News The US space agency (Nasa) has formally outlined its $28bn (£22bn) plan to return to the Moon by 2024.

[Notebook]

Nasa outlines plan for first woman on Moon by 2024

The US space agency (Nasa) formally outlines its $28bn plan to return astronauts to the Moon by 2024.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Sbb1413]

It looks like NASA will do away with Lunar Gateway for Artemis 3, which will send first woman and next man (after Eugene Cernan) on the Moon in 2024. Artemis 4 and beyond will see human activities in Lunar Gateway.

NASA Publishes Artemis Plan to Land First Woman, Next Man on Moon in 2024 - NASA

Following a series of critical contract awards and hardware milestones, NASA has shared an update on its Artemis program, including the latest Phase 1 plans

www.nasa.gov

 

[jedidia]

Why do I still doubt Artemis will fly within 4 years?

 

[Sbb1413]

I know you are skeptic. However, if you compare Apollo with Artemis, you will realise that Artemis is not Apollo 2.0 (despite it is a twin sister of Apollo in mythology). Artemis is a cheaper, safer, and commercialised version of Apollo. I know the development cost of Artemis is astronomical, but since NASA will be reusing key parts of Artemis hardware (Orion capsule and lunar lander(s)), the flight cost will go to several hundred millions or lower.

The avionics of the Orion capsule is drastically improved compared to Apollo. The astronauts will no longer use 15-bit guidance computer when 64-bit computers are available. The 64-bit computer will use touch screen rather than heavy buttons, making the craft lighter. Therefore, NASA had to be ambitious about the program.

 

[Urwumpe]

The important difference to Apollo: Most components are already COTS. They don't need to be especially developed for this project.

Still, project management does not change much. More can be solved by software than before, but this does not mean less QA.

Generally, I am also skeptical that 2024 can be done. Too many components still need testing, the budget for those tasks is pretty low. But then, a lot of the work is already done, so it might be possible to solve such resource problems. If NASA can focus on their task and is not getting too much influence by politics, not later than 2026 could be realistic.

 

[dman]

Why do I still doubt Artemis will fly within 4 years?

NASA lays out $28 billion plan to return astronauts to the moon in 2024, page 2
What about flying a circumlunar around the moon flight using a modified Crew Dragon spacecraft launched by
Falcon Heavy booster

Space X had already done the engineering studies about using a Crew Dragon for lunar flights

While Musk has said did not want to man rate Falcon Heavy would probably not be difficult for NASA to sign off
considering FH has already flown several times with more coming soon

Saturn V which launched Apollo 8 had only been flown twice, with 2nd test flight a near disaster with 2 engines
in 2nd stage shutting down and 3rd stage failing to restart

If anything would preempt a possible Chinese flight , much as Apollo 8 was flown to prevent Soviets from beating US to moon in their ZOND project

 

[4throck]

Musk has said did not want to man rate Falcon Heavy

Yes, because Dragon is not that good for long duration flights. It's great for short LEO missions, but not for much else.
SpaceX's solution for BEO is Starship. And NASA has already selected for cargo delivery.

 

[Sbb1413]

NASA lays out $28 billion plan to return astronauts to the moon in 2024, page 2
What about flying a circumlunar around the moon flight using a modified Crew Dragon spacecraft launched by
Falcon Heavy booster

Space X had already done the engineering studies about using a Crew Dragon for lunar flights

While Musk has said did not want to man rate Falcon Heavy would probably not be difficult for NASA to sign off
considering FH has already flown several times with more coming soon

Saturn V which launched Apollo 8 had only been flown twice, with 2nd test flight a near disaster with 2 engines
in 2nd stage shutting down and 3rd stage failing to restart

If anything would preempt (sic) a possible Chinese flight , much as Apollo 8 was flown to prevent Soviets from beating US to moon in their ZOND project

Musk has said did not want to man rate Falcon Heavy

Yes, because Dragon is not that good for long duration flights. It's great for short LEO missions, but not for much else.

Falcon Heavy is too shakey to be reliable for human, see the maiden launch of it where the cameras near the launch pad vibrated a lot more than Falcon 9. This is why me and Elon Musk don't like a crewed mission onboard a shakey vehicle.

SpaceX's solution for BEO is Starship. And NASA has already selected for cargo delivery.

And also for moon landing, alongside Blue Origin and Dynetics.

 

[dman]

Musk has already considered using modified Crew Dragon for circumlunar flight Japanese billionaire was supposed to take flight around moon using Crew Dragon booster was supposed to be Starship

Trip around moon will take 6 1/2 - 7 days within capacity of Crew Dragon

As for "shaky" Falcon Heavy , Saturn V was notorious for vibrations, especially "pogo" where rocket vibrated on long axis The FH vibrations probably have to do with earliest flight when boosters still attached . Boosters are jettisoned after 2 minutes

 

[Sbb1413]

Well, what about reentry? I don't think Crew Dragon heat shield can withstand reentry from circumlunar trajectories. Look at the damages of the Apollo 12 heat shield wrought by the reentry after the trans-Earth insertion burn.

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, what about reentry? I don't think Crew Dragon heat shield can withstand reentry from circumlunar trajectories. Look at the damages of the Apollo 12 heat shield wrought by the reentry after the trans-Earth insertion burn.

AFAIR, the SpaceX Crew Dragon uses the same heatshield technology used for the Galileo probe. This can handle a lot of heat better than what was possible with Apollo technology.

AIAA Aerospace Research Central

 

[cannon_gray]

It could be not quite reliable, but still it is better to take it as start position and the launch-vihicle would be ready by 2020 cause SLS requires lots of resources to be spent. Really, how long is it already in the progress of development?

Falcon Heavy is too shakey to be reliable for human, see the maiden launch of it where the cameras near the launch pad vibrated a lot more than Falcon 9. This is why me and Elon Musk don't like a crewed mission onboard a shakey vehicle.

 

[Sunhillow]

Falcon Heavy is too shakey to be reliable for human, see the maiden launch of it where the cameras near the launch pad vibrated a lot more than Falcon 9.

The cameras near the launch pad are shaking due to acoustic (added: and air-flow) stimulation, not because the rocket itself is pogo dancing. FH is just much noisier than F9

 

[Sbb1413]

It could be not quite reliable, but still it is better to take it as start position and the launch-vihicle would be ready by 2020 cause SLS requires lots of resources to be spent. Really, how long is it already in the progress of development?

Well, after the maiden launch, the manufacturing cost of SLS will be lower in later flights due to the stabilisation of production of the vehicle. See Tim Dodd's blog for speculative conservative costs of SLS in later flights.

 

[N_Molson]

I wish them good luck and hope to live long enough to watch a live manned lunar landing. I'm only 37 so I still have some hope, despite the fact I've been waiting for 20 years already.