@@WALTERBROADDUS That's awesome, always like hearing other people's story. Was he at Cape Canaveral or NJ? My grandpa was at the Cape from the Redstone program till the beginning of the STS missions. They were tracking spacecraft downrange on radar.
@@LichaelMewis They were resourceful and determined with a clear goal in mind to beat the Russians to the moon. What do we have? Beat China to... I don't know any millennials or zoomers that give two s**ts about space exploration. I still do though so come on gen X! If there's anyone sober enough to fly a spaceship please stand up please stand up...
@@LichaelMewis yes we can, and are, with the Artemis Program. It's not that we couldn't all this time, it's that NASA got raped by Congress on funding and a lack of reasons to revisit the lunar surface.
@Constance & James Turpin you do realize that India, Japan, Russia, and the U.S. have all imaged every single one of the apollo landing sites with modern day lunar orbiters, right? So are you claiming that russia is in on it too? 😅😂
@Constance & James Turpin not only can you still see the landers, they can image so well that you can still see the footsteps, and the paths of the lunar rover. You flat earthers are weird.🤣
As part of the Artemis program, I'm pleased to see you bring this to your audience. I currently split my time betweem SLS and lunar and in-space inflatable habitats. I will say that the people at NASA are serious about Artemis and truly excited about going back to the moon. For your listeners, I'd encourage them to elect representatives that support the Artemis mission so that we actually get the funding to really do it!
-- Yeah, the democrats have been tooth and nail hamstringing this project for decades. Add contracting shenanigan's ... no need to write a novel there. I wasn't around the first time. Would love to see us go back, and thank you for being a part of the project. Lowly Army Ranger, 22 years a PSC, and WWII fighter pilot here (not in WWII, just fly the planes), that loves spaceflight. But Kerbal Space Program is about as close as I've come :^) I can only imagine how many times you've had to rethink these projects due to changing budgets. You touch it with a needle: Politics - per usual - is what's in the way. So, I'm pleased we have companies like SpaceX that can at the very least, distance themselves to some degree from the red tape. Thanks for your comment.
@@free-birdrocker8809 The current administration has shown support for Artemis in word, and put Bill Nelson in charge of NASA. Nelson was a strong NASA advocate when he was in the Senate, and one of the original group that proposed SLS. Don't get me wrong, I think Jim Bridenstine was the best NASA Administrator I've ever served under (I go back to the mid-90s when Dan Goldin was administrator for Clinton). I'm 90% sure "Artemis" was his idea. I am 100% sure the Artemis Accords are his idea. He leveraged the momentum and public support that SpaceX had brought back to the manned space program and built on it to get the public excited about the return to the Moon. He created Commercial Lunar Payloads program (small landers for science and lunat base precursor missions) and started the work for the current Commercial LEO Destinations - commercial space stations to replace ISS, freeing up Billions of dollars in available budget to focus on Artemis. The man was a genius at working around Congress to bring as many resources to the Artemis program as he could. Nelson is a good administrator, but he just doesn't have the charm or administrative and technical accumen that Bridenstine did. JB is sorely missed!
We're never going back current administrations too busy trying to bankrupt us too busy trying to get everybody to fight with one another we're not interested in us going anywhere as I've always said it's just a pipe dream now which absolutely sucks 😔
@@jasonyuill1430 I pray that you're wrong about that. If nothing else, there's still a ton of momentum from SpaceX and other commercial space entrerprises that was built upon by Bridenstine and NASA to forge Artemis. Those entities are still excited about going, and NASA still has funding to move forward. 2024 was never an achievable goal, but it sure kicked everybody into gear! I'd be satisfied with 2030, which I think really is doable.
I always felt somewhat unfortunate that I never got to see the Apollo era, so I'm extremely happy that Artemis is happening now and that I'll get to see it right from the start.
You'll get to see "SpaceX" get there first. NASA is using leftover parts from the shuttle mainstage for the (wow) great "Artemis" heap of junk. They've been using the same space suits for almost 20 years knowing that they were obsolete. NASA is useless now that the private sector is involved!
