NASA Has A Problem With Artemis
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 06. 2024
- More problems arise for NASA's Orion capsule and Artemis 2 mission to the Moon...
Last Video: The Soviet Obsession With Venus Revealed
• The Soviet Obsession W...
►Become a member today: / @thespaceraceyt
►Support the channel by purchasing from our merch store: shop.theteslaspace.com/
► Join Our Discord Server: / discord
► Patreon: / theteslaspace
► X/Twitter: / thespaceraceyt
► Subscribe to our other channel, The Tesla Space: / theteslaspace
Mars Colonization News and Updates
• Mars Colonization News...
SpaceX News and Updates: • SpaceX News and Updates
The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!
► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslaspace.com
Business Email: sean@creatormill.com
#Spacex #Space #Mars - Věda a technologie
When don’t they have a problem with Artemis?
cuz it's the gov't. they get to make their own rules
This very good thanks
Just wait until Starship makes fifteen flights for one trip to the moon... in 2030. That's when we discover they needed to blow up a few more Starships to figure out the One More Problem.
@@The-KP With the Artemis campaign, NASA will kill the first woman and first person of color in space.
@@chrislyon7147 Christa McAuliffe and Ronald McNair were the first woman and black man killed while on journey to space, aboard the last ride of the Challenger, STS-51-L. Also the first Asian American died aboard that trip, Ellison Onizuka. A sad day.
You should reintroduce the introduction part you used earlier "And This is the space race" I miss it alot😅
For Boeing...start using the theme music from "Lost in space".
@@MrGchiasson "Danger, Will Robinson..."
That's the best line, I love that part of the movie every time@@ArmstrongandTumbler
The more G’s, the better!! They’ll reflect our minds, technology, and more!! G strings!! 👙 👙👙👙
Our brains look like gum!! 🧠 Juicier the better!!!🍏🍋🟩🫐🍍🍎🍌🍈🥥🍐🍉🍒🥝🍊🍇🍑🍋🍓🥭
Love everything until it loves you back!! Mosquitos too!!🦟 ❤
Each of us and each galaxy would represent a cell!! 🦠 We’re stars putting ourselves back together again!! Like Humpty Dumpty!! 🥚 🐓
The sky is blue because we’re meant to imagine it as a diamond!! The auroras then create the rest of the spectrum!! 🌈 💎
A purple sky would reflect the heart of the ocean!! An opened mind!! 🤯 The earth purring more!! Purrrrrple rain!!☔️ 🐈⬛ 🧶
Each thought to me is a solar flare, which shifts us into parallel worlds!! It’s hard here!!! I’m a peaceful dude, yet my life here has been super difficult!!🥹
Alpha Centauri represents a shift in consciousness!! Dog planet!! We’re riding the alpha waves!! Woof woof!!🐶 🐾 This is our world peace and enlightenment for the world and universe!! All is one!!😇🥳🥰🤩
We’re each a mini universe!!🌌
The 3 Body Problem represents our gut brain, 🍱 heart,❤️ and mind!! 🧠
The moon is a black hole!! 🕳️ A neutrino!! The planet is a colonized moon!!😇🌍👽 The sun is a shapeshifter!! 🌞
Are you and I sculpting together as a team or as individuals??? 🧑🎨 Using the moon as a tool!!! 🪨 The Sun is the eye!!👁️
I love the tool/word grinder!!!😮 We’d be Bumping and Grinding!!😂
The Earth is like a refrigerator and the atmospheric pressure is melting or defrosting the stars above, as if they’ve been in the freezer!! 🥶
It would also reflect us krystalyzing and becoming diamonds in the sky!! 💎 💎💎 Lucy becomes Maisie!! 🐒 👽
We could be stars from above aka heaven, melting everything from above, as well! Like a River Running Through It!!! 🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊 Gravitational waves or our thoughts raining down on us!! 🌧️
Unlocking a Secret Garden within and outside of us!!🤫 An Oasis!!!🏝️ 🏝️🏝️🏝️🏝️
Flowing!!! It helps a lot to flow!!!🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊 Letting go, so we can concentrate more and work on our project!! Heaven On Earth!!🌍 👼
Flowers!! 🌺 🌸 💐 and Flow-Ers!!🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊
I know energy is still impurrtant!! 😻
And of course imagination!!! Love!!!💗 🐶 🎾 🧶 🐈⬛
To create heaven On Earth, the galaxies collide!! 🌌 Twin flames connect!! 🔥 🔥 We’re creating quantum entanglement!! Ghost particles merging, becoming more like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man!!👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻
The universe is still the Earth!!⭐️🌍⭐️ We’re seeing it from the insides!! 🕵️ Like we’re inside a volcano 🌋 or wishing well!! The stars and galaxies are like coins!!🪙 The Goonies vibes!! 💀 We’re treasure!! Antarctica is treasure island!! 🐧🇦🇶 Unlocking antimatter!! 🐜 Booby and booty traps exposed!! Planet X!! Hubba Hubba!!🥰
