>>16894497
Is there going to be anyone on this piece of shit?

>>16894498
a woman, a black man, a canadian and a caucasian american white male

>>16894500
>canadian
That’s a jeet right?
>white man
Of course. Someone reliable must be on board in case shit goes sideways.

artemis i was suppose to be that

>>16894497
It will be great to see for sure, though I will not believe it will actually happen until it does happen, NASA can and will find a way to bungle it up a stray cloud, astronaut forgot his teddy bear, joggers loose on the launchpad who knows.

>>16894497
Sounds like a waste of money

>>16894638
your momma is a waste of money. too expensive for the lousy sex she provides

File: Flanderization.jpg (143.4 KB)

143.4 KB JPG

>>16894497
If a handful of college students started wearing bell bottoms and butterfly collars, I wouldn't give a shit. Why should I care that a some human ballast is doing a poor recreation of an event from the 1960s?

why does nobody care about moon landings in 2026? it's gonna happen with trump president you know
this in the 60s attracted billions of people to their tvs

>>16895103
Because it's been done before

>>16895149
it's been done with all whites before.
this time, a woman, a black man, and a canadian are on board

>>16894497
Thank God for Space X and Elon Musk or we would never be going back to the Moon at all. NASA should be disbanded and all their money and equipment and launch pads given to Elon, since he's such a gamer Chad super genius.

kek

>>16894497
The Artemis programme as of now.

>Artemis I
>Launch: 16th November 2022
>Mission: First launch, deep space flight of Orion and unmanned test of European Service Module as well as first atmospheric aerobrake and re-entry from Lunar return.
>Result: Orion entered distant retrograde orbit of the Moon and returned to Earth with Crew Capsule splashing down safely in the Pacific.

>Artemis II
>Launch: February 2026
>Mission: First Astronaut mission. Test deep space life support and crew operations. Will perform a Lunar flyby on a free return trajectory and return to Earth.

>Artemis III
>Launch: Mid-2027
>Mission: Land at the Lunar South Pole. First human Lunar landing since Apollo 17. First manned test of Lunar Lander. Begin South Pole exploration and science experiments.

>Artemis IV
>Launch: 2028
>Mission: Deliver the first module (I-Hab) of the Lunar Gateway station to NRHO around the Moon and perform human landing.

>Artemis V
>Launch: 2030
>Mission: Lunar Gateway expansion (ESPIRIT) and Lunar landing

>Artemis VI-X
>Launch: 2030s
>Mission: Sustained human Lunar operations and construction of surface infrastructure.

File: Space Elevator.jpg (175 KB)

175 KB JPG

>>16895171
Has Musk change him mind about the Moon? In the past he said going to the Moon was stupid and it didn't really get you anything. I know SpaceX got the contract for the lander but Musk himself doesn't seem to like it at all. Going to guess the lunar contract is to get some NASA funded experience with landing systems.

>>16896094
SpaceX's Starship HLS is due to be used for Artemis 3&4 but Blue Origin has Artemis 5 with Blue Moon. Artemis 6 onwards have yet to have specified which lander will be used so it can be assumed the two companies will compete there pending their performance on Lunar operations. Before only SpaceX had the contract with Starship but NASA opened up the contract again because they were uncertain that SpaceX could deliver and wanted a backup option if they didn't. Musk didn't like not being the sole provider any more but given what Artemis is and what he hope to do one day on Mars he will want to be involved regardless I'm sure.

>>16896094
formely, he thought colonizing the moon was impossible and suggested colonizing mars instead
today, he thinks both colonizing the moon and mars is impossible, so he suggests sending satellites to lower orbit instead

File: Captura de pantalla de 2026-01-22 03-46-03.png (94.4 KB)

94.4 KB PNG

uh oh
it seems even if trump takes an unconstitutional 3rd term and stays in the white house for 4 more years, artemis III still won't happen with him as a president, even though china will

>>16896090
No chance Starship is ready for human landing by 2027, maybe unmanned.

