Author Topic: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3  (Read 646217 times)

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14902
  • Liked: 5505
  • Likes Given: 2415
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2880 on: 07/01/2022 01:57 am »
Quote from: Coastal Ron
everyone should know that my focus is on expanding humanity out into space, and if that is also the goal of the U.S. Government

It is not.

Maybe that's where you are laboring in vain here.

Artemis does have as a goal to create a lunar economy, so arguably expanding humanity into space isn't incompatible with that goal.

Quote from: page 12 of the Sustainable Lunar Presence Report
Developing a sustained and vibrant lunar presence will not only require the best of NASA and its international partner space agencies, but also the best of the entire U.S. government and commercial sector. Establishing the infrastructure that will enable additional international and commercial partnerships will result in opportunities for the first international and commercial astronauts on the lunar surface, opening up Earth’s ’s off-shore continent for ongoing human discovery and development. NASA’s unique leadership and capabilities will be combined with innovation and contributions from the same sectors that fuel our nation and economy here on Earth.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/a_sustained_lunar_presence_nspc_report4220final.pdf
« Last Edit: 07/01/2022 01:58 am by yg1968 »

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7054
  • Liked: 2575
  • Likes Given: 1303
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2881 on: 07/01/2022 02:59 pm »
Any excuse for a program that is literally spending Apollo-level amounts of money for anything short of very regular moon landings is just that, a bad excuse.

Not quite.

The Apollo-Saturn spending depicted in those plots was sufficient for about 9 lunar landing attempts*.  At its glacial launch rate and even if expenditures for gateway are ignored, Orion/SLS's will have burned through a substantial fraction of the money consumed by Apollo by the time it launches 9th lunar landing mission.  Considering the advance in technology since the 1960's, that is completely ridiculous.  The whole point of a Shuttle-derived launch vehicle was that it was meant to be cheap and easy.



* Launch vehicles for 10 landings and spacecraft for 9 were completed, with the 10th pair of spacecraft in progress at the time of cancellation in January 1970.  Had 9 rather than 7 launches occurred, there would have been some additional operational expenses.

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7054
  • Liked: 2575
  • Likes Given: 1303
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2882 on: 07/01/2022 03:03 pm »
NASA is planning to do longer stays on Gateway, for months in duration, in the future.

Source, please?

Offline whitelancer64

Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2883 on: 07/01/2022 03:20 pm »
NASA is planning to do longer stays on Gateway, for months in duration, in the future.

Source, please?

"As NASA and its partners build the Gateway, the outpost’s capabilities will expand to include more living and research space, enabling months-long crew expeditions"

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/step-3-artemis-moon-missions-as-an-astronaut-testbed-for-mars
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online Athelstane

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Washington, D.C.
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 512
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2884 on: 07/01/2022 03:44 pm »
Relevant to the discussion: Jake and Anthony had a special Off Nominal interview with Eric Berger of Ars Technica yesterday, discussing the now emerging problems with the Artemis schedule as recently updated. Eric: "What this shows is that the SLS cadence of one mission every one or two years—every two or three years?—is preprosterous if Starship works. Now if it doesn't work, then that's our space program. But it's all going to come down to who can execute."


Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11567
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 5883
  • Likes Given: 2898
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2885 on: 07/02/2022 03:50 pm »
I find the Moon just as important of a destination as Mars, perhaps even more given its close proximity.  I think that it is important to go to the Moon to stay. If a choice has to be made between the Moon and Mars, I would chose the Moon. I think that there is a real opportunity for a lunar economy to develop (private astronauts, etc.).

I totally agree. I want us to go to Mars (eventually), but not without first putting things in place to actually develop a thriving lunar economy. Developing a Martian economy in the foreseeable future is possible, but will be several orders of magnitude more difficult and expensive than doing the same thing on the Moon. We have the potential to actually develop a 2-planet economy (earth and the moon). That is where, imo, the real focus should be. Mars WILL happen, but it should not be at the expense of lunar development.
« Last Edit: 07/02/2022 04:36 pm by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5595
  • Liked: 8078
  • Likes Given: 767
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2886 on: 07/03/2022 04:41 am »
Gateway is not the problem, it's just an annoyance, SLS/Orion is the real problem. Getting rid of Gateway is not going to solve anything at this point, you free up ~$700M/year, not neglectable, but nothing game changing either, not even enough to fund a 2nd HLS lander.

