Artemis II : Updates and Discussion Thread : NET April 2026

[catdlr]

Good questions, but the timer does not start until the second SRB segments are stacked atop the first SRB segments.

Interesting point! Thanks for the clarification!

Whatever: I think the best thing that could happen is NASA finally revealing the root cause of the heat shield troubles for Artemis I and presenting their way forward for Artemis II thus putting an end to speculation.

I cannot wait! Go, Artemis II! Go, Reid and crew!

 

The stacking Clock is explained in Philip Sloss's Updated video posted here:

https://.youtube.com/watch?v=N7aC0AFL69A#t=315

[DanClemmensen]

Good questions, but the timer does not start until the second SRB segments are stacked atop the first SRB segments.

Interesting point! Thanks for the clarification!

Whatever: I think the best thing that could happen is NASA finally revealing the root cause of the heat shield troubles for Artemis I and presenting their way forward for Artemis II thus putting an end to speculation.

I cannot wait! Go, Artemis II! Go, Reid and crew!

 

Oops, you may be getting ahead of yourself. All we know now is that it may be possible to meet the launch schedule, and that they have not announced the decision about the nature of the mission. My own opinion, which is not based on any information that is not public, is that NASA feel that they must launch on schedule, but that they cannot risk a crewed flight. They will come up with a mission design that extracts the best information they can get from an uncrewed flight. Maybe they will test a new Orion heat shield so they can still do the full Artemis III mission as the next mission.

[yg1968]

Good questions, but the timer does not start until the second SRB segments are stacked atop the first SRB segments.

Interesting point! Thanks for the clarification!

Whatever: I think the best thing that could happen is NASA finally revealing the root cause of the heat shield troubles for Artemis I and presenting their way forward for Artemis II thus putting an end to speculation.

I cannot wait! Go, Artemis II! Go, Reid and crew!

 

Oops, you may be getting ahead of yourself. All we know now is that it may be possible to meet the launch schedule, and that they have not announced the decision about the nature of the mission. My own opinion, which is not based on any information that is not public, is that NASA feel that they must launch on schedule, but that they cannot risk a crewed flight. They will come up with a mission design that extracts the best information they can get from an uncrewed flight. Maybe they will test a new Orion heat shield so they can still do the full Artemis III mission as the next mission.

I am not convinced that an uncrewed Artemis II mission would survive cancellation.

[DanClemmensen]

Good questions, but the timer does not start until the second SRB segments are stacked atop the first SRB segments.

Interesting point! Thanks for the clarification!

Whatever: I think the best thing that could happen is NASA finally revealing the root cause of the heat shield troubles for Artemis I and presenting their way forward for Artemis II thus putting an end to speculation.

I cannot wait! Go, Artemis II! Go, Reid and crew!

 

Oops, you may be getting ahead of yourself. All we know now is that it may be possible to meet the launch schedule, and that they have not announced the decision about the nature of the mission. My own opinion, which is not based on any information that is not public, is that NASA feel that they must launch on schedule, but that they cannot risk a crewed flight. They will come up with a mission design that extracts the best information they can get from an uncrewed flight. Maybe they will test a new Orion heat shield so they can still do the full Artemis III mission as the next mission.

I am not convinced that an uncrewed Artemis II mission would survive cancellation.

Me either, and your insight is almost certainly better than mine. But I'm not sure a crewed Artemis II should or would survive ASAP.

[Hadley Delta]

And therein lies the dilemma, I suppose. If it cannot proceed with a crew, is it worthwhile proceeding at all?

[catdlr]

Phillip Sloss Weekly Report in Artemis II:

Starship flight test six completed while Artemis II stacking begins and then goes back on hold

Nov 24, 2024
Stacking for NASA's Artemis II lunar flyby mission finally began this past week...and then went back on hold again until whenever the Orion heatshield decision is made.  Regardless of the uncertain decision schedule, it's still a big milestone and in this video, I'll look at Exploration Ground Systems activities over the last week and a half to stage the SLS solid rocket booster aft assemblies to roll out of storage at the Kennedy Space Center, move them to the Vehicle Assembly Building, and then crane them onto the Mobile Launcher in VAB High Bay 3.

I'll also go over why that's likely where stacking will stay put until after Thanksgiving and into December.

SpaceX executed the latest Starship flight test and although the visual spectacle was a mixture of new launch lighting and a missed catch opportunity, I'll review how what happened in space during the middle of the mission was more important for Artemis III.

There was also new Orion and SLS information that provided some updated status, even if updates to NASA schedules and SpaceX roadmaps remain elusive for Artemis overall.

Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.

00:00 Intro
00:58 In-space restart test during Starship flight test 6 was the top Artemis priority
03:14 NASA starts Artemis II initial stacking, but the rest is on hold until the Orion heatshield decision
09:13 Artemis II Orion vacuum test continues in the O&C Building
11:36 Boeing SLS November status updates
14:45 Other news and notes on Gateway and the Axiom Space AxEMU
16:12 Thanks for watching!

