NASA & SpaceX aren't Telling US Something About The Artermis Moon

Falcon and Falcon heavy faced a lot of challenges and the skeptics laughed. Ha ha ha. Look who’s laughing now.

In the 60's they had unlimited budget and took a lot of risks. They basically landed in the moon manually.

I can't believe it: an informative, objective (if incomplete) video that does not boil down to SpaceX cheerleaders!

By the time Artemis gets our guys on the moon, they'll be able to order Chinese take-out when they get there!

12 launches for a moon shot. Wow. Makes you wonder how those little Apollo modules made it there and back several times in the sixties with no refuelling.

The oddball orbit was specifically chosen to accommodate the inadequacies of SLS and the capsule, rather than building a more capable rocket and a better capsule.

The easist thing to do like the international space station, roboticly docked, and launched.

One risk factor I am seeing here is the lone expedition mindset.
Columbus sailed with three ships for a reason.

Might be better to start building up more infrastructure before making jumps.

Like get an actual fuel reserve station in earth orbit capable of filling multiple ships.
And then getting a similar fuel station in lunar orbit. and also building out habitats in both orbits. then start getting ships up, and sending dedicated landers to park at the lunar orbit station.

So that when you are ready to start landing humans you have an extraction if anything goes amiss.

Also would be good to pre position enough habitat on the moon, to buy time if there was a problem. That guys could subsist long term until things got sorted out.

Getting one ship from Florida to the Moon's surface and back, would be an impressive feat, but very risky. And its not like we havent seen problems, or human losses before.

If safety is the primary concern, the logistics should reflect that, and not just give it lip service.

Well in the 60's cost was nowhere near as obnoxious as it is now, their budget was damn near unlimited then due to this, so they were very easily able to do so, as opposed to now with all the FAA regulations, and budgeting, they have the plans but congress is too busy playing marbles instead

Why doesn't NASA just launch 2 or 3 ships instead of 1, the second one should be a back up, while the main ship or ships launch last the other 1 or 2 could be launched ahead of time with extra resources just incase

What congress seems to be waiting on is China t9 get there first, 🤷🏿‍♂️🤷🏿‍♂️, that's the only reason, they did it decades ago with technology on par with a calculator or so they say, but for some reason today where we can lock our doors from our phones, it seems impossible for the US to set foot there again , something ain't right 🤨🤨

NASA = "Never A Straight Answer". 😉😉

the reason we have not returned to the moon is that none of the major aerospace megacorporations either can or are willing to do so. take boeing for example - enough said. for decades, boeing and the other big suppliers were more interested in failing and sucking in more money than succeeding and fulfilling their contracts, let alone get us to the moon. due to insider deals, those in government awarding those contracts were more interested in securing their personal wealth - through follow on careers with the megacorps or flat out quid pro quo - than they were in successful contracts or going to the moon. Space-X was not only the only contractor who fulfilled contracts, (doing so near budget and deadlines), they set new paradigms in space vehicles, severely lowered the cost per launch, increased expectation of payload size, and really do want us to go to the moon AND beyond...

SpaceX better put some pretty big landing legs on their moon lander. due to the SpaceX lander height and low gravity and so the landing is slow in the contact and stabilization. On the Moon, one doesn't want to kick up too much dust.. The SLS lancher has an additional problem, engines..ULA is running out of Russian gear.

Hey thanks a bunch , always so captivating your topics.

Pretty clickbaity title and 9 minutes of waffling about ...nothing really.

I don't understand why NASA thinks a plan that requires multiple launches of Starship and complex orbital refueling is even feasible.

We know that there has not been much to get on the moon since 1969. Walking on the moon just to prevent the Chinese from claiming the moon to be theirs?

Yeah they will find out apllo was not actually real. not possible its Nazi to Nasa lies

How many Billions have been wasted on the junk that's now setting unusable tied to ISS now?

The entire Artemis mission concept is wrong, there's not one thing you fix and it'll all just work, every part of the plan is wrong.

You could detail every other part of the mission design and highlight how fundamentally stupid they are but the root cause is NASA'S decision to make the Orion capsule too big and too heavy.

The SLS/Orion combination is functionally incapable at entering a low Luna orbit at the desirable inclination and returning.
This is where the entire Artimis mission failure begins, all the other bad decisions in the program are rooted in this fundamental failure of design but if it was changed in some way or even thrown out and a whole new design used, that would see all the other parts of the mission design thrown away too.

I strongly believe that engineers can basically do anything given enough time and money, so keep puring money into Artemis and keep pushing back the schedule and they could make it work and use it to put people on the moon.
But I also believe that I'd they stopped everything Artemis right now, threw all that work in the bin and started from scratch with a clean sheet design specifically designed to do sustainable repeatable manned landings on the moon they could get there quicker and cheaper than persisting with the current program.

Nice video. Thank you.

DISASTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can we ferry and assemble a solid state boosters into LEO and store them there? Can solid state booster work in a space?

It's like you do something crazy when you're a kid, then when you're an adult you look back and wonder how you managed to do that without killing yourself? Also, a cowboy will take risks that an engineer will decline. However, back then we had cowboy engineers.

We are decommissioning and bringing down the ISS and it will be replaced with Mr. Musk's new TSS. Space X has been sending parts on a regular schedule to low earth orbit to be assembled on site.

theres an obvious kerbal solution for SLS, it already has a docking connector, so launch a 2nd unmanned vehicle thats just a booster to connect to SLS

they are telling us we did not go to the moon, because 60 years later, we still can't do it.

Got to get the government out of our building stuff

They aren’t telling you that you misspelled Artemis as Artermis. 😉

This video was downright silly. Spacex is so far ahead of this narrative is not even funny. They LANDED!!!!!! an orbital stage the size of a 10 story building. They LANDED!!!!!! the booster. That means the cost of launching these devices in the future will rapidly approach just the cost of fuel. Am I and Elon the only people seeing this? Spacex is on the verge of being able to land on the moon NASA or no NASA just with the profits from lobbying Starlink V2 satellites to Orbit. They may land on the moon just for the fun of it. Maybe to sent a few hundred Tesla bots and start construction on the moon base. No life support needed!!!! Man, people have no vision!

Put the ISS in lunar orbit and use it as the gateway.

If Starship requires refueling in LEO just to make the trip to the Moon, then how is it supposed to get to Mars? This thing is starting to look like SpaceX's version of the Cybertruck.

The real reason is because they have never been on the moon 😢

We can GET there. Nobody really has a f*cking clue how to STAY there and for it to be for any reasonable purpose being there has to generate some sort of money so you need industry there to support economy/purpose otherwise...wtf are people going to do on the moon. Spin with their thumbs up their butt all day?

The 1960s moon landings are a James Cameron project.

You nailed it. V3 is the only way to the moon. THis is why the new tower is 30 to 40 meters taller. 10 refueling missions causes wear and tear on the ship, and what about getting back? Are they going to need another refueling on the way back? Cant rely on the header tank.
Thanks for the episode.
NOM

CIA - ' China has destroyed NASA Apollo Mission landing site, leaving no trace of American Astronaut on the Moon surface !!! '

Artermis Moon. Your Title is a half sentence. ArtERmis ? How is this not discovered and corrected ?

V3 carrying capacity will bring down the number of refuelings needed. They already know how to do precise orbital rendezvous. Just volume and fast pacing need to be mastered

No one will ever go to the moon 🌙 except for SpaceX StarShip. Elon will get to moon first. Elon is a mover and things get done. Unlike NASA.