I think you should really read what I just said. It's worth your time and effort to also do a full investigation on the facts. I am only sharing because I also have a plan for humanity in space...cheers
!lmfao! If you could build a base on moon , you would done it 50 years ago ! Faked Moon Landings Forever ! And oops ! You are still unable going to moon and coming back alive ! So , Don't Believe this junky named as Elon Musk or whatever . lol !
@@krashdown5814 artificial turf, a landing pad , made of heat resistant materials and under padding. The reason is the problematic lunar dust and it will compromise the reusability of many crafts. That's all
I'd bet high on SpaceX making it to the moon first, on their own. They might sell tickets to tourists to witness the next Nasa moon landing in person. 😂
Unlikely nasa will make it most likely in 2025-26. Spacex has no plans on making a lunar starship that has controls and a heat shield to return to earth
@@SV7-2100 SpaceX could use a Starship as an Earth - Moon shuttle. To dock to the Lunar Lander Starship. Or use a Crew Dragon of course as a small Earth Moon Shuttle.
I do hope so, it would cause alot of embarrassment for NASA and might force some change in the organization. Stop programs like the SLS from being overbudget, delayed, job programs in the future. Also a push for NASA to put more emphasis on private corps to make more economically feasible space rockets/programs.
I’ve followed the space program from the very beginning. I was born in 1954. Even though I was less than 10 I saw just about every launch and never missed any moon landing. I remember staying up almost all night when Apollo 11 landed on the moon.
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so. THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
I see things playing out differently. Elon Musk can only wait just so long following NASA’s many delays before he decides to go it alone. After lunar Starship has been thoroughly tested and NASA’s still not ready, Spacex will launch astronauts on a Dragon ship, rendezvous with a lunar Starship and go to the moon on his own. Don’t worry. By the time this happens NASA will already have conceded that his is the best method to avoid more delays. Also, Musk will never agree to only one mission per year with SLS. The latest plan to use only four tankers to fill a tanker mothership makes a lot of sense. Go Spacex,!!
Yes. But if Starship can take people to Mars, I don't see why they would need a Dragon to take them to the Moon. They will need some sort of re-entry vehicle for the return trip, so maybe that will be Dragon. But if they really don't get to the Moon until 2028 I agree that SpaceX will probably have long since developed the capability to do the whole thing themselves. I almost wonder if NASA didn't partly select them as a backup plan. (Yes, I know that they were also the lowest cost and furthest along in development, etc, etc.)
@@briangodfrey5079 if NASA wants to be the first to return to the moon then Starship/Dragon would be the first method that would work. Super Heavy will not be man rated for a while. This combo is both cheap and safe. The best trait of Elon is he will do anything to meet his goals.
@@stevebroome1288 Oh yeah, the "man-rated" thing. As things stand right now you're right. But a lot can change by then. Other SpaceX investors may have different ideas, but Musk wants to launch men (and women, too, I assume) to Mars soon. Super Heavy will need to be man-rated soon in order to do that.
Good thing I am not conspiracy-minded. Otherwise, I might suspect all the delays coming from the federal government were coordinated to delay SpaceX and allow NASA, and the legacy rocket industries to save face. Looks to me like Starship has had prototypes ready to launch for many months already. Were it not for regulatory slow-walking, SpaceX would likely already be proving reusability of Starship rather than making projections. 🙄 Probably a mistake to have built Starbase in TX?
By the time Artemis gets up, SpaceX will have a bnb set up and waiting for them. They can watch starship as it heads back to Earth from Mars. Artemis is a cost plus contract. Great coverage Thanks Bob
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so. THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
Perhaps by 2024 SpaceX can develop a CLS -- a cargo landing system. It could take a pallet to the moon, drop it off, and return to Earth orbit. The CLS could haul, say, ten tons at first and demonstrate the refueling system, its lunar landing ability, the automated cargo handling system, the elevator and, of course, the take off and return to earth orbit. It may need to carry more fuel rather than the hundred tons of cargo. A few roundtrips would help iron out the "Kinks" and establish faith in the HLS. Also, they could design a lunar Stayship. This would be a Starship that lands on its side on a prepared site (perhaps featuring inflatable pads) and is designed to stay put. The decks in the living/working area would run lengthwise rather than across. The tanks and engines can be pulled out and put to other uses while additional interior space is made available. Four of these fellows attached "Nose on" to a repurposed fuel tank would be a good start towards a lunar colony. Leftover parts could be used to build a Starships on the moon. I hope these assignments will keep them busy down at Boca Chica.
They still cant even get a man back to the moon apparently…. Last time the had eagle with its toy jeep and drove around and flew back to the shuttle no problems on the first shot in 1969 All a bunch of BS
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so. THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
I watched the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo flights. I watched all of the moon landings and excursions on the moon. I am ready to watch the new landing if I am still alive.
You all have so much faith in musks companies even after he delays everything by years. I wouldn’t be surprised if nasa beat spacex to mars if they started work to it today. Musk makes absurd claims his companies rarely can follow.
I’d love to see plans for optimizing lunar starship into part of a permanent base. I imagine packing cargo to move earth (err Luna?) in order to make a safer, proper landing field. And while modules are great, I have to imagine immediate work on maybe light, prefab building materials. At least until they’re able to make some kind of version of concrete. I know there’s water on the moon, not sure how easy it is to get to and process. Lastly, any kind of permanent settlement would be a lot easier with a miniaturized nuclear reactor.
I imagine by 2024 or 25 SpaceX will attempt not only their own uncrewed flight for HLS but also a landing and then yeah if there is any delay from Nasa the SpaceX may say fine we'll go it alone with landing humans back on the Moon probably by 2027. Who knows they may even use Axiom to develop their own iteration of Gateway and privately develop a Lunar site where people live for up to 2 weeks before returning.
On of the NASA panelists was asked what was the cost of a scrubbed Artemis mission and he replied "much less that a mission failure". Good point. I saw the Challenger explosion live on T.V.. I was lucky enough to be in Port Canaveral for Discovery Launch 2 and a half years later to see and feel that feel that launch. We can wait.
