You forgot to mention that, in Greek mythology, Artemis is the twin sister of Apollo --- a nod to the original manned missions to the Moon.
@cleverusername93696 ай бұрын
Beat me to it
@petercozzaglio60706 ай бұрын
I didn’t know that. Thanks for sharing.
@1ndragunawan6 ай бұрын
In the same mythology, Artemis killed Orion. NASA's lunar capsule name is Orion.
@Torgo-and-the-Lucifer-Cat6 ай бұрын
Right! And Gemini program had 2 astronauts in each mission, i.e. twins.
@erickchandran6 ай бұрын
@@1ndragunawan The Orion may be killed but the Dragon will rise
@distinguishedcolleague23456 ай бұрын
I love that every few months I discover a new channel of Simon's
@SigmaFridge6 ай бұрын
fax
@brianarbenz13296 ай бұрын
I find one every few minutes.
@Dingusdoofus6 ай бұрын
@@viktorm3840don’t forget about the beard too
@christopher41016 ай бұрын
That isn't a good thing
@zdo000006 ай бұрын
Whenever he forgets his password he just starts a new channel.
@poppyrider55416 ай бұрын
That was a very optimistic look at Artemis. I hope you're right.
@ittositto64946 ай бұрын
He’s not, unfortunately the whole ‘science community’ are forgetting NASA don’t actually have any of the lander capabilities worked out. With Apollo they knew what they had to launch to keep people alive, there and back again. And build a rocket around that… Artemis hasn’t even got an engineering drawing better than a napkin. All the hype has been on the rockets which don’t have the capabilities and are later expecting to calculate their needs based on how many multi billion dollar rockets they can send to make it happen. Adding more and more ‘abilities and tools’ to fuel the hype. But they have no ability to do any of it. 🍿🚀💥 Im here for the show, but it will end in flames and tears.
@danwhiffen92356 ай бұрын
Optimistic? Or delusional. This will all get canned, but not after the money is spent
@1237barca6 ай бұрын
Nobody leaves low earth orbit. The Nixon administration lied. Simple.
@Bow-to-the-absurd6 ай бұрын
Artemis is the opposite of 'simplify and add lightness'
@JMartJr6 ай бұрын
@@Bow-to-the-absurd This. They are grossly understating the number of fueling launches that have to go off without a hitch for this the work, but even with the reduced number they are admitting, you are looking at multiple huge rockets launching to do what Apollo did with one launch. Instead of a Lunar Orbit Rendezvous mission, they are designing mission architecture for multiple Earth Orbit Rendezvous flights leading into multiple Lunar Orbit Rendezvous. It's a Rube Goldberg mission architecture.
@hacker4chn8416 ай бұрын
This is the best non-business Blaze channel in the Whistleverse
@Hillbilly0016 ай бұрын
I think Decoding the Unknown is better than Astro graphics, but I'm a resident of the Whistlerverse. Allegedly. I even have some of his failed channels on my sub page. I might need psychological help. Cheers
@BURDYMAN7776 ай бұрын
Science Unbound was good too imo. I still enjoy mega and side projects as well too. I wish they'd just chain him in the basement with Danny and Dave and make him record videos forEVER.
@wtfpwnz0red6 ай бұрын
Love watching him blaze those businesses
@bigmike91286 ай бұрын
I like warographics
@string_fellow_hawk6 ай бұрын
I like the Whistleverse. ❤
@BillyOrBobbyOrSomething5 ай бұрын
I love all the “engineers” in the comments who apparently know better than the thousands of actual aerospace engineers working on this project. Legends.
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
So true 😂😂
@JohnnyWednesdayАй бұрын
After a few decades that aspect of humanity really starts to make you feel depressed
@DM-kl4em11 күн бұрын
I agree. There is no ONE engineer who is capable of pulling off this mission. There are entire teams of engineers who are responsible for individual components, whether it's a nozzle, a window, or a space helmet. every one of these components are a potential point of failure. A rubber O-ring failed on the Challenger mission, and it resulted in the deaths of the entire crew. These projects take time, patience, testing, and approvals. I think that even 2025 sounds ambitious, and delays are not a failure on the part of the engineers. Every part of the mission has to succeed, and the astronauts have to get home safely after the mission.
@7521eric3 күн бұрын
I don't get why it takes so long. Between 69 and 72 they put 12 men on the moon. With today's tech we should been back by now. What's the point of all the probes and rovers? Get people up there!
@Mikey_Likes_It_Too6 ай бұрын
One of the best (and least biased) takes on the entire Artemis campaign, thank you Simon (and Arnaldo)!
@brewtank67386 ай бұрын
Gonna be crazy to get 2025 quality video of humans on the moon. Crazy.
@oldconspiracydude2366 ай бұрын
Lets hope NASA isn't still using 320 x 400 CMOS cameras. You never know
@adammfharris5 ай бұрын
@danthevanman294And why wouldn’t you? Just take your iPhone with you. It will work just fine.
@Harry.Dresden4 ай бұрын
@@adammfharris You could very well have been sarcastic here, but to head off and inform people who won’t see that and will take your statement as factual: no, your iPhone will not work on the moon, at least not for very long, the unfiltered radiation from the sun will kill any technology not “hardened” for those conditions.
@Global-yt4 ай бұрын
@@adammfharris iPhone: *chilling on the moon* Unobstructed solar radiation spectra: Allow us to introduce ourselves
@directedby1004 ай бұрын
I suspect the whole Artemis mission series is designed to fail, so NASA can shrug & say "Hey we tried!" And certain parts of the Artemis mess will be redeployed in some new mission series later on. NASA is a space race dinosaur & should be abandoned. Some BRICS multinational mission will likely be the first manned return to the moon, in the mid-2030s.
@aaroneiland60775 ай бұрын
Love all your channels Simon! Always have to listen at 0.75 though!
@anhedonicauthor6 ай бұрын
Oh boy, a Simon channel I hadn't heard of before with 6 months of content to binge watch!
@BURDYMAN7776 ай бұрын
Finally!! Now start doing more Science Unbound videos! I miss when it was called science of science fiction, but either way, we need more of them.
@MrSpectralmania6 ай бұрын
I agree. More Science Unbound
@kevinmcqueenie74206 ай бұрын
Sorry to say that Simon has confirmed that channel is dead and has been partially folded into this one.
