Mastodawn

I feel I need to say something about Artemis as a former NASA employee, Space scientist and engineer.

I hope more than anything that the astronauts get back safely. But let us not be fooled by what this is.

Is it spectacular, yes. Is it a feat of engineering, yes. Does it make any advance in science, no. Does it help mankind explore the universe, dubious at best.

Why exactly are we sending humans to the moon? With our technology we will never send humans much further than Mars. The only way humans can possibly go further is through a scientific breakthrough. Good luck with that when Trump is gutting science.

Human exploration needs money spent on long-term advances - not using the same technology to do what we did before, however, glamorous it is.

So why do this and why do it now? Political theatre, a win for a Trump led NASA if it succeeds.

So I hope all works well and all return safely. But let us be clear what this is and why it is being done.

This is my opinion, I do not represent anyone.

Naomi Heartbreak 11h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith surely in the midst of a war over the last few drops of oil in the world this is nothing but disgusting?

@paranoiapen Well the two things have always been decoupled to some level, although the rationale for manned spaceflight has always been defence. The US is in space not because it's good for humanity but because of military interests and the glory of the US of A.

It is always part of military or cultural domination at the political, funding level. Politicians know of nothing else.

It must also be said that the US is not the only country that acts this way.

Woozle Hypertwin 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen

Personally, it gives me optimistic feels that we are still able to do stuff like this despite all the BS we are also doing.

Watching an ISS spacewalk during the previous Tr#mp misadministration was one of its few bright spots (for me) -- a brief view of extreme competence amid all the self-serving twittery.

Woozle Hypertwin 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen P.S. for a little more on how this sort of thing provides scientific benefit, I suggest a little Hank Green.

Apollo 11 was the Worst Moon Mission

YouTube

Petra van Cronenburg 7h ago

@woozle For me, the ISS is also a symbol that humankind could much better cooperate on earth. When astronauts of "enemy' states can live and work together in such a small room, we could also live in peace on earth.
My dream is still that spaceflights become a global cooperation (yes, I watched the very first Star Trek and the first moon landing live.)
@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen

Woozle Hypertwin 6h ago

More space exploration, more science, more caring and empathy.

Less bombs and stupidity.

(I was too young for Trek's first run, but I do remember the moon landing. One of the good things my dad did...)

@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen

Naomi Heartbreak 5h ago

@woozle @NatureMC @SamanthaJaneSmith my point was really meant to be emphasis on the oil tho. Like there's none left, right? So how do you power the thing? I mean, without destroying the planet we actually have...

@paranoiapen @woozle @NatureMC It doesn't use oil to power it although of course most manufacturing processes use oil.

Woozle Hypertwin 4h ago

@paranoiapen @NatureMC @SamanthaJaneSmith

I don't know what the fuel mix is in general, but I know that at least some rocket fuel is just hydrogen -- combines with oxygen, leaving behind deadly DHMO (aka water) exhaust.

I think the SRBs (solid rocket boosters -- the first stage) are something different -- let me check it...

Wikipedia confirms that the main rocket is hydrogen+oxygen... and the SRBs are apparently:

aluminum powder (combustible)
ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer)
polybutadiene acrylonitrile (binder)

I don't know the exact production processes; I suppose the nitrogen (which is in both the oxidizer and binder molecules) might be fossil-fuel derived, but I suspect not?

Dihydrogen monoxide parody - Wikipedia

Henrik Pauli 7h ago

@paranoiapen @SamanthaJaneSmith I think it's important to note that the mission was planned way before Iran, Venezuela, Greenland, etc. were a twinkle in Trump's eyes.

@phl @paranoiapen and I mentioned this in a reply.

Dror Bedrack 11h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith Theater is also impotant if you want to encourage the political will.
Yes, there are better things we can do. But this is also a good thing. It gives me some hope.
Also, it's good to dust off the old tech from time time. To make sure it's not forgotten.

Martin Vermeer FCD 11h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith Yeah, basically. The younger me used to get drunk on every manned space mission. This is just nice, and I'll look at the pictures later on.

Essentially this is a replication of the Baltimore Gun Club's 1868 lunar mission...

https://fediscience.org/@martinvermeer/111896017713222867

martin lentink 🇪🇺 🇺🇦📎11h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith I am of the same opinion. Let's fund science, not theatrics.