Keep in mind that NASA is a *civilian* space program, but we also have a military space program too with the United States Space Force. And they just announced that they're extending their jurisdiction into cislunar space. My point is that if you're excited about missions to the Moon, just know that NASA isn't the only one with interests in doing so. The only downside is that while NASA has to make all of their stuff public, the USSF indeed does not, so they could (and perhaps have) made trips to the Moon without the public's knowledge.
They can't launch a manned spacecraft to the Moon without being detected by radar and spy satellites. When the Space Force sends people up, it will need to be public. Also, the United States has already signed the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 which forbids weapons in space. China never signed it, so we will break the treaty whenever they force our hand, but not before.
@@CountArtha At 5:19 AM EST on December 7th 2021, NASA's Atlas V rocket launched into orbit and amongst its payload were several classified U.S. space force technologies (which included a couple of their satellites). They could surely send someone up to the moon in secret if they wanted. Matter of fact, although Artemis 1 is supposed to be an unmanned trip around the Moon, it could very well be the case that an individual could be part of that payload and once again just say that it's classified.
@@matthewviramontes3131 In an era when everyone has a camera on their phone, you think they'll be able to get astronauts in and out of the clean room, out to the launch pad, and into the capsule and no one will leak it? Maybe from Vandenberg, but I doubt they could do it from Cape Canaveral even though it's a Space Force base.
The USAF, now Space Force, has delivered cargo and supplies to the moon for decades. You need yo remember, that most space experts after 1945 came from Germany and they continued to send supplies to the Moon station through the USA space programme.
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so. THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
Just so I am clear on this. The plan is to fly a giant "Lander" along with a separate ship that has never flown before, transfer 2 people to the "Lander", land on the moon, do things, then take back off and transfer the 2 people back to the separate ship? Why not just have them ride all together on the Starship, land and take back off together without a separate ship in orbit around the moon.
because the starship doesn't have a abort launch feature where the crew are shot off the rocket in case of emergency. Like crewdragon can launch from the falcon 9 rocket during launch. NASA wants that! because of that spaceX can launch one moonstarship to the moon to stay there, and be some taxi between moon and moonorbit
It's called fuel. The smaller sls uses less fuel. The starship makes a better lander because of it's space but it uses more fuel and would have to be refueled in orbit of earth and the moon to returned back to earth. Witch translates to refueling star ship twice, Or once and the sls from lanch. Means a bigger moon base and less experience just in fuel. And like was said the star ship can be converted in to a better moon base
@@benschram9629 They why aren't they using Dragon? The SLS is a waste of time, money, and effort. With as much repeatability SpaceX has with their current rocket architecture it surpassed what SLS would be capable of. Also, I am pretty sure a Dragon capsule would fit inside the starship cargo bay. After it is lowered to the ground getting back off the moon wouldn't require much fuel.
If you look at the timeline, I think that's the reason. SLS was planned and began production before anyone took SpaceX seriously. NASA planned to have Orion ferry astronauts to the Gateway that would stay in orbit around the moon and then have another system that would take people and cargo from the Gateway to the moon's surface. They started production on SLS, they started work on the Gateway, and eventually decided that with commercial vehicles becoming viable, they would try to contract out the HLS. SpaceX was already planning and developing Starship, so they sent a bid using a ship that can do more than what NASA asked for and do it cheaper than the competition. If you're NASA, you have all kinds of time and money invested in the original idea, so you can't walk away from it. You keep going with the plan that looks inefficient and antiquated, knowing that this is the best way to keep getting funding and the work with SpaceX will be important going forward.
@@jennciavarella6888 I think you are spot in. With projects I work on if a better option becomes available we don't continue with the lesser of the options though. We are talking about NASA though and they are know for making decisions that are costly.
Well given the there is no wind on the moon or anything that can push regolith onto the landing pad once is clean it will stay clean, especially if you have rockets landing there regularly because the exhaust fumes will push any residue off of it
The reason the FAA is delaying starship is because they are being told to. It would be a huge embarrassment to many government organizations if starship flew before SLS hence the approval date of March 28th after SLS is rolled out on the 17th.
The FAA is acting in a huge partisan manner with these delays. It reeks of corruption that clearly goes to the top of this illegitimate regime as Biden failed to even mention Tesla and Elon Musk’s contribution to the development of electric cars during his “State Of The Union” mess.
Anyone else think NASA is a low expectation operation? 🤔 I mean really? 2 guys on the moon to jump around for a day. And that ride cost how much and has taken how long? THANK GOD FOR SPACEX.
@@archer1133 Watching the video, we see that every stage is prerequisite for the next. For example, the astronauts will first orbit the moon and then return to earth without even attemping to land untill the next launch. In this same manner, it is paramount that we first return to the moon, using today's technology before even attempting to travel to any other planets.
@@edword3457 I can agree with this, Starship will probably land on the moon before Artemis, but I think most of the testing will come when we send a fleet of unmanned Starships to Mars in 2026 (according to the current schedule) carrying life support equipment and robots.
Just wanted to share a simple fact on getting these missions to the Moon complete. Artificial turf , we use to see this in plenty of stadiums around America and other countries. This is important for the next phase due to moon dust . I hope some day that someone reads this and understands the importance it will play . The dust which is similar to shards of glass has had an effect on every astronaut who went to the moon . To lay the ground work , is the only option and to suppress the upheaval of lunar dust by putting down a durable rug . This will have to cover a very large area and strong enough to withstand the landing of a spacecraft. I'm not a fanboy , I care about survivability. Take a look at what NASA first used that bounced on the surface of Mars while carrying an extraordinary rover. Thanks for coming out...
@@cloudgamer178 if you remember all those illustrations of a moonbase, they showed a flat surface surrounded by pods and launch pad . Well that material and a few bot should be able to do some landscaping and that material btw can withstand the heat of a craft landing and not the entry like that of Mars which has an atmosphere and the Moon , nada . Try to help instead of being useless with nothing to say . Thanks for sharing
I believe NASA is well aware of the moon dust and its dangers since they are the only ones who actually been to the Moon, have real life experience with it and the data necessary to implement viable precautions
did not know it was that difficult to get people to the moon with the current technology. Wished we had the 1970s tech to get people to the moon and possibly use the 1970s lunar lander and rovers.
