Tumsa

Will Starship and Commercial Landers Make Artemis Better Than Apollo? 

Skatījumi 1,7 milj.
98% 16 808 251

NASA's making some big moves to finally get humans back to the moon for the first time in over 50 years. The Artemis program is shaping up with checks written and hardware built! So how does a 21st Century program to the moon compare to that of the 1960's?
In Today's video, we’re going to answer the question, why does NASA think Artemis will be a sustainable program when SLS is sooooo dang expensive AND it’ll take at least two launches to get humans and their lunar landers to the moon.
This CAN’T be more sustainable than Apollo, right? Well, we didn’t even begin to scratch the surface of the costs, so today we’re going to really dive into the total costs, including development, infrastructure and hardware by giving SLS and Orion a full cost audit.
But we’ll even show you how the Apollo program and Artemis mission profiles differ including the specific orbits and rendezvous and everything required to get humans to the surface of the moon and even talk about the upgraded safety considerations and hardware involved.
Once we look at all these details, we can answer the question, 50 years later, is the Artemis program actually an improvement over the Apollo program or is NASA going completely in the wrong direction when returning to the moon?
#ApolloVSArtemis #SLSVSSaturnV
00:00 - Intro
03:50 - The Hardware
15:55 - The Missions
29:15 - Safety & Upgrades
35:50 - Program Costs
46:20 - Rant
52:25 - The Good Parts of Artemis
55:35 - Conclusion
--------------------------
Want to support what I do? Consider becoming a Patreon supporter for access to exclusive livestreams, our discord channel and subreddit! - patreon.com/everydayastronaut
This video wouldn't be possible with out the generous support of my Mission Directors on Patreon!!! - Frans de Wet, Gregory M. McKee, Chad Souter, Sam Fisher, Jason Kelnhofer, pexis petersons, Eric Beavers, Arthur Carty, Lawrence Mansour, Bob Lewis, DLB, Joshua Rule, Ryan M., David Glover, Scott G Raderstorf, Nicholas T. Gallman, Max Haot, John Malkin, TTTA, Jared smith, Simon Pilkington, Héctor Ramos, Tomdmay , Mac Malkawi, Ole Mathias Aarseth Heggem
Or become a LVlocal member for some bonus perks as well! - lvlocal.info/must/6uKrU_WqJ1R2HMTY3LIx5Qjoin
The best place for all your space merch needs!
everydayastronaut.com/shop/
All music is original! Check out my album "Maximum Aerodynamic Pressure" anywhere you listen to music (Spotify, iTunes, Google Play, Amazon, etc) or click here for easy links - everydayastronaut.com/music
I'm the cohost of an awesome podcast where we talk all about current technologies and how they shape our future! ourludicrousfuture.com or here on LVlocal lvlocal.info

Zinātne un tehnoloģija

Publicēšanas datums

 

13 sep 2020

Kopīgot:

Link:

Lejupielādēt:

Lejupielādēt.....

Pievienot:

Mans atskaņošanas saraksts
Skatīties vēlāk
komentāri 100   
Ian Stewart
Ian Stewart Pirms 3 Stundām
Tim I've watched most of the stuff you've produced, but your "Rant" section here is probably my most favourite part of all.
lvs
lvs Pirms 7 Stundām
Another amazing video, so much detailed information, thanks Tim!
Joseph Abernathy
Joseph Abernathy Pirms 13 Stundām
lol he said moom at 0:18
Moto Bum
Moto Bum Pirms 14 Stundām
i would prefer a comparison of starship vs Artemis
Ferb 74
Ferb 74 Pirms 18 Stundām
Spacex should supersede NASA As it’s Not fit for the job anymore To sluggish to slow to long in the tooth
kano 1971
kano 1971 Pirms dienas
Space x is subsidized by overcharges for the military luanches 316 million for one while ula charged 337 for 2 luanches Elon is nothing special .. hyperloop nothing new thought about ages ago and will never happen on a large scale for many reasons .. he can bore tunnels at the same price as everyone else and got 50% more power in a battery by making it 50% larger .. the Elon cultist are unreal though and don't believe in fact just fiction
Jim Abbey
Jim Abbey Pirms dienas
SLS will be 20 BILLION over budget by the time it launches in a couple of years! Hang a lemon on it cut your losses and abandon SLS!!
