Live data from Hacker News

Artemis II Launch Day Updates

nasa.gov

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#303
post #83
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.

I suspect it's the optics of it.

If you can fly people around the moon, then landing people on the moon is a more reasonable next step.

I agree that it may not be entirely logical, but keeping public and funding opinion positive & invested _is_ important.

edit: I thought RocketLab flew their elecron rocket around the moon a few years ago? So it's definitely doable... so again I think it's about the optics.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#304

I do hope the doomers who think that the entire US government has been completely gutted will take note of this. The government workforce is in a bad spot for sure, SLS is far from a perfect program, but this still demonstrates that we are doing some real work still.

While the current administration has multiple areas of improvement and isnt really taking feedback in an adult manner, the federal workforce has some of the most competent people working for it inside certain parts of the organization. im thinking especially of NASA and NASA JPL.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#305
post #296

I do hope the doomers who think that the entire US government has been completely gutted will take note of this. The government workforce is in a bad spot for sure, SLS is far from a perfect program, but this still demonstrates that we are doing some real work still.

[flagged]

not to be a pedant, but would cutting costs not make healthcare cheaper?

do you mean cutting funding to healthcare?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's what "untested" means in spaceflight.

> that's what "untested" means in spaceflight Sort of. At a certain threshold, everything is untested. I’d put this closer to modified than untested—the general config was tested in Artemis I and the specific configuration in a variety of ground tests.

I'd say it's tested. It failed. Then they're flying it anyway. Wonderful stuff.
Post reply on HN