First Launch - NASA's big new rocket at 1.30pm today ?

[Ross365]

The first scheduled launch for NASA's huge new rocket is at 1.30 this afternoon (UK time). It's designed to take people back to the Moon and then possibly to Mars. It has appreciably more thrust than the beloved Saturn V, achieved mainly by using the strap-on boosters developed for the Shuttle. After the changes made to those back in the 1990's, they are considered safe now.

The first flight should send the new Orion capsule around the Moon, but this mission carries no crew. Watch on https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/#public which already streaming.

 

[blackolive (Ste)]

Not quite correct re the crew. Shaun the Sheep is going https://www.aardman.com/latest-news/shaun-the-sheep-esa-artemis-i

 

[Bullet2012]

The first scheduled launch for NASA's huge new rocket is at 1.30 this afternoon (UK time). It's designed to take people back to the Moon and then possibly to Mars. It has appreciably more thrust than the beloved Saturn V, achieved mainly by using the strap-on boosters developed for the Shuttle. After the changes made to those back in the 1990's, they are considered safe now.

The first flight should send the new Orion capsule around the Moon, but this mission carries no crew. Watch on https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/#public which already streaming.

Please see here

https://www.mig-welding.co.uk/forum/threads/space-astronomy-star-gazing.98038/page-25

 

[Kram]

Personally hoping that this unmanned one explodes shortly after launch. The whole idea is retarded and the money better spent giving it to spacex.
This SLS and the future launches dump boosters into the sea unrecovered, where as they previously were reused. Same with main engines and tank? Great for enviroment...

NASA's huge new rocket

Boosters design predate the shuttle, nothing really new there. The 4 main engines all previously flown on shuttle missions, quite old. The new bit is the tanks and the euro capsule on the top.

This one orbits the moon. None of them will land. To get people actually on the moon, a Starship fuel depot needs to be launched into orbit. Fourteen starship tankers need to go up to fuel it, and then another Starship adapted for the moon will be sent.

The orion will dock with starship HLS which will do all the cool stuff landing and returning to moon orbit.

Annoys me a bit that the starship test has been delayed as Nasa want to go first.

 

[Ross365]

Personally hoping that this unmanned one explodes shortly after launch. The whole idea is retarded ....

I would agree that the US Government has been in total chaos over the last decade re its Space Programme, but it's not within me to want this vehicle, the hard work of very many ordinary people, to fail.

Re the boosters, the use of the big segmented boosters was new for Shuttle; first tested around 1975 I think. These boosters produce much more thrust than the core stage (liquid propellants) whereas on other launch vehicles, the solid boosters just add to the core stage.

 

[Maker]

I had no idea there was a new moon mission, I thought everyone agreed with Leela: "The moon is a dump, it's a boring, dried up wasteland."

 

[Ross365]

I had no idea there was a new moon mission, I thought everyone agreed with Leela: "The moon is a dump, it's a boring, dried up wasteland."

There are private companies working to get there, so they must have other ideas.

For what it's worth, I do have reservations about spending on space. There are various medical issues for which I'd like more research, and if we took funding for it out of the space budget, I'd be totally happy with that.

 

[Bullet2012]

Launch cancelled.

 

[Screwdriver]

I have mixed feelings about this "mission" to the moon. Been there, done that. It is a vast reserve of "rare earth" metals (!) but getting them back here makes mining for minerals a teensy bit expensive.

I literally can't see the point other than as a political statement (largely in the choice of crew). There is no new science to be had and what little science we could glean from this dead lump of boring rock could be much better made with robotics. Once you stick a life form onto any space vehicle, cost spiral upwards dramatically. That's not just costs in dollars but also in terms of payload etc.

There is a minuscule science budget for NASA compared to say, the military. This is going to eat up a gigantic amount of that tiny budget. Other more valid experiments are going to suffer for it.

 

[minimutly]

Space 1999, moonbase alpha will have to wait...

 

[Mark 2]

Space 1999, moonbase alpha will have to wait...

Can we have the haircuts though, as a consolation prize.

 

[optima21]

Not quite correct re the crew. Shaun the Sheep is going https://www.aardman.com/latest-news/shaun-the-sheep-esa-artemis-i

you could say he's having "A Grand Day Out"

 

[Windy Miller]

Just caught the tail end of the report on the 10:00 o’clock news - that bloke Bill Nelson from NASA was talking.

Anyone else think he’s really Max Headroom?

 

[Bullet2012]

Second launch attempt scrubbed.
liquid hydrogen leak again.

Artemis I Launch Attempt Scrubbed – Artemis

blogs.nasa.gov

 

[Screwdriver]

Incredibly, the seals weren't tested at the crazy low temperatures they need to operate under prior to this launch!

That's nuts. I believe I got that info from no less than Scott Manley himself...

 

[Pigeon_Droppings2]

The cost per launch is pretty insane for the SLS when compared to new technology from SpaceX...SpaceX starship is pretty darn cool in comparison.

The SLS is how you'd build a rocket when you aren't spending your own money!

 

[Screwdriver]

The cost per launch is pretty insane for the SLS when compared to new technology from SpaceX...SpaceX starship is pretty darn cool in comparison.

The SLS is how you'd build a rocket when you aren't spending your own money!

Don't forget all that diversity and inclusivity training don't come cheap either. I wish I was joking...

 

[optima21]

Incredibly, the seals weren't tested at the crazy low temperatures they need to operate under prior to this launch!

That's nuts. I believe I got that info from no less than Scott Manley himself...

you'd have thought that NASA would have learnt about dodgy seals after the Challenger disaster.

and at the time it was said that NASA stands for Need Another Seven Astronauts.

best err on the side of caution with history like that I guess

 

[Kayos]

Personally hoping that this unmanned one explodes shortly after launch. The whole idea is retarded and the money better spent giving it to spacex.
This SLS and the future launches dump boosters into the sea unrecovered, where as they previously were reused. Same with main engines and tank? Great for enviroment...


Boosters design predate the shuttle, nothing really new there. The 4 main engines all previously flown on shuttle missions, quite old. The new bit is the tanks and the euro capsule on the top.

This one orbits the moon. None of them will land. To get people actually on the moon, a Starship fuel depot needs to be launched into orbit. Fourteen starship tankers need to go up to fuel it, and then another Starship adapted for the moon will be sent.

The orion will dock with starship HLS which will do all the cool stuff landing and returning to moon orbit.

Annoys me a bit that the starship test has been delayed as Nasa want to go first.

Cheer up pal, could be worse

 

[mike os]

NASA is unfortunately forced to accept the lowest bids to make its kit …

Hydrogen fuel issues will hopefully focus some attention on the real risks using it as a fuel … ie it is not just a hydrocarbon gas substitute.

And for the record there is absolutely nothing green about anything to do with rocketry… other than olive drab so beloved by their main users.

Bottom like however is that if we are to survive as a species we need to get off this rock because it cannot sustain our current population let alone next century