Astrum Space - Absolutely Everything We Know about the Moon

Episode Date: May 6, 2025

A compilation of episodes of everything we know about the Moon. Discover our full back catalogue of hundreds of videos on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@astrumspaceFor early access videos, bonus content, and to support the channel, join us on Patreon: https://astrumspace.info/4ayJJuZ

Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank. Earlier this year, Japan made history. But not for the reason you may think. Yes, it landed a spacecraft on the moon for the first time, joining the ranks of the USA, Russia, India and China, who came before them. But Jax's mission was much more than that. They achieved such a precise landing on the moon,

it would be the equivalent of successfully shooting a skin cell from London to Cairo and having it land on a specific grain of rice. In the run-up to the launch, it was this insane ambition of precision engineering that had everybody talking. Once Jaxa touched down, the headlines back on Earth shifted. Nicknamed Moon-Sniper for its stealthy precision, its whole mission was mainly to demonstrate how precise of a landing we can now pull off. As such, the tiny spacecraft was not meant to survive the extreme conditions of a lunar night,

and yet, somehow, it has survived three. Baffling scientists, this resilient craft kept waking up and sending back data and images from the lunar surface. Oh, and it's also upbursed. upside down. I'm Alex McColgan and you're watching Astrum. Join me today on this topsy-turvy ride as we dive into the details of Jax's first moon landing, what has kept the moon-sniper functional through three lunar nights, and how much pinpoint

landings will change the future of lunar exploration. The smart lander for investigating moon, also known as Slim or Moonsniper, is a small, lightweight spacecraft about the size of a passenger vehicle. Its mission is to analyze the composition of Olivine rocks near the Sholi Crater, some 200 miles south of the Sea of Tranquility, where Neil Armstrong took his famous small step. This landing zone stands on ground ejected by the nearby crater, giving researchers a chance to study lunar rock without having to drill. By analyzing the rocks there, Jaxsa hopes to learn more about the moon's origins, interior, and formation. Slim also carried two tiny lunar excursion vehicles, Lev 1 and Lev 2. They were designed

to deploy from Slim and gather some of their own data and photos. Beyond its scientific aims, Slim is also a showcase of the latest in engineering and mission operations. It aimed to demonstrate how a small explorer could execute accurate lunar landing techniques. This would accelerate the study of the Moon and other planets by using a lighter, more precise exploration system, able to land in treacherous rocky terrain too difficult for larger crafts. To understand why this is a big deal, it helps to have some historical context. The first thing you have to know is that only about 43% of lunar landings are successful. Past lunar missions faced huge limitations in landing accuracy, mainly constrained by technology.

and the lunar environment. For example, it took the Soviet Union a dozen attempts before they finally landed Luna 9 on the moon. Similarly, NASA's Ranger series took six tries before achieving success. The absence of an atmosphere on the moon means that landers rely solely on engine thrust for descent, complicating the ability to adjust trajectories accurately during landing. The craft must touch down at near zero speed to ensure no instruments on board get damage from the impact. Every single Apollo mission landed dangerously close to rocks, craters or slopes that could have caused serious damage, with very limited ability to make adjustments in real time.

The Apollo missions also all landed on the near side of the moon, close to the equator, and in almost perfect lighting conditions, to make touchdown as safe as possible. The downside of this, though, is that NASA was always sending spacecraft to the same patch of moon, meaning actual exploration of the surface was limited to this specific landing zone. If we could make a spacecraft capable of landing in a super precise landing zone, we could send it to explore whatever and wherever we like. Scientists would be able to carry out targeted studies of different rocks and soil types, without relying on rovers to travel long distances.

This reduces mission complexity and cost, while opening avenues to explore new lunar regions. Moon sniper's mission cost $120 million. For comparison, the four lunar rovers built for Apollo 15, 16, and 17 cost $38 million to develop back in 1972, which would be about $286 million today. recent rovers, such as the Shandrean 2 and Changi 4, cost about $141 million and $180 million respectively. And this is exactly what researchers are working on with excellent progress. A landing footprint, also known as a landing ellipse, is the area of uncertainty of a spacecraft's

landing zone on an astronomical body. Back in 1969, Apollo 11's targeting ellipse was 18.5 kilometers. by 4.5 kilometers. Fast forward to 2013, and China's Changi 3 launched with a landing ellipse of 6 kilometers by 6 kilometers. In January 2024, a Jaxa lander made Japan the fifth country to land on the moon, touching down just 55 meters from the center of its 100 meters by 100 meter target ellipse, a target 8,325 times smaller than Apollo 11's. Let's take a closer look at the technology that made this possible. Moon sniper was able to land as precisely as it did thanks to its vision-based navigation system,

which Jaxter refers to as smart eyes. By continuously capturing images of the moon's surface as it descends, the spacecraft is able to locate itself in real time on all of the Earth's surface. real-time on orbital maps made by data from other lunar rovers, including NASA's LRO, India's Chandraean 2, and Japan's Seleni. These positions were then matched to a broad map, encompassing its location to determine the exact landing site. By processing the images in real-time, Moonsniper can adjust its trajectory, literally on-the-fly,

enabling it to hit its target with pinpoint accuracy. weighing just 200 kilograms without propellant, a successful slim landing would demonstrate that small, lightweight spacecraft can accomplish complex lunar exploration missions. Except, Slim didn't exactly stick the landing. While Jackson managed to land the craft on target, it sort of toppled over at the last minute. But after such a precise approach, what caused this grave malfunction? On the 6th of September, 20203, Jaxa launched Slim on course for the moon.

It arrived in orbit on Christmas Day, 20203, and eventually approached for landing on January 18th, 2024. As Japan watched on intently, the approach was live streamed, one mission team member dubbed the deceleration to landing as expected to be a breathless, numbing 20 minutes of terror. As it made its descent to the lunar surface, one of the Sliquist, Slim's two main engine nozzles mysteriously detached 50 meters above the moon surface. This off-center thrust caused it to gain lateral motion, which it tried to stabilize, unsuccessfully with its smaller thrusters.

The incredible thing is that Slim was able to identify the anomaly in its descent and find a safe spot to touch down, avoiding a crash. Slim tipped over onto its nose, as seen in images from one of the first of the same. with two autonomous probes Slim released before it touched down. We can see the box-shaped main vehicle on the surface of the moon upside down, with its panels pointing away from the sun instead of up towards it, as planned. Without light from the sun, it was only a brief matter of time before the craft would run out of energy and shut down.

Soon after landing, Slim sent back a mosaic image of its landing site using its limited battery power. With just 12% of power remaining, Jackson decided to switch the craft off in hopes of a possible recovery when the sun's angle changed. Indeed, just 10 days later on January 29th, that's exactly what happened. For two short days, Slim was able to power on using energy from the sun, which had since shifted its angle in the sky. However, the elation was short-lived by the Jaxi team, who knew the Lunar Night was approaching, which would likely spell the end of our revolutionary little spacecraft. Lunar nights are a challenge to all moonbound missions. They are absolutely brutal, and it isn't uncommon for Lunar craft not to survive a lunar night.

For example, the first US craft to make it to the moon in 50 years, the US lander Odysseus, failed to awaken following a lunar night. Much like Slim, it malfunctioned on approach and landed on its nose in early 2024. Despite going into hibernation mode for three weeks, it did not wake up again. Since the moon doesn't really have an atmosphere, there's nothing to stabilize its surface temperature. During a lunar day, when the moon is facing the sun, temperatures can reach 121 degrees Celsius. During a lunar night, the moon is plunged into total darkness, and temperatures drop to an average of minus 180 degrees Celsius. That's quite the whiplash for our little lander.

What's more, days and nights on the moon aren't like the 12-hour days and nights on Earth. They last 14 days each. That's a fortnight of searing heat followed by a fortnight of total freezing darkness. Slim wasn't designed to withstand a lunar night, so on the 31st of January, the mission team put it into a hibernation state for the next 14 days. It was not expected to survive. But the hopeful crew decided they tried to establish contact after the sun rose again, just in case.

On the 26th of February, Jaxa attempted to establish contact with Slim with few expectations. Imagine their total shock and allation when Slim responded. Their miracle moon-sniper survived its first lunar night and started sending pictures back to Earth. gets even better. After two weeks of data and image collection during its second lunar day, Jaxa set Slim into hibernation once again. Surviving one lunar night is no small feat. No one expected Slim to survive a second one, but somehow it did. On the 21st of March, Jaxa confirmed they'd received more communication from Slim following its second lunar night.

The pattern continued in late April, when even more pictures were sent. back from the lunar surface following its third lunar night. Slim had totally defied the odds, maintaining its functionality through intense levels of heat and cold which could destroy most electronics not specifically designed for these conditions. Somehow Slim still managed to send back data and images following three lunar nights. These images of the surrounding moon rocks will help researchers better understand lunar geology. In one image, Slim took a close-up photo of a moon rock called Toy Poodle, using a special multi-band camera.

Despite the blur, geologists can use this to distinguish between the different materials that make up the rock, giving clues as to how the moon formed. Following the fourth lunar night, Jaxsa attempted once again to reestablish communication with Slim. However, as of the 27th of May, they've been unable to confirm successful communication with the Moon sniper. Despite all its heroic efforts, it's likely it has fallen silent once and for all. Still, Jax's first lunar touchdown is a breakthrough in interplanetary travel.

Demonstrating the feasibility of such pinpoint landings opens the door to many other possibilities. One key area of interest to scientists is the South Pole-Aitken Basin, where the Moon's mantle is suspected to have once been exposed on the sea. the surface. NASA is also planning a return to the moon in 2026 with the launch of their Artemis missions. Pinpoint touchdowns like the one executed by Moon Sniper may be vital in helping us get to water ice lying in permanently shadowed regions, which until now have been inaccessible. Moon Sniper stands as a testament to all the progress and innovation we've achieved since the

last lunar era of the late 60s and early 70s. As both public and private interest in revisiting the moon continues to grow, missions like Moon Sniper give us a glimpse into what the second lunar era might have in store for us. If I were a superstitious man, I would advise you to be careful what you call your space missions. When Russia named its first mission to the moon in 47 years, it was originally given the designation Lunar Glob, translating in English to Lunar Sphere. However, this name troubled scientific director of the Space Research Institute of the Russian

Academy of Sciences, Lev Zeleni. Glob was too similar to a different Russian word, grob, meaning coffin. Zeleni changed the name of the mission to Lunar 25, intending to call back to the earlier Soviet lunar missions, which were the last time Russian spacecraft successfully landed on the moon. But perhaps it was too late. something of that original name lingered. Because we now know that Lunar Coffin was a much more apt name for the ill-omened Lunar 25. I'm Alex McColgan and you're watching Astrom. Join us today

as we explore the fate of Russia's first moon mission since 1976. For the country that once led the world in the space race, what exactly went wrong? Although we often look at NASA or Ethan missions here at Astrum, Russia's space program has historically been quite the powerhouse. Back when Russia was part of the USSR, it was the Soviet Union's launching of Sputnik 1, the first artificial satellite that triggered the space race in 1957, and for a time the Soviet space program went from strength to strength. It was the Soviet Union that put the first man into space and the first woman, the first multi-person crew. The first dog.

Their rockets escaped the Earth-moon system first, impacted the moon first, orbited the moon first, took photos of the far side of the moon first. Soviet cosmonauts did the first spacewalk. The USSR launched the first space station. To the eyes of many and to the pleasure of Soviet leadership, the USSR was winning the space race. But beneath the surface, not everything was going as small. smoothly as it appeared. The Soviet Union also saw the first death during a space mission, when the reentry capsules

parachutes of Cosmonaut Vladimir Komorov failed to open on his reentry to Earth. The only three men to have died in space were a crew of Soviet cosmonauts, visiting that first-ever space station. Soviet launches were plagued with failures, but eager to look good in the eyes of the world, Particularly compared to its rival, the US, the USSR simply didn't report any of its failed lunar missions. It pretended any rocket that didn't make it out of the atmosphere was never intended to be a moon mission at all. In reality, only about 34% of Soviet moon missions ended in success, in comparison to America's 60% success rate on equivalent missions. America

landed the first man on the moon in 1969. That crowning achievement, both superpowers seemed to lose interest in continuing the race, refocusing their space programs towards non-lunar pursuits by the mid-1970s. Soviet cosmonauts never set foot on the moon itself. The USSR cancelled any of its plans to do so, as the endeavour was ultimately seen as too expensive. Perhaps more importantly, what was the point of going if you were only going to get their second? But with the turn of the millennium, and since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the

world's interest in going to the moon has been rekindled. Scientists realized that the moon would make a good stepping stone for human space missions to Mars, due to its plentiful resources, such as newly discovered water ice, ideal for rocket fuel, air and water, and low gravity. Resources on the moon began to attract the attention of businesses for economic. economic reasons, and nations began to consider setting up permanent bases on its surface as a way of turning a profit. And of course, there is still a lot of science to be done there, attracting those who wish

to learn more about the processes by which the moon formed and the cycles that govern it. Russia's old rival, the USA, rose to dust off their space programs. America started its constellation program in 2005, declaring their end. to go back to the moon. But now other nations were getting in on the Act 2. India, who had not been part of the first race for the moon, began its Chandraean program for lunar exploration in 2000. Governments across the world believed that the benefits of going to the moon in this second rush were so great, nations who didn't go would in some way fall behind. In the words of Israel Chairman Krishna Swami Kastarirangan, it is not a very much.

whether we can afford it. It is whether we can afford to ignore it. Russia did not intend to be left behind. It was eager to pick up the Soviet legacy of space exploration. In fact, it beat its competitors to the punch. Russia had already begun thinking about a new lunar mission as early as the mid-1990s when scientists Mikhail Mavrov and Eric Gallimov put forward their proposals to Ros Cosmos. Russia's newly restructured space agency. Their lunar globe mission was approved and was initially intended to have a lot more parts to it, including a penetrator for seismic sounding, a lander, and an orbiter.

However, the project initially did not have enough political will behind it. It faced budget cuts after the Russian financial crisis of 1998, when the ruble lost over two-thirds of its value in three weeks and was marred in delays that repeatedly knocked it back and put it on hold. The penetrator and orbiter were scrapped, leaving just the lander, as the plan for the mission was reimagined to make it more economical. Russia wanted to be a nationally recognized player in the space game, but didn't want to spend massive amounts of its budget on the plan.

In 2005, Russia only invested 20 billion rubles, or about 700 million US dollars, in its space industry, compared to the USA's $15.6 billion. One way to work around this was to collaborate with other nations. Russia initially tried to work with India on the Shandrein 2 mission in 2007. Luna 25 would fly with India's orbiter and be the mission's lander. However, this low spending ultimately punished them, and Russian scientists were unable to get the lander's technology working in time

for the initial 2013 launch date. India eventually abandoned the collaboration and completed Chandraean 2 on their own. Russia was left trying to get Lunar 25 to the moon surface solo. India's Chandraean 2 lander crashed into the moon. But India was eager to try again with Chandraean 3. This set Russia and India on a course from collaborators to competitors. Both Russia and India were interested in the Moon's South Pole, where Chandraean 2 and others had confirmed through spectrometry the presence of water ice. Luna 25 and Chandra 3 were now racing to be the first lander to successfully touch down on the Moon South Pole and potentially discover that water ice.

However, Russia faced a new problem, the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Western countries were were outraged at Russia's decision to attack its neighbor and came together to impose massive sanctions. Not only was this painful economically, but one vital element of these sanctions was a ban on the trade of high-end computer chips and components. These would prevent Russia from developing high-precision ballistic rockets for use in its military, but hit Russia's lunar goals too. European scientists began ending their collaborations with Roscosmos. In an integrated The connected world where Russia traded for much of its high-end components, Russia would now have to go it alone.

India completed Chandrayan 3 and launched it on the 14th of July, 2023, a mission we covered in greater detail in a previous video. However, the route that they took to the moon was a fuel-efficient, but time-inefficient one. It would take over a month to actually arrive on the moon's surface. estimated a touchdown date on the 23rd of August. If Russia really hurried, it could complete its lander and arrive before India by taking a shorter, more fuel-intensive route using Russia's powerful Soyuz 2.1b rocket. The Lunar 25 mission had by this time been delayed from 2021 to 2022 and then to 2023. In a bad stroke of luck for Russia, its BIB.

