The Artemis Program
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ม.ค. 2022
- Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com/megaprojects for 10% off on your first purchase.
Got a beard? Good. I've got something for you: beardblaze.com
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
This video is #sponsored by Squarespace.
Love content? Check out Simon's other TH-cam Channels:
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Casual Criminalist: / @thecasualcriminalist
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
XPLRD: / @xplrd
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
![[TH] VCT Masters Shanghai Playoffs DAY 2 // PRX vs G2 | EDG vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T5j2XVcDFs0/mqdefault.jpg)
Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com/megaprojects for 10% off on your first purchase.
Nice video
Hi, the space shuttle always used tiles and was never intended to use an ablative heat shield.
Great video. Please do make one on the Mangalyan mission of India
We need a SPACE X video! love your work!
If it were not for the competitive element with Apollo, we would still be "planning" to go to the moon, with bureaucrats and corporate industrial complexes milking the treasury all the way. Apollo was steroids for the USA in multiple dimensions: political, moral, industrial, technical, social, etc. We all benefit from the technological advancements it produced: from styrofoam cups to the computer chip. We all just need to be gracious and say "thanks" to those extraordinary people who made that happen in 1969.
Others have probably mentioned it, but the Apollo 1 fire was not due to hydrogen. The fire was caused by an electrical spark of some kind, and the extreme intensity was due to the pure oxygen atmosphere inside the spacecraft.
Simon never said the fire was caused by the hydrogen. He said hydrogen has never been used since the fire.
@@cfdtv1 It seemed to be implied, thus Nevada Hamaker felt the need to clarify. Considering the collective IQ of the masses, I think that was a smart decision.
@@cfdtv1 I believe the upper stages of the Apollo stack used hydrogen/lox fuel.
@@massmike11 SLS is also Hydrogen and Liquid Oxygen fueled
The Delta IV rocket (still being used by ULA but it is being retired and replaced by the Vulcan rocket) also uses Liquid Hydrogen/LOX engines. As did the Space Shuttle.
Also of note that it wasn't just the pure Oxygen atmosphere inside the capsule that killed the Apollo 1 crew, but rather pure Oxygen at 1 bar pressure. That made for a very volatile situation.
The Apollo missions including Skylab continued to use a pure Oxygen atmosphere for life support, but it was at a much lower 200 milibar pressure. Which is more than sufficient for human respiration.
The Apollo program was, like every other NASA program, not so much an exploratory program as it was Proof-of-Concept. Mercury: Can we send a human to orbit and bring them back alive? Answer: Yes. Gemini: Can we perfect on-orbit rendezvous, docking, and EVA? Answer: Yes. Apollo: Can we, in fact, send humans to the moon, land them, and bring them back alive? Answer: Yes. The ISS: Can we perfect on-orbit construction to build a multi-modular vehicle system in LEO? Answer: Yes. The STS, or Space Shuttle: Can we design, build, launch, and operate a space transportation orbiter that can bring launch and mission costs of crew and cargo down to around $10 million per mission? Answer: NO! The cost projections of the orbiters was off by a factor of 100, with mission costs (including flight-readiness turnaround maintenance) hitting nearly $1 Billion per mission.
The Artemis Program is the first true exploratory mission.
Well said!
Space Shuttle is too much for 70s-80s tech, but spaceplane design still has its advantages that other designs can't do. Even Space Shuttle programs can't do their original goal of rapid reusability and cost reduction, it still achieves a lot; more than half of all people who went into space are from Space Shuttle and many iconic programs is impossible without the shuttle. It is still one of my favorites with all of its flaws that is, maybe the next shuttle with better tech can do what the original can't.
For now, I have the highest hope for Artemis! and will watch every step of it.
@@DOSFS The shuttle, for all it's positives, was too expensive, took too long to turnaround, and had a mediocre safety record with 2 failures in only 135 flights, with 13 fatalities. The US military applications (which were never actually performed) added too many additional requirements that hurt the program.
Maybe first manned exploratory mission. There were plenty of unmanned exploration missions.
