9 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

To be honest this launch leaves me cold. Yes, it might be as powerful as a Saturn V but nothing gets close to the drama of those Apollo launches back in the late 60s / early 70s.

Not only was it something that had never been seen before on that scale but having astronauts inside gave it a real edge.

I’ll never forget Christmas 1968 and the sight of Earth seen from the capsule in orbit around the moon. The first time Earth had been seen from such a remote place.

And the dramatic countdown voice made it unforgettable. Subsequent Apollo launches were no less spectacular.

In comparison this seems an anti-climax but perhaps not for younger people than this old git. I was 18 when Armstrong walked on the moon. The images are burnt into my memory.

We didn't have TV in RSA in 1968, so I remember lying in bed, listening to the radio. I seem to remember the worst thing was dreading that there would be some bug or virus brought back, which would infect Earth.

10 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

To be honest this launch leaves me cold. Yes, it might be as powerful as a Saturn V but nothing gets close to the drama of those Apollo launches back in the late 60s / early 70s.

 

It's a completly different scenario with different objectives. No iconic presidential speeches, not the same relative expenditure, not the plethora of companies across America involved and not the same media attention. 

My son wasn't even aware we were going back to the Moon untill I told him and my daughter wasn't either. I'd bet there's a lot of people that don't.

The objective now is different too. It's not just "land on the Moon" its create a long term presence on the Moon. That's where the excitement lies

This Artemis 1 launch is equivalent to Apollo 8. When space X drop "spaceship" vertical onto the Moon with the  Artemis 3 landing and astronauts are "lowered" out, people will be more excited and there will be more media attention and the people that say "what's an Artemis" will know precisely what an Artemis is an SLS system and a SpaceX Spaceship. Especially when high definition images are beamed back and ee see the Moon and astonats and vehicles in exquisite detail.

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by martin-w

2 minutes ago, martin-w said:

The objective now is different too. It's not just "land on the Moon" its create a long term presence on the Moon. That's were the excitement lies

I suppose the first “spade” to enter the surface of the moon will be Artemis’s Armstrong “one small step” moment. Broadcast live in glorious high def and colour.

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I suppose the first “spade” to enter the surface of the moon will be Artemis’s Armstrong “one small step” moment. Broadcast live in glorious high def and colour.

That in of itself is one of the missions main goals.  To take the existing communication methods from space and use those for real time high definition collaborative audio and video. So someday an astronaut with a camera and an engineer on earth can look at the same thing together in real time and collaborate on issues.  It's the equivalent of putting 100 lanes of traffic into 1 and improving quality without degrading performance... 

6 hours ago, martin-w said:

This Artemis 1 launch is equivalent to Apollo 8.

Apollo 8 was manned. This mission, if it ever launches, is going to be more like Apollo 6.

The primary goal for the SLS was to provide lots of engineering jobs in many congressional districts. Actual launches would be an unexpectedly pleasant accident.

Cheers!

2 hours ago, Luke said:

Apollo 8 was manned. This mission, if it ever launches, is going to be more like Apollo 6.

 

Huh... Apollo 6 orbited the Earth, that's it.

Artemis 1 travels to the Moon and orbits the Moon. Artemis 1 is a 38 day 1.3 million mile Moon orbiting mission. It will also be deploying cubesats.

No, it's not more like Apollo 6 it's nothing like Apollo 6. The only thing they have in common is "not manned". 

Apart from the squidgy bodies on board it's more like Apollo 8, as Artemis is actually reaching the Moon and orbiting... like Apollo 8 did.. Apart from the fact that Apollo 8 was only a 6 day mission. Compared with almost 38 days for Artemis. 

 

 

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by martin-w

Ignore the cynical brigade, Martin. I am looking forward to seeing where Artemis takes us.

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by Christopher Low

2 hours ago, martin-w said:

Huh... Apollo 6 orbited the Earth, that's it. No, it's not more like Apollo 6 it's nothing like Apollo 6. The only thing they have in common is "not manned".

