I think in general space exploration is a great use of taxpayer money, but the artemis program doesn't seem great from either a "science per dollar" or "novel accomplishment per dollar" standpoint.

If the goal was just to flex on the rest of the world I would've much rather we focused on going somewhere new or returning to the moon in a more sustainable way

▲

pj_mukh 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"returning to the moon in a more sustainable way"

Isn't this the point of this mission? If your point is "it shouldn't take this much money", then I agree. But also point to almost everything else.

▲

Rebelgecko an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Each Artemis launch costs something like $4b (that's the incremental cost of a new rocket, it's much higher if you amortize the design costs).

IMO the program is not optimized for cost or sustainability, it's optimized for creating jobs in various congressional districts. Of course that provides a certain amount of political sustainability to the so-called Senate Launch System.

I just don't see a future where NASA can afford multiple SLS launches per year to maintain a continuous Lunar presence

	▲	JumpCrisscross 14 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Each Artemis launch costs something like $4b Early launches, yes, because SLS is a garbage heap. Later ones, almost certainly not.

▲

runarberg 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think that is the point, but whether this mission will actually do that is rather unconvincing.

After (and if) Artemis III lands on the moon and brings home the astronauts there seems to be very little planned on how we actually get to the moon base which NASA is claiming this will lead to, let alone the manned Mars mission that is also supposed to follow.

In other words, I think NASA is greatly exaggerating, and possibly lying, about the utility of this mission.

	▲	JumpCrisscross 11 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> there seems to be very little planned on how we actually get to the moon base There is a lot of research going into in situ construction methods and even nuclear power plants on the moon. (Which would be necessary to bootstrap eventual indigenous panel production [2].) It’s actually more encouraging to see this fundamental work being attacked than an endless sea of renderings. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-department-of-energy-... [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00971-x
	▲	shash 30 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		They’ve changed it so III isn’t landing. That will be IV apparently.

▲

sixothree an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I feel like these missions are just paving the way for billionaires to have a new vacation spot.