Improving Artemis | Is It Really Sustainable?

Today we are taking a look at the Artemis Program to discover how sustainable it really is. This deep dive will be performed in 3 parts. Understanding the current Artemis Plan, proposing new ways to improve Artemis, and comparing the current plan to Apollo and my proposals.
Let me know your thoughts below.
Want to support Apogee? Consider becoming a Patreon supporter and earn access to exclusive live-streams and patron-only discord channels - / apogeespace
Checkout the official Apogee Website for awesome merch! - www.apogeechannel.com/
Join in on the discussion on the Apogee discord server, open to all - / discord
Follow me on Twitter for updates - / apogeespace
Special thanks to NASA, Hazegreyart, SpaceX, Dynetics, Blue Origin, Airbus for clips used in this commentary.
Timestamps
0:00 - Intro
05:56 - Apollo vs Artemis
14:53 - Commercial Lunar Crew Program
20:40 - Lunar Dragon
26:15 - Lunar Starliner
30:42 - HLS Starship
39:15 - SLS Cost
47:26 - Comparison
55:29 - Results
1:03:45 - Final Thoughts

[@dust1209]

Apogee's first video was amazingly high quality for even an established channel, let alone as a first entry. Great content! Can't wait to watch this.

[@wrwhiteal]

ISS is the most expensive object ever created by humans... over $150 billion.... with basically ZERO space exploration, engineering, science return to show for it... NASA’s $1.6 billion per flight shuttle (the most unaffordable, dangerous & unreliable space vehicle in history) was created to build & service the ISS, the ISS was created to give NASA’s shuttle something to do... Both ISS & STS are unaffordable, unsustainable, dead end NASA pork boondoggles. Good riddance.

[@Apogeespace]

Don't worry everyone, this video didn't get outdated by todays HLS announcement, in fact it aged pretty well!

[@OriginalUnknown2]

Thank you for this video, it was very well made! I expect huge growth on your channel soon. I wouldn't have thought to compare costs in the ways you did and it certainly shows how inefficient SLS is. Granted, it did start development in 2012 when Starship was nothing more yet than Elon's wet dream.

[@DatTacoGuy]

i mean, how about that timing though? lol

[@DatTacoGuy]

@@OriginalUnknown2 it was even built of off existing tech, was suppose to be a simple slap it together n go thing!!

[@vilmospalik1480]

poggers am i right fellow gamers

[@jedmeades]

Schedule a live stream if you can, plenty of space fans itching to hear and discuss the HLS decision and what it means for Artemis

[@DougRattman]

"Team Space can't just become a shield against any and all criticism of certain rockets" Exactly! Thank you!

[@SomeoneNamedTygget]

What a day to release this video EDIT: Also, fantastic breakdown of Artemis.

[@wrwhiteal]

Artemis is based on the unneeded, useless & idiotic Lunar Gateway... and the $4 billion per flight SLS/Orion... while SpaceX Starship costs $2 million per flight. Get a clue... Federal Agency NASA is hopeless. Bloated, pork driven NASA & it’s incompetent dead wood centers & HQ should be downsized or eliminated... replaced with taxpayer funded x-prizes for American enterprises accomplishing US space goals like Lunar Colonies, Americans to Mars, trips to asteroids, etc..

[@angelsaavedra633]

What happened?

[@SomeoneNamedTygget]

@@angelsaavedra633 The vid was uploaded the same day Starship was announced as the winner of the HLS contract.

[@angelsaavedra633]

@@SomeoneNamedTygget Oh what changed with that announcement?

[@affenimperator9155]

​@@angelsaavedra633 You can watch Apogees video on the HLS and you will understand

[@orbitaldiscourse2445]

Man this video must've taken a long while! Very interesting watch

[@pfscpublic]

Yes, lots of analysis and presentation effort, amazing work!

[@vava54]

NASA just announced that Spacex won the HLS contract. I'm so glad you were wrong when you said in your last video that there was a "0% change of spacex getting the contact". Very bold move by NASA, I don't think anyone actually expected them to go with only Spacex.

