Important Artemis Questions Will Be Answered Today (Update)
Keith’s note: Last week Jim Bridenstine suggested that landing at the south pole of the Moon might not be in the cards for Artemis III. A few days later HEOMD AA Kathy Lueders did not give a clear answer when asked. The obvious questions will be “Will Artemis III land at the lunar south Pole? Will the Artemis III mission land before the end of 2024? When will the SLS Green Run Test happen?”
Oh yes there’s a NASA hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday: “Hearing to conduct oversight of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s budget and activities”
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 to land the first woman and the next man on the surface of the Moon in 2024.”
Keith’s update: The update issued today by NASA makes no mention of the Artemis III landing site. The press release that announced the report makes no mention of the lunar south pole all together. But Jim Bridenstine was rather blunt today saying that Artemis III will will land at the lunar south pole. Full stop. Apparently someone tweeted something about something from the LEAG meeting last week and someone tweeted something else and …
I asked a question that went roughly like this: “When Gateway was first announced lunar landings were still planned for 2028. Then last year things got moved up by 4 years to 2024. Yet after more than a year NASA is still not exactly sure what Gateway will or will not do or when these things will happen – especially with regard to the first human landing mission. “Sustainable” means different things to different people – to some it is funding to others it is engineering. The House seems to think it means funding. The more you delay Gateway, the more people are going to question why you even need it. When will you know exactly how Artemis III will be conducted?”
I got some meandering responses from Jim Bridenstine and Kathy Lueders which can be distilled down to “since NASA has chosen the private sector to do the whole 2024 lunar landing system thing NASA does not actually know how their astronauts will land on the Moon. Good? Bad? We’ll soon see.”
The House only gave NASA $600 million toward the Human Landing System. NASA needs $3.2 billion. Bridenstine is hopeful that there will be a CR (continuing resolution) soon followed by an omnibus appropriations bill either at the end of this year or in March 2021 and that he hopes/expects that the full $3.2 billion for the HLS will be in there. While ever the optimist, he also said “if Congress keeps delaying the funding we will go the the Moon at the earliest possible opportunity.”
Let me consult my Magic 8-Ball:
Q: Will Artemis III land at the lunar south Pole?
A: Outlook not so good.
Q: Will the Artemis III mission land before the end of 2024?
A: Very doubtful.
Q: When will the SLS Green Run Test happen?
A: Ask again later.
Shhh. That is supposed to be our little secret …
I heard a report on Morning Edition about Artemis Actually, about moon landing; I didn’t hear the program named) this morning that included a sound bit from the Administrator. If it’s secret, he’s very upfront about it. He also addressed the transition from SLS as something like when the private sector can provide services, we will use them.
Sounds like if SpaceX beats the SLS/Orion to the Moon than the program name gets transferred to it and SLS/Orion go to the scrap heap.
pessimists to the left, cynics to the right,
here I am, stuck in the middle (with no hope) …
in the meantime, what’s SpaceX up to ? (tomorrow would be a good time for an update from Elon.)
Weather has slow them. They are waiting for the winds from the Tropical Storm hitting Texas to decrease before blowing the SN7.1 tank. Then they will fly SN8 to 20 kilometers. Word has it they have also started work on the Super Heavy number 1 for the first flight test next month.
The rumour is that the first Super Heavy will be stunted with only 2 or 3 Raptors. Just good enough for a few hops and maybe a 12km high test flight to test out the landing gear. All without a Starship on top.
Yes, one step at a time. That is one huge advantage of a reusable VTVL system. And using steel means its easy and quick to build more test articles.
A few months ago I came across an old pitch by Boeing for a scheme to reuse the S-IC (landing vertically, engine up, in the ocean, compressing a column of air to cushion impact). They made almost exact same arguments as Musk does for reuse. What might have been…
Well, Elon started the “rumor” so I’d give it some weight 😉
They’ve already done a number of pressure tests on 7.1 including cryogenic… lost track of how many, but 3 or 4 I’d think. Seems unlikely that high winds are delaying the pop. Probably test objectives changed or they’re having issues with their procedures or equipment.
Probably a combination. One of the tests is to put the engine puck on it and simulate the stress of three Raptors firing at full throttle using a hydraulic ram. One thing is sure, they are designing it to be robust. Maybe they are having trouble getting it to blow up.
Starship SN-08 has gone to the pad; 3 engines, nose section, fins, etc. Flight to 50,000 feet after cryotest and 2 static fires. SN’s 9-11 and Super Heavy #1 under construction
https://twitter.com/elonmus…
https://twitter.com/elonmus…
If Artemis ever lands on the moon SPACEX will be there to greet them.
Naw…SpaceX will meet them in lunar orbit, having taken off from their (SpaceX’s) base on the Moon, and will then fly the NASA astronauts down to the surface base.
So they didn’t give a date for the Green Run? Last I heard it was in October.
Think Sally and Beta causes some schedule slippage.
NO … storms are to be expected in the panhandle, and the schedule should (ok, “should”) accommodate for expected risks. Now, if the storms cause unexpectedly high damage, that’s a different thing.
I do have a concern about this $10 billion piece of equipment sitting in the elements for 6 months.
Considering the corrosive nature of the salt air at KSC, it really ought to be capable of sitting in the (non-salt air) elements for many months.
But than you wouldn’t have the storms to use as an excuse for the schedule slipping…
I’m pretty sure that this is getting it the wrong way around. Surely NASA should be saying to the HLS competitors: “We’re landing at the lunar south pole. Give us something that can do it and make it as cost effective as possible.” They shouldn’t say: “Build whatever you can at the lowest cost possible and we’ll see what we can do with it.” That’s what killed VSE.
Looks like SpaceX will try to blow the SN7.1 tank again tonight having failed to do so in the last test.
https://www.teslarati.com/s…
SpaceX Starship test tank ready for a second shot at destruction
By Eric Ralph
Posted on September 22, 2020
“Theoretically, the 304L-esque alloy SpaceX has decided to replace 301 steel with should make Starships less brittle under cryogenic temperatures, meaning that a breached tank should spring leaks instead of violently bursting. That characteristic would be a boon for vehicle safety and survivability relative to almost any other rocket. With Starship test tank SN7, SpaceX has already demonstrated that its custom steel alloy will gently leak before bursting.
Simultaneously, SN7 is believed to have broken SpaceX’s internal Starship tank pressure record despite having multiple flawed welds, meaning that SN7.1 could reach even higher pressures if SpaceX has since improved build quality.”