We're still using the same approach as in the 1960's. No reusable rocket, no in-situ resource utilization, no new breakthrough tech.
What's the point of returning? To prove we haven't regressed since the 60's?
We're still using the same approach as in the 1960's. No reusable rocket, no in-situ resource utilization, no new breakthrough tech.
What's the point of returning? To prove we haven't regressed since the 60's?
Essentially the same point that we had in 60s, to be stepping stone for greater things.
Artemis is basically rebooting the manned space program, and that inevitably includes retracing some past steps to regain the position. Progress is not always a linear straightforward thing, occasionally there are setbacks and losses.
So the exitement for Artemis is not just for the mission itself, but more for it being a sign of manned space programs getting attention again, hopefully this time on a more sustainable basis than Apollo.