Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Exploration: Asteroids, Moon and Mars
  [Discuss] Artemis III (Orion/Starship HLS) (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   [Discuss] Artemis III (Orion/Starship HLS)
Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-30-2019 01:43 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Please use this topic to discuss NASA's Artemis III mission, the first crewed flight to the surface of the moon since Apollo 17 in 1972.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-30-2019 01:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Artemis III mission plan, as it exists today, from the NASA Advisory Committee Human Exploration and Operations (HEO) meeting on Wednesday (Oct. 30).

YankeeClipper61
New Member

Posts: 3
From:
Registered: Jan 2016

posted 10-31-2019 12:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YankeeClipper61     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm trying to fully understand this mission. The Lunar Gateway has to be launched initially to get it in lunar orbit. Will the Human Landing System (HLS) be launched at the same time? Or is it another launch?

That being said, what about the return from the lunar surface? The HLS will dock at the Gateway when the astronauts leave the lunar surface. Will the HLS be discarded like the LM was or saved for another mission? If it's saved, that opens up a whole world of complexity to be dealt with, doesn't it?

Any thoughts?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-31-2019 12:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Gateway is planned to be assembled in lunar orbit with separate pieces arriving on separate launches (at first, a power and propulsion element and then a node/mini-hab).

The Human Landing System would then be launched to dock with the Gateway and await the arrival of Orion with the crew.

NASA does intend for the reuse of the HLS (or at least some of its elements). Those details are still be defined with the selection of an architecture/provider.

Blackarrow
Member

Posts: 3499
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-01-2019 09:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Blackarrow     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Good questions, and clearly more detail is needed, but, before you actually land on the Moon you have to have a plan, and at least this is a start.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 05-13-2020 12:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Artemis 3 mission plan, as it exists today, from the NASA Advisory Committee Human Exploration and Operations (HEO) meeting on Wednesday (May 13).

This version removes the Gateway from Artemis 3; the Gateway is now planned for launch in November 2023, but will not be used for the 2024 landing.

328KF
Member

Posts: 1366
From:
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-13-2020 06:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 328KF   Click Here to Email 328KF     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Could that chart be a little more confusing? Given that they’ve now said no Gateway for Artemis III, are the red events now deleted?

And since the lander will not be staged at the Gateway, does it launch with Orion or separately for an Earth orbit rendezvous scenario?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 05-13-2020 07:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
According to Doug Loverro (Human Exploration and Operations), the plan is to still launch Orion and the Human Landing System separately. They will both fly to a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit* (NRHO) and dock there to transfer the crew, without using the Gateway.

* Loverro acknowledged that NASA is studying other orbits as an alternative to NRHO, but has yet to find a better approach.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 07-07-2020 05:55 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Has NASA provided its detailed cost estimate to land an Artemis crew on the moon by 2024 to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science? I believe they requested this detailed cost estimate from NASA on several occasions, some of which were last year. The last I heard of this matter, the detailed cost estimates were supposed to be turned over in late March, or very soon thereafter, of this year.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-07-2020 06:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The cost estimate was delayed when Loverro left the agency. Now Kathy Lueders is being given time to review and revise the plan as she feels is merited.

In response to the delay, the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee limited NASA's spending on exploration:

Not more than 40 percent of the amounts made available in this Act for the Gateway; Advanced Cislunar and Surface Capabilities; Commercial LEO Development; Human Landing System; and Lunar Discovery and Exploration, excluding the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, may be obligated until the Administrator submits a multi-year plan to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate that identifies estimated dates, by fiscal year, for Space Launch System flights to build the Gateway; the commencement of partnerships with commercial entities for additional LEO missions to land humans and rovers on the Moon; and conducting additional scientific activities on the Moon. The multi-year plan shall include key milestones to be met by fiscal year to achieve goals for each of the lunar programs described in the previous sentence and funding required by fiscal year to achieve such milestones.

SpaceAholic
Member

Posts: 5127
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-20-2020 11:14 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SpaceAholic   Click Here to Email SpaceAholic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA video
A crew module cone panel with openings for windows – which will provide that spectacular view – is ready for shipment to NASA’s Michoud Assembly Facility near New Orleans, Louisiana, for welding as part of Orion’s pressure vessel. The panel was designed by Orion’s prime contractor, Lockheed Martin of Denver, Colorado, and manufactured by AMRO Fabricating Corp., of South El Monte, California. It is the first element of the Artemis III crew module to be machined.

