Artemis 2 splashdown and recovery

[Scm]

I read where the latest mission cost 4.1 Billion dollars

"The entire Artemis effort was projected to cost NASA $93 billion up to fiscal year 2025, according to the audit"

Artemis II mission to the moon: By the numbers

The rocket to send astronauts on a lunar adventure will launch Wednesday.

abcnews.com

 

[Sidekick]

We ALREADY HAVE MARTIANS! They Found US FIRST! They aren’t on Mars…They’re in D.C. and on Social-Media!

Actually I just read they have DNA from the batch of aliens that crash landed in the desert that has been inseminated into female earthling volunteers to see what the results will be. Mad scientists at work .

 

[Scm]

They’re in D.C.

Those aren't martians, those are lizard people.

 

[GeoHorn]

There's an incredible amount of water on the moon in the form of ice. It's not rocket science to convert liquid H2O into H2 and O2. There's ice in very deep craters on the moon where the sun never shines.

YEs…. Correct…(at least as far as the theory goes…. it’s yet to be proven ice is up there.). but the electricity required to CONVERT it and break it into it’s components of Hyd and Oxy…. can use WIND POWER..right…?? (BTW, there’s a Huge Loss of efficiency separating water into 2H and O. LOTS of that excess power up there…. heh…?

And ..THEN…there’s the little easy matter of digging UP all that predicted ICE supposedly buried deep down under the moonscape. I’m sure that’s easier than simply saying it…

Here’s what‘s Really Happening: We’re squandering our children‘s and grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s futures. That’s what’s happening.

 

[skeets]

Sorry but every time I hear about this flight I think of this

 

[Hugo Habicht]

YEs…. Correct…(at least as far as the theory goes…. it’s yet to be proven ice is up there.). but the electricity required to CONVERT it and break it into it’s components of Hyd and Oxy…. can use WIND POWER..right…?? (BTW, there’s a Huge Loss of efficiency separating water into 2H and O. LOTS of that excess power up there…. heh…?

Actually, yes, the excess power is there. Just bring up a few photovoltaic solar panels and you have all the energy you need. The smallest panel will do if you have enough time.

Otherwise, I am with you, in my opinion a total waste of space the whole thing. The solution of the earths problems are not on the Moon or on Mars. I sometimes think, like in the Roman empire the games, they are doing that to distract the population from the real problems. All that money could be spent in a better way.

 

[Sidekick]

They are working on developing miniature nuclear plants right now for this application. With no atmosphere, solar would be easy also . Power is the least of the problems. Hopefully I am around long enough to see it happen. Heck, there's already a Tesla in orbit that may be easy to tow out and put big tires on.
I remember when I was young and everyone thought Dick Tracy was crazy with the talking watch. Well without the space program developing new technology and materials, they would have been right. Best spent money ever in my mind with many spin-offs that benefit everyone.

 

[McMXi]

YEs…. Correct…(at least as far as the theory goes…. it’s yet to be proven ice is up there.). but the electricity required to CONVERT it and break it into it’s components of Hyd and Oxy…. can use WIND POWER..right…?? (BTW, there’s a Huge Loss of efficiency separating water into 2H and O. LOTS of that excess power up there…. heh…?

Wow! You're proving that you really don't know a whole lot about the efforts that are going on by many countries when it comes to generating power on the Moon, on Mars and even in orbit around the earth.

There are many discoveries, improvements, inventions and new technologies that come out of the different space programs.

SpaceX has a different set of criteria landing booster rockets back on barges. First off there's fuel available to burn and secondly, if something goes wrong there are no people on board. Parachutes and no fuel is a reasonably safe way to bring four people back to earth.

 

[Scm]

The solution of the earths problems are not on the Moon or on Mars.

The solution to MY problems are on the moon or on mars.
Population density 1 per planet

 

[GeoHorn]

Wow! You're proving that you really don't know a whole lot about the efforts that are going on by many countries when it comes to generating power on the Moon, on Mars and even in orbit around the earth.

