US fails to land on the Moon

[Ug make hammer]

The US's moon mission now has 'no chance' of landing on the moon after a fuel leak that started hours following the launch

Peregrine, a lunar lander meant to land on the moon, is leaking fuel and won't reach its target, according to Astrobotic, which built it.

www.businessinsider.com

You can find dozens of articles announcing the launch of "Peregrine" but pretty much nothing about its failure. In my opinion, US citizens should be outraged that despite huge advances in technology, the US is stumbling in the attempt to repeat what they did fifty years ago. I think it's hugely unlikely that the human missions will continue on schedule.

Note though, that in space nomenclature the mission was not a "failure." It was a "partial success" because it didn't outright blow up.

China says its moon mission is on track as Nasa suffers setbacks - Times of India

China News: China said its lunar exploration program is on track to hit a target to launch in coming months, with its confident update contrasting with two high-p.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It's likely that China will set the next milestone: soft landing and return with samples, from the far side of the Moon.

 

[PoS]

Space vehicles are extremely complex machinery, and anytime you build a new one, even with new tech, theres still going to be lots of glitches and false starts, because you cant really test them until they actually get to space.

The Russian Soyuz rockets still use 1960s tech for a reason. Why? Because theyre tried and true. Even SpaceX nearly went bankrupt during their start up phase- it was the final launch of their first series that saved them, but they were hanging on by a thread before that.

Personally, I think NASA shouldnt be involved in any SLS missions, and it ought to be done by private firms instead.

 

[RetiredUSN]

US citizens should be outraged

Most Americans already have enough worries.

Gathering a few moon rocks isn't one of them.

 

[trouble13]

Most Americans already have enough worries.

Gathering a few moon rocks isn't one of them.

There's more at stake than a few moon rocks.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Personally, I think NASA shouldnt be involved in any SLS missions, and it ought to be done by private firms instead.

On principle, I think US government spending should go to US firms (whether Boeing or Space X or whatever) not Russian or Chinese ones.

Webb was launched with a European booster, which I'm neutral about. It was reliable compared to US boosters of the time (and the payload was VERY expensive,) and I'd rather send money to Europe than to China or Russia.

 

[trouble13]

There is still a lot of scientific value in exploring the moon. We know very little about the things in space including our moon. The moon holds many clues to learn from.

 

[RetiredUSN]

There's more at stake than a few moon rocks.

I was referring to the outrage

Most Americans already have enough worries on their plate. Moon rocks are the least of them.

 

[PoS]

On principle, I think US government spending should go to US firms (whether Boeing or Space X or whatever) not Russian or Chinese ones.

Webb was launched with a European booster, which I'm neutral about. It was reliable compared to US boosters of the time (and the payload was VERY expensive,) and I'd rather send money to Europe than to China or Russia.

The Ariane family of rockets dates back from the early 1970s, with slight mods.

If NASA wants a guaranteed no glitch tech to take to the moon, then they ought to start building Saturn Vs all over again. Those rockets have a 100% success rate.

 

[Ug make hammer]

I was referring to the outrage

Most Americans already have enough worries on their plate. Moon rocks are the least of them.

So, in your opinion, will Trump cancel Artemis and let the Chinese have the glory?

Chinese are damn good at building stuff, and they have lower standards of human risk. They won't just land on the moon, they will establish a permanent colony. You OK with that?

 

[RetiredUSN]

So, in your opinion, will Trump cancel Artemis and let the Chinese have the glory?

I could give a shit about Trump. He hasn't been in office for 3 years and your throwing this bilge out?

 

[Ug make hammer]

I could give a shit about Trump. He hasn't been in office for 3 years and your throwing this bilge out?

You took a populist line practically identical to what I'd expect of Trump. In deed and word, he has made it plain that US reputation overseas does not matter to him.

So I ask you again, are you comfortable with China taking the lead on lunar exploration, and perhaps also colonization? Are immediate concerns like inflation more important than that?

 

[RetiredUSN]

You took a populist line practically identical to what I'd expect of Trump.

Another assumption by you.



America has much bigger problems to deal with right now.

So Yeah...........................moon rocks are extremely low on the working mans list of concerns to be outraged over.

 

[Airyaman]

For so many years I would laugh at "conspiracy theories" about the moon landing. Lately, with some many failures, I'm not so sure anymore.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Unfortunately, the US's inability to achieve a past success is probably one of our biggest issues as a nation and is more evidence that we are in the late empire stage.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Another assumption by you.

And another failure by you, to answer a relevant question.

In fact, you've avoided the whole question of the thread. I'm getting the impression you want to cancel Artemis entirely. If that's so, is your opinion based on the recent failure, or are you opposed to space exploration of all kinds?

 

[samiam5211]

The US's moon mission now has 'no chance' of landing on the moon after a fuel leak that started hours following the launch

Peregrine, a lunar lander meant to land on the moon, is leaking fuel and won't reach its target, according to Astrobotic, which built it.

www.businessinsider.com

You can find dozens of articles announcing the launch of "Peregrine" but pretty much nothing about its failure. In my opinion, US citizens should be outraged that despite huge advances in technology, the US is stumbling in the attempt to repeat what they did fifty years ago. I think it's hugely unlikely that the human missions will continue on schedule.

