Request Artemis landers

francisdrake

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
834
Reaction score
312
Points
78
Website
francisdrakex.deviantart.com
Up to now only some concept art was published. I think the offer of SpaceX (or any other competior) was not disclosed - correct me, if I am wrong.

When looking back to the first pictures of the Mars Colonial Transport, that became BFR and then Starship, this changed quite a lot in size and performance. On the other hand, Starship is already flying, so the cornerstones of its design are determined. Still, all this on-orbit tanking is a far way to go, and reducing the number of tanker flights may be worth to improve mission reliability.
 

cosmonaut2040

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
31
Reaction score
15
Points
8
I'd think that a SpaceX way to reduce the number of tanker flights would be to start sourcing LOx from lunar ice.
This way they can also take advantage of all that payload capacity to bring up excavators, electrolysis plants and personnel to operate them ;)
 

gattispilot

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
7,139
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Dallas, TX
Let me throw this out. MAybe someone can help.
A scenario using AMSO and the Dynethics lander
He gets this:
DtA0KCR.png

But I get this:
jEufmvW.jpg


See in the top how the deep they are.

Fixed it should be AMSO
 
Last edited:

Sbb1413

Add-on developer and tester
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
940
Reaction score
358
Points
63
Location
India
Preferred Pronouns
he/his/him
Let me throw this out. MAybe someone can help.
A scenario using MASO and the Dynethics lander
He gets this:
DtA0KCR.png

But I get this:
jEufmvW.jpg


See in the top how the deep they are.
What do you mean by "MASO"? Do you mean "AMSO"? IDK why the historic Apollo stuff are relevant with the ALPACA lander by Dynetics.

Edit: I have noticed that the rovers and the EVA suits are from AMSO. Therefore, AMSO is necessary for the EVA suits and rovers.
 

kuddel

Donator
Donator
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
1,809
Reaction score
327
Points
83
I would compare these:
a) Orbiter version (both 2016?)
b) "Surface elevation" (both using "linear interpolation"?)
 

Jeremyxxx

Active member
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
292
Reaction score
83
Points
43
Location
Dawson Springs
November 22nd is on the way for Orion's first flight around the Moon, and construction of the Moonship has yet to commence.
 

Gargantua2024

The Desktop Orbinaut
Joined
Oct 14, 2016
Messages
819
Reaction score
945
Points
108
Location
San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
The ALPACA will no longer feature drop tanks as part of their Appendix N redesign, revealed in the Angry Astronaut's interview with Kathy Laurini:
EDIT: New link posted since the Angry Astronaut removed it and then reuploaded yesterday
 
Last edited:

Gargantua2024

The Desktop Orbinaut
Joined
Oct 14, 2016
Messages
819
Reaction score
945
Points
108
Location
San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
I saw a comment on the Angry Astronaut's latest video about Dynetics which he proposed "Starship launching ALPACA". Of course a future partnership with SpaceX and Dynetics is still unlikely at this time, but a fully fueled ALPACA (on its 2020 design concept) can be transported to the Moon without refuelling the lander on the Gateway via Starship
1632292241610.png
 
Last edited:

Gargantua2024

The Desktop Orbinaut
Joined
Oct 14, 2016
Messages
819
Reaction score
945
Points
108
Location
San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
Due to a new contract announced named the Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS), the Starship HLS might not be used beyond Artemis 5. Given there is no plans to land astronauts during Artemis 4, the fate of the Starship used in the previous mission is somewhat vague
 

Kyle

Armchair Astronaut
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
3,892
Reaction score
294
Points
123
Website
orbithangar.com
Honestly, the whole Artemis program after Artemis III seems so incredibly vague right now that I wouldn't jump to that conclusion.
 

Gargantua2024

The Desktop Orbinaut
Joined
Oct 14, 2016
Messages
819
Reaction score
945
Points
108
Location
San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
I agree. Though if they plan to ditch the Starship used after Artemis 3 that would be a total waste.

NASA clearly planned to make Artemis 4 a Gateway-only mission dedicated in delivering I-HAB to the station. What happens for Artemis 5 and beyond is not clear
 

Kyle

Armchair Astronaut
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
3,892
Reaction score
294
Points
123
Website
orbithangar.com
I agree. Though if they plan to ditch the Starship used after Artemis 3 that would be a total waste.

NASA clearly planned to make Artemis 4 a Gateway-only mission dedicated in delivering I-HAB to the station. What happens for Artemis 5 and beyond is not clear

I sincerely doubt they're ditching Starship after Artemis III. The whole idea is "dissimilar redundancy".

It's more likely that NASA simply doesn't know what it's going to do after Artemis III. I wouldn't be surprised if Artemis IV ends up being the landing mission.
 
Top