[@Apogeespace]

Hey, I did predict one thing right, I embarrassed myself with my prediction haha.

[@wschmrdr]

I'm not so sure it was an embarrassment, as the MIC and their lobbyists typically win these sorts of things. I know if I were a betting man, I would've lost my money.

[@rainer9825]

To be fair, the NASA source selection statment has some surprises, that nobody could predict imo: Dynetics price went way up, lander is too heavy and engine development is lackluster...The only one clear indicator for SpaceX was the NASA budget.

[@wschmrdr]

More than budget, SpaceX has also proved themselves able to deliver results. This Thursday is expected to be proof of that. I still think there will be some delays in court actions, but if SpaceX has also shown a commitment to footing some of their own bill through Starlink, why not go for the grant offered?

[@peterwmdavis]

Should have stuck to your own scores!

[@franciscootero7056]

Your videos are exactly the kind of content i'm looking for in space-related matters. Well thought out, extremely detailed and long without losing the enjoyability. Thank you and please keep 'em coming!

[@justspace103]

Instant subscription. your videos are extremely well done

[@Apogeespace]

Thanks so much!

[@jimseibyl5140]

Compelling points here, I appreciate your take on things and your well thought out and detailed dives.

[@levysrugo6861]

Loved the in depth research and balanced perspective. Thank you! I personally think Starship will be ready to do the whole job (from Earth to moon and back) before 2025, but it’s still great to look at all of the possibilities.

[@wschmrdr]

Direct ascent may be nice, but I really like the idea of the ferrying and EOR, with a possible option for LOR with Gateway. Most expensive part of a launch has ALWAYS been getting outside Earth's atmosphere. If you can get a Starship up there with a small or no payload until you're ready to transfer, the cost goes WAY down. And hey, after its flight use is finished, it would make for a good habitat, if you look at some of the other concept ideas out there.

[@Nazar_Melnyk]

Let's hope that there are smart people in NASA and congress that think about sustainability rather then just talking about it. Apogee, thanks for the great Artemis sustainability breakdown! First video showed me that you're very good content creator, second one showed me that you are one of my favorites. Wish you luck!

[@zettas1157]

They selected Lunarstarship. Your final prediction was dead wrong but hey I was just as shocked. I thought at least dynetics would be a safe bet

[@Apogeespace]

NASA really flipped the script huh? My next video will cover my thoughts on their selection.

[@ivangalantz4927]

@@Apogeespace That's great, when can we expect it?

[@DatTacoGuy]

what he didnt take into account though was the slashing of nasa's budget and nasa in a diss back to congress chose 1 lander and not only the cheaper one but also spacex cut their cost down to match nasa's budget! that kinda changed things

[@wschmrdr]

SpaceX is in it for the science. They have their own ways of making money (i.e. Starlink). They don't need to fleece the angel.

[@Apogeespace]

@@ivangalantz4927 much faster! The next few videos I’m aiming for ~20 minutes length.

[@KEB129]

You are one of the few that use the rocket equation and delta V for every move in space. Many space fans forget how important that is! Well done!

[@andrewsarchus9079]

Once Starship is making reliable orbital lifts it's all over for SLS based at a minimum on the three orders of magnitude cost differential.

[@dschannick9865]

This video is awesome, over an hour and so much detail! Great

[@zzubra]

1:05:00 I think there is every reason to believe Starship will be rated for human travel between Earth and LEO before an upgraded Crew Dragon could be available. SpaceX needs to develop this capability for their Dear Moon mission. I expect SpaceX will be much more interested in accelerating the timeline for that than in enhancing Crew Dragon. / I do appreciate the video.

