Artemis I Moon Rocket Arrives at Launch Pad Ahead of Historic Mission
NASA Mission Update
Around 7:30 a.m. EDT the Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft for the Artemis I mission arrived atop Launch Complex 39B at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida after a nearly 10-hour journey from the Vehicle Assembly Building.
In the coming days, engineers and technicians will configure systems at the pad for launch, which is currently targeted for no earlier than Aug. 29 at 8:33 a.m. (two hour launch window). Teams have worked to refine operations and procedures and have incorporated lessons learned from the wet dress rehearsal test campaign and have updated the launch timeline accordingly.
58 responses to “Artemis I Moon Rocket Arrives at Launch Pad Ahead of Historic Mission”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
So here we finally are, well not exactly. Orion still won’t carry any humans into space until 2024 at the earliest. But still a significant test of the Orion during the unmanned Artemis-1 misison.
Gee, to think its only going to take 20 years for the Orion spacecraft, from the original need and description for a “Crew Exploration Vehicle” in 2004 to replace the Space Shuttle, to finally getting people into space in 2024 during the Artemis-2 mission! 20 years, for an oversized, overweight, warmed over Apollo CSM clone. Even the main engine of Orion is essentially derived from the original Apollo main engine, a reused Space Shuttle OMS engine!
As for SLS, poor NASA still can’t escape from the curse of the Space Shuttle. Even today, the legacy of the Space Shuttle plagues NASA, tying it up in porktacular makework, that only delivers a fraction of what it promised. Years behind schedule, and ten times more expensive than advertised.
The worst is yet to come. Perhaps a decade more of the struggling SLS, burning up an additional 30 billion dollars, but only providing at best maybe two lunar landings by 2030.
$L$ delenda est
The “Second Space Age” started in December 2015. It will take a while for the mammals to fill the ecological niches and the Dinosaurs to die off.
The last astronauts returned from the Moon in 1972 on Apollo 17 and that was the end of the first space age. NewSpace is THE END of the dream as its proponents seek to end “government employees” from getting “free rides” in favor of handing it all over to “commercial interests” and pinning faux astronaut wings on billionauts. The obscene spending displays of the uber-rich on space tourist trips are the worst thing that could happen to space exploration. And the disgusting sycophants worshiping Rocket jesus idiotically clap and spew spam. There is no ROI in Human Space Flight. The last bunch of tourists were unhappy about having to work so hard and it did not go well. The novelty of floating in a radiation bath and throwing up while looking out a window will wear off. Musk is all about taking over the internet with Starlink and that is going to fail when he can’t get any more free billion tax-dollar grants. He did not get the last one. His Mars fantasy was always just a scam. Those supporting NewSpace are posers and ANTI-SPACE or just gullible fools. Truth.
there is no second space age
Gee, even Arianespace, ULA, and Roscosmos know today’s space age is different.
New Space, the Second Space Age, call it what you will, its here and its only going to get better.
$L$ delenda est
its not. launching the same old stuff
“its not. launching the same old stuff”
That’s pretty much correct. Not including StarLink missions, which don’t really count as “commercial” missions for SX, below is an analysis I posted about a month ago looking at the first 13 commercial SX missions of the year.
I think what Robert is trying to say, but is not getting across, is that the commercial missions SX is flying were going to fly to space on some booster in any case, whether it was F9, Ariane, Proton, Soyuz, Long March, ULA, Rocket Lab, PSLV, GSLV, or whatever. His point (correct me if I am wrong, Robert) is that SX really hasn’t generated any commercial launches that weren’t going to happen anyway, with or without SX. Of the commercial launches so far this year, we have:
1-Transporter 3: Some sats might not have flown without F9.
2-CSG-2: Clearly going to space.
3-NROL-87: Clearly going to space.
4-Transporter 4: See 1 above.
5-Axiom-1: Wouldn’t have flown without SX.
6-NROL-85: Clearly going to space.
7-Crew-4: Would have gone on Soyuz if no Crew Dragon.
8-Transporter 5: See 1 above.
9-Nilesat-301: Clearly going to space.
10-SARah 1: Clearly going to space.
11-GlobalStar-2: Clearly going to space.
