Artemis II Helium boogaloo

Summary

Awesome Astronomy – Episode 170: "Artemis II Helium Boogaloo"

Release Date: March 18, 2026
Hosts: Paul and Dr Jeni

---

Episode Overview

This edition of Awesome Astronomy delivers its trademark blend of warm banter, listener interaction, and an in-depth, no-nonsense guide through the current turmoil and transformative decisions in NASA's Artemis lunar programme. Paul and Jeni start with personal updates (including a dramatic household plumbing saga and a foray into two Michelin star dining), before moving into a detailed, opinion-rich breakdown of recent setbacks and, more crucially, the seismic shakeup in Artemis’s planning under Jared Eisenman's leadership. The latter half of the episode is dedicated to listener emails, with discussions ranging from lunar landing pads to the challenges of British astronomy funding and some stellar astrophotography.

---

Main Segments & Key Topics

1. Hosts' Life Updates and Banter (00:00–14:23)

• Personal Catch-Ups & Science Communication Woes

  • Jeni laments an overwhelming period: "Science communication is one of those jobs where you have two periods in of time where everything is happening all at once...and it completely overwhelming." (01:11)
  • Continuing issues with "dark matter" drains—resolved through much hands-on effort. Listener support comes through, particularly from Ray "CosmicBlaze" McCarthy, with advice on household plumbing and solidarity. (03:00–05:44)
  • Lighthearted exchange about starting "Dr. Jen's Drain Solutions Limited": "Solving the mysteries of dark matter in space and in your sink." (05:51)

• Michelin Star Experience

  • Jeni describes an elaborate meal at Afiem in Birmingham, focusing on the meticulous artistry and multi-course drama:
    "I had no idea that carrots could taste so good…it's not just going out for dinner. Like the whole thing, it takes hours." (07:34, 09:10)
  • Both hosts reflect on the value of splurge-experiences over holidays, and the ‘theatre’ of top tier restaurants.

• Astro Weather and Teaching

  • Paul bemoans the lack of clear skies for astronomy despite improving weather.
  • Jeni wraps her lecture series for the year, soliciting student-driven topics for next year such as dark matter and the edge of the solar system. (12:28)

---

2. Artemis II – Technical Drama and Program Overhaul (14:23–38:32)

a. The Helium Boogaloo: Status of Artemis II (14:23–19:09)

• Rocket Setback Recap

  • Artemis II returned to the Vehicle Assembly Building due to a problematic helium seal in the upper stage:
    "So the upper stage...develops a helium leak...a seal got dislodged...but that stem was inhibiting the flow of the helium." (15:01–16:55)
  • The hosts muse about their prophetic accuracy in forecasting such setbacks:

    "We are mystic Millard and prophetic Paul." – Jeni (16:16)
    "We are sitting here with our crystal balls going like, Artemis is not going to go and it's going to go back to baby." – Paul (16:20)

• Near-Future Outlook

  • Despite replacement parts and supplies, April launch seems unlikely. Both predict May or later for rollout, emphasizing NASA's desperation to keep momentum. (17:47–19:09)

b. Program-Wide Overhaul: Jared Eisenman’s Masterstroke (19:13–38:32)

• Why the Overhaul?

  • Paul applauds the decision to take a pause and admit:

    "Artemis is not working. This is not right...I was really excited by this. I was like, finally someone has had the balls to actually stand up and say, Artemis is not working." (19:36)

  • Both critique the old Artemis schedule—dangerous leaps between missions, long gaps:

    "The biggest concern that we've had is the huge gaps between launches and the huge leaps in kind of achievements, technology that's required between missions." – Jen (20:11)

• The New Artemis Timeline

  • Artemis III: Now a low Earth orbit mission (not lunar landing), focusing on practicing rendezvous and docking with one or both human lunar landers (SpaceX Starship and Blue Origin Blue Moon). Scheduled for 2027.

    "The main goal is to practice rendezvous in...with one or both lunar landers..." (21:43)

  • Emphasis on Mission Control Training: Not just a technological practice, but procedural and operational shakedown – likened to Apollo’s stepwise ramp-up (22:17–23:28).
  • Competitor Landers: New competitive push between SpaceX and Blue Origin, with Blue Moon’s 2026 cargo lander possibly leapfrogging Starship’s still-unproven lunar landing capabilities (24:37–26:39).
  • Artemis IV: Earliest projected lunar landing—now scheduled for 2028. Both predict further delays and likely that Artemis IV will be a lunar dress-rehearsal (Apollo 10 equivalent), with first crewed landing slipping to Artemis V around 2029.
  • China’s Timeline: Compared to Apollo-era America; the hosts suggest China’s program is robust and analogous to the Gemini-to-Apollo build up of the 1960s, but 2030 remains a practical target despite media hype. (32:03–35:12)

• Key Quotes & Insight

  "It's not about technology. It's a money thing...given the right money, America and NASA could be on the moon in two years easily." – Paul (27:26)
  "If you're gonna do something as stratospheric as going back to the moon with people, you need the money. Yeah, you do." – Jeni (32:51)
  "What does concern me about both landers though...they are both tall and skinny. All the commercial missions have shown us thus far..." – Jeni (28:39)
  "It's all about: what is it you’re trying to do? ...With Artemis, there's no clear aim...is it a leapfrog to Mars, or is it actually a thing itself?" – Paul (35:28)
  "Jared Eisenman wants cadence of 10 months between launches...That's good, that sense." – Jeni (32:10)

• Summary of the Revamped Plan (37:16–38:09):

  • SLS configuration streamlined for faster manufacture
  • Artemis III: LEO docking practice, 2027
  • Artemis IV: Earliest possible crew lunar landing, 2028 (but both predict a dress rehearsal will come first)
  • Target cadence: one Artemis flight every 10 months

---

3. Listener Emails & Community Discussion (39:05–53:22)

a. Plumbing, Praise, and Binoculars

• Ray ‘CosmicBlaze’ with sewage advice (03:00)
• Gavin Huggett expresses love for the show and the new sky/moon guide:

  "I absolutely love the show...I also appreciate the effort you put into researching current topics, giving us the benefit of your own expert insight and opinions..." (40:09)

b. Lunar Landing Pads & Technical Queries

• Alastair Frith asks about the feasibility of purpose-built lunar landing pads to prevent "space dildos full of cosmic seamen" from toppling (42:09)
  • Paul & Jeni discuss technical obstacles—landing precision, regolith-based construction (node to upcoming Chinese 3D-printing tests), and how abrasive lunar dust could become a long-term issue if pads aren’t built:

    "There’s a risk that it's actually going to kick up so much stuff...that it will affect landers...It is actually a massive issue." – Paul (44:37)

c. Astrophotography Showcase

• Listener Peter Liverdink shares a Jellyfish Nebula photo, lauded by both for its quality despite the low elevation challenge (49:03, see Astro Bin user Cafuego).
  • Paul: "It still blows my mind that that is the kind of, like, image and detail...you can now...do."

d. Global Astronomy & British Funding Woes

• Multiple emails from Visto vent humorous frustration at British astronomy funding cuts:

  • "It is so sad to hear of the defunding of British astronomy. The once great nation that discovered such things as that line that runs down the entire Earth through Greenwich..." (51:06)

  • Nostalgic laments, offers for Australian aid, and the existential despair from not having emails read for months due to technical snafus.

• The hosts promise a future segment on the state of British astronomy and encourage continued listener emails as their inbox issues are finally resolved.

---

Notable Quotes (w/ Timestamps)

• "Artemis is not working...someone has had the balls to actually stand up and say..."
  — Jeni, 19:36

• "Too many shortcuts. Trying to do it bizarrely, too quickly."
  — Paul, 31:03

• "What does concern me about both landers...they are both tall and skinny."
  — Jeni, 28:39

• "If you're going to do something as like stratospheric as going back to the moon with people, you need the money."
  — Jeni, 32:51

• "Jared Eisenman wants cadence of 10 months between launches."
  — Jeni, 32:10

• "It's all about: what is it you’re trying to do?...There's no clear aim."
  — Paul, 35:28

---

Essential Timestamps

• 00:00–14:23: Opening, life catch-ups, listener emails, science comms, Michelin stars
• 14:23–19:09: Artemis II technical setback explained
• 19:13–38:32: Programme overhaul and criticism of NASA's old and new plans
• 39:05–54:07: Listener emails: technical lunar questions, astrophotography, British astronomy, community banter

---

Takeaways

• Artemis II faced technical issues (helium seal), confirming the hosts' earlier predictions of setbacks; rollout and launch likely delayed until May or later.
• Under new leadership, NASA’s Artemis program is getting a much-needed pragmatic overhaul, introducing more incremental steps between major milestones and enforcing a more sustainable 10-month mission cadence.
• The lunar lander competition between SpaceX and Blue Origin is heating up, with concerns about the practicality and safety of their "tall and skinny" designs.
• China’s methodical approach, while media-hyped as “imminent,” is best likened to Gemini/Apollo—“slow and steady,” aiming for a manned landing by 2030.
• The hosts highlight global funding issues (especially for UK astronomy) and encourage both continued public support and ongoing listener interaction.
• The episode is infused with irreverent, self-aware humour, but ultimately delivers a highly informed, critical perspective on space policy and planning.

---

For Listeners

• Contact: Email the team at [e-mail] for questions, pictures, or to join the banter.
• Astro Bin Showcase: Visit user "Cafuego" to enjoy Peter's Jellyfish Nebula astrophoto.
• Stay Tuned: Next episodes will include more detailed coverage of British astronomy funding and ongoing Artemis developments.

---

Episode in a nutshell:
A jovial update on broken drains and stars, a five-course meal of lunar policy analysis, and a bracing call for realism in space exploration—Awesome Astronomy’s chatty Mid-March edition is a must-listen (or read) for any lunar enthusiast or policy wonk hungry for insight buried beneath the headlines.

Transcript

[A]

So utterly at variance is destiny with all the little plans of men. What good would the moon be to men even of their own planet? What have they made but a battleground and a theatre of infinite folly? Small as his world is and short as his time, he is still in his little life down there. Far more than he can do. No science has toiled too long forging weapons for fools to use. It is time she held her hand. Let him find it out for himself again in a thousand years time. H.G. wells there clearly being prescient about the Artemis timeline. A plan so obviously in chaos that the mess is visible from 1901. But let us not dally and prevaricate like a Boeing engineering team. We have a podcast to record. I'm Paul.

[B]

And I'm Jenny.

[A]

And welcome to episode 170 of awesome Astronomy for March 2020. Hello there, you gorgeous space babe, you.

[B]

Oh, hello darling.

[A]

How are you?

[B]

Oh, stressed. I just. You look this time. Yeah. Science communication is one of those jobs where you have two periods in of time where everything is happening all at once.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And it completely overwhelming. And on top of dealing with drains and like the work being done in my attic means that everything is everywhere and mess is very stressful. And it's just.

[A]

It is, it is.

[B]

That is how I feel.

[A]

Life can come at you all at once sometimes, can't it really?

[B]

Yes. And this is what's happening right now. And I am extraordinarily stressed.

[A]

And science communication is. It's feast or famine a lot of the time. You can have loads of work on and none. And often that coincides with when everything else happens in your life too. So. Yeah.

[B]

And don't get me wrong, I love my career, I love my job, but it's just a difficult time right now.

[A]

Yes, yes. Which of course we mentioned it in the last episode. Your dark matter drains.

[B]

My dark matter drains. I have an update.

[A]

You have an update.

[B]

They be flowing.

[A]

They be flowing.

[B]

They be flowing. You fix it. And we don't really understand how. So before I kind of regale the end of the story of the drains

[A]

because we had an email.

[B]

I know we're starting to get emails through. So thank you everyone who has been emailing us constantly helping us fix this problem. We think we've got to the root cause. We have some emails now. There is a huge backlog obviously because we haven't been able to access them for months, but we are going to start making our way through them, especially in this episode. So thank you. And if you have emailed us recently. Please, we are gonna get back to you. We are gonna be reading them out. It's just gonna take us some time but we really appreciate it. So our first email actually comes from Ray CosmicBlaze McCarthy who says hello awesome astronomers. Glad you found the problem with the email. Listening to the latest edition re the disgusting smelly substance offering advice based on 30 years of working in the sewage industry. Cheers. Right, yeah, I know it's utilize. So Dr. Jen, it sounds like the waste pipe from your kitchen sink, washing machine etc is the problem. If the manhole is clear, it could be the lateral connection from the kitchen to the main sewer pipe which is fed from the manhole. It might have broken or collapsed if it's a salt glazed pipe. Usually on old properties. This is an older property. I don't know exactly when this one was built but the house across the way from me has got a sign that says 1910. So it is an older property. Or someone could have used a plastic waste pipe and it's cracked. Hopefully this will help. Great show and enjoy the cruise, Dr. Jen. Regards Ray. Under cloudy Essex skies. So I don't know if a pipe has collapsed or not. It may well have but I've now got flow through the pipes and we don't really understand how because we had a day where we, I am not joking, pulled out like a foot of black sludge. And I know this is not just me because I've been in this house less than a year. So you know, and I'm pretty vigilant about using the catches in the sinks and stuff like that. Right. I honestly, I don't know if I was. Yeah. Pulling up stuff.

[A]

Yeah, you were trying to, you were trying to describe to me the other day what like what this sludge was, like what the color of it, the shadow, how sort of glossy and shiny and everything it was, it was.

[B]

Oh my God. And some of it was solidified and like it just stunk of ammonia. And I think I was pulling up stuff from the last moon landing. Yeah, like it's just been in there for so long. But so we did as much as we could. We poked, we prodded, you know, we were using rods, we were blasting it with the hose pipe. We were poking it with bamboo sticks to try and break it up so that we could like scoop more of it out.

[A]

Nice.

[B]

We did hours of work and eventually we just got to a point where we can't do any more. Let's just leave it for a few days. We ordered like stuff to go down the Drains. And then we left it for a few days, pulled the drains back up and we looked in the drain and we were like, that hasn't filled back up.

[A]

Dun, dun, dun.

[B]

That looks like it's clear. Question mark. And so then we pulled the manhole back up. My uncle had the bright idea of get your washing up bowl and like fill it and we'll pour like a deluge of water down to see if it will go through. Went straight through. He was watching it go through the manhole. So all that digging turned out to be worth it. Now it could be that I have a cracked pipe and it'll build up

[A]

again and you'll get all the.

