Artemis 1

[Hesi]

Lift off on Monday

 

 

[LookingForValue]

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-sets-launch-coverage-for-artemis-mega-moon-rocket-spacecraft

[LookingForValue]

 

[LookingForValue]

 

[LookingForValue]

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-waves-off-first-artemis-i-launch-attempt

NASA Waves Off First Artemis I Launch Attempt

Following the Artemis I launch scrub Monday from Launch Complex 39B at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, the agency will hold a media briefing at approximately 1 p.m. EDT today, Monday, Aug. 29, to discuss mission status.

The briefing will livestream on NASA Television, the agency’s app, and on the agency’s website.

[LookingForValue]

NASA Artemis

Teams have reviewed the data from Monday's launch attempt of the #Artemis I mission and are moving forward with a second launch attempt on Sat., Sept. 3, with a two-hour launch window starting at 2:17 p.m. EDT (18:17 UTC).

[LookingForValue]

 

[LookingForValue]

https://blogs.nasa.gov/artemis/?fbclid=IwAR3I9Vy4VCcpRE7C2fBxkQS3RBVrsyzvQro3od04E29fF3sHztxaeX1WnUo

NASA to Stand Down on Artemis I Launch Attempts in Early September, Reviewing Options
After standing down on today’s Artemis I launch attempt when engineers could not overcome a hydrogen leak in a quick disconnect, an interface between the liquid hydrogen fuel feed line and the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, mission managers met and decided they will forego additional launch attempts in early September.

[Hesi]

Just reading up about it Rich.  Bill Nelson the NASA Administrator who runs the show, who was first and foremost a politician, but trained to be able to go into space, went up on a 6 day mission on the space shuttle Columbia, the flight directly before the ill fated Challenger.  Everything you watch about him, says safety first over expediency.  Another Challenger disaster, would kill the space program as far as Artemis is concerned

[Globederby19]

Doesn't look good does it. Another problem, fuel leak of some kind ,so off the pad and into rehab again. I can just see it exploding at takeoff at this rate. How many other problems will show up after launch ?. Could be spectacular either way.

[Freda]

 I thought they had a sort of notion how to do this stuff nearly sixty years ago.

 

Silly me, wrong again.

[Hesi]

I'm pretty sure they do, but a launch catastrophe would probably put them back 60 years.

Illustrative of the huge difficulties exploring space from the Earth poses.  Exploring it from the moon does not pose the same problems, but they have to find reasonable quantities of water, somewhere on the moon.  That is the whole key to it, as then they can be self sufficient without having to keep coming back to earth to restock.  Water obviously needed to sustain human life, but can be split to produce oxygen also needed to sustain life, but split also to produce liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen which would power missions to explore Mars.  And only a fraction of that needed, as you are not having to clear Earth's gravity each time

[LookingForValue]

There is nothing easy about launching and completing missions. Once a Moon base is established, the way is open. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents

[LookingForValue]

"In order for humanity to survive and thrive long term, it makes sense to have a permanent human settlement on Mars as it offers us a relatively benign environment. Doing so would require sending tens of thousands of tons of material from Earth to the martian surface via hundreds of huge rocket launches. That’s pretty much exactly what SpaceX’s Starship hopes to do. Here’s where our celestial neighbor, the Moon, can make things better.

Our Moon has a much weaker gravity than Earth, allowing rockets to take off with ease. This was most notable during the Apollo missions, when even a spacecraft hosting two astronauts could gracefully make its way to lunar orbit. Moreover, the Moon lies at the outer edge of Earth’s gravity well, meaning it’s easy to escape our planet’s pull completely if launched from the Moon. Almost five times easier in fact.

If we establish a vast, permanent settlement on the Moon first, we can eventually tap into its resources to launch rockets from the Moon itself. NASA and ISRO missions have discovered plenty of water ice on the Moon’s poles. It’s possible that future human habitats built from mining the metal-rich lunar soil tap into this water ice for consumption needs. This water can also be split into hydrogen and oxygen for use as rocket fuel. Rockets taking off from an industrially enabled Moonbase can ride the lunar interplanetary highway to reach Mars more efficiently than from Earth."

https://blog.jatan.space/p/the-moon-as-a-rocket-platform

[Globederby19]

We cant look after our own planet and we pollute the shit out of it. Might as well do the same to the moon and Mars . Frankly it is a huge waste of resources and pie in the sky shit from an elite bunch of people with lofty ideals. By the time they set up on the moon this planet will be dead and gone .

[Hesi]

That comment has it's merit Rees, but the human race has to continue the search for knowledge.  Average human lifespan has doubled in the last 100 years, from 40 to 80, and that is all down to advances in our scientific knowledge

[Freda]

2 hours ago, Hesi said:

That comment has it's merit Rees, but the human race has to continue the search for knowledge.  Average human lifespan has doubled in the last 100 years, from 40 to 80, and that is all down to   " advances in our scientific knowledge "

But, despite these 'advances'  we can't do what we did in 1969.  

[Lightning Blue]

21 minutes ago, Freda said:

But, despite these 'advances'  we can't do what we did in 1969.  

Land on the moon .? Would cost many Billions these days. Just to bring back a bit of Moondust and some rocks.

Better to sit out on the veranda and just enjoy the view from here in the evenings. ( Of any Lunar events ) and maybe do some stargazing (like some of our horses and Jockeys lol )

[Hesi]

24 minutes ago, Freda said:

But, despite these 'advances'  we can't do what we did in 1969.  

Doubt it, you're surely not suggesting technology in the aeronautics industry has gone backwards in 70 years

Just think of it as fine tuning, exhaustive checking etc etc to make sure there are no catastrophic launch events

[LookingForValue]

They went to the Moon for propaganda reasons in 1969. There was no need to return. Attention turned outwards towards the planets, Voyager 1&2 explored the solar system and still bring valuable information, we have a probe orbiting close to the Sun, a space station, New Horizons visited Pluto etc etc. All these advances and successes/failures have led to the possibility of returning to the Moon. It is imperative to do so if we wish to continue to visit Mars and one day send the first humans. The technological returns on these missions have been vast. No launch from the Earth can be 100% safe.