NASA局长Jared Isaacman全景访谈：重返月球、核动力推进与太空新竞赛

Announcer: Ignition sequence start, all engines up.

Host: It's good to have an aviator and astronaut in charge. Jared Isaacman,

Host: the new NASA administrator.

Jared Isaacman: NASA's still hot. Humankind will not be contained to planet Earth indefinitely. In the next giant leap capabilities, that's nuclear power and propulsion. That's what extends America's reach farther into the solar system. That's what guarantees the third race will never be in question.

Good morning everyone. It is an absolute honor to be here at All-In.

We are living through an extraordinary moment in history, aren't we? It took just 65 years from Orville and Wilbur's first flight to Neil and Buzz walking on the surface of the moon. Now, it's been 57 years since Apollo 11. And for a while there, pace of progress hasn't been all that inspiring, but look at what is on the horizon right now. We got artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, robotics, additive manufacturing, the promise of fusion energy, biotech to heal the disabled, autonomous transportation, this whole abundance thing everyone's talking about, all converging in the years ahead is beyond what most people can comprehend.

Our world will fundamentally change: how we live, how we work, how we fight wars, how we reach out and touch the stars.

But we are not alone on this journey. We are living through a great power competition. Other nations understand the opportunities that can elevate nations and change civilizations. And perhaps nowhere are the possibilities, the competition, and the consequences of getting it wrong more apparent than in the ultimate high ground above us.

Now at NASA, we are doing things differently and we are regaining our swagger and putting wins on the board. But absent this president, absent this geopolitical competition and the very real possibility of losing the second space race, I suspect very little would have changed. For too long, resources at the world's most accomplished space agency were spread everywhere, trying to make everyone happy. Much of it was through external imposition, but plenty of it was self-inflicted. We partnered for the sake of partnerships, often at the expense of clarity, accountability, and the mission itself, burning valuable time and treasure in the process.

Those days are over.

We are refocusing NASA. We will cut through the bureaucracy, stop wasting taxpayer money on dead-end programs, and restore accountability across the agency. We will focus on a few defining priorities: returning to the moon to stay, opening the path to Mars, accelerating deep space nuclear propulsion, and securing American leadership across all domains of flight.

If a program does not directly advance these critical goals, it will make way. This is a time for clarity, commitment, speed, and winning again.

Jared Isaacman: Let's talk about the moon. People ask: why go back to the moon? Didn't we do that over half a century ago? The truth is, we went, we planted a flag, we left footprints, and then we left. We never stayed. We never built the enduring infrastructure. The moon is not just a destination; it is the proving ground and the stepping stone for the rest of the solar system.

At the lunar south pole, there are hundreds of millions of tons of water ice trapped in permanently shadowed craters that haven't seen sunlight in billions of years. That water ice is not just drinking water and breathable oxygen for astronauts—it is rocket propellant. By cracking water into liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, we create the fuel depot of the solar system. If we can mine and refine propellant on the lunar surface, we don't have to haul every single pound of fuel out of Earth's deep gravity well. That changes the physics and economics of deep space travel completely.

The moon is also an extraordinary scientific platform. The far side of the moon is shielded from the radio noise of Earth, making it the ideal location for the next generation of radio telescopes to look back into the cosmic dark ages. The lunar environment, with one-sixth gravity and a hard vacuum, enables manufacturing of ultra-pure materials, advanced pharmaceuticals, and novel alloys that simply cannot be made on Earth.

We are returning to the moon to build a permanent outpost, to develop lunar industries, to utilize in-situ resources, and to test every life support and operational system we need for Mars.

Moreover, China and Russia are actively pursuing their International Lunar Research Station, targeting the exact same strategic locations at the lunar south pole. The areas of permanent sunlight—the peaks of eternal light—and adjacent water ice deposits are extremely scarce real estate. If we are not there first to establish rules-based operations under the Artemis Accords, others will set the norms. The outcome of this great power competition will be determined by who establishes that foothold first.

Jared Isaacman: Let's turn to the defining bottleneck for Mars: propulsion. If we rely solely on conventional chemical propulsion, a one-way transit to Mars takes anywhere from six to nine months. During that extended transit, astronauts are exposed to intense galactic cosmic radiation, solar particle events, and prolonged microgravity that degrades bone and muscle mass. Furthermore, orbital mechanics dictate that the launch window opens only once every 26 months, committing crews to nearly three-year round trips.

The only way to fundamentally change the calculus of deep space exploration is through nuclear power and propulsion.

With Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP), a compact nuclear reactor heats a low-molecular-weight propellant like liquid hydrogen to extreme temperatures, expanding it through a nozzle to produce a specific impulse at least twice that of the best chemical engines. This cuts transit times down to two or three months, dramatically reducing radiation exposure, slashing required life-support consumables, and offering flexible abort trajectories.