@@zysmith it seems the US military's already has their own shuttle after the failure of The Space Shuttle program, with the introduction of the x-37a/b
The irony that Artemis killed Orion in mythology, is not lost among its engineers.
let's hope it doesn't happen in real life with a kaboem
Lies again? Apex Predator Italian Spanish
@@NazriBare you just saying random words?
@@teaser6089 If it goes KABOOM i would blame the DIE, not the bad luck associated with the names...
In some stories, a scorpion killed him.
A lot of our technological miniaturization came from the Apollo program. This often gets overlooked
Definately do one on Starship/ Moonship would be a great watch!
That would be an amazing video
I am sure he will after it seems that it is done. though wouldn't mind if they do a 2 part on it. part 1 would be everything up to 2021, part 2 would be after it seems to be sending people up to space
Might be too volitile a topic in motion everydayastronaut did a great video on them FYI
@@Mr2winners it's always great to see another perspective, yes the SpaceX community has some great updates, but would love to see this channels take on the technology
true. but it would be interesting to see how if they find anything TimDod didn't
Would love to see a Starship episode!!
lets let starship become a more mature platform first.
Seconded
Same here. I've been asking for the same. It will happen
I would as well
Look on you tube. They had 3 Starship RUDs
I've had the honor of seeing two shuttle launches, both by accident. The first was from the air on a commercial flight. The captain came over the intercom and told us to look out the left side of the plane and in the (very) far distance, we could see the flame as it pitched over to to the east; and the second time I was driving to the airport in Orlando and happened to see the Discovery appear in the sky in front of me.
fun fact: I got to submit an engineering design proposal and prototype to a NASA Artemis competition which was designed to solve a lot of the problems that lunar dust poses (to electronics, launch systems, eventual habitats, space suits, human health, etc.). my group spent almost a year designing a lunar dust filtration system for the phase 3 habitat of the Artemis mission. was a huge undertaking & it’s super cool to think that our input could actually influence the design of future lunar and martian habitats!
and since Simon didn’t really cover this, the Artemis program has multiple phases: phase 1 is establishing the lunar gateway orbiter (2024), phase 2 is short-term scientific visits to the lunar surface from the orbiter while running resupply missions and establishing surface maneuverability (2024-2028), and phase 3 is an established long-term lunar habitat (2028).
I'm so stoked for phase 3, it's such a big development for humanity. We're finally getting the fuck off this beautiful blue rock.
your comment deserves more upvotes!!!!! How awesome that you got to try to tackle this issue. I hope i get to see your name, photo or person in interviews in future videos and docs that cover phase 3.
Good on you for your achievement; but if you believe NASA will achieve anything but sending an expensive tin can up into space again, watch out for those pigs too.
Right now, exotic lunar maneuvers aside, I'll settle for seeing the thing light up when it's supposed to!
As the late, great Gus Grissom might have said: "how are we supposed to get to the moon if we can't even get off the ground?"
By comparison with what's to follow, launch is the easy bit - and we seem to be struggling already.
I think we can safely take current timelines and double them, while tripling today's cost projections.
NASA is putting on a show for the masses. I'd you really believe that humans have ever been to the moon let alone have ever been in to space, you need to get the space between your ears checked out.
1:25 - Chapter 1 - Artemis
5:05 - Chapter 2 - The space launch system
8:20 - Mid roll ads
9:45 - Chapter 3 - The orion module
18:30 - Chapter 4 - The HLS
It is exciting to be one of the many people involved with Artemis. I grew up learning and obssessing over Apollo and now am part of and involved in the next generation taking man back to the moon and beyond.
Beg beg beg
Well done mate 👌
Must be working hard. Watching you tube in the middle of the work week? You're fired.
And how does one get involved in such projects? Asking for a mate of course 😜
#brag
@@psychohazards not even a #humblebrag with this one.
One correction: he actually said " one small step for A man", but the vox cut it short.
