I am a proud member of team Artemis I and work for one of the many NASA contactors that have been working hard to get this rocket to the moon. In my case, I work on the Mobile Launcher (ML) and make sure that all the fluids (compressible and incompressible) travel from a tank to somewhere on the SLS or ML. So, why would I ever watch your video on the Artemis program, you ask? Simple, you do a fantastic job summarizing the available information for all to consume and enjoy! And that's true not just for Artemis.
You hit one of the things I'm most excited about. We are finally going to have some decent HD video of what it looks like to walk on the moon. I cannot wait to see this. Live streaming would be fantastic but I'll settle for some recorded 4k video of the whole thing. No more grainy, AI upscaled and cleaned up 70s video quality. Finally!
LOL.. It's very easy to believe this con because it's all designed to leave you in awe and admiration. Inspiring you to fantasize something that doesn't exist, thereby conning you psychologically and financially in taxes. Yes, the hard fact remains: the space programme is all fake unfortunately.
I am so excited! We haven't had a launch so powerful in a very long time! I will be keeping my daughter home from school and we're gonna watch from the river. My dad has front row seats at the KSC Engineering Development Lab Building. He built the Haz Gas Detection systems for Artemis.
I was a freshman in high school when we first went to the moon. Watched every launch until the 3 or 4 TV networks in existence at that time found the public getting bored with it(I guess after they found out it wasn’t made of cheese) and stopped covering the moon landings. I’ll be happy to see it happen again and get to see it live from the gateway and lander.
Ohh! you just reminded me of the best memory.. my niece was maybe three years old and I caught my uncle whispering to her “did you know that the moon is actually made of cheese?” 😅her face. Wooooahhh.. really?🤭?” “Of course. “ he stated. Hey! You’re a TEACHER!! What the heck lol?” So he says “c’mon let her be a little kid for petesakes “ lol I almost forgot about that moment. I love him for it.
It's interesting that the only president overseeing all of the alleged "moon landings" was that notorious American liar: Richard "I'm not a crook" Nixon... Remember when they pretended he talked to the astronauts... from the whitehouse... on a landline... in the 60's?? - "Good times".
When nasa was asked why we didn't go back to the moon .they said"we lost the technology".mankind's greatest achievement was lost in the back room to the janitor 🤔. SUSPECT.SUPER SUSPECT
Are you sure ? 4k video is 25 Mb/s, The LLCD (Lunar Laser Communication Demonstration) in 2013 made error-free upload rate of 20 Mb/s. That's what I could find. Edit: the upload from the moon to Earth is: 622 Mb/s, it's the other way which is only 20 Mb/s. The previous record was: 4k/s
your intro is seriously underrated. I watch a crap-ton of yt videos .yours is short, clear, identifiable, not over the top, quiet, simple and fun I'm probably missing something but this is my top rated intro.
Personally I think it's great that we are heading back to the moon. It makes perfect sense that in preparing for Mars and beyond, it also gives us opportunity to expand on the Apollo missions. In addition, I hope they decide to revisit earlier landing sites, which will hopefully silence the "We never went" brigade!
They don't believe the space station exists. They will post like fifty videos of astronauts looking like they are suspended by cables, and space footage that looks like cgi.
watching this the day after Artemis launched. I felt a sense of pride in humanity watching it reach into the heavens for its first time. I can’t imagine what it was like to see it in person
Don't delude yourself bud, have some self-respect. It's very easy to believe this con because it's all designed to leave you in awe and admiration. Inspiring you to fantasize something that doesn't exist, thereby conning you psychologically and financially in taxes. Yes, the hard fact remains: the space programme is all fake unfortunately.
My biggest problem with SLS is that they made SpaceX fly Falcon 9 multiple _multiple_ times before they'd even _consider_ them for human rating, but SLS just has to just fly once. Then it's "All systems are go for the first two -suckers- _astronauts_ to fly around the Moon!" All this from a consortium of companies all with competing interests and no overall managerial structure to make sure everything works. Not to mention Boeing is involved, which over the last 20+ years hasn't been a hallmark of success.
The idea is that SLS (like the rockets before it) was designed to be human rated from the beginning, while Falcon 9 wasn't. But yeah, I'd definitely trust multiple flight tests over pretty much any simulation and testing on the ground.
This was actually partly spacexs choice. While it would not shock me if additional flights where added becouse of politics nasa have two ways of getting to human rating. One involves more flights and the other a ton of more paperwork for every single part. There are plenty of real things to complain about with nasa. This is not really one worth the time.
It's a 2 billion dollar project and R and D is extremely intense and has been already in motion from decades and to cap that NASA has decades of experience and countless top scientists where as the guys of SpaceX accepts themselves that they learn through experiments so they are prone to mistake and you can't put human life at risk
They claim their certification process precludes the need for getting "human rated". As we have seen in recent years trust Boeing as far as you can throw their old space technology.
What are you talking about? I think you are getting something mixed up. SpaceX did exactly the same thing, NASA wanted a finalized booster that doesn‘t change every launch, hnece SpaceX froze the booster at Block 5 in mid 2018. Then they build and tested various aspects of Dragon 2 on the pad and such. Then they had exactly one unmanned Demo (Spx-DM1) and finally the second flight was already a manned test flight (Spx-DM2). Since that unmanned test flight they are now regularly flying Crew missions to the ISS. Dragon 2 was the linchpin here, not Falcon 9. You can‘t say you tested your rocket if you have only ever tested the booster, that makes no sense. This is exactly the same NASA is doing with SLS.
Saying that the Apollo guidance computer had less power than a smartphone is like saying that a bathtub holds less water than an olympic pool. A smartphone has more power than super computers in the 90s. Also, computers in space are generally not very fast compared to their earth counterpart due to radiation hardening, so I wouldn't be surprised is Orion's computers are actually slower than today's smartphones as well, especially given how long it was in development. There's no doubt that they're orders of magnitude faster and smaller than Apollo's, though
Quite true. It's difficult to find current real-life examples of computers with anywhere near as little computing power as the Apollo guidance computer. Digital pregnancy tests have more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer. Smart light bulbs have more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer.
The word Claculation Power does not at all make sense here. We talk about Computation Capabilities that could be mesured on the fraction of a digit. Strange it is not done and published and at the end its Programming.
Very true. I watched a RUclips video somewhere (sorry, too lazy to look it up now) that calculated that your average USB charger has probably more computing power than the Apollo lander. And yes, USB chargers have chips.
Interesting "rear-view mirror" stuff for sure, and I bet a lot of the draftsmen who designed the Sat V rocket did not have cads, I know since I was "on the board" as a kid in the 60's at a firm that was building electric power plants and oil refineries. I was a "piping designer" by title, then I got drafted and left that career behind for a while. So, and the ancient Egyptian did not even have steel chisels (copper instead) to build the pyramids either. What does all this prove, you use what you have at the time and make do with it. Apollo is the best example of that we have today, a world history making endeavor done with basic tools of the time (over 50 yrs ago) and the courageous "right stuff" astronauts who took risks, big risks, regardless of the best they had to work with, regarding the equipment/support at the time. Same will be said in the future about our today's "advanced" computers, in 50-100 years: "Hoooly fuuuk can you believe that crazy digital shit they had to work with way back then"!!! LOL ;D
amusing analogy of bathtub to a pool, yes comparing phone to AGC doesn't make sense. I think what should be emphasized is reliability, that is what AGC had way more than a phone (it also got to ride a zillion horsepower rocket which at this time we have yet to fly such a thing). A guidance computer that can remedy itself in case cosmic rays dislodge some electrons in memory banks and also be able to prioritize tasks during critical moments such as last few hundred feet from touchdown.
It has indeed been in development for quite a long time. You mention since 2011-though I’d argue SLS is essentially just a rebranding of Ares V so it’s development can be traced back to 2004.
"pissing contest": It's sad that it's needed but I hope so Joe. Been through so many NASA plans to return to the moon since Apollo that I'm highly skeptical Artemis as described here will actually happen. Maybe the "pissing contest" will be the impetus. Without that sort of external pressure I foresee funding and the technical issues of human rating a lander and the EVA suit as pushing the timeline a fair bit further in to the future than NASA is planning.
The craziest part of the mission to me is that the payload will orbit around the moon in an orbit that is perpendicular to the direction it came in. Basically like a clock as if you’re looking at it. So it will always be able to see the earth In a longitudinal axis rather than an axis that crosses the back side of the moon.
Agreed, super cool, and also a new trajectory, meaning new lunar data as well as no possible radio silence issues! I mean, there could be relay satellites, but this way it's a non-issue!
When I was a little kid, the way of the world as I experienced it was that missions to the the Moon were always going on from time to time. Maybe at some particular moment there was no one up there, but just wait a while, they will be soon enough. The way the seasons come and go. Apollo 11 happened just before I was cogent, and Apollo 17 launched shortly after I turned 8. Distant memories after all this time, but I still remember how it felt like regular routine, the only kind of world I had ever known. “Are they on the Moon today, Dad?” “No, they‘re going next Tuesday.”
As a 51 year old American, the Apollo program happened just as I was born, I have no memory of it but remain fascinated by it even today. I'm absolutely stoked that we are going back to the moon and beyond!!
Each Starship launch is going to cost about 5% as much as each Artemis launch. Eventually, it makes sense that Starship will take over the whole job of launching people, materials and equipment to Gateway and the Moon.
well, currently the return value still makes the sls/artemis the better one, even if that would be the actual price. since we actually know, the falcon price and the seat price for the dragon is a bit different...