[B]

But, yeah, but for now it's working. So we're gonna see. Good work.

[A]

There we go.

[B]

I know. Like, I can open a new business now. Dr. Jen's Drain Solutions Limited.

[A]

Dr.

[B]

Drain Solving the mysteries of dark matter in space and in your sink.

[A]

Your company motto, let's get this moving.

[B]

Yeah, yeah. But, yeah, so it could be a cracked pipe. I suspect that there is more going on than just clogged stuff. But for now, while I've got all this other crap going on, that crap is flowing. So as far as I'm concerned, it's fine. But thank you very much.

[A]

And so what else, other than your sewage dark matter problems, what else you been up to?

[B]

I did something nice. I don't think I talked about this on the last episode. I think I saved it for this one. I went to a Michelin star restaurant.

[A]

Ooh, get you.

[B]

I know. Not just one Michelin star. Two Michelin stars.

[A]

Two Michelin stars.

[B]

I know.

[A]

Ooh, fancy.

[B]

It's not. It is fancy. And like, it's not a thing that you would do like all the time.

[A]

No. Got it.

[B]

You know, it's a. It's a very much like you gotta treat it a bit like a weekend away. It's like an event, you know, it's like buying concert tickets or something.

[A]

Completely, completely.

[B]

You know, it's like one of those special things that you sort of decide to do and do you know what? I wasn't convinced. I wasn't sure, but I had an absolute blast. Oh, yeah. The whole thing took like five hours.

[A]

Oh, yeah, yeah. Once you're there, you realize why they've got a Michelin star. You're always a bit skeptical. We used to do, before we had kids, we used to go like, make it a thing that we'd go to like one Michelin starred restaurant a year.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Just like when we had money. And time and stuff like that. And it was. You always still had. Every time, even when you've been to a couple, you think, oh, is it going to be worth it? Is it actually? And you get that. And the food is just. Yeah, completely next level. It's just incredible.

[B]

I had no idea that carrots could taste so good. Yeah, exactly. Don't get me wrong, I love a carrot. But we went. So the place we went to is called Afim and it's in Birmingham and it's Indian based. It's like Indian inspiration and stuff. And we had one dish and this is the one that lives in my brain rent free. And it was like carrots, carrots, all different ways and like they were cut out into little flowers. And the thing is, it's not just like, they don't just like put the food in front of you, like a whole story with every dish and they like add stuff in front of you. And we did the wine pairing and I got smashed. I was so drunk. It was the drunkest I've been in months. Like, literally I was with my partner and his uncle and he was like, you were just slowly sinking down in your seats between courses. You were just getting lower and lower and lower. And then apparently by the end, underneath my eyes was just puffy and gray and we went back, back to his uncles. It was half past seven and I went to sleep.

[A]

It's really good though. It's great. Mention star. Russians are amazing.

[B]

Yeah, it was, it was amazing. Like, I think it was like, I didn't know how many courses it was. It was like 12 or 15.

[A]

Oh God, yeah, yeah. And you get, you get the little mini, little mini courses between courses and stuff like that and.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. And it was. So if anyone is like, like, oh, I'm not sure about this Michelin star. I wasn't sure about this Michelin star thing, but give it a go and you will not regret it.

[A]

Oh, I've never been disappointed.

[B]

No, it's a fan and it's a whole experience. And that's what you've got to remember is it's not just going out for dinner. Like the whole thing, it takes hours.

[A]

The one that always sticks my. Is the one that's shut now. Le Gavroche, which was the really famous one in, in London that was really like back from the 60s. It's been like a kind of was. Was a top restaurant. It was one of one of the first Michelin star restaurants in, in the, in the country. It closed, I think it was last Year, year before it. Finally, after like 50 years, whatever, it closed down. We went years ago. And it does the whole thing, as you say, it's like going to the theater. It's like a piece of performance. It was just the most incredible meal. Just stunning. Absolutely stunning. Yeah, that was. That was made up of years ago.

[B]

Yeah. And like everything is considered down to like what cutlery they're giving you for each dish is thought about and the lighting and the positions of everything.

[A]

All those things. It is, it is like I remember the main meal coming up and it was literally the whole team of waiters was just yours for like a couple of minutes while they brought everything simultaneously and then kind of da, da. Just revealed the whole thing on your table simultaneously. And there was just like this. So it was like watching a symphony kind of unfold. It's just incredible.

[B]

Yeah. And like you can see the. Well, the one I was in, anyway. You could see the finishing kitchen.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So apparently most of the cooking in that is done at this like hidden kitchen. But then there's like a finishing kitchen and then like you could see them all working. So that was amazing.

[A]

Yeah. It is completely worth it. So they're always really expensive, but they are.

[B]

And that's why it's a treat. You got to think about it like it's an event.

[A]

Save your pen, as you say. He's like going to a concert or something like that is just, you know, it's worth. Worth once in a while if you've got, you know, save up some money and to be honest, I'd rather do that than go on like some big expensive holiday. Sometimes I think it's just like.

[B]

Yeah, it's definitely a thing that's worth doing. Yeah. As instead of doing a weekend away, you go and do like, it's good. It is good, that kind of thing. So what have you been up to?

[A]

What have I been up to? Actually, not a great deal. Not a great deal. Since we last spoke. I've been just busy just in that sort of working away.

[B]

Just, you know, because even like our back channel chat has been so quiet.

[A]

Just. Yeah, just been really busy. Really busy with kind of life and work and just. And the weather. The weather's improved a lot, but it still hasn't improved massively in that we haven't actually had much astronomy yet still.

[B]

Yeah. Like it's warmer, but I can actually see some blue as we're recording.

[A]

Absolutely. But the few clear nights we've had, I've been working, I've been in other work so it's like, ah. So. Yeah, but it's just been. Yeah, it's just. Life's all good. Just busy. Just really kind of. I did go away. I think I mentioned. Did we mention that last episode? I can't remember if I mentioned that last episode.

[B]

I think you did, yeah.

[A]

Southwold. So it was just blurs, you see what, what time and, you know, what's going on. But yeah, other than that, not. Not a great deal. Not a great deal. Just been kind of chugging along and being busy basically, and then suddenly it's like, oh, my God, it's the middle of the month. That we should record.

[B]

We need to record. Yeah, yeah.

[A]

So the.

[B]

The other thing I've got to mention is I finished my lectures now for Astronomy in Action for the year.

[A]

Wow. Another. Another batch of lectures done.

[B]

Yeah. And it went well. It was nice. Well, I. I enjoyed it. I think they enjoyed it.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

We've, you know, had our discussion for what we're going to do next time. Always. It's always nice because I always ask this at the end, because at the end of the day they're paying for this lecture course, so they may as well learn what they want to learn instead of me just kind of choosing things. So there was dark matters on the list quite topical compared to what we were discussing last time. The edge of the solar system is another point that they're interested in doing debated. So, yeah, so that'll come back around now, September time. So cool. Yeah, yeah.

[A]

Soon be here. Soon be here. We should probably get on with a few. This is our. This is our chatty McChatty episode where we're just gonna kind of.

[B]

It is our chatty McChatty episode.

[A]

Sort of just blunder through various things. This is our kind of astro waffle, if you like.

[B]

Yeah, it is. We have our very kind of structured episodes at the start of the month. And this is our. Just like kicking back with a gin slash whiskey.

[A]

Well, to be honest, this time of day. A cup of tea.

[B]

Yeah. Although. Exactly. We are recording this at lunchtime. Yeah, at lunchtime. So. Because.

[A]

Because we've been so busy.

[B]

Because we've been so busy. Yeah.

[A]

Let's throw in quick lunchtime. I'm available this lunchtime. So we're sitting here. We're sitting here in. Yeah. Broad daylight, doing it daytime, doing it day. Doing it daytime, doing it during the day. So, Artemis.

[B]

Yeah. This is our. This is going to be our chatty McChatty topic of choice. And it's not because, you know, it's not. Oh. Artemis 2 has rolled back and there's been issues. I mean, there is that. Which we'll just cover very quickly. But there's actually been enormous changes to the program which we do need to discuss.

[A]

Old Jarrod has grabbed the reins, isn't he? This is like. This is the very first kind of, I think, thing where we've seen Jarod kind of.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Grab the reins and try and kind of do something.

[B]

And I think it's amazing. But before we get into it, let's just. So where are we with Artemis 2?

[A]

Where is Artemis 2? Where is it now?

[B]

He's in the vehicle assembly building.

[A]

We did. We did. We guessed it would go back to the vab, didn't we?

[B]

Yeah. Now, the wet dress rehearsal actually was very successful. It's afterwards that the problems arose. So this is when they're transitioning from testing configuration to flight configuration. And during that switchover, they use helium to pressurize the engines and to kind of keep them in a flight ready status. And unfortunately, the upper stage. So this is not the. The orange kind of liquid fuel bit. This is not the solid rocket boosters that you see on the side. The. The tall, skinny white things. This is the upper stage. So it's like the. The end bit that develops a helium leak.

[A]

Yep.

[B]

And so then the engines weren't conditioned. And unfortunately it's a part of the rocket they can't access at the paddle. No.

[A]

They said it had to get back. Literally. Didn't we say, didn't we guess that there would be issues. They'd have to go back to the vab. They would have to do some disassembly. They would have to go and get like it was nothing. Something they couldn't do on the pack. We literally said this.

[B]

Yeah, I know. Honestly, they should just hire us.

[A]

I don't want to keep picking us up, but we seem to be like Nostra flipping diamonds.

[B]

We are mystic Millard and prophetic Paul.

[A]

Exactly. Yeah, we are. We are sitting here with our crystal balls going like, Artemis is not going to go and it's going to go back to baby. Yeah.

[B]

Right. It's crazy.

[A]

It is.

[B]

But yeah. So it's currently back in the vehicle assembly building. They have determined what the issue was. A seal in the. So the. In the umbilical that puts the.

[A]

How that seal got in there, I don't know, but they're teasing it out with some fish. Sorry, that was a pretty bad joke.

[B]

Papa dad joke.

[A]

Papa dad joke. That one.

[B]

That was proper dad joke. But a seal got dislodged.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

They don't entirely know how, but that stem was inhibiting the flow of the helium, which is why, then. So it wasn't so much of a leak, but a flowing inhibition.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And so they've replaced the seal. They've replaced a few other seals. They've replaced some batteries while they're at it, because the batteries have a finite lifetime. So they're like, well, we're here. We may as well. They've refreshed. Refreshed. Refreshed.

[A]

Refreshed.

[B]

Refreshed. Refreshed Some supplies is what I'm trying to say on the crew capsule.

[A]

Yeah, the sandwiches. The sandwiches have gone off and the.

[B]

You know, you don't really want to take the mold off the bread, do you?

[A]

Yeah, the cherry on top was going a bit stiff and.

[B]

Yeah. So. So we're. I think soon we're gonna hear the announcement. I mean, maybe even as this episode goes out, it's going to be rolling out again.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Because they really do want to hit this April launch. I don't think it will go in April, but. No, but I think it may go kind of May. I think it'll go out.

[A]

Whether they'll roll it out and then there'll be some other issue.

[B]

I don't think it'll go back. I think it'll be out at the pads now, and I think it'll probably go May. I would love for it to go closer.

[A]

I wanted to go. Don't get me wrong. I'm hoping it. But I just. It just feels like it's. So this has just been the Artemis thing. It's just. Yeah.

[B]

Yeah. I. So I think, yeah, it'll go out soon. I. I'm not sure they're gonna make this April launch window. We're recording on the 10th. Yeah, it's.

[A]

And they've got a whole wet dress rehearsal again. And they've got. They might. When. When's the window?

[B]

1st of April is when it opens.

[A]

Yeah, that's. That's tight, isn't it? That's 20 days. It's like 21 days. So it's three. Yeah.

[B]

Because they. They need about a week and a half. They need to be on the pad about a week and a half before launch because they have to do a wet dress rehearsal, which takes a few days. Then they have to turn it around for launch. So it's a bit.

[A]

It's tight. Yeah. Because it's basically got three weeks. So they've got to get it out to the Pad that takes basically, like, essentially a couple of days for it to be all there and up and.

[B]

And then plugged in. Yeah, it's a bit. It's a bit touch and go. So maybe May, June.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[B]

But that's not the main focus of our discussion.

[A]

No, no, no, no, no, no.

[B]

Our main focus of discussion is that they are completely overhauling the whole Artemis program. And I think you're in agreement with me that this is absolutely the right thing to do. I was really excited by this. I was like, finally someone has had the balls to actually stand up and say, artemis is not working.

[A]

This is not right. This is not. It probably listens it. I bet Jared. Jared's probably listening. Hello, Jared. He's probably.

[B]

I'd love it, Jared Eiseman, if you listen to us. Hello?

[A]

Yeah, he's probably listening in going, like, that's a good idea. Yeah, they're right. But we've said this for a while, and various people have said this for a while. It's not just us. There's various podcasts and shows and things. If you've sort of been following artists have been saying this is really weird kind of program lineup, what they're trying to do, the schedule and which missions. It just seems all very odd and chaotic and a bit messy.

[B]

I think the biggest concern that we've had is the huge gaps between launches and the huge leaps in kind of achievements, technology that's required between missions. So it's like, you know, Artemis 1 to Artemis 2. We're over three years at this point, and the kind of. The technological leap between the two is not too bad because it was just an uncrewed test and then a crew test. But to go from this Artemis 2 to Artemis 3, which was going to be a landing mission, and we don't even have a landing yet.

[A]

And also just. It was always that kind of weird thing where you sort of. It was such a big jump in the. You're going from essentially in. In the. In the kind of historic way. We're going from kind of Apollo 8. 8. And we haven't done Apollo 7.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So we're combining Apollo 7 and 8, and then we're jumping straight to 11.

[B]

Yeah, it's just. It seemed illogical and dangerous, and Jared Eisenman has finally pulled the plug and said, this isn't safe. It isn't in our interest to do it like this. And so he has completely revamped the Artemis timeline, and it's brilliant. So now Artemis 3 is no longer the landing. Artemis 3 is going to be a low Earth orbit mission.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Where they will. The main kind of goal is to practice rendezvous in. Now, this is interesting with one or both lunar landers, but that's the crazy

[A]

thing, because they were going, all right, let's, let's go and do essentially, Polo seven, Polo eight, One big mission. Let's just kind of combine that and go. And then we're going to just jump straight to. Let's go to the moon, get in a lander and land. You haven't even practiced, like a crew docking that this would work.

[B]

Yeah. And it's not even the technological side. It's like giving the crew a chance to practice doing it.

[A]

Well, I tell you what, it's, it's the ground crew. It's mission control more than anything. I mean, because actually there are various astronauts who are practiced in docking. Because, of course, docking is something we do all the time now in space.

[B]

Because with the iss.

[A]

Yeah, exactly. So docking is not an unusual activity,

[B]

but it's still new capsules and everything.

[A]

Yeah, but it's, it's a, it's a sort of known quantity in terms of like, the crew. And all the crew you would send would have that kind of experience. So it's not what, in simulator time and stuff like that. These simulators are very good now and, you know, so that's not too crazy. It was more, for me, the procedural thing. Mission control. Yeah, they've got to practice that kind of, you know, what are they doing, how are they running this mission and all the little kind of problems of it. And that's what, you know, Apollo 9 was. You know, Apollo 9 is this kind of testing, getting all the procedures for, you know, going into the, the, the module and docking and the rendezvous and all that, but doing it in Earth orbit where it was nice and safe.

[B]

Exactly. If something goes wrong, they can get back quickly and.

[A]

Exactly. And the crew can train in that. But it's actually more about mission control going, right, well, we need to go through all the procedures here. We need to actually write the manual on this so we know how to. Like what, what the little pitfalls and things like that.

[B]

Yes, exactly. Like, if this, if this flashes up, can we ignore it or do we need to do something?

[A]

And, and sometimes until you actually physically do that, the crew are perfectly fine. Like, yeah, look, we've docked spaceships before, but then it'll be that kind of whole procedural thing. And then doing it, of course, then you go and do Apollo 10, which is where they go and do it. Around the moon. And then they did Apollo 11 and it was really weird. Artemis was just going like, right, we're just going to go and do fly around the moon, come back and then we're just going to land.

[B]

Yeah. And it was just. Yeah, exactly. So they've now remedied this. So Artemis 3 is this low Earth orbit docking practice? Yes, scheduled for 2027. And I thought it was really interesting that the wording was very specific. It was with one or both landers. Because now it's not just SpaceX with their Starship supposed lander, but also Blue Origin.

[A]

You've got Jeff versus Muskie Boy. Muskie, muscular. I have a sneaking suspicion they've introduced that in a way of trying to encourage them both to get the hell

[B]

on, to get on with it.

[A]

Because both will want the glory of being the people who put. Because when it was just one of them, it was like, we'll deliver you a lander at some point.

[B]

Yeah, it'll happen. Now there's competition, now there's a push to go.

[A]

Well, who's going to be the first guys? Who's going to get there first? Which one's going to be successful?

[B]

And the blue moon lander, which is the one from the audience we haven't actually talked much about.

[A]

No, no, we haven't.

[B]

And so there's actually a cargo mission planned for this year to the moon with blue moon. And it's a big lander. Yeah, it's a capacity of 3, 000 kilos. I think it's 8, 8 meters tall. It's about the size of a Tardis. Like an old telephone box.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[B]

Like it's big. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it is.

[A]

Well, I remember seeing when they very first announced it, long, long time ago when they did that surprise announcement was like, here's blue moon. And it doesn't look different. But the original concept lander that they presented, that, you know, Jeff stood there, went, eh, it's my lander. Shining head, shiny head. It was huge. It was a big ass thing. But it's a different concept in it. It's actually much more. It's much more like the old kind of Apollo moon lander. And it's kind of concept basically. And it's kind of originally it's changed a bit. But it's not a big ass rocket sitting on its bum. No, no, that's the key. That's the difference.

[B]

Yeah. And the thing is like I'm gonna say it and I know that anyone who likes Elon Musk is gonna be listening and they're gonna be swearing at us. But starship has done what, 13 flights now? Something like that. And his still not done.

[A]

We still haven't had that orbital one yet, have we at least like not been in space properly.

[B]

Yeah. Blue moon is going to the moon this year, you know, even if they mess up the landing because, you know, they haven't been before, so they may well, but they are at least going to the moon.

[A]

This is, this is. We were having a little chat. Well, I say you and Dustin were having a little chat about all this yesterday while I was working and it was like, yeah, I saw my message going ping, ping, ping, ping. As two of you are having this conversation about Artemis and things. I was like, what the hell? And I think my tuppence worth actually, because we've been a bit down on it all and saying, actually because we were talking about how quickly we get there, China, stuff like that.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

We're saying if there is what a country and an organization that could get to the moon quickly. Yeah, it is. NASA in the usa. It is, you know, Absolutely. Given the right money.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

America and NASA could be on the moon Ashram in two years easily.

[B]

And I think especially like with Trump as president, he really wants this to happen in his presidency.

[A]

Absolutely.

[B]

He really wants it. So I think they could end up with like a big cash injection to make it happen.

[A]

Exactly. But what I would argue is the reason I say that with, you know, I'm commenting. Yeah. The Americans and NASCAR is because actually they've done soft controlled landings on the surfaces of places for years. So you look at Mars, you know, you look at how, who's, who's the organization that's got things on, on Mars regularly and safely now. It's, it's NASA. They have that capability and they have that, that kind of knowledge. And yes, moon is different, but it's also principles and they've landed on the moon and all those, you know, they've got all the things it did just need the money.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And that's what we've been saying for a long time is it's, it's not about money thing. It's really the money thing that they just have. This has not been funded properly and they're trying to do it on a budget and they're trying to shortcut it. And so it was always. And then they pick the wrong things. Like bloody great SpaceX thing. That's, you know, landing a tower block on the moon, you know.

[B]

Yeah. I think what does concern Me about both landers though that are proposed is they are both tall and skinny.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

All the commercial missions have shown us thus far.

[A]

The blue moon one has gone to the skinny thing. Yeah. It's a bit more. I think.

[B]

See, I don't know why they haven't kind of contacted Firefly Aerospace. They are the only commercial company to successfully land on the moon and conduct a full mission. Why haven't they approached them and been like, can you make a human version?

[A]

What it shows you is the, the. The technical ability and the knowledge and, and the tech. It does exist and exists in the state. And if you, if you threw the money at it and made. You could make this happen and it could, it could land on. In two years. They won't. I don't think they're going to land on the moon in two years. That's not that. I just don't think that's going to happen.

[B]

I think that's a good point to mention is that the landing is now Artemis 4.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Which is scheduled for 2028 now.

[A]

Yes. Which is two years.

[B]

But it's. The thing is, yeah, we got to see what happens with Artemis 3 and the docking and the landers and to see what's ready and. And I've got a funny feeling it'll change again. I don't think Artemis 4 will be the landing. I think it'll be Artemis 5 and Artemis 4 will be Apollo 10.

[A]

Exactly. Arthur. As was exactly the same thing. I think an Artemis 4 will end up being basically an Apollo 10 mission where they do a big dress rehearsal of the landing. They do everything but.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And then it'll be five, which will be the big. The big stupendous landing in probably about 2029, 2030.

[B]

And I also wonder if they'll kind of do an Artemis 4A and a 4B where they do this. The whole thing with the crew and they do everything but land. But then the part B is they have a lander that actually goes and

[A]

lands and takes it off with no crew on it.

[B]

With no crew. But just to make sure it can be done.

[A]

Because that wasn't something you could do very much in. In 19. It wasn't.

[B]

They didn't have all the automations that we have now.

[A]

Whereas now you could actually do a. Exactly. You could do an autonomous mission with a. With a. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Completely. I could absolutely see that. Because I think what Jared is kind of saying is like this is. This was too risky. This was far too risky. We were going to kill People doing this.

[B]

And there's been independent reports that have also said that. They've said it's just too dangerous. We don't think that the Artemis program, this is like government reports from the US saying that it's too dangerous in the way that it's. Too many shortcuts. Too many.

[A]

Too many shortcuts. Trying to do it bizarrely, too quickly.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

But at length, like. But over a huge time. Take it. It's. I mean, you look at the Apollo, the Apollo program, you know, when you look at, you know, Apollo 7. So that's the first crewed flight of the capsule that works. That's October 68, then.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

December 68 is Apollo 8. So they go to the, you know, just a couple months later.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And then March 69, you get Apollo 9 testing the stuff in orbit. Then May 69, you get Apollo 10, they go back to the moon and do the dress rehearsal and it's July 69, they land. So literally October to July, they do all the things that basically the Artemis program is doing from three years ago. Hasn't done yet. Yeah, we'll probably do in a couple of years time. And it's like. But they're also trying to shortcut it. And it was all just.

[B]

Just a mess. It was just a. Yeah. And this is what Jared is saying is that he wants the cadence of flights down to 10 months is the goal between launches.

[A]

And I think that's sensible, given the budget.

[B]

That's good, that sense. Yeah, it is.

[A]

This is what we said about China in that China may well get there first, not because they've actually thrown loads of money at this, but they've thrown a decent budget at it and they've

[B]

had a decent plan.

[A]

And they seem to have like, a decent plan that's like kind of staged and they're. They're kind of working through the program.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And they put. They put an amount of money in that. We don't quite know how much money they put in, but it appears that they put a sort of reasonable in that. That's kind of funding it and getting. Getting the milestones ticked off. And that's the problem with the NASA. They just haven't got the budget at the moment and they never haven't. You know, it's all a bit of a mess.

[B]

So this is the thing. If you're going to do something as like stratospheric as going back to the moon with people, you. You need the money. Yeah, yeah, you. You do. And so it's. Yeah, we Were talking about this on the back channel because this thing, you know, was like, I think China is just going to do it. They could do it really quickly. And it's like. Actually, no, I don't think China will do it quickly. I think they have a solid plan for 2030 and I think that it will be 2030 when they get there because they have lots of things that they haven't done yet. They haven't sent their crude lander to the moon and back. America has done that. Yeah, there's no kind of. Sorry, when I say crude lander, I mean like a capsule is what I should say. A crew capsule has been to the moon and back. They're imminently going to send people to the moon and back. Right. Like the moon's vicinity, China. There's no signs of China doing that anytime soon.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

And so these are all incremental steps that China will need to do before they do a landing. But, you know, they're 2030 timeline.

[A]

And I think.

[B]

I think realistic.

[A]

I think China are very much in that sort of. If you wanted to kind of compare it to Apollo, they're very much in that sort of Titan Gemini stage.

[B]

Yeah. Where they're working on their lander.

[A]

All the stuff is being developed and. But so the astronauts are in that sort of era of they're going back

[B]

and forth to Yangon to skipping their

[A]

crew, which is like the Gemini. The Gemini crews going up and meeting and docking with the. What's it called? I've got the name of the blooming docking thing they had. But they're getting the skills base and the mission controls, getting the experience, stuff like that. They've been doing some probes to the moon, which.

[B]

Yeah, exactly.

[A]

So they're kind of mirroring what was going on through the 60s. And of course, you know, it did take that whole decade to get there. So I think they, you know, they're doing it in that kind of similar way. And what you'll see is that. That kind of, if you like, the Apollo bit will kick in in the same way it did in. In America, though. Actually, it was only in the last couple of years of the 60s that the Apollo bit kicked in.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And that will happen in show. You'll suddenly see their. Their moon, actual direct moon bit will kick in.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

From that, you know, 2027, 2028. And suddenly they'll. Yeah, they'll.

[B]

I think it'll be around 2028 is when I think we'll start really seeing their kind of crew moon stuff. I Mean, they're still doing lunar missions. They've got another one planned for this year.

[A]

You'll see something their version of Apollo 8 and things like that, that will happen. And then so like. Oh, yeah, they test a lander and stuff like, you know, it'll kind of just suddenly happen.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

But it's all there, you know.

[B]

Yeah. And China's program is looking a bit more like Apollo 2.0. Whereas we know that Artemis, they want to be long duration. But then, you know, also China have not sent people to the moon before, so you would anticipate that their first stages would be more Apollo 2.0.

[A]

And, you know, it's all about what is it you're trying to do? And I think that, that we've said this before about Artemis is that we don't. There's no clear. I think the problem with Artemis, there's no clear aim of exactly what it is they're trying to. Are they just trying to go back? Because they want to go back and they want to plant another flag and say, like, look, it's still our moon.

[B]

Yeah. Because there's no timeline on when is gateway happening, when a module's going up, like, what exactly.

[A]

Or is it. They want a permanent base. This is the next stage and we're. Is it, is it a leapfrog to the Mars, or is it actually a thing itself?

[B]

Yeah, they talk about all that, but it's like, where's the plan?

[A]

What is the actual.

[B]

What is. Yes, exactly. It's like, how many missions are you doing before you do X, Y, Z?

[A]

And we could argue the same with China. Like, we don't actually know what it is. But in a way their goal is much simpler in that it's like the 60s, they just actually want to get to the moon and be that next country that plants a flag. We've got here, look at, look at what we can achieve. So the, In a way, they've got a much more. Whether you think you agree with it or not, it's much more pure, simple goal in. We want to show our greatness, we want to show our, you know, technological ability by getting to the moon, landing on it, putting a couple of shots there, putting a moon, the flag there, and, you know, coming some rocks and going home and then we'll take it from there. Whereas it's not quite clear because the Americans have already been to the moon, it's not entirely clear what it is they're doing.

[B]

And that's.

[A]

I think that's part of the ultimate problem is when you're trying to sell it to the public and you're trying to sell it to the taxpayer and you're trying to sell it to senators and you're trying to sell it to the budget, what is it you're actually doing? You know, why, why are you buying this big ass rocket and all its bits?

[B]

You know, what is the bottom line?

[A]

Yeah, exactly.

[B]

So, yeah, it's, it's an interesting one. But to summarize.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

What's happening with the Artemis revamp SLS rocket is being streamlined. They're not having different configurations for every Artemis. And this is to speed up manufacturing. Let's just streamline the whole process. So Artemis rockets moving forward will be very similar to the current configuration. A few minor tweaks, none of this. Block 1, block 2, block 1B, it's going to be set and then it's going to stick there. Artemis 3 now is a low Earth orbit mission for rendezvous with starship slash blue moon, slash both. Then that's 2027, 2028. Is Artemis 4 supposed to be a landing potential for 2028 to also have Artemis 5 a second landing? Jared Eisenman wants cadence of 10 months between launches. Yeah, I think it's, it sounds, sounds pretty good. So doable.

[A]

Gets a bit of a. Yep. Yeah.

[B]

And we want to say thanks, Jared, for pulling the socks up on Artemis and making it realistic. Yes, yes, yes, yes, continue as a yes. Yeah, he's done a great job making it realistic. Yes.

[A]

That's what I like is he's not gone. I want like six months or four months or something between, you know, it's like 10 months.

[B]

He's like realistic goal.

[A]

See that's really, it's like saying, yeah, the year's too long, more, but let's make this happen. But yeah, yeah, so yeah, let's see what happens.

[B]

Yeah. And if anyone's listening who you know, can like forward this episode onto Jared, do it.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

He never didn't know that he was listening to us. Rabbit on.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Should we move on to emails?

[A]

Should we move on to some emails? We've got loads of them. We're not going to do them all today, are we?

[B]

We are not. But it's good. We are finally getting our emails back. So, yeah, thank you to everyone who's

[A]

been going, my God, I mean, I think he alone has like pushed most of the emails through because when we said keep emailing us, he kept emailing us.

[B]

Yeah. So yeah, we've got loads to get through. Obviously we're not going to be able to fit them all in this episode but we're going to kind of go through them in our second episodes of the month over the next few months and we will work through them. So keep emailing us because you guys have sent us all sorts of stuff. Yeah, like it's been comments, it's been like, look at this cool picture I took.

[A]

There's all sorts.

[B]

I'm still alive.

[A]

We will try and work through a bunch. So go on this, this crack on then.

[B]

All right then, so should we. Let's have a self glowing one to begin.

[A]

Should we go for it? I like yourself Glenn. Go on.

[B]

Oh let's, let's do that. So we've got one comes from Gavin Huggett from a very cloudy Bournemouth.

[A]

I was in Bournemouth. Yes. Sunday actually. I was in Bournemouth on Sunday.

[B]

Look at that, look at that, look at that. And Gavin says, hi Dr. Jenny and Paul. I've been an avid listener to the show for more than a year now and you've kept me company for many a lonely commute. I abs. I know. Ah, thank you for listening to us. I absolutely love the show and it's one of my monthly now bi monthly thank you highlights. I love the interaction between you both. It's had me giggling to myself on many occasions while it gets us giggling. So we're glad it gets you as well. But I also appreciate the effort you put into researching current topics, giving us the benefit of your own expert insight and opinions. I really enjoy the new format. The sky guide is brilliant. I love the introduction of the Moon Guide. That was another listener's idea. So it was. Yeah, yeah. A puzzlingly overlooked object and I enjoy hearing about its features even though I don't own a telescope. Being a bit of a binocular enthusiast.

[A]

See, I love binocular astronomy. I still do lots. In fact, that's pretty much the only astronomy I've done this year is a little bit of binocular astronomy.

[B]

Yeah. And whenever I travel it's not telescopes that come with me, it's binoculars.

[A]

It's all I took on holiday this year was b pair of binoculars a couple months ago. Well, a couple. A couple of weeks ago was good.

[B]

Pair of binoculars cannot be underestimated. Like they're brilliant. Please keep it coming. You guys are simply awesome. It's in the name. See what you did there, Gavin. Yours, Gavin Huggart. So, yeah, thanks. Thanks Gavin. Thank you for listening to us.

[A]

Cool.

[B]

And if you've only been listening for a year, if you go a bit further Back in the repertoire, there's lots of interviews from back in the day that you may enjoy. We've got astronauts and scientists and all sorts of interesting people. So do, do go and check out the back catalogue and yeah, have a, have a dig into those. Right, who's next then?

[A]

Let's have a look. So next I'm gonna throw at you here. Okay. Alastair, Alistair Frith.

[B]

Ah, hello Alistair. Hello there, long time emailer, big fan

[A]

of the show because friend of the show. Hi team. Given that the main issue with the tall, thin landers, Starship, etc. Is their propensity for falling over, I'm just wondering what is the feasibility of building a nice flat landing pad before we send the space dildo full of cosmic seamen? Seamen. Alistair, you're disgusting. And I love it. Can Luna regolith be used as a cement to make a flat, smooth, level landing pad? Can we land accurate enough to hit it? Surely we can. We've been doing it on Earth for a few years now. Just a thought, I'm sure it must have been looked into. Land a squat robotic lander with the machinery to cement the regolith, build the pad, then land the big rocket on it. Thoughts? As in, now this is interesting because actually I was reading a thing the other day which I was going to slot into an episode in the future about the problem of landing on the moon.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

And this idea that actually basically all the crap that's kicked up every time you land a rocket on the moon, moon is basically, we think is slowly creating a sort of very, very. Corrosive is the wrong word. Abrasive. That's the word I'm looking for. Abrasive cloud around the moon.

[B]

Because lunar regolith.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Can levitate.

[A]

Exactly.

[B]

Because the reason it can levitate is it essentially in a nutshell because there's no protective atmosphere, no protective magnetic field. It's more the magnetic field than anything. But you, you get it gets bombarded by like charged particles from the sun and then that imparts charge and then they can start floating.

[A]

Yeah. And so you kick some up and it basically is like it'll stay. And there's, there's a paper I was looking at, I say it's one for the future, one for the future where it's basically creating this sort of cloud of stuff around the moon and if we keep landing loads and loads of big ass rockets, there's a risk that it's actually going to kick up so much stuff that it's actually going to be problematic that it will affect, I wondered about this. It will affect landers. It will become more abrasive for like spacesuits and all these sorts of issues. And so actually they are seriously looking at this that if we're going to just keep landing on the moon, actually we probably should sort of have a way of making pads. So if you're going to have a permanent base there, actually you need a landing pad because you need to not be doing this.

[B]

Yeah. But landing accurately is an issue. So the slim lander from Japan a few years ago wanted to land with an accuracy within a hundred meters and it achieved that. And that is as accurate as you can be. That's like the tip top at the minute. So it's not like landing on Earth. Now part of that issue is when they're trying to land, they're trying to avoid obstacles. So actually, if you've got maybe a landing pad that's like the size of a football field, you can actually land on that. You know, you can be accurate to within that kind of size. But it would have to be an enormous land impact. And then it's like, how many launches are you going to have to do to take them to material up there?

[A]

But. Exactly. But although I think once you've actually got some stuff there, you can actually then add some guidance equipment that draws in your, your rockets who are much smaller.

[B]

Like a beacon.

[A]

Like you need some beacons. Exactly.

[B]

You want to land.

[A]

Exactly. Because we, we have that technology, we absolutely have that kind of ability on Earth to kind of, you know, is this how you blind land an airplane that, you know, at night in the fog on a Runway?

[B]

Yeah, yeah.

[A]

So actually, I think it's all perfectly possible. But yeah, this is interesting. It is actually a massive issue.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

That we can.

[B]

Yeah. Using regolith to like make this the landing pad, as it were. China's actually going to try using lunar regolith in 3D printing on their next Changi mission, which is scheduled for this year. It's one of their technology tests is to see can you use lunar regolith to 3D print bricks. Because their idea to build a moon base is to use. Use regolith to make bricks so you don't have to take everything with you all the time. So that would be interesting to see.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So the technology, I think for using the regolith as a building material is kind of on the horizon, but it doesn't actually exist yet.

[A]

No, no.

[B]

And like, I'm going to be honest, this kind of debris from launches is what Concerns me about starship because did you see the size of the crater that it put under the launch pad for the first launch?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

When there wasn't the great big metal plate underneath it.

[A]

This is. This is an aside I would want to get too much into, as we've talked about before. But yeah, we need bigger landers for the moon. But I wonder if there is going to be a sort of upper limit maybe, like. Yeah, exactly. A limit on how big. And perhaps things like starship and perhaps even blue Moon potentially are actually too big. So certainly too big initially when you haven't got a pad to land on.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

And that actually you. You can only land on the moon with probably bigger than Apollo, but smallish landers, because actually you're going to cause a massive problem throwing regolith up in the air into the. Into the. What do you call it? What would you call it? Throwing. See, this is a problem.

[B]

We got the air, is it?

[A]

Not the air, exactly.

[B]

I was just thinking exosphere.

[A]

That's the completely the wrong thing.

[B]

Because it has an exosphere. Yes. Right. This is not an atmosphere. It's called an exosphere because it's like so tenuous.

[A]

Throwing it up above the surface doesn't

[B]

sound quite right, but yeah, into the exosphere.

[A]

Yeah. And that. That's. Yeah. So, yeah, interesting. It would be. It's one to one to follow that one to. So Alice has kind of picked up on a thing there.

[B]

Yeah, really interesting discussion points.

[A]

Right, next. Go on. What's the night of Gasket Email.

[B]

Next we've got Peter Liverdink. Hello, Peter. Longtime listener, we know, friend of the show. And Peter says, because you're asking for it.

[A]

I was always asking for it.

[B]

Here you go, another email. Hopefully this one arrives promptly without E. Pat the electronic postman getting attacked by some E dog causing problems. And because Paul mentioned it, as he pretty much does for all things I spent some time imaging in the months prior. Here's a go at the Jellyfish nebula.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

From 36 degrees south, where it gets to about 20 degrees elevation. Oof. And he sent a link to his astro bin. He says cheers and newts. Because, you know, he is our penguin fancier friend, Peter. And I've had a look at your picture.

[A]

It's gorgeous.

[B]

It is.

[A]

It is.

[B]

Gorgeous image is what I should be saying. It's beautiful. So congratulations. Even though it's only a 20 degree elevation, you have done it justice.

[A]

Age, of course. Gorgeous image. It's a gorgeous image. I absolutely love it.

[B]

So, yeah, thank you for Sending that across to us.

[A]

It's a weird jellyfish, though.

[B]

Yeah. If any listeners did want to try and have a look at his image, it is on Astro Bin and the username is Cafuego. So C A F U E G O Cafuego, go and hunt it down, give it a thumbs up. It's a really, really, like, you've done it justice. And thank you so much for sharing it with us.

[A]

It's one of those images that you think years ago that would have been like. You'd have been really impressed if that had come from, like, a professional telescope. You'd have been like, wow, that's really cool. And the fact that this is now, like, amateur level stuff, it still blows my mind that that is the kind of, like, image and detail and things that you can now people are able to do is just. It shows the skills of people. Like, Peter is just 100%. And I absolutely take my hat off because someone who just draws stuff. Yeah, I do take my hat off to these people who spend all these days.

[B]

Oh, I know.

[A]

I always take them, like, kind of, oh, it's imagery or what, but actually it is a hell of a skill, really. And the effort and time they put in. I just. I always. The reason I sketch is actually I get instant results. I can't be asked.

[B]

This is why I like. I like a sea star and I like my phone, because it's instant gratification.

[A]

I'm gonna be perfect. Love an image. I just haven't got the patience.

[B]

It's just the time and effort to do the kind of astrophotography that Peter's doing. It just so much goes into it and you get extraordinary results. You know, the time and effort that you put in it is reflected in the quality of what you produce completely. So congratulations, Peter.

[A]

So to sort of finish off, I've got. He sent so many.

[B]

He sent so many. He sent so many.

[A]

And I've got to. I've got to do visto. So I picked one.

[B]

Ah, visto.

[A]

I've picked one.

[B]

We are alive.

[A]

I've picked one. I've picked one.

[B]

So he said, I've got one for visto too.

[A]

It is so sad to hear of the defunding of British astronomy. The once great nation that discovered such things as that line that runs down the entire Earth through Greenwich and other celestial facts has fallen on hard times. I understand that you have that great big Brexit to pay for, but still, it's sad to see British science let go like some old manor house with A leaky roof and pieces falling out the stained glass windows. Perhaps Australia come to the aid of old Blighty like we did during the war. Send us, your poor huddled Brits some coal to keep warm and some beef jerky and oranges to keep the rickets at bay with sympathy Vista. I just abused me that one.

[B]

No, it's a good one. But yeah, we haven't talked about the Darth of British astronomy.

[A]

Oh, well, we mentioned it for a little while. We did about six weeks ago, didn't we? And yeah, we haven't followed that up yet. That's probably for next month. We'll have a little.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, it's a good. Actually we should do a follow up

[A]

and see where we are on that, where that's going. But yeah.

[B]

And I have another email from Visto again.

[A]

He's emailed you as well, is he?

[B]

He's in my list. So I've got Viso says with no reply from you for months. We're sorry, Viso, it's not because we hate you, it's because we couldn't get into our emails. I'm beginning to doubt if I exist. Surely you would at least acknowledge with a simple heyo. Unless, like in that Bruce Willis movie, I have passed into the other side but I am in denial about it and hallucinating that I hear voices coming from my pod player. Are they really only my own imagination? No, we are still alive. Easter. We have just had many issues accessing emails but now we are getting back on track.

[A]

Absolutely. Absolutely right.

[B]

That brings us to the end.

[A]

That brings us to the end because I think we've rabbited on enough and we got loads more emails so we will do some more.

[B]

We have and we are going to work through them. So if you haven't heard from us, we haven't read you out.

[A]

Now it's working. Keep email.

[B]

It's going to happen over the next few months. Thank you so much. We've had so many people. We have got Scott Jorgensen has contacted us, we've got Roy from the Isle of Wight. All sorts of people.

[A]

Who else? There's more. Visto. I'm just flicking through. We've got Ian Cook. Yeah, there's all sorts going on here.

[B]

All sorts of people.

[A]

There's all sorts of emails. There's loads and loads of emails go

[B]

to get through and we are going to. So thank you ever so much everyone who has contacted us. We're so glad that you are still with us and still listening. It's not just us shouting into the void. So yeah, thank you ever so much. If you do want to email us. Yeah, our email is still for now, the show awesomeastronomy.com so that's the showsomeastronomy.com indeed. Let us know your thoughts, your feelings, your send us your pictures, your videos, Send us questions. Yes, tell us what you want for dinner.

[A]

We've got, we've got questions to answer, but we've, we thought we'd just throw a few out there more than just see how we go. And so until next time, it's goodbye from Cydonia Bass.

[C]

Balsam Astronomy is produced by Ralph Paul, Jen, John Damian and Dustin and is free to use with attribution. Theme music by Star Salzman with stinger variation by Rin Jorgensen. We promote general science, astronomy, space exploration and rational thinking with more resources on our [e-mail] if you want us to read your thoughts and comments out on the show, send us your views, opinions, critiques or questions to the [e-mail] tweet us @awesomeastropod or give the awesome Astronomy Facebook page a like and leave your comments there. Thanks for listening. From Cydonia Base Head of Transmission.