Cuky

When I was a kid I knew Mir mostly from drawings in news. And it was beautiful. The day I read about it being de-orbited I was sad. Now, with couple of decades more under my belt and having seen pictures like that and videos from the outside and inside I can only say: what a mess. I mean it worked, it was first to be built in orbit and obviously it is function over looks. But damn, they could have made some different arrangements for all those antennae

I'd be surprised if that is to be the last delay

I am looking forward to renewing my interest in KSP

just now doing rehearsals for crew flight test.... and they got double the budget of what Spacex had received

1. I haven't read anything specific tbh, but my thought is that they would either be derived from ISS designs or will be fresh design incorporating lessons learned with ISS 2. I guess not, at least not close as much as ISS has too. ISS has to be boosted in large part due to drag from atmosphere that slows it down and lowers its orbit. 3. So far I haven't seen anything about them not going forward with Dragon XL. But I guess Starship will probably replace it

Sorry if this is double post, but I can't seem to find that anyone did post this clip

It is hilarious to see them boasting about being "ahead of schedule" when they are at least 6 years late

I love it how in few short years we went from "will they make the landing" to "how close to the center will the booster land"

If I remember correctly SpaceX was nearly ready for first launch, but the approval process started dragging out a lot so they decided to implement changes they had in pipeline whilst waiting for the approval. And since they haven't been sitting still all this time but actually working I'd say there was a lot of modifications and upgrades to be made and there's no point in stopping mid way.

SuperDraco are those 8 engines used for abort which were originally intended to be used for landing as well. Draco engines are all those RCS thrusters

I didn't explain myself well enough. I meant the Artemis II vehicle, not the Artemis II mission. Artemis I vehicle keeps popping up with problem after problem. I am not superstitious but am starting to think that it is cursed

I think now is maybe the time to scrap Artemis I and go straight to Artemis II... the amount of mishaps and bad luck with this vehicle is astonishing

I am not sure, but seems to me that they do spin primes before every static fire, at least with Booster 7 since they started testing. Maybe that is part of getting raptors ready to fire properly. Or maybe just a test they do before they test so that they don't blow up the whole thing when they go to fire it up for static test because of faulty fuel line or something.

Better have a lot of those, and them being successful, then to go do a first launch, hype it all up only for vehicle to even start it's engines. NASA, Boeing and co. are already doing that, let's have SpaceX at least do it properly. If it blows mid flight then there is some work to do, but at least get to "take off" part without having to abort because of some hardware issue that wasn't checked before.

Fair enough, teething problems for new hardware (wether reused old parts or brand new parts) are kinda expected. What isn't expected is for manufacturers and operator to be so far behind schedule due to problems occuring in testing, them not understanding the cause and how to fix them dven after they show up in further testing. And then to just wing it in a hope that they won't appear for first launch attempt. Going by what was reported as problems and their attempts to solve them I would hazard a bet that Boeing, Bechtel, NASA and others still. have no idea ehat exact problem they are having and how to solve them

Fair enough, it is a new vehicle. But they are 6 years behind original plans, they had tests that weren't completed because they had technical issues and they still proceed to attempt a launch where they continue to have those same technical issues. And I would agree with you that it is kinda gottagetthereitis if it wasn't the same thing with other Boeing developed hardware for NASA which was just a tiny bit late when problems were discovered and still haven't had a problem free flight with that craft as well. I think it is much much much deeper that simple rushing to get there. I think the main reason is that whatever happens program is so far in development that it won't be canceled before at least one or two flights. And contractors know that, they also know their contracts are safe because of political reasons so they are just milking the federal budget as much as they possibly can. And when opposition gets loud enough only then will they get their act together, actually work on solving the issues, launch and pat themselves on the back for a job well done

At this moment I have so little faith in Artemis program and contractors that make hardware for it that I sincerely doubt they will launch before 2023. If I am not mistaken first stage is made by Boeing which in last few years hasn't really proven itself with reliably building stuff. They are facing delays and are over budget in rockets, space crafts and airplanes. That doesn't give confidence in the company. And mobile launch platform is made by Bechtel, and from what experience I have on that company (they built a large part of highways here in Croatia) they also like to go over budget and face delays after delays. And guess what, both scrubbed launch attempts were due to equipment built and delivered by those two companies.

I would be hugely surprised if it doesn't end up with a scrub today

That price seems a bit steep doesn't it? I mean, they were talking about how much they will save per seat in comparison to launching astronauts on Soyuz, but if quick google search wasn't wrong it is "only" $15 million per seat saving. TBH, I expected Dragon ticket to be much cheaper.

Love how it burbs/farts on shut down. If that is the feature of Raptor engines that sound will probably get as famous as Titan II turbo pump spool up

@Scotiusdon't be like that. After all this wait we have a chance to see live (or on TV) a demonstration flight of a technology from late 70s and early 80s. It is also fitting that Boeing is behind it, since they still produce airliners from that era. SpaceX, Blue Origin and co. are all about pushing new technologies, being more efficient and actually making a profit. However stupid throwing absurd amounts of money on ancient tech may seem I think it is not thaaaaat bad of an idea to have some low(er) tech solutions on the line ready to be used. Shame that they are actually super expensive and take eternity to be built.

Can't wait for Blue Origin to use this clip as evidence that NASA made a mistake in choosing SpaceX for Moon landing missions claiming "they missed the whole darn thing"

Probably because it started to feel like "been there, done that" now with SpaceX. Falcon 9 became super reliable, both in terms of launch performance and landing success. Starlink has been launched so many times now that there is basically nothing new to see there. We can notice this thread as well getting pretty quiet lately. Only when there is coverage of crewed missions there seems to be some buzz around Spacex. They made it seem like routine and people look for interesting stuff elsewhere. My guess is once Starship/Heavy testing and flights resume there will be so much more noise around SpaceX.

See Boeing, when competent and/or not living of a tax payers wallet valve problems don't take 2 years to find and repair