He’s being directly critical of Artemis and Orion/SLS, which is not at all built that way, was basically architected by politics, and will probably not end up actually going to the moon unless there’s a major change.
Talking about methane, in situ refueling (not just spacex, but they've been the most vocal): 41:25
Complexity/redundancy: 46:28 (looong pause and laughter)
Comments on engine design: ~48:00 (you have to be aware of Raptor/SS booster design to get the criticism)
Landing on the Moon is supposed to use some other engines as well at the time, so that may help. As soon as we'll know more about design, we can say things more confidently.
He clearly argued against flashy technology demonstrations like orbital refueling, which if you have paid attention, doesn't apply to the SLS but Starship. Orbital refueling adds an insane amount of uncertainty to the entire mission due to the boiling off of cryogenic fuels. He clearly pointed out that despite the plan of sending six Starships to LEO, nobody actually knows how many rocket flights are necessary. Fancy technology has been put on a pedestal, while the actual mission is being neglected. This is a common theme I have seen on HN and Reddit. SpaceX enthusiasts think the moon mission is some irrelevant symbolic political boondoggle to keep NASA facilities open. They all want to go on the promised 100 people trip to mars.
>will probably not end up actually going to the moon unless there’s a major change.
I don't know if you have paid attention lately, but currently Starship is significantly behind schedule. I'm not sure what to call this interpretation except "biased". Maybe this will refresh your memory: The Starship "Propellant Transfer Test" was supposed to happen in 2022 Q4.
EDIT: https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/qujnsi/propos...
I think this ignores that a lander of significant size would need newly designed hypergolic engines and would need very complex orbital refueling of hypergolics as well.
> Fancy technology has been put on a pedestal, while the actual mission is being neglected.
I think this is just a misunderstanding of the long term vision for the program. I its not about Artemis 3 only.
> SpaceX enthusiasts think the moon mission is some irrelevant symbolic political boondoggle to keep NASA facilities open. They all want to go on the promised 100 people trip to mars.
That's unfair. SpaceX enthusiast for the most part are simply happy money flows into the Starship program. The real win here is the Starship program itself, not any individual mission.
And I think that is the most impactful thing about this, having impact all future deep space missions. So call me a SpaceX enthusiasts.
So unless you go to a tiny lander, its just a reality. Its in the critical path.