Can Starship Help Make The Artemis Program Better Than Apollo?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 พ.ค. 2024
- NASA's making some big moves to finally get humans back to the moon for the first time in over 50 years. The Artemis program is shaping up with checks written and hardware built! So how does a 21st Century program to the moon compare to that of the 1960's?
In Today's video, we’re going to answer the question, why does NASA think Artemis will be a sustainable program when SLS is sooooo dang expensive AND it’ll take at least two launches to get humans and their lunar landers to the moon.
This CAN’T be more sustainable than Apollo, right? Well, we didn’t even begin to scratch the surface of the costs, so today we’re going to really dive into the total costs, including development, infrastructure and hardware by giving SLS and Orion a full cost audit.
But we’ll even show you how the Apollo program and Artemis mission profiles differ including the specific orbits and rendezvous and everything required to get humans to the surface of the moon and even talk about the upgraded safety considerations and hardware involved.
Once we look at all these details, we can answer the question, 50 years later, is the Artemis program actually an improvement over the Apollo program or is NASA going completely in the wrong direction when returning to the moon?
#ApolloVSArtemis #SLSVSSaturnV
00:00 - Intro
03:50 - The Hardware
15:55 - The Missions
29:15 - Safety & Upgrades
35:50 - Program Costs
46:20 - Rant
52:25 - The Good Parts of Artemis
55:35 - Conclusion
--------------------------
Want to support what I do? Consider becoming a Patreon supporter for access to exclusive livestreams, our discord channel and subreddit! - / everydayastronaut
This video wouldn't be possible with out the generous support of my Mission Directors on Patreon!!! - Frans de Wet, Gregory M. McKee, Chad Souter, Sam Fisher, Jason Kelnhofer, pexis petersons, Eric Beavers, Arthur Carty, Lawrence Mansour, Bob Lewis, DLB, Joshua Rule, Ryan M., David Glover, Scott G Raderstorf, Nicholas T. Gallman, Max Haot, John Malkin, TTTA, Jared smith, Simon Pilkington, Héctor Ramos, Tomdmay , Mac Malkawi, Ole Mathias Aarseth Heggem
Or become a TH-cam member for some bonus perks as well! - / @everydayastronaut
The best place for all your space merch needs!
everydayastronaut.com/shop/
All music is original! Check out my album "Maximum Aerodynamic Pressure" anywhere you listen to music (Spotify, iTunes, Google Play, Amazon, etc) or click here for easy links - everydayastronaut.com/music
I'm the cohost of an awesome podcast where we talk all about current technologies and how they shape our future! ourludicrousfuture.com or here on TH-cam / ourludicrousfuture - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
‘It’ll be virtually impossible to have cost overruns’ Boeing: Well how we gonna make money now?
Boeing squeezed another $287 Million out of NASA on the fixed price Starliner contract because NASA was afraid that Boeing would otherwise pull out of Commercial Crew. The SLS and Orion programs could use the same strategy to get more funding. At least until there's a viable commercial option.
When you compare SpaceX Crew Dagon and Boeing Starliner BUDGET and the actual RESULTS. BOEING just looks like a joke ... I won't even mention BOEING 737 MAX ! Pleasing Wall Street is the devil
@@TheGoyard thats why a lot of companies are staying or returning to private.
First and foremost great video perhaps your best. I agree that with all those money spent let's fly that rocket. But if they ask for more money 💰 as I'm sure boeing is how much more would you give them before cancelling. Remember its 30 billion for a new fuel tank cause all the rest is reused.
JackTSR
I’m sick of ‘the devil made Nasa do it’ revisionist nonsense.. sick of Nasa apologists blaming NASA’s incompetence/waste/failures on Congress, taxpayers, Shelby, contractors, etc..
Congress acts on Nasa recommendations/promises..contractors do what they’re told, paid, contracted to do.
Nasa promised a gullible Congress a ‘cheap, safe, reliable’ STS then delivered a $1.6 billion per flight boondoggle that killed 2 crews & had chronic multi-year service outages.. the most unaffordable, dangerous, unreliable space vehicle in history..
Then Nasa promised Congress a quick, cheap, & dirty Constellation/Sls based on shuttle components.. how’s that going $80 billion & 16 years later?
Nasa, Government is the problem, not the solution.
Looking forward to hearing this for the first time since 1972:
"Artemis 2, Houston.
"
"Go ahead, Houston.
"
"Artemis 2. You are Go for TLI. Over."
(that's the Apollo 8 dialogue from 1968 with the spacecraft name updated; the actual Apollo 17 dialog went:
"Roger. Guys, I've got the word you wanted to hear; you are Go for TLI - you're Go for the Moon."
"Okay, Robert. Understand. America and Challenger with their S-IVB are Go for TLI.")
Just imagine, if you will, they brought in Harrison Schmitt, god willing still with us, to give the TLI call for Artemis 2. A handoff from Apollo to Artemis. Would be amazing.
Hearing anything get the go for TLI makes me moist. The chance of hearing it in the 21st century makes my heart race.
''You are go for TLI''
I'll probably cry hearing those words
"aaaaaaaand ACTION"
More likely to be "Go ahead, Boca Chica".
A friend working at NASA told me "the reason we can't get to the moon now is that the amount of paperwork to be done would be unsurmountable".
Lol
We were warned not to come back .
