Astronauts Are Going Back to the Moon for the First Time in Half a Century
time.comCool!
> Artemis II will fly a relatively simple trajectory. After launch, it will make two long, high, looping orbits around the Earth, before pointing toward the moon, firing its engine and pulling itself away from the grip of earthly gravity. It will follow the safe profile Kraft long ago rejected, flying around the far side of the moon and coming home without a lunar orbit, to end a 10-day mission. But those 10 days will serve as a critical test for NASA’s giant Space Launch System (SLS) moon rocket and the Orion spacecraft, preparatory to lunar landings by Artemis III, IV, V, and beyond.
More like by the moon. No landing. Not even orbiting. Party like it's 1966.
If you feel the 'by' vs 'to' distinction is pedantic, consider the following thought experiment. A friend of yours invites you to go with them to another friend's house. A bit later, sitting in the passenger seat of their car, you see your friend's house come into view as you turn down their street. What's your reaction as you're sitting there and instead of stopping and parking, your friend continues past the house and starts heading back to your house?
By that interpretation, I believe you also mean Mariner 10 did not go to Mercury and New Horizons did not go to Pluto, correct? Those were flybys.
NASA uses to in that context: "The mission [by Mariner 10] was the last visit to Mercury by a robotic probe for more than 30 years." says https://science.nasa.gov/mission/mariner-10/ .
I see your point, but the key difference here is the back part.
Zond 5, Zond 6, and Artemis I were lunar flybys. They were not in lunar orbit but rather were on a free return back to Earth, where at least part of the craft were recovered on the Earth with usable mission data.
By your definition, they did not travel to the Moon, correct?
Yet they are on the list of missions to the Moon at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_the_Moon .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zond_5 has "In September 1968 Zond 5 travelled to the Moon in a circumlunar trajectory and became the first Moon mission to include animals and the first to return safely to Earth."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_I has "Orion then separated from the expended stage and fired its auxiliary thrusters to move safely away as it started its journey to the Moon."
For a non-Wikipedia example, "Zond 6 was an unmanned Soviet mission to the Moon that launched in November 1968." at https://physicsworld.com/a/zond-6-recording-translated-by-gr...
Or, "Between the time of Pioneer 4 and the beginning of Apollo (Apollo 8, launched on 21 December 1968), a total of 37 missions were launched to the Moon: 16 from the Soviet Union (Luna 2–14; Zond 3, 5, and 6) and 21 from the USA (Ranger 1–9; Surveyor 1–7; Lunar Orbiter 1–5; see Table 1)." at https://web.archive.org/web/20090625175521/http://www.nd.edu...
Now, look, I understand there is a difference between a circumlunar orbit, a lunar orbit, and a lunar landing. But "to the Moon" demonstrably includes all three of them.
As for your thought experiment ...
I went to the Grand Canyon. That is, I drove to the visitor center on the South Rim, got out of the car, and looked out into canyon. It was very impressive. I did not actually go into the canyon but stayed a dozen or so feet from the edge.
I believe you want me to say I went by the Grand Canyon, but I didn't actually go to it, right? I think a lot of people would disagree with your assessment.
I also say I went to Devil's Tower. I didn't actually climb it. In fact, I don't think I got out of the car. Do I need to actually go onto the butte to say I've been there?
Most people do not go onto Mount Rushmore (more correctly referred to as "Six Grandfathers") but instead look at it from a nearby terrace. When they say they went to Mount Rushmore, do you correct them and say they only went by Mount Rushmore? Or perhaps you tell them they went to the Mount Rushmore National Memorial, but not to Mount Rushmore?
Yes, they may be more correct, in some technical sense, but not in the sense most people mean.