Fun fact about the Apollo Guidance Computer: The phrase "It had as much power as your cell phone" was coined by the early 2000s..... long before iPhone. The ACG featured 2KB of RAM and 4KB of ROM, with a processor millions of times less powerful than our modern smartphones.
@@jhoughjr1 You are correct in saying it is not a general-purpose computer, and specialized computer are still a big part of the world. That said, It is still a Von Neuman computer nonetheless capable of loading digital programs into RAM and using a dedicated processor for executing different sets of dedicated instructions on instructions also within RAM. This differed from prior types of computers, such as analog computers (such as the cog-based ones of our ancestors), purely register-based computers running off of separate program tape and switches instead of RAM, hard-coded calculators which couldn't be reprogrammed, and biological computers (women who did math as a job, the OG computers). This was an INSANE accomplishment for the time, especially for something so small (several pounds, but still pretty dang small for the 1960s).
@@dylangtech If I'm not mistaken it was the very first computer with an LSI design in a compact form factor, and also the first one with a solid-state ROM. The computer was an incredible innovation in the field of computing in general, and it was purpose built for a very specific task. In fact so much of the R&D that went into the Apollo Program ended up helping the technological progress of the private sector to a large extent. I hope the Artemis Program can do the same for technology in our day and age, and that is why it'll be an investment worth spending, beyond the already incredible feat of going back to the moon and inspiring the younger generation.
@@Cheap_Grey_Plastic Kind of, I've already got a safety razor that takes the cheap disposable blades and goes fine and those have been around for ever, but this one does look much more slick and who knows it might even work a bit better with those higher tolerances.
@@jackfarmboy Hahaha, we spend too much time on RUclips. Good choice in channels though. Maybe the time zones give me an advantage to get in first. See you somewhere else random soon!
NASA has moonrock brought back by Apollo crews. How can that not be enough proof we went to the Moon? C'mon, guys. Still, when I examine the missions in detail l struggle to understand how Apollo happened. Seems miraculous.
11:25 This is why I don't see space X's starship being used for lunar landings any time soon. Fully reusable or not. It's just too big, too complex, and too inconvenient with its need for a lift or crane. It's just too much of everything to be feasible. Too much that can go wrong, too much unnecessary complexity. I feel NASA "chose" space X as a publicity stunt to get exposure through musk's and space X's massive online following, but doesn't really intend to use it any time soon as the development of Artemis proves. On top of that, even the relatively simple cargo version of starship is now 2 years late for its first orbital test and hasn't even been to space yet or tested re-entry. Let alone space X having to develop a version rated for crewed flight with full life support systems. I don't see space X developing the starship rated for human space travel any time soon, especially not before Artemis launches and lands on the moon. Again, starship just too big, too complex, and too inconvenient. Falcon heavy is far more convenient, cheaper, more flexible, and easy to assemble for cargo, and for crews Artemis is as good as ready (compared to starship), and just far more plausible since WAY less can go wrong. Sorry but starship is not flying people to the moon any time soon. Let alone mars. 15:38 EXACTLY.
I think a very interesting part of the program is that the lunar orbiter will never be out of sight of the Earth. It will orbit different than the Apollo program.
I want all of this to happen on schedule, but I feel like we'll be sitting here watching videos in 2028 about a new schedule putting us on the moon in 2034. The JWST timeline has scarred me.
@@richspillman4191 fake? What the hell are you on about. JWST is one of the greatest achievements humankind has ever done. Maybe the greatest achievement if we look exclusively at space telescopes or telescopes aimed at space.
@@wolfiemuse Absolutely fake, there have been video debunking it, the images are artist composites, who put the color to the images? It might be one of humankind's greatest achievements, but the category is in fraud, not in science.
Lmao at Joe's slick, but hilarious introduction to Henson Shaving products 😂 The space race is going to ramp up over the next 20-50 year's, but given our limited resources on earth, it will be interesting to see which country does what space project's to become the dominant space force who will lead us into the 21st century, and beyond. Thankyou for another great presentation Joe, and keep up the great work. Now that i have finished binge watching my 3rd RUclips channel, i will getting back to having an immense amount fun in binge watching all of Joe's video's ❤️🔥👍
Unless EM's SS fails miserably or is sabotaged intentionally by another nation, the US is on a course to dominate space for quite some time to come. Estimates put the Spacex reusability lead at ~ 10 years, and any competitors w/o this capability are long term also-rans.
I found out about Artemis/SLS back in middle school while randomly scrolling Wikipedia lol (during the 2014 WC days) like 8 years ago. Now in my 3rd year at university, and I can't wait for Aug 29 :)
And the visible engine flames are an error too. Hydrogen / Oxygen flames are almost blue to clear. Only the carbon rich solid rocket boosters produce visible flames or smoke.
@@danieljensen2626 What many forget is how often Starships will launch. Falcon 9 is launching once a week, but once Starship is operational it will launch at least 2 or 3 times a week, maybe more. So they reach the number of flights needed for human rating much much faster.
@@danieljensen2626 Dear Moon is currently scheduled for 2023, while Artemis 2 is 2024. Although both SpaceX and NASA are not known for running on schedule.
@@knowledgeisgood9645 Per the SpaceX plan for Lunar Starship for Artemis III, they will launch 1 Starship every 12 days (GAO report denying the HLS complaints pg 12). For Starship to get to even a once a week cadence will likely take years. It took Falcon 9 about 13 years to reach a once a week launch cadence. Yusaku Maezawa has said that he is willing to wait until Starship is ready for Dear Moon, so Artemis III is almost certainly likely to happen first, since it will take up to 10 flights to get a Starship to the Moon (GAO pg 12).
@@steveaustin2686 HLS is just one type of Starship. If we add all Starlink and other flights the total number will be much larger and will be done faster than Falcon 9. The whole reason with developing Starship has been more mass and faster turn-around. They might not achieve it, but it is the goal.
Not really You only need two to test the facilities And if you do fill all the seats and something goes wrong you've endangered dozens of people unnecessarily or maybe even killed them
11:00 The Dynetics Alpaca original plan was to drop off the outer 2 tanks and ascend with the inner 2 tanks and cabin. But that apparently changed and it will keep the outer 2 tanks on now all the way through, so it is also fully reusable.
Joe, your logic is absolutely solid. Now having said that, America isn't as unified as it used to be. Now having said that, if China gets a little froggy and jumps say on the terrestrial level with some militant actions, then that may unify the nation. Another great video Joe. Thank you so much.
Russia invading Ukraine hasn’t unified the US - why would China invading Taiwan? The Apollo program was concurrent with the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War. Those weren’t very unifying.
NASA didn’t select Starship because it is reusable, they chose it because it is billions of dollars less, and you get a whole building with large laboratories and equipment on the moon instead of a vehicle with as much space as a smart car.
And a much stronger likelihood of timely development. Not to mention giving the Moon program a hope of surviving the cancellation of SLS, which they have to be worried about.
Who cares about all this tech stuff guys, it looks the part, a bit like the moon rocket Luna in "Destination Moon", the first serious movie (1950) about a mission to the moon, 72 freaking years ago!! And if you did not know it, it was a "privately financed venture" to boot, hence a little nod to SpaceX!! That's my opinion, and it should be yours!! ;D LOL However, the other lunar lander versions look capable enough, and reminiscent of the Apollo LEM's. And I don't think Joe needs to worry too much about us "cluttering up the moon" with landing modules either!! ;D
I haven't watched you in quite a while. I forgot how much fun it is to watch you do your thing. Mentioning space dust reminds me of this difficult hazard. Have we made any progress towards solving it?
Nr.1.Problem i got with Climate-Coverage is the big Lack of Shout-Outs. Never a mention of Hbomberguy, UpisNotJump, Some More News, Second Thought, OCC or Climate-Town.
This whole thing gives me goosebumps. GOING TO THE MOON! I was born too late to be a witness the first time around. I sincerely hope that the technology of today will allow us all to experience this in amazing ways. GO NASA!!!
Second time around for me, yawn!!! ZZZZZZZ! ................Just kidding! "Fantastic", as the old/first astronauts used to say a lot when on the moon!! ;D LOL
Given how long it has taken for SLS development when compared to the timeline SpaceX has shown in developing Falcon Heavy and now Starship, it remains to be seen which rocket will be ready to lift the heavy loads needed to build the moon orbiting space station. I do question how quickly SpaceX can develop the crew capable moon landing Starship though. They seem good at putting together test stuff, but to evolve Starship into a moon lander and the into an interplanetary vehicle....the jury remains out for me. The refinement needed for that is huge and with supposedly only a few years to develop the moon lander and concurrently a Mars mission crew Starship....I do not think they will be able to do that before 2030 for the moon lander and 2035-40 for a Mars mission. Of course that is not their desired timeline by any means. Given how long Falcon Heavy was in development as well as Crew Dragon....I hope I'm wrong though as I want to see both happen in my lifetime.
my hope is that it does seem like SpaceX's progress since founding 20 years ago is on an exponential slope and not a linear one. also that they are not bound by the random whims of us govt spending and seem to have already found a profitable business model to fund further progress. i think the only things stopping them is global war or a complete breakdown in leadership. im quite hopeful, im hoping the moon or mars is an affordable and safe tourist destination by the time im 60 or 70 😂
I might be remembering this wrong but wasn’t the falcon heavy only delayed because of the falcon 9 evolution? Falcon 9 kept evolving with its block variants and so falcon heavy was forced to evolve with it causing delays. stuff like that won’t happen with starship But again I don’t know 100% if that’s actually the full reason and i might just be misremembering all of that
I've been watching this show for years. You be cracking jokes on this episode. I see you striving for comedy on this one. You had me dying, bro. Keep it up
After hearing Elon's "aspirational" timelines it's weird to think that it will take so long for Artemis to get people on the moon, but I trust NASA's timeline a lot more and I'm glad there's a plan to land people there again. I do wonder if the gateway construction couldn't be done a bit faster? I thought most of the tech is already developed for putting stuff in that orbit, no?
