kog

kog t1_ja54v12 wrote

> Well then you sure confused the issue by saying:

I said Artemis 2. You're so confused.

> Because the implication is that it is capable of launching and returning humans during a mission. It is not. Artemis is far from being able to get a person to the Moon and back again.

Artemis 2 is going to be doing that.

> you flipped to saying that Artemis is meeting NASA specs, and now you’ve flopped to talking about Starship again.

I haven't flipped at all, you're just extremely confused.

> Starship doesn’t have to meet NASA specs to take people

You're the one talking about NASA using Starship. You said:

> As NASA currently expects Starship to work, Starship can replace Artemis entirely.

EDIT: LOL he blocked me after realizing that he said NASA would use Starship and I was responding to that.

1

kog t1_ja51zdd wrote

I said Artemis is capable of launching and returning humans.

> You were talking about Starship when you spoke of NASA’s human safety analysis, remember?

Yes, what are you confused about? If Starship were to be NASA's launch vehicle, they will have to meet NASA's safety standards. SpaceX recently did this with Crew Dragon.

The rest of your comment is frankly just nuts.

1

kog t1_ja4ward wrote

Artemis 2 will be launching and returning humans. The vehicle is already mission capable. Starship cannot do that.

NASA is absolutely the sole arbiter of human safety for the Artemis program. If Starship were to be the launch vehicle for Artemis, it would have to meet their standards. Starship HLS will have to meet NASA's human safety standards to be part of Artemis 3.

1

kog t1_ja1eh9e wrote

Artemis 2 is slated for next year, what are you even talking about?

Starship has literally years of testing to go before NASA will consider it human safe for launch and return, and they aren't even working on a human safe launch and return vehicle right now, they're working on launching payload into orbit.

1