Americans didn't actually land on the moon last week, despite some congratulations to the contrary, and Artemis II didn't quite captivate the full attention of a country distracted by global strife and gas pumps. But the technical accomplishments of the flight -- as spelled out in the late-breaking "Return to the Moon" -- were massive. As was the groundwork, so to speak, for flights in -- and into -- the future.
The "NOVA" presentation, bookended by takeoff and splashdown footage, isn't for astrophysicists. It's for the rest of us. But even the program's very accessible yet highly technical content doesn't obscure the fact that four people were taking a trip strapped in atop a 25-story explosive device. And as the directors interviewed at NASA make us keenly aware, they are always keenly aware that things can go wrong -- space flights being the "ultimate pass-fail test," as someone puts it.
"NOVA" is always pro-science and sometimes a bit breathless about the accomplishments it showcases. But it's not so propagandistic that it ignores some of the misfires of the U.S. space program -- specifically in its use of footage from the Challenger and Columbia disasters, both of which likely contributed to why the Artemis II was the first manned U.S. moon flight in 50 years.
In that vein, one might call Artemis II a gateway excursion, a rehearsal for the planned lunar landings of Artemis III and IV and a review of Artemis I, which apparently completed its 24,581-mph return to Earth with a bit of crisping on its heat shield. Pride mixed with apprehension comes across during interviews with NASA officials, among them Artemis II launch director Charlie Blackwell-Thompson and mission commander Reid Wiseman. (In addition to Commander Wiseman, the crew is identified as "pilot Victor Glover, mission specialist Christina Koch and Canadian Jeremy Hansen," whose countrymen might be puzzled.) Much enlightenment, too, is provided by space educator Maggie Aderin, and by Eric Berger of the website Ars Technica, who provides information political and budgetary: The Apollo program was born of the Cold War, intended to display America's scientific superiority over the Soviet Union and across three years spent $280 billion in today's money completing six manned moon landings.
Today, Mr. Berger says, the Artemis project is making do with one-tenth of what Apollo had. And yet, some would say the stakes are comparable. The "geopolitical imperative," as Mr. Berger calls it.
China, after all, is scheduled to put men on the moon by 2030, though not before Artemis III and IV blast off. But schedules change. "China's space program is more advanced than I think a lot of people realize," says Andrea Leinfelder, Houston Chronicle space reporter. "And there's a concern that China is accelerating and NASA's not keeping up." Which explains the recycling of the Artemis I heat shield, despite the charring incurred, albeit with a modified re-entry approach intended to reduce the stress on the module. "You can't help but be nervous," Commander Wiseman said preflight; the adjustments now seem to have worked. But as is made quite clear by the veteran engineers and scientists who have worked on or merely witnessed the U.S. exploration of the universe, it's not the safest thing making space into a race.