Artemis isn't even shifting the needle compared to 1960s spaceflight principles
That may not be the manner of lack it might feel like at first glance:
after all,
aircraft haven't shifted the needle from 1910s aerodynamic principles, they still require wings, require production of lift, require propulsion machinery which itself moves air, just like aircraft did in 1910.
and
automobiles haven't shifted the needle from 1880s automotive principles, they still require wheels, tires/tyres, roads, power sources, infrastructure to supply and maintain those power sources. Yeah yeah, so there are drivererless cars, big whoopee, show me the driverless cars which have no wheels, require no roads, and do not have a powersource which needs periodic replenishing.
and
then there are the boats and ships which still rely on principles which are thousands of years old, yeah, yeah, yeah, we've changed propulsion from oars to sails to nuclear-electric plants turning screw propellors, and we've advanced construction material from wood to metal to synthetic composites, so?, they still get designed with displacement and wetted area and load limits and ... and ...; show me a ship which has no surfaces in contact with the water and therefore no frictional drag and now we'll have something to talk about.
 
These days the biggest thing going for it is that it isn’t Elon’s rocket. Some otherwise red states that are SLS states may be a stumbling block…tax dollars can go to a union rocket-or a union buster’s rocket…with ties to China…No Pinkerton fan here.

Another’s view on Starship

Alpaca on the other hand, is perhaps getting a second look
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu9KkCra4L0

I think it is important to distinguish different meanings for the words "expensive" and "costly."

High end dealerships have a subscription service where a motorist can drive different new cars. Like SLS, that is expensive.

Now if you pay a couple of grand on an old Jaguar behind a trailer park thinking you have a bargain--only for it to actually stay in the shop 364 out of 365 days a year--now you know the meaning of the word "costly."

That and you know not to hire shade tree mechanics who work out of a tent.

Jaguars will ALWAYS be more costly than a new car is expensive.

Starship-not SLS-is the biggest example of the sunk cost fallacy.
 
Last edited:
Following two failures by Intuitive Machines due to elementary design mistakes that SpaceX is determined to repeat, compounded by extreme overdesign, Dynetics' Alpaca does seem like a good option for the first return to the Moon missions - or so the Angry Astronaut says.

IIRC, Dynetics was rejected because Alpaca couldn't meet the mass requirements. OTOH, it certainly addresses the lack of smooth flat bowling greens on the moon.

Thoughts?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu9KkCra4L0&t=244s&ab_channel=TheAngryAstronaut
 
ALPACA such a ridiculous accronym (and hairdo, too ROTFL)

1280px-Alpaca_-_panoramio_%28977%29.jpg
 
Thoughts?

"Orion is a mature spacecraft". Lost myself at that point.

So this narrator reckons Dynetics can go from PowerPoint to an operational Lunar lander by 2028? A company that hasn't delivered any spacecraft except participating in FASTSAT?

The design does look practical and they've been working on it for at least five years, but still...
 
At Space News a year or two back, one Disqus post had it that some of their talent left because their project proposals kept getting turned down.

That’s worrisome…you want to keep assets lively and engaged.
 
Philip Sloss has another update for SLS, Orion and Artemis II:


The release of the Artemis II mission crew patch is another event symbolizing the coming launch, but will imagery like the recent SLS Core Stage to Booster mate or the patch change plans for the future of Artemis?
A few days before the patch was made public, another news story added weight to the rumors that President Trump and Elon Musk are looking at terminating SLS, freeing Musk from his Artemis lunar lander obligations, and pivoting to Musk's long-time goal of Mars. NASA Administrator nominee Jared Isaacman was said to be onboard with Trump and Musk's plans; he'll get a chance to speak to that in his confirmation hearing that was scheduled for April 9.
I'll go over that, the arrival of the Gateway HALO module in the U.S., and more Artemis II information that Exploration Ground Systems provided to the media at an event in San Diego after their landing and recovery training exercise.Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
00:00 Intro
01:46 WSJ story adds weight to rumors that Trump/Musk want to cancel SLS or all or Artemis
03:39 Jared Isaacman's NASA Administrator nomination hearing scheduled for April 9th
04:34 Artemis II astronauts unveil their mission patch
06:03 URT-12 media event held in San Diego after EGS landing and recovery certification
14:13 Gateway HALO module frame arrives in Phoenix from Turin for outfitting to become a spacecraft
16:29 Thanks for watching!
 