Mars is not the problem either, NASA can afford both Moon and Mars if they bet everything on Starship, which is what they should do once Starship proves itself.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • California
  • Liked: 1578
  • Likes Given: 619
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2887 on: 07/03/2022 05:08 am »
Gateway is not the problem, it's just an annoyance, SLS/Orion is the real problem. Getting rid of Gateway is not going to solve anything at this point, you free up ~$700M/year, not neglectable, but nothing game changing either, not even enough to fund a 2nd HLS lander.

Mars is not the problem either, NASA can afford both Moon and Mars if they bet everything on Starship, which is what they should do once Starship proves itself.
Gateway is needed to sustain Orion when it needs to wait for a 30-day HLS lunar mission. If you build a mission plan that does not need this NRHO rendezvous and wait, then you don't need Gateway in NRHO. But consider the mission plan where HLS meets one or more Crew Dragons in LEO. That mission would be cheaper if the Crew Dragons could loiter in LEO instead of needing two Crew Dragon flights. Suddenly, we need something like Gateway in LEO for this purpose, so let's just use the Gateway hardware as a small LEO station to sustain the Crew Dragons.  Of course, if you are eventually running back-to-back HLS missions, the Crew Dragons can bring the new crew up and take the old crew back down, and eventually the Crew Dragons get replaced by the crewed EDL-capable Starship.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4168
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1230
  • Likes Given: 1119
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2888 on: 07/03/2022 03:42 pm »
Gateway is not the problem, it's just an annoyance, SLS/Orion is the real problem. Getting rid of Gateway is not going to solve anything at this point, you free up ~$700M/year, not neglectable, but nothing game changing either, not even enough to fund a 2nd HLS lander.

Mars is not the problem either, NASA can afford both Moon and Mars if they bet everything on Starship, which is what they should do once Starship proves itself.
Gateway is needed to sustain Orion when it needs to wait for a 30-day HLS lunar mission. If you build a mission plan that does not need this NRHO rendezvous and wait, then you don't need Gateway in NRHO. But consider the mission plan where HLS meets one or more Crew Dragons in LEO. That mission would be cheaper if the Crew Dragons could loiter in LEO instead of needing two Crew Dragon flights. Suddenly, we need something like Gateway in LEO for this purpose, so let's just use the Gateway hardware as a small LEO station to sustain the Crew Dragons.  Of course, if you are eventually running back-to-back HLS missions, the Crew Dragons can bring the new crew up and take the old crew back down, and eventually the Crew Dragons get replaced by the crewed EDL-capable Starship.
Something like the Gateway isn't needed if the Starship is operational. Which could acts as temporary stations at Earth orbit and Lunar orbit. As well as cis-Lunar logistics vehicle. Just need a lot of Starship launches.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • California
  • Liked: 1578
  • Likes Given: 619
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2889 on: 07/03/2022 03:51 pm »
Gateway is not the problem, it's just an annoyance, SLS/Orion is the real problem. Getting rid of Gateway is not going to solve anything at this point, you free up ~$700M/year, not neglectable, but nothing game changing either, not even enough to fund a 2nd HLS lander.

