ISS R&D Conference

When I think about innovation beyond boundaries, so I cannot think of a better representation of that concept in our generation. Please join me in welcoming Elon Musk and ISS program manager Kirk Shireman to the stage. Very good. So Elon, thanks so much for for being here today. Um Elon commuted from the West Coast this morning. So we appreciate you taking the time and coming out here and talking with us. Absolutely. Thanks for having me.

We've had we've had a pretty good conference so far at least in my opinion. Over a thousand people signed up for the first time, so a significant increase. And lots of people interested in in in space and lower earth orbit and the International Space Station and work that's going on. So um Anyway, we're very very excited about the work that's going on and excited to have you here today, too. Great. Thanks for having me.

So you were here a number of years ago in July in 2015. It's not that long ago, I guess, two years ago. And had a had a discussion like this with Mike Suffredini. And a lot of things have happened since 2015 for SpaceX. So can you can you talk about how things have gone, how how they've progressed, how you're feeling about how the industry and and SpaceX in particular progressed? Sure.

What I think I think we we are entering a new era of space exploration, which is extremely exciting. Um And it's it's not just SpaceX, but there's a number of other companies that have developed new approaches. NASA is taking new approaches things, which is really exciting in in the way that the the contracting has been done for space station resupply. I think it's a great model that frankly should be adopted throughout government.

I spoke a little bit about this at the governor's conference and was actually using the NASA NASA cargo resupply contracting process as a really great model for government in general. Um You know, it's where you have two competitors fixed price milestone based with a hot milestones are are primarily hardware oriented.

Um and then if one of the two companies that's that's competing does not Um reach their milestones, then the remainder of the milestones are are competed to another company. And that's what happened with cargo resupply. Started off with SpaceX and Kistler. Kistler made some progress, but wasn't going to get across the finishing line.

And then Orbital Sciences was competed for the second slot and they did get across the finishing line and now both SpaceX and Orbital are providing NASA with cargo services to the space station. Um And having that competitive dynamic is is I think it's a very powerful powerful function for getting a great outcome for the NASA as the customer.

Um and I think that that's just a great that was a great model really well executed and to the degree that's applicable in other areas of NASA or the government, I think um that's there's the potential for revolutionary progress on that front.

Um so from from a from a technical standpoint the the the biggest thing that's happened in the last couple years, which I'm really excited about and I think makes a difference for access to space is the landing of the uh Falcon 9 rocket booster um and then the that um And if you ever get a chance to go out to the the the the Cape um uh over Vandenberg to see that, I'd really recommend it. It's really pretty fun.

So um And um there'll be a lot of those flights in the remainder of the year. We've got about a dozen flights still to go this year. Um and then after landing re-flying that same booster with minimal work to the booster. Um and we believe we can get to the point where in the not too distant future, in fact, probably by by next year where the uh the the the um Falcon 9 booster can be re-flown um within 24 hours. Um so yeah.

And and and and the key the key to that is that uh all you do is inspections and no hardware is changed not even the paint. And so this is very important. Uh so that's our aspiration for for next year. Um obviously while paying very close attention to mission assurance and reliability. Um But we think we've got at least a technical path to to achieving that. Um and then the I think we're quite close to being able to recover the the fairing.

Um so it's a huge nose cone on the front of nose cone. You can fit a basically a whole sort of city bus in there.

And and and that just that that fairing alone with all of its systems and the acoustic damping and qualification all that and separation system, that's about a five or six million dollar um piece of equipment and the analogy I use with my team is like, guys, imagine we had you know, six million dollars in a pallet of cash and that was you know, six million dollars is falling through the sky and would we try to catch it? I say we do.

I say we give it a shot. You know, worst case it ends up at the bottom of the ocean, but maybe we do catch it and then pay six million dollars. Let me know when that pallet of cash is coming back. Yeah. I mean I'd like to give it a shot, too. You know, it might as well be a pallet of cash because it costs six million dollars. So um And but I I think we we got a decent shot of recovering the fairing by the end of the year.

Um and and possibly reflight by either late this this year or early next. Um and that just leaves the the upper stage of the rocket. Upper stage is about 20% of the cost of the mission. Um so if we get booster stage and and fairing, we're right around 80% reasonable. And then um I think I think we for for a lot of missions we can even bring the second stage back. So we're going to try to do that.

Um Although our primary focus will be on our Dragon over the next particular of the next year or so. Our Dragon 2 spacecraft, which is what will which is the crew crew Dragon next generation Dragon spacecraft, which has got all of the equals systems and the but it will allow you to do a launch aboard um all the way to orbit. And um uh and and do an automated docking maneuver. So it's not it does it doesn't need to berth with the aid of the arm.

It can do a direct docking maneuver. Um and then that will be the what once that's operational the new method of taking both cargo and crew to the space station. Um so if I say what's what's our primary focus, it's making sure we stay on track for um uh getting getting crew to station as we promised NASA around the middle of next year. That's going to be real exciting. I think it's going to be great for getting the public fired up.

You know, that's really It's been a while since we launched uh astronauts from US soil. So we're we're all looking forward to that. Yeah. Um and I I I just like to to to to to thank um people at NASA for giving SpaceX a chance to to do this and um just want a word of appreciation for the working relationship with NASA, which is great. Um in fact, I told the governors uh last week that, you know, for a long time my password was I love NASA.

That that is actually true. This is um You know, you've just given you've given all the hackers around the world a chance to go work on that. I I hopefully I don't have like some old email accounts somewhere that still with that. You know, like I've got to I've got to change this. People are going to cotton on. Very good. So how you talked a little bit about commercial crew. How is that going?

I know it's you know, flying flying humans is more systems involved. Of course, the risk is higher. How is that progressing? Um you know, it's it's been way more difficult than cargo for sure. Um Yeah. I mean, as soon as as soon as sort of people enter the picture, it's it's really a giant step up in um making sure things go right, you know, and and for sure the the the oversight the oversight from NASA is much tougher.

It was not that it wasn't tougher cargo, but it's really intense for crew. Um So coming from the right motivations. Um but uh yeah, it's uh you know, it can be a bit tough on on on my guys you know, what with the women men of SpaceX, but uh but I but I you know, know where it's coming from. It's the right right motivation.

Um And uh and there'll be some debates, you know, going into next year about some of the detailed technical de- de- de- um But I think uh we really want to uh do everything humanly possible to make sure it goes well. Um And um you know, triple check everything. Um and uh O- overall, I think it's going you know, really well.