[ddspaceman]

NASA Artemis
@NASAArtemis
Visiting the @NASAGroundSys teams, celebrating the recent @SpaceX Starship flight test, and reflecting on the Artemis I mission two years ago — all in a week’s work when you are the #Artemis II crew.

https://twitter.com/NASAArtemis/status/1861156630038999410

[catdlr]

Artemis II Iceland Geology Training Reel

Nov 26, 2024
The Artemis II crew astronauts, Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen, their backups, Jenni Gibbons and Andre Douglas, and the geology training field team traveled to Iceland for geology training. Along with exploring the geology of Iceland, the astronauts practiced navigation and expeditionary skills to prepare them for living and working together, and gave feedback to instructors, who used this as an opportunity to hone their instruction and identify sites for future Artemis crew training. They also put tools to the test, learning to use hammers, scoops, and chisels to collect rock samples.

[daedalus1]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

[eeergo]

Maybe the oldest sedimentary rocks on Earth are located in Greenland. https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/planet-earth/how-has-the-earth-evolved/ancient-sediments-from-greenland

Maybe in those rocks there exists some of the earliest known biochemical evidence of the first lifeforms on Earth: https://www.science.org/content/article/hints-oldest-fossil-life-found-greenland-rocks

Maybe the earliest known paleomagnetic record is located in Greenland, on iron formations reminiscent of Mars': https://news.mit.edu/2024/geologists-discover-rocks-oldest-evidence-earths-magnetic-field-0424

Maybe Greenland's mostly glacier-covered surface offers some of the best similarities on Earth to some of Mars' post plausible water-bearing conditions, which MAY be available also in Alaska, yet in a vastly more anthropomorphized environment, smaller scale, and without the features above.

On a side note, I wonder if you stopped to consider how much taxpayer money this represented before posting, especially compared to MANY other asinine or outright outrageous expenditures, and within NASA's overall budget as a whole. Why the cost of going to Greenland would be significantly higher than staying within the US (Alaska is the only meaningfully similar environment to Greenland's there, albeit with less relevant features as mentioned), is beyond me, unless the comments only aim at nationalistic pride.

[daedalus1]

It's Iceland. Not Greenland.

[woods170]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

Eeergo gave the polite answer.

The not so polite answer to your question is: No, it isn't possible in the USA because that country's geologic diversity is too limited. You would be well advised to look up where the Apollo astronauts went for geology training: all over the planet.

[daedalus1]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

Eeergo gave the polite answer.

The not so polite answer to your question is: No, it isn't possible in the USA because that country's geologic diversity is too limited. You would be well advised to look up where the Apollo astronauts went for geology training: all over the planet.

Well my main point was that they are not landing on the moon so what's the point of field training.
I just pointed out also that they were training in Iceland, not Greenland.

[catdlr]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

Eeergo gave the polite answer.

The not so polite answer to your question is: No, it isn't possible in the USA because that country's geologic diversity is too limited. You would be well advised to look up where the Apollo astronauts went for geology training: all over the planet.

Well my main point was that they are not landing on the moon so what's the point of field training.
I just pointed out also that they were training in Iceland, not Greenland.

Most astronauts participate in comprehensive training programs, even if they do not intend to conduct extravehicular activities on a planetary body or moon. This necessity extends to individuals involved in missions such as
Jared Isaacman Polaris Dawn's recent spacewalk. The training emphasizes team building, fostering mutual support among team members, recognizing the limitations of each individual, and functioning effectively under critical conditions. Although these activities may superficially resemble "field trips," they enhance human interaction and teamwork. Similarly, many organizations implement team-building exercises to promote employee collaboration and cohesion.

[yg1968]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

Eeergo gave the polite answer.

The not so polite answer to your question is: No, it isn't possible in the USA because that country's geologic diversity is too limited. You would be well advised to look up where the Apollo astronauts went for geology training: all over the planet.

Well my main point was that they are not landing on the moon so what's the point of field training.
I just pointed out also that they were training in Iceland, not Greenland.

Most astronauts participate in comprehensive training programs, even if they do not intend to conduct extravehicular activities on a planetary body or moon. This necessity extends to individuals involved in missions such as Gerrit's Polaris Dawn's recent spacewalk. The training emphasizes team building, fostering mutual support among team members, recognizing the limitations of each individual, and functioning effectively under critical conditions. Although these activities may superficially resemble "field trips," they enhance human interaction and teamwork. Similarly, many organizations implement team-building exercises to promote employee collaboration and cohesion.

The Artemis II astronauts also explained that their mission also includes building the training for Artemis III astronauts and beyond.

[eeergo]

Sure, I misread and thought it was Greenland, my bad.

Ok, for Iceland:

- Recent/ongoing volcanism and rifting, allowing to study pristine and lightly water-weathered geology.
- Similar climatic conditions as in Greenland.
- Related to Greenland in that it's hypothesized the hotspot that created Iceland first was located under Greenland, allowing for correlation of the unique geology there with a more recent one from the same source.
- As Sandy Evans from JSC says in the video: "Iceland is a great analog for the Moon in a bunch of different ways: it has the planetary processes, in this case volcanism; it has the landscape, as there's no vegetation here, it looks like the Moon; it has the rocks, both volcanic rocks, basalts that we see on the Moon, and also volcanic breccias that are analogues to breccias on the Moon. And it has the scale, the scale of features that astronauts will both be observing on the Moon and be exploring on the Moon".

