Artemis Moon Landing Missions Delayed!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 січ 2024
- Breaking News. Join us in this comprehensive update on NASA's Artemis missions! 🚀 In this video, we delve deep into the latest developments concerning the Artemis II, III, and IV missions. Despite setbacks, NASA continues to prioritize crew safety above all. We'll explore the complexities of the missions, including the delay of Artemis II to September 2025, the challenges facing Artemis III, and the status of Artemis IV and the Gateway. Plus, don't miss out on breaking news about SpaceX's Starship and its crucial role in these lunar missions. Stay tuned for detailed analysis, expert insights, and exclusive clips!
🌕 Artemis II Delay Explained: Crew Safety, Heatshield Investigations, and Life Support System Challenges
🌗 Artemis III's 2026 Target: The Hurdles of Starship, Space Suits, and Advanced Technology Needs
🌑 Artemis IV and Gateway: On Track for 2028, But Will It Hold?
🔗 Check out our exclusive merchandise at Shop.NASASpaceflight.com
👉 What's your take on the Artemis III landing timeline? Share your thoughts in the comments!
⚡ Become a member of NASASpaceflight's channel for exclusive discord access, fast turnaround clips, and other exclusive benefits. Your support helps us continue our 24/7 coverage. Click JOIN above to get started.⚡
🤵 Hosted & Written by Adrian Beil (@bccarcounters). Additional writing by Philip Sloss and Alejandro Alcantarilla Romera.
🎥 Video from Jack Beyer (@TheJackBeyer), Michael Baylor, Max Evans (@_mgde_), Sawyer Rosenstein (@thenasaman), NASA, ESA, SpaceX, Axiom Space, Space Coast Live, and Stephen Marr (@spacecoast_stve).
✂️ Edited by Sawyer Rosenstein (@thenasaman).
💼 Produced by Kevin Michael Reed (@kmreed)
🔍 If you are interested in using footage from this video, please review our content use policy: www.nasaspaceflight.com/conte...
L2 Boca Chica (more clips and photos) from BC's very early days to today.
🔗 forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...
(Join L2 and support NSF here: www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/)
#NASA #ArtemisII #ArtemisIII #ArtemisIV #MoonMission #SpaceX #Starship #SpaceExploration #LunarMission #SpaceTechnology #CrewSafety #NASAUpdates #SpaceLaunchSystem #OrionSpacecraft #Heatshield #LifeSupportSystem #SpaceSuits #LunarLanding #SpaceTravel #DeepSpace #HumanSpaceflight #RocketScience #SpaceNews #SpaceCommunity #SpaceEngineering #AstronautTraining #SpaceMission #MoonLanding #SpaceAgency #OuterSpace #InterstellarTravel - Наука та технологія
Biggest surprise was not that there was a delay - but that NASA announced it so early this year.
Let's be real though, did anyone believe they would meet their initial timeline?
NASAfanboys mostly did. I knew it would be delayed because we've never been.
No...and has't NASA been saying that the Starship delays are the reason going back to the moon will be delayed?
No, mainly because of all the games the FAA /Fish and Wild Life were playing in 2023 that held up Starship testing. It's just been delays after delays after delays. And don't get me started with Artemis that has been a complete joke since day 1. Back in the 60's NASA could launch a new Apollo rockets multiple times a year with 50+ year old technology where nowadays for some reason it take YEARS just to launch a single rocket. I get "space is hard" and we value safety first. But other countries ( China ) are quicky catching up and we are not going to win this new space race by walking on egg shells in every step. Risk is part of the game. Grow a pair or go home.
@@derp8575 🙄 The evidence for the Apollo landings is overwhelming. That you doubt them, makes anything you say not credible at all.
@@OhShiitakeMushrooms The FAA vs SpaceX is not really a thing, except for clicks by some YT channels. After all, the FAA defended SpaceX in front of Congress in Jun 2021 over the unauthorized SN8 flight. The 'NASA delaying Starship until the SLS flies' was just as silly, since NASA needs BOTH Starship and SLS for Artemis.