While Apollo 4/6 and "just orbited the earth" they validated the concepts of in-space restart of the engines and successful re-entry to the Earth at lunar return velocities. That's the most demanding parts of the mission profile.

It's also instructive to compare SLS to Apollo 6 for another reason - if there is an unexpected issue with the booster as there was with Apollo 6 and they don't feel comfortable man-rating it without another launch, that's going to set the program back years because they can only launch one every two years or so, at $2 billion a pop. Which is amazing - we're reusing existing Space Shuttle tech that's been around for a half century and even now we can't get it working and launching reliably!

Mark my words - SLS will be America's version of the N1. Too complicated and unreliable, and ultimately canceled. You should read Lori Garver's thoughts on the subject - she was the Deputy Administrator of NASA and had little good to say about SLS a dozen years ago, and the passage of time has done nothing but prove her right.

I think there's a 50% chance Starship carries a human before SLS, and a 99% chance that the first humans to the Moon travel on something other than SLS.

Cheers!

14 hours ago, martin-w said:

It's not just "land on the Moon" its create a long term presence on the Moon. That's where the excitement lies

It's create a long term presence on the Moon first.

In the words of Neil deGrasse Tyson:

"I'm sure we'd all get excited if we landed there again and we would be really irritated if somebody else lands there again before we do."

4 hours ago, Luke said:

we're reusing existing Space Shuttle tech that's been around for a half century and even now we can't get it working and launching reliably!

My thoughts exactly.  The SLS is currently just a modified space shuttle main tank and engines and solid rocket boosters.

Yes, it's supposed to evolve into a brand new design over time, but the prognosis isn't looking good.

I just don't have much faith in NASA any more.  I want to, though.  I support NASA and all space missions.  I actually want us to spend more money on this.  I just think that we'd make better progress if SpaceX was the primary developer, with NASA providing support and infrastructure.

Dave

13 hours ago, Luke said:

While Apollo 4/6 and "just orbited the earth" they validated the concepts of in-space restart of the engines and successful re-entry to the Earth at lunar return velocities. That's the most demanding parts of the mission profile.

 

Artemis 1 is doing all of that and far more. Its actually traveling to the Moon and engaging in pretty complex orbital maneuvers.... thus more like Apollo 8. In fact, apart from the humans on board, its a far more ambitious mission than Apollo 8.

I should make it clear, I'm no fan of SLS. Its been plagued with issues, is non reusable and NASA just don't seem particularly competent these days.  The hydrogen leak issue is not new. Hydrogen leaks out of the tiniest gap. Hence why SpaceX switched away from H2 and now use CH4.

 

13 hours ago, Luke said:

 99% chance that the first humans to the Moon travel on something other than SLS

 

The plan... 

"The mission plan calls for a Super Heavy booster to launch a Starship HLS into an Earth orbit, where it will be refueled by multiple Starship tanker spacecraft before boosting itself into a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO). There, it will rendezvous with a crewed Orion spacecraft that will be launched from Earth by a NASA Space Launch System (SLS) launcher. A crew will transfer from Orion to HLS, which will descend to the lunar surface for a stay of several days which is to include five or more EVAs. It will then return the crew to Orion in NRHO."

I guess it's feasible for the present mission plan to be scrapped/reconfigured. Time is of the essence. Given that China have set their sights on the same Moon landing locations, ( not to mention Mars) we really are in another space race. 

 

Edited September 7, 20223 yr by martin-w

September 27th targeted for next attempted launch, space cadets.

Seals are repaired. How well remains to be seen.

I really hope this "Artemis" is beaten to the Moon and Mars by  SpaceX.

Equally likely is the Chinese will get there before.

9 minutes ago, ThrottleUp said:

I really hope this "Artemis" is beaten to the Moon and Mars by  SpaceX.

 

Well its a joint mission, so both Artemis and SpaceX "Spaceship" is required. There would have to be a completely new plan for that to happen.

10 minutes ago, ThrottleUp said:

I really hope this "Artemis" is beaten to the Moon

Why?