SpaceX delivers four astronauts to the International Space Station just 15 hours after launch
The four U.S., Russian and Japanese astronauts pulled up in their SpaceX capsule after launching from NASA's Kennedy Space Center. They will spend at least six months at the orbiting lab, swapping places with colleagues up there since March. SpaceX will bring those four back as early as Wednesday.
Moving in are NASA's Zena Cardman and Mike Fincke, Japan's Kimiya Yui and Russia's Oleg Platonov — each of whom had been originally assigned to other missions. "Hello, space station!" Fincke radioed as soon as the capsule docked high above the South Pacific.
Cardman and another astronaut were pulled from a SpaceX flight last year to make room for NASA's two stuck astronauts, Boeing Starliner test pilots Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, whose space station stay went from one week to more than nine months. Fincke and Yui had been training for the next Starliner mission. But with Starliner grounded by thruster and other problems until 2026, the two switched to SpaceX.
Platonov was bumped from the Soyuz launch lineup a couple of years ago because of an undisclosed illness.
Their arrival temporarily puts the space station population at 11.
"It was such an unbelievably beautiful sight to see the space station come into our view for the first time," Cardman said once on board.
While their taxi flight was speedy by U.S. standards, the Russians hold the record for the fastest trip to the space station — a lightning-fast three hours.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SpaceX rocket launch in Florida: What time is liftoff for Amazon satellites?
A daytime rocket launch from Florida is on the horizon — and if you're in the Volusia County area, it'll be a sight to see. A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will potentially carry the fourth batch of Amazon satellites into low-Earth orbit. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos launched Project Kuiper, a global network of satellites, to compete with SpaceX CEO-billionaire Elon Musk and Starlink satellites. The first two launches of the Amazon Project Kuiper production satellites were courtesy of a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket from Cape Canaveral. Online, the mission has been called the "Amazon rocket launch" or "the Amazon rocket launch from Florida,' but it's accurate to call it the Amazon satellite rocket launch or Project Kuiper missions. Rockets here launch from NASA's Kennedy Space Center or nearby Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. Weather permitting and depending on cloud cover, a rocket launch from Florida's Space Coast could be visible as far north as Jacksonville Beach and Daytona Beach to as far south as Fort Pierce and West Palm Beach. When there's a launch window in the middle of the night or very early morning, there's an opportunity for unique photos — the rocket lights up the dark sky and the contrail after makes for a great photo. Below is more information about the SpaceX rocket launch in Florida and suggestions on where to watch them from here. Is there a launch today? Upcoming NASA, SpaceX, ULA rocket launch schedule at Cape Canaveral For questions or comments, email FLORIDA TODAY Space Reporter Rick Neale at rneale@ or Space Reporter Brooke Edwards at bedwards@ For more space news from the USA TODAY Network, visit When is the next rocket launch from Florida? Thursday, Aug. 7: Amazon Kuiper KF-02 Mission: SpaceX will launch the next batch of satellites for Amazon's Project Kuiper satellite internet constellation. This is the second launch of the satellies on a SpaceX rocket and the fourth launch of the Amazon satellites. Launch time and day: 10:01 a.m. to 10:28 a.m. Thursday, Aug. 7, 2025 Launch location: Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Cape Canaveral, Florida Sonic booms for Space Coast of Florida (Merritt Island, Melbourne area): No Live coverage starts 90 minutes before liftoff at : You can watch live rocket launch coverage from USA TODAY Network's Space Team, which consists of FLORIDA TODAY space reporters Rick Neale and Brooke Edwards and visuals journalists Craig Bailey, Malcolm Denemark and Tim Shortt. Our Space Team will provide up-to-the-minute updates in a mobile-friendly live blog, complete with a countdown clock, at starting 90 minutes before liftoff. You can download the free FLORIDA TODAY app, which is available in the App Store or Google Play, or type into your browser. Florida rocket launch photos from Volusia County Where