#uncrewed flight

[falconisinstartup]

MaxQ New Shepard abort

#blue origin #new shepard #abort #in flight anomaly #rocket #uncrewed flight #g forces #be-3 #solid rocket engine #ns-23 #aerospace #engineering

[identifying-spacecraft-in-posts]

Roscosmos Space Shuttle 1K 1.01 Buran (Snowstorm)

Antonov An-225 Mriya (Dream)

#I'm so upset that both these vehicles have been destroyed #first the Buran when it's hangar roof collapsed at Baikonur due to years of neglect #and then the Mriya during the attack on Kyiv in 2022 #there are incomplete examples of both which could in theory be finished with enough funding #but I don't have the money to do it #the Soviet space shuttle program was interesting #in several ways the Soviet design was superior to the American one #it's booster rocket - Energia - used kerosene and liquid oxygen as opposed to the solid rocket boosters of the US shuttle #this meant the engines could be shut down in an emergency #and you wouldn't have an accident like the one which destroyed Challenger #the Buran was also fully autonomous #it's first flight was uncrewed and it managed to land itself back on the runway after reentry #an impressive feat for the technology of the time #thanks for the ask! #roscosmos #buran #space shuttle

[michaelgabrill]

60 Years Ago: Gemini 1 Flies a Successful Uncrewed Test Flight

On April 8, 1964, Gemini 1 successfully completed the first uncrewed test flight of the Gemini spacecraft and its Titan II booster. The three-orbit mission proved the structural integrity of the spacecraft and the launch vehicle, paving the way for a second uncrewed test flight and ultimately missions with astronauts. The primary goals of Project […] from NASA https://ift.tt/MJoDr1d

#NASA #space #60 Years Ago: Gemini 1 Flies a Successful Uncrewed Test Flight #Michael Gabrill

[apas-95]

Did you know that NASA engineers considered the failure rate of some critical shuttle parts to be about 1 in 100 (significantly greater than what NASA upper-management considered the failure rate to be, and what was considered at all acceptable by the certification process)?

Do you know that NASA engineers currently have no idea how many rocket launches the next mission in the Artemis program (in 2 years!) is meant to involve, because the mission plan relies on SpaceX being contracted to deliver a supply of cryogenic fuel to the crewed Orion (™ Lockheed-Martin) capsule in orbit - a procedure that 1: has never been attempted before on any spacecraft, let alone the Orion™ capsule, not even in uncrewed technology demonstration flights; and 2: would require an as-of-yet unknown number of SpaceX 'Starship' launches, because said vehicle does not actually exist at time of writing?

Did you know they're planning on using this 'starship' as the crewed lander? A design for a lunar ascent vehicle, that is, that does not use hypergolic fuel, that relies on a swing-out crane as the only entry and egress point? During the original moon landings, the LEM had so many redundant methods to make sure it got astronauts off the surface of the moon, that in the most absurd, extreme case, where every single mechanism fails, there's a procedure trained into the astronauts to climb around the outside of the capsule, take a pair of bolt-cutters from the equipment box, physically cut the couplings holding the capsule to the lander stage, and take off to get home. Artemis' proposed lander, on the other hand, is planned to be a vehicle whose design didn't even include heatshields until it was realised it would obviously need heatshields, which are ceramic tiles bolted after-the-fact directly through the steel hull, because SpaceX had decided to mass-produce the original-design hull sections all at once for all the 'starships' first, before doing any integrated testing.

We're seeing the exact attitude that led to the shuttle disasters not being prevented now expressing itself in (and even through) the Artemis program, a project pushed harder and faster through the gates than it should be, by a government (and NASA administration thereby) desperate to advance the eponymous Artemis Accords (that goes unsigned by China, Russia, and much of the world) and reneg on all previous space charters that onsidered ownership, commercial exploitation, and military usage of space forbidden. Something bad is going to happen, and it's going to happen for the sake of SpaceX and the military-industrial complex at large.

[rodspurethoughts]

SpaceX's Starship Rocket Suffers Major Setback in Inaugural Test Flight, Explodes Four Minutes After Liftoff

Starship Test Flight Mission SpaceX’s Starship rocket, which is designed to facilitate multi-planetary life, suffered a major setback during an inaugural test flight on Thursday. Although the 400-foot-tall rocket successfully lifted off the launch pad, it failed to separate from its booster and exploded four minutes after liftoff. The uncrewed spacecraft had been expected to complete a 90-minute…

View On WordPress

#booster #engine malfunction #Hawaii #inaugural test flight #livestream #MaxQ #methane fuel #multi-planetary life #NASA #reliability #reusable moon shuttle #reward #risks #rocket #Space Travel #SpaceX #SpaceX staff #Starship #uncrewed spacecraft

[nasa]

What is Artemis I?