I mean... no space station is got that far before and if Gateways have any problems is pretty much bye-bye as no way to repair it in time so they have to make sure that Gateway can stay there safely in the first go, more than pure construction which I'm sure if said they just gonna put it on the LEO is much easier and faster. I chose slower but safer any time of the day.
@@rrangel1968 I trust NASA's timeline because NASA has done this before and also isn't run by an entitled attention-seeking manchild who thinks that just because he's rich he's free to sexually harass women who work for him.
I did what you said and went to the Henson site and purchased a blue safety razor. With of course the 100 razors. It is the best safety razor I have ever shaved with. Thank you so much for turning me on to such an outstanding product.
11:09 Dynetics was also fully reusable with the only exception being the fuel tanks , but even before Starship was selected Dynetics had changed it so those are reused as well So yeah, Dynetics was also 100% reusable , only the National Team lander would leave the landing stage behind 14:00 I know that there was no way of knowing at the time of upload , but for anyone watching in the future , Nasa changed the Artemis 4 mission plan to include a crewed landing , and if you are wondering, Starship will also carry out the HLS part of the mission , and there were no lawsuits this time (And yes , this does mean Spacex will receive another $2.89 Billion, like they got for Artemis 3) 14:30 For Artemis 5 NASA has confirmed that it will NOT use Starship but will require a new lander , that is required to be 100% reusable , and both the National Team and Dynetics have confirmed that they will be competing for this contract , with Boeing joining the national Team and Northrop leaving them to join Dynetics 15:34 Not so quick ... Congress , while not commiting to fund further missions made it a requirement that future Artemis missions will need to be carried out by a rocket that can bring at least 42 tons to TLI in a single launch ... this requirement applies to future Artemis missiosns until at least Artemis 14 and of course was designed to make it impossible for Starship to even be considered for competition with SLS and basically ensure that the SLS will be kept around until at least the late 2030s (if congress chooses to fund further Artemis missions , that is)
I'm ready to bet that the starship will never work and NASA will fall back on a plan B with another contractor; which would be frankly much more reasonable (this has never made any sense honestly to use this thing)
Not only is starship insanely ambitious with things like elevators and reusability, but the thing is so big it's going to take 18 rocket launches to get it to the moon. Starship is a really dumb idea, and basically every current/former NASA engineer agrees so. It's too big, too heavy and the reusability is nowhere close to the costs Elon claims. In fact judging by what SpaceX charges, SpaceX is the most expensive of all the launch partners (based on actual contracts rather than claimed launch prices). Also, you forgot to mention that NASA is also funding Blue Origin's lander and will be using that to land on the moon as well. Congress basically turned what should be a science mission into a way of funneling billions to billionaires. For any remaining Elon fanboys, Elon only wins these contracts because of lobbying. Tesla and SpaceX are only around due to insane amounts of government funding, without which none of them would have gotten off the ground. If NASA had the budget or leaniency of SpaceX (or other private corps) missions like SLS would occur far more frequently and at a fraction of the price. And for all those wondering "why SLS costs so much" well, because NASA has to funnel all the money over to SpaceX and Blue Origin. That's literally the reason why.
15:38 SpaceX can sidestep that issue entirely with F9 and Crew Dragon until Starship is reliable enough to be human rated for launch and landing: 1. Launch astronauts on a F9/Crew Dragon, just like other SpaceX crew missions. 2. Launch a crew Starship (or Lunar Starship) uncrewed. 3. Dock with Starship in Earth orbit. Humans transfer to Starship while empty Crew Dragon stays in orbit. 4. Execute mission with Starship. 5. Return Starship to Earth, dock with the Crew Dragon, and re enter. 6. Starship lands if it's a capable variant, or goes into a parking orbit to await refueling. That's similar to how Orion will interact with Lunar Starship anyway for Artemis, and no human crew will have to transit Earth's atmosphere in Starship. I'd be surprised if SpaceX doesn't try this at least once during Starship development, even if totally unrelated to Artemis.
Two problems. First, Crew Dragon can't fly by itself that long as it has a 10 day limit. The Artemis III landing looks to be about 13 days long, 6 there and back with about 7 on the surface. The ISS is in a 51.6 degree inclination orbit and Artemis will likely use a similar 32.5 degree inclination parking orbit that Apollo used. Also the ISS only has 2 docking ports for Crew Dragon, Starliner, cargo Dragon, and likely Dream Chaser. One of those two are taken up by the on-orbit crew's capsule. So timing would be an issue for that open port. Second, Lunar Starship is basically out of propellant once it returns to lunar orbits after the surface mission is over. The SpaceX launch cadence for Artemis III is 1 Starship every 12 days per the GAO report denying the HLS complaints (pg 12). Per that same GAO report (pg 27), with Musk's payload update for Starship (~150t to LEO), the unmanned Lunar Starship takes up to 10 flights (~108 days) to get refilled to go to the Moon. So too long to send a tanker as Lunar Starship can only wait 100 days in lunar orbit per the Apr 2021 HLS Option A Source Selection Statement (pg 9). A Starship Shuttle (similar to Lunar Starship w/o legs) could directly replace SLS/Orion for the LEO to lunar orbit and back to LEO bit, once Starship's launch cadence matures to about a week per launch. The Falcon 9 took over 12 years to get to a once a week launch cadence, so Starship would likely take a while as well. Even with up to 10 Starship flights (~$147M ea*), a Crew Dragon ($300M), a Starliner ($360M), and a cargo Dragon ($133M), the trip would be $2.3B. Still less than the $4.1B for SLS/Orion or $3B if Boeing cuts SLS' cost in half. * based on the $2.94B HLS Option A contract of 2 landings with 10 flights each. SpaceX had the GAO redact info on the propellant depot, but confirmed it was a propellant depot from the context. So the depot is likely something more and I think it is a crew transfer node for up to 3 capsules to attach to the depot. Two crew would stay on the depot, while six would go to the Moon. Four would go to the surface, while two stay on in lunar orbit. This would match up with the plans for the later Artemis missions of 4 crew to the surface.
Any reason Dragon Capsule couldn’t dock with a modified StarShip fuel depot? Considering it will have to be fuelled up anyway before it leaves for the moon?
Thank you Joe for making me aware of the Artemis program. There is so much hype about SpaceX that that we forget about the depth of planning of NASA Artemis future. Your a wonderful voice explaining the US Artemis future space endeavors which more of the public needs to be aware of. Thank you for your time and effort producing well informed information to the public.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 SpaceX is the largest launch provider in the world, by far, NASAs trusted partner and an integral part of the Artemis program. And maybe you should look in the mirror. Passive aggressive complaints about fanboys aren't exactly wholesome. No one is more toxic than those who hate on the accomplishments of others. It's perfectly alright to doubt the realism of their plans, but still cheer them on.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 what do you mean they haven't done anything but 3D renderings? You're absolutely joking right? SpaceX has already sent astronauts to the ISS. Careful your jealousy is showing
Get kinda sick of people raggin' on the Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC), saying "had less power than a pocket calculator", etc. Yes, in some ways, the AGC is many orders of magnitude less "powerful" than your phone, but in others ways, it's WAY more powerful than your phone (particularly when it comes to I/O and machine control). And it had fixed rope memory for God's sake! Would love to see something that operationally secure and efficient in a phone (despite being physically impossible, as far as my very limited knowledge can tell). You could/would make a great video about the AGC, I reckon. Please, do that ... 🙏❤ EDIT: Would love to know why the toilet was in an anechoic chamber. Well, I have a pretty good idea, but it doesn't stop it looking pretty hilarious. And yes, Apollo 2 and 3 were skipped, but the Apollo Program did include the AS-201, AS-202 and AS-203 test flights of Saturn stages and the CSM, so there was actually 12 steps to the moon landing! Hehe.
DO NOT TRUST THE AUG 29 LAUNCH!!! If you’ve seen Terminator 2, clearly we remember that Skynet becomes self aware on Aug 29th! I mean…supposedly in 1997…but still. Setbacks. Do you want terminators? THIS is how you get terminators.
I'm glad that we're back to doing one of the things America does best: pushing the limits of technology. Hopefully, just like Apollo(I love the continuity of naming the current project Artemis, btw), there are a lot of advancements made on the pathway to landing on Mars.
America is also AMAZING at being the unmitigated bully of the world... The only country in the world to actually use the horror of nuclear weapons on people... and they did it TWICE.
Nice, Kudos to your dad, if no techs like him, no missions, period. Many a "bacon" was saved in Apollo by guys like your father. Check the Apollo 12 mission for a good example. Best to him and you!! : )
Joe, there's a lot of hoo-haa on RUclips about the JWST detecting artificial light on Proxima B "There's Life!", and capturing images that potentially debunk the widely accepted big bang theory. However, pretty much all of these videos have little substance or just bang on about what we already know about the JWST and are on crappy clickbait channels. Reckon you could look into this and come up with some answers (with Joe)?