There are many discoveries, improvements, inventions and new technologies that come out of the different space programs.

SpaceX has a different set of criteria landing booster rockets back on barges. First off there's fuel available to burn and secondly, if something goes wrong there are no people on board. Parachutes and no fuel is a reasonably safe way to bring four people back to earth.

You must be a “Real Space-Cadet!” if you think this is a good expenditure.

 

[GeoHorn]

Actually, yes, the excess power is there. Just bring up a few photovoltaic solar panels and you have all the energy you need. The smallest panel will do if you have enough time.

Otherwise, I am with you, in my opinion a total waste of space the whole thing. The solution of the earths problems are not on the Moon or on Mars. I sometimes think, like in the Roman empire the games, they are doing that to distract the population from the real problems. All that money could be spent in a better way.

Solar..? REally..?? Well…maybe… IF IF you can only plan on HALF the month having sunlight available! (Any spot on the Moon (excluding poles) experiences approximately 14.5 earth-days of continuous sunlight, followed by roughly 14 to 15 days of continuous darkness.) That’s not very useful as far as solar power goes.

And all these theories Ignore the lack of manufacturing and repair resources up there…even After the project is in-place!

”SIr, we need another PN 23-668…oh.. Wait…that’s been obsoleted… Hmmnn….. Sir, ;we’ll need an entirely new, complete solar-array…. Oh, wait…those are backordered from CHYANA…?? ..”

 

[D2Cat]

I wonder how all the supplies will be transported, will they develop a trailer for the space capsule to toe?

 

[McMXi]

You must be a “Real Space-Cadet!” if you think this is a good expenditure.

Do you think the JWST is a waste of money, or the Hubble telescope or Voyager 1 and 2, or any of the space probes scheduled to launch in the next five or so years?

 

[Scm]

Do you think the JWST is a waste of money, or the Hubble telescope or Voyager 1 and 2, or any of the space probes scheduled to launch in the next five or so years?

How do these "probes" benefit me?

 

[GeoHorn]

Do you think the JWST is a waste of money, or the Hubble telescope or Voyager 1 and 2, or any of the space probes scheduled to launch in the next five or so years?

Did you see or read where I criticized those programs…? or are you having a mis-fire….

My opinion was/is about the Artemis/Moon/Mars manned / joy-ride / mission waste-of-resources.

 

[skeets]

GeoHorn Just MHO, but maybe the drive by was to see what our little yellow brothers have placed on the dark side,, you know just passin through da hood

 

[GeoHorn]

…..

 

[Hugo Habicht]

Well without the space program developing new technology and materials, they would have been right. Best spent money ever in my mind with many spin-offs that benefit everyone.

Not sure if you noticed, but innovation driven by space programs ended in the 70s.

Nowadays innovation is driven by the teletubbie generation and (throw away) consumerism. Cheap consumer technology is even used for wars now. Space programs use consumer technology now (sensors, communication, controls...) not the other way around.

 

[GrumpyFarmer]

How do these "probes" benefit me?

last time I checked, NASA was federally funded. if you are a federal taxpayer than you can consider yourself ‘benefitted’ to be a contributor on a Progressive, I say progressive scale (I am not sure if my tone typed thru but I was going for Foghorn Leghorn).

 

[Sidekick]

Not sure if you noticed, but innovation driven by space programs ended in the 70s.

Nowadays innovation is driven by the teletubbie generation and (throw away) consumerism. Cheap consumer technology is even used for wars now. Space programs use consumer technology now (sensors, communication, controls...) not the other way around.

You should look at the basic processes, coating technology, and materials developed to make those components come to life. I worked on bringing many new products to life in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s that actually had costs reduced and performance increased due to previous engineering r & d investments by our government spun off by subcontractors during the early space programs. At this point AI could actually speed up the process working in extreme condition without human intervention while reducing costs and plumbing problems . Can't wait to see the results.