- 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: NASA sets tentative launch date for Artemis 1 - August 29, 2022
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:49 am to Fun Bunch
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:49 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Multiple astronauts died in the missions leading up to Apollo. It was a small miracle that no one died in the Apollo missions, given Apollo 13. They also had a few other close calls. The Space shuttle was a different mission and was flawed. It was a dark era for NASA in many ways.
Then why are we having issues going back then? It’s a no brainer to just do what the Apollo astronauts did?
1
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:50 am to Palmetto98
I’ve answered this multiple times
—they were all mass-hypnotized?
—they were all mass-hypnotized?
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:52 am to cypresstiger
quote:
they were all mass-hypnotized?
Who said they didn’t call it a hoax? How do you know this? Were you in the USSR at the time?
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:55 am to Palmetto98
quote:
Then why are we having issues going back then?
Are they?
They just got funding for Artemis project and started the process not all that long ago. They were supposed to do it under the Constellation project but that got scrapped by Obama admin.
They are doing the first unmanned run this year.
quote:
It’s a no brainer to just do what the Apollo astronauts did?
Everyone associated with those projects is long retired or dead. Many of the manufacturers of all of the pieces don't even exist anymore.
Why wouldn't they attempt to drastically update the technology to make the mission better, more efficient, safer, cost less, and replicable?
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:56 am to Napoleon
quote:
What happened the the Saturn V's people saw launched?
We are rocket launch nerds... and with EVERY Space X launch photo of that beautiful arc... these weirdos claim the rockets are just landing in the ocean.
I can look into the sky with my naked eye and see the space station. You can see many satellites with your naked eye or telescope (or just binoculars). I'm not sure how you convince some people of anything, honestly.
These same folks likely never doubt the existence of God, something you cannot prove, but if you can physically show them something flying around in space, they refuse it.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 9:59 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Are they? They just got funding for Artemis project and started the process not all that long ago. They were supposed to do it under the Constellation project but that got scrapped by Obama admin. They are doing the first unmanned run this year.
Sounds like excuses to me
quote:
Everyone associated with those projects is long retired or dead. Many of the manufacturers of all of the pieces don't even exist anymore. Why wouldn't they attempt to drastically update the technology to make the mission better, more efficient, safer, cost less, and replicable?
You’re better than this man. I literally live next to a fricking to the space shuttle replica in Houston lmao. Unless we experienced a Bronze Age civilization crash, it makes no sense for technology to regress like that.
This post was edited on 7/22/22 at 10:01 am
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:02 am to RollTide1987
The way I understand this is that NASA is gonna launch their billion dollar one time use rocket to the moon and then pay Musk to fly his Starship to the moon and rendezvous with the NASA ship to take the astronauts down to the moon because NASA’s ship can’t land on the moon.
Why not just use SpaceX for the whole trip? I’m guessing because NASA has already invested billions in their new rocket and doesn’t want to look stupid for not even using it.
Why not just use SpaceX for the whole trip? I’m guessing because NASA has already invested billions in their new rocket and doesn’t want to look stupid for not even using it.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:03 am to Palmetto98
The technology hasn’t “regressed”. What are you talking about?
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:04 am to Palmetto98
quote:what are you talking about
Unless we experienced a Bronze Age civilization crash, it makes no sense for technology to regress like that.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:05 am to WestCoastAg
I think he believes we should just take the remaining Apollo capsule out of the Smithsonian and send it up there or something. 
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:15 am to Fun Bunch
Really glad the OP started a thread on this topic because it really is a big deal. Constellation was a shitshow from the start that wasted a lot of time/money and should be an embarrassment for the way it was managed but was SOP for most of the Obama admin.
Would love to have a serious conversation about this since I will be running studies on crew members as part of Artemis 2 and beyond. But the crazy folks that flock to this sort of thread would make that impossible.
Would love to have a serious conversation about this since I will be running studies on crew members as part of Artemis 2 and beyond. But the crazy folks that flock to this sort of thread would make that impossible.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:15 am to Palmetto98
So no answer.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:17 am to TheLSUriot
quote:
Would love to have a serious conversation about this since I will be running studies on crew members as part of Artemis 2 and beyond.