Um you know, there's getting like these little small technical bones of contention, which um you know, but we're working through those. Um We're engineers. We live We live for that. Exactly. Um Yeah. Um it And and some of these things are really like esoteric.

I mean, unless somebody's really in the weeds on the rocket and spacecraft design, it will just sound like we're talking Greek, but um ancient Greek, you know, but um Yeah, but there's you know, I think it's good to have these debates.

Uh and overall, um I'm confident that it's going to be a system that uh that NASA feels good about and that SpaceX feels good about and uh we're looking forward to continuing the partnership into next year and um doing a great job for NASA. Excellent. Thank you. Um and of course we're looking forward to. We're excited about it and and as you mentioned, we're NASA's working hard with you Yep. on uh on Oh, yeah.

Um Uh and and yeah, and we're also all down in the weeds on those technical details. I'm sure you are down. Yep. Let's see. You see down to the little bolt to the little thing and all that. Where's Gerst? Gerst is here somewhere. That's Gerst's uh gravy, too. Gerst, if you can't have a If you can't have a dry lube bolt pitch discussion with Gerst, you know, it's not a good day.

We We I guess I have a many many just many sort of in the weeds technical discussions. Um I actually love I love talking to Gerst. Uh one of my favorite people in the world, actually. So. Yeah. There you go. Mine, too, but but he's my boss. I I have to say that. Let's see. So, you you talked We talked a little bit about commercial crew.

We have uh cargo supply resupply one, which you have the Dragon, which of course Dragon one, which is uh birthed. And and in fact, you've done a reflight recently with uh with the Dragon. You know, thanks for bringing that up. You know, um cuz that's kind of important. Yes, it is. And again, thanks for the NASA support on that.

Um God, we we really should uh you know, we should have made a slightly bigger deal out of it because it was the first reflight of a spacecraft since the shuttle. Mhm. Um and uh we kind of forgot to make, you know, let people know to I mean, I guess it was there in the details, but we forgot to you know, let I don't think the public even realizes that it's the first reflight of a spacecraft orbital spacecraft since the shuttle.

Um Which performed very well, too. Very good good clean mission. Yeah, solid. Um I mean, that that now that was a case case where I should in full disclosure say that it cost us almost as much to in fact, probably about as much, maybe more to re- re- negotiating contract here. No, I know. I know. I'm just I'm just being totally honest here.

Um I I Our the SpaceX internal accounting said that it cost us almost as much as building a a Dragon one from scratch. I suspect our internal accounting was probably being um wasn't counting certain things. Um There were some circumstances unusual about this one, right? This one had some water incursions and things like that. Yeah, yeah. The amount of rework on this particular This had a lot of rework, yeah.

But the next one, we think there's a decent shot of of being maybe sort of 50% the cost of a new one. Um and uh Keep going. My contract is here. Yeah, I'm negotiating against myself here. Yes. Um and um but um yeah, no, I I mean, we want to offer the, you know, best possible uh deal deal for NASA and um it's always tough to get that top line budget to increase. Hope it does.

Um man, I think so much could be could could be accomplished if the NASA top line budget was increased. I think people have no idea, you know. Um So, it's there. So, talk a little bit So, we talked about CRS one and and birthing and CRS two. Are we talking about commercial crew? CRS two, the Dragon is going to its cargo Dragon It's It's the similar Adam old line of It's It's It's It's Dragon two, it's yeah. But it's going to dock.

And so, talk about the it could then we'll have good commonality between the two. and and things like that. Yeah. Um so, the I mean, the only thing cargo Dragon won't have is the launch escape system. Uh although it'll still have the logic associated with separating from the vehicle. Uh So, I I think most likely even even cargo Dragon two um would be able to survive uh booster anomaly. Like like that word anomaly.

Um The the We don't like that word. Yeah, well, I got um I guess I don't like it. Yeah, right. Um The the one of the the launch It have everything else on the Dragon crew Dragon two has except the the thrusters, but I think in most cases actually it would still be able to survive re-entry um and and keep the cargo safe. Um But uh but having that commonality is great. Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, going forward, it seems like, you know, docking itself and if, you know, even beyond testing of systems and evolutions and things that might be beneficial to test on on the cargo version Yeah, totally. Absolutely. And I know you've already done some things on on CRS one to prepare for CRS two and you're testing some TPS uh repair capability and things like that. So, exactly.

Um actually uh uh I really, you know, just like to uh you know, express some appreciation for the the whole CRS team um because they they've really allowed us to uh update the rocket and you know, add crazy things like landing legs. Um and um and been really fair, I think, in allowing us to iterate with the booster for for the CRS contract.

Um And then uh uh and and then as you're pointing out, um Dragon two being used for both uh cargo and crew allows us to iterate uh uh with a just a slight less little more risk on the cargo version um and prove it out for the screw on board. Yeah, it's really helpful. Excellent. So, let's let's talk about I I I know we got a few more minutes here and then we'll open it up to questions.

But uh you know, the the theme here is for the conference is innovation. And and of course we talked already about some innovations in the launch business, but what what do you think needs to be Where are the areas or the thrusts for innovation that we really need both uh you know, not not excluding the launch, but but also looking at lower earth orbit. What's in lower earth orbit?

Where do we Where do you think we as a as a uh you know, space industry need to go and look for our innovation? Yeah. Um Well, you know, I I I think for long I I I I still believe in I think many people do that the the real the key to opening up uh space space or orbit, you know, Leo and beyond is um rapid and complete reusability. Um uh uh near complete reusability. Um Like we have with aircraft.

Um or cars or you know, almost any form of transport. Um Now, it's it's super hard with space cuz this is uh you know, we live on a planet with pretty high gravity. Um so, so, it'd be pretty easy if we're on Mars or something like that.

Um But uh but the earth's gravity is is really pretty pretty high and we've got a thick atmosphere and um so, uh reus- reus- reusability is tough when you're going through, you know, high sort of you you're going to operate in a vacuum, hypersonic, uh supersonic, transonic, subsonic. Um That's just a lot of regimes for um any sort of flying object to go through.

Um Uh but but reusability I think is absolutely fundamental to a breakthrough in uh access to orbit and beyond. Um the Leo Leo and beyond. Um Anything that can be done in that direction, I think is is is good. Mhm. Surely change the economics of transportation to lower earth orbit, right? Really fundamental. You get quick reusability, the economic equation it becomes easier to get to lower earth orbit and do more things. Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, it's kind of like, you know, just any mode of transport. Like it's uh And before there was the Union Pacific going across the US to California, and there was like hardly any people in California. People thought building the Union Pacific was just crazy cuz you got like nobody there. So, why are we building a railroad to nowhere? Um Now, you know, California's most populous state in the country.

