> the agency said it was confident that a change to the re-entry trajectory would be more than adequate to offset any spalling issues. Somewhat confusingly, they also announced their intention to switch to a new heat shield design, starting with Artemis III.
It's fine to be concerned, but this kind of take is why public agencies are damned no matter what they do. In the private sector, operating with the suboptimal resources you have while working on a better iteration is standard practice, even in industrial settings. But when you're a public organization, if anyone can find anything that is less than 100% optimal, the same people who complain about how slow the public sector is will complain that you're cutting corners, or that you're inept.
> the agency said it was confident that a change to the re-entry trajectory would be more than adequate to offset any spalling issues. Somewhat confusingly, they also announced their intention to switch to a new heat shield design, starting with Artemis III.
This is not confusing in the least. Engineers don't talk about safety in binary terms. It's not "safe" vs. "not safe". Instead, it's all about the probability of a bad outcome. At NASA, they compute the probability of Loss of Crew (LoC) and the probability of Loss of Mission (LoM).
For Artemis II, a change to the re-entry trajectory brings the LoC/LoM back to an acceptable level. For Artemis III, which a new shield design, they can get to the same LoC/LoM with a different trajectory (which gives them other benefits).
Stop thinking in terms binary terms. Everything is a probability.
Sometimes we need to disconnect from the internet and realize we can't solve all the world's problems. The best thing you can do is solve things in the communities you are in.
The entire world's problems is too much for one human.
There’s not a lot of sweet left in the world of bitter. But there are far more people that want peace than war, and the powerful are not as protected and immune from concequences as they think.
Well. You are getting down voted but here I am in later stages in life watching this Moon launch, and unlike other times in past, I didn’t feel any inspiration.
Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff.
I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).
I understand your side to some extent. It helped watching my 11yo watch the launch - for him it's more meaningful, more imminent than it can be for a jaded person like myself.
I don't think it's mutually exclusive with food aid, though. If anything, it's taking money that probably would have gone into bombs and aeroplanes instead if we didn't have a space program. Honestly, it feels like we could redirect the entire military-industrial complex into space travel... retain the same pork spending but use it for rockets that aren't designed to land on our neighbours. Nice compromise.
Yeah totally. Ideally, I’d like it if we feed the kids that need the food, educate them, and have them build the rocket and have them take the glory of that achievement (the glory being we as a society uplifted ourselves, literally … to the moon).
Right now it feels like the privileged are being sent to the moon. Many babies and young adults are on battlefields right now.
But thank you for reminding me how important it is for the child to see something magical.
I find it crazy how whenever space stuff or even fundamental science stuff in general gets talked about, the its a waste of money crowd comes out. Everyone is totally fine with the AI bullshit of the day or the people spending millions on a start ups whose pitch is so stupid it sounds like something that would have been rejected from silicon valley the tv show, but suddenly if its for science its a bridge to far.
You want to save the world? by all means have at it. But let the science peeps do science things. Its not like the world would be any more saved if they weren't doing these things.
The same crowd comes out because in every human generation, a young boy will have seen the advances of human technology and ambition, and will have also seen the sheer scale of our curious contraptions by the time they are an old man. That’s why you get the same “revelation” generation after generation.
More like a shakedown, not a joyride. Artemis 2&3 are similar to Apollo 8-10. Practice, cautious testing. Yeah we've been there done that, but it's been 50 years and we've got a new ship we've got to run through its paces.
Space is still hard.
Aside from just "neat" we always have more to learn. The last Apollo mission was the only one to carry an actual scientist, prof. Harrison Schmitt. Artemis stands to do a lot more actual science overall. We still don't know how the moon actually got there.
As to what if anything useful we actually get from this, the same stuff we did the first time really. Though arguably much less economic gain.
> Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food
NASA has a tiny budget - 0.35% of the US Federal budget. Kids aren't going hungry because of Artemis II. There are much better candidates to be upset about in that regard.
We're literally only doing it to beat the Chinese back. As a Gundam fan, I can't help but feel (likely misplaced and misguided) enthusiasm for the development of space, but objectively, this is a stunt, through-and-through. Trump-y on the Moon.
Yeah the whole production of the launch broadcast was pretty lousy compared to what SpaceX does. Their mission tracker website isn't working either. Considering that this broadcast and the other public affairs stuff is essentially the deliverable of the mission, it's not too great.
But it isn't speeding by, it's heading away following a closely predetermined trajectory. A better analogy would be filming a high-altitude aircraft flying away from you, using a gear-driven tripod mount.
It is hard, but Everyday Astronaut had a manually-operated camera with a 2,000mm lens that captured everything from engine start all the way through a reasonably-clear view of SRB separation.
Both myself and my 12yo were disappointed by the NASA feed, it was more like the matter-of-fact coverage of 'routine' Shuttle launches of the 1980s than something worthy of this historic mission.
Always watch Everyday Astronaut's live feeds for rocket launches. It's the primary gig for some of those involved, so they care a lot about making it something that is both informative and superb.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. The camera work was atrocious.
It's not just frilly video, it's how the world sees it, emotionally connects to it, and grows up loving it, and wanting to support more.
