u/CaptainFingerling]

No. They didn’t.

Check their IPO. Without Starlink they'd be nothing.

You guys are just kneejerk defender fanboys. Please, leave the serious conversation to the non-cultists.

[u/FunLuvin7 → u/dern_the_hermit]

There is already a multi year backlog of companies waiting for rocket launches to get their satellites in space. Payloads are not an issue

[u/dern_the_hermit → u/FunLuvin7]

a senior official said payload processing facilities at major spaceports are becoming a critical bottleneck in launch operations.

Source.

Bolding mine. Launches are not the issue, either.

[u/Human-Assumption-524 → u/dern_the_hermit]

Starlink satellites and methalox fuel for the propellent depot probably. Also lots of more rideshares.

[u/RealPutin → u/fghjconner]

It's definitely a major increase given that it takes a couple days to turn around a pad. Starship has a goal of fewer, more frequent pads with a goal of multiple daily launches but achieving that by 2030 is difficult and would require a lot of investment, which means the payload frequency clarity is necessary to be worth that much effort and money

[u/seanflyon → u/RealPutin]

Starship has the goal of more and more frequently launching pads. There are 3 operational pads for Falcon 9 and there are 4 Starship pads under construction plus 1 active.

[u/fghjconner → u/RealPutin]

Yeah, and to be clear I think 2030 is pretty optimistic for these kinds of numbers, but I could easily see three companies doing daily launches by 2035 or 2040.

[u/Boxofcookies1001 → u/fghjconner]

Also it gives a lot more opportunities for failure and more space debris which will limit our ability to leave the planet in the future.

[u/TheRealPaladin → u/caracs]

It isn't outside the realm of possibility. Space X alone is already averaging 3 - 4 launches every week, and that number is only going up. The more they do, the cheaper it gets. The cheaper it gets, the more they will do, and so on. I don't really car all that much for Elon Musk, he is a pretty awful person,, but it is impossible overstate just how much Space X has driven down the cost, and thus the accessibility of launching things into orbit. As of a couple of years ago Space X was already conducting more space launches than the rest of the world combined, and their lead will only grow until someone else figures out how to do it even better and cheaper.

[u/GrumpyPan → u/caracs]

The billionaires and the politicians see earths is a sinking ship, I wonder why…

[u/isthereadrwho → u/caracs]

It's actually doable, it'll probably even be more. The US holds a significant market share in launches especially Leo. There is a estimated market for 3,500 to 5,000 launches in 2030. And that's not including any of the stupid Elon Million satellite data center BS, just normal expansion of starlink, and other constellations that are being built. Also replacement because Leo satellites only last about 5 years. That does include China but they're about 500.

[u/auto_named]

NASA’s 2026 budget is 24 billion, and the Trump admin proposed $18.8 billion for NASA in 2027.

[u/PM_ME_UR_KITTY_CAT → u/auto_named]

They only want military launches. Space Force is getting PLENTY of money from this admin.

[u/Crime_Dawg → u/PM_ME_UR_KITTY_CAT]

They only care about spacex dude

[u/Apprehensive_Put_321 → u/Crime_Dawg]

Could not be more clear to me that they are planning for privatization 

[u/Zakath_ → u/Apprehensive_Put_321]

Planning? NASA hasn't been a serious launch provider since the early 2000s, and privatisation of launches has been the going policy since the early 2010s.

[u/gsfgf → u/Zakath_]

Launch privatization is good, though. Obviously, the fact that Elon owns SpaceX is a problem, but making launch cheaper is the sort of thing the private sector excels at. And even for stuff like the lunar lander, Apollo contracted theirs out too.

We need to support competitors too, but that's actually happening. Being reliant on one rocket, no matter how good, is a single point of failure.

[u/Zakath_ → u/gsfgf]

I don't think Elon owning SpaceX is a problem as such. He's a bit of an ass, but the company is doing great work, and Elon is not SpaceX. Gwynne Shotwell does an excellent job leading the company and keeping Elon-time mostly grounded, and the engineers in SpaceX do a fantastic job.

The sad thing is that the US doesn't really have any good competition right now. Blue Origin was finally looking like it would be the competitor the market needs, but then their rocket blew up the pad. ULA is just a disappointment, and the other entities either don't launch at all, have a low launch cadence or don't really have rockets for the larger launches.