[@jetstreambrony]

Plus, Starship's Thermal Protection system is already designed for Lunar return, Crew Dragon's isn't

[@mikeromeo5590]

Lunar starship will likely have stretched tanks carrying upto 2000 tons of propellant(more refueling would be required though). This will reduce the usable volume of starship but it will be more than enough for a 4 person crew. So u don't require a second lunar starship for each mission. Great job on the video

[@linecraftman3907]

I think you forgot that crew dragon can carry more than 4 people, and yes Starship-Moonship should be the ultimate goal. It's simply too OP to not use it. And how would gateway fit into all this?? But other than that, this is an amazing study of possible mission profiles and using available tools right now to improve the Artemis. NASA really surprised us today with moonship, lets hope they will surprise us by following at least similar plan!

[@wschmrdr]

Gateway would actually make for a great command station. Heck, let's use that idea to prep for Mars so we don't need to wait 40 minutes for answers from NASA; just get the general go/no-go and the Martian station can monitor the rest.

[@Apogeespace]

True. I wanted to go with what was possible now. There are plans for Orion to carry 6 also, but I just went with 4 for now to level the field so to speak. Great point though!

[@linecraftman3907]

@@wschmrdr gateway would be at lunar orbit and moon is only 1 lightsecond away from us

[@wschmrdr]

Although the distance to the Moon is factual, the Moon has been seen as a staging ground for Mars. Why not get some practice in while NASA supervises to ensure readiness?

[@davidmacmillan9168]

Thanks for the shoutout!!!!

[@TraditionalAnglican]

We have to realized that Apollo not only developed Saturn V, the Apollo Command & Service Modules, the LEM (& a lunar rover), IVA & EVA suits, micro-computers (something we benefit from), Mercury & Gemini Capsules, Skylab & hundreds of technologies we’ve benefited from for the last 50+ years. SLS/Orion won’t have these spin-offs because these were specifically developed from “legacy hardware”.

[@alrightydave]

Fantastic video. This is like Everyday Astronaut’s Artemis VS Apollo video but done more in depth, more useful and better! I already was aware of the lunar Starship crew dragon system, but this video went so much more in depth! I hope more SLS fans will watch this to realize what Artemis can be compared to what it is now. Awesome video always, you’re now officially in my top 3 favorite space KZbinrs with Everyday Astronaut and Scott Manley! Can’t wait to see the next video about Lunar Starship that you’ve got which is already uploaded but that will have to wait for tomorrow.

[@vilmospalik1480]

you need more subs, these vids r so fucking good

[@nootbootsma4925]

LOVE the intro! Can't wait to watch the rest of it and the rest of your content in general!

[@devindykstra]

These videos are such high quality! Thank you!

[@Renvoxan]

After today's announcement on HLS awards, you will have to update the video 😛

[@wschmrdr]

Meh, just ignore the parts that are now moot.

[@Hokie2k11]

Haha, I think this video still stands. He did a great job of explaining why Starship would win.... I don't think any of us actually thought NASA had the guts, political will and foresight to make the right choice. Props to NASA!

[@ElrichPretorius]

Absolutely awesome video :) Thanks for the update!

[@jasperlawrence5361]

Absolutely superb two videos, and am I right in thinking these are your first two? Very well done whatever the number. thanks.

[@debott4538]

I'm once again baffled by the amount of thought and care you put in your videos. It's a joy following your thought process. My initial reaction to your concept proposals was "please don't over-estimate Starship and SpaceX in their capabilties. They haven't even done anything moon related yet." But once again, I stand corrected. Nasa also seems to put more and more trust into them. I just feel like this is too good to be true.

[@originalmin]

Dude - fantastic video. Your channel has good branding, professional production quality, unique concepts and good voiceovers. Well done. Looking forward to the next one.

[@citizenblue]

I absolutely love this type of long form content! Please keep it up! You just got a new subscriber

[@eliyasne9695]

*Your production quality is superb!*

[@EuroFighter59]

This video is awesome. Will deffo share it!

[@nagaea7409]

Great video! i saw the first video you made, it was great quality.

[@mestrohugo]

Really great stuff, keep up the amazing videos

[@morwatou5285]

A wealth of information. Thank you.

