Artemis Moon Program

So, word is getting out that Boeing tried to amend their lunar lander bid after getting input from Doug Loverro, which is why he's out and might be why Boeing didn't get an award.

What puzzles me is that their source claims no procurement laws were violated in the process. Which seems very hard to believe. Boeing attempted to amend their bid after the change period, apparently to address specific deficiencies pointed out by Loverro. That sounds very much like a violation to me. (If it wasn't, why fire Loverro so precipitously before DM-2?)

 
And now Dynetics lander update. By the way, what was that "other thing" you keep hearing in Kennedy's moon project announcement.

 
fredymac said:
By the way, what was that "other thing" you keep hearing in Kennedy's moon project announcement.
Click to expand...

You need to go back to the previous sentance or two in the speech for that little aside.
But why, some say, the Moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask, why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?

We choose to go to the Moon. We choose to go to the Moon...We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard;
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Errare humanum est... :
"The panel has great concern about the end-to-end integrated test capability plans, especially for flight software," [ Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, one of its members, former NASA Flight Director Paul Hill] said. "There is no end-to-end integrated avionics and software test capability. Instead, multiple and separate labs, emulators, and simulations are being used to test subsets of the software."

The safety panel also was struggling to understand why, apparently, NASA had not learned its lessons from the recent failed test flight of Boeing's Starliner spacecraft, Hill said.
Click to expand...
arstechnica.com

Safety panel has “great concern” about NASA plans to test Moon mission software

“Flight systems should be developed for success with a goal to test like you fly.”…
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com
 
Europe have now signed up to the Artemis Moon Program to contribute to the Lunar Gateway, TAS will build two pressurised sections one where the astronauts will live and the other section which will be where refuelling and telecommunications equipment will be housed. The UK arm of TAS will provide the refuelling equipment.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54537906

And just discovered this article on the BBC News site. The UK has just signed up to the Artemis Moon Program principles.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54530361
 
This made me wonder how Italy and Luxembourg can be the only other nations among Europe to have signed this. What's wrong with the EU?!!
 
TomcatViP said:
This made me wonder how Italy and Luxembourg can be the only other nations among Europe to have signed this. What's wrong with the EU?!!
Click to expand...

There's some stuff baked into the Accords that push for the US view on commercial resource extraction in space. I can imagine that some European states might want to discuss that a bit more. It's not quite as simple as it looks.
 
One question about the UK being involved with the Artemis Moon Program? Would that mean that Tim Peake would get a chance to go to the moon as well at some point? I would certainly hope so.
 
Commercial resource extraction on the moon. Hmmm... Surveys, best locations, digging out the desired material and shipping it out. Meanwhile, a massive group of daily launches from earth to keep the miners supplied.
 
I like the layout of the Dynetics lander over the Blue Origin design. It is more reusable, seems to have more interior volume, and the "low slung" layout eliminates a long ladder trip every time you want to leave/return. Both landers need to think about some way to externally mount EVA suits so you don't bring lunar dust inside. Any samples would also be left outside in a storage box.

 
Scenarios where someone falls need to be considered. Perhaps a quick-seal system or patch or both if a tear occurs. Perhaps the rule should be two people on each exit.
 
Flyaway said:
”On behalf of President @realDonaldTrump, I am honored to invite Brazil to sign the Artemis Accords. These accords will guide the US, Brazil, and like-minded partners as we strengthen space exploration efforts for a prosperous future.” – NSA O’Brien
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1318548775661686784
View: https://twitter.com/WHNSC/status/1318548775661686784
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that Brazil has now signed up to the Artemis Program now. Will Brazil be putting forward its own astronauts to fly on the Space Launch System rocket at some point in the future?
 
FighterJock said:
Flyaway said:
”On behalf of President @realDonaldTrump, I am honored to invite Brazil to sign the Artemis Accords. These accords will guide the US, Brazil, and like-minded partners as we strengthen space exploration efforts for a prosperous future.” – NSA O’Brien
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1318548775661686784
View: https://twitter.com/WHNSC/status/1318548775661686784
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that Brazil has now signed up to the Artemis Program now. Will Brazil be putting forward its own astronauts to fly on the Space Launch System rocket at some point in the future?
Click to expand...

They've already sent one astronaut to the ISS.

Note that signing the Artemis Accords is not the same as actually participating in the Artemis Program, or especially sending astronauts. Just says you agree to some principles about space exploration that NASA considers a prerequisite for actually participating in Artemis.

This link is an interesting discussion of why some countries aren't as thrilled about these Accords as you might expect.

theconversation.com

Artemis Accords: why many countries are refusing to sign Moon exploration agreement

Some nations are concerned the Artemis Accords represent a US power grab.
theconversation.com theconversation.com
 
TomS said:
FighterJock said:
Flyaway said:
”On behalf of President @realDonaldTrump, I am honored to invite Brazil to sign the Artemis Accords. These accords will guide the US, Brazil, and like-minded partners as we strengthen space exploration efforts for a prosperous future.” – NSA O’Brien
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1318548775661686784
View: https://twitter.com/WHNSC/status/1318548775661686784
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that Brazil has now signed up to the Artemis Program now. Will Brazil be putting forward its own astronauts to fly on the Space Launch System rocket at some point in the future?
Click to expand...