This video was incredibly well-researched and you did a great job of sharing the information accurately and succinctly. And I agree: missions beyond Artemis V will most likely happen, cuz if there's one thing American politicians hate more than giving government programs more money, it's China beating them in any way.
Hi Joe, great video. Loved it all. Huge fan of all your work. I do understand that your quip about aborting was a joke, and your are welcome to your perspective. Just wish it wasn't in there. Please keep making such great content. I will keep happily consuming
So we are coming up on the end of 2022, SLS hasn't left the ground yet, funky space suit issues... I'm loosing hope that i will see this come to fruition in my life time... At least i got to see Skylab, Columbia and all the shuttles, i still remember the gut punch i felt when Challenger blew up, MIR, Hubble and it's repairs, Voyagers leaving the solar system, the pale blue dot, the first data sets of the GAIA mission, rovers and a dainty little helicopter drone on Mars, JWST went up and it worked, crashing spaceships on asteroids, amazing real time footage of the sun, finding planets all over the place, ion drives, space tourists, Captain Kirk got to go to space for real, the ISS is still going strong, Tiangong, Magellan, Galileo, Cassini, Messenger!!! To name but a few...
Apollo 2 and 3 were not skipped; they never existed. Apollos 4 to 6 were labeled as such to fit with the new numbering of Apollo 7, so named by Wally Schirra to represent the Mercury 7 astronaut group, of which both he and the dead Gus Grissom had been members.
So here’s a fun fact. The Orion capsule is not welded or bolted together. The entire capsule was cut out of solid steel with a CNC machine. Like a 140 foot tall CNC machine. And I only know this because I’ve seen the capsule Being made with my own eyes
If Blue Origin wants to make up for that missed government funding I'm sure Cialis and Viagra would have quite the bidding war to get that sponsorship deal😂😂😂
Great video and always very informative. One thing I wonder about is the Chinese program. Please correct me if I'm wrong but aren't all or most of their lunar missions and space technology shown via CGI? I understand national pride and thr Chinese culture is very much about saving face. Combine that with state run media and information controls, and I believe there is not a minor amount of doubt about their space program capabilities. Again. Please correct me if you think I'm way of base. And great video as always :)
The Apollo Guidance Computer wasn't just weaker than your phone, but also your phone charger. That's right, a simple power brick has more compute capability than the computer that landed humans on the moon.
so I see Blue origin is back on track for a lander; have NASA executives figured out yet that starship was a ridiculous idea or will it take some more time? (seriously what the hell were they thinking? it looks like a joke)
My humble opinion, we have lost 50 years, sad to think we want to win a pissing contest against China and Russia, here we go again, let's do it because is the right thing to do, exploration of space is on hold, we should've explored the moon, built some sort of base on it and at least be very close to or even be on the surface of Mars...what a shame we didn't had a pissing contest with somebody before...just saying.
And 50 years we should have already colonized the moon but for some reason we have not, which makes you ? What happened 50 years ago, my big question is the moon dust issue and major exposure to radiation, tell this day the Russian melt down area is still highly radiated
Get the Moon right. Then think about Mars a few decades later. If we can't support a base on the Moon, going further is foolish. Robots can explore the Solar System in the mean time.
How dumb can NASA be? If they must use the SpaceX Starship for this solution why not build a version that can be used as a permanent module for the Gateway and send it with a single flight for far less than using the non-reusable Artemis launcher that cost a metric sh1t ton of money to launch?
Great video as usual. The only thing that bugged me was that Artemis has a goal of putting the first woman and person of color on the moon. How about putting the most qualified people on the moon? Chances are, at least one of them will be a woman or person of color anyway. Now, just like our Vice President and newest supreme Court Justice, we'll all know they were chosen because of racist leftist attitudes and not because they were the most qualified people. I subscribe to the MLK attitude of not judging people by the color of their skin. If all the best astronauts are black, great. If they're all white or Latino, great. Nobody cares and I wish people could get past this racist and sexist BS.
"Not the least of which is the economic and political landscape that we'll be in in the next eight years, both of which are super stable these days." I almost got knocked out of my chair by the powerful sarcasm in that statement.
I hate to be a stickler but at 13:00 it looks like the gateway goes slow while at the low point in the lunar orbit and faster in the higher part of the orbit. This is backwards, things speed up as they get closer to the body they are orbiting.
I once read that using Orion as the vehicle to get to the moon and then Starship as the lander is like using a tender to cross the ocean and then an ocean liner to get to port. Very apt. At some point, it will make sense to use an ocean liner all the way. I agree that a space race with China will help stimulate space exploration.
Yeah well that "ocean liner" better show some concrete signs of being able to do the mission or it's going to be a long wait between Artemis 2 and Artemis 3.
I am a proud member of team Artemis I and work for one of the many NASA contactors that have been working hard to get this rocket to the moon. In my case, I work on the Mobile Launcher (ML) and make sure that all the fluids (compressible and incompressible) travel from a tank to somewhere on the SLS or ML. So, why would I ever watch your video on the Artemis program, you ask? Simple, you do a fantastic job summarizing the available information for all to consume and enjoy! And that's true not just for Artemis.
THANK YOU! Your work is absolutely vital, and I'm a huge fan!
Wow
Damn. That's high praise!
Thanks! Both for your comment and the work you're doing.
I watched challenger and Columbia blow up.
Russians kept going to space.
US is a third rate space program.Billions spent, not much exploration
Tell everyone the public needs live 24/7 video feed to and from the moon. We deserve full transparency.
Orion Commander: “Alexa, dock with Artemis.”
Alexa: “Playing, Rock Me Amadeus, by Falco.”
It could be a lot worse actually. Remember that spaceships have self destructs!
@@mattperson7293 “Alexa, stop self destruct!”… “Ok, calling Scrooge McDuck, mobile.”
😆😆
NASA was taking us to space with Orion!
HAL 9000 vibe?! "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
You hit one of the things I'm most excited about. We are finally going to have some decent HD video of what it looks like to walk on the moon. I cannot wait to see this. Live streaming would be fantastic but I'll settle for some recorded 4k video of the whole thing. No more grainy, AI upscaled and cleaned up 70s video quality. Finally!
And no more space doubters and flat earthers to try and ruin our fun they will all be silent or silenced.
I am excited about what media/IT jobs will be available related to the moon
@@griimrose Optimist.
Hope nobody points the camera at the sun, eh? (With apologies to Al Bean. Though they'll probably have dozens of 'em, including ordinary phones.)
@@griimrose They will just say its CGI now.
I'm just sitting here smiling from ear to ear. I cannot wait to see this mission to succeed!
must enjoy watching cgi bullshittery
@@thevlaka your right, there’s a lot of people lying about all of this 😂 🤡
@@thevlaka 🤡
LOL.. It's very easy to believe this con because it's all designed to leave you in awe and admiration. Inspiring you to fantasize something that doesn't exist, thereby conning you psychologically and financially in taxes. Yes, the hard fact remains: the space programme is all fake unfortunately.
@@falconheavy809 Thunderf00t
I am so excited! We haven't had a launch so powerful in a very long time! I will be keeping my daughter home from school and we're gonna watch from the river. My dad has front row seats at the KSC Engineering Development Lab Building. He built the Haz Gas Detection systems for Artemis.
I was a freshman in high school when we first went to the moon. Watched every launch until the 3 or 4 TV networks in existence at that time found the public getting bored with it(I guess after they found out it wasn’t made of cheese) and stopped covering the moon landings. I’ll be happy to see it happen again and get to see it live from the gateway and lander.
For me it was the Space Shuttle I mysteriously had a tummy ache every time it went up so I can watch it live
Ohh! you just reminded me of the best memory..
my niece was maybe three years old and I caught my uncle whispering to her “did you know that the moon is actually made of cheese?”
😅her face. Wooooahhh.. really?🤭?”
“Of course. “ he stated.
Hey! You’re a TEACHER!! What the heck lol?”
So he says “c’mon let her be a little kid for petesakes “ lol
I almost forgot about that moment.
I love him for it.
It's interesting that the only president overseeing all of the alleged "moon landings" was that notorious American liar: Richard "I'm not a crook" Nixon...
Remember when they pretended he talked to the astronauts... from the whitehouse... on a landline... in the 60's??
-
"Good times".
Freshman here can’t wait to experience the same as you
When nasa was asked why we didn't go back to the moon .they said"we lost the technology".mankind's greatest achievement was lost in the back room to the janitor 🤔. SUSPECT.SUPER SUSPECT
It's gonna be so wild to see 4K footage of the moon, something we've only seen in sci-fi until now.
Are you sure ? 4k video is 25 Mb/s, The LLCD (Lunar Laser Communication Demonstration) in 2013 made error-free upload rate of 20 Mb/s. That's what I could find.
Edit: the upload from the moon to Earth is: 622 Mb/s, it's the other way which is only 20 Mb/s. The previous record was: 4k/s
@@autohmae While not streamed, they will for certain take high quality video that they bring home with them on little memory sticks.
@@autohmae 4k is a resolution. You can. Compress it to any bitrate you want. You're also confusing mb/s with mbps.
@@sanitarium017 if you can compress it so any bitrate, it's lossy, it's not 4k anymore. 🙂
Hey! We have the same name! And I agree
your intro is seriously underrated. I watch a crap-ton of yt videos .yours is short, clear, identifiable, not over the top, quiet, simple and fun I'm probably missing something but this is my top rated intro.
Vsauce! Michael here.
@@aygwm joe is womderful, but no educational youtuber will ever top vsauce for me. Nostalgia alone will ensure that
8 Bit Guy's intro is also awesome
If there is one thing that will get me to pass/close on a YT vid is a self-indulgent, long intro. So yes thank you Joe.
