Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday June 02 2020, @03:02PM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the to-boldly-go-where-only-a-few-men-have-gone-before dept.

Third European Service Module for Artemis Mission to Land Astronauts on the Moon:

It's official: when astronauts land on the Moon in 2024 they will get there with help from the European Service Module. The European Space Agency signed a contract with Airbus to build the third European Service Module for NASA's Orion spacecraft that will ferry the next astronauts to land on the Moon.

NASA's Artemis program is returning humans to the Moon with ESA's European Service Module supplying everything needed to keep the astronauts alive on their trip in the crew module – water, air, propulsion, electricity, a comfortable temperature as well as acting as the chassis of the spacecraft.

The third Artemis mission will fly astronauts to Earth's natural satellite in 2024 – the first to land on the Moon since Apollo 17 following a hiatus of more than 50 years.

ESA's director of Human and Robotic Exploration David Parker said: "By entering into this agreement, we are again demonstrating that Europe is a strong and reliable partner in Artemis. The European Service Module represents a crucial contribution to this, allowing scientific research, development of key technologies, and international cooperation – inspiring missions that expand humankind's presence beyond Low Earth Orbit."

[...] The first European Service Module is being handed over to NASA at their Kennedy Space Center for an uncrewed launch next year, and the second is in production at the Airbus integration hall in Bremen, Germany.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Could Corporations Control Territory in Space? Under New US Rules, It Might Be Possible 58 comments

Could corporations control territory in space? Under new US rules, it might be possible:

First, the Artemis Accords go beyond simply rejecting the unpopular 1979 Moon Agreement, which declared lunar resources to be the "common heritage of mankind" and committed parties to establish an international regime to oversee space mining. Only 18 countries have signed the treaty.

In its place, the accords envisage a US-centric framework of bilateral agreements in which "partner nations" agree to follow US-drafted rules.

Second, the accords introduce the concept of "safety zones" around lunar operations.

Although territorial claims in space are prohibited under international law, these safety zones would seek to protect commercial and scientific sites from inadvertent collisions and other forms of "harmful interference". What kinds of conduct could count as harmful interference remains to be determined.

Previously:
(2020-06-02) Third European Service Module for Artemis Mission to Land Astronauts on the Moon
(2020-05-16) NASA Wants Partner Nations to Agree to "Artemis Accords" for Lunar Exploration
(2020-03-12) CoronaVirus (SARS-CoV-2) Roundup 2020-03-12
(2018-07-22) Who Owns The Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers
(2018-03-07) China to Recruit Civilian Astronauts, Partner With Russia on Upcoming Missions
(2018-01-09) Russia Assembles Engineering Group for Lunar Activities and the Deep Space Gateway
(2017-10-18) Bigelow and ULA to Put Inflatable Module in Orbit Around the Moon by 2022
(2015-11-26) Who Owns Space? USA's Asteroid-Mining Act is Dangerous and Potentially Illegal

Robert Heinlein explored the notion in a novel. Does the future of space exploration lie with governments or corporations?


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 02 2020, @04:26PM (7 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 02 2020, @04:26PM (#1002212)

    Did anyone else get slightly nauseous the 20th time you heard the phrase "American Astronauts launched on an American made rocket from American soil"?

    There was also a brief segue during the SpaceX launch coverage into the SpaceForce stuff... which made it all clear to me why Russia suddenly started saber rattling with their new submarine base killer Hbomb torpedoes shortly after the Cheeto in Chief took office.

    At least there's still functional international cooperation in the major programs going forward, trampoline jokes notwithstanding.

    --
    John Galt is a selfish crybaby [huffpost.com].
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by takyon on Tuesday June 02 2020, @04:53PM (3 children)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday June 02 2020, @04:53PM (#1002223) Journal

      There was also a brief segue during the SpaceX launch coverage into the SpaceForce stuff... which made it all clear to me why Russia suddenly started saber rattling with their new submarine base killer Hbomb torpedoes shortly after the Cheeto in Chief took office.

      Space Force changes nothing about what the Air Force was already doing. U.S., Russia, and China have been working on new weapons for years, such as hypersonic missiles.

      Is this the torpedo you're talking about?

      https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/new-russian-submarine-carries-ultimate-doomsday-weapon-155081 [nationalinterest.org]

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 02 2020, @05:49PM (2 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 02 2020, @05:49PM (#1002258)

        No, 2MT 108knots unlimited range unmanned - that's a different beast.

        The one I remember from early 2017 was a 20MT "base buster" intended to neutralize targets like King's Bay submarine base. I live a bit over 50 miles from King's Bay - 20MT going off there would be... unpleasant.

        I agree that "SpaceForce" is nothing new, capability wise. It's more of a PR package: emphasizing the space capabilities the same way that the Air Force emphasizes airborne capabilities, etc. However, just putting "SpaceForce" on a broadcast like the SpaceX launch seemed completely counter to the "Came in peace, for all mankind" messaging of my youth.

        All these weapons programs happen all the time - lots of them (like X37) try to keep as low a profile as possible. A reorg like Space Force doesn't just invite Netflix mini-series lampooning, it's the US equivalent of a big "in your face" parade of the big guns down the capital city center street. Maybe that's why the Don visited North Korea, besides affording the CIA an opportunity to slip some poison to Kim Jong Un, he was probably looking for parade tips.

        --
        John Galt is a selfish crybaby [huffpost.com].
        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Tuesday June 02 2020, @06:10PM (1 child)

          by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday June 02 2020, @06:10PM (#1002273) Journal

          I live a bit over 50 miles from King's Bay - 20MT going off there would be... unpleasant.

          It will look 33% prettier than Castle Bravo, at least.

          However, just putting "SpaceForce" on a broadcast like the SpaceX launch seemed completely counter to the "Came in peace, for all mankind" messaging of my youth.

          It sounds like a mismatch, but I would have to see that segment. SpaceX has routinely thanked the U.S. Air Force for monitoring their launches. If Space Force is taking over that duty then it makes sense to mention them or even give them a small commercial during the broadcast (like what they do for customers, for example Qatar in Nov. 2018).

          Also, Space Force participation seems to go beyond that:

          Space Force rescue units prepare for ‘new era’ of commercial human spaceflight [spacenews.com]

          Three hours before the SpaceX Crew Dragon launch May 30, teams of combat rescue specialists staged at military bases in Florida, South Carolina and Hawaii went on alert status in the event of a mission abort.

          The task force of about 150 personnel and eight aircraft is under the command of the U.S. Space Force’s 45th Space Wing at Patrick Air Force Base, Fla. It is deployed to ensure that if astronauts abort the mission, they are recovered anywhere in the world where they might land.

          The U.S. military’s rescue units have supported NASA operations for six decades but this is a “new era” because astronauts are flying in commercial capsules and each requires different procedures and training, said Maj. Gen. John Shaw, commander of the Combined Force Space Component of U.S. Space Command at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California.

          “We are supporting three capsules,” Shaw said June 1 during a SpaceNews online event. In addition to SpaceX Crew Dragon, troops are training to rescue astronauts from Boeing’s Starliner and Lockheed Martin’s Orion capsules.

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 02 2020, @07:15PM

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 02 2020, @07:15PM (#1002295)

            I would have to see that segment.

            It was brief - I remember being a little surprised that NASA TV didn't even show a still of T(he)rump watching the launch, but then they started spouting Space Force military capability this, control of space that, ensure the safety of our assets the other, and then they moved on.

            --
            John Galt is a selfish crybaby [huffpost.com].
    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday June 02 2020, @09:24PM (2 children)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 02 2020, @09:24PM (#1002375) Journal

      Did anyone else get slightly nauseous the 20th time you heard the phrase [ ...phrase removed for your protection... ]

      It's probably pent up pride mixed with piss off't ness at politicians for letting America get into a situation where it had no manned launch capability. How could this happen? Politicians!

      SLS will be ready any decade now!

      The Lunacy of NASA’s Pretend Moon Program [insidesources.com]


      Jim Bridenstine is lucky staffers at the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice don’t pursue bureaucrats for violating U.S. truth-in-advertising laws.

      If they did, NASA’s administrator would be in the slammer.

      Whether it’s the press releases his agency regularly issues, or the blog entries “he” writes, Bridenstine is responsible for the boast that NASA “will land the first woman and next man on the Moon” by 2024.

      No one who has studied America’s manned-spaceflight program to any significant degree believes that NASA will accomplish such a ludicrously ambitious goal. And Bridenstine should stop claiming that it can.

      --
      This Christmas season is the most likely to see Missile Tow instead of large artillery pieces being toed.
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 02 2020, @09:37PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 02 2020, @09:37PM (#1002385)

        I was living next to the Houston Space Center when Bush (W) announced "his bold initiative to return to the moon." Nobody got terribly excited about it, good news to be sure, some more money, less layoffs in the near term, but hardly credible.

        --
        John Galt is a selfish crybaby [huffpost.com].
      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday June 02 2020, @09:54PM

        by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday June 02 2020, @09:54PM (#1002403) Journal

        They could definitely do it by 2024 if they wanted to. Build the dumb Lunar Gateway segments, launch them with Falcon Heavy rockets, send astronauts*, use the lander module. The technology involved is not novel.

        Will it happen on time? Meh. 2028 was the original plan.

        NASA no longer counting on Gateway for 2024 moon landing [spaceflightnow.com]

        *Maybe they have to drop Orion [wikipedia.org] from the plan.

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2020, @02:35PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2020, @02:35PM (#1002731)

    sheesh someone teach them boeings and easa some basic financial knowledge:
    for two non-selfsustaining outerspace projects the one that uses reusable rockets wins, everytime (unless ofc, for example making a 10 time reusable rocket ten times more expensive).
    boeing and esa should totally ignore anything "outerspace" and redo their first step: that is getting off the planet with the same hardware, multiple times.
    it's like some else said: sinking your ocean linear after one ocean crossing.
    boeing and esa (ariane) talking about "spaceships" is like talking about the designing a new pier at arrival site for the ship that sinks on arrival.
    ofc, all this "throw away, one way rocketry" is a grandfathered philosophy from the atom bomb times: rockets were primarly (just like "civilian" reactors) ment to deliver bombs!
    you're not going to put much research into resuable rockets that deliver atom bomb. you just hope the thing flies and doesn't fall back on your head!
    so one could say that each and every on-way, one-use, exo-athmosphere rocket TODAY is acctually a atom bomb delivery mechanism in disguise, dressed up with "civilian" payloads, that at a whim could turn into a bomb carrier.
    the "sputnik" shock was really about parking a potential bomb in orbit and everybody was hopeing the "ewwp", "ewwwp" interval it was emitting was getting shorter and shorter, signalling it is homeing in to a target.
    the first person to orbit was another shock: it meant that jamming a orbital parked nuked would not work, since now a unjammable trigger finger attached to a astronaut could be sent up to ... push the button if need be.
    so, dear boeing and esa stop disguising your silly one way atom bomb delivery mechanisms as outerspace exploration enabling devices ...

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2020, @04:02PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2020, @04:02PM (#1002778)

    If you are an astronaut on that, given the EU's track record for landing things on other bodies, talk about a sphincter-clencher as you are approaching the surface!

(1)