Artemis Program in a nutshell:

Artemis I will also be launching several cubesats on the way and around the moon
https://spacecenter.org/artemis-i-about-the-payload/

Malachi Constant said:

---

Artemis Program in a nutshell:

---

That graphic just seems ridiculous... All that craft for 2-6 people, basically the same capacity we had for 50 years...

Then the comparison of the orion with Starship lander... Just seems crazy.

Its been a hell of a lot of money and no real apparent breakthroughs.

They haven't manufactured new engines as of yet. Artemis 2 will fly on SSMEs, and the only "new" engines that have been produced got built from parts sitting around.

Unless something has changed, RJ/AD is still asking for billions more dollars in development money before the can actually produce any NEW engines, which means Artemis IV would be it...

You're wrong on several levels with that. I want it to fail because it's a horrendous waste of money, dangerous, and will hold us back as badly as shuttle did.

It only exists because Senator Shelby was an arrogant ***** that couldn't accept EOR refueling was a better way forward, and it made work/jobs. That's it...there's no real sound scientific reasoning behind the choices made, from engines not built to the purpose to the flawed and dangerous booster design being reused.

I dont,, and most don't, care what rocket the mission components go on.....SpaceX happens to be the only real competition in the game atm who aren't raping the American taxpayer for cost/r&d

Ag_of_08 said:

---

You're wrong on several levels with that. I want it to fail because it's a horrendous waste of money, dangerous, and will hold us back as badly as shuttle did.

---

It's different this time. I don't think it will hold SpaceX back.

It already has to a degree.

EOR , after Shelby threatened to pull MSF funding if anyone said tanker to him again, was abandoned, which meant all but the LEO ferry to ISS was abandoned, and money was never allocated to any company for r&d.

They waited until far to late to open the bid and award the HLS contract, assuming that it would be something launched with SLS. If I remember right, there was a resignation over NASA admin trying to stack it in favor of the national team once the requirement was released.

I truly believe spacex launch approval has been delayed to give SLS a launch window as well, though it's likely they wouldn't have launched yet.

Just the fact we have dumped this many billions of dollars into a dead end, and yes blk1 is a dead end period, and are going to have to keep hemorrhaging money for a 1 launch a year shot is insane. Just the launch tower cost something like 2 billion dollars, and will have to be replaced after the third launch, IF it makes it that far without damage.

I want to see the US manned space flight program successfully launch lunar and Martian missions. I don't care if we have to give Musk, Bezos, ULA, or whomever, I just want it done safely, and with the best use of the money.

We SHOULD have walked away from SLS 4 years ago. FH can launch the orion stack and ICPS. A centaur with a docking mechanism can launch it TLI. The docking adapter on the centaur upperstage is not that complex, nor is the aerodynamics work on falcon heavy, people with far more engineering ability have done the math on that. It doesnt require new technology, or ifr, to pull off a EOR mission equal to the SLS. The two launches combined cost just over a quarter of ONE SLS...but was never even looked at.

Caliber said:

---

Malachi Constant said:

---

Artemis Program in a nutshell:

---

That graphic just seems ridiculous... All that craft for 2-6 people, basically the same capacity we had for 50 years...

Then the comparison of the orion with Starship lander... Just seems crazy.

Its been a hell of a lot of money and no real apparent breakthroughs.

---

So you missed the part about the 6 week mission? As for the amount of hardware it takes to get comparatively small craft to the moon and back, if you know a way around the rocket equation, please enlighten us.

And for the record, SpaceX also has to obey the rocket equation. They will just launch several times to bring up enough fuel to get the Starship to the moon.

SpaceX will have Boca Chica and the Cape. The only thing holding them back right now is the time it takes to work through the technical hurdles. If they're part of NASA's moon program, great. If NASA's moon program fails, they will go to the moon anyways, and on to Mars.

Holding out for the US government to act intelligently is futile. You should know that by now. It is what it is, no matter what gripes we have. When pictures start coming in from lunar orbit, especially with Americans, and ESPECIALLY from the lunar South pole, I plan on savoring those moments no matter how they happen.