I was working in Richmond Hill this week. On my way out I decided I take a drive to Tesla Canada to see if I could meet someone for a tour of the Canadian facilities. I come up with innovative business ideas on a daily basis so I feel like I can help with the transition to sustainable transportation and energy. We all know there is corruption in finance markets and politically with the use of oil and gas. I would like to continue to contribute what I can do to help this world be a better place and allow humanity to spread its wings. The time is now to stop corruption and all of our actions should be built with love consciousness in mind. All matter is built from love consciousness energy and all that matters is love consciousness energy! Let's shoot for the Moon and Mars, then we will end up amongst the Stars!
I'll believe it when I see it, (and maybe not even then,) I can still remember watching the first moon landings and I've yet to see anything that convinces me that, all the hot air aside; we'll be back there any time soon ?
The problem of The Expanse's G pulls at high speeds is all our experience with high-velocity travel is Gs only last a short time. When we take off on an airplane, we feel the G pull only until we get to cruising speed, and then we can't hardly feel the motion. If we do get to that sort of speed then we maybe would do it in stages, like 1~4 each stage would settle to a specific speed and stay there for the crew to get adjusted then on to the next stage of Volocity. Until reaching max V at stage 4. A whole lot better than taking G juice:)
SLS will be scrapped in 2025, just before Artemis2, which was delayed because of technical issues with Artemis 1. Starship will take over. The end. Oh, and Boing goes "bankwupt"
Boeing's space division is not as big as its aviation division. It's why they don't take SLS seriously, but unfortunately it's also why they won't go out of business after screwing up this badly on SLS.
Nasa has been planning this mission for years, and they put so much money into the SLS that it has to fly at least once. SpaceX and NASA have developed quite the symbiotic relationship, and SpaceX really needs the expertise of NASA to have any chance of a lunar landing. Also keep in mind that Starship has still not yet proved it's ability to get to orbit. (they will). Still needs to prove orbital refilling. (they will) Still needs to prove lunar orbital docking. (they will) And still needs to prove that such a massive craft is capable of landing on the lunar surface. (I'm optimistic) If their collaborative efforts into Artemis succeeds, they will absolutely scrap the horribly expensive SLS and use starship for any subsequent missions. I'm so excited.
The contractor for SLS needs to be able to save face by launching their overpriced, antique creation at least once. A lot of politicans' reputations depend on it.
As is typical of most SX only nerds, you fail to mention the incredible complexity of SPACEX HLS and the 10+ Starships it will take to get it's lander to the moon. We have yet to see even 1 fly successfully yet. I'm sure it will happen, but the haven't proved anything yet.
Recent upgrades to the Raptor engine mean that it will only take 4 launches to refuel the Starship. The booster has a higher thrust:weight ratio and the ship can have larger propellant tanks. But you're totally right that they haven't demonstrated on-orbit refueling yet.
@@CountArtha what you actually wanted to say is that Elon fantasizes about Raptor having more thrust while at the same time admitting Raptors are not yet working cause they melt themselves. Untill SpaceX produces version of Raptor that runs flawlessly for 10min I suggest not getting aroused by Elon's PowerPoints
I think people keep forgetting that SpaceX has been very clear - and detailed - about their plans. As Starship is well into testing, it kind of begs the question of why should NASA spend any further money on SLS given that Starship largely exceeds SLS capabilities and will be a service - and in numbers -long before SLS would be ready. I dont think SLS will ever be a thing.
I think SLS will put humans in orbit before Starship does. I think the odds of SpaceX killing someone before SLS launches have lengthened considerably though.
@@tasmanianbadger True. But I was answering your question '... why should NASA spend any further money on SLS'. I doubt if Artemis will get beyond 3. I think New Zealand's Neutron will be the alternative by then. Maybe even New Shephard?
Like you said, lots room to poke holes in, but to have a plan in action is absolutely better than whatever that was after the last space shuttle flight. So let’s get to it! Nothin but kudos and positive encouragement from this space fan! It’s important beyond explanation to continue the aspirations of humankind beyond the current boundaries! Don’t ask me why…. It just is.
I have been a Space Fan since seeing the Apollo 11 launch in person at KSC in 1969. I have a few doubts of the Star Ship being the Lunar lander. It doesn’t look that safe. Too tall, if anything goes wrong, and the Rocket falls over, the Astronaut’s are caught on the Moon to slowly die! Some sort of lunar module and the limb, maybe a bit bigger than the 70’s model, but certainly not Too top heavy like the Star Ship.
We also need NASA because they actually have the experience and all the equipments+ experience and everything they want to do on the moon, what exactly does Spacex has aside from the rocket?! Stfu!!!!!
@@carholic-sz3qv NASA doesn't have the funding. SLS is literally reused rocket parts from Apollo and the Space Shuttle, so no new technology there, yet, the project has costed 25 billion for a rocket that isn't reusable. I kind of agree, in that NASA needs to stick with the highly complex telescopes and science experiments, while SpaceX needs to stick to rocket and robot development. However, private companies will always have the funding to produce better technology because politics is politics and billionaires are billionaires.
Not with those specific politics, it is just that it is really awkward that SLS isn't reusable and costs 4.1 billion per launch, while Starship is reusable, will carry far more to orbit, and will cost less than 10 million dollars per launch. 25 billion for nothing
3:17 “plenty of rockets fail on their first launch” Poor choice of clips of rocks not failing on their first launch. The experimental craft detonated over SpaceX McGregor test was a test article. The drone ship crashes were experimental landing attempts after a Successful mission. Falcon 9 had a successful first launch
The best reason to have Moon bases will be to turn it into an automated refueling way-station for Mars rockets. It's not a realistic place for people to live long term.
Yes exactly the moon's low gravity is great for ship launching and landing , and the moon has valuable resources like titanium and helium 3 , titanium is a natural good building material for ships and helium 3 would make good fuel for reactors to use , so the moon is a natural space port to use
Seeing all this working to landing people on the moon, now I believe that people didn't go to the moon before. This will not be the second time but it will be the first time that people go to the moon
@@Vater1 It took NASA 15 years to get from building rockets capable of moon landings to sending a crew there. SpaceX has been working on this for about 9 years now, NASA 10. It isnt just knowing how that takes the most time, its actually building, testing, and getting FDA approval for launch. If SpaceX wanted they could have probably sent someone to the moon last year, which they said they were ready for, but its FDA and final testing now that they have time, which is whats taking up the extra time. Humanity has definitely gone to the moon in the 60's. Rocket science is not that difficult. Building things is an entirely different story.