12-SES-22: Clearly going to space.
13-CRS-25: Would have gone via Antares or Progress if no F9.
The ones where I said “Clearly going to space” means that whoever built those sats and/or contracted for those launches was going to do so regardless of the existence of SX.
So out of 13 commercial launches so far, 9 would have gone anyway. Some of the sats on the three transporter missions would have gone anyway, call it 50-50. All of them might have gone on a combo of Rocket Lab, PSLV, and possibly Vega.
This leaves *only* the Axiom-1 mission that was totally dependent on the existence of SX.
Some of the other missions might not have flown as soon as they did, but they would have flown.
So back to Robert’s presumed point, most of what SX is launching hasn’t served to expand the space economy. It’s just a movement of payloads from other launchers to F9, not a huge net increase in commercial payloads overall.
thank you, you said it much better than I did. when I think of “new age” in some system it is primarily 1) expanding the customer base 2) expanding what services are being provided and 3) the economics of those two things
an obvious example of this is either the B707 or the IPM/Clone PC. the closest thing to this in spaceflight is the cubesat movement…but it really is nothing more than taking what was done before and putting it on smaller platforms
and in human spaceflight…we are doing esssentially the same thing Gemini could have done thanks again RGO
There have been major advancements in all three of your chosen metrics over the past seven years. Your case does not stand.
advancements are advancements tehy are not a new age. the 707 was a new age, the PC was a new age,
Starlink launches are very definitely commercial, they just represent deferred profitability. The OneWeb launches on Soyuz also represented an expansion of commercial payload demand. As will the remaining OneWeb launches on F9, GSLV and Terran-R. As will all the upcoming Kuiper launches.
You also manage to overlook the fact that SpaceX’s launch total for the year will be roughly double that of last year and that the 13 “commercial” launches you deign to recognize were done in the first six months of this year and roughly equal the comparable launches SpaceX did during all of last year.
SpaceX has expanded the commercial launch market. The number of annual U.S. government payloads has not changed much in recent years, but commercially-motivated launches have ramped up hugely. And it is hardly a case of SpaceX simply eating the lunches of other launch companies – though that is certainly going on. There are simply a lot more commercial space launches than there used to be.
And my point is that all of those commercial launches would have likely happened on some launch vehicle, with or without SX. Do you honestly believe that the developers of those sats just decided to build them once SX came about? There is no evidence for that.
I did that analysis about a month ago. It was complete at the time. I didn’t redo it because the results would be the same.
Please list the non-StarLink launches that would never have happened without F9.
It has been 12 years and 4 months since President Obama called for a new lift booster in his 2010 speech, to be ready to fly by 2018…
Ready by 2018? Oh, it was worse than that!
13 minutes into his April 2010 space policy speech, Obama bragged that his SLS giant rocket would be operational two year sooner than the Ares V he cancelled.
$L$ delenda est
Pretty clear what you are hating. Just like you can’t stand a person of color landing on the Moon. Transparent, considering spacex would not exist without President Obama.
You can’t rush big hardware, you rush and you get explosions.
Sorry, your Gary Church impersonation is not convincing.
Agree. Nowhere near nasty enough. Needs more nasty.
We had explosions in the late 50s and early 60s when we were also rushing. That worked out pretty well in the end. It will this time too.
The Cult of Musk, like the Cult of Trump, is a corrosive pernicious force ruining everything it touches.
The American space program has been attacked by this legion of Ayn-Rand-in-space-libertarian-whackjobs for going on ten years. The Musk Cult is anti-American in every way and made up of individuals attracted to the bizarre and autocratic character of a narcissist billionaire hobbyist. They are the worst of the worst on the internet, gullible, toxic, cyberthugs.
The SLS is going…to the Moon. And the spacex fanboys, despite years and literally libraries of death-to-SLS propaganda, have not stopped NASA, mostly thanks to Jim Bridenstine, from returning to that prize we never should have taken our eyes off of- the Moon. That place Musk made verboten because his hobby rocket was far too little to go there. Now the shiny, that space shuttle redux that has blown up more times than any other rocket this century, with no escape system, is going nowhere while the SLS goes to the Moon.
How is NASA getting from Lunar Orbit to the Surface of the Moon?