Love the video! I work on Artemis (SLS and Lunar Gateway/Lunar Habitat). One correction though: The European Service Module has just one AJ10 engine (26 kN thrust; hypergolic fuel), while the Exploration Upper Stage is the part with 4 RL10C engines (hydrogen/oxygen propellant). EUS is the second stage of the SLS, and will drop off after delivering Orion to the trans-lunar injection orbit, whereas the ESM stays with the Orion throughout operations until it is jettisoned just before the entry burn at Earth to return the astronauts to the ground. Its AJ10 engine is primarily to provide the lunar orbit insertion burn and the trans-Earth injection burn. It needs hypergolic propellant because those are "storable", whereas the liquid hydrogen and oxygen needed for the RL-10C upper stage engine tend to boil off when heated by the sun in space.
Amazing, Simon, your revisionist mockery weaving Cold War reality with a revisionist knowingly myopic view of NASA’s future in space. Simplifying Cold War reality to a base, gotta get there first thuggish mentality essentially taking the great President Kennedy’s vision made manifest when he said, “We choose to go to the Moon.” Thereby twisting his promise to put a man where no man had gone before. Realized, I will also submit only 6 years after its declaration. Into “just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.”
You knowingly presented NASA as having a myopic view of a future in space, it’s moon launch culminating in only short term gains. Though impressive but ultimately stunting any true interplanetary progress.
No, not amazing Simon, as there is no wonder left for talking heads such yourself presenting such fantastic revisionism. Your writer's cutesy, it takes 10 years to build, 10 years to explain, how about another 10 years to realize and 10 billion more to pay for,
Really? Quite frankly Simon it disgusts me, you hurt the NASA of old to placate this current NASA who needs a kick in the ass not woefully ignorant apologist presenters. For a second I thought I was watching BBC America, pun intended.
Very interesting
I want to be you.
Reading this after the launch. You must be thrilled! I know I am! 🚀
@@LisaBowers I am very thrilled! Thanks!
Great video as usual Simon! Please do videos on The Lunar Gateway and on SpaceX's Starship and Super Heavy Booster. HLS would also be cool but I am not sure how much hard info is out there on that.
Yeah lets look into the spacex stuff. having professionals fact check that would actually be really interesting. Would maybe help prove its do-able or debunk the viability of a lot of what Elon is saying he wants to achieve. Not a hater or a believer I would just be interested to see some non emotional review of the subject from people who actually know what they are talking about.
@@neonteepee8453 NASA selected SpaceX so that's a pretty big vote of confidence. Look into the GAO rebuttal of Blue and Dynetics protests and it's pretty clear why SpaceX won.
The end of the video suggests Gateway is coming up, so that’s good, eh
Yeah I'm pretty skeptical that anything involving the ULA is going to succeed. They are years behind, no test flights have happened. They should have tested sls before SpaceX had the first successful test flight of starship. I have some faith in Lockheed, but Boeing isn't exactly inspiring these days.
@@bensemusx I read that - It just says that the protest/request for review was not justified as NASA hadn't done anything wrong/illegal/against policy in awarding the contract. It doesn't say that SpaceX is capable or not capable of fulfilling the contract just that it was the lowest bidder. Like I say it would be interesting to see what a professional researcher could come up with.
Absolutely need to see a video on the SpaceX Starship
Starship is currently more about generating $$$ in Tesla share sales, its no where near capable of going to the moon and wont be for at least a decade.
@@Battleneter 🐂💩
@@Battleneter Tesla has nothing to do with the SpaceX Starship. Starship is about Musk’s stated desire to make humanity a multi-planet species by building a colony on Mars.
The GAO determined that each launch of the expendable SLS rocket will cost $2 billion. After the abilities of the fully reusable SpaceX Starship are demonstrated, Congress might lose their stomach for the SLS/Orion money pit.
@@Laura-S196 sure sure, nothing to do with Elon Musk companies, where does SpaceX money come from again?
Correction, Fact Boy: Hohmann Transfer is not _the_ most efficient way of changing orbits, it's just _usually_ efficient way. Bi-elliptic Transfer can sometimes be more efficient, but it does come with a big asterisk to it, as it will nearly always take longer time to execute.
