82
NASA delays Artemis II and III missions
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
82 points (98.8% liked)
Space
8669 readers
2 users here now
Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Picture of the Day
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
Related Communities
๐ญ Science
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
- !space@lemmy.world
๐ Engineering
๐ Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That's just a difference in testing methods. Testing to failure figuring out what went wrong and fixing it is a valid method. If you look at ULA's timeline, their testing and design for Vulcan was done not during flights, but it cost them falling behind in launch orders.
Besides, the lander wasn't going to be used until Artemis III. Whatever delays II isn't caused by SpaceX.
Vulcan was delayed because of BE-4 readiness, not because of anything ULA itself was doing
Still doesn't invalidate what I said. If their testing was done during flights it could have made it to space sooner.
The BE-4 did look really good though.