Main Engine Cut Off - T+188: Starship SN15, and the HLS Protests

Episode Date: May 11, 2021

SpaceX successfully flew and landed Starship SN15 last week, amid protests of their NASA HLS award by Blue Origin and Dynetics.This episode of Main Engine Cut Off is brought to you by 40 executive producers—Brandon, Matthew, Simon, Lauren, Melissa, Kris, Pat, Matt, Jorge, Ryan, Donald, Lee, Chris, Warren, Bob, Russell, Moritz, Joel, Jan, Grant, David, Joonas, Robb, Tim Dodd (the Everyday Astronaut!), Frank, Julian and Lars from Agile Space, Tommy, Matt, The Astrogators at SEE, Chris, Aegis Trade Law, and seven anonymous—and 576 other supporters.TopicsStarship | SN15 | High-Altitude Flight Test - YouTubeFollowing Starship SN15's success, SpaceX evaluating next steps toward orbital goals - NASASpaceFlight.comLittle Joe 2 BP-22 Successful Failure - YouTubeT+186: NASA Selects Starship as Artemis Lander - Main Engine Cut OffBlue Origin protests NASA Human Landing System award - SpaceNewsDynetics protests NASA HLS award - SpaceNewsSpaceX bid on launch of NASA cubesat mission - SpaceNewsNASA Suspends HLS Contract With SpaceX – SpacePolicyOnline.comThe ShowLike the show? Support the show!Email your thoughts, comments, and questions to [e-mail] @WeHaveMECOListen to MECO HeadlinesJoin the Off-Nominal DiscordSubscribe on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Pocket Casts, Spotify, Google Play, Stitcher, TuneIn or elsewhereSubscribe to the Main Engine Cut Off NewsletterBuy shirts and Rocket Socks from the Main Engine Cut Off ShopMusic by Max JustusArtwork photo by NASA

Hello and welcome to Main Engine Cutoff. I am Anthony Colangelo, as always, and I wanted to talk a little bit today about Starship Serial Number 15 and the test flight that SpaceX completed. I think it was last week at this point as I'm talking to you. And then I want to touch on the protests that have been filed about the Human Landing System Award where NASA chose SpaceX's Starship as the sole winner of that contract. Both Blue Origin, their team, and Dynetics

have filed protests at this point. I've been thinking about it a little bit and wanted to share some thoughts. But let's start with serial number 15. So this flight happened a week ago, and it was an incredibly successful flight in terms of what they were trying to accomplish with this particular phase of testing. This one again flew to about 10 kilometers, turned around and came back in the way that we've seen the previous Starship test flights go. turned around and came back in the way that we've seen the previous Starship test flights go. But this time it landed successfully on the landing pad. Two engines fired all the way down to the ground, landed a little bit of a slide after landing, but all in all, they got this

Starship back. They're inspecting it right now, and there may be a reflight attempt. Things seem to be changing very frequently about what the plans are for SEAL number 15 now that they've got it back. But that's a huge thing for SpaceX because if you remember historically when they were working out Falcon 9 reusability, getting those initial stages back, and this is happening right now with Rocket Lab as well who's working on reusability, you can learn so much from having that hardware to look at and see exactly how things survived, how they worked on the flight. You can get some data out of those in terms of inspections. You can figure out which things need to be a little bit stronger, which things are built just right. There is so much to learn from that recovered hardware.

And not only do you get those lessons from the hardware, but you get to use that hardware again to do any other testing. If you're going to fly it like Serial Number 15 might, or if you're just going to use it for ground testings, or even you've got Raptor engines back that now you can use again, which it's always nice to save the money on future engines. And then honestly, it's nice to have those engines in the stockpile because future testing, especially the testing that's going orbital is going to need a ton of engines in the long runile because future testing, especially the testing that's going orbital, is going to need a ton of engines in the long run. So every engine you get back helps that cause out a good bit. Now there's an aspect to this flight,

while it was a successful landing, that didn't appear to go exactly right. And you can see some of this in the video from the live stream itself on when they were going for that final landing burn. And if you haven't seen the flight, I would recommend going over to YouTube. I've got the link in the show notes to the live stream. Just watching this again, especially if you're someone who has not followed along closely with these Starship flight tests. Watch the video.