On November 14, NASA is set to launch the uncrewed Artemis I flight test to the Moon and back. Artemis I is the first integrated flight test of the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, the Orion spacecraft, and Exploration Ground Systems at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. These are the same systems that will bring future Artemis astronauts to the Moon.

Standing 322 feet (98 meters) tall, the SLS rocket comprises of a core stage, an upper stage, two solid boosters, and four RS-25 engines. The SLS rocket is the most powerful rocket in the world, able to carry 59,500 pounds (27 metric tons) of payloads to deep space — more than any other vehicle. With its unprecedented power, SLS is the only rocket that can send the Orion spacecraft, astronauts, and cargo directly to the Moon on a single mission.

Before launch, Artemis I has some big help: the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at KSC is the largest single-story building in the world. The VAB was constructed for the assembly of the Apollo/Saturn V Moon rocket, and this is where the SLS rocket is assembled, maintained, and integrated with the Orion spacecraft. 

The mobile launcher is used to assemble, process, and launch the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft. The massive structure consists of a two-story base and a tower equipped with a number of connection lines to provide the rocket and spacecraft with power, communications, coolant, and fuel prior to launch.

Capable of carrying 18 million pounds (8.2 million kg) and the size of a baseball infield, crawler-transporter 2 will transport SLS and Orion the 4.2 miles (6.8 km) to Launch Pad 39B. This historic launch pad was where the Apollo 10 mission lifted off from on May 18, 1969, to rehearse the first Moon landing.

During the launch, SLS will generate around 8.8 million pounds (~4.0 million kg) of thrust, propelling the Orion spacecraft into Earth’s orbit. Then, Orion will perform a Trans Lunar Injection to begin the path to the Moon. The spacecraft will orbit the Moon, traveling 40,000 miles beyond the far side of the Moon — farther than any human-rated spacecraft has ever flown.

The Orion spacecraft is designed to carry astronauts on deep space missions farther than ever before. Orion contains the habitable volume of about two minivans, enough living space for four people for up to 21 days. Future astronauts will be able to prepare food, exercise, and yes, have a bathroom. Orion also has a launch abort system to keep astronauts safe if an emergency happens during launch, and a European-built service module that fuels and propels the spacecraft.

While the Artemis I flight test is uncrewed, the Orion spacecraft will not be empty: there will be three manikins aboard the vehicle. Commander Moonikin Campos will be sitting in the commander’s seat, collecting data on the vibrations and accelerations future astronauts will experience on the journey to the Moon. He is joined with two phantom torsos, Helga and Zohar, in a partnership with the German Aerospace Center and Israeli Space Agency to test a radiation protection vest.

A host of shoebox-sized satellites called CubeSats help enable science and technology experiments that could enhance our understanding of deep space travel and the Moon while providing critical information for future Artemis missions.

At the end of the four-week mission, the Orion spacecraft will return to Earth. Orion will travel at 25,000 mph (40,000 km per hour) before slowing down to 300 mph (480 km per hour) once it enters the Earth’s atmosphere. After the parachutes deploy, the spacecraft will glide in at approximately 20 mph (32 km per hour) before splashdown about 60 miles (100 km) off the coast of California. NASA’s recovery team and the U.S. Navy will retrieve the Orion spacecraft from the Pacific Ocean.

With the ultimate goal of establishing a long-term presence on the Moon, Artemis I is a critical step as NASA prepares to send humans to Mars and beyond.

Make sure to follow us on Tumblr for your regular dose of space!

#tech #technology #NASA #Artemis #Space Launch System #Moon #Orion #spaceblr #space #space exploration

[fuckyeahfluiddynamics]

Farewell, Saffire!