@@carymartin9548 lolll, wrong
@@carymartin9548 yeah sure buddy
Are they still using Paper now LoL🤣
5:11 “you want your lunar lander to be as lightweight as possible”. SpaceX: “ I don’t think so”
Yes for the Apollo model limited by earth's gravity well. . Starship is a different model. Refueling in space, space manufacturing and fuel mfg on the moon /Mars moves us from space rafts to equivalent sailng vessels.
@@argylehunter2733 if you haven't seen it yet there's a channel I found called Apogee. He's a young guy but his idea on how to use the Starship is genius. I'll post a link.
@@argylehunter2733
⁰⁰⁰
@@argylehunter2733 Yeah because it’s flying on a booster that can lift like 100 tons lol
Starship Lunar lander will weigh 100 tons, and land 100 tons. The other "lightweight" landers will weigh 10 tons and land 3-4 tons. Oh, and only one of them is fully and rapidly reusable.
Your rant reminds me of a quote by Gwynne Shotwell: "I don't even know how to spend $400 million on a rocket"
Somebody needs to hold these contractors accountable.
Hahahah, did she say that? Beautiful. :D
That's a great quote if it's real. Could you provide a source? I did a web search and wasn't able to find it.
I'm pretty sure it was a sit down interview.
@@ronniebauman28 So you recall seeing a video of her saying something like that in an interview? Do you remember anything about the context, e.g. the event, interviewer, or how long ago it took place?
I can't stop laughing at that clip at 56:54
"We need to test moving the rocket back and forth"
"What, build some specialized machine? Sounds difficult"
"Nah, I've got a better idea-get me some interns."
xD
That won't happen today though, because no company will lose the op to skim another billion quid for specialized equipment.
I believe this test actually worked too! I read that there were structural weaknesses discovered during the rocking
@@nathanjohnson9464 You mean those 2 guy's had to get leg massages after an hour of rocking? Quiet a structural weakness alright. ;-) 🦵
Hell yeah.. Getting paid to work out.
Congrats to SpaceX for winning the contract for the lunar lander!
@J6F05 CHEUNG Hei-yeung Andy Yes they changed some aspect of the design, like those you cite.
SpaceX has flown all his stuff and blown it all up and it still didn’t cost as much as the pig that NASA iOS using…go figure. And don’t even mention how long it’s been going on.
Tbh at the current rate of progress, I wouldn't be surprised if Space X just go to the moon themselves before NASA even launches a single SLS. Yet alone build the Lunar Station.
Giving SpaceX the Artemis contract was a major mistake.
Especially since Starship still tends to... well, explode.
By doing so, NASA has practically guaranteed the deaths of all Artemis crews.
I could be wrong, of course, but as of right now I have serious doubts SpaceX knows what it's doing when it comes to super-heavy lift rockets like Starship.
Go NASA or Explode.
@@TheOneTrueDragonKing Do you really think space X and NASA will launch people up in a Starship before they have the landing sorted?
Unlike the other 2 options space x actually have something that flies, even if it doesn't land just yet. But the only way you learn is through failiure.
It was also by far the cheapest to produce. Furthermore space X were probably going to send people to the moon on Starship regardless.
Blue Origins option also stipulated advanced payments which NASA refused to sign up for in the contract. And the other option was found to have Negative mass (too heavy).
I am a great believer in sending an unmanned version to the Moon/Mars landing site ahead of the actual manned flight. This enables the mission to test all the craft involved and also gives reassurance because it would carry ahead lots of food, water, oxygen and equipment needed. It can even mean a spare space craft with engines can be on hand on the target site with spares of everything should they be needed. So the pressure is taken off everyone.
Sounds like a good plan.. redundancy...
Sounds expensive.. redundancy...
@@elnico5623we are already doing that anyways
SLS looks like if Saturn V and The space shuttle had a baby
Thanks for the heart Tim! 🤙 😁
It is very very similar
That's exactly what I always thought
Maybe more Starship than sls
I see it as a Saturn 5 bogged down by Shuttle hardware. SLS will prove to be a huge waste. Sea Dragon should have been the direction they should have went in if their goal is both a moon base & a mission to Mars. Sea Dragon could have lifted over 1.6 million lbs to orbit & without a launch pad out at sea. It would have been super cheap compared to Shuttle & SLS at around $60 per kelo to space.
“Boeing: ‘Failure is not an option, it comes standard in every product.’”
Lmao
got us in the first half
You still have to pay extra for it, though...
Omg lol
boeing 737 max
Whelp, you were accurate with the lander animation for the mission profile. Spacex did in fact win the contract.
This aged well
Shoutout to KSP for actually teaching me stuff that was required for this video
"NASA maybe dodged a bullet... while driving a car on two wheels on the edge of a cliff inside of a tornado while buying lotto tickets."
That sounds a little more risky than 5%
People in Texas do this all the time.. it's no big deal. (I was going to include Florida, but it's flat, and barley above sea level.. so no cliffs.. but then again... Never underestimate Florida Man.)
LOL
hawkdsl, you just replace the cliff with a croc or gator
While dangerous in it's own right, it does seem an effective way to dodge a bullet.
They did do it 6 times successfully so that would be 5%^6 = 0.0000015625% chance of success.
It's literally 11 pm in India when you released the video ( in India )
I was so curious to watch this video. Great work. Waiting for a video about isro from you tim.