To acknowledge the milestone, leaders from NASA, Lockheed, and AMRO recently showcased Orion’s progress through a video looking at the manufacturing process and hardware at AMRO. Participants included NASA’s Howard Hu, Lockheed Martin Vice President for Human Space Exploration and Orion Program Manager Mike Hawes, and AMRO CEO Mike Riley.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-16-2020 03:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine suggested Sept. 14 that NASA would be open to sending Artemis 3 to a location other than the south pole of the moon, including revisiting an Apollo landing site, reports SpaceNews.
"If you're going to go to the equatorial region again, how are you going to learn the most? You could argue that you'll learn the most by going to the places where we put gear in the past," he said, referring to the equipment left behind at the Apollo landing sites.

"There could be scientific discoveries there and, of course, just the inspiration of going back to an original Apollo site would be pretty amazing as well," he said. He also cited creating "norms of behavior" for protecting those sites from other expeditions.

Bridenstine treated a landing away from the south pole as, for now, a hypothetical scenario. "If we made a determination that the south pole might be out of reach for Artemis 3, which I'm not saying it is or isn't," then a landing near an Apollo site might be an option, he said. "Those decisions haven't been made at this time."

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-16-2020 04:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Rather than an Apollo landing site, NASA should seriously consider sending Artemis 3 to Tycho, specifically the Surveyor 7 landing site. This has the advantages of:
  1. Conducting a landing toward, but not at, the lunar South Pole.
  2. Landing outside the Apollo operational envelope.
  3. Bringing home samples that would verify Surveyor 7's remote findings.
  4. Returning parts of Surveyor, which will have endured the lunar environment for 56 years (assuming a 2024 Artemis landing).
  5. Exploring an area near a large, young lunar impact crater.

oly
Member

Posts: 1410
From: Perth, Western Australia
Registered: Apr 2015

posted 09-16-2020 07:54 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for oly   Click Here to Email oly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am all for selecting one of the Apollo landing sites to revisit.

While a Surveyor site does provide the opportunity to return Surveyor hardware that has been left there for so long, an Apollo site provides more opportunity to study a wider range of equipment and the site has well documented history for comparison and for locating study targets.

Questions about how the Lunar Module launch impacted the materials left behind, the effects of long duration exposure to a wider range of materials, including the rover batteries.

Looking at rocks that had previous samples chipped away, and being able to take another sample 50 years later for comparison, and even the discarded trash and byproducts left behind by humans could provide valuable data.

Questions that have been the subject of discussion for many years could be answered (including the brand of golf ball and the true distance of that shot), the effects of 50 years of lunar environment on photographic film, or what remains of an American flag.

Being able to follow up on questions raised after the initial exploration of a site can be helpful for the scientific investigators, and engineers and benefit from learning how materials and equipment survive long duration exposure.

Revisiting a site would also feed the natural curiosity of many people and help determine how fragile the Apollo landing sites are. what measures are required to preserve the sites into the future.

Plus, returning some of the equipment would make for a great addition to the National Air and Space Museum collection.

Delta7
Member

Posts: 1682
From: Bluffton IN USA
Registered: Oct 2007

posted 09-16-2020 08:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Delta7   Click Here to Email Delta7     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It would be really neat if they landed where one of the four currently remaining moonwalkers was able to observe where they walked as a guest in mission control. God willing.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-19-2020 10:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Will the Artemis 3 lander be equipped with a lunar rover? If not, that will certainly limit useful landing site candidates.

Also, unless my memory is faulty, I read that the Artemis 3 lander will have a crew of only two. Is that still the current plan?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-21-2020 03:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Per The Artemis Plan, released by NASA today (Sept. 21):
In addition to two crew, the HLS will carry up to 220 lbs (100 kg) of science tools and equipment to the surface, with the goal of returning up to 87.5 lbs (35 kg) of samples.
As for the Artemis 3 landing site, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said today (via Twitter) that the mission is still aimed at the South Pole. Per the plan:
The exact landing site for Artemis III astronauts depends on several factors, including the specific science objectives and the launch date.