Scott Liles
Scott Liles Pirms dienas
unfortunate they lost all of the data from first trip to the moon.... man's greatest accomplishment and they lost the data. hmmmm that's odd
Kaleb Cash
Kaleb Cash Pirms dienas
The massive structures we have to build to make this possible (alone) is impressive!
San Ien Jao
San Ien Jao Pirms dienas
SLS is a corrupt lobbying POS that should have been blown up long ago. If SpaceX got half the money we would be on the moon and have a base there.
True Grit
True Grit Pirms 2 dienām
Great video but my only confusion is why is this cost an issue? Nasa has a 22 billion dollar a year budget, so why is 100 billion even an issue? This program will last like 10 years
space guy 9 32
space guy 9 32 Pirms 2 dienām
tim was that the everyday astronaut badge on the starship proposel.
Vi Trong
Vi Trong Pirms 3 dienām
The uncovered kale immunohistologically moor because macaroni emphatically hope except a glistening glorious interest. certain, crazy point
Jim Buja
Jim Buja Pirms 3 dienām
09:20 Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) name was replaced with Lunar Module (LM) early on ‘because Excursion sounded too much like a picnic’ Excuse please if it was already pointed out...
aswler
aswler Pirms 3 dienām
An amazing and professional video! Thanks a lot for this great content.
Absolutely Spiffing
Absolutely Spiffing Pirms 3 dienām
Not my taxes
Frank Ruiz Jr
Frank Ruiz Jr Pirms 3 dienām
Excellent video but Artimis would have killed the 13 crew if that was their ride. Apollo is not being built today because the current generation can't build an F1 engine. That's kind of sad.
kevin clayton
kevin clayton Pirms 4 dienām
They cart even get the SLS ready for the europa mission.we will now after wait 8 years instead of 3 years.
Spiff
Spiff Pirms 4 dienām
Where do you get all those amazing rocket models behind you?????
Lemon Checks
Lemon Checks Pirms 4 dienām
How can you be so IGNORANT running a channel to "EDUCATE" others about Aerospace?? I mean REALLY?!!.. you don't know if they can REUSE the Lunar Landers - then actually say out loud, "I mean maybe in the future they can REFUEL on the Moon!!??" How stupid can you get?? That's NOT the issue! DUH.. the original LM ascent stages made it off, and get this -- they had FUEL & DIDN'T need to REFUEL on the MOON!!!! It's called *HYPERGOLIC* fuels.. WoW "CREATORS" astound me HOW dumb they truly are.. & this one TRIES to teach SPACE!!!! KEEP your kids OFF his channel!! They don't need dummied down any more than what DAMAGE is already done. More like *EVERYDAY idiot*
Shocker2009
Shocker2009 Pirms 4 dienām
Abuse of taxpayer dollars? Say it ain't so. :P
Poppa San
Poppa San Pirms 5 dienām
Never understood why Apollo 8 -10 didn't drop 1-3 Lunar orbiting ComSat(s) to eliminate the communication blackouts. Or a few more Lunar Orbiter missions specific to this task.
John .S
John .S Pirms 5 dienām
What does that guitar got to do with space ?😄
Anubis space
Anubis space Pirms 6 dienām
great video..nice 👌
Rasmus Sørensen
Rasmus Sørensen Pirms 6 dienām
A late comment but didn't they reuse mainly because it was faster? They suddenly had very optimistic timelines they had to try and make which resulted in them reusing rather than creating.
Jacob May
Jacob May Pirms 7 dienām
One of the reasons for extreme costs is because all of the labor involved is union. I’m not against unionized work but the fact is non union vs union is pennies on the dollar cheaper for the same quality. I’ve worked for the federal government for decades I’ve seen this over and over.
Jacob May
Jacob May Pirms 7 dienām
It’s why I’m such a huge SpaceX fan.
