The post SpaceX, Blue Origin propose faster lunar timelines after NASA pushback appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. NASA has confirmed that it has received and is reviewing accelerated lunar mission plans from SpaceX and Blue Origin, in an effort to outpace China’s lunar ambitions. The space agency has formed a committee of subject matter experts to determine the best path to win the second lunar race. The space agency now suggests the lunar landing timeline could be accelerated to fit within President Donald Trump’s term, ideally before 2028. The confirmation comes just days after NASA’s acting chief Sean Duffy slammed SpaceX for repeated delays and explosions during Starship moon lander tests. He also threatened to pass the $4 billion contract to Blue Origin, among other American companies. Cryptopolitan recently reported that NASA doubts SpaceX’s ability to complete the lunar mission within the scheduled timeline. The Artemis II mission, which aims to launch astronauts for a trial run around the moon, is scheduled for next year, highlighting NASA’s urgency.  SpaceX says it is working on a simplified mission architecture In a lengthy blog article published on October 30, SpaceX revealed that its engineers are working on a simplified mission architecture to fulfill the key role of landing humans on the moon in more than half a century. Elon Musk’s aerospace and defense contractor said it has shared and is formally assessing the concept of operations that will return man to the moon faster and safer.   The updated design features direct orbital refueling, over 1,000 cubic meters of habitable space, and a payload capacity of up to 100 tons. SpaceX aims to establish a permanent human presence on the moon’s surface, not just footprints and flags, ultimately paving the way for a path to Mars.  Meanwhile, Duffy had previously complained that SpaceX is falling behind the U.S. timeline to return to the moon with Artemis, adding that the agency… The post SpaceX, Blue Origin propose faster lunar timelines after NASA pushback appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. NASA has confirmed that it has received and is reviewing accelerated lunar mission plans from SpaceX and Blue Origin, in an effort to outpace China’s lunar ambitions. The space agency has formed a committee of subject matter experts to determine the best path to win the second lunar race. The space agency now suggests the lunar landing timeline could be accelerated to fit within President Donald Trump’s term, ideally before 2028. The confirmation comes just days after NASA’s acting chief Sean Duffy slammed SpaceX for repeated delays and explosions during Starship moon lander tests. He also threatened to pass the $4 billion contract to Blue Origin, among other American companies. Cryptopolitan recently reported that NASA doubts SpaceX’s ability to complete the lunar mission within the scheduled timeline. The Artemis II mission, which aims to launch astronauts for a trial run around the moon, is scheduled for next year, highlighting NASA’s urgency.  SpaceX says it is working on a simplified mission architecture In a lengthy blog article published on October 30, SpaceX revealed that its engineers are working on a simplified mission architecture to fulfill the key role of landing humans on the moon in more than half a century. Elon Musk’s aerospace and defense contractor said it has shared and is formally assessing the concept of operations that will return man to the moon faster and safer.   The updated design features direct orbital refueling, over 1,000 cubic meters of habitable space, and a payload capacity of up to 100 tons. SpaceX aims to establish a permanent human presence on the moon’s surface, not just footprints and flags, ultimately paving the way for a path to Mars.  Meanwhile, Duffy had previously complained that SpaceX is falling behind the U.S. timeline to return to the moon with Artemis, adding that the agency…

SpaceX, Blue Origin propose faster lunar timelines after NASA pushback

NASA has confirmed that it has received and is reviewing accelerated lunar mission plans from SpaceX and Blue Origin, in an effort to outpace China’s lunar ambitions. The space agency has formed a committee of subject matter experts to determine the best path to win the second lunar race.

The space agency now suggests the lunar landing timeline could be accelerated to fit within President Donald Trump’s term, ideally before 2028. The confirmation comes just days after NASA’s acting chief Sean Duffy slammed SpaceX for repeated delays and explosions during Starship moon lander tests. He also threatened to pass the $4 billion contract to Blue Origin, among other American companies.

Cryptopolitan recently reported that NASA doubts SpaceX’s ability to complete the lunar mission within the scheduled timeline. The Artemis II mission, which aims to launch astronauts for a trial run around the moon, is scheduled for next year, highlighting NASA’s urgency. 