Ray McCarthy 10h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith
Unless we invent a radically new technology, particularly the probably impossible solution to travelling to the stars in a generation ship, sending humans to the Moon, Mars or Jupiter's moons is pointless. Do as much science sending machines at a tiny fraction of the cost.
No point to a Moon or Mars base either.

ghostdancer 9h ago

@raymaccarthy @SamanthaJaneSmith This is the main reason, the race is on again: https://phys.org/news/2026-03-moon-china.html

Moon race: How China is challenging the US

Walking on the moon by 2030, building a lunar base, and then perhaps on to Mars: after 30 years of honing its expertise, China is challenging the United States' supremacy in spaceflight.

Phys.org

Ray McCarthy 9h ago

@ghostdancer @SamanthaJaneSmith
Ego.

ghostdancer 9h ago

@raymaccarthy That too. @SamanthaJaneSmith

Tubemeister 9h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith It's a nice revival.

Summer of 69...

The US is going to the moon, is involved in a war they're going to lose, and there's a crook in the white house.

Conny Nasch 9h ago

@Tubemeister @SamanthaJaneSmith History repeats - but maybe the NASA guys will come to the EU and take part in ESA?

Petra van Cronenburg 9h ago

@Tubemeister so lets repeat history with the 1968 revolution and the anti-war protests! @SamanthaJaneSmith

Toni Aittoniemi 9h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith Yes it’s all theatre.

But most of all it’s authoritarianism. It’s spectacle, of ”look what you get by being on my team!”

It power that doesn’t have any other aims than power itself. That’s it.

@SamanthaJaneSmith This has nothing to do with "Getting to Mars" or expanding space travel, and everything to do with land grab.

They're going to the side of the moon that cannot be seen from Earth, perfect for ensuring nobody can physically see what you are up to. NASA has already said it intends to build a base on the moon, and let's not forget why NASA was created. It was created in response to the Russians and Sputnik. Now, America is in a new race with China just about everywhere.

@dick_turpin I didn't even get into the rationale behind manned space as a whole. Too long a post.

But we know the US military wants to know about dominating space.

@SamanthaJaneSmith I suspect you know more than me but I beleive the moon is a dead planet. All this talk of ice and minerals is a load of old rubbish, but the Russians have proved humans can survive in space for a long time with Mir, so building a structure on the moon is probably trivial by comparison.

Imagine the horror that would sweep through America if NBC broadcast images of the Chinese flag on the moon?
🇨🇳

Marianne 3h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith @dick_turpin I know the thread is muted and not expecting any response, but the more we can use 'crewed' over 'manned' the better.

For some comic relief around a serious point
https://noodlemaz.wordpress.com/2018/08/16/on-gender-neutral-language/

On gender-neutral language

Despite being a relatively small issue, this one’s important to me. Hopefully I’ll explain why and what you can do to address it too. An (imperfect) example that fellow nerds will be ve…

Purely a figment of your imagination

@SamanthaJaneSmith how is it political theater for a specific admin if it has spanned multiple?

@synth Politicians in all parties since spaceflight began have used NASA as a means to push their own political ambitions and to get support for their vision of America. Often to the detriment of both astronauts and the country as a whole. An example was the political decision surrounding the SRBs on the shuttle program. Lives were lost due to politics.

At no point did I say that only Trump does this or has done this. I didn't get into much of the political rational behind funding spaceflight, particularly manned, but it's really only about control and domination of space. The politicians and funders don't give a damn about engineering and science. Those are by products of the drive to control space.

Manned spaceflight is a product of this desire and is therefore a show that is very useful to politicians and at this time specifically Trump. If another person was in the white house and this was happening I would say the same. But what makes it worse now is that Trump is gutting the rest of NASA, at least in the past science has survived. So more than ever it is now a show for the public while NASA is prepared for it's demise.

@SamanthaJaneSmith For sure, politics is deeply intertwined with space exploration and especially so with manned missions. It was really just this bit I was iffy about: ‘Political theatre, a win for a Trump led NASA if it succeeds.’ The clarification that you’d say the same regardless of who’s in office is good context. I wholeheartedly agree with your point about utility and the current admin gutting science.

You definitely know more about this world than I, so thanks for the insight.