Mike -X
Mike -X Pirms 7 dienām
Commercial providers have caused NASA to revamp how they operate and may just end up as a purchaser and not be a developer or provider. It would be cheaper and NASA could focus more on missions. Those rocket scientists, assemblers, etc... will be absorbed by the commercial sector and a bunch will take a cushy retirement. Bridenstine did what he had to do because commercial providers had already exposed NASA and Boeing’s secret money flow and he had no choice. Starliner was a major blow to both and really exposed that NASA was being held hostage by Boeing and their opened ended contracts but SpaceX freed NASA when they didn’t want saved. Costs are what they are but to think politicians and the higher ups at NASA weren’t being “compensated” by Boeing has never worked in a position where large amounts of money are at stake based on purchasing contracts.
General Sirc
General Sirc Pirms 9 dienām
One issue I see with the lunar version of starship is how tall and heavy it is. They would have to land on almost perfectly flat ground that is firm enough so they don’t sink at all to one side. KSP clearly shows tall landers can be dangerous lol.
General Sirc
General Sirc Pirms 9 dienām
The government can’t make things cheap and fast like a private company can.
General Sirc
General Sirc Pirms 9 dienām
NASA doesn’t have to worry about bankruptcy like a private company does.
Cheston Kordys
Cheston Kordys Pirms 9 dienām
The null camp tinctorially tremble because porter parallely water into a better clarinet. green grey grieving, staking icicle
BoomedYetLush
BoomedYetLush Pirms 9 dienām
Hi Tim and friends. Can you do a short segment on future options to reach Mars, discussing the ‘pork chop’ diagram.
PHOBOS1708
PHOBOS1708 Pirms 10 dienām
excellent work Tim. as nearly always
Pat
Pat Pirms 10 dienām
SLS is a joke and should be scrapped for private company solutions. SpaceX will be decades past the SLS in a very short time frame.
reaktor55
reaktor55 Pirms 10 dienām
Nasa is now much more aware of the risks involved and have therefore not been back to the moon in 50 years.
adam seekell
adam seekell Pirms 10 dienām
bloated program. lots of good ol'boys getting paid. SpaceX is the future. period.
Chester Chanin
Chester Chanin Pirms 10 dienām
I agree with your 'rant'. This is where I depart with traditional thinking, despite following the space program since the Mercury missions! Yes, I've been president of the rocket club as a HS student and advisor of several rocket clubs since, as a teacher. I'm convinced that much of NASAs funding is being siphoned off into black projects. Here's a thought: If indeed, NASA was completely straightforward, in trying to find life on Mars for example, why wouldn't they use drills that could dig 3 or more feet into the Martian surface, for example (where they would likely find water ice and protection from UV and solar radiation)? Why wouldn't they have advanced labs onboard their rovers? This is not a 'rant'. These are obvious questions.
Otpyrc Ralph Pierre
Otpyrc Ralph Pierre Pirms 11 dienām
In my opinion, NASA is trying to resurrect a Dinosaur. If NASA would use Elon Musk for the dominant program, we could be back on the moon in a couple of years, and Mars in less than ten.
Patrick Heyman
Patrick Heyman Pirms 11 dienām
NASA is working really hard? Your kidding, it seems like it’s just the goal of a backburner project. I’m a huge Artemis fan but it doesn’t seem like it’s a big deal for NASA
Bein' Ian
Bein' Ian Pirms 11 dienām
Dude... DUDE! Idk how I didn't think about this before, but we're gonna get HD video of people walking on the moon! Like yeah rover shots of Mars are awesome, but there's something special about seeing humans on an extraterrestrial body. HD BABYYYY leggoooo
brian bou
brian bou Pirms 12 dienām
29:25
brian bou
brian bou Pirms 12 dienām
229:25
Flexiblelip
Flexiblelip Pirms 12 dienām
funny moon vids, you dont see the fakery???
John
John Pirms 12 dienām
A first class video. A lot of content zero waffle. Well done.