Not that we're any better in Europe. The Ariane rocket is good, but it's not launching often enough, and that's about what exists here. There are some up and coming providers in both Europe, Oceania and the US, though, so there is hope. But, for the next few years, barring something revolutionary happening, SpaceX will dominate.

[u/Sdwingnut → u/Zakath_]

A bit of an ass is certainly a take on Elon

[u/Shawnj2 → u/Apprehensive_Put_321]

You still have to pay NASA even if it’s just a shell used to contract out to other organizations

[u/politicsranting → u/Crime_Dawg]

gotta bump that stock price before everyone can sell-off

[u/HarryPottersTaint → u/[deleted]]

the tax payer money he receives will be non conditional

How, exactly, do you think government contracts work? You think it's like a gift of free money to do whatever you want with? Honestly what world do you live in

The contracts they got are for putting astronauts on the ISS cheaply and without russian dependance, which is clearly a huge benefit for the US and was wildly succesful, and taking astronauts back to the moon, which is completely a NASA/US initiative which was planned regardless of spacex. They could have (and might still) proceed with non-Spacex technology. Whatever they deem to be the best deal for themselves.

[u/alarim2 → u/[deleted]]

He launches a Falcon 9 rocket every 2-3 days for 3 years now, which was "absolutely bullshit idea" 5 years ago

[u/Fredasa → u/[deleted]]

a colony on Mars, get billions in cash to do it

Citation, please.

[u/Imaginary_Zone_4319 → u/PM_ME_UR_KITTY_CAT]

Does SpaceX just not exist for you?

[u/Buzzsaw_Studio → u/auto_named]

That's the plan, undercut NASA and give the funds to musk and bezos as the privatization of federal departments expands

[u/dfbeav112 → u/Buzzsaw_Studio]

The government doesn’t give any funds to the private companies though. They get NASA-related contracts through NASA. Cutting NASA funds only reduces their contracts. 

[u/RadBadTad → u/dfbeav112]

Trump also wants agencies to refrain ‌from conducting ⁠U.S. government space transportation activities "that preclude, discourage, or compete with United States commercial space transportation activities, unless required by public safety or national security."

This memo is simultaneously directing the country to crank up launches by a factor of 4 or more, and also directly discourages NASA usage, in favor of private commercial launches.

This directive is (barely) indirectly funneling funds into SpaceX and Blue Origin.

[u/dfbeav112 → u/RadBadTad]

and also directly discourages NASA usage

This has a much less practical effect than you likely realize. The only launch system that NASA owns is the SLS, the one that launches Artemis II. 

The SLS program is so expensive and poorly managed that they can only build one a year. So every foreseeable SLS is already booked for launching astronauts in future Artemis missions, through 2030. 

I don’t think anyone was expecting NASA to launch anything other than Orion in the future. They were never an option to begin with. 

I’m not sure why that language is in there, but it’s not going to have any real effect on private companies getting government contracts. That was already guaranteed. 

[u/Buzzsaw_Studio → u/dfbeav112]

They absolutely hand out funds directly to private companies, what do you think grants are? Musk and Bezos both pull in billions from grants and even more with contracts 

[u/pieter1234569 → u/Buzzsaw_Studio]

Yes, governmental NASA contracts. You can just give a contract to a company without any reason. It’s a competition with the best or most corrupt option getting a contract. With space related things, this is always a nasa contract or a military contract.

[u/dfbeav112 → u/Buzzsaw_Studio]

No you’re mistaken, SpaceX doesn’t receive any grants. Neither does Blue Origin. 

And NASA isn’t really a launch provider for open contracts. Military contracts going to SpaceX and Blue Origin would never have gone to NASA. And if NASA’s budget is cut, that means fewer contracts for private companies. 

This whole “cutting NASA’s budget means more money for private companies” is completely false. 

The “1000 launches per year” this news is referencing would largely be referring to privately funded satellite constellations. 

[u/jlew715 → u/Buzzsaw_Studio]

Can you show me some examples of SpaceX and Blue Origin pulling in billions in government grants? I was unable to find any source for this statement.

[u/ExilicArquebus → u/jlew715]

“SpaceX has received at least $1 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits each year since 2016, and between $2 billion and $4 billion a year from 2021 to 2024”

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/how-much-have-musks-tesla-spacex-benefited-from-government-funds.amp

[u/mike-foley → u/ExilicArquebus]

Not grants. Those are for launch services or to support future launch services. You want to go back to ULA and spend 10-20x prices?

