Eric Berger has published his thoughts on the matter.

  • burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    Except SLS isn’t working. The insane cost, delays, low flight rate, and ballooning ground infrastructure costs are making it untenable. Distributed lift via commercial launchers is conceptually more complicated, but practically a lot cheaper, more available, more flexible, and removes some size and weight constraints.

    Also, for Artemis 4+, I think a Starship with an adapter to Orion would be a cleaner single launch than a New Glenn / Centaur distributed lift.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Artemis is really nothing like Apollo though.

      They’re making stupid changes just for the sake of changes. Like launching a separate lander, or the stupid orbit around the moon, or massive over engineering for other missions that everyone already knew wouldn’t happen on this craft. What are the astronauts going to do when they get to the moon that hasn’t been done already and/or can’t be done better by robots?

      Artemis is a Multi-billion dick waving mission that only serves to get money into the pockets of huge companies.

      • burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        I’m divided on Gateway, because I know it’s unnecessary, but space stations are cool. I lean toward cancelling it.

        I’m totally on board with distributed lift for the landers. That architecture lets them land more mass, like bigger pressurized landers for longer stays and bigger crews, the surface habitat, and the pressurized rover.

        Whether to explore space or not is a different question. I’m a hopeless sci-fi nerd, so I’m already inspired and working in the industry. I think that’s a much better way to spend money than the Pentagon. I would much rather have space exploration and planetary science instead of more ICBMs.