I understand that sending Artemis up and around the moon was something that needed to be done to confirm that the equipment worked...
It's the same mission that Apollo 8 did.
All the "ground breaking" is 58 years old.
We're retracing our old steps, and I'm OK with doing it, but I refuse to act like it's never been done before.
We have done it before.
Do we even have a vehicle for the Apollo 9 and 10 analogs?
Do we have a lander for those mission analogs?
Are we even going to use this same capsule past the next Artemis launch?
There's only one more SLS stack, right?
I am excited we're going back to the moon, but...
There's only one instance of Kitty Hawk. There's just one Blériot flight that matters. There's just one Spirit of St Louis flight that crossed the Atlantic. There's just one Apollo 8...
The firsts matter.
Who made the second powered flight?
Who was the second person to cross the English channel in the air?
Who was the second person to make a trans-Atlantic flight?
Hell, who was the crew of Apollo 8? Because their absolutely essential mission to prove the gear pales to insignificance against the Apollo 11 mission.
Nobody was watching the Apollo 13 mission until everything went wrong.
I have the newspaper clippings for Apollo 17... It's not first page news.
I want to participate in the hype, but I worry that if we don't get back to the Moon before Trump leaves office, we're not getting there until SpaceX ignores the FAA and launches his mission that doesn't come back; but establishes a base.
So, goody for the crew of Artemis II and I wish the program all the luck in the world.
But we need to get on with it and stop with dead ends like SLS.