Simon and the script writers think that getting into orbit means you've escaped the earth's gravity well.
I don't think they're going to know much about orbital mechanics.
@@Raz.C It's fine, but I can always use that to post additional facts for the Fact Boy :) Maybe he'll even read them!
@@Raz.C
Is it possible to stay in orbit if you've left the gravity well? It's pretty hard.
@@bobfg3130
No, since it's the gravity that keeps you in orbit. Without it, you'd just fly off in a straight line, away from the body you're attempting to orbit.
@@Raz.C
Thought so.
One neat radiation mitigation method not mentioned is using water. Having a certain module that has a water tank surrounding it. Depending on the depth of that 'water shield' will depend on how much radiation and charged particles are able to pass through.
Might work but remember water is heavy so it can increase launch costs
Good video as always, Simon. I did have one issue, however. While aluminum-lithium alloys are stronger than some grades of commercially pure titanium, cp titanium is not typically used as a structural material. Titanium alloys are used for structures, and they are on the order of twice the strength of aluminum-lithium alloys. Your statement that aluminum-lithium is stronger than titanium gives the wrong impression. (Can you tell I am a metallurgist, lol)
With the internet access to about any information about everything makes anyone a metallurgist
@@telsat And with the lack of knowledge necessary to understand it people can believe whatever stupid bullshit they like.
After the success of Ariane 5 sending the JWST into Lagrange point 2 a MP on the Ariane project would be a nice follow-up.
I would say that, without what we learned from the Apollo project we wouldn't be anywhere near as far along in the sciences required to launching rockets efficiently.
Yeah, the author really understates the advances made by Apollo by a factor of 100.
I agree that Apollo provided huge amount of learnings, but that was still 50-60 yrs ago, and many of those engineers and management geniuses are no longer with us. Artemis is not going to be as easy as many seem to think, if launching the basic rocket configuration is anything to go by.
Looking at the Orion module, I can't help but think of Kerbal Space Program. That legit looks like something Matt Lowne or Scott Manley would build.
I want the program to succeed more then anything
However it’s biggest problem is using SLS and Orion. If they’re using Starship they should launch the starship into LEO unmanned, do the required refueling, then send the astronauts to dock with it still in LEO, not on Orion, but on the current Crew Dragon spacecraft. Send the Dragon home, send the Starship with the astronauts to the moon
Orion isn't terrible. At least it's partially reusable. But yeah, SLS is the program's biggest weakness right now.
@@ianmathwiz7 SLS will be a spectacular launcher, no doubt about it. Its primary issues are its per-launch cost with everything included. And Boeing.
Yes, I'm a SpaceX fanboy. But I meant what I just said about SLS. And Boeing (it's SO sad for me to see how far they've fallen)
Would love to see the Space X Starship episode! Especially to compare against the SLS. Looking forward to the rest of the series!
th-cam.com/video/KA69Oh3_obY/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=EverydayAstronaut
i would also love to see this.
@@zysmith yeah, Tim dot is a classic!
but I like Apogee even more :
th-cam.com/video/e9ZKo8h5Ddw/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=Apogee
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
Yes! Starship, even though it is still early, is an interesting subject. The whole process is very public compared to the rest of the space industry.
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
It warms my heart to hear Simon get on board the Freedom Unit train! Lolol
Yes, please more content on this subject!
awesome job Simon although the rl10 engines are on the sls second stage. And kelvin is an absolute unit and is NOT measured in degrees. I'd also love to see a starship video but maybe wait until it's first launch which would be within a month or two
you should definitely do a video on the b-36 peacemaker, "4 burning, 6 turning" its an absolute beast of an aircraft
I do want to point out a small error: the 4 RL-10C engines are going to be the upper stage of the SLS Block 1B, basically the next development of the SLS. The first version of the SLS will use more or less the same upper stage as the Delta IV currently does. The Orion's service module will use the and updated version of the AJ-10, the same engine that you'd find on the service module of the Apollo missions, and they were also used by the Space Shuttle for orbital maneuvers. They're good engines, no need to reinvent the wheel for those.
