Moonshot

[luvflyin]

Artemis II is scheduled to launch tomorrow evening.

Countdown to Artemis II: What to know about NASA's moon mission

Four astronauts are set to lift off Wednesday on a journey around the moon — the first such mission in more than 50 years.

www.nbcnews.com

Amazing how little news coverage this has received.

It’s being covered on C-SPAN.

 

[SFDukie]

Had you told 12 year old me, that >53 years would passed before anyone ventured further into space than low earth orbit, I wouldn’t have believed you.
We’re built to explore. Glad we’re doing it before the last of the moon walkers are dead.

 

[Justin M]

"The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress"

I really enjoyed Delta V and Critical Mass ( by Daniel Suarez) about establishing a near-earth-orbit economy; in part by harvesting chemicals from the moon using solar powered machinery.

 

[Jim_R]

I’m not asking anyone else to believe it, nor am I saying that I even do. I’m repeating what I heard first-hand from an elder Artemis engineer.

What would explain why as advanced as we are 60 years later that it’s so darn difficult? Either we are less great than our predecessors (which I believe) or the actual human touch and return may not have happened. Do you have to only believe one of these two?

I am scientific enough to not be certain of either opinion.

We landed on the Moon in 1969. Why would it be questionable that we were able to send a probe to the Moon in 1966? That's silly.

It's hard to go to the Moon today for all the same reasons it was hard to go to the Moon in 1969. At least in '69, they had consistent support from the top down, did not have silly management structures, did not make major changes to their program goals halfway through, and had huge budgets. NASA's manned spaceflight program was focused on that one effort, and much of its unmanned space work was as well.

NASA has continued flying the International Space Station--a huge program in its own right--while standing up the Artemis program. In early Artemis days it was envisioned that ISS would ramp down as Artemis was ramping up, but the ISS decommissioning date has been pushed out about a decade since then, causing both programs to compete for funds, human resources, and management focus.

 

[SFDukie]

I’m not asking anyone else to believe it, nor am I saying that I even do. I’m repeating what I heard first-hand from an elder Artemis engineer.

What would explain why as advanced as we are 60 years later that it’s so darn difficult? Either we are less great than our predecessors (which I believe) or the actual human touch and return may not have happened. Do you have to only believe one of these two?

I am scientific enough to not be certain of either opinion.

To be clear- you’re asserting that you’re uncertain as to where or not the Apollo moonwalkers did so?

That’s the antithesis of “scientific”

When I was a little boy, I was a big space exploration fan. Huge.
Fortunately we got to watch the Apollo 14 liftoff. Still remember it fondly and vividly.

About that time I went with my aunt to the house of an elderly woman in rural NC. My aunt warned me not to say anything if the woman said anything about Apollo (“you know Ms Lois, they can make anything look real on tv”)




Apologies for my response. But it’s an insult to reason and fact. I’m not going to normalize it. Part of the problem with our country is we’re led by some folks who would have us believe fact and objective truth don’t exist, or are at least impossible to determine due to “fake news”

If we distrust all news, we’re incapable of being a republic. Otherwise we should trash the constitution and pick a king. I hear former Prince Andrew is available

 

[Jim_R]

To be clear- you’re asserting that you’re uncertain as to where or not the Apollo moonwalkers did so?

Oh, good grief--I thought we were only arguing about the 1966 probe per the post he originally replied to.

If he's suggesting the moon landing was faked, then I'm out. That's too ridiculous to bother with.

 

[Brad Smith]

From AI - “A 2024 report indicated that NASA's ~$25 billion budget generated over $75 billion in economic output in 2023, representing a roughly 3-to-1 direct economic return, with broader, long-term technological and societal impacts likely being much higher.”

We should all be rejoicing about the big returns to be had from once again exploring the moon and setting up a moon base. Even at a cost of 100 billion dollars, we have a 300 billion return to look fwd too!

 

[wanttaja]

There are times, it's worth it to get banned, and I'm close. My software is on the 2nd stage of Artemis - the ICPS (interim cryogenic propulsion stage). Rocket software is the most boring software I ever worked on (other than banking) until the button is pushed (there's really no button) and the rocket launches. Then it's not boring at all.

Had a saying when I was in space operations:

"Boring is good."

Actually saw it on a sign in one operations center.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Baked Potato]

I’m not asking anyone else to believe it, nor am I saying that I even do. I’m repeating what I heard first-hand from an elder Artemis engineer.

What would explain why as advanced as we are 60 years later that it’s so darn difficult? Either we are less great than our predecessors (which I believe) or the actual human touch and return may not have happened. Do you have to only believe one of these two?

I am scientific enough to not be certain of either opinion.

Everything is more difficult and costly now. Look at the time, expense, and bureaucracy involved in the simplest civil engineering projects now compared to the post-war era. It takes 15 years to plan and build a 12 mile passenger rail line these days.

How many new fighter jets or other military aircraft have we successfully developed this century? Especially compared to the Mercury and Apollo era.

 

[geneseib]

Not so exciting. If I flew to Oshkosh, didn't land, and then flew home would you say I went to Oshkosh?

