Artemis II Launch Day Updates • Hacker News Board

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#971

Post by dmix » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 9:49 PM UTC

danem wrote: post #964

mulmen wrote: post #828

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice drive by pessimism.

Sorry, it's just a fact about HN informed by visiting it daily for over 13 years.

18yrs here and fully agree, but it's against the rules to discuss it :)

> Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit.

also has these rules though which is a nice reminder

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

> Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead.

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

etc

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#972

Post by tsoukase » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 10:06 PM UTC

mathieu4v wrote: post #108

I will be watching the launch from Europe, so it will be not earlier than half past midnight for us. My kids (9 and 10) are sleeping on the couch in front of the projection screen, so that they do not even have to get up when I wake them up at midnight, which I promised. Just wanted to add my grain of positivity here. Godspeed Artemis 2!

My kids are exactly the same age. The younger already ordered Lego Nr 42221 for his Easter present.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#973

Post by thecommakozzi » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 11:10 PM UTC

sd9 wrote: post #320

Minutes after launch they reached "ten thousand miles per hour". That's 2.78 miles per second. Nuts. No doubt the speeds go even higher later too. I'm sure people here are already familiar with the speeds these things go, but that's the first time I've confronted a fact like that and it blew me away.

[dead]

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#974

Post by bdamm » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 11:44 PM UTC

muskstinks wrote: post #925

NetMageSCW wrote: post #915

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The American people didn’t pay for the R&D if SpaceX, Musk did and then customers did. Customers (including the federal government) that saved millions on every purchase.

NASA gave SpaceX 400 Million just for the development of Falcon 9 and there is a video were Musk said SpaceX was bancrupt if NASA wouldnt have stepd in. NASA also another 6 Billion upfront to SpaceX for Dragon and HLS. So yes the american paid for the R&D of SpaceX. SpaceX took the 'risk' but either succeeding or not in your main business is hardly a risk if you need to succeed anyway to have that business.

Yes, but recall that those contracts were made in a competitive marketplace where SpaceX was the lower bidder.

If not for SpaceX, the American People would have paid more to the ULA group for what has clearly turned out to be inferior results, since ULA has received far more money for far fewer services.

SpaceX was the underdog.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#975

Post by bdamm » Thu, Apr 02, 2026, 11:50 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #947

gibolt wrote: post #892

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyperloop is the only thing you listed that is accurate, although it was only a whitepaper + competition. It was open for others to pursue. Tesla easily has the best vehicle software + OTA and has since the S in 2012. It still feels better than most new vehicles. You can buy a Tesla (including Cybertruck) today that will do 95+% of drives with 0 intervention. It may not be 100% autonomous yet, but there isn't anythin…

> Tesla easily has the best vehicle software + OTA and has since the S in 2012 Sure: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/05/the-vehic... https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-drivers-are-paying-big-buc... https://www.thestreet.com/automotive/tesla-employees-shared-... https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2025-04-15... https://www.torquenews.com/17998/after-software-update-left-... https://www.mot…

If you think Tesla is bad, you should look into GM or Ford.

There have been many accusations about sudden accelleration, but except for the Cybertruck's pedal-cover slide, there has never been a proven case of a Tesla autonomously accellerating into a crash. But these accusations come a lot, because people are always wanting to shift the blame away from themselves and the automaker seems like an easy target.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#976

Post by partiallypro » Fri, Apr 03, 2026, 12:05 AM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #574

partiallypro wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Even assuming what you're saying is correct and government spending doesn't matter (odd thing to say when you're arguing that the government has been "gutted,") your own chart is only flat over time because of USPS workers being less due to automation/retirement and there being less military recruitment (both account for about ~1.5M employees lost,) and doesn't include offloading to contractors. Underlying agencies and government is bigger than ever before. The government (federal AND state levels) itself is much larger, with more regulations, than it was even 20 years ago.

Every company has bureaucracy, but it's nothing compared to government work. Also, government has no competition, bureaucracy in big companies will eventually be punished (even if it takes a long time.) In government it is often rewarded, both internally and externally (via regulatory capture, etc.)

