jinnantonix

Artemis 6 - Gateway US Habitat Module and Lunar Landing 2027 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 6a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle 2027 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 6 Crewed delivery of US Habitation Module, and lunar landing

No RO. It's not supported at v1.7.3.

Artemis 6 - Gateway US Habitat Module and Lunar Landing 2027 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 6a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle 2027 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 6 Crewed delivery of US Habitation Module, and lunar landing \

Yes it does. But Mars and the Moon are different beasts. Mars is a lot further away, so re-usability for any equipment that has been sent to Martian orbit has greater value. I am assuming the only role for the re-usable "Starhopper" craft is to ferry humans to/from the Martian surface, so minimal payload requirement. I envisage that any surface logistics would be delivered to the surface of Mars on an expendable lander, one way traffic only. This is because Mars has some atmosphere, so an efficient lander would comprise of a staged chutes and minimal propulsion on touchdown. Spring is at 0.5 and damper at maximum, exactly as you have suggested. In the video you see I forget to set RCS prior to touchdown, my bad. It may not be apparent in the video, but the floor of Shackleton Crater in the KSP model is very rough, with very few flat areas to land.

Artemis 6 - Gateway US Habitation Module and Lunar Landing 2027 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 6a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle 2027 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 6 Crewed delivery of US Habitation Module, and lunar landing

Artemis 6 - Gateway US Habitat Module and Lunar Landing 2027 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 6a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle 2027 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 6 Crewed delivery of US Habitation Module, and lunar landing

Artemis 5 - International Habitat Module and AEL Exploration Mission May 2026 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 5a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle Jul 2026 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 5 Crewed delivery of International Habitation Module and lunar landing This mission launches a Falcon Heavy with a new expendable Lunar Descent Vehicle for integration with the Advanced Exploration Vehicle and additional supplies to the Gateway. The SLS delivers the new International Habitat Module for the Lunar Orbital Platform. While the lunar exploration mission continues to evaluate resources in Shackleton Crater, the crew on the Gateway establish the habitat for future missions.

In mid 2025, the new re-usable Advanced Exploration Lander is launched on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy, and rendezvous with the LOP-G. Soon after NASA launches the ESPRIT module, a crew of 4 aboard an Orion. The crew completes another exploration mission in Shackleton Crater. determining the resources that are available there for ISRU.

Both have valid high level designs for large mass, low cost cargo delivery to LEO, LLO and even Mars. The trick is low cost fueling with methane, and re-usability of core stage. What Elon says and what he hypes in the media is nonsense. SpaceX on the other hand will continue to kick goals. The underlying design of BFR (like New Glenn) is workable as a commercial heavy lifter, and I have no doubt SpaceX and New Glenn will compete for the lions share of launch contracts from 2025 onward. But Starship is ridiculous. Who is going to pay for it? Interesting for mine is that Starhopper has the exact features (TWR, mass, aerodynamics) of a re-usable Mars surface to orbit lifter. The single Raptor would be replaced by variant quarter sized methanox engines, in a redundant quad configuration. The below craft is built from a Falcon second stage fuel tank and a few stock components. Tests fine from surface to SOI and back to surface with a fully propulsive landing at 75% thrust. I am sure there's more than a half dozen serious landing hazards in Shackleton Crater. That's' why they are sending Peregrine first. That's not my understanding. The perpetual shadows of the south pole is where the water (fuel) is at, along with other potential resources such as nitrogen compounds, CO, CO2, ammonia etc. - that's the reason to go there. Even shaded from the sun, crews would still be subject to cosmic radiation, hiding under regolith would be expensive to facilitate, perhaps dangerous too. Long term habitation makes no sense. Robotic vehicles with redundancy and the need for only occasional maintenance and refueling would be the more commercially viable solution. That does not necessarily mean that humans will stay. "We" could mean humans and our robotic proteges. Really? I think the mere mention of the word "nuclear" will have the loonies out picketing the launch pads.