A lot of people say space exploration is a waste of money and we should use the money here on Earth. They don't realize all the technology they depend on today was largely developed originally for space. Not to mention if you spend a few billion on a rocket that money doesn't just vanish it goes to companies and people that help build it. Everyone from rocket scientist to janitors and truck drivers.
@@User31129 when you understand why social programs like this are a pathetically poor idea, then you can make demands like that. Until then you are too ignorant of reality to speak intelligently on why you personally have the right to demand anything from anyone else, much less at point of government force.
Why does NASA need to consider the gender or race of anyone for these missions? Send the best, regardless of those labels. Just stick to space exploration, select on merit.
Because the last time we sent people to the moon, we didn’t think we should send people based on merit alone, regardless of race or sex. The first American astronauts who went to space who weren’t white men went in the 1980s, because prior to that race and sex were exclusionary factors. Now, we’ve made strides to overcome that. So it’s a thing to celebrate because we’re no longer as obviously prejudiced as we were back then. Selecting people based on merit now means that the first woman and first person of color will go to the moon now, because they couldn’t in the 60s and 70s.
While everyone is busy stating it should be the best this, that or the other, who says the best is an American crew? Russia and China have astronauts, so does the UK and plenty more on the way, so as space, the moon and mars don't have a nationality, how about maintaining that and picking the best person at their specialist subject no matter where they were born here, their skin colour or race, creed or sex? That will be a first!
I don't know about race, but both fertile genders will be necessary for colonization; which is ultimately what the whole effort is about. The space agencies involved are going to want to know the long-term effects of radiation(amongst other factors) on fertility. Might as well find out as soon as possible. Unless you wish to clone, of course.
What did we learn the first round, other than it is too expensive and there is no compelling reason to go to the moon? What do you think we will learn this time around?
When your space program's goals revolve around race and gender, your society is messee up. How about we just send the best, most qualified astronauts, regardless of their race and genitals?
@@robgrey6183 Here's an interesting idea, little green med seem to appear in a lot of UFO news, and they all 'seem' to be missing gender, could this be how alien races get around that problem? Remove genitalia? Ouch...
Great video. It’s a great time to be alive. I hope to see a manned Mars landing in my lifetime. In the meantime, we’ll at least get to see some amazing rocket launches.
Ironically true. If I understand a damn, the moon orbits bc of its mass. If a spacecraft was out that far it it way way out of earth gravitational pull. I think.
@@connorbaniak it would depend on the spacecraft and its velocity. If moving slow enough it would remain in Earth's orbit. If moving fast enough it would keep going.
All we need is more politics involved in the space program. I am for the best candidate going into space, not driven by Affirmative Action rules. Some of your repeated comments were sending the first woman and race minority to the moon. The best candidate should be leading these missions. If they are female or purple in skin color, that should not matter. Another great video, Thx
Agree 1000% Some of the comments made by NASA and other government agencies as of late, are quite concerning. There’s currently this huge push by Democrats to “weed out extremists” and “whyte supremacists” from our military and other agencies. With ALL the parameters being political rather than performance based, it’s a recipe for disaster if they continue this nonsense. The path they’re blazing will only end up costing tons of tax dollars and eventually accidents or death but they’re too tunnel visioned to even consider the fallout from their actions. Concerning indeed...
Throwing away four 40 million dollar RS-25 rocket engines for every sls launch seems criminally wasteful. We did get a lot of use out of them and it's more dignified to go out flying than sitting in a museum somewhere. Forty million in 1980 dollars is what now?
At this point, if they aren’t stopped by government intervention, I honestly think SpaceX will go there on their own and get their first (even if it’s just a fly-by at first). NASA has been all-talk for so long. Yes timescales and budgets have changed etc but it’s not like they haven’t been planning for this so plans for all the required tech should be sitting on shelves and they really shouldn’t be needing to develop anything from scratch. Their current issues with space suits is unforgivable for example.
NASA will stop them so they don't look bad while they take more time to create more jobs programs for geologists, global warming cultists, minorities and adversarial nations. Because money good, but USA bad.
Unfortunately SpaceX is also a lot of talk. Shouldn't their first spaceship land on Mars 2018... Musk is inspirational and a good salesman, but the delivery is so far only partially matching the promises.
