/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11294212
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Gateway#Criticism
>Lunar Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it".
>Gateway would not be useful to go to the Moon, Mars, near-Earth asteroids, or any other possible destination.
>Lunar Gateway is "useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base."
>Lunar Gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness."
>Lunar Gateway can be useful only after there are facilities on the Moon producing propellant that could be transported to the Lunar Gateway.
>"using the Gateway as a staging area for robotic or human missions to the lunar surface is absurd."
>"lunar orbit project doesn’t help us get back to the Moon".
>Lunar Gateway is "a great way to spend a great deal of money, advancing science and humanity in no appreciable way."
>"The “lunar Gateway” is, in essence, building a space station to orbit a natural space station, namely the moon." and that "If we are going to return the moon, we should go directly there, not build a space station to orbit it."

Lunar Gateway is a grant farming scheme. Nothing more.

>>9227040
>suddenly remember this

OH SHIT!!!

>36mins left

WEW MADE IT!

Now that I'm here, if this launch works, it will be the first I've seen that did work. I've literally not seen it work ever during a live broadcast. Every damn time I'm here to see it, something blows up or it is rescheduled. I want to see it land on one of the drones.

>313 / 115 / 81 / 4

Impressive. 1 image for every 2.72 posts. Nearly 4 posts per IP. All those tl;dr length posts.

/thread

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/space/os-spacex-attempt-launch-monday-20160229-post.html

Cockteasing moved to Tuesday at 6:35 p.m.