@MrSpectralmania6 ай бұрын
@@kevinmcqueenie7420 awww damn. Where does he announce these things?
@kevinmcqueenie74206 ай бұрын
@@MrSpectralmania think I saw it on a live blaze, but can’t be sure.
@MrSpectralmania6 ай бұрын
@@kevinmcqueenie7420 thanks mate 👍
@madmick37946 ай бұрын
This is such an exciting age of exploration
@newforestpixie52976 ай бұрын
it is for those whom can afford Cruises or Mountaineering but general tourism is over priced & lacks authenticity in my opinion. 👍
@madmick37946 ай бұрын
@@newforestpixie5297 apologies, I ment the discoveries that are coming from these excursions. Admittedly the fat cats help fund it though there should be space reserved for those than can offer real learning regardless of their finical status.
@1237barca6 ай бұрын
We haven’t left low earth orbit in 50 years. (If you trust the Nixon administration, maybe we did prior.) This isn’t an age of exploration.
@TheUnfulfilledOne6 ай бұрын
Outer Space doesn't exist.Earth is the only World there is.There are no other Physical Cosmic Worlds out there and there is no Infinite Cosmic Spatial Vacuum Void.Outer Space has "3 Enormous Problems":Problem 1 - Survivability - Cosmic Space is completely and inherently uninhabitable, inhospitable and unliveable.This doesn't seem/feel right.If Outer Space truly existed it should therefore be completely and inherently habitable,hospitable and liveable.If Outer Space was real it would be 100% welcoming of All-potential Beings,Creatures and Life-forms.This means that Outer Space must be "Breathable",because otherwise Everyone and Everything would immediately and perpetually suffocate and no Life-forms would ever emerge or survive in such a lethal Cosmic Universe.Problem 2 - Cosmic Travel - All-vehicles must push "Something" in order to move and go "Somewhere".In Earth's Atmosphere Automobiles push "Air" to move,Airplanes also push "Air" to move and Cruise Ships push "Water" to move,but Outer Space has no Atmosphere.You cannot travel to/in Outer Space,because The Vacuum of Space neutralizes All-pushing power/travel power.This means that Space Travel is impossible,that No One has ever left The Earth,that No One has ever traveled to Space and that every single Space Mission from the beginning to today is a lie.If Outer Space truly existed it would need to have an "Atmosphere" in order for Outer Space Travel to be possible.Problem 3 - Vast Separation - Celestial Space is just far too tremendously vast as a territory.All-Life-forms are separated,because of the "Humongous Distance" between them.This is not convenient.If Outer Space was real it wouldn't be so gargantuan,because it has to be much smaller and more "Tightly-Knit",so that All-potential Life-forms can locate and discover each other.Outer Space is a lie designed in order to convince The Public that Extraterrestrial Beings exist.The total "Inhospitableness" and "Unfeasibility" of Outer Space proves that Outer Space cannot exist,because Outer Space doesn't exist!
@mho...2 ай бұрын
**experimentation rather!
@josephmckenna53464 ай бұрын
Good Luck with that load of optimism
@muhammadrizqanilmi13014 ай бұрын
If any single things go wrong, SpaceX will solve anything about that.
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
Good luck with that skibidi fanum of yours
@mho...2 ай бұрын
without optimism ther would be no progress!
@Cat-On-Wabdermelon2 ай бұрын
K then nihilist you enjoy not believing in humanity
@mikami57996 ай бұрын
I double checked my youtube settings, 1x, now I change it to 0.75x
@JoeMcMorrow-k7e6 ай бұрын
me too!!!
@chrismac7776 ай бұрын
Me three!
@keestel69755 ай бұрын
This man speaks faster than my brain can order information. There should be a warning for epilepsy in front of this video. ;-)
@TondaGentile3 ай бұрын
English is my third language and I still perfectly understand him
@tariffictypist73723 ай бұрын
Same
@clementine772 ай бұрын
I'm a boomer who remembers watching the Apollo moon landings with 11 and 12 in 1969....14 and 15 in 1971....16 and 17 in 1972.. SIX successful landings on the moon in less than 4 years ..the engineers of that time must of been super brilliant as compared to the scientists we have now
@martinoso388Ай бұрын
Well...back then the only reason people wanted to go to moon was to prove its possible. It was also part of the cold war. USA wanted to prove that they have better space program than SSSR. But now we want to make moon a 'gateway' to Mars and also somewhere where people could live. And its a lot more harder to put all the equipment you need for that into one rocket without it breaking or costing even more billions than it costs.
@chikgaming511 күн бұрын
Not necessarily. We’re just making sure that the mission is far more reliable and safe so less people die.
@linesided6 ай бұрын
At this point picking on Artemis is like beating the cripple. It's just not a fair fight.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
kzbin.info/www/bejne/haCtpIOsoqucrrc#t=21m36s 😂
@newforestpixie52976 ай бұрын
Jaques - Thankyou 👍
@armaniwebb44676 ай бұрын
Artemis is much bigger than going to the moon for the hell of it. We are building a gateway in space
@ryanab016 ай бұрын
@armaniwebb4467 yes, and by we, you mean SpaceX. Boeing and Congress is just fleecing the American taxpayers with SLS.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
@@armaniwebb4467 Hmm, more likely a castle of air in air free space 😂
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
Cost is kind of subjective, hour per hour on the moon will be about 100 times cheaper than Apollo. Apollo 17 was on the moon for 27 hours while Artemis 3 will be there for more than a week. So, for the first landing of Artemis they will be on the moon around 6 times longer than the last landing of Apollo. As Artemis progresses it will be on the moon for 2 weeks then a month and a half and so on.
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
And eventually twice an many people.
@mikeguilmette7766 ай бұрын
Sending robots would be even cheaper.
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
@@mikeguilmette776 So would you rather get a photo of the Grand Canyon or go to the Grand Canyon? You're falling for the fundamental flaw about sending robots. You're not going to get nearly as much funding to send robots or maybe any at all.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
Yeah, comparing an actually event with an well into the future event is sooo grounded . . . You spent way too much time on the internet and in video games . ..
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
@@JacquesMartini Well at least I can read a NASA schedule and budget.