They obey the rocket equation, but introduce a new variable in one key factor: cost.

And I will enjoy the photos of the moon, and the manned flights there, but I don't believe they'll come from Artemis, not in this incarnation at any rate.

It looks like we'll see Monday. I don't look for the next flight to be until late 2023 or early 2024, so a lot will change in that time span.

I'll be at SpaceX tomorrow for the huge announcement! I work at the Mission ,TX site and they gathered about 50 T-Mobile employees to join in for the festivities. Super pumped. I have some theories in what the announcement is but we have been told nothing official yet.

Free trip to Mars for T-Mobile customers??

double aught said:

---

Free trip to Mars for T-Mobile customers??

---

still wouldnt get me to sign with t-mobile

I figured this was something people knew and I just missed somehow.

Hope it's something insane like all t-mobile phones can also use satellites if service is bad

Sat phones or combining T-Mobile's home internet with Starlink somehow.

It's likely a partnership between starlink and T-Mobile that will allow T-Mobile rural substations to utilize a starlink connection to provide 5G service to a rural area.

Likely to be powered by solar and Tesla power pack batteries.

So it's basically a substation that can be anywhere on earth, powered by solar, energy storage by battery, that has a starlink connection on top to provide broadband.

T-Mobile's stock symbol is TMUS btw.

I feel like that post had something for everyone.

Starlink, rural (substations), solar power, Tesla power pack batteries, 5G service, and the T-Mobile stock symbol.

Interesting. I was about to send back my Tmobile 5g home internet thing I've had for a few months and just stick with ATT.

I detest the latter company and they wound up having to replace my unit 4 times this year so I was giving the new mm wave tech a try, but it isn't really as fast/has some latency issues at times. I'll hold off for sure and see if somehow this might get better, but I doubt it from my locale just something like 8 miles from DFW airport.

Still, they do a decent job with it, and if it worked as it does at my house in a rural location without access to fiber I'd absolutely stick with it.

A wired fiber line is probably always going to be faster, and more stable. I think starlink will be a significant step up from cell based internet, but the wired lines are going to be better when accessible.

What is hoping is starlink suppresses prices a bit

Starlink is incredible. Just as fast as my former office located in Addison

Now that's a backdrop. Cool.

Starlink V2, launching next year, will transmit direct to mobile phones, eliminating dead zones worldwide

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 26, 2022

Great experience. Now the fun begins

Decay said:

---

I figured this was something people knew and I just missed somehow.

Hope it's something insane like all t-mobile phones can also use satellites if service is bad

---

Also... called it...

The Starship tower has now passed the Falcon 9 tower at the Cape

Quote:

---

T-Mobile says it's getting rid of mobile dead zones, thanks to a new partnership with SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet, at an event hosted by T-Mobile CEO Mike Sievert and Elon Musk. With their "Coverage Above and Beyond" setup, mobile phones could connect to satellites and use a slice of a connection providing around 2 to 4 Megabits per second connection (total) across a given coverage area.

That connection should be enough to let you text, send MMS messages, and even use "select messaging apps" whenever you have a clear view of the sky, even if there's no traditional service available. According to a press release from T-Mobile, the "satellite-to-cellular service" will be available "everywhere in the continental US, Hawaii, parts of Alaska, Puerto Rico and territorial waters." The service is scheduled to launch in beta by the end of next year in "select areas," and Sievert says he hopes it will someday include data.

According to Musk, second-generation Starlink satellites launching next year will be able to broadcast service using part of T-Mobile's mid-band PCS spectrum, which was bolstered when it was allowed to buy Sprint a few years ago. Musk said the new satellites have "big, big antennas" that are 5 to 6 meters across to enable the new connections and that the plan is to launch the equipment using its upcoming Starship rocket.

---

link

Pretty cool

I can't believe a little iphone, with an omnidirectional antenna, can even reach a starlink satellite with an open sky, frankly. I think it's somewhere in the neighborhood of .6 to 3 watts, somewhere around 800 or 2,000 MHz? Even dedicated handheld radios I think can only go around 20-30 miles, so I am still dubious as to how they can even get that link to work even sporadically. I'll believe it when I see a bunch of videos validating it, I guess is all I am saying.

