NASA selects SpaceX Starship system to land on moon - Discussion of Preparations

[Nikxice]

That target date certainly will not be achieved. But I believe it is possible for the HLS Starship to be ready by that time.

Agree that Artemis 3 SLS readiness, with the Orion heat shield problem or other issues, could easily impact the projected Dec. 2025 launch date. But, quoting Elon in Sept. 2020, "We've got to first make the thing work; automatically deliver satellites and do hundreds of missions with satellites before we put people on board".... Although three years later Musk has likely downsized his "hundreds of missions" number for a HLS Starship (No crew onboard for earth launch), there's still going to be numerous missions to get Starship to a Crew rated status.

I'd be a lot happier if Artemis 3 was an unmanned mission to reach the Moon's surface and return.

I like this idea for a dress rehearsal. Aside from SpaceX eventually demonstrating a uncrewed HLS mission, along with NASA they could both benefit from the coordination of lunar orbit rendezvous, hopefully docking. Also, using a crewed Orion vehicle might help to maintain morale within the program.

 

[mongo]

Does anyone think that Artemis 3 will be ready anywhere close to December 2025? There's so much work yet to be done both by NASA and SpaceX. I'd be a lot happier if Artemis 3 was an unmanned mission to reach the Moon's surface and return. It's one thing to move fast and break things, but it's another to move fast and kill people.

SpaceX must do an HLS test (liftoff not required, but I don't see SpaceX skipping that) before Artemis 3, and that doesn't require SLS/ Orion/ Gateway, so why make it Artemis 3?
2 -> crew on Orion
HLS to Moon (and ideally back to space)
3 -> crew on Orion to HLS (ideally via Gateway) to Moon and back

 

[JB47394]

SpaceX must do an HLS test (liftoff not required, but I don't see SpaceX skipping that) before Artemis 3, and that doesn't require SLS/ Orion/ Gateway, so why make it Artemis 3?

SLS, Orion and the Lunar Gateway may well be ready before HLS. So they may be running an Artemis 3 with whatever bits of HLS are ready. Wikipedia has a line suggesting that Artemis 3 may be nothing but a trip to the Lunar Gateway and back. No HLS involvement at all.

To be honest, I was mentally hand-waving HLS testing. To hit December 2025 would require inordinately fast development and limited testing. Given all the stuff that SpaceX has to design, develop, build and test, the current deadline is a joke.

And why is HSL liftoff not required?

 

[Grendal]

SLS, Orion and the Lunar Gateway may well be ready before HLS. So they may be running an Artemis 3 with whatever bits of HLS are ready. Wikipedia has a line suggesting that Artemis 3 may be nothing but a trip to the Lunar Gateway and back. No HLS involvement at all.

To be honest, I was mentally hand-waving HLS testing. To hit December 2025 would require inordinately fast development and limited testing. Given all the stuff that SpaceX has to design, develop, build and test, the current deadline is a joke.

We shall see whether the PPE and HALO module are ready launch on a Falcon Heavy in 2024. I'm willing to bet that launch will be delayed because something is not done or needs more testing. Then you have a new SLS rocket that needs to be ready. The new RS-25E test engine seem to be doing well in testing.

SpaceX testing is going well. I'm sure they learned a lot from the test they did the other day. They didn't destroy the Stage 0 stand. Elon thinks they will have a 50% chance they reach staging on the next full stack launch test. Two years is a lot of testing for SpaceX.

 

[ecarfan]

In the latest Starbase update video from NSF there is an interesting find that may relate to the topic of this thread. The S22 nosecone has been moved out of the MidBay and it now has what looks like a door cut into the side, covered by a piece of fabric. The base of the nosecone is now rounded. A sign taped to the side of the nosecone shows “HLS”. Speculation is that it could be an HLS mockup. Note that the location and shape of the fabric-covered door is close to the location of the door shown in the SpaceX image of what the HLS might look like when on the surface of the Moon.

 

[JB47394]

Does that cable elevator system bother anyone else? I think I'd prefer a track on the exterior of the ship that allows a platform to crawl its way up and down. Put the electric motor on the platform so that if it failed, a hand crank could be used to operate the mechanism. If that fails, use the track as a ladder. I have this horrible image of the lift not working, the two astronauts looking up, then looking at each other.