After eight years and six flight tests, NASA said a fiery farewell to the Spacecraft Fire Safety Experiment, or Saffire, mission. Each Saffire test took place on an uncrewed Cygnus supply vehicle after undocking from the space station.  (Image and video credit: NASA; via Gizmodo and NASA Glenn) Read the full article

#combustion #experimental fluid dynamics #flames #flow visualization #fluid dynamics #microgravity #physics #science

[apod]

2023 November 30

Artemis 1: Flight Day 13 Image Credit: NASA, Artemis I

Explanation: On flight day 13 (November 28, 2022) of the Artemis I mission, the Orion spacecraft reached its maximum distance from its home world. Over 430,000 kilometers from Earth in a distant retrograde orbit, Orion surpassed the record for most distant spacecraft designed to carry humans. That record was previously set in 1970 during the Apollo 13 mission to the Moon. Both Earth and Moon are in the same field of view in this video frame from Orion on Artemis I mission flight day 13. The planet and its large natural satellite even appear about the same apparent size from the uncrewed spacecraft's perspective.

∞ Source: apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap231130.html

[lonestarflight]

"Saturn Apollo Program

In this photograph, the Saturn I S-I stages for the SA-4, SA-6, and SA-7 missions were being assembled at the Fabrication and Assembly Engineering Division in the Marshall Space Flight Center building 4705. (Left to right: SA-6, SA-7 & SA-4.) Marshall designed, developed and managed the production of the Saturn I and the Saturn V rocket that took astronauts to the moon. SA-4, an uncrewed test flight of the Saturn I booster, was the final of a series of four tests of the Saturn I first stage."

Date: January 13, 1963

NASA ID: 6413388

#SA-4 #SA-6 #SA-7 #Saturn I #S-I #Saturn I Block II #rocket #construction #Marshall Space Flight Center #NASA #January #1963 #my post

[katy-l-wood]

HOLY SHIT HOLY SHIT.

WE ARE GOING BACK TO THE MOON IN A MONTH. A. MONTH.

It's an uncrewed test flight, but NASA just announced that they're launching Artemis 1 between August 29th and September 6th.

A MONTH.

BACK TO THE MOON.

AAAAAAAAAAAA.

#SPACE

[falconisinstartup]

New Shepard Abort

#blue origin #new shepard #abort #solid rocket motor #uncrewed flight #max q #be-3

[spacetimewithstuartgary]

Artemis I – Flight Day Six: Orion Performs Lunar Flyby, Closest Outbound Approach On its sixth day into the Artemis I mission, Orion successfully completed its fourth orbital trajectory correction burn using the auxiliary engines at 1:44 a.m. CST ahead the first of two maneuvers required to enter a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon. The first three trajectory correction burns provided an opportunity to fire all three thruster types on Orion with the first using the large orbital maneuvering system engine, the second using the small reaction control system thrusters, and the third using the medium-sized auxiliary engines. Orion completed the outbound powered flyby at 6:44 a.m., passing about 81 miles above the surface at 6:57 a.m. The spacecraft speed increased from 2,128 mph before the burn to 5,102 mph after the burn. Shortly after the outbound flyby burn, the space craft passed about 1,400 miles above the Apollo 11 landing site at Tranquility Base at 7:37 a.m. Orion later flew over the Apollo 14 site at about 6,000 miles in altitude and then over the Apollo 12 site at an altitude of about 7,700 miles “The mission continues to proceed as we had planned, and the ground systems, our operations teams, and the Orion spacecraft continue to exceed expectations, and we continue to learn along the way about this new, deep-space spacecraft,” said Mike Sarafin, Artemis I mission manager, in a Nov. 21 briefing at Johnson Space Center. The spacecraft was preparing for the Outbound Powered Flyby maneuver which would bring it within 80 miles of the lunar surface, the closest approach of the uncrewed Artemis I mission, before moving into a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon. The spacecraft entered the lunar sphere of influence Sunday, Nov. 20, making the Moon, instead of Earth, the main gravitational force acting on the spacecraft. Orion will enter distant retrograde orbit beyond the Moon on Friday, Nov. 25 with the second maneuver, called the distant retrograde orbit insertion burn. The orbit is “distant” in the sense that it’s at a high altitude from the surface of the Moon, and it’s “retrograde” because Orion will travel around the Moon opposite the direction the Moon travels around Earth. This orbit provides a highly stable orbit where little fuel is required to stay for an extended trip in deep space to put Orion’s systems to the test in an extreme environment far from Earth. Orion will travel about 57,287 miles beyond the Moon at its farthest point from the Moon on Nov. 25, pass the record set by Apollo 14 for the farthest distance traveled by a spacecraft designed for humans at 248,655 miles from Earth on Saturday, Nov. 26, and reach its maximum distance from Earth of 268,552 miles Monday, Nov. 28. As of Monday, Nov. 21, a total of 3,715.7 pounds of propellant has been used, 76.2 pounds less than prelaunch expected values. There are 2,112.2 pounds of margin available over what is planned for use during the mission, an increase of 201.7 pounds from prelaunch expected values. Just after 2:45 p.m. CST on Nov. 21, Orion had traveled 216,842 miles from Earth and was 13,444 miles from the Moon, cruising at 3,489 miles per hour.

