Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Artemis II Launch Day Updates

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#151

Post by techteach00 »

xnx wrote: post #83
adamsb6 wrote: post #31

It is a bit chilling to watch these astronaut profiles having just read yesterday about the heat shield issues observed on the prior mission, and that this will be the first time we can test the heat shield in the actual pressures and temperatures that it will have to endure. Godspeed crew of Artemis II.

Truly. I'm not sure why anyone needs to be on the rocket at all, let alone our best and brightest.

Because they want to be on the rocket. To see the moon up close with your own eyes? It's spiritual.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#152

Post by nancyminusone »

runarberg wrote: post #126
nancyminusone wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that we hope to get some new tech with this whereas sports aims for nothing is just icing on the cake. I think big space missions are worth it every now and then on a humanitarian level; even if no new discoveries are made, a new generation of engineers will become fluent in what we have already discovered. Humanity's education is not "done" when the last fact is written in a book, it needs to be constantly…

> a new generation of engineers will become fluent in what we have already discovered. We seem to have lost the technology of going to the moon we gained from Apollo. So without an actual follow-up and a tangible long term plan I suspect the exact same will happen this time around.

Yeah, that's probably an indication that we waited too long.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#153

Post by ge96 »

dguest wrote: post #146
mikkupikku wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll probably turn out fine (in the same way that you'll probably survive one round of Russian roulette.) I am quite nervous about this though.

Get nervous in 10 days, they won't need a heat shield until reentry.

10 days? Hope they brought snacks

Seriously though I hope they're able to get up and walk around

I don't know if I could handle that 10 days in that small room

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#154

Post by WalterBright »

anonymous_user9 wrote: post #89
WalterBright wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when executed in a non-profit form For-profits are of no benefit to society? Are SpaceX rockets a loser for society?

> Are SpaceX rockets a loser for society? That remains to be seen. By giving Musk the prominence to set up DOGE and destroy USAID, they've indirectly led to the deaths of almost a million people. By launching starlink, they're also increasing the amount of aluminum in the upper atmosphere, which may have catastrophic effects on the ozone layer.

Do government non-profit spacecraft not use aluminum?

SpaceX rockets also are re-usable, which is environmentally better. They also cost about 10% of what non-profit rockets cost to launch.

> they've indirectly led to the deaths of almost a million people.

DOGE is a non-profit entity. Besides, why can't other non-profit governments pick up the aid?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#155

Post by cosmicgadget »

glimshe wrote: post #33

I'm just SO HAPPY we can talk about something that doesn't involve the Iran war, ICE etc. This is a really historic moment, I hope that the current and future administrations continue investing in space exploration. I've waited my whole life for this as the entire "action" happened before I was born. Hubble/James Webb/ISS are cool but Artemis is something else!

... federalized voting, birthright citizenship... it is amazing how space exploration can be a unifying moment of positivity.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#156

Post by cosmicgadget »

jcon321 wrote: post #48
rogerrogerr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your opinion based on?

walking outside, and the surf report... they cancel all the time for less wind shear

They should switch out to a quad fin fish, it'll handle the chop much better.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#157

Post by cindyllm »

qingcharles wrote: post #38
hghid wrote: post #7

Even though you could question the whole Artemis concept, it's still extremely exciting watching the countdown with my son. I just missed the original Apollo flights and had assumed I would never see a moon landing in my lifetime. We may well not have a landing for quite some time yet, but it's still cool to see a Moon bound rocket standing on the launchpad...

I don't know if it's feasible for you, but if you can, try to take your kid to see a live rocket launch. The TV is grossly unable to display how awesome these things are in person.

[dead]

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#158

Post by cosmicgadget »

duped wrote: post #80
lp0_on_fire wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Artemis was already set in stone well before DOGE came about and IMO if the federal government is going to set mountains of cash on fire I'd rather it be to NASA than half the crap the government wastes every year.

My point is that DOGE killed a bunch of government programs that help people while saving no money, yet this giant waste of money survived. Cancelling Artemis II alone in favor of III would save a billion dollars by itself.

It was never intended to save money. It was about a crusade against remote work, eliminating civil servants who might be loyal to the Constitution rather than the president, and planting a seed of government dysfunction for later years.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#159

Post by adrian_b »

hparadiz wrote: post #101
runarberg wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether a moon base is needed or even beneficial is a question I have not heard a convincing answer in favor. And even if moon base is indeed needed and/or beneficial to future space exploration / resource extraction why robots cannot more efficiently build (or assemble) such a moon base is another question I need an answer to. We are sending humans to (or around) the moon now, but it may just turn out to be a wasted…

The moon has about the same make up as the Earth when it comes to distribution of elements in the crust. If it's anywhere near 8% like Earth then it makes sense to mine aluminum and other metals on the moon in order to build megastructures in orbit. Since the moon has no atmosphere you can accelerate things using mechanical mass drivers. Basically rail systems. At 5,300 mph you hit escape velocity and can then move p…

The rocks at the surface of the Moon are richer in metals than the crust of the Earth. They are especially richer in iron and titanium.

Without oxidizing air, it is easier to extract metals from the Moon rocks.

There is little doubt that it would be possible to build big spaceships on the Moon.

However, what is missing on the Moon is fuel. For interplanetary spacecraft, nuclear reactors would be preferable anyway, which could be assembled there from parts shipped from Earth, but for propulsion those still need a large amount of some working gas,to be heated and ejected.

It remains to be seen if there is any useful amount of water at the poles, but I doubt that there is enough for a long term exploitation.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#160

Post by dannyfreeman »

cogman10 wrote: post #129
xnx wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Truly. I'm not sure why anyone needs to be on the rocket at all, let alone our best and brightest.

Yeah. Doesn't really make sense. The entire mission could be done remotely. Even with a goal of eventually putting humans on the moon, it'd be better to do an automated run, measure everything in the cockpit, and put in sandbags and/or something to consume O2 to make sure the CO2 scrubbers are working correctly. It's maybe cruel, but a few dogs would work fine for that sort of thing. A flame would be better, but it's…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_I
Post reply on HN