Jared Isaacman

You get no muscle memory if you're launching that thing every three and a half years.

People are working to launch the mission, and then they're going to move on and go somewhere else, and you have to rebuild all those competencies again.

It's not a recipe for success.

Again, we also have tended to just go right to the dream state and forget that you need to do things as challenging as returning to the moon in an iterative, evolutionary way.

We had Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and an awful lot of Apollo missions before 11.

Now,

We should have learned some things since then.

We do have the power of our great industry in order to help us.

So I don't think you necessarily need as many missions.

You certainly need more than one trip around the moon and then land and call it a day.

That's not going to work.

So, you know, we're getting back to some of our basics.

We're inserting another mission in 27 to, again, ensure that we have the muscle memory at the pad so when we intend to launch, we actually can launch.

And then you got to rendezvous with one or both your lander providers in low Earth orbit, just as we did with Apollo 9.

Get confidence in the systems, buy down risk before you send people to the moon.

I mean, it's the difference between if something goes wrong, you're hours away from being in the water or days away.

So we got to get it right.

It's incredibly hard to return to the moon.

We got to do it in, you know, again, a smart approach.

Yeah, you know, look, I mean, a lot of people when I came to this job was like, industry is not going to let you do what you want to do and the politicians aren't going to let you do what you want to do.