[AllAroundTheWorld]

NASA announce their latest group of astronauts who will pretend to go to the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65165845

[J-Man]

Reparations for all.....

[DuncanDoenitz]

Like Apollo which preceded it in the 60s, this is a developmental programme in which each mission uses proven tech, and adds on new developments.  Apollo 1 through 7 developed and proved the basic space-worthiness of the vehicles, 8 explored the tech to reach the moon, 9 the ability to rendezvous in Earth orbit, 10 took that rendezvous-technology to lunar orbit and 11 actually landed.  Artemis does all that in 3 planned missions, presumably because greater reliance can be placed on developments due to the ability to test computer modelling, and the shear experience of being in space for 6 decades. 

What I find particularly interesting is that Apollo was laid out in the early 60s and every schoolboy (it was the 60s; it was a boy-thing) knew the names of the modules, length of the journey, how the modules interacted and so forth well before any of the tech actually got close to the moon.  The difference with Artemis is that NASA was quite open early on that how they will get from lunar orbit to lunar landing has not yet been developed; they are still just assuming that something will be facilitated by emerging technology.  That's the difference between fact and fiction; if they were just making this stuff up, they wouldn't have to wait another 2 or 3 years to actually work out how to build something. 

[Dual1ty]

Like Apollo which preceded it in the 60s, this is a developmental programme in which each mission uses proven tech, and adds on new developments.  Apollo 1 through 7 developed and proved the basic space-worthiness of the vehicles, 8 explored the tech to reach the moon, 9 the ability to rendezvous in Earth orbit, 10 took that rendezvous-technology to lunar orbit and 11 actually landed.  Artemis does all that in 3 planned missions, presumably because greater reliance can be placed on developments due to the ability to test computer modelling, and the shear experience of being in space for 6 decades. 

What I find particularly interesting is that Apollo was laid out in the early 60s and every schoolboy (it was the 60s; it was a boy-thing) knew the names of the modules, length of the journey, how the modules interacted and so forth well before any of the tech actually got close to the moon.  The difference with Artemis is that NASA was quite open early on that how they will get from lunar orbit to lunar landing has not yet been developed; they are still just assuming that something will be facilitated by emerging technology.  That's the difference between fact and fiction; if they were just making this stuff up, they wouldn't have to wait another 2 or 3 years to actually work out how to build something.

Since you're clearly an expert in space travel technology - How many more years until the warp drive do you think? Once the Space Force gets done developing the warp drive, are they going to be able to use it to get to the Moon in a nanosecond, or is 240,000 miles too close for the warp drive?

The sad part is that Artemis 1 was originally scheduled for 2016 and didn't happen until 2022. Who knows how many more years of delays for the upcoming "missions". Meanwhile, NASA gets $69 million a day and Biden wants to increase that to $74 million a day in 2024. All so that people like you can keep their cozy uncritical faith intact.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Since you're clearly an expert in space travel technology - How many more years until the warp drive do you think? Once the Space Force gets done developing the warp drive, are they going to be able to use it to get to the Moon in a nanosecond, or is 240,000 miles too close for the warp drive?

The sad part is that Artemis 1 was originally scheduled for 2016 and didn't happen until 2022. Who knows how many more years of delays for the upcoming "missions". Meanwhile, NASA gets $69 million a day and Biden wants to increase that to $74 million a day in 2024. All so that people like you can keep their cozy uncritical faith intact.

I don't know where you got the idea that I'm "an expert in space travel technology", though as a licenced aircraft engineer I understand some of the technologies and challenges involved.  Warp Drive?   Completely outside my training and experience, and I haven't seen reference to it in any industry journals, so I've no idea how it might work, what progress they are making, or what limitations may apply to it. 

Artemis delayed by 6 years?  My goodness, what are they frigging around at.  Appalling progress.  Should be ashamed of themselves. 

What I do understand though (referencing JFK, and this really isn't rocket science) is that they don't attempt  these things because they are easy, but because they are hard.  Humankind doesn't achieve anything unless it strives for what appears to be unachievable.  I'm sure medieval Europe and Viking Scandinavia had its share of cynics complaining about how many millions of Krona were being spent on pointless (non-existent?) sea voyages, when they should be concentrating on witch burning. 

Fortunately, others believed in the need to explore frontiers and send vessels on 5-year missions to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man had been before. 

[Pete Svarrior]

if they were just making this stuff up, they wouldn't have to wait another 2 or 3 years to actually work out how to build something.

As the resident expert in epistemology, how have you established that they have to wait 2 or 3 years, as opposed to simply deciding to?

[DuncanDoenitz]

I'm no more an epistemologist than a cosmologist, but If you want my opinion; if I was in the White House, I'd prefer to get the deed done, and accolades garnered whilst I was still rational and elected.  And alive. 

I suppose we could always put the delay down to the Writers Guild of America dispute.  This narrative doesn't write itself. 

[Dual1ty]

I'm no more an epistemologist than a cosmologist, but If you want my opinion; if I was in the White House, I'd prefer to get the deed done, and accolades garnered whilst I was still rational and elected.  And alive. 

I suppose we could always put the delay down to the Writers Guild of America dispute.  This narrative doesn't write itself.

"Get the deed done".



 

[Dr Van Nostrand]

I'm no more an epistemologist than a cosmologist, but If you want my opinion; if I was in the White House, I'd prefer to get the deed done, and accolades garnered whilst I was still rational and elected.  And alive. 

I suppose we could always put the delay down to the Writers Guild of America dispute.  This narrative doesn't write itself.

"Get the deed done".




 

It's a lot easier to fake a fake moon trip being faked than to fake a real moon trip. Anybody could craft the kind of green screen bullshit that the moon conspiracy people post. What makes your bullshit pictures real and everyone else's bullshit pictures fake?

What if "the deed" is about getting lulz and making money by messing with people who don't know what's real?

Wouldn't be the first time...
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/moon-shot-race-a-hoax-and-the-birth-of-fake-news

What evidence would you have to examine to believe the moon trip occurred?

[Dual1ty]

It's a lot easier to fake a fake moon trip being faked than to fake a real moon trip. Anybody could craft the kind of green screen bullshit that the moon conspiracy people post. What makes your bullshit pictures real and everyone else's bullshit pictures fake?

What if "the deed" is about getting lulz and making money by messing with people who don't know what's real?

Wouldn't be the first time...
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/moon-shot-race-a-hoax-and-the-birth-of-fake-news

What evidence would you have to examine to believe the moon trip occurred?