← Back to context

Comment by hgoel

12 hours ago

>Blue Moon is one of the two lander contractors. But pretty much everyone thinks Artemis is Starship HLS or bust.

That isn't my impression of NASA/government opinion. Starship HLS is seen as the eventual option, as is obvious from the testing campaign. It'll get there eventually and offer unprecedented capability, but it's very clearly several years out.

Blue's option was being seen as the faster option due to having a less risky critical path. The rocket was already orbital, fewer refueling flights were needed, the engines weren't pushing the limits of materials technology, no reusable heat shield to worry about.

Though, ultimately it's worth keeping in mind that the landers aren't actually the current bottleneck in the program. The space suits are in total development hell.

> Blue's option was being seen as the faster option due to having a less risky critical path

Source? (Not doubting, and it sounds vaguely familiar.)

> the landers aren't actually the current bottleneck in the program. The space suits are in total development hell

The neat thing about Artemis is it’s pushing so many boundaries that it’s reasonable to debate the actual bottlenecks. I still think launch is it, since even without spacesuits you can do robotic construction. (Hell, even without HLS you can ship nuclear power stations and solar panels and rovers.)

  • I was speaking mainly off my reading of the discussions on the internet in recent months, but I'm assuming the impression stems from this OIG report https://oig.nasa.gov/news/artemis-lander-program-faces-sched...

    It seems to point to rising costs on SpaceX's end, and in my reading, is very critical of them compared to BO.

    >The neat thing about Artemis is it’s pushing so many boundaries that it’s reasonable to debate the actual bottlenecks. I still think launch is it, since even without spacesuits you can do robotic construction

    I believe that suits are still important because you can't really do much with a crew there without them. There aren't even new EVA suits available. And, of course politically, it's going to be seen very poorly if they can't do a "One small step for a man..." moment.

  • > I still think launch is it, since even without spacesuits you can do robotic construction.

    The plans for Artemis are public, and they don't include any robotic construction before a manned landing.

    Neveemind that the idea of a moon base is fanciful, I think it's very unlikely to happen in anything resembling current world climate.

    • > plans for Artemis are public

      They also change every time a Congressional staffer sneezes. If the space suits don’t work, a pivot would be easier than having the space suits with no rocket to put them on.