Predictably when you ask a question, the answer to which creates cognative dissonance, the conversation pivots from the topic to an ad hominem attack which gets deleted the day after it is called out.
Forunately NASA has the answer:
https://www.nasa.gov/press-…
lol
Oh well, this is SLSFanboy’s time, when he gets to say “told you so”. Don’t think he won’t be beating us all over the head with this for several years at least 🙂 and it won’t matter what “Rocket Jesus” gets up to in the meantime LoL
This is his time until mission results start coming in.
Maybe. I’ve been watching the NASA briefings on Artemis One objectives and it certainly is a huge step beyond Apollo 8 – actually very ambitious and over 40 days duration. The Orion is truly going to get a work out and from my point of view, hopefully some great modern-camera views of the Moon (rather than 16 mm or whatever it was). I wish them well
Ambitious? I’d agree with you if Orion had a crew aboard, but it won’t. The Artemis-1 mission won’t even test the Orion life support system, as it won’t be installed!
Look at the Artemis-2 mission design, which will be manned. That’s a more fair comparison to Apollo 8. Artemis-2 is a free return lunar flyby, which is much less ambitious than the Apollo 8 mission! Artemis-2 also has a serious chance of being eclipsed by the SpaceX “Dear Moon” lunar tourist mission, which is also a free-return flyby.
$L$ delenda est
Did he tell us that after Artemis IV Orion will depend on NASA purchasing launch services from a commercial launch provider, new-space style?
https://www.nasa.gov/press-…
By the time Artemis V comes around, SLS will be a commercial rocket.
Now just wait until he realizes that the FIA didn’t raise the Karman Line after Apollo 8 or 11, but is actually considering lowering the internationally agreed upon boundary of space from the 100km where it was from the time it was first established through Mercury, Gemini and Apollo to the present, down to possibly as low as 80km.
Sounds more like how NASA handled the Space Shuttle, with a contact to a single launch provider, United Space Alliance (USA), which than managed the subcontractors. It was as commercial as MATS was, but it’s Washington and if they want to call a Donkey a Horse folks will accept it. Likely it will be the same suspects, Lockheed and Boeing, that will channel the money to the rest of the existing gang.
It doesn’t sound the same to me. United Space Alliance provided NASA with support and operations services for NASA’s vehicles, and staffing for NASA run launches.
The shuttles weren’t flown as a service by USA for NASA, and USA couldn’t go and launch a shuttle for anyone but NASA.
What is being described for SLS, with Deep Space Transport launching it for NASA or others sounds more like a commercial launch provider to me.
https://spacenews.com/nasa-…
I’ll go with Toms’ reply on this. It won’t be a commercial rocket in the sense of Falcon or Electron. More like the ‘commercial’ Shuttle with one customer total that also dictates all the details.
To me, a commercial company is the likes of XCOR or Masten that can fail if they make a mistake. I had friends in those companies and regret their passing, but also find that preferable to endless life support for the chosen ones. The true strength of commercial is that success is rewarded while creating the future and that failure has consequences. First impression is that this will not apply here.
To me, the big difference is not whether NASA as a customer is enough business to sustain the company on it’s own, but rather the structure of the agreement – whether it is providing support services to NASA for SLS launches NASA is doing, or whether it is doing SLS launches for NASA, a key indicator being whether it can also do SLS launches for customers who are not NASA, which appears to be the case with Deep Space Transport, LLC.
I see your point. I doubt they will be able to attract business, but they can take it if given the opportunity.
I too find it hard to imagine non-NASA customers beating a path to their door given SLS’s launch costs.
Well Robert, when Apollo 8 went around the Moon they moved the goalposts and Earth orbit stopped being space. Somewhat like the difference between balloons and heavier than air flight. Not the greatest analogy of course but you get the idea.
It is the difference between the Montgolfiers and the Wrights. Some may cite the first successful V2 rocket launch as the beginning, others Sputnik, others Gagarin. In my view, the first space age, from when we actually escaped Earth gravity, lasted just short of 4 years and then ended. When humans again leave Earth’s gravitational field the second space age will begin.