I will watch it in 4k tomorrow on large screen.. 🇮🇳🇮🇳
desi gang
After watching this video you have actually changed my view on SLS and Orion. You also upgraded my view of the commercial crew program as well. Before I thought that SLS and Orion was a money pit and ... IT IS.. BUT.. You make very valid points. I now believe the more the merrier. I just hope that going forward NASA purchases Commercial Crew contracts for 10 years in advance just like they did with the SLS to ensure future administrations cannot cancel or change direction of NASA objectives big time.
43:23 Well done Spacex for getting the Human Landing System contract ! Turns out the developpement will cost only 2.9B, not 17.5B as you predicted since Spacex pays half of it.
Well that’s just for the initial phase of the contract. It’ll still be several billion more once in operation
@@EverydayAstronaut
Freed
Two years later &:Spacex has wasted 1.5 billion and has nothing but a Rocket Go Boom!
@@java4653 they are still on time and within the budget, unlike sls
"The rockets should by no measure be going backwards."
That's why it's essential to verify which is the pointy end before launch.
Dad jokes!!! Classic
"Apollo program at Astronomical costs"?
...
Basically half of one years defense spending
well actually there's something to be said there for deceleration and landing...
@@jyuyd8274 Jj?jjjjjj
@@jyuyd8274 jjjjjjjjj
Me: Sees that Tim has uploaded a vide “ah yes”
Also me: Sees the video is over an hour long “OH HELL YES!!!!”
Runs for snacks and gets comfortable
wait i just watched this for an hour and didn't realize it was that long
The same happens to me, but in the opposite way 😂😭
(an hour is too much for me)
Tim's videos are great, but maybe he should do also a *shorter version* / resume of them ✂️ (maybe a 15~20 min video, in addition to the full video).
An hour video for comparing this two rocket systems is definitively too much for the _"space (not too much in deep)amateur"_ .
Sure it is tasty for the most ardent fans, but I think for people who just like a little the topics, an hour video looks like *too much* 😬
@@cicher *Our goals are beyond your understanding*
Yes! Radiation shielding was something I ponder for current future missions into space.
It's good to hear that Artemis will have better shields & I hope that'll be a trend going forward.
Great animated graphs and stuff too by the way.
apollo none of any radiation shielding ?
@@yoskarokuto3553 They had some shielding but I read that one or more missions had close calls with avoiding solar flairs.
They were using tinfoil and thin sheets of led for the bits that went to the moon and back. Nothing strong enough for long term moon bases let alone going to other worlds with people aboard.
Second time I've watched this video. One thing that comes to mind; Tim Dodd represents all or most of us. He does his "job" better than anyone else could. We are fortunate to have him.
He easily won access to Elon as an equally conspiratorial nerd. Very likeable together, I thought.
Tim: "it'll be virtually impossible to have cost overruns"
NASA: "Hold my beer"
* Hold my $2 million beer.
@@riparianlife97701 It's $3M now.
Matthew Liebrich oops sorry programme now cancelled but don’t worry we’ve come up with yet another rocket programme which will cost another $100b even though utilising old technology but it’ll keep your local senator in power for another 33 years. Want your beer back? That’ll be another $100b please.
*Hold my rocket.
Weren't here cost overruns on commercial crew? For Boeing at least. Though it was "only" $187 million, which is cheap by "traditional" space industry cost overruns.
"That's going to do it for me, I'm Tim Dodd the Everyday Astronaut..."
Me *Nooooo please Tim don't leave I want to watch you rant for another hour*
Then go watch the Our Ludicrous Future podcast.
@@Gibson99 true but I already do that lol, I just need more tim in my life, I think we all do
Just watch it again
Thanks for your videos Tim, I'm learning some really cool stuff from you, I may just go and sign up for your Patreon to help you make these😁
Great video tim love your content. Really helps keeping me entertained but I’m also learning stuff at the same time 👍
Links for mobile users! (Sorry the play-bar might not breakup on mobile either)
00:00 - Intro
03:50 - The Hardware
15:55 - The Missions
29:15 - Safety & Upgrades
35:50 - Program Costs
46:20 - Rant
52:25 - The Good Parts of Artemis
55:35 - Conclusion
Tim you are the best and amazing.
Hmm, the play-bar works on google
Play bar breakups are working on my Pixel 4 on the TH-cam app
It works on the TH-cam app
Mmm bar breaks up for me
LOL lunar lander size comparison - Starship hello little guys.
Starship itself can hold all the moon landers
SLS is actually Senate Lunch System
Orion + Starship coupled... which one is the lander, again?
@@anwar4227 Oof, truth singularity right there
all the other landers hitch a ride in a cargo starship
Spot on, Tim! No fluff. No waisted time. Good pace. I appreciate the rant. You are more objective and kind than I am. Great job!
Love your videos. I like how you still explain what things are in each video! I love all things space but I'm terrible with physics and some of the specifics for the rockets, so thank you man!
This monster of a video is excellent - great work Tim! Loved the rant :)
Oh look, famous person
Hey Joey 🐝
Joey? 🤔
BPS moon landing by 2024!
Look, it's the carbonated milk guy
Love the cost breakdown between SLS and Saturn V. I can't believe how much time and money has been spent on SLS when so much hardware was available. I wish the Artemis program a long life. I just hope the costs don't take away from funding future NASA projects.
Yes, NASA needs to get more funding in general. SLS cost ~1% of the total development cost for the F35, SLS is actually kinda cheap, and we really don't want to make the mistake of losing the capability of the Saturn V again, SLS is the right ship for right now.
guys cost is pointless for this i think,most of the money is turned back to the American economy since you probably import a minimum amount of parts...
