This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Artemis

Hurry Up Artemis

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
NASAWatch
August 29, 2022
Filed under , , ,
Hurry Up Artemis
The Martian
NASAWatch

Keith’s note: Growing up in the 60s We heard that we’d be “on the Moon by 1970”. Done. Then we heard “Mars by 1981″”. That morphed to “Mars within the next 20 years”. Then “early to mid 2030s”. Now Bill Nelson says “late 2030s or 2040s.” We’re making negative progress NASA. Just sayin.’ Hurry up Artemis.

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

7 responses to “Hurry Up Artemis”

  1. Johnhouboltsmyspiritanimal says:
    0
    0

    Mars always just far enough over the next hill to not be any meaningful milestone for the current administration, president or workforce. A nebulous goal to seem like moving towards it while our feet are stuck in quicksand. I hope to live another 40 years and have low hopes a NASA meatball will be on any astronaut setting foot on the red planet before I die

  2. Nick K says:
    0
    0

    We already know that Artemis and its Orion capsule cannot land us on the Moon and certainly wont get us to Mars. Other serious new systems are needed for those trips. It requires more powerul booster, a moon lander and a nearly entirely new vehicle for Mars travel, landings and returns. The handwriting has been on the wall for a long time, NASAs manned space budget is not going up. Nor should it with the kind of waste weve seen on Artemis, Orion and SLS. I am hoping Musk, and StarShip will come tnru, otherwise no one is landing on tje Moon or Mars, at least not before the Chinese.

    • fcrary says:
      0
      0

      A more powerful booster is not necessary. Multiple launches with docking and refueling in orbit are a viable and superior alternative. SLS and the idea of a single, huge launch are just an obsession with doing things the way Apollo did them.

      • Christopher James Huff says:
        0
        0

        SLS isn’t even doing anything different, it’s just doing the multiple launches and assembly out in cislunar space, with Orion taking the majority of the available payload (leaving an unimpressive 10 t for co-manifested cargo, once Block 1B finally comes along) and making every launch involve risking a crew. Any sane plan would do the assembly in LEO and put the launched mass to vastly more effective use, but then, as you say, practically any medium-heavy launch vehicle could do the work.

        A more powerful booster could have advantages in lifting larger components to LEO, but SLS is actually very poorly suited to that.

  3. Dewey Vanderhoff says:
    0
    0

    The betting pool is open : Which will happen first ? A man walking on Mars , or the first commercial nuclear fusion reactor goes online ? Both feats have always been reckoned ten years out for several decades now…

  4. ed2291 says:
    0
    0

    Ideally, we should face some unpleasant truths:
    -SLS will either fail technically or fail because it is too expensive.
    -Congress will never grant Apollo era money for space exploration.

    I would like to see us make the best of a bad situation by:
    -completely abandoning SLS after the next technical failure or price failure.
    -Go with Space X as our best path forward.
    -Give up for now our plan of permanently inhabiting the moon and go with a goal of having a base inhabited by astronauts for several weeks at a time.
    -Follow Elon’s lead and plans for Mars.

    I was in 10th grade when we landed and walked on the moon. This January I will be 70 years old. I am very weary of NASA’s plans that we will really kick ass 10 – 20 years from now with plans that are never implemented. Certainly there is risk with SpaceX, but that is the best shot we have for real advancement.

Leave a Reply