Um Some people stopped in Texas along the way. Yeah, yeah. Few of us did. Um I love Texas. By the way, by the way. Texas. Uh you know, we we do uh a huge part of our R&D in Texas, in Central Texas. A lot of people don't know about that. Um near Waco. We have Um so Central Central Texas, we do um You did Boca Chica down in the south there. That's right. Yeah, yeah, exactly. So, we've got a lot of activity um uh throughout Texas.

Um we're building yet third launch site um in South Texas near Brownsville. Um I think that'll that'll give us good uh um you know, contingency capability if there's a say a hurricane coming through the cape um and we still need to get to the station, we could, you know, launch out of South Texas and that that'll ensure continuity of service. Um and um yeah. I really I spend a lot of time in Texas. Yeah, it's great. Excellent. All right.

Uh traffic's not as bad as in Southern California. Oh man, traffic. So, that's the biggest issue with Southern California, traffic hell. I mean It's like It's like which level of hell are you in? You're in hell. Yeah, Washington's uh trying to catch up. But you know you know what we're I I mean this is I mean um we're digging a tunnel. Have you heard about that? Yeah. Yeah.

Um So so it's like the the and the tunnel starts right across from SpaceX HQ. So, if you're ever out and want to see our tunnel uh Yeah, as long as you promise not to close it in after That's not a problem. Um it would Yeah, we're digging a tunnel. Um and I it's kind of like a So, actually maybe I don't know.

Sort of It It's like a little Actually, oddly enough, it's like a little low-stress activity cuz like everyone uh expects it to fail um and um I mean the sort of uh grown-worthy joke that I make about uh tunnels is that they have low expectations. There's nowhere to go but down. Yes. I could keep going. Uh Wow. Um That makes sense. You you're involved in space, you're involved in tunnels, you kind of kind of cover the gamut.

They used to call me internet guy when I was in startup open space. Um hey, this is internet guy. Uh he's in space. He's obviously going to fail. Um So, then they stopped saying internet guy. Um I think they call me transport guy. He's a transport guy. So, talk Speaking of transports, you know, so today ISS is up there and and really the conference is focused a lot on on some of the research and development that's going on there.

But and and commercialization, too, by the way. But what and commercialization, at least NASA's strategy is commercialization will will be fostered on ISS and then at some point in the future ISS will go away and and we are we we expect we hope for a vibrant lower earth orbit economy at that point in time. That's cool. And I'm kind of curious what what you see in terms of SpaceX and your transportation relative to that that economy.

What's next for commercial crew after after ISS? Sure. Well, first of all, I don't think the public realizes how cool ISS is. Um you know, that is an awesome thing that's up there. Um you know, I I I talked to a lot of people that First of all, some people don't realize we have a space station. Like you can't can't be serious. Uh like we have a gigantic space station. It's huge. Yeah, it's really gigantic.

Um um I mean it's a pretty incredible structure that we have orbiting uh orbiting the earth um and I think just I I I'd recommend like man, we've got to do something to educate the public about the awesomeness of of of the space station cuz it is pretty amazing. Um and and and big. Like people just lose sight of like they think oh, it's like a little thing. You know, it's big. It's real big.

Um and um yeah, so uh and and I was finally getting it to sort of real operational use and um that was great. So, again, amazing technological achievement.

So, uh but then yeah, uh I I I think the the in terms of lower earth orbit stuff on the commercial side, I think there's a lot of opportunities in um you know, kind of a global internet capability to providing internet to parts of the world that either don't have it or where it's very expensive and not very good.

Um Yeah, so like the the space is really good for providing uh internet connectivity uh for sparsely populated or or low populated regions. Um So, it's not it's not really a threat to telcos. It actually can make um make telcos' lives easier because there are a lot of customers that are very hard to serve where like you're digging a fiber cable for 2 miles, they'll never pay off the investment to you know, to get to one house type of thing. Mhm.

But um but for space, you can really serve serve those customers um at at at so at economically sensible rates. Um There's earth observation um you're getting better understanding of um of uh uh natural sort of uh nat- any natural disaster uh you know, information. Um and um You know, but I think the If you want to get the the public real fired up, I think we got to we got to have a base on the moon. You know?

Uh I don't It's like that'd be pretty cool. Um and then going beyond that, getting people to Mars. Yeah. Certainly sending people further we've ever sent them before, I think it's captivating for the people, so. Yeah, exactly. It's captivating for me, I know that. Yeah, exactly.

Um So, uh yeah, just uh you know, having some permanent presence on another heavenly body um should be the the kind of moon base and then the uh you know, getting getting people to to Mars and beyond. Um and uh you know, it's sort of the That's the that's the continuance of the dream of Apollo that uh I think um people are really looking for. Yeah. Excellent.

You know, this might be a good time to to go ahead and open it up for a few questions from the audience. Uh we're where the um where they're on the side. I think microphones on the side. I can't tell if people are I don't know where they are. lights are so bright, it's hard to tell. I know this is a risk asking people to ask questions, but uh any uh any questions? Looks like there's a few people signed up lined up over here, so. Go ahead.

Uh hi Elon, over here from the UK. Pleasure to ask a question to you. Um my question is how are you managing the risks associated with the Falcon Heavy and particularly the recently announced private launch around the moon. Thank you for your time. Sure. Um so the But first of all, I should say Falcon Heavy that requires the simultaneous uh ignition of 27 orbit class engines. Um It's like, you know, a lot that could go wrong there.

Um and uh I I encourage people to come down to the cape uh and see the first Falcon Heavy mission. Uh it's guaranteed to be exciting. Um But it But it's you know, this is one of those things that's really difficult to test on the ground.

Um I mean we can fire the engines on the ground, but um and we try to simulate the the the dynamic the dynamics of having 27 instead of nine booster engines um and the you know, the airflow as it goes through transonic. Uh it's like it's going to see heavy transonic buffet. Um the max Q or has behavior on a max Q. Um There's a lot of risk associated with Falcon Heavy. Real good chance that that vehicle does not make it to orbit.

Um want to make sure set expectations accordingly. Um I hope I hope it makes it past you know, far enough away from the pad that it does not cause cause pad damage. I would consider even that a win, to be honest. Um um and uh yeah. Um Very exciting. Major pucker factor, really. It's like another way to describe it. Um You know, that dwindles that that dwindles the amount of people who want to ride on that the first time. Yeah.