50% of the total NASA budget is for human space flight. SLS and all the other stuff (space station) is within that budget, so all the other more scientifically viable programs are not effected. Your still going to have space telescopes, planetary missions, and probes... which are planned out in 10 year cycles... So they are safe no matter how much HSF gobbles up.
What's hilarious is they're going to spend a ton of money to launch an Orion capsule, just to have it dock with a Starship, which the astronauts could have just ridden off the planet themselves.
What has NOT been factored in any of this, is the ultimate goal of the reason for going to the moon: To set up a habitat. The cost to fly there is going to look like change next to a Gold Bar.
You just might be my new favorite youtuber. Incredible video
That was great I love the way you broke down each one of the cost
How are these videos free?
This is an absolutely fantastic in depth video. Well done Tim 👏
Patreon
@@panaxion ads and sponsorships as well
these hands down could sell for absolute bank
Is a commercial to sell rockets and spacecraft to our kids and our grandkids. New used rockets for sale. Start your mining colony today.
@@robertothigpen511 - i was sold by red dwarf… i’m just waiting for deep core mining ships to come down in price…
I think it’s important to note that Orion’s low delta v numbers were because originally it was too travel to the moon with the LSAM / Altair. Altair would perform the lunar breaking burn. When Altair and constellation were cancelled Orion kept these metrics assuming if lunar missions were to be developed again they would have a lunar lander to perform the burn or a Lagrange station (gateway)
Huh. I always wondered why Altair had such a massive lower stage.
I think the current service module of the Orion capsule was developed and built by the European Space Agency for the asteroid retrieval mission during Obama administration(after the cancelation of the lunar and martian projects) , this is the reason why use non cryogenic propellant with low specific impulse (but suitable for long term use in space) and have a lower mass to fit into less performing SLS compared to Aries-5 from the constellation program.
@@theOrionsarms It was but the ESM and USM still have / had the same D/V performance numbers. That is why ESM was chosen as is, it was literally the perfect size for the missions they expected to fly. the USM was in some designs smaller than the ESM
@@rundownpear2601 so basically original service module for the Orion existed only on the paper, like many other hardware in the constellation program in that time , and when they started to built a real thing don't make one new from the scratch(more adequate for their new purposes) only modified a piece of hardware that fits to the original specifications despite in that moment planning to use it in a very different way. The way how NASA keeps changing their lunar program (or pretending to doing, without really make it ) never stop to amaze me.
Vasile Sulica yeah it was never officially contracted I believe, Lockheed just had the designs. I am also noting that the CEV had a delta v requirement of 1742 m/s, still not enough for adequate lunar maneuvers due to Altair’s propulsion.
Great video, noticed your metric to imperial conversion for the capsules volume at 7:25-ish is incorrect.
From me too: "This monster of a video is excellent - great work Tim! Loved the rant :)"
Yes -"My blood is boiling" - Too. Kudos, thumbs up! " :)
And thanks also for the the chapter "The Good Parts of Artemis" which sets a good mood again,
and especially:
the Conclusion is a great, great in rounding it off. "A bad sequel to a bad movie", that sums it off.
As you said - glad to have SpaceX with Falcon9 and Dragon now.
Tim at the beginning: "We're diving deep"
Tim at the end: "We just scratched the surface"
Expectation: Liquid.
Reality: Very solid.
'Tis but a scratch
Think of it like the ocean. A deep dive for one person is anything beyond 60m, whereas that barely scratches the surface of the oceans 10,929m depth
@@FlightRecorder1 Oh, do that's how metaphors work! Thanks. I thought he was really going for a dive.
@@FlightRecorder1 The Earth's ocean depth is nothing compared to Enceladus's 60-mile deep ocean!
Finally this is the episode I was looking forward to.
ONE HOUR
Mannnn......
It's funny - it has been up a few minutes and already has 140 comments, and almost 500 likes. Now to make some popcorn!
@@ghaznavid yeahh boyy
Me too
this is great, watched every second of this video. please consider going in depth about the lunar lander!!
Great work Tim, I'm a big lover of Project Apollo and how America in just over 8 years went from a few minutes in sub orbital space to landing men on the moon.
Thanks for all your hard work and great informative videos.
After watching SLS twice fail to launch and Starship being a crazy system to land on the moon just can't figure out why NASA has gone for these systems.
Cause they cant fake it with spacex
When Jim Bridenstine was appointed head of NASA, I was sceptical. But boy has he done some incredible things in the last two years! I really really really hope they keep him as head of NASA, no matter who wins in november.
He does seem to have done a pretty good job of balancing competing interests... promoting competition and commercial space, while paying enough respect to political demands to keep himself in the job...
This is one of my concerns this November and beyond. I hate how political NASA has to be but it's finally seemed to turn a corner under Bridenstine.
@@chyza2012 but wasn't artemis announced under Obama because Biden's whole campaign is pretty much I knew Obama and was his VP
@@kyleking3839 If I remember correctly it was ARM (Asteroid Redirect Mission) under Obama but some of the hardware was the same and they were going to orbit the Moon, just not land on it.
@@zapfanzapfan yeah artemis now has barely any government hardware when it comes to the landing aside from gateway but it doesn't seem necessary for a landing
Studio's lookin' pretty great!