It's a couple of minutes long and you'll get an idea for exactly which parts I'm going to break down here. So, on that initial, or the final landing burn, when they do that flip from the belly first orientation, and it flips over to come in for the vertical landing, you can see that only two of the engines lit up at the end there. Now, as the latest info we have goes, all three engines are supposed to light up. The Starship would then select which two engines it's going to use to do the flip back to vertical, and then ideally they land on a single engine for efficiency, though these new Raptor engines that flew on Zero Number 15 are able to throttle low enough

to take Starship all the way to the ground with two engines firing controlled and actually come in for landing that way. Now, that didn't happen on this flight. Only two lit up, and it was a weird pattern of two engines that lit up. It was not the two engines on kind of the inside of the turn, if you will. They're arranged in a triangle. There's two engines positioned towards the bottom of the vehicle, if you kind of think of it flying like an airplane. And those two would be the ones that you would think because they have the most moment of inertia to get around the turn that they need to do. It was actually one of those engines and the engine that's on the, what I'm calling here the top side when it's an airplane orientation. Those are the two that lit

up for the landing. Now, that was a weird arrangement. You could see the third engine gimbling around a little bit, but it didn't actually fire. I've seen some other people talking about this online. I've heard a little bit that that engine actually shut down a little early on ascent and was not able to light back up for the landing here. So this was not exactly how this was supposed to go. And I think of this a little bit like if you've ever seen the Little Joe abort test from the Apollo era. This was an abort test that failed in the most successful way possible. This was back in the 1960s during the Apollo program, and they were testing the launch escape system for the Apollo spacecraft, and they had a high-altitude abort test queued up

on top of Little Joe 2. It launched, the rocket actually failed, and the abort system fired and pulled the capsule to safety out of a failing rocket. And it was a successful test, gone the wrong way, that actually proved out that the system was working as intended. And this kind of seems like a similar thing here with Starship in that this wasn't exactly how this was supposed to land, but they were successful in landing a Starship for the first time without explosions, either during landing or after landing, and also doing it by way of the contingencies that they have built into the system, where it's able to have this redundancy built in that if one of the engines doesn't work, they still have enough firing that they can actually pull off the landing successfully.

So tidbits aside, you can just see this plainly in the video that it didn't go exactly as was intended, and still resulted in a successful flight of Starship and a successful landing. So that's a pretty spectacular situation for SpaceX to be in. And we'll see exactly what other kind of tests they need to do with this Starship in particular and Starships generally into the future. But by and large, they are getting to the point when they are just about done learning what they need to do before they're going orbital with Starship. And there's a lot of talk about this right now, about exactly what the path is between here

and orbital flight for Starship. Even before this, there was a lot of talk of aiming for the summer of that first orbital flight. We're seeing a lot of activity down in Boca Chica where they're building up the integration tower next to the orbital launch site. They're building up the tanking systems that they need to be able to support Starship and Super Heavy, the booster that it will launch on top of. They're going to need a lot of infrastructure in place to pull these launches off. Not only are they going to need to build Super Heavy, they're going to need to have enough fuel and everything that they need in terms of consumables to fuel these things and launch them. They're going to need the hardware that actually mounts this on the launch mount that stacks Starship on top of Super Heavy.

There's a lot that they have to get done, so summer might be a little hopeful, but sometime this year we're looking at that first orbital flight test for Starship. Sometime this year, we're looking at that first orbital flight test for Starship. And given how well this recent test of student number 15 went, given what other things they have to learn in the test program, it certainly seems like we're getting to the point when orbital flights are the thing that is going to teach them the most and is the thing that is the most productive for them to start working on down in Boca Chica. Now, that will be a real moment for the Starship program overall, because there is something about these flights up to 10 or 12 kilometers with Starships in some state of fully constructed, right? There's a lot of

heat shield tiles on each vehicle, but they're kind of in these random patterns. They're not covering the whole vehicle. So they just generally look half finished. Um, and there's only, you know, the three sea level, sea level Raptors on the bottom of these starships. Uh, there's just a lot of placeholder stuff. If you're looking at it as, you know, somebody who's not intimately involved in the program. So there's something about these 10 or 12 kilometer flights where you can say, Oh, they're doing, you know, relatively small scale tests considering the amount that they have to do to get these things to fully operational. Orbital flights are going to be a lot harder to do that with. You're going to be having