@Geschosskopf there are certainly downsides to having a 3 stage lander. But it is necessary to get maximum payload to the lunar surface. I tested a re-usable SSTO and it was hopelessly inefficient in terms of payload ability. However the 3 stage craft is intended only to be a temporary solution until ISRU is established. I am certain that with fuel manufacture on the surface, a re-usable fuel tanker/lander is intended. By then (~ 2030), the BFR and New Glenn will be launching 60 ton payloads into TLI, so I expect multiple tankers for redundancy, and they will be substantial craft, weighing up to 100 tons fully fueled. According to NASA's proposed agenda there will be 6 LDVs left in Shackleton Crater. I don't think it will be too crowded, the crater is large. I suspect also that NASA may reduce the number of surface missions, just sufficient to establish the ISRU. I am not convinced there is a plan for a "main base". Why have a permanent habitat in a place where humans can only survive for a short period due to radiation exposure? It may be a controversial idea, but I believe the "Lunar Surface Asset" is a nuclear powered autonomous roving ISRU facility. Not a habitat. I believe the plan is to deploy multiple such facilities. Humans will visit only occasionally to service them and refuel. I suspect also that the facility will do more than generate hydrogen and oxygen for fuel - it may also be capable of making ammonia for use as stable long-term propellant for NERVA nuclear engines. I believe the future of space propulsion will be natural gas / methane for heavy lift from Earth and Mars, hydrogen/oxygen for Lunar lift, and uranium fueled nuclear fission and hydrogen and/or ammonia propellant for Earth/Moon orbital and deep space transfer. The robot arm isn't needed for KSP game-play so I didn't use it, although I could have. From what I understand it will be used for assisting the robotic modules to dock and undock - at least that's what it is used for on the ISS. I believe it is also intended to transfer surface samples to avoid contamination. The process is this (although I didn't need to use the robotic arm): The transit vehicle and resupply module detaches and moves away to a safe distance. The LTV detaches the Cygnus resupply modules, which uses it's own engines and thrusters to de-orbit. The LOP-G using thrusters reorients (spins on its axis) so the LTV and LDV ports are aligned The robotic arm is used to assist with docking the LTV to the LDV The LTV/LDV detaches and moves away to a safe distance The LOP-G reorients so the LAV and LDV ports are aligned The robotic arm is used to assist with docking the LDV/LTV to the LAV. The crew will also need to refuel the LAV and LTV during this process. The robotic arm is also used to detach future Cygnus resupply modules from the international habitat, and clear it from the LOP-G, therafter the Cygnus uses it's own engines and thrusters to de-orbit.

Artemis 5 - International Habitat Module and AEL Exploration Mission May 2026 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 5a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle Jul 2026 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 5 Crewed delivery of International Habitation Module and lunar landing This mission launches a Falcon Heavy with a new expendable Lunar Descent Vehicle for integration with the Advanced Exploration Vehicle and additional supplies to the Gateway. The SLS delivers the new International Habitat Module for the Lunar Orbital Platform. While the lunar exploration mission continues to evaluate resources in Shackleton Crater, the crew on the Gateway establish the habitat for future missions.

Artemis 5 - International Habitat Module and AEL Exploration Mission From Artemis: To the Moon and Beyond. May 2026 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 5a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle Jul 2026 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 5 Crewed delivery of International Habitation Module and lunar landing This mission launches a Falcon Heavy with a new expendable Lunar Descent Vehicle for integration with the Advanced Exploration Vehicle and additional supplies to the Gateway. The SLS delivers the new International Habitat Module for the Lunar Orbital Platform. While the lunar exploration mission continues to evaluate resources in Shackleton Crater, the crew on the Gateway establish the habitat for future missions.

Artemis 5 - International Habitat Module and AEL Exploration Mission May 2026 Falcon Heavy** Artemis 5a Uncrewed delivery of fuel resupply module and lunar descent vehicle Jul 2026 SLS Block 1B Crew Artemis 5 Crewed delivery of International Habitation Module and lunar landing This mission launches a Falcon Heavy with a new expendable Lunar Descent Vehicle for integration with the Advanced Exploration Vehicle and additional supplies to the Gateway. The SLS delivers the new International Habitat Module for the Lunar Orbital Platform. While the lunar exploration mission continues to evaluate resources in Shackleton Crater, the crew on the Gateway establish the habitat for future missions.