1.5 million subscribers isn't exactly 'seriously underrated.'
Personally I think it's great that we are heading back to the moon. It makes perfect sense that in preparing for Mars and beyond, it also gives us opportunity to expand on the Apollo missions. In addition, I hope they decide to revisit earlier landing sites, which will hopefully silence the "We never went" brigade!
The 'never went' brigade ignores any evidence they don't like, so they will ignore any new evidence unfortunately.
Sorry to say I don't think you can silence those kind of people today, they'll only twist it to "the moon isn't real" or something like that
@@jacobdaboss8413 I agree, I find in my experience that you cannot argue with idiots.
Those people will never change their view on it. It doesn't have anything to do with a lack of evidence; it is a lack of critical thinking abilities.
They don't believe the space station exists. They will post like fifty videos of astronauts looking like they are suspended by cables, and space footage that looks like cgi.
watching this the day after Artemis launched. I felt a sense of pride in humanity watching it reach into the heavens for its first time. I can’t imagine what it was like to see it in person
Don't delude yourself bud, have some self-respect. It's very easy to believe this con because it's all designed to leave you in awe and admiration. Inspiring you to fantasize something that doesn't exist, thereby conning you psychologically and financially in taxes. Yes, the hard fact remains: the space programme is all fake unfortunately.
My biggest problem with SLS is that they made SpaceX fly Falcon 9 multiple _multiple_ times before they'd even _consider_ them for human rating, but SLS just has to just fly once. Then it's "All systems are go for the first two -suckers- _astronauts_ to fly around the Moon!" All this from a consortium of companies all with competing interests and no overall managerial structure to make sure everything works. Not to mention Boeing is involved, which over the last 20+ years hasn't been a hallmark of success.
The idea is that SLS (like the rockets before it) was designed to be human rated from the beginning, while Falcon 9 wasn't. But yeah, I'd definitely trust multiple flight tests over pretty much any simulation and testing on the ground.
This was actually partly spacexs choice. While it would not shock me if additional flights where added becouse of politics nasa have two ways of getting to human rating. One involves more flights and the other a ton of more paperwork for every single part. There are plenty of real things to complain about with nasa. This is not really one worth the time.
It's a 2 billion dollar project and R and D is extremely intense and has been already in motion from decades and to cap that NASA has decades of experience and countless top scientists where as the guys of SpaceX accepts themselves that they learn through experiments so they are prone to mistake and you can't put human life at risk
They claim their certification process precludes the need for getting "human rated". As we have seen in recent years trust Boeing as far as you can throw their old space technology.
What are you talking about? I think you are getting something mixed up.
SpaceX did exactly the same thing, NASA wanted a finalized booster that doesn‘t change every launch, hnece SpaceX froze the booster at Block 5 in mid 2018.
Then they build and tested various aspects of Dragon 2 on the pad and such. Then they had exactly one unmanned Demo (Spx-DM1) and finally the second flight was already a manned test flight (Spx-DM2).
Since that unmanned test flight they are now regularly flying Crew missions to the ISS.
Dragon 2 was the linchpin here, not Falcon 9. You can‘t say you tested your rocket if you have only ever tested the booster, that makes no sense.
This is exactly the same NASA is doing with SLS.
Saying that the Apollo guidance computer had less power than a smartphone is like saying that a bathtub holds less water than an olympic pool. A smartphone has more power than super computers in the 90s. Also, computers in space are generally not very fast compared to their earth counterpart due to radiation hardening, so I wouldn't be surprised is Orion's computers are actually slower than today's smartphones as well, especially given how long it was in development. There's no doubt that they're orders of magnitude faster and smaller than Apollo's, though
Quite true. It's difficult to find current real-life examples of computers with anywhere near as little computing power as the Apollo guidance computer.
Digital pregnancy tests have more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer. Smart light bulbs have more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer.
The word Claculation Power does not at all make sense here. We talk about Computation Capabilities that could be mesured on the fraction of a digit. Strange it is not done and published and at the end its Programming.
Very true. I watched a RUclips video somewhere (sorry, too lazy to look it up now) that calculated that your average USB charger has probably more computing power than the Apollo lander. And yes, USB chargers have chips.
Interesting "rear-view mirror" stuff for sure, and I bet a lot of the draftsmen who designed the Sat V rocket did not have cads, I know since I was "on the board" as a kid in the 60's at a firm that was building electric power plants and oil refineries. I was a "piping designer" by title, then I got drafted and left that career behind for a while. So, and the ancient Egyptian did not even have steel chisels (copper instead) to build the pyramids either. What does all this prove, you use what you have at the time and make do with it. Apollo is the best example of that we have today, a world history making endeavor done with basic tools of the time (over 50 yrs ago) and the courageous "right stuff" astronauts who took risks, big risks, regardless of the best they had to work with, regarding the equipment/support at the time. Same will be said in the future about our today's "advanced" computers, in 50-100 years: "Hoooly fuuuk can you believe that crazy digital shit they had to work with way back then"!!! LOL ;D
amusing analogy of bathtub to a pool, yes comparing phone to AGC doesn't make sense. I think what should be emphasized is reliability, that is what AGC had way more than a phone (it also got to ride a zillion horsepower rocket which at this time we have yet to fly such a thing). A guidance computer that can remedy itself in case cosmic rays dislodge some electrons in memory banks and also be able to prioritize tasks during critical moments such as last few hundred feet from touchdown.
Great episode, Joe! Clean. Simple and easy to understand. Thank you. (addendum: I'm getting Henson!)
Joe is like an old-time reporter on these things, a younger Walter Cronkite (who absolutely Loved reporting on this subject, for example).
@@ronschlorff7089 That is one heck of a great compliment to Joe! 😊
I really hope they do live stream all this amazing stuff...one of my favorite parts of this incredible future we are a part of.
It has indeed been in development for quite a long time. You mention since 2011-though I’d argue SLS is essentially just a rebranding of Ares V so it’s development can be traced back to 2004.
"pissing contest": It's sad that it's needed but I hope so Joe. Been through so many NASA plans to return to the moon since Apollo that I'm highly skeptical Artemis as described here will actually happen. Maybe the "pissing contest" will be the impetus. Without that sort of external pressure I foresee funding and the technical issues of human rating a lander and the EVA suit as pushing the timeline a fair bit further in to the future than NASA is planning.
Too bad we can't just do things because they're awesome things to do. Maybe when enough of us live in space, we will become better creatures.
The craziest part of the mission to me is that the payload will orbit around the moon in an orbit that is perpendicular to the direction it came in. Basically like a clock as if you’re looking at it. So it will always be able to see the earth In a longitudinal axis rather than an axis that crosses the back side of the moon.
That's really cool.
Agreed, super cool, and also a new trajectory, meaning new lunar data as well as no possible radio silence issues! I mean, there could be relay satellites, but this way it's a non-issue!
However it does not have continuous communication with the landing site, but fortunately the landing site has permanent line of sight with earth
@@victoriaeads6126 no permanent communication with landing site
Wow. How much energy does that change of orbit need?
When I was a little kid, the way of the world as I experienced it was that missions to the the Moon were always going on from time to time. Maybe at some particular moment there was no one up there, but just wait a while, they will be soon enough. The way the seasons come and go. Apollo 11 happened just before I was cogent, and Apollo 17 launched shortly after I turned 8. Distant memories after all this time, but I still remember how it felt like regular routine, the only kind of world I had ever known. “Are they on the Moon today, Dad?” “No, they‘re going next Tuesday.”
As a 51 year old American, the Apollo program happened just as I was born, I have no memory of it but remain fascinated by it even today. I'm absolutely stoked that we are going back to the moon and beyond!!
Each Starship launch is going to cost about 5% as much as each Artemis launch. Eventually, it makes sense that Starship will take over the whole job of launching people, materials and equipment to Gateway and the Moon.
well, currently the return value still makes the sls/artemis the better one, even if that would be the actual price. since we actually know, the falcon price and the seat price for the dragon is a bit different...
Fun fact about the Apollo Guidance Computer: The phrase "It had as much power as your cell phone" was coined by the early 2000s..... long before iPhone. The ACG featured 2KB of RAM and 4KB of ROM, with a processor millions of times less powerful than our modern smartphones.
Yeah, a Nokia phone has more processing power.
It also was not an general purpose computer.
Your phone wastes most of its capacity
@@jhoughjr1 You are correct in saying it is not a general-purpose computer, and specialized computer are still a big part of the world. That said, It is still a Von Neuman computer nonetheless capable of loading digital programs into RAM and using a dedicated processor for executing different sets of dedicated instructions on instructions also within RAM. This differed from prior types of computers, such as analog computers (such as the cog-based ones of our ancestors), purely register-based computers running off of separate program tape and switches instead of RAM, hard-coded calculators which couldn't be reprogrammed, and biological computers (women who did math as a job, the OG computers). This was an INSANE accomplishment for the time, especially for something so small (several pounds, but still pretty dang small for the 1960s).
@@dylangtech If I'm not mistaken it was the very first computer with an LSI design in a compact form factor, and also the first one with a solid-state ROM. The computer was an incredible innovation in the field of computing in general, and it was purpose built for a very specific task. In fact so much of the R&D that went into the Apollo Program ended up helping the technological progress of the private sector to a large extent. I hope the Artemis Program can do the same for technology in our day and age, and that is why it'll be an investment worth spending, beyond the already incredible feat of going back to the moon and inspiring the younger generation.
