Artemis moon shot on its way!

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,015
32,502
1
An altered state
A perfect launch for the news space system that will take humans back to the moon for the first time in over 50 years. 16% bigger than the Saturn 5s. Will take several weeks and orbit the moon. It is unmanned but has dummies (insert @Catch50 jokes here)on board to simulate same weight and measure various environmental concerns.
 

SLUPSU

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2018
4,814
2,793
1
A perfect launch for the news space system that will take humans back to the moon for the first time in over 50 years. 16% bigger than the Saturn 5s. Will take several weeks and orbit the moon. It is unmanned but has dummies (insert @Catch50 jokes here)on board to simulate same weight and measure various environmental concerns.
I was lucky to catch the launch live very early this morning, it was impressive to see. As I understand, they are using rebuilt & upgraded rocket engines leftover from the shuttle program.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,015
32,502
1
An altered state
I was lucky to catch the launch live very early this morning, it was impressive to see. As I understand, they are using rebuilt & upgraded rocket engines leftover from the shuttle program.
Lucky man. YEs they are re- using old shuttle engines. Can they salvage the first stage and recycle the engines or is it one and done?
 
  • Like
Reactions: psuted

SLUPSU

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2018
4,814
2,793
1
Lucky man. YEs they are re- using old shuttle engines. Can they salvage the first stage and recycle the engines or is it one and done?
Here's an article with info on the engines.

 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,015
32,502
1
An altered state
Boosters and the core will not be recovered.

Good article. Thanks. Hope we have a lot old engines sitting around. Or are building new ones now.

Some interesting twists. Like the 2024 moon landing mission. SpaceX will have a unarmed lander in orbit around the moon. The Artemis crew will dock with it and transfer into it for the landing. Then return to orbit, transfer back to the Artemis and then home, leaving the SpaceX ship,in orbit. Hamite is reusable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLUPSU

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,015
32,502
1
An altered state
Here's an article with info on the engines.

Seems like they have enough for five flights, then a flight with two old and two new. Then continued flights with all new engi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLUPSU

Catch50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2003
36,901
2,412
1
Good article. Thanks. Hope we have a lot old engines sitting around. Or are building new ones now.

Some interesting twists. Like the 2024 moon landing mission. SpaceX will have a unarmed lander in orbit around the moon. The Artemis crew will dock with it and transfer into it for the landing. Then return to orbit, transfer back to the Artemis and then home, leaving the SpaceX ship,in orbit. Hamite is reusable.
There is no reason to go to the Moon or Mars. Zero.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: psuted

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
23,632
5,794
1
Lucky man. YEs they are re- using old shuttle engines. Can they salvage the first stage and recycle the engines or is it one and done?

This rocket is expendable. Which is kind of weird seeing as how it's 4 main engines are from the shuttle and are fully reusable.
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
23,632
5,794
1
The Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS - 2nd stage) was jettisoned into a heliocentric orbit, so it won't be coming back either.

This rocket was outdated 6 years ago. It costs so much to launch NASA can only afford 1 two launches a year. I think they launch the absolute minimum number that will allow them to claim success then move on to much less expensive options.

The SLS? About $4 billion per launch, some sources say. And according to veteran space reporter Eric Berger, it's at least $2 billion per launch.​
 

Nostraduzzi

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2019
452
385
1
Good article. Thanks. Hope we have a lot old engines sitting around. Or are building new ones now.

Some interesting twists. Like the 2024 moon landing mission. SpaceX will have a unarmed lander in orbit around the moon. The Artemis crew will dock with it and transfer into it for the landing. Then return to orbit, transfer back to the Artemis and then home, leaving the SpaceX ship,in orbit. Hamite is reusable.
Artemis 2 (manned) will fly in 2024 and the boots on the moon mission (Artemis 3) will be in late 2025 or early-mid 2026. that's the word around the campfire. Depending on the results of Artemis 1, these dates could slip or be brought in. But, I wouldn't bet on the latter.

Can ya believe it, we are going to the moon and then onto MARS! No matter what some people may want or think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister

Nostraduzzi

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2019
452
385
1
This rocket was outdated 6 years ago. It costs so much to launch NASA can only afford 1 two launches a year. I think they launch the absolute minimum number that will allow them to claim success then move on to much less expensive options.

The SLS? About $4 billion per launch, some sources say. And according to veteran space reporter Eric Berger, it's at least $2 billion per launch.​
Outdated by what? Is there another rocket capable of launching a vehicle into lunar orbit?
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,015
32,502
1
An altered state
This rocket was outdated 6 years ago. It costs so much to launch NASA can only afford 1 two launches a year. I think they launch the absolute minimum number that will allow them to claim success then move on to much less expensive options.

