3 ms·

Being able to watch a live video feed of the launch is pretty amazing. Previously, TV coverage (if it existed at all) was terrible. This makes me wonder what th

by ender7 15y ago

Being able to watch a live video feed of the launch is pretty amazing. Previously, TV coverage (if it existed at all) was terrible. This makes me wonder what the fate of NASA would have been if the past few generations had grown up with access to this kind of coverage. I'd like to think that NASA would have had a lot more support than they currently do.

owenmarshall 15y ago
Nearly 10% of the earth watched the lunar landing. But IMO the problem is that the "space race" was initiated & presented -- well, as a race! The goal was to beat the Russians, and once we did, interest waned. The most depressing realization comes from comparing our actions between the Apollo days & now. As a response to Sputnik, this country managed to go from an insignificant investment in space to putting a man on the moon, and we did it in just over a decade. Today? We don't seem to pay attention to these challenges.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  You can still present the space race as a race. Landing on the Moon is the first lap. If a goal for the second lap existed - like a permanent moonbase or something like it, it could have continued. As marvelous as the shuttles are, they are just an expensive way to go knee deep in space. LEO is boring because we already went much further. Let's set foot on the Moon once again, and launch from there (using local materials is a good excuse) to Mars and the outer planets. Imagine how big a telescope could be with the lower gravity and how crisp its image with no atmosphere to disturb it or absorb parts of the spectrum. Or a radio telescope shielded (by the Moon) from Earth's radio emissions. And, if something broke, someone would dress up and drive there to take a look instead of taking a year of planning and a billion-dollar mission to, maybe, fix it.

3 ms·

Being able to watch a live video feed of the launch is pretty amazing. Previously, TV coverage (if it existed at all) was terrible. This makes me wonder what th

by ender7 15y ago

owenmarshall 15y ago
Nearly 10% of the earth watched the lunar landing. But IMO the problem is that the "space race" was initiated & presented -- well, as a race! The goal was to beat the Russians, and once we did, interest waned. The most depressing realization comes from comparing our actions between the Apollo days & now. As a response to Sputnik, this country managed to go from an insignificant investment in space to putting a man on the moon, and we did it in just over a decade. Today? We don't seem to pay attention to these challenges.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  You can still present the space race as a race. Landing on the Moon is the first lap. If a goal for the second lap existed - like a permanent moonbase or something like it, it could have continued. As marvelous as the shuttles are, they are just an expensive way to go knee deep in space. LEO is boring because we already went much further. Let's set foot on the Moon once again, and launch from there (using local materials is a good excuse) to Mars and the outer planets. Imagine how big a telescope could be with the lower gravity and how crisp its image with no atmosphere to disturb it or absorb parts of the spectrum. Or a radio telescope shielded (by the Moon) from Earth's radio emissions. And, if something broke, someone would dress up and drive there to take a look instead of taking a year of planning and a billion-dollar mission to, maybe, fix it.