Well, It gets smaller cap There are still people And full disclosure here, man. Full disclosure. Um Um I you know, I think Falcon Heavy is going to be a great vehicle. Uh just just like so much that's really impossible to test on the ground. Um and we'll do our best. Um and um it it actually ended up being way way harder to do Falcon Heavy than we thought. Uh cuz it's at At first, it sounds real easy.

Just stick two first stages on as strap-on boosters. Yeah, how how hard can that be? But then everything changes. All the loads change. Um Aerodynamics totally change. Uh you've tripled the vibration and acoustics. Um so, if you sort of break the the qual levels on so much of the hardware um the amount of load you're putting through that center core is ins- is crazy um cuz you've got two super powerful boosters also shoving that center core.

And it's like So, we had to redesign the the whole center core airframe. Uh it's not like the Falcon 9 cuz it's got to take so much load. Um, then you got the separation systems. Um, and, uh, yeah, it just ended up being really way, way more difficult than we originally thought. Uh, we were pretty naive about that.

Um, but I I but it the nice thing is it's it's, uh, yeah, when it on fully optimized, it's about 2 and 1/2 times the payload capability of a Falcon 9. So, you know, it's um, well over 100,000 lbs to to Leo uh, payload capability, yeah, about 50 tons, could even get up to a little higher than that if, you know, if optimized.

Um, and, um, and then the the nice thing is that does have the throw capability to toss a Dragon 2 in a loop around the moon. Um, and, um, and then Dragon 2 itself, uh, the heat shield is, um, designed with a huge amount of margin. So, it's got enough margin to handle, uh, lunar re-entry. Um, and, uh, particularly if we do initial velocity scrub, um, do sort of at least one pass to scrub velocity, then come in on the second pass.

Um, um, yeah, but, uh, no question, whoever's on the first flight, you know, brave. Yes. Let's see, let's go over here to this side. Here's a question from over here. Uh, hey Elon. Uh, Ted Tagami with, uh, educational company called magnitude. io. I had the good fortune of meeting you, uh, back in September watching your five sons launch their own rockets Black Rock Desert. Oh, yeah, cool. Yeah. That was fun.

And since then, we've actually been able uh, had the great fortune of sending students payloads up to the International Space Station. And we're now working with CASIS to extend that. We'd like 50 million students to get on the International Space Station, their experiments on the Space Station by 2014. Uh, so my question to you is more about the innovations in education and your thoughts.

That same year that I met you and your sons, uh, you announced Ad Astra. Oh, yeah. Uh, and and before the, uh, advent of Neuralink gets fully implemented, what what are your thoughts on the innovations in education today? Thank you. Uh, just the thoughts on education.

Um, well, um, I I think there's maybe a um, there's definitely some good schools out there, um, but I think the some of the the mistakes, at least in my opinion, that I see being made in education is, um, that um, people teachers do not explain why kids are being taught a subject. Um, you know, you just sort of get dumped into math and like, well, why are you learning math? What's the point of this?

It seems like some, you know, for some people like maybe it's a I don't know why I'm being asked to do these strange problems. Um, but you know, the why of things is extremely important. Um, because, you know, our brain has evolved to not to discard information that it thinks is has no relevance.

So, then if on the one hand you, uh, you're being asked to memorize or learn, uh, say formulas, um, but you do not know why this is the case, then you have this cognitive dissonance of it seems irrelevant, but I'm being told to remember it, so I'll be punished.

So, so I better remember it, but so the why of things is very important, and then, uh, being able to and and then pi- picking kind of a a problem, and then, uh, using various educational tools to solve that problem, um, like using math or physics or economics to to solve that problem is far more engaging, um, than teaching the tools.

Um, you know, it's different between if you say, well, we're going to take apart this, uh, this engine, um, and and see how it works and put it back together again.

Um, and then in order to take the engine apart, we need, you know, wrenches and screwdrivers and a winch, um, and Allen keys and and whatnot, um, and and and it's a and then in the course of solving the problem of taking the engine apart and putting it back together, you learn about wrenches and screwdrivers and all the tools that you need. Um, and then now you understand the relevance. Ah, this is why wrenches are important.

I you know, whereas if you had a a class on wrenches, you'd be like, uh, why is this this not seem that great, you know? Um, so ti- tying it to solving a problem is I think very powerful for, um, establishing relevance and getting, um, kids excited about what they're working on. Um, and then and uh, and and having the knowledge stick. Yeah.

And so to some extent, fly, you know, building a a a CubeSat or flying an experiment on on ISS is like that, right? You you've got the you've got the why or the relevance and the curiosity and in terms of building that, uh, that device or that experiment. I I think there's some really cool and it ties to the, it gives you a really a concrete example of what, uh, what you're learning and why. Yeah, exactly.

I think like things like CubeSats, uh, exactly. We're we're because say like, okay, w- like what is a solar panel? How does orbital dynamics work? How do we, um, you know, how do we power this thing? You know, how do batteries work? Electronics, co- control systems, um, and you you need to then then you're like, oh, we want to make our satellite work. That's why we need to understand all these disciplines.

Um, so I think it's like like CubeSats students CubeSats are great. Um, like things like design build fly for model airplanes or Formula SAE. Uh, we've got a design and build a, um, kind of a uh, a race car and and then you know, race that against other people. That I think those things are very powerful for uh, learning as learning tools. Yeah, very cool. All right, thank you. I see over here another question.

Uh, hi, my name is, uh, Jacob and I actually live near the Cape. So, my question is not much of a tech question, but more of what your prediction is. So, about maybe 100 years after we develop sustainable colonies on Mars, do you think, and of course many other countries will also try to get to Mars, uh, that there would be like a conflict for the best resources on Mars?

Um, like in I guess you could say in sort of like a interplanetary warfare, if you know what I'm trying to get This sounds like a video game, doesn't it? Uh, it's an idea. Mars Attacks or, um, the you know, I think it's some pretty open territory on Mars. Um, so there's I don't think we're going to be there's going to be any kind of scarcity. Uh, there's like a lot of land on Mars. Not many people. Um, so Unless they're hiding on the backside.

Yeah, no, I mean, they're they're pretty clever. If there are people on Mars, man, they are way cleverer than us cuz they're hiding well. Um, so, um, yeah, I know, there's plenty of land on Mars. It's I mean, you know, the history of human civilization does contain a lot of war, so I I don't think we you know, we go to Mars and that you you know, be war free forever.