I actually watched the advertisement all the way through, I can't overstate what an achievement that is on your part and the product looks great too.
@@Cheap_Grey_Plastic Kind of, I've already got a safety razor that takes the cheap disposable blades and goes fine and those have been around for ever, but this one does look much more slick and who knows it might even work a bit better with those higher tolerances.
What the heck, here we are again?! I swear I'm just cruising the comments on channels I'm subbed to! Hope all is well down under friend.
@@jackfarmboy Hahaha, we spend too much time on RUclips. Good choice in channels though. Maybe the time zones give me an advantage to get in first. See you somewhere else random soon!
I can't wait to see how moon landing debunkers react to these new landings!
let them wait until china tries to colonise it , then theyll believe
That will be super interesting.
Them and flat-earthers even though they often fall in the same group.
NASA has moonrock brought back by Apollo crews. How can that not be enough proof we went to the Moon? C'mon, guys. Still, when I examine the missions in detail l struggle to understand how Apollo happened. Seems miraculous.
well keep waiting. Old nasa said we’d be back by now.
The only way to shut up everyone is to have 24/7 live video feed to and from the moon. Full transparency
11:25 This is why I don't see space X's starship being used for lunar landings any time soon. Fully reusable or not. It's just too big, too complex, and too inconvenient with its need for a lift or crane. It's just too much of everything to be feasible. Too much that can go wrong, too much unnecessary complexity. I feel NASA "chose" space X as a publicity stunt to get exposure through musk's and space X's massive online following, but doesn't really intend to use it any time soon as the development of Artemis proves.
On top of that, even the relatively simple cargo version of starship is now 2 years late for its first orbital test and hasn't even been to space yet or tested re-entry. Let alone space X having to develop a version rated for crewed flight with full life support systems. I don't see space X developing the starship rated for human space travel any time soon, especially not before Artemis launches and lands on the moon. Again, starship just too big, too complex, and too inconvenient. Falcon heavy is far more convenient, cheaper, more flexible, and easy to assemble for cargo, and for crews Artemis is as good as ready (compared to starship), and just far more plausible since WAY less can go wrong.
Sorry but starship is not flying people to the moon any time soon. Let alone mars.
15:38 EXACTLY.
I don't think you're gonna need a heat shield on the moon...
I got that one "unless they are not allowed to abort in Florida".... hilarious. 10/10
I think a very interesting part of the program is that the lunar orbiter will never be out of sight of the Earth. It will orbit different than the Apollo program.
@Thanks 🅥 wrong channel, scambot
I want all of this to happen on schedule, but I feel like we'll be sitting here watching videos in 2028 about a new schedule putting us on the moon in 2034. The JWST timeline has scarred me.
Why jwst went flawless.
@@BladeValant546 just 15 years late and oh so fake fake fake
How late is it already, and how far over budget? You are on the right track, it taint never gonna happen...
@@richspillman4191 fake? What the hell are you on about. JWST is one of the greatest achievements humankind has ever done. Maybe the greatest achievement if we look exclusively at space telescopes or telescopes aimed at space.
@@wolfiemuse Absolutely fake, there have been video debunking it, the images are artist composites, who put the color to the images? It might be one of humankind's greatest achievements, but the category is in fraud, not in science.
Lmao at Joe's slick, but hilarious introduction to Henson Shaving products 😂
The space race is going to ramp up over the next 20-50 year's, but given our limited resources on earth, it will be interesting to see which country does what space project's to become the dominant space force who will lead us into the 21st century, and beyond. Thankyou for another great presentation Joe, and keep up the great work.
Now that i have finished binge watching my 3rd RUclips channel, i will getting back to having an immense amount fun in binge watching all of Joe's video's ❤️🔥👍
Unless EM's SS fails miserably or is sabotaged intentionally by another nation, the US is on a course to dominate space for quite some time to come. Estimates put the Spacex reusability lead at ~ 10 years, and any competitors w/o this capability are long term also-rans.
I found out about Artemis/SLS back in middle school while randomly scrolling Wikipedia lol (during the 2014 WC days) like 8 years ago. Now in my 3rd year at university, and I can't wait for Aug 29 :)
"Enough solar power for 2 3-bedroom houses."
Gosh. Imagine if every 3 bedroom house on Earth was solar powered. At least partially? Who's with me
Will the Artemis rocket still have its solid rocket boosters attached as it orbits the Earth as portrayed?
(Seems counter-intuitive to me.)
No, it’s definitely not a perfectly accurate animation. 😄
@@joescott actually I thought it was to scale.
I wouldn't expect Adobe illustrator to be a sponsor anytime soon.😁
We love you regardless, Joe! 😂😂❤
And the visible engine flames are an error too. Hydrogen / Oxygen flames are almost blue to clear. Only the carbon rich solid rocket boosters produce visible flames or smoke.
"They will be the first human beings to see that in 50 years." This will only be true if the Dear Moon Project doesn't get there first.
It will probably be a bit before SpaceX puts people on Starship, but yeah, it may be around the same time.
@@danieljensen2626 What many forget is how often Starships will launch. Falcon 9 is launching once a week, but once Starship is operational it will launch at least 2 or 3 times a week, maybe more. So they reach the number of flights needed for human rating much much faster.
@@danieljensen2626 Dear Moon is currently scheduled for 2023, while Artemis 2 is 2024. Although both SpaceX and NASA are not known for running on schedule.
@@knowledgeisgood9645 Per the SpaceX plan for Lunar Starship for Artemis III, they will launch 1 Starship every 12 days (GAO report denying the HLS complaints pg 12). For Starship to get to even a once a week cadence will likely take years. It took Falcon 9 about 13 years to reach a once a week launch cadence.
Yusaku Maezawa has said that he is willing to wait until Starship is ready for Dear Moon, so Artemis III is almost certainly likely to happen first, since it will take up to 10 flights to get a Starship to the Moon (GAO pg 12).
@@steveaustin2686 HLS is just one type of Starship. If we add all Starlink and other flights the total number will be much larger and will be done faster than Falcon 9. The whole reason with developing Starship has been more mass and faster turn-around. They might not achieve it, but it is the goal.
Only two astronauts on the first Lunar Starship seems kinda silly when it theoretically will have space for dozens.
Not really
You only need two to test the facilities
And if you do fill all the seats and something goes wrong you've endangered dozens of people unnecessarily or maybe even killed them
@@Alucard-gt1zf They could at least take a whole lot of stuff with them. Why else have such a massive lander and not use the capacity?
The early Orion flights will have 4 crew and half will go to the surface. The plan for the later flights is 6 crew with 4 going to the surface.
@@joyl7842
They are?
You really think they're just gonna send 2 astronauts in an empty room?
11:00 The Dynetics Alpaca original plan was to drop off the outer 2 tanks and ascend with the inner 2 tanks and cabin. But that apparently changed and it will keep the outer 2 tanks on now all the way through, so it is also fully reusable.
"Assuming they'll still be allowed to abort in Florida."
ZING
Joe, your logic is absolutely solid. Now having said that, America isn't as unified as it used to be. Now having said that, if China gets a little froggy and jumps say on the terrestrial level with some militant actions, then that may unify the nation. Another great video Joe. Thank you so much.
Hope soon
I think the us was never really unified. You just had less media propaganda bombarding you about it for political reasons in the past.
Russia invading Ukraine hasn’t unified the US - why would China invading Taiwan? The Apollo program was concurrent with the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War. Those weren’t very unifying.
NASA didn’t select Starship because it is reusable, they chose it because it is billions of dollars less, and you get a whole building with large laboratories and equipment on the moon instead of a vehicle with as much space as a smart car.
No, SpaceX had the best HLS Option A bid, before cost was factored in (pg 4 & pg 8, Apr 2021 HLS Option A Source Selection Statement).
And a much stronger likelihood of timely development. Not to mention giving the Moon program a hope of surviving the cancellation of SLS, which they have to be worried about.
One of the biggest reasons that it's less expensive is that it's reusable.
Who cares about all this tech stuff guys, it looks the part, a bit like the moon rocket Luna in "Destination Moon", the first serious movie (1950) about a mission to the moon, 72 freaking years ago!! And if you did not know it, it was a "privately financed venture" to boot, hence a little nod to SpaceX!! That's my opinion, and it should be yours!! ;D LOL
However, the other lunar lander versions look capable enough, and reminiscent of the Apollo LEM's. And I don't think Joe needs to worry too much about us "cluttering up the moon" with landing modules either!! ;D
Except it'll cost way more than what Elon said it will lol
I haven't watched you in quite a while. I forgot how much fun it is to watch you do your thing.
Mentioning space dust reminds me of this difficult hazard. Have we made any progress towards solving it?
I thought they knew about water on the Moon in the 60s when Nasa landed Apollo in Hollywood studios 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
We can’t survive long term in micro gravity. To the degree we can or not survive in one sixth gravity indicates whether Mars is possible.
Love your content Joe! You always deliver such quality stuff
Love the videos joe! keep up the good work, best of wishes from Australia
Nr.1.Problem i got with Climate-Coverage is the big Lack of Shout-Outs. Never a mention of Hbomberguy, UpisNotJump, Some More News, Second Thought, OCC or Climate-Town.
This whole thing gives me goosebumps. GOING TO THE MOON! I was born too late to be a witness the first time around. I sincerely hope that the technology of today will allow us all to experience this in amazing ways. GO NASA!!!
True space travellers don't use tin cans with rockets attached.
Go humans!
@@leonardgibney2997 Yeah, they just hold their breath like Superman... duh!