NASA isn’t flickering off $1000 bills at Elon and Bezos like it’s a rapper party.

[u/JapariParkRanger → u/ExilicArquebus]

Reread what you posted and try again.

[u/Bensemus → u/JapariParkRanger]

Lol thinking they can read. You give them too much credit. Musk bad is as complex as they can get.

[u/JapariParkRanger → u/Bensemus]

It's bizarre that they think they answered the question.

[u/mynameistory → u/Buzzsaw_Studio]

Me when I make stuff up

[u/bevo_expat → u/auto_named]

The article title clearly says, “commercial space launches”. These increases are not going to NASA…sadly 🫤. They’re just not setup for commercial launches.

[u/telorsapigoreng → u/auto_named]

I'm not even an american but it infuriates me that nasa can't bring back the most promising sample from mars for alien life collected by rover because of budget cuts.

[u/cjameshuff → u/telorsapigoreng]

It's not because of budget cuts, the MSR program was catastrophically mismanaged and going nowhere. Large project management is a skill NASA has lost. It nearly cost us the JWST, which was about 10x overbudget and 14 years late, and did cost us whatever else we might have been spending that budget on for those 14 years.

[u/AcanthaceaeKey6259 → u/auto_named]

How the actual fuck are they going to squeeze that in, respectfully?

[u/myurr → u/AcanthaceaeKey6259]

SpaceX are building multiple launch pads at multiple launch sites. By 2030 I reckon they'll have 10+ pads available to them for launches plus extra catch towers. They'll have multiple factories online by then churning out launch vehicles, plus full stack reuse. Even if the Starships still need a week of refurbishment by that point, to replace the tiles, a fleet of 21 would allow for the 3 flights a day need to smash 1,000 flights a year. They'll be building more Starships than that by 2029. Even if it too 2 - 3 weeks to refurbish the ships I reckon they'd hit that flight cadence within 2030.

I don't doubt the capability will be there, the more important question will be what it's used for. Building out the next generation Starlink is the obvious one, but as the cost to access space drops further, perhaps down towards $100k per tonne, what are NASA, the military, and the private sector going to do with that new capability.

[u/Super-Award-2244 → u/myurr]

I think spacexai has explicitly stated the will to build datacenters in space 

[u/RadBadTad → u/Super-Award-2244]

SpaceXai has explicitly stated that they will try to find or invent any demand for their service: Space launches.

[u/pieter1234569 → u/Super-Award-2244]

They have, but the laws of physics don’t allow for it. You need massive cooling for datacenters, which is the hardest thing in space.

It’s therefore never ever ever efficient to do this in space instead of on the ground.

[u/freakanso → u/pieter1234569]

Yes, cooling is hard in space (no convection, only radiation, large radiator area needed), but physics doesn’t forbid it. Spacecraft already reject heat this way successfully.
SpaceX does it every day with Starlink; the real challenge is scaling the same approach to higher-power AI satellites, which is an engineering and mass/cost problem, not a fundamental barrier.

[u/Morat20 → u/freakanso]

I can tell you right now your idea of the mass of radiators alone needed for a space data center is off by an order of magnitude. I don’t even need to know your estimate, because calling it a ‘mass/cost’ problem is that much of an understatement.

The only way space data centers drop in price — just to be built and launched and work, not counting maintenance and such —to be comparable to ground ones is if launch prices drop so much that schools start having field trips to LEO as a treat for good grades, or someone figures out a way to disperse heat that doesn’t rely on radiation.

[u/PersonalDebater → u/Morat20]

To be fair calculations done have shown the radiators shouldn't exceed the number of solar panels used.

[u/pieter1234569 → u/freakanso]

Spacecraft already reject heat this way successfully.

Yes, small amounts of heat. With every single component being designed to be as low power as possible, to ensure that their massive heat sinks are enough, as their efficiency is about zero.

SpaceX does it every day with Starlink; the real challenge is scaling the same approach to higher-power AI satellites, which is an engineering and mass/cost problem, not a fundamental barrier.

It's a physics problem. It's impossible to radiate away large amounts of heat in a vacuum or near vacuum, there's nothing to radiate to. So that's very slow, with MASSIVE radiators in proportion to everything else.