But, uh, but I think there's certainly not going to be a resource-based conflict due to scarcity of resource on Mars. I think we're going to go to to the Mars as a multinational effort, too, right? So, it's not it's not one country going and another country going and then they're fighting over wars. I think it's countries going together and and so I think we're we're more likely to be peaceful in that in that scenario as well.

Yeah, but you know, I I actually advocate for I think it's fine if if if countries get together to form teams, but I think it's actually probably better if there are at least, you know, at least two or three, uh, country coalitions going going to Mars, um, in a friendly way, um, and and competing to see who can make the most progress.

Um, and if you look at like say the Olympics, it would be pretty boring if everyone just linked arms and crossed the finish line at the same time. Um, we're friendly, um, but it would you know, not be More like the opening ceremonies, I guess. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Um, so we I think friendly competition is a good thing. Yeah. Very good.

Well, I I think, you know, NASA wants to be part of one of those kind of coalitions with the United States and and so we're I know we're actually trying to build such a coalition now. Let's see, um, from over here, another question. Hi, I'm, uh, Yotam Ariel, founder and CEO of Bluefield. We're deploying methane tracking microsatellites.

And my question to you, I hope to learn your thoughts on advancing remote sensing capabilities of critical gases on Earth and on Mars. Thank you. Well, that's a pretty esoteric question. Um, remote sensing of of gases, um, yeah, I think, um, that that's something that's going to be important. Uh, Mar- Mars has a number of trace gases that are pretty helpful. Um, it's very helpful that that Mars has CO2 and nitrogen and argon.

Those are those are like really helpful gases to have in the atmosphere. Um, it's mostly CO2, but that little bit of nitrogen and argon is really can be pretty helpful. Yeah. And other and whatever other trace gases we can get out of there. know. We we always say Mars has just enough atmosphere to, it's not enough to be really helpful in terms of, uh, aerobraking, but it sure makes it a lot harder. So, it's just enough to be to be difficult.

Yeah. of in situ resource utilization, you know, when we get there to be able to build to to to get your oxygen and That's super helpful. have a water and can build a build a hot get hydrogen manufacture hydrogen on on on the planet. So, Yeah. Hopefully there's enough resources that we'll we don't have to carry everything with us. Well, the nice thing having if you got H2O and and CO2, um you can build hydro carbons of of any kind.

Um you can certainly build plastics. Um you can build well, you know, short chain long chain hydrocarbons. Um you know, the the current SpaceX thought for um uh kind of a Mars transport vehicle is a primarily methane based system. Um cuz you get to have a kind of a smaller uh I mean, the tanks are half the size with if with methane.

Um uh so and and and uh yeah, but and and Mars with with a CO2 atmosphere and a lot of water ice is is great for for that. Um uh going beyond Mars, I think there's a lot of merit for hydrogen cuz then you only need water. Um But uh that's that's also our current thinking on that front.

So, we we speaking of that, last last year at Guadalajara at the IAC conference, you talked about plans to go to the Mars and and and I know you guys have been working on that since then. Yep. You do you so you plan at some point to talk about that work publicly?

Yeah, thinking probably the upcoming IAC in Adelaide uh might be a good opportunity to do the updated version of the Mars architecture cuz it's it's evolved quite a bit since uh that last talk. Um Yeah, I'm I'm going to ask for questions to be collected at time and and for that I assume um Good strategy. There was some very enthusiastic people to the mic at the IAC last time.

Um I mean, but but um the You know, the the the key thing that that we figured out is like how do you pay for this whole, you know, something to go to Mars? That's very super expensive. Mhm.

Um and um I kind of think by kind of you know, if we downsize the um the the Mars vehicle, you know, make it capable of doing uh Earth orbit activity as well as uh you know, Mars activity, then um you know, maybe we could pay for it with by using it for Earth orbit activity. Um that's that's one of that's one of the key elements in the new uh architecture.

It's it's it's similar it's similar to what was at IAC, but it's uh it's it's it's a bit a little bit smaller, still big, but but but but I think it's um I think this one's got a shot at uh uh being real. And and on on the on the economic front, you know, that's the trick. All right, let's see. I think another question from over here. Hi Elon, Eugene Mark. Um I have mostly one important question and one little aside.

Uh I Can you talk a little bit about your R&D strategy for your companies and is it all focused on short-term problem solution or how much and in what fashion do you allocate time and money towards R&D spending on some of the long-term goals you're working at?

And then just as a little aside for the Boring Company, are you looking at that only as a habit as a transportation, but potentially as a habitat um company uh for not just tunnels, but habitats on Mars or the moon? Yeah, actually so I do think like getting good at digging tunnels um could be really helpful for Mars. Mhm.

Um cuz like once you've got a a kind of a it would be a different optimization for, you know, a Mars boring machine versus a Earth boring machine, but um for sure there's going to be need to be a lot of of ice mining on Mars and mining in general to get raw materials.

Um and then along the way uh building um uh underground habitats where, you know, you get good radiation shielding um and you kind of have you know, as much you can you can build a really an entire city underground if you wanted to. Uh I think people are still going to want to go to the surface, you know, um from time to time, but um you you you can build trans mount underground uh with the with the right boring technology on Mars.

So, I do think that there's uh some uh overlap in that uh technology development arena. Um And then R&D um you know, I I try to spend as much on R&D as we can at uh my companies. Um So, we really max out R&D. I mean, I spend most of my time on engineering. Um um that's probably 80% of my week is engineering meetings. Um and so as you know, any money that we get in revenue, we we we would put that right back into R&D.

Um And some of it is longer term. Um uh yeah. Um You know, like for example, the you know, Mars vehicle um uh look at some doing some Mars communication stuff potentially with with with the NASA or in part um and um yeah, but one super priority is like engineering's my most fun thing. So, try to follow that to the max. Over here. Hi, my name is Chris LeFlore. Um I work for Congress for Representative John Conyers.

A couple days ago I read about you talking about artificial intelligence and the dangers of it uh and how as a uh as a businessman, you are totally against regulation and stuff like that, but as a you know, a human being, you think it's critical that we get ahead of this issue. Yeah.

Uh can you please elaborate on um like why um what are you seeing that we don't get to see and uh what as a policy maker I should be looking to do to sort of I guess protect us all? Sure. Well, um I think it it it is difficult to appreciate just how far um artificial intelligence has advanced and how far it is advancing um because we have a double exponential at work.

Uh we have an exponential increase in hardware capability um and we have an exponential increase um in software talent that is going into AI. Um so whenever you have a double exponential, it's very difficult to predict. Um real predictions almost always going to be too conservative in terms of thinking it'll be further out than it is.