@jonkayl94166 ай бұрын
Too fast, its not an advert. slow it down a bit
@kellydclear6 ай бұрын
Just adjust your player to play it at .75 speed. It's almost perfect that way
@bigdoghenry14416 ай бұрын
You know I feel like it’s every day I find out you have a new channel ? Just how many do you have !
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
Simon is an AI character! 😂
@felipaorfr6 ай бұрын
Anyone interested in Artemis should watch SmarterEveryday's video about it. He raises serious concerns and asks really good questions about it. Starship, for instance, may need a dozen or more launches to refuel just for a single moon landing. The reason for the Gateway is not for science, it is because SLS with Orion doesn't have the delta-v to go straight to the moon's surface like Apollo did. The program seems to be messy with a lot of overcomplications.
@motokid60086 ай бұрын
I feel like people have the wrong idea of how Starship is going to be refueled. Its going to be one fueling instance at a depot. The depot is what will get the regular fueling missions. Refueling needs to happen as its a huge game changer by essentially resetting the rocket equation. SmarterEveryDay is great, but Destin is old space. SpaceX is new space which needs to happen if we're to move on from flag waving missions.
@Ormusn2o6 ай бұрын
The point of that was that people did not knew how many refuelings it's gonna take, not that it's a bad thing. It's a problem of miscommunication, there is not much information about Artemis program considering it's a public program.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
@@motokid6008 Hahahaha, new SpaceX physics, inventet by genius Elon!
@motokid60086 ай бұрын
@@JacquesMartini - What new physics are those?
@RasakBlood6 ай бұрын
Its a terrible video that ignores reality of politics budgets and the need for more efficient hardware for any lasting program that is not just an apollo reenactment theater. If you dont remember that program was ended early because of cost and lack of political will. With no starship or replacement there is no long term moon program. Simple as that.
@VS-et4pn6 ай бұрын
I just found this channel after watching the Kharkiv update on Warographics. Simon and the team don’t sleep
@Snowy355876 ай бұрын
2:34 I thought the Starship was the most powerful rocket or am I getting smth wrong?
@bobbleczar6 ай бұрын
I love how many channels you have. Your voice is great.
@debott45386 ай бұрын
Thanks for the summary. This is actually a new space race in the making. I would like to point out a few inprecise factoids from the video: 1. @0:00 Apollo 17 was correctly mentioned, but then a SpaceX Falcon 9 is shown in the background for some reason. 2. @7:34 the acronym ICPS stands for "Intermin Cryogenic Propulsion Stage" not "Space". It is correctly shown @7:45 3. @14:06 you mention a JAXA owned SLS rocket, but SLS is purely a NASA vehicle. Keep up the great work. But please check for these minor mistakes next time. :)
@ryanab016 ай бұрын
The SLS is a Boeing spacecraft. NASA claims it as their own due to Congressmen requiring it. That way, they get their kickbacks, inflating their income. The SLS is nothing but a jobs program, accomplishing nothing useful. The SLS is comprised of technology from the 1970s.
@MrJJ866 ай бұрын
Oki need a clear and concise list of all his channels. He is trying to elude us all from content.
@robertlee63386 ай бұрын
Darkside of the moon is just a point of view from Earth. The"dark side" receive as much sunlight as the side we look at.
@24_AB4 ай бұрын
there are deep craters at the south pole were sunlight doesnt reach
@devinkaiser22029 күн бұрын
More considering the shadow we cast on the Earth facing inside
@SMEGTACULAR6 ай бұрын
Really enjoying this channel
@RogerM886 ай бұрын
Imagine the incredible Scientific research NASA would have access if instead of Artemis, the budget was use for a large Space Telescope as LUVOIR, probe missions to the icey moons, a lander probe to Europa, a drone mission to Titan, and a Radio Telescope on the Far Side of the Moon.
@debott45386 ай бұрын
Agreed. Human spaceflight is very wasteful. LEO stations are fine, but Luna? I'm not convinced yet.
@DesertRat3326 ай бұрын
Yes! All make more sense than Artemis.
@remliqa6 ай бұрын
@@debott4538 Luna just as minor step in establishing our reach beyond Earth , such as Mars or further.
@remliqa6 ай бұрын
I wonder If other countries such as China or India's own plan to establish human presence on the Moon is a why this project seem more urgent to the US government.
@debott45386 ай бұрын
@@remliqa Absolutely. I think the USA would try everything to not see Chinese Boots on the moon before they can return themselves. The only reason why Artemis is rather slow going (relative to Apollo that is) is because unlike in the 1960s they have a significant headstart. If anything, it's the Chinese who would need to cut corners (which they do). All this serves to reinforce my earlier statement that pushing for the moon has little value in itself, regardless of the Nation or space organization. A large portion of the motivation stems solely for prestige reasons, which is awesome for sure, and also very dumb.
@Turbo4956 ай бұрын
Love this channel and a great video! Hope you guys keep it up as the channel grows. Thanks Simon and the writers!
@brettwagner29505 ай бұрын
Fantasy!
@patrickirwin36625 ай бұрын
Shhh! Let them find out when they're old enough.
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
Haha skibidi toilet reference gooning
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
@@patrickirwin3662 what's up fello goon maxxer
@jonofthehill4 ай бұрын
Never thought the world would reach for the stars this hard in my life, thought it would be my daughter seeing this.
@mleko236 ай бұрын
Well, believe it when I see it
@johnslaney80546 ай бұрын
Thanks for the vid, must’ve read my comment asking about Artemis a few days ago lol
@JoeMcMorrow-k7e6 ай бұрын
Isn't the SpaceX Starship the most powerful rocket in the world?
@thedausthed6 ай бұрын
Yes, by an extremely large margin (nearly 2x).
@spaceexploration-Don5 ай бұрын
Starship will help Artemis mission during 4th 5th mission
@room4boom425Ай бұрын
@spaceexploration-Don not even starship is expected to be apart of Artemis 3
@angeldanielblancosoto54586 ай бұрын
Just when I thought I'd seen all of Simon's channels this pops up (not complaining)
@basbekjenl6 ай бұрын
That 12:30 till 14:00 segment was hard to watch. The shaking was nauseating. I figured I'd give that as feedback. Besides that great video, hope everything will go as intended and if things don't go as intended that the back up systems are robust enough that everyone can make it home safely.
