Yawn.
Maybe we will get something other than Teflon out this latest trip. I fail to see a ROI from spending 100 billion dollars sending a handful of woke people around the moon, when there are so many other initiatives we could do that would improve our lives on earth.
Ha ha, yes, good point 
. This was also a political issue during the Apollo program. I would rather live in a country with a good health care system, than one that has a good space exploration system.
PS/ Over the years, the more I think about humans in deep and interstellar space, the more idiotic the concept is to me. We are stuck in our magnetic bottle for good I think.
Brent, this is an amazing engineering feat. I just question it's value. The Apollo program revealed cosmic rays punching holes through space suit lids, and through astronaut's heads. They saw flashes of light when this happened. Apollo 11 was an 8 day journey. Imagine 6-9 months of cosmic radiation exposure at the rate these astronauts were exposed to, and completely out of the earth's and moon's magnetospheres ?
I did a basic calculation once to calculate the energies required to divert an typical cosmic ray away from a ship. My calcs were basic and assumed perfect conditions. The energies required were not outrageous, but what if a big bugger from a super nova was heading for the ship ?. What about other stuff like high speed dust ?. It's ok if you're Pioneer 10. That's not going to kill it.
Space travel is brutal, we have not evolved to survive there. Or on the highest mountains. Or sailing the oceans for years at a time. But the bravest amongst us do these activities despite the risks. Their stories teach us what we can achieve. I think there's more value in that for our species than the endless folly of war.
Agreed Brent however I also give credit to the 'id rather spend the money on............' argument.
"The launch team loaded more than 2.6 million litres of fuel into the 32-story Space Launch System rocket on the pad, setting the stage for the Artemis II crew to board"
Hydrogen fuel, but for example.
(H) buses can transport the masses
(H) can generate power.
(H) biproduct is water.
Given our current environment?
Images make no sense to me. >20 years had me firmly convinced the earth was flat!!!
I hear what you're saying Brett. Australia would not have been discovered with my attitude. But I bet the Apollo program had little knowledge of this radiation hazard, and just sent it. Where as the Artemis crew have lifted on minimum sol activity, and are gobbing down radiation sickness pills.
Artemis 2 astronauts — now halfway to the moon — report 'burning smell' from toilet, but everything's fine | Space share.google/Yaa4R4XA1LH1Coy4b
The news reports keep banging on about how this crew is going to see parts of the moon that no human has ever set eyes on. But missions from Apollo 10 to 17 all orbited the moon, so they saw at least some of the dark side.
I don't know how high their orbits were, or if they were lunar equatorial or inclined, so I don't know how truthful the claim about seeing cheese never before sighted by gourmets is.
I'd ask ChatGPT, but a few weeks ago I was trying to get rid of an old windsurfing board on this site and thought I should check what I had written about it for accuracy. ChatGPT came back with an answer citing my Seabreeze post as a primary source, so I've become a bit sceptical about what it might tell me.
Rule one when gathering info, start with the source. Head to the NASA website.
www.nasa.gov/
Another thing about their view of the dark side is that it was full moon only a couple of days ago, so the dark side is facing away from the sun, mostly. It doesn't even have reflected light from the earth to light it up. The only radiation impinging on it is from deep space so it's going to be very dark in all wavelengths. From Artemis point of view it will look like a big patch of starless sky.
Select to expand quoteMr Milk said..
Another thing about their view of the dark side is that it was full moon only a couple of days ago, so the dark side is facing away from the sun, mostly. It doesn't even have reflected light from the earth to light it up. The only radiation impinging on it is from deep space so it's going to be very dark in all wavelengths. From Artemis point of view it will look like a big patch of starless sky.
Without looking into the mission specifics, I reckon the spin around the far side of the moon would be aligned with sunlight so the crew can visually record what they encounter. I believe this far side journey will represent the furthest a human being has been into space.
The dark side is somewhat of a miscommunication. The moon is tidally locked and a better term is the far side of the moon. The far side gets illuminated, we just don't see it from our particular perspective on Earth due to the tidal locking.
So they won't be able to see Macroscience's house then.
I'd assumed it was next door to the Clanger's soup crater.
Reading the blog on ABC news it looks like they do pass around the back of the moon when it is sun-earth-moon orientation, so yep, totally dark.
If the Artemis 2 space craft had been built in Aussie-land it would have had a massive bull-bar, 3 inch lift and a bank of spot lights able to light-up the dark side of the moon.
Reckon the Yanks missed a trick there. Quick trip down to Kings 4x4 store in Balcatta week before Easter long weekend would have had them sorted.
$100b and we saw nothing. But do agree with Brent that the mission is better than war. Maybe we get a photo from space of Iran getting nuked tomorrow.
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..
$100b and we saw nothing. But do agree with Brent that the mission is better than war. Maybe we get a photo from space of Iran getting nuked tomorrow.
Maybe Artemis 2 becomes the Red Dwarf, the last survivors of the human species.
mmmmm, perhaps the resemblance is closer than might be comfortable.....
Holly (left)
Cat (back)
Lister (front)
Rimmer (right)
Space Core directive 003 :
By joining Star Corps, each individual tacitly consents to give up his inalienable rights to life, liberty, and adequate toilet facilities.
Friggin heck, do your own research sheeple. You can't make this **** up. I'm off to the bunker for a while.
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..
So they won't be able to see Macroscience's house then.
I think we did. On ABC they showed shots of the dark side with a blue dot on it they described as earthshine. But we know it was Macro's porch light
Amazing pic from the dark side of the moon - look at those craters - thanks Artemis 11 - whoops that's Gaza
Returning tomorrow. Artemis II is scheduled to splash down off the coast of San Diego at 8:07 AM WA time approx.
Sorry, it was on the suggested viewing of the above youtube. So I clicked on it...