SpaceX had approval for orbital launches of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy from Boca Chica since 2014. They could also fly sub-orbital tests of reusable spacecraft. SpaceX went through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to get that approval in 2014. Since SpaceX wanted to fly orbital flights with Starship, that has roughly 3 times the propellant as the Falcon Heavy, out of Boca Chica, a relook was in order. So the FAA review was to see about adding Starship to that existing approval, without having to go through another EIS.
The FAA was the lead agency with NASA, the Army Corps of Engineers, the US Coast Guard, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service all involved from the beginning. With 6 different government agencies involved, it is not surprising that the review took time. Musk asking everyone to comment, over 18,000 comments were received, didn't help. Consultations were mentioned for a third time on Apr 29th,2022 and mitigations for the first time, so some issues did come up and SpaceX had been working out a solution with whichever agency or agencies covered the issue. The Permitting Dashboard: Federal Infrastructure Projects had 5 sections to the FAA review. The first was completed in Oct 2021, second in Jan 2022, third in Apr 2022, fourth in May 2022, and fifth in Jun 2022, so there was continual progress. The FAA review was completed with Starship able to fit under the existing EIS for Boca Chica.
At this rate, the Artemis 2 astronauts will be senior citizens by the time they get to space.
And that would be a first the current administration could boast.
This may be a good thing. Being old, they will be able to say "Hey you kids, stay off my Lunar Lawn!" 😆
@ag1382 Actually, the famous Mercury program astronaut, John Glenn, the 1st American to orbit the earth in February 1962 flew into space a 2nd time on board the space shuttle Discovery in late October 1998 on STS-95. On that mission, he was 77 years old and is perhaps still the oldest human to have orbited the planet.
I think that record still stands because although a couple other senior citizens have gone into space including William Shatner who was 90 at the time in a BO New Shepard capsule in 2021, they were suborbital flights.
I still don't understand the point in SLS when Starship is launching from Earth as well. SLS is a massive waste of 1980's single use rocketry.
Just put the astronauts in Starship from the outset for goodness sake.
Absolutely! @@RGBmode
German Ed Sheeran really has become a top tier space presenter. Keep up the great work Adrian.
😂😂😂
It's the real Ed Sheeran. He's using a fake German accent to disguise himself.
There is zero chance that Starship will be ready for a crewed moon landing in this decade.
Best cold opening EVER.
Artemis is a very exciting program, and it's disappointing to hear any delay on this, but there are so many more space programs going on. 2024 would still be exciting year for astronomy and space launch.
But Artemis 1 was done without problems.
Maybe the Moon Hoaxers are right.
We went to the spoon.
@@Helga7850 😂😂😂
Thanks for the update, Adrian! Great job!
I was 13 when Neil Armstrong took the first step on the moon. I still remember watching it on an old black and white tv at my military academy, and I fully expect to watch the return trip be it in 2025 or later!
It was a fake staged event.
Do you believe everything you watch on the tell-a-vision?
@@derp8575moon landing inst fake
@@derp8575 did you forget your meds again?
@@TurdBoi-tf5lf Ad hom.
"If we die, do not mourn for us. This is a risky business we are in, and we accept those risks" -Gus Grissom
ah this must be the breaking content Adrian had to dip out yesterday to cover, great work!!
I believe it was inevitable these delays would come, these things are hard for sure
thanks for the great video. Hope to see Philip Sloss on stream soon to talk about the program updates and timeline
Well done guys, great summary
The fact is that most of NASAs Human space flight resources are still dedicated to ISS. Once ISS is retired, NASA will be able to make a lot more progress in a shorter time frame.
This is why Apollo, Skylab, and the shuttle programs never overlapped.
Thanks for the update thx 👍🏻🇺🇸🚀
Sadly, not a surprise to me. Thanks for this update NSF.
that's a nice start of the video Adrian :)
Thanks Adrian and NSF team.
I appreciate the content of this video.
a
@@joaquin5440 bro you’re me…
Love the updates AND Ed Sharron hair look!
Love your video's but if I could give a tip: add time marks in the video with descriptions with what is being talked about.
