SunlitZelkova

Incorrect, IMO. SLS is the primary source of delays. Artemis I was originally scheduled for November 2021 but was pushed back by a year due to delays. We might have been closer to Artemis II if it weren't for the delays between the rocket's inception circa 2011 and the completion of the first vehicle in 2021. I would bet $1000, that yes they were. It's well known NASA and SpaceX have had good communication with each other on HLS development progress. There is no evidence they did this, but if they did, then I believe SpaceX would inform NASA.

I like this proposal. My understanding of it is that SLS missions to the Moon would then wait for EUS. Perhaps they got some radiation readings they didn’t like during the multiple passes through the Van Allen belts with ICPS. Does Artemis II still use that profile? Or is it more direct because it’s just a flyby? Edit for clarity- waiting for EUS gives them time to realize SLS is unworkable and cancel it and then just use Dragon as a LEO taxi. Better than producing more ICPS and more cores that then need to be used to avoid wasting money, prolonging SLS’ service life.

What if we’re the ones in a fish tank, and fish control us? An inverse fish tank, to be exact. They exist in a fifth dimension above our 4D world, and are the masterminds behind everything in history and the designers of the laws of physics.

Let’s say there is a limited nuclear war. Military sites and major cities are hit by ICBMs, but bombers are called off mid-flight and only a few SLBMs are launched before a ceasefire is agreed upon. High tech factories were destroyed in the cities they were in, but rural fossil fuel industries remain intact. What is the best option for restoring power to the country during recovery? I was thinking about this in the shower and wondering if survivors of a nuclear war would ever be able to have hot showers again. Would coal be the most viable route for a quick recovery? I’ve heard China has mastered building them pretty quickly. Or would renewables like solar and wind make sense, if countries that have industries for producing such infrastructure escape the war unscathed?

Color me skeptical that jet engine maintenance can be translated to rocket engines. The stresses out on them in flight and the temperatures they operate at are completely different. What is your basis for suggesting this? I am also skeptical of this. Current Raptors that fly are not intended for reuse right now, so there would be no reason to run them at lower power.

I had a thought. I don’t think we will ever see the government built Artemis Base Camp habitat. Instead, after 3-4 missions, SLS will retired, because in a few years the holders of the purse will come around and see SLS as an interim system like how Shuttle was never meant as a permanent means of launching astronauts to the ISS. Artemis Base Camp will instead be outsourced to someone like Axiom or Gravitics, perhaps even i-Space (the Japanese company that wants to colonize the Moon), similar to how the ISS replacement will be an all commercial station. Artemis will become a completely privately run program, apart from NASA sending astronauts and funding experiments and research. By then (circa 2033) focus will then shift to funding technology and experiments for a crewed Mars mission, as international tensions will have heated up with China and there will be a perceived threat of them landing first. I don’t expect Starship to fly to Mars for a long time, at least not until a few Artemis missions are flown, because SpaceX will want data of how Starship behaves when landing on the Moon before trying to land on Mars. Data from landing on concrete pads on Earth or getting caught by chopsticks won’t contribute to the problem of landing on Mars without infrastructure, and landing on the Moon allows more tests to be carried out instead of waiting for every transfer window to launch to Mars. Also by this time, I would expect the 7 seat version of Crew Dragon to fly, for the transport to the ISS replacement station and LEO taxi to the waiting Starship HLS which will take more astronauts to the Moon than the initial Orion missions.

From a certain Pixar movie everyone loves. I did this on mobile, I hope it isn’t too big.

https://x.com/dsshhh114/status/1778708684044165449?s=46&t=Jd73T2beq0JLNtwTy1uR5A The new lunar communications relay sat, Queqiao-2, is in lunar orbit. Chang’e 6 will launch on May 3rd. It will attempt to bring back samples from the South Pole. It’s a shame there can’t be more cooperation. NASA would surely benefit from having access to some samples ahead of VIPER’s launch. Meanwhile, Shenzhou 18 will launch soon too, on April 25th- just a day after China’s space day. https://x.com/dsshhh114/status/1779861392167928280?s=46&t=Jd73T2beq0JLNtwTy1uR5A Curiously, while the crew “has been selected,” the names have not been announced. https://x.com/raz_liu/status/1775426422469013897?s=46&t=Jd73T2beq0JLNtwTy1uR5A And finally, the first flight of one of the various Chinese F9 “visual clones” inches closer. While ZQ-3 may look like F9, it is made of stainless steel and uses methalox.

Depends on your definition of using aircraft. Japanese scout planes dropped flares over Allied cruisers at night time during one of the Guadalcanal battles, and then the surface ships attacked. Counterpoint to that: during one of the Guadalcanal battles, Japanese and Allied ships got so close they were able to use their AA mounts against each other as well as the main guns. It was brutal, but neither side suffered total devastation of the lighter mounts.

True. Although I remember reading somewhere NASA currently has a requirement that MSR must happen before sending a crewed mission. On the other hand… The 1969 proposal had the Mars spacecraft having small probes attached that could take samples and bring them up to the ship to confirm whether there was life or not before landing. Meanwhile DRM 5.0, using Constellation equipment, assumed no MSR and thus took into account landing at somewhere akin to Jezero in order to have a good chance of finding life. ——— My 2 cents- I’m a bit of a two face when it comes to this. On the one hand, I think robotic MSR is necessary to have pristine samples and thus not risk contaminating the area, which astronauts might do. On the other hand, much like how the Soviet Luna sample return missions obviated the need for a Soviet crewed lunar landing and helped kill that program, MSR might have people asking questions about why we need to go to Mars. In which case I’d rather see a crewed mission and no MSR. Simply because landing people is cooler, not with any care for rather we have a responsibility to try and find life or not.

The idea of humanity reaching out into space and colonizing stars, living forever beyond the death of the sun, is a fantasy. It is the religious concept of humanity ascending into (the) heaven(s) and individuals having eternal life, a fantasy found in many humans, but dressed up in scientific lingo. The true fate of humanity, when we take a scientific look rather than philosophical or religious one, is to go extinct one day. The idea of humanity never ending dates to a time when we didn't even know extinct species existed. It relies on the idea of us being different than all of the animals that came before us, again a religious concept now popularized into secular discourse. In reality, we are simply animals. Even the most ardent space colonization supporters expect wars to continue to occur in space. It is all forms of conflict that will destroy the species. Culture is not evidence we can be saved. The Neanderthals made paintings too. A collapse will come eventually. I look forward to the Age of Corvidae and the Age of Rattus.

It's much more about looking for life rather than geology. Or areology.

It's actually okay, and happens from time to time. It was the Japanese officer he ends up saving.

The issue is that Artemis is currently eating up funding right now. A crewed mission would be much more expensive than a robotic one. On the other hand, I could see “Polaris 11” funded by Isaacman being the first crewed mission to Mars. But I highly doubt government space agencies will have much money to spare to partake in such a mission for quite awhile. All focus is on the Moon.

Dimension, universe, and reality are used interchangeably in sci-fi and it’s really annoying.