Artemis II

I have been hooked on manned space travel since the 12th April 1961 a few days before my 15th birthday.

I was on a weeks Geography field trip with my school staying in Aberystwyth when we got news about Yuri Gagarin's single orbit of the Earth. I was amazed and excited by the event and that has stayed with me ever since.
 
argyle said:
Or just leave for the politics threads yourself and leave this one for those interested.
Click to expand...
It's interesting. It's a minor miracle of science, engineering and human endeavour every time we put something in space. I just don't think this really represents much progress over the Apollo missions half a century ago, unless you count the onboard toilet. That's been playing up already, so it sounds like one of the crew needs more fibre in their diet, or someone has tried flushing a sanitary towel.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It's interesting. It's a minor miracle of science, engineering and human endeavour every time we put something in space. I just don't think this really represents much progress over the Apollo missions half a century ago, unless you count the onboard toilet. That's been playing up already, so it sounds like one of the crew needs more fibre in their diet, or someone has tried flushing a sanitary towel.
Click to expand...
It is iced up, not good for No.1's but OK for No.2's as they go into a tie up bag.
 
normskih said:
Let’s hope not. There’s not a scrap of ill feeling between posters that enjoy the fascination with space.
Click to expand...
I have the following Lego models.
  • Saturn V rocket.
  • Lunar Excursion Module (LEM).
  • Space Shuttle Discovery.
  • International Space Station
  • Perseverance Mars Rover.
  • Artemis II
 
The Soviets were the first to see the far side of the moon and make an image from Luna 3 on 7 October 1959.
photograph-of-the-far-side-of-the-moon-taken-and-transmitted-back-to-earth-by-the-soviet-lunar.jpg

They won 1000 bottlles of champagne for it.
www.rbth.com

How Soviets photographed the ‘dark side of the Moon’ and won 1,000 bottles of champagne

To receive the first photographs, scientists totally totally blacked out the Black Sea Fleet.
www.rbth.com www.rbth.com

However the west didn't know if it was real or a hoax. It was the University of Manchester, who confirmed that Luna 3 had transmitted a large (relative) amount of data as it emerged form the shadow of the moon, supporting the argument that it was real. They were tracking Luna 3 using the Jodrell Bank radio telescope.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It's interesting. It's a minor miracle of science, engineering and human endeavour every time we put something in space. I just don't think this really represents much progress over the Apollo missions half a century ago, unless you count the onboard toilet. That's been playing up already, so it sounds like one of the crew needs more fibre in their diet, or someone has tried flushing a sanitary towel.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's fair enough.

Outwardly there's not much between the Apollo and the Artemis missions. However they're testing new navigation systems and a lot of new materials and technology, such as materials to shield from radiation which Apollo programmes didn't have. They're also testing new solar arrays, air and water filtration systems, etc. The new toilet system will definately have to be revised. There's a lot of new things, too many to mention here, that are being tested which are on the NASA website.

This will hopefully all lead to a base someday. If the programme isn't cut by their government first.
 
argyle said:
Its funny seeing the disconnect between those who've no interest in space acting like sending human beings to the moon and back is no big deal.

And those who do and know even sending a human up into orbit is hard let alone the enormous challenges of leaving Earths orbit, going to the moon and back and landing safely.

The logic is thinking winning the Premier league is easy because we've done it before - let alone winning it back to back and even 4 in a row.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure many have said its easy, waste of money already done not exactly wow maybe. Not seen all the posts mind.
 
Can't explain it but watching them go further than ever before and then the guys story about the woman he lost has made my eyes a bit wet. The whole thing is just wonderous.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It's interesting. It's a minor miracle of science, engineering and human endeavour every time we put something in space. I just don't think this really represents much progress over the Apollo missions half a century ago, unless you count the onboard toilet. That's been playing up already, so it sounds like one of the crew needs more fibre in their diet, or someone has tried flushing a sanitary towel.
Click to expand...

You have to walk before you can jump though.

Most would agree journeying out into space feels like a natural extension of human endeavour. Well to do that we need to find a way to go to Mars. To do that successfully we ideally need a launch pad and experience of being on the Moon. To do that we need to land on the Moon. To do that we need to test the equipment that will eventually get us to the moon. Before we do that we need to build the rockets and the equipment to test. Apollo didn’t have this grander plan, its objective was simply to go to the moon and it achieved it numerous times.

We are currently at step 3 of a decades long plan and people are complaining that we aren’t just jumping straight to step 10 which would be total folly given the dangers involved and modern safety standards. Surely every step along this plan is by its very definition progress?
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
You have to walk before you can jump though.

Most would agree journeying out into space feels like a natural extension of human endeavour. Well to do that we need to find a way to go to Mars. To do that successfully we ideally need a launch pad and experience of being on the Moon. To do that we need to land on the Moon. To do that we need to test the equipment that will eventually get us to the moon. Before we do that we need to build the rockets and the equipment to test. Apollo didn’t have this grander plan, its objective was simply to go to the moon and it achieved it numerous times.

We are currently at step 3 of a decades long plan and people are complaining that we aren’t just jumping straight to step 10 which would be total folly given the dangers involved and modern safety standards. Surely every step along this plan is by its very definition progress?
Click to expand...
Agree, but it feels like we did step 8 or 9 fifty years ago and we've gone back to step 4 or 5.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Agree, but it feels like we did step 8 or 9 fifty years ago and we've gone back to step 4 or 5.
Click to expand...

You could see it like that, but I think that’s akin to saying we could fly planes over the Atlantic in the 1920s so flying over it in the 2020s isn’t exactly progress. Factually yes you’re right, but the difference is that in the 1920s you had a pretty good chance of being lost at sea - and you couldn’t even take a packed lunch.

Similarly we could get Apollo astronauts on the moon in the 70s, but the success rate wasn’t the kind of thing most would sign up for with two catastrophic failures, and the idea of building a moon base with the state of the tech and safety record felt like a stretch too far. Artemis isn’t without jeopardy but the improvement from all we’ve learnt over 50 years means we can do it better and more consistently.

And it absolutely has to be better and more consistent if we ever have notions of permanent settlement on the moon. We need to be doing this metronomically like a well-oiled machine. In that respect the progress is in the quality of the mission not so much the milestone, because that is what will allow us to reach the next milestone.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
You could see it like that, but I think that’s akin to saying we could fly planes over the Atlantic in the 1920s so flying over it in the 2020s isn’t exactly progress. Factually yes you’re right, but the difference is that in the 1920s you had a pretty good chance of being lost at sea - and you couldn’t even take a packed lunch.

Similarly we could get Apollo astronauts on the moon in the 70s, but the success rate wasn’t the kind of thing most would sign up for with two catastrophic failures, and the idea of building a moon base with the state of the tech and safety record felt like a stretch too far. Artemis isn’t without jeopardy but the improvement from all we’ve learnt over 50 years means we can do it better and more consistently.

And it absolutely has to be better and more consistent if we ever have notions of permanent settlement on the moon. We need to be doing this metronomically like a well-oiled machine. In that respect the progress is in the quality of the mission not so much the milestone, because that is what will allow us to reach the next milestone.
Click to expand...

You can word stuff like this far better than I ever could. Great posts @SkyBlueFlux
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top