Thank you so much for the update you guys rock❤
Godspeed, Capricorn One!
Nice presentation. Give me more.
Adrian wird wilder und wilder! I like it!
Cheers Ears!
Im shocked. SHOCKED!
Well, not that shocked
Okay, we need to address the hair in the room 🤣😂
It's long and fabulous.
Just got out of bed by the looks of it🤣
I heard your theme song on a dish soap commercial the other day.
artemis? delayed? who could've ever seen this coming
Not the NASAfanboys. They were all pumped up, while those with intellect were saying that it wasn't going to happen. How many more years of delays will it take before you and your ilk start to become skeptics?
NASA has made it complicated. It needs to be simple.
I think SpaceX ought to have a little side project going to develop a "shuttle" for use from ship to ship while in orbit or transit to the moon. Not a "Space Shuttle" like the giant ones that used to carry stuff to orbit, but more like a in-orbit Jeep/utility vehicle. Something with thrusters, an airlock, a closet full of space suits, some emergency rations, and maybe a simple grab arm to help it hold onto another space vehicle while doing maintenance or something. It could also be useful as a lifeboat - something most exploratory ships have had since the post-Viking days (over 1000 years ago) and even most small private ocean-going sailboats have nowadays. Though it would not have re-entry capability. Just the ability to hold a few astronauts while help is dispatched, to transfer them from ship to ship, and to help them get around those really big ships if needed to do repairs, mods, etc.
They could leave one docked to the orbital refueling station for Starship launches that are at max payload capacity or carry one along with them when launching just a few astronauts in that massively over-capable ship. Another could be left at the orbiting lunar station.
Just ideas.
The problem is changing orbits which uses a LOT of propellant. Something small like that would not be able to change orbits and would be restricted to working around something like the ISS. It's additional hardware which would not materially add to the mission, unfortunately, cause it is a cool thing to imagine. Current tech is not up to it.
Ditch the airlock and closets, and just have a jetbike for personal use.
No ability to handle atmosphere, but lightweight and really cool.
At this point just give the whole Artemis budget to SpaceX and let them do their thing, it will be faster...
I agree let them launch at their own cadence Skip a few ffa mishap reviews and let them send a dozen or so up and they will have it figure out
No budget increase will help with the FFA and saying you should be independent of the FFA is really not smart. They can plan to land the booster in an inhabited area/ don’t inform interested parties/ have a budget with no oversight.
HLS Starship can't do the mission on its own, as it can't reenter the Earth's atmosphere and is basically out of propellant after returning to lunar orbit once the surface mission is over. The SpaceX planned launch cadence and number of flights needed to refill the depot for Artemis III, is longer than the time HLS Starship can wait in lunar orbit. Until Starship matures to a faster launch rate in the future, SLS/Orion are needed to get the crew to and from the Moon.
Lets adress the Elephant in the Room: Adrians Hair Style 😂
just as expected...
We shouldn't even be thinking about Artemis 3 yet, my eyes are set on Starships development for now because neither NASA or SpaceX are ready to land people on the moon, maybe in the early 2030s at best.
Love the intro hahahaha.
Also, who is surprised?
I have built a "realistic" starship mission schedule for the next 3 years. Here's some highlights.
10/25 HLS-1 Demo
4/26 Dear Moon
1/27 HLS-2 Artemis 3
Dear Moon in 2026? IMHO, not a chance. Shame UA-cam won't let us place bets on that.
I won Surviving Mars some years ago
you have an unrealistic schedule, I expect all this to slip past 2030, especially the whole Starship program.
I have based my expectations on contractual commitments that SpaceX currently has with the Starship Program and the dates agreed to. My estimates for Artemis 3 are still passed the newly announced NASA schedule. The abilities Starship needs to be able to try and hit current contract schedules make an outfitted human rated HLS test article in space in early 2026 really a handy thing to have for testing. Dragon is human rated launch and reentry. Someone needs to go and test out the HLS habitation systems, preferably in low earth orbit. Then, take it for a spin around the moon and check of another contractual obligation. I agree that contracts can change. Hopefully you found this at least amusing.@@erlienfrommars
Fingers crossed the Vogon Constructor Fleet doesn't arrive until _after_ then
how did they refuel apollo missions?