On the surface, Fission Surface Power is equally non-negotiable. During the 14-day lunar night, temperatures plummet and solar power is non-existent. On Mars, planet-wide dust storms can blot out the sun for months. A robust, compact fission reactor operating 24/7 is the only reliable way to provide continuous tens or hundreds of kilowatts of electrical power needed to run life support systems, in-situ propellant production plants, and habitats.

NASA is actively doubling down on nuclear technologies, partnering with the Department of Energy, DARPA, and commercial industry to accelerate ground testing and flight demonstrations. Nuclear capability is what extends America's reach across the solar system.

Jared Isaacman: Many people forget that the first "A" in NASA stands for Aeronautics. From the X-1 breaking the sound barrier to hypersonic flight research, NASA's aeronautics work has laid the foundation for global civil and military aviation. Nearly every commercial airliner and military aircraft flying today incorporates NASA technology—whether in supercritical wings, fly-by-wire controls, advanced composite structures, or fuel-efficient turbofan designs.

Today, NASA is getting back into the business of flying high and fast. Our X-59 quiet supersonic aircraft is proving that commercial supersonic flight over land is possible without disruptive sonic booms. Our investments in hypersonics, autonomous airspace management, and next-generation propulsion will ensure that American aviation retains its clear technological edge for decades to come.

We must lead in the skies just as we lead in the cosmos.

Our future depends on the choices we make today. Our children will either inherit the confidence of a nation still capable of the extraordinary or the memory of one that used to be. That responsibility belongs to all of us.

When history looks back on this moment, let it record that America did not hesitate any longer. We did not allow bureaucracy, complacency, waste, inaction, or fear of failure to constrain what we could accomplish. We chose to go, and we went.

Thank you very much.

Host: America. Good job. Good job.

Jason Calacanis: Where do you want me? Oh, right on the I was commenting backstage on how easy it is for NASA to come and do speeches given the content, the capabilities.

Jared Isaacman: No, we have unbelievable material to work with. I'm thankful every day that I don't lead the IRS or Social Security.

Jason Calacanis: Yeah. Right. Can we talk about—we don't have a lot of time, so I know I want to move our way through the universe, but can we start with the moon? What is—there's kind of all these plans about Artemis and returning to the moon. What is the actual roadmap?

Jared Isaacman: Yeah, right. So, I think we are extremely fortunate. We've been gifted a moon three days away to test out everything we need on this great adventure of discovery, right? This is where you test life support, in-situ resource utilization, radiation mitigation, and habitat construction. If you can't survive and build an enduring presence on the moon three days away, you have no business trying to do it on Mars months or years away.

Chamath Palihapitiya: Sorry, one sec. But and then we have to map the South Pole to figure out where we're going. Is that right? And that's part of this next series of missions. That's kind of the next big mission for the moon.

Jared Isaacman: I'm glad you brought that up. We have mapped the lunar south pole. There are only so many good landing spots. And what do I mean by that? I mean the surface area of the moon is roughly equivalent to North and South America combined, but the truly strategic real estate is clustered around a few specific crater rims at the south pole.

The reason is twofold: first is the water ice trapped in permanently shadowed craters where temperatures are near absolute zero; second are the peaks of eternal light, elevated topographic features that receive near-continuous solar illumination, providing both power and manageable thermal conditions. So the spots that give you both proximity to water ice and continuous access to solar energy are very limited. That is why there is an intense race to get there first and establish operations.

David Sacks: And Jared, you were educating me last night on this specific southern region of the moon being absolutely critical for us to get to first versus China. From an organizational execution standpoint, how are you ensuring NASA moves fast enough to secure that lead?

Jared Isaacman: Yeah. Just to be clear, you're talking about some of the best talent in this nation showing up to work at NASA every day, wanting to change the world in air and space. But for too long, layers of bureaucracy, risk aversion, and conflicting mandates slowed them down.

We are actively breaking those bottlenecks. We're flattening the decision-making hierarchy, empowering program managers on the ground, and clearing out red tape. At the same time, we are deepening our partnership with the commercial space ecosystem. We are moving away from traditional cost-plus contracts toward milestone-based fixed-price commercial procurement. When commercial partners deliver, they thrive; if they run over budget or slip schedule, the risk is on them. That unleashes private-sector speed, capital efficiency, and rapid iteration, transforming projects that previously took decades and tens of billions of dollars.

David Friedberg: What is the big technological leap that you have to make from the current course and speed to actually make Mars more realistic? Is propulsion and thrust the main vector?