this gigantic system, this huge booster stacked with this gigantic launch tower. It's going to be almost like 500 feet tall or something like that. And you're going to have this giant spaceship stacked on top of that giant booster. And then this thing's going to launch. And the sheer scale of that, of that test going off as planned is a lot harder to shrug off than hop tests that we've done up until now. And that's something that I'm not exactly sure how everyone out there is going to handle that situation. There's, you know, a lot that are going to go in these tests in terms of what they're testing. They're going to be testing the actual launch of the booster. They're going to be testing the stage separation system. They're going to be testing the Raptor vacuum

engines for the first time on an operational vehicle on the upper stage. They're going to be testing the re-entry systems of the booster itself, the ability to guide itself back to a landing site, the ability to do the vertical landing, what that will be landing on, who knows at this point. Will it do ocean landings? Will it land on an oil rig that they're converting to a landing pad? Will it return to launch site? All up for grabs at this point, but they'll be testing some sort of landing system for the boosters themselves. Then you've got the Starship going into orbit, doing all of the attitude control and thermal management and communications systems that they need to actually be successful on orbit. And then you have the whole aspect of, oh yeah, the heat shield. Probably the stickiest problem that Starship is going to encounter is all these heat shield tiles that they've

been attaching to these various vehicles. They're going to actually have to test that coming back through the atmosphere, covering all of the control surfaces that they need to, covering the joints of those control surfaces, making sure that they're able to guide the vehicle once it comes out of that thermal heating phase back to, here's the other kicker, where are they going to land this sucker? They're going to need somewhere to aim for, and I assume it will be in the ocean. There are a couple of guesses you can make about places that they have worked in the middle of nowhere in the ocean in a past life that would be good

targets to come back from orbit and either land on land or just aim for a general region of the ocean because this is going to be a huge thing of where do you bring a starship back from orbit that doesn't have to fly over populated land areas because good luck getting that approval and good luck even wanting to do that when you're testing out a system like this you want a lot of space that you can close down in the ocean to make sure that no one is going to get harmed by this thing, but you still need to make sure that you have coverage of being able to get test data out of that system as well, and being able to see what's going on at the same time. So there's some infrastructure concerns there aside from safety concerns alone. So you can just see the amount of things that they're testing

in this orbital regime is almost a magnitude higher, if not two magnitudes higher, than what they've been doing up to this point. And that's really the turning point that we're at now is that I think SpaceX has learned what they need to learn from these lower altitude tests, and the amount of things that they need to accomplish and learn from in the next orbital flight tests is so much greater and has so much more payoff for them that they need to get there as soon as possible. And, you know, for a while I thought that was pretty crazy and just the sheer buildup that that requires is staggering, but that is really where they need to go to be able to get all of the data and get

all the tests done that they need to if this program is going to be successful in the long run. And, you know, now, yeah, great, they've landed this, you know, lower altitude flight that does the really cool flip part at the end, but getting to the point when you do the flip is just as, if not more important, than the actual flip itself. So now they've proved that out, but they've got to prove out the heat shielding and the aerodynamic guidance from that really high altitude back to where they're going to be doing this landing to then proceed to the part that they've tested out right here, which is the landing flip and the final touchdown. So all that's to say is that this is going to get even more exciting from here on out.

I think it is smart of them to get to the orbital flight test as soon as they possibly can. I think it will change the way that you can shrug off if you're somebody who likes to shrug off starship tests like this. It's a lot harder to do that when you're doing an orbital flight test of a system this grand in all senses of that word. a system this grand in all senses of that word. And I think there's a lot of nerds out there who either grew up during the shuttle era or, you know, were just interested in space shuttle generally who are really interested to see how the heat shielding system goes for Starship

and to see what those early tests are like coming back in through the atmosphere. So a lot of excitement to come from Starship, a really big achievement for the SpaceX teams working on it. And I'm excited to see where it goes from here. I'm sure we'll be talking about it a lot as we tend to do every couple of months once something this big happens and probably even more so now that Starship is the selected Artemis winner. And that's the last thing I want to talk about Starship here is that, well, for this part of the conversation, this was a huge moment for them because this was the first flight test after they had been selected as the Artemis lander. So this had a lot of potential. And I think I mentioned this on the show that I did about Starship being selected, had a lot of potential for some crappy headlines in your local newspaper where it says NASA's moon lander blows up or NASA moon lander explodes on contact with Earth. It's like just some terrible headlines that are misrepresenting

