Artemis 2 splashdown and recovery

Gaspasser

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
L6060, FEL, forks, front snowblower. KX033 mini ex. Dump truck, Husqvarna saws.
Dec 16, 2023
425
676
93
NH
My wife and I watched the Artemis 2 splashdown yesterday and were thrilled that we are back in the space game. However, the recovery felt like an awfully protracted process resulting in the astronauts sitting almost 2 hours in a relatively calm but still undulating sea. The helos were touted as the fastest way to get the crew to the receiving ship but given the complicated sequence of events required to setup for the helo recovery, would it not have been more expedient to shuttle the crew in one of the larger fast boats? Apparently, the mother ship was less than 2 miles away.

I am an amateur armchair observer, and not second guessing NASA and the experts but did this occur to anyone else?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

whatsupdoc

Active member

Equipment
L3302
Jul 9, 2024
152
173
43
USA
I have worked with a few aerospace engineers years ago while employed for a military contractor. All I can say is that they are brilliant but sometimes lack common sense.
 

Sidekick

Well-known member

Equipment
Kioti CK2620SE cab, RTV-X, BX2360, Z726XKW-3-60
Jul 29, 2023
1,188
1,669
113
N.Y,
I was thinking the same thing. Elon would have landed it on that boat and had them out in 15 minutes. They seem to have gone back to Gemini technology instead of moving forward.
 

D2Cat

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
L305DT, B7100HST, TG1860, TG1860D, L4240
Mar 27, 2014
14,835
7,451
113
40 miles south of Kansas City
Looked like a rerun of technology of 1972. We got smart phones and 40 new versions and they still use parachutes to ease down to earth. The goal of a lunar south pole refueling station, and getting there before China, will require faster progress then displayed in the last 57 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

whatsupdoc

Active member

Equipment
L3302
Jul 9, 2024
152
173
43
USA
1775933399811.png

Apollo capsule.

1775933524091.png

Artemis Capsule 53 years later looks like they painted the
the old model and reused it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

GeoHorn

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
M4700DT, LA1002FEL, Ferguson5-8B Compactor-Roller, 10KDumpTrailer, RTV-X900
May 18, 2018
6,668
4,053
113
Texas
I guess I”m the curmudgeon. I can’t believe we’re burning up this much money going back to that dusty old rock. There’s nothing worth going there for and even if there were it would do us no good in the amounts we’d bring back …. unless it were pure gold….. and even then all it’d do is De-value the gold we already have down here.

Maybe if it WERE made of cheese …. we could at least Feed Somebody!

Total Waste of Time and Money and Resources. We should be exploring the oceans instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

North Idaho Wolfman

Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
L3450DT-GST, Woods FEL, B7100 HSD, FEL, 60" SB, 743 Bobcat with V2203, and more
Jun 9, 2013
35,292
10,509
113
Sandpoint, ID
I guess I”m the curmudgeon. I can’t believe we’re burning up this much money going back to that dusty old rock. There’s nothing worth going there for and even if there were it would do us no good in the amounts we’d bring back …. unless it were pure gold….. and even then all it’d do is De-value the gold we already have down here.

Maybe if it WERE made of cheese …. we could at least Feed Somebody!

Total Waste of Time and Money and Resources. We should be exploring the oceans instead.
Yes it does sound like your being a curmudgeon.

We are going to that dusty old rock to set up a base to be able to launch missions to Mars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Lil Foot

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
1979 B7100DT Gear, Nissan Hanix N150-2 Excavator
May 19, 2011
8,113
3,455
113
Peoria, AZ
No, to contact the Martians of course! ;)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

Old Machinist

Well-known member

Equipment
Kubota LX3310 cab, JD4410, JD F725, Swisher 60", etc.
May 27, 2024
633
746
93
NE FL
I guess I”m the curmudgeon. I can’t believe we’re burning up this much money going back to that dusty old rock. There’s nothing worth going there for and even if there were it would do us no good in the amounts we’d bring back …. unless it were pure gold….. and even then all it’d do is De-value the gold we already have down here.

Maybe if it WERE made of cheese …. we could at least Feed Somebody!

Total Waste of Time and Money and Resources. We should be exploring the oceans instead.
I'm with you. We are trillions in debt. Our postal service has had to suspend pension contributions to their employees. Lower middleclass citizens can't afford a new home or car. ETC. ETC. ETC.

Besides, look at the impact craters on the moon. Does this look like a good place to set up a manned base?

And how would we achieve that when we can't advance to a reusable spaceship. Oh WAIT, WE HAD ONE!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

torch

Well-known member

Equipment
B7100HSD, B2789, B2550, B4672, 48" cultivator, homemade FEL and Cab
Jun 10, 2016
2,869
1,110
113
Muskoka, Ont.
I was thinking the same thing. Elon would have landed it on that boat and had them out in 15 minutes. They seem to have gone back to Gemini technology instead of moving forward.
No he wouldn't. Landing a rocket requires fuel -- fuel that had to be carried aloft with the initial launch, making the vehicle bigger and heavier, requiring even more fuel to get it aloft, etc. etc. Not to mention the mass of the extra landing motors and fuel tanks, which need more fuel to launch and manouver.