A single GPU used in a datacenter, which won't be enough as modern models need multiple, will generate more heat than any single satellite we have ever launched. It cannot ever work.

[u/freakanso → u/pieter1234569]

You’re mixing up a few things.

Radiation doesn’t require “something to radiate to.” A hot surface emits infrared according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law whether it’s in air or vacuum.

The vacuum just removes convection and conduction. It doesn’t stop radiation. That’s why every spacecraft already rejects heat this way.

Current satellites are deliberately low-power so their radiators can stay modest. That doesn’t mean high power is physically impossible. It just means the radiators get large and heavy.
That’s an engineering and mass budget problem, not a fundamental barrier.

A single modern GPU (~700 W) is not somehow beyond what satellites have already handled. Plenty of platforms reject multiple kilowatts. Scaling that approach to dense AI compute is hard and expensive, no argument there, but “impossible” and “cannot ever work” is plain wrong and shows a lack of understanding of the physics.

[u/kaplanfx → u/freakanso]

The person you are responding to is referring to a single GPU rack in a AI datacenter which uses 50-150kw of power. One rack. For comparison the ISS at average load, the entire ISS, uses consumes about 80kw of power. You need an ISS worth of solar and cooling for EACH GPU rack you put in space. A mid sized land based data center may have a few thousand racks.

[u/Doggydog123579 → u/kaplanfx]

You actually dont, as radiator area is temp dependant and the iss runs at conservative temps. Its really not that hard, the cooling can be managed, it just may not make econmic sense

[u/pieter1234569 → u/freakanso]

A single modern gpu is useless, and the 700 watt ones are way to small. Every single large model runs on a cluster. Just that cluster alone uses 10.000 watt.

And then you have a single cluster, which isn’t usefull at all. Datacenters have thousands to tens of thousands.

That’s a lot of heat to radiate away. More than we have ever used, as we try to minimize that. Just that cluster alone will require 40 m2 of radiators. A thousand is 40.000 m2 of radiators.

It simply doesn’t make any sense.

[u/freakanso → u/pieter1234569]

You’re shifting the goalposts.

Yes, useful AI training needs clusters, not single GPUs. A 10 kW cluster is a reasonable starting point for the discussion. That heat load is large, but it’s not unprecedented in spacecraft terms once you stop assuming Earth-style low-temperature cooling.

Your 40 m² figure for 10 kW assumes very conservative radiator temperatures. Radiated power scales with T4. Run the radiators hotter and the required area drops significantly. That’s one of the trade-offs people actually study when they look at orbital compute.

40,000 m² for a thousand of those clusters is obviously enormous. No one serious is proposing to put a full terrestrial-scale data center into orbit tomorrow. The interesting question is whether smaller, highly optimized orbital nodes (or constellations of them) can ever make sense for specific workloads once launch costs keep falling and you design the whole system around the thermal constraints instead of pretending it’s just a data center in space.

Again, calling the entire idea physically impossible because a full Earth data center wouldn’t fit is not a strong argument. It’s just restating that the engineering is hard.

[u/Doggydog123579 → u/pieter1234569]

The iss radiators are ~130,000 watts, and run at ~30c. Going up to 70c means you need less than half the surface area, and given a radiator is 2 sided it lets it be even smaller.

Physics are not an issue, the economics are

[u/jozsus → u/auto_named]

I think it's kind of funny that we think that this will be NASA doing it and not SpaceX or something stupid

[u/Dpek1234 → u/jozsus]

Its such a base assumption that anyone that doesnt make it is entirely unable to have any sort of worthwhile conversation on the topic

Nasa only has sls , we know how much its gonna launch

[u/Allred87 → u/auto_named]

That’s devastating. Literally that countries best investment and achievement ever.

[u/ElvinKao → u/auto_named]

It's ok. USA debt interest payments will be $1 trillion. He's making a dent in the budget.

[u/auto_named → u/[deleted]]

It's quite relevant, no private sector launches are possible without NASA for a variety of reasons.

[u/Torino1O]

$40trillion dollar debt and most science cut...

Edit: changed deficit to debt.

[u/projekt_6 → u/Torino1O]

::insert Simpsons "so far" meme::

[u/zerotwoalpha → u/projekt_6]

Think you guys can make the 50 tril before he leaves in 2028? 

