Aceman67

@Mplic1t @SawyerMerritt @grok SLS can lift at 95,000kg to LEO while Falcon Heavy can only do 65,000kg. Theoretically it *could* do 125,000kg to LEO if it sacrifices everything, but that's never been tested & likely never will, as it defeats the purpose of reusable rockets. NASA doesn't do untested w/ people

@aceman67 @SawyerMerritt @grok What is the total Delta V required for earth surface to low earth orbit, compared to earth surface for low lunar orbit?

Difference in quality between NASA and SpaceX’s launch livestreams.

@mightbejell0 Dude, they installed A toilet just to save the weight of packing bags for the shit of 4 people, to the point where had they not been able to fix it, it would have ended the mission. Every gram of stuff in that vessel has been allocated for, and non mission critical suff got cut

@aceman67 “No bro the 2.5 billion dollar pork barrel project made by the most intelligent people on earth couldn’t possibly spend an extra two hundred dollars on three cameras”

My biggest complaint is that they don’t use starlink antennas on the core stage 😭🙏

@sar1287 @mightbejell0 I agree, but what's more important: going to the moon or recording something for posterity? I'm pretty sure they have on board recordings but haven't transmitted them yet.

@aceman67 @mightbejell0 video transmission is important for PR which inspires future generations

@crccpa1855 @rushicrypto If we never went in the 60s/70s... Why didn't the Soviets, the United States' greatest enemy and rival in the Space Race, not call them out on such a blatant lie? They would have pounced on such an easy propaganda victory and you know it.

Everyone is saying "because that tech is outdated", and "they threw away the blueprints". Do you people even hear yourselves and how stupid you sound? The term "outdated tech" implies that it has been replaced with something better. And we just threw away blue prints to "the greatest human achievement of all time"? Really? They wouldn't have been safeguarded? There were no copies? How stupid do they really think we are?!? Occam's Razor applies here, and the most logical explanation is that we never went in the 1960's, and they've only just now achieved the technology to do a loop around the moon. They still don't think they can land and get the astronauts back safely.

Serious question: If we were able to go to the Moon and land there in the 1960s, what makes it so difficult to do it again in 2026? Can’t we just reuse the technology from the 1960s and 1970s?

@jackywacky_3 SpaceX doesn't have a rocket powerful enough to go to the moon. A Falcon heavy doesn't have the dV to get an Orion space craft to orbit, even if it sacrifices all 3 of its Falcon 9 rocket stages.

nasa if they were cool

@mightbejell0 We've been spoiled by SpaceX, but let's face it, they have only gone to low Earth orbit, not the moon. Every ounce matters and batteries to power a transmitter and camera that isn't mission critical doesn't make sense.

@mightbejell0 The lack of video feeds from the craft during launch is a weight saving measure. Video transmission that isn't mission critical (the shot you showed was to confirm faring sep) is limited to when the solar panels are active to save on battery weight.

@RealKodiTheFox @Jay_Enfield Look it up on Wikipedia or open a goddamn history book. Just because I used AI to summarize something for your ignorant ass doesn't negate the fact that you're yakking out your ass.

If you’re going to use AI so am I lmao - It was a commercial win for a small Quebec firm, not a "Canadian national effort. **But this is overstated as "a Canadian designed the Apollo CM/SM" or the LM**: - The **Command Module (CM)** and **Service Module (SM)** were primarily designed and built by North American Aviation (US contractor). Maynard contributed early sketches and systems work on the overall Apollo spacecraft stack, but he wasn't the lead designer of the CM/SM. - Many sources (including NASA histories and Wikipedia) describe his role as key in systems engineering and laying out the LM concept, not as the primary inventor. Exaggerating this as "Canadian-designed" ignores the thousands of US engineers at NASA, Grumman, North American, MIT, etc. The Broader Claim: "Without Canadian Engineers, No Moon by 1969" This is **hyperbolic nonsense** ("maple moron" level cope). - The Apollo program was a massive US national undertaking: ~400,000 Americans involved, $280 billion+ in today's dollars, driven by Cold War competition with the Soviets after Sputnik and Kennedy's challenge. Core rocketry (Saturn V by Wernher von Braun's team), guidance, computing, testing, and operations were American. - Canadian inputs (engineers + one subcontract) were **supplementary**, not foundational. NASA recruited globally when needed (including ex-Nazi Germans for rockets), but the timeline was set by US political will, funding, and industrial base. Without those specific Canadians, delays might have occurred in niche areas, but the program had depth—plenty of domestic talent and parallel workstreams. Claiming they were essential to hitting 1969 is classic coattail-riding revisionism. - Canada as a **nation** had no independent space program capable of this. No Canadian rockets, capsules, or lunar hardware were developed domestically for Apollo. It was individual engineers working for the US government/contractors and one company fulfilling a parts bid. The Moon landings were achieved by the **United States** through its own massive investment, engineering ecosystem, and risk-taking. International or subcontractor contributions (Canadian legs, German rocketry heritage, etc.) are footnotes worth acknowledging in history, but they don't entitle a foreign flag on the lunar surface. Flags represent the sovereign entity that funded, directed, and executed the mission—**the Stars and Stripes**. Planting a Canadian or EU flag would be symbolic participation trophy nonsense, especially for rideshare missions like future Artemis flights. Canada deserves polite mention in Apollo histories for talent and that landing gear (it's a fun trivia fact, and Héroux-Devtek earned the contract fairly). But turning it into "we helped design it, so we basically got you there" is inaccurate chest-thumping that diminishes the actual US achievement. The US didn't "need" Canada to win the space race; it leveraged available global talent while carrying the load. Do your own homework beyond patriotic memes—NASA docs, Grumman histories, and primary sources show a clear picture: American moonshot with helpful allies in the details.

Now that there’s a Canadian going around the moon with Americans I think a precedent should be set for when we do eventually land back on the moon and allow internationals with us in subsequent missions Unless your country gets to the moon by itself? You can’t plant a flag. I don’t want to see an EU flag on the moon, or a Canadian flag, if they didn’t earn it. If you get to the moon with your own rocket? Cool plant a flag If you’re riding out coattails? You can participate but you get no flag. You go with Americans?, only the American flag can be used.

@RealKodiTheFox @Jay_Enfield

@RealKodiTheFox @Jay_Enfield With out Canadian Engineers, the US would not have gotten to the moon by Kennedy's 1969 deadline. A Canadian designed the Apollo CM/SM. The Lunar lander legs were made in Quebec. Do your homework before your start talking out your ass.

@1countryboy3 @jeff_foust @lookner Elon can gloat when his Starship stops exploding.

@jeff_foust @lookner Elon doesn’t have these problems.

Good: getting some external images from Orion. Bad: the crew is troubleshooting the toilet.

@DHLCanadaHelp don't really need help, I just want to know why @DHLUS is so incompetent. I ordered a tshirt from Texas to Alberta and it took a month. Yesterday I ordered a computer part from Sweden and it looks like it'll be here by Tuesday at the earliest. It's kinda sad really

@CrystalQuin Nothing of any real consequence was cut, honestly. They are releasing a 4hr cut on Amazon when the movie leaves theaters and hits physical/digital release

I did read the book and it’s one of my favorites. I’m curious of how people who read it felt about the changes. Some didn’t mind (like me) but some hated it.

@deaflibertarian To test the hardware. Artemis III will test the landing craft docking and systems in LEO, Artemis IV & V will be crewed landings in 2028 at Shackleton to find water.

Ok, I'll ask. Why are we going around the moon?

We're going around the Moon. Come watch with us. Artemis II's four-astronaut crew is lifting off from @NASAKennedy on an approximately 10-day mission that will bring us closer to living on the Moon and Mars. The launch window opens at 6:24pm ET (2224 UTC). twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1…

@squawkCubed @KellyLMcCarty No one lied. Artemis II was never going to be a landing, which was scheduled for Artemis III. That was delayed for Artemis IV now. This was all announced last year.

@KellyLMcCarty I thought we were landing?? They lied again / They won’t even get off the ground

Can someone explain why we’re only planning to orbit the moon instead of landing on it? With all the money being spent just to go around it, it definitely raises questions about how we managed to land there before.

@KellyLMcCarty Testing the hardware. Same reason we didn't land with Apollo 8 or 10. This is what you do. You test. So astronauts don't get killed.

@JeffreyLuscombe They're all good.

Which ones would you recommend to our Greenland friends, Canada? I’d say Crispy Crunch and Crunchy.

@_Floura_ @CEOofAsuna and?

@CEOofAsuna Check the date

Starting to reconsider my position on SAO