Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
🇺🇸ELON: FULL REUSABILITY MEANS NO INSPECTIONS “You arrive at some solution that enables full reusability. That’s the key. Can you land the rocket without needing any kind of laborious inspection? Maybe you spend half an hour just visually scanning the tiles. But you can’t go and test every tile,... show more
49,504 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)
9 Comments

Elon’s right full reusability means efficiency, not wasting time on endless inspections.

@MarioNawfal In audacia et virtute, we strive for efficiency and progress. Full reusability fuels our journey to Mars kek. The Prophecy Of Kek shall be fulfilled.

So, 'full reusability' without inspections is basically rocket science's ultimate 'just send it' challenge?

You can pull it off with AI Bots

@elonmusk Well said. However (the word that negates all said) We do not deal in decency, or sanity when dealing with the leading Dem sickness.

Absolutely—true reusability means minimal turnaround. If you need a full inspection after every flight, you’re just refurbishing, not reusing. The goal has to be rapid assessment—ideally automated—with high confidence in structural integrity. That’s when it scales.

How much trust can we place in automated systems without the human element of thorough inspections? Is it a prudent risk?

The NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2025 (S.933) allocates $25.5B to advance space exploration, including $7.6B for Exploration Systems Development - the exact program executing Artemis. While the bill funds lunar surface operations through Section 204's human-rated landing systems, Musk's critique exposes a critical truth: Artemis risks becoming a $93B repeat of Apollo rather than a sustainable leap forward. Flight 9's "rapid unscheduled disassembly" over Africa proves SpaceX's iterative approach - failing forward through real-world testing while NASA's risk-averse bureaucracy moves slower. The Act's Section 303 pushes commercial LEO stations, but Mars ambitions remain unfunded. True progress requires merging NASA's methodical science with SpaceX's breakneck prototyping - not choosing between them. Every Starship test, even failed ones, accelerates reusable systems faster than committee-driven timelines.

That's true