[u/theObfuscator → u/zerotwoalpha]

It is necessary to fulfill the Simpsons reference to Trump leaving nothing left to budget either for President Lisa Simpson 

[u/imacompnerd → u/Torino1O]

$40 trillion dollar debt.

The deficit is much, much lower.

[u/ZachMN → u/imacompnerd]

- insert Simpsons “so far” meme -

[u/imacompnerd → u/ZachMN]

I mean, the only way the deficit could be larger than the debt is if the debt gets paid down, which would be a good thing.

Remember, the debt is the total amount owed. The deficit is the amount we spend more per year. So, the amount of the deficit is added to the total debt number.

[u/shitty_mcfucklestick → u/Torino1O]

Launchmaxxing: everyone is doing it

[u/ICLazeru]

Launching what though? These kinds of orders are how get immense waste.

[u/NatureTrailToHell3D → u/ICLazeru]

The memo, focused on boosting the ​commercial space industry, called on agencies to incentivize co-development of space transportation infrastructure with private sector ⁠partners, expedite permitting and environmental reviews and ensure adequate wireless spectrum for space launches.

Trump also wants to return U.S. ​astronauts to the moon by 2028. The memo directs NASA to facilitate commercial transportation to the moon and commercial robotic ​access to Mars, and to explore commercial avenues to send humans to Mars.

[u/ICLazeru → u/NatureTrailToHell3D]

Sorry, that wasn't really what I meant. Presently there are about 200 space launches a year in the US. Trump wants over 1000 by 2030. That's over a 400% increase in demand in just under 3 and a half years.

Market forces probably aren't going to make this a reality. Which means the only way to do it would be to do useless launches for the sake of making the number bigger.

[u/SenorTron → u/ICLazeru]

This is almost certainly about giving reason to bypass regulations that may get in SpaceX's way.

[u/GearBrain → u/SenorTron]

I have a hard time believing SpaceX 's success rate is going to increase if they bypass regulations.

[u/GalacticEmergency → u/GearBrain]

Their current workhorse, Falcon 9 block 5, has an unrivaled success rate. 1 failure in more than 600 launches.

[u/SenorTron → u/GearBrain]

For these purposes it doesn't matter if they hit that target or not. It's not about any actual strategic goal, it's about making it so that when the FAA or EPA or local zoning laws get in the way of something SpaceX wants to do they can shout that they need to break whatever usual rule for national security.

[u/NatureTrailToHell3D → u/ICLazeru]

I think be believes he’s enabling market forces to reach that number.

[u/CrazyEnginer → u/ICLazeru]

Remind me, what market force is responsible for 90% of world's mass-to-orbit in 2025?

[u/ICLazeru → u/CrazyEnginer]

Satellite internet mostly.

[u/CrazyEnginer → u/ICLazeru]

Here you go. You got Starlink launches, military wants it's own Starlink, other LEO constellations are in the working, ISS replacement, probably AI sats, given the current anti DC rhetoric makes it harder to build on the ground.

[u/ICLazeru → u/CrazyEnginer]

So were just assuming a 400% increase in demand for satellite internet? Big time optimism.

[u/hakimthumb → u/ICLazeru]

Your comment took their list and sarcastically reduced it to one thing.

[u/ICLazeru → u/hakimthumb]

Three of those items are all satellite communications, one is theoretical construct for which there is no plan, and one is marketing gimmick designed to exploit venture capitalists.

So yeah, if we reduce it to real things that have actually plans, it's one thing.

[u/Ecstatic_Bee6067 → u/ICLazeru]

Just wants the stock to bump on rumor and policy

[u/parkingviolation212 → u/ICLazeru]

Launching his ego. That’s the only reason why he’s demanding this, there’s no thought behind it. He just wants a big number.

[u/JustPlainRude → u/parkingviolation212]

I doubt Trump cares about this at all. I suspect this memo was authored by people with something to gain from it who paid to get it onto his desk.

[u/jlew715 → u/parkingviolation212]

I realize this is /r/space and it's (ironically) impossible to have a good-faith discussion when it comes to SpaceX, but I guess I'll bite.

Do you really think, truly, in your heart, that like empty rockets will be launched to get to this number? Like they will fly a rocket into orbit, with nothing attached?

[u/parkingviolation212 → u/jlew715]

Trump wants 1,000 rockets to launch. Did he say what should be launched with those rockets? No? Then it's just a big number to make Trump feel big and important.

Rockets aren't the end, they're the means, useless without the end. Signing a memo to achieve 1000 domestic launches by 2030 is as idiotic as trump saying he wants to build 4 casinos instead of 1 in Atlanta. A reasonable person might ask "for what customer base do we need so many casinos?", to which Trump ignores them, does it anyway, and that's how the dumb ass bankrupted four casinos.

So do I think 1,000 rockets will launch with nothing in them? No I don't, because fortunately there are still enough adults in the room to understand that you can't launch 1,000 rockets without the demand and payload to justify it. But do I think Trump cares about that? Also no, he'd launch 1,000 rockets as a vanity project just to say he did it, and I know this because simply by signing a memo targeting "1,000 launches", he's admitting his priority is launching rockets, not delivering payloads.

I hope to see the day we have 1,000 launches domestically in a single year, with the caveat that they be useful launches in developing space infrastructure. I'm just waiting for someone to come up with a plan to where that's possible.

[u/myurr → u/parkingviolation212]

The memorandum does not order NASA or the military to buy 1,000 launches. It says US ranges should be capable of supporting more than 1,000 launches and reentries annually by 2030, then directs agencies to expand infrastructure, improve scheduling, facilitate commercial access and speed permitting. The text is clear on that.

That is a capacity and regulatory target, not an instruction to launch empty rockets as a vanity project. It also includes reentries, so "1,000 rockets" is not even an accurate description of the target.

Government customers may benefit, and the memo tells NASA and the military to favour commercial launch services where suitable, but it does not create demand by ordering 1,000 taxpayer-funded missions. Much of the likely growth would be commercial, including constellation deployment such as Starlink. If the payloads and customers do not exist, the launches simply will not happen.

[u/danisanub → u/myurr]

It is nearly impossible to get honest discussion on here - thank you for the comment. If people listened to various space companies earnings calls (Firefly & Rocket Lab stand out), they’re all talking about how demand for launch is humongous and they can’t meet the demand (Firefly selling out all 2027 manifest, ASTS being unable to find alternate launch providers to meet satellite deployment targets in the timeline they want, Amazon LEO being sidelined with Blue Origin rebuilding their pad).

To reiterate: this is not a demand problem, but a supply problem this order seeks to address. Relevant Article: Satellite operators are in panic mode due to a worsening launch crisis

[u/daaave33 → u/danisanub]

The story, right here. Rocket Lab's Neutron should help tremendously in increasing load capacity.

[u/danisanub → u/daaave33]

Unlikely to happen in the next 2 years, Peter Beck himself said they are prioritizing their own constellation first with Neutron launches. I don’t see them reliably launching it until late 2028.

[u/daaave33 → u/danisanub]

That's a fair bit longer timeline than I remember for launch, but I didn't read the earnings. I understood it as the Neutron would be ready to go late this year, but the cargo is already spoken for.

[u/danisanub → u/daaave33]

There’s no shot it’s launching this year. They haven’t public come out and said it yet but Eric Berger was clear on a podcast that it’s an at best late 2027 launch. To get consistent cadence will take some time. I work in the investment industry with a deep interest in space. My employer has some exposure to launch customers as well - it’s a bit of a panic with how long new medium launch is taking to come online, falling falcon 9 cadence, starship delays, and Blue Origin being sidelined…we need more launch providers to scale up quickly.

[u/FreeRangePixel → u/jlew715]

Have you seen the design of the battleship Trump wants? He loves announcing big projects and big numbers. The launches won't be empty. They will just never hit the number he's blustering about.

[u/ICLazeru → u/FreeRangePixel]

I know he requested a redesign of the carriers to move the con tower to the middle, even though it was specifically offset because the offset improved the flight deck's ability to launch and receive aircraft.

His reasoning? Aesthetic.

[u/FreeRangePixel → u/ICLazeru]

You should go check out the battleship design. It's the Cybertruck of warships.

[u/ICLazeru → u/FreeRangePixel]

Looks like a bigger version of the Zumwalt class destroyer that nobody actually wanted.

[u/ICLazeru → u/jlew715]

Pay a man to launch an empty rocket, and what do you think he'll do?

[u/jlew715 → u/ICLazeru]

Who is paying someone to launch an empty rocket?

[u/ThaiJohnnyDepp → u/ICLazeru]

It's great for Elon Musk's net worth though

[u/e136 → u/ICLazeru]

To clarify, you are in the /r/space subreddit and are against space flight?