Philip Sloss has uploaded his quarterly report for Artemis and the SLS:


Reviewing the work completed by NASA and its Artemis partners during the first quarter of 2025 on preparations and planning for the Artemis II, III, and IV missions.
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
00:00 Intro
00:20 Quarter in review: three major themes
03:54 Artemis II status and outlook
08:00 Artemis III status and (cloudy) outlook
23:52 Artemis IV status and outlook
35:02 Artemis V and beyond
37:15 Thanks for watching!
 
Jared Isaacman has been confirmed as the new NASA administrator but there are programmes in jeopardy with everything in doubt, from Philip Sloss:


Soon-to-be NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman's nomination hearing is the main focus of this week's Artemis roundup. Mr. Isaacman held his proverbial cards very close so there wasn't much clarity. I'll go into detail about where that uncertainty leaves NASA's Artemis programs, with the subsequent reports that the White House wants to cut the Science directorate in half.
I'll go over other news and notes during the week, with more Gateway HALO sightings and a lot of work activity in the Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 area in preparation for Artemis II, III, and IV.
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
Space Coast Live (http://nsf.live/spacecoast) courtesy of NSF/NASASpaceflight, used with permission.
00:00 Intro
01:55 Mr. Isaacman had the NASA Admin job before the nomination hearing started
02:43 Did the hearing answer any long-standing questions?
07:25 Takeaways from the hearing: Mr. Isaacman very guarded in his testimony
12:54 Ranking Senators in the hearing still support current Artemis programs
16:16 Bottom lines from the hearing: White House cuts to Artemis not off the table
18:00 No showstoppers to confirmation, but Mr. Isaacman did not tell Senators what they wanted to hear
20:17 Mr. Isaacman's legacy begins again as a Trump man
20:35 Artemis II SLS Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter stacked in the VAB
21:41 Pegasus barge picks up SLS transportation equipment at KSC for future deliveries
24:49 New Gateway HALO pictures released
25:43 Mobile Launcher-2 umbilical tower module 6 stacked
27:18 Thanks for watching!
 
20:35 Artemis II SLS Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter stacked in the VAB
21:41 Pegasus barge picks up SLS transportation equipment at KSC for future deliveries
24:49 New Gateway HALO pictures released
25:43 Mobile Launcher-2 umbilical tower module 6 stacked
27:18 Thanks for watching!

Ya know, I am at the same time pleased that progress is being made & actually a bit distressed that this is all the far we as both the US and humanity in general have gotten at this date in making sure at least some humans live and grow and work on more than just one little ball of rock.
 
Moon Monday #221: The US is failing to explore lunar water as the principal goal of Artemis
And, countries allied with the US are facing delays in their own missions, allowing China to lead in this aspect of lunar exploration too.
Jatan Mehta
14 Apr 2025 — 11 min read


Last decade’s joint Indo-US discovery of water ice on the Moon’s poles by India’s Chandrayaan 1 orbiter not only catalyzed the world’s heightened interest in our Moon but also provided a possible path to have future lunar astronauts stay for long periods by utilizing these water deposits. However, planning and executing a sustained human presence on our Moon hinges greatly on what we learn about the ground truth of these deposits in terms of their nature, abundance, exact locations, and ease of utilization. Especially as they are sequestered inside extremely harsh permanently shadowed regions on the poles.

The US has spent nearly $100 billion so far via Artemis and other related programs but has failed to meaningfully progress our understanding of lunar water, much less how to use it. A review of the current states and unfortunate outcomes of US Moon missions across orbit and the surface reveals the direness of the situation. Delays in similar missions by international allies of the US add to the problem.
 
This was entirely predictable (see posts in relevant thread).

As a significant portion of early Civil astronauts will be wealthy individuals, space suits will invariably be trimmed according to their preferences wherever possible. I used to make the comparison with diving suits. We will see the same.

Citing myself on a shameful way here but with a decomplexed mood since I have complete anteriority on the subject:

ns-31-lauren-sanchez-crew-capsule-recovery-1152x648.jpg


Space fashion is now alive.
 