S App
S App Pirms 12 dienām
Government agencies suck at everything! EVERYTHING!
brookestephen
brookestephen Pirms 12 dienām
DUDE! Politicians get kickbacks from contracts for spacecraft built by their donors. The Military Industrial Complex knows how to treat their benefactors in government. It's symbiosis.
William Mesmer
William Mesmer Pirms 13 dienām
....but.....but, it's Apollo 2.0...
r f
r f Pirms 13 dienām
Boeing is greedy af. They should just get cut off and cut out
R O C R O C
R O C R O C Pirms 13 dienām
Second time I've watched this video. One thing that comes to mind; Tim Dodd represents all or most of us. He does his "job" better than anyone else could. We are fortunate to have him.
Experiential Russ T
Experiential Russ T Pirms 13 dienām
I think they need to get a brain trust to figure out how to move the ISS to orbit the moon or a lagrange point and build a bigger and better space station for low earth orbit.
Otis Boss
Otis Boss Pirms 13 dienām
Why can’t: Spacex Luna Lander take off and in LEO. One or two of the refuelers bring two rockets connected to fuel tanks attach them to the crew/cargo part of the starship. Then Starship takes it to the moon. Once in orbit of the moon the crew/cargo starship detaches from the Starship and uses the external rockets to land. starship returns to LEO or if it is there the lunar station. there you have a permanent moon base and a truck to bring stuff out from Earth. The external self contained rockets would be like the Dynetics Alpaca! Now you have a TRUCK that can haul stuff back and forth to and from the moon and you are using the spacex moon rockets rather than having them sit on the moon all the time. You have a moon habitat that you don't need an elevator to get in and out of and the strap on rockets can run on hydrogen and oxygen.
BestIntentions
BestIntentions Pirms 13 dienām
Deth
willyolio
willyolio Pirms 14 dienām
Why is Boeing charging so much for so little work? i dunno, but the 737MAX debacle tells me they have a culture that expects minimum effort and minimum oversight.
Two Tone
Two Tone Pirms 14 dienām
If it says Boeing, it ain't going.
econojon
econojon Pirms 14 dienām
How likely do you think SLS will launch in November?
Stuart Brown
Stuart Brown Pirms 14 dienām
This is a simply amazing report I really enjoyed it Well done team Stuart in ireland
ROCROCROC1
ROCROCROC1 Pirms 15 dienām
In that his response comes in February 2021, I have the advantage of seeing this picture with improved eyesight. Basically, SLS continues to run far beyond budget and the estimates made here are billions less than actual projections. My other big problem is that this basically continues with old programs. We should be looking at a permanent moon base from which we can operate a permanent moon program. All this program gets you is visitation rights for a few astronauts. It is a waste of time.
cambobby2011
cambobby2011 Pirms 15 dienām
Eberything is so expensive, why: Because it keeps Boeing's jobs which looks good on the states revenues (low unemployement, big taxes comming into the gvt revenues, etc.), it keeps bringing BIG BIG $$ in some ''administrative parties'' (i.e. bribes), etc.etc.
Sanviews
Sanviews Pirms 15 dienām
I'm still not convinced that we went to moon :) Lol.
Theironminer2721
Theironminer2721 Pirms 14 dienām
What about the light reflector pannels? On apollo 11, 14, and 17 there where light reflector pannels left on the moon So if you got the right kind of laser you could point it at the moon and have it come back. Now some common "evedince" you might belive: 1. No crater below the landing site Okay so on the bottom of the landing legs there where sencors that would have folded up when you land, these where 16 Feet! so therefore the engine wouldnt effect the landing site! 2. The flag staying up This is caused by a metal pole. Pretty simple 3. No stars this is caused by the moon surface reflecting light to the sky (think about it like the sky in a big city) 3. The radiation They only spent 6 hours in the radiation and they also did their maneuver in a way that avoided the most lethal parts of the radiation while also saving some metres per secong of delta V (run the numbers it wouldnt have killed them.) 4. the multible shadows This is again caused by reflection of the moon surface reflecting back to the LM 5. Im not sure if you are a general nasa denier or just a moon landing denier but if you are a nasa denier Keep in mind it is entirely possible to get a telescope and see the ISS from your telescope. Keep in mind that there is a serious affect in psycology where once somebody firmly belives in something (wether that be politics, your stuid conspiracy theories ect) it can be nearly impossible to change your mind. Please keep in mind there is lots of evidence (such as the light reflector pannels) that we went to the moon and that there is no evedince supporting your theory.