>>16896430
They have about a year and a half to hit the planned launch window. They are right now getting into the initial stages of testing in orbit refuelling which is probably the biggest obstacle in getting it there. After they are able to fully fuel a Starship in space the next logical step would be sending it somewhere so I think that the natural progression from there would be firing HLS prototypes at the Moon. Thus far SpaceX have been launching a Starship prototype roughly every 3 months so a year and a half would mean they have 6 prototypes or maybe 7 including the one they are working towards launching soon to get something serviceable together in time, assuming they keep the same tempo going. Again the biggest obstacle is the refuelling as it means launching about a dozen Starships in quick succession while they have thus far only managed one at a time. At a guess I would say they manage to get refuelling working in about a year and then have another 6 months of HLS tests. Still seems a bit tight for something meant to carry people but they might have something working at least.

>>16896444
for a manned mission it isn't enough to make something that works. it needs to be tested dozens of times before

>>16896424
Don't want to get too deep into politics but Trump and TDS should end in January 2029, if not earlier. Partisan political posturing will of course continue but even with Musk involved with SpaceX, there's not much reason for the next president, even if a Democrat, to engage in Biden type interference.

>>16896449
Orion itself got 1 unmanned test before they are to start putting people on it and the same goes for the SLS under it. Strapping yourself into a giant bomb and blasting yourself into orbit with it that has had exactly 1 flight before this point is already pretty brave.

File: 18299289029.jpg (902.3 KB)

902.3 KB JPG

>>16894638
Putting a theme park on the moon justifies all the expense and effort alone.

>>16896444
how can they test orbital refuelling when they havent been to orbit? and then there are at missing several other major systems to become a space lander.

>>16894497
>it will go extremely near it, only kilometers away its surface
No, not extremely near. The closest Artemis II will get to the Moon is 6513km. The Moon's diameter is 3474km.
To to crew, it will look like roughly the size of a basketball from 6cm (1.5 feet) away.

>>16896900
sorry, 45 cm away

>>16896899
They can go to orbit. They have successfully tested everything they need to get to orbit and back. Full duration engine burn, relight in space and surviving re-entry. They don't actually do it yet because if something goes wrong and it's in a circular orbit around Earth you then have 100 tons of spaceship orbiting Earth for years until eventually the upper wisps of the atmosphere slow it enough for it to fall out of the sky and crash basically anywhere on Earth.

>>16896905
I will give you the orbit but then you still have to build in 1,5 years: orbital refuel, life support system , interior(habitation) , docking system for the orion capsule and have that tested , certified and trusted by nasa. Is there anything going on with those systems?

>>16896913
The next prototype preparing for launch has refuelling hardware on it and there is also an HLS prototype being worked on including life support, interior etc though you hear less about it. Don't know anything about the docking system.

>>16896915
Are they gonna launch 2 starship next time and do it then?

>>16896923
Could be. They are preparing multiple launch pads at various locations.

>>16896925
they could also be 2 years behind schedule, wasted 2 billion in taxdollars and doing a panic ipo to get funds for a pipedream that's not going to work. but what do I know

>>16896925
Given the odds of a weather or other site specific delay, having multiple sites is going to be a bit of a headache as it increases the odds that one or the other will cause a scrub. Guess it doesn't matter in the long run since in production use, the tankers will be heading to an already orbiting Starship instead of trying to coordinate two launches in the same window.

>>16896930
The differing weather at different launch sites is a good point. Trying to get a green light at potentially 15 different points on Earth at the same time could be a nightmare. I suppose the slightly more long term solution for that would be a fuel depot in orbit that you can fill up as you get clear weather on the ground and then have a Starship dock with it when you want to go somewhere.

File: f053adb3c667925cc4605376ed2b0655.jpg (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB JPG

>>16896488
I’ll be staying at the moon hotel primarily for therapeutic reasons. I need to decompress my spine in zero gravity.

>>16894497
Probably not worth it.
Better to get good enough at robots so we can begin practice doing construction remotely.
Then we practice with people stuff.

Fucking boomers warped the public's conception of progress in space with space race 1.0
Sending people this time is 100% NASA just playing to that old fucked conception in order to continue getting funding approval from the public.
Maybe there is a hidden goal of claiming/occupying/human-shielding that we are sabre rattling towards but the nostalgia pander is obvious.

they entered quarantine

>>16894497
The complete lack of public hype is worrying.

>>16897942
we could open a few daycare centers

>>16899203
most normies fall somewhere between not being aware that we haven't left LEO since apollo, thinking that its a waste of money and we should solve our problems on urf first, to straight up thinking space is fake.
most of them will probably also not notice until it shows up on their xitter feed or on tictoc.

what would happen if artemis II explodes and all 4 of the astronauts die? would the moon exploration US program be over? would the chinese stop too or would they try a landing nonetheless?