Everything and everyone has been our teacher!!👩🏫
3D is like the murky bottom of a bong or volcano!!🌋 The fourth dimension, representing Mars is like the stem of the bong or the volcanos vent!! 👽 Experiencing higher dimensions is like the smoke or magma reaching our mouths 😋 and then circulating through our bodies!! We are the Earth!!🌍 👼
The road less traveled!!!🧳 🌹 Straight up!! 🎈 🎈🎈🎈🎈We’d be super condensed or extremely packed neutron stars!! Like Rigel!! Blueberries 🫐 Antioxidants!! Betelgeuse has evolved into a neutron star!! 🧊 🦖 🧊 🦕 🧊 🦣
Our long winding road, exploring different dimensions, finally straightening out!! I’m getting Pee Wee vibes!! Large Marge sent me!!🚴😂
We’re vaporized, as if we’ve been smoked or roasted!! 💨 The smoke representing again those compressed neutron stars climbing the higher dimensions of the universe like a chimney!! I’m Mary Poppins, y’all !! ☂️ 🧞♀️
It would also represent us as a comet traveling through a wormhole!! 💫
Who me, I’m just a worm!!🐛 🫖 Solving a labyrinth!! 🦉 Solving amaze!!! 🦋
Different energies tell a different story!! 📚
We’re storytellers!! Artists!!🧑🎨
We’re energy first!! 🐝
A 12 inch boner is like receiving a foot of snow!!⛄️ 😂 When powered by neutrons and a magnetar energy field, one is like the energizer bunny!!🐰 They’ll keep going and going and going!! 🐇 🐇🐇🐇🐇
If you’re destined to have more than one twin flame, you’re like Frogger, playing leap frog!! Lucy is a sucker for Lillies!! 🐸 🍀 🐸 🍀 🐸🍀🐸🍀🐸
G Force!!!🥳👙🥳👙🥳👙🥳👙🥳
Don't we have loads of data regarding heat shields at these speeds from the Apollo missions half a century ago??? Why do they keep re-inventing the wheel?
Do your home work.
beacuse they fake it from begining
Cold Hard Caaaaaash
We do, thats how we were able to fly the first mission without losing Orion. There were even similar issues with the heat shield on Apollo and none of them returned without some issue of concern. Dont forget Orion is a large craft then Apollo as well.
Because the wheel was faked back then
Every problem with Artemis is an advantage for China. When US congress deny funding for Artemis, is helping China to achieve the supremacy in space.
Exactly
LMAO, do you think this is just a funding problem? The chief of NASA even mess up common knowledge about the Moon.
So....i don't see a problem here...
Reminds me of the 8 billion USD we gave Raytheon to develop a new armored troop vehicle and only got some sketches back.
The Artemis heat shield issue cannot be overstated. When a fix is found, it may require an additional unmanned test flight before NASA is ready to fly astronauts.
I believe ethically it SHOULD. Whether they’ll value life over cost remains to be seen.
@@mostlyvoid.partiallystars No, it doesn't necessarily require another unmanned test flight. The Demo-2 Crew Dragon had similar heat shield abrasion problems and SpaceX thickened the area that abraded too much for Crew-1. It's possible that Lockheed Martin may be able to do the same as NASA and Lockheed Martin have been researching this extensively already.
@@steveaustin2686 they can always choose not to re-fly and probably will - I don’t dispute that. But ethically I believe it’s the wrong choice. What SpaceX did does not dissuade me of that, and I work in a closely linked industry to these. There are not humans on my rockets but I understand the systems engineering process and steps to mitigate risk and limitations to tolerable levels. That tolerance when humans are on the stack should, IMO, ethically, be much much smaller.
We were doing this routinely in the Sixties. Did we lose that know-how since then?
@@ronniemask5921 For some strange reason Nasa destroyed all that knowledge...
Awesome content and editing as well. I always wonder how long it takes you to make a great video like this
Once again, problems that were miraculously not evident, or significant with the original missions - more than 50 years ago - are prolonging the programme, such that it is years behind schedule. It was originally supposed to deliver man BACK to the moon eight years ago. Let that sink in.
Man what on earth are talking about!?
@@juhopuhakka2351 What are YOU talking about?
@@bidipbo Im trying to improve my digital foot print by imitating "good people".
💯💯💯💯💯💯
These same issues existed during the program. The larger capsule uses more advanced technology, rather than just cork and ablator, and are meant to survive far into the future. Test flights are also far more expensive and there's no deadline to meet.
