Ex-NASA seriously Warning SpaceX Starship Refueling Problem, DUAL SLS System to Replace...

Ex-NASA seriously Warning SpaceX Starship Refueling Problem, DUAL SLS System to Replace...
===
00:00: Intro
00:36: Ex-NASA Chief’s comment about Artemis and Starship
08:52: Orion’s delayed rehearsal
11:09: SpaceX’s 600th launch
===
#greatspacex #elonmusk #spacex #nasa
==
Advertisers who want to place ads on our channel, please contact the email manager: [email protected]
===
SpaceX Starship SN
Be the first to sponsor us Thank you.
https://www.patreon.com/GreatspaceX?f...
===
Ex-NASA seriously Warning SpaceX Starship Refueling Problem, DUAL SLS System to Replace...
Again, the former NASA chief is criticizing the structure of the Artemis program, arguing that Starship should be removed from the architecture and replaced with a dual-SLS approach.
Many are now questioning whether this proposal is meant to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, NASA has announced another delay affecting the Orion Artemis II rehearsal, and SpaceX has reached a major launch milestone in its history.
Let us explore the details in today’s episode of Great SpaceX.
Ex-NASA seriously Warning SpaceX Starship Refueling Problem, DUAL SLS System to Replace...
The Moon has become one of the most debated subjects in the space industry today, especially as NASA prepares to transition to a new Administrator. Much of the current controversy centers on differing views about the direction of the Artemis program and what architecture the United States should rely on as it attempts to return humans to the lunar surface. Among the most outspoken voices are former NASA leaders who repeatedly challenge the existing structure of Artemis. They warn that without significant changes, the United States risks falling behind China in crewed lunar missions and long-term exploration capabilities.
At the center of this criticism stands former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, who continues to express strong doubts about SpaceX’s Starship Human Landing System. Although he rarely mentions the vehicle directly, his arguments often point toward the complexity of the orbital refueling system that Starship requires. He highlights the fact that the mission depends on multiple refueling flights, precise docking operations, and an unprecedented scale of propellant transfer in orbit. In his view, this degree of complexity creates too many points of failure. He argues that the concept is very unlikely to succeed and, in some statements, he has gone as far as to say that it simply cannot work.
Ex-NASA seriously Warning SpaceX Starship Refueling Problem, DUAL SLS System to Replace...
While Griffin is skeptical of the current American approach, he and several other former officials speak with admiration about China’s progress. They point out that China is following an architectural model similar to the Apollo program, which has already proven capable of placing humans on the lunar surface. They argue that this straightforward architecture is more reliable than the ambitious multi-step design chosen for Artemis. Based on this, Griffin concludes that the current plan should be abandoned starting with Artemis III. Instead, he proposes returning to an approach he supported nearly twenty years ago: a dual-SLS system in which one Space Launch System rocket would carry the lander and the other would carry the crewed spacecraft. The two vehicles would then meet in lunar orbit. The crew would transfer to the lander, descend to the surface, complete the mission, return to orbit, and finally reunite with the spacecraft for the journey home.
In this scenario, the architecture would rely entirely on NASA-controlled systems. The lander would almost certainly be similar to the Apollo Lunar Module, built by whichever contractor NASA selected for the job. On paper, this approach sounds simple and traditional. However, when we look deeper at the costs and schedule implications, major issues immediately appear. And before we explore those challenges, it is important to remember why the original architecture that Griffin supported was eventually abandoned. The reason was not technical feasibility. The reason was cost. It was far too expensive to sustain.
----
We use images and content in accordance with the YouTube Fair Use copyright guidelines: https://www.youtube.com/intl/en/about...
Any questions about copyright please send us via Gmail: [email protected]
To be resolved, thank you.