Page 32 of 37 FirstFirst ...
22
30
31
32
33
34
... LastLast
  1. #621
    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    I've read it has more to do with Gateway not being where they want it in its development. This way they can guarantee at least a landing if there's no Gateway module to dock with.
    Still, signing that extension now is insane. Artemis 4 is tentatively scheduled for 2027 at this point (and let's be honest, it's not gonna meet that), so NASA has got to be liking what they're seeing in the HLS-Starship development so far.

  2. #622
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerraw View Post
    Still, signing that extension now is insane. Artemis 4 is tentatively scheduled for 2027 at this point (and let's be honest, it's not gonna meet that), so NASA has got to be liking what they're seeing in the HLS-Starship development so far.
    You'd be surprised; they are already producing long lead parts for the SLS to be used in Artemis 4

  3. #623
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    You'd be surprised; they are already producing long lead parts for the SLS to be used in Artemis 4
    The core they just launched was under construction since November 2014, with the upper stage being completed and delivered in 2017. I have no faith in SLS time tables.

  4. #624
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerraw View Post
    The core they just launched was under construction since November 2014, with the upper stage being completed and delivered in 2017. I have no faith in SLS time tables.
    Okay but like, the core for Artemis 2 was already almost finished back in August; and the core for Artemis 3 is halfway built.

  5. #625
    NASA has made availabile video of liftoff from most if not all of their groundside cameras: https://images-assets.nasa.gov/video...14595~orig.mp4

    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    Okay but like, the core for Artemis 2 was already almost finished back in August; and the core for Artemis 3 is halfway built.
    That's Artemis 2 and 3 though, they're still flying Block 1. Artemis 4 will be on 1B, necessitating, amongst other things, a brand new billion dollar launch tower.

  6. #626
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerraw View Post
    NASA has made availabile video of liftoff from most if not all of their groundside cameras: https://images-assets.nasa.gov/video...14595~orig.mp4



    That's Artemis 2 and 3 though, they're still flying Block 1. Artemis 4 will be on 1B, necessitating, amongst other things, a brand new billion dollar launch tower.
    A launch tower that's already been in construction for a couple years. Hell, what the fuck does the launch tower have anything to do with progress of the construction of the actual rocket?

    They have five years to finish both the rocket and the launch tower.

  7. #627
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilithvia View Post
    A launch tower that's already been in construction for a couple years. Hell, what the fuck does the launch tower have anything to do with progress of the construction of the actual rocket?

    They have five years to finish both the rocket and the launch tower.
    The current launch tower was delayed because it originally couldn't bear the weight of itself. They couldn't even bvalance that out. Other than the actual launch itself (which looked great btw), nothing about SLS has gone smoothly or even remotely according to plan. I will believe they can meet a schedule the day it actually happens.

  8. #628
    Speaking if SpaceX; SpaceX fired 9 employees who organized an open letter describing Elon Musk's tweeting as a 'distraction and embarrassment,' report says

    SpaceX fired a total of nine employees who organized an open letter in the summer condemning the online behavior of CEO Elon Musk, The New York Times reported.

    Some SpaceX employees circulated the letter on June 15, urging the company to denounce the billionaire's "harmful Twitter behavior," per The Times. The letter followed an Insider report in May about SpaceX settling a sexual harassment claim against Musk, which he made jokes about on Twitter.

    The day after the letter was shared, SpaceX fired the organizers behind it, according to media reports. The Times reported it was unclear how many workers had been sacked, while Reuters said at least five employees had lost their jobs over the letter, citing two sources.

    It's now understood that nine SpaceX employees were fired over the letter, The Times reported on Thursday, citing workers and lawyers.

    The report comes at a time when Musk has fired about two dozen employees at Twitter for openly criticizing him on the social media platform, Insider reported.

  9. #629
    Huh, so that's what happened with that. I really hope all of his companies are forced to go through fundamental changes when it comes to treatment of employees.

  10. #630
    The Unstoppable Force PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    24,968
    The SLS for Artemis 2 is quite far in its production. It's actually waiting for the return of the Orion capsule used in Artemis 1 for parts. NASA seems confident that they can maintain production. They have at least secured the funding for more rockets than originally planned (I still don't think they will actually follow through with all of those but they have the more and approval for them). One potential constraint is that Artemis 4 will be a 1B, the first one, so it's construction is going to be slightly different. I might be when they transition to the upgraded parts (slightly different SRBs, engine, and upper stage) , not 100% sure.


    On other note, SpaceX is known for not being the best place to work for. A lot of people are in love with their rockets because they could easily go down the street to Boeing, NG, Rockwell, Lockheed, even NASA, and be treated a lot better.

    .

