How SpaceX and NASA Will Land On The Moon



Last Video: How SpaceX Will Land On Mars
https://youtu.be/pUK0KIZAa9E

►Become a member today: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeMcDx6-rOq_RlKSPehk2tQ/join
►Support the channel by purchasing from our merch store: https://shop.theteslaspace.com/
► Join Our Discord Server: https://discord.gg/jeZgzNUcBw
► Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theteslaspace
► Subscribe to our other channel, The Tesla Space: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheTeslaSpace

Mars Colonization News and Updates
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBfN0491sF0SQRy0-pZBjdnBaU6JsWr4B

SpaceX News and Updates: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBfN0491sF0QGbrNimSIWKYeyQ7JjENhE

The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans’ mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race… you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!

► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: https://www.theteslaspace.com

Business Email: [email protected]

#Spacex #Space #Mars

source

43 thoughts on “How SpaceX and NASA Will Land On The Moon”

  1. What is amazing is that Starship is not just a replacement for a manned lunar lander like Apollo, it is more like the originally envisioned Direct Ascent version lander of the Air Force and Army's lunar base program of the 1950s. It will land 100 TONS of cargo on the moon.
    I think it may take much longer than envisioned in "Elon time", but when it is finished, it will have capability that no other country or group of countries could hope to have. America will have the true capability to support a HUGE base on the moon and build it much faster than the Chinese-Russian partnership.
    As long as SpaceX and NASA go the distance, we will be unmatched and dominant on the moon.
    My queston is how many tanker flights will be required to get the Lunar Starship ready to leave LEO or MEO, land on the moon, and return to lunar orbit or MEO? Does HLS Starship need its tanks to be fully refueled to have enough fuel to land and return? I don't think they will. Also, upon reaching orbit, there is still residual fuel left in the Starship tanks, so that also reduces the amount of extra fuel required.
    With Elon's recent presentation on Starship upgrades, it may take fewer tanker flights if each one carries more fuel. And I expect that SpaceX will build a fuel depot version of Starship or a docked complex of them that will get fueled up in advance of launching the HLS version. That way it isn't waiting in orbit for a bunch of tanker flights.
    Another thing I am interested in is the landing gear. As we have seen, landing at the South Pole is very tricky, given the difficult terrain. i think the landing gear is going to have to be much wider than the renderings are showing, more along the lines of the Falcon 9 booster landing gear.
    As for Starship leaving the surface of the moon and returning directly to Earth orbit, Werner Von Braun calculated that the old WW2 V-2 rocket had enough delta-V to get from the surface of the moon back to Earth. With the Aerobraking capabilities of Stainless Steel, it might even be better than that for Starship. We will see what NASA and SpaceX come up with. They can be very resourceful.

    Reply
  2. The "current Starship design" can barely carry itself to low earth orbit with a zero payload mass. On test 3, the fuel tanks were exhausted, and it barely made it to orbit. Oh, but you may infer the "current lunar Starship design", which has not been built yet, the one which will probably capsize ont the moon if it ever reach its surface. OK.

    Reply
  3. The only thing landing on the moon is going to do for humanity is give us another place to terrorize the planet from. Humans are pointless monkeys and take every achievement as a chance to sling shit at each other.

    Reply
  4. Can I just say someting? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Reply
  5. The Artemis missions are using a Near Rectilinear HALO orbit – specifically the 9:2 L2 Southern NRHO – NOT a DRO, or Distant Retrograde Orbit. That is the retirement orbit of Gateway after the Artemis program, and where the Orion capsule was tested. However, it is not where any of the human landing systems, Orion, or Gateway will reside during the program. Your animation was correctly showing an NRHO, but incorrectly labeling it as a DRO.

    Reply
  6. SpaceX needs to use / deploy the same system that their Starlink booster do for their upcoming Lunar and Mars capsules…!
    I know ..Added weight due to
    " Landing Legs " , but there's No MegaZillia Catching Arms on the Moon or Mars…

    Reply
  7. The problem with why it's taking so long for NASA to land on the moon is that they put their trust in SpaceX and the fact that electric Jesus Elon is a liar who has no problem promising things without thinking. According to Elon, the Starship spacecraft was supposed to land on Mars twice in 2022 and four times in 2024.

    Reply
  8. If NASA wanted to beat the former Soviet Union, they ONLY NEED ONE TRIP to the moon and fully reveal their success to the Whole World(there were various claims of fakes.) While their subsequent Moon landings are so MUTED that they are not even News Worthy. Coupled with their disappeared Moon Landing design documents leaves very serious questions as to NASA's Actual Moon Landing.

    Now with NASA scaled back Moon Landing arrangements, it doesn't bode well for their Artemis Project.

    Reply
  9. Hey Guys, isn't it obvious that landing a tall tubular spacecraft on an uneven surface is going to result in disaster. The entire vehicle is going to be prone to tipping over. The surface of the moon isn't flat and level. Unless a logical landing gear is created the spacecraft will not survive the landing. Think about it.

    Reply
  10. Hahahahaha. Right. Zero successful launches. Zero successful landings. No tanker variant. No lunar lander. No orbital fuel depot. 12 launches for 1 moon shot. Muxrat fanboys are morons

    Reply
  11. How are you going to build the landing pad? What machinery is SpaceX needing to move rocks, level the soil, and compacting it down? Right now, this top heavy vehicle might topple over landing on a boulder or a pad sinking in soft dirt (doubt those thrusters would keep it level once the fuel is exhausted)….and at the same time, the engines might get damaged by flying dust to large stones disabling it. No repair stations anywhere.
    Sure I would love SpaceX to succeed but these YouTubers are missing A LOT of details and fail to think this through.

    Reply
  12. I really hope SpaceX launches thier first Moon Lander with 2x TeslaBots inside. They could test-drive the control systems in 1/6th gravity (to confirm the simulated control weights). Also, they would demo humanoids walking around inside the crew spaces. Lastly, how cool would it be to show TeslaBots suiting-up in space suits (to protect their electronicsfrom dust), and actually walking around on the moon!

    Reply
  13. They are going to hire some people and buy some metal the workers are going to draft some designs using neutermeters then off the plans build a ship that will travel to space the moon were they will get some clues as to were they want to land then with all the math find a proper landing technic wether it be (now here's the important part) multiple ways they could gain access to the moon 1 landing flat on slides problems, strips, structural, build a slide parachuting multiple separation landing rocket propelled landing dust issues , self guided tower rocket landing a big net to catch the ship crash landing balloon roll nose reverse thrust vectoring hope step jump 3 stage landing cable explosion lock finding a small caviate to grapple catch ( you don't sell what you say it's shit don't title a vid without the real explanation you fuck up your shit pisses me off)

    Reply
  14. Let us stop asking why we never went back to the Moon. The ONLY motivation strong enough to justify the huge funds necessary to explore deep space is if there are strong GEOPOLITICAL REASONS to do it. Period. Apollo was born out of obvious geopolitical reasons during the Cold War. "Exploration is in our DNA" is just there to make the pill easier to swallow for the general public, while bringing a patriotic tear or two.

    Reply

Leave a Comment