[@rayry2010]

Quality content! This was incredibly detailed and fun to watch!

[@chemicheto]

Amazing video man, very well made

[@steverafferty4114]

Quality video guys, great work 👏

[@Verrisin]

Whow, this is amazing content and amazing quality!

[@joebushnell143]

Incredible timing and great insight. Thanks.

[@bertkoerts3991]

Great video, I’m impressed! Please continue!

[@IanValentine147]

This is a great new channel. Thank you!!!

[@chrisintoronto7137]

Great video and I love your logo!

[@mikstratok]

If spaceX delivers on starship, Artemis will be a grandious program, and a worthy successor to Apollo I'm thinking mars by the end of the decade.

[@starmanssciencechannel1834]

Totally agreed, as long as they keep making SLS rockets and RS-25s this program could last for a long time! (Of course, starship has to succeed first)

[@davidhenry5128]

A very well made video that describes excellent options to the currently accepted requirements. I loved it !!!

[@fr3D_The3Dprinting]

Great video!

[@rdmsh]

Fantastic breakdown of all the options and costs

[@davidheller1650]

I think your analysis makes a lot of sense. Let's hope NASA is watching!

[@alisonken1]

Remember - it's not NASA you have to target - it's not nicknamed the Senate Launch System for nothing!

[@floof9789]

Great work, you def earned my sub! 👍🏻

[@OwenCampbellMoore]

Unbelievable quality video. If this was an Everyday Astronaut video I’d be super impressed. Please keep it up and make a Patreon if funding would help!

[@AlcidesBan]

A great video. I like how you to think in really very clever alternatives avoiding the SLS vs Starship war. Great content!!!

[@morwatou5285]

Great content. Thank you.

[@stuartfox8499]

Insightful, educational,interesting and informative.

[@evannibbe9375]

Just imagine if you could convert the SLS funding directly over to just building Starships and getting 4 astronauts per month!

[@aaronmcculloch8326]

and have them stay a few months each, 15 tons of rigging is a lot of mass budget!

[@ayushjaiswal.]

I continued to this long ! Amazing Video ! ♥️♥️

[@reachfaithwithericmoser]

Very awesome video! 👊💥

[@GasztonVizsnyiczai]

Thank you, very nice video. SLS does not advance compared to apollo in any way. Not in cost, not in cadence. I like that you state this in the video. The way forward is cheap launches with high cadence plus orbital refueling, which SLS has no way to ever enable. Great work!

[@jphellify]

great info!

[@pascalarens2492]

Great show

[@lolle18]

One error a 7:17 - there were only 3 Moon flights in 1969, Apollo 10, 11 & 12. Apollo 9 stayed in Earth orbit.

[@mcarpenter2917]

Loved the Vid, Really covered the questions I had about SS/FH/SLS costs and mission profiles I had since SS was picked for HLS. Still so many possibilities and moving parts in space ATM, the next 10 years are going to be fascinating watching this unfold. I'd love to see a speculative video on what you could build on and around the moon, Gateway is funded so there is a basic lunar space station going up. But I've seen little about what a lunar base will need and look like. Anyways, your vid's are very good!! Subbed :)

[@jasonlockhart4647]

Wow what a great video at about 35 minutes I thought to myself man this is a long video thinking I was at about 10 minutes once I realized I was 35 minutes in and then seeing it's over an hour I thought hell yeah this is an awesome video. Definitely got my subscription

[@ironspider9280]

I just found your channel and It's quality is pleasantly surprising. You are the next Tim Dodd. Can't wait to see you reach 1million subs

[@ineoon1941]

AMAZING!!

[@FinneyDale]

After watching your video, I'm really excited about Artemis. Thanks!!!

[@FinneyDale]

Can't wait for the next one

[@WasatchWind]

Fantastic video. I was so excited to hear that Starship won the HLS program - but now it cements just how big a deal that is. This doesn't even factor in the possibility of Starship being crew rated and taking the costs down further - and then making money off of commercial operations on the Moon. Great video, I can't wait to see more!