Martin Verrisin
Martin Verrisin Pirms 16 dienām
Reusing things is hard. I am a programmer, and often, reusing existing codebase ends up being harder, than just doing it from scratch...
Martin Verrisin
Martin Verrisin Pirms 16 dienām
Some of it is obviously nonsensical, though, and the contractors clearly did not try to do it in a cheaper way... and why would they. ^^
Serf Overlord
Serf Overlord Pirms 16 dienām
did they audit all those? thats a good magic trick
Benjamin S.
Benjamin S. Pirms 17 dienām
Absolutely stated comprehensively.
Marcos C. Santos
Marcos C. Santos Pirms 17 dienām
3:45 When only the last 3 minutes of a movie is "The good parts" sections, we know is really thought stuff
Manbull
Manbull Pirms 17 dienām
I think Starship will be both orbital and get to the moon before SLS will. And it will likely cost 10x less to get there.
Jerome Barry
Jerome Barry Pirms 18 dienām
My thoughts: NASA is the major component of the discretionary portion of the federal budget. That is, a government facing large debt, as we do, and large deficit, as we do, will find in NASA the only way to reduce spending by tens of billions of dollars per year with no political penalty. The greatest danger to NASA is in the first year of a new president, as now, and the first sign of monetary deflation, as now, along with the stirrings of rampant price inflation, as now. Add to this political risk the observation that commercial interests seem to be moving along quite well to creating their own systems of interplanetary travel, and a U.S. government can make a compelling case to end or greatly reduce NASA. For now, Feb 2021, it seems that this government is willing to keep NASA whole for this year. The pressures building against NASA will become apparent after the pandemic ends. A government needing to reconstitute a broken society, as we have become, will have no interest in supporting NASA, even as a symbolic example of American prestige. It was, after all, cisgendered white male Americans (and a few NAZIs) who created the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo story.
Antonio Montanez
Antonio Montanez Pirms 18 dienām
I wish 60 minutes should run your content, our stimulus check and our Education got hoodwinked.
R W
R W Pirms 19 dienām
I do think the Artemis program is a step forward in the right direction. The disappointment however, is that it isn't as great a step as it should be 50 years on. its already 20 years out of date before its launch. Also, it seems they could have build brand new cutting edge rockets for a fraction of tax payers dollars they ended up spent on this historic restoration of a cathedral to Apollo .
Paul Makinson
Paul Makinson Pirms 19 dienām
The big disappointment of Artemis is the lack of reusability. SpaceX has proven that it is not only feasible but the only way forwards for cost effective access to space.
Paul Makinson
Paul Makinson Pirms 19 dienām
A friend working at NASA told me "the reason we can't get to the moon now is that the amount of paperwork to be done would be unsurmountable".
star wars fan
star wars fan Pirms dienas
Lol
colby bohannan
colby bohannan Pirms 19 dienām
Science? Fiction.
Theironminer2721
Theironminer2721 Pirms 14 dienām
What about the light reflector pannels? On apollo 11, 14, and 17 there where light reflector pannels left on the moon So if you got the right kind of laser you could point it at the moon and have it come back. Now some common "evedince" you might belive: 1. No crater below the landing site Okay so on the bottom of the landing legs there where sencors that would have folded up when you land, these where 16 Feet! so therefore the engine wouldnt effect the landing site! 2. The flag staying up This is caused by a metal pole. Pretty simple 3. No stars this is caused by the moon surface reflecting light to the sky (think about it like the sky in a big city) 3. The radiation They only spent 6 hours in the radiation and they also did their maneuver in a way that avoided the most lethal parts of the radiation while also saving some metres per secong of delta V (run the numbers it wouldnt have killed them.) 4. the multible shadows This is again caused by reflection of the moon surface reflecting back to the LM 5. Im not sure if you are a general nasa denier or just a moon landing denier but if you are a nasa denier Keep in mind it is entirely possible to get a telescope and see the ISS from your telescope. Keep in mind that there is a serious affect in psycology where once somebody firmly belives in something (wether that be politics, your stuid conspiracy theories ect) it can be nearly impossible to change your mind. Please keep in mind there is lots of evidence (such as the light reflector pannels) that we went to the moon and that there is no evedince supporting your theory.