B navigation sensor didn't pass quality tests. This was problematic as the BIB sensor relied on a computer chip normally supplied from the West, a chip that Russia could no longer purchase due to Western sanctions. So Russian scientists had to develop a new one on their own, the Bias L. Luna 25 was cleared as ready to launch on the 11th of August 2023. It had eight Russian scientific instruments on board, including. laser mass spectrometers, infrared spectrometers, cameras for imaging the lunar surface, and even a device for measuring dust and micrometeers. Lunar 25 would operate on the moon's surface

for a whole year, enduring the freezing cold of lunar nights and the intense solar radiation of lunar days. It had the potential to do some good science. The Soyuz rocket was powerful enough that it would get Lunar 25 to the Moon's surface by August 21st, two crucial days before India's lander arrived. Russia would indeed win the race against its rival. Lunar 25 launched successfully from the Vostokane Cosmodrome on the 11th of August 2023 and entered the Moon's orbit on August 16th. It took photographs of the Moon's surface, imaging the Zeman crater. All systems were functioning normally, and, and, And communications were good. Russian scientists then began to make final preparations for the

landing itself. The south pole of the moon is home to some treacherous terrain, and the scientist didn't want a rough touchdown which could potentially harm Luna 25. But then, something went wrong. On August 19th, Luna 25 lost communications with Earth. No longer guided remotely, Luna 25 attempted to perform its own pre-planned maneuver that would take it from a circular orbit around the moon into the new path down towards the surface. However, further failures occurred. The Bias L navigation device, the one developed by Russian scientists after the previous one hadn't passed quality control tests, had sent bad information to the ship's onboard control unit. As a result, the thrusters

fired for 127 seconds instead of the intended 84 seconds, pointing at the Lunar 25 into a steeper and steeper descent. On the 20th of August, Luna 25 creed down towards the moon's surface at a pace too fast to stop. Roscosmo scientists could do nothing but look on in horror as the lander hurtled into the terrain, travelling faster and faster. Although no external cameras witnessed the impact, it's easy to imagine the grim result of acceleration under gravity that turned Luna 25 back into a lunar coffin. Its lunar mission had not lasted a year, but only a few days. NASA's lunar reconnaissance orbiter did a fly-by later, taking an image of the site of the

craft's final resting place. Luna 25 had impacted hard, creating a crater about 10 meters in diameter. Russia had attempted to show the world that it was still a great power when it came to space exploration. However, Luna 25 had been mired by pressures and challenges. Western sanctions had indirectly sabotaged it. The Russian replacement chip was not precise enough, or was not hardy enough to survive the high radiation environment of space. However, Russia's attempt to beat its rival India had also created problems for itself. When I learned about its arrival date being two days before India, it reminded me of a similar time when the Soviet Union's Luna 15 mission crashed into the moon only a few hundred miles and on the same day as Apollo 11 landed.

Luna 15 had been tasked with collecting moon rocks, the same as the astronauts of Apollo 11, and although it was unmanned, if America's mission had failed, it would have been a point of pride to the Soviet Union that Luna 15 had managed to steal America. American's thunder. This was political point scoring. The Soviet Union didn't want to just get to the moon. It wanted to get there first. And inevitably, when you're racing to beat someone else, you take less time making sure everything

works as well as it needs to, and so you run a greater risk of failure. Ultimately, just like with Luna 15, Russia's Luna 25 had the opposite effect that its country's leadership intended. Rather than show Russia's superiority in space exploration, it showed the downsides of isolationism and rivalry over collaboration. If Russia still was working with institutes like ESA and shared in technological advances, perhaps it would be boasting a success right now. In many respects, it's a tragedy. Perhaps this can one day change. The future of mankind kind seems pointed towards the stars. If we are to thrive out there, it will be because we as a world work together. The tragic fate of the Lunar 25 mission can and should be a learning

experience, not just an embarrassing footnote in history, but only if the right lessons are drawn from it. Pride is not always a good thing. Rivalry can leave us isolated when we don't need to be and can prevent us from thinking things through. Although it's unlikely, it would certainly be nice if our efforts to prove our superiority to each other could finally be put to rest, buried in a frozen coffin on the lunar surface. The Moon. Earth's natural satellite, orbiting approximately 384,000 kilometers away. A celestial object that scientists have studied for thousands of years, using its regular motions

to mark the passage of time in calendars. Its dependable rhythms helped ancient civilizations to track when to plant crops, and its waxing and waning faces cemented the moon's place deep in the heart of symbol and tradition. It's a wonder, a necessity, and a curse. While the moon's desolate beauty has captured the vision of poets, it also brings desolation. There is one lunar rhythm that is not helpful to us, a 19-year cycle that brings unexpected floods and ruin. And NASA scientists are worried that in the middle of the 2030s is about to hit its hardest yet.

For ecosystems that are adapted to it in the right way, this won't be a problem, but how adapted are we? I'm Alex McColgan and you're watching Astrom. Join with me today as we learn about the inner-sendom. recently named Lunar Nodal Cycle, and why we need to start developing a much better understanding of the fluctuating behaviour of our Moon if we are to protect ourselves against its dangers. Much like the Sun, the Moon is an inescapable part of life on Earth. The Moon has an immense impact on our planet.

You likely have already heard how its cycles influence our wildlife, affect our climate, and create tides. We tend to imagine that the Moon and the Earth's gravities cause them to circle each other in a relatively stable, synchronized harmony. But, as is so often the case, nature is not as simple as we imagine it. Instead, every 18.6 years, the Moon's orbit undergoes a subtle revolution, a shift in its alignment between us and our Sun that causes high tides to grow even higher, tipping us over the edge into dangerous flood territory. But, let's delve into what this subtle revolution is.

Its name is the lunar nodal cycle, or the procession of lunar nodes. This complex name refers to a specific feature of the moon's orbit of the Earth. You likely know that every 29.5 days, the Moon orbits the Earth. However, this orbit is not flat. Or, to be more specific, there is a 5 degree difference between the angle of the Moon's orbit it, and the ecliptic plane, the 2D plane on which the Earth orbits around the Sun. For half of the month, the moon is slightly higher than the plane of the ecliptic. For the other half, it drops below it.

Naturally, this means that there are two crossover points, or two nodes, an ascending node and a descending node, that mark the point where the moon goes from one side over to the other. And it is these nodes that move over the course of the 18. 6-year cycle, slowly rotating around the planet in one complete revolution. The nodes themselves are what causes the problem. To understand why, let's recap what we know about tides. You may already be familiar with how the moon's gravity pulls the Earth's water towards

it, causing a bulge in sea levels on the side closest to it that we call high tide. You likely also know that this happens on the side of the planet furthest away from the the moon. Rather than being caused by gravity, this second bulge is caused by centrifugal forces, as the Earth and the Moon's gravitational pull on each other causes them to behave like two dancers holding each other by the arms and spinning across the dance floor. While it's mostly the Moon moving, due to the Earth being much more massive, the Earth is also swung around a little.

The water behind it is thus trying to fling off into space through its raucous and the spinning, causing the second high tide. The sun also has a role to play in tide formation, albeit to a lesser degree. It's a bigger mass, which would cause a greater pull if it were closer, but its further distance means that the sun's effect is only one-third as big as the moon. When the moon and the sun are aligned, we get extra large tides called spring tides. This happens six to eight times a year. not aligned, they partially cancel each other out, causing smaller tidal extremes known as

neap tides. So now consider the influence of lunar nodes on this tidal tug of war. During spring tides, the pole of the sun and the moon working in unison causes the highest tides and the largest risk of floods. However, the sun and the moon are never more aligned than they are at a node. the rest of each 9.3-year phase, they are not quite tugging in the same direction, so tides are more temperate. At a node, that's where things get more serious, and risk of floods become highest.

The last time this alignment occurred in September 2015, the UK and the US both issued major flood warnings to its citizens. In September itself, there were floods, albeit minor ones, but it was only when heavy rain combined with the strength of the lunar nodes a couple of months later, that the real damage was inflicted. In the US, in October, South Carolina saw flash flooding that caused property damage and people having to be rescued by emergency services. At the end of December 2015, the UK was hit by some of the worst floods it had seen in a century. Combined with the power of Storm Desmond, flooding and storm damage caused an estimated 1.3 billion pounds in damages.

