By which time SpaceX will have the MCT close to completion. This is a rocket so large that pad 39 at the Cape can't be used because the flame trench is too small. I don't know what 100 tons of payload to the surface of Mars translates in terms of tonnage to LEO, but it is safe to say a little bit more than 130 metric tons.

Besides, the 130 ton version of the SLS will still be a couple of years away even after the first launch happens for the 70 ton version, assuming it flies at all.

No, that hand-operated "parking brake", while it can certainly be used in that fashion, is an emergency brake and a back-up system to the primary braking system. Furthermore, it doesn't have nearly the same braking power as the primary braking system even if adjusted correctly and otherwise in working order.

I'll agree that a well designed vehicle should have that "parking brake" available to be used in this fashion, and assuming it is even a hand brake at that (instead of yet another pedal down on the floor as sometimes happens). On some vehicles it isn't an option though.

That is so old of a comment that it isn't relevant anyway. Can you name any current "Muslim outreach" efforts?

Other than some space tourism stuff from Dubai trying to buy American launch services and perhaps some countries in the Middle East trying to put up some communications satellites, I can't think of anything that might even remotely qualify for what you are talking about here. I certainly don't see any specific policy initiatives or anything with a congressional line item that targets Muslim countries.

The really fun maneuver is to have a manual transmission going from a full stop heading uphill (a steep hill at that) and some jackass that is only six inches from your rear bumper. Bonus points if you don't touch that car behind you.

For me, that takes pressing three pedals at the same time (break, gas, & clutch). You let off the brake pedal first as you let the clutch slip a little bit while stomping on the gas and trying not to stall out the engine at the same time. Perhaps there is an easier way to get that to happen, but typically with a manual clutch you will roll backward at least a few inches or even feet in that situation if you let off the brake pedal too soon and take the fraction of a second to move your foot from the brake to the gas pedal. Automatic transmissions are definitely much easier to use in that situation.

This is unusual even for Congress though. The excellent engineering firm known as the upper house of the American legislature went so far as to specify faring sizes, metallurgy requirements, engine thrust ISP numbers, and concrete mixes being used in the construction the manufacturing plants to make these parts. They really outdid themselves even for typical pork barrel projects to absolutely ensure that there was no possibility that any other contractor could have possibly met the RFP requirements. By the time the legislation was written, there wasn't anything left for the engineers to actually do other than supervision of the rocket construction itself.

It is almost as if the rocket was already designed even before the initial hearings on the proposal began. That wouldn't happen in America, would it?

Gwynne Shotwell already announced it won't launch until 1st quarter of next year at the earliest. I would take her word over Rand Simberg any day.

One of the big things that needs to happen with the Falcon Heavy is to complete the engine test stand in McGregor that will fire all 27 engines for a full mission burn simulation. There appears to be some construction going on that may get that to happen this summer, so I don't think this is something you can shrug off and suggest will never happen, but there certainly are some steps that must happen first before that launch goes off. The current hang-up doesn't appear to be getting engines built for other launches as the Hawthorn plant (from the same interview) is now producing about one full 9 engine rocket core each month, three of which are going to be used for the Falcon Heavy.

The lease on pad 39A at Cape Canaveral is also going to be used for the Falcon Heavy launch, but the upcoming flight is going to launch at Vandenberg instead for the initial test flight. Pad work on the Vandenberg launch site has been ongonig for a couple of years now in preparation for the Falcon Heavy. One of the problems with LC-40 is that the strongback lifter system is positioned in the wrong location to work with the Falcon Heavy in terms of having the flame trench positioned for all 27 engines properly and needs to be rotated 90 degrees, hence why the move for 39A. That is one of the things being worked on in Vandenberg.

I won't even touch the rest of the disparaging remarks you made here about SpaceX, but I will say that sometimes fans do get the best of themselves and are overly optimistic. I hope that is some actual analysis that shows some reasoning for some actual launch dates, and I'll even admit the launch could be pushed back another six months to another year even beyond next year. On the other hand, critical issues like getting the engines developed are already done and the other sub-systems are not really seen as significant critical path issues. The largest hang-up is the cross-feed system between the cores that may or may not even be fully implemented on the maiden flight.

The one current use of He3 (as opposed to He4 which doesn't work as well) is as a refrigerant, as it is able to cool things down to a far colder temperature than any other gas based refrigeration system.