Starship in one vid and the others in a second vid
I can’t help thinking of ‘For All Mankind’ on how we kept going and created a Moon Base in true 70s.
You should cover Roman Roads, one of the largest mega projects ever. The design, layout, and construction of 400,000km of roads, some still in use, might even be the GOAT.
He didn't? I think he did.
5:00 SLS
9:41 Orion Module (end of ad)
A) SLS
1st Stage - (4x RS-25D/E engines + 2 boosters) - We are at Earth's orbit!
2nd Stage - A single RL10B engine - Hohmann's Transfer Orbit, whatever that is - We are at Moon's orbit!
B) Orion - Astronauts live in this. It will stay at Moon's orbit when they descend in HLS, and after they ascend in it, take them to earth.
C) HLS (Starship) - Methylox boosters, for landing and starting. Wait I even wrote about them!
"all we are saying is perhaps we should used Apollo as a lesson as to what happens when we allow conflict to drive innovation as opposed to our curiosity"
you would think a channel like this who has covered so much from the cold war and world war two would know that necessity isn't the mother of all inventions but in fact it is bloodlust
Holy crap, his last sentence is one of the dumbest things I've heard him say. Of course conflict drives innovation. It has for humanity's entire history. Humans gonna human there Simon.
You missed the point entirely - Simon was saying that conflict drives a short burst of innovation in a mad scramble for power and once the conflict is over (someone wins) the innovation and drive ceases or drops way down.
@@efulmer8675 No I didn't miss that point at all. I'm saying that's the way it is. People innovate when the alternative is that you die.
@@MrTexasDan Whether Necessity is the mother of Invention or not was never what Simon (or I) was arguing over. Simon was lamenting that the Apollo program came out of a conflict between the US and the Soviet Union, and once it was clear that the US had won, the Apollo program and NASA's budget were axed. The US proved it was superior and it immediately became complacent.
If Apollo's and NASA's budgets were not based on conflict (and more on a continuous test of human ingenuity, like JFK suggested in his Rice speech) then there wouldn't have been a 50 year gap in space capabilities between then and now, and we would have continued exploring the Moon, potentially having settled it for decades by now if not made it to Mars.
Simon, another excellent video! Thank you for doing a show on Artemis. I am looking forward to the Lunar Gateway video.
One small correction that needs to be made from near the end of the video is when you said the last Apollo mission was in 1971. The last mission (Apollo 17) happened December 7-19, 1972.
Once again, great video. And yes, like many others already stated it would be exiting to see a vide about starship hls!
I am impressed with you and your teems knowledge of this subject.
This is Simon's best channel.
Casual criminalist tops all imo. Love the tangents he goes on
HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE BLAZE?!?!
@@cpt-cheese3489 am I right Peter 🤣
No, PLEASE, do the 15 hour version, and cut it into segments about each part of the project. You get more content, we get more info; it’s a win/win. 🤠👍
Definitely agree Simon! I would invest 15 hours for your work. I’m 80 yrs old & have the time & interest. Go for it. 🐻🇨🇦👍🤪😎🚀
well that's a lot of work to have him do, he already has multiple channels he's doing content for.
@@alexjones50 are you getting your news from simon whistler now, come on.
Born and raised on the space coast and I assure you these machines are damn near magical
I would love to get Simon's reaction to the recent launch of SLS and Artemis 1, first mission back to the Moon. It would be incredible to get his reaction to all of this that just recently happened.
An informative and interesting video, thank you! I'd love to see a video on the HLS Starship. By the way, the last Apollo lunar landing mission ended in December 1972, not 1971.
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
That’s the bit of the very last mission when Walter Cronkite apparently asked “ what’s that square shaped thing in the background ? “ before communication were temporarily interrupted. Thank the gods for technically aware videos where armchair nonsense warriors can’t steal the narrative although I was only 4 & woke in the middle of the night last time so can’t wait to see it again . 👍
14:15 Oops! Hydrogen wasnt what made the Apollo 1 fire so bad, it was the high pressure oxygen environment.