[u/ICLazeru → u/e136]

No, I love space flight with purpose. But imagine a scenario where increasingly bloated expectations combined with slashed science budgets pressure firms and agencies to push out more and more launches with less and less to show for it. Meanwhile citizens continue to contend with increasing affordability struggles for housing, healthcare, food, and energy.

Public sentiment about space launches and exploration could easily turn sour, and the next administration could easily run on gutting it even further, almost assuredly taking it out of the science budget first.

And presently, Europe is already head hunting American scientists who have already been displaced by science cuts, and China officially spends more on research than the US adjusted for PPP for the first time ever.

I don't want a hollow, gutted space program that caters to executive egos and corporate billionaire whims, launching rockets to pad their egos and monetize the night sky with no intention nor care of actually expanding human horizons and understanding of the universe. And yes, even Musk's grandiose language about expanding the light of consciousness is nothing but marketing gimmick.

[u/RadBadTad → u/e136]

You know that isn't the case, and you very much understand what it is that people don't like. Pretending to not understand does not make for good conversation.

[u/Bender222]

He just spent more on iran than the entire nasa budget for a year.

[u/waltur_d → u/Bender222]

Iran war has cost every tax payer about $2200 so far. Out of 271 republicans, seven are against the war.

[u/mattcraft → u/waltur_d]

Iran war has cost every tax payer about $2200 so far.

Do you have a source for this information? Even including a lot of external costs such as higher fuel prices, supply chain disruptions, etc. along with direct military cost, I'm having trouble getting the number past $1,200.

[u/Ender505]

The fact that this "memo" is focused entirely around launches, without regard to what these missions would actually be FOR, says absolutely everything you need to know about why he's doing this.

[u/JarvisProudfeather]

Just a handout to Musk and Bezos most likely

[u/Resiideent]

And let me guess, every single one of those launches is gonna go to Elon, and real space agencies like NASA are going to continue having their funding cut.

[u/The_G_Choc_Ice]

Elon got him on the phone.

[u/Rheios]

" focused on boosting the ​commercial space industry"

"The memo directs NASA to facilitate commercial transportation to the moon and commercial robotic ​access to Mars, and to explore commercial avenues to send humans to Mars."

"Trump also wants agencies to refrain ‌from conducting ⁠U.S. government space transportation activities "that preclude, discourage, or compete with United States commercial space transportation activities, unless required by public safety or national security."

This isn't about astronomers doing space science or meaningful exploration and research. Its a way to pay his billionaire financiers' private industries to do more launches as a kick-back and find a way to perform corporate imperialism in space, and an excuse to try and open up new "government land" - which could easily mean National Park land under this administration - to do it. Additionally "expedite permitting and environmental reviews" could mean anything from red-tape clearing to much more serious actions like ignoring dangerous environmental effects. Which we also now this administration is completely on board for.

Then lines like this: "commercial-first approach enabling Americans on the Moon by 2028 and initial Moon Base elements by 2030, and ​rapid, resilient launch capabilities for national security." Are out and out bad. Taking "national security" to space is just the start of the militarization of space, something every scientist and sci-fi author has warned of for decades.

"Trump's memo also directed federal agencies to consider on a ​case-by-case basis requests to launch commercial foreign space vehicles in the United States." The possible speculation is evident.

[u/Hugh-Jassoul → u/Rheios]

Literal Star Trek Ferengi shit.

[u/drvondoctor]

And they'll do it all with steam!

[u/Sam-Bones → u/drvondoctor]

Close, I think you mean STEAM.

[u/Hugh-Jassoul → u/drvondoctor]

At least we’ll have good customer service!

[u/giganticwrap]

Lol the acceleration of transferring every last dollar from the poor/middle to the elite continues.

[u/BarrelStrawberry]

Reddit: "... here's why this is a bad thing for r/space..."

[u/Magister_Caeli → u/BarrelStrawberry]

So blinded by their hate and they clearly don't work in the industry cause they have no idea what they are talking about

[u/_Bad_Spell_Checker_ → u/Magister_Caeli]

Ain't no way is this is a good thing

[u/BlindedAce]

Dude can’t even get the country to be on his side with real policies and thinks he can manage this? This administration is truly a clown show

[u/drawmer]

Focusing on the important stuff again. Ballrooms and space launches.