@@old_man_with_hat yeah but these days as far as spacex goes they are getting closer to the dates they say because it's less Elon time and more thousands of engineers and a huge team reviewing it with him.
@@RedSiegfried Racist much? I enthusiastically support diversity and the aspirations for a better nation. I am well educated, liberal old and white and I enltsted, voluntarily in the US Army in 1972, served proudly and was discharged honorably. I gave up cars in 75 and have ridden a bicycle over 200k miles since then because there is no doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and an existential threat. I am sincerely sorry for you and the many like you that I have known and watched grow smaller, more bitter and incapable of joy year by year. Let me guess, anybody who does not agree with everything you believe is an enemy and there is no middle ground on any issue? Or have I read you wrong? If so, my bad.
When NASA's Artemis astronauts finally step onto the surface of the moon they can Uber up a ride to Elon's Bar and Grill where SpaceX's lunar mining team hangs out after work.
I've watched a few of these videos and weirdly, there's rarely, if ever a mention of the role of autonomous robots in building habitats, mining, and producing fuel, water and gasses, long before the first humans arrive.
Any idea what the cost of the infrastructure needed to establish a moon base? Got a launch vehicle that can reliably soft land a fleet of dump trucks, and backhoes on the moon?
@@josephg3231 more likely preferably prefabricated assembly tucked away near a cave entrance and pre-assembly with these robotic trucks and backhoes you are talkin about
Very funny. Seriously though, NASA chose Starship as the Lunar Lander! NASA is stuck with SLS thanks to Congress, but they've been trying to leverage ALL the private space outfits to get us there the quickest! DarkSpace didn't mention the Commercial Lunar Payload Service program, but that will be leveraging a number of technologies from a dozen or so smaller companies to get small precursor missions to the moon. They're working WITH SpaceX and the other commercial space companies, not in COMPETITION with them!
@@fleafrier1 SpaceX better get it stuff together. I'm not so sure picking Starship as the Lander was a smart idea. They are at least two, maybe three years away before they are even human-rated
@@robgrey6183 doesn’t actually matter to me what someone’s sex or race is. I think we should choose astronauts for a moon mission based upon the most qualified for the job. It seems wrong to eliminate a more qualified candidate simply because they are the wrong gender or have the wrong skin color.
So the biggest talking point about NASA returning to the moon is the gender of the crew. Not what advancement the mission brings to the table with the engineering of the vehicle, or the new ground breaking way to keep a human alive for longer in a vacuum. Not even the advancement made to make all that tech easier and cheaper to make. Nope it's such a great mission cause it's crewed by all females and no racism. That in itself says a lot about what "science" has become.
You didn’t show the VP touching the capsule… you know, the one where the sign says DON’T TOUCH but he’s got his grubby little hands on it like he can’t read. Good times…. good times!😉
Keeping my comments non-partisan, it is necessary for each of the subsequent US Federal Administrations to keep NASA's SLS/Artemis program steadily funded over the next 5-6 Presidential terms. The US cannot faulter on this or we risk falling behind the Chinese Space Program. The US also needs to use every bit of NASA's planning expertise to coordinate/and encourage as much commercial space venture participation and also International Space Program participation in this extended effort to permanently inhabit the moon and travel on to Mars.
We already have it with SpaceX and it's not as costly as previous systems. This is the main reason you see Nasa using more and more SpaceX rockets for exploration.
We should scrap the Artemis program and take whatever hardware they have developed and hand everything over to SpaceX. We could be back on the moon by spring if Elon had full control over the project.
they are the same boosters they used on the shuttle... which they retrieved and refurbished every damn time!...they are not thrown away as suggested...
-- I sure wouldn't want to be the woman that walked on the moon, knowing I might not have been the best person for the job, but just because of my gender. Case in point: Kamala Harris. We see how that's working, well, if at all. If the best person for the job, however, is a woman, I'm rooting for her. I just can't believe a professional of any race or gender would want a free pass. Worse yet to satisfy political and financial goals for the adventure.
