NASA-Chef: Ich interessiere mich nur für „gute Angebote“ von internationalen Partnern | „Es gab wirklich eine Zeit, in der wir versuchten, alle glücklich zu machen.“
https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/09/nasa-chief-im-only-interested-in-good-deals-from-international-partners/
31 Kommentare
>NASA must be more selective in the way it forges international partnerships as the race to the Moon transforms from a battle for national prestige between the United States and China into a high-stakes competition for extraterrestrial real estate and resources, the agency’s administrator said.
>Jared Isaacman, now in his 10th month at the helm of the world’s largest civilian space agency, told a gathering of military leaders and defense contractors last week near Washington, DC, that the 21st century race to the Moon is more than a battle of ideologies. The sweet spot for a Moon base, Isaacman said, is a relatively small region near the lunar south pole, and there are tangible implications for who gets there first.
>The Moon’s south pole harbors substantial quantities of water ice concentrated on the floors of craters away from the reach of sublimating rays of sunlight. The ice inside these eternally dark craters could be used to supply water, air, and rocket fuel for a Moon base, supporting a permanent settlement and providing a springboard for future expeditions to Mars.
>“It’s a big Moon, with the surface area of Africa,” Isaacman said Wednesday at the Air & Space Forces Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference. “The south pole is more akin to Washington, DC, when there are only so many roads and so many good parking spots that you’re going to want to occupy.”
>The best parking spots aren’t just those close to the Moon’s water ice bound up in deep craters. A few select crater ridges extending high above the ice deposits provide access to near-continuous sunlight for power generation.
Every single trump nominee has to go
Space exploration is going to be difficult for individual nations to accomplish. The ISS is an example of what nations can do working together. But sure let’s push this rock up the hill, just to be sure.
This is what will inevitably happen when you put a techbro in charge of a science agency. Science, expansion of knowledge for its own sake, and the betterment of humanity go straight out the window and it becomes all about „value“, scarcity, and ROI.
Curious to know how they think they can „occupy“ some part of the Moon. Build a big beautiful wall and have Chine pay for it?
Incredible to think how many people on this sub were completely glazing this dude when he was nominated.
Translation: they’ve got to bribe us.
The public sector is not where we need to be trying to monetize space, leave that to the private sector. They’re already benefiting from the years of free R&D that NASA has provided to the world, let them come up with their own capital to try to setup data centers in space or whatever they think they’re going to do. NASA should be working on scientific endeavors, actually trying to advance human progress & understanding. NASA monetizing shit is basically going to be a handout to the private sector: tax dollars will be spent to built up infrastructure, and then it will be handed off for free to the private sector. They’ll try to socialize costs, then privatize the profits.
[deleted]
“it creates an urgency, and we must [go fast] because the Chinese are going to the exact same locations … and they could potentially deny this training environment that is a necessity for America’s space ambitions.”
Just utter hypocrisy and projection. “We have to do the bad thing first because if we don’t, others will”
https://www.cnbctv18.com/world/trump-claims-moon-us-territory-white-house-green-lantern-space-force-uniform-19985289.htm/amp
[https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/09/for-the-first-time-the-us-military-confirms-it-has-deployed-weapons-in-orbit/](https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/09/for-the-first-time-the-us-military-confirms-it-has-deployed-weapons-in-orbit/)
NASA used to be one of the things about which Americans could be most proud. Its accomplishments were by and large American accomplishments, but there was always a sense that they also advanced humanity and were done on behalf of the world.
An inward-gazing self-righteous NASA is less impressive even before you look at their diminishing budgets and humbler ambitions. Now they must sing for their supper to a Congress and Presidency that worships at the altar of anti-intellectualism, and so to do anything they need to talk in smaller and meaner terms about transactional cost-benefit analysis, securing resources, „What NASA is gonna do for America!“ While paying private companies to do their launches for them.
There is still good, even great, work being done at NASA. By and large, those people don’t get to talk into microphones anymore. They’re keeping their heads down, focusing on and protecting their projects, and hoping for better days ahead.
I look forward to NASA’s next great accomplishments. I’m less interested in how they’ll be marketed to MAGA voters.
You are supposed to make space exploration happen and advance science while at it. Not „broker dealz“
“Good deals”. I really dislike the trumpification of American language
Read the article before commenting. He highlights the meaningful contributions of the Italians and Japanese
Of course they were going to also get NASA…
A fucking techbro speaking about parking lots on the moon as the head of NASA is a good metaphor of what the US has become (Always was, but the propaganda was really effective). This fucking stupid timeline ffs…
I think people are misjudging this because they’re focused on the way it’s worded as opposed to WHY this the stance.
