Training day in Orion spacecraft for Artemis II crew
What do the Artemis II suits look like?
Teams tested out different situations so the crew could get practice dealing with any challenges that could arise during the mission. The astronauts also had the chance to check out the sleeping arrangements and the hygiene bay as well as learn how to review air quality levels. It means they'll be prepared to deal with any challenges they may face. The training days were also a chance to try on their bright orange space suits called the Orion Crew Survival System (OCSS). It's worn inside the Orion spacecraft on launch day, in emergency situations, in high-risk parts of the missions near the Moon and on their return to Earth. It's fitted specifically to each astronaut and has lots of tech to help protect the wearers.It's not the only spacesuit they'll have. Like many missions they'll also have another to wear outside the spacecraft during space walks and they work like a personal spaceship.
Everything you need to know about the Artemis II mission
Artemis is Nasa's first Moon mission in more than 50 years and is a three-part series of increasingly complex missions aimed at putting a man and a woman on the Moon. The Artemis I mission didn't have any astronauts on board (although Shaun the sheep went) but was designed to fully test the Moon mission kit. It was successfully sent in orbit around the Moon in November 2022.Artemis II takes it a step further with a crew on board, and will circle around the Moon before returning home while Artemis III plans to land Nasa astronauts on the Moon's surface. The original plan was to have people walking on the Moon by the end of 2025, but the mission has been delayed multiple times. Nasa ended up moving the mission back a year to be able to fix a safety issue with its heat shield.
American astronauts Christina Koch, Victor Glover and Reid Wiseman and Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen have been selected for the Artemis II mission.Reid Wiseman will be the mission's commander. He's a US Navy pilot who has also previously served as the head of Nasa's astronaut office. He's flown one previous mission to the International Space Station (ISS) back in 2015.American astronaut Christina Koch is the only woman on the mission. She's an electrical engineer with a pretty impressive track record, having spent more time in space than any other woman.In 2019 she made the first all-female spacewalk along with fellow astronaut Jessica Meir.US Navy test pilot Victor Glover is the third member of the Artemis II team. He joined Nasa in 2013 and made his first spaceflight in 2020. He was the first African American to stay on the space station for an extended period of six months.Jeremy Hanson is the chosen Canadian astronaut on the team. He was a fighter pilot with the Royal Canadian Air Force before joining the Canadian Space Agency and he's yet to travel to space.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
44 minutes ago
- Sky News
Fragmented and febrile - is threat of nuclear war worse than ever?
Why you can trust Sky News Eighty years ago today, an American B-29 bomber dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. It was the dawn of the atomic age, but the birth of the bomb can be traced beyond the deserts of New Mexico to Britain, five years earlier. A copy of a hand-typed document, now in the Bodleian library in Oxford, is the first description of an atom bomb small enough to use as a weapon. The Frisch-Peierls Memorandum was written by two nuclear physicists at the University of Birmingham in 1940. Otto Frisch and Rudolf Peierls don't feature in the film Oppenheimer, but their paper is credited with jump-starting the Manhattan Project that ultimately built the bomb. Both Jewish scientists who had both fled Nazi Germany, they built on the latest understanding of uranium fission and nuclear chain reactions, to propose a bomb made from enriched uranium that was compact enough to be carried by an aircraft. The document, so secret at the time only one copy was made, makes for chilling reading. Not only does it detail how to build a bomb, but foretells the previously unimaginable power of its blast. "Such an explosion would destroy life in a wide area," they wrote. "The size of this area is difficult to estimate, but it will probably cover the centre of a big city." Radioactive fallout would be inevitable "and even for days after the explosion any person entering the affected area will be killed". Both lethal properties of the bombs that would subsequently fall on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing around 100,000 instantly and more than 100,000 others in the years that followed - most of them civilians. 'The most terrifying weapons ever created' Those bombs had the explosive power of around 16 and 20 kilotonnes of TNT respectively - a force great enough to end the Second World War. But compared to nuclear weapons of today, they were tiny. "What we would now term as low yield nuclear weapons," said Alexandra Bell, president of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which campaigns for nuclear disarmament. "We're talking about city destroyers…these really are the most terrifying weapons ever created." Many of these "high yield" nuclear weapons are thermonuclear designs first tested in the 1950s. They use the power of nuclear fission that destroyed Hiroshima to harness yet more energy by fusing other atoms together. Codenamed "Mike", the first test of a fusion bomb in 1952 yielded at least 500 times more energy than those dropped on Japan. Impractically devastating, but proof of lethal principle. Variants of the W76 thermonuclear warhead currently deployed by the US and UK are around 100Kt, six times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. Just one dropped on a city the size of London would result in more than a quarter of a million