In any case, saying the federal government has been "gutted" is a flat lie. I don't see how people can argue otherwise. I want more money going to NASA, and more money going to civil projects like HSR, but would that magically remove 15 years of bureaucratic mess? No. More money to these projects can only happen on a large political scale if/when the bureaucratic red tape is cut to lower the costs. Adding an additional layer of bureaucrats and middle managers and pot of gold everyone can dip their hands in before it reaches the final project doesn't fix the issue.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#977

Post by nandomrumber » Fri, Apr 03, 2026, 12:22 AM UTC

turtlesdown11 wrote: post #888

nandomrumber wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s only a fallacy if the purported facts are fallacious. And in the case of lifting most of humanity out of poverty, two things are responsible: capitalism and technology. You can argue that China is a communist state, but it’s the allocation of capital to things that matter that has enable China to thrive.

> And in the case of lifting most of humanity out of poverty, two things are responsible: capitalism and technology. You alleged above it was due to the moon landings that people were lifted out of poverty. Do you understand the difference here?

Was not the space race, and the cold war context it happened it, a driving force in pushing technological advances forward?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#978

Post by ActorNightly » Fri, Apr 03, 2026, 1:42 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #779

ActorNightly wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starship is just obscene. The thing is never going to work for its designed purpose once you understand what the mission looks like (basically insane amount of refuel dockings while the thing is in orbit)

> insane amount of refuel dockings while the thing is in orbit What's wrong with this? Lots of launches is fine until we build the scale required to make a proper depot worthwhile. (Which, by the way, is part of Artemis's plans. Though currently it looks like a bunch of glued-together Starship tankers.)

People act like with Falcon, they basically just get it off the drone ship, fill er up, and she is good to go again. There is a shitload of repairs/maintenance that has to be done to Falcon vehicles after every launch.

In space, you can't do that kind of repair/maintenance, you have to make sure the refueling is PERFECT. And this is with deep cryogenic propellants that very much like to boil off and cause pressure increases in the tanks they are contained.

That problem hasn't even been touched yet. In order to make Spaceship X happen, they need to figure one refueling out, which is difficult given the fact that Raptors run on cryogenic propellant that likes to boil off, then they need to figure out how to do 10 in a row without any issues, which is exponentially difficult.

And then there is the whole thing about everything working well for trip to Mars, and back.

And if there is a configuration that exists that can do all of that, its very unlikely that a company under the leadership of someone as Musk can ever figure this out.

For interplanetary travel, things need to start from either orbit or the moon. This has been known for quite some time.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#979

Post by apitman » Fri, Apr 03, 2026, 2:56 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #730

dotancohen wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been to the rocket garden at KSC? The Saturn V isn't vertical, but they've got almost everything from the Redstone and later vertical. I was in Florida in 2018 and I think they were getting ready to display a pair of SRBs. They did have Atlantis inside, too. And of course a horizontal Saturn V. I saw that Saturn V as a child once, too. I think that the Saturn V really made me the person that I am today. Seei…

I've never been to KSC. I've been to Houston a few times. I couldn't imagine trying to have a Saturn V permanently standing would be an easy feat with both locations susceptible to hurricanes and tornadoes. Walking the length of it is still pretty impressive. I come from a construction family, so I'd put some of the famous sky scrapers in that category too. Especially thinking about the crazy beam walkers like that f…

I saw the one in Houston for the first time last week. It was so cool. My favorite spacecraft as a kid, but in real life it was about 4x as big as I expected.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#980

Post by anon291 » Fri, Apr 03, 2026, 4:34 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #596

anon291 wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy to believe that people who believe in one holy book are killing people over another holy book in countries like (but certainly not limited to) Nigeria, while another country launches people to the moon. But, alas, I agree with you. There's no way out but through I guess.

You seem to be forgetting that the country launching people to the moon is primarily of one holy book and is currently bombing the people of another holy book.

The United States is not a Christian country and is not at war with anyone due to religion. I know you're talking about Iran but Iranian Christians are as affected as Iranian Muslims. Muslim countries in the area have pushed America to continue this war.

I am completely against this military excursion. Just an honest takeaway. A lot of rhetoric in America on religion is due to people's religious trauma. I blame American evangelicals.