cRAzy A
cRAzy A Pirms 19 dienām
Awesome I like that rant,remember stay angry about space,lol .. cA
HAL 9000
HAL 9000 Pirms 19 dienām
one hour, really, that's why I don't watch your videos... although subscribed!
K SC
K SC Pirms 20 dienām
Put vectoring Grid fins at the top of the starship
phero
phero Pirms 20 dienām
1980s: It’s right around the corner, guys! 2020s: It’s right around the corner, guys!
mrlegkick666
mrlegkick666 Pirms 20 dienām
Shall we just leave it to spacex?? Lol
Winkkin
Winkkin Pirms 21 dienas
Excellent comparison between the two programs. Your rant is sooo on point. I'm hoping Super Heavy will finally and financially put a stake in the heart of the ULA and its component entities.
Paul Freedman
Paul Freedman Pirms 21 dienas
Boeing: "Hey Jim, remember our agreement about fixed price?" Jim Bridensine "Of course." "Well we can't make if for that money. If we do, we'll go bankrupt." "Oh my. We can't have that can we. Here, have 2 billion. Will that suffice?" "Yes. We'll be back in about three months with an update." 3 Months later:
Greg Sparham
Greg Sparham Pirms 21 dienas
Sad that half a century has gone by and we havent gone back to the moon I watched all the apollo missions my dad even got a colour tv just for the landings he was miffed when the moon was mainly grey all we have are people saying we didnt really go I can assure you we did latest one shows astronaughts with plain soled boots then pointing to cleated footprints on moon every heard of over boots that were cleated I hope we go to mars in my lifetime it's a big step but we must all pull together NASA and private companies such as elon musk the saturn five was built by private companys getting together to build the greatest rocket to date I've been to Kennedy many times and even walked on the gantry that Armstrong Aldrin Collins walked on to get into apollo 11 I never stop gazing at the moon most nights and dream of humans returning what pictures we would get back with 2days camras roll on the next few years
Sarnith Yugaraja CSA CBE
Sarnith Yugaraja CSA CBE Pirms 21 dienas
Buddy you rock
Sarnith Yugaraja CSA CBE
Sarnith Yugaraja CSA CBE Pirms 21 dienas
Great video
Turtul
Turtul Pirms 21 dienas
I like how the good parts section in this video is the shortest XD
Willi Reisdorf
Willi Reisdorf Pirms 21 dienas
A human mission to the moon is a very important thing. But if you do it like Apollo 11, it's a waste of money. This money could have been used to improve our space skills and not by reinvent the Saturn V rocket. Consider mounting and starting the spaceship in the orbit. If the mission starts and ends there, much of the ship would automatically be reusable. And this new assembly environment could also be reused to go to other destinations or to protect Earth from meteroids ... or more.
Darth Revan
Darth Revan Pirms 21 dienas
Tim Dodd, The Everyday Astronaut turns into The Angry Astronaut when the costs are spoken about! 😆
fakecubed
fakecubed Pirms 17 dienām
I honestly don't care how much it costs. There's massive opportunity costs for *not* going back to space, and they outweigh rockets costing several orders of magnitude greater. The Apollo program was expensive, but we ultimately profited from it financially as well as culturally and scientifically. While getting costs down is a good thing, obviously, I'd rather spend more now to get something ASAP than wait.