We had black screens as it left the pad, they didn't know what camera to switch to and kept changing feeds every 2-3 seconds, they switched to a grainy feed of the crowd just looking up while booster separation happened, so we missed that, and hastily switched back after they separated.
All the prep and they couldn't come up with a media plan? Maybe it was technical problems and their camera indexing was off or something.
They had the longest reaction shot of some people filming it with their phones (maybe they got a good shot) and when they switched back to after the booster separation I said at the time, “that would have been cool to see.”
Yeah it was horrible. Why are we here, to watch a video feed of other people watching it live through their phones?
We have 30 seconds maybe while this thing is in the local atmosphere, Jesus Christ just keep the camera on it and let us watch it launch.
I know this sounds like whining, and part of me is annoyed that I'm so annoyed at this. But it was just such an emotional moment, and it felt like the media team had no plan or any idea what to do.
I suspect that they might have switched away from the booster separation on purpose. That's probably a risky moment of the launch, and they may have wanted to avoid televising a disaster like in the Challenger launch.
Aside from that, agreed that the camera work was awful.
You should always seek out the best. From watching lots of Everyday Astronaut streams over the years, I knew the stream would be the best live experience because they care about and focus on the production. NASA cares and focuses on the rocket, astronauts, mission. I'm fine with that.
Well, yes, we certainly can as is shown by the coverage of SpaceX launches. I guess NASA is just not as focused on publicity as commercial launch operators are. They should have read The Right Stuff and learned the mantra No bucks, no Buck Rogers. Next time, better I hope.
https://idlewords.com/2026/03/artemis_ii_is_not_safe_to_fly....
https://theconversation.com/heat-shield-safety-concerns-rais...
It's fine to be concerned, but this kind of take is why public agencies are damned no matter what they do. In the private sector, operating with the suboptimal resources you have while working on a better iteration is standard practice, even in industrial settings. But when you're a public organization, if anyone can find anything that is less than 100% optimal, the same people who complain about how slow the public sector is will complain that you're cutting corners, or that you're inept.
2. NASA employees don’t have criminal immunity.
This is not confusing in the least. Engineers don't talk about safety in binary terms. It's not "safe" vs. "not safe". Instead, it's all about the probability of a bad outcome. At NASA, they compute the probability of Loss of Crew (LoC) and the probability of Loss of Mission (LoM).
For Artemis II, a change to the re-entry trajectory brings the LoC/LoM back to an acceptable level. For Artemis III, which a new shield design, they can get to the same LoC/LoM with a different trajectory (which gives them other benefits).
Stop thinking in terms binary terms. Everything is a probability.
The entire world's problems is too much for one human.
Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff.
I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).
I don't think it's mutually exclusive with food aid, though. If anything, it's taking money that probably would have gone into bombs and aeroplanes instead if we didn't have a space program. Honestly, it feels like we could redirect the entire military-industrial complex into space travel... retain the same pork spending but use it for rockets that aren't designed to land on our neighbours. Nice compromise.
Right now it feels like the privileged are being sent to the moon. Many babies and young adults are on battlefields right now.
But thank you for reminding me how important it is for the child to see something magical.
The truth is definitely quite deep.
You want to save the world? by all means have at it. But let the science peeps do science things. Its not like the world would be any more saved if they weren't doing these things.
Some people truly grow up.
I’m sure folks said the same before the Green Revolution. “Plants have always grown one way!”
Don't get me wrong. I'm excited about it but are we looking to get anything of use out of it beyond, "Neat"?
Space is still hard.
Aside from just "neat" we always have more to learn. The last Apollo mission was the only one to carry an actual scientist, prof. Harrison Schmitt. Artemis stands to do a lot more actual science overall. We still don't know how the moon actually got there.
As to what if anything useful we actually get from this, the same stuff we did the first time really. Though arguably much less economic gain.
NASA has a tiny budget - 0.35% of the US Federal budget. Kids aren't going hungry because of Artemis II. There are much better candidates to be upset about in that regard.
In 4k, at 720fps.
(I didn't bother with watching the NASA feed.)
Both myself and my 12yo were disappointed by the NASA feed, it was more like the matter-of-fact coverage of 'routine' Shuttle launches of the 1980s than something worthy of this historic mission.
Always watch Everyday Astronaut's live feeds for rocket launches. It's the primary gig for some of those involved, so they care a lot about making it something that is both informative and superb.
https://www.spacevoyaging.com/news/2024/02/08/now-we-know-ho...
It's not just frilly video, it's how the world sees it, emotionally connects to it, and grows up loving it, and wanting to support more.
We had black screens as it left the pad, they didn't know what camera to switch to and kept changing feeds every 2-3 seconds, they switched to a grainy feed of the crowd just looking up while booster separation happened, so we missed that, and hastily switched back after they separated.
All the prep and they couldn't come up with a media plan? Maybe it was technical problems and their camera indexing was off or something.
We have 30 seconds maybe while this thing is in the local atmosphere, Jesus Christ just keep the camera on it and let us watch it launch.
I know this sounds like whining, and part of me is annoyed that I'm so annoyed at this. But it was just such an emotional moment, and it felt like the media team had no plan or any idea what to do.
Aside from that, agreed that the camera work was awful.