They didn't, as the spacecraft were as bare bones as possible. Apollo was very risky and NASA doesn't want to risk crews like that now, as Artemis would like be ended.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long. So the new hardware has to be more robust and capable.
Starship, is intended for the landing on the moon and the return of astronauts to the space station gateway. When the question arises of how they are going to transfer fuel from one ship to another, I wondered why they don't just remove the nose of the ship and connect them like a buster and a ship and make a long rocket. Thus, we connect 5-6 rockets in space and push the landing module to the lunar orbit. Then we send a connecting module into space to connect all the rockets to (the front part of the rocket) the central module and create a space fuel tank station that can rotate in all directions for optimal fuel distribution, like a rubik's cube where the middle faces of the cubes are replaced by starships bodies.
ooh i really like your haircut adrian!
Does anyone know if the Orion capsule from Artemis 1 is the same one they will use on Artemis 2? I mean, is there only one Orion capsule in existence?
idk, but the new mojo is to reuse as much as possible. SLS is junk and need to go to museum with Space shuttle.
They built separate ones for Artemis I through III. After Artemis III, Orion is supposed to be reused. Some of the flight control systems from Artemis I are being reused on Artemis II. Artemis III is all fresh equipment.
Shocker..
Who knew Ed Sheeran was a space nerd.
It is like we’ve never done this before. Smh
Because we have not done this before.
@@derp8575yes we have
ats new on delay ti moon?
Been thinking about this a lot lately so I’m happy to see this. If they need 36 months to transfer hardware from Orion 1 to 2 module. I wonder what makes them think there’s any possibility of doing it in around 12 months between 2 and 3?
They are not transfering anything from the Orion on 2 to the Orion on 3. The Orion on Artemis III is all new and is being built now.
Are you willing to place a wager? I will bet you here, publicly, that they will never have a manned moon landing.
@@derp8575 Since there have already been 6 manned landings, that is a silly bet.
Who told you so? NASA? Here is where you will depart. Are you willing to bet here, publicly, that they will have a manned moon landing before 2030? Show us your confidence. @@steveaustin2686
Where'd you go? So far, not one NASAtard has wagered against me. They must be broke.@@steveaustin2686
Okay, I do like compact videos with high signal-to-noise ratios, but this one started out just a.little*too* suscinct. ☺☺
ooh
Really need the FAA to step up and be a lot lot faster at the paperwork. SpaceX should not have to wight for them.
The FAA has to wait for SpaceX to submit its report before it can start.
The FAA vs SpaceX is not really a thing, except for clicks by some YT channels. After all, the FAA defended SpaceX in front of Congress in Jun 2021 over the unauthorized SN8 flight. The 'NASA delaying Starship until the SLS flies' was just as silly, since NASA needs BOTH Starship and SLS for Artemis.
SpaceX had approval for orbital launches of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy from Boca Chica since 2014. They could also fly sub-orbital tests of reusable spacecraft. SpaceX went through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to get that approval in 2014. Since SpaceX wanted to fly orbital flights with Starship, that has roughly 3 times the propellant as the Falcon Heavy, out of Boca Chica, a relook was in order. So the FAA review was to see about adding Starship to that existing approval, without having to go through another EIS.
The FAA was the lead agency with NASA, the Army Corps of Engineers, the US Coast Guard, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service all involved from the beginning. With 6 different government agencies involved, it is not surprising that the review took time. Musk asking everyone to comment, over 18,000 comments were received, didn't help. Consultations were mentioned for a third time on Apr 29th,2022 and mitigations for the first time, so some issues did come up and SpaceX had been working out a solution with whichever agency or agencies covered the issue. The Permitting Dashboard: Federal Infrastructure Projects had 5 sections to the FAA review. The first was completed in Oct 2021, second in Jan 2022, third in Apr 2022, fourth in May 2022, and fifth in Jun 2022, so there was continual progress. The FAA review was completed with Starship able to fit under the existing EIS for Boca Chica.
