Anyhting is possible, but some things are more likely than others; here I will give him more credit than you do. I think the chances of him speaking off the cuff about this in a realativley high profile interview in Av Week is unlikely.

I admire your faith in Mr. Musk, but do not (especially after what he said in the Av Week interview) share it. I am not personally adverse to having NASA involved in the Systems Engineering of a project they are paying for, but by the standards you are setting that is already ‘polluting and corrupting their corporate culture”.

Additionally anybody who would accept a fixed cost contract allowing the party giving the contract to control Systems Engineering (essentially the management of the project) would have to be extremely stupid or suicidal. I have seen no signs that Mr. Musk is either.

I understand the difference between a fixed cost and cost plus contract very well, I do not understand why you assume the SLS contract would be fixed cost.

I don’t understand why you don’t understand the key distinction. SLS on a cost-plus contract, versus SLS on a fixed-price contract.

I suspect he really wants a lucrative government contract (not that there is anything wrong with that). The way things are shaping up (so far – the fat lady has not sung yet) that is SLS. So he has “got your SLS for you, right here”.

So he wants to bid on the SLS contract, take on dealing with NASA in effect running his business, at some point dump the HLV in order to get NASA to fund a new bigger engine which he will then retro-fit into the Falcon-9 (or would it still be called that?).

Machiavellian little sucker, isn’t he. But you should really stop giving away his game plan. NASA might have some “mole” reading this sight and not like the fact that good old Elon is trying to rip them off.

Yes, just as Ares V was the justification for Ares I, the BFR is the justification for the BFE, which he wants just to reduce Falcon 9 costs and complexity.