Jared Isaacman: I think there are a couple of essential pillars. First, autonomous robotics will be critical. Before humans set foot on Mars, automated cargo landers must deliver power plants, life-support units, and in-situ resource utilization plants. Humanoid robots and automated systems will need to assemble habitats and initiate propellant production autonomously.

Second, for human transit, relying purely on chemical propulsion requires carrying enormous propellant mass fractions and subjects crews to six-to-nine-month journeys through hostile deep space radiation environments. Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) and Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) represent the definitive technological leap. With double or triple the specific impulse, nuclear propulsion cuts travel time down to weeks or a couple of months, fundamentally reducing physiological degradation and radiation hazards while dramatically increasing payload capacity.

Jason Calacanis: That's great. I'm glad you brought up nuclear again, but what is the current state of development and how quickly can we actually build and deploy operational nuclear propulsion?

Chamath Palihapitiya: Can you explain just really briefly a primer on how nuclear works for generating thrust?

Jared Isaacman: Yeah, sure. You can think of it in two main categories:

First is electric propulsion, like the Hall-effect ion thrusters used on Starlink satellites. In that architecture, electrical power—generated either by solar arrays or a nuclear fission reactor—is used to ionize a noble gas like xenon or argon, and electrostatic or electromagnetic fields accelerate those ions out of the nozzle at tens of kilometers per second. While the absolute thrust is tiny—measured in fractions of a pound—the specific impulse is astronomical, allowing continuous acceleration over months or years in the vacuum of space.

Second is Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP). In NTP, you have a compact, high-temperature nuclear fission reactor core. Instead of combusting chemicals, you pump a lightweight propellant like liquid hydrogen directly through the superheated core. The hydrogen expands violently and exits the nozzle at extreme exhaust velocities. Because molecular hydrogen has the lowest molecular weight of any element, thermodynamics allows it to achieve exhaust velocities more than double that of the best chemical rocket combustion products, giving you high thrust combined with unmatched efficiency.

David Friedberg: Right. It's very low mass flow, but extremely high exhaust velocity and efficiency.

Jared Isaacman: Exactly. That's why for deep space transit, nuclear propulsion is the only transformative technology that breaks through the mass fraction barriers of chemical rocketry.

Jason Calacanis: What is NASA's budget, and if you could have your druthers, what would it be?

Jared Isaacman: NASA's annual budget is approximately $25 billion. I've said it many times: NASA does not have a top-line budget problem; it has had a focus and resource allocation problem.

If you spread $25 billion across hundreds of diffuse pet projects and legacy cost-plus programs to appease political constituencies, even $50 billion wouldn't be enough. But if you take that $25 billion, ruthlessly prioritize around permanent lunar infrastructure, nuclear propulsion, Mars transit, and aeronautics dominance, while leveraging commercial fixed-price partnerships for massive private-capital matching, that budget is more than sufficient to win the space race and put humans on Mars.

David Sacks: Are you sure that's a Blackbird?

Jason Calacanis: Well, okay. What was that picture that you showed up there?

Jared Isaacman: Like I said, NASA's getting back in the business of flying high and fast again.

Jason Calacanis: I mean, that doesn't seem like a space vehicle. It seems like an Earth air vehicle.

Jared Isaacman: Yeah. So the first "A" in NASA is our aeronautics portfolio. What we've contributed over the decades is vast. When you go see an F-22 fly at an air show or fly on a modern commercial airliner with high-bypass turbofans and supercritical wings, that all originated from NASA research centers at Langley, Ames, and Glenn.

We are pushing forward with the X-59 quiet supersonic demonstrator, hypersonics research, advanced boundary layer manipulation, and novel airframe configurations. We want to ensure America retains total supremacy in atmospheric flight just as we do in outer space.

Jason Calacanis: Tell us about the importance of having a human on these ships when we go to the moon, when we go to Mars, versus if humanoid robotics like Optimus or Figure are ready. Why would we risk human lives?

Jared Isaacman: Because exploration is our destiny. It is the same reason our ancestors crossed uncharted oceans, traversed continents, and climbed the highest mountains. That is fundamentally who we are. If explorers throughout history had only sent empty probes, the human story would not exist as we know it.

Robotics are extraordinary tools and vital pioneers—they will scout the terrain, perform heavy construction in radiation environments, and manage industrial extraction. But the ultimate objective of space exploration is to expand the sphere of human civilization, to make life multiplanetary, and to ensure the long-term survival of human consciousness. Science, inspiration, and civilizational destiny are only truly realized when human beings live and work on those new frontiers.

David Sacks: What about autonomous navigation and modernized flight systems? You mentioned fly-by-wire. In civil aviation, we still see safety incidents and traffic constraints. What role is NASA playing in modernizing air traffic safety and autonomy?