The same FAA that wasn't strict enough to prevent the Alaskan flight from experiencing a near fatal incident needs to be even stricter for the whole Moon program. You wouldn't want fatalities on the ground or in the air or this whole Space program is dead.
@@erlienfrommars The FAA does not watch every plane being built. That failure is on Boeing. The 737 Max disaster was on Boeing, as Boeing LIED to everyone about what they were doing with the 737 Max.
@@steveaustin2686 I appreciate the amazing information. Thank you
How is it that in the 1960s we knew how to do these things, and now after 50 years of technological development we *don't* know how to do these things?
We KNOW how to do it but have much less money and higher safety required than 50 years ago. 50 years ago whole USA was working hard for apollo program.
I think the problem is that back in the day contractors were mostly engineers rather than management obsessed with profits so could get stuff done well and fast. Combine that with INSANE amounts of funding to spite the USSR and you had a system that could get the job done. Nowadays with stupid management, limited (and constantly changing) funding, and worse political infighting it just goes slow and stupid.
The big problem is that 50 years of technological development.
Things like life support systems didn't have complex touch screen interface controls back in the 60's for example.
Switching SCE to AUX? You mean a couple gigabytes of code and around 10 different computers to flip it these days.
@@MKJ8888 We had a heat shield capable of returning a capsule from lunar orbit, but now the current version is inadequate. We have life support systems capable of sustaining a dozen astronauts in low earth orbit for months, but now the lunar version for 4 astronauts for two weeks is inadequate. Yeah I know there's always money for another war but never anything for NASA, but they don't seem to have made good use of the money they did get over this period of time. Growing seeds for high school students and playing with spiders in the space station didn't bring us closer to exploring and developing the solar system. I'm not directing any of this at you - I just need to vent my frustration at NASA being so aimless and directionless since the mid 1970s. They should have been developing in-orbit refueling and propellant depots back then. There is so much NASA should have been doing over the decades, but didn't, and now that they finally have a mandate to explore, they don't have the technology they need. You cannot imagine my frustration. I don't think any of the astronauts who walked on the moon thought they would go to their graves with us never having returned.
Stanley Kubrick forever
I’ll be like 20 when Artemis 2 happens!
*24
I’m 18 and I’m about to be in College
Is there a strong breeze in the studio????
"Wow big shocker"
Starships tiles 🤔
Why wouldn't it be delayed smh
Let me give you a suggestion. There will no more delay in moon landing. It is gonna work. And it is the most cost-effective option ever. That is, NASA should team up with China in a joint mission to the moon.
Why does this guy look like Ed Sheeran? Nice update!
Oh my my guy that hair! Lol
no surprise here, 2025 is super ambitious for a moon landing when the lander isnt even halfway to being ready yet
We need to be speeding this up! Not pushing it back! omg nasa! We should have had at least a moon base by now!
Mark my words the subsequent Artemis missions will be delayed into oblivion or outright canceled
😐 Shocking.
they even disabled comments on their video.
Eric Berger's anonymous source predicted that after Artemis 3 Nasa will drop SLS and will use Dragons to transfer astronauts to HLS on LEO, then HSL go back and forth between Earth and the Moon then use Dragon to return astronauts back to the surface. NASA will also give a chance to ULA, Boeing, Blue Origin, etc. to build a similar system with Starliner and a future lander.
All the people I know working at the cape have been cleaning and doing building safety checks over and over and over. Must be nice to sweep a floor for a year and make 100k+ a year. Going to be another year now.
Great start of the video 😂
How did we get to the moon if we can’t do it today?
The budget for Apollo was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long.
Apollo was very risky and NASA doesn't want to risk crews like that now, as Artemis would like be ended.
Copy and paste. @@steveaustin2686
Grand theft auto 6 will be out before we get to the moon
Goodbye moon it was nice trying to
What is missing within the Artemis program are Test Pilots. Test Pilots were absolutely critical to getting to the moon during the sixties. Test Pilots were the absolute authority for spacecraft design and functionality throughout Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo! Test Pilots not only flew the aircraft and spacecraft but were themselves, engineers and mathematicians, who were absolutely critical in the design of the spacecraft they would operate.