19:10 Oops again! It's just Kelvins, not degrees Kelvin. Other temperature scales have degrees, but Kelvins are just Kelvins.
The units of the Kelvin scale are called Kelvins instead of degrees?
"That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind." There was a little static that covered up the 'a'...or, under the stressful circumstances he forgot to say the 'a'.
It still brings joy to my heart to have been around to see the Apollo missions, even if I was barely old enough to understand them. I'm glad we're FINALLY getting back into the game. Even as a kid, I was greatly saddened to see it all end.
Grateful for this video. Excellent description of risks, threats and mitigation techniques. Exploration and curiosity is fundamental to humanity. Artemis is a very exciting project. I'm looking forward to our future on the Moon and eventually Mars. Comment: Neil Armstrong since corrected that audio did not capture correctly his first words, whether uttered or not, intended to be...One small step for man. One giant leap for mankind.🤓
Great work Simon! Amazing delivery as always. From a fellow TH-cam creator, I tip my hat to your style!
Well done, you cover a ton of quality information for the time period of your videos.
4:12 Ian Malcom would be proud. I was fully expecting a cut to the best jurassic park meme here.
Conflict has always been a massive driver of innovation. Even if the motive behind the first landing was dubious, without that landing, none of what has followed would be possible.
EXACTLY. His shitty take kinda pissed me off
Of course it would have been made possible. Probably years later and perhaps by another country. Conflicts are always responsible for wasting money. Cooperation between countries/organisations such as in the Artemis project is way more economic and efficient because it's mainly based on science. It is science that lays the base of future projects and because of the international cooperation everybody, every country and every organisation can benefit. To give two examples: CERN and the ITER project. The only motivation to do such projects by one country is conflict (or in other words to proof I have the longest and biggest d#ck). Latest example of the benefits of cooperation between ESA and NASA was the launch of the JWST. Thanks to ESA the lifespan of this telescope has doubled because of the ingenious trajectory of the JWST. In stead of the planned 5 year, JWST can now operate more than 10 years because it needs less fuel to get to L2.
I just realized I've seen or heard Simon every day for the last 7 years. That's more than my own mother.
Have you ever seen Simon and your mother in the same room? Just saying....
You need to call your mum.
@@tonyatthebeach
Conspiracy Theory: Simon Whistler IS Chris Betts' Mom.
Call your mom. 🤗💙😅
@@LiquidShadows Yes! 😅😅😅
Loved this so much I watched it twice looking forward to the follow up!!
An outstanding presentation for laypeople, of which I am one. Thank you much.
I would be interested to see a video on the SpaceX Booster and Starship program.
FYI, the entire ship when assembled is called Starship, When separate it is booster and Starship. Think of corn, when it's in a field on the stalk it is called corn, when it is on your plate it is still called corn, even though it is separated from the stalk. "Borrowed" from The Everyday Astronaut.
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
its a real shame they are throwing away those RS-25 engines. they were made to be reusable with the shuttle and now we're just gonna let them burn up.
Great coverage and yes please..more space videos!
17:36 The European Service Module is using a single AJ10-190 engine, which provides 33 kilonewtons of thrust. This is the same type of engine that was used on the Space Shuttle's Orbital Maneuvering System. The four RL10C engines will be used on the Exploration Upper Stage - a larger SLS upper stage which is still in development.
Apollo did have scientific benefit, especially near the end. Lunar rocks are still the subject of much study. Also, we still use the mirrors left behind for calibration of many kinds.
This is the perfect video for this channel. Yet another project way over budget and way behind schedule. Let’s shoot for 2030 guys!
Edit: latest estimate I saw was 2028, but you know….Boeing is involved.
Starship is supposed to reach orbit this year, but that is Elon time so...
@@isaackolman2861 he’s building the largest, most powerful rocket in history in a shed on the beach. Cut him a break!