@Bow-to-the-absurd6 ай бұрын
Felt like a mistake to me
@basbekjenl6 ай бұрын
@@Bow-to-the-absurd I do not really care whether or not it is a mistake, it could be or maybe someone thought it would be a cool effect. That is why I said it was feedback, what they do with it is their business.
@cedvelt6 ай бұрын
Victor Glover appears to be the ultimate human. Mad respect
@ishadow60446 ай бұрын
I don’t think I’ll be around for mars (I’m 28 ish)
@marshalbali6 ай бұрын
You probably will, not for us to establish a proper colony but the first manned landing is within 10-20 years.
@lambo60126 ай бұрын
@@marshalbali meh, that's pretty optimistic. It will be 10-15 years before a good lunar base is set up and governments will likely favour that as opposed to a Mars mission as it will deliver a return on investment faster. After that it would take years of development even still to make a Mars mission safe. I'm guessing 25-35 years before a Mars shot.
@jasonbledsoe66765 ай бұрын
USA vs China vs Private ... yeah definitely not taking 25, 35 yrs.. it's 10.. maybe 12
@thomasfreeman74105 ай бұрын
Have more faith in starship
@admiralrustyshackleford1195 ай бұрын
Elon seems pretty hellbent on getting there in his lifetime, and he's got a couple decades on you (and I). I doubt we'll see any permanent residents living in colonies on Mars in the next 50ish years, but it seems like we're like we're within 15-20 years of the first manned mission. It's definitely gonna be private industry leading the way, if left up to Nasa (or any other government organization) it'd never get done.
@fubaralakbar68006 ай бұрын
11:36 I Never realized that cutting off part of the word "Earth" would have such a unique result
@16sierra763 ай бұрын
LMAO you had me and my wife laughing so hard😂
@JackMott6 ай бұрын
There is zero percent chance the Artemis moon landing happens as currently planned.
@facedeer6 ай бұрын
Indeed. Somehow the SLS rocket has turned out to be even *worse* than Shuttle in terms of cost and launch cadence, and Artemis is mandated by law to use it because the real purpose of Artemis is to spend money in the right congressional districts rather than to actually reach the Moon.
@craigmackay49096 ай бұрын
@@facedeerare Lockheed Martin Northrop Grumman Boeing price gouging?
@seenew6 ай бұрын
2030 still feels ambitious
@RasakBlood6 ай бұрын
The true date from nasa was 28. And then politics made it 26 or whatever. And then reality will make it more like 30. This is sadly how it always works.
@motorsr206 ай бұрын
Space x bout to blow this whole thing
@oreh3506 ай бұрын
Actually, it's pretty inspiring that people are planning to get back to the moon! I normally watch some educational videos to improve my English at 1.25 but this gut is at the right speed all the time, so X 1.00 =)
@holymonitor896 ай бұрын
Moon water! The next $100 bottle of water.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
Mooneshiner's in space! 😂
@JoeBManco6 ай бұрын
Fun fact: there is considerably more water in the Sahara Desert then what can be found in the shadows of the Moon's south pole.
@24_AB4 ай бұрын
@@JoeBManco why? what about ice underneath the soil or bigger pieces of ice
@JoeBManco4 ай бұрын
@@24_AB The amount of ice under the soil is very minimal. Again, there is more water in the Sahara Desert.
@michaelblankenship70646 ай бұрын
Starship has twice the thrust and has been to space. That makes it a legitimate space ship. True, it hasn't been to orbit yet or landed but no one has ever tried landing a skyscraper before.
@danwhiffen92356 ай бұрын
Starship and SpaceX fan, but SS not realized quite yet. I’ll concede to the SLS disposable money sink for right now, but soon it will be undeniable. IFT-4 coming soon and I am excited for them to crush it. Not even China is going to catch SpaceX, if only the US government were actually behind SpaceX and not being a headwind
@TheMarkieGoodBoy6 ай бұрын
There's a lot of work to do to have it reliably land on the moon. Here's hoping they pull it off!
@JMartJr6 ай бұрын
I hope they can do it -- but note that an EMPTY Starship failed to make orbit with all engines, as far as I could tell, functioning (earlier flights had problems losing engines, so OK, while you work that out it is understandable that you won't make orbit. But with all engines firing on an empty ship, it should have been hugely oversupplied in terms of reaching orbit.)
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@JMartJr On flight three, Starship reached the target trajectory, which was slightly suborbital. They would have been in orbit had the plan been to enter orbit, but to ensure that the Starship would reenter in a known location regardless of what happened next, the plan was to stay slightly suborbital. Starship also reached the target trajectory with probably around 70 tons of propellant left over. That demonstrates roughly 40 tons of payload to LEO, in reusable mode.
@GrimJerr6 ай бұрын
StarShite was supposed to have an Orbital flight done by now, I doubt it will ever be a viable Spacecraft. What happens when you give unregulated tax dollars to a Malignant Narcissist. Elon Musk is a Conman and Starshite is an EPIC FAIL.
@anthonyhall70196 ай бұрын
More simon channels please! Just found this, hoping this is one of 10 😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅
@sailinbob116 ай бұрын
Ugh... not me. Frankly, at 64, I doubt it's in the cards for me,but DAMN ! Hope I live to see it.
@lexif.54636 ай бұрын
Aye the Wright Brothers witnessed the moon landing, you very well may be
@Skakel20124 ай бұрын
I’m 38 and when I was in my early 20s I was so hyped about going to mars and the moon. I use to follow all the launches and updates from nasa and spacex religiously. The hype has faded for me. They keep delaying and delaying. I’ll be typing your comment one day still waiting. Progress has been made but I’ll be in my 60s before we land probably.
@inlee992 ай бұрын
I am not sure if I live to see it but I am hoping to see the formal admission of the hoax before I die.
@SteveGrandjambe32 ай бұрын
Let’s go Artemis to the beyond
@TomsYT926 ай бұрын
Artemis was never the personification of the moon that was Selene.
@BETTERWORLDSGT2 ай бұрын
I thought We'd be colonizing Mars by now!
@favesongslist6 ай бұрын
Orion also has heatshield problems.
