Have you always be fascinated by space and its exploration?

@mina That's not true. They have a roadmap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#SLS_missions

It's not for showing that you can land on the moon. It's for showing that you can live there in a space station like you can in the ISS. It's also for research about the moon (we don't know so much).

Mars stays probably pure SciFi, as @sundogplanets recently recommended good books.

@mountdiscovery

@NatureMC @mina @sundogplanets @mountdiscovery

There's a lot we don't know about the moon and it's a good place for further observation and research of the universe, so going back makes some sense.

But Mars is still far far away...

@NatureMC

I didn't say, there wasn't a roadmap, I spoke of a "sensible roadmap".

However: I'd be happy to see the next steps, if they happen, though I'm afraid it's going to peter out over time.

Actually: A successor to the ISS would make sense, if we weren't in a situation always closer to a Kessler event.

@sundogplanets @mountdiscovery

Have you always be fascinated by space and its exploration?

Do you find stories about the Apollo program deeply inspiring?

Then you and me are on the same page.

So: Do also you find the knowledge that in the next few months there will be a crewed moon flyby just not interesting or inspiring at all?

I sincerely don't see what this is for, aside from filling the contractors' companies' pockets at the expense of actual research.

Is it my age or is this just pointless?

#Space #Moon #Artemis

@echopapa

Wouldn't it make more sense to send just probes, for a fraction of the cost?

@NatureMC @sundogplanets @mountdiscovery

@NatureMC

There is a huge difference between companies making money on a program and a program that is essentially made to funnel money into billionaire's pockets and certain congressional districts, whilst NASA's real science programs get defunded left and right.

I make a prophecy now: In our lifetime, there will be no permanent settlement on the moon and no human will set their foot on Mars, unless there is some game changing technology breakthrough which will *not* come from this program.

@NatureMC

There is a huge difference between companies making money on a program and a program that is essentially made to funnel money into billionaire's pockets and certain congressional districts, whilst NASA's real science programs get defunded left and right.

I make a prophecy now: In our lifetime, there will be no permanent settlement on the moon and no human will set their foot on Mars, unless there is some game changing technology breakthrough which will *not* come from this program.

@NatureMC @mina @sundogplanets @mountdiscovery

There's a lot we don't know about the moon and it's a good place for further observation and research of the universe, so going back makes some sense.

But Mars is still far far away...

Have you always be fascinated by space and its exploration?

Do you find stories about the Apollo program deeply inspiring?

Then you and me are on the same page.

So: Do also you find the knowledge that in the next few months there will be a crewed moon flyby just not interesting or inspiring at all?

I sincerely don't see what this is for, aside from filling the contractors' companies' pockets at the expense of actual research.

Is it my age or is this just pointless?

#Space #Moon #Artemis

@echopapa Yes, the aspect of watching the universe from the moon is an important one! Perhaps @knud can tell more about that?

@mina @mountdiscovery

Have you always be fascinated by space and its exploration?

Do you find stories about the Apollo program deeply inspiring?

Then you and me are on the same page.

So: Do also you find the knowledge that in the next few months there will be a crewed moon flyby just not interesting or inspiring at all?

I sincerely don't see what this is for, aside from filling the contractors' companies' pockets at the expense of actual research.

Is it my age or is this just pointless?

#Space #Moon #Artemis

@mina the flyby is a test flight for the rocket systems. Btw they did the same thing with the Apollo rocket.

The rocket is a NASA one which is owned by the US government.

@mina @NatureMC @sundogplanets @mountdiscovery

The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress...

look at the number of failed moon missions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_the_Moon

@mina May I give you the facts about the NASA budgets: https://ourplnt.com/budget-of-nasa-year-by-year/ (1958-2024). And please don't forget the budgets of ESA and CSA.

Economically, the earnings are mostly indirectly: with the first moon landing it was the "birth" of the modern computer industry and the hegemony of the US in these areas. We feel the consequences today in our dependence!
ESA + CSA are connected to this program also for more independance, even if this might sound contradictory.

@mina For your prophecy I linked to these 3 books ...

@mina
It should be unmanned. Between a core launcher that leaks and a heat shield that can't actually take the heat, this is a PR disaster waiting to happen.

@mina
The fundamental difference between Apollo and Artemis is: Apollo was literally impossible before it was done in 1969.
The rest of Apollo was replicating results, proving it was not just one lucky shot.

Artemis does what Apollo did, just with today's technology. Great. We know the computing power is available, we have powerful enough rockets.

IMHO Artemis just proves we can still write software good enough to land on the moon.
Which is honestly something I'd doubt, with AI slop around…

@syn_rst

I reckon, the main challenge today is the organization.

Back in the day, NASA did a great job, bringing all the talent and the industrial resources together to build something amazing.

With today's tech, it should be a piece of cake, but it still isn't.

@mina

because it's rocket science?

@syn_rst

@echopapa

Well, most rocket scientists nowadays work in finance.

@syn_rst