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

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#391

Post by PyWoody »

whackernews wrote: post #381
general_reveal wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well. You are getting down voted but here I am in later stages in life watching this Moon launch, and unlike other times in past, I didn’t feel any inspiration. Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff. I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).

A waste of money to explore the cosmos? It’s our duty is it not? What exactly are you doing about kids starving?

Is this an exploration or a joyride?

Don't get me wrong. I'm excited about it but are we looking to get anything of use out of it beyond, "Neat"?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#392

Post by mikestorrent »

general_reveal wrote: post #365
curiousgal wrote: post #324

[flagged]

Well. You are getting down voted but here I am in later stages in life watching this Moon launch, and unlike other times in past, I didn’t feel any inspiration. Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff. I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).

I understand your side to some extent. It helped watching my 11yo watch the launch - for him it's more meaningful, more imminent than it can be for a jaded person like myself.

I don't think it's mutually exclusive with food aid, though. If anything, it's taking money that probably would have gone into bombs and aeroplanes instead if we didn't have a space program. Honestly, it feels like we could redirect the entire military-industrial complex into space travel... retain the same pork spending but use it for rockets that aren't designed to land on our neighbours. Nice compromise.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#394

Post by JumpCrisscross »

tw04 wrote: post #350
0xffff2 wrote: post #282

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.

Take note of a project that’s about 15 years behind schedule and many multiples over budget finally progressed because we lowered safety standards to just launch? I’m not sure how that’s proof the government isn’t gutted. Let me know what our schedule is for the next one and how that timeline has changed. Ignoring the projects that have been outright canceled… You’re currently the guy saying “ya, all you haters that…

> we lowered safety standards to just launch

Aren’t they still well above anything in the history of human space flight?

We keep treating these systems in popular discourse as airliners. They’re not. They’re experimental craft. With mass production maybe SpaceX can bring launch closer to general aviation. But the notion that any loss of life is intolerable is (a) unsustainably expensive and (b) not a view shared by the lives actually at risk.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#395

Post by turtletontine »

ls612 wrote: post #325
bradhe wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a really hard time telling if this is despite the current administration’s best efforts, because the current administration’s policies, or just an artifact of government inertia. Top level: Super excited to witness this in my lifetime. Edit: Also, my 40 years of life leads me towards the latter category.

NASA has been well treated by both parties in general, with their budget rising faster than inflation most years. This administration also appointed Isaacman to be the NASA administrator which I think is a 10/10 choice for that job.

It’s not that simple. Trump admin requested a massive cut to NASA’s budget, which after much delay Congress finally rejected. Isaacman’s path to NASA administrator was also, erm, circuitous. Having a competent and knowledgeable NASA head was not really Trump admin’s priority.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#396

Post by Electricniko »

hagbard_c wrote: post #285
anonymars wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A real bright spot compared to lately. The messages of positivity and comradery in the live stream were a nice contrast (That being said, I can't believe they cut to people on the ground during SRB separation!) edit: here's better footage from Everyday Astronaut: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOsSRRBMNoc&t=24512s

It was probably deemed a relatively high-risk moment which they did not want to broadcast in case of failure like it was when the Challenger mission exploded.

NASA had another feed that was just the view of the launch from Kennedy Space Center, no commentary. It was a few seconds ahead of the main broadcast, so it seems they already had a delay built in for the masses.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#397

Post by randomNumber7 »

russdill wrote: post #162
4khilles wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The heat shield is a bit different, and the reentry profile is a bit different as well.

I suppose "this will be the first time we can test this slightly modified heat shield in the slightly different pressures and temperatures that it will have to endure." isn't quite as eye catching.

With humans on board? Even if they are not necessary for the actual mission?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#398

Post by justinator »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #363
justinator wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't astronauts by definition bat shit crazy? We have people lining up for one-way missions to Mars. Not to say this is a bad thing, but their ROI calculations are not normal.

> Aren't astronauts by definition bat shit crazy? By poetic definition, e.g. “Here’s to the Crazy Ones,” yes. Clinically and technically, no. They’re paragons of human explorers, and exploration is a fundamentally human trait. > We have people lining up for one-way missions to Mars How many astronauts?

I think sometimes, clinically: yes.

https://www.houstoniamag.com/news-and-city-life/2018/11/astr...

> How many astronauts?

More than we can send. Wasn't there a country-wide competition?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#399

Post by [deleted] »

general_reveal wrote: post #365
curiousgal wrote: post #324

[flagged]

Well. You are getting down voted but here I am in later stages in life watching this Moon launch, and unlike other times in past, I didn’t feel any inspiration. Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff. I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).

[deleted]

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#400

Post by carlosjobim »

general_reveal wrote: post #365
curiousgal wrote: post #324

[flagged]

Well. You are getting down voted but here I am in later stages in life watching this Moon launch, and unlike other times in past, I didn’t feel any inspiration. Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff. I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).

A rat done bit my sister Nell. With Whitey (and Blackey) on the Moon...
Post reply on HN