SpaceX says it is working on a simplified mission architecture

In a lengthy blog article published on October 30, SpaceX revealed that its engineers are working on a simplified mission architecture to fulfill the key role of landing humans on the moon in more than half a century. Elon Musk’s aerospace and defense contractor said it has shared and is formally assessing the concept of operations that will return man to the moon faster and safer.  

The updated design features direct orbital refueling, over 1,000 cubic meters of habitable space, and a payload capacity of up to 100 tons. SpaceX aims to establish a permanent human presence on the moon’s surface, not just footprints and flags, ultimately paving the way for a path to Mars. 

Meanwhile, Duffy had previously complained that SpaceX is falling behind the U.S. timeline to return to the moon with Artemis, adding that the agency will not wait for a single company to catch up. He emphasized that NASA will continue to push forward and win the second space race against China, highlighting Blue Origin as likely to take over. 

However, Musk dismissed Duffy’s criticism, claiming the person responsible for America’s space program cannot have a 2-digit IQ. He also responded to the NASA executive, claiming Blue Origin has never delivered any useful payload to orbit, let alone the Moon.

Shotwell says she cannot wait to go to the moon

The President and COO of SpaceX, Gwynne Shotwell, said earlier today that she cannot wait to go to the moon. Her remarks came as her company claimed to have maximized real-world testing throughout the Starship development process to demonstrate capabilities and identify areas for improvement, or prove out solutions.

SpaceX clarified that it has self-funded up to 90% of system costs and development of the HLS-specific Starship. The company also disclosed that it is working under a fixed-price contract with NASA, ensuring that it is only paid based on delivered milestones. 

To date, SpaceX has produced nearly 600 Raptor rocket engines, with more than 226,000 seconds of run time on the Raptor 2 engine and over 40,000 seconds on the Raptor 3 engine. It has also produced over three dozen Starships. 

The aerospace and defense contractor claims there have been 11 Starship-only flight tests and 11 generated flight tests of Super Heavy and Starship. It has constructed and continues to construct new Starship launch, production, integration, and test facilities in Texas, Florida, and California. 

The private investment of billions of dollars is creating over five million square feet of manufacturing and integration space, multiple Raptor test stands, and five launch pads across Florida and Texas. SpaceX says all will be engineered to ramp Starship’s launch cadence above and beyond what was achieved by its Falcon program.

Join a premium crypto trading community free for 30 days – normally $100/mo.

Source: https://www.cryptopolitan.com/spacex-and-blue-origin-pitch-nasa/

Market Opportunity
Bluefin Logo
Bluefin Price(BLUE)
$0.02011
$0.02011$0.02011
+0.34%
USD
Bluefin (BLUE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 7, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — HitPaw, a leader in AI-powered visual enhancement solutions, announced Comfy, a global content creation platform, is
Share
AI Journal2026/02/08 09:15
Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