I think they are talking about using the 5G spectrum, meaning mm wave so maybe those can just keep going up, much more efficiently, but I thought…long wavelength does better at long distances.

Quote:

---

When asked how his company had to tweak Starlink satellites for the service to work, Musk said SpaceX had to design a very big, extremely advanced antenna that has the ability to pick up very quiet signals from your cellphone. The company is still currently working on it in the lab, but Musk said SpaceX is confident that it's going to work in the field.

The company chiefs have issued an open invitation to carriers around the world to make the service available everywhere. In the US, international carriers can team up with T-Mobile so that visitors to the country will also be able to connect to Starlink satellites with their mobile devices.

---

Ok, this will also perhaps get some NSA/intelligence folks up a bit in arms, imho. If you have foreign nationals communicating directly to satellites more, then the data is perhaps beamed (or will be) around via laser interlinks back to the Moscow ground station (to pick a random enemy of the FBI-Dem party theoretical) it would subvert surveillance.

Now, for Tesla, and car mfg's in general, I could see this as working much better/being a premium feature they can sell. They should be able to crank up the transmit power from a rooftop antenna.

Yes

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 26, 2022

Conceptually, for instance, I could see an application for this where an EV would alert when/where to go to top up when low on charge no matter what else is going on with the network if it has a starlink connection, or for Tesla to drive software updates etc. In a future with autonomous driving, this could even be done by the vehicle itself when convenient etc ('you seem to have time to charge up this afternoon, I will go to the nearby supercharger and fill up then return before you are likely to want to head out for dinner/the weekend trip on your calendar. Ok?'). Add in the complexity of future taxes for EV's varying if the driver is in the vehicle or not, rush hour, charging when the utility wants you to, etc.

There's a different kind of Raptor at Starbase today



At about 0:32 it starts with quite a show with 2 F-22 Raptors showing off their maneuverability
Pretty sweet

I am not fighter jet pilot, but these new vectored jet fighters are interesting to watch.

In a traditional dogfight, if you get into a gun fight, it is essentially who can turn the fastest. (I doubt there are very many gun fights in the future.) And you bleed a lot of energy in a turn fight. But these guys are a totally different animal. Knowing just a little about energy and dogfighting, these guys blow off a lot or all of their energy to do some of these maneuvers. (Not that I know if they would be doing these types of maneuvers in a real dogfight, also) They would be in a bad situation if they bled off all that energy and the other fighter could get around on them.

Hit the brakes and he'll fly right by!

Mav! Do some of that pilot *****

will25u said:

---

I am not fighter jet pilot, but these new vectored jet fighters are interesting to watch.

In a traditional dogfight, if you get into a gun fight, it is essentially who can turn the fastest. (I doubt there are very many gun fights in the future.) And you bleed a lot of energy in a turn fight. But these guys are a totally different animal. Knowing just a little about energy and dogfighting, these guys blow off a lot or all of their energy to do some of these maneuvers. (Not that I know if they would be doing these types of maneuvers in a real dogfight, also) They would be in a bad situation if they bled off all that energy and the other fighter could get around on them.

---

The F-22 is also the first, and last one we will have that has that.

It's added complexity/cost that is no longer needed, and that's why it's not in the F-35, or any of our UCAV's now. While premature for the Korean/Vietnam wars, with stealth and directed energy weapons/integrated networks etc., thrust vectoring for dogfighting in a manned aircraft is...a 20th century concept.

The USAF actually already had a trial balloon to retire the Raptor fleet, but that is politically untenable for now.

nortex97 said:

---

The F-22 is also the first, and last one we will have that has that.

It's added complexity/cost that is no longer needed, and that's why it's not in the F-35, or any of our UCAV's now. While premature for the Korean/Vietnam wars, with stealth and directed energy weapons/integrated networks etc., thrust vectoring for dogfighting in a manned aircraft is...a 20th century concept.

---

Pretty sure that's the intro to as well as the topic of the first meeting in Top Gun.