to see Florida rocket launch in Daytona Beach, New Smyrna Beach area In Volusia County, immediately north of Brevard County — home to Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station — you can get a great view of a SpaceX, NASA or United Launch Alliance rocket launch. The best views to watch a rocket launch from here are along the beach. Look due south. Recommended spots: • South New Smyrna Beach (Canaveral National Seashore) • Mary McLeod Bethune Beach Park, 6656 S. Atlantic Ave., New Smyrna Beach. Bethune Beach is 3.5 miles south of New Smyrna Beach and one mile north of the Apollo Beach entrance to Canaveral National Seashore Park. • Apollo Beach at Canaveral National Seashore (south of New Smyrna Beach). Canaveral National Seashore runs along Florida's East Coast in Volusia County and Brevard County. To access Apollo Beach, take Interstate 95 to exit 249, then travel east until it turns into State Road A1A. Follow SR A1A south to the park entrance. • Oak Hill riverfront is the southernmost city in South Volusia County. • Sunrise Park, 275 River Road, Oak Hill • Goodrich's Seafood and Oyster House back deck, 253 River Road, Oak Hill • Seminole Rest national historic site, 211 River Road, Oak Hill • Riverbreeze Park, 250 H.H. Burch Road, Oak Hill • Mary Dewees Park, 178 N. Gaines St., Oak Hill • Nancy Cummings Park, 232 Cummings St., Oak Hill • Jimmie Vann Sunrise Park, 275 River Road, Oak Hill • A.C. Delbert Dewees Municipal Pier, 243 River Road, Oak Hill • Bird Observation Pier on River Road across from A.C. Delbert Municipal Pier (see above) • Rose Bay in Port Orange, Florida • beaches along New Smyrna Beach, Florida • New Smyrna Beach Inlet, New Smyrna Beach lifeguard station • Halifax Harbor Marina in Daytona Beach, Florida • Ormond-by-the-Sea in Ormond Beach, Florida • George R. Kennedy Memorial Park in Edgewater, Florida This article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: Amazon, SpaceX launch in Florida: What time is Cape Canaveral liftoff? Solve the daily Crossword
13 minutes ago
US should put nuclear reactors on moon before other countries do, acting NASA administrator says
Nuclear power on the moon is critical to the United States' space exploration and national security goals, and the U.S. government should "move quickly" to build reactors there before its terrestrial rivals, according to a directive issued by Transportation Secretary and acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy, which was obtained by ABC News. One full "day" on the moon is two weeks of light followed by approximately two weeks of darkness (in Earth time). Nuclear energy, referred to as fission surface power, or FSP, in the directive, is a "sustainable" and "high-powered" energy source that can survive through the lunar night and be deployed on other celestial bodies, like Mars, according to Duffy. "Since March 2024, China and Russia have announced on at least three occasions a joint effort to place a reactor on the Moon by the mid-2030s," Duffy said in the directive. "The first country to do so could potentially declare a keep-out zone which would significantly inhibit the United States from establishing a planned Artemis presence if not there first." When reached for comment by ABC News, NASA said, "We'll let these directives speak for themselves." The directive, dated July 31, calls for a "Fission Surface Power Program Executive" to be named within 30 days who will implement and oversee the project and will report directly to the NASA administrator. It does not say what exactly the nuclear reactors would power on the moon. Politico was the first to report on this directive. A second directive, issued on the same day by Duffy, aims to speed up the development of replacements for the International Space Station, which is set to retire by 2030. While NASA has never used a fission nuclear reactor in space, it has been using nuclear material to power spacecraft since the 1960s. Known as radioisotope thermoelectric generators, or RTGs, these systems use the heat generated by the decay of plutonium-238, a nuclear element, to create electricity for powering spacecraft and rovers. Currently, NASA's Curiosity rover on Mars is using an RTG system for its power. In recent years, billions of dollars have been spent developing a new kind of nuclear reactor called Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). These reactors produce less power than traditional reactors, but are significantly smaller in size. SMRs are still being developed in the U.S. and there are no units currently in operation.
