this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
72 points (98.6% liked)

Space

2042 readers
9 users here now

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  2. Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
  3. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics

Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.

Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ZafiraHUN@mander.xyz
otter@lemmy.ca
Bitswap@lemmy.world
otter@mander.xyz
72
Congress warned that NASA’s current plan for Artemis “cannot work” - Ars Technica (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 month ago by otters_raft@lemmy.ca to c/space@mander.xyz
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In recent months, it has begun dawning on US lawmakers that, absent significant intervention, China will land humans on the Moon before the United States can return there with the Artemis Program.

So far, legislators have yet to take meaningful action on this—a $10 billion infusion into NASA’s budget this summer essentially provided zero funding for efforts needed to land humans on the Moon this decade. But now a subcommittee of the House Committee on Space, Science, and Technology has begun reviewing the space agency’s policy, expressing concerns about Chinese competition in civil spaceflight.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thebardingreen@lemmy.starlightkel.xyz 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Artemis is a boondoggle corporate giveaway. Its main purpose is to funnel money into the pockets of big contractors as quickly and efficiently as possible.

I worked on it for a year and a half, and saw so much mismanagement and self-sabotage, I can't even say. I've made multiple posts about it in the past. NASA spent $10 million at least having my team fail to build something that we could have built for probably $2.5 million. Most of that money vanished into the pockets of a giant, evil corporation that mostly builds weapons. I can tell you the guys (and they were all men) that we worked with from that company were laughing all the way to the bank when they canceled our project. Now they're launching without that component.

I have lots of feelings.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's disheartening. I was really excited for Artemis. Guess we can't have nice things.

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

I'm still excited for Artemis. Once some of the newer heavy-lift launch vehicles increase their cadence, that will provide alternatives for the most expensive parts of the program (like SLS).