Okay then try bouncing a laser off the mirrors planets on the moon by Astronauts in the 1960s not to mention the "shocking" finding of all past Lunar landing sites.... morons
Remember, supposedly we had several successful moon landings, between 1969 and 1972, before most of you were born. It’s becoming clear to many that we never went to the moon.
If this was true NASA would have colonized the moon by now but I don't think space x nor NASA would be able to accomplish this we haven't gone back in 50 years
Boca Chica is and will remain an R&D facility no matter what the FAA decides. So yes, you are correct because it isn't meant to be the primary launch facility.
It will be interesting to see if SpaceX develop their own EVA suits faster than the Artemis xEMU which has a 3-year head start. They are going to test one NET November of this year with a spacewalk from Crew Dragon.
I would like to see rovers on the Moon powered by solar panels. There should never be dust on those panels because there's no atmosphere. And because there's no atmosphere, the Sun will be brighter and never obscured by clouds. And there's only a 1-2 second delay for light to go to and from the Moon, so vehicles could be remote controlled instead of autonomous. And on the Moon there is a 14-day night and 14-day day. But there are some places on the Moon which never have sunlight and some places on the Moon which have permanent sunlight. Be careful not to argue with that last sentence, because there are some craters near the poles which never see the Sun shine inside them, and there are some hills near the poles which always see "half the Sun" on the horizon. You should be able to build a rover without any battery if there's permanent daylight. That would make the robot more reliable.
The first U.S. lunar colony is planned for Shackleton Crater at the South Pole for this very reason: polar day and perpetual sunlight with nearby craters that are in perpetual shadow and have large deposits of water ice. The only way to keep the base powered without that polar day would be nuclear power.
There is no need for the SLS. Just get the crew to earth orbit. There they will board the spacex lander for a trip to the lunar surface; The lander will then return them to earth orbit where they will use the Starliner capsule to splash down, Less expensive less complicated.
Check out our new discord server: discord.gg/zfMNSnuRQN
I think you should really read what I just said. It's worth your time and effort to also do a full investigation on the facts. I am only sharing because I also have a plan for humanity in space...cheers
!lmfao! If you could build a base on moon , you would done it 50 years ago ! Faked Moon Landings Forever ! And oops ! You are still unable going to moon and coming back alive ! So , Don't Believe this junky named as Elon Musk or whatever . lol !
@@wikkid1show569 ll pp wee 1wqq1w wear all e AA AA AA at
@@wikkid1show569 It doesn't come up, out of the 3 replies, only this one is shown. Can you resubmit your proposal please, I am interested.
@@krashdown5814 artificial turf, a landing pad , made of heat resistant materials and under padding. The reason is the problematic lunar dust and it will compromise the reusability of many crafts. That's all
I'd bet high on SpaceX making it to the moon first, on their own. They might sell tickets to tourists to witness the next Nasa moon landing in person. 😂
Would not be shocked if that happened either!
😂
Unlikely nasa will make it most likely in 2025-26. Spacex has no plans on making a lunar starship that has controls and a heat shield to return to earth
@@SV7-2100 SpaceX could use a Starship as an Earth - Moon shuttle. To dock to the Lunar Lander Starship.
Or use a Crew Dragon of course as a small Earth Moon Shuttle.
I do hope so, it would cause alot of embarrassment for NASA and might force some change in the organization. Stop programs like the SLS from being overbudget, delayed, job programs in the future. Also a push for NASA to put more emphasis on private corps to make more economically feasible space rockets/programs.
I’ve followed the space program from the very beginning. I was born in 1954. Even though I was less than 10 I saw just about every launch and never missed any moon landing. I remember staying up almost all night when Apollo 11 landed on the moon.
Me too!
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so.
THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
I see things playing out differently. Elon Musk can only wait just so long following NASA’s many delays before he decides to go it alone. After lunar Starship has been thoroughly tested and NASA’s still not ready, Spacex will launch astronauts on a Dragon ship, rendezvous with a lunar Starship and go to the moon on his own. Don’t worry. By the time this happens NASA will already have conceded that his is the best method to avoid more delays. Also, Musk will never agree to only one mission per year with SLS. The latest plan to use only four tankers to fill a tanker mothership makes a lot of sense. Go Spacex,!!
Yes. But if Starship can take people to Mars, I don't see why they would need a Dragon to take them to the Moon. They will need some sort of re-entry vehicle for the return trip, so maybe that will be Dragon. But if they really don't get to the Moon until 2028 I agree that SpaceX will probably have long since developed the capability to do the whole thing themselves. I almost wonder if NASA didn't partly select them as a backup plan. (Yes, I know that they were also the lowest cost and furthest along in development, etc, etc.)
@@briangodfrey5079 if NASA wants to be the first to return to the moon then Starship/Dragon would be the first method that would work. Super Heavy will not be man rated for a while. This combo is both cheap and safe. The best trait of Elon is he will do anything to meet his goals.
@@stevebroome1288 Oh yeah, the "man-rated" thing. As things stand right now you're right. But a lot can change by then. Other SpaceX investors may have different ideas, but Musk wants to launch men (and women, too, I assume) to Mars soon. Super Heavy will need to be man-rated soon in order to do that.
Good thing I am not conspiracy-minded. Otherwise, I might suspect all the delays coming from the federal government were coordinated to delay SpaceX and allow NASA, and the legacy rocket industries to save face. Looks to me like Starship has had prototypes ready to launch for many months already. Were it not for regulatory slow-walking, SpaceX would likely already be proving reusability of Starship rather than making projections. 🙄 Probably a mistake to have built Starbase in TX?
@@robertmoore3581 lol..... you think Spacex is ready too?! Wtf do you have with spacex" is Beeing delayed"
By the time Artemis gets up, SpaceX will have a bnb set up and waiting for them. They can watch starship as it heads back to Earth from Mars.
Artemis is a cost plus contract.
Great coverage
Thanks
Bob
Artemis 3 will land before starship even gets to orbit
@@Sleepless-nights99 I guess you haven't heard the latest about artemis?
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so.
THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
@@donsise1126 you are such a sad, sad little man.
Perhaps by 2024 SpaceX can develop a CLS -- a cargo landing system. It could take a pallet to the moon, drop it off, and return to Earth orbit. The CLS could haul, say, ten tons at first and demonstrate the refueling system, its lunar landing ability, the automated cargo handling system, the elevator and, of course, the take off and return to earth orbit. It may need to carry more fuel rather than the hundred tons of cargo. A few roundtrips would help iron out the "Kinks" and establish faith in the HLS.
Also, they could design a lunar Stayship. This would be a Starship that lands on its side on a prepared site (perhaps featuring inflatable pads) and is designed to stay put. The decks in the living/working area would run lengthwise rather than across. The tanks and engines can be pulled out and put to other uses while additional interior space is made available. Four of these fellows attached "Nose on" to a repurposed fuel tank would be a good start towards a lunar colony. Leftover parts could be used to build a Starships on the moon.
I hope these assignments will keep them busy down at Boca Chica.
Very nice setup
They still cant even get a man back to the moon apparently…. Last time the had eagle with its toy jeep and drove around and flew back to the shuttle no problems on the first shot in 1969 All a bunch of BS
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so.
THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
I watched the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo flights. I watched all of the moon landings and excursions on the moon. I am ready to watch the new landing if I am still alive.
I just pray to God I can find a way to last 5 more years. I want to see this!
eat your broccoli!
@@AveRay_ Yes Sir! I’m on it.
The most complex space vehicle ever succeeded on it's first launch. Almost Like NASA knew what it was doing.
WE WILL SEE WONT WE?!
1970's NASA Rocket Scientist VS. 🤔
2020's NASA Rocket Scientist, who is more worth their Metal!? 😏
@@VRtechman we will see, but I expect SLS to either abort or launch, not fail.
@@VRtechmanArtemis I was a success so it’s looking good so far
9:34 "Or being caught by a *Giant Robot!"* Best words you ever spoke 💖🤖💖 Giant Robot Lives Matter!! 🤖💖🤖
I would call it a virtual certainty that the SLS crew making its first landing on the moon will be greeted by the crew of a SpaceX lunar base.
🤣🤣🤣
I hope so, that would be hilarious
exactly
and spacex done it 10x cheaper :)
You all have so much faith in musks companies even after he delays everything by years. I wouldn’t be surprised if nasa beat spacex to mars if they started work to it today. Musk makes absurd claims his companies rarely can follow.
I’d love to see plans for optimizing lunar starship into part of a permanent base. I imagine packing cargo to move earth (err Luna?) in order to make a safer, proper landing field. And while modules are great, I have to imagine immediate work on maybe light, prefab building materials. At least until they’re able to make some kind of version of concrete. I know there’s water on the moon, not sure how easy it is to get to and process. Lastly, any kind of permanent settlement would be a lot easier with a miniaturized nuclear reactor.
some big dome like structures would be nice. Created open breathable spaces with buildings inside. Would replicate living on earth the best.
@@65stang98 So what will shield the inhabitants from radiation ?
@@krashdown5814 uh id assume the fuckin building?
I imagine by 2024 or 25 SpaceX will attempt not only their own uncrewed flight for HLS but also a landing and then yeah if there is any delay from Nasa the SpaceX may say fine we'll go it alone with landing humans back on the Moon probably by 2027. Who knows they may even use Axiom to develop their own iteration of Gateway and privately develop a Lunar site where people live for up to 2 weeks before returning.
On of the NASA panelists was asked what was the cost of a scrubbed Artemis mission and he replied "much less that a mission failure". Good point. I saw the Challenger explosion live on T.V.. I was lucky enough to be in Port Canaveral for Discovery Launch 2 and a half years later to see and feel that feel that launch. We can wait.
Keep in mind that NASA is a *civilian* space program, but we also have a military space program too with the United States Space Force. And they just announced that they're extending their jurisdiction into cislunar space. My point is that if you're excited about missions to the Moon, just know that NASA isn't the only one with interests in doing so. The only downside is that while NASA has to make all of their stuff public, the USSF indeed does not, so they could (and perhaps have) made trips to the Moon without the public's knowledge.
They can't launch a manned spacecraft to the Moon without being detected by radar and spy satellites. When the Space Force sends people up, it will need to be public. Also, the United States has already signed the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 which forbids weapons in space. China never signed it, so we will break the treaty whenever they force our hand, but not before.
@@CountArtha At 5:19 AM EST on December 7th 2021, NASA's Atlas V rocket launched into orbit and amongst its payload were several classified U.S. space force technologies (which included a couple of their satellites). They could surely send someone up to the moon in secret if they wanted. Matter of fact, although Artemis 1 is supposed to be an unmanned trip around the Moon, it could very well be the case that an individual could be part of that payload and once again just say that it's classified.
@@matthewviramontes3131 In an era when everyone has a camera on their phone, you think they'll be able to get astronauts in and out of the clean room, out to the launch pad, and into the capsule and no one will leak it? Maybe from Vandenberg, but I doubt they could do it from Cape Canaveral even though it's a Space Force base.
The USAF, now Space Force, has delivered cargo and supplies to the moon for decades. You need yo remember, that most space experts after 1945 came from Germany and they continued to send supplies to the Moon station through the USA space programme.
NASA never never never landed on the Moon with PEOPLE !!! The US Government kept lying for 60 years now over and over again. It is the biggest lie of the modern times, but nobody challenged that because they haven't had any major interest in doing so.
THE BIGGEST LIE SPILLED OUT AND REGURGITATED ALL OVER AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN !!!!
I was 6 years old when they landed on the moon in 1969 and I don’t remember watching it on tv 😢
I was 9, I vaguely remember it. But I still have a cool t-shirt from then that commemorates it !
Don’t forget to make spacesuits!!!
Nice presentation 😊
Glad to see this too long delayed action getting to the Moon and Mars.
great video!! TO THE MOOOONNN!!!
and then MARS! :D
I will absolutely visit the moon given the opportunity.