These floods can be highly damaging. But that in and of itself doesn't completely explain NASA's worry for the upcoming alignment in mid-2030. There is an extra element at play beyond the regular rhythm of this rising flood risk we have been seeing through the course of human history. Unfortunately, the next node's alignment with the sun promises to be particularly devastating. The danger is that this phenomenon is combined with the future. with an already strained system, even more strain than it was in 2015.

Climate change has resulted in steadily rising sea levels. When the next node aligns with the Sun in the mid-2030s, this will likely lead to a dramatic increase of floods on planet Earth. Worryingly, a new study led by NASA's sea level change science team predicts that almost all US mainland coastlines, Hawaii and Guam, will have a huge leap in full. flood numbers when this happens. Some predictions claim this node alignment could cause four times the amount of flooding from one decade to the next, which will damage infrastructure and change our coastlines around the world. This means human life will inevitably be affected by these floods,

impacting shelter, clean water supplies, electricity, as well as the increased risk of waterborne disease outbreaks like hepatitis A and cholera. Plus, the receding flood water can create stagnant pools of water where mosquitoes gather, which can spread other diseases like malaria. This has a knock-on effect on economic issues, as these natural events can make coastal life unaffordable, with increased cost of insurance on these homes, or an inability to find insurance at all, which could cause a reduction in asset value in the community. Consequently, this lunar nodal cycle will damage the quality of life in coastal communities,

infrastructure may not be rebuilt or adapted to this force of nature. It's not just bad for humans. Ilya Rochlin, a visiting professor at Rutgers University, analyzed at the peak of the lunar wobble where high tides are higher, can drown salt marshes. Salt marshes are a habitat for a range of species, such as invertebrates, and these floods can cause these creatures to drown, which means that other species like fish, seabirds, and others who rely on invertebrates to survive also suffer. And they aren't the only ones that rely on salt marshes, as salt marshes hold a multitude

of marine life, which includes 75% of all fishery species. This means that the lunar wobble impacts the food chains of humans and animals, causing disturbances to their natural habitat and impacting their populations. While this all does seem fairly doom and gloom, it's interesting to note that not All ecosystems on the planet are negatively affected by flooding and high tides. Ecologist Neil St. Alan of Macari University analyzed that the lunar nodal cycle impacts heavily on the expansion and contraction of mangrove canopy cover over most of the Australian continent.

The analysis showed that the peaks of the lunar nodal cycle coincided with the cover of the mangrove canopy. It showed that when the lunar wobble is at its minimum phase, it causes the mangrove mangrove ecosystems to become very dry, which leads to thinner canopy cover. Yet, when lunar wobble is at its maximum phase, mangrove cover increases. Mangrove canopies are beneficial to Earth's environment, as they are complex ecosystems that fight against climate change, protect wildlife, and shield coastlines. They can also absorb four times as much carbon dioxide than rainforests of the same size.

growth is vital to the welfare of our planet, so it's not all downside. Still, it's clear that if we don't plan ahead, coastal cities and environments will face a serious crisis. The all important question then is, what can we do about it? One method is better protection. As I mentioned previously, the protection and restoration of mangroves can act as a shield against flooding, as they can mitigate the vulnerability of communities on the coastlines. More specifically, mangroves can avert damage by decreasing the height and energy of waves as they pass through

mangrove forests. The above-ground roots and branches diminish the height of the waves, and thus the waves lose energy, ultimately stopping the waves emerging onto the seabed and engulfing the sediments. The mangroves' roots and branches also reduce wind energy, which can start with the waves. stop the formation of waves. According to reports, densely packed mangroves can half the height of a wave through just a 100 meter passage. For comparison, in an open forest where roots and branches are more sparse, it would take 500 meters for a wave to half its height. So preservation and reforestation of these mangroves or plants with a similar capability can become a great shield against upcoming floods.

Another possible solution is to learn how to live with these flood-heavy conditions, working with nature rather than against it. For example, let's take a look at the flood defences in the Netherlands, where one-third of the country is below sea level, and another third is at risk of flooding. They've built infrastructure that works with water and manages the rising sea levels. They do this by designing facilities like polders. Polders are bits of land below sea level that have been reasserted from a body of water. It's always fully or partially surrounded by an embankment to keep the water out that comes

from either the sea or a river. These polders offer a network of drainage canals and pumps to manage water levels by disposing of excess water and running water back to the sea or river to make sure that the water doesn't run over land. can be used to protect houses, farms and factories, and thus are used a lot around the country. The Netherlands also built dams, and utilized sand dunes to create ways to stay dry in their swampy land. This shows that there are ways in which we can observe nature and live alongside it. So the bad news is, behind its ethereal beauty, our moon hides a power that, if just so combined, is set to overwhelm

humanity's coastal settlements. However, there's always a bit of good news too, as knowledge is a power of its own. By understanding our plight, we can look for solutions, both among already existing ideas and ways forward that have yet to be discovered. If we are to endure what is coming, it's high time for us to use our innate creativity and drive to adapt and survive to work with our planet rather than against it. From the 4th of March 2022, a mysterious rocket booster crashed into the surface of the moon. This event was watched by the scientific community who had been tracking the booster since 2015

while it silently orbited our planet. When it crashed, it formed a strange double crater that defied precedent or obvious explanation. However, other watchers were more curious about its origin. Who had launched it? No nation claimed to have done so. My mind when I heard about this was immediately caught up in the idea of secret government programs or shady corporations launching pirate satellites for a quick profit. But as I delved into it, the origins of this mystery rocket actually opened my eyes to an unexpected

issue, one that was deeply troubling. It speaks of an era fast in coming, where rather than space being a place of peaceful exploration, might be rife with danger and conflict. Hopefully this is something that can be avoided, but the first step is to understand what is happening up there. I'm Alex McColgan and you're watching Astrum. Join with me today as we learn the likely origins of this rocket and the unsettling implications its existence casts on space exploration in general. To begin with, figuring out the origins of the rocket booster, known as W-E-Z-Z-E-Z-E-Z-E-Z-E-E. 0913A is actually one of the simpler aspects of this mystery.

And no, it's likely not the jettison from a secret government program. While admittedly, I don't have insider knowledge about the classified space programs of all the nations around the world, it turns out secret space launches are surprisingly difficult to achieve, making this explanation unlikely. This is because, for the last 70 years, after the invention of the intercontinental, ballistic missile, countries have become very invested in knowing when other countries are launching rockets. The great fear during the Cold War was that America and Russia would send nuclear missiles at each other. As such, it was a matter of survival for each to know what the other

nation was doing. They did this with radar, but also with spy networks. When Russia launched Sputnik 1 in 1957, American intelligence already knew about it. even if they didn't pass this information on to the American people. But since then, radar systems and satellites have become so good, they are able to spot launches within minutes. It's essentially impossible now to send a rocket up without someone noticing. Rockets are, after all, quite difficult to hide. And even if you did manage to launch it undetected, space is incredibly open.

And even if governments missed it, amateur astronomers across the the globe watched the skies as a hobby. It wouldn't take very long before someone spotted it. You'd likely have more success disguising your secret spacecraft as something it wasn't. If you sent it up disguised as an innocent satellite, or had it fall off a rocket as if it was simple space junk, you could let it drift through space in plain sight, yet hidden. If our mystery rocket was something like this, that might make more sense. However, we likely know its true origin thanks to a little bit of mathematics. Independent astronomers, as far back as 2015, had watched the path of the mystery rocket,

and by plotting its course, they were able to calculate the reverse of its trajectory. By doing so, they could work out which nations it had passed over at various points in its past. While initially this led them to believe that it was a stage of a space X rocket, this theory was later supplanted by a much more probable explanation. that it had belonged to the Chinese Chang'A-5-T-1 mission. The mystery rocket's orbit passed over China on the same day as the Changi-5-T-1 launch, and matched its trajectory exceptionally well.

There was additional evidence. University of Arizona students at the Space Domain Awareness Lab used a Raptors' telescope to take a spectroscopic survey of the mystery rocket. Essentially, by looking at it through a telescope and evaluating the type of paint-uselloscope, used on it from the light reflecting off it, they were able to compare it to existing records and identify that it was a closer match to China's rocket style than SpaceX's. These cooperating pieces of evidence led astronomer Jonathan McDowell to claim a 90% certainty that the mystery rocket had belonged to China.

But China denied it. When asked by journalists, Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said the following. According to China's monitoring, the upper stage of the Chang'A-5 mission rocket had fallen through the Earth's atmosphere in a safe manner and burned up completely. China's aerospace endeavors are always in keeping with international law. Some astronomers believe China was innocently mistaken here. It is also possible that China wasn't telling the truth. But if the evidence is so strongly against them, why deny it?

It's perhaps that last line that offers the vital clue. China does not want to be seen as in breach of international law. And this is where I start to get annoyed. Not necessarily with China, but with something which is a worldwide problem. You might not be aware of international space law. It does actually exist, although it is a little patchy. It is made up of a number of treaties that various countries have signed and ratified over the years, such as the Rescue Agreement, highlighting nations' resources.

responsibilities to help astronauts in distress if they are able, or the Outer Space Treaty of 1963, which enshrines in international law the right of all nations to explore space, makes states responsible for all space-related activities of their citizens, and maintains that space objects like the Moon should only be used for peaceful purposes. It is the treaty that forbids any nation from placing nuclear weapons in space, which is probably why there are no orbiting satellites with nuclear weapon platforms up there today, ready to rain down destruction on the planet. It makes states liable for damages that they cause in space and requires them to avoid harmful

contamination of celestial objects. It's likely this last article that China is trying to not run afoul of. While there was likely little harm done by the mystery rocket crashing into the moon, it's not a good look to accidentally lose track of your rocket stages. and have them crash into things later. If any bacteria were on the rocket, that could cause contamination. Even worse, if the rocket part had crashed into a satellite, or if there one day ends up being lunar bases on the moon and the rocket part had hit one of those, then it would

have meant China had broken international law. But why do I suggest that this will lead to an era of conflict? All, while it's disappointing, it's certainly not that surprising a nation would try to hide things to get ahead or to avoid looking bad. And I take issue with more than just the fact that there's an increasing amount of space debris circling in space, although this is becoming an increasing problem. No, the true cause for alarm is the fact that space law is so unregulated that a rocket's origin was a mystery in the first place.

Law is currently insufficient to ensure the peaceful exploration of space in the years to come. What exists is noble, but rife with holes and ambiguities. Let's take, for example, the Outer Space Treaty, one of the foundational treaties for the peaceful use of space, signed by 117 countries around the world, including the US, China, Russia, and essentially anyone else with a space program. It states that outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. But this is actually being somewhat ignored.

How does this idea square with the desires of an increasing number of nations to set up bases and mine places like the moon? If you set up a base on a planet or moon, that certainly sounds like you're trying to stake a claim to at least part of it, which sounds a lot like sovereignty. claiming resources certainly appears to me to be appropriation. The US Artemis Accords, signed by 23 countries now, attempts to get around this by having Sineas legally state that they're not appropriating any of the resources they extract from the moon, but other nations claim that this is nonsense. The American interpretation has been perceived

by Sam as just a new version of the enclosure movement of Britain in the 18th century, where Britain just claimed land as its own. Depending on which legal interpretation is carried out in the end, there is a risk that any nation that attempts to claim resources from the moon might be in breach of international law. But clearly, this is not slowing anyone down. Furthermore, consider the Outer Space Treaty's article about space being a place for peaceful purposes. No nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction are allowed in space. However, this applies only to weapons of mass destruction, which leaves a lot of wiggle room for weapons of middling destruction or lower, and such ideas are being currently explored.

In 2003, a full 40 years after the outer space treaty was signed, the US Air Force proposed an idea of placing 20-foot-long tungsten rods, nicknamed rods from God, into orbital launches that could fire them from space. These falling rods would drop at speeds reaching Mach 10, hitting with the force of a small tactical nuke, but without the radiation, would launch far less detectably than a missile, arriving in half the time,

and would be almost impossible to defend against. Fortunately, rather than rods, it was the idea that was dropped as it was too expensive, but not because it encroached on international law. With civilisations increasing reliance on satellites for business, communication, banking, navigation, and a host of other applications, weapons in space are becoming increasingly common. Satellites are increasingly becoming a point of vulnerability in a nation's security. Various nations are developing anti-satellite missiles or defenses against ASAT missiles

to threaten others' interests and defend their own. This is a complex issue, but one that carries unexpected dangers. Space conflict of this kind is not as intuitive as you might think. When Russia tested one such ASAT missile on a test satellite of its own, it sent thousands of pieces of debris into orbit around the planet. Some of these pieces could remain in space for years, and if they collide with other debris or satellites, those in turn could shatter. creating a cascade effect collectively known as Kessler syndrome.

If such conflict became widespread, it could be an end to satellites in space for everyone. Interestingly, Russia and China have pushed for a treaty known as Paros that bans all weapons in space of any kind, but this has been stonewalled by the US, who favour the approach laid out by US President Theodore Roosevelt, speak softly and carry a big stick. Arguably, some force in space might actually be necessary, adding to the complexity of the situation. To say that there is a lack of trust between the big superpowers at the moment might be a bit of an understatement.

Beyond that, in January 2018, a US company called Swarm was denied permission by the US Federal Communications Commission to launch four satellites. Swarm went to India and launched them anyway, without government approval. There were illegal ramifications for this. The FCC later fined swarm $900,000 for their actions, but it sets a concerning precedent as space becomes more and more available for companies with large wallets and few scruples. It may one day become profitable to participate in illegal space ventures.

Some degree of policing, with some degree of force to back it up, might become necessary to protect the interests of legitimate or scientific space fairs. Sadly, as has been noted by many analysts, there is a perceived preference from countries on all sides towards rules that promote freedom for their own actions while curtailing the activities and aspirations of others. And yet, space needs greater global regulation. If the nations of the world can't agree on some kind of framework for ongoing exploration, there is a risk that space exploration becomes a wild west,

rife with conflict, and with the more noble aim of scientific advancement left by the wayside. This would be a waste, as with a little extra work, international law could become robust enough to prevent this. What has been agreed so far shows promise. One treaty, known as the Moon Treaty, lays out the environment of the moon as the common heritage of mankind to be used only for peaceful purposes, and only to be exploited at the careful agreement according to an international regulatory regime. However, not many nations have signed up to this treaty. None of the nations that have their own significant launch

capabilities, such as the US, Russia, or China, which leaves this treaty largely ineffectual. There so far has not been any agreement on what this regime would look like, nor what the common heritage of mankind actually means. If space is going to be a safe place for future generations, this needs to change. More discussion needs to happen on these topics to rein in future illegal activity or escalating space-based arms races. Groups that send rockets into space need to keep track of them. Ultimately, the nations of the so-called civilized world need to come to more agreement on these issues. At the end of the day, we don't want to live in a world where we have mystery rockets crashing

into the moon. We want to live in a world where space is appreciated for its alien beauty, where its dangers and mechanisms are purely natural and understood, and the moons and planets out there can be explored peacefully and fairly, rather than fought over and ultimately destroyed. Maybe as a people, we need to grow up not just technologically but civilly too. Humanity has always loved new frontiers. In the 16th century, when Christopher Columbus first sailed to America, thousands of Europeans embarked on a perilous six-month voyage across dangerous oceans to follow him. When they arrived, they knew that there would be none of the trappings of European civilization

waiting for them. They would have to farm, build shelters, and work hard just to survive. Many didn't make it, either dying in the crossing or in the years after arrival. But it didn't stop more from coming. It couldn't. The call of the new frontier was too strong. Fast forward to the 21st century and before us lies a new frontier, space. Despite its beauty, it is the most hostile environment imaginable.

Space will burn you to death. It will freeze you. Its radiation will kill you. The changing gravity will crush you or waste you away. Not even breathable air can be taken for granted. Yet, this frontier is calling to us. Perhaps it highlights something within human nature that we would strive to go to such a desolate place.

Maybe we relish the challenge. There is something that speaks to certain souls about going somewhere hostile and deadly and building something warm and safe there. Or maybe it's curiosity. There is so much to learn about the universe around us. And while looking at photographs and measuring conditions through instruments is interesting, there is nothing quite like experiencing a place, a phenomenon, a wonder of the universe firsthand.

Plus, being physically present opens up whole new avenues of science. And so, humanity's sights are set on the other planets in the solar system. Mars might have humans walking on it as early as 2030. But it begins with the moon. The Artemis mission intends to get humans back to the moon by 2024. Through doing so, it will develop new technology and explore technical frontiers currently uncharted. The technical expertise gained from this enterprise will enable scientists to create spaceships

capable of carrying human life to the wider solar system. It begins with the moon and with Orion One. I'm Alex McCulligan and you're watching Astrum. Join with me today after the recent successful splashdown of the first cruable spacecraft to travel to the moon and back in nearly 50 years. This mission will open the doorway to distant planets. So what did it do over the course of its nearly 26-day journey? The answer to that gains us a fascinating insight into how close we are to having a human on the moon once more. Orion 1's journey to the moon and back started at Launch Complex 39B at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

The atmosphere there was tense but excited. This was an important mission. It had been nearly 50 years since the conclusion of the last space race. But just like that previous one, America is not the only one trying to get to the moon's surface. The Chinese National Space Administration landed a rover on the far side of the moon in 2019. And they have recently developed a rocket, the long March 9, that could potentially carry a human to the moon in the 2030s. NASA is nothing, if not competitive.

They hope to be the first ones back up there. For that to happen, Orion 1's mission would need to go well. The journey was planned to be a complex retrograde orbit, meaning traveling in the opposite direction to the moon's orbit of the Earth, swinging around the moon three times, two of them close flybys. But this was no mere attempt at threading the celestial needle. More than flying accurately, Orion 1 would be testing out the various onboard systems needed to support human life on such a journey.

Many pieces had to be working perfectly. A single failure could be fatal for anyone on board. Of course, Orion 1 was not carrying human passengers for this trip. That would be for the later Artemis 2 mission. That said, there were passengers of a different sort. Introducing Commander Moonerkin Campos. Mooner King Campos is a mannequin dummy filled with radiation sensors designed to record the levels of cosmic exposure astronauts might experience inside Orion One's crew module.

The name is a reference to Arturo Campos, an electrical engineer who helped save the Apollo 13 mission by designing a fix after its oxygen tank ignited, which is a nice nod. I do love the name Moonakin, though. Moonakin was accompanied by two other mannequins built for a similar purpose, but for different body types and genders. As female astronauts are going to be heading into space as part of later Artemis missions, it's important to see how space travel affects them specifically. The clothes these mannequins wear, and Orion itself will need to protect the mannequins

from cosmic radiation. Most agencies say 50 miloseverts is the maximum safer man. amount of radiation a person can be exposed to in a year. On the moon, levels can get as high as 380 milliseconds. If NASA cannot get these exposure levels down to more manageable levels, it will pose serious health risks for any future astronauts. Orion 1 launched. This was the maiden voyage for both it and the rocket carrying it. The super heavy lift space launch vehicle rocket is NASA's tallest and most powerful rocket to date. and currently the most powerful in the world, providing 3.8 million kilograms of thrust at launch

and capable of lifting nearly 70,000 kilograms and sending it on its way to the moon, useful for carrying Orion 1, along with 10 cube satellites that NASA would be using to monitor space conditions for future missions. Although it was initially delayed, Orion finally fired up through and out of the atmosphere before detaching from its other stages and beginning its journey. And, as a personal side note, I have never seen a rocket launch like this one. The power you can see through the video is simply incredible. I've seen a lot of rocket launches in my time, but this one was jaw-dropping.

The first phase of the flight had begun. It would take four days to get to the moon, but NASA had no intention of wasting the time. Immediately, on the very first day of space travel, They started to test. And surprisingly, this meant it was time to activate Alexa. Yes, that Alexa. Alexa made it on board as part of a collaboration with companies Amazon, Cisco, and Lockheed Martin, as part of Orion One's Clisto payload.

This payload is a suite of video conferencing and voice command technology paid for by the companies as an attempt to prove how useful such software could be as part of NASA's initiatives. Technicians on Earth were able to call Orion One and speak to Alexa, getting her to access information on telemetry and flight status. It's an intriguing use of the technology being showcased. One day, just like in sci-fi, perhaps all of spaceship control will be voice-activated. On the third day of Orion One's journey, once some course adjustments had been made and it was well on its way towards the moon, Orion One performed a visual examination of itself.

There was always the risk of micrometeas hitting Orion 1's surface, and taking these photos would allow NASA to confirm the extent of the damages caused by this potential cosmic threat. It was a reminder of one of the potential dangers Orion 1 would face. Fortunately, while results are still being analyzed, it seems that micrometeer impact damage was minimal on this trip. In those first days of travel, Orion 1 took images of the planet Earth. drinking, the further from it the spacecraft traveled. It also started looking ahead.

This first lunar flyby was an important one. Orion one would be traveling over sites visited by its predecessors, such as Tranquility Base, where Apollo 11 landed, or the sites of Apollo 12 and Apollo 14. Traveling close to the lunar surface would be a good dry run, excellent practice for any future missions where they need to drop off cargo or personnel. However, it also demonstrated one of the most important, repeatedly tested aspects of Orion 1's flight, its autonomy. For 15 minutes, the moon's mass would block out communication with Earth.

NASA is deeply concerned with astronaut safety. As such, they have worked hard on developing backup systems into Orion 1, but what would happen if ever Orion 1 lost contact with Earth and had to navigate on a its own. You can't just access Google Maps when you're traveling 8,210 kilometers an hour, over 370,000 kilometers from Earth. Although they did test GPS connectivity while they were on this mission just in case. Like sailors traveling across the seas in ancient times, Orion 1 would need a compass to help it find its way. Its method for doing this was actually very like those sailors. Orion 1 can navigate by using the stars.

The spacecraft comes equipped with an optical navigation camera designed to be able to use the position of the stars to track its position, orientation, and motion in space at any time by comparing what it sees with onboard digital star maps. At numerous points on this journey, scientists tested systems related to making sure this capability worked and wouldn't be jeopardized by anything space had to throw at it, such as the warping effects of solar heat. these systems all worked perfectly. Orion 1 was able to maintain a sense of its position and kept going in the correct direction. After passing through this zone of radio silence, Orion 1 was able

to pass back around the other side of the moon and easily re-establish contact. And while doing so, it was able to record an incredible sight, an inverse to what we see here on Earth, an Earth rise. Then, it was time for more tests, including one of my favorites, the sloshing test. Fluid mechanics are complicated. Being able to predict how liquids like engine fuel will move under acceleration requires advanced computer models even on Earth. But once you add to that the complexity of variable gravity levels, it almost becomes easier simply to go up to space and see.

NASA was keenly interested in how much, and in what ways the fuel on board Orion 1 would move under thrust, otherwise known as sloshing. This would provide valuable data that could be used to predict how much Orion 1's thrusters might be needed to perform various space maneuvers. Over the course of the next two weeks, Orion 1 performed its delicate lunar orbits. During these complicated maneuvers, Orion 1's thrusters were tested intensely. It takes mathematical precision to dance along the line between crashing into the surface of the moon and flying off into space.

Without thrusters that performed exactly as needed, when needed, Orion 1 would not have enough fuel to complete its trip, even with the extra supplies it carried. As it happened, Orion 1 performed more efficiently than expected. Its thruster burns were exactly what NASA had hoped. It was able to do its second lunar fly-by, passing as close. close as 130 kilometers from the moon's surface. While many things went well, there were difficulties too. On day 8, for reasons that remain unclear, Orion 1 dropped out of communications with Earth for

47 minutes. On top of that, on day 19, power temporarily dropped out to the ship's heaters and propulsion subsystems. Fortunately, NASA were able to get these systems up and running again. The second stage of its journey was complete. The final stage, re-entry, was all that remained. Could Orion survive re-entering Earth's atmosphere? To make the process easier, Orion would only attempt to get its crew module home.

This detached itself from the rest of Orion and dropped towards the planet. To ease its way into the atmosphere, Orion's crew module performed a skipping maneuver, similar to the way you might skim rocks across a body of water. This dip and bounce technique slowed its speed, allowing it to try to land at its desired location with greater precision. Still, temperatures got so hot during re-entry that the friction turned the air around Orion 1 into plasma. Orion 1 dropped out of radio contact temporarily.

