3 ms·
Someone dying is devastating if you have a connection to that person. People die every second and if everyone was devastated by every death then the world would
by njarboe 7y ago
Someone dying is devastating if you have a connection to that person. People die every second and if everyone was devastated by every death then the world would grind to a halt. The first people going into deep space dying would be devastating to billions because billions of people will feel a personal connection to the person dying. This is a grave thing causing so much pain, but hopefully space travel can become a boring activity like landing a rocket has after 80 successful ones.
If people aren't going to space it not being conquered. Explored, but not lived in. About 270 men left on the Magellan expedition and 18 returned. Some people are willing to take that kind of risk for the right kind of project/adventure. I give my best wishes to those who wish to try.
- melling 7y agoYes, that was covered six years ago too. The Alaskan fishery example is a modern comparison. We retired the Space Shuttle because it was too dangerous. One accident every hundred flights. We live in a different world than we did hundreds of years ago. One accident will require a review board and many expensive changes. Flights will be grounded. The point that I really want you to get is this: “In 100 years, more humans will live off earth if we iterate with machines, etc now”
- NikolaeVarius 7y agoNASA/US Govt retired the space shuttle since it was extremely expensive to operate and there was funding competition for next generation vehicles/missions. Safety might have had a impact, but it was not the reason the shuttle was retired.
- melling 7y agoYes, the Shuttle was expensive and Project Constellation was going to replace it. We’d only be without orbital capabilities for a few years. https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/163092main_constellation_program_overview.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/163092main_constellation_program_ov... Unfortunately, that was canceled 10 years ago. That was superseded by Orion?
- NikolaeVarius 7y agoMore or less. Constellation was effectively broken up into smaller chunks (Artemis, Orion, Commercial Crew) versus being a unified program.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y agoWhy have one manned space program when you can have three for 3x cost.
- NikolaeVarius 7y agoBecause they have completely different mission parameters. Commercial crew is for ISS trips, so short duration trips, so limited life support or things like toilets required. Artemis needs to send a lander to the moon and come back. So 3-7 days with extended life support, and the ability to land on the moon with a vehicle and take off within the size confines of a single launch. Orion is for deep space exploration, no lander necessary, and extended life support. So yes, three completely different vehicles. The last time we tried to combine multiple roles into a unified chassis, the F35 happened.
- njarboe 7y agoCould be true, but if we wait too long I think people would just stop trying to do it. Rocket technology basically was stuck with 1960's technology and ideas until Elon Musk decided he wanted to build a human colony on Mars. Now we have rockets that are re-usable and soon a likely $100/kg to orbit lift capability. After crew dragon, SpaceX is decoupling from NASA and won't be beholden the their review their board. The NASA astronauts can continue to head up to the ISS on crew dragon while others can head off into the solar system in the Starship without them.