Um you know, you start to see things like um I don't know if you've seen like the the videos where you can sort of really quite accurately video simulate uh someone um and put words in their mouth that they never spoke. Um you just Google it. It's really pretty amazing. Um and then they they had something called a generative adversarial network. Uh it had had two of them. Um compete with one another to make the most convincing video.

So, one would generate the video and then the other one would identify where it it it looked fake and and then that would the other one would fix that. And then and they'd go back and forth to the point where you couldn't tell which one is the real real video, which one is the fake one. Um and um you you actually there've been some very public things like the defeat of AlphaGo or defeat of Go by AlphaGo of the world's best Go champion.

People thought defeating Go was either never or 20 years away. That was world's best Go player was defeated. Um and now that same AlphaGo system can defeat the top 50 players simultaneously with 0% of chance of them winning. Yeah. And that's 1 year later. Um so the degrees of freedom to which artificial intelligence is able to apply itself are in really increasing I think by 10 orders of magnitude a year. It's that's really crazy.

Um So, I think and and we're starting and this is on hardware that is really not well suited for neural nets. Um you know, uh like a GPU is maybe an order of magnitude better than a CPU, but something but a um a chip that is designed optimally for neural nets is an order of magnitude better than a GPU. Um and that is there are a whole bunch of neural net optimized chips coming out um either late this year or next year.

Um so, I think we should I think you know, the part of the role of government is to make sure the public is uh safe, like to take care of public safety issues. And I think so, I think the right move is to establish some government regulatory agency, which at first is just there to gain insight. So, um it's not about like shooting from the hip and just putting in rules before anyone knows anything, but you got to set up agency.

It's got to gain insight. Once that insight is gained, then start applying rules and regulations. Um we have that for the you know, for aircraft, the FAA, we've got that for cars, we've got that for uh, you know, drugs, for food. Um, and I don't think anyone wants the FAA to go away or the FDA to go away or, you know, um, any of those regulatory agencies. Um, I think we would just need to make sure people do not cut corners on AI safety.

It's going to be a big deal. It's going to be a real big deal. Um, and it's going to come on like a like a tidal wave. All right, thanks. Let's see you. Over here, question. Good afternoon. Um, my name is Anna and I'm a film director and VR producer.

And I'm currently working on a on a film, on a documentary film about future scenarios for humanity, which actually brought me to this amazing conference where I can learn and complete my research on the space exploration area.

And in the previous few days, there was a lot of talks, uh, which is, I think, an extremely beautiful phenomenon, about this kind of dual philosophy behind space exploration and space solutions, about solutions that are coming back to Earth that can benefit humankind in very, very wide area.

And today we've been talking about the commercialization of the of the space area, and it brings a lot of questions to me about social responsibility behind uh, gigantic companies that would actually probably take over how the space industry would develop in the nearest future.

So, I'm very curious how you see in long term, uh, these kind of benefits for people or social goals for for SpaceX, and especially in the context that uh, you are an entrepreneur that invests in infrastructure and transport, hard solution that would probably change the way most of us live, and the way we communicate with each other.

So, I'm very, very curious how you see that in terms of long-term mission, long-term philosophy, and what would be your advice or maybe it's kind of security signal for other of your colleagues and for all of us. Phew. I I I'm you know, I'm not sure I I fully understood uh, the question. Um, the uh, yeah, or the answer.

Um, Um, but Yes, I I I think mainly about uh, long-term benefits from the R&D endeavors that your companies would conduct that could actually be also not only serving building a service that can be useful for business or for people, but also benefit the societies in a wider context. And also knowing that it would probably the interest the commercial industry in space would probably develop very quickly and it it will grow.

How do you see the social responsibility of the companies who actually do that and where are the limits of what can be done, what should be done? The same way as you think about, for example, open AI mission in the area of of of AI development. So, can you try could be translated into space industry endeavors? Well, I think there's a a pretty big social benefit or um, civilizational benefit to being a multi-planet civilization.

Um, you know, that dramatically increases the probable lifespan of human civilization if we are a multi-planet species versus a single-planet species. Um, but sometimes that is misinterpreted as, well, shouldn't we just focus everything on Earth?

It's like, well, you know, but we should focus almost everything on Earth, but I think that should be maybe 1% or 2% of our resources that um, are applied to making life multi-planetary because there are certain irreducible irreducible risks uh, for you know, for on Earth.

Um, it's it's you know, it's possible in the future that there there's some global war that knocks us back many levels of technology, you know, certainly if it was a major nuclear war it would.

Um, and uh, the there's just so the general decay of societies over time, um, we see this uh, through history, you know, if you look at ancient Egypt or ancient Rome, um, you know, they had reached peak peak technology levels and then for reasons that aren't obvious, just declined.

Um, and uh, you know, so so I think just having being a multi-planet civilization, um, you you know, having human bases throughout the solar system, I think First of all, I think it's very exciting and inspiring and there needs to be things that are exciting and inspiring and and uh, make you look forward to waking up in the morning. Like, it's like, hey, future's exciting. This is underappreciated. You know, like tunnels. Sorry.

I was just saying. All right. Um, and um, you know, but there's got to be things that make you excited about life. Um, like, you know, it can't just be problem solving, you know, one one sort of miserable problem after another. It's got to be like, I'm fired up about the future because and here's why, you know? And and space is one of those things that that does that for people all around the world.

Um, you know, when um, when Apollo 11, you know, when when they landed on the moon, I mean, it was that was something for all of humanity. It really was, you know? And people would you know, if there's like one TV for 50 miles around, people would walk you know, they'd walk 50 miles just to go find that one TV to to watch it happen. Um, so it you know, sometimes people think, what about what about poor nations of the world? Like, you know what?

It inspires them, too. Um, and um, you know, we need things like that. We don't have we don't have enough of them. All right, thank you. Over here? Hi Elon, quick question. I heard that Dragon is no longer planned to land propulsively. Is that true? Yeah, that was a tough decision. It Dragon is capable of landing propulsively Dragon 2 is capable of landing propulsively. Um, and it technically it still it still is.

Uh, although you'd have to land it on some pretty soft landing pad because we we've deleted the little legs that pop out of the heat shield. Um, but it's technically still capable of doing it.

Uh, the the reason we decided not to pursue that heavily is it would have taken a a tremendous amount of effort to qualify that um, for for safety, uh, particularly for crew transport, and then um, uh, there was a time when I thought that the Dragon approach to landing on Mars, um, with a base heat shield and side-mounted thrusters would be the right way to land on Mars, but um, now I've I'm pretty confident that is not the right way.