Last edited:
Philip Sloss has released a new video with more updates on Artemis II:


Preparations for NASA's Artemis II lunar flyby mission lead this week's recap. Stacking of the SLS vehicle in the Vehicle Assembly Building at the Kennedy Space Center is almost complete, and the last element to be lifted for a while, the in-space second stage, is now standing in the transfer aisle.
I'll go over that and also continuing reviewing last week's budget news, NASA Administrator nomination hearing in the Senate, and where those intersected. Big picture, if Congress wants to beat China back to the Moon and use Orion and SLS to help do that, then there will be even more focus on when Artemis III can fly...assuming the White House agrees, which remains a big question.
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
00:00 Intro
00:50 Artemis II update, beginning with SLS LVSA hard mate to the Core Stages
03:07 ICPS moves to the VAB for stacking
04:53 Artemis II Orion Stage Adapter seen in Huntsville recently
05:32 Status of Artemis II Orion spacecraft final assembly
07:58 B-roll video released of Artemis II SLS Core Stage lifting and mating activities in March
10:10 Political news and notes, more takeaways from Jared Isaacman's hearing before Congress
23:47 A look at the big picture, all eyes on Artemis III, assuming it isn't cancelled
27:24 What's next in April
28:01 Thanks for watching!
 
The NASA Marshall spaceflight centre released this short video of the Artemis II first-stage being transferred inside the VAB:


Technicians use massive cranes inside the Vehicle Assembly Building at NASA Kennedy’s Space Center in Florida to lift the fully assembled SLS (Space Launch System) core stage vertically 225-feet above the ground from High Bay 2 to a horizontal position in the facility’s transfer aisle. In the transfer aisle, technicians conducted final preparations of the core stage before it was integrated with the completed twin solid rocket booster segments. NASA is implementing a more efficient stacking process to support future missions to the Moon beginning with the Artemis II test flight.
For more information, and to learn more about the Artemis campaign visit https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/...https://www.youtube.com/redirect?ev...sa.gov/humans-in-space/artemis/&v=adsJ3fRCJZQ
 
Interesting detail on the lock and driving plate.
It appears there is only one safe position: locked*.

(General refresh on Vocabulary here)

*(if the door is shut but remains unlocked, the structural integrity doesn't appear to be as much granted)
 
Artemis II engine replacement update, does Congress want SLS around for NASA after Artemis III?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl2jA1Q7cK8&t=88s


Apr 27, 2025
Soon-to-be NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman was clearer about his views on the future of SLS for Artemis in his confirmation hearing than Senators, and in this video I'll start going through his written responses to questions for the record. Isaacman is ready to retire SLS after Artemis III, but it's not so clear about Congress, given all the attention on the "one and done" lunar landing race with China.

I'll go through takeaways from questions about the NASA Science budget being crushed, cancellation rumors, and how much influence Elon Musk will retain inside NASA going forward. While the politics continues to overhang the future, I'll also go through updates on the Artemis II RS-25 engine changeout, Mobile Launcher-2 construction, Boeing SLS production, and some pictures of things that aren't under "double secret ITAR probation."

Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.

Links to stories referenced:

Like the video? Consider buying me a coffee to support my work and the channel.

Or, join the channel for additional members-only content:
/ @philipsloss

00:00 Intro
01:31 The Artemis II big picture plan to accelerate launch date
06:09 Core Stage RS-25 engine removal and replacement work in progress
07:58 More takeaways from recent news about next NASA Administrator and budget
11:51 Jared Isaacman is ready to move on from SLS, but what about Congress?
16:09 Isaacman responds to more, written questions from Senators for the record
19:26 Boeing provides an SLS production update and NASA provides images to illustrate
29:10 Other news and notes, beginning with the next Mobile Launcher-2 umbilical tower module added
29:46 EUS Green Run test stand preparations update
30:08 An Orion docking module (test article) sighting
32:18 Thanks for watching!
 
Reinventing the wheel again, again? NASA Glenn went through that research about a decade ago, why is it being repeated?

 

Attachments

  • NASA_Glenn_Wheels.png
    NASA_Glenn_Wheels.png
    1.5 MB · Views: 8
The Trump administration has just withdrawn Isaacman nomination to lead NASA. Artemis will probably gain a more fervent supporter to move ahead full steam.


Philip sloss has put out a short video about this:


Filling the weekend with NASA policy news, President Trump suddenly pulled the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA Administrator six months after he announced it and maybe only a few dozen hours before Senate confirmation. In this video, I'll take a first look at the stunning, last-minute reversal and what happens next.
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
White House video of Trump/Musk press conference: • President Trump Participates in a Press Co... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAv3PaMnme8
00:00 Intro
00:24 Recap of how the news broke on Saturday, May 31
01:05 The nomination process restarts, but the budget process can't wait for that
03:51 Hard to tell what impact this change will have on NASA and its budget
05:53 Thanks for watching!

I was very surprised to see his name withdrawn as I thought that Isaacman was sure thing.
 
Philip Sloss has put out a video concerning whether or not the US Congress will follow up on the Trump/Musk vision for NASA:


While President Trump and Elon Musk fight out their feelings, the rest of the White House and Congress will fight about the budget for NASA and Artemis. Right after Trump released the NASA budget request that vibes with Musk's vision for the space agency's future, he fired Musk's vision for the space agency's administrator.​
In this video, I'll try to walk through takeaways from that without getting any of the flame war on my shoes...there's the Fiscal Year 2026 budget request when Trump and Musk were buddies last week and the aftermath of Jared Isaacman being let go as NASA Administrator before he could even start. Also a key group of Senators went on the record in favor of keeping Artemis as it is.​
That might not be as entertaining, but it is important; there's that, there's an Artemis II launch preparations update, and I got some notes on SLS production.​
Your entertainment mileage may vary.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
 
It’s possible, but Blue Origin is going to have to speed up considerably to manage it, especially with all their other launch commitments.
Blue Origin plans on trying a lunar mission at the end of this year, early next year with an unmanned version of lunar lander,,,at least that was plan announced late last month...
 
Yes, I know of their plans. I’m more dubious about their ability to execute. If they succeed, great! Genuinely. That is beneficial for the US. They just have a long ways to go in my mind.
 
Philip Sloss has put out a short video giving an overview of the Orion launch-abort modes:


An overview of what is known in public about the launch abort modes for Orion. We mostly have a high-level outline of the different modes, but not a lot of details. There is also some history, which goes back to the Constellation version of Orion. Orion and crew can abort the launch any time during the final few minutes of the countdown all the way into orbit. (And they have abort capabilities beyond launch, although those aren't covered here.)​
For the first three Artemis launches, using the initial version of SLS, there's enough launch performance to eliminate one of those modes.​
In this video, I go over that and an example case acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request by Chris D, @CR15PYbacon, for Artemis II, including timings for the different boundaries between the abort modes.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
Artemis II Mission Analysis and Integrated Assessments (MAIA) infographics courtesy of @CR15PYbacon, acquired by a FOIA request:
https://x.com/CR15PYbaconhttps://www.youtube.com/redirect?ev...://buymeacoffee.com/philipsloss&v=ukULlx4_vYI
00:00 Intro
01:33 Orion launch abort modes, 1-4
02:46 Concept of operations, roots in Constellation
03:20 Mode 1 uses the Orion launch abort system
03:58 Differences launching on SLS, overlapping abort capabilities
05:09 Launch abort mode 2, untargeted abort splashdown
06:13 Mode 3 not applicable until Artemis IV, maybe
08:01 A look at preliminary Artemis II abort boundaries
08:59 Thanks for watching!
 
Philip Sloss has uploaded a video concerning the recent Starship problems and how this will put pressure on Artemis III:


While the White House races to implement its scorched Earth policy on the NASA workforce before Congress can do anything about it, all the holiday week news was overshadowed by another setback with Starship testing at Starbase. It's not as clear what schedule impact this specific anomaly will have, but the six-month string of delays from this anomaly on top of the last three Starship flight tests make another delay to the Artemis III mission likely, since the latest delay is likely to extend well into the summer.​
In this video I'll go through those developments and preview a ground test of the next-generation SLS solid rocket booster that Northrop Grumman plans next week.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
00:00 Intro
01:22 Starship ground anomaly prolongs flight test stasis
06:20 Northrop Grumman ready for first test of upgraded SLS SRB
10:30 Mid-year status of the budget process
15:00 White House unilateral moves to slash NASA workforce
16:03 Other news and notes, starting with Mobile Launcher-2 construction progress
16:49 China tests pad abort case for Mengzhou launch abort system
17:34 Thanks for watching!
 
Northrop Grumman Tests the NASA BOLE Booster for Future Artemis Missions

June 26, 2025
Watch live as Northrop Grumman fires the next-gen BOLE (Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension) solid rocket booster, set to power future Artemis missions to the Moon. This is a key test for NASA’s upgraded Space Launch System (SLS) hardware. NSF will also provide unique camera views of the test.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyDPnw7dkdA
 
Booster failed during test:

SOLID ROCKET MOTORS ARE AN ABOMINATION UPON MANKIND, simple as that. If I were not aware of who is bunking in the White House these days, I would honestly moderately be surprised and dismayed at how long it apparently takes USG decision makers to acknowledge this simple fact after the Challenger disaster and take commensurate remedial action post haste. Nuff said. But I'm not bitter...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom