8 ms·

Private company landing on the moon today

516 points by SigKill9 3y ago

ethbr1 3y ago
Curious question: as a private company, how do you determine your lunar orbit parameters after a burn? Are they leveraging Earth/orbit-based radar? Or satellites around the moon? Or something else?
- vardump 3y ago
  Maybe star (and moon/earth) tracking and radio signals to earth?
- dylan604 3y ago
  I don't understand the "as a private company" qualifier. The math is the same, and doesn't care if it's private/public.
  - martincmartin 3y ago
    But observations need powerful domestic telescopes. If you're NASA, you own and have access to them.
    - jebarker 3y ago
      Do you mean optical telescopes? I would have thought they used earth based radar plus star tracking onboard to figure out where they are in orbit, but I don't know.
    - dylan604 3y ago
      No, as an American, you own them. NASA just administrates them for you. If you're a space faring private company, you contract out the various parts of the mission. You didn't build a rocket, you hired SpaceX. You didn't build the relay network, you licensed access time. You don't build a space observation platform, you license time to use them.
      - tzs 3y ago
        Which of those, or what else instead, did the specific company in this case do for this specific mission? That is what ethbr1 was asking.
        datadrivenangel 3y ago
        Almost certainly NASA.
      - sneak 3y ago
        If I owned them, I would get to use them. I don’t, so logically I must not. By this logic, there are huge amounts of land that I also “own” that guys with M16s (or, more accurately, M4s) will keep me from walking on if I try to go there. Half the year I live in southern Nevada, so this distinction has some direct practical consequences in my life. It’s deceptive. Government property is not owned by citizens, it is under the exclusive control of the state—i.e. not you.
        dylan604 3y ago
        You conveniently left out the part of licensing the time. You can license with the BLM for access to government control land. Ranchers do it all the time. Special events like Burning Man also do it. You just have to contact the correct agency to do it. But of course, it so much easier to make a know it all sarcastic filled internet rant than do anything approaching useful information to a conversation.
        bigstrat2003 3y ago
        Do you not see how that just furthers the parent's point? If I have to license usage of something, I don't actually own it.
        dylan604 3y ago
        I think we have a basic misunderstanding of private vs public ownership. When we all own it, you can't just do whatever you want like build a house, but withe proper permit, you can use it. If it was private, I could never do something with what you owned.
  - andyjohnson0 3y ago
    I'm not the person you replied to, but I assume they meant something like "as a non space agency". Ie how are they tracking the lander? How are they sending and receiving telemetry? What resources did they use for mission planning and site selection? Perhaps they've built their own comms system for example - maybe even a multi-site one that enables continuous contact - or maybe they're using NASA/ESA/JAXA assets. It would be interesting to know. I'm not aware of any commercial providers for lunar communications.
    - maronato 3y ago
      Their website has all that info. They have their own satellites for comms, and lots of other stuff too. They seem to either own or co-own all of the hardware
- ooterness 3y ago
  Ground infrastructure is important for space missions. Intuitive Machines is operating under a NASA contract for Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [1]. As such, they can negotiate access to NASA resources such as DSN and NEN for this mission. Intuitive Machines has also built several ground stations of their own [2]. These allow communications with the spacecraft as well as the range/velocity measurements needed for accurate navigation. I'm the longer term, the Artemis program plans to build out LunaNet [3] for improved communications and GPS-like navigation services. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machines/ https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machine... [2] https://www.intuitivemachines.com/post/commercial-lunar-network-completed-ahead-of-im-1-moon-mission https://www.intuitivemachines.com/post/commercial-lunar-netw... [3] https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/lunanet-empowering-artemis-with-communications-and-navigation-interoperability/ https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/lunanet-empowering-arte...
  - dpflan 3y ago
    Thanks for these great details. Is there a fee for using the NASA resources (I assume there is, I just don't know how this works)?
    - ooterness 3y ago
      Yes, there is a fee. The largest antennas (i.e., the absolutely gigantic 70 meter dishes) can be $5k per hour. Further discussion on StackOverflow [1] and the NASA MOCS guide [2]. [1] https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/21005/what-makes-time-on-the-dsn-so-expensive https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/21005/what-makes-t... [2] https://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/files/6_NASA_MOCS_2014_10_01_14.pdf https://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/files/6_NASA_MOCS_2014_10_01_...
  - ethbr1 3y ago
    You are awesome! Thanks for all the links and info, to an open-ended question. The process of bootstrapping to Earth-space-parity is fascinating to me. One thing in the 1960s, when there was no GPS and terrestrial net assumption, but now you're going from everything we've built here to... if you don't bring it, you don't have it. The accretion of Mars support satellites has also been fascinating.
integrits 3y ago
50 years have passed and all we get are two crappy photos of the "landing". Hilarious.
adityaathalye 3y ago
The private lander's mission control looks like the proverbial two-pizza team. Would it that the silent revolution in spaceflight, hidden under the glamour of reusable rockets, is incredibly sophisticated telemetry, communication, on-board automation? A computing stack that's making the 1x mission control a 10x mission control? I understand there will be other teams elsewhere (delivery vehicle, remote sensing etc. etc.). But that image is rad too --- from one or a few space agencies co-orchestrating a program to multiples more doing so. Obviously some version of this has been going on for decades, but somehow the imagery on their website struck a chord.
- JonChesterfield 3y ago
  Linkedin suggests about 250 people. Lots of them with software in the name. Company looks very lean relative to the semiconductor monsters I'm more familiar with.
- datadrivenangel 3y ago
  JAXA has done rocket launches with a ground crew of less than 10. Obviously the extended support staff is much bigger than that to enable so few people to launch a rocket, but the number of people required when things are ready to go can be very small.
- kragen 3y ago
  better, lighter-weight computing stacks have been a huge boost; that's what made cubesats possible. but the much bigger deal is the dramatic drop in launch costs driven by spacex, even though so far that's only a factor of 3.4 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cost-space-launches-low-earth-orbit https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cost-space-launches-low-e... with lightweight computers driven by the cellphone industry, it became possible for a small team or even individual to launch a low-power ham radio satellite or weather satellite. but they can't launch a high-resolution space telescope, earth observing satellite, or high-power communications satellite, nor can they do laser communication pointcasting. and lightweight computers are a crucial enabler for starlink-style communications constellations, but there's only one of those, because that's still a big-money kind of project suppose that, instead, you had 01980s computing power, but the cost of space launch dropped by a factor of 100. if you need to launch a 200-kg satellite to get the sky-observing optical aperture you're looking for so diffraction doesn't cremate you, you don't care if the onboard computers weigh 1 gram or 10 kilograms. (i mean, you do care, because it lets you cut your launch budget 10%, but it's not a dominant determinant of viability.) with saturn v or zenit 2, according to the plot linked above, that launch would cost you a million dollars. today, at falcon heavy's 1500 dollars per kg, it's 300,000 dollars, which is already a radically more feasible project spacex's 'starship' is supposed to carry 150 tonnes to leo for 10 million dollars. that's 70 dollars a kilogram. our hypothetical 200-kg aditya athalye space telescope satellite would then cost 14000 dollars to launch. it becomes a hobby project comparable in cost to an engine lathe or a camper van. this would change the economics of space in a profound way, far beyond what cellphone chips have done for comparison, the csis aerospace security project number for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_(rocket_family) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_(rocket_family) on that chart was 118500 dollars per kg in 01961. (but of course you couldn't launch a cubesat on it for that price; it was a military thing.) by 01967 saturn v had brought that down by a factor of 22. after that it remained constant for 43 years until falcon 9 in 02010. starship, if it works, will reduce launch costs by that same factor of 22 over the current falcon heavy number i described above, and by a factor of 73 over saturn v
CartyBoston 3y ago
The spacecraft has an ad prominently displayed on itself, it's depressing. We will never reproduce the experience of 10 year old me watching the moon landing with my dad. It's all just egos and entertainment now.
- jdelman 3y ago
  That's because you were a child at the time. A child now will most likely have the same sense of awe and wonder you had, not the cynical point of view you've developed over time.
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    A child now will be totally unaware about that because he will be occupied doomscrolling whatever trends is current now on TikTok.
- ordu 3y ago
  Experience is irreproducible. It depends on too many factors, we even don't know the full list of them, and some of them change irreversibly with time passing. You will not be 10 years old anymore. It is not a good reason for a depression, you can experience world now like you couldn't being a 10 year old boy.
  - Loughla 3y ago
    Actually one of the absolute best things about having kids, that is not reproducible for no-child lifestyles, is seeing everything for the first time through their eyes. All the other stuff people say about parenting can be reproduced via service or volunteering or something else. But that experience absolutely is unique. Magic is real. The world is wild and exciting, and it's all there for that kid. It's amazing to watch and be a part of. So, while you can never go back to being at 10 year old boy, you absolutely can get a taste of what that's like via adoption or having your own. In my opinion, that is.
    - ordu 3y ago
sgt 3y ago
Where is the live stream?
- TrueGeek 3y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IarunZ9Ykas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IarunZ9Ykas
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - pugworthy 3y ago
    Nice background music - not jarring.
- sp332 3y ago
  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg2ffigGcYM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg2ffigGcYM
ArunRaja 3y ago
Is this the first time for pvt company...?
NedF 3y ago
Landing in ~ 8 hours. "The Odysseus moon lander is aiming for a 5:30 p.m. EST (2230 GMT) lunar landing" https://www.space.com/intuitive-machines-odysseus-moon-landing-what-time-livestream https://www.space.com/intuitive-machines-odysseus-moon-landi...
- obelix150 3y ago
  The landing time has been updated to 1524 CST. https://www.intuitivemachines.com/im-1 https://www.intuitivemachines.com/im-1 There will be a live feed on the Intuitive Machines site above and mirrored on NASA TV+ here: https://plus.nasa.gov/scheduled-video/intuitive-machines-1-lunar-landing/ https://plus.nasa.gov/scheduled-video/intuitive-machines-1-l... The coverage on both live feeds will begin around 1400 CST.
- mosselman 3y ago
  Pretty cheeky of Columbia to sponsor this. They couldn't even make the shoes I bought that were 'absolutely waterproof' actually waterproof. A super light rain would result in wet feet. This didn't even happen in normal sneakers. But it is all about image I guess.
  - _yb2s 3y ago
    Columbia is known for incredibly good lifetime warranty- contact them and get something that works for free. I use mostly Columbia gear for some pretty serious outdoor adventures, and generally consider their waterproof tech, especially outdry rain shells to be the best you can get at any price. However, I don't (and wouldn't) use any of their footwear. For waterproof footwear, breathable membranes don't work well in my experience, they quickly tear and leak. The membranes are just too delicate for the forces and flexing on a boot. A really well built traditional leather boot with external waterproofing like Sno Seal applied daily is both more breathable, and more waterproof. Failing that, heavy rubber boots like commercial fisherman wear are really the only totally waterproof footwear.
  - falserum 3y ago
    If it’s waterproof your legs will be wet anyway (sweat will accumulate)
Communitivity 3y ago
[flagged]
- Shatnerz 3y ago
  > Not moving my family to Texas, Florida, or Alabama, for anything. Beautiful states, but I have a daughter. Are women not safe in these states? I'm not sure I'm picking up whatever you are implying.
  - jorts 3y ago
    They’re likely referring to the effects of the Dobbs ruling [1]. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization#:~:text=Dobbs%20v.%20Jackson%20Women's%20Health%20Organization%2C%20No.%2019%2D,confer%20a%20right%20to%20abortion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_H....
  - midasz 3y ago
    Women die because they're not allowed to abort nonviable fetuses that would also likely kill them. Seems very unsafe, I wouldn't want to be a woman there.
    - arrozconcosas 3y ago
      That is terrible. How often does this situation happen?
      - spiderfarmer 3y ago
        I don't know the statistics, but even if it happens only once, the authors of the policies in place should be prosecuted. One stat that jumps out is that infant death rates are way up. Forcing women to complete their term anyway is sadistic and completely unnecessary.
        ejb999 3y ago
        [flagged]
jdelman 3y ago
It's interesting how this feels like a big deal; when I learned of this yesterday, I almost forgot that there have been almost 30 missions to Mars (which I assume is much harder and more expensive) in the years since the last moon landing.
- JonChesterfield 3y ago
  I'm more excited about the moon. Being that much closer is a big deal. This company is looking to make sending stuff to the moon (not sure about getting stuff back) a reliable & vaguely cost effective thing to do. There's probably valuable stuff on the moon and even if not, it's learning a load of things about going further afield. Lots of science fiction about the asteroid belt beyond mars.
- danavar 3y ago
  It is a big deal! While just landing on the moon is definitely much simpler than a Mars mission, this lander is a part of the Artemis program; it's one of the first steps towards developing the Artemis base camp on the moon.
- gwbas1c 3y ago
  > which I assume is much harder and more expensive Manned space missions are significantly more expensive (and complicated) than robotic missions. (Otherwise, we'd be sending a lot more people into space.) Let's do a little bit of back-of-the-envelope Googling: From https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-apollo https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-apollo > The United States spent $25.8 billion on Project Apollo between 1960 and 1973, or approximately $257 billion when adjusted for inflation to 2020 dollars. From https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-the-mars-exploration-rovers#:~:text=The%20Mars%20Exploration%20Rover%20(MER,15%20years%20of%20mission%20operations https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-the-mars-expl.... > The Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission cost $1.08 billion. Of that amount, $744 million was spent on spacecraft development and launch; $335.8 million was spent on 15 years of mission operations. So it looks like "manned" space missions cost at least 100x the cost of sending a robot.
  - 3y ago
Someone 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitive_Machines_Nova-C#EagleCam_to_record_lunar_landing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitive_Machines_Nova-C#Eagl...: “EagleCam to record lunar landing Just before landing, at approximately 30 m (98 ft) above the lunar surface, the Odysseus lander will eject the EagleCam camera-equipped CubeSat, which will drop onto the lunar surface near the lander, with an impact velocity of about 10 m/s (22 mph). From the surface the EagleCam will attempt to capture the first third-person images of a lunar landing. The EagleCam will use a Wi-Fi connection to the Odysseus lander to relay its images back to Earth.” That CubeSat is student built. I wonder what camera they have and how hard it will be to make it record the landing. Will it orient itself during that six-ish second drop or can it move the camera after landing? Does it have a fisheye lens to increase the likelihood of the lander being in its field of vision? Unfortunately, their project page (https://erau.edu/eaglecam https://erau.edu/eaglecam) seems to be light on such details.
- sdwr 3y ago
  That's an impressive school project! First university to land on the moon
  - lukan 3y ago
    Unless they would have build and operated the rocket themself (and not SpaceX), I would consider that a false clickbait headline.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      A decade ago, maybe. Today? SpaceX is commoditizing access to space - we're at the point we can start treating Earth-orbit delivery as a given, i.e. just a service you pay money for.
      - lukan 3y ago
        Earth orbit maybe. But here we are at earth-moon. And the lander is not build or operated by the school/university either.
acefaceZ 3y ago
I believe they are part of the recently setup homesteading program similar to what Alaska setup in the 80s. If they can put a stake in the ground they get 20 acres around the stake.
- psd1 3y ago
  Reassuringly anachronistic to use acres as a unit of measure on the moon.
  - p1mrx 3y ago
    For historical reasons, a moon acre is approximately 16.7% smaller than an earth acre.
  - samatman 3y ago
    It's an official unit of the only flag on the Moon to date. What else would you suggest?
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      It’s not the only flag. https://web.archive.org/web/20220725003858/https://www.space.com/china-flag-on-moon-chang-e-5-lunar-landing https://web.archive.org/web/20220725003858/https://www.space...
    - p1mrx 3y ago
      m²
    - lunakid 3y ago
      Maybe the same units basically everybody has always ever used (in earnest) for space tech (including NASA)?
- strombofulous 3y ago
  This reminds me of countries who send pregnant women to antartica to (somehow) strengthen their land claims: https://medium.com/good-to-know/why-11-babies-have-been-born-in-antarctica-7409e0cc98f https://medium.com/good-to-know/why-11-babies-have-been-born... Like antartica, I'm sure someone with guns will tell us who really owns the moon as soon as it actually becomes relevant.
consumer451 3y ago
FYI, they have a subreddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/IntuitiveMachines/ https://old.reddit.com/r/IntuitiveMachines/
photochemsyn 3y ago
The next stage in this project is the ice-drilling PRIME-1 - which might rely on the success of this stage? Details: > "The [Odyssus] Nova-C Lander is a tall hexagonal cylinder on 6 landing legs. It is capable of carrying 100 to 130 kg of payload to the surface. It uses solar panels to generate 200 W of power on the surface. Propulsion and landing use liquid methane as fuel and liquid oxygen as an oxidizer. The PRIME-1 mission has two primary components, The Regolith and Ice Drill for Exploring New Terrain (TRIDENT) and the Mass Spectrometer observing lunar operations (MSolo). TRIDENT is an augering drill approximately 1 meter long. The drill is able to stop at any depth as commanded from the ground and deposit and deposit its sample on the surface for analysis. MSolo is a commercial off the shelf (COTS) mass spectrometer modified for spaceflight and lunar operations. Total PRIME-1 payload mass is about 40 kg." https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=PRIME-1 https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id...
Anduia 3y ago
It is the size of a Tardis
dghughes 3y ago
> the Odysseus lander will eject the EagleCam camera-equipped CubeSat, which will drop onto the lunar surface near the lander So the first non-government device to land on moon will be viewed trying to land by a device also non-government (but part of the lander) that lands on the moon first? I guess that evens out.
ngneer 3y ago
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
AlbertCory 3y ago
Wallace and Gromit did it a long time ago.
lacoolj 3y ago
does someone have a telescope pointed at the moon so we can have a third, third-party view of this landing?
dang 3y ago
See also https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/us-nears-attempt-first-moon-landing-half-century-with-private-robot-spacecraft-2024-02-22/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/us-nears-attempt-fi... (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39468115 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39468115, but no comments there)
wesselbindt 3y ago
This is great, it really proves that the free market can be just as innovative and efficient as the public sector. They managed to get there less than 50 years after the taxpayer funded space guys did. No small feat! Imagine all the things they must've learned along the way!
- JoeDaDude 3y ago
  You do realize this mission is taxpayer funded. Intuitive Machines is getting paid as part of a contract to NASA under the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLIPS) program. https://www.nasa.gov/commercial-lunar-payload-services/ https://www.nasa.gov/commercial-lunar-payload-services/ https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machines/ https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machine...
  - FactKnower69 3y ago
    No way!! I thought private enterprise didn't need government handouts?
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      It's poor people and small businesses who don't need government handouts.
      - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
        TBTF FTW!
thisisauserid 3y ago
This is not a hoax. But won't we soon have a real fake moon landing? What a world.
mastermedo 3y ago
Their desk in the middle of the control room is proof that earth is a flat disk. Surely they would have a spherical desk had the earth been a sphere!
albchamo 3y ago
[dead]
malkia 3y ago
I didn't know about them. I recently watched the whole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_All_Mankind_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_All_Mankind_(TV_series) and was mesmerized by it - it's alternative reality fiction, where a private company comes to land on Mars!
- rkagerer 3y ago
  Yeah, For All Mankind is a great show for people who are excited about this kind of stuff. It's an alternative-history fictional drama exploring "What if" the space race never ended.
  - krasin 3y ago
    Yep. Highly enjoyed its Season 1, but I wished I never watched any further - it feels complete at this point and the later seasons destroy the impression. Kind of like with The Matrix. Note: some people have an opposite opinion, that the interesting stuff starts at Season 3.
    - malkia 3y ago
      I loved them all - but I can see your point!
    - rkagerer 3y ago
      Agreed, Season 1 was by far the best. I'm re-watching the whole thing with my spouse and in some ways it's more fun the second time around (surely biased because of the shared experience). Some shows are like that - I didn't think Star Trek Deep Space Nine was all that hot first time around, appreciated it much more years later on a rewatch (the supporting characters are awesome). Maybe in part it's adjusted expectations ;-).
  - jessriedel 3y ago
    I wanted to like it, and having some (reasonably-)big-budget visualization made of proposed rockets like Sea Dragon was great. But the (imo) awful dialog made the show unwatchable for me, and they did a lot of scientifically silly stuff like taking the Space Shuttle to the moon.
rkagerer 3y ago
Ridiculous this isn't more prominent in mainstream news. Eg. I open Google News to stories of killers and a new real estate tax and some sort of scandal by an actor. This is why I come to HN instead.
- saagarjha 3y ago
  It was on NPR today if that makes you feel better
- godelski 3y ago
  Edit: Front page of a few sites Reuters: See the right part of the image https://imgur.com/VpGAIBl https://imgur.com/VpGAIBl CNN: https://imgur.com/TzRtit8 https://imgur.com/TzRtit8 AP News: https://imgur.com/OgrtzrC https://imgur.com/OgrtzrC NBC: Not so apparent but there https://imgur.com/7itvGeh https://imgur.com/7itvGeh NYT: Also not obvious https://imgur.com/4DMDqr0 https://imgur.com/4DMDqr0 NPR: Gotta scroll: https://imgur.com/dp5UDCq https://imgur.com/dp5UDCq I found it on Fox News by search and it's a fair scroll down. I also found in MSNBC by search, but actually don't know where it is just that the word "moon" exists somewhere on that page and for the life of me I cannot see what word is highlighted.
  - pcl 3y ago
    It’s the fourth story on the Washington Post website right now.
    - SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
      And it looks like it crashed… not the website.
  - prawn 3y ago
    It's a major (red background!) story with live coverage on The Guardian site here in Australia.
  - adriand 3y ago
    It's been the #1 headline story on the NYT for a couple of hours at least now. They had the live feed on the homepage too.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
qwertox 3y ago
Now to the problem with YouTube, and I'm sick and tired of reporting this, because by now they should have an automated solution for this, look at this link: https://www.youtube.com/hashtag/im1 https://www.youtube.com/hashtag/im1 Channels named "SpaceX [LIVE]" [0], "SpaceX" (which is actually @uyenmusic with 148.000 subscribers), and so on. Most of these channels have no videos except for that single live stream, occasionally inserting QR-codes with crypto-scams. Like the first one I mentioned. > Huge crypto-giveaway during to the launch! > During this unique event, you have the opportunity to take a share of 1.000 BTC & 10.000 ETH & 100.000.000 DOGE & 10.000.000 USDT. Have a look at the rules and don't miss out on this. You can only participate once! And the most interesting thing about this video is that they are using AI to make Elon Musk say that you should scan the QR-code and that you will get the crypto. 100% sounds like him. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toDNnSBzgEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toDNnSBzgEU
- defenestration 3y ago
  That livestream [0] looks like a pretty convincing scam to me, with 22k people viewing at the moment. And it indeed sounds like him. The real username is hidden behind the visible SpaceX[Live] name.
armcat 3y ago
It looks like it touched down, mission control picking up a faint signal, trying to refine it now.
- malfist 3y ago
  First successful commercial landing!
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
pjungwir 3y ago
NASA is covering this on twitch right now: https://www.twitch.tv/nasa https://www.twitch.tv/nasa
fragmede 3y ago
I don't know why they made it so hard to get to the youtube link for the video, which is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-qwhozfYeQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-qwhozfYeQ
anigbrowl 3y ago
Update: communications have been a bit glitchy but the craft has made a safe landing and is transmitting data. Was watching NASA administrator Bill Nelson's congratulatory message; can't help wondering if he also recorded a commiseration one looking to the future in case it didn't work...
- samschooler 3y ago
  I'm sure. That was very recorded. Reminds me of Nixon's speech written in the event the moon landing failed. https://www.archives.gov/files/presidential-libraries/events/centennials/nixon/images/exhibit/rn100-6-1-2.pdf https://www.archives.gov/files/presidential-libraries/events...
- unstatusthequo 3y ago
  Maybe it had an AT&T SIM? ;) But seriously, it's weird how this really didn't make a lot of news today overall. Did the cellular outage really overshadow this? Times have changes if so. Our idea of "wow!" has been desensitized I guess. Pretty impressive to me!
  - layer8 3y ago
    The JWST is on a similar level of impressive (if not more), and arguably more important than a single moon landing, and the general public doesn't have much interest in that either.
    - belval 3y ago
      To defend the general public, landing an unmanned craft on the moon just doesn't sound impressive anymore, it's like SpaceX landing their boosters. The first time it's mindblowing, the Nth time, not so much. EDIT: And for JWST for the average person it's just a new Hubble.
      - layer8 3y ago
        The average person is likely to not even know about Hubble or any space telescopes.
rkagerer 3y ago
Just adding the news this was achieved, even if it wasn't a clean landing, gives me a warm fuzzy feeling as a human being of Earth.
happytiger 3y ago
It’s interesting to watch this company operate and see just how much better SpaceX is at PR and how internet native their broadcasts annd PR efforts are — they are head and shoulders better than their competitors. I really am stoked to see more and more space companies setting new milestones. It’s going to be a bright future for humanity if we can continue to expand space exploration and eventually become multiplanetary. It’s awesome to be alive to witness it.

516 points by SigKill9 3y ago

Curious question: as a private company, how do you determine your lunar orbit parameters after a burn? Are they leveraging Earth/orbit-based radar? Or satellites around the moon? Or something else?

vardump 3y ago
Maybe star (and moon/earth) tracking and radio signals to earth?
dylan604 3y ago
I don't understand the "as a private company" qualifier. The math is the same, and doesn't care if it's private/public.
- martincmartin 3y ago
  But observations need powerful domestic telescopes. If you're NASA, you own and have access to them.
  - jebarker 3y ago
    Do you mean optical telescopes? I would have thought they used earth based radar plus star tracking onboard to figure out where they are in orbit, but I don't know.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    No, as an American, you own them. NASA just administrates them for you. If you're a space faring private company, you contract out the various parts of the mission. You didn't build a rocket, you hired SpaceX. You didn't build the relay network, you licensed access time. You don't build a space observation platform, you license time to use them.
    - tzs 3y ago
      Which of those, or what else instead, did the specific company in this case do for this specific mission? That is what ethbr1 was asking.
      - datadrivenangel 3y ago
        Almost certainly NASA.
    - sneak 3y ago
      If I owned them, I would get to use them. I don’t, so logically I must not. By this logic, there are huge amounts of land that I also “own” that guys with M16s (or, more accurately, M4s) will keep me from walking on if I try to go there. Half the year I live in southern Nevada, so this distinction has some direct practical consequences in my life. It’s deceptive. Government property is not owned by citizens, it is under the exclusive control of the state—i.e. not you.
      - dylan604 3y ago
        You conveniently left out the part of licensing the time. You can license with the BLM for access to government control land. Ranchers do it all the time. Special events like Burning Man also do it. You just have to contact the correct agency to do it. But of course, it so much easier to make a know it all sarcastic filled internet rant than do anything approaching useful information to a conversation.
        bigstrat2003 3y ago
        Do you not see how that just furthers the parent's point? If I have to license usage of something, I don't actually own it.
        dylan604 3y ago
        I think we have a basic misunderstanding of private vs public ownership. When we all own it, you can't just do whatever you want like build a house, but withe proper permit, you can use it. If it was private, I could never do something with what you owned.
- andyjohnson0 3y ago
  I'm not the person you replied to, but I assume they meant something like "as a non space agency". Ie how are they tracking the lander? How are they sending and receiving telemetry? What resources did they use for mission planning and site selection? Perhaps they've built their own comms system for example - maybe even a multi-site one that enables continuous contact - or maybe they're using NASA/ESA/JAXA assets. It would be interesting to know. I'm not aware of any commercial providers for lunar communications.
  - maronato 3y ago
    Their website has all that info. They have their own satellites for comms, and lots of other stuff too. They seem to either own or co-own all of the hardware
ooterness 3y ago
Ground infrastructure is important for space missions. Intuitive Machines is operating under a NASA contract for Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [1]. As such, they can negotiate access to NASA resources such as DSN and NEN for this mission. Intuitive Machines has also built several ground stations of their own [2]. These allow communications with the spacecraft as well as the range/velocity measurements needed for accurate navigation. I'm the longer term, the Artemis program plans to build out LunaNet [3] for improved communications and GPS-like navigation services. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machines/ https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machine... [2] https://www.intuitivemachines.com/post/commercial-lunar-network-completed-ahead-of-im-1-moon-mission https://www.intuitivemachines.com/post/commercial-lunar-netw... [3] https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/lunanet-empowering-artemis-with-communications-and-navigation-interoperability/ https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/lunanet-empowering-arte...
- dpflan 3y ago
  Thanks for these great details. Is there a fee for using the NASA resources (I assume there is, I just don't know how this works)?
  - ooterness 3y ago
    Yes, there is a fee. The largest antennas (i.e., the absolutely gigantic 70 meter dishes) can be $5k per hour. Further discussion on StackOverflow [1] and the NASA MOCS guide [2]. [1] https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/21005/what-makes-time-on-the-dsn-so-expensive https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/21005/what-makes-t... [2] https://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/files/6_NASA_MOCS_2014_10_01_14.pdf https://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/files/6_NASA_MOCS_2014_10_01_...
- ethbr1 3y ago
  You are awesome! Thanks for all the links and info, to an open-ended question. The process of bootstrapping to Earth-space-parity is fascinating to me. One thing in the 1960s, when there was no GPS and terrestrial net assumption, but now you're going from everything we've built here to... if you don't bring it, you don't have it. The accretion of Mars support satellites has also been fascinating.

integrits 3y ago

50 years have passed and all we get are two crappy photos of the "landing". Hilarious.

adityaathalye 3y ago

The private lander's mission control looks like the proverbial two-pizza team. Would it that the silent revolution in spaceflight, hidden under the glamour of reusable rockets, is incredibly sophisticated telemetry, communication, on-board automation? A computing stack that's making the 1x mission control a 10x mission control? I understand there will be other teams elsewhere (delivery vehicle, remote sensing etc. etc.). But that image is rad too --- from one or a few space agencies co-orchestrating a program to multiples more doing so. Obviously some version of this has been going on for decades, but somehow the imagery on their website struck a chord.

JonChesterfield 3y ago
Linkedin suggests about 250 people. Lots of them with software in the name. Company looks very lean relative to the semiconductor monsters I'm more familiar with.
datadrivenangel 3y ago
JAXA has done rocket launches with a ground crew of less than 10. Obviously the extended support staff is much bigger than that to enable so few people to launch a rocket, but the number of people required when things are ready to go can be very small.
kragen 3y ago
better, lighter-weight computing stacks have been a huge boost; that's what made cubesats possible. but the much bigger deal is the dramatic drop in launch costs driven by spacex, even though so far that's only a factor of 3.4 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cost-space-launches-low-earth-orbit https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cost-space-launches-low-e... with lightweight computers driven by the cellphone industry, it became possible for a small team or even individual to launch a low-power ham radio satellite or weather satellite. but they can't launch a high-resolution space telescope, earth observing satellite, or high-power communications satellite, nor can they do laser communication pointcasting. and lightweight computers are a crucial enabler for starlink-style communications constellations, but there's only one of those, because that's still a big-money kind of project suppose that, instead, you had 01980s computing power, but the cost of space launch dropped by a factor of 100. if you need to launch a 200-kg satellite to get the sky-observing optical aperture you're looking for so diffraction doesn't cremate you, you don't care if the onboard computers weigh 1 gram or 10 kilograms. (i mean, you do care, because it lets you cut your launch budget 10%, but it's not a dominant determinant of viability.) with saturn v or zenit 2, according to the plot linked above, that launch would cost you a million dollars. today, at falcon heavy's 1500 dollars per kg, it's 300,000 dollars, which is already a radically more feasible project spacex's 'starship' is supposed to carry 150 tonnes to leo for 10 million dollars. that's 70 dollars a kilogram. our hypothetical 200-kg aditya athalye space telescope satellite would then cost 14000 dollars to launch. it becomes a hobby project comparable in cost to an engine lathe or a camper van. this would change the economics of space in a profound way, far beyond what cellphone chips have done for comparison, the csis aerospace security project number for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_(rocket_family) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_(rocket_family) on that chart was 118500 dollars per kg in 01961. (but of course you couldn't launch a cubesat on it for that price; it was a military thing.) by 01967 saturn v had brought that down by a factor of 22. after that it remained constant for 43 years until falcon 9 in 02010. starship, if it works, will reduce launch costs by that same factor of 22 over the current falcon heavy number i described above, and by a factor of 73 over saturn v

CartyBoston 3y ago

The spacecraft has an ad prominently displayed on itself, it's depressing. We will never reproduce the experience of 10 year old me watching the moon landing with my dad. It's all just egos and entertainment now.

jdelman 3y ago
That's because you were a child at the time. A child now will most likely have the same sense of awe and wonder you had, not the cynical point of view you've developed over time.
- prmoustache 3y ago
  A child now will be totally unaware about that because he will be occupied doomscrolling whatever trends is current now on TikTok.
ordu 3y ago
Experience is irreproducible. It depends on too many factors, we even don't know the full list of them, and some of them change irreversibly with time passing. You will not be 10 years old anymore. It is not a good reason for a depression, you can experience world now like you couldn't being a 10 year old boy.
- Loughla 3y ago
  Actually one of the absolute best things about having kids, that is not reproducible for no-child lifestyles, is seeing everything for the first time through their eyes. All the other stuff people say about parenting can be reproduced via service or volunteering or something else. But that experience absolutely is unique. Magic is real. The world is wild and exciting, and it's all there for that kid. It's amazing to watch and be a part of. So, while you can never go back to being at 10 year old boy, you absolutely can get a taste of what that's like via adoption or having your own. In my opinion, that is.
  - ordu 3y ago

sgt 3y ago

Where is the live stream?

TrueGeek 3y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IarunZ9Ykas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IarunZ9Ykas
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- pugworthy 3y ago
  Nice background music - not jarring.
sp332 3y ago
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg2ffigGcYM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg2ffigGcYM

ArunRaja 3y ago

Is this the first time for pvt company...?

NedF 3y ago

Landing in ~ 8 hours. "The Odysseus moon lander is aiming for a 5:30 p.m. EST (2230 GMT) lunar landing" https://www.space.com/intuitive-machines-odysseus-moon-landing-what-time-livestream https://www.space.com/intuitive-machines-odysseus-moon-landi...

obelix150 3y ago
The landing time has been updated to 1524 CST. https://www.intuitivemachines.com/im-1 https://www.intuitivemachines.com/im-1 There will be a live feed on the Intuitive Machines site above and mirrored on NASA TV+ here: https://plus.nasa.gov/scheduled-video/intuitive-machines-1-lunar-landing/ https://plus.nasa.gov/scheduled-video/intuitive-machines-1-l... The coverage on both live feeds will begin around 1400 CST.
mosselman 3y ago
Pretty cheeky of Columbia to sponsor this. They couldn't even make the shoes I bought that were 'absolutely waterproof' actually waterproof. A super light rain would result in wet feet. This didn't even happen in normal sneakers. But it is all about image I guess.
- _yb2s 3y ago
  Columbia is known for incredibly good lifetime warranty- contact them and get something that works for free. I use mostly Columbia gear for some pretty serious outdoor adventures, and generally consider their waterproof tech, especially outdry rain shells to be the best you can get at any price. However, I don't (and wouldn't) use any of their footwear. For waterproof footwear, breathable membranes don't work well in my experience, they quickly tear and leak. The membranes are just too delicate for the forces and flexing on a boot. A really well built traditional leather boot with external waterproofing like Sno Seal applied daily is both more breathable, and more waterproof. Failing that, heavy rubber boots like commercial fisherman wear are really the only totally waterproof footwear.
- falserum 3y ago
  If it’s waterproof your legs will be wet anyway (sweat will accumulate)

Communitivity 3y ago

[flagged]

Shatnerz 3y ago
> Not moving my family to Texas, Florida, or Alabama, for anything. Beautiful states, but I have a daughter. Are women not safe in these states? I'm not sure I'm picking up whatever you are implying.
- jorts 3y ago
  They’re likely referring to the effects of the Dobbs ruling [1]. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization#:~:text=Dobbs%20v.%20Jackson%20Women's%20Health%20Organization%2C%20No.%2019%2D,confer%20a%20right%20to%20abortion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_H....
- midasz 3y ago
  Women die because they're not allowed to abort nonviable fetuses that would also likely kill them. Seems very unsafe, I wouldn't want to be a woman there.
  - arrozconcosas 3y ago
    That is terrible. How often does this situation happen?
    - spiderfarmer 3y ago
      I don't know the statistics, but even if it happens only once, the authors of the policies in place should be prosecuted. One stat that jumps out is that infant death rates are way up. Forcing women to complete their term anyway is sadistic and completely unnecessary.
      - ejb999 3y ago
        [flagged]

jdelman 3y ago

It's interesting how this feels like a big deal; when I learned of this yesterday, I almost forgot that there have been almost 30 missions to Mars (which I assume is much harder and more expensive) in the years since the last moon landing.

JonChesterfield 3y ago
I'm more excited about the moon. Being that much closer is a big deal. This company is looking to make sending stuff to the moon (not sure about getting stuff back) a reliable & vaguely cost effective thing to do. There's probably valuable stuff on the moon and even if not, it's learning a load of things about going further afield. Lots of science fiction about the asteroid belt beyond mars.
danavar 3y ago
It is a big deal! While just landing on the moon is definitely much simpler than a Mars mission, this lander is a part of the Artemis program; it's one of the first steps towards developing the Artemis base camp on the moon.
gwbas1c 3y ago
> which I assume is much harder and more expensive Manned space missions are significantly more expensive (and complicated) than robotic missions. (Otherwise, we'd be sending a lot more people into space.) Let's do a little bit of back-of-the-envelope Googling: From https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-apollo https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-apollo > The United States spent $25.8 billion on Project Apollo between 1960 and 1973, or approximately $257 billion when adjusted for inflation to 2020 dollars. From https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-the-mars-exploration-rovers#:~:text=The%20Mars%20Exploration%20Rover%20(MER,15%20years%20of%20mission%20operations https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-the-mars-expl.... > The Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission cost $1.08 billion. Of that amount, $744 million was spent on spacecraft development and launch; $335.8 million was spent on 15 years of mission operations. So it looks like "manned" space missions cost at least 100x the cost of sending a robot.
- 3y ago

Someone 3y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitive_Machines_Nova-C#EagleCam_to_record_lunar_landing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitive_Machines_Nova-C#Eagl...: “EagleCam to record lunar landing Just before landing, at approximately 30 m (98 ft) above the lunar surface, the Odysseus lander will eject the EagleCam camera-equipped CubeSat, which will drop onto the lunar surface near the lander, with an impact velocity of about 10 m/s (22 mph). From the surface the EagleCam will attempt to capture the first third-person images of a lunar landing. The EagleCam will use a Wi-Fi connection to the Odysseus lander to relay its images back to Earth.” That CubeSat is student built. I wonder what camera they have and how hard it will be to make it record the landing. Will it orient itself during that six-ish second drop or can it move the camera after landing? Does it have a fisheye lens to increase the likelihood of the lander being in its field of vision? Unfortunately, their project page (https://erau.edu/eaglecam https://erau.edu/eaglecam) seems to be light on such details.

sdwr 3y ago
That's an impressive school project! First university to land on the moon
- lukan 3y ago
  Unless they would have build and operated the rocket themself (and not SpaceX), I would consider that a false clickbait headline.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    A decade ago, maybe. Today? SpaceX is commoditizing access to space - we're at the point we can start treating Earth-orbit delivery as a given, i.e. just a service you pay money for.
    - lukan 3y ago
      Earth orbit maybe. But here we are at earth-moon. And the lander is not build or operated by the school/university either.

acefaceZ 3y ago

I believe they are part of the recently setup homesteading program similar to what Alaska setup in the 80s. If they can put a stake in the ground they get 20 acres around the stake.

psd1 3y ago
Reassuringly anachronistic to use acres as a unit of measure on the moon.
- p1mrx 3y ago
  For historical reasons, a moon acre is approximately 16.7% smaller than an earth acre.
- samatman 3y ago
  It's an official unit of the only flag on the Moon to date. What else would you suggest?
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    It’s not the only flag. https://web.archive.org/web/20220725003858/https://www.space.com/china-flag-on-moon-chang-e-5-lunar-landing https://web.archive.org/web/20220725003858/https://www.space...
  - p1mrx 3y ago
    m²
  - lunakid 3y ago
    Maybe the same units basically everybody has always ever used (in earnest) for space tech (including NASA)?
strombofulous 3y ago
This reminds me of countries who send pregnant women to antartica to (somehow) strengthen their land claims: https://medium.com/good-to-know/why-11-babies-have-been-born-in-antarctica-7409e0cc98f https://medium.com/good-to-know/why-11-babies-have-been-born... Like antartica, I'm sure someone with guns will tell us who really owns the moon as soon as it actually becomes relevant.

consumer451 3y ago

FYI, they have a subreddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/IntuitiveMachines/ https://old.reddit.com/r/IntuitiveMachines/

photochemsyn 3y ago

The next stage in this project is the ice-drilling PRIME-1 - which might rely on the success of this stage? Details: > "The [Odyssus] Nova-C Lander is a tall hexagonal cylinder on 6 landing legs. It is capable of carrying 100 to 130 kg of payload to the surface. It uses solar panels to generate 200 W of power on the surface. Propulsion and landing use liquid methane as fuel and liquid oxygen as an oxidizer. The PRIME-1 mission has two primary components, The Regolith and Ice Drill for Exploring New Terrain (TRIDENT) and the Mass Spectrometer observing lunar operations (MSolo). TRIDENT is an augering drill approximately 1 meter long. The drill is able to stop at any depth as commanded from the ground and deposit and deposit its sample on the surface for analysis. MSolo is a commercial off the shelf (COTS) mass spectrometer modified for spaceflight and lunar operations. Total PRIME-1 payload mass is about 40 kg." https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=PRIME-1 https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id...

Anduia 3y ago

It is the size of a Tardis

dghughes 3y ago

> the Odysseus lander will eject the EagleCam camera-equipped CubeSat, which will drop onto the lunar surface near the lander So the first non-government device to land on moon will be viewed trying to land by a device also non-government (but part of the lander) that lands on the moon first? I guess that evens out.

ngneer 3y ago

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

AlbertCory 3y ago

Wallace and Gromit did it a long time ago.

lacoolj 3y ago

does someone have a telescope pointed at the moon so we can have a third, third-party view of this landing?

dang 3y ago

See also https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/us-nears-attempt-first-moon-landing-half-century-with-private-robot-spacecraft-2024-02-22/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/us-nears-attempt-fi... (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39468115 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39468115, but no comments there)

wesselbindt 3y ago

This is great, it really proves that the free market can be just as innovative and efficient as the public sector. They managed to get there less than 50 years after the taxpayer funded space guys did. No small feat! Imagine all the things they must've learned along the way!

JoeDaDude 3y ago
You do realize this mission is taxpayer funded. Intuitive Machines is getting paid as part of a contract to NASA under the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLIPS) program. https://www.nasa.gov/commercial-lunar-payload-services/ https://www.nasa.gov/commercial-lunar-payload-services/ https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machines/ https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/clps/intuitive-machine...
- FactKnower69 3y ago
  No way!! I thought private enterprise didn't need government handouts?
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    It's poor people and small businesses who don't need government handouts.
    - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
      TBTF FTW!

thisisauserid 3y ago

This is not a hoax. But won't we soon have a real fake moon landing? What a world.

mastermedo 3y ago

Their desk in the middle of the control room is proof that earth is a flat disk. Surely they would have a spherical desk had the earth been a sphere!

albchamo 3y ago

[dead]

malkia 3y ago

I didn't know about them. I recently watched the whole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_All_Mankind_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_All_Mankind_(TV_series) and was mesmerized by it - it's alternative reality fiction, where a private company comes to land on Mars!

rkagerer 3y ago
Yeah, For All Mankind is a great show for people who are excited about this kind of stuff. It's an alternative-history fictional drama exploring "What if" the space race never ended.
- krasin 3y ago
  Yep. Highly enjoyed its Season 1, but I wished I never watched any further - it feels complete at this point and the later seasons destroy the impression. Kind of like with The Matrix. Note: some people have an opposite opinion, that the interesting stuff starts at Season 3.
  - malkia 3y ago
    I loved them all - but I can see your point!
  - rkagerer 3y ago
    Agreed, Season 1 was by far the best. I'm re-watching the whole thing with my spouse and in some ways it's more fun the second time around (surely biased because of the shared experience). Some shows are like that - I didn't think Star Trek Deep Space Nine was all that hot first time around, appreciated it much more years later on a rewatch (the supporting characters are awesome). Maybe in part it's adjusted expectations ;-).
- jessriedel 3y ago
  I wanted to like it, and having some (reasonably-)big-budget visualization made of proposed rockets like Sea Dragon was great. But the (imo) awful dialog made the show unwatchable for me, and they did a lot of scientifically silly stuff like taking the Space Shuttle to the moon.

rkagerer 3y ago

Ridiculous this isn't more prominent in mainstream news. Eg. I open Google News to stories of killers and a new real estate tax and some sort of scandal by an actor. This is why I come to HN instead.

saagarjha 3y ago
It was on NPR today if that makes you feel better
godelski 3y ago
Edit: Front page of a few sites Reuters: See the right part of the image https://imgur.com/VpGAIBl https://imgur.com/VpGAIBl CNN: https://imgur.com/TzRtit8 https://imgur.com/TzRtit8 AP News: https://imgur.com/OgrtzrC https://imgur.com/OgrtzrC NBC: Not so apparent but there https://imgur.com/7itvGeh https://imgur.com/7itvGeh NYT: Also not obvious https://imgur.com/4DMDqr0 https://imgur.com/4DMDqr0 NPR: Gotta scroll: https://imgur.com/dp5UDCq https://imgur.com/dp5UDCq I found it on Fox News by search and it's a fair scroll down. I also found in MSNBC by search, but actually don't know where it is just that the word "moon" exists somewhere on that page and for the life of me I cannot see what word is highlighted.
- pcl 3y ago
  It’s the fourth story on the Washington Post website right now.
  - SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
    And it looks like it crashed… not the website.
- prawn 3y ago
  It's a major (red background!) story with live coverage on The Guardian site here in Australia.
- adriand 3y ago
  It's been the #1 headline story on the NYT for a couple of hours at least now. They had the live feed on the homepage too.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

qwertox 3y ago

Now to the problem with YouTube, and I'm sick and tired of reporting this, because by now they should have an automated solution for this, look at this link: https://www.youtube.com/hashtag/im1 https://www.youtube.com/hashtag/im1 Channels named "SpaceX [LIVE]" [0], "SpaceX" (which is actually @uyenmusic with 148.000 subscribers), and so on. Most of these channels have no videos except for that single live stream, occasionally inserting QR-codes with crypto-scams. Like the first one I mentioned. > Huge crypto-giveaway during to the launch! > During this unique event, you have the opportunity to take a share of 1.000 BTC & 10.000 ETH & 100.000.000 DOGE & 10.000.000 USDT. Have a look at the rules and don't miss out on this. You can only participate once! And the most interesting thing about this video is that they are using AI to make Elon Musk say that you should scan the QR-code and that you will get the crypto. 100% sounds like him. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toDNnSBzgEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toDNnSBzgEU

defenestration 3y ago
That livestream [0] looks like a pretty convincing scam to me, with 22k people viewing at the moment. And it indeed sounds like him. The real username is hidden behind the visible SpaceX[Live] name.

armcat 3y ago

It looks like it touched down, mission control picking up a faint signal, trying to refine it now.

malfist 3y ago
First successful commercial landing!
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

pjungwir 3y ago

NASA is covering this on twitch right now: https://www.twitch.tv/nasa https://www.twitch.tv/nasa

fragmede 3y ago

I don't know why they made it so hard to get to the youtube link for the video, which is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-qwhozfYeQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-qwhozfYeQ

anigbrowl 3y ago

Update: communications have been a bit glitchy but the craft has made a safe landing and is transmitting data. Was watching NASA administrator Bill Nelson's congratulatory message; can't help wondering if he also recorded a commiseration one looking to the future in case it didn't work...

samschooler 3y ago
I'm sure. That was very recorded. Reminds me of Nixon's speech written in the event the moon landing failed. https://www.archives.gov/files/presidential-libraries/events/centennials/nixon/images/exhibit/rn100-6-1-2.pdf https://www.archives.gov/files/presidential-libraries/events...
unstatusthequo 3y ago
Maybe it had an AT&T SIM? ;) But seriously, it's weird how this really didn't make a lot of news today overall. Did the cellular outage really overshadow this? Times have changes if so. Our idea of "wow!" has been desensitized I guess. Pretty impressive to me!
- layer8 3y ago
  The JWST is on a similar level of impressive (if not more), and arguably more important than a single moon landing, and the general public doesn't have much interest in that either.
  - belval 3y ago
    To defend the general public, landing an unmanned craft on the moon just doesn't sound impressive anymore, it's like SpaceX landing their boosters. The first time it's mindblowing, the Nth time, not so much. EDIT: And for JWST for the average person it's just a new Hubble.
    - layer8 3y ago
      The average person is likely to not even know about Hubble or any space telescopes.

rkagerer 3y ago

Just adding the news this was achieved, even if it wasn't a clean landing, gives me a warm fuzzy feeling as a human being of Earth.

happytiger 3y ago

It’s interesting to watch this company operate and see just how much better SpaceX is at PR and how internet native their broadcasts annd PR efforts are — they are head and shoulders better than their competitors. I really am stoked to see more and more space companies setting new milestones. It’s going to be a bright future for humanity if we can continue to expand space exploration and eventually become multiplanetary. It’s awesome to be alive to witness it.