I don't know how many people need things cooled down to 3 degrees Kelvin, but there is indeed a market for bulk quantities of He3 even without any sort of fusion reactors using the substance. He3 also has a few other interesting properties that make it sort of unique for some researchers as well. Admittedly though it is the use of this material in fusion that is the real market that would pay for lunar mining operations all by itself.

Hopefully a competent lawyer would be able to make that subtle distinction in terms of the exact provision of law that they are using to issue a complaint. You can still send a cease & desist request for trademark violations, which on YouTube would be with the same interface and e-mail submission tools that are used for DMCA requests.

The net effect is the same in either case, as the video is removed pending your counter-complaint to have the video put back up and fighting in a federal court room if the uploader disagrees with the assertion it is a violation of trademark.

Yes, I understand that there is a difference between copyright & trademark law. It is important to note also that in the case of these kind of videos it would not be a copyright violation as there is nothing in this case that Tesla actually produced in terms of copyrighted content (besides perhaps a somewhat questionable copyright issue on the visual appearance of the automobile itself). On the other hand, it is a clear use of trademarks without authorization, which is why a trademark challenge can be used in this situation.

This is a very common kind of thing done in most college film schools, where students are encouraged to make a commercial about some product that they like and promote it as if they were hired by that company. I had a rather progressive high school where I did that as a high school junior for a television communications class.

Really, it isn't that big of a deal. If the company itself picks up the commercial and runs it as if it was their own, that is where the FTC gets real nasty.

The other thing to worry about is that these guys posted the video on YouTube. Technically Tesla could yank the commercial as a violation of their trademark, and I suppose if it was misleading or doing something to ruin their reputation, they certainly could send in a DMCA request to YouTube and cause the commercial to be pulled. On the other hand, if it is this good, it is free advertising for them and generates buzz with a whole lot of people seeing their products in positive light, so it generally is a win-win situation for companies to support

This is not an interstate commerce issue. It is a state level issue for which the White House can do absolutely nothing about as it isn't a federal issue at all.

I'll admit that the interstate commerce clause is heavily abused in situations like this where activist federal judges try to presume that state governments don't even exist at all, but in the end this is about overturning a state law and regulations by state governments upon its own citizens. States can control and regulate how businesses interact on a local level with their citizens, which is precisely what the New Jersey government is doing in this case. If you want to make a difference here, you need to be a New Jersey citizen or use the New Jersey court system to resolve the issues involved according to New Jersey law. The U.S. Supreme Court can make a ruling upon appeal and overturn a decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court... assuming there is merit and for some reason the law wasn't actually followed. Even in a situation like that, the U.S. Supreme Court will make a ruling based upon New Jersey law and not federal law except in extreme situations.

That is tarnishing the good name of the National Enquirer for any such comparison to be made.

The proper comparison is to Pravda or The Pyongyang Times and the excellent journalistic integrity of those publications.

Keep in mind that the loans were available to any American automobile company. That at the time the legislation was written Tesla didn't even qualify for the loans should be even more kudos that Tesla was able to qualify themselves for the requirements to receive the loans. It was originally intended as a sort of bail-out to GM, and sort of fortunate that Tesla could submit a request for the same loan program. I have no idea why Fisker didn't qualify (or even if Fisker even tried), but that is a completely separate issue too. Also note that these loans had nothing at all to do with the Obama stimulus packages, something that it has been frequently been lumped into by clueless individuals since the announcement of the loans did take place about the same time other money was being doled out to a whole bunch of other companies under other programs.

I'll agree with you on principle here that the loans should never have been offered to anybody in the first place, but to single out Tesla in this case and claim that these loans are proof that the government is somehow favoring one company over another is simply false. It is a sort of favoring American companies over foreign counterparts, but that is international business negotiations where other countries do the same thing to companies based in their country.

Tesla is breaking the industry in the right way too.... by being competitive and making a better product. I like that. There is nothing which can stop GM, Ford, or any other major automobile company from doing the same thing in terms of trying to actually compete with Tesla, and that is ultimately good for ordinary people who may want to purchase some of these improved vehicles too.

If that is true, why did California lose representation in Congress with the last decennial census?

If it was on the New Jersey governor's website, I might be impressed. Neither Barack Obama nor anybody in his administration except for those who have New Jersey citizenship (aka registered voters in New Jersey) are capable of doing a thing about this issue, and those who are registered voters can only act as ordinary citizens in New Jersey and not in any official federal capacity.

Really, this is a stupid petition that will do nothing other than get somebody in the Obama administration try to explain the 10th Amendment with a straight face. It isn't a federal issue at all.