If the capsule isn't man-rated, men don't fly to the moon. They'll fix it. What's slowing the program down is mostly bureaucracy and contractor work, which really only started a few years ago. All the Apollo infrastructure that was dismantled in the 70s and 80s needs to be rebuilt and reworked for modern techniques and new contractors. It's a massive headache. No such thing as an "insignificant" problem with this kind of thing, and these kinds of problems are generally fixed within a few months.
We didn't have that problem of the Apollo mission to heat shield held and held really well.
Why is this new tech even necessary?
Is possibile that the Apollo heat shield was not green😉
Reminds me of when I was working at Ford.
They were having major problems with the roll-up windows in next year's model.
A very angry man from HQ came out and listened to the explanation of the issue.
He then very deliberately asked "How long has Ford been building cars that had windows that go up and down and WHY are we changing the mechanism?"
Design reverted to the old design that week and the new model year rolled out on schedule.
Dear NASA;
If it's not broke, DON'T FIX IT.
saves costs, more $$$ for the snow addicted glue sniffing managers
10-4
Because Orion is expected to do more (with a MUCH higher re-entry speed) with a budget 10 times smaller. Would you like to go back to a 1960's higher tax rate to compensate? 😆
Love it, keep it coming
“Many of these rocks are filled with extremely precious materials..” Only of “filled” means *contains a very small proportion of extremely hard to extract minerals.*
Is all the content here as thin analysis as it is in this clip?
Asteroid mining isn’t for earth dwellers. That doesn’t make any economic sense. It’s for projects in earths orbit and beyond. You can get a lot of asteroids below the 9.4 km/s delta-v fee of earths gravity. The peak concentration of Main Belt Objects is around that, leaving a lot of objects being less costly to bring material from than from earths surface. Most Near Earth Objects are below that.
As for how hard it will be… we’ll just have to wait and see. We don’t actually know much about the composition, it’s all just speculation based on meteorites and only now some small amount of pebbles from the surface of two of them.
@@ParameterGrenze *How about this model: **_Mine the far side of the Moon._* Its low-but-present gravity will stabilize the mining and delivery machinery in a way known by gravity dwellers but essentially absent on asteroids. The lack of atmosphere and the low gravity are two less impediments to 'tossing' it to Earth. The basalt 'oceans' from ancient lava flow pulled toward the Earth on the near side mean the far side has more exposed mineral bearing rock, less digging. The refining would be _in situ_ thus less mass to accelerate toward Earth and the tailings remain on the Moon. The transit time is not important once the process is underway so the delta-v can be just enough to get the 'tossed' (launched) product captured by Earth's gravity. At the Earth end of the chain both asteroid mining and Moon mining face the same final delivery problem posed by the atmosphere. Perhaps tailings could be an ablative coating that is not available from asteroids because of _in situ_ refining difficulties in zero-G. 'Tossing' from the Moon can be simple leverage (or angular momentum as being researched by SpinLaunch) as opposed to the requirement of engines to provide delta-v from asteroids. (I didn't edit this post, please forgive spelling and grammar goofs, just trying to get make the case quickly over lunch.)
@@ParameterGrenze If they had started seriously making moves towards asteroid mining back in the 70's the first asteroids could have already been in Earth's orbit. They could never get anyone on board with the idea of unpowered capture because it would take so long and they could barely explain the concept to politicians let alone drum up public support. Now the economy isn't in a fit state to support to support anything but unpowered methods.
I'm genuinely captivated by the depth and brilliance of your content. It's truly remarkable, and words hardly do justice to its magnificence. However, if I may offer a humble suggestion, I believe enhancing the visual elements-graphics and effects-would complement the exceptional caliber of your work. The current visuals, while charming, might inadvertently undersell the sophistication and maturity of your content. Upgrading them could further elevate the immersive experience for your audience, aligning perfectly with the profound essence of your creations.
When mentioning measurements in imperial, in particular temperatures, please display the metric value on screen. Fahrenheit to celsius is a nasty formula for mental arithmatic.
There were similar issues with Apollo. The good is that NASA is identifying these issues and working them. That is how we get to the moon safety.
More good stuff. Thanks.
Part of the ULA, Boeing, Lockheed Martin group!😮 They are protect by their politicians!😊
Just FYI, ULA is a 50/50 joint venture between Boeing & Lockheed Martin. Your point is absolutely correct as well!
After shenanigans in competing for USAF/NRO contracts, Boeing and Lockheed Martin divested their medium space launch divisions into the new ULA company in 2006. While ULA is owned 50/50 by Boeing and Lockheed Martin, ULA is a separate company with its OWN managment.
Lockheed Martin makes the Orion capsule. Boeing is the lead contractor for SLS. Northrop Grumman does the SRB's and for the first 3 flights, the ULA Interim Cyrogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) is the second stage for SLS. Boeing's Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) is slated to replace the ICPS in the Artemis IV+ missions.
