Updates Artemis II
- Thread starter barrygolden
- Start date
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
I think the Michoud Assembly Facility was always awesome, these days and back then. It always amazes me.
barrygolden
Well-known member
Make note of the 3 Saturn 5's at one time only one in there with SLS and very little work on SLS for Artemis 3
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
I didn't think about it when I looked at the pictures. But yeah. Well, it was 10 manned flights with the Saturn V within only 4 years! Followed by one more to put Skylab into orbit, only 5 months after Apollo 17!
For the SLS it's one manned flight maybe three years after the first, unmanned test flight. Followed by a second manned flight, maybe two years after the first manned one. That's only two manned flights with the SLS within maybe two or three years. And since the establishment of the Artemis program, it might be 10 years until they complete two manned missions with the SLS. All in all it might be two manned flights within over 16 years, if we count the start of development for both, SLS and Orion...
It would be very depressing, would there not be the ISS and Commercial Crew Program. Actually there is more manned space flight going on in the U.S. than ever before. But just not beyond low Earth orbit
(which is sad, I think).PS/EDIT: and it was only six years after the last flight of a Saturn 1b/Apollo spacecraft, until they launched an entirely new and maybe the most complex space vehicle in a complicated launch configuration that had never been tried before; followed by 135 launches within 30 years, or actually 25 years if we exclude the gaps after STS-51L and STS-107
Last edited:
barrygolden
Well-known member
Well said .
During Gemini and early Apollo NASA flew manned missions about every other month then starting with Apollo 12 about 4 months after the first landing then 5 to 6 months between flights after that. Having said that NASA had an open check book until Apollo 13 then went on a fixed budget and when talking with older NASA people they were wrong to cancel Apollo 18 and 19 with the hard ware already built and have stated that they could have flown those missions about 1 per year during the Skylab project which was to use the Apollo 20 hardware but ended up using parts of all three canceled Apollo's.
We must look back and think about it only took 10 years to learn to build large rockets like the Saturn 5 and fly to the Moon, amazing.
Flying to the Moon every three years won't work it will be canceled soon.
If they did those graphs that were done by the Augustine Commission we would see that Artemis will not work just as Constellation was canceled . We could look at the Orion service module is too small and too weak so we have to build this gate way station , how much does that cost ? . SLS costs way too much . How do you have a surface base flying once every 3 years. Now the plan is to fly a bulldozer to the Moon to make a landing site for Lunar Starship, what will that cost , what will it cost to refuel what ever lander NASA will use ? Well you would have 3 years to refuel it if that can even be possible.
Sadly I think this will all be canceled in 2025 after the election no matter who wins and all the big shots at NASA will move to Fisher island and collect their fat cat pensions and pat them selves on the back with the " job well done .
We do need to get samples from the south pole to answer the water ice question and i think it will take a man to get those.. Space X might build a Lunar Lander Dragon and a deep space Dragon to do an Apollo style landings to get those samples using Falcon Heavy . Bezos might send a robotic lander to get those samples as well .
NASA 's goal is Flaud with the stated goal of landing a " Woman and a person of Color " on the Moon. We should send the best people to find those samples . NASA does have an astronaut who is a woman of color and is qualified to go on that mission and I hear she is penciled in for the Artemis 3 flight.
Sorry about all that I still hold out hope to see free men walk again in the Lunar soil Having worked with NASA and for NASA on the Skylab , Shuttle and Constellation programs and with Space X i still have the passion for exploration.
Many thinks to orbiter and those who help keep My Dreams Alive
During Gemini and early Apollo NASA flew manned missions about every other month then starting with Apollo 12 about 4 months after the first landing then 5 to 6 months between flights after that. Having said that NASA had an open check book until Apollo 13 then went on a fixed budget and when talking with older NASA people they were wrong to cancel Apollo 18 and 19 with the hard ware already built and have stated that they could have flown those missions about 1 per year during the Skylab project which was to use the Apollo 20 hardware but ended up using parts of all three canceled Apollo's.
We must look back and think about it only took 10 years to learn to build large rockets like the Saturn 5 and fly to the Moon, amazing.
Flying to the Moon every three years won't work it will be canceled soon.
If they did those graphs that were done by the Augustine Commission we would see that Artemis will not work just as Constellation was canceled . We could look at the Orion service module is too small and too weak so we have to build this gate way station , how much does that cost ? . SLS costs way too much . How do you have a surface base flying once every 3 years. Now the plan is to fly a bulldozer to the Moon to make a landing site for Lunar Starship, what will that cost , what will it cost to refuel what ever lander NASA will use ? Well you would have 3 years to refuel it if that can even be possible.
Sadly I think this will all be canceled in 2025 after the election no matter who wins and all the big shots at NASA will move to Fisher island and collect their fat cat pensions and pat them selves on the back with the " job well done .
We do need to get samples from the south pole to answer the water ice question and i think it will take a man to get those.. Space X might build a Lunar Lander Dragon and a deep space Dragon to do an Apollo style landings to get those samples using Falcon Heavy . Bezos might send a robotic lander to get those samples as well .