Well the wood panelling is nice, but all those "cigar shaped objects"... it has a bit reseamblance to a high class sex shop by now :D
Ugly German Truths wtf
@@3m_my admit it you can't unsee it now either...
Ugly German Truths why you gotta be like that tho broski
A first class video. A lot of content zero waffle. Well done.
The massive structures we have to build to make this possible (alone) is impressive!
I love how there is just a section called RANT 😂🤣
The Rant section was good!
Best presented and most informative rant on youtube.
Ideot he just put his kneck on the line with NASA and Jim B . That's Funny !!!!!!
Same rant applies to most government programs...good job Tim.
When Tim started ranting, I was like .. YEAHH !!! That's rite !! Yeahh .. Preach it brotha !!
Those Shuttle Main Engines deserve better than to end their lives discarded on an expendable rocket.
Yeah they could have easily refurbished them after each launch and slap it under the next rocket.
Seriously. Just the innovations in hydrogen turbo pumps alone. Painful to think of all that magical tech just burning up. :-/
Humans will pack bond with anything.
Nobody in history ever put it better than Scott Manley: "You strap on solid propellant boosters and pretend its a rocket."
Solid rockets belong in Morton The yokel's 20th century. Enough already.
Grak70 than we would have another Ares V, I won’t explain if you already know but am happy to elaborate
Wow this is the best video do far! Really enjoyed watching it , thank you for the effort!
And I forgot to congratulate not only for this video, but for the whole channel. The most informative and complete videos I found on the subject
At 50:02 Tim finally uses the word “literally” properly. I am figuratively blown away.
Steven Banks 💪😎
Steven Banks +1 best comment award.
Now try to make people use word "theoretically" properly. People use word "theoretically" instead "hypothetically" and we have those brilliant phrases as "it's just a theory. It hasn't proven yet"
P.S. hypothetically is quite hard to say. May be it's one of the reasons why people use "theoretically" instead. Because we lazy :D
@@myentertainment55 Same reason even NASA says space instead of outer space. I'm always thinking' These are supposed to be professionals and they can't even get the name right'.
At least he knows how to use "regardless", people that say "irregardless" drive me into orbit! Hell, Grammerly didn't even pick that up, Gawd.
People who take a critical look at government spending: “Wait this is insane these numbers don’t check out”
Military industrial complex: “Money printer go brrrrrrr”
MIC : we fund the development of Gps that you use go brrrrrtttt
@Robert Willis Yeah, something likes this would never happen in the defense industry.
Or basically every other industry
@Robert Willis okay, then we are on the same page.
I think many of NASA's dubious decisions are because of the current "administration"
@@whosjulez1157 I hate to call you out but all of Orion's and Artemis's problems are from Obama's administration. In fact Jim Bridenstine Trump's appointee is probably the best NASA administrator we've had in a long time. It's actually the one thing Trump's probably done best.
Hahaha
Plenty of great content,well produced and very informative. The dingy , wrinkled undershirt is an interesting choice for the presentation.
Wow!!! Brilliant job all around on this piece. I will need to watch a few times to fully absorb everything. Many, many thanks to everyone involved.
I get out of the hospital, sleep in a real bed, and then wake up to this. Looking like a great day so far.
Congrats for getting home and getting better. Hope u stay healty
Congrats! What happened?
I’m glad you’re home, safe, and healthy!!
And then you get to eat home cooking and it get's even better!
Arnav Singh, I have a auto immune condition where in my neutrophils are low I got a infection that didn’t respond to the meds I hade at home so I when to get iv antibiotic because oral antibiotics don’t work well.
With my condition a pimple and have half my face swollen in 24 hours one it starts to get bad.
Last time I was this early Tim used to wear his orange suit
Last time i was this early Tim's dad had just finished pulling out
.......
@@nicosmind3 Why where you there?
and it needed ironing, too
@@Tuning3434 Isnt that answer obvious?? Tim's mum of course
Another amazing video, so much detailed information, thanks Tim!
Awesome man graphics are pretty suitable thank you for this video
BASK IN THE GLORY OF A 1 HOUR LONG VIDEO!
Extremely rare!
EFAP: "Hold my rhino milk!"
the scary part, is none of the listed launch vehicles have flown yet.
Starship is coming, baby!
The first Saturn V launch was less than two years before Apollo 11 (20 months). The scheduled lunar landing is in 2024 (no month that I know of), with most of the relevant rockets planning to fly in 2021, though SLS and Super Heavy may slip to early 2022. At minimum, the rockets for the return will have more time between the first launch and the actual lunar mission, and its unlikely we’ll see significant problems like the pogo oscillations that plagued the early Saturn V launches. It’s also nearly certain that every rocket except SLS will have more launches by that mission than the Saturn V, as they’re commercial vehicles in a growing and competitive industry.
@@Imbeachedwhale tbh, it is really unlikely that first Artemis mission to moon. Will be 2024. More like 2026
Starship flew, it just landed a bit hard the first time.
@@jordonberkove7438 SN5 and SN6 landed. But landing is not all
How did I miss this video a year ago? Excellent Tim!
Great job of presenting the various approaches, and the pros and cons of each.
Woo, this video has been hyped. Going to be a fun watch!
I agree
I think that the best part of Artemis is the Lunar Gateway in the elliptical Moon Orbit since it can be used by potentially any partner and will be somewhat similar to ISS.
Nice to see you are back ! Where have you been? We missed you.