>>16896488
Yeah ideally with blackjack and hookers
In fact forget about the theme park

>>16894742
Your mother on the other hand is an absolute steal

>>16895149
>he doesn't know

they are building space station on the moon, but it will actually orbit the earth, not the moon. i would post the gif but too big

File: Moon nuclear explosion.jpg (22.5 KB)

22.5 KB JPG

>>16899581
Wild guess: NASA would be stripped of most of its operations, being reduced to a regulatory agency similar to the FAA. Some of its programs would shift to other agencies but anything that involves manned space flight would be turned over to the private sector. No partnerships, only regulatory oversight. Coordination with other space agencies would be limited to setting standards for the purchase of services that US commercial operators don't provide.

>>16896926
This. Anyone who thinks Starship will ever do anything but dispense massive amounts of e-waste in LEO is a retard.

It barely survives suborbital reentry...

>>16899299
Humans on the moon IS completely useless, just send a rover and a new orbiter with modern sensors.

>>16899581
It would be over.

>>16899829
It's pointless, sure you technically save some propellant compared to a lunar orbiting station, but how about no station at all?

Men on the moon is a retarded gimmick for boomers. I'd rather have a radio Observatory deployed on the dark side of the moon by robotics instead.

File: 1689626692517319.jpg (118.8 KB)

118.8 KB JPG

>>16899876
> Anyone who thinks Starship will ever do anything but dispense massive amounts of e-waste in LEO
But anon, that's exactly what it's supposed to do. How are going to build large space stations, moon cyclers, mars rockets, etc, if we don't have a way to efficiently move a bunch of stuff from earth to orbit?

>>16894500
Good comedy set up.

>>16896094
>>16896366
I wonder if he's realized at this point that the whole refuelling thing is inefficient and Starship is best at making it cheap to send stuff up and assemble larger nuclear powered ships in orbit. If he's realized that, then he might delay Mars, because you'd have to come up with the nuclear electric ships first. It's pretty much known technology, but cheaply sending large amounts of mass up and assembling it is a block, so there's never been any point fully assembling a nuclear thermal or nuclear electric craft/or hybrid. Why you would bother refuelling with 6-12 Starships for every one you send up, only to send a mere 100 tonnes or so to Mars, when 6-12 Starships could put a nuclear transport vessel weigh 600-1200 tonnes plus, and then it could go to Mars, and put multiple hundreds of those tonnes down. If you accept taking the same amount of time, nuclear craft allow to take a lot more mass. We're not talking torch ships here. The mass ratio might be as high as 3 for nuclear thermal, but as low as barely above 1 for nuclear electric, but if in that case of wanting the same thrust (to take 8 months or so, you would need to increase reactor power, so more reactor mass instead of propellant.

>>16899205
>Look at me, I am the licensed daycare operator now.

>>16900013
>he might delay Mars
Mars ain't happening bud, at least not by Elon Musk

>>16900061
Cheap fully reuseable rockets are a big prerequisite for very large space... anything. So Elon is at least completing the first stage. The US government can then get a large craft sent up in sections for much cheaper, although they may spend more on the contractors to create it.

>>16900091
Elon doesn't want to go to Mars chud, that's just propaganda. He just wants the government gibs

File: 1920px-Clouds_Over_Tempe_Terra_(34076340151).png (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB PNG

>>16900093
Chud? If the government gives him gibs to launch sections of NASA's Mars craft, then he'll take the gibs and launch the sections.
Besides, if Starship at all works (and SpaceX is profitable from Starlink not only gibs), then it proves the principle, and we'll get Chinese copies. Even if the US fails, China will use the technology to get a giant nuclear craft assembled in space, and one way or another, humanity WILL be going to Mars.

>>16900095
Elon used ro have 20 billion dollars in 2020, then the government gave them gibs and now he has half a trillion dollars.
This money isn't being used to go to Mars, it's all for his personal use

>>16900098
Yeah, but SpaceX is profitable now due to Starlink. That's the bulk of the money, not the gibs. Besides, NASA treats SpaceX as a contractor, so you're correct that NASA made SpaceX profitable initially, but they had to fulfill the specifc contracts still. If NASA buys SpaceX launches they are going to get it, especially now that the company is publically traded, and even more so in the future. That step means SpaceX will outlive Musk.