@@aggiewoodie fair point, but he also said we'd have a new roadster in 2020, lol. Hes awesome though, just slow
@@isaackolman2861 considering what he's doing I wouldn't call it slow. It feels slow because he tells us overly optimistic timelines
@@isaackolman2861 *I mean it wasn’t like there was a global pandemic decimating our supply-chains…*
Putting man on the moon in 1969, over half a century ago was the greatest technological achievement ever. And when you consider what technology is now compared to what it was then it is even more unbelievable.
Best description of Apollo I’ve ever heard. I watched the liftoff from my backyard. It was incredible.
"...what happens when we allow conflict to drive innovation as opposed to our own curiosity." We need a t shirt and a meme for this. Also yes, that would be a great video and I'm looking forward to the next one as well.
Gotta point out that it's not "degrees Kelvin". It's just Kelvin. For example, absolute zero is 0 Kelvin, not 0 degrees Kelvin.
This is a great description of Artemis. Looking forward to your Gateway follow-up video. I’ll make sure to share it with my Gateway peeps. Thanks for the great video.
Great video, though I disagree that the Apollo program was done for the wrong reasons. Outpacing the Soviet juggernaut in space was a great morale boost for the entire Free World. Everyone seems to forget that the Soviets intended to dominate the whole planet.
Fun fact: at certain points the ISS crew are the closest humans to people on certain islands and outposts.
Also, at least to me, it's shocking how many people don't realize just how close the ISS is to earth. It averages ~250 miles up. On clear nights if you know where to look, you can see it with the naked eye zooming by. Same with the Starlink satellites.
Not very surprising. They're only about 100 km above the surface
@thegamingpigeon3216 brother we know how far away 400km is
YESSSS!!! Of course do an episode on the starship/moonship. 😃👍
My favorite quote from the Apollo program was from Pete Conrad, Commander of Apollo 12: "Whoopee! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me."
Amazing video Simon! It's so professional. Those graphics are tight!
Do a video on Starship please
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
14:10 Nope! The disaster was caused by the pure oxygen atmosphere in the capsule.
Correction, was caused by a spark in a pure oxygen environment. The oxygen didn't cause the disaster. The spark did.
At 9:59 the Capsul is not the Orion but Starliner from Boeing as part of comercial human launching to the iss. But overall pretty good summary of the programm.😀
Great video and would certainly love to see one about Starship!
I was wondering how you were going to visualize the particles. That bunker made of shotgun shells was perfect.
Can't wait for the Starship video, which will make you realize the Artemis will most probably look different when the largest rocket ever built (Which is Starship not the SLS)
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
I'm really enjoying all your videos. I am working towards finishing my pre-law degree, and always looking for insight from all perspectives. I am an artist but leaned into Art to help fund my ... Policy, Politics and International Affairs Degree. This is really interesting
Great video, nice work Jen
Every time I consider this project I am filled with an urge to shout FINALLY!
Finally going out there and exploring, and doing it in peace and cooperation rather than to prove whose d*ck is bigger.
Well, for now anyway. I plan to hold out hope that Artemis leads the way not just to the Moon but to a better world for everybody. So many things came out of the Apollo missions and the projects before them - things that weren't necessarily intended to affect the world in general, of course. But they did change the world, they did make huge differences in the lives of people in the USA and outside of it, GOOD changes. A wonderful thing to imagine, that this phase of humans' ventures into the universe might bring even more, even better changes.
Can you do the history of The Thunderbirds?
The encore of airshows, a history decades long with tragedy, unmatched skill which entertained millions, it's a long story from Nellis AFB, home of The Thunderbirds!!!
Honestly yeah. If he starts talking about airshows, he'll have to cover the Ramstein disaster on Into the Shadows
Last line , best line. Thanks Angus.
Good video presentation 👍. Thx man
I thought the apollo fire (well actualy Gemini) was really due to having 100% oxygen environemne within the cabin?
I'd like you to do a program on "the safe route through the Van Allen Belts". 😉
This is exactly where all of the missions to the moon fall over.
"...computer system that is orders of magnitude more powerful than Apollo." No kidding... but my phone meets that description! LOL
As much as I would love to see a Starship Megaproject; I would love for you to wait until they achieve their first orbital flight. Be a nice beginning, middle and end. When you do get around to it, make sure to cover the building of Starbase. That's been one hell of a mega project to watch. NASA Spaceflight channel on YT.
