NASA delays Artemis 2 astronaut moon launch to September 2025

[Admin]

NASA announced today (Jan. 9) that its flagship Artemis 2 moon mission will be delayed until September 2025 due to technical challenges and safety concerns.

NASA delays Artemis 2 astronaut moon launch to September 2025 : Read more

 

[SpaceForce_45]

NASA has taken a step back in the last 3+ years, that is for sure!

 

[CDNSpacefan]

With all the delays, it does make a believer feel like maybe we never did actually land on the moon and return back to the earth safely. I mean back in the 60's when I watched the moon landing, I was in awe. However, today's world and all of our technology we still can't make a space craft to accomplish this mission. The world watched an event happen in one test flight basically. Yet we can't study from history and do it again.
Becoming skeptical.

 

[Wolfshadw]

I would argue that with the advances in technology over the past 50+ years, comes a whole slew of new points of failure that we simply haven't been able to navigate through as yet. I also think this generation lacks "Go Fever" which was so prominent back in the original space race (probably a good thing, too).

I was too young to understand what was happening back then. I'm (much) older and wiser now. I don't mind taking the time to get things right.

Personally, I'd rather not make it than lose any more lives on missions.

-Wolf sends

 

[rod]

With all the delays, it does make a believer feel like maybe we never did actually land on the moon and return back to the earth safely. I mean back in the 60's when I watched the moon landing, I was in awe. However, today's world and all of our technology we still can't make a space craft to accomplish this mission. The world watched an event happen in one test flight basically. Yet we can't study from history and do it again.
Becoming skeptical.

While I did view the Apollo launches and returns from 1968-1972, I can understand folks now questioning the whole program and claims. Continued NASA failures here will edit likely help the skeptics on the Internet or some in the flat earth society that present a flat disk Moon and translucent, so no Apollo missions there. Wolf in post #4 makes some good points.

 

[joelanier]

It is not good trying to engineer your way into a one shot success by creatively applying OTS equipment to new expanded missions or trying to do too much on a dime without allowing budgeting for failures. The OTS equipment is limited in supply, so failure testing is too costly. The 737max was engineered to save money as was the Titanic explorer, and probably the latest example, the Peregrine lunar mission. My guess is the Peregrine mission was funded by all the add-on missions and they probably also had to work on a dime. Musk has it right. Keep testing and failing cheaply, till you end up with a robust resilient system. Start simple and cheaply and fail, fail, fail until you fully understand the engineering and work out all the kinks. Sending Astronauts around the Moon on a second shot, with such a complicated system, is like throwing a hail mary in a football game hoping nothing goes awry. I have never been comfortable with that approach, and I agree with delaying for more robust testing, if that is their approach. Better yet, would be to have SpaceX send a few more dummy capsules around the Moon to test the heatshields. His launches have to be a lot cheaper.

 

[COLGeek]

Listen to this, especially the part about life support expertise:

NASA delays first Artemis mission to the moon to 2025 - https://one.npr.org/i/1223988628:1223988637

 

[CDNSpacefan]

I must say, I am happy with the responses I am seeing. Also, I didn't really mean to make my comment a downer. I am a real space nut. I love the subject of space. I wanted to be an astronaut when I was younger. It is far too late for an old guy like me. However, I think some of my, I'll say disappointment. Is based on wishing that we were already back at the moon.
After reading the above comments. I do not dis-agree with anyone saying that the delay is based on the safety of the astronauts. I too want them to go and come home safely. I also agree with testing, failing, failing, failing, and finally getting it right.

 

[CDNSpacefan]

Listen to this, especially the part about life support expertise:

NASA delays first Artemis mission to the moon to 2025 - https://one.npr.org/i/1223988628:1223988637

That is a great piece of information. Thank you.

 

[DominicML]

Personally, and perhaps this is a bit cynical, but as a lover of space and space travel... I struggle to find the purpose of these Artemis missions. I understand they're meant to help us further understand and prepare for deep space travel in some capacity, but a more cynical part of me sees them as a publicity stunt and waste of funds. I'm hoping somebody can change my mind on that.

 

[Classical Motion]

We need a B-52. Every time will go up there, we want to do it with new tech and new methods and a new craft to do it with. This takes time money and delays.

If we stuck to one model, we wouldn't have this overhead.

 

[billslugg]

NASA is risk averse, see: "Challenger". NASA has a tight budget. Musk does not give a rip and can print money. You do the math.