- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Artemis II has begun its rollout to the launch pad…
Posted on 1/17/26 at 10:13 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 1/17/26 at 10:13 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
As a man who has been fascinated by the space program from an early age, this is very exciting.
This is like being a fan of a team that was really good years ago, went through a long lull, and is good again. I was a huge space nerd growing up and followed every shuttle mission. NASA hasn’t done shite the last 15 years, but now it’s time to start paying attention again.
2
Posted on 1/17/26 at 11:14 pm to The Boat
Launch Window: February 6, 2026, to April 2026.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 12:23 am to The Boat
quote:
This is like being a fan of a team that was really good years ago, went through a long lull, and is good again. I was a huge space nerd growing up and followed every shuttle mission.
the shuttle sucked. A real sideways step in advancing space travel. quote:
NASA hasn’t done shite the last 15 years
I believe they've landed a couple mars rovers and did the whole James Webb telescope thing in the last 15 year. Exceedeing pretty much the entire history of the shuttle, except in the tragedy category.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:08 am to RollTide1987
Why am I worried about this mission?
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:11 am to hellifiknow
quote:
Why am I worried about this mission?
I don't know.
Are you going to be on it?
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:13 am to hellifiknow
quote:
Why am I worried about this mission?
They're carrying astronauts and not just equipment.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:48 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
I believe they've landed a couple mars rovers and did the whole James Webb telescope thing in the last 15 year. Exceedeing pretty much the entire history of the shuttle, except in the tragedy category.
OSIRIS-REX was a pretty cool mission too.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 8:27 am to auggie
No, but I am concerned for the safety of the astronauts for reasons I can't explain.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 11:18 am to RollTide1987
This is not a space mission, it is an employment program. Artemis is not reusable!
GROK:
The most commonly cited figure for the per-launch cost (covering production, operations, and related elements for SLS + Orion + ground systems) is around $4 billion to $4.1 billion per mission. This estimate comes from multiple NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG) reports and audits, particularly for the early missions (Artemis I through IV or so):
GROK:
The most commonly cited figure for the per-launch cost (covering production, operations, and related elements for SLS + Orion + ground systems) is around $4 billion to $4.1 billion per mission. This estimate comes from multiple NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG) reports and audits, particularly for the early missions (Artemis I through IV or so):
quote:
Current/Test Phase Estimates (2025–2026)Starship has conducted multiple test flights (around 11 by late 2025, with ongoing progress into 2026), but these are not yet fully reusable or commercial. Estimates for recent or near-term launches include:Around $90–100 million per flight in some analyses (e.g., for expendable or early test configurations, including hardware, propellant, and operations).
Some sources and discussions suggest higher figures during early testing (potentially $100–500 million+ when factoring in development overhead, failures, and non-reusability), though these are rough and debated in community forums.
Propellant alone (methane + liquid oxygen) costs roughly $1–2 million per full stack launch.
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 11:19 am
Posted on 1/18/26 at 11:22 am to Auburn1968
GROK:
quote:
The question about "payload" can refer to a few related aspects in this context:Starship's general payload capacity (to low Earth orbit, as the baseline for the system): SpaceX targets 100–150 metric tons (reusable mode) to LEO, though recent reports indicate current performance may be around 40–50 tons to orbit in some configurations, with ongoing improvements expected.
Starship HLS payload to the lunar surface (for Artemis missions): This is frequently cited as up to ~100 metric tons of payload capacity that could be delivered to the Moon's surface in a cargo-optimized or one-way configuration. This massive capacity (far exceeding Apollo-era landers) is a key selling point for establishing sustained lunar presence, enabling delivery of rovers, habitats, scientific equipment, or infrastructure.
However, for crewed Artemis missions (e.g., Artemis III), the actual usable payload for surface delivery is much lower due to requirements for crew accommodations, life support, ascent propellant (to return to lunar orbit), and mission constraints. Some analyses suggest Artemis III could deliver on the order of ~10 tons or less of dedicated cargo to the surface while meeting all safety and return needs.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 11:40 am to Auburn1968
Not sure Elon/Grok are unbiased when it comes to the Artemis program. He’s bitter these billions aren’t coming SpaceX’s way.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 11:43 am to mmmmmbeeer
quote:
Not sure Elon/Grok are unbiased when it comes to the Artemis program. He’s bitter these billions aren’t coming SpaceX’s way.
SpaceX is building the lunar lander for the Artemis program.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 11:50 am to RollTide1987
quote:
SpaceX is building the lunar lander for the Artemis program.
Ah, nice. Didn’t know that. Just know he’s been critical of the design/inefficiencies he believes exist in the program.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 1:09 pm to RichJ
quote:According to DeGrasse-Tyson it is because China began talking about going there back in 2019 and we only do things like this to beat political/economic rivals.
Other than a cool trip, can anyone explain why we are really going back after 53 years?
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News