Mars is not the problem either, NASA can afford both Moon and Mars if they bet everything on Starship, which is what they should do once Starship proves itself.
Gateway is needed to sustain Orion when it needs to wait for a 30-day HLS lunar mission. If you build a mission plan that does not need this NRHO rendezvous and wait, then you don't need Gateway in NRHO. But consider the mission plan where HLS meets one or more Crew Dragons in LEO. That mission would be cheaper if the Crew Dragons could loiter in LEO instead of needing two Crew Dragon flights. Suddenly, we need something like Gateway in LEO for this purpose, so let's just use the Gateway hardware as a small LEO station to sustain the Crew Dragons.  Of course, if you are eventually running back-to-back HLS missions, the Crew Dragons can bring the new crew up and take the old crew back down, and eventually the Crew Dragons get replaced by the crewed EDL-capable Starship.
Something like the Gateway isn't needed if the Starship is operational. Which could acts as temporary stations at Earth orbit and Lunar orbit. As well as cis-Lunar logistics vehicle. Just need a lot of Starship launches.
There are multiple Starship variants, and they won't become operational at the same time. I think the EDL-capable crewed Starship will become operational quite a bit later than HLS, Depot, and Tanker.  A space station variant would probably be easy of someone want to pay for it. missions that use Crew Dragon for crewed Earth-to/from-LEO can bridge the gap until EDL-capable crewed Starship is available. Using Gateway as the LEO transfer station is basically a face-saving measure to salvage something from the international effort.

Offline lykos

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 239
  • Greece
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2890 on: 07/05/2022 08:56 am »
There is no better way to test and train for a crewed Starship-Mars-Mission than a crewed Starship in space.

When will the Gateway be ready for monthlong crew?
When will the Staship be ready for monthlong crew?

We all know very well, when there will be Starship, there will not be any need for Gateway, SLS, Orion, ......(maybe for a short time need for F9 and Dragon, but not for very long)

The only question is: "will there be a Starship?"
For me it looks it will.

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6784
  • Enthusiast since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 3397
  • Likes Given: 2693
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2891 on: 07/06/2022 12:22 pm »
How NASA Built Artemis, Its Most Powerful Rocket Ever

NASA is going back to the moon for the first time in 50 years with its most powerful rocket ever. CNET's Claire Reilly goes inside the factory where this super heavy-lift giant is being built, ahead of NASA's most ambitious human journey yet.

0:00 Introduction
1:46 NASA's Manned Missions
2:30 Artemis Mission Overview
3:25 Michoud Assembly Facility
4:41 Rocket 101
6:26 Orion Capsule
8:23 The SLS (Space Launch System)
10:28 Transporting the SLS to Kennedy Space Center
11:21 The VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building)
11:43 Artemis Challenges
12:19 One and Done
13:41 The Future of Artemis

Tony De La Rosa

Offline [email protected]

Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2892 on: 07/06/2022 12:46 pm »
How NASA Built Artemis, Its Most Powerful Rocket Ever

NASA is going back to the moon for the first time in 50 years with its most powerful rocket ever. CNET's Claire Reilly goes inside the factory where this super heavy-lift giant is being built, ahead of NASA's most ambitious human journey yet.

0:00 Introduction
1:46 NASA's Manned Missions
2:30 Artemis Mission Overview
3:25 Michoud Assembly Facility
4:41 Rocket 101
6:26 Orion Capsule
8:23 The SLS (Space Launch System)
10:28 Transporting the SLS to Kennedy Space Center
11:21 The VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building)
11:43 Artemis Challenges
12:19 One and Done
13:41 The Future of Artemis


Can't help it but saying the misconceptions. It's like saying a Saturn V "an Apollo rocket", but it's MSM anyways
My parents was just being born when the Apollo program is over. Why we are still stuck in this stagnation, let's go forward again

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14902
  • Liked: 5505
  • Likes Given: 2415
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2893 on: 07/06/2022 07:31 pm »
At 13m30s of the video, the reporter says that NASA's goal is to eventually commercialize Artemis and sell it to anyone that wants heavy launch capability. Hmmm... Not exactly. First, Artemis and SLS aren't the same thing. Secondly, although the possibility exists, NASA doesn't actually expect SLS to have non-NASA customers. The main goal of the RFI is to reduce the costs of SLS for NASA.
« Last Edit: 07/06/2022 07:38 pm by yg1968 »

Offline whitelancer64

Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2894 on: 07/06/2022 07:51 pm »
There is no better way to test and train for a crewed Starship-Mars-Mission than a crewed Starship in space.

When will the Gateway be ready for monthlong crew?

After the attachment of the Gateway's hab module, the i-Hab, currently planned to be co-manifested on Artemis 4.
Quote
When will the Staship be ready for monthlong crew?

