Updates Artemis Program Updates & Discussions
- Thread starter Sbb1413
- Start date
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
GLS
Well-known member
An Audi Sport Quattro would take well to the Lunar terrain... too bad there's no atmosphere to make it run... or hear itIf Audi can do moon rovers (hahahaha), Mercedes can do lunar Mogs.
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
An Audi Sport Quattro would take well to the Lunar terrain... too bad there's no atmosphere to make it run... or hear it
Well, if we could fit a Bugatti W16 engine into it, we could at least feel it.... provided enough oxygen supply.
PS: And I actually wanted to remind about the fate of the Audi Lunar Quattro and the team Part Time Scientists, that wanted to deliver it to the moon:
Didn't age well. The company is called Planetary Transportation Systems (PTS) GmbH today. But their homepage looks....weird.
Last edited:
GLS
Well-known member
The first time this was done, it wasn't easy, but even starting from scratch it was much faster
Thunder Chicken
Resident Lua Script Rabble-Rouser
Interesting photo of Integrity's heat shield underwater just after splashdown:
www.nasa.gov
NASA on Track for Future Missions with Initial Artemis II Assessments - NASA
Following NASA’s Artemis II mission successfully splashing down on Earth, engineers started diving into detailed analysis of data to assess how key systems
www.nasa.gov
Frilock
Donator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
- Messages
- 870
- Reaction score
- 516
- Points
- 108
Funny you say that, my youtube feed got flooded with people live streaming their reactions to the launch. I guess I'm happy that people care about it, but...Is Twitch not posh enough for NASA?
GLS
Well-known member
Forget ML-2, we have a new winner:
Here are Isaacman's remarks on HAL and I-HAB in full:
"I appreciate the contributions, and look forward to working with them on how we could potentially repurpose hardware to surface applications. I’ll tell you, at the Gateway program -- outside of the PPE hardware that we’re going use for the nuclear power and propulsion demonstration -- the only two habitable volumes that were delivered both were corroded. And that’s unfortunate because it would have delayed, probably beyond 2030, the application of Gateway."
Here are Isaacman's remarks on HAL and I-HAB in full:
"I appreciate the contributions, and look forward to working with them on how we could potentially repurpose hardware to surface applications. I’ll tell you, at the Gateway program -- outside of the PPE hardware that we’re going use for the nuclear power and propulsion demonstration -- the only two habitable volumes that were delivered both were corroded. And that’s unfortunate because it would have delayed, probably beyond 2030, the application of Gateway."
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
Can't NASA store a spacecraft module properly? I-Hab was still fine when it left Italy in February this year.
Fabri91
Donator
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,287
- Reaction score
- 432
- Points
- 98
- Location
- Valmorea
- Website
- www.fabri91.eu
I hope a blame-game doesn't start now :\
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
I think Isaacman just started it. Just remember that in February, only days before delivery to Florida, there was also a review with NASA about it, without any claims or reports about (unacceptable) corrosion. So, either the damage happened in Italia and his own NASA engineers didn't spot it or during the few hours in flight in a dry container pressurized with nitrogen on two separate flights or the people at NASA are, in the eyes of Isaacman, incompetent. Neither option sounds anyway credible or respectful by Isaacman.
GLS
Well-known member
Simple... 
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
What could go wrong?
Does SpaceX even have a "translunar depot" (or tanker) yet to be tested?
Does SpaceX even have a "translunar depot" (or tanker) yet to be tested?
GLS
Well-known member
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
Ok, that clarifies a part of it.... but not why it was accepted flown to the Cape then, when it was unacceptable corrosion.
RisingFury
OBSP developer
Thunder Chicken
Resident Lua Script Rabble-Rouser
They also need to determine what the actual boil-off rate of propellants would be for a fully fueled Starship. They can't determine their fuel margins for ANY mission profile until they understand this fully. This isn't a minor detail - this is currently unknown and the number of tanks of fuel needed for the entire mission architecture will be dictated by it. Everyday Astronaut's numbers don't account for this at all. It's not just a Tsiolkovsky rocket equation problem, that would be easy - it's a miserable combined mode heat transfer and thermodynamics problem for a very complicated liquid fuel system.What could go wrong?
Does SpaceX even have a "translunar depot" (or tanker) yet to be tested?
It would suck, to put it mildly, to realize that your fuel margins go negative due to boil-off halfway to the Moon or Mars, especially when you need the propulsion to actually slow down and land at your destination.
dennis.krenz
Well-known member
Without way to actively cool the propellant, I don't think the HLS will go anywhere. Even just sitting on the lunar day side for hours would be wasteful then.
Of course, you need to determine the needed power of that cooling unit....
The Blue Moon lander also includes such a feature.
Similar threads