@JoeUzzolino6 ай бұрын
Orion and Boeing are not cutting it. Elon has started a car company and put his capsules on a launch vechile he invented built tested and has put people into orbit all in less time than Boeing space liner and Orion have been trying to get to the moon. Plus Elon can recycle the launch rocket instead of pollute space
@JoeMcMorrow-k7e6 ай бұрын
Houston - Orion has many problems.....
@Crioten6 ай бұрын
Starfishes love you guys
@Ozie19816 ай бұрын
Once the Starship program reaches operational status, this whole plan is gonna get turned upside down. I don’t oppose the current development of sls or Orion because it’s never a good idea to put all of your eggs in one basket. But the capabilities of the starship launch system exceed sls and Orion in every way, and some of those ways by several orders of magnitude (especially the $$/kg of mass to orbit ratio). Each starship has a pressure vessel which has almost exactly the same internal volume as the entire international space station. In addition to all this, spaceX is building a gigantic factory in Texas to LITERALLY mass produce these things. And by the way, I’m not necessarily saying that NASA will start using starship for everything they do, I think it’s far more likely that as we start trying to go farther than the moon they will use it to start building much larger vehicles in orbit.
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
You're talking total bullshit. SLS-Orion is the only system capable of safely carrying crew to deep space and returning them to Earth. NASA would never ever even consider using Starship as a primary vehicle, it would be the worst choice they could make as there would be so many problems with that. Not like Starship will be proven anytime soon anyway, especially to carry crew in any capacity like for its HLS role. I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't even happen in this decade at this point. The public perception of the Starship program is one giant illusion, I can tell you that for a fact. NASA is already losing patience and not happy at all with how their contract is going.
@matthewcasady62766 ай бұрын
SLS as currently designed can lift much heavier cargo than starship to geosynchronous orbit and beyond. Maybe that will change over time, but it's a fact today.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@FrankyPi NASA doesn't have to start using Starship without Orion to carry crew to the surface of the moon. SpaceX are saying they will do it. NASA will have the choice between coopting the SpaceX plans, or watching SpaceX do it by themselves. I'm thinking it could go either way. I'd guess the first Orion-less moon landing happens before Artemis 5, with or without NASA.
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
@SpaceAdvocate Never gonna happen buddy, and if it somehow does happen, I wish best of luck to those people who decide to fly on it, they'd need it for sure.
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
@matthewcasady6276 It can lift much heavier payload anywhere, and even New Glenn can lift more assuming their 45 tons is accurate (probably is), as Starship is only capable of lifting around 35 tons or less to LEO due to severe underperformance from multiple design issues.
@bearlogg7974Ай бұрын
We need to forbid all space cargo containing LED lights. The last thing the night sky needs is a moon telling us to buy Coca-Cola
@Nick3DvB6 ай бұрын
Great, more of this sort of thing. But your editor is clearly over-worked, looks like he just blacked-out for a few minutes around @12:40 8 )
@poppetrurazvan390016 күн бұрын
Hi. In my opinion is to buil with automation an base first and then to go. Thank you very much. Eventualy ice particle analisio for breathing air.
@chrisyoung96536 ай бұрын
An amazing time to be alive
@MyKharli6 ай бұрын
In an existential climate catastrophe with hyperloop level space fantasy projects ..yeah right !
@chrisyoung96536 ай бұрын
@@MyKharli which we have solutions to but they just haven't been implemented on a large scale yet. With an attitude like that your life will suck but ours won't. Have fun. The REALITY is that we have it better than anyone ever before but I suppose there is always someone who wants to cry about it and mistakenly believe that things used to be better
@MyKharli6 ай бұрын
@@chrisyoung9653 Lol my attitude is where are the solutions and how can they realistically be implemented , not childish hopeum fanboy cgi led nonsense ! If my dad was a mugger , i am sure i would have had a rich childhood full of stolen goods , your `best time ever `is on the back of robbing the future of all natures stored bank of fertility , clean water , and energy that have nearly been all used for a flash of greed and hubris ...your go .
@1237barca6 ай бұрын
The late 1960s?
@TheUnfulfilledOne6 ай бұрын
Outer Space doesn't exist.Earth is the only World there is.There are no other Physical Cosmic Worlds out there and there is no Infinite Cosmic Spatial Vacuum Void.Outer Space has "3 Enormous Problems":Problem 1 - Survivability - Cosmic Space is completely and inherently uninhabitable, inhospitable and unliveable.This doesn't seem/feel right.If Outer Space truly existed it should therefore be completely and inherently habitable,hospitable and liveable.If Outer Space was real it would be 100% welcoming of All-potential Beings,Creatures and Life-forms.This means that Outer Space must be "Breathable",because otherwise Everyone and Everything would immediately and perpetually suffocate and no Life-forms would ever emerge or survive in such a lethal Cosmic Universe.Problem 2 - Cosmic Travel - All-vehicles must push "Something" in order to move and go "Somewhere".In Earth's Atmosphere Automobiles push "Air" to move,Airplanes also push "Air" to move and Cruise Ships push "Water" to move,but Outer Space has no Atmosphere.You cannot travel to/in Outer Space,because The Vacuum of Space neutralizes All-pushing power/travel power.This means that Space Travel is impossible,that No One has ever left The Earth,that No One has ever traveled to Space and that every single Space Mission from the beginning to today is a lie.If Outer Space truly existed it would need to have an "Atmosphere" in order for Outer Space Travel to be possible.Problem 3 - Vast Separation - Celestial Space is just far too tremendously vast as a territory.All-Life-forms are separated,because of the "Humongous Distance" between them.This is not convenient.If Outer Space was real it wouldn't be so gargantuan,because it has to be much smaller and more "Tightly-Knit",so that All-potential Life-forms can locate and discover each other.Outer Space is a lie designed in order to convince The Public that Extraterrestrial Beings exist.The total "Inhospitableness" and "Unfeasibility" of Outer Space proves that Outer Space cannot exist,because Outer Space doesn't exist!
@LutherClaytonKotlinsky2 ай бұрын
Why is Simon Whistler the voice of information and education all of a sudden? He used to be with one channel, now he seemingly talks for dozens. No complaint though, I like it.
@liquidpza6 ай бұрын
It always breaks my heart when I think about what knowledge we'd wield if we had launched as many science space telescopes as we have spy satellites.
