Artemis Moon Program

https://twitter.com/x/status/1602357194145644544
View: https://twitter.com/chrisg_nsf/status/1602357194145644544


The @ulalaunch ICPS for the SLS on Artemis I performed quite well as a fully in-space upper stage. Exactly how well did it do & what are the schedules for the 2 ICPS elements for Artemis II & III? We spoke to ULA...

✍️: me
️: Mack Crawford (@brickmack)
Click to expand...

www.nasaspaceflight.com

Artemis I review shows perfect ICPS performance, ULA looks to next Artemis launches - NASASpaceFlight.com

United Launch Alliance (ULA), the prime contractor for the Space Launch System’s (SLS’s) Interim Cryogenic…
www.nasaspaceflight.com www.nasaspaceflight.com
 
NMaude said:
jeffb said:
Didn't know they were going to do this, very interesting.
www.livescience.com

Orion capsule bounces off atmosphere to complete hottest and fastest reentry ever, capping off NASA's Artemis 1 mission

The capsule intentionally skipped like a stone off the atmosphere to make its reentry easier.
www.livescience.com www.livescience.com
Click to expand...

As far as I know Apollo-11 did use the skip reentry profile.

On another note on tonight's six o'clock news in the article on the completion of Artemis-1's mission it showed time-lapse photographs showing the separation of the CM from the SM.
Click to expand...
9 posts above (earlier than) yours is a list of spacecraft that used a skip re-entry profile.
 
My bad, I never thought of it as a "skip".
iu


iu


But apparently that's what everyone calls it...
iu
 
I wonder what all of those little weird white square patches are scattered around the upper heat shield are?
 
I stumbled across this short video from NASA concerning the origins of the Moon (The Moon-rock samples brought back by the Apollo Moon missions had a big role in this):

 
FighterJock said:
I am surprised at the at as well NMaude
Click to expand...

I'm surprised because when the successful reentry was reported on the six o'clock news the NASA supplied footage included a shot showing the Orion CM separating and then immediately manoeuvring away from the SM.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1608939902611214340
View: https://twitter.com/nasaartemis/status/1608939902611214340


The @NASA_Orion spacecraft has arrived back at @NASAKennedy in Florida after an 1.4 million mile mission beyond the Moon and a cross-country truck ride from Naval Base San Diego in California.
Click to expand...

Artemis I Orion Spacecraft Returns to Kennedy Space Center - Artemis

After its 1.4-million-mile mission beyond the Moon and back, the Orion spacecraft for the Artemis I mission arrived back at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center Dec.
blogs.nasa.gov blogs.nasa.gov

Artemis I Orion Spacecraft Returns to Kennedy Space Center

After its 1.4-million-mile mission beyond the Moon and back, the Orion spacecraft for the Artemis I mission arrived back at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center Dec. 30. The capsule splashed down in the Pacific Ocean on Dec. 11 and was transported by truck across the country from Naval Base San Diego in California to Kennedy’s Multi Payload Processing Facility in Florida.

Now that Orion is back at Kennedy, technicians will remove payloads from the capsule as part of de-servicing operations, including Commander Moonikin Campos, zero-gravity indicator Snoopy, and the official flight kit. Orion’s heat shield and other elements will be removed for extensive analysis, and remaining hazards will be offloaded.

Artemis I was a major step forward as part of NASA’s lunar exploration efforts and sets the stage for the next mission of the Space Launch System rocket and Orion to fly crew around the Moon on Artemis II.

Author Madison Tuttle
Posted on December 30, 2022 4:18 pm
Categories Uncategorized
Tags Artemis I, Exploration Ground Systems, Orion spacecraft
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1608943369958608897
View: https://twitter.com/nasagroundsys/status/1608943369958608897


Preparations are underway to transport the @NASA_Orion spacecraft inside the High Bay of the Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF) at @NASAKennedy.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1609223631602651138
View: https://twitter.com/lmspace/status/1609223631602651138


It’s baaaaaaaack…

Yesterday, @NASA_Orion returned to @NASAKennedy and is now safely inside the Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF). Welcome home!

/: @NASAGroundSys
Click to expand...
 
Flyaway said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1608939902611214340
View: https://twitter.com/nasaartemis/status/1608939902611214340


The @NASA_Orion spacecraft has arrived back at @NASAKennedy in Florida after an 1.4 million mile mission beyond the Moon and a cross-country truck ride from Naval Base San Diego in California.
Click to expand...

Artemis I Orion Spacecraft Returns to Kennedy Space Center - Artemis

After its 1.4-million-mile mission beyond the Moon and back, the Orion spacecraft for the Artemis I mission arrived back at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center Dec.
blogs.nasa.gov blogs.nasa.gov

Artemis I Orion Spacecraft Returns to Kennedy Space Center

After its 1.4-million-mile mission beyond the Moon and back, the Orion spacecraft for the Artemis I mission arrived back at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center Dec. 30. The capsule splashed down in the Pacific Ocean on Dec. 11 and was transported by truck across the country from Naval Base San Diego in California to Kennedy’s Multi Payload Processing Facility in Florida.

Now that Orion is back at Kennedy, technicians will remove payloads from the capsule as part of de-servicing operations, including Commander Moonikin Campos, zero-gravity indicator Snoopy, and the official flight kit. Orion’s heat shield and other elements will be removed for extensive analysis, and remaining hazards will be offloaded.

Artemis I was a major step forward as part of NASA’s lunar exploration efforts and sets the stage for the next mission of the Space Launch System rocket and Orion to fly crew around the Moon on Artemis II.