That's awesome!
I would love to hear more about this, if you can.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 10:50 am to TheLSUriot
How is this "26-42 days"? What unknown variables account for a two week window? It's space. We know exactly what the bodies' orbits and velocities are. We know the exact acceleration and cruise profiles of our rockets.
I could understand a 4 or 8 hour window because we don't know what weather patterns are like a month from now (reentry friction, etc) but 16 days?
I could understand a 4 or 8 hour window because we don't know what weather patterns are like a month from now (reentry friction, etc) but 16 days?
Posted on 7/22/22 at 11:24 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:I think the duration of the mission boils down entirely to the launch date, mostly because the timing for the type of re-entry they want varies a lot.
How is this "26-42 days"? What unknown variables account for a two week window? It's space. We know exactly what the bodies' orbits and velocities are. We know the exact acceleration and cruise profiles of our rockets.
I could understand a 4 or 8 hour window because we don't know what weather patterns are like a month from now (reentry friction, etc) but 16 days?
Posted on 7/22/22 at 11:31 am to Palmetto98
quote:Technology has not regressed. The mission is entirely different and requires far more advanced tech, has far more moving pieces, and has far more considerations.
Unless we experienced a Bronze Age civilization crash, it makes no sense for technology to regress like that.
Apollo was a weekend vacation. Artemis will establish a base and a platform for future operations.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 1:31 pm to fatboydave
quote:
we are reinventing the wheel
quote:
Arent they reusing shuttle engines?
quote:LINK
Sixteen Block II Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSME) were retained from the Space Shuttle Program and will support the first four SLS launches.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 1:45 pm to Palmetto98
Posted on 7/22/22 at 2:26 pm to Korkstand
Korkstand sez: "Technology has not regressed."
Really?? Dying on THAT hill? smh
(So the Narrative goes alleged):
NASA, 1969: "Hold muh-beer. Watch us go to the Moon. Hold the rest of the six pack and we'll go to the Moon several more times until 1972."
NASA, 2022: NOPE. WE STILL CAN'T GO BACK TO THE MOON...
"..NASA scientists tell us cuz, "We cant go beyond Low Earth Orbit or else Astronauts will be fried by Radiation. Just don't ask how the survived the trip back in 1969.
"And OH WAIT. And didn't you hear? Somebody lost or trash-canned our Tech from 1969. That's right -- in 50 years NOBODY has ever figured out how to return to the Moon -- DESPITE computer power & tech that's advanced & improved Gazillion-fold."
Some Fairy Tales are just gonna have to die HARD.
Really?? Dying on THAT hill? smh
(So the Narrative goes alleged):
NASA, 1969: "Hold muh-beer. Watch us go to the Moon. Hold the rest of the six pack and we'll go to the Moon several more times until 1972."
NASA, 2022: NOPE. WE STILL CAN'T GO BACK TO THE MOON...
"..NASA scientists tell us cuz, "We cant go beyond Low Earth Orbit or else Astronauts will be fried by Radiation. Just don't ask how the survived the trip back in 1969.
"And OH WAIT. And didn't you hear? Somebody lost or trash-canned our Tech from 1969. That's right -- in 50 years NOBODY has ever figured out how to return to the Moon -- DESPITE computer power & tech that's advanced & improved Gazillion-fold."
Some Fairy Tales are just gonna have to die HARD.
Posted on 7/22/22 at 2:36 pm to TigerFanatic99
quote:
How is this "26-42 days"? What unknown variables account for a two week window? It's space. We know exactly what the bodies' orbits and velocities are. We know the exact acceleration and cruise profiles of our rockets.
I could understand a 4 or 8 hour window because we don't know what weather patterns are like a month from now (reentry friction, etc) but 16 days?
There's only so much of a window per day. After enough time sitting on the pad, especially during inclement weather, and they're gonna have to roll that bitch back to the VAB. You're not just dealing with weather in Brevard county, balls deep into hurricane season, but also the aborted landing site.
Page 4 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News