In reality GEO is the best demarcation line regarding where orbital flight ends and “space” begins. The difference between a duck pond and the North Atlantic. Again, not the best analogy when I also sometimes characterize Cislunar Space as the Mediterranean and missions to icy bodies starting with Ceres in the Asteroid Belt and beyond as the Pacific.
The point is that human beings going farther than in circles a couple hundred miles up is Human Space Flight. Beyond Earth Orbit is Human Space Flight.
HSF-BEO is where Artemis is going.
no one is going to the Moon this decade… Muskateers remain calm
Eh?
Even China will land on the Moon by 2030.
$L$ delenda est
nope mid decade 30’s
they are not in any hurry
The shiny is not going to make a very good Lunar Lander, that’s for sure. What a monstrosity.
As I have described in other comments, the logical course is to first place “Fat Workshops” in frozen lunar orbit and deploy Robot Landers to fill the workshops with cosmic ray water shielding derived from lunar ice.
Those two pieces of hardware (and the SHLV to loft them) can provide radiation sanctuaries within ten years. Spinning these constructs with a tether system will eventually provide a Near Sea Level Radiation One Gravity environment. Then a permanent presence in Cislunar Space is enabled.
Hundreds and then thousands of tons of water available in lunar orbit in larger and larger space stations will enable regular human landings. Of course, as above so below and some form of sanctuary will be required for astronauts when they descend to the surface. Either roofed-over regolith covered craters or, ideally, lava tubes. In other words, a Moonbase.
Except anent falling apart. At that the PRC is very much in a hurry. And still picking up speed.
I dont agree but curious. what does PRC fall apart look like? I have a theory how the Russian federation breaks up but what do you think PRC breakup would look like? curious
The PRC would be doing well to still exist even in a radically diminished form by 2030. Most likely, it will be several years into its long dirt nap by then. What it won’t be doing is going to the Moon.
If this flight is succesful, we’re not more than 7 years out from returning to the Moon (which I’ll take it to mean landing on; we’ll certainly be going around the Moon by mid-decade).
We get at least one Moon landing in this decade.
Two landings might be possible, but with a flight rate of only once every two years and the inevitable delays involved with each seperate campaign, significant chunks of a decade start getting eaten up…
It’ll be a lot more than two. Not by NASA using SLS-Orion, of course.
Time to show NewSpace and the SpaceX Fanboys what a real rocket is capable of!!
Oh? The very real Falcon Heavy launched into a Mars crossing orbit four and a half years ago, and also recovered its own boosters for reuse.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
But your giant orange rocket? Your money pit? Your 3 billion dollars per year exercise in pork barrel spending, has been in development since 2006, even though it’s reliant on actual bits and pieces salvaged from the cancelled Space Shuttle.
Orange rocket Bad!
They could have went with Sidemount and be on the Moon or close to it right now. Except for a certain “entrepreneur” promising a cheap ride to the ISS.
It took spacex ten years to finally provide that “cheap ride.” NewSpace has set space exploration back at least a decade and the damage is accumulating. The worst thing that has ever happened to space exploration, worse than both shuttle disasters.
Ha!
Yeah. Launching once-only, getting almost none of what is launched back, and then having to wait at least two more years to do it all again. Such fun!
Well, hopefully this is a big success like the long overdue and budget busting James Webb has been. I certainly would have done it differently, and still would, but as long as it’s going, I’ll be looking forward to a good launch.
Mainly, I’d just like to finally get this show on the road. I’ve been waiting for another lunar landing since the 70s. This test flight will just be a stepping stone, so I’m not particularly excited, though perhaps that’ll change once I see the big rocket actually fire up. I’ll start getting more engaged for the crewed flight around the Moon though, for sure.
What a waste of money (didn’t have to be this expensive or throw away), but if it finally gets crew on and around the Moon again and opens the door for more sustainable options, it’ll have been worth it
Let’s hope we have a good flight to mark the end of the summer launch season. And what a season it was.
I was hoping it and Starship could share a launch day.
I’ll be happy if they share the same launch year. That will be good enough.
I personally prefer “Muskatoons”.
not bad
If Muskatoons were on TV on Saturday mornings, I’d watch them.
well said I do watch them some on their various Utube channels.
Go SLS!!