Now it's one thing to carry enough extra fuel to land a booster that a) only went up part way and b) had a velocity of 0 when starting the return and c) can use the same motors. It's a completely different thing to use fuel to slow a vehicle traveling many tens of thousands of mile an hour as it approaches earth. Which is also the reason they can't simply dock with a landing craft in orbit -- no way to slow to orbital speed without all of the above.

Ablative shielding and parachutes have far less mass.

As to why it took 2 hours, I have no idea why it would take so long to reach out 2 miles by helicopter. One would have thought Mercury 7 taught the need to be prompt (it's the one that sank and almost killed Grissom).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

GeoHorn

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
M4700DT, LA1002FEL, Ferguson5-8B Compactor-Roller, 10KDumpTrailer, RTV-X900
May 18, 2018
6,668
4,053
113
Texas
Yes it does sound like your being a curmudgeon.

We are going to that dusty old rock to set up a base to be able to launch missions to Mars.
Has anyone been recalling how much Hydrogen and Oxygen we need to Get Off the planet ..Just to get to the Moon…?? How much More will be required to get off the Moon to Mars..?? WHERE is that H and O going to come from…? Huh?

Then…IF…we get to Mars….. HOW are we going to GET BACK..???
And Exactly WHAT do we hope to Achieve by all this…?? Looking for another place to Live after we finish Poisoning THIS PLACE?

I suggest it’d be a lot smarter to discover ways to STOP Killing Earth.

(Not to mention that we know a Lot More about Moon and Mars than we do about the bottom of Our Own Oceans and the resources available down there!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

GeoHorn

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
M4700DT, LA1002FEL, Ferguson5-8B Compactor-Roller, 10KDumpTrailer, RTV-X900
May 18, 2018
6,668
4,053
113
Texas
No, to contact the Martians of course! ;)
We ALREADY HAVE MARTIANS! They Found US FIRST! They aren’t on Mars…They’re in D.C. and on Social-Media!
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 4 users

GeoHorn

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
M4700DT, LA1002FEL, Ferguson5-8B Compactor-Roller, 10KDumpTrailer, RTV-X900
May 18, 2018
6,668
4,053
113
Texas
I was thinking the same thing. Elon would have landed it on that boat and had them out in 15 minutes. They seem to have gone back to Gemini technology instead of moving forward.
FINE! Let’s SHOOT ELON OUT THERE WHERE HE BELONGS! 😅
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

GeoHorn

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
M4700DT, LA1002FEL, Ferguson5-8B Compactor-Roller, 10KDumpTrailer, RTV-X900
May 18, 2018
6,668
4,053
113
Texas
No he wouldn't. Landing a rocket requires fuel -- fuel that had to be carried aloft with the initial launch, making the vehicle bigger and heavier, requiring even more fuel to get it aloft, etc. etc. Not to mention the mass of the extra landing motors and fuel tanks, which need more fuel to launch and manouver.

Now it's one thing to carry enough extra fuel to land a booster that a) only went up part way and b) had a velocity of 0 when starting the return and c) can use the same motors. It's a completely different thing to use fuel to slow a vehicle traveling many tens of thousands of mile an hour as it approaches earth. Which is also the reason they can't simply dock with a landing craft in orbit -- no way to slow to orbital speed without all of the above.

Ablative shielding and parachutes have far less mass.

As to why it took 2 hours, I have no idea why it would take so long to reach out 2 miles by helicopter. One would have thought Mercury 7 taught the need to be prompt (it's the one that sank and almost killed Grissom).
All the Extra Fuel and Equipment to SLOW to LAND…. is yet another reason that using Moon Or Mars for further exploration is a Fools-Errand. Without an atmosphere to help Slow-Down to Land….. those places simply add moe complexity and fuel/equp’t requirements to an already Unweildy and Cumbersome Travelogue.

This entire enterprise is stupendously Stupid!

DId I mention that, at age 13, I was one of the 1961 Houston Schools Science-Project Winners and had lunch with the original Mercury Seven? (Mom was an 8th grade algebra teacher and may have had her thumb on the scales..?)

Yep. And when I cleaned out my parents garage-attic in 2017 and found my old Boy Scout footlocker…. I discovered Mom had held a garage-sale decades ago…and the footlocker was empty.
Someone …Somewhere…. has an autographed photo of the Mercury Seven with a goofy little ugly kid standing in front of them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

D2Cat

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
L305DT, B7100HST, TG1860, TG1860D, L4240
Mar 27, 2014
14,835
7,451
113
40 miles south of Kansas City
I read where the latest mission cost 4.1 Billion dollars The fraud in Mn. is over 19 Billion dollars. That equates to $1,000 for each citizen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

McMXi

Well-known member
Lifetime Member

Equipment
***Current*** M6060HDC, MX6000HSTC & GL7000 ***Sold*** MX6000HST & BX25DLB
Feb 9, 2021
8,086
11,364
113
Montana
Has anyone been recalling how much Hydrogen and Oxygen we need to Get Off the planet ..Just to get to the Moon…?? How much More will be required to get off the Moon to Mars..?? WHERE is that H and O going to come from…? Huh?
There's an incredible amount of water on the moon in the form of ice. It's not rocket science to convert liquid H2O into H2 and O2. There's ice in very deep craters on the moon where the sun never shines.