The last point still stands as it did before, and catdlr then expanded upon. I'd add geologic knowledge of features on the ground is needed to properly interpret what you can see from above, and which they clearly can have access to globally through aircraft or satellite surveys. Of course, if you're looking to denigrate anything and everything in (government-run) Artemis, it's never enough.

[ThatOldJanxSpirit]

This is not about denigrating Artemis. I remember Apollo. I have a degree in geology. Harrison Schmidt was my hero as a kid. I’m excited about the science that could be done by Artemis. It’s not even my tax dollars.

Yes this is a relatively small amount of money but that is never an acceptable answer.

Yes it helps with team building, and yes they might even help in developing a sampling plan, but is this really a cost efficient way of doing any of these?

Sending non geologists who aren’t going to do any geology on a geology field trip is manna from heaven for people who believe Artemis is a waste of money. At a time when science missions like VIPER and Chandra are on the chopping block it also seems rather insensitive.

[woods170]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

Eeergo gave the polite answer.

The not so polite answer to your question is: No, it isn't possible in the USA because that country's geologic diversity is too limited. You would be well advised to look up where the Apollo astronauts went for geology training: all over the planet.

Well my main point was that they are not landing on the moon so what's the point of field training.
I just pointed out also that they were training in Iceland, not Greenland.

Counterpoint: every single Apollo CMP (Command Module Pilot) that went into lunar orbit had received basic geology field training, similar to the basic levels received by the commander and LMP (Lunar Module Pilot). This despite the fact that the CMPs would never land on the Moon. Instead, they made geology observations from orbit, which required them to have received a general training in geology, including basic field training.
CMP Alfred Worden of Apollo 15, for example, not only went thru field training with his crew members David Scott and Jim Irwin, but he also spent lots of time in aircraft, observing and describing geological features from the air.

Yes, it's a fact that the Artemis II crew is not landing on the Moon. But they will be performing geologic observations when they swing by the Moon. And that requires them to have basic training in geology, including basic field training.

[ThatOldJanxSpirit]

You'd think that they are going to be landing on the moon and need geology experience. Lol.
Anyway isn't it possible to do what they're doing in the USA?

Eeergo gave the polite answer.

The not so polite answer to your question is: No, it isn't possible in the USA because that country's geologic diversity is too limited. You would be well advised to look up where the Apollo astronauts went for geology training: all over the planet.

Well my main point was that they are not landing on the moon so what's the point of field training.
I just pointed out also that they were training in Iceland, not Greenland.

Counterpoint: every single Apollo CMP (Command Module Pilot) that went into lunar orbit had received basic geology field training, similar to the basic levels received by the commander and LMP (Lunar Module Pilot). This despite the fact that the CMPs would never land on the Moon. Instead, they made geology observations from orbit, which required them to have received a general training in geology, including basic field training.
CMP Alfred Worden of Apollo 15, for example, not only went thru field training with his crew members David Scott and Jim Irwin, but he also spent lots of time in aircraft, observing and describing geological features from the air.

Yes, it's a fact that the Artemis II crew is not landing on the Moon. But they will be performing geologic observations when they swing by the Moon. And that requires them to have basic training in geology, including basic field training.

True, but during Apollo the Moon was still largely terra incognito. Now we have an atlas of high resolution imagery and altimetry from LRO covering by nearly all the lunar surface.

Also the Apollo CMP would spend days at 69 miles. Artemis 2 will zip by at a minimum 4600 miles.   I’d further add that you really don’t learn geomorphology in a quarry with a hammer.

I’m not arguing that Artemis astronauts shouldn’t learn geology, quite the opposite. I wouldn’t blink an eye if the same crew burnt through many more dollars developing sampling techniques in the NBL. But at times like this when budgets are tight I’d suggest that such obvious conspicuous consumption  is politically unwise.

[catdlr]

Phillip Sloss Weekly Report in Artemis II:

Will December 2024 bring updates to the Artemis schedule?

Dec 1, 2024
In this video I'll take a look at what could be ahead in the final month of 2024, now that Thanksgiving week is ending.  At the Kennedy Space Center, the rest of Artemis II stacking waits for a possible December decision on the Orion heatshield, and preparations are being made to stand up the Artemis II SLS Core Stage for some offline work in the meantime.

I'll also go over the two SLS elements that were stacked, an Artemis II flight crew KSC visit before Thanksgiving, and a few other news and notes.

With possible decisions before the end of the year and possible announcements around the change in administrations, there's time to take a look at watch items for Artemis II, III, and the big picture for Artemis on a relatively slow news week.

Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.

00:00 Intro
00:40 Artemis II SLS booster aft assembly stacking recap
04:06 Artemis II flight crew visit to KSC
05:15 VAB High Bay 2 notes, preparing to host Artemis II SLS Core Stage
06:03 Other news and notes, HLS Cargo awards and an Orion heatshield delivery
08:27 Big picture outlook as 2024 ends
12:54 Thanks for watching!