@1237barca6 ай бұрын
Breaks my heart that ppl blindly trust the Nixon administration did something nobody has been able to replicate for 50 years.
@all_out_tripp72206 ай бұрын
Probably not as much, the space telescopes we have already do a pretty good job
@DallasRabot6 ай бұрын
Another day, another Simon Whistler channel you have found.
@Asterra26 ай бұрын
Surprisingly out of date for something that dropped just today. The issues discovered with the Orion craft have pushed Artemis III to an _optimistic_ 2027. This gives NASA's subcontractors three years, starting now, to have their obligations sorted out, and that assumes nothing new rears its head in the ensuing three years, such as during Artemis II.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
The current date for Artemis 3 is September 2026. But it wouldn't be surprising at all if it slips to 2027.
@ukmediawarrior6 ай бұрын
VIPER .... you just know that in the meeting to name the robot they first came up with the coolest name, then spent hours trying to think up words that started with those letters of its name, LOL :D
@lordgarion5146 ай бұрын
Congress mandated Cost-Plus contracts in action.... NASA even testified to Congress that the Cost-Plus contracts weren't working, and that the cost was unsustainable. Congress ordered NASA to keep using Cost-Plus contracts..... Senate Launch System.
@trevdagg6 ай бұрын
0:25 funny how media works, everyone knows who Neil Armstrong is but this is the first time ive ever heard of Gene Cernan or Harrison Schmitt but they were just as important as Neil. It takes a different breed to be willing and not just want to go to the moon especially given the comparative level of technology at the time
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
What about the other 8 moonwalkers, heard of them?
@THE-X-Force6 ай бұрын
Maybe blame your lack of education instead of "the media".
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
Naaaa, the first one take all the fame, all followers are just lame copies. Sir Edmund Hillary climbed Mt. Everest the first time, can you name 5 more?
@favesongslist6 ай бұрын
@@THE-X-Force Unless you were around during the Apollo era, It is unlikely to know much more than Apollo 11 from school.
@newforestpixie52976 ай бұрын
a “ space nut “ commented he’d been unaware of the Apollo/Soyuz 1975 missions until finding a YT video. I found this tragic .
@lipingrahman66486 ай бұрын
As navy men navigated the space ways the first time so shall it be this time.
@TomHill-xh7ec6 ай бұрын
SpaceX's Starship system is almost twice the size of SLS.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
Like the average american, twice the size of regular humans! 😂
@JoeBManco6 ай бұрын
Good luck landing a sky scraper on the Moon.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
@@JoeBManco Think BIG! 😂
@TomHill-xh7ec6 ай бұрын
@@JoeBManco Landing a skyscraper on Earth was considered impossible in 2010.
@JoeBManco6 ай бұрын
@@TomHill-xh7ec How many attempts did it take them to perfect it? Also if they're so good at it, why do they have to do it out in the ocean? Wouldn't it be cheaper to do it on land?
@vlnow3 ай бұрын
About time.
@matthewcasady62766 ай бұрын
2025? Not likely. I don't want to make a firm prediction, but I'll be happy if NASA gets humans on the moon this decade.
@downix6 ай бұрын
The concern is SpaceX delivering the lunar lander at this point. They were supposed to land their test article on the moon last month.
@favesongslist6 ай бұрын
@@downix SpaceX appear to be running a year behind, yet the amazing work expanding Starbase will more than pay off over time.
@downix6 ай бұрын
@favesongslist A year behind? They promised the fuel transfer test, which needs to be done before any landing can happen, by April 2022, two years ago. Per the GAO audit of the program, they put it at nearly 3 years late, and likely will not deliver until 2030.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@downix If they're three years delayed, the landing would happen in 2027. That doesn't seem unreasonable. Orion is almost as delayed.
@downix6 ай бұрын
@SpaceAdvocate three years delayed *in 2023*, and have yet to progress much since. Their specific point was that out of the 13 milestones they were to have met by the end of FY2023, they only met 6 of them. That means they predict it will take twice as long, so instead of 4.5 years, 9 years. And do note, I would be incredibly happy for this prediction to be wrong.
@Youngbl33zy6 ай бұрын
Had to watch this in .75x and thats a first
@valkyrie0136 ай бұрын
I belive the new current thinking is that they'll board the Starship in Earth Orbit, and go straight to the moon surface. Which I'd prefere.. why use a VW Bug when you can use a Greyhound bus..
@debott45386 ай бұрын
Because the Greyhound (aka HLS Starship) does not have enough propellant and/or a heat shield to safely bring the Austronauts back to Earth. So far, this is only possible via the Orion spacecraft. No other way. That said, the proposal you mention is very real and definetely worth considering, because you could replace the expensive Orion with a cheap Dragon 2 from SpaceX, saving billions of dollars. But this needs more development to solve the problems as stated above.
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
@debott4538 Good luck reentering from TEI with Dragon 2...
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
No, it's not. You're talking about rumours from Ars Technica that NASA is apparently considering downscaling Artemis III to an Apollo 9 style mission, where Orion and HLS would test procedures in LEO, because HLS won't be ready in time to make it to the Moon due to refueling. These rumours have been shot down by Nelson in a recent conference, what I heard from people working on HLS at NASA is that they're considering making Artemis III another Orion only mission, because they think HLS will be nowhere near ready to do anything. NASA would also never even consider using Starship instead of SLS-Orion, for very good reasons. SLS-Orion is the only system capable to safely carry crew to deep space and return them to Earth. There is no other option and likely won't be for a very long time.