I need to believe that Artemis and the SLS will get off the ground, I have invested a lot in the videos. Lunar Orbital Platform Crewed Lunar Landing

Goes to show, you can't always believe wiki. Perhaps by "operational capability for the core elements" does not mean launch? Too cynical? Exactly. So who is going to fly humans to the moon if not NASA on the SLS?

The SLS only entered full development In August 2014, with initial planned launch in September 2018. This has slipped now to around June 2021, for the current schedule for a lunar landing in July 2024. Remember, this is a human rated craft to lunar orbit, it's not easy. SpaceX and Blue Origin are still working on human rating to suborbital flight.

Remember though that the SLS is just a stretched Space Shuttle Core tank, and Space Shuttle SRBs increased to 5 segment. It's not all new technology, it is closely derived from a human rated rocket. The Orion development is looking promising. I think SLS will launch on time (but I am an optimist). According to my estimated preliminary schedule, I count 9x SLS launches to cover the testing and crewed lunar landings, and 7x Falcon Heavy and/ or Delta IV Heavy launches over 7 years (2022 - 2029), or alternatively as many as 18x Falcon 9 or Vulcan launches. Or a combination of "Heavy" and "Light" launches, whatever is lowest cost and risk. I may be missing a few resupply missions (I am guessing at the proposed lunar surface payloads and life support) - these would involve launching a few Northrop Grumman Cygnus craft on a smaller launch vehicle. There is also the CPLS missions, and there will be at least one launch on a Vulcan in support of the program. All considered, the timescale seems quite feasible at the current rate of vehicle manufacture, although both SpaceX and ULA will be busy. Perhaps the Atlas V may get a new lease on life to keep the program on track.

Since the Artemis program seems to be rolling along, I have decided to model the program in Real Solar System - mission log Artemis - To the Moon and Beyond. Reviving this thread as the above comments are all still relevant and informative. Some of the big questions: Is the lunar landing site in Shacketon Crater, or nearby? Speculation? Will CPLS land a payload at the lunar south pole prior to human landing? To map the terrain with LIDAR, act as a beacon? How will NASA design the refueling systems for the first lunar landing if ESPRIT is delayed to Artemis 4? Which payloads will go on the SLS, and which will be delivered by commercial carriers? Big payloads on a single Falcon Heavy or Delta IV Heavy, or multiple smaller payloads on Falcon 9, Vulcan, Ariane6, etc. How soon (if ever) will the New Glenn and SpaceX Super Heavy (BFR) get human rating to replace the SLS. What is the "Lunar Surface Asset"? Human habitation module? Or ISRU facility?

Another Falcon Heavy launch on Artemis: To the Moon and Beyond.

I should say "partially re-usable". NASA did have a plan for a fully re-usable Advance Exploration Lander, but it has serious deficiencies in terms of payload to surface, and a few others problems, not the least - at 50 tons it is too heavy to launch on current commercial rockets, or even the SLS Block 2. My understanding is NASA plans for the Ascent Vehicle and Transit Vehicle to be re-usable, and use the more expensive but robust Space Shuttle Orbital Maneuvering Systems AJ10-190 which has a 15 hour service life. In this simulation I have assumed that NASA has developed a Mark 2 AJ10-190 model with a modified pressure chamber which is lighter and operates at half throttle, I use two in the LAV (where NASA expects to use one), because I cannot figure out how to redock the LAV unless the engines are offset. Not sure how NASA plans to to do it - regardless my solution works. My Lunar Descent Vehicle is as cheap as I can make it. Basically its a fuel tank with a pair of SuperDRACOs, no electronics other than a connection from the LAV through to the engine throttle (the craft lands at 20-30% throttle). There is a shaft down the centre to allow refueling lines to be manually connected to the LTV and fuel resupply tank. This space is also used for storage of lunar surface logistics and contingency supplies. Apparently that's NASA's plan for the re-usable AEL. They also intend to send with more fuel for the LAV and LTV, and I am assuming they would do this with a Northrop Grumman Cygnus (modified into a big hypergolic fuel tank), and this provides the navigation and communications capability with remote control to handle the docking at the LOP-G. The integrated craft fits nicely as a payload on the Falcon Heavy, although I am sure NASA is keeping open the option of using multiple smaller rockets (to keep the fixed price contract negotiation competitive). Artemis AEL Resupply Vehicle

Artemis Program in RSS. SSTU parts used in nearly all components. The Advanced Exploration Lander is modified from the prototype replacing the SuperDRACO engine with the SSTU AJ10-190 to allow multiple firing in the re-usable components.