NASA had expected this, but they still had to wait with bated breath as Orion's autonomous systems worked to stabilize its entry and as its new heat-resistant exterior plating tried to protect its residents within. At 2,900 meters above sea level, travelling at over 200 km per hour, Orion's parachutes began to deploy. First, three smaller ones, to remove the bay doors. Next, two drogue parachutes intended to begin slowing Orion's arrival, and a minute later, the main parachute.

Together these parachutes slowed Orion One's entry to the point where a human on board could survive it. On the 11th of December, Orion 1 splashed down in the Pacific Ocean. Activating a wide array of signal beacons, it called for someone to pick it up. It was the USS Portland that came to collect it. Scientists waited for a couple of hours while the outer casing cooled. This also allowed them to perform even more tests. This time, the tests were on how the salt water of the sea affected various Orion 1 systems,

evaluation on how it had done at resisting the heat of reentry. Analysis of that is still underway, but the initial results look positive. The passengers within were not cooked by the 2,800 degrees Celsius reentry temperatures. We are also waiting on NASA for data from the radiation sensors on the mannequins themselves. But they had done it. They had run their race. The data that Artemis 1 mission had generated would be instrumental in allowing NASA astronauts to stand on the surfaces of worlds other than our own again.

Humanity's quest to reach ever further frontiers continues. For Orion One, its part in this ever-developing journey was complete. The Apollo program. An iconic part of human scientific history. To this day, we have never beaten some of the landmarks set by the Apollo missions. It is still the only program to get a human beyond the world. a low Earth orbit. And with recent efforts being made by some nations to return people to the moon by as soon

as 2024, it seemed like a good idea to look back at mankind's first giant leap to visit our closest neighbor. But what drove humanity to visit the moon in the first place? And what did we learn once we were there? There's a lot to discuss. The program consisted of 12 crude flights and over a dozen unmanned. There were challenges, breakthroughs in technology, triumphs and tragedies. I'm Alex McColgan and you're watching Astrum.

Join with me as today we explore the first steps in getting a man on the moon with the Apollo program, the intro to this new series I'm planning on this incredible group of missions. NASA's Apollo program was, and still is, the single largest research and development program program that has ever been conducted by a nation during peacetime. During its peak, NASA was employing 400,000 people, drawing on the support of 20,000 different industrial companies and universities, and represented 4.4% of the entire US government's budgetary spending. Given that nowadays, NASA only represents about 0.5% of the US government's spending, this raises an important question. Why was the US Socialist?

focused on achieving this goal. Firstly, we must understand a little of the context that led up to the creation of the Apollo program, and that begins with understanding the Cold War. In the aftermath of World War II, tensions began to rise between the two global superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, who each wanted to prove that their nation was superior. This was more than a rivalry between two nations striving to compete, however. Due to political differences, each saw the success of the other as a threat to their very way of life. America was worried that if the Soviet Union did too well, it could be the end of capitalism

and democracy. While the USSR was concerned that if it didn't do better than America, it could spell the end of the communist dream. Each side viewed the other with deep suspicion, and each was adamant that they wouldn't be left behind. And so it was with great alarm to the American. people, that on the 4th of October, 1957, the USSR had successfully launched the first ever artificial satellite to orbit the Earth, Sputnik 1.

Sputnik 1 weighed 83 kilograms, 8 times the size of any satellite the US was considering launching, and it went around the Earth 1,440 times during the three months it remained in orbit. By sending signals to and from it, Soviet scientists, and from it, Soviet scientists, and it was a single were able to use it to acquire information about the density of Earth's upper atmosphere and its ionosphere. The rocket that launched Sputnik 1 was called the R7, and was capable of producing 4.4 million newtons of thrust.

American rockets, by comparison, could only produce 670,000 newtons of thrust. This breakthrough unsettled the American people for two reasons. Firstly, in an era where the threat of nuclear war was never far away, knowing that an enemy nation had access to such powerful rockets made Americans feel vulnerable. It seemed perfectly possible that such rockets could carry nuclear payloads instead of scientific ones, a valid concern, as the R7 was designed with a nuclear payload in mind. And up until that point, the US had never been worried about such attacks on their home soil due to their geographical distance from other nations.

But more than that, Americans were worried that the Soviet Union was advancing further than them in terms of science and technology. To reassure the people, the then-unelected President Kennedy ran for office on a promise that he would ensure American supremacy over the USSR in space technology. When he was successfully elected, he began looking at ways to keep this promise, and was shocked when he realized how much the whole of the whole world. thing would cost. However, when the USSR completed another space landmark on April 12, 1961, by getting the first human into space, President Kennedy began to ask his researchers

what they could do to match or exceed the Soviet progress. The answer came back on April 20th of that same year. If they wanted to beat the Soviet Union, who were already ahead in the space race thanks to their powerful R7 rockets, they would need to aim for some something that was currently outside of both nations' capabilities. The target suggested was an internationally lofty one, designed to impress the world. NASA would put a man on the moon. This challenge would require improvements to America's existing rocket technology. They would need to produce 50 times as much force to lift all the rocketry and modules necessary

to get a person to the moon and back. NASA would also require a significantly higher budget, which would also require a significantly higher budget, which was swiftly approved. In 1961, NASA was given $744 million for their various projects. Just a few years later, as the budgetary requirements ramped up, NASA was receiving over $5 billion per year. NASA began using these funds to expand their operations, building new launch sites and mission control centers, hiring new staff, and purchasing research and development equipment, such

as vacuum chambers capable of nearly simulated. a perfect vacuum. Nasser had already been considering how to get a man to the moon in early 1960, but with this infusion of resources and political impetus, they began to consider the problem much more seriously. There were various plans drawn up to explain how to go about getting a person on the moon. Should they build one giant rocket that would fly straight to the moon and back again in a plan called direct ascent?

Or maybe instead an Earth orbit rendezvous might be a better option, where over the course of up to 15 rocket launches, various spacecraft parts could be carried up to and assembled in space. There were various difficulties with these plans. Firstly, a rocket just flying straight to the moon and back again would be extremely heavy and would need incredible lift. It would have to carry enough fuel to exit both the Earth's and Moon's orbits, and this much extra weight was even further beyond the USA's rocket capabilities. The second idea, namely the Earth orbit rendezvous to build a rocket in space, was problematic

too. It would get around the lift issue, as carrying only a part of a spacecraft would be much lighter for each individual rocket, but launching so many rockets would massively increase the overall costs and complexity of the project, as each rocket launched would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and assembling a spacecraft in space would be no easy feat either. Finally, NASA decided on a plan that could use the best elements of both. Their idea was to create a rocket that would come apart. With a mission plan, they called the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous.

The rocket would take two modules, a capsule-like command module, and another segment called the Lunar Module out of Earth's orbit. These two modules would travel together to the moon. The lunar module, which was much smaller than the overall rocket, would detach from the command module and would take astronauts down to the surface. Once they were there, it would take them back up again to rendezvous with the command module. Once all the astronauts and samples were transferred back to the command module, the command module would travel alone back to Earth before finally splashing down in the ocean.

It seems a little complex, but it was hoped to be the most economical model, both in terms of cost and in terms of weight thrust requirements. With this plan in place, NASA could begin construction and testing. They would need to create rockets that were significantly larger and more powerful than anything they had ever done before. They would need to put their own astronauts into space and thoroughly test each stage of the journey to ensure the success of the program. But they were underway.

The Apollo program had begun. If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of the program of the program. giants. Just like with Isaac Newton, the Apollo program did not stand alone. Its achievements would not have been possible if it had not been for the important missions that ran before it and alongside it. It built on the understanding learned from those missions, expanded on their technology, and drew on the expertise of the people who worked on them. I'm Alex McColgan and you're watching Astrum. Join with me today as we examine the in two of those vital early programs, Project Mercury and Project Gemini, and investigate

how they helped a fledgling NASA to gain a greater understanding of how to put a man on the moon. I hope by the end of this video to have earned your like and subscription. NASA as an institution has not been around forever. It was only created in 1958 in response to the Soviet Union launching the Sputnik satellite about a year earlier. However, it's not accurate to say that NASA was completely new even in 1958. When US President Eisenhower signed off on the formation of NASA, he did it by combining

several already existing programs and institutions. There was the NACA, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the US Army's ballistic missile agency, and German scientists who had worked on ballistic missiles for Germany during World War II. Beyond that, the US Air Force had been working on a man-in-space soonest, or Miss program, which was also given to NASA, along with some of their facilities. These alongside other government projects provided the foundation for NASA. However, amongst all of these, there wasn't a way to get a human into orbit.

The closest was the X-15 program of NACA. The airplane was able to skim the edges of space, and in the early 1960s broke record by flying to a height of 105 km and achieving speeds of over 6,000 kilometers per hour. A later X-15 broke 7,200 kilometers per hour and holds the record to this day for the fastest crewed-powered aircraft. However, while this was above the Carmen line of 100 kilometers, or the FIA's definition of space, this really is the limit of an airplane. more would need to be developed to get a human into orbit and ultimately to the moon.

And so NASA began its first project to get a human properly into space, Project Mercury. Project Mercury's mission was a continuation of the Man in Space Soonest program, and as that name suggests, its objective was to get a man into orbit and back safely, ideally before the Soviet Union. This would not be an easy task. Riding a rocket into space meant an astronaut would need to deal with G-forces, intense vibrations, the risk of explosion from riding on what was basically a repurposed missile, and the threat of catastrophic burning up on re-entry.

Scientists also worried about radiation once an astronaut left the atmosphere, and even micrometeore striking the ship. While some of these threats proved to be negligible, the odds had been hit by a meteor turned out to be very small, the rest were very real dangers to a human life. The rockets NASA used for Project Mercury were the Redstone rocket, which was later replaced by the Atlas rocket. Both of these rockets were originally designed as missiles. The Redstone was a direct descendant of the German V-2 rocket developed for use in war.

When the Second World War ended, America brought German scientists over and put them to to work developing American weapons and technology. Werner von Braun, a German scientist brought over in this way, became a chief engineer at NASA, and was instrumental in helping develop the rocket technology for Project Mercury and later Apollo. The idea was for a launch vehicle to carry a pod up to a height of 161 kilometres, shedding boosters and unneeded sections along the way. The pod would orbit the Earth, getting as high as 280 kilometres at the highest point in

its orbit, before using its boosters to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere. After surviving the frictional heat of re-entry, which got as hot as 1,600 degrees Celsius, parachutes would open and slow the pods landing in the ocean where it would be retrieved. Boosters would need to jettison at the correct time to keep the weight down. This didn't always happen. They were trying out new ablative heat shields. Rather than completely prevent heat absorption, ablative heat shields absorbed a large amount of heat and then burned it off as a gas, carrying the excess heat with it.

Obviously, if you miscalculated how much heat shield you would need, your craft would run out and you'd burn up. Redundancies would need to be built into the rocket in the event of a malfunction while there was a human on board. A rocket-powered escape vehicle was built into the spacecraft as a kind of a different. projector seat. The whole process had to be thoroughly tested before they could try out a manned mission. The first effort in August 1959 did not go well. Due to an incorrectly installed power plug, the first Mercury Redstone rocket, known as Little Joe 1, only got about 4 inches

off the ground before dropping back down on the landing pad. Future launches had mixed results. Fond Brown ran 20 tests in all between 1959 and 1961. Most of these tests were not crude, except for a few where trained monkeys and chimpanzees occupied the pod. Von Braun wanted to be absolutely sure of success before allowing a human to go up in one of his rockets. While his caution was excellent scientific practice, it came at a price. In April, 1961, Russia beat America to the punch by successful.

launching astronaut Yuri Gagarin into orbit, making him the first man in space. From Brown's first human launch came one month later with astronaut Alan Shepard, although this was still only a suborbital flight. Two-nil for the Russians. They got the first satellite into space and now the first human into orbit, and the US was worried. Project Mercury ended up launching six human flights, two on Redstone Rockets and four on Atlas rockets, all of which were successful.

And although they didn't get into space soonest, as had been their goal, they learned incredibly important things about launching rockets, enduring space, and surviving reentry. However, when NASA announced the Apollo program in 1960, with its intention to reach the moon, it became clear that far more knowledge would be needed. Mercury had seen its final mission put an astronaut in space for a day and a half, but a trip to the moon and back would take eight days. Also, NASA decided the best way to get to the moon would be to use the lunar orbit rendezvous method. The plan required them to perform perhaps the most difficult maneuver in space travel,

docking with another object in orbit. They hadn't even achieved this around Earth yet, let alone the moon. The lunar orbit rendezvous method consisted of a lunar module detaching from a command and service module, landing on the moon, then meeting back up with the moon, with the command and service module, which would then take all the astronauts back to Earth. Astronauts would also need to practice doing spacewalks, in case work on the outside of a spacecraft became necessary during transit. And finally, more practice would be needed with re-entry techniques, particularly touching down at a pre-selected location on land, although in the Apollo missions this last idea

was dropped. On top of that, the Soviet Union was ahead, and America needed to count. So while the Apollo team set to work developing its rockets and modules, these extra challenges were handed off to a support mission to work out. The mission was given the name Project Gemini. Project Gemini, which launched 12 missions between 1961 and 1966, built on the foundations of Project Mercury. The Gemini capsule was essentially a larger version of the one used on Mercury, now able to

hold a crew of two. The rocket used was a Titan 2, another adapted military missile redesigned for a new purpose of discovery. Gemini also saw an expansion on that technology. For Project Mercury, the Mercury spacecraft could do little to redirect itself once it made it into orbit. If a space rendezvous was going to happen, this would need to change. The Gemini spacecraft was given an orbit attitude and maneuvering system to allow it to

change its orbit and orient while in space. The Gemini spacecraft was also developed to be able to support a crew in space for longer. By the launch of Gemini 5, astronauts were able to spend an entire week in space. To play it safe, in later flights this time was extended to 14 days by Gemini 7, six more days than would be required for a trip to the moon. While there was a lot of success with these missions, there were some scares too. Neil Armstrong flew on Gemini 8. The purpose of this mission was to meet up with and dock with an uncrewed agenda target vehicle

which had been launched earlier. The first part of the mission went smoothly, with the docking being a success. But while Armstrong and his co-pilot David Scott were still in the target vehicle, they noticed that the ship had started spinning in space. This could be catastrophic. If the spinning ship hit their Gemini ship while the two attempted to undock, it could cause fatal damage to their craft. Furthermore, they were not exactly sure why the craft was spinning.

If a thruster was firing when it shouldn't be, then it would be using a valuable fuel, fuel that was needed to orient themselves for the correct way for re-entry. If they were not facing the right way, the heat shield would not protect them from the incredible heat generated. The two astronauts worked quickly, and by firing one of the opposing thrusters, they were able to slow the two crafts enough that they were able to get back into the Gemini craft and just about undocked safely. They realized then that it had been one of the Gemini craft thrusters that had been firing.

Both astronauts were close to passing out, however they managed to fix the fault, and using the re-entry thrusters, Armstrong calmly got the craft back under control, stopping his tumble. He managed it, with only 30% fuel remaining. Moments like this reinforced the importance of being able to perform EVAs or extra-vehicular activities, And so, Gemini also saw missions where astronauts practice going outside of their spacecraft to perform checks. Buzz Aldrin set the record for this, performing a five-hour 30-minute spacewalk, proving that, with proper rests, work outside of a spacecraft was indeed possible.

This also gave engineers ideas on ways they could make it easier, such as installing handholds at certain places on the craft. All in all, it was through the work of Gemini and Mercury. that the foundation was laid. Thanks to the discoveries made on both of these programs, NASA was making strides in its objectives to reach the moon. It also started to close the gap between it and Russia. It would now be up to Apollo to take the last steps.

Thanks for watching. This video was in part made possible by all the astromnoughts on Patreon. If you think these videos add some educational value to the world and want to give them more stability than the algorithm, you can become a paid member. on Patreon to contribute towards their creation. When you join, you'll be able to watch the whole video ad-free, see your name in the credits, and submit questions to our team. Just sign up with the link in the description.

Once again, a huge thank you from myself and the whole Astrom team. Meanwhile, click the link to this playlist for more Astrom content. I'll see you next time.