Close Menu
    Weltraum

    NASA kündigt umfassende Überarbeitung des Artemis-Mondprogramms an: „Wir müssen zu den Grundlagen zurückkehren“


    NASA kündigt umfassende Überarbeitung des Artemis-Mondprogramms an: „Wir müssen zu den Grundlagen zurückkehren“

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nasa-artemis-moon-program-overhaul/

    View 28 Comments

    28 Kommentare

    1. KrimsunB on

      This might have been a good idea around 20 years ago.

      They launch in a couple of weeks.

    2. moritsunee on

      I fear for any manned launch in this mess. Maybe disaster is the goal though, seeing how much external pressure there is to maintain a US decline.

      Also I hope their vibe coded ejection system does not need to windows update when they need to use it.

    3. RumsfeldIsntDead on

      I’m 100% in favor of all this stuff getting delayed until after Trump

    4. SolomonBlack on

      And to think r/space told me my doubts about a permanent moon base were poppycock.

    5. sojuz151 on

      SLS was a major mistake, and the level of mismanagement and wasted money is staggering.

    7. sithelephant on

      It is remarkable that the goals – in the crudest terms, twentyish missions and x tons for $B are damn nearly identical for Apollo and Artemis, to within very uncomfortable margins.

      Assuming that starship doesn’t dramatically reduce prices and increase capabilities.

      I do wish that a significant fraction of NASAs budget had been in contracts offering $/kg to LEO and other targets.

      With a comparable fraction of the budget going on developing suitable hardware at that $/kg metric.

    11. AgreeableEmploy1884 on

      TL;DR

      Artemis III is rescoped to a LEO mission similar to Apollo 9 in 2027. Artemis III will dock with either Blue Moon or Starship in LEO.
      Artemis IV is the initial landing in 2028.
      EUS is cancelled, meaning block 1B and 2 are dead. Artemis IV+ will use a standardized upper stage.
      HLS acceleration work continues.

      I think this still has to pass by Congress so it’s not finalized.

    12. micahpmtn on

      How do we keep fucking up our space program? (Rhetorical question). NASA is the ultimate definition of the Peter Principle, on an order of magnitude that keeps getting bigger each generation. We’ve learned nothing.

    13. R-O-Stu on

      There seems to be some good ideas in here.
      Launching lunar landers in LEO to test functions (like Apollo 9) seems like it should have been the plan from the start.

      Also, the comment on ‚whichever lander is ready by 2028‘ seems to be a soft confirmation they’ll be more likely to take the Blue Moon option since lunar starship is nowhere even close to being ready

      Increased launch cadence for SLS launches should also prevent some of the teething issues we saw with getting Artemis I and now II launched.

      My only hope is that this actually pans out – we may find the gap between the vision and reality grows as time goes on. (Especially given the awful state the US in right now)

      Either way, I’ll remain primarily excited for Artemis II for now. Whatever the future holds, a launch of astronauts to the lunar vicinity in the here and now should hopefully create a lot if buzz!

    14. cpthornman on

      Yeah I think we all knew block 1b and 2 were never going to happen. At least they’re finally admitting how horribly limited this rocket is.

    15. Imaginary_Ganache_29 on

      The only way the plans that Issacman is announcing is possible if with a major funding increase for NASA. Unfortunately, NASA continues to have funding cut.

    17. NorcalGGMU on

      10 years to get to Mars seems optimistic if nasa is getting back to basics… jebus

    18. sanitarySteve on

      i am shocked! shocked i tell you! i never in a milion years could have guess the most controversial and bungled space program in my lifetime would get a „major overhaul“ weeks before launch. smh

    19. jch60 on

      This is what happens when Congress makes engineering decisions (take it or leave it) and NASA is forced to go along with it.

    20. Leakyboatlouie on

      Isaacman is prioritizing crew safety, as he should. The existing (or rather, former) plans for Artemis were simply not realistic.

    22. frankduxvandamme on

      Artemis III was never realistically going to land on the moon by 2028 because the landers are nowhere near ready.

      But now we’re expecting one or both to be ready for a low earth orbit docking maneuver in 2027 along with the lunar EVA suit which is to be tested as well? What magical timeline are we living in?

      Oh, and also there might now be two Artemis missions in 2028? That might be the single biggest BS statement ever to come out of this program.

      My prediction: Artemis II launches in July. It is mostly successful, but issues remain. Artemis III launches in 2029, but not before Trump threatens to pull funding and DRPs more of the staff.

    23. Vinidesigner on

      54 years waiting, and they are chicken outing. This way China will plant a flag there too.

    24. SailorRick on

      There was no mention of getting Boeing off of the cost-plus tit. Despite all of Boeing’s failures, they will make out like bandits with this new approach.

    26. Seanspeed on

      Do they even have the money/resources to just start adding in more test flights?

    27. M_Venez on

      Long story short they added an additional launch to rule out risks prior to the 2028 launch to the moon. However, I am a manager in this god forsaken industry and these are the most over-engineered assemblies that should be built in months, not years. You have these insane requirements causing paralysis by analysis. My point is, you got an additional launch which adds more scope to schedule which will undoubtedly push out the 2028 launch the way these programs work

    Leave A Reply