Nasa is the Master of delays.
imagine the engineering that the Gemini Program had to invent and test to make Apollo feasible.
Artemis is kinda in the gemini phase i think.
I would agree with this if we didn’t already have the knowledge from the Gemini, Mercury, Apollo, ISS, Shuttle, Falcon 9/Dragon etc.
@@dgymnast6473 The budget for Apollo was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long.
Apollo was very risky and NASA doesn't want to risk crews like that now, as Artemis would like be ended.
@@dgymnast6473you still developing brand new systems tho. Gonna take time
hmm, I never heard NASA whine that it was too complex problem to go to the moon the 1st time. Yeah they had challenges - F1 engine stability, computer and navigation issues, life support, a disastrous fire, etc.. But they never let that even slow them down!
The budget for Apollo was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. And Apollo was very risky. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long. So the spacecraft have to be more capable than Apollo and that increases the mass needed.
I love government efficiency
This has little to do with government and a lot to do with technology and engineering. We accept much less risk and don't want the enormous costs of the 60/70's - and want to do much more on the Moon.
@@knowledgeisgood9645 we have been “going back to the moon” for a decade. We were supposed to be going to the moon this year, and now we will be lucky if we get there before 2030. While I know the Federal government’s refusal to properly fund NASA is a hindrance, the red tape and bureaucracy is just as bad.
@@jmacefire6581 The congress is the one that funds NASA, not the government. Unless you call the congress the government.
@@knowledgeisgood9645 congress is the government. They make the federal government budget.
Astronaut Boreman had to take a really hard comprehensive look at Apollo, after a severe 3 astromaut death, fire. This idea that design flaws can be corrected, with a design that has replicated but enlarged Apollo, may not yield to updates that require a severly higher standard of certainty in crew safety. "The "guys" with "the right stuff"--were willing to risk death in that venture. America, and really, the World, seem less curious by a degree that could fail us. NASA rewewarded Boreman by sending him on the very next mission to the moon...he "walked point" on that.
Jeese, this is all been done before. Didn't anyone keep notes?
The budget for Apollo was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long.
Apollo was very risky and NASA doesn't want to risk crews like that now, as Artemis would like be ended.
@@steveaustin2686 should be a lot easier after six successful missions, if they really went of course.
For me, SLS killed my belief in NASA's ability to deliver on time or on the money. I still believe in Starship.
I don't. We should never have given SpaceX money for that.
I believe in SLS more than Starship, the former already reached the Moon nearly 2 years ago, Starship still can't reach orbit, let alone that silly orbital refuelling.
@@erlienfrommars well, orbital refueling is a required skill. So, silly, it aint. Orbital refueling is the future.
@@ericmatthews8497 why? They are going to master it.
Over half a century since the US was on the moon. Ridiculous.
I mean, if some other country had of stepped in and had a moon mission then the US would have been back there in no time.
Spoiler, we never went.
@@jonmedders3866
China has stepped in and has a moon mission; where is America?
@@derp8575yes we did
Well that settles it! I am now no longer a skeptic! Thanks!@@ClinchfieldRailfan
If I where NASA I would fly a couple of Orion missions that will not land on the moon until HLS is ready. J.
Orion doesn't land on the Moon. The Artemis II mission is the crew test of Orion to fly around the Moon and Artemis III is the first landing using HLS Starship. Artemis II is backed up because of some Orion problems and the Mobile Launcher 1 (ML-1) having more damage than expected from Artemis I. The NASA OIG said that Artemis III was likely to slide into 2026 two years ago. NASA just made it official.
You know it's gonna be late when NASA makes a date. They of course need to make sure everything is right because failure is not an option for them.
I bet we see Starship land on the moon before Artemis.
So Penzance-1 will land after all? Beter late than never I guess.