7/20/1969 was a spectacular day to be an American. Apollo was landing on the moon and Mr. Armstrong spoke the now famous ,” small step for man”…
Just so I am clear on this. The plan is to fly a giant "Lander" along with a separate ship that has never flown before, transfer 2 people to the "Lander", land on the moon, do things, then take back off and transfer the 2 people back to the separate ship? Why not just have them ride all together on the Starship, land and take back off together without a separate ship in orbit around the moon.
because the starship doesn't have a abort launch feature where the crew are shot off the rocket in case of emergency. Like crewdragon can launch from the falcon 9 rocket during launch. NASA wants that! because of that spaceX can launch one moonstarship to the moon to stay there, and be some taxi between moon and moonorbit
It's called fuel. The smaller sls uses less fuel. The starship makes a better lander because of it's space but it uses more fuel and would have to be refueled in orbit of earth and the moon to returned back to earth. Witch translates to refueling star ship twice, Or once and the sls from lanch. Means a bigger moon base and less experience just in fuel. And like was said the star ship can be converted in to a better moon base
@@benschram9629 They why aren't they using Dragon? The SLS is a waste of time, money, and effort. With as much repeatability SpaceX has with their current rocket architecture it surpassed what SLS would be capable of. Also, I am pretty sure a Dragon capsule would fit inside the starship cargo bay. After it is lowered to the ground getting back off the moon wouldn't require much fuel.
If you look at the timeline, I think that's the reason. SLS was planned and began production before anyone took SpaceX seriously. NASA planned to have Orion ferry astronauts to the Gateway that would stay in orbit around the moon and then have another system that would take people and cargo from the Gateway to the moon's surface. They started production on SLS, they started work on the Gateway, and eventually decided that with commercial vehicles becoming viable, they would try to contract out the HLS. SpaceX was already planning and developing Starship, so they sent a bid using a ship that can do more than what NASA asked for and do it cheaper than the competition. If you're NASA, you have all kinds of time and money invested in the original idea, so you can't walk away from it. You keep going with the plan that looks inefficient and antiquated, knowing that this is the best way to keep getting funding and the work with SpaceX will be important going forward.
@@jennciavarella6888 I think you are spot in. With projects I work on if a better option becomes available we don't continue with the lesser of the options though. We are talking about NASA though and they are know for making decisions that are costly.
Matt Damon has the right stuff.
I was too young to go to the moon with Apollo and too freaking old to go with SpaceX (Although I would go if they would let me).
A successful SpaceX moon-landing on the first try is not something I would put money on.
th-cam.com/video/FrCh6weh3hs/w-d-xo.html
I cheesed so hard during this entire video, extremely exciting!!!!!!!!
What technology would keep a moon landing pad clear of it's regolith?
Well given the there is no wind on the moon or anything that can push regolith onto the landing pad once is clean it will stay clean, especially if you have rockets landing there regularly because the exhaust fumes will push any residue off of it
drones
push brooms
tarp
The reason the FAA is delaying starship is because they are being told to. It would be a huge embarrassment to many government organizations if starship flew before SLS hence the approval date of March 28th after SLS is rolled out on the 17th.
The FAA is acting in a huge partisan manner with these delays. It reeks of corruption that clearly goes to the top of this illegitimate regime as Biden failed to even mention Tesla and Elon Musk’s contribution to the development of electric cars during his “State Of The Union” mess.
That's a reach. SLS is just doing tests in March and will launch NET May. Starship will have flown by then.
@@jamietodd2560 I certainly hope so
@@jamietodd2560 that's what you think?! Lol...
@@chrisbragdon5901 "illegitimate regime" 🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪
The bfr is coming along nicely
Anyone else think NASA is a low expectation operation? 🤔
I mean really? 2 guys on the moon to jump around for a day. And that ride cost how much and has taken how long? THANK GOD FOR SPACEX.
I thanks all the gods man has made up just this second. So we’re good.
Very interesting, very creative , many options. good technical explanations of possible scenarios
please more .
Some time between May and July? JUNE!!!
i died :))
The time schedule is depressingly slow. In the 1960s, we went from zero to moon landing in much less than 10 years.
Thank you The Tesla Space compliment video interesting.
I bet the original folks never made it back or never went at all.
Getting to Luna (the moon) is tons more important than going to Mars. Elon the Elon surely knows this point.
Nah, Elon is focused on getting life multi-planetary (on Mars), while Bezos is focused on the moon (good luck with Jeff who tho)
Agree.. we aint goin anywhere untill we get back to the moon first
@@edword3457 Can you elaborate please?
@@archer1133 Watching the video, we see that every stage is prerequisite for the next. For example, the astronauts will first orbit the moon and then return to earth without even attemping to land untill the next launch. In this same manner, it is paramount that we first return to the moon, using today's technology before even attempting to travel to any other planets.
@@edword3457 I can agree with this, Starship will probably land on the moon before Artemis, but I think most of the testing will come when we send a fleet of unmanned Starships to Mars in 2026 (according to the current schedule) carrying life support equipment and robots.
Just wanted to share a simple fact on getting these missions to the Moon complete. Artificial turf , we use to see this in plenty of stadiums around America and other countries. This is important for the next phase due to moon dust . I hope some day that someone reads this and understands the importance it will play . The dust which is similar to shards of glass has had an effect on every astronaut who went to the moon .
To lay the ground work , is the only option and to suppress the upheaval of lunar dust by putting down a durable rug . This will have to cover a very large area and strong enough to withstand the landing of a spacecraft. I'm not a fanboy , I care about survivability. Take a look at what NASA first used that bounced on the surface of Mars while carrying an extraordinary rover. Thanks for coming out...
We should have roads and highways and plant grass
@@cloudgamer178 if you remember all those illustrations of a moonbase, they showed a flat surface surrounded by pods and launch pad . Well that material and a few bot should be able to do some landscaping and that material btw can withstand the heat of a craft landing and not the entry like that of Mars which has an atmosphere and the Moon , nada . Try to help instead of being useless with nothing to say . Thanks for sharing
I believe NASA is well aware of the moon dust and its dangers since they are the only ones who actually been to the Moon, have real life experience with it and the data necessary to implement viable precautions
did not know it was that difficult to get people to the moon with the current technology. Wished we had the 1970s tech to get people to the moon and possibly use the 1970s lunar lander and rovers.