@debott45386 ай бұрын
@@FrankyPi I thought we were only talking about Earth orbit rendevous. Dragon can obviously not go to the moon. Although I can imagine a lunar rated Dragon at some point. Heat shield, radiation and comms/navigation are probably the most significant hurdles. I agree, SLS-Orion will remain the only viable US human-rated vehicle for yet some time. But things might change over the years, especially if the Artemis program turns out to be a success. Or if the Chinese pressure the US into even more lunar activity.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@debott4538 You'd need an additional propellant transfer in somewhere in the LLO-NRHO area to bring the crewed HLS Starship from lunar orbit to LEO, using propulsion. The HLS Starship still wouldn't have a heat shield, so it would need to rendezvous with a reentry craft. That could be a Dragon or Starship. In my opinion, the easiest architecture for an Orion-less moon landing would be: 1. Launching two propellant depots to LEO and filling them up with propellant. 2. Sending one of the propellant depots to LLO. 3. Launching an HLS Starship. 4. Having HLS Starship rendezvous with the propellant depot in LEO and filling the tanks. 5. Launching a Crew Dragon. 6. Having Crew Dragon rendezvous with the HLS Starship, and transfering crew onto HLS Starship. 7. Having HLS Starship go all the way to the moon, perform the surface mission, and return to LLO. 8. Having HLS Starship rendezvous with the propellant depot and adding some propellant. 9. Having HLS Starship propulsively go to LEO. 10. Having Crew Dragon rendezvous with the HLS Starship, and transfering crew from HLS Starship to Crew Dragon. 11. Perform the reentry with Crew Dragon. Beyond some minor modifications, this doesn't need anything that SpaceX doesn't already have operational or is developing for NASA.
@OMGWTFBBQLMAOLOL6 ай бұрын
Thank you for making videos without an intro song
@Justwantahover6 ай бұрын
I really don't think Starship will be ready in two years! 😅
@Ch1ckeNug016 ай бұрын
Ehh there’s really only a few construction errors, but they are making much better improvements that’ll lead to better space flight capabilities.
@canadasempror55216 ай бұрын
great video but I don't think you need to put the subtitles straight in the video
@ericsecrist40846 ай бұрын
Starship is the most powerful rocket. But it is still in its testing phase
@ObscureNemesis6 ай бұрын
Its a tin can that can't get in to orbit.
@philippeferreiradesousa45245 ай бұрын
The forest behind the tree: the Starship system (booster, tanker/crew/cargo/lunar ship) is being designed to be able to ferry 100t of cargo/crew from Earth to Moon and back. Artemis III is a big milestone but not the end goal.
@lorisperfetto60216 ай бұрын
Ain't happening with the current budget
@craigmackay49096 ай бұрын
Yea Ukrainians took it all.
@JoeBManco6 ай бұрын
@@craigmackay4909 Thanks to George Bush, we wasted all that money that could have gone to space projects on Iraq and Afghanistan.
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
@@craigmackay4909 Ukraine is a superior country tho. (Blonde people with blue eyes in big numbers)
@OrneryHumorist6 ай бұрын
im not a fan of the buzzing sound/tv static that astrographics uses...feels like a hardware issue at my end. simon, do something about this!
@Torgo-and-the-Lucifer-Cat6 ай бұрын
It's really named for Artemis Gordon, from "wild wild west", lol, 😅 (actually, the writer thought 'artemis' was a male name)
@calebbean13846 ай бұрын
Or Artemis Fowl. It's always a name for smart guys too
@Torgo-and-the-Lucifer-Cat6 ай бұрын
@@calebbean1384 lol, forgot that one
@THE-X-Force6 ай бұрын
I'm one of the three people who apparently enjoyed that movie lol ..
@Torgo-and-the-Lucifer-Cat6 ай бұрын
@@THE-X-Force I was about the t.v. show, but I kinda liked the movie.
@JoeBManco6 ай бұрын
Does that mean Artemis Gordon is the forefather of Flash Gordon?
@TedNomura2 күн бұрын
Artemis turned out to be a bigger and heavier version of their twin Apollo with a lot more health issues. Probably why Artemis Moon ship was destroyed by General Zod in Superman II.
@jamesb.78596 ай бұрын
First - the critique. What the heck was up with the high school PowerPoint bouncy image during the Gateway description part? Please knock it off. Second - how is this not a mega project? Third - love your videos, keep them coming.
@tonbopro6 ай бұрын
for how long this mission? wait using Starship as a Base?
@superpowerdragon6 ай бұрын
looking at how the program went so far, i think we will be fortunate if we can see a human on the moon before 2035
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
Moon landing before gta 6 is crazy
@TrollbaitMage6 ай бұрын
Selene was the goddess of the moon 🌝 for the Greek and Luna for the Roman
@darrenorange29826 ай бұрын
You are incorrect about the most powerful rocket. SpaceX Starship is currently the most powerful operational rocket of all time.
@michaelsommers23566 ай бұрын
_"SpaceX Starship is currently the most powerful operational rocket of all time. "_ Too bad it can't, so far, take a single ounce of payload to LEO.
@darrenorange29826 ай бұрын
@@michaelsommers2356 It can. Unless you did not watch the last launch.
@michaelsommers23566 ай бұрын
@@darrenorange2982 Yes, I watched it, and saw it carry no payload and not reach orbit.
@darrenorange29826 ай бұрын
@@michaelsommers2356 it carried extra fuel.
@darrenorange29826 ай бұрын
I'm gonna check out here...so enjoy ChatGPT4 Exactly, the perspective that Starship did not carry any "useful" payload during its test flights might stem from a misunderstanding of the spacecraft's design and the objectives of these flights. Starship is engineered to carry more fuel than what is required merely to reach orbit. This extra fuel capacity is part of its design to enable longer missions beyond Earth orbit, such as to the Moon and Mars, and for in-space operations like refueling and maneuvering. During the test flights, carrying additional fuel-beyond what would be needed just for reaching orbit-serves as ballast to simulate the mass and balance of a fully equipped operational flight. This helps test the spacecraft’s performance under expected future mission conditions. The fuel serves a dual purpose: it acts as ballast and is part of essential tests like the propellant transfer demonstration. Understanding this dual functionality is key to recognizing why SpaceX designs its test flights this way. It's not just about reaching orbit but preparing the spacecraft for the complex, multi-phase missions for which it is ultimately intended.
@nixeye46916 ай бұрын
Thank you for making this video! (: I love learning more about these space missions that are coming up. I’ve watched a couple of NASA’s videos so it’s nice to see a different perspective on these upcoming missions
@stevenwiederholt70006 ай бұрын
The Department of Agriculture..I mean NASA is going to get us back to The Moon? Hold on to that dream.
@TurdBoi6663 ай бұрын
This guy thinks genshin impact better than wuwa
@Mr-Damage6 ай бұрын
In Superman 2 the moon Scene where General Zod, Ursa & Non wreack havoc the name of the lander is called Artemis.