Second time around for me, yawn!!! ZZZZZZZ! ................Just kidding! "Fantastic", as the old/first astronauts used to say a lot when on the moon!! ;D LOL
Ladies and gentlemen, we have liftoff, Artemis 1 is currently moon bound .
I can’t believe I might see a second moon exposition. Looking forward to this
I wasn't aware Artemis I launch is only 2 weeks away. Well, that's something I'll be very excited about for the next 2 weeks
Given how long it has taken for SLS development when compared to the timeline SpaceX has shown in developing Falcon Heavy and now Starship, it remains to be seen which rocket will be ready to lift the heavy loads needed to build the moon orbiting space station.
I do question how quickly SpaceX can develop the crew capable moon landing Starship though. They seem good at putting together test stuff, but to evolve Starship into a moon lander and the into an interplanetary vehicle....the jury remains out for me. The refinement needed for that is huge and with supposedly only a few years to develop the moon lander and concurrently a Mars mission crew Starship....I do not think they will be able to do that before 2030 for the moon lander and 2035-40 for a Mars mission. Of course that is not their desired timeline by any means. Given how long Falcon Heavy was in development as well as Crew Dragon....I hope I'm wrong though as I want to see both happen in my lifetime.
my hope is that it does seem like SpaceX's progress since founding 20 years ago is on an exponential slope and not a linear one. also that they are not bound by the random whims of us govt spending and seem to have already found a profitable business model to fund further progress. i think the only things stopping them is global war or a complete breakdown in leadership. im quite hopeful, im hoping the moon or mars is an affordable and safe tourist destination by the time im 60 or 70 😂
I might be remembering this wrong but wasn’t the falcon heavy only delayed because of the falcon 9 evolution? Falcon 9 kept evolving with its block variants and so falcon heavy was forced to evolve with it causing delays. stuff like that won’t happen with starship
But again I don’t know 100% if that’s actually the full reason and i might just be misremembering all of that
I've been watching this show for years. You be cracking jokes on this episode. I see you striving for comedy on this one. You had me dying, bro. Keep it up
Voice control? You can write off that crew. Astronaut: “prepare to dock”. Orion: “opening airlock”.
In space, voice command can not hear you scream. Or say anything for that matter.
After hearing Elon's "aspirational" timelines it's weird to think that it will take so long for Artemis to get people on the moon, but I trust NASA's timeline a lot more and I'm glad there's a plan to land people there again. I do wonder if the gateway construction couldn't be done a bit faster? I thought most of the tech is already developed for putting stuff in that orbit, no?
that's not how privatized works br0
Apollo program lasted 10 years and had 32 successful launches. Artemis has been going for 5 years and hasn't done a single launch yet.
I mean... no space station is got that far before and if Gateways have any problems is pretty much bye-bye as no way to repair it in time so they have to make sure that Gateway can stay there safely in the first go, more than pure construction which I'm sure if said they just gonna put it on the LEO is much easier and faster. I chose slower but safer any time of the day.
You trust NASA's timeline? hahaha. SpaceX does circles around every program out there.
@@rrangel1968 I trust NASA's timeline because NASA has done this before and also isn't run by an entitled attention-seeking manchild who thinks that just because he's rich he's free to sexually harass women who work for him.
I did what you said and went to the Henson site and purchased a blue safety razor. With of course the 100 razors. It is the best safety razor I have ever shaved with. Thank you so much for turning me on to such an outstanding product.
hoo boy, you make me feel pressured to buy them myself lol.
I’m intrigued
Feels like a spam bot, probably its not, still feels like one
11:09 Dynetics was also fully reusable with the only exception being the fuel tanks , but even before Starship was selected Dynetics had changed it so those are reused as well
So yeah, Dynetics was also 100% reusable , only the National Team lander would leave the landing stage behind
14:00 I know that there was no way of knowing at the time of upload , but for anyone watching in the future , Nasa changed the Artemis 4 mission plan to include a crewed landing , and if you are wondering, Starship will also carry out the HLS part of the mission , and there were no lawsuits this time (And yes , this does mean Spacex will receive another $2.89 Billion, like they got for Artemis 3)
14:30 For Artemis 5 NASA has confirmed that it will NOT use Starship but will require a new lander , that is required to be 100% reusable , and both the National Team and Dynetics have confirmed that they will be competing for this contract , with Boeing joining the national Team and Northrop leaving them to join Dynetics
15:34 Not so quick ... Congress , while not commiting to fund further missions made it a requirement that future Artemis missions will need to be carried out by a rocket that can bring at least 42 tons to TLI in a single launch ... this requirement applies to future Artemis missiosns until at least Artemis 14 and of course was designed to make it impossible for Starship to even be considered for competition with SLS and basically ensure that the SLS will be kept around until at least the late 2030s (if congress chooses to fund further Artemis missions , that is)
I'm ready to bet that the starship will never work and NASA will fall back on a plan B with another contractor; which would be frankly much more reasonable (this has never made any sense honestly to use this thing)
Yeah, american ingenuity... With help from the Europeans, japanese, Australians, New Zealanders................ Hmmmm
Not only is starship insanely ambitious with things like elevators and reusability, but the thing is so big it's going to take 18 rocket launches to get it to the moon. Starship is a really dumb idea, and basically every current/former NASA engineer agrees so. It's too big, too heavy and the reusability is nowhere close to the costs Elon claims. In fact judging by what SpaceX charges, SpaceX is the most expensive of all the launch partners (based on actual contracts rather than claimed launch prices). Also, you forgot to mention that NASA is also funding Blue Origin's lander and will be using that to land on the moon as well. Congress basically turned what should be a science mission into a way of funneling billions to billionaires.
For any remaining Elon fanboys, Elon only wins these contracts because of lobbying. Tesla and SpaceX are only around due to insane amounts of government funding, without which none of them would have gotten off the ground. If NASA had the budget or leaniency of SpaceX (or other private corps) missions like SLS would occur far more frequently and at a fraction of the price. And for all those wondering "why SLS costs so much" well, because NASA has to funnel all the money over to SpaceX and Blue Origin. That's literally the reason why.
15:38 SpaceX can sidestep that issue entirely with F9 and Crew Dragon until Starship is reliable enough to be human rated for launch and landing:
1. Launch astronauts on a F9/Crew Dragon, just like other SpaceX crew missions.
2. Launch a crew Starship (or Lunar Starship) uncrewed.
3. Dock with Starship in Earth orbit. Humans transfer to Starship while empty Crew Dragon stays in orbit.
4. Execute mission with Starship.
5. Return Starship to Earth, dock with the Crew Dragon, and re enter.
6. Starship lands if it's a capable variant, or goes into a parking orbit to await refueling.
That's similar to how Orion will interact with Lunar Starship anyway for Artemis, and no human crew will have to transit Earth's atmosphere in Starship. I'd be surprised if SpaceX doesn't try this at least once during Starship development, even if totally unrelated to Artemis.
Two problems. First, Crew Dragon can't fly by itself that long as it has a 10 day limit. The Artemis III landing looks to be about 13 days long, 6 there and back with about 7 on the surface. The ISS is in a 51.6 degree inclination orbit and Artemis will likely use a similar 32.5 degree inclination parking orbit that Apollo used. Also the ISS only has 2 docking ports for Crew Dragon, Starliner, cargo Dragon, and likely Dream Chaser. One of those two are taken up by the on-orbit crew's capsule. So timing would be an issue for that open port.
Second, Lunar Starship is basically out of propellant once it returns to lunar orbits after the surface mission is over. The SpaceX launch cadence for Artemis III is 1 Starship every 12 days per the GAO report denying the HLS complaints (pg 12). Per that same GAO report (pg 27), with Musk's payload update for Starship (~150t to LEO), the unmanned Lunar Starship takes up to 10 flights (~108 days) to get refilled to go to the Moon. So too long to send a tanker as Lunar Starship can only wait 100 days in lunar orbit per the Apr 2021 HLS Option A Source Selection Statement (pg 9).
A Starship Shuttle (similar to Lunar Starship w/o legs) could directly replace SLS/Orion for the LEO to lunar orbit and back to LEO bit, once Starship's launch cadence matures to about a week per launch. The Falcon 9 took over 12 years to get to a once a week launch cadence, so Starship would likely take a while as well. Even with up to 10 Starship flights (~$147M ea*), a Crew Dragon ($300M), a Starliner ($360M), and a cargo Dragon ($133M), the trip would be $2.3B. Still less than the $4.1B for SLS/Orion or $3B if Boeing cuts SLS' cost in half.
* based on the $2.94B HLS Option A contract of 2 landings with 10 flights each. SpaceX had the GAO redact info on the propellant depot, but confirmed it was a propellant depot from the context. So the depot is likely something more and I think it is a crew transfer node for up to 3 capsules to attach to the depot. Two crew would stay on the depot, while six would go to the Moon. Four would go to the surface, while two stay on in lunar orbit. This would match up with the plans for the later Artemis missions of 4 crew to the surface.
Any reason Dragon Capsule couldn’t dock with a modified StarShip fuel depot? Considering it will have to be fuelled up anyway before it leaves for the moon?
Thank you Joe for making me aware of the Artemis program. There is so much hype about SpaceX that that we forget about the depth of planning of NASA Artemis future. Your a wonderful voice explaining the US Artemis future space endeavors which more of the public needs to be aware of. Thank you for your time and effort producing well informed information to the public.