Tim: the costs for artemis are insane, how is this possible?
Me: Easy, corruption!
Simone Bartolini Answer: Boeing : The only company where safety features are optional upgrades...
B O E I N G, a cancer in the aerospace world.
Jixuan & Sebastian can tell you also. Corporate lobbyists by Boeing & Lockheed Martin.
It’s because SLS is a jobs program for the state of Alabama. They’re essentially using billions in taxpayer money from all over the country to keep people employed in one specific part of the country. Make of that what you will
SLS = Senate Launch System.
I oversaw a gov contact once. I was so pissed about all the money I lost from my program to all the legal requirements in gov contracting.
Tim Dodd, The Everyday Astronaut turns into The Angry Astronaut when the costs are spoken about! 😆
I honestly don't care how much it costs. There's massive opportunity costs for *not* going back to space, and they outweigh rockets costing several orders of magnitude greater. The Apollo program was expensive, but we ultimately profited from it financially as well as culturally and scientifically. While getting costs down is a good thing, obviously, I'd rather spend more now to get something ASAP than wait.
As well as he (or anyone) should.
@@fakecubed think elon musk said something about life on 2 planets means 1 extra life. 2 lives better than 1. Every waking moment theres a chance a rogue planet or asteroid rams earth and end life just like that. We would probably know weeks in advance but that wouldnt change anything. What angers me most is when people see this as a waste of money and instead argues it should be funneled to problems at hand. Problems we have cant be solved once and done forever. if we do then our humanity's future is sealed into extinction.
Tim is a Space X fanboy .. that's why
The cult of Elon Musk is probably the worst fandom in existence right now. Want to talk about costs? Look into how much the US taxpayer has subsidized his businesses over the years. SpaceX is just another Boeing or McDonnell Douglas, but we’re supposed to think it’s something new. All that’s new is there’s a rich egomaniac taking up the spotlight instead of thousands of anonymous engineers working government contracts same as it ever was.
I was in my teens when we went to the Moon. It's amazing that it has taken so long to get where we are now.
Tim, Tim, Tim... Once again you've provided a cornucopia of knowledge, analysis, and insight that is truly a treasure.
While I can't be a Patreon supporter, I wish I could send you a case of Tang and Space Food Sticks to keep you going.
Lovvvvvve your content and enthusiasm.
"no cost overruns"
NASA: laughs in sunken cost fallacy
It could be just an easy vehicle to fund black book programs, it is Northrop and Boeing. Two Zombie Companies that are in massive amounts of debt to the Government (Financial control) who build and hold A LOT of advanced technologies that are necessary for national defense.
@@twichy4life1 You may have a point. It's been pretty clear for many years now that the F-35 program is just a money laundering program for Lockheed Martin's black projects (particularly in the drone area).
@@fakecubed You maybe right but F35 is a major advance tech speaking.
Military spends way more in just 1 FRICKEN PLANE!!!!
@@jacekrowinski5637 so right. People continually underestimate the utility of the F35 being a stealthy networked mini-AWACS. Whether they perform as well in a dogfighting paradigm (which is likely an anachronism at this point) is a point of contention that really misses the point: f35s are designed to fight like wolves.
Blessed be this day! The everyday astronaut has posted!
🙏🙏🙏
Blessed be the moon fruit.
I like how different SpaceX's approach is
Trial and error
basically 2 stages and the upper stage/lander is HUGE compared to others
Very amusing to read the insanity of the MuskCult as it ages.
Could you put a link to part one and three in the description of the video? Or am I just missing it?
The increased mission duration is actually a very interesting perspective, and definitely makes the enormous costs significantly more palatable. Also the head of human spaceflight was forced to resign in May due to improper contact with Boeing regarding their lunar lander submission really proves that indefinite cost overruns and delays won't be acceptable moving forward.
Well done, Tim! You’re the only guy on TH-cam who can get me to click on a video that is longer than ~20 minutes and keep me watching until the end. Thank you!
Hey Tim, jus rewatching some of your videos... watched the Firefly interview, and pt,2 wit Elon....even tho this vid is a year old....with the rapid progess of the Starship program an the snail's pace of SLS....you nailed it with this one.
You're absolutely right about USA, NASA and Artemis. Loved the graphics, spreadsheets, and your presentation as a whole. (Cough) the music. :)
I’m currently studying Aerospace Engineering and I hope to one day design such rockets. Your videos have really inspired me and I have actually used your videos as some sources in some of my high school projects. Really great work Tim!
Obviously from this video... it's where the real money is. Good choice. You'll be able to afford a really hot chick.
@@hawkdsl Even musk can't afford that.
You must have a great school that teaches Aerospace Engineering! Glad your making good use of your education. The biggest advances that Elon has done, is with his Metallurgy Engineers in development of the Raptor engine. There are many aspects of engineering. Find the one you like the most and see what specialist role you can get a job in. Then aim for that. That's my suggestion. May as well enjoy your work than be pushed into something you don't get inspired by.
@@David-yo5ws That's great advice for everyone.
@@MonkeyKing3333 Yeah, that's the advice I DIDN'T get when I was a kid. I'm now 60 and tried to change my career in my 40's. Though top of the class, fell flat on my face. No one wants an apprentice at that age. Now they are screaming out for trained people in the field that I couldn't get an apprenticeship with? Now I have no sympathy for that industry, just watch them go out of business, one by one.
