Comment by nixon_why69
6 hours ago
I'm not being a hater, but we landed on the moon 55+ years ago and now we're doing a flyby with 35+ year-old engine tech. It's good that we're doing something but we should be doing better.
6 hours ago
I'm not being a hater, but we landed on the moon 55+ years ago and now we're doing a flyby with 35+ year-old engine tech. It's good that we're doing something but we should be doing better.
You’re not seeing better engines because there aren’t any. We are reaching the limits of physics.
That’s why we are working on alternatives like refueling in space or reusable ships.
The Artemis missions are testing things that we still have a lot of area to improve upon — materials (a huge one), international standards for things like docking ports, computing, radiation safety, and a lot more.
<snark>Did we really need to spend $90 billion and send people past the Moon to troubleshoot Bluetooth?</snark>[1]
Sharing because this seems to capture the je ne sais quoi that seems off about Artemis for me.
1. https://github.com/RICLAMER/Artemis_II_2026
NASA's Artemis II Live Views from Orion, 04 - Day 1-2 - 03-04-2026 - 1645-Transcript-EN.txt: "03/04/2026 - 18:57:27 (-3 TMZ) | 01:23:22:27 (Artemis Clock) "No joy seeing the device in the list of available devices when I attempt to re-pair it after doing the Bluetooth forget."
Artemis II doesn’t have any docking hardware since it won’t have anything to dock with. And Artemis in general is just using the IDSS used on the ISS and by Dragon and Starliner, nothing new being discovered or tested there.
Yeah, RS25/SSME still have a higher specific impulse than any boost stage engine in operation, past or present.
Also the heatshield is designed in a way that is cheaper to manufacture but less safe.
> but less safe
Depending on the outcome, that’s also a way to say less overengineered.
In 2-3 years we should expect a Starship mission to Moon, at a much more sensible scale, as in the amount of scientific gear and actual researchers delivered to the surface (and then back).
2 to 3 years is wildly optimistic. Of the 5 launches last year 3 were failures and it's not even close to be ready for humans yet.
Some people don’t understand the difference between testing and use. You can afford to test when your launches cost 1/100 of SLS launches instead of risking human lives. Artemis II was human rated with zero launches of its life support equipment, modeling failures of its heat shield, multiple power issues in its only predecessor flight in space. Starship will carry humans after hundreds of launches and landings.
1 reply →
There is literally not many things in life I hope so much for than starship success. Sounds strange perhaps but I just love space and I hope it succeeds.
Funnily I absolutely despise Musk at the same time for being absolute buffoon
We're days away from the SpaceX IPO that will make Musk even richer than he is now. I don't trust him with that money.
5 replies →
[flagged]