The agency is working with the global science community to study different regions that provide key desired traits: access to significant sunlight, which provides minimal temperature variations and potentially the only power source; continuous line-of-sight to Earth for mission support communications; mild grading and surface debris for safe landing and walking or roving mobility; and close proximity to permanently shadowed regions, some of which are believed to contain resources such as water ice.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-21-2020 05:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine further clarified about the Artemis 3 landing site during a media telecon today (Sept. 21):
To be clear, we are going to the south pole. There is no talk or trades or anything about anything else than going to the south pole at NASA.

It came up in a LEAG meeting, which is the Lunar Exploration Advisory Group, somebody asked me, "Wouldn't it be a good idea to go to an Apollo legacy site?" or something like that. The way I answered was, Where we are going is the south pole, that is where we are going. I think I said something like, 'You know if it were to be determined we could not get to the south pole, then that would be something to look at.' From that, somebody tweeted something and it became a story.

Right now we have no plans for Artemis 3 for anything other than the south pole.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-22-2020 07:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Unless I missed something in the report, aside from the landing site at the Lunar South Pole, Artemis III looks to be as capable as an Apollo H (12 or 14) mission.

Blackarrow
Member

Posts: 3499
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 09-23-2020 04:14 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Blackarrow     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
With any new system, it's probably wise to limit activity on the first mission. Besides, if the aim is to land in "...close proximity to permanently-shadowed regions" then the astronauts would not need to venture too far from their lander. Their goal would be right on their door-step. Conrad and Bean didn't need a rover to reach Surveyor 3.

It would be fascinating to learn if the astronauts would have the capability of venturing down into a permanently-shadowed crater to search for ice or other volatiles at or just below the surface. I suppose it would depend on several factors, not least the capability of the new suits to keep the wearers warm.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 11-09-2021 03:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
In an update provided today, NASA Administrator Bill Nelson spoke about the launch date for Artemis III.
Our teams need time to speak now with SpaceX about the Human Landing System. We've lost nearly seven months in litigation and that likely has pushed the first human landing likely to no earlier than 2025.

However, this crewed landing will be preceded by an uncrewed landing on the moon sometime before that human landing.

There are other reasons: prior to fiscal year 22, previous congresses did not appropriate enough dollars for development of the Human Landing System. And then the Trump administration target of a 2024 human landing was not grounded in technical feasibility.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-17-2022 06:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA release
NASA to Announce Candidate Landing Regions for Artemis III Moon Mission

NASA will hold a media teleconference at 2 p.m. EDT Friday, Aug. 19, to announce regions near the lunar South Pole the agency has identified as potential areas for astronauts to land as part of the Artemis III mission, targeted for 2025. This will be the first time astronauts will set foot on the Moon since NASA's Apollo 17 mission in 1972.

Audio of the briefing will livestream on NASA's website.

Within each region, there are several potential landing sites. Each of the selected regions, from which specific landing sites could be selected, is of scientific interest and was evaluated based on terrain, communications, and lighting conditions, as well as ability to meet science objectives. NASA will engage with the broader science community in the coming months to discuss the merits of each region.

Teleconference participants include:

  • Mark Kirasich, deputy associate administrator for the Artemis Campaign Development Division, NASA Headquarters
  • Jacob Bleacher, chief exploration scientist, NASA Headquarters
  • Sarah Noble, Artemis lunar science lead, Planetary Science Division, NASA Headquarters
  • Prasun Desai, deputy associate administrator for the Space Technology Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 08-19-2022 02:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Regarding the image of the various Artemis 3 landing regions that was released today (below), the crater Shackleton on whose rim the Lunar South Pole lies is 13 miles (21 km) in diameter. Just to provide some scale.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 08-19-2022 06:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Does anyone know if Artemis 3 mission will have some sort of lunar rover, or will the moonwalks be strictly "walking only."

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-19-2022 07:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Artemis III is a week-long sortie mission. All of the potential landing sites have been selected in part because they are within walking distance of an area (or areas) of interest.

Artemis V will introduce a lunar terrain vehicle. (Artemis IV is a lunar orbit mission to expand the Gateway.)

jimsz
Member

Posts: 640
From:
Registered: Aug 2006

posted 08-19-2022 10:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jimsz   Click Here to Email jimsz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The mission sounds exciting but why not pick the most qualified astronauts not a choice due to color or gender? Cause me to lose interest.

Gordon Eliot Reade
Member

Posts: 175
From: Palo Alto, Calif.
Registered: Jun 2015

posted 08-20-2022 01:12 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Gordon Eliot Reade   Click Here to Email Gordon Eliot Reade     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The most qualified astronaut might be a person of color or a woman. But this stated goal will put undo and unnecessary stress on him or her.

Just imagine how difficult it'd be if they didn't have a successful mission. There are those who'd blame the selection process and say that they were given their mission assignment due to gender or ethnic background.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-20-2022 10:11 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
As recently stated by chief astronaut Reid Wiseman, all of the members of the astronaut office are equally qualified to fly to the moon. There are no more or less capable individuals, otherwise they would not be a member of the active corps.

Representation is important. Given an even footing, there is no justification for not selecting a woman to be part of the Artemis III landing crew (as stated during a press call on Friday [Aug. 19], there is no requirement for a person of color to be on Artemis III; NASA has only said that the Artemis program will include landing people of color).

Blackarrow
Member

Posts: 3499
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 08-20-2022 12:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Blackarrow     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
As recently stated by chief astronaut Reid Wiseman, all of the members of the astronaut office are equally qualified to fly to the moon.
That sounds like modern groupthink. To say that "all are equally qualified" sounds like an excuse for using selection criteria other than actual abilities.

It is self-evident that anyone who has been selected as an astronaut has achieved minimum necessary standards of intelligence, skills, flying ability, etc. The issue is whether some individuals in an astronaut group (i.e. the pool of Artemis astronauts) are at the bottom, in the middle, or at the top, relatively speaking. There must inevitably be a heirarchy in terms of "the best for the job" because NOT all people (including astronauts) have identical skills or abilities.

We know that Deke Slayton judged some of his astronauts to be better than others, even though all had met the minimum criteria for astronaut selection. We know that, by and large, he felt that an experienced test-pilot was a better choice (at least on the early missions) than a non-test-pilot.

One thing which Slayton did with his Mercury, Gemini and Apollo astronaut groups was to make them do "peer ratings" whereby you would exclude yourself, then indicate in what order the other group members deserved to fly missions. It goes without saying that nobody answered "1st equal" for everybody else. Those peer ratings clearly showed that certain astronauts were more highly rated than others by their own peers. As Walt Cunningham pointed out ["All-American Boys," p. 42]:

But when judging another pilot's capability, someone on whom your own life might some day depend, you can't afford to get sentimental.
Do we know whether the "Artemis pool" of astronauts has done a "peer rating" exercise?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-20-2022 01:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Beginning with Peggy Whitson's time as chief astronaut, a rule was put into place that if you weren't capable of carrying out the missions that NASA was flying, then you were no longer a member of the active astronaut corps. While certainly some astronauts do better than others in certain skill sets, all have to meet the mission requirements to stay eligible for a flight assignment.

So when Wiseman said that all the members of the astronaut corps are eligible to fly to the moon, he said that knowing that all of the active astronauts can meet the skill sets needed for the Artemis missions.

I have not heard of any peer ratings being conducted.

Colokent
Member

Posts: 16
From: Colorado Springs, CO USA
Registered: Jun 2013

posted 08-20-2022 02:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Colokent   Click Here to Email Colokent     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Remember, NASA (much like the military) is a reflection of the current state of American society. That pretty much explains it.

Blackarrow
Member

Posts: 3499
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 08-20-2022 05:16 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Blackarrow     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Was there ever a time in NASA's history that an astronaut who was "incapable of carrying out the missions" remained a member of the active astronaut corps? Using such a statement of the obvious to justify treating every astronaut as "equally capable" is a negation of reality. In any peer group, some are better than others. That was always the case and always will be the case. When selecting astronauts for a vital early test mission, the sole selection criterion must be "Who are the best people to do this crucial job?"