They've already sent one astronaut to the ISS.

Note that signing the Artemis Accords is not the same as actually participating in the Artemis Program, or especially sending astronauts. Just says you agree to some principles about space exploration that NASA considers a prerequisite for actually participating in Artemis.

This link is an interesting discussion of why some countries aren't as thrilled about these Accords as you might expect.

theconversation.com

Artemis Accords: why many countries are refusing to sign Moon exploration agreement

Some nations are concerned the Artemis Accords represent a US power grab.
theconversation.com theconversation.com
Click to expand...

Interesting that Russia was one of the countries that refused to sign the Artemis Accords, after all it was very quick in joining the program that launched the International Space Station. Let's see what happens when Russia tries to build its own heavy lift rocket for Lunar and Martian exploration.
 
The Artemis Accords will establish a foundation for extraction and exploitation of space resources based on private risk taking and investment. It does not feature UN control and imposition of a global tax. Therein lies the “controversy” and the means to predict who won’t be thrilled.
 
FighterJock said:
Let's see what happens when Russia tries to build its own heavy lift rocket for Lunar and Martian exploration.
Click to expand...

With all my Russian patriotism, but I'm extremely skeptical about Roskosmos ability to do ANYTHING not based on reliable Soviet legacy. The leadership of Roskosmos have neither vision, nor understanding, nor even interest in space programs, except of "making some quick money".
 
P.S. Are you sure that it was even SUGGESTED to Russia? I was unable to find anything about Russia being offered to join Artemis Accords, with the exception of some quite dubious sites. Considering the current US-Russia relations... I strongly suspect, that there are some mistake.
 
There is a lot to be said about the probnlems of the Acords being a seriues of bilateral agreements with the US, rather than an actual multilateral treaty. It sits aoutside the normal framework of space
Dilandu said:
P.S. Are you sure that it was even SUGGESTED to Russia? I was unable to find anything about Russia being offered to join Artemis Accords, with the exception of some quite dubious sites. Considering the current US-Russia relations... I strongly suspect, that there are some mistake.
Click to expand...

Bridenstein said publicly that NASA had offered Russia an MOU for the Lunar Gateway similar to the one for ISS. Given that NASA has also said that the Artemis Accords are mandatory for participating in Artemis, it sounds like Russia was given a chance to sign, but Rogozin has rather publicly stated that Russia isn't interested in that.

spacenews.com

Russia skeptical about participating in lunar Gateway

The head of Russia’s space agency said that the lunar Gateway, part of NASA’s Artemis lunar exploration program, is too “U.S.-centric” for it to participate in, even though the Gateway leverages th…
spacenews.com spacenews.com
 
Under a "normal framework of space [treaties]", Musk's Mars plans would be under government control right up to the point of needing permission to pursue them.
 
IMOHO the accords are simply that, an agreement, aside of some basics common sense rules: that no liabilities been imposed on entrepreneurs afterwards.

Private Investments will with no doubt be heavy (a billion dollars tickets?). Hence securing margins is what will attract investors.

That's mostly the sense of those agreements.
It would be foolish not to begin this way in this endeavor.
 
Last edited:
Is that me or the central monocoque torso is endrogenic?! What's the say behind it: if you are a C or D cup you ain't gonna be an astronaut?!
 
Last edited:
amp.cnn.com

NASA, European Space Agency to collaborate on Artemis Gateway lunar outpost

NASA and the European Space Agency agreed on Tuesday to work together on the Artemis Gateway lunar outpost. The Artemis Gateway will act as a way station serving astronauts traveling from Earth before they reach the surface of the moon.
amp.cnn.com amp.cnn.com

www.space.com

Europe will help build NASA's moon-orbiting Gateway space station

Europe will provide a habitat module and a refueling module for the Gateway outpost.
www.space.com www.space.com
9KewvKfzPtg2vWpK6FcD6j-1200-80.jpg
 
So, it seems like signing the Artemis Accords isn't actually a prerequisite for signing an agreement to cooperate on the Artemis program.
 
TomcatViP said:
Is that me or the central monocoque torso is endrogenic?! What's the say behind it: if you are a C or D cup you ain't gonna be an astronaut?!
Click to expand...

I suspect you'd be surprised at the amount of open space inside that torso. Also, these systems will definitely come in multiple sizes, just as the current EVA suits do.
 
I don't think they come in multiple size since all the swiveling interfaces looks to be standards. You can also see the lady test subject in the video bent forward during the presentation what could be a way for her to not enter in contact with the front torso inner shell.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom