Especially as it is so easy in English. In German it can get much more difficult, we don't really have a word for crewed. Sometimes you can use astronautic versus robotic, but it does not always work.

Yep, I did not mention him because he was "only" acting...

Bill Nelson as well, even if he never was an astronaut.

Some of the journalists really have no clue about the mission, otherwise they would not ask this kind of questions.

Maybe you should read the thread from @jthutt.bsky.social who actually works the mission and explains a lot of this in detail.

It's really annoying that you have to explain these things over and over again even to people who should know better!

I heard something like this as well from a soon-to-be ESA flight controller 😉

Remember they got rid of a big part of the Comms team at HQ last year, including Bob Jacobs who was in charge of setting up a lot of the visual stuff?

Wasn't there a problem with Range equipment as well?

"So much" in highlighting his opinion as valid critisism - which it is not. For me it does not matter if it is done in five or twenty sentences. The guy is just no credible source at all.

Hale nuts - which says something. Now he is mainly attention seeking to sell his book. People actually working on the heatshield investigation already told him off a few times because in reality he has no access to the current data anymore and is just spreading BS to remain in the limelight.

I like this story, but why did you give Charlie Carmarda so much room in the other one? The guy has a personal beef with NASA after he was kind of sidelined in 2006 as nobody at JSC was able to work with him anymore. After his flight on STS-114 he completely ticked out emotionally, drove even Wayne

Fingers crossed! 🤞🤞🤞

Congrats - enjoy!

You can do a lot of things in theory, but you very often run the risk of creating more new problems than you solved.

Then you would sacrify all the science that was meant to be done on orbit, BO lander for sure does not have capacity for 4, additional risk for docking in case of for example a software failure on Orion, or in general a problem during the stay in LLO which a human on board might be able to solve.

Lot of ideologic opinion and buzzwords without any knowledge about the real historic background of the reality we have to deal with nowadays...

corrections which need a lot of extra fuel which limits your time in LLO even more...

I wish you had access to some internal papers I read about Gateway, its importance, details about its implications etc. Might open your eyes a bit. There is so much more to it than reported in most of the media By the way knowledge about MASCONs doesn't prevent us from the need of constant course

Orion has a free flight time of 21 days. So you can't run a long time Mission without Gateway because you won't habe any abort option at all. And by the way LLO can cause a lot of other problems at all, just think about MASCONs...

The nuclear spacecraft being ready for 28 is nearly impossible, with "pausing" Gateway we will lose so much important scientific data and at least for the nearer future the chance to run long-term Moon missions safely. What a great plan!

not thougt through to the end at all. A lot of PR and 98 percent of the space community, who mostly have never spoken to any mission planner, scientist, engineer or real expert on human spaceflight, fall for it. And I include most of the popular YouTubers, who in reality don't have a clue either.

We don't even know if refuelling Starship in LEO will work. We would need a similar infrastructure around the Moon for this. Where should a new service modell come from in three or four years from scratch? What about the extra costs? For me all this looks nice in presentations and renders, but is

This is exactly my point - I would not feel comfortable at all leaving astronauts on the surface without the chance of returning home in case of an emergency. At least not in the rather early stages of the program with the base not completely ready and kind of autarc for a longer time.

If you talk to people really working on it does not make sense at all and a lot of the claims they make, for example about timeline/delays are a ton of BS. Also nobody seems to think about how to do long-term safe Moon missions without Gateway. Orion has a limited free-flight time of 21 days...

What will happen when they realize that a) the Mars spacecraft will never be ready for the 2028 window and b) safe long-term Moon missions are not possible without Gateway due to the limited free-flight time of Orion. The whole plan is absolutely ridiculous if you ask people really working on it.

really need to get there. Talking to some of them on a very regular basis, I can tell you: It is much more complicated than many people who have not looked into the fine details imagine. Quite often one question answered rises two new ones...

step the real experts where brought in, who also learned a lot over the years, also from ISS experience, what could be learned from there, what not, what kind of problems arouse... And they now have a realistic view on the challenges ahead - and how far we are still away from solutions and what we

If you would know how and by whom (top management) the first plans and models were created 10 to 15 years ago, you would realize that there was a lot of daydreaming going on without having a look at a lot of unconvieniant details and also a lot of lack of knowledge on different levels. Then step by

why I said the other, less political and more scientific "second line' of NASA is so important now.