Artemis II launch and mission

Forums › Off topic › Artemis II launch and mission

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Jase2985

13731 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6202

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3479274 8-Apr-2026 16:31

Rikkitic:

Jase2985:

you realise its testing the life support, habitability, communications etc etc for future launches/missions

Sure, but that can be done with instruments. Or they can add a couple monkeys again. The human cargo is just that: cargo.

im sorry but you are 100% wrong there.

You can only test something so much with instruments and monkeys till you need to test it with real people.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16304

Lifetime subscriber

#3479278 8-Apr-2026 17:02

Jase2985:

im sorry but you are 100% wrong there.

You can only test something so much with instruments and monkeys till you need to test it with real people.

Of course you are right but something feels a little off about this venture. Maybe it is just the group hugs and soppy comments. Not really what I expect from highly trained professional astronauts going where no human has gone before.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

nova

260 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 143

Trusted

#3479349 8-Apr-2026 20:31

Rikkitic:

Jase2985:

im sorry but you are 100% wrong there.

You can only test something so much with instruments and monkeys till you need to test it with real people.

Of course you are right but something feels a little off about this venture. Maybe it is just the group hugs and soppy comments. Not really what I expect from highly trained professional astronauts going where no human has gone before.

Just to add my 2c, I'm with Rikkitic, $4 billion is a lot of money for a mission with very modest goals. Artemis II doesn't get any closer than 4000 miles to the moon. Apollo 8 went to within 60 miles, and also orbited 10 times. Apollo 11 landed less than a year later. In the Apollo days, the astronauts were essential to the success. With this mission, the astronauts are there primarily for the experience. There are no technological hurdles to a fully automated mission. And in fact a few years ago India sent a lander and rover to the moon for $75 million. Almost all of the science from Artemis II doesn't require people. The stem cells being used to measure radiation can be sent solo, and they can use dummies with sensors just like Artemis I.

Of course, it is an exciting mission. But for my money, if you are going to risk the astronauts lives on a mission like this, you might as well iron out the kinks first with autonomous missions, and risk the lives of the astronauts on something a bit bolder. And not just a free return flyby at 4000 miles.

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9544

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3479353 8-Apr-2026 21:00

+1 for this being a bit of a waste of time and money. Life support system tests? Absolutely necessary - could've done it in LEO with a smaller, cheaper rocket. As far as science is concerned the Lunar Reconnaisance Orbiter has been taking lots of pretty pictures of the moon from much closer up since 2009. Advancing the science of rocketry? I'm no Musk fan but Starship has demonstrated a clear developmental path to full reusability, developed from scratch. If anything SLS is a step backwards having taken refurbishable Space Shuttle engines and dumping them in the Pacific Ocean.

Luckily, it's not my money, and the US certainly wastes its taxpayers money on way worse things than moon rockets.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#3479354 8-Apr-2026 21:02

It is all about publicity though and manned flight gets that publicity . There is a reason the Apollo program got scrapped, people lost interest even though they drove a car on the moon and played golf etc.

Jase2985

13731 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6202

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3479357 8-Apr-2026 21:23

it's a new launch vehicle, it's a new launch capsule. It's what they are putting their future missions etc in.

Everything costs more in capitalist America

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

gzt

18682 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7823

Lifetime subscriber

#3479363 8-Apr-2026 22:38

If it was easy Musk and Bezos would be taking tourists to the moon already.

Dratsab

3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1728

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3479615 10-Apr-2026 06:59

Open photo

Batman

Mad Scientist
30013 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3479633 10-Apr-2026 07:37

Rikkitic:

It is kind of pathetic the way NASA commentators keep trying to justify their presence by insisting they are doing real science by looking at the moon. They are not. They are doing group hugs and singing kumbaya. These are not the no-nonsense astronauts I remember from the 1960s.

hmm i could do group hugs and kumbaya in my backyard. am i an astronaut too?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5