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

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#571

Post by KennyBlanken »

feyman_r wrote: post #548
dingaling wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no technological innovation in the Artemis stack. Three of the main engines are refurbished Shuttle engines. The fourth is a clone that cost more than the entire SpaceX Starship stack. The boosters are derived from the Shuttle SRBs. It's a late-60s technology rocket stack with a 2000s-era flight computer. It's such a travesty.

Its true that innovation isn't clearly shown in this mission; we also haven't flown humans out that far in more than 50 years either and while we have memories of it, our ability to even execute something like this must be built again. I'd rather see us doing this and 'pick up from where we were last time', than giving up on it or just using a stack that's not currently set to do this. What Artemis is doing is not im…

> our ability to even execute something like this must be built again

Why? Because "dreams"? "Reach for the stars"?

You know what I remember from the shuttle launches as a kid? I remember my school not being able to afford textbooks but apparently we had enough to spend billions on putting people in space for no reason.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#572

Post by MarsIronPI »

ge96 wrote: post #153
dguest wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I've heard it feels a lot bigger once you're in freefall. Imagine if you could use all of your room's surfaces as floor space. I would think your room would feel a lot bigger.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#574

Post by mullingitover »

partiallypro wrote: post #491
mullingitover wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, the federal workforce is now the smallest it's been in a half century[1]. February 2026: 2.693 million, the lowest number since July 1965. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES9091000001

That's per 100k (which just says it's mostly flat per 100k), net spending of the federal government is more than ever, and actual workforce is bigger than ever. Federal spending as a percentage of GDP is stubbornly high despite us being in "peace time," and not recession spending. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/W068RCQ027SBEA https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/USGOVT https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S…

> That's per 100k

No, it's a plain headcount. Your first link is a chart of non-inflation adjusted spending. Your second link is all government, not just federal employees so it's not really germane to the discussion, and your third link includes things like Social Security, and frankly...good. Without the government stabilizing spending the economy would be even more of a dumpster fire of random investor panics.

I'm close to a number of people in the public sector. They're brilliant, they do great work and they aren't paid what they're worth. I've also worked for a long time in a mega-corp. It was frequently just as bureaucratic and wasteful, if not more so, than the government.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#575

Post by d0gsg0w00f »

smnplk wrote: post #563
ge96 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I hope they will be able to stretch their legs on the moon.

They're not getting off at the moon, it's just a fly by.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#576

Post by throwatdem12311 »

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

Just a reminder that even the Utopia of the 23rd century and beyond envisioned by Gene Roddenberry for Star Trek - the Federation and Starfleet are still at their core military institutions. Even war was very much still a thing in his utopic vision, despite the fact that scarcity basically no longer exists so what hell was everyone fighting over anyway?

Starfleet is only a few steps removed from the regime in Heinlen’s Starship Troopers. At least Heinlen didn’t pretend that they were enlightened post-imperialists. He was honest about what it was.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#577

Post by m4rtink »

browningstreet wrote: post #283
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…

Space Force would disagree. The talk of taking the Moon would belie.

Old is new again! :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Horizon

Next stop - defending the base with claymore sticks! :-)

https://www.sandboxx.us/news/featured/project-horizon-nukes-...

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#578

Post by nirav72 »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #571
feyman_r wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its true that innovation isn't clearly shown in this mission; we also haven't flown humans out that far in more than 50 years either and while we have memories of it, our ability to even execute something like this must be built again. I'd rather see us doing this and 'pick up from where we were last time', than giving up on it or just using a stack that's not currently set to do this. What Artemis is doing is not im…

> our ability to even execute something like this must be built again Why? Because "dreams"? "Reach for the stars"? You know what I remember from the shuttle launches as a kid? I remember my school not being able to afford textbooks but apparently we had enough to spend billions on putting people in space for no reason.

Do you honestly believe that by repurposing money from missions like these would suddenly free up money for text books? That’s not how it works. Especially not in 2026.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#579

Post by dylan604 »

dingaling wrote: post #482
GaryBluto wrote: post #450

It is very disconcerting to see so many completely disregarding incredible technological innovation because other problems exist, especially on HN. If we were not allowed to progress technology until everybody is 100% free of suffering, we'd never be able to create technological that may potentially lead to the alleviation of suffering. It all feels very crabs in a bucket - "I don't feel happy so nobody else should,…

There is no technological innovation in the Artemis stack. Three of the main engines are refurbished Shuttle engines. The fourth is a clone that cost more than the entire SpaceX Starship stack. The boosters are derived from the Shuttle SRBs. It's a late-60s technology rocket stack with a 2000s-era flight computer. It's such a travesty.

While that might be true, it is on course to the moon now. Starship hasn't really done anything close. So while cheaper might be on the way, it doesn't exist now. When Starship can do now, we can talk about if the Shuttle Leftover System is ready to be retired

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#580

Post by dylan604 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #501
dingaling wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no technological innovation in the Artemis stack. Three of the main engines are refurbished Shuttle engines. The fourth is a clone that cost more than the entire SpaceX Starship stack. The boosters are derived from the Shuttle SRBs. It's a late-60s technology rocket stack with a 2000s-era flight computer. It's such a travesty.

> is no technological innovation in the Artemis stack Scaling is still engineering. And the environmental control system, laser-optical communication systems and block-construction heat shields are new. For Artemis III, in-obit propellant transfer will be new and transformational.

> in-obit propellant transfer

I'm hoping they can do it in-orbit. We've had enough NASA obits

Post reply on HN