Um, and that there's a there's a there's a far better approach. Um, and um, and that that's what the next generation of uh, SpaceX um, rockets and spacecraft uh, is just going to do. Um, so yeah, so just the difficulty of of of safely qualifying Dragon for propulsive landing and the fact that um, from a technology evolution standpoint, it it was no longer in line with what we were confident was the the optimal way to land on Mars.

Uh, that's why we are not pursuing it. It could be something that we bring back later, um, but it's it it doesn't seem like the right way to apply resources right now. Over here. Hi Elon. Um, my name is Elia Overby. I'm a PhD student studying genomics. We've all made we've all together made a lot of technological progress um, on space systems. My question isn't about the technology, it's about the biology.

Um, what are the principal biological concerns you have about human health on long duration missions, such as a mission to Mars? And um, have you identified any solutions to these problems? Um, well, I'd say uh, going to Mars is not for the faint of heart. Um, and it's it's risky, uh, dangerous, uh, uncomfortable, and you might die. Now, do you want to go? Yeah.

Um, you know, and for a lot of people the answer's going to be hell no, and for some it's going to be hell yes. Um, so um, there will you know, there will be issues. Um, I don't think it's like it's it's going to be a case of like you get irradiated to death along the way. I don't think that's the case at all.

Um, you you know, the the radiation levels sort of roughly you you know, in worst case scenario really kind of about equivalent to smoking on the way there. Uh, now smoking's pretty bad. Uh, but um, but I think with um, with some moderate shielding, we we can cut down on um, a large percentage of the incoming radiation.

Um, and that should be enough that um, that the the sort of marginal risk of cancer is not something that is going to be a showstopper. Uh that's that's my best assessment to date. Um something learning a lot about solar winds and um you know, fast particles and what not.

Um And uh you know, one of the things that I learned recently that I wasn't didn't didn't quite understand is that the I I always thought of the particles from the sun the sort of solar wind is going kind of straight up from the sun, but they they follow the magnetic field lines. Um so, you you actually can get the particles coming at you from the side even though you know, it's kind of at a direction orthogonal to the sun.

Um So, you do need some some amount of uh protection um at least on uh yeah, on on on kind of four four or five sides. Um Anyway, but I don't think it's it's it's not a showstopper, but it's um it's it's definitely, you know, if if safety is your top goal, I wouldn't go to Mars. Yeah. You know, there's a there's a bunch of work going on ISS right now to understand the risk to the humans for long duration.

Certainly we're in we're in the Van Allen belts, so the radiation environment's different. But uh and all part of it is understanding what happens to the humans the longer you stay. So, so far we've had humans stay a little bit longer than a year, and that's it. So, in the history of the species they've we've had someone off the planet for a little more than a year, and we're talking 3 years to go to Mars.

Well, you know, I think you can get the Perhaps perhaps shorter, but it's in the years. Uh it's uh you know, it's so there there potential for for things out there that we haven't found yet. Yeah. And uh so, we'll we'll learn more as we go along. Hopefully learn more before ISS is done.

Yeah, it's interesting that actually the you know, you know, Mars is only in the same um sort of rough quadrant of the of of Earth six roughly 6 months every 2 years. Um By same, I mean it's sort of trans slightly offset cuz it's like a transfer quadrant, but um but if you can get the ship to and from Mars in inside that 6-month window, then you get to reuse it twice as often.

So, there's actually a lot of merit to being able to get to Mars uh in under 3 months. If you can get there quick and back, of course it means a bigger bigger vehicle and and resupply. So, anyway, we'll interesting problem that will I'm sure we'll work on here as we go forward. Lot lot lot of lot of Earth orbit refueling or it's not really mostly oxygen, but it's um propellant reload. There's no good word for for propellant for fuel plus oxygen.

Uh prop, I guess. Prop prop load. We'll have to We'll have to invent a new word, right? So, that's I guess that's it. Okay, question over here? Demetrios Tseriotis from Los Angeles. First, thank you very much for digging those tunnels. They will be really handy during Olympics. Um my question is uh like with Tesla cars, will we see you riding the crew module to ISS and back? Thank you. Um I would like to at some point. I would like to.

Um Yeah, I would I think um assuming things work out, you know, I I you know, I'd like to yeah, maybe three three or four years, something. Um yeah, be great. All right, we'll put you on the manifest. Okay. Next question over here? Hello, I'm Anna Sophia Bagirayev, and I have kind of a follow-up on the biology question from before.

It is one thing to say obviously it's not going to be a safe experience to go to Mars, but there are some technologies essential especially if we're looking to putting humans there permanently um that are going to be have that are going to have to be developed with biological capabilities. Speaking of like flight suits, habitats, um eventual artificial biospheres for people to live in.

Do you see your company playing a part in the development of those technologies? Do you see biology having a place in SpaceX's work, or will that be outsourced to other unrelated companies? Hey, and before you answer, you should know that Anna Sophia over here won a Genes in Space competition and flew on a SpaceX Dragon. Anna Sophia was at uh was at SpaceX uh 10? When was that? Eight. SpaceX eight.

So, um as a yeah, and uh a very smart uh young lady. I think in fact, I think she's smarter than me in high school than uh than than I am now. So, anyway, so good luck with your answer. Sure. Um Uh biology absolutely has a significant role to play in any kind of uh permanent Mars base or city. Um I mean, if if for SpaceX, you know, we're we're we're trying to make sure we can get people there reliably at a at a cost they can afford.

Um and get cargo there at at a at a at the right cost number. You know, cuz there's there's there's kind of a threshold cost per ticket or cost per ton to the surface of Mars um below which uh a self-sustaining city can develop and above which it cannot. Um that that sort of critical um sort of economic and tech technical threshold is um is is what we're is what we're focused on at SpaceX.

Um And then we'll we'll probably also have to do a fair bit of work on propellant depot, uh basically propellant plant on Mars. Um but then our our intent is to uh you know, we we we don't want to get in the way of of what others are doing.

Like we want to make sure that uh let's say if somebody makes an investment or wants to do something on Mars, create a you know, a business or do some scientific endeavor, that SpaceX does not compete with them, you know, cuz they need to feel like okay, they're we're not going to just go in and compete with them arbitrarily.

Um We we we want to make sure that they they they they feel it's going to be a fruitful environment uh to be that you know, to go there and and and um and do something special.