deaths. The largest warhead in America's current arsenal, the B83 has the explosive equivalent of 1.2 megatonnes (1.2 million tonnes of TNT) and would kill well over a million instantly. But modern intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) are designed to carry multiple warheads. Russia's Sarmat 2, for example, is thought to be capable of carrying 10 megatonnes of nuclear payload. They're designed to strike multiple targets at once, but if all were dropped on a city like London most of its population of nine million would be killed or injured. If that kind of power is incomprehensible, consider how many nuclear warheads there now are in the world. Nine countries - the US, Russia, China, France, the UK, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel - have nuclear weapons. Several others are interested in having them. The US and Russia have around 4,000 nuclear warheads each - 90% of the global nuclear arsenal and more than enough to destroy civilisation. According to analysis from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, China us thought to have around 600 warheads, but has indicated a desire to catch up. Beijing is believed to be building up to 100 new warheads a year and the ICBMs to deliver them. Five more nuclear powers, including the UK, plan to either increase or modernise their existing nuclear stockpiles. The nuclear arms race that created this situation was one imagined by Frisch and Peierls in their 1940 memorandum. Given the mass civilian casualties it would inevitably cause, the scientists questioned whether the bomb should ever be used by the Allies. They wrote, however: "If one works on the assumption that Germany is, or will be, in the possession of this weapon… the most effective reply would be a counter-threat with a similar bomb." What they didn't believe was that the bomb they proposed, and went on to help build at Los Alamos, would ever be used. Devastated by its use on Japan, Peierls disavowed the bomb and later campaigned for disarmament. But that work is now as unfinished as ever. Non-proliferation treaties helped reduce the expensive and excessive nuclear arsenals of Russia and the US, and prevent more countries from building nuclear bombs. 'Everything trending in the wrong direction' But progress ground to a halt with the invasion of Ukraine, as nuclear tensions continued elsewhere. "After all the extremely hard, tedious work that we did to reduce nuclear risks everything is now trending in the wrong direction," said Alexandra Bell. "The US and Russia refuse to talk to each other about strategic stability. "China is building up its nuclear arsenal in an unprecedented fashion and the structures that were keeping non-proliferation in place stemming the spread of nuclear weapons are crumbling around us." 'New risks increasing the threat' The world may have come closer to nuclear conflict during the Cuban missile crisis of 1963, but the fragmented and febrile state of geopolitics now is more dangerous, she argues. Conflict regularly flares between nuclear armed India and Pakistan; Donald Trump's foreign policy has sparked fears that South Korea might pursue the bomb to counter North Korea's nuclear threat; some states in the Middle East are eyeing a nuclear deterrent to either nuclear-wannabe Iran or nuclear armed Israel. Add to the mix the military use of AI and stressors like climate change, and the view of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists is the situation is more precarious than in 1963. "It's more dangerous, but in a different way," said Alexandra Bell. "The confluence of all these new existential risks are increasing the threat worldwide."
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
RFK Jr. pulls $500 million in funding for vaccine development
The Department of Health and Human Services will cancel contracts and pull funding for some vaccines that are being developed to fight respiratory viruses like COVID-19 and the flu. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary and a longtime vaccine critic, announced in a statement Tuesday that $500 million worth of vaccine development projects, all using mRNA technology, will be halted. The projects — 22 of them — are being led by some of the nation's leading pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer and Moderna to prevent flu, COVID-19 and H5N1 infections. The mRNA vaccines are credited with slowing the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Kennedy said in the Tuesday statement that he wants the health department to move away from mRNA vaccines, calling on the department to start 'investing in better solutions.' He provided no details on what those technologies might be.
Reuters
4 hours ago
- Reuters
US health agency to wind down mRNA vaccine development
Aug 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said on Tuesday it would wind down mRNA vaccine development activities under its biomedical research unit. The unit, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, helps companies develop medical supplies to address public health threats, and had also provided billions of dollars for development of COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic. HHS said the wind down includes cancellation of a contract awarded to Moderna (MRNA.O), opens new tab for the late-stage development of its bird flu vaccine for humans and the right to purchase the shots, a move first reported in May. The U.S. health agency said it is also rejecting or canceling multiple pre-award solicitations, including proposals from Pfizer (PFE.N), opens new tab, Sanofi Pasteur ( opens new tab, CSL Seqirus ( opens new tab, Gritstone and others. In total, this affects 22 projects worth nearly $500 million, the agency said. HHS said the decision follows a comprehensive review of mRNA-related investments initiated during the COVID-19 public health emergency.