[@dizbeefpvdizbeliefdizzy3612]

Awesome amazing video thanks.

[@differenttan7366]

Extremely well done video, I did the math myself on lunar starship from Leo mission a while back and got the pretty much same numbers ( I assumed more optimistic payload knocking off one refuelling in leo). I love the idea that someone at nasa maybe hedging their bets with sls knowing they could transit to your cheapest method or eventually a earth>starship>lunar starship >moon>lunar starship>starship>earth method

[@DoryAbelman]

I hope people at NASA see this video! :) I greatly enjoyed watching it and learned at lot

[@justinhuntink1528]

like your vid, well explained, understand your proposals.. subscribed..

[@AnimieBahn]

Well done, nice video! Actually, now even more interesting since Starship has been awarded the HLS contract. 😳 Btw: I also like your background music haha Gives me chills

[@wietsepruijmpie1922]

This is insane!

[@meditaly]

Apogee the man no one asked for but we all needed

[@comediehero]

The amount of math here is insane! No wonder it took you a while. Great video!

[@michaelburton2158]

Excellent analysis of our options to the Moon!

[@kapybara8079]

I loved this video so much! I just love the style you are going for One feedback that I have is that you could probably make the letters bigger in certain moments or use a dark background instead of bright white. But that's just my experience and that might be a bit selfish and biased from me because I personally have a very hard time reading with bright backgrounds and my head hurts a bit :P Either way, awesome video :)

[@Nazar_Melnyk]

Haven't seen this video yet, but it looks like the conclusions of your previous one are slightly wrong! I can't imagine anyone seriously could expect SpaceX to win the competition!

[@spotlizard0374]

I wonder what happened with Dynetics that made them the most expensive by far, plus the reduction in their technical rating from very good to marginal.

[@linecraftman3907]

@@spotlizard0374 the report says that there is no solid solution for the dynetics tanker which is crucial for the system

[@spotlizard0374]

@@linecraftman3907 Yeah that report was really damning for BO and Dynetics. I guess they really had no other choice bedsides Spacex.

[@iamarokotmanson]

YAY new vid

[@McClarinJ]

I'm very impressed! Every member of congress should view this presentation prior to any vote affecting Artemis. I think there was one option overlooked that could vastly reduce the cost and increase the man-hours on the moon and that is when Starship becomes crew-certified. It could deliver dozens of astronauts per mission to the HLS Starship, which could then land them on the moon. There would be no need for any sort of limited capacity capsule and the cost of launching to LEO would be far FAR less than using the Falcon 9. At the same time, the dual Starship approach could bring 50 tons or more of lunar base cargo each trip.

[@LuigiRBedin]

This is the BEST video ever I've seen making a detailed comparison and analysis of the Artemis sustainability. Better than any similar by Tim or Scott. Congratulations! Great job!!! ... I really hope someone at capital hill will see this ... especially NASA managers ; )

[@andrewshirley7105]

keep up the great work man keep the videos coming .do more space x videos and do some space x updates thats a great and easy way to grow your channel.

[@n3cr0ph4g1st]

Really good shit

[@mmeiselph7234]

Another thing about the 2 commercial options. Both Starliner and Dragon were designed explicitly to be able to carry 7 crew, not just 4. If Starship is the landing system (and it is ;) ), 7 crew is not a problem at all. That nearly doubles the human time on the surface (and nearly halves the cost per astronaut, AND offers many more possibilities for including other nations.).

[@privateerburrows]

WOW! What a clever idea! I'm watching this on May 3, over 2 weeks since this video was published; and in the time between NASA selected Starship for the HLS. Now I wonder if it wasn't this video that convinced them... Liked, subscribed; and hit the bell. EDIT: 9 missions a year would soon expand to 12, carrying paying tourists.

[@gyulagyorffy5937]

New video! Yaay

[@mr.president6922]

Duude this video is blowing my mind thanks for your hardwork i love every second on this video and i enjoye with it please don't stop From Morocco

[@jamisonbernard2624]

Good vid

[@veedrac]

While this is a cool approach and much better than SLS+Orion, all of these seem suboptimal without ISRU. Expendable Moonship makes sense because you get 100 tons to the surface for your trouble, so you can't exactly go smaller. But the huge number of launches is a poor fit when you're just ferrying a small number of people for short stays aboard. OTOH, building a full Orion alternative means more substantial upgrades to Dragon for the longer duration two-way trip, and also launching on a Falcon Heavy. Here's my modest proposal: Put a (reusable) Lunar Dragon return capsule on each cargo Moonship, and dump them in lunar orbit before the moon landing. This uses 10-20% of Moonship's payload. This is a short term solution, but is a clear win due to the very low cost. You need to launch a Crew Dragon on a Falcon 9 to get to the Moonship, but that is unmodified, and the return trip Lunar Dragon requires no extra launch, and comparatively very few modifications. In fact, you can probably just store the Crew Dragon aboard the Moonship and use that on return. The development cost is an upgraded heat shield, plus a kick stage to return from lunar orbit. The marginal cost is a F9 launch for the Dragon with upgraded heat shield (the kick stage can be launched with Moonship), and a 10-20% hit to the Moonship's payload. Since F9+Dragon is already human-rated, the total cost should be about the same as Crew Dragon. Multiple Crew Dragon can fly per Moonship, if wanted. Ideally, you'd eventually move to ISRU with a lunar cycler, and so ferry 100+ people per ship. But a Lunar Dragon return capsule can be ready in time for early Artemis, with a fairly low level of investment and extremely low comparative marginal cost to any alternative I've seen.

[@iitzfizz]

Some interesting numbers here

[@hikodzu]

‏nice vid

[@ayushjaiswal.]

F9 + HLS Starship means that spacex can do this all alone lol and wow for SpaceX

[@iamarokotmanson]

Laughs in lack of ExEMU

[@alvianchoiriapriliansyah9882]

@@iamarokotmanson Which who knows, maybe they can start developing it

[@iamarokotmanson]

@@alvianchoiriapriliansyah9882 they are

[@tradingpatternsnotcandles7734]

NASA should thank you :) Great content!

[@richardrigling4906]

Very good analysis. Distilled down, Starship completely changes ANY space cost calculation. 1 or 2 order of magnitude decrease in cost fundamentally obsoletes competing systems. Entire new markets and industries will launch when it be omes available. The transistion period will be . . . fluid.

[@matthewakian2]

0:24 That's just such a beautiful image. Can you imagine lunar farms?

[@Opusss]

The dollar to dollar comparison still falls flat as a comparison due to inflation. The space program during Apollo was receiving 5% of the entire federal budget. Furthermore the decision to go with the space shuttle program actually set us back on overall space exploration progress. Artemis is another example of this kind of decision.

[@Apogeespace]

All prices adjusted for inflation

[@PlaynBass]

Yes!

[@Derlaft]

A couple things regarding your evaluations: 1) There's no need to put any other engine on dragon: it already has dracos. Amazing engine with amazing ISP. Just enough to do everything. 2) You need storable fuels! It's hard to go to the moon with kerolox. 3) It's super-wasteful to go to the moon orbit and back visiting GTO.

[@nisenobody8273]

Imagine what would be possible if Starship were qualified to launch humans from the surface of the Earth to the surface of the Moon, in numbers far greater than four astronauts per mission. Excellent video!

[@SteveBakerIsHere]

SpaceX call the Lunar version of Crew Dragon "Grey Dragon" - there is a Mars version called "Red Dragon"...so they have certainly been thinking about this.

[@dotsmassacre]

For me, the great thing about the CST module design, from a development standpoint is, all of the components that we would have to change to make it containable for trans orbit we already developed for Orion... and the thing is modular and remote modular so, it just clips into a whole range of different command base modules...