I was working in Richmond Hill this week. On my way out I decided I take a drive to Tesla Canada to see if I could meet someone for a tour of the Canadian facilities. I come up with innovative business ideas on a daily basis so I feel like I can help with the transition to sustainable transportation and energy. We all know there is corruption in finance markets and politically with the use of oil and gas. I would like to continue to contribute what I can do to help this world be a better place and allow humanity to spread its wings. The time is now to stop corruption and all of our actions should be built with love consciousness in mind. All matter is built from love consciousness energy and all that matters is love consciousness energy! Let's shoot for the Moon and Mars, then we will end up amongst the Stars!
I'll believe it when I see it, (and maybe not even then,) I can still remember watching the first moon landings and I've yet to see anything that convinces me that, all the hot air aside; we'll be back there any time soon ?
So far so good .retro orbit in progress. 😀
I wonder if Elon has ever watched The Expanse
Maybe it will not be called "the Epstein drive" but "the Musk drive"...:)
The problem of The Expanse's G pulls at high speeds is all our experience with high-velocity travel is Gs only last a short time. When we take off on an airplane, we feel the G pull only until we get to cruising speed, and then we can't hardly feel the motion. If we do get to that sort of speed then we maybe would do it in stages, like 1~4 each stage would settle to a specific speed and stay there for the crew to get adjusted then on to the next stage of Volocity. Until reaching max V at stage 4. A whole lot better than taking G juice:)
i wonder if a future starship design will be named Rocinante :)
@@robwagnon6578 That would be dope
Wow really going to the moon 🌝🌜? I like it
SLS will be scrapped in 2025, just before Artemis2, which was delayed because of technical issues with Artemis 1. Starship will take over. The end.
Oh, and Boing goes "bankwupt"
🤣🤣🤣
B(*)(*)M
AMEN TO THAT!
Boeing's space division is not as big as its aviation division. It's why they don't take SLS seriously, but unfortunately it's also why they won't go out of business after screwing up this badly on SLS.
@Til Merkan...We can only hope...
@@hankscally9658 Nah ein forgot, Boing will be saved by war spending. Or the world ends.
We have an awesome civilization
why cant they just use the starship to bring the people (and other things)
Nasa has been planning this mission for years, and they put so much money into the SLS that it has to fly at least once. SpaceX and NASA have developed quite the symbiotic relationship, and SpaceX really needs the expertise of NASA to have any chance of a lunar landing. Also keep in mind that Starship has still not yet proved it's ability to get to orbit. (they will). Still needs to prove orbital refilling. (they will) Still needs to prove lunar orbital docking. (they will) And still needs to prove that such a massive craft is capable of landing on the lunar surface. (I'm optimistic) If their collaborative efforts into Artemis succeeds, they will absolutely scrap the horribly expensive SLS and use starship for any subsequent missions. I'm so excited.
@@cf3757 thanks and they will lol
The contractor for SLS needs to be able to save face by launching their overpriced, antique creation at least once. A lot of politicans' reputations depend on it.
As is typical of most SX only nerds, you fail to mention the incredible complexity of SPACEX HLS and the 10+ Starships it will take to get it's lander to the moon. We have yet to see even 1 fly successfully yet. I'm sure it will happen, but the haven't proved anything yet.
Recent upgrades to the Raptor engine mean that it will only take 4 launches to refuel the Starship. The booster has a higher thrust:weight ratio and the ship can have larger propellant tanks. But you're totally right that they haven't demonstrated on-orbit refueling yet.
@@CountArtha what you actually wanted to say is that Elon fantasizes about Raptor having more thrust while at the same time admitting Raptors are not yet working cause they melt themselves. Untill SpaceX produces version of Raptor that runs flawlessly for 10min I suggest not getting aroused by Elon's PowerPoints
@@maciejzamecznik3146 They weren't powerpoints. They were videos of Raptor 2 tests.
I think people keep forgetting that SpaceX has been very clear - and detailed - about their plans. As Starship is well into testing, it kind of begs the question of why should NASA spend any further money on SLS given that Starship largely exceeds SLS capabilities and will be a service - and in numbers -long before SLS would be ready. I dont think SLS will ever be a thing.
I think SLS will put humans in orbit before Starship does.
I think the odds of SpaceX killing someone before SLS launches have lengthened considerably though.
Redundancy. NASA wants to put their eggs into to more than one basket.
@@smacksman1. I’m sure that they’d love some options… but atm… SpaceX is the only game in town. 😟
@@tasmanianbadger True. But I was answering your question '... why should NASA spend any further money on SLS'. I doubt if Artemis will get beyond 3. I think New Zealand's Neutron will be the alternative by then. Maybe even New Shephard?
Artemis I was a success
Like you said, lots room to poke holes in, but to have a plan in action is absolutely better than whatever that was after the last space shuttle flight. So let’s get to it! Nothin but kudos and positive encouragement from this space fan! It’s important beyond explanation to continue the aspirations of humankind beyond the current boundaries! Don’t ask me why…. It just is.
Nice channel
the REAL reason is they want obsolete SLS to launch first
I have been a Space Fan since seeing the Apollo 11 launch in person at KSC in 1969.
I have a few doubts of the Star Ship being the Lunar lander. It doesn’t look that safe. Too tall, if anything goes wrong, and the Rocket falls over, the Astronaut’s are caught on the Moon to slowly die! Some sort of lunar module and the limb, maybe a bit bigger than the 70’s model, but certainly not Too top heavy like the Star Ship.
Thanks yellow fellow ☯️
Everything you say right now will be completely different by the year 2030. Welcome to NASA. They NEED space X.
We also need NASA because they actually have the experience and all the equipments+ experience and everything they want to do on the moon, what exactly does Spacex has aside from the rocket?! Stfu!!!!!
@@carholic-sz3qv NASA doesn't have the funding. SLS is literally reused rocket parts from Apollo and the Space Shuttle, so no new technology there, yet, the project has costed 25 billion for a rocket that isn't reusable. I kind of agree, in that NASA needs to stick with the highly complex telescopes and science experiments, while SpaceX needs to stick to rocket and robot development. However, private companies will always have the funding to produce better technology because politics is politics and billionaires are billionaires.
As long as this happens is my lifetime.
First we get mars cybertruck and not moon cybertruck
The fact that this video is so out of date and it's only been released 14 days ago
The Empire never had a King, that''s ALL! BRO...
