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

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#251

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wvbdmp wrote: post #247
jgord wrote: post #208

Regardless of whether this particular mission is perfectly planned, this is precisely the kind of thing that will help humanity outgrow the dark age of war, inequality and climate mismanagement. It is a noble endeavor - science, engineering and peaceful exploration hold the keys to our survival and prosperity. It is also important psychologically to our survival - a reminder there is a bigger pie, that we can solve h…

I hope so, but if this goes awry in any way, especially if – god forbid – they lose the crew, my fear is it’ll be a blow to the American hegemony that will be very hard to recover from. Orange man is bad, but I think something like that would add a whole other dimension to the US’s loss of face. I’m as anti-american as they come, but despite everything Pax Americana must be acknowledged and I shudder at the thought o…

> if – god forbid – they lose the crew, my fear is it’ll be a blow to the American hegemony that will be very hard to recover from

This has zero impact on American hegemony. That mission is being prosecuted in Iran and with respect to NATO.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#252

Post by JumpCrisscross »

113 wrote: post #245
TeMPOraL wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also wrt. "climate mismanagement", pretty much all tools we get to measure climate exist because of space program, and many require it to function.

Okay well we have those already and it hasn't really changed anything.

> we have those already and it hasn't really changed anything

What’s the term for antibiotics having been so successful that we forget all their benefits?

The Montreal Protocol worked [1]. It probably couldn’t have without our satellite data.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#253

Post by fasterik »

lapcat wrote: post #234
jgord wrote: post #208

Regardless of whether this particular mission is perfectly planned, this is precisely the kind of thing that will help humanity outgrow the dark age of war, inequality and climate mismanagement. It is a noble endeavor - science, engineering and peaceful exploration hold the keys to our survival and prosperity. It is also important psychologically to our survival - a reminder there is a bigger pie, that we can solve h…

> this is precisely the kind of thing that will help humanity outgrow the dark age of war, inequality and climate mismanagement. How do you figure? The previous Moon missions certainly didn't accomplish that.

The key phrase is "kind of thing". It certainly does matter what kinds of things we focus our attention on as a species. I think you would have to be quite cynical to think that progress in spaceflight over the past 60+ years hasn't had a positive impact.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#254

Post by TeMPOraL »

lapcat wrote: post #248
TeMPOraL wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't solve these problems in a single step, but notice how space imagery and analogies pop up every time people try to talk about peace, global problems, mutual empathy, understanding, etc. The Pale Blue Dot, images of Earth from orbit or the Moon, etc. Those are anchors in public consciousness, competing in memetic space with usual divisive, dystopian, hope-draining pictures and soundbites - we need more of the…

> You don't solve these problems in a single step Obviously, but there's no evidence that the previous Moon missions were a step toward solving the problems. > notice how space imagery and analogies pop up every time people try to talk about peace, global problems, mutual empathy, understanding, etc. You think these problems will be solved with... photos? How many more photos do we need? Everyone has seen the photos…

Nobody it'll say space exploration will alone solve those problems. But it helps, and can help more - much more, if we go all the way in and establish permanent economic activity and eventually settlements in the space near Earth and beyond.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#255

Post by JumpCrisscross »

runarberg wrote: post #123
sarchertech wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are nowhere near the capability to launch robots to the moon that can autonomously build or assemble a moon base for any useful definition of moon base. > We are sending humans to (or around) the moon now, but it may just turn out to be a wasted effort, done solely for the opulence My 4 year old is extremely excited to watch the launch tonight because it’s manned. I’d say a few billion is worth it if all it does i…

And neither are we anywhere near the capability to lunch construction workers to the moon which can build or assemble an equivalent moon base with their human labor. So this answer does not satisfy me one bit. > inspire a new generation of astronauts, engineers, and scientists This is a good point. And I would like it to be true. However when you have to lie about (or exaggerate) the scientific value of the mission,…

> neither are we anywhere near the capability to lunch construction workers to the moon which can build or assemble an equivalent moon base with their human labor

Why do you say this? What is the bottleneck you feel we are more than half a decade from?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#256

Post by russdill »

glenstein wrote: post #231
russdill wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I've also read material outside of that article from NASA's own staff and literature. Statements like this: "Put more simply, NASA is going to fly Artemis II based on vibes, hoping that whatever happened to the heat shield on Artemis I won’t get bad enough to harm the crew on Artemis II." Are just so intellectually dishonest and completely ignore the extensive research and testing that's gone into qualifying thi…

So did they! And they showed their work. So far you're just beating around the bush. What would would help is if you said something like "Maceij says modeling a different entry approach on computers is no substitute for a bona fide re-entry testing a new design, but that's incorrect because _____."

I would, except all Maceij is providing is "vibes" and much of the official report is redacted.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#257

Post by discardable_dan »

palata wrote: post #167
techteach00 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I understand why they want to fly. I don't understand why the people is fine paying taxes for that.

Bro, of all the stupid shit we spend taxes on ($50 billion on corn subsidies), you're mad about space exploration?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#258

Post by TeMPOraL »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #237
TeMPOraL wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only in the last few minutes, the livestream actually covered various goals this mission - explicitly a test mission - is meant to achieve. For example, one they just mentioned is they're going to be doing some docking maneuvers practice. This is not just training the current flight crew and ground crews, but is also generally testing the entire system - including operations and hardware too, with feedback important…

> testing the entire system - including operations and hardware too, with feedback important to logistics and component manufacturers, etc. This can be done autonomously. The human training cannot.

Not just yet. Give it a few more years for AI (haha, another thing yielding stupid amount of value to everyone, that people are totally oblivious of - your antibiotics comparison in another subthread kinda applies too) - but for now, having actual people with full sensory capabilities, able to look at stuff on-site (and hear, and smell), is something we can't fully cover with computers and sensors. We can recover that and more data later, but it's a delayed, after-the-fact analysis. There's value in immediate feedback and immediate decisions.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#259

Post by runarberg »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #214
runarberg wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is the point, but whether this mission will actually do that is rather unconvincing. After (and if) Artemis III lands on the moon and brings home the astronauts there seems to be very little planned on how we actually get to the moon base which NASA is claiming this will lead to, let alone the manned Mars mission that is also supposed to follow. In other words, I think NASA is greatly exaggerating, and p…

> there seems to be very little planned on how we actually get to the moon base There is a lot of research going into in situ construction methods and even nuclear power plants on the moon [1]. (Which would be necessary to bootstrap eventual indigenous panel production [2].) To me it’s encouraging to see this fundamental work being attacked than an endless sea of renderings. The reason you aren’t seeing heavy detaili…

> This effort ensures the United States leads the world in space exploration and commerce.

> “History shows that when American science and innovation come together, from the Manhattan Project to the Apollo Mission, our nation leads the world to reach new frontiers once thought impossible,”

> Under President Trump’s national space policy

I smell politics and American exceptionalism, not science. There are a lot of could-bes in these statements as well, I have serious suspicions that these goals are not serious engineering. I am 99.999% certain that NASA will not build a nuclear reactor on the moon this decade, nor even the next decade. NASA is not giving me any signals they are capable of that.

Post reply on HN