Jared Isaacman: NASA has played a foundational role in air traffic safety and modernization for decades. For example, the Autonomous Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS), which has saved dozens of pilots' lives and aircraft, was pioneered by NASA in partnership with the Air Force and industry.

As we look toward a future with thousands of eVTOL air taxis, autonomous cargo drones, and denser commercial flight corridors, legacy human-centric air traffic control cannot scale. NASA is developing the next-generation autonomous airspace management systems powered by AI and real-time mesh networks, enabling automated trajectory deconfliction, dynamic routing, and extreme weather mitigation to ensure air travel becomes exponentially safer and more efficient.

Jared Isaacman: Right now, science represents approximately a third of NASA's total budget. We recently reorganized, but our core mission directorates are sharply focused on human space exploration, space technology, transformative science missions, and advanced aeronautics.

Jason Calacanis: As we wrap up, can we watch the video of the helicopters on Mars and can you tell us about the timelines to this becoming a broader reality?

Jared Isaacman: Oh, absolutely.

Jason Calacanis: So, here it is coming in. There it is.

Jason Calacanis: Yeah. I mean, how cool is this?

Chamath Palihapitiya: I mean, I'm telling you, you can't do this at HUD.

Jason Calacanis: Or IRS. Imagine the IRS putting out a video. I only made the IRS joke because I know...

David Sacks: Here's the auditor.

Jason Calacanis: I mean, it is really incredible.

Jason Calacanis: So, what's the status of this program?

Jared Isaacman: So, we tested Ingenuity on our last rover mission to Mars. It did fantastically well. Can you imagine—this is in near-vacuum conditions on Mars.

Jason Calacanis: Right? It's like a fraction of an atmosphere, right?

Jared Isaacman: A fraction of one percent. In such thin atmosphere, the rotor blades have to spin at nearly 3,000 RPM just to generate lift. Ingenuity was originally designed for just five tech-demo flights, but it completed 72 historic flights.

Now, we are planning to send three advanced next-generation helicopters equipped with ground-penetrating radar and multispectral imagers. They can scout impassable terrain, cliffs, and lava tubes where rovers cannot go, mapping subsurface ice and geological formations. That completely revolutionizes how we explore planetary surfaces.

Jason Calacanis: Are you going to test pilot that aircraft?

Jared Isaacman: That's not the Blackbird. [laughter] We have a lot of incredibly talented test pilots.

David Sacks: At all levels of the organization.

Jason Calacanis: Exactly. [laughter] All levels of the organization—including the head of the organization is quite a pilot.

Chamath Palihapitiya: Hey Jared, I know we've got to wrap, but you mentioned China and Russia collaborating together. Just wanted to double-click on that. What are their actual capabilities? Russia is bogged down in war. Are they truly capable of getting to space and doing anything of material?

Jason Calacanis: Please come back to this.

Chamath Palihapitiya: China is copying a lot of what Elon is doing in real time. This is a serious question: what is their real capability?

Jared Isaacman: This is an extremely critical question.

While Russia faces severe economic and supply chain headwinds due to the war, they still possess decades of proven heritage in heavy rocket propulsion, life support, and long-duration space station operations.

China, however, is a formidable competitor operating at an entirely different scale. They possess massive state funding, world-class industrial manufacturing infrastructure, and an immense pipeline of engineering talent. They built and operate the Tiangong space station with continuous human presence; they successfully executed the first-ever sample return from the lunar far side (Chang'e 6); and they are rapidly building the Long March 9 heavy-lift rocket and next-gen crewed lunar landing systems. Furthermore, their private aerospace sector is rapidly replicating reusable launch architectures.

China has a clear, unyielding national objective to land taikonauts on the moon before 2030 and establish a permanent lunar research outpost. Their timelines are aggressive and they consistently hit their milestones. If America slows down or gets bogged down in bureaucratic inertia, China has every capability to reach those strategic lunar sites ahead of us. That is the reality of the race we are in.

Jason Calacanis: And where would we be if we didn't have SpaceX in relation to China?

Jared Isaacman: SpaceX is an extraordinary, indispensable partner. Without SpaceX, the United States would have had no domestic capability to launch our own astronauts to the International Space Station after the Space Shuttle was retired; we would still be completely dependent on Russian Soyuz seats.

Falcon 9's reusability gave America overwhelming dominance in global launch mass to orbit over the past decade. And Starship represents a revolutionary leap in payload capacity for lunar and Mars logistics. NASA's strategy is to unite the mission-driven mandate of the nation with the relentless innovation of American commercial powerhouses like SpaceX.

We are grateful every single day for the ingenuity of American industry.

Thank you all so much.

Jason Calacanis: Thank you so much, Jared! Truly respect your service to this country and the world. We are lucky to have you. Don't forget your book!

Jared Isaacman: Thanks, man. Thank you. Appreciate it.