And they chickened out on even going into orbit around the moon. In the 60's we went from the first man shot into space to three men in orbit around the moon in 8 years. Way too much software these days.

 

[wanttaja]

Provenance of such a find is always of benefits. The magazines in the drawer were Playboys from 1963. The museum declined to include them.

Are you questionin' mah word, as a gennelman, sah?"


Ron "Pistols for two, breakfast for one" Wanttaja

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

AFAIK, only one nation has stuck a flag in the lunar soil.

What about the Nazi moon base on the far side?

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

You guys took my comment way too far.

 

[wanttaja]

AFAIK, only one nation has stuck a flag in the lunar soil.

I wouldn't be sure. The Soviets had a string of landers and rovers from 1965 to 1976, including at least one sample return mission and a couple of rovers. Wouldn't be surprised if there was a hammer-and-sickle on at least one of them.

Now, surely, only one nation's HUMANS have stuck a flag in the lunar soil....

Ron Wanttaja

 

[MauleSkinner]

I’m not asking anyone else to believe it, nor am I saying that I even do. I’m repeating what I heard first-hand from an elder Artemis engineer.

What would explain why as advanced as we are 60 years later that it’s so darn difficult? Either we are less great than our predecessors (which I believe) or the actual human touch and return may not have happened. Do you have to only believe one of these two?

I am scientific enough to not be certain of either opinion.

I think a big factor is the willingness to accept risk was a lot higher in Apollo than it is in today’s space programs. The astronauts were willing to accept it, and everyone else was willing to let them.

They were figuring a lot of it out as they went, where today everything needs to be thoroughly checked and rechecked to ensure probability of failure is less than 10^-9 or something like that.

 

[172andyou]

Artemis is possibly the worst of the NASA programs that could be funded. Like I said, and it bears repeating, there are plenty of things NASA could and should focus on other than going where we've already been, and developing all those great things we've already developed that you point out. If there's something revolutionary in Artemis, let me know. It all seems barely evolutionary to me, and I'd prefer that we leave 'been there, done that' to private equity.

Yes. This.

For me, I would say I'm 1000% pro-NASA and agree we've learned a lot as a result of being in space AND anti-artemis because I don't think it has a science mission worth pursuing. It's 30-40 year old hardware flying a 50 year old mission to someplace we already know isn't going to be useful. Having occasionally looked at some of the projects that didn't get funded at NASA, it would be very easy to convince me to double or triple its budget. Just don't spend any of it on a manned moon program.

 

[Hang 4]

So far so good. Noticeably bigger from Flagler (KFIN) compared to a Spacex launch. Glad things are good so far.

 

[2-Bit Speed]

From my drunk uncle - “A 2024 report indicated that NASA's ~$25 billion budget generated over $75 billion in economic output in 2023, representing a roughly 3-to-1 direct economic return, with broader, long-term technological and societal impacts likely being much higher.”

We should all be rejoicing about the big returns to be had from once again exploring the moon and setting up a moon base. Even at a cost of 100 billion dollars, we have a 300 billion return to look fwd too!

FIFY

 

[Barrett50]

Waste is a dirty word. So, lets doo something about it. Let's make it a number 2 priority. We'll go better with Artemis than we've ever gone before.

Artemis II’s toilet is a moon mission milestone

On their voyages to the moon, NASA’s astronauts are finally getting some creature comforts of terrestrial toilets—such as having a door and being able to pee and poop simultaneously

www.scientificamerican.com

I can't make this **** up if I tried.

 

[Larry in TN]

So far so good. Noticeably bigger from Flagler (KFIN) compared to a Spacex launch. Glad things are good so far.

SpaceX has better video and more informative graphics.

 

[Racerx]

Had you told 12 year old me, that >53 years would passed before anyone ventured further into space than low earth orbit, I wouldn’t have believed you.
We’re built to explore. Glad we’re doing it before the last of the moon walkers are dead.

The youngest was 36 nearly 54 years ago. 12 have graced the lunar surface. Four are still alive. How many 40ish people from 1972 are alive 54 years later? I think 33% is a pretty good clip

 

[eman1200]

that AI launch was pretty convincing

 

[Learnin’ to fly…]

So awesome. An exciting and hopeful event.

Have been looking forward to this and have been like a kid at Christmas the past few days. Here is Artemis II from St Croix. Now a nice dinner, and some diving in the morning with my kids.

Life is good.

 

[kayoh190]

That was friggin' cool. Was really awesome to share the experience with my 5yo daughter. Shared it with my 11mo old too, but I don't think she was as into it.

 

[kyleb]

Got home just in the nick of time. I'd instructed my son to find the launch on TV and have it on when I sprinted in the door. He had CNN playing.

Terrible launch coverage. Stevie Wonder must have been operating the cameras with Jerry Louis selecting the shots. The video snips included rocket off camera, shot of nothing identifiable, shot with so little magnification you could almost tell there was a rocket at the tip of the contrail, out-of focus shot, shot of an apparent dark thing. And the tracking shots were very poorly stabilized. Uggh. We've gone a long way backwards in 55 years.