Are the cranes shown at 4.37 minutes at Port Canaveral? I just looked on Earth and can't seem to find them!
Why don't they use the tried and tested coating material that was use on the Apollo capsule...?
Dont you trust science?
one, they are. two, orion is bigger. three, orion is faster. look up a side by side comparison of the capsules before making these comments please
Could the damage all have been done during separation by the explosive rings?
Just started my internship at Axiom Space this week working with the future space suits 🔥🔥
Apollo, the Space Shuttle and our numerous Mars missions all developed successful heat shield solutions.
Nice try igor the bot.
@@juhopuhakka2351 XD, whatever.
Yeah sounds like it's cooling to fast causing embrittlement so when it makes contact with water it cracks. Possibly slowinh reentry would prevent cracking....
I'm starting to wonder again if SpaceX will land on the Moon before Artemis is ready.
That's why we all keep saying that Nasa should scrap the SLS system and just go with Starship!
@@ArmstrongandTumbler starship cant get back from lunar orbit, dragon capsule cannot survive reentry from lunar velocity, so they need to either upgrade dragon or starship, which will not happen soon, but maybe before nasa gets their shit together
First to land on the moon? Yes because that's the whole point of the HLS.
But now I'm wondering if SpaceX will just be ready to launch a solo moon mission before orion is ready, even if SpaceX does still need at least 3-4 years for that.
SpaceX needs ~12 missions to orbit and refueling with a 100t vehicle to fulfill their part of the mission.
At the moment they still have issues to open a door and fly straight or keep the tiles on the hull + everything is one-time use
how long do yout think they need to have a fueled starship in orbit?
@@benjaminmeusburger4254 late 2025
Great Video ! You can do several mining missions to the moon before you finish one mission to an asteroid ! Also two asteroids are orbiting Mars and would be great for a Fuel Depot for Oxygen ! tjl
Soon will be the Expanse - Earth vs Mars vs the Belters
- "Inyalowda, go to hell!"
At The Space Race, we always have a problem 😂
This is probably the dunning Kruger effect in action… BUT (and please tell me why I’m wrong)
As the material heats, the initial flakes would come off in separate spots, creating weak areas where heat concentrates. This causes more flakes to come off near these spots, leading to concave dips. Over time, this would make the surface increasingly uneven with a few main dips.
The wear was deeper than expected, but did not compromise the spacecraft. For the Apollo spacecraft, they were one-use, so if the heat shield mounting got a little damaged, no big deal as long as the system did the job. For Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner, they want the heat shield to take all the damage and leave the mounting hardware untouched, so that they just put a new heatshield on for the next flight. Crew Dragon had a similar heat shield wearing away more than expected for Demo-2. SpaceX increased the thickness for Crew-1. Lockheed Martin will likely do the same for Orion, once the research is done.
could it be heat shock caused by going from hot to cold when it goes in the sea
Also the issue with all the commodities needed to support all these launches, liquid oxygen, liquid hydrogen, hypergals, helium, solid rocket motors. Plus the huge number of engineers and technicians, machine shops, assembly facilities, specialized equipment and exotic materials. These are just a small portion of the areas that would need to be addressed. The race to space will be won by the one that can overcome and manage the logistics and infrastructure issues.
They should make the heat shield out of asbestos
Wouldn't a better and less costly solution be moving crew and stuff to the ISS or a commercial equivalent? Then use a commercial capsule that works to get back to Earth?
Crew Dragon and Starliner don't have the range or life support to go to the Moon or even just return from the Moon.
The ISS is in low Earth orbit (LEO) and is roughly 250 miles (400km) above the Earth. The Moon averages 238,900 miles (384,400km) from Earth. Also the ISS is in the wrong orbit than is used to go to the Moon, so it would take extra propellant to get to the ISS. The ISS also only has 2 IDA docking ports for cargo Dragon, Crew Dragon, Starliner, and Dream Chaser, so the ISS is too busy anyway.
"Pathetic earthlings, hurling your bodies out into the void, without the slightest inkling of who or what is out here"
Be terrified of what you will find this time on the moon.
why not show orion 's crack window ? it not problem or shy to show ?
The ablative material they used over 50 years ago on many Apollo capsules seemed to work well every time. I wonder why they can’t use that same material now. You would think that they would have even better materials after all these years. Maybe they should just go back to what worked before. Is this capsule so different that even the previous ablative materials would break off as well?
Imagine if we would have just kept going with the Apollo program and upgraded them as we went instead of abandoning it for decades. It reminds me of how many of the American shipyards went out of business, and now we don’t have the manpower and money to build all the ships we need.