I am sure that the FAA decision has nothing to do with the Biden vs Musk issues. (Tesla)
Not with those specific politics, it is just that it is really awkward that SLS isn't reusable and costs 4.1 billion per launch, while Starship is reusable, will carry far more to orbit, and will cost less than 10 million dollars per launch. 25 billion for nothing
3:17 “plenty of rockets fail on their first launch”
Poor choice of clips of rocks not failing on their first launch. The experimental craft detonated over SpaceX McGregor test was a test article. The drone ship crashes were experimental landing attempts after a Successful mission. Falcon 9 had a successful first launch
even falcon heavy
7:48 they rejecting something that could lead to a new era and change humanity over not going to the beach.
Coronavirus -> Russia -> ? -> Moonlanding! 🚀
PLEASE MAKE THE BASE A GIANT TREE
The best reason to have Moon bases will be to turn it into an automated refueling way-station for Mars rockets. It's not a realistic place for people to live long term.
Yes exactly the moon's low gravity is great for ship launching and landing , and the moon has valuable resources like titanium and helium 3 , titanium is a natural good building material for ships and helium 3 would make good fuel for reactors to use , so the moon is a natural space port to use
and MARS is???
the u.s. should shock the world by laying ground work for a moon base that would be worth the trip
2028?! Now we know what is really motivating the government’s attempts to slow SpaceX down with regulations and bureaucracy.
I’m 70. NASA is good at waiting time and money. Go spaceX.
Is it to late to go back to school to become an engineer to potentially go there and help build the base?
Seeing all this working to landing people on the moon, now I believe that people didn't go to the moon before. This will not be the second time but it will be the first time that people go to the moon
Strongly agree
@@Vater1 It took NASA 15 years to get from building rockets capable of moon landings to sending a crew there. SpaceX has been working on this for about 9 years now, NASA 10.
It isnt just knowing how that takes the most time, its actually building, testing, and getting FDA approval for launch. If SpaceX wanted they could have probably sent someone to the moon last year, which they said they were ready for, but its FDA and final testing now that they have time, which is whats taking up the extra time.
Humanity has definitely gone to the moon in the 60's. Rocket science is not that difficult. Building things is an entirely different story.
Okay then try bouncing a laser off the mirrors planets on the moon by Astronauts in the 1960s not to mention the "shocking" finding of all past Lunar landing sites.... morons
Remember, supposedly we had several successful moon landings, between 1969 and 1972, before most of you were born. It’s becoming clear to many that we never went to the moon.
Strongly agree too.
So crazy bcos it’s happening in 20 miniutes for me
Sure they’ll build this. Sure.
It's going to be almost impossible to figure out how to stay up there for so long.
Space dreams come trough. Long Live NASA & Space X. Von Voyage Artemis I - V.
I was so far ahead of these clowns...I built a permanent settlement on the moon in 1983 at ten years old...out of legos.
how did you get legos to the moon
We should have been had a Moon base.
I would love to help build a moon base I'm ready let's go
Love space tech
th-cam.com/video/FrCh6weh3hs/w-d-xo.html
Aliens, man...Aliens.
That's the smartest way to get to Mars. From the moon.
Just imagine when they live stream them sending people to the moon again and building a base on there.
Just get one lander there with removable engines. We leave that lander as a base and take the engines back one at a time if we have to.
If this was true NASA would have colonized the moon by now but I don't think space x nor NASA would be able to accomplish this we haven't gone back in 50 years
SPACE X is doing what no one else thought could be done. Reuse a space craft like a air plane. HE'S DONE IT..
I hope you are sarcastic.
will never forget where I was dor noon landing, watched it on black & white grainie tv on a island in WA.state, Lopez San Juan islands
Thay finally figured out how to
I don't think Boca Chica was ever meant to be the primary launch facility for SpaceX. It was always going to be Cape Canaveral and ocean platforms.
Boca Chica is and will remain an R&D facility no matter what the FAA decides. So yes, you are correct because it isn't meant to be the primary launch facility.
Still no Suit to use on the Moon so what's the point?
It will be interesting to see if SpaceX develop their own EVA suits faster than the Artemis xEMU which has a 3-year head start. They are going to test one NET November of this year with a spacewalk from Crew Dragon.
Hopefully SpaceX will design a good-looking suit. NASA's suit will be done in 2025.
People will be able to experience the moon landing first-hand in virtual reality.
NASA SAID we would be on MARS before the end of 1970's..
More like 2070
@@KingLarbear Back then Americans had a different mentality. They cared about the nation. They ,WE supported the space efforts.
@@pulesjet yeah I know, they say each year we invest less and less into stem until like a few years ago
@@KingLarbear Thank Your creator that people like Elon are around...
@@pulesjet my creators name is Hashem
There is nothing wrong with dreaming. But, isn't just getting there first on the list???
I would like to see rovers on the Moon powered by solar panels. There should never be dust on those panels because there's no atmosphere. And because there's no atmosphere, the Sun will be brighter and never obscured by clouds. And there's only a 1-2 second delay for light to go to and from the Moon, so vehicles could be remote controlled instead of autonomous. And on the Moon there is a 14-day night and 14-day day. But there are some places on the Moon which never have sunlight and some places on the Moon which have permanent sunlight. Be careful not to argue with that last sentence, because there are some craters near the poles which never see the Sun shine inside them, and there are some hills near the poles which always see "half the Sun" on the horizon. You should be able to build a rover without any battery if there's permanent daylight. That would make the robot more reliable.
The first U.S. lunar colony is planned for Shackleton Crater at the South Pole for this very reason: polar day and perpetual sunlight with nearby craters that are in perpetual shadow and have large deposits of water ice. The only way to keep the base powered without that polar day would be nuclear power.
@@CountArtha Well, I guess NASA doesn't need me to advise them if they've already figured this out. 😀
We did this
so the moon will get a cybertruck before i do?
😂😂😂
There is no need for the SLS. Just get the crew to earth orbit. There they will board the spacex lander for a trip to the lunar surface; The lander will then return them to earth orbit where they will use the Starliner capsule to splash down, Less expensive less complicated.
OH THE HORROR, i can't visit the beach cuz humanity wants to progress, WAAAAAAH WAAAAAAHHH!! 👶👶👶
hi
The Artemis Moon landing will change the world? Like the last time? How did the world change with the Apollo Moon landings?
i hope when this all goes wrong they start looking after our mother
Perfect