Note though, that in space nomenclature the mission was not a "failure." It was a "partial success" because it didn't outright blow up.

China says its moon mission is on track as Nasa suffers setbacks - Times of India

China News: China said its lunar exploration program is on track to hit a target to launch in coming months, with its confident update contrasting with two high-p.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It's likely that China will set the next milestone: soft landing and return with samples, from the far side of the Moon.

This is why private industry will do better.

Not because private industry is better, but because people do not accept it when the government fails.

If the government had one of the failures that SpaceX has had, people would be calling for NASA to be dissolved.

 

[Ug make hammer]

For so many years I would laugh at "conspiracy theories" about the moon landing. Lately, with some many failures, I'm not so sure anymore.

It's an old example, but when Hubble went first light and was out of focus, I considered a conspiracy. It just seemed incomprehensible that British and American engineers could make a middle school math mistake. But since then, there have been many international collaborations which were flawless.

NASA does science very well. They don't have a clue about launch systems. Remember the Shuttle?

 

[samiam5211]

It's an old example, but when Hubble went first light and was out of focus, I considered a conspiracy. It just seemed incomprehensible that British and American engineers could make a middle school math mistake. But since then, there have been many international collaborations which were flawless.

NASA does science very well. They don't have a clue about launch systems. Remember the Shuttle?

I remember that two of the 135 launches ended in disaster.

 

[Ug make hammer]

I remember that two of the 135 launches ended in disaster.

Which is fine for a satellite launch system. Problem is, Shuttle was used from the start for manned launches.

Shuttle was also far too expensive. Re-use is supposedly cheaper, but there's a limit on how many re-uses are economical. Maintenance costs go up even more steeply than military aircraft, because of the travail of thrust-to-weight.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Gathering a few moon rocks isn't one of them.

There's more at stake than a few moon rocks.

Synchronized response?

 

[Ug make hammer]

Synchronized response?

"Moon rocks" is pretty old rhetoric. Some Americans opposed the Apollo program you know.

Ironically, they were mostly left wingers, who considered landing people on the Moon to be nationalistic posturing, when the money could better be spent on social programs. I wonder if @RetiredUSN used to be one of them ...

 

[BirdinHand]

Something new that NASA was trying failed?

Shocking.

They’ll gather data from this mistake, correct the error and try again.

Scientists fail frequently. It is part of the process.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Something new that NASA was trying failed?

Shocking.

They’ll gather data from this mistake, correct the error and try again.

Scientists fail frequently. It is part of the process.

NASA aren't just scientists. They're more a task force of scientists, engineers and administrators.

While it's fair to say that science progresses most when it fails, the same can't be said for engineering. Fuel leaks shouldn't happen at all, and if they happen in atmosphere the usual result is "catastrophic failure."

 

[VySky]

The US's moon mission now has 'no chance' of landing on the moon after a fuel leak that started hours following the launch

Peregrine, a lunar lander meant to land on the moon, is leaking fuel and won't reach its target, according to Astrobotic, which built it.

www.businessinsider.com

You can find dozens of articles announcing the launch of "Peregrine" but pretty much nothing about its failure. In my opinion, US citizens should be outraged that despite huge advances in technology, the US is stumbling in the attempt to repeat what they did fifty years ago. I think it's hugely unlikely that the human missions will continue on schedule.

Note though, that in space nomenclature the mission was not a "failure." It was a "partial success" because it didn't outright blow up.

China says its moon mission is on track as Nasa suffers setbacks - Times of India

China News: China said its lunar exploration program is on track to hit a target to launch in coming months, with its confident update contrasting with two high-p.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It's likely that China will set the next milestone: soft landing and return with samples, from the far side of the Moon.

Let SpaceX do it.

 

[VySky]

NASA aren't just scientists. They're more a task force of scientists, engineers and administrators.

While it's fair to say that science progresses most when it fails, the same can't be said for engineering. Fuel leaks shouldn't happen at all, and if they happen in atmosphere the usual result is "catastrophic failure."

My father was an SES'er at NASA. Grew up in Huntsville Alabama where he was hired out of college into the Gemini program. Dr Von Braun had a great team.

After the war NASA was able to get most of Germany's propulsion guys (buzz bomb dudes) and Russia grabbed the scientists. If we remember the Apollo/SOYUZ spacecraft docking in 1975 with the infamous handshake in the hatch it only happened due to NASA's outstanding Aeronautical Engineers.

The Russians couldn't follow NASA drawings on how to construct the hatch on the SOYUZ. If I recall they tried 4 times before letting NASA do it for them. Which we did enabling the iconic joint docking at SOYUZ

NASA clearly benefited for being heavily reliant on engineering to achieve its scientific objectives.

However, in 1966 walking the halls at NASA, particularly in Huntsville, it benefited you to speak German