Has anyone ever thought of just pulling the Apollo out of retirement instead of reinventing the wheel???
Yes, of course, but it was made from 1960’s era components that aren’t made anymore.
@@Scotto_desugotta be a blueprint somewhere.....
@@johndoepker7126 yeah, the point is that there are thousands of parts that there is no supplier for. This means that they'd have to convince / pay big bucks to manufacturers to make specialized ancient tech parts for which there is no market now. That would come at an eye-wattering premium. And, all of those parts would have to be space-certified and tested out the wazoo from scratch. It's much easier to design around proven available technology with an established supplier base.
@@johndoepker7126 The blueprints are all there. The problem is that in the sixties, engineers would have a basic design on paper, but a lot of the details and specific manufacturing was just in the heads of the workers in the factories.
Can we make an F1 engine according to specs? Sure. Will it be reliable by just building it from specs? No, it won't, because many details that were added while manufacturing, are not in the specs.
Much of SLS is based on using leftover shuttle hardware for cost saving. So yeah, it was considered.
When I see the capsule in the water I’m thinking “Nooooooo! Don’t open that door! No! Don’t open it!!”
They might need to implement a 2 stage heat shield with the first discarded early leaving the second to function from a less arduous entry period.
The wear was deeper than expected, but did not compromise the spacecraft. For the Apollo spacecraft, they were one-use, so if the heat shield mounting got a little damaged, no big deal as long as the system did the job. For Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner, they want the heat shield to take all the damage and leave the mounting hardware untouched, so that they just put a new heatshield on for the next flight. Crew Dragon had a similar heat shield wearing away more than expected for Demo-2. SpaceX increased the thickness for Crew-1. Lockheed Martin will likely do the same for Orion, once the research is done.
Heat shields have been a problem since we went to space
Getting to the moon is only a secondary consideration. Most important is to keep the lobbyists happy.
We really need to change the framing of the conversation tho. The real problem is that NASA has a tiny budget that could easily be expanded. We just make 0 noise about this for some reason.
That's half of the problem. The other half is corporate greed.
Yes! If we just have the same spirit that we had back in times of Apollo.
@@ronniemask5921 Wrong answer. Try again
You can thank Obama for NASA's tiny budget. Most of it was repurposed for obamacare. So thanks for nothing.
No. The problem is time after time NASA becomes a faux research organization that pisses away money without actually finishing anything.
Compare this his parachute method re-entry of NASA to that of rocket re-entry of SpaceX!!(?)
I don’t know anything but seems like with 7 returns from the Moon maybe 8 then tests that at least the heat shield would be easy for them…
It appears that NASA has far too many managers/executives that they are top heavy, many are aged and soon due for retirement ! But with costs rising and budgets blown they really need a company wide mission audit !
Nice video, but why not use NASA units?
So will the team get pay cuts or still get their yearly 3% raise?
How can you expect greatness in people when you think they are predisposed to to failure.
NASA core business is problem solving, and doing it beyond the norm.
Those astronauts chosen for artemis must be frustrated. They were chosen for this mission, but everything keep being delayed.
At least they aren’t gonna die yet.
Wouldn't it be easier to bring back saturn v?
I suspect that mining asteroids for their raw material will not be economically viable for many years to come. However I think that collected rocks from the moon or asteroids will sell well to institutions and enthusiasts as soon as we get them to earth.
Yea we could just give them petrified wood rocks to shut up.
Why cant they use the technology as of apollo?
Because the Apollo crap didn't work either.
Oh dear @@straydog02
When Congress cut the Apollo funding, the hundreds of thousands of people and hundreds of factories making the Apollo hardware moved on to other things. Lockheed Martin will likely end up doing what SpaceX did for the Crew Dragon heat shield issues, just thicken it in the areas where it abraded too much.
Asteroid mining is a great idea, but will not be practical unless we have deep space materials processing and manufacturing infrastructure in place. Basically the moon would need to become a massive industrial hub.
Wasn’t the heat shield issue completely solved in the Apollo program?
1 time use craft, not multi use, so orion is using a completely different technique for its headshield.
@@Yattayattaactually no orion still uses an ablative shield
Also to answer OP’s question - even Apollo was slower than this
@@thesilentpearl8575 The Apollo capsules were one use and the Orion is planned to be reused, so you can't use the exact same thing as Apollo. After the Demo-2 manned test flight, the Crew Dragon heat shield had similar issues of abrading too much that Orion has. SpaceX just thickened the heat shield in those areas, something that NASA and Lockheed Martin will likely do with Orion, after their research is done.
@@steveaustin2686 i guess? the thing about ablative heat shields is that they are usually replaced tho
@@thesilentpearl8575 It is not quite that easy, while Apollo did also use an ablative heat shield, Apollo was single use so the heat shield carrier could take part of the heating.