😢
I didn't know you guys hired Ed Sheeran
What did they use 50 years ago as a heat shield, just use the same as that,,, it worked.
PLEASE!!! Just SEND OPTIMUS!!!! We will get to people later! Just send the hardware
If yall think you can build a better rocket/capsule quicker come on out!!
Atleast they are playing it safe.
Haters gonna hate.
“ I believe this nation should commit itself to landing a man on the moon, and returning him safely to the Earth.” (8 YEARS LATER!!!). “ That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”
In the 1960’s we did the impossible with way less technology. More than 50 years later how is it we can’t just build a rocket and go? We’ve been planning the lunar return since 2003! Why can’t we accomplish in 21 years what they accomplished in 8 years!
The budget for Apollo was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long.
Apollo was very risky and NASA doesn't want to risk crews like that now, as Artemis would like be ended.
@@steveaustin2686 True but 0.5% of the budget today IS WAY MORE, than 10% of the budget in the 1960’s.
@@subman721 Not with inflation. The inflation adjusted cost for Apollo is WAY more than Artemis costs.
Why does inflation occur? @@steveaustin2686
Hello tomorrow in real time 😂
Kind of expected. I'm happy as long as the whole return to the moon project isn't cancelled, because the cost of SLS is a big problem for it. Staying on the moon will only be possible by the ideas of Elon and SpaceX, i.e. rapidly reusable rockets. It's a difficult start for Starship atm and I really dislike that Elon is being distracted by Twitter and politics so much, but in the end his approach seems a lot more reasonable than Apollo reloaded from NASA.
Eh, Apollo was done on a shoestring engineering wise. But the budget was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
HLS Starship needs a lot of Tanker flights to get to the Moon. The plan SpaceX submitted for Artemis III was to launch the [DELETED] Starship propellant depot, 14 Tankers to refill the depot, and then HLS Starship to refill from the depot. The launch cadence was 1 Starship variant every 12 days. So it would take a while to fill up the depot, before HLS Starship could launch.
The crew does not get onto HLS Starship until they reach lunar orbit. The crew goes to and from the Moon in Orion which is launched by the SLS. It will be the same for the Blue Moon lander on Artemis V.
It is a misconception that something is being delayed by Elon Musk's takeover of Twitter or X. On the one hand, Spacex has a great team and on the other hand, EM already had other important matters, such as Tesla and other companies.
Incidentally, other platforms also have owners who are involved in other things and others like Jeff Bezos have also bought media, as has happened continually over the past century and a half.
I'm grateful that Elon has the stones to publicly say things that everyone with a brain is thinking
@VanquishedAgain Nah, Musk fell for the GOP Sedition Caucus Fantasy Land of Lies, showing even smart people can be conned by nonsense.
If you had a brain, you'd understand that Elon is controlled opposition. @@VanquishedAgain
Not unexpected but my god!! How many things are suspect?? doesn't sound like anything has been done right
A trolling we will go.
Ill be honest 2026 seems really soon :D
I think delaying Artemis 2 is a mistake.
Reality is often disappointing
Hey Adrian! We're over here ! → → → → →
I think they should have tested the life support on the first flight! NASA were starting to make SpaceX the scapegoat for the delays. Seems Elon might save their (wait for it Jack) bacon. Cheers! You chaps are my ‘go to’ for space. Thank you.
Starship isn't exactly on schedule either. Everyone involved is causing delays.
@@iamaduckquack I agree. I was just being cheeky. I really thought it was just the heat shield of Orion that was a problem.
I wonder, if the 1960s hardware software, engineers, pilots were all exactly the same, would NASA still slide based solely on government bureaucracy
The budget for Apollo was huge, at like 3-4% of the US budget at the time. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS, which is a big project like Apollo.
The Artemis III landing is planned to be a week long, which is over half the time ALL of the Apollo missions spent on the Moon. Later missions are planned to be two weeks to a month long.
Apollo was very risky and NASA doesn't want to risk crews like that now, as Artemis would like be ended.
Your skills at copy and paste are impressive. But are you able to debate without?@@steveaustin2686
"Bremman" 😂