Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by hubie on Wednesday November 23, @09:59PM   Printer-friendly
from the fly-me-to-the-moon dept.

So far, NASA's ambitious Artemis I mission seems to be going swimmingly. The Orion spacecraft has performed a number of propulsive burns, flying smoothly past the Moon, and will now test out its capabilities in deep space.

On Monday evening, after flying around the Moon, the spacecraft returned images of the flyby back to Earth via the Deep Space Network. While no humans are on board Orion during this test flight, they will be during its next mission. The views of the Moon from human spacecraft—the first in more than half a century—were brilliant.

[...] All of the separation events, including the solid rocket boosters and first and second stages, were nominal. Every performance metric in terms of thrust and accuracy was either on target or within less than 0.3 percent of what was predicted, Sarafin said. In terms of dropping off the Orion spacecraft in its desired payload, the rocket was off by just three miles, a remarkably small error.

Sarafin acknowledged that the extreme thrust of the Space Launch System rocket caused some damage to the mobile launch tower that supports the rocket during fueling and countdown operations. There was damage at the base of the launch stand where the boosters produce thrust and breakage of some pneumatic lines that carry gases to the vehicle. The violent shaking from the launch also broke the tower's access elevator and blew its doors off.

[...] The spacecraft's next big move will come on Friday, when its main engine will burn for a little more than a minute to place it into a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon, taking it far out into deep space to test the ability of Orion to maintain a constant interior temperature and stress other systems. Then the vehicle will fly by the Moon again on December 5 before burning its engines for home.

Original Submission

This discussion was created by hubie (1068) for logged-in users only. Log in and try again!
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.
  • (Score: 2, Troll) by Snotnose on Wednesday November 23, @11:28PM (4 children)

    by Snotnose (1623) on Wednesday November 23, @11:28PM (#1281349)

    they were using old, unused Space Shuttle engines with boosters that matched those on the Space Shuttle.

    Those in combination were supposed to be cheap and quick to orbit.

    Considering they weren't cheap, nor quick to orbit, why am I not surprised they cost more to launch than expected.

    Musk has proved time and time again it's time to get congre$$ out of $pace "my district, my vote".

    The Word Of the Day (WOD) is finicky. As in, "sharks avoid the sewage discharge pipe because they make their finicky".
    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23, @11:40PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23, @11:40PM (#1281353)

      That he's an asshole.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24, @07:35AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24, @07:35AM (#1281420)

        You're the asshole for calling Musk one. Give information and let us decide if he's an asshole.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by RS3 on Thursday November 24, @07:46AM

      by RS3 (6367) on Thursday November 24, @07:46AM (#1281423)

      Actually they're used Shuttle engines. From the Wikipedia page []:

      Artemis 1 was launched on the Block 1 variant of the Space Launch System.[18] The Block 1 vehicle consists of a core stage, two five-segment solid rocket boosters (SRBs) and an upper stage. The core stage uses four RS-25D engines, all of which have previously flown on Space Shuttle missions.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by ElizabethGreene on Wednesday November 23, @11:54PM (1 child)

    by ElizabethGreene (6748) on Wednesday November 23, @11:54PM (#1281358)

    Nasa reportedly asked the press not to photograph the launch tower after the launch. If there is one way to guarantee it's going to get photographed, it's to ask people not to do it. Source: []

    I also read reports that something fell off and struck the spacecraft, which is far more concerning than damage to the launchpad.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Thursday November 24, @02:03AM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday November 24, @02:03AM (#1281373)

      My impression of the Apollo days is that problems such as this were treated as: no harm, no foul and the band played on.

      I wouldn't be surprised at all if there were launch gantry repairs after each Saturn V launch, written up as "routine maintenance".

      They certainly had film of massive ice sheets crashing down as the rocket cleared the tower. Of course an elevator door blowing back into a gimbaling engine would be bad news, but IIRC there was an Apollo mission that continued on 4 engines after a problem in one.

      Україна досі не є частиною Росії.
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by pTamok on Thursday November 24, @07:40AM

    by pTamok (3042) on Thursday November 24, @07:40AM (#1281422)

    I have not had enough caffeine yet to write a proper allusion to The (original) Italian Job (1969), and the classic line uttered by Charlie Croker, played by Michael Caine []. Just make one up.