 

[Electroman]

Does that cable elevator system bother anyone else? I think I'd prefer a track on the exterior of the ship that allows a platform to crawl its way up and down. Put the electric motor on the platform so that if it failed, a hand crank could be used to operate the mechanism. If that fails, use the track as a ladder. I have this horrible image of the lift not working, the two astronauts looking up, then looking at each other.

Agreed another point of failure that could be catastrophic.

 

[mongo]

Does that cable elevator system bother anyone else? I think I'd prefer a track on the exterior of the ship that allows a platform to crawl its way up and down. Put the electric motor on the platform so that if it failed, a hand crank could be used to operate the mechanism. If that fails, use the track as a ladder. I have this horrible image of the lift not working, the two astronauts looking up, then looking at each other.

Third crewmember can acess the mechanism. Or, have a self rescue climber device on the platform.
Window washers have been dealing with this a long time.

 

[JB47394]

Third crewmember can acess the mechanism. Or, have a self rescue climber device on the platform.
Window washers have been dealing with this a long time.

It's my understanding that two stay on orbit and two go to the surface.

I have my doubts about any novel system that has yet to be tested in the intended environment. But I guess we'll see.

 

[mongo]

It's my understanding that two stay on orbit and two go to the surface.

I have my doubts about any novel system that has yet to be tested in the intended environment. But I guess we'll see.

That's what I'm saying though, it's not that novel. Just the environmentis different: vacuum, 1/6th G, and lunar dust.
They can easily make the lift mechanism redundant by putting motors on both ends of the cable and looping it through a pully. Or add a gearbox and crank to the platform (up direction only). Having the motors in the ship reduces dust issues.

Plus, NASA has already operated machinery on the Moon for a lot more cycles/ rotations than HLS will experience.

 

[Electroman]

Many of you might know the brilliant YouTuber - Destin Sandlin - who runs his channel under the name, "Smarter Everyday". Every physics and engineering student should watch all of his videos. He is lot more accomplished than just another YouTuber.

He was invited to give a talk to an audience of scientists, engineers and bureaucrats at NASA in Alabama. And he said the things that were needed to be said but many inside NASA are afraid to say it aloud. It is about the Artemis program. About the overall architecture and design. The timeline. He didn't mention SpaceX, but one of his main concerns centers around SpaceX design.

Watch it. You will not regret it. Did I say he is brilliant?

 

[Cosmacelf]

Many of you might know the brilliant YouTuber - Destin Sandlin - who runs his channel under the name, "Smarter Everyday". Every physics and engineering student should watch all of his videos. He is lot more accomplished than just another YouTuber.

He was invited to give a talk to an audience of scientists, engineers and bureaucrats at NASA in Alabama. And he said the things that were needed to be said but many inside NASA are afraid to say it aloud. It is about the Artemis program. About the overall architecture and design. The timeline. He didn't mention SpaceX, but one of his main concerns centers around SpaceX design.

Watch it. You will not regret it. Did I say he is brilliant?

Wellll…. There’s a reason why NASA doesn’t know the details of SpaceX’s system. Unlike Saturn 5, NASA isn‘t developing it. It’s a fundamentally different way of contracting.

Also, SpaceX system does look a lot more complicated, but he forgets that it is all based on reusable technology. Thats why it is so different. 16 rockets isn’t a big deal when you have a fleet and they are reused constantly. There was only one Apollo 11 rocket because it all got thrown away after one use.

 

[spacerfc]

Watch it. You will not regret it. Did I say he is brilliant?

Oh no, not this again. This video was circulating on spitter and reddit a week ago, there has been a lot of rebuttal's about his opinion on Starship, I think the twitter thread below is the most direct and on point rebuttal:

https://x.com/Anton81191831/status/1731791638484210021

Both Everyday Astronaut and John Kraus also replied but theirs is rather long and too polite.

The following video didn't entirely focus on his point on Starship but more about his talk in general:

TLDR: He doesn't know what he's talking about...

 

[JB47394]

TLDR: He doesn't know what he's talking about...

No, but he's got a great heart and he was trying to help, which is a damn sight better than the vast majority of people out there. So I would just take Destin aside, point out how he misunderstands the situation, underscore what he could have done as prep work to avoid making the same mistake again, and encourage him to keep at it. If Tim Dodd and John Kraus were gentle with him, then kudos to them. Destin doesn't deserve derision.