exactly what this test is and exactly its relationship to the Artemis lander. But the fact that this stuck the landing, I think it gives everyone a good sigh of relief that they got that news cycle behind them. There will be others, but this was a big one to do and make a statement in the middle of what is the current protest environment of that Human Landing System Award, which is what I want to get into next. But before we do that, I need to say thank you to all of you out there supporting Main Engine Cutoff every single month over at mainenginecutoff.com support. There are 616 of you. I am blown away by the amount that this number is growing consistently right now. So thank you all so much for jumping on board there. It's

making a huge difference in the content that I'm thinking about here for the show, the content I'm putting out on the Patreon feed for all of you jumping in and supporting there, and some plans I've got in works for the rest of the year. So thank you all so much for that support. This episode of Main Engine Cutoff was produced by 40 executive producers. Thank you to Brandon, Matthew, Simon, Lauren, Melissa, Chris, Pat, Matt, George, Ryan, Donald, Lee, Chris, Warren, Bob, Russell, Moritz, Joel, Jan, Grant, David, Eunice, Rob, Tim Dodd, the Everyday Astronaut, Frank, Julian and Lars from Agile Space, Tommy, Matt, the Astrogators at SEE, Chris, Aegis Trade Law, and seven anonymous executive producers.

That list is getting out of hand in the best way possible. So thank you all so much for your support. If you want to help join that crew and get Miko headlines in your feed every single week, head over to managingcutoff.com support, and thank you all once again. All right, so these protests, this was not surprising at all. When I did the show about the Artemis selection, I think I mentioned expecting this to happen pretty soon. Certainly, it did pretty quickly. So Blue Origin, the team that they led of Lockheed Martin, it did pretty quickly. So Blue Origin, the team that they led of Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Draper, and Dynetics have both protested the NASA award for the human landing system at this point. If you want context on this, go back, listen to episode 186 that I did. It was two shows ago. Listen to that one and then come back to this part because you'll need all

that context loaded into your brain to make sense of many of the words that I'm about to say in this part of the show. So a lot of the content that we have as far as these protests goes come from redacted versions of these protests that have been posted. Blue Origins was redacted in all of the interesting areas except a couple of them. One of the interesting areas that was not redacted was that they bid $5.99 billion in terms of the NASA funding for the human landing system. SpaceX bid just below $3 billion. So about a $3 billion difference there in the bids for Starship and the Blue Moon-based system. The Blue Origin protest, well, let's start first by saying disregard the dynetics protest their protest was pretty vague they had like one statement that was like we we have concerns

about this uh and dynetics of course their bid as explained in the nasa source selection statement was fighting with the concept of physical reality in terms of the mass of their lander already not really working in actuality. So there were a lot of issues with the Dynetics proposal that had them kind of thrown out immediately, and I don't think there's any protest in the world that can overturn that in terms of Dynetics. The Blue Origin one is the one that we're going to zoom in on. And when I say Blue Origin, I mean the national team, as it is called. Like I said, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and Draper. So anytime I say Blue Origin, sub in all those other names as well. The crux of the protests, among some other, you know, comments in the protest itself and some stuff that I've heard outside of the actual

documentation in terms of how they agree or disagree with NASA's assessment of their technical situation on this lander. The crux of the argument here is that they weren't given an opportunity to revise their proposal in the same way that SpaceX was given when NASA decided that they were going to select SpaceX only because of the budget limitation that they're facing in terms of not having received the amount of funding from Congress that they were hoping to for this program. NASA all along in the RFP process for these bids said that they would like to select two contractors, but that they might select one given budget availability and other constraints. So they left it open for themselves.

They're fine there. It wasn't a problem that they only selected one, but Blue Origin's main protest here is that they were not given an opportunity to revise their bid in the same way that SpaceX was given, and that because of that, they were prejudiced against for this selection. Now, an important note about these protests and how they work generally, these protests are common across the entirety of the U.S. government in terms of when you award somebody a, a winning bid, you're going to get protested by the people that lost out on that,

but what the protest is, is not that the decision was wrong or not that they disagree with the specific, you know, grading that they've done on each proposal. The actual functionality of this is that you have to prove, or at least, I don't know what level of proof you need, but you need to have the government accountability office agree that NASA or whoever the, this applies to all of these protests, Space Force, Air Force, whatever. So I'm just using NASA here as an example, that NASA did not follow the rules that they set out in the original proposal, request for proposal, that they put ground rules in place that everyone bid to and that they did not follow those rules as they were written. And if that's true, then the protest would be successful and they would have to be recompeted.