It would be interesting if someone in the pool of astronauts available for Artemis missions could be asked if a "peer rating" has been conducted. I wouldn't expect the results to be made public, but if no peer rating has been conducted, that would in itself be almost as interesting as the results if one has been held.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-20-2022 06:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There was a time in the shuttle-era when astronauts who were incapable of conducting a spacewalk (for various reasons) or who were poor at robotics (for example) but excelled in other areas remained on the flight list and indeed did fly. Under today's rules (as I understand them), you either qualify on all the main aspects of a mission, or you don't remain an active astronaut.

Part of the job of Artemis III is to start bringing equity to an activity that was limited due to biases ingrained in society. Since there are numerous more-than-capable women who are members of the active astronaut corps, there is no reason that at least one of the landing assignments on Artemis III be filled by one of them.

oly
Member

Posts: 1410
From: Perth, Western Australia
Registered: Apr 2015

posted 08-21-2022 06:49 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for oly   Click Here to Email oly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What if the first woman to fly to the moon is also the first person of color?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 48948
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-21-2022 12:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Having now had to remove some inappropriate and off-topic replies, and given that the crew assignments for Artemis III are still a year or more away from being made, let alone announced, I suggest that we table the current discussion until the astronauts flying the mission are known. Then, if need be, we can debate if the choices made were right or wrong.

onesmallstep
Member

Posts: 1366
From: Staten Island, New York USA
Registered: Nov 2007

posted 08-22-2022 10:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for onesmallstep   Click Here to Email onesmallstep     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Maybe to put a little perspective to the discussion on who is 'qualified' to go to the moon: It should be pointed out; in the good old Apollo days, there was definitely a pushback against scientist-astronauts (of any kind) flying on a crew, especially since Deke and others thought a military jet or test pilot can learn enough geology, morphology etc. to operate on the lunar surface as well as any trained earth/planetary scientist. This changed in no small part to Dr. Jack Schmitt's performance in getting AF pilot wings (not just as a mere passenger in a T-38, mind you) and impressing his fellow astronauts who were 'jet jockeys.'

As we all know, Schmitt took over Joe Engle's seat as LMP on Apollo 17, and the last moon landing flight for more than fifty years took along the only trained geologist in the program. Although there were protests, of course, none other than Bill Anders, of Apollo 8 and a jet interceptor pilot AND trained physicist, recommended that a scientist fly on the last Apollo flight. Fast-forward some fifty years, and today we have a plethora of highly qualified astronauts who can easily fill the crew positions for any Artemis mission (orbital or landing). Top of the list and, not coincidentally, one who considers Dr. Schmitt one of her mentors, is Dr. Jessica Watkins, who has a PhD in geology from UCLA and is currently serving aboard ISS as an expedition crewmember, due to return to earth next month.

328KF
Member

Posts: 1366
From:
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 08-22-2022 09:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 328KF   Click Here to Email 328KF     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
We can speculate all we want here...the real story about how the crew of Artemis III is selected, as well as subsequent missions, won’t be told until a decade or so from now, when people start retiring and writing memoirs or doing interviews.

No one currently at NASA, particularly the astronauts at risk of jeopardizing flight assignments, will be willing to opine on the demands put on the decision makers by those in power.

SpaceAholic
Member

Posts: 5127
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-23-2022 10:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SpaceAholic   Click Here to Email SpaceAholic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The political landscape and any affiliated influences on the selection process are subject to change. Artemis III is at risk of pushing further right (even if the first two test flights are successful) so concur with a couple of the preceding posts - best to wait and see how things play out.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1116
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 08-25-2022 11:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am curious as to what NASA estimates the sun-angle will be during the landing and how it might compare to the Apollo 12 landing sun-angle. I believe 12 had the lowest sun-angle of all the Apollo landing missions. Some of the pictures during 12's first moonwalk are downright eerie.

328KF
Member

Posts: 1366
From:
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 08-27-2022 07:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 328KF   Click Here to Email 328KF     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
there is no justification for not selecting a woman to be part of the Artemis III landing crew (as stated during a press call on Friday [Aug. 19], there is no requirement for a person of color to be on Artemis III...
I wonder why, then, that veteran space reporters like Bill Harwood still write as if this is a requirement?
If the unpiloted Artemis 1 test flight goes well, NASA plans to launch four astronauts atop the second SLS rocket for an around-the-moon shakedown flight in 2024 — Artemis 2 — before the first woman and the first person of color touch down near the moon's south pole in 2025 or 2026.


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 2022 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement