Talk:Artemis III
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Artemis III article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
 | On 4 September 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Artemis 3 to Artemis III. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Two programs
editThe subject (and infobox) encompass with 2 programs: Orion program and Artemis program. The infobox is designed for only one, and Artemis 3 being part of the Artemis program, should logically have priority over Orion. Rowan Forest (talk) 19:04, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Inconsistent
editThe article is inconsistent. It has changed to the new name in the frame of the “Boots on the Moon by 2024” program, but its description is still based on the “Orion focused on the assembly of the Gateway” paradigm. Hektor (talk) 09:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Number of astronauts
editSince two astronauts are to land on the lunar surface while two will remain in orbit, is this because the Integrated Lander Vehicle doesn't have enough space for more astronauts, or is it just an exception for that mission? It should be made clear in the article. 212.186.15.63 (talk) 09:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- NASA's requirement for the initial HLS was for two astronauts. The Starship HLS that was picked will probably have room for a whole bunch of astronauts, as it's a variant of SpaceX's huge spacecraft that will allegedly carry up to 100 people at a time to Mars. However, this is the first crewed flight of Starhip HLS and would have been the first crewed flight for any competitor. That makes it the qualification test flight for human rating the spacecraft, and NASA uses a crew of two on the qualification test flight. -Arch dude (talk) 00:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Change launch date to 2025?
editSince NASA selected HLS as the lunar landing module and since the latter won't be ready before 2025 [1][2], it might be worth updating the launch date to NET 2025? Pcauchy (talk) 10:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree, the article needs to be updated. Turtleshell3 (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- I read those references. The slip to 2025 was in reference to the lack of funding for a second HLS development. NASA went with a single HLS in order to avoid that slip, and SpaceX signed a contract to deliver by end of 2024. We may still get a slip either because of the bid protests or because of the space suit slip, but those are different problems. Of course, SpaceX could also slip the whole Starship program, but we have no evidence for that yet. -Arch dude (talk) 00:41, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ Berger, Eric (16 April 2021). "NASA selects SpaceX as its sole provider for a lunar lander - "We looked at what's the best value to the government."". Ars Technica. Retrieved 17 April 2021.
- ^ Brown, Katherine (2021-04-16). "As Artemis Moves Forward, NASA Picks SpaceX to Land Next Americans on Moon". NASA.gov.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
Change launch date to September 2024?
editHi everyone. Can we change the launch date to September 2024 because of a date change according to NASA's office of safety and mission assurance. Here is the reference https://web.archive.org/web/20210614003506/https://sma.nasa.gov/docs/default-source/sma-disciplines-and-programs/smsr/smsr-intergrated-master-schedule_24feb2020aab4a269d2a865b9a1a0ff0f003ca228.pdf?sfvrsn=8290faf8_26
Never mind I changed it. But somebody needs to add the reference.
Change article title to 'Artemis III'
editOfficial name of the mission, has a lot of use. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- I would support this move. It is the official title, and we can easily automatically re–direct Artemis 3 to Artemis III. They same should apply to other Artemis articles.--MorrisIV (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support and agree with the redirect from Artemis 3 to Artemis III.Jusdafax (talk) 06:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- support Calderknight (talk) 10:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support and agree with the redirect from Artemis 3 to Artemis III. Whotookthatguy (talk) 19:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
NHRO versus NRHO typo on orbital diagram
editNHRO versus NRHO typo on orbital diagram.
There is a typo and “NHRO” is on the diagram instead of the correct acronym “NRHO”.
This is for Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit.
To be clear, the verbiage within the article is correct. The issue is related to the visualization diagram only.
-Jason Hildebrand
Houston, TX 2600:1700:4274:8410:504B:773:F2E1:AC77 (talk) 21:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're correct, and it appears to have been corrected in a later version (https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/artemis_iii_mission_map_2022.jpg) but I am very unskilled at Commons/graphics stuff and can't get this corrected version uploaded there, sorry. Hopefully a more skilled editor will see this and make it happen. Schazjmd (talk) 21:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
editThere is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Artemis 1 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)