I'd really like to see an episode on the SpaceX Starship project, and it would be nice to see a spitball of the levels of investment we've seen playing out in Texas.
th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for all of the information, well done! I think a more realistic schedule will be 2030 or so for a landing, since they don't really have the tech developed yet. The 2024 estimate is looking pretty much impossible since they've only tested about 1/3 of the systems at this point. But we'll get there, and it'll be much more about the science this time.
Sorry, but I doubt science will be in the driving seat this time. I agree with your longer, more realistic timelines but this obviously introduces greater risk of the programme being defunded due to {as yet) unforeseen circumstances.
This was another key reason for Apollo's compressed time frames - to secure the funding needed to achieve its goals within the agreed timelines, and before loss of public support and competing needs. Any delays could have shutdown Apollo immediately.
When Apollo 17 launched in 1971 (the final mission) public support and global interest were negligible, bordering on negative - and that was just three years after a man had first walked on the moon! Rest assured, once Artemis puts people on the moon again, public support for doing it again, and again, and everything that follows, will fall off a cliff..... science or no science.
A public funding model, for a programme of this scale and duration, by one single nation simply won't work - a new, collaborative funding model is required, with shareholders happy to wait decades for their first return on investment - if any.
@@cgo225 China is getting more active in space and we don’t seem to like the Chinese government too much so I doubt they would get rid of funding for this and give up the moon to China.
Simon, thank you for the freedom units!
"As a lesson as to what happens when we allow conflict to drive innovation, as opposed to curiosity" - the lesson here is that conflict drives innovation *significantly faster* than curiosity does. See also: nearly every major technological breakthrough in modern era. Even stuff as fundamental to a North American audience as the colonisation of the Americas was driven by European conflict. Apollo wasn’t somehow worse because it was driven by political conflict not curiosity, it entirely *happened* because it was it was driven by conflict, and not by curiosity. The lesson is that innovation is a peace dividend of war, and it that an innovation arose through conflict should not diminish the innovation.
Angus and Simon,
Why I like and highly appreciate your videos?
Your scripts and delivery are concise and pertinent, with a healthy dose of humour.
Thanks for your efforts guys.
I'd like to learn more about the SpaceX entry in this program
Here ya go th-cam.com/video/EojxThnDPng/w-d-xo.html
More on this topic please!
Excellent. Thank You
When the ISS retires, they should upgrade a few life support systems, stock it food and move it to a higher sustainable orbit. That way it can kinda be like a near by life boat for the on going moon missions.
Yes. A space station would be useful.
Good point, but what for? What value would the ISS provide in the event of an emergency?
@@josephc.9520 Could be put in a extream orbit incase a lunar or mars mission runs into trouble. Not sure how practical that is. Just a thought thoe.
The Space X Starship absolutely deserves a megaprojects video also. The engineering feats they are accomplishing is amazing.
Your rant at 3:00-4:30 was so ass backwards it’s hard to comprehend. Going to the moon was the most inspirational achievement for scientists ever. It’s hard to imagine they were able to do it with the tech they had at the time, and what it showed was mankind’s ability to overcome nearly impossible odds by working together and solving problems through engineering
4:13 Simon paraphrasing Jurassic Park!!!
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
APOLLO left the moon for the last time in 1972, not 1971 as stated several times in this video.
Actually not entirely true, NASA had big expectations and plans to keep going to the moon, but their budget was cut. Apollo missions were horrible expensive and Nixon just didn't think it was worth it. Who knows what the world would be like today in terms of technology had their budget not been cut.
I agree with you but I think the larger comment here is on the Why we did it. Most people were board with space in the end. We had beaten the Russians so why keep going? In this sense we as a nation/ species only went to the moon solely to say FIRST. With that being done we had no further intentions. Luckily NASA fought for its survival and we can finally pursue the intentions that Nixon squashed
Excellent stuff bro