Scientific American
42 minutes ago
- Scientific American
NASA's Plan for a Nuclear Reactor on the Moon Could Be a Lunar Land Grab
NASA could soon go nuclear on the moon. The space agency's acting administrator, Sean Duffy, has issued a directive to expedite building a nuclear reactor on the lunar surface. Duffy, a former Fox News host, is also head of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and he took over leadership of NASA in July after the Trump administration pulled its nomination of the private astronaut and businessman Jared Isaacman. The directive, first reported by Politico, would accelerate NASA's long-simmering —and, to date, largely fruitless—efforts to develop nuclear reactors to support space science and exploration. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. The space agency has pursued various projects over the years, most recently in 2022, when it by awarded three $5 million contracts to companies crafting designs for small, space-ready reactors meant for lunar operations in the mid-2030s. Inspired in part by a space policy directive issued by President Trump during his first term, those were intended to produce 40 kilowatts of power—enough to sustain a small office building—and would weigh less than six metric tons. Duffy's directive is more ambitious, calling for NASA to solicit proposals for reactors that would yield at least 100 kilowatts of power and be ready for launch by late 2029. The space agency is tasked with appointing an official to oversee the effort within 30 days, and to issue its solicitation within 60 days. Lunar nights are very long—two Earth weeks—and perilously cold, making nuclear power desirable for surface operations. But according to the directive the greater impetus for the fast-tracked plan is a burgeoning partnership between China and Russia to build a nuclear-powered outpost near the moon's south pole by the mid-2030s. The sun never crests high above the horizon there, leaving some craters in permanent shadow—and valuable deposits of water ice lacing their eternally dark floors. Despite its cryogenic chill this lunar region is hotly contested, with NASA's Artemis program also targeting crewed landings there as early as 2027 as part of the Artemis III mission. Besides providing abundant electricity for surface operations, a nuclear reactor on the moon could also allow for a strategic lunar land grab. Ownership of otherworldly territory is prohibited according to the U.N. Outer Space Treaty, but the treaty also obliges spacefaring powers to exercise 'due regard' in their activities, meaning that they should not encroach on or interfere with sensitive infrastructure built there by others. A nuclear reactor placed on the lunar surface, therefore, could allow the declaration of what Duffy's directive calls a 'keep-out zone.' Although the Trump administration's acceleration of NASA's nuclear-power efforts may be welcomed by many space-exploration advocates, it comes alongside other proposals from the White House that seek to radically reshape the space agency and could be at cross purposes. These include plans for extraordinarily deep cuts to NASA's science programs, as well as an active and ongoing culling of the space agency's work force. The president's budget request for fiscal year 2026 notably zeroes out funding for a joint program between NASA and the Department of Defense to develop nuclear rocketry; it would also wind down the space agency's ability to build and deploy radioisotope power sources, which offer nuclear-derived heat and electricity sans complex and heavy reactors for robotic missions to the outer planets and other sunlight-sparse parts of the solar system. The biggest question facing NASA's latest nuclear foray, however, may be what these notional new reactors would actually power. Many experts say a 2027 launch for Artemis III is unlikely, citing factors such as the ongoing difficulties of developing a requisite lunar lander based on SpaceX's Starship rocket. With each logistical misstep or schedule delay, additional Artemis missions that would put more meaningful and power-hungry infrastructure on the moon slip further over the horizon, potentially making the entire program more vulnerable to additional rounds of budget cuts—or even outright cancellation by future administrations. It's Time to Stand Up for Science Before you close the page, we need to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and we think right now is the most critical moment in that two-century history. We're not asking for charity. If you become a Digital, Print or Unlimited subscriber to Scientific American, you can help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both future and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself often goes unrecognized.
