logoalt Hacker News

hgoeltoday at 3:22 AM1 replyview on HN

>Blue Moon is one of the two lander contractors. But pretty much everyone thinks Artemis is Starship HLS or bust.

That isn't my impression of NASA/government opinion. Starship HLS is seen as the eventual option, as is obvious from the testing campaign. It'll get there eventually and offer unprecedented capability, but it's very clearly several years out.

Blue's option was being seen as the faster option due to having a less risky critical path. The rocket was already orbital, fewer refueling flights were needed, the engines weren't pushing the limits of materials technology, no reusable heat shield to worry about.

Though, ultimately it's worth keeping in mind that the landers aren't actually the current bottleneck in the program. The space suits are in total development hell.


Replies

JumpCrisscrosstoday at 3:24 AM

> Blue's option was being seen as the faster option due to having a less risky critical path

Source? (Not doubting, and it sounds vaguely familiar.)

> the landers aren't actually the current bottleneck in the program. The space suits are in total development hell

The neat thing about Artemis is it’s pushing so many boundaries that it’s reasonable to debate the actual bottlenecks. I still think launch is it, since even without spacesuits you can do robotic construction. (Hell, even without HLS you can ship nuclear power stations and solar panels and rovers.)

show 1 reply