 

[Cosmacelf]

No, but he's got a great heart and he was trying to help, which is a damn sight better than the vast majority of people out there. So I would just take Destin aside, point out how he misunderstands the situation, underscore what he could have done as prep work to avoid making the same mistake again, and encourage him to keep at it. If Tim Dodd and John Kraus were gentle with him, then kudos to them. Destin doesn't deserve derision.

He wouldn’t have deserved derision if he didn’t give the presentation the way he did. It was awful. He put himself up on a pedestal and pretended he knew what he was talking about. “I’m an engineer!” Gawd. You’re a good performance artist. Stop pretending you’re something you’re not.

 

[Electroman]

I think he is spot on, on several things he said it out loud, For a mission that has a stated timeline of two years (2025) to land on the moon, we should already have these answers:

- The rocket that is supposed to take the men is a new radical design still under development

- The engines are new too, and is that ready? maybe.

- The architecture depends on docking and transferring in-space liquid cryo fuels, which has never been done before. How much of that fuel will boil off before it is ready to depart LEO? How much will it boil off when it is sitting on Moon?. NASA doesn't know

- How many re-fueling missions needed before the rocket in LEO is ready for its moon journey? NASA doesn't know.

- What is the mechanism by which the two starships are going to dock in LEO - NASA doesn't know

This is just the SpaceX part of the concerns that I captured. He also mentions the highly elliptical orbit around the moon for the Gateway module. Not using Hydrazine for fuel for the moon ascent phase.

These are not little things, but major stuff that any one of them will delay the project by several years. And could one of them end up being a complete show stopper? Probability is not insignificant.

If we declare this mission as a cool & advanced futuristic technology demonstration mission and make that as the primary objective, then we are okay.

But I agree he was a little too pompous and had a 'I am smarter than you guys' attitude. I am guessing several NASA folks would have privately agreed with his assessment and are afraid to say it loud, and would have egged on him to go and make that speech and stir the pot.

 

[spacerfc]

For a mission that has a stated timeline of two years (2025)

This is his first mistake: It's never going to be 2025, and everybody in the business knows it. The 2024 target (delayed to 2025 due to protests) is basically NASA version of Elon Time, it assumes everything works perfectly which it never does. NASA will move the timeline once delays set in, that's how it works, SLS/JWST/Commercial Crew all went through this, they'll launch when they're ready.

 

[adiggs]

https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/exploration/affordable-exploration-architecture-2009.pdf

This is the paper linked off the x post. Anybody that hasn't yet read it needs to read this. Stuff like boil off of propellant is actually an understood problem and discussed extensively in this paper from 2009.

Quite fascinating reading I felt - ULA really nailed it on how SpaceX is going to get people back to the moon (my prediction), and using a more high volume / sustainable process.

EDIT: The tl;dr version being - yes there is boil off. The amount is small, without trying to implement exotic solutions to make it smaller, and happens to be just about the right amount that would need to be used for station keeping. It's a rounding error that washes out as long as there is a steady flow of propellant through the logistics pipeline, and is actually needed for station keeping anyway. Pretty cool

 

[Cosmacelf]

This is his first mistake: It's never going to be 2025, and everybody in the business knows it. The 2024 target (delayed to 2025 due to protests) is basically NASA version of Elon Time, it assumes everything works perfectly which it never does. NASA will move the timeline once delays set in, that's how it works, SLS/JWST/Commercial Crew all went through this, they'll launch when they're ready.

Exactly right. Nothing else, including SLS, is going to be ready for 2025. Indeed, the long pole might be the lunar space suits. I mean, for this guy to not know that is pretty bad.

 

[Nikxice]

PHD student seemed quite sure of himself in front of that sparse, yet friendly audience. Wasn't very cool for him to emphasize communication, while coming across as patronizing. Specifically, hearing him lecture and shame anyone in attendence who hadn't read "What Made Apollo a Success"....Also, he'd apparently just picked up the Artemis playbook. Stated that he just learned about plans for orbital refueling?...He did talk about unknowns, but much of it is Captain Obvious stuff that's surely getting attention.....Neglecting the topic of reusability was a glaring ommision.