That '70s Show.

With tomorrow's launch of NASA'S Artemis I mission, we will see the long-awaited renewal of the American human-based space exploration program. 

Well, not exactly.  Without the pressure of trying to beat the USSR to a Moon landing (although they're keeping an eye on China, apparently) NASA is taking a more careful approach this time.  Artemis I is a 42-day unmanned mission that will orbit the Moon, launch ten compact Cubesats en route, and return.  Artemis II, scheduled for early 2024, will take four astronauts (one Canadian) on a similar flight plan around the Moon, and Artemis III will land the first woman at the south polar region of the Moon in 2025, along with a male astronaut. The eventual goal is to establish a permanent presence in the form of a lunar base - Moonbase Alpha, if you will.  

NASA also plans to start assembly of its Gateway lunar space station in 2024, with the intention of the Artemis III crew being able to make use of new station. However, if there are any delays in the construction schedule, Artemis III will not need to rely on Gateway to complete its planned mission.  

Graphic by The Daily Mail

 
The sad thing is that even though it's been not quite 50 years* since the last lunar landing, NASA is using almost exactly the same non-sustainable approach to space exploration that it used then. Given the delays in project completion** and the cost overruns, I was surprised to learn that the Space Launch System, successor to the legendary Saturn V rocket used for the Apollo missions, uses four RS-25 engines that were literally recycled from the space shuttle program, as was the Orion 1 main engine.  Sadly, this will be their last mission: apparently NASA decided that recovering any of the parts from the core stage of the SLS wasn't feasible.  Similarly, the twin booster rocket sections contain components from the shuttle program, but once again, they will not be recovered.

It seems odd that NASA has taken this approach to the Artemis program, given that SpaceX has been quietly transporting cargo to the ISS since 2012 - and crew since 2020 -  using reusable components such as boosters that land on floating rafts, and the Dragon cargo and crew modules that are salvaged and refurbished for additional missions.  Just to clarify what this means in practical terms, SpaceX charges NASA $67M USD per launch (they've just raised the price from $62M, apparently everyone is suffering because of the supply chain).  

Artemis I?  $23 BILLION TO BUILD AND ANOTHER $4.1 BILLION DOLLARS*** for tomorrow's launch - and it will only fly once.   Sigh...  NASA, the '70s called, they'd like their rocket back.

- Sid

* December 19th, 1972.

** The first SLS launch has been delayed a staggering 15 times since 2010 - I did a blog posting in 2019 with a more optimistic timeline for Artemis than the eventual result.

*** These number comes from The Daily Mail website.  NASA announced in 2017 that it wouldn't be giving cost-per-flight estimates for the SLS, which has to say something about how much it costs.

UPDATE:  The launch was cancelled due to engine problems and is being rescheduled  - well that can't be good...