@tazerface86596 ай бұрын
SLS is not the world’s most powerful rocket
@FrankyPi6 ай бұрын
It is operationally.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@FrankyPi They didn't say the worlds most powerful operational rocket.
@Little9086 ай бұрын
It was at one point, which i believe the source they got it from is slightly outdated
@TheCanagoose6 ай бұрын
Then what is? You can't comment a "fact" without sources. Especially in Simon's community.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@TheCanagoose Starship.
@jamesmazzoni50636 ай бұрын
Only half kidding They should just update and use the technology from the Apollo missions. Talk about reinventong the wheel.
@niox19206 ай бұрын
It doesn't work like that
@Roset5956 ай бұрын
That's basically what Artemis is doing, updating technology from Apollo
@accutronitisthe2nd956 ай бұрын
Starship will never work to put people on the moon, NASA now knows this...
@Nathan-vt1jz6 ай бұрын
I believe both Blue Origen’s New Glen rocket and SpaceX’s Starship are both larger and significantly more powerful than SLS. Everything’s been delayed due to COVID and nearly all space development timelines get delayed anyway (inherently complicated and ambitious).
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
New Glenn isn't close to being more powerful. SLS is around 4,000 tons of thrust, New Glenn is around 1,750 tons. Starship is 7,130 tons, and later versions are planned to reach 10,000 tons.
@plainText3846 ай бұрын
No New Glenn is comparable to Falcon Heavy and much less powerful than SLS. For comparison, SLS Block 1B and Block 2 will be capable of lifting about as much mass to TLI as New Glenn will be capable of lifting to LEO. Starship does exceed SLS in thrust at liftoff, but since it has yet to successfully reach orbit, SLS is still the most powerful currently operational rocket.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@plainText384 SLS is technically operational, but it isn’t a super worthwhile distinction. The cadence is just so low. Starship should have done close to ten operational flights before SLS does it’s first operational flight.
@Nathan-vt1jz6 ай бұрын
@@SpaceAdvocate I genuinely thought New Glen was larger than that, at least the final version. Thanks for the correction.
@Nathan-vt1jz6 ай бұрын
@@plainText384 For some reason I thought New Glen was substantially more powerful. If not, it would be a financial boondoggle even compared to SLS - one that doesn’t have any capability to distinguish itself from proven platforms (such as falcon heavy). The biggest issues with SLS is cost, limited production, and production rate. It is a cool stopgap rocket while other developments mature, but too inefficient for long term use. People keep saying Starship didn’t make orbit as if it wasn’t capable or a failure. It deliberately didn’t reach orbit to avoid risk of leaving large space debris and focus on re-entry development. So it can make it to space, it’s mainly just the other capabilities that need to be ironed out.
@zackatwood28676 ай бұрын
PLuH! moon base ftw, let us look up and find a new lighted star on a familiar place all can see
@BBBrasil6 ай бұрын
Meanwhile in China...
@后宫后3 ай бұрын
China is just a late starting point, and it is normal to innovate from unknown practices
@pieterconradie98346 ай бұрын
Please do q load out and include where load out must br used with you vehicle successfully
@KentoLeoDragon6 ай бұрын
Don't worry, by the time the mission flies it will cost more than Apollo, by a lot.
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
Actually, hour for hour on the moon this Artemis will be about 100 times cheaper than Apollo. The longest time spent on the moon was 27 hours by Apollo 17. Whereas Artemis 3 will spend over a week.
@captainspaulding59636 ай бұрын
What's your point?
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
@@captainspaulding5963 That an hour on the moon costs so much more for Apollo than an hour Artemis. If you spend 2 billion dollars for 27 hours on the moon for Apollo and you spend 2 billion dollars for 650 hours on the moon for Artemis. The hourly rate is 2 billion divvied by 27 for Apollo versus 2 billion divvied by 650 for Artemis.
@JacquesMartini6 ай бұрын
@@joeker1013 "will spent over a week". Sure thing!
@joeker10136 ай бұрын
@@JacquesMartini Spend not spent. You should actually read the NASA plans and budget. Or don't you think Space Xs lunar lander can last a week?
@LuKaZz4204 ай бұрын
Hey, first of all I love your channels. Could you please do a video on the refueling issues of the Starship. It needs 12 refueling rockets all to successfully rendezvous in earth’s orbit in order to get to the Moon. Then it also needs to refuel in Lunar orbit to come back. Nobody in human history has ever refueled in orbit using the type of fuel Space X is using for the Starship. More than 12 successful launches, 12 consecutive rendezvous and orbital refueling yet supposedly they are to land in 2026? PLEASE! With your analytical skills it would prove a good video Take care mate
@archierush8684 ай бұрын
A starship would require closer to 7-8 if they use Block 3 as a tanker (200T to LEO) and they refuel the lander which would be a Block 2 (1,400T of fuel). Flight 3 proved that they can conduct an in flight fuel transfer within the ship and they will target a ship-to-ship demo early next year. Also, Artemis 3 is probably delayed to 2027 and then 4 for 2028, meaning they have over a year to refuel it.
@LuKaZz4204 ай бұрын
@@archierush868 Thanks for the info
@garrymartin64746 ай бұрын
Lets hope it all goes to plan as they say "Many a slip between cup and lip"
@jaypaint48554 ай бұрын
We also know that there will be two more lunar landings, a second by SpaceX’s Starship and one by Blue Origin
@ImNotPotus6 ай бұрын
How did you mess up your own captions?
@bartmannn67176 ай бұрын
Genuinely had to look up the transcript, because I kept wondering why the capsule is called "Iran"
@BrockSamson-i1i6 ай бұрын
i would much rather see delay after delay to thew human adventure than a fatal incident that would set ambition back more than any delay ever could
@Pete1987pl6 ай бұрын
Simons the man !
@s4-bf6vp6 ай бұрын
Didn't Orion on Artemis1 not have any life support on board?
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@debott4538 It didn't have the life support. It wasn't needed for the uncrewed flight.
@michaelsommers23566 ай бұрын
"Starship" has no life support, either.
@SpaceAdvocate6 ай бұрын
@@michaelsommers2356 That's true. Not yet.
@mikaxmsАй бұрын
Yeah, good luck with that SpaceX Starship Lunar lander. They are so far behind on schedule already. XD