Apollo used a brazed steel honeycomb structure impregnated with phenolic epoxy resin for it's ablative substructure, which was both very heavy and very labor intensive to make.
Orion won't replace the substructure, just the ablative coating.
The substructure is also about 500kg lighter than on Apollo, so both being multi use and shedding 25-30% weight is quite the difference.
NASA certainly has a problem with Artemis - each of the 1st four launches cost $4.2Billion (plus: inflation, cost over-runs , etc) . SLS has proven its reliability, but costs are out of control !
NASA did a great job making the Apollo space capsule bigger and renaming it Orion. Outstanding job! Regarding expanding roads and docks, also good thinking. I am seeing planet size chunks of cash flowing into the big guys sons pocket. Nice work.
wassup wassup
Maybe it was a solar flare from sun that has access heat in outer atmosphere
How to fix NASA, fire the mummy bill Nelson
If they are going to hire an astronaut, get someone who has been to the ISS
🙏🏿🙏🏿
Dont get rid of fire Marshall Bill. 😆😆😆😆😆😆
“You can bet ya boots the other side of the moon is always in darkness “ 😂
Boy the NASA of today, really makes me wonder if the NASA off old really went to the moon. Especially with the constant issues NASA keeps having.
They had constant problems from 1961 to 1972.
@@gunternetzer9621 Agreed, but they got it done by the time past now by the NASA of today.
@@vc7393 The Apollo NASA had 3-4% of the US budget and no other big programs besides Apollo. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS at the same time as Apollo.
Apollo 1 was a pretty big problem during the Apollo program.
@@steveaustin2686 No argument with you there, however how is it that Elonusk can build a larger building for 3.8 Billion, and NASA builds something similar (Both to build their systems) and it costs NASA 18 Billion. I am not arguing the money differences from them and now. It's how they seem to waste the money they have.
Also, what the hell is wrong with Artemis, now you have to admit, this has become embarrassing, all of this tech of today, and still so many issues. I really wonder, if the guys from the sixties had it, how many times would we have been back to the moon, and I mean in the 2020's. I know there is insane politics within NASA and it hinders them immensely.
@@vc7393 What buildings are you comparing?
After the Apollo program reached the Moon before the Russians, most of the US lost interest in the Apollo program for other concerns. So Congress cut the funding.
NASA now is trying to run Artemis on a fraction of the budget while also running a big program in the ISS at the same time.
Again, NASA had many problems with Apollo, they just are fogotten in the rosy glow of history now.
"Again," is the key word. NASA is becoming a stubborn child. Just let X do all the work.
Thanks for the great episode.
NASA wouldn’t have problems if congress properly funded them…
I think arrogance is a big problem. Everybody thinks just because we did it way back in the 1960s, it would be a piece of cake. They’re finding out those engineers back in the 1960s are just as good as the ones now. And they had a lot more support back then from the government and the people.
NASA had 3-4% of the US budget in the Apollo program. Now NASA has less than 0.5% of the budget and is running the ISS already.
I would say they were far better.
Love the videos but pod? It’s called a capsule. Lol.
Right? That was irritating me too 😅
On todays episode of *Stop giving boeing contracts*
Realist be 10 years until manned moon landing and 25 years until Mars
7:42 I saw this one. The crew of the mining rig ends up with this cute pet alien that pops out of this dude’s chest and eats the rest of the crew. Space mining. What a fun prospect.
Why not use Apollo rocket 🚀 since it already been to moon 🌝🌝
What happens when we run out of fuel? Are we stranded on earth?
I have a hard time understanding why NASA has so much trouble with Orion heat shield. Didn’t they use heat shields on Apollo missions? 5:08 Shouldn’t they base their designs for the Orion capsule on that reliable technology instead of going for something entirely new and untested? In this “cost effective“ new space race to the Moon, shouldn’t NASA go for proven and effective methods and technologies instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?
Several reasons.
1. Funding isn't what it was during the apollo program, adjusted for inflation NASA had nearly 10x the budget at the height of the Apollo program.
2. Safety, the space race during the cold war saw some massive risk taking, numbers thrown around indicate a 50% chance of actually landing on the moon, and a survival rate of between 73% and 90% depending on sources. (Neil Armstrong said in an interview that he had a 90% chance of returning alive)
That is obviously unacceptable in todays climate, anything below 99% survival rate won't be launched.
3. Apollo was single use, Orion is reusable with refurbishment, public opinion could be expected to be negative if you throw away complex space hardware for no reason, it is also more expensive in the long run.
4. Nasa is aiming to set up a permanent solution, not a hand full of one off missions like Apollo was.
5. Nasa is conducting research into many more areas of space flight and stay, Nasa has 10% of the budget they had during the Apollo era, and they have 10% of the budget they had back then.