If that is not true, then this will be thrown out, as is typically the case with these GAO protests. So that is the goal here. It is not to prove that Blue Moon is a better lander. It's not to prove that Starship's unrealistic, whatever the case is that you might agree or disagree there. The goal is that they need to prove that NASA did not follow the rules that they wrote down months ago when they

asked for these proposals, and that because of that, they should be re-competed. So Blue Origin is saying that NASA changed the ground rules because they selected only SpaceX because of that budget shortfall from Congress, and that that was not made clear that they would do that if they didn't come up with the amount of funding that they requested in the whole government budget process. If they didn't get that full amount, that they would be changing their selection strategy here, and that if Blue Origin were made aware of that, they would have bumped up their corporate contribution significantly to ensure that their price could come in line to be competitive. Now, the problem is, and I've been asking around

some contacts that I have in various areas of US government agencies about, you know, where is this at in terms of NASA being above board here? Because it intersects with the rules that they did write down in the request proposal process in an interesting way. So NASA said that the three criteria they would be grading these bids on in order of priority is technical, price, and management. So the technical aspects of your bid matter more than the price that you give, and that matters more than the management rating of your system. Now, I think something that the Blue Origin lawyers might be going for is that if NASA made the selection of SpaceX because they had limited funding available, and this was the one

that matched their funding profile, that they actually made price more important than technical. But the other thing the source selection document says is that technical and management, when combined, are significantly more important than price. And SpaceX and Blue Origin had the same technical rating. SpaceX had a much better management rating. So it even shakes out in the way that SpaceX wins out by the criteria. But it's really just that one thing maybe they're looking at, that they made price more important by way of this reasoning. Now, what I've heard from a couple of different people, like I said, I've asked around about some opinions on this, is that SpaceX won out on their own merit per the source selection document. And then when looking at the prices to figure out how many offerors they could fit,

they couldn't fit the second offer in to actually make the award. So therefore, NASA is safe, right? They didn't pick SpaceX because they were the cheapest, but SpaceX being so cheap and fitting the budget shortfall that NASA received, that made it the rationale for picking the only winner being SpaceX was that budget shortfall. I've stumbled through that sentence, but I think you can stay with me on that one. The rationale for picking SpaceX was not the price, but the rationale for selecting only SpaceX was the price. And that is an important difference in how this will shake out. Now, one part about the Blue Origin bid that I want to harp on

for a minute is that a lot of that common refrain of, if we were given the opportunity to revise, we would have significantly increased our corporate contribution. The corporate contribution was redacted here in the entire document that I saw. The one thing that it did say is that part of the corporate contribution from Blue Origin was that they would be covering the entire development of the BE-7 rocket engine that they'd be using on the landing system. And I believe that was also on the Northrop Grumman tug stage as well. So that was their main contribution there in terms of the contract. It was unclear to me with the redactions if there was an additional contribution as well. But what I want to just run past you real quick is that I think these prices between SpaceX and Blue Origin, the total price of these, are a lot closer

than they appear at first glance. So SpaceX bid $3 billion, but NASA said they would have contributed or will contribute more than half of that. And they got a very resounding endorsement of how much contribution they were putting in to this project. Blue Origin, on the other hand, they had less glowing things to say about their contribution. They called it commendable or something. I forget the exact words. I should do a search real quick. Yeah, so here are the pieces about contribution. SpaceX has planned to self-fund and assume financial risk for over half of the development and test activities as an investment in its architecture, which it plans to utilize for

numerous commercial applications presents outstanding benefits to NASA. This contribution not only significantly reduces the cost to the government, which is reflected in SpaceX's lower price, but it demonstrates a substantial commitment to the success of the HLS public-private partnership commercial model and SpaceX's commitment to commercializing technologies and abilities developed under the Option A contract. Here's the portion about Blue Origin. For example, while Blue Origin proposes a significant corporate contribution for the Option A effort, it does not provide a fulsome explanation of how this contribution is tied to or will otherwise advance its commercial approach for achieving long-term affordability or increasing