27:29
RIP to the camera man who got left on the moon so he could get this shot
can't wait until someone says "He DiDnT GeT StUcK HeS NoT a PeRsOn"
@@TheWagonroast He DiDnT GeT StUcK HeS NoT a PeRsOn
They picked him up on the next mission.
@@AdamNDJ no they used the Gemini SRS
@@maxattack3853 oh no
An amazing and professional video! Thanks a lot for this great content.
this videos are so great. i can watch them over and over. each time i learn new stuff!
The sheer professionalism of this guy blows me away.
I've been watching SLS's development for the past decade. And your rant is music to my ears. It is awesome to hear someone bring up the huge scandal of NASA's contractors being careless with taxpayer money. But at the end of the day we have a deep spacecraft now, and I'm just happy we have something that is almost ready to fly.
either nasa's contractors or what we have now- jeff bezos, bill gates, elon musk et al... take your pick it's all the same, one kind of corruption or another.
Brian Wheeldon I understand what you’re saying about corruption. This is why it is vital that we all pay close attention to what is going on around us. It is our job to hold Our Governments to the mark. Otherwise we will be stuck spinning our wheels for 30 years like with the Space Shuttle (Sorry to be tip toeing into politics, but this is important.)
@@HunterKutz Problem is for every 1 of us that actualy pays attention and tries to hold our government and representitives to the mark theres 1000 that dont pay attention at all and vote because theres a D or R next to the name. Thats not even considering all the people that keep voteing in the same guy who's fighting to keep the wasteful programs running because they ensured a critical widget was manufactured in their district resulting in millions of $'s comeing in for what would be a 5$ part in any other program.
@@merendell Not all corruptions are created equal, the tea party running NASA is the least wasteful we taxpayers possibly get for now.
@@brianwheeldon4643 how is MUSK corrupt ??????
Tim, you cover things very well. My thanks :)
Amazing in-depth video. Hopefully we all could witness a successful launch into the moon this decade!
Phenomenal vid!! This is as good or better than anything I've seen on Discovery, National Geographic, PBS, ect. I love the fact that you don't dumb down the content but rather take your audience to be as smart as anyone else. Script, graphics, everything is A+! You could not have done a better job. You have created a unique space for your self that feels like your calling ...few ever achieve this. God bless!!
*etc.
Yu
The problem with SLS is just bad project management. But Jim seems to be fixing that.
It's a job program dude. They don't care about getting to the Moon or anywhere else. Jim can't do anything congress funds NASA.
@@badtrekee4348 Thank you, people don't understand that. NASA only exists to spend money and they do a great job at it, if something gets accomplished so be it, but the important thing is that money gets spent and jobs are created.
I worked on JPL experiments that rode on Endeavor. We spent mos testing at Kennedy in buildings built for the Apollo program. Those buildings have been well used again and again.
I’m proud that My daughter Artemis by coincidence was born 2018 just 2 months before introducing Artemis program by NASA.
That's an awesome name for a kid!
Tim drops Artemis vs Apollo video
Me: this does put a smile on my face
You have covered a great many points here and in each case you hit the nail on the head. I used to be in contracting and acquisitions with the Government for many years before I retired. The one main thing you point out was the fist thing that bothered me when I was working there, but I was unable to come up with an answer. What is your answer to letting a contract which was completely inovative meaning there were times the research and development that went into bidding for contracts a) would have to be eaten by the company that did NOT get the bid and b) would have to be changed along the way because of unforeseen consequences. That is the reason you can not put a money cap on this sort of project. And the contracting vehicle, as you say, has "baked into it" the flexibility one needs to succeed. Yes there are contracting officers (CO's) responsible to watch the funds after the contract has been let to make sure gigantic cost overruns are necessary to the fulfullment of the project and he has the power
to STOP a project dead in its tracks. He is often dependent on TR's ( Governemt technical representatives) who, depending how strongly they present their case, can guide the CO's to the right conclusion. But under the circumstances where, as you indicate, we were in a race with the Russiians, no CO would do that, no matter what the cost. It works pretty much the same way today. So how would you solve the problem where no one can foresee the appropriate path to follow when hitherto today untested and new technologies are implemented?
Without strong commercial incentives, I fear this will end up going nowhere. I think Musk knows as much, and is doing everything he can to make sure SpaceX won't rely on government funding. After Starlink, the next step might be fast cargo delivery from Earth to Earth, then on to space mining.
We need to get together and buy one of those things. And make some money 🤑💰. On the moon.
$ 100.000 To get in. Mine team One.
Starlink is a fluke and hemoraging spacex money. It is a commersially unfeasable program, unfortuatly i fear starlink will be the death of spacex which is unfortuate.
It is littering space around our planet with dangerous space junk increasing the chances for kessler syndrom with each sattelite that they are throwing into LEO.
If spacex doesn't cut starlink off like the cancerous tumor that it is spacex will fail
@@derpaton4354 .. / military application. Gear of war. Halo. Just exhausted dreams.
Food delivery 🚚. Large payload of food.
Rescue teams search and rescue.
Starlink will make the Tesla Pi the new IPhone at which point Musk will be the first trillionaire giving him the personal wealth to lead us to be a multi planetary species. F those government clowns
@@tomdolan9761 moon slavery . Get your first day moon slave?