Um So, our focus is going to be on transport, kind of fundamental utilities, survivability, um and you know, we'll we'll and we'll do more if we need to do more, uh but um we want to make sure that that lots of people can go and do all sorts of things on Mars or the moon, um and not feel like SpaceX is going to do anything but try to help them. We don't want We don't want to interfere or compete.

Um you know, they got to feel like the opportunity is there. Next question over here? Hi Elon. Um my name is Tracy, and I'm not here for any reason related to my career or to my area of study. I'm actually here as a very cool and only slightly overbearing mother Okay.

to my 10-year-old daughter Harper and a sister to my 14-year-old brother Ben, who are both in the audience today, and who think of you the way that I guess I thought of Madonna at the same age. Um Wow. Yeah. That's that's that's some That's some high praise there. Thank you. In this spirit of that, I wanted to get um your advice for two kids who are All right. very interested in space and engineering and entrepreneurism. Thank you. I'm sorry.

Space, engineering, and entrepreneurialism. What's your advice? What's your advice? Yeah, well, you know, there's a lot of uh technical problems to solve. Um so, I guess it would be sort of, you know, start studying kind of engineering and physics and biosciences and that kind of thing would be the um way to go. Um yeah. Um lot of going to be a lot of problems to solve to to make a city work on Mars.

Um You know, we're we're thinking of just as a well, sort of a semi-joke putting a uh job description on our website for urban planner in brackets Mars. Uh Um but um you know, there's there's there's going to be a tremendous amount of problems to solve. There will be There's a lot of building, building and problem solving.

So, those are like the right you know, skills to work on if if if someone's interested in going beyond Earth or, you know, space in general. Thank you. We're glad you're We're glad you're here. Glad your kids are here, too. They're uh they're the future for all of us. So, thanks for coming. See you over here? Hi.

My name is Gerard Valle, NASA Johnson Space Center, and my question is uh in your quest to um colonize Mars, do you foresee utilizing expandable spacecraft modules um as a stepping stone or or even a final final utilization? Well, I think there's definitely going to be inflatable things on on Mars itself. Um you know, in the journey there, there might be some amount of inflatable, but um we're not currently baselining that.

Otherwise itself I think there'd be quite a lot. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Inflatable and and perhaps just building it with the materials that's already present that exactly. Local materials are key. You don't have to carry it with you. Yeah, tunnels. Tunnels. You got to get that tunnel that boring machine there though. That's going to be a It's Well, right now the earth ones are really heavy. Like really heavy. Right.

Well, they're not built by aerospace engineers there. You're not worried about weight for earth tunneling machine. You like actually want one that's nice and heavy. Um but for a Mars one you'd have to redesign it to be super light. That's a tricky one. And then just taking into account the different conditions on Mars and everything. So Um yeah.

It's interesting the um you know, the Curiosity rover and the tires being chewed up by the the sharpness of the of just of the dirt of the gravel there. It's a you know, a very foreign environment to us and even in very subtle ways. So Let's see. A next question over here? Hi Alan. My name is Praful Chandra. I'm a regenerate medicine scientist from Wake Forest University.

My question is regarding your company Neuralink that makes a brain machine interfaces. So what do you think this technology, how is it useful for humans when they you know, go into low earth orbits or even deep space exploration? And do you have any plans in that direction? Well, the the reason for the reason I wanted to create Neuralink was primarily as an offset to the existential risk associated with artificial intelligence.

Um I think we will human intelligence will be not I mean we will not be able to beat AI. So then if you know, as the saying goes if you can't beat them, join them kind of thing. Um So I think having some some basically way to to link um you know, human will on mass to the outcome of of AI. Having AI be an extension of individual human will. That's really the point of Neuralink.

Now along the way I think there'll be some a lot of good that's achieved in uh addressing uh any any brain damage that's you know, as a result of a stroke or lesion or something congenital. Um or just you know, loss of memory when you get old that kind of thing. Um and you know, that will that will happen well before it it becomes a sort of um you know, brain AI symbiote situation. So if we plan it you'll see it coming.

It'll be it won't it won't happen all of a sudden. Um Very I I I do think it it it increases the long-term relevance of human exploration. Um and um yeah and I don't think I think it's for for me it increased my motivation long-term that that it doesn't just need to be done by robots. You know, um yeah. I don't know if that answers your question but Does that answer your question? Oh, yes. Okay, okay. All right, let's see.

Maybe we're one more question here and we'll we'll wrap it up on the left here. Okay. Hi. Call it from Space Nation. As we are building the first global astronaut training program for everyone. My question relates what you earlier said to the about International Space Station and how it's a shame that it's not better known around the world as probably compared for example the shuttle program.

So and thinking that in the future we need thousands and more space pioneers. So how do you see the significance of this public engagement and especially in the time where we have more and more tools to do that and and do you have specific plans on that and how you see that affecting accelerating or does it have in that kind of effect for the whole humanity's transition to space and and the new space era? Sure.

Well, I think just getting more more human space flight is going to automatically engage the public. I just pointed out that space shuttle there was a lot more engagement when the space shuttle was launching.

Um I think um if if the public public sees some some path even if it's long-term where they themselves may be able to go to orbit or beyond or to to the moon or Mars, I think their interest level increases dramatically and it may not be even that that they want to go but they have a son or a daughter brother or a friend that really wants to do it and and and so they want to support this their you know, friends and family uh in in that in that ambition.

Um but it really needs to be something ultimately that looks like it's going to be accessible to uh a large number of people. Um and then I think we'll get a large number of people engaged. Yeah, one of the things about engagement too I think for the for the US anyway will be we have had people launch from the United States. So I can't tell you how many people around the world have said you know, oh you guys are still flying?

Well, absolutely we never stopped flying. We've had people living on board ISS uh you know, for almost 17 years. And but they don't see the smoke and the fire, right? They see that they see they knew they turn on the TV and there's a shuttle going and it's got seven people on board and they see it and nowadays at least in the US it's half a world away. So here in in a week a week from Friday we'll be launching three people. Yeah.

But it doesn't feel the same as if it was happening in in our backyard in in Florida. Absolutely. So so we're looking forward to to that happening very soon here in in the US and we wish you the best of luck. Thanks very much for being here today. Thanks for for joining the conference. You're a big part of ISS and a big part of of the research and development that goes on on ISS. So so thanks very much.

I'm glad we've been able to help be helpful and thanks for having me. I'd like to to extend my thanks also for a incredibly insightful and frank discussion that you guys have had with the group. So we really truly appreciate it. And tunnels are cool, too.