In mid 2025, the new re-usable Advanced Exploration Lander is launched on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy, and rendezvous with the LOP-G. Soon after NASA launches the ESPRIT module, a crew of 4 aboard an Orion. The crew completes another exploration mission in Shackleton Crater. determining the resources that are available there for ISRU.

Of course, and all space craft control will be at least semi-automated or scripted. But the issue is, what to do if something goes wrong. Being on hand to press the red button, and then to have the hands and minds to work around the problem - best scenario from a risk mitigation viewpoint is when humans are at the location and directly observing and responding to the situation. That's the whole reason for a crewed mission.

As I understand it, the Cygnus (which this module is based on) consists of two basic components: the Pressurized Cargo Module (PCM) and the Service Module (SM). The SM includes hypergolic fuel tank, engines and electronics with no access internally from the PCM, so no ability for the astronaut to pass. The other reason for the double docking is that the Orion be used to dock the module manually, the Cygnus typically is berthed at the ISS using a robotic arm, which at this stage is not delivered to the LOP-G. After docking the Cygnus, the Orion decouples from the Cygnus, then docks again so the astronauts can access the MHM. The lack of fuel capacity is actually not a serious problem. It is resolved by being able to refuel from the Cygnus. The equipment delivered in the Cygnus includes fuel pumps which manually attach via hoses run through the MHM, LAV and LDV, and connected to ports on the top of the LVT. The LVT needs to be able to be refueled this way if it is to be reusable. The fuel pumps remain stowed on the MHM, and will act as redundant spares to the ESPRIT fuel pumps. It is a serious problem, but there is a simple answer. The Lunar Ascent Vehicle habitation module includes an airlock, with room for two EVA suits, and a grate in the floor where dust can accumulate and can be easily cleaned out. The astronauts maintain a protocol to ensure dust remains in the airlock, and never enters the living space. By isolating the dust to the airlock, the astronauts are only temporarily exposed. Also they could use 7 micron masks while in the airlock to minimise inhalation. Yes, it allows remote control from Earth, via the LOP-G and also direct from Lunar Ascent Vehicle auxiliary console. This is necessary to ensure safe docking of the craft with the LOP-G, and also with Lunar Ascent Vehicle in LLO. The LAV and LDV do not have remote control, and are manually piloted from the LAV main console. Big question: Is it possible to dock the lunar lander with control from Earth (this is never been done before)? If not then it should be possible to initially hold the lunar lander stationed near the LOP-G using occasional thruster bursts (controlled from Earth), and the Orion crew remote control dock the lander when they arrive at the LOP-G. I am sure there are many surprises still in store. e.g. the recent agreement that the first Peregrine Lander will launch on a new ULA Vulcan rocket. All indications up until last week was that it would launch on an Atlas V. The really interesting stuff is still just speculation. What resources will they find in Schackleton Crater? Water ice, frozen CO, CO2, nitrogen compounds? Will ISRU be possible? Will ISRU produce LH2 (needs expensive and heavy cryo equipment) or more stable methane or ammonia? How will the refueling be done, and where? How will fuel be refined, and how will it get to the LOP-G. Will future interplanetary missions use NERVA engines (with LH2, methane or ammonia, or a combination). Or is the future methane/LOX? - it is becoming a popular idea with the development of the Raptor and BE-4 engines. How much will re-usability feature in the architecture? Will commercial operators get there first, or will they have their technology contracted into NASA's plan?

Artemis Program in RSS. SSTU Merlin engines and tanks used in the SLS Block 1B, and SSTU lander pod, fuel tanks and SuperDRACO engines used in the Advanced Exploration Lander and transit vehicle. SSTU pods used for the logistics module and MHM. SSTU Orion capsule and service module.