A Journalist gave a brutal review of the new Melania documentary, which has been criticized by those who say it won't make back the huge fees spent to make it,
Share
Rawstory2026/02/08 09:08
Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Prominent analyst Cheeky Crypto (203,000 followers on YouTube) set out to verify a fast-spreading claim that XRP’s circulating supply could “vanish overnight,” and his conclusion is more nuanced than the headline suggests: nothing in the ledger disappears, but the amount of XRP that is truly liquid could be far smaller than most dashboards imply—small enough, in his view, to set the stage for an abrupt liquidity squeeze if demand spikes. XRP Supply Shock? The video opens with the host acknowledging his own skepticism—“I woke up to a rumor that XRP supply could vanish overnight. Sounds crazy, right?”—before committing to test the thesis rather than dismiss it. He frames the exercise as an attempt to reconcile a long-standing critique (“XRP’s supply is too large for high prices”) with a rival view taking hold among prominent community voices: that much of the supply counted as “circulating” is effectively unavailable to trade. His first step is a straightforward data check. Pulling public figures, he finds CoinMarketCap showing roughly 59.6 billion XRP as circulating, while XRPScan reports about 64.7 billion. The divergence prompts what becomes the video’s key methodological point: different sources count “circulating” differently. Related Reading: Analyst Sounds Major XRP Warning: Last Chance To Get In As Accumulation Balloons As he explains it, the higher on-ledger number likely includes balances that aggregators exclude or treat as restricted, most notably Ripple’s programmatic escrow. He highlights that Ripple still “holds a chunk of XRP in escrow, about 35.3 billion XRP locked up across multiple wallets, with a nominal schedule of up to 1 billion released per month and unused portions commonly re-escrowed. Those coins exist and are accounted for on-ledger, but “they aren’t actually sitting on exchanges” and are not immediately available to buyers. In his words, “for all intents and purposes, that escrow stash is effectively off of the market.” From there, the analysis moves from headline “circulating supply” to the subtler concept of effective float. Beyond escrow, he argues that large strategic holders—banks, fintechs, or other whales—may sit on material balances without supplying order books. When you strip out escrow and these non-selling stashes, he says, “the effective circulating supply… is actually way smaller than the 59 or even 64 billion figure.” He cites community estimates in the “20 or 30 billion” range for what might be truly liquid at any given moment, while emphasizing that nobody has a precise number. That effective-float framing underpins the crux of his thesis: a potential supply shock if demand accelerates faster than fresh sell-side supply appears. “Price is a dance between supply and demand,” he says; if institutional or sovereign-scale users suddenly need XRP and “the market finds that there isn’t enough XRP readily available,” order books could thin out and prices could “shoot on up, sometimes violently.” His phrase “circulating supply could collapse overnight” is presented not as a claim that tokens are destroyed or removed from the ledger, but as a market-structure scenario in which available inventory to sell dries up quickly because holders won’t part with it. How Could The XRP Supply Shock Happen? On the demand side, he anchors the hypothetical to tokenization. He points to the “very early stages of something huge in finance”—on-chain tokenization of debt, stablecoins, CBDCs and even gold—and argues the XRP Ledger aims to be “the settlement layer” for those assets.He references Ripple CTO David Schwartz’s earlier comments about an XRPL pivot toward tokenized assets and notes that an institutional research shop (Bitwise) has framed XRP as a way to play the tokenization theme. In his construction, if “trillions of dollars in value” begin settling across XRPL rails, working inventories of XRP for bridging, liquidity and settlement could rise sharply, tightening effective float. Related Reading: XRP Bearish Signal: Whales Offload $486 Million In Asset To illustrate, he offers two analogies. First, the “concert tickets” model: you think there are 100,000 tickets (100B supply), but 50,000 are held by the promoter (escrow) and 30,000 by corporate buyers (whales), leaving only 20,000 for the public; if a million people want in, prices explode. Second, a comparison to Bitcoin’s halving: while XRP has no programmatic halving, he proposes that a sudden adoption wave could function like a de facto halving of available supply—“XRP’s version of a halving could actually be the adoption event.” He also updates the narrative context that long dogged XRP. Once derided for “too much supply,” he argues the script has “totally flipped.” He cites the current cycle’s optics—“XRP is sitting above $3 with a market cap north of around $180 billion”—as evidence that raw supply counts did not cap price as tightly as critics claimed, and as a backdrop for why a scarcity narrative is gaining traction. Still, he declines to publish targets or timelines, repeatedly stressing uncertainty and risk. “I’m not a financial adviser… cryptocurrencies are highly volatile,” he reminds viewers, adding that tokenization could take off “on some other platform,” unfold more slowly than enthusiasts expect, or fail to get to “sudden shock” scale. The verdict he offers is deliberately bound. The theory that “XRP supply could vanish overnight” is imprecise on its face; the ledger will not erase coins. But after examining dashboard methodologies, escrow mechanics and the behavior of large holders, he concludes that the effective float could be meaningfully smaller than headline supply figures, and that a fast-developing tokenization use case could, under the right conditions, stress that float. “Overnight is a dramatic way to put it,” he concedes. “The change could actually be very sudden when it comes.” At press time, XRP traded at $3.0198. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 11:00