NASA isn’t shunning cooperation. They’re more than willing to work with anyone that is willing to place nice, but some governments are more reasonable than others. Considering China’s maritime track record on earth, it’s reasonable to be anxious about what they might try to get away with on the moon. Consequently, it doesn’t seem like a bad idea to skip the “wait around and find out part” by getting there first.
I want NASA to focus on science too, but building and sustaining a moon base is a logistics problem that practically requires resource extraction. It may be hopeful, but if theres any chance for moon resources to be shared at all, it’s probably more likely if it’s the US that gets there first.
I remember this assclown getting the job and everyone was all „Wow hes actually a decent pick, give him a chance Trump might have found a good one“.
And now here we are, talking about parking lots on the moon.
I see a vitreous reaction to these comments but there is truth to them. When you have any large project and there are inter-organizational or departmental politics, you will have everyone trying to design their ideas into the project. You won’t take the most efficient path, you will take the path that is politically feasible for everyone since that’s the primary goal, not the project itself.
A perfect example is the Gateway. It served no purpose other than to be a way for international partners to be involved. It wasn’t needed for a lunar base or mission, but it’s easy enough for Europe and Japan to get to by themselves.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|——-|———|—|
|[COTS](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbeqtn7 „Last usage“)|[Commercial Orbital Transportation Services contract](https://www.nasa.gov/cots)|
| |Commercial/Off The Shelf|
|[CRS](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbek1d3 „Last usage“)|[Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/launch/)|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[DSN](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbe4omk „Last usage“)|Deep Space Network|
|EELV|[Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_Expendable_Launch_Vehicle)|
|[ESA](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbe7fhj „Last usage“)|European Space Agency|
|[FAA](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbd9kw5 „Last usage“)|Federal Aviation Administration|
|[HLS](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbelzvl „Last usage“)|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)|
|[HLV](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pben88q „Last usage“)|Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (20-50 tons to LEO)|
|[JWST](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbe7fhj „Last usage“)|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope|
|[LAS](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbesdoz „Last usage“)|Launch Abort System|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbekzwj „Last usage“)|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[NRHO](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbdmtv3 „Last usage“)|Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit|
|[NSSL](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbeqtn7 „Last usage“)|National Security Space Launch, formerly EELV|
|[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbebgu3 „Last usage“)|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbesdoz „Last usage“)|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|[SRB](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbesdoz „Last usage“)|Solid Rocket Booster|
|[ULA](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pben1zh „Last usage“)|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)|
|[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbeqtn7 „Last usage“)|United States Air Force|
|Jargon|Definition|
|——-|———|—|
|[Sabatier](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbdwiuf „Last usage“)|Reaction between hydrogen and carbon dioxide at high temperature and pressure, with nickel as catalyst, yielding methane and water|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbeeyv9 „Last usage“)|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbem5rx „Last usage“)|SpaceX’s world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|[hydrolox](/r/Space/comments/1wn7sf0/stub/pbemnkt „Last usage“)|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
—————-
^([Thread #12707 for this sub, first seen 22nd Sep 2026, 13:38])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Well gee, who could possibly have seen *this* coming?
[Oh wait, I did](https://www.reddit.com/r/space/s/bA1GM6Iy8Z).
Would love to push the nose of every person in this sub that paraded this fuckhead around as the „good billionaire“ into this shit. Of course this Trump-lackey only cares about monetizing space travel, that was always clear from anyone with two neurons to rub together.
Oh god please do something about this utterly idiotic timeline
Am I still supposed to believe that he only supports Trump’s NASA cuts for cynical political reasons? Does this maybe show that he is, in fact, ideologically aligned with the trump admin?
Damn so the era of international cooperation in space is over? Yet another reason to be depressed
If you walk out on deals made with key partners for one of their leading missions, as happened with ESA just this month with the instrument on Envision, don’t be surprised if future partnerships are made with the very rival you are most concerned about.
Is there any agency, department or branch in the US that doesn’t suck?
If we take heavy resources like water from the moon it would potentially change its weight and then have an effect on the earth such as tidal gravity.
i get wanting NASA to be more selective, but “good deal” seems like a pretty thin test for partnerships that last decades. wonder what metrics theyre actually using here besides the immediate price tag?
well, there goes NASA. Just love trumpland, don’t you?
This seems like a statement made for the current administration
If they’re moving to the Trump model, perhaps we the people should move to the French model?