 

[Matthew]

My brother got a couple of pix this afternoon. One from his parking lot at work, and another on the way home.

 

[JOhnH]

I experienced a lot of deja-vu watching this. Except there was no Walter Cronkite. And I was watching on an 82 inch screen instead of a 16 inch screen.

 

[AV8R_87]

Terrible launch coverage. Stevie Wonder must have been operating the cameras with Jerry Louis selecting the shots.

That was my reaction as well. The NASA TV crew was definitely not on top of their game today.

 

[wanttaja]

I experienced a lot of deja-vu watching this. Except there was no Walter Cronkite. And I was watching on an 82 inch screen instead of a 16 inch screen.

In black and white, with aluminum foil on the rabbit-ear antennas.

Mercury program happened right after we moved in our first house. My bedroom was being remodeled, so I was living on a cot in the basement. Made sure I had a TV, though.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Half Fast]

I can remember being in elementary school back in the ‘60s, when the teacher would roll a TV into the classroom so we could watch a launch or a splashdown. The space program was a big enough deal back then to take precedence over Fun With Dick & Jane for a little while.

 

[Bob Noel]

all the whining about the quality of the broadcast video reminds me of the joke with a punchline: "he had a hat"

We have become truly spoiled.

 

[midwestpa24]

Hopefully they brought better cameras on thid trip than last time.

 

[Larry in TN]

Terrible launch coverage.

SpaceX does a much better job of both the video and the on-screen graphics. I did like that the speed, when it was displayed, as in mph instead of kph, though.

 

[GaryM]

That exists. It's used in rebreathers. It's called "Sorb."

https://www.divegearexpress.com/rebreathers/absorbent

Still, more weight to carry up there.

Sorb captures CO2, removing it from the breathing loop, but it doesn't actually strip out the O2 for re-use. The entire CO2 molecule is captured.

 

[AvNavCom]

all the whining about the quality of the broadcast video reminds me of the joke with a punchline: "he had a hat"

We have become truly spoiled.

If one of the goals of the mission is to get people excited and inspired about space again (as all of the surrounding hoopla suggested), then high-quality video and well-managed coverage is low-hanging fruit that NASA completely failed to capitalize on. This is a solved issue from the technical perspective, as Space-X has proved repeatedly, both with un-crewed and Crew Dragon launches. I'm a very big supporter of NASA and its efforts, but even I was commenting to friends and family about the frankly amateur level of graphics and video coverage. At one point, shortly after liftoff, I think there was a lingering shot of a dude in a deck-chair. For such a "historic" mission, you'd think they could have asked the Space-X folks to lend their expertise in coverage.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

We've gone a long way backwards in 55 years.

That was one of my points above.

You could tell in the broadcast that they were gushing about the feelings and emotions. I remember launches where they talked about the technical things (G’s, speeds, etc), stage separation. They actually missed the sep on video!

 

[catmandu]

My favorite radio station is, as was said on air this morning, “totally dorking out” over the mission. Entire space and moon themed shows the last couple of days with promises to at least do entire sets for the duration. A pleasant surprise as I think their target demographic is a lot younger than the one we have around here.

 

[Domenick]

There is a reason we have not found intelligent aliens. In the universe's 13 billions, at the very least the galaxy should be teeming with technological life. Imagine the technology attained by a million or billion year old civilization. They should be easy to see. They should be virtually everywhere. Why haven't we found them?

Because a single planet is a single point of failure.

While we live in a seemingly benign solar system orbiting a seemingly benign star, all it will take to wipe out humanity is a medium-sized asteroid. Or a coronal mass ejection stripping away the atmosphere in a heartbeat. Or a nuclear war. Or a bio-weapon induced zombie apocalypse. Or another inevitable ice age. Or Yellowstone's supervolcano to let loose. Or a magnetic field flip and a decade or two of a weaker magnetic field allowing the powerful rain of high-energy radiation from our "benign" star to fry us and our crops. Or any number of other earthbound and spacebound calamities.

History shows massive meteor hits have redirected evolution more than once. Another Carrington event or larger could wipe out massive amounts or all electronic tech.

Until we get off this rock, humanity has NO hope of long term survival. It's a race for survival.

 

[Dana]

You could tell in the broadcast that they were gushing about the feelings and emotions.

On NASA's own channel! Around T+13, that's when I switched it off.

 

[Matthew]

That was one of my points above.

You could tell in the broadcast that they were gushing about the feelings and emotions. I remember launches where they talked about the technical things (G’s, speeds, etc), stage separation. They actually missed the sep on video!

I thought the same thing. They were asking kids things like, “…for the first time in your lifetime…”, that’s, what, like 8 years?

I think it was Jerry Pournell that said something like, “I never thought I would live long enough to see the first man land on the moon, and I never thought I would live long enough to see the last.”

Maybe the NASA Apollo days ruined it for a lot of people. Until Challenger we sort of got complacent to the risks. Space flight is hard. Covering the technical and engineering complexities must not bring the ratings it used to. I will admit to seeing that thing shooting down range and thinking about all the things that can still go wrong.