@SamanthaJaneSmith Yet another desperate attempt at denying the complete failure of a dying economic system to advance mankind.

@SamanthaJaneSmith I have been feeling much the same way. It seems like a pointless spectacle to distract people from the problems happening at home. I guess I would be more enthusiastic about it if there were some actual tangible benefit to it other than the space colonization angle. It is hard to be enthusiastic about Team USA when the government is operating as a highly destructive anti-science criminal enterprise.

Kumar Ghosh 9h ago

they probably wanted to get it out the door before Trump guts NASA 😏

Petra van Cronenburg 9h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith People in the USA should be aware that this flight would have been impossible without European tech! The rogue US regime might collect all honor for themselves but Artemis would never have started with US tech only.

@SamanthaJaneSmith There can be only one reason Trump is firing them up to a moon landing - he wants to find OIL up there.

Softspeak 8h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith

I am no friend of Trump.
I understand that Trump is temporary, Jan 2029 he will be removed from power, maybe sooner through a newly elected congress, or the stress or diabetes will take 80 year old man. Trump's days are numbered.

As a NASA employee you would understand that the science to travel to Mars or anywhere out the moon require technology we currently do not have for a human to land, survive, and live and perform their duties on Mars comfortably.

Outside the Earth's magnetosphere is Gama Cosmic radiation will cut through any craft and will damage the DNA of any Mars astronaut, and realistically we are century away from creating a safe and reasonable plan for a traveler to land on Mars and come back to Earth.

The current Moon landing is not about a creating a event, nor should we measure success based on that. It is about surveying possibilities of creating a space-port for space craft in the future. That future of that space-port may not be a few years, it may be decades or a century. The ground work have to be laid for the future, and requires a scope see further than the present.

wendythedruid 8h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith boosting this because it needs saying , thank you sjs

Keri Svendsen 8h ago

@GlasWolf @SamanthaJaneSmith This sums up perfectly why I just don't care that people are off to the moon. I hope they come back safe though.

Per Jakobsen (no anonymity)8h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith

Not to mention the massive burning of fossile fuels.

🇨🇦 CowMan 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 🇲🇽8h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith I don't know a lot about this rocket machine ~ but question: is it really much of an engineering feat?

Cursory wikipedia jaunt implies this rocket is kit-bashed from spare parts from the 1950s-1980s/shuttle program.

Obviously getting to space etc. is a grand feat, but (and perhaps to your point), none of the big things here seem new or inventive or ... if you will ... 'engineer-y'

@SamanthaJaneSmith

steps to militarisation of the moon?

colonialisation of the moon?

peachfront 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith

hard agree

Guy on the run 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith

"...not using the same technology to do what we did before..."

Thank goodness! I thought that I was the only person to have this thought.

@SamanthaJaneSmith I don't see it that gloomy. We are finally let humans travel beyond low Earth Orbit. Right now further than they could ever get from their destination by any means of transportation in the past 50 years. Been there, done that? Sure not.

Also, we won't develop any better spacecraft by sitting around on Earth. Or by just doing in space what we have always done. Even known technologies on the surface will likely not behave the same in space. For getting further, we must go.

@urwumpe I hear this a lot. The issue is that to actually get anywhere you need to invest in science. This is the opposite of what is happening. Politicians want the glory but won't spend the cash on science to actually change anything.

This is particularly true of Trump cutting science. Even gutting NASA.

So I am afraid it is very gloomy IMHO. If you want to get anywhere beyond the moon and perhaps Mars you need new technology beyond chemical rockets.

@SamanthaJaneSmith There is much more on this planet than a demented old pedophile. Sadly also many people who rather trust demented old pedophiles than science.

But should we stop doing science and have science be more successful than they are, just because they don't like what science says?

@urwumpe That is my point. But science is being gutted by the US government, going to the moon is not science. At best it's rediscovery of the technology we used to have.

@SamanthaJaneSmith which technology are we rediscovering? Did the Orion spacecraft fly in 1969? Did most people at NASA, that work on Artemis, already work on Apollo ? Or even one? Yes, the mission does superficially that Apollo 13 already did. But it does that with a new spacecraft on a new launcher with lots of new technologies, intentionally and planned, more safely than ever.

I am more angry for killing Gateway. That was a bad decision to please guys that badly need phallic spacecraft...