#space #science #Astronomy #physics #news #nasa #esa #artemis 1 #orion #sls

[michaelgabrill]

NASA, Boeing Complete Starliner Uncrewed Flight Test to Space Station

NASA and Boeing safely landed the company’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft Wednesday in the desert of the western United States, completing the uncrewed Orbital Flight Test-2 (OFT-2) to the International Space Station to help prove the system is ready to fly astronauts. from NASA https://ift.tt/40Tw72E

#NASA #space #Boeing Complete Starliner Uncrewed Flight Test to Space Station #Michael Gabrill

[usafphantom2]

The B-21 Raider: Designed For Low Risk

head-on view of B-21

Images released during the week of the Air and Space Force Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference revealed a head-on view that allowed for a reliable estimate of the wingspan.

Credit: Northrop Grumman

The design of Northrop Grumman’s B-21 Raider points to a conservative approach on the part of the U.S. Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office. The B-21’s resemblance to the original B-2 bomber design is close, but it is a smaller aircraft, with a wingspan estimated at 132 ft. compared with the B-2’s 172 ft., and is approximately half the empty weight. The planform itself is driven by the need to accommodate complex inlets and exhausts and a large weapon bay within the flying-wing profile while staying within a maximum thickness-to-chord ratio compatible with efficient flight above Mach 0.8.

Planform of two bombers

Credit: Giuseppe Picarella/TheCutawayCompany.com

The B-21 planform, which has not been officially released, was depicted in a video that accompanied a presentation by Gen. Duke Richardson, commander of the U.S. Air Force Materiel Command, on Sept. 11 at the Air and Space Force Association’s (AFA) Air, Space & Cyber Conference at National Harbor, Maryland. A new set of images released that week included an undistorted head-on view that permitted a reliable estimate of the wingspan. Recently recovered unclassified imagery from Pratt & Whitney presentations dating back to the early 2010s proved to be a close match for the B-21’s inlets.

U.S. Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office prioritized use of mature subsystems

Northrop draws on aspects of B-2 bomber and X-47B UCAV

The B-21’s low-risk design in part stems from the program’s origins. Before 2009, the Air Force was working to a requirement known as Next-Generation Bomber (NGB). It has been characterized as complex and ambitious, with a full suite of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) sensors, a self-defense capability and long endurance. This was canceled in April 2009 by then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The following year, the Air Force proposed a different approach to the mission, which Pentagon leadership found acceptable: a Long-Range Strike family of systems including classified uncrewed aircraft systems for ISR and electronic attack (the former becoming the Northrop Grumman RQ-180), a replacement cruise missile (now the Raytheon AGM-181) and the Long-Range Strike-Bomber (LRS-B), for which a contract was awarded to Northrop Grumman in October 2015.

Aside from scrubbed and scaled-back requirements, the LRS-B project differed from NGB in three ways: Unit cost was a key performance parameter; two competing teams were funded through preliminary design review, which normally takes place after contract award; and management was assigned to the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO). The RCO modeled its approach on the Lockheed F-117, developed using mature subsystems in a new platform so that the program could focus on applying new technology.

B-21 diagram

Click on this image to see an interactive version of a microcutaway of design features likely on the U.S. Air Force's next stealth bomber.

The B-21 emerging today is evidence that these principles have been adhered to. Its configuration and stealth technology have evolved from the “flying saucer” approach used on the B-2, but originally proposed in the late 1950s. Remarkably, Lockheed Martin Skunk Works founder and former chief Clarence “Kelly” Johnson, in a retrospective paper delivered in 1975 and quoting pre-SR-71 Blackbird work, noted that “a shape similar to flying saucers, with a sharp edge and no protuberances, has a very low radar cross-section without any anti-radar treatment.” And at a February 1959 conference with President Dwight Eisenhower, also discussing the future Blackbird, Harvard physicist Edward Purcell remarked that “the best shape would be a flying saucer.”

No documents found so far have explained the exact connection between the flying saucer phenomenon—the original popular term for unidentified aerial phenomena—and early stealth developments. But one part of the explanation may be that the mysterious craft were often believed to evade radar detection and that it would naturally occur to anyone with knowledge of radar that the shape might have something to do with it.

The classic 1950s flying saucer shape—seamless and continuously curved, with a domed center flaring out to a sharp edge—is visible on the B-21. Some details, though, are reminiscent of the X-47B—the uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV) designed by Northrop Grumman—such as the longer nose, or “beak.” This feature is a result of the need for continuous sharp leading edges, but with a curved-down nose to improve stall characteristics. As on the B-2, however, the saucer profile in elevation is matched with a straight-edge planform to concentrate residual radar reflections—reduced by deep-section radar-absorbent material (RAM) edges—in the smallest possible number of “spikes.”

The design benefits from advances in computational engineering and simulation. The B-2 was designed with the help of early 2D computational fluid dynamics (CFD), but airflows on a blended wing body shape are highly 3D with effects propagating from the center-body outward, and more recent designs using 3D CFD are more efficient.

Computational electromagnetics allows for better low radar cross-section (RCS) shapes and more efficient use of RAM and eliminates much of the empirical cut-and-try methods used in earlier programs: Northrop Grumman closed its Tejon Ranch, California, outdoor RCS test range in 2011.

The B-21 is also the first known major U.S. military aircraft program to be fully designed on a digital thread, with not only the shape but the physical characteristics of each part built into a digital prototype. This has allowed errors to be caught early and has made it possible, according to program officials, to incorporate all core systems on the first aircraft.

The differences from the B-2 include the new bomber’s planform. In fact, the B-2 planform at contract award in October 1981 was similar to the B-21’s now, but a low-altitude dash capability was added to the requirement late in its evolution. In early 1983, Northrop engineers discovered that the original design had insufficient control power to alleviate gust loads at the same time as controlling the aircraft, and it was necessary to add control area farther aft, close to the centerline, for rigidity. The fix resulted in the B-2’s unique planform, but at a price in time, weight and cost—and the low-altitude capability was never used.

Some of the features carried over from the X-47B include the apparent absence of split brake-rudder surfaces. Instead, the plan-view sketch suggests the presence of “inlay” surfaces above the wing, which would not be used in stealth mode. Instead, lateral and longitudinal control are provided by eight trailing-edge surfaces, augmented by differential thrust as on the B-2.

The center-body section matches images of highly serpentine inlets mated to a medium-bypass engine. Pratt & Whitney discussed such an engine, the PW9000, as a future bomber powerplant in 2010 but has not mentioned it since. The PW9000 used the core of the PW1000G commercial engine family, mated to a direct-drive fan with a 4:1 bypass ratio. On the B-2, the low-bypass GE F118 engine was selected because it was too risky to place a higher-bypass engine, more sensitive to flow distortion, behind the curved and RAM-treated inlet ducts needed to hide the fan face from radar. With the aid of better CFD, that problem can be eliminated: Northrop Grumman proposed a large bomber UAV in 2005, powered by two modified GE CF34 turbofans, and Lockheed Martin flew the Polecat demonstrator in 2006 with two Williams FJ44s.

Further evidence of innovation in the propulsion installation is that it is one of very few specific B-21 problem areas mentioned in public. Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, mentioned potential inlet and exhaust issues in March 2018. In March 2021, then-RCO Director Randall Walden said that a redesign was completed before the design was frozen, without affecting the schedule.

A higher bypass ratio provides much better specific fuel consumption than the B-2’s fighter-type engine, improving range, and would enable a cooler, lower-velocity exhaust, not only lowering the B-21’s infrared signature but also alleviating thermomechanical stress on the open “aft deck” area of the exhaust, immediately ahead of the trailing edge.

The B-21’s structure benefits from the absence of a low-level flight requirement and improvements in both composite materials and RAM, reducing the use of fillers and tapes. While the RAM itself would perform the same functions as on earlier stealth aircraft, with multiple layers to absorb energy, diffuse surface currents and protect the skin from lightning, it would require less maintenance than the notoriously finicky B-2 surface.

Internally, the B-21 apparently uses many proven systems. At the AFA meeting, Doug Young, Northrop Grumman vice president and general manager for strike systems, noted that where possible, the company has used commercial components and systems on the aircraft, reducing costs and taking advantage of long-lasting commercial supply networks. Early in the program, one Washington consultant with close ties to BAE Systems disclosed that the electronic warfare system of the B-21 is closely related to the Lockheed Martin F-35’s ASQ-239.

The most important feature of the avionics, however, is an open mission systems architecture. Young compares older systems with adding peripherals to a computer in the early PC age, where “you had to go through a whole rigmarole to make it work.” But the B-21 has standard interfaces and a partitioned architecture where changes to the mission systems cannot affect flight-critical functions.