>>16900098
>it's all for his personal use
have you seen how he lives, retard?

>>16900110
Who is the biggest purchaser of Starlink bandwidth? Hint: their account is so large it even has it's own name (Starshield).

I'm excited!

Fuck the cold I already have a hotel lined up.

>>16900624
It looks like the single biggest purchaser doesn't dominate the total revenue, and 60-62% comes from commercial/enterprise clients. This is besides the point anyway, because even if this wasn't the case, SpaceX would still be supplying the service to government, not just getting money for doing nothing that Elon was pocketing to put in a big money bin. He has even less room to do that now, like I said before, because he's gone public with it.

>>16896094
Musk is in the epstein files with trump ( both chold rapists) and makes dumb claims ever 38 seconds for the last decade+

Also he's a massive fraud/liar/ horrible human to his core

Maybe think less about what the deformed worst-of-humanity is thinking

>>16899299
If you think space is real, YOU're the normie.

File: Apollo 8 is underrated.png (2.1 MB)

2.1 MB PNG

>>16899203
I'm pretty sure normies don't even know that there were Apollo missions other than 11

>>16902475
all blue marble pics are doctored (admitted by NASA)
therefore, this picture is doctored

File: 1477764806578.jpg (42.4 KB)

42.4 KB JPG

>>16895171
>that dumb faggpt that thinks his God Elon is ever going to Mars
It was fucking hilarious watching New Glenn mog his meme rocket on its second flight and actually launch a payload to Mars while he's still filling the Indian Ocean with roasted starship debris.

>>16903173
New Glenn is just a larger Falcon 9. Starship is way more ambitious.
Among competitors, I think Stoke is more interesting.

>>16902475
Tom Hanks was in a movie about Apollo 13, so they now about that one.

>>16894497
They should make a mission to the sun instead, and throw all the corrupt boomers from Washington in it

File: Booshit.webm (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB WEBM

>>16903258
Starship is an underpowered piece of shit that will never make orbit, let alone with 100 tons of payload. It was a nice con while it was being "tested", but now that it's literally delaying Artemis III, it's no longer funny.

Raptors a shit. BE-4s ftw, lol.

>>16894497
>landing on the moon is the next one
I hope it's in 3+ years because the orange retard (with his retard techbros) is going to ruin it... he will find a way to ruin it.

>>16896090
The NASA webpage has changed since you wrote this post
>What you wrote:Artemis III Launch: Mid-2027
>What it days now: Launch:2028

File: Screenshot_2026-02-03-14-42-08-115-edit_org.mozilla.firefox.jpg (248.5 KB)

248.5 KB JPG

every now and then, I'd come back to this thread to bump it so that it stays alive until Artemis II's launch. Well, that was useless, it ain't happening in a long time
These guys claim to have won/to be winning the space race

>>16904895
well, at least they prevented a launch explosion

>>16903411
meds

>>16896913
Why does it need to certified by nasa? >>16899581
chuds are in charge, they wouldn't stop

>>16903173
Sauce nig?

>>16899581
settle down, we all know they die during mission return so that the faked footage can stand as immortal proof of a landing. We can all rest easy then knowing the first moon landing definitely happened and also the holocaust.

how do you redditards still trust NASA when "project anchor" is a thing?

File: 886582256897.jpg (9.4 KB)

9.4 KB JPG

>>16894497
>Things that never happened

Consult my comment post-factum the launch date where nothing happens.

>>16899203
Faking the moon landings again isn't interesting like it was for Boomers, especially because it's just an excuse to insert women and minorities into any space a White man ever (allegedly) occupied.
Unfortunately Netflixing the Apollo missions simply won't work, so they need to create a whole new production and then piss and moan and try and shame people for not watching it like they do any original media product they make that invariably bombs.

>>16899203
It isn't worrying. It merely confirms that the public are cattle that only care about monkey crap like celebrity drama and stuffing their fat faces. Anything that is done simply to prove humanity's power and reach is something they can't understand, because cattle are naturally utilitarians and can't accept anything that doesn't involve shovelling food or drugs into poor people. China will beat us in colonizing space because they have engineers in government running things instead of a democracy filled with lawyers.