Howard Chu @ Symas 6h ago

@urwumpe @SamanthaJaneSmith Indeed, it's not the same technology we had before, and most of that technology (like Saturn V) is lost and not reproducible anyway. This is still progress, even if you refuse to acknowledge it as such.

It will only be wasted effort if we stop here (again) instead of building on it further.

@hyc @urwumpe From the perspective of going anywhere else but the moon and perhaps Mars it is the same old rocket technology - throw mass from a chemical reaction out the back. A technology which will only get us so far.

Yeah we can mess around with the fuel combination, the pressure systems etc. etc. but no fiddling will get us any farther.

To get beyond requires a different technology and the issue is that this is not funded. Indeed, the present government in the US is gutting science and technology.

So I have no issue with progress but the present government have no wish to support the science required to make real progress.

So instead they spend money on doing "something" with no plan, while not funding the underlying technologies which could make a breakthrough.

Ask why.....

This is the issue.

@SamanthaJaneSmith @hyc Its the technology we have, not the technology we dream of. When will it ever be enough? Should Magellan have waited until he can board a cruise ship? Should we stop manned spaceflight until we have Epstein* fusion drives to get us to Mars in 3 days? And if we have that, should we then wait until we solved the cosmic radiation challenge?

* Not the best choice of names by the Expanse team.

Marianne 3h ago

@urwumpe @SamanthaJaneSmith @hyc not as bad as Discovery name-dropping fking Musk

Howard Chu @ Symas 4h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith @urwumpe yes, this lack of vision and funding is the issue. None of which is a reason to criticize the Artemis mission.

Back when I worked on the Space Shuttle at JPL it got a lot of criticism too, for being far less than what scientists hoped for. And yet a lot of important science was still accomplished with it. Despite budget cuts, headcount reductions, and the usual lack of govt commitment to supporting it. None of that was the Shuttle's fault either.

TC Won't Give In To Lies 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith

I believe you are 100% right

It is definitely political theater

...and also a boost for Musk's IPO of SpaceX. Just watch to see Musk "gift" Trump a chunk of SpaceX stock.

#AlwaysAGriftWithTrump

Sassinake!7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith

Mars would only have been feasible if it sustained life.

as it is, 'colonizing it' is about as smart as creating golf courses in the desert: poor people will go without water, so rich people can play games.

We are much closer to making Earth into Venus, than we are to living on Mars.

But the Old Fuckers don't care. Some want the world to end with them

10tothe22 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith A silver-ish lining for me, is that many younger people were awed by the launch and engineering feat of Artemis 2. They will be in positions of power long after Trump meets maker and thus, will have a chance to better the world through scientific advancement.

@10tothe22 True but we entering an era of non-truth and while Trump will be dead many of the tech bros won't.

@SamanthaJaneSmith I'm usually more cynical, but I was getting the sense this was to rekindle a love of space, esp. in young people (hence all the historic firsts, the excitement of setting up trans lunar infrastructure for future lunar presence, and the tech being used to give a sense of humanity and realness to the vehicle and it's occupants throughout the mission).

I also got the sense this was more positioned in *spite* of the current administration in the US that's been gutting NASA. Not a single mention of the Trump administration, or even the federal government.

I read it more as NASA trying to rise above the current moment, to show that the US isn't it's government. Its people can still be international partners to the world, and still do good and inspiring things together with them.

I'm happy it's happening, and suppose that even my usually cynical heart sees this all pretty differently.

JWcph, Radicalized By Decency 7h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith Let's be clear, the Apollo program was political theater, too - cold war & all that. Personally I applaud exploiting that sort of thing for scientific progress. As for going to the Moon, don't think scientific projects of that magnitude is the kind of thing you do once & go "Welp, nothing more to learn!", pretty sure Artemis is still going to produce a valuable science & engineering yield.

As for Trump, he's too stupid to take credit without getting laughed at.

Isaac Ji Kuo 6h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith "The only way humans can possibly go [much further than Mars] is through a scientific breakthrough."

I think it's best done without scientific breakthroughs, but it does require serious investment in straightforward science and technology progress.

We need long term physiological data on low gee exposure - a spin gravity station in LEO could provide this.

We also need ISRU of propellant, at which point chemical rocket propulsion is both optimal and sustainable.