The SLS? About $4 billion per launch, some sources say. And according to veteran space reporter Eric Berger, it's at least $2 billion per launch.​
They have done some updates on the engines to improve them.
 

Nostraduzzi

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2019
452
385
1
There will be.
So, the SLS was not outdated 6 years ago. SpaceX is developing a rocket for deep space, I do not how much that is going to cost. Space exploration is not cheap. We get technological advancements from space exploration, so IMO its money well spent. More useful than Spacebook, MyFace, or Tweeter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psuted

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
23,632
5,794
1
They have done some updates on the engines to improve them.

They added a section to the solid rocket boosters. I think the main engines are pretty much the same that flew on the shuttle.

Let's face it, this rocket is a boon doogle.

No one building/designing a modern rocket is making it fully expendable.
No one building/designing a modern rocket is using hydrogen for the propellant.
No one is building a rocket that costs north of 1 billion dollars per launch.
 

Nostraduzzi

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2019
452
385
1
They added a section to the solid rocket boosters. I think the main engines are pretty much the same that flew on the shuttle.

Let's face it, this rocket is a boon doogle.

No one building/designing a modern rocket is making it fully expendable.
No one building/designing a modern rocket is using hydrogen for the propellant.
No one is building a rocket that costs north of 1 billion dollars per launch.
What do you suggest for propellent? Once out of Earth's gravitational pull, perhaps ion propulsion like that used on the DAWN mission.
 

Nostraduzzi

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2019
452
385
1
Well both Blue Origin and SpaceX chose methane/oxygen.
I don't know enough about propellent and oxidizers to say which is better, or what other alternatives there would be. Hopefully, Space X will be successful with Starship. I haven't seen much in the news lately about where they are in development and testing.
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
23,632
5,794
1
I don't know enough about propellent and oxidizers to say which is better, or what other alternatives there would be. Hopefully, Space X will be successful with Starship. I haven't seen much in the news lately about where they are in development and testing.

They completed a 14 engine static fire test a few days ago. They need to do and all engine static fire test then full wet dress rehearsal then they should be ready to let it rip.

 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
27,015
32,502
1
An altered state
They added a section to the solid rocket boosters. I think the main engines are pretty much the same that flew on the shuttle.

Let's face it, this rocket is a boon doogle.

No one building/designing a modern rocket is making it fully expendable.
No one building/designing a modern rocket is using hydrogen for the propellant.
No one is building a rocket that costs north of 1 billion dollars per launch.
They are probably using hydrogen because of green weenie cry babies. H + O2 = water. Cleanest rocket fuel there is.


Edit: For any anal retentive chemists. Actually it is 2H2 + 02 = 2H20.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: psuted

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
23,632
5,794
1
They e probably using hydrogen because of green weenie cry babies. H + O2 = water. Cleanest rocket fuel there is.

No.

They used Hydrogen because Congress deemed it so.

Eric Berger:

Why does the SLS rocket use liquid hydrogen fuel if it leaks all the time? Well, it is very efficient, energy density-wise. But most importantly, it's what space shuttle designers used 50 years ago, and Congress mandated that the SLS rocket use those same engines.​
Every other modern rocket is migrating toward kerosene or, increasingly, methane. These fuels are much easier to work with, and less bulky in the sense that you can use smaller fuel tanks. LOX and methane also have similar boiling points so tanks can have a common bulkhead.​
 

Catch50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2003
36,901
2,412
1
So, the SLS was not outdated 6 years ago. SpaceX is developing a rocket for deep space, I do not how much that is going to cost. Space exploration is not cheap. We get technological advancements from space exploration, so IMO its money well spent. More useful than Spacebook, MyFace, or Tweeter.
We reaped the R&D rewards from a years of a $ 20 trillion free market economy. The NASA can't name a technology they want. Throwing shit against the wall to see if anything good comes out is just ... shit.
Besides. DOD spends far more in R & D.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: psuted

Catch50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2003
36,901
2,412
1
A perfect launch for the news space system that will take humans back to the moon for the first time in over 50 years. 16% bigger than the Saturn 5s. Will take several weeks and orbit the moon. It is unmanned but has dummies (insert @Catch50 jokes here)on board to simulate same weight and measure various environmental concerns.
Tell us why we need to go to the moon ... dummy. ???
 
  • Haha
Reactions: psuted

Nostraduzzi

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2019
452
385
1
Spending on space exploration is 100% waste.
yeah-well-thats-just-like-your-opinion-man.jpg
 

Latest posts