The B-21 program includes a “software factory,” Young said, which is already developing capabilities beyond the service-entry baseline. And under a program called Spirit Realm, a partitioned architecture is being developed for the B-2 fleet.

After Lockheed Martin and Boeing unsuccessfully protested the Air Force’s B-21 contract award to Northrop Grumman, a consultant to both companies wrote that “there’s a real possibility that the B-21 program isn’t executable at the price the winning team bid—which would mean either big cost overruns or program termination.”

Northrop has warned that it faces up to a $1.2 billion charge on the first five years of low-rate initial production for the B-21 due to inflation-related cost increases not anticipated when bids were submitted in 2015.

But a lesson to be drawn from the B-21’s appearance is that the designers of the B-2 did an amazingly good job “inventing to schedule” while existing materials and subsystems were inadequate and produced a basic vehicle architecture that was still considered the best choice almost 40 years later.

[blueiskewl]

SpaceX Starship Rocket Lost in Second Test Flight

SpaceX made a second attempt to successfully launch Starship, the most powerful rocket ever constructed. The uncrewed rocket took off just after 7 a.m. CT (8 a.m. ET).

The rocket took off as intended, making it roughly 8 minutes into flight before SpaceX confirmed it had to intentionally explode the Starship spacecraft as it flew over the ocean.

CEO Elon Musk described Starship as the vehicle that underpins SpaceX’s founding purpose: sending humans to Mars for the first time. NASA has its own plans for the rocket.

This mission comes after months of back-and-forth with federal regulators as SpaceX has awaited a launch license. The company is also grappling with pushback from environmentalists.

#SpaceX #Starship #SpaceX Starship Rocket Lost in Second Test Flight #elon musk #space #spaceship #spacecraft #space exploration

[nasa]

What Makes the Artemis Moon Mission NASA's Next Leap Forward?

When NASA astronauts return to the Moon through Artemis, they will benefit from decades of innovation, research, and technological advancements. We’ll establish long-term lunar science and exploration capabilities at the Moon and inspire a new generation of explorers—the Artemis Generation.

Meet the Space Launch System rocket, or SLS. This next-generation super heavy-lift rocket was designed to send astronauts and their cargo farther into deep space than any rocket we’ve ever built. During liftoff, SLS will produce 8.8 million pounds (4 million kg) of maximum thrust, 15 percent more than the Saturn V rocket.

SLS will launch the Orion spacecraft into deep space. Orion is the only spacecraft capable of human deep space flight and high-speed return to Earth from the vicinity of the Moon. More than just a crew module, Orion has a launch abort system to keep astronauts safe if an emergency happens during launch, and a European-built service module, which is the powerhouse that fuels and propels Orion and keeps astronauts alive with water, oxygen, power, and temperature control.

Orion and SLS will launch from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida with help from Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) teams. EGS operates the systems and facilities necessary to process and launch rockets and spacecraft during assembly, transport, launch, and recovery.

The knowledge we've gained while operating the International Space Station has opened new opportunities for long-term exploration of the Moon's surface. Gateway, a vital component of our Artemis plans, is a Moon-orbiting space station that will serve as a staging post for human expeditions to the lunar surface. Crewed and uncrewed landers that dock to Gateway will be able to transport crew, cargo, and scientific equipment to the surface.

Our astronauts will need a place to live and work on the lunar surface. Artemis Base Camp, our first-ever lunar science base, will include a habitat that can house multiple astronauts and a camper van-style vehicle to support long-distance missions across the Moon’s surface. Apollo astronauts could only stay on the lunar surface for a short while. But as the Artemis base camp evolves, the goal is to allow crew to stay at the lunar surface for up to two months at a time.

The Apollo Program gave humanity its first experience traveling to a foreign world. Now, America and the world are ready for the next era of space exploration. NASA plans to send the first woman and first person of color to the lunar surface and inspire the next generation of explorers.

Our next adventure starts when SLS and Orion roar off the launch pad with Artemis I. Together with commercial and international partners, NASA will establish a long-term presence on the Moon to prepare for missions to Mars. Everything we’ve learned, and everything we will discover, will prepare us to take the next giant leap: sending the first astronauts to Mars.

Make sure to follow us on Tumblr for your regular dose of space!

#NASA #Artemis #Space Launch System #Moon #Orion #spaceblr #space #space exploration #tech #technology