Joseph Nichols
Joseph Nichols Pirms 22 dienām
I just still cant wrap my head around the fact that nasa is going to throw most of this rocket out after they use it 🤧 I'm insanely passionate about space travel but my tax dollars are being thrown out by these assholes while musk's out re using boosters and has the perfect economics system going
EimajOzear
EimajOzear Pirms 21 dienas
Think of it this way; does it makes sense to re-use a rocket (SLS) that takes 6-12 months to build, therefore only being used 1-2 times a year? Building in reusable elements will reduce the payload capacity and increase costs. Yes, these costs would decrease over time - as in the case of the Falcon 9, which can be turned around in 27 days - but if the SLS flies, at best, twice a year, is there any point in recovering the parts? Also, if by "the perfect economics" you mean the cheapest rocket, you might want to look at the Proton M - it is the same price as a Falcon 9 and can launch 22t into LEO; surely if the rocket is cheaper when expendable, this shows reusability isn't necessarily the cheapest option? Maybe it will be proven some day to be dramatically cheaper, but that time isn't now, sadly. The final nail in the coffin; if the Falcon rockets are "the perfect economic system", then why isn't it used for every launch? Are the evil "old space" guys keeping the underdog SpaceX down or does the Falcon series of rockets have some disadvantages such as their inaccurate orbital insertion and reduced payload capacity due to reserving fuel for propulsive landing? Everything in engineering is a trade-off, there is no perfect system. Hope this helps.
Frank Velik
Frank Velik Pirms 22 dienām
Gibe the darn project to space x, there will be more money to spare. This is a catastrophy, just anothere system to syphon tax dollars to corrupt back door misterius back hole.that Nasa. has somewhere. Love your channel, dont expect our favorite astronaut to answer, but other can clarify wdf about this go back in time abomination.
J de la Cruz
J de la Cruz Pirms 22 dienām
I'm starting to think NASA won't be the next one to land on the moon. Not even from the US. It will be left to private companies. Being a government agency it will get set back again from one administration to the other. There's a better chance for Space force to do it than NASA.
InfamousDBZ
InfamousDBZ Pirms 22 dienām
The scientists who developed the technology that got us to the moon have retired. This new generation of engineers are learning how to land on the moon using this old hardware instead of developing newer technology, like they learned in school. It's not a simple as just having the parts. Like all things, it's more complicated.
Enes
Enes Pirms 22 dienām
Just use Space X
Austin Gossett
Austin Gossett Pirms 23 dienām
Could you imagine flying to the moon, and making it there, then an engine fails & flip & burn fails then 💥
EimajOzear
EimajOzear Pirms 22 dienām
No reason to do a flip at the Moon since that is an aerodynamic consideration. Lunar Starship would point near retrograde just like any other planetary lander in vacuum.
BigDawg Cleveland
BigDawg Cleveland Pirms 23 dienām
I wonder how many families around the world could have been fed/ for how long, spending 88.1 Billion dollars? How many jobs could have been launched? For what? So a peace of metal could land on the moon? Or even a man landing on the moon provides how many jobs, and feed how many people? THAT is ridiculous to spend one cent on this. This does not help mankind but is only a dream that is NOT a help to mankind. We need to check our hearts. Technology should help people, not take even more money out of their pockets. Use the money for charity and love.
S App
S App Pirms 12 dienām
While I’d concede that government meddling in ANYTHING is inefficient and rife with greed and corruption; in principle, you are creating jobs and businesses that can go on to do more than just the project that involves space flight. Also new technologies, products, and materials are created as a byproduct of the push to space. That coupled with space travel and research as a unifying activity is all beneficial for society long term. Conversely, a single hand out of cash to the public can be short-sighted and far less beneficial to society. If all members of society used the money wisely, you might have a case, but most are fools with “easy money”. Teach a man to fish vs feed a man a fish principle.
linas Zigmantas
linas Zigmantas Pirms 23 dienām
Idk why but I laughed real hard at 16:02
BM Babej
BM Babej Pirms 23 dienām
Starship the Evel Knievel of Rockets!
blaze jennifer
blaze jennifer Pirms 23 dienām
The dead corn statistically confess because mosquito numerically peel except a amused shape. efficient, legal tire
Conor McNamara
Conor McNamara Pirms 24 dienām
So Vaun Braun's 1969 Saturn V has way better performance than the 2021 SLS? NASA..... WOT R U DOIN?!