performance. So it didn't quite have as good of things to say about the Blue Origin contribution there. And this is where I want to do some like math in your head. So let's say SpaceX's was $4 billion, which doesn't seem unrealistic and is likely even conservative with how much they're putting in to the Starship program. So that brings that full overall price for Starship to like $7 billion, $3 billion from NASA, $4 billion from SpaceX. Numbers are probably wrong, but just use it as a guideline. The Blue Origin bid was $6 billion. I kind of think the way that some of these things are written, that they were going to contribute under a billion dollars, maybe closer to $2 billion if I'm feeling generous.

But even that alone, right, that puts it at eight billion dollars, a billion dollar difference between my fake numbers with SpaceX's contribution being four billion dollars and Blue Origin's being two. A lot closer in price than you might otherwise think. And I think that right there gets at the crux of what's going on with Blue Origin. I talked about this a lot on the last show with Eric Berger. It just kind of smells like a lack of internal commitment to this program, that they're not putting in that kind of money unless NASA is willing to fund $6 billion worth. And maybe you know, maybe this will play out if this protest is not sustained and we see everything go forward. We'll see exactly how Blue Origin plays the Blue Moon Lander program from here on out, exactly what architecture changes,

what teammates come in or out, what the funding levels are for that program. Maybe we'll see a change here, but it does certainly, it has to sting that the Blue Origin Lander was within striking distance of the price if Blue Origin itself was willing to put in a little bit more money and commit a little bit harder internally to Blue Moon. And I do think those prices are a lot closer than you would think. And I'm very curious what their corporate contribution would be, but it kind of just smells like it wasn't that much. And it shows that they're not that committed internally to the existence of this program without an anchor tenant like NASA to sign on to it. SpaceX, on the other hand, is like, we're doing this anyway. We're spending many billions of dollars. Give us three billion. We can do the lunar version too. Maybe that's SpaceX aggressively

pricing the NASA contribution here so that they will edge out competition because they're willing to do that. They're going to be building Starship anyway. They clearly are on that path regardless of Artemis. And they wanted to make it clear that they were the ones that were going to win this contract. So they super load balled, because they're already confident in their ability to get funding from elsewhere. That's a definite possibility. And will they lose a bunch of money on the Artemis work they need to do? Likely, I don't know. I don't know exactly the accounting of the program down there, but I think SpaceX sees this as a huge program that they need to be a part of to further their own goals.

And that's where SpaceX does its best work, is when they have a goal in mind that they're aiming for internally, and they find partners like NASA who are headed in the same direction that can make them achieve that goal better. And SpaceX wants to be the premier company that does all things in space. And if they're already putting a bunch of money into this, billions of dollars, maybe they did lowball that offer to make sure that they were the one picked. And by way of doing that, edged out these other competitors. But I do think if Blue Origin put more money into their bid on that first proposal, things could have turned out differently.

The budget shortfall from Congress is what it is, but I can't help shake that thought that the indication that that would send of the commitment to the program internally is a big factor here that really plays on a subconscious level about these two programs. So all in all, I don't expect these protests to go anywhere. I think NASA is above board in terms of what's happening here. They do have to suspend work with SpaceX on the human landing system contract while these protests are underway. They have to be resolved by August at the latest.

They'll probably be resolved sooner than that. It's not going to hold up, obviously, given this episode. SpaceX's work on the rest of Starship, and luckily for SpaceX and NASA, they have plenty of work to do on the rest of Starship before they get to the Artemis-specific variant. So we'll see how it shakes out over the next couple of months. I think it's going to be okay if you're someone who hopes to see this go forward with SpaceX alone. We will see what kind of congressional wrangling comes out of that. I'm sure there'll be questions asked about the result of this protest somewhere down the line. But until we get to that point, that's all I've

got for you today on these topics. I hope you enjoyed the rambling discussion of both of these topics. And as always, thank you so much for your support. Head over to mainenginecutoff.com slash support if you want to help join the crew supporting this and listen to Miko headlines. If you've got any questions or thoughts, hit me up on Twitter at wehavemiko or email me anthony at mainenginecutoff.com. And until next time, I'll talk to you soon.