6. New capabilities, the Orion capsule will be able to do many things the old Apollo ones couldn't, ranging from different experiments, sample returns, extended stays and so on, it's a bit like asking why we have modern cars when you could drive a 1930 Ford.
@@Yattayattanot 10% about 40-50%
@@Yattayatta but that is exactly my point. NASA has but a fraction of the budget they had when they were running the Apollo program. Hence why they should look into revamping and making that “old Ford“ run again - with modern improvements to make it safer and reusable - instead of always going for new technologies. If India can land on the Moon on a small fraction of the budget of Artemis - mainly by keeping their systems simple yet effective - you have to wonder if NASA still has the right people with enough innovative and creative drive to effectively run these projects.
@@thesilentpearl8575 The Apollo NASA had 3-4% of the US budget and no other big programs besides Apollo. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS at the same time as Artemis.
@@davidst-cyr5277 When Congress cut the Apollo funding, the hundreds of thousands of people and hundreds of factories making the Apollo hardware moved on to other things. Redoing Apollo requires remaking all those factories with hardware that had a higher chance of failure than allowed today.
After the Demo-2 manned test flight, the Crew Dragon heat shield had similar issues of abrading too much that Orion has. SpaceX just thickened the heat shield in those areas, something that NASA and Lockheed Martin will likely do with Orion, after their research is done.
If sea levels are going to rise as much as NASA and NOAA believe, why would they need to dredge so much to expand their port facilities?
Not surprising since it’s build by Boeing.
How do they get the space rock back from space to earth?
In the capsule bringing the crew back to Earth.
@@steveaustin2686 I'm talking about when they are mining tons of material from an asteroid not just samples
@@ahuels67 Mining in space to bring the ore back to Earth isn't likely to be economical anytime soon. Any large scale mining for the foreseeable future would be for colonies off Earth. Colonies off Earth aren't happening anytime soon either.
Earth First, we will mine the other planets later. Strip mining prevents forest fires.
strip mining isnt used for finding diamonds anymore, we need to explore cave. Are you stuck in 1.16?
Its odd to me that after 60 years since apollo they havent evolved the design of the space capsul one bit
They have. It’s bigger and heavier now, which is partly the cause of the heat shield problem.
@@peterfireflylundvery well said. People don't seem to realize that the weight of the reentring object has a huge impact in the stress on the heat shield for fast reentries (like when coming back from moon or aerobraking in Mars)
The lunar orbit NASA has chosen is ridiculous.
The NRHO was chosen so that Gateway would need minimal propellant to stay in orbit. The low lunar orbits (LLO) are not stable, as the mass of the Moon is distributed unevenly with mass concentrations (masscons) clustered on the Earth facing side of the Moon.
Something has to support Orion for the longer missions after Artmemis III. It's planned to be a few days to the Moon, about a week on the surface and a few days back, which Orion can do on its own. Later missions will be 2 weeks to a month or more on the surface, so something has to support Orion for that long. Gateway is that something.
They should use flatearther AS the heatshield. Nobody would Miss them anyway
NASA just take ready-made solutions from the Apollo program from 60 years ago.🤔🤣😂🙃🤣
That's the problem - the technology is archaic and the requirement is very different and they are trying to do more with less money.
🙄 When Congress cut the Apollo funding, the hundreds of thousands of people and hundreds of factories making the Apollo hardware moved on to other things. Lockheed Martin will likely end up doing what SpaceX did for the Crew Dragon heat shield issues, just thicken it in the areas where it abraded too much.
@@gunternetzer9621 This is the one thing this certain croud can not wrap their head around, we just can not take 1/3 of nations budget for this now.
As we develop technology we are seemingly working at automating driving and vehicles in earth in an attempt to make transport safer for humans and save thousands of lives a year on earth - yet we seem to think that we shouldn’t be progressing our moon programs using unmanned technology - this would be the most sensible way to actually progress space technology - reverting to shuttles and having around in low earth orbit since Apollo is seemingly regressive - why not regular lunar missions using unmanned tech instead of adding the complication and billions in cost trying to mitigate risks for humans - its kinda dumb actually - i mean even thr space suits budgets are nearly a quarter a billion dollars - yet there was no problem with space suits on the lunar surface in the 1960s - there is a bunch of BS going on as usual
They should just rename it Columbia.
When I hear the head of NASA saying the far side of moon always in dark. I know they’re fucked😂😂😂
That’s why Biden has a teleprompter “pause “
oh no this Orion cracks thing sounds bad :(
After the Demo-2 manned test flight, the Crew Dragon heat shield had similar issues of abrading too much that Orion has. SpaceX just thickened the heat shield in those areas, something that NASA and Lockheed Martin will likely do with Orion after the research is done.
