Author Topic: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread  (Read 229324 times)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35996
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 18423
  • Likes Given: 397
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #200 on: 03/18/2022 11:33 am »
I have been waiting 50 years for this to happen. I recall clearly as a 10-year-old living in Huntsville that Apollo missions 18 and 19 had been canceled and the dismay I felt that we would not continue human exploration of space.
Now, I feel that we are embarking on the next phase of human evolution with the SLS/Orion/Artemis program. This is a development of humanity, not so much based on physical change but one of what our minds, working in concert, can achieve to improve our species and our world. We can never withdraw from this advancement, but go ever outward. Today, I have hope and faith that we can do this.

I feel bad for you.  SLS is not going to do that.

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1086
  • Likes Given: 2910
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #201 on: 03/18/2022 03:11 pm »
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Offline cplchanb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • Toronto
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #202 on: 03/18/2022 04:01 pm »
I have been waiting 50 years for this to happen. I recall clearly as a 10-year-old living in Huntsville that Apollo missions 18 and 19 had been canceled and the dismay I felt that we would not continue human exploration of space.
Now, I feel that we are embarking on the next phase of human evolution with the SLS/Orion/Artemis program. This is a development of humanity, not so much based on physical change but one of what our minds, working in concert, can achieve to improve our species and our world. We can never withdraw from this advancement, but go ever outward. Today, I have hope and faith that we can do this.

I feel bad for you.  SLS is not going to do that.

Geez what a killjoy.....can we just shut up on the cynicism for a few moments and actually just enjoy the moment that was long time coming?? Were going to the moon again for crying out loud!

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1086
  • Likes Given: 2910
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2055
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1669
  • Likes Given: 916
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #204 on: 03/20/2022 06:08 am »
I have been waiting 50 years for this to happen. I recall clearly as a 10-year-old living in Huntsville that Apollo missions 18 and 19 had been canceled and the dismay I felt that we would not continue human exploration of space.
Now, I feel that we are embarking on the next phase of human evolution with the SLS/Orion/Artemis program. This is a development of humanity, not so much based on physical change but one of what our minds, working in concert, can achieve to improve our species and our world. We can never withdraw from this advancement, but go ever outward. Today, I have hope and faith that we can do this.

I feel bad for you.  SLS is not going to do that.

Geez what a killjoy.....can we just shut up on the cynicism for a few moments and actually just enjoy the moment that was long time coming?? Were going to the moon again for crying out loud!
I see with just a few dozen posts, you are probably fairly new to this forum.  Now you understand that Jim's job is to be a killjoy (just kidding Jim).  Jim is just very blunt in his assessments.  Not everybody always agrees with his assessments, but he is probably one of the most informed people on this site.  Don't take it personally.  When you get one of these blunt replies from Jim, it means you've arrived as a member.  I appreciate that he is blunt and gets to the point.  You always know where he stands.

Offline tea monster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
  • Across the Universe
    • My ArtStation Portfolio
  • Liked: 785
  • Likes Given: 163
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #205 on: 03/22/2022 12:08 am »
Jim is telling it like it is. Yes, we don't always agree, but if you want to label it as cynicism and being a killjoy - well, that is your own interpretation.

Some of us remember Apollo from the first time round and see history repeating itself. You guys are seeing a return to the moon and thinking "Yipeee!" which is entirely valid. That's how I feel as well.

The problem is, that some of us see the other parts of the Apollo story recurring - the parts that led to missions being cancelled and a long, dry drought for lunar exploration for decades afterwards. That is the bit that is very much NOT "Yippeee!".

I am rooting for you being right and Jim being a cranky old killjoy (no offence intended Jim!!). Unfortunately, history does have this way of repeating itself.

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1086
  • Likes Given: 2910
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #206 on: 03/22/2022 01:01 am »
Jim is telling it like it is. Yes, we don't always agree, but if you want to label it as cynicism and being a killjoy - well, that is your own interpretation.

Some of us remember Apollo from the first time round and see history repeating itself. You guys are seeing a return to the moon and thinking "Yipeee!" which is entirely valid. That's how I feel as well.

The problem is, that some of us see the other parts of the Apollo story recurring - the parts that led to missions being cancelled and a long, dry drought for lunar exploration for decades afterwards. That is the bit that is very much NOT "Yippeee!".

I am rooting for you being right and Jim being a cranky old killjoy (no offence intended Jim!!). Unfortunately, history does have this way of repeating itself.

Except SLS is being run significantly cheaper than Apollo on a sustainable NASA budget, and unlike Apollo we have international and commercial partners. 

Apollo's budget could never have been maintained, but SLS budget is the same as STS which we ran for 30 years.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7771
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 9062
  • Likes Given: 10826
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #207 on: 03/22/2022 01:57 am »
Except SLS is being run significantly cheaper than Apollo on a sustainable NASA budget...

That is not the opinion of the NASA OIG, who would have better insight into what is "sustainable" or not for government programs. Specifically he stated:
Quote
Appearing before a House Science Committee hearing on NASA's Artemis program, Martin revealed the operational costs of the big rocket and spacecraft for the first time. Moreover, he took aim at NASA and particularly its large aerospace contractors for their "very poor" performance in developing these vehicles.

Martin said that the operational costs alone for a single Artemis launch—for just the rocket, Orion spacecraft, and ground systems—will total $4.1 billion. This is, he said, "a price tag that strikes us as unsustainable." With this comment, Martin essentially threw down his gauntlet and said NASA cannot have a meaningful exploration program based around SLS and Orion at this cost.


The NASA OIG is forecasting that an Artemis cost-per-launch will cost $4.1B for at least the first four Artemis missions.

Quote
...and unlike Apollo we have international and commercial partners.

Which means nothing, and shows a lack of understanding for what the goal of Apollo was, and what the goal for Artemis is.

For instance, when President Kennedy proposed to Congress in 1961 that the U.S. "should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.", the U.S. was in the middle of the Cold War with the USSR, and the Apollo program was part of the effort to woo unaligned nations to side with the U.S. against the USSR. The effort was deemed so important that at one point NASA was consuming more than 4% of the Federal Budget.

The Artemis program started with a goal that was created to benefit President Trump specifically - landing Americans on the Moon before the end of a potential 2nd Trump term in office. And Presidents can create whatever reasons they want for agency and department goals, but unlike the Apollo program, Trump never secured enough funding to support his 2024 goal (probably because he didn't think it was very exciting).

Quote
Apollo's budget could never have been maintained, but SLS budget is the same as STS which we ran for 30 years.

The Apollo program reached its goal with Apollo 11, but was allowed to keep flying since they had already built most of the hardware. Most of the money spent on the Apollo program was for development, and by the time Apollo 11 flew NASA's budget had fallen from a high of 4.41% of the Federal budget in 1966, to 2.31% in 1969.

The bottom line though is that the Apollo program had a singular goal, and the hardware stack was built for speed, not to be "sustainable".

The SLS was created by Congress well before there was a real return-to-Moon program, and no cost goals were ever set. Though then-Senator Bill Nelson (now NASA Administrator) did say "If we can't do a rocket for $11.5 billion, we ought to close up shop." That was about $10B ago, yet Congress doesn't seem to care.

As for the Artemis program, Congress still has not fully agreed with the Artemis goals. NASA has been told to shoot for 2024, but Congress has always preferred 2028. So the Artemis program is in this kind of no-mans land of ambitious goals without enough funding to support them.

The Apollo program achieved it's goal, on time, and Congress fully supported the program with funding.

The Artemis program has, according to the NASA OIG, "a price tag that strikes us as unsustainable.", and Congress is NOT fully supporting the program with funding.