Author Madison Tuttle
Posted on December 30, 2022 4:18 pm
Categories Uncategorized
Tags Artemis I, Exploration Ground Systems, Orion spacecraft
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1608943369958608897
View: https://twitter.com/nasagroundsys/status/1608943369958608897


Preparations are underway to transport the @NASA_Orion spacecraft inside the High Bay of the Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF) at @NASAKennedy.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1609223631602651138
View: https://twitter.com/lmspace/status/1609223631602651138


It’s baaaaaaaack…

Yesterday, @NASA_Orion returned to @NASAKennedy and is now safely inside the Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF). Welcome home!

/: @NASAGroundSys
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Good to see the Orion capsule back at Kennedy.
 
NASA has posted a short video about the anthropomorphic test-dummy used on Artemis 1:


The Purposeful Passengers consist of one manikin and two phantoms that flew aboard the Orion spacecraft during the Artemis I mission in order to collect important data that will prepare astronauts for future Artemis missions. The manikin was used to study vibrations and accelerations during the flight and was named Commander Moonikin Campos after NASA held a public naming contest in June 2021. The name "Campos" is a dedication to Arturo Campos, a Mexican-American electrical engineer who worked for NASA’s Johnson Space Center and contributed to the rescue of the Apollo 13 mission and crew.
Click to expand...
 
Flyaway said:
Apparently they are currently stripping the relevant equipment out of Artemis 1 that will be refurbished and subsequently fitted into Artemis 2.
Click to expand...
seems quite cost effective that way. however i would like to know what equipment specifically they are "refurbishing" it does reduce costs because of this.
(they were already past their budget on the launch of ARTEMIS1)
i would think its most of the interior avionics systems and computers.
but how big is the cost difference? maybe a couple million?

Alan Ladwig stated that they will continue this practice to the point of reusing the pressure capsule from ARTEMIS 3
seems a bit risky due the the stress from pressurizing and depressurizing but plausible.
 
Conspirator said:
Flyaway said:
Apparently they are currently stripping the relevant equipment out of Artemis 1 that will be refurbished and subsequently fitted into Artemis 2.
Click to expand...
seems quite cost effective that way. however i would like to know what equipment specifically they are "refurbishing" it does reduce costs because of this.
(they were already past their budget on the launch of ARTEMIS1)
i would think its most of the interior avionics systems and computers.
but how big is the cost difference? maybe a couple million?

Alan Ladwig stated that they will continue this practice to the point of reusing the pressure capsule from ARTEMIS 3
seems a bit risky due the the stress from pressurizing and depressurizing but plausible.
Click to expand...
I think it was mostly a politically driven decision to placate congress over costs back in the day.
 
Conspirator said:
Alan Ladwig stated that they will continue this practice to the point of reusing the pressure capsule from ARTEMIS 3
seems a bit risky due the the stress from pressurizing and depressurizing but plausible.
Click to expand...

Why would this be risky? No one accuses the Dragon crew capsule of being risky, despite going through multiple cycles like this over its life.
 
Besides-capsules are a tad closer to diving bells-or pressure spheres on old airguns-than are most airframes. I even wonder if a capsule may be a bit of a threat to lighter, weaker dedicated dry station tubes over time. The capsule is rugged to survive aborts. ET stations withstand SRBs. Dry tube modules-being cylinders...
 
TomS said:
Conspirator said:
Alan Ladwig stated that they will continue this practice to the point of reusing the pressure capsule from ARTEMIS 3
seems a bit risky due the the stress from pressurizing and depressurizing but plausible.
Click to expand...

Why would this be risky? No one accuses the Dragon crew capsule of being risky, despite going through multiple cycles like this over its life.
Click to expand...
how many trips has one of those capsules endured? (without any reconstructions/overhauls?)
i'm sure there is at least some concern over this. the only details i could find on this particular subject are quite vague and unclear. I'm also unsure of the number of capsules that have been completed and launched in total. (i'm sure there is more than one)

the capsule endures immense stress from the change in pressure on the inside and out. so of course they have to design it to withstand these kinds of changes. but how long or how many trips could it safely do without serious concerns/issues arising?
its merely a safety concern on my end.
 
Conspirator said:
how many trips has one of those capsules endured? (without any reconstructions/overhauls?)
i'm sure there is at least some concern over this. the only details i could find on this particular subject are quite vague and unclear. I'm also unsure of the number of capsules that have been completed and launched in total. (i'm sure there is more than one)
Click to expand...

"Without any reconstructions/overhauls" is a pointless caveat, because Dragon goes through a rebuild/refurbishment process between flights, and so will Orion.

Obviously, there are "concerns" about reuse" in the sense that NASA and SpaceX have taken care to make sure it is safe to reuse the capsules. But it's not considered any more "risky" than any space launch. And probably less, in the same way that flight-proven Falcon 9 boosters seem to be at least as reliable as new ones.

There are four active Crew Dragon capsules (and one more, C213 under construction). At least one of these (C206) has made three flights. SpaceX and NASA are sufficiently confident in their lifespan that SpaceX is not planning to make any more Crew Dragons after C213, despite having contracts to fly them for many more missions. SpaceX estimates 15 flights each, with refurbishment mainly of expendables like parachutes.

There are also a number of Cargo Dragons that have pressurized capsules. The current ones are based on the same Dragon 2 design as the Crew Dragons and are intended for at least five flights each and one has already flown 3 times (C208). Several of the older Dragon 1 cargo capsules also made three flights before being retired in favor off the more modern Dragon 2 versions. I've seen no indication that the retirements were for safety, just that the new ones are easier to refurbish and thus cheaper to fly.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom