Best Moon Lander? Starship HLS vs. Blue Moon

NASA has selected to landers for their Artemis program: SpaceX's Starship and Blue Moon from Blue Origin and the so called National Team.
Both have their strengths and weaknesses. Which is best suited for what? Let's find out by using Kerbal Space Program!

🠴Join me to stay in the loop for more KSP stuff and general madness, Kerbal, space or otherwise!🠶

#starship #bluemoon #nasa

0:00 Two Landers for NASA
0:33 Blue Moon isn't really new
1:29 Starship HLS details
2:24 Kerbal shenanigans
3:00 Blue Moon details
3:55 The problem with refueling
6:59 Which is best?
11:39 More competition is good for everyone

🠴Interested in the vehicles I make in Kerbal Space Program? Check out my KerbalX🠶

🠴Music🠶
"Invictus Outro" (c) The ShadowZone

Get my Music here:
▶ Spotify:
▶ Apple Music:
▶ Google Play:
▶ Deezer:
▶ Tidal:

Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0

🠴HELLO everybody and welcome to the ShadowZone🠶

Here you can find weird and funny videos about Kerbal Space Program and other video games. In general, if you like space, space ships, space stations or any space related video game, this channel is the right place to be!
I try to deliver you fascinating creations, tutorial and how-to videos about KSP and other video game content.
I also compose my own music from time to time.

Stay a while and join the shadowzone community by subscribing to my channel or following me on those social thingies up there.

[skywatcher]

Glad you came to the conclusion that both are roughly equal when weighing all areas (with different strengths and weaknesses). Unfortunately the comment section doesn't seem to be as unbiased.

[benjaminrickdonaldson]

That JWST is insane! Your builds are amazing, great recreations.

[GreenGj-]

The dynetics HLS/ALPACA is the one I prefer, although we had the best option already: Altair. Altair would have not been re-usable, but the decent stage could be used as a lunar outpost for future missions

[gptiede]

One disadvantage for Blue Origin's lander that was only hinted at: Not only is the rocket engine right next to the crew compartment making it noisy, but upon liftoff the engine and crew compartment seem to be less than 1 meter above the surface. What is the probability of debris puncturing the crew compartment upon liftoff? SpaceX just gave us a demonstration of the "debris tornado" caused by rocket engines above a rocky/sandy surface, and while Starship's total thrust is massive compared to a moon lander's, Starship's pressurized crew compartment is over 100 m from the engines, not less than 1 m.

[gaius_enceladus]

Ok, I love what SpaceX is doing but yeah, this Blue Moon lander does look GREAT!
Kudos to them for coming up with a great design!
It has a hint of the "Apollo" look to it - a bit like a much smoother and cleaner-looking Apollo lander!
They *do* need to work faster though but if they can get this lander built then best wishes to them!

[goetzvonb]

2:51 never seen such a smooth spaceship entrance - at least the right kerbal hit on first try.

[mikekopack]

One could also argue that assuming Water Ice is found on the moon, having an LH/LO based system would tip the balance in favor of B.O. when it comes to Propulsion - can mine fuel right there on the moon. Methane is a lot harder to make on the moon (but is quite doable on Mars, which is what it was intended for originally).

[kman]

for the propellant comparison, imho, blue moon also has a good thing going for it, in that you can get hydrogen on the moon. Methane is a lot harder to come by. They are both incredibly capable landers and I am very excited to see them both

[dr_yui_ikari]

6:22
While very similar, that diagram is actually from American Rockwell in 1972 about a Reusable Space Tug And Lander

[briancox]

H2 will never be truly storable. Even if you keep the stuff at temperature, it still leaks through valves, tank walls, everything. Plus it's hard to pump on the ground, let alone in zero g. Maybe some day the specific impulse of an NTR transfer stage will mean it makes sense, but for now, my vote is for starship.

[verdigo]

I think this was a very well thought out review of the two landers. Before Blue Origin revised their lander I was in favor of the Space-X design. (Actually my favorite was the Dynetics Alpaca design, but I knew NASA wasn't going to go for anything less than a "fully reusable" design.) Now I think the Blue Origin and Space-X designs are evenly matched. If Blue Origin can refine their design a little more I think it will win out easily. The main issue I see with the Blue Moon design right now is the engine placement, it's too close to the ground and crew. The issue I've always had with the Space-X design is that it's too tall verses its base, any uneven terrain with and incline and it could tip over.

[mrman]

the more i look at these proposals, the more i become in favour of single-use Apollo LM style craft! having the redundancy of an entirely separate stage (and the option to use the landing stage as a crumple zone and/or debris shield) makes sense when k̶e̶r̶b̶a̶l̶s̶ humans are involved.

[mburnzy]

I wonder if the top of the Starship could be detached from the drive section? While the descent(the top)stage lands, the drive section refuels. Multiple Starships in Lunar orbit might make such a scenario work because Artemis is looking very shaky.

[MinerBat]

2:56 well at least one of them got in :)

[arieldario]

IMHO Dynetics had the more cheaper, safe, and fast proposal for 2025, with technology and concepts already proven, and even better: would only required 2 Vulcans, or 1 SLS launch, with the flexibility to adapt and be able to even docking with the Moonship...

[emmata]

Also Starship may be a first base on the moon.
So there is also 2 different tasks for the 2 landers

[danclemmensen]

The $4B for Starship HLS included two crewed lunar landings. The $4B for National Team's lander includes only one crewed lunar landing.

[SpaceT]

The fact that starship is bigger than gateway 💀

[bradwooldidge]

Blue Origin **hasn’t even made it to orbit yet!**

[hurgle]

I wish Sierra Nevada corp made it further their design seemed pretty revolutionary and useful