NASA has done it before. SpaceX is nothing but 3D renderings, hype and venomous fanboys.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 SpaceX is the largest launch provider in the world, by far, NASAs trusted partner and an integral part of the Artemis program.
And maybe you should look in the mirror. Passive aggressive complaints about fanboys aren't exactly wholesome. No one is more toxic than those who hate on the accomplishments of others. It's perfectly alright to doubt the realism of their plans, but still cheer them on.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 what do you mean they haven't done anything but 3D renderings? You're absolutely joking right? SpaceX has already sent astronauts to the ISS.
Careful your jealousy is showing
“Assuming they’ll still be allowed to abort in Florida” I’m dead. That was great!
UNDERRATED!
Get kinda sick of people raggin' on the Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC), saying "had less power than a pocket calculator", etc. Yes, in some ways, the AGC is many orders of magnitude less "powerful" than your phone, but in others ways, it's WAY more powerful than your phone (particularly when it comes to I/O and machine control). And it had fixed rope memory for God's sake! Would love to see something that operationally secure and efficient in a phone (despite being physically impossible, as far as my very limited knowledge can tell). You could/would make a great video about the AGC, I reckon. Please, do that ... 🙏❤
EDIT: Would love to know why the toilet was in an anechoic chamber. Well, I have a pretty good idea, but it doesn't stop it looking pretty hilarious. And yes, Apollo 2 and 3 were skipped, but the Apollo Program did include the AS-201, AS-202 and AS-203 test flights of Saturn stages and the CSM, so there was actually 12 steps to the moon landing! Hehe.
DO NOT TRUST THE AUG 29 LAUNCH!!!
If you’ve seen Terminator 2, clearly we remember that Skynet becomes self aware on Aug 29th! I mean…supposedly in 1997…but still. Setbacks.
Do you want terminators? THIS is how you get terminators.
I'm glad that we're back to doing one of the things America does best: pushing the limits of technology. Hopefully, just like Apollo(I love the continuity of naming the current project Artemis, btw), there are a lot of advancements made on the pathway to landing on Mars.
America is also AMAZING at being the unmitigated bully of the world...
The only country in the world to actually use the horror of nuclear weapons on people... and they did it TWICE.
so excited to see the orion capsule in action!! my dad worked on its flight system software for over a decade so i’m personally invested!
Nice, Kudos to your dad, if no techs like him, no missions, period. Many a "bacon" was saved in Apollo by guys like your father. Check the Apollo 12 mission for a good example. Best to him and you!! : )
Your enthusiasm for these projects always makes me happy. Considering all the doom and gloom in the media, you're a breath of fresh air.
Joe, there's a lot of hoo-haa on RUclips about the JWST detecting artificial light on Proxima B "There's Life!", and capturing images that potentially debunk the widely accepted big bang theory.
However, pretty much all of these videos have little substance or just bang on about what we already know about the JWST and are on crappy clickbait channels.
Reckon you could look into this and come up with some answers (with Joe)?
This video was incredibly well-researched and you did a great job of sharing the information accurately and succinctly. And I agree: missions beyond Artemis V will most likely happen, cuz if there's one thing American politicians hate more than giving government programs more money, it's China beating them in any way.
Hi Joe, great video. Loved it all. Huge fan of all your work. I do understand that your quip about aborting was a joke, and your are welcome to your perspective. Just wish it wasn't in there. Please keep making such great content. I will keep happily consuming
So we are coming up on the end of 2022, SLS hasn't left the ground yet, funky space suit issues... I'm loosing hope that i will see this come to fruition in my life time... At least i got to see Skylab, Columbia and all the shuttles, i still remember the gut punch i felt when Challenger blew up, MIR, Hubble and it's repairs, Voyagers leaving the solar system, the pale blue dot, the first data sets of the GAIA mission, rovers and a dainty little helicopter drone on Mars, JWST went up and it worked, crashing spaceships on asteroids, amazing real time footage of the sun, finding planets all over the place, ion drives, space tourists, Captain Kirk got to go to space for real, the ISS is still going strong, Tiangong, Magellan, Galileo, Cassini, Messenger!!! To name but a few...
08:00 - Yeah, you watch the reactions of FLERFers/Space deniers when this happens... Coz, you know, they'll scream "Cee gee eyyyye!" hahaha 🤔😏 😎🇬🇧
Sad it's launching on a Monday, can't go see it now
Apollo 2 and 3 were not skipped; they never existed. Apollos 4 to 6 were labeled as such to fit with the new numbering of Apollo 7, so named by Wally Schirra to represent the Mercury 7 astronaut group, of which both he and the dead Gus Grissom had been members.
So here’s a fun fact. The Orion capsule is not welded or bolted together. The entire capsule was cut out of solid steel with a CNC machine. Like a 140 foot tall CNC machine. And I only know this because I’ve seen the capsule Being made with my own eyes
If Blue Origin wants to make up for that missed government funding I'm sure Cialis and Viagra would have quite the bidding war to get that sponsorship deal😂😂😂
Great video and always very informative. One thing I wonder about is the Chinese program. Please correct me if I'm wrong but aren't all or most of their lunar missions and space technology shown via CGI? I understand national pride and thr Chinese culture is very much about saving face. Combine that with state run media and information controls, and I believe there is not a minor amount of doubt about their space program capabilities.
Again. Please correct me if you think I'm way of base. And great video as always :)
The Apollo Guidance Computer wasn't just weaker than your phone, but also your phone charger. That's right, a simple power brick has more compute capability than the computer that landed humans on the moon.
so I see Blue origin is back on track for a lander; have NASA executives figured out yet that starship was a ridiculous idea or will it take some more time? (seriously what the hell were they thinking? it looks like a joke)
My humble opinion, we have lost 50 years, sad to think we want to win a pissing contest against China and Russia, here we go again, let's do it because is the right thing to do, exploration of space is on hold, we should've explored the moon, built some sort of base on it and at least be very close to or even be on the surface of Mars...what a shame we didn't had a pissing contest with somebody before...just saying.
And 50 years we should have already colonized the moon but for some reason we have not, which makes you ? What happened 50 years ago, my big question is the moon dust issue and major exposure to radiation, tell this day the Russian melt down area is still highly radiated
Get the Moon right. Then think about Mars a few decades later. If we can't support a base on the Moon, going further is foolish. Robots can explore the Solar System in the mean time.
How dumb can NASA be? If they must use the SpaceX Starship for this solution why not build a version that can be used as a permanent module for the Gateway and send it with a single flight for far less than using the non-reusable Artemis launcher that cost a metric sh1t ton of money to launch?
Stupid launch system will waste four heirloom space shuttle main engines with every launch, because this abomination is expendable...
The biggest problem with SLS?
They left the tank orange. Paint the bastard white and let us relive the Saturn V vibes fully.
"It would be voice operated"
Open the pod bay door Callisto.
I'm sorry dave, but I'm afraid i can't do that.
What makes you think ET will allow anyone to see their bases on the dark side? A legit question for which there is no definitive answer.
Your dislike for SpaceX is slightly showing Joe. I'm not sure why you show disdain for success.
You could have said the Orion capsule will have it's own version of HAL instead of Alexa...
Nasa: We've built a bigger capsule so the astronauts have more space! Also Nasa: Ok, let's put more astronauts in..
Weird political jab. Shame we can’t escape all that tribal garbage even here where we are talking about the moon and space. It’s very unfortunate
With Artemis II I hope they take with them a Hasselblad 500 EL and some 70 mm film for a little reenactment.
silly Joe nasa still streams 720p60 bc they think it is 2007 for some reason.... wtf better be 4k by the time we go back to the moon
Thanks Joe. You help me settle many arguments lol.
"assuming they'll be allowed to abort in Florida" 😂🤣😂🤣
Great video as usual. The only thing that bugged me was that Artemis has a goal of putting the first woman and person of color on the moon. How about putting the most qualified people on the moon? Chances are, at least one of them will be a woman or person of color anyway. Now, just like our Vice President and newest supreme Court Justice, we'll all know they were chosen because of racist leftist attitudes and not because they were the most qualified people. I subscribe to the MLK attitude of not judging people by the color of their skin. If all the best astronauts are black, great. If they're all white or Latino, great. Nobody cares and I wish people could get past this racist and sexist BS.
You are absolutely correct 👍
I’ll be so disappointed if the name of the voice activation system isn’t “HAL.”
Anyone that blows off sending people back to the moon don't really understand how hard space rolls.
The last manned mission was top secret. Apollo 20. 1974.
"Not the least of which is the economic and political landscape that we'll be in in the next eight years, both of which are super stable these days."
I almost got knocked out of my chair by the powerful sarcasm in that statement.
4:44 Nice "difficult difficult" reference there
ruclips.net/video/7mAFiPVs3tM/видео.html
An example of American ingenuity, as usual, will be fueled by Europeans
Are they bringing the yeast back and making beer with it? They can call the brew "Andromeda Strain"
I hate to be a stickler but at 13:00 it looks like the gateway goes slow while at the low point in the lunar orbit and faster in the higher part of the orbit. This is backwards, things speed up as they get closer to the body they are orbiting.
I once read that using Orion as the vehicle to get to the moon and then Starship as the lander is like using a tender to cross the ocean and then an ocean liner to get to port. Very apt. At some point, it will make sense to use an ocean liner all the way. I agree that a space race with China will help stimulate space exploration.
Yeah well that "ocean liner" better show some concrete signs of being able to do the mission or it's going to be a long wait between Artemis 2 and Artemis 3.
At least it hasn't taken 11 years of development and doesn't cost $2 billion per mission, unlike the "tender".