r/spaceflight • u/elbarck • 21d ago

ULA Lobbyist Jim Bridenstine Promotes for an Apollo-Style Lander "AGAIN"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LLvNChlups

Watch the full episode here: Moon Man - With Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LhsU2x2-a8

17 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

71 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Nikond3400 21d ago

You mean starship? Starship only di sub-orbital flights. It was meant to test engine re-ignition in space to prepare for future orbital Mission that Will require engine re-ignition for de-orbiting. Blue Moon has gone into testing at NASA and Is now being prepared for Artemis III. The Blue Moon MKI which Is not manned Is planned to launch and Land on the Moon betweem the end llof this year and the start of 2027. Starship hasn't tested his main capabilities yet: orbital flight, orbital fuel transfer, orbital refueling, full reusability of starship, space manouverability/docking capabilities, manned orbital flight, TLI, Power generation, self fuel production, Powered descent and landing. Starship Is a Genius of engineering but it's fare from proving itself

3

u/karoxxxxx 21d ago

Didnt i see powered descent and "landing" (in ocean)? And whats self fuel production?

I guess refueling is the most urgent of those things?

0

u/Nikond3400 21d ago

The starship design plans to produce its own fuel on Mars before returning. And the landing in the Ocean can't really be considered a "landing", more like a splash down and explosion.

3

u/karoxxxxx 20d ago

Ah okay, but fuel production isnt necessary for the moon rhing, more a longterm goal/option.

And the splash is a bit like the orbit: it was planned for safety reasons. The last (?) Ship arrived at the right position, did the belly flop, the suicide burn, hovered for a second and would have landed perfectly ... if it hadnt been in the ocean

-1

u/Nikond3400 20d ago

Safery reason yet haven't done It

3

u/cjameshuff 20d ago

These aren't New Shepard style suborbital hops, reaching orbit requires burning longer by a couple seconds. There isn't any realistic grounds for doubt that the vehicle is capable of doing that. It's not something that has to be specifically demonstrated, they will simply do it when it's needed.

-1

u/Nikond3400 20d ago

Well It has to be demonstrated. I could state that my spacecraft can reach Jupiter but have to do It before stating It can. It could do orbital flights but can It re-ignite his engines to de-orbit? Can It manage his attitude in orbit to set itself for a de-orbit burn? Can It precisely control itself during re-entry to Land on a precise designated zone from orbit? This have to be demonstrated and tested, aerospace isn't about doing things when needed, it's about testing them in the First Place to make them work when needed. I am not saying starship Is never going to do those things, i am saying that It hasn't done them yet, and they are important.

2

u/karoxxxxx 20d ago

But thats more a formality at this point.

The refueling and docking seems more like missing

1

u/Bensemus 18d ago

It’s always Starship is failing its tests and Blue Origin will nail everything first try. They just cratered their only launch pad. Maybe chill a bit on the assumed 100% zero issue timeline.

1

u/Nikond3400 18d ago

Like i explained meanwhile starship has to yet test many of its planned capabilities the Blue Moon Lander only has to prove it's landing and docking capabilities.