The difference is pretty clear...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15310
  • Liked: 5754
  • Likes Given: 2554
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #208 on: 03/22/2022 02:30 am »
The post above is actually off topic for this thread which relates to the Artemis I mission only. So I have posted my reply in the SLS General discussion thread:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=54967.msg2352550#msg2352550
« Last Edit: 03/22/2022 02:33 am by yg1968 »

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1086
  • Likes Given: 2910
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #209 on: 03/24/2022 02:10 pm »
Love the view of inside the crew access arm

https://twitter.com/NASA_Orion/status/1506729076924596224
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Online kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1433
  • Somewhere on the boat
  • Liked: 1630
  • Likes Given: 1149
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #210 on: 03/24/2022 03:38 pm »
Love the view of inside the crew access arm

https://twitter.com/NASA_Orion/status/1506729076924596224
That’s what you call the  “agricultural” look.

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • USA
  • Liked: 924
  • Likes Given: 1303
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #211 on: 03/24/2022 11:32 pm »

The Artemis program started with a goal that was created to benefit President Trump specifically - landing Americans on the Moon before the end of a potential 2nd Trump term in office. And Presidents can create whatever reasons they want for agency and department goals, but unlike the Apollo program, Trump never secured enough funding to support his 2024 goal (probably because he didn't think it was very exciting).


While Trump obviously ..... colored the start of Artimis, I think he was simply twisting something that would've happened anyways. SLS was coming and it had no use. I really think Artimis was created to have a reason to launch and make SLS rockets.

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1086
  • Likes Given: 2910
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Online sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6435
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 1390
  • Likes Given: 1313
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #213 on: 03/25/2022 02:47 pm »
Is there an explanation for the uncertainty (shown in the attached timeline snipped from a NASA image) of the duration of the return? Surely it isn't uncertainty in the capability of the Orion propulsion system, since that engine is well characterized. Is it still uncertainty in the navigation, i.e. how close to the lunar surface Orion gets during the return lunar flyby?
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline cplchanb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • Toronto
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #214 on: 03/25/2022 08:18 pm »
Wow that's quite a slow TLI and return compared to the Saturn v. Didn't they used to make it there in only 3 days with the S-IVB?

Offline saturnapollo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 618
  • Edinburgh, UK
    • Space Models Photography
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #215 on: 03/25/2022 08:36 pm »
I think the duration is determined by where the Moon is at launch. And yes it took 3 days to get to the Moon on Apollo, but my understanding is that both it and Artemis 2 the crewed mission will be going beyond the Moon in a far larger orbit than Apollo did.

Keith

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #216 on: 03/25/2022 08:39 pm »
Is there an explanation for the uncertainty (shown in the attached timeline snipped from a NASA image) of the duration of the return? Surely it isn't uncertainty in the capability of the Orion propulsion system, since that engine is well characterized. Is it still uncertainty in the navigation, i.e. how close to the lunar surface Orion gets during the return lunar flyby?

Mostly the uncertainty is in the specific orbits that the Artemis I mission will fly, that changes depending on the exact launch date. Since there is a wide range of launch dates, there's a wide range of possible mission durations.

Once Artemis I gets a proper launch date, the mission duration will solidify.

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/11/artemis-1-launch-periods/
« Last Edit: 03/25/2022 08:40 pm by whitelancer64 »
"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

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1086
  • Likes Given: 2910
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #217 on: 03/26/2022 04:39 pm »
Hydrazine loaded onto SRB's hydraulic power units this past Friday.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Offline [email protected]

Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #218 on: 03/28/2022 04:23 pm »
I think it's impressive how NASA planned to make more people excited about the first rocket that will takes people to the Moon in more than 50 years
https://twitter.com/stevenyoungsfn/status/1508451455493152779?t=qHNds1oTpJWLtU8k94Me6A&s=19
« Last Edit: 03/28/2022 04:26 pm by [email protected] »
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

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2887
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1376
  • Likes Given: 1333
Re: Artemis 1 Discussion Thread
« Reply #219 on: 03/28/2022 04:32 pm »
I don't see how this prevents independent media coverage. An uncommented camera view (which NASA says will be provided) would actually be better for independent media IMHO. Plus it's not like you can't see the rocket across the entire space coast. I'm sure the NSF crew has ideas.
« Last Edit: 03/28/2022 04:33 pm by Orbiter »
Astronomer & launch photographer

Tags:
 

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