Unknown. SpaceX needs to work out a life support system for that large volume that could sustain people for months on end. That won't be for some time, since the HLS for Artemis 3 does not require a life support system that can support more than 2 people for more than a couple weeks.
Quote

We all know very well, when there will be Starship, there will not be any need for Gateway, SLS, Orion, ......(maybe for a short time need for F9 and Dragon, but not for very long)

The only question is: "will there be a Starship?"
For me it looks it will.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • California
  • Liked: 1578
  • Likes Given: 619
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2895 on: 07/06/2022 10:37 pm »
When will the Staship be ready for monthlong crew?
Unknown. SpaceX needs to work out a life support system for that large volume that could sustain people for months on end. That won't be for some time, since the HLS for Artemis 3 does not require a life support system that can support more than 2 people for more than a couple weeks.
True, but SpaceX may choose to meet the HLS Option B sustainability requirements early, as part of the initial HLS, to simplify the overall design and testing. NASA mentioned this possibility in the Option B announcement, and it aligns with SpaceX's overall goals. This makes even more sense as Artemis III slips further.  This is still not the full-up "100 people for a year" needed for a Mars trip, but it's at least 4 people for at least 30 days. But as you say: "unknown".

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4168
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1230
  • Likes Given: 1119
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2896 on: 07/07/2022 10:55 pm »
At 13m30s of the video, the reporter says that NASA's goal is to eventually commercialize Artemis and sell it to anyone that wants heavy launch capability. Hmmm... Not exactly. First, Artemis and SLS aren't the same thing. Secondly, although the possibility exists, NASA doesn't actually expect SLS to have non-NASA customers. The main goal of the RFI is to reduce the costs of SLS for NASA.
The reporter is confused. Artemis =/= SLS.

Think at about 12:30 someone says they are building a national treasure. More like a monument to futility, IMO.

The RFI is a joke. The cost of the SLS is dictated by backroom deals in Congress. The key product of the SLS program is the number of jobs in certain Congressional districts.

However, NASA might be unintentionally showcased a viable commercial heavy lift capability to orbit. The HLS lander and the propellants it requires have to get to orbit after all. ;)

Online Athelstane

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Washington, D.C.
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 512
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2897 on: 07/08/2022 12:32 pm »

The RFI is a joke. The cost of the SLS is dictated by backroom deals in Congress. The key product of the SLS program is the number of jobs in certain Congressional districts.


And the result is that there are so many of them - 27,000+, at last check. Which is almost 3 times SpaceX's entire workforce.

It's exuberantly expensive by design.

Online deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1014
  • USA
  • Liked: 902
  • Likes Given: 1234
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2898 on: 07/11/2022 02:17 pm »
At 13m30s of the video, the reporter says that NASA's goal is to eventually commercialize Artemis and sell it to anyone that wants heavy launch capability. Hmmm... Not exactly. First, Artemis and SLS aren't the same thing. Secondly, although the possibility exists, NASA doesn't actually expect SLS to have non-NASA customers. The main goal of the RFI is to reduce the costs of SLS for NASA.
The reporter is confused. Artemis =/= SLS.


The cynic in mean thinks that this is a lie we tell ourselves (that artimis is not SLS). Because without SLS, none of the rest of the stuff would be happening anyways.

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14902
  • Liked: 5505
  • Likes Given: 2415
Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #2899 on: 07/11/2022 03:37 pm »
At 13m30s of the video, the reporter says that NASA's goal is to eventually commercialize Artemis and sell it to anyone that wants heavy launch capability. Hmmm... Not exactly. First, Artemis and SLS aren't the same thing. Secondly, although the possibility exists, NASA doesn't actually expect SLS to have non-NASA customers. The main goal of the RFI is to reduce the costs of SLS for NASA.
The reporter is confused. Artemis =/= SLS.


The cynic in mean thinks that this is a lie we tell ourselves (that artimis is not SLS). Because without SLS, none of the rest of the stuff would be happening anyways.

You can say that about the lander too.

Tags: Artemis ISS China 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0