James Jackson

@satofishi Too bad you don’t have a LiOH filter in there you can swap out. Safe travels!

@jtjacks I was actually thinking about that first day on the ship when the carbon dioxide in my cabin hit 800 ppm. The crew had locked all the doors to the deck because of the weather, so there was no fresh air. Yet our CO₂ level is still much lower than it was in Dragon.

Day 6 at sea: There are not many icebergs around Bouvet Island compared with the deeper Antarctic waters, so we were fortunate to spot one this morning. Last night we were positioned 280 km north of the island. Because of the wind and waves, we have since made our way to the eastern side and plan to approach from there. According to the weather forecast, we may encounter waves of up to 7 meters tonight. Right in the middle of the “Furious Fifties”, living on board does not feel any worse than it did on the first day. As of 2026-02-27T00:00Z, our ship is located 70 km east of Bouvet Island, at 54°06′S, 4°23′E, moving slowly at less than 5 kt toward our destination. If all goes well, we should be able to see Bouvet Island from the ship early tomorrow morning.

@astro_alexandra Here is a pretty good tracker for their live position z6z.co/fram2/

SpaceX’s Fram2 mission is bringing humans in space above the poles of Earth for the first time ever! #astronomy #nasa #space #science

@satofishi So beautiful to see you all in space!!! Amazing stuff. Keep posting for us because we are in awe of the views down here!

GM Flight Day 2

Meet the @framonauts

Watch Falcon 9 launch Fram2, the first humans to fly to Earth's polar regions:

@grok just did a fantastic job of digesting the 80,000 pages of JFK files and reporting out a concise list of previously non-public information. Blown away by how well it worked.

@kyleumlang Not a good look when your alma mater is, checks notes, 1-11…

Be excited for the future of humanity!

Very excited about this mission. Love being a part of something so amazing and pushing the boundaries of human spaceflight.

@elonmusk @awoooouwuooooo @danpiemont Starship 29: “hold my beer”

This is a matter of execution, rather than ideas. Unless we make the heat shield relatively heavy, as is the case with our Dragon capsule, where reliability is paramount, we will only discover the weak points by flying. Right now, we are not resilient to loss of a single tile in most places, as the secondary containment material will probably not survive. I will explain the problem in more depth with @Erdayastronaut next week. This is a thorny issue indeed, given that vast resources have been applied to solve it, thus far to no avail.

As a founder of a launch company, I disagreed with the thrust of this NYT article. I admire SpaceX and welcome their success. Our goal at ABL is to create fundamentally better launch systems, spread them all over the world, and launch all kinds of new technology that is 10x – 100x better than what exists today. We can help guarantee security, explore our solar system, study the cosmos, and improve billions of lives in the process. The only way to do this seriously is to push the cost of launch as close as possible to it’s physical limit. Everyone working on launch systems is on the same team in this goal. SpaceX continues to raise the bar as high as they can. We don’t feel short-changed by it, we feel challenged and motivated to do the same. Addressing a few specific points in the article: Is rideshare pricing anticompetitive? Some rideshare missions have definitely launched at a loss. Just do the math. Others have launched at a profit (particularly those with “cake toppers”). On average, with all costs baked in, it’s probably somewhere between a slight loser and slightly profitable. Which side of the line it’s on doesn’t really matter. Whether you are losing $4MM or making $6MM per rideshare launch, there’s no doubt it’s the least profitable activity. And yes, it’s (partially) motivated by putting pressure on new entrants. That’s not too hard to corroborate if you speak to the right people and they are honest with you. but… at the end of the day this program has been a MASSIVE boon to our industry. Almost every innovative space program I can think of depends on rideshare to get started, test technology, get heritage, and build further. The existence of this program has increased the total demand for launch over the next 10 years by a multiplicative amount. Is counter-selling anticompetitive? No… if you are trying to win an investment or customer sale, you should expect other bidders to make their case against you. Many of ABL’s customers and investors are also customers and investors of other launch companies. This is not an issue… Is it OK for the government to rely on a single commercial vendor for key national security capabilities? Obviously not. And yes, it is relevant if a vendor is governed by an individual majority shareholder, as opposed to a syndicate of institutions with a diverse board. Is it OK for former government officials to work for vendors they favored while in office? This is a textbook example of something should generally not be happening if you want fair play. There are rules to govern it, cooling off periods etc. Everyone should follow them and not mess around with exceptions waivers and loopholes. How do launch companies compete? First of all, launch is not one market. Even just in LEO, the market for a 3U cubesat vs. a 150kg satellite vs. a 600kg satellite vs. a 1-ton constellation plane stack vs. a 10- or 20-ton plane stack are completely different. Beyond that there are distinct markets for MEO, GEO, cislunar and planetary missions. Without new entrants, the best option to launch a 2-ton satellite to polar LEO today is to use 15% of the capacity of a $60MM+ launch vehicle. So there’s plenty of room for improvement purely through diversification. LEO Rideshare + OMV doesn’t solve this due to the OMV costs which are not substantially lower than small ELV costs. In the long term though, cost is the most important factor as continued cost improvement unlocks larger and more frequent flights, creating a virtuous cycle. Reusability is a huge lever, and I think every launch system will eventually get there. But reusability is on a spectrum it’s not the only lever. Staffing level is the biggest and therefore workflow automation is a huge competitive opportunity. Material selection, machine selection, verticalization, design simplicity, testing costs, logistics costs, and infrastructure costs are all critical as well. Excellence in all of these areas (not ticky tacky pricing games or social dynamics) will determine the competitive outcome as the industry continues to drive forward.

Flap.

@astrosbatgirl Made a few tweaks

IT’S GAME DAY BABY!

@MichaelJBier @UnfortunateMLB 👀

The same video, but with Beast Mode playing underneath it.

@haleykesparza I hate interacting on this app but I swear if you don’t invite me to meet your car the next time I am in town…

Hey Twitter, meet Rocket.

@neiltyson An Anti-Gravity Love Song if you will for A Certain Shade of Green @mybrandonboyd

A cosmic romance on the color GREEN follows shortly…

Watch Falcon 9 launch 49 Starlink satellites to orbit → spacex.com/launches twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1…

@MLBStats @MLB @FreddieFreeman5 @BlueJays @Reds @Athletics @Braves @CueHealth This is a despicable list. The 1B that won the gold glove and batting title is not on here. How can you be taken seriously?!?!

Who was the best 1B in @MLB this season? Vote now: atmlb.com/30k1LRK

@DJSnM looks like engine ignition sparked something (hot gas/leaked fuel?) trappedin the lower raceway and blew lower section.Maybe 3 (or more) diff things that lead to termination: Engine out off the pad, excess prop burn due to slew off pad, damage caused from raceway destruction

Yeah.... that disconnect didn't look right:

@Explorer_Flight Amazing job with the recovery, Zeb!

Yeehaw! That. Was. A. Day.