NASA 's goal is Flaud with the stated goal of landing a " Woman and a person of Color " on the Moon. We should send the best people to find those samples . NASA does have an astronaut who is a woman of color and is qualified to go on that mission and I hear she is penciled in for the Artemis 3 flight.
Sorry about all that I still hold out hope to see free men walk again in the Lunar soil Having worked with NASA and for NASA on the Skylab , Shuttle and Constellation programs and with Space X i still have the passion for exploration.
Many thinks to orbiter and those who help keep My Dreams Alive
Attachments
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
Yeah. It's just one of those zeitgeisty things imho. Advertising for starry-eyed idealism: "Hey, we are woke at NASA!" It's like that LGBT thingy going on at NASA TV recently as well. It's not that I am against it. But it is really annoying. Space flight is about science and exploration. Please keep that political spirit of our time away from it. I personally don't give a s**** on gender and sexual orientation/identity. Which place does it have on NASA TV or crew selection? It's a personal matter. I am not interested in it.
Sorry for the little rant
Yep. Color and gender shouldn't matter. Qualification, experience and passion matters.
I think it's Stephanie Wilson?
MarkWatney2015
The Desktop Orbinaut
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2016
- Messages
- 1,274
- Reaction score
- 1,627
- Points
- 128
- Location
- San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
- Preferred Pronouns
- He/him
Artemis 3 already has an official crew manifest?
barrygolden
Well-known member
Jessica Watkins is a geologist and has flown to the ISS , Stephanie Wilson would also be a good choice
jedidia
shoemaker without legs
Yeah, uhm... Kennedy might have words to say about that...
It's not that I fundamentally disagree with you, but the main drivers of spaceflight so far have been politics and economics. Science and Exploration have always enjoyed the ride in the backseat, and I think we do well to remember that.
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
I think the political driver in the U.S., for funding NASA, is to be the leader in aerospace and space flight technologies, offer and keep jobs and maybe get economical benefits. While the mission of NASA is to explore the secrets of the universe for the benefit of all and to give the U.S. space development effort a distinct civilian orientation, and emphasize peaceful applications in space science.Yeah, uhm... Kennedy might have words to say about that...
It's not that I fundamentally disagree with you, but the main drivers of spaceflight so far have been politics and economics. Science and Exploration have always enjoyed the ride in the backseat, and I think we do well to remember that.
When I watch NASA TV, I want to see something that is related to the mission of NASA. I don't think that political science, sex science or any passing fad is part of NASA's job
jedidia
shoemaker without legs
I do think gender medicine and psychology does fall into it, actually. We should not repeat the old mistake on testing everything on men and just assume that it'll have the exact same effect on women. That includes, medicine, environmental effects and equipment. As such, I think a certain degree of diversity is actually necessary for NASA's mission. That's not really where this kind of poster-child goal-setting comes from, obviously, I'm just saying that something like a minimum gender quota in a moon base might actually be important, not for representation, but for actual science.
Concerning the specific goals... well, NASA's goals have traditionally been what politicians told them. That's how NASA started, after all. So... yeah, that goal seems a bit misguided for sure, but it's hardly surprising. NASA started with the explicit mission of "putting a man on the moon", and while not explicitly stated it is really hard to argue that it could have been anything but an american white male, because that's what the Zeitgeist back then very much implied (and any non-american would completely have failed to meet the political purpose, no matter how qualified) , so there's ample precedence here.
barrygolden
Well-known member
NASA is all Political . where does its money come from. During Apollo it had a budget of $ 300 billion in todays dollars and today it is $ 25 billion. A shuttle flight cost $ 500 million and the SLS costs $ 4.8 billion, almost 1/5 of the NASA budget. Senator Dick Shelby of Alabama saved the SLS to keep the jobs so is NASA a jobs program ? I was driving into Huntsville Alabama few weeks ago and saw a Saturn 5 standing up and I had never seen one standing and it took my breath away then stopped at the Museum and was greeted by someone dressed like a planet and selling Astronaut ice cream , The Apollo 16 Command Module was was in the back room. Pretty much the same at KSC and JSC, sad. If we saw those same grafts Sally ride showed Artemis would be canceled . " No bucks No Buck Rodgers " I have been inside Challenger and Discovery and a Command Module planned to go to Skylab and i don''t care what their color or gender might be "" I guess I can say that " I have thought about what " Lucy " thought as she made her nest in a tree for the night and looked up at the same full Moon I see today. that's where exploration starts
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
Since we are all equal, I don't think an astronaut's skin color matters. I do not think of the Apollo astronauts as "white men only" or "Americans only". I think of them as humans and explorers.
Also, afaik, the current astronaut corps consists of 20 women and 28 men. So diversity for gender medicine exists. LGBTQ is not a requirement.
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
The funding is, and the administration. But going into space technically is pure engineering, science and exploration. The people working at NASA and in the aerospace industries around the globe, will do whatever you want them to do politically or in a corporational context, because R&D is simply their job, they get payed for that
They all have different personal opinions, different religions and different needs. But yet, their goal is the same: getting their jobs done. And that's what I expect to see and hear when I review their stuff via the www or NASA TV.
GLS
Well-known member
GLS
Well-known member
It looks like a sausage, but it is not built as fast.
TheShuttleExperience
Well-known member
At least it already looks rusty 