A few words on Orions Service Module: I think it makes sense for it to be so small, since Orion isn't just build for the moon, but it is also supposed to be used for Mars. When you build a capsule solely for the Moon, like Apollo CSM, the approach of having the command module do all the pushing around and returning to earth makes sense, since things are generally lighter that 30 tons and Delta-V requirements are only 2x800 m/s=1600m/s. However, when you look at a Mars Mission, different components can easily weigh more than 50 tons and Delty-V requirements for capture and return are much bigger. Giving Orion a Service Module big enough to accomplish all those goals would be hugely inefficient and would turn Orion more into a crewed space tug than simply a manned capsule. All the pushing-around would be done by high-energy transfer stages like the blie Origin lander one. I feel like Artemis' weird approach to lunar landing is not only dictated by the need to communicate 24/7, but also by Orion's Mars-worthy construction.
I still can't believe that the Orion capsule is going to mars. How can a crew stay healthy in such a small area, especially without gravity?
@@henryfleischer404 Well you would bring an habitation module along with you
@@edki669 I don't understand your comment about the command module doing all the pushing around. This makes no sense.
I'll bet you a million dollars that Orion never goes to Mars (except as a display piece for the martian air and space museum).
11:25 OMG he pronounced Thales right. I'm proud of you whether you researched that or not. Much love from a Thales employee who is planning on making the move to Alenia Space based in Bristol, UK.
I thought it was thayls lol.
The company? Yes, correct . The Greek philosopher: “thay -leez “
To be fair, how you pronounce an ancient Greek name depends on what modern language it is used in. But most people I know just say “TAS” instead of Thales Alenia Space, anyway.
@@eypandabear7483 yeah for sure. Thales loves a good acronym anyway. Every business has a different acronym. I was working in IAS (integrated air support), was AOW (Air Operation Weapons), but they deemed the word to be too agreesive in the current climate.
09:20
Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) name was replaced with Lunar Module (LM) early on ‘because Excursion sounded too much like a picnic’
Excuse please if it was already pointed out...
Tim I've watched most of the stuff you've produced, but your "Rant" section here is probably my most favourite part of all.
Makes you realise how amazing Apollo was 50 years ago
52 years ago
Juì. Vml
Almost TOO amazing to be true.
@@theconspiracydentist Definitely not, though.
@@maxv9464 definitely not true? Or definitely not too amazing?
Anyone who is surprised that retrofitting an older solution is so expensive has clearly never worked on legacy code. Making modifications to an existing system can be just as hard as building a new system sometimes.
Yes, and that's why it was so stupid to use 50 years old technology instead of inviting somethig new and really better.
@@west_adv The issue is that if NASA tried to rebuild everything from scratch and it didn't work, it would be a huge political black eye and the program could get completely scrapped. NASA learned that the hard way with the space shuttle program. When it comes to the politics of keeping the Artemis program going, the best option is the more expensive but safer route of basically reconfiguring and updating the Apollo systems rather than the potentially cheaper but far riskier option of building something completely new.
The U.S.A. government can't ever upgrade old technology without huge additional costs. It's all that corruption in congress and so forth.
Well in fairness to Aerojet Rockdyne, the RS-25 is still one of the best engines ever made with many unique and powerful features like having the ability to run at 105% thrust, a unique nozzle that sorta compensates for the altitude, highest specific impulse of any liquid engine that has flown and the first fully reusable engine. However I do agree to build something new or to completely refit the engine for modern manufacturing techniques but building a new engine takes time, a lot of money, no guarantee that it will perform the way you want or even if the engine is needed to begin with. Cough cough F-1B engine
I''m not so sure that Tim is surprised as much as he knows most of his audience will be surprised. Congress has turned this part of NASA into jobs program, not a space program.
Anyone here after spacex won the lander contract?
I'm just hanging out happily waiting to see Tim's next monster video breaking down the decision to go with SpaceX. Give him time and he'll deliver another amazing vid.
I'm here after the contract got suspended.
concur with you level of detail. Keep it up.
Okay, I've gotta say it:
I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THIS VIDEOS SPACECRAFT TRAJECTORY ANIMATION!!
I picture spacecraft operating in a similar way to this in my head, but that's from years of studies in celestial & orbital mechanics, along with just being a massive lifelong spaceflight/rocketry nerd.
I think this will go a LONG way in helping those who are new to orbital mechanics "get it": for these ideas to go from an abstract notion of unintuitive maneuvers to a real understanding of exactly how things happen in orbit.
Well done Tim Dodd & Crew, well done!!
*Post Script: I can't help but giggle a lil everytime I think of you as "Tim" instead of "Everyday Astronaut". I've been here since the beginning: before the "no photoshop" series, the first public pics posted on social media, the transition from art project to spaceflight enthusiast to serious science communicator(term used with due diligence). The first time I heard your name as "Tim", I thought that was just the generic name given to your character "Everyday Astronaut".
I greatly appreciated this video. I actually just wrote a 10-page paper on this very topic, and I came to the same conclusion on the cavalier use of taxpayer money. With the completion of the Starship, I believe that we will see a shift in the program to the more advanced, affordable, and capable Spacex option.
If you look at how the Government manages and administrates, it’s contracts, Boeing or Northrop etc are not the problem, though they get blamed. The problem is how the Government monitors and structures the contract tracking and reporting via an agency called DCMA. It takes engineering teams 5 times more effort to report on their work than actually doing the work. Remember, you are paying an engineer at the same rate, whether they are designing or telling you how they did it.
Where can we read this paper?