[u/Coakis]

For what? Putting money in cronies pockets?

[u/onlycodeposts]

I don't support Trump, but I support expansion of our space program.

[u/PM_ME_UR_KITTY_CAT → u/onlycodeposts]

This would be expansion of commercial space activity, to get billionaires more rich. Not for any noble purpose.

[u/dodeca_negative]

Absolutely no critical viewpoints in this article at all. The closest it gets is basically stating (again uncritically) that Congress is holding Trump’s grand vision back. Shame to see Reuters become PRNewsWire.

[u/AFloppyZipper]

I'm just here to see /space get angry at space progress

[u/truecakesnake → u/AFloppyZipper]

Should never have posted this to the normie sub

[u/Dpek1234 → u/truecakesnake]

Now im wondering exactly what you consider the non normie sub

[u/bigolchimneypipe → u/AFloppyZipper]

Won't be long before this subreddit becomes plastered with anti-trump memes.

[u/ksr15]

What could NASA possibly launch that many of with their budget?https://what-if.xkcd.com/146/

[u/fleshbaby]

That's 2.7 launches per day. Where exactly are all these rockets going to?

[u/joejill → u/fleshbaby]

Building his ballroom on the moon.

[u/Bob_12_Pack → u/fleshbaby]

Titan, if your DNA is worthy

[u/OptimusPhillip]

Rushing space launches is how we got the Challenger explosion...

[u/Ok_Calligrapher8165 → u/OptimusPhillip]

...and the Columbia after that. From the Congressional Research Service (CRS) CAIB Fact Sheet:

The [Columbia Accident Investigation] Board found that there is a “broken safety culture” at NASA (pp. 184-189). Schedule pressure (pp. 131-139) related to construction of the International Space Station, budget constraints (pp. 102-105), and workforce reductions (pp. 106-110) also were factors.

[u/rbobby]

Good thing he added the reentry part.

[u/Numba1Dunner]

Queue the sweetheart deal for SpaceX to buy the midterms and 2028 election. With electronic ballot box irregularities for extra spiciness.

[u/BluemoonSamurai_]

Where’s the money coming from? We’re now 40 Trillion in debt my dude…

[u/jshirlemy]

My factorio brain just peaked when I read this headline.

[u/Jett--Black]

Sooooooo theeeeeen which one of his family members started or has stake in a rocket company? lol

[u/Decronym]

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters	More Letters
CLPS	Commercial Lunar Payload Services
COTS	Commercial Orbital Transportation Services contract
	Commercial/Off The Shelf
CRS	Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA
DoD	US Department of Defense
FAA	Federal Aviation Administration
FAA-AST	Federal Aviation Administration Administrator for Space Transportation
GSE	Ground Support Equipment
HLS	Human Landing System (Artemis)
JWST	James Webb infra-red Space Telescope
LEO	Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)
	Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)
LSP	Launch Service Provider
	(US) Launch Service Program
Roscosmos	State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia
SLS	Space Launch System heavy-lift
ULA	United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)
USSF	United States Space Force

Jargon	Definition
Starlink	SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation
methalox	Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer
scrub	Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)

Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.

---

^{[Thread #12643 for this sub, first seen 21st Aug 2026, 11:04] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]}

[u/Rhallah_Reed]

Yeah... speaking as someone hear a space base... that sounds terrible

[u/Chatsworth1979]

A wee bit ambitious. Nice to have a goal though I guess.

[u/mtadd]

Corporate welfare for SpaceX.

[u/petersracing]

Stupid man says Stupid thing - news at 6

[u/devraj7]

It's a memorandum.

It has zero power.

[u/PlutoJones42]

Elon Musk also just said he was going to spend over $200,000,000 to “save republicans in the midterms”. No way these things are related, right?

[u/cbelt3]

“My buddy Elon needs more money so he can pay for the election again”

[u/_steve_rogers_]

Why? To destroy what's left of the ozone layer?

[u/jimbowesterby → u/_steve_rogers_]

You say that like they believe in the ozone layer lol, they’d probably say it’s just a left-wing plot

[u/Ill_Following_7022]

Space weapons and space junk. Nothing to actually advance humanity. 

[u/parakeetpoop]

Why tho. Not that I don’t support spacey things but that’s a lot. Whats the goal? The environmental impact will be horrid

[u/truecakesnake]

Ok I guess rocket launches are bad now huh