Kara Hultgren- first U.S. Navy female fighter pilot, they dumbed down the training for her. Was killed when her F-14 crashed after missing a landing at sea. A noncrash situation for a fully trained naval aviator. Today the Navy has many female strike-fighter pilots, but they are well trained aviators who had an interest in naval aviation instead of an activist that used political pressure just so they could be first.
Luna would be the ideal staging area for deeper space exploration, considering how weight is the cost limiting factor for launches from Earth. Even if they just diverted a few decimal points percentage worth of funding from the US military, they'd be doing very well.
More mention of the importance of SpaceX in driving this sort of programme forwards might have been appropriate, especially as there are many delays in the mainstream projects ...
I remember sitting with my Dad watching Apollo 11. As a young boy that shit was amazing. Now as an adult (I'm 56 today 11/24) after fifty years and the state of our government during this current administration I don't believe anything said period. Space X should of been to mars already. I can hear the comments already "nasa helped space x" I understand that but look at our government always trying to get there fingers in the pie and when they can't they throw up the red tape. Sorry, rant complete. One more thing now that I think about it... we could have been on mars ten years ago with Dr. Zubrin's "Mars Direct" plan. It was totally economical and do-able with the technology at the time. It was presented to congress and nasa. LLS it was shot down. My feelings on that is the "economical" aspect. Our government save money? HAHAHA no they want to spend it!! How dare someone suggest that we use equipment that is bought and payed for that is the same technology that we will still be using twenty years from now. OK now I'm done. Lets go Brandon
It looks a lot like NASA doesn't think those groups could stand a chance on their own, which in itself is offensive. Just pick the best of the best, as usual to minimize risk.
Who's to say they are not the best? They are probably all incredibly smart and proffecional people and NASA should definitely celebrate the fact that they have such a diverse crew and be proud of it. Isn't it a big deal for the first time women and people of ethnic minorities will set foot on an extraterrestrial surface. It shows how far we have come
Its already here!!! One thing USA 🇺🇸 n Russia 🇷🇺 agreee The one thing Trump n Biden agree on! Lets do this, as a planet! For all man/woman kind! (And dogs n cats too, why not? Laika beat humans let us not forget)
There's actually logic to selecting women astronauts: they're smaller, weigh less, consume less food and oxygen, but can be just as capable as anyone else. It might be possible to put five women in an Artemis capsule and have no greater payload weight than 3 1/2 or 4 men.
I was just another 5 year old kid, when I watched Neil Armstrong walk in the Moon. I got a boost from Star Trek. My partner's granddaughter is 5, I want her and her friends to get the same inspiration I had, because STEM is the future.
It gets ‘even more’ complex because, one has to remember that once we leave earth’s surface, even just to the height of a passenger jet, the object (whether it is a jet, or the moon, or anything else) does not ‘know’ how big in volume & density, the Earth is. A plane, or the moon, essentially feels the pull of a ‘point object’ with the same MASS as the earth. It could be much smaller than earth but much denser; or much bigger, but less dense. The moon cannot ‘know’. It just assumes a point mass, with earth’s mass, located at where the ‘actual’ centre of the Earth really is, if this makes sense. It is by this fact that black holes can occur (but that’s too much to type here!). So the business of defining and calculating orbits is a complex one. Add to that the sheer complexity of the files of “Many Body Mechanics” (the interactions of more than two objects, or bodies, and how they move) and i gets very… interesting!
I'd love to go to Mars. Knowing humans, we'd have a war on there shortly after settling and then I could be one of the first Mars veterans if I survive :D
Hard to go back to a place humans have never been...Lol! NASA is still figuring out how to safely navigate through the "deadly radiation" their words not mine.
for non-manned launches we've developed spin-launch to cut those billions of cost down so i'm sure this changes the game entirely,before we had to worry about gravity now we can just build on the moon and not have to expend an exponentially large amount of fuel to escape earth's gravity well
Amazing how you managed this whole video without denouncing the SLS being obsolete on arrival and it's ridiculously expensive price tag making it absolutely useless for sustainability, or the SpaceX lander being the only thing that has a chance to be on time and under budget (if Blue Origin stops lawyer-bombing)... At this point it's a race between China and SpaceX anyway. Nasa shines when you need a spacecraft to survive new and extraordinary conditions on the first try, but even with the shuttle they suffered from senate budgetary approval dependant on innefficiently distributing jobs everywhere, to the point of insanity... like the SLS.
I agree with you partly: SLS represents a horribly inefficient use of tax dollars - an extemsion of the Shuttle program, which was also a horribly inefficient use of tax dollars. BUT it's really the only rocket with a shot of getting crew to the moon in a reasonable time frame. Keep in mind that even though SpaceX is the rising star (and I LOVE SpaceX) it's going to be several years at least before Starship starts launching crew. For lunar missions, Starship will require a propellant depot, which has yet to be demonstrated, to refuel Starship before it heads off to the moon. Also, Lunar Starship is going to require specialized descent and ascent engines that don't stir up the lunar regolith so badly. I mention all these as examples of some of the things that still have to be worked out to allow anyone to land on the moon.
@@jamesowens7176 None of that is being ignored by the planners at SpaceX. While much is subject to unnecessary delays (law suits, FAA, etc) that have to be dealt with, It is highly likely that Starship will land people on the Moon before NASA or for NASA. The SLS is an albatross around NASA's neck and they know it.
@@jamesowens7176 Thanks for your insightful comment, it is rare enough on this platform it's worth mentioning it. 😅👍 I agree that the Starhip HLS have some steep challenges, but they are are very much in the realm of "possible real soon", with the added benefit that solving this will grant the same capability to send people to Mars, Titan or any asteroid... While the SLS costs so much per launch (and limited to 2 per year) that it will never be worthwhile. I can't wait to see which one launches, goes for TLI and lands on the Moon first. 😎👍 Because unless Starship succeeds, you can be damn sure the Chinese are going to be there.
Exactly! The SLS is everything wrong with wasteful government programs. It’s the old way of doing things. Our money is getting tighter. This is something best handed off to private companies who have to answer for their spending and have something to show for it. NASA is a money pit. Thanks for the memories but you are obsolete.
@@freiermann7 I agree re: the SLS. NASA DOES however have more yet to do. The pure science missions to Mars, the asteroids, Jupiter, Saturn and beyond have been the most efficient and scientifically impactful for the money than anyone could have ever expected. But now that private companies are getting into the launch business, they can ease up there a bit. Setting the standards is still their bailiwick, I would think. Don't sell them completely short. They did keep a space program alive until the private guys got into it.
Thats what was so great about spacex, their lack of government funding was making it possible for them to make HUGE and fast leaps in a short period of time. now that theyre working with nasa's money, an working hand n hand with them, i would be lying if i wasnt slightly bummed about the timeline that this is most likely going to happen in. 2024 most likely means 2027, 2028:(.
sounds like they want to use a spacecraft in orbit around the moon to land on same and the orion spacecraft to get to the moon and back to earth. this allows them to use a different ship/missile configuration. all good but didn't they recently pull the plug on the orion space capsule? thought I had heard something to that effect. also there is a simple issue; what if spacex beats them there?
Yea let's just make exploration a CRT project and it is doomed. I'd love to see people who are competent and proficient and Best qualified for the mission regardless of race. Why can we not drop race and just be good to each other? Because it does not fulfil the AGENDA.
Why are organizations so concerned, or why do they make statements like; "the first woman to....." "we ant to be the first to have a member of this subsegment of the population do X". Instead everyone should only be concerned that the most qualified individuals be selected or on the team to do whatever it is. This "wokeness" will do nothing but increase the possibility that individuals that are less qualified or less capable are selected to do these tasks. If the next crew to go to the moon is an all female crew, that is fine. It's fine along as they are all the most qualified and prepared individuals available for the mission. But if a crew is being selected and one of those crew members is a woman who may meet the qualifications but is selected only so the organization can get that, "hey, we put a woman on the moon" box checked....things will eventually go less than great. The only consideration to gender for crew selection should be that some of their equipment may need to be configured differently. Note: data shows that women make better pilots.
I think you could convey the same information by speaking at a normal rate, instead of blurting out each sentence as fast as possible and pausing for a few seconds between.