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  11. #631
    Over 9000! ringpriest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    The Silk Road
    Posts
    9,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerraw View Post
    The core they just launched was under construction since November 2014, with the upper stage being completed and delivered in 2017. I have no faith in SLS time tables.
    That is less than completely accurate. The core for Artemis I started assembly in November 2014, but it used components, particularly the four RS-25 engines, that had flown on previous Space Shuttle missions. The oldest of the four veteran, reusable engines NASA just expended was E2045, which first flew on STS-89 in 1998, and which started assembly in March 1997. (Artemis I was E2045's thirteenth, and last, flight.) E2045 was one of the first Block IIA RS-25s, an incremental evolution of an engine design that started construction in 1970.

    After NASA has finished disposing of the sixteen RS-25s allocated to the SLS program, it intends to use newly manufactured RS-25Es for (hypothetical) future SLS missions. RS-25E testing has been quite successful, using two modified test engines from the Space Shuttle program. No new RS-25Es appear to have been built yet.
    Last edited by ringpriest; 2022-11-18 at 04:14 PM.
    "In today’s America, conservatives who actually want to conserve are as rare as liberals who actually want to liberate. The once-significant language of an earlier era has had the meaning sucked right out of it, the better to serve as camouflage for a kleptocratic feeding frenzy in which both establishment parties participate with equal abandon" (Taking a break from the criminal, incompetent liars at the NSA, to bring you the above political observation, from The Archdruid Report.)

  12. #632
    Launch tower sustained some amount of damage. An example being the elevator doors being "removed".

  13. #633
    Artemis is doing its moon flyby in 5 hours. Hoping we get some good footage out of that.

  14. #634
    The Unstoppable Force PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    24,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerraw View Post
    Launch tower sustained some amount of damage. An example being the elevator doors being "removed".
    I would bet that they knew they would destroy the pad if they would admit to it. They know the rocket like the back of their hand. Nothing about the performance of the rocket has surprised them and that infrastructure was built for Saturn Vs and up. Prove SLS works flawlessly but their everything up.


    I think they are trying to secure more funding to complelty upgrade the pad (they already expeditated a new MLP). Probably would have put a whole in the VAB too if they didn't need it in-between having it upgraded.

    I'm half joking BTW. Just half.

    In all seriousness though, they definitely knew they would wreck the pad.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  15. #635
    Quote Originally Posted by Corvus View Post
    Artemis is doing its moon flyby in 5 hours. Hoping we get some good footage out of that.
    Too bad they can't or won't take pictures of the first moon landings. I bet they did not send up the ability to take those pictures.

  16. #636
    Quote Originally Posted by Logwyn View Post
    Too bad they can't or won't take pictures of the first moon landings. I bet they did not send up the ability to take those pictures.
    The landing sides were in the dark on this flyby. The December 6th flyby will see them in direct sunlight.

  17. #637
    Love the way this guy thinks!


  18. #638
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerraw View Post
    The landing sides were in the dark on this flyby. The December 6th flyby will see them in direct sunlight.
    Apollo landing site pictures wen

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    The SLS for Artemis 2 is quite far in its production. It's actually waiting for the return of the Orion capsule used in Artemis 1 for parts. NASA seems confident that they can maintain production. They have at least secured the funding for more rockets than originally planned (I still don't think they will actually follow through with all of those but they have the more and approval for them). One potential constraint is that Artemis 4 will be a 1B, the first one, so it's construction is going to be slightly different. I might be when they transition to the upgraded parts (slightly different SRBs, engine, and upper stage) , not 100% sure.


    On other note, SpaceX is known for not being the best place to work for. A lot of people are in love with their rockets because they could easily go down the street to Boeing, NG, Rockwell, Lockheed, even NASA, and be treated a lot better.

    .
    say it louder for the moderator in the back @Nerraw

  19. #639
    WC3 Megathreader Lilithvia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    No matter the topic, someone will find a way to redirect it to complain about their current aggro.
    Posts
    4,366
    Hey @Nerraw that's weird, looks here like the Artemis 2 core stage just needs engine section before it gets shipped to Kennedy Space Center... but you said it was unlikely for Artemis 2 to be on time... That's a pretty weird statement to make, don't you think?

  20. #640
    The Unstoppable Force PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    24,968
    Artemis 1 is officially in the books. It went as well as a maiden flight of its scope could go, which is huge.

    Have to do a little shitposting. So much for Starship beating SLS in orbit, right?

    But seriously, hopefully Starship goes up in Jan. I got tired of going on Twitter and seeing people swear Starship would go up first, or run the Artemis program solo, or that Artemis 1 would fail. There would be no Starship without the Space Shuttles, and SLS is basically the Shuttle stack without the payload bay of the Orbiter (the space plane part of the Shuttles).
    Last edited by PACOX; 2022-12-12 at 12:52 AM.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •