6 ms·

For lack of a political will or the technical know how?

MPSimmons 5y ago
In order to make a vehicle like that, you need the tools to make it. That doesn't just include wrenches and hammers - it includes the tooling used to form the curve of the skin and the area you assemble the pieces into. Almost all of that is gone, disassembled or misplaced.
CamperBob2 5y ago
The popular wisdom is that we literally lost some of the technical specs and drawings. A lot of the R&D would have to be redone from scratch... not that it wouldn't make sense to do that anyway, 50+ years later.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- tjchear 5y ago
  Not exactly related, but this reminds me of this triple nuclear plant project that ran into trouble by the time they're on their third, because it took so long, people with the requisite knowledge was gone and the remaining people had no idea how to fill the gap.
- ebruchez 5y ago
  The CuriousMarc YouTube channel [1] features a current series where they work on some Saturn transmission equipment (Apollo Comms). They also also restored an AGC (Apollo Guidance Computer). Those were incredible designs for the time, but you wouldn't build (and probably couldn't even if you tried) these modules this way today. I'd say the loss is more one of history than actual utility. The only way would have been to keep the Saturn V going during the whole time, and upgrade its technology as time went. [1] https://www.youtube.com/c/CuriousMarc https://www.youtube.com/c/CuriousMarc
pacetherace 5y ago
1. Lost records 2. Many companies that help build those rockets have ceased to exists 3. Technology and tooling have changed substantially 4. Standards to deem a rocket flight worthy for human space flight have changed
- adastra22 5y ago
  > Lost records This is actually a myth FYI. No records were ever lost, and you can go see all the original blueprints and relevant memos and technical reports in the archives at Marshall or DC if you want. It's all there. Where the myth comes from, and the kernel of truth underlying it is that the Saturn V was a hand-crafted machine made by experts. NASA and their contractors did their damndest to record every aspect of its production, but undoubtably there is some things that slipped through the cracks and were never written down. Those were lost not because records were lost, but because the individual workers went on to other jobs, and have since retired. EDIT: Also the tooling has been dismantled and recycled. The blueprints for the tooling exist and it all could be recreated, how sure are we that the specified tolerances matched the actual article? Uncertainty over this would probably invalidate all the testing that had been done.
  - adolph 5y ago
    Reminds me of the Fogbank story: In a bizarre twist, the new production facility and reverse-engineered production process yielded a version of Fogbank that was of a higher purity than it had been in the past, according to the article. The problem, however, was that for Fogbank to work as intended in existing warhead designs, that previous level of impurity was actually essential. NNSA had to revise the process to ensure the final product was just as impure. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32867/fogbank-is-mysterious-material-used-in-nukes-thats-so-secret-nobody-can-say-what-it-is https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32867/fogbank-is-myste...
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    "undoubtably there is some things that slipped through the cracks and were never written down." I dont think they slip through the cracks as much as people today have different skils. It's like trying to get. Bunch of Node-JS developers to get a mainframe-based system from the 80s working.
CountSessine 5y ago
Technical know how, mostly. But in expected ways. Machining and engineering skills as they relate to manufacturing are different now. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ovD0aLdRUs0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ovD0aLdRUs0
edgyquant 5y ago
The phrase, “we couldn’t build one if we wanted to,” is misleading. We could build the exact vehicle but we could build one that looks similar and does the same thing.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  We could not get it working in 5 years, maybe in 10. At that point you are not building, you are reverse engineering and re-engineering
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    With money and political will they absolutely could build one in 5 years. I'm not sure why people are stuck on this "we just can't accomplish what they did in the good ol' days"
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      Because they look at how uk or california take 20 years to build a railway or any other infrastructure project and draw conclusions

In order to make a vehicle like that, you need the tools to make it. That doesn't just include wrenches and hammers - it includes the tooling used to form the curve of the skin and the area you assemble the pieces into. Almost all of that is gone, disassembled or misplaced.

CamperBob2 5y ago

The popular wisdom is that we literally lost some of the technical specs and drawings. A lot of the R&D would have to be redone from scratch... not that it wouldn't make sense to do that anyway, 50+ years later.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tjchear 5y ago
Not exactly related, but this reminds me of this triple nuclear plant project that ran into trouble by the time they're on their third, because it took so long, people with the requisite knowledge was gone and the remaining people had no idea how to fill the gap.
ebruchez 5y ago
The CuriousMarc YouTube channel [1] features a current series where they work on some Saturn transmission equipment (Apollo Comms). They also also restored an AGC (Apollo Guidance Computer). Those were incredible designs for the time, but you wouldn't build (and probably couldn't even if you tried) these modules this way today. I'd say the loss is more one of history than actual utility. The only way would have been to keep the Saturn V going during the whole time, and upgrade its technology as time went. [1] https://www.youtube.com/c/CuriousMarc https://www.youtube.com/c/CuriousMarc

pacetherace 5y ago

1. Lost records 2. Many companies that help build those rockets have ceased to exists 3. Technology and tooling have changed substantially 4. Standards to deem a rocket flight worthy for human space flight have changed

adastra22 5y ago
> Lost records This is actually a myth FYI. No records were ever lost, and you can go see all the original blueprints and relevant memos and technical reports in the archives at Marshall or DC if you want. It's all there. Where the myth comes from, and the kernel of truth underlying it is that the Saturn V was a hand-crafted machine made by experts. NASA and their contractors did their damndest to record every aspect of its production, but undoubtably there is some things that slipped through the cracks and were never written down. Those were lost not because records were lost, but because the individual workers went on to other jobs, and have since retired. EDIT: Also the tooling has been dismantled and recycled. The blueprints for the tooling exist and it all could be recreated, how sure are we that the specified tolerances matched the actual article? Uncertainty over this would probably invalidate all the testing that had been done.
- adolph 5y ago
  Reminds me of the Fogbank story: In a bizarre twist, the new production facility and reverse-engineered production process yielded a version of Fogbank that was of a higher purity than it had been in the past, according to the article. The problem, however, was that for Fogbank to work as intended in existing warhead designs, that previous level of impurity was actually essential. NNSA had to revise the process to ensure the