I still remember when NASA talked about the mobile launch pad after Artemis 1. The standout was the elevator doors (made to withstand the pressure and force from a rocket) was blown off its hinges. They jokingly said that it was pretty powerful 😏
I’m flummoxed Artemis has made it as far as it has. It’s fscking 1979 tech and hardware being grafted onto a light remix of 2010 era design. And that’s a generous assessment.
Yet the 1960-1972 tech worked.
@@christophercripps7639 absolutely true. And I’m not saying the design and engineering isn’t both valuable and useful. But I am saying that allegedly cost-saving in order to under-bid and win SLS on the basis of using old, remaining shuttle hardware is fine when there aren’t humans on top. But being that humans are about to be on that machine, we should be valuing quality a whole lot more than cost.
Then again, ‘mericuh, capitalism, yadda.
@@christophercripps7639 In the same way that wooden sailing ships once worked, but would be considered quite ridiculous for any serious work today...
Fahrenheit. LOL
Love this channel. You should show your face
It seems there was never a problem with the Apollo era heat shields....then why change the technology?
When Congress cut the Apollo funding, the hundreds of thousands of people and hundreds of factories making the Apollo hardware moved on to other things. Lockheed Martin will likely end up doing what SpaceX did for the Crew Dragon heat shield issues, just thicken it in the areas where it abraded too much.
Is the problem that yall stopped uploading podcasts to iheartradio with no explanation and then refuse to answer when we ask?
That was expected
We put people on the Moon fifty years ago with slide rules and the seat of our pants. Now with super computers we can’t do it at all.
I simply can't see asteroid mining ever making economic sense.
When there is a constant space presence, so that asteroid mining is cheaper than launching material from Earth. So a future project.
LOL. WHATS THE PROB???
And starliner got many problems
Why do they want to re-enter so fast? What’s the rush??
The speed returning from the Moon is MUCH higher than the speed returning from LEO. They have no choice as the only way to reduce speed before reentry would be using propellant which would greatly increase the size and cost of the spacecraft.
Its okay to keep blaming NASA for the delay since they are the major stakeholder but isn't the orion made by the ESA? I have not see one person raise doubt on them. Why is that? Is there a good reason?
No, Orion is made by Lockheed Martin. After the Demo-2 manned test flight, the Crew Dragon heat shield has similar issues of abrading too much that Orion has. SpaceX just thickened the heat shield in those areas, something that NASA and Lockheed Martin will likely do with Orion.
The ESA makes the European Service Module (ESM) to support Orion for the mission.
I watched Apollo missions when I was building Estes rockets in 8th grade & thought we should be on Mars by the time I was an adult. NASA and their ESG pipe dreams no longer interest me.
The problem is that Nasa is now run by politicians not engineers as it once was. This is how they lost two space shuttles.
Need to get rid of EPA oversight over Rocket programs. This is a primary need and it doesn't need to be held back. And, we need to get ahead of China and get back to the moon ASAP and get to MARS as quick as possible. Playing around with EPA and ESA, holds us down.
This should become a national security concern and the EPA should be told to mind its own business or be completely disbanded
@@RedRyan 🙄Then you end up like Russia, with a lake so radioactive, you can't stand on the shore without receiving a lethal dose.
The FAA vs SpaceX is not really a thing, except for clicks by some YT channels. After all, the FAA defended SpaceX in front of Congress in Jun 2021 over the unauthorized SN8 flight. The 'NASA delaying Starship until the SLS flies' was just as silly, since NASA needs BOTH Starship and SLS for Artemis.
SpaceX had approval for orbital launches of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy from Boca Chica since 2014. They could also fly sub-orbital tests of reusable spacecraft. SpaceX went through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to get that approval in 2014. Since SpaceX wanted to fly orbital flights with Starship, that has roughly 3 times the propellant as the Falcon Heavy, out of Boca Chica, a relook was in order. So the FAA review was to see about adding Starship to that existing approval, without having to go through another EIS.
@@steveaustin2686 thank you for the level-headedness and the good history lesson
@@steveaustin2686 I didn't say there was
always problem....oh. backside of the moon, nasa does not go....😂
I would like to see a new shuttle. Lessons learned could make something better.
How did they do it in 1969?
The Apollo NASA had 3-4% of the US budget and no other big programs besides Apollo. Currently, NASA has less than 0.5% of the US budget and is also running the ISS at the same time as Artemis.
@@steveaustin2686 You think technology might have advanced a little in half a century?
@@billsimpson604 🙄 The technology has advanced. The first landing is the Artemis III mission that plans to stay a week or so on the Moon. That is over HALF of ALL of Apollo landings COMBINED.
"It makes sense for the U.S. government to..."
So that means they won't.