EimajOzear
EimajOzear Pirms 21 dienas
@Conor McNamara I love the X33 as much as anyone, but it was cancelled for technical reasons and never picked up again as it would be too expensive due to its experimental nature. Besides, the RS-25 has better performance at sea level and in vacuum, so aerospikes still have a long way to go ($$$)
Conor McNamara
Conor McNamara Pirms 22 dienām
@EimajOzear Yes but you would think that technology had advanced a bit in 50 years, maybe for the money you could get more than in 1969. Like the X 33 Areospike
EimajOzear
EimajOzear Pirms 22 dienām
Less performance and less development cost: SLS: 95t to LEO, $17bil+ dev cost Saturn V: 140t to LEO, $50bil dev cost (adjusted for inflation) Pay less, get less I suppose!
Kitty Hawk
Kitty Hawk Pirms 24 dienām
NASA, as much as I love their past accomplishments, is a Perfect example of how a private company like SpaceX can perform and produce anything Much better and for FAR Less money than a government bureaucracy ! Think about this example anytime you hear politicians trying to sell the idea of taking over ANY industry.
Cool Purple
Cool Purple Pirms 25 dienām
Corruption is the reason it cost more than it looks
Scifisteve55 Baruday
Scifisteve55 Baruday Pirms 25 dienām
Dump Boeing! They have broken every promise and have been overpaid for every piece of equipment--none of which has flown! Close Boeing down, charge them with misuse of funds and throw a billion dollars at Space X and let them back up their Starship plan with modified Heavy Lift vehicles and manned capsules! Use an adapter to use Artemis landers and the Lunar space station. It will cost Nasa a fraction of the cost and keep the program going. There is no such thing as "cost Overruns" with Space X!!!!! Boeing is a money pit!!!!
David Gapp
David Gapp Pirms 25 dienām
I think NASA should've focused on construction in space both for lunar and mars mission, using SpaceX to lift component parts to orbit. But perhaps a much bigger question to answer is why major corporations, including Intel, Boeing, Lockheed etc., have so lost their way that anything you give them to build runs massively over-budget, is invariably bug-ridden, then takes years or (in the case of the F-35) decades to sort out. It is so hard to recognize this is the same country that went to the moon in eight years almost from scratch, and which built breathtaking aircraft like the Lockheed A-12, SR-71, Jumbo Jet and XB70 (Valkyrie) in just a handful of years, again using relatively primitive technologies. As for Intel, a company that consistently proves it's a one-trick pony, they have spend many hundreds of millions of dollar trying to develop software (such as for their now-defunct media processors) and have absolutely ZERO to show for their efforts! I have to assume this is some kind of corporation "dry rot" that is afflicting American industry as a whole (and sparing only a relatively few go-get-it-done and/or newer companies like SpaceX).
Florencio Vela
Florencio Vela Pirms 25 dienām
I've ordered my CT tri motor fsd last April & may also order the S Plaid +...& I LOVE SPACE X TOO!! TO THE MOON & M A R S WE GOOO000!!!
Tobias Schobitz
Tobias Schobitz Pirms 25 dienām
I don't like when everyone says "we've already been to the moon, so why go back?" Yeah we went there when everything was kept secret and cameras were garbage. I would love to see it in the next couple years. A live stream to the world from the surface of the moon would break the internet.
Chester Chanin
Chester Chanin Pirms 10 dienām
Just a point of clarification, Tobias: Though moon video cameras may have been primitive, their (Hasselblad) still cameras were of vey high precision, even by today's standards.
John Games and Draws Channel
Rocket that takes you to the moon for 2 hours vs rocket that takes you to the moon for months
EimajOzear
EimajOzear Pirms 22 dienām
Wait... what rocket - across the entire history of crewed exploration of space - only gives you 2 hours at the Moon?
Nākamais
Are Aerospikes Better Than Bell Nozzles?
1:01:31
Егор Крид - Голос
3:05
Skatījumi 1,5 milj.
This Helicopter Is Now On Mars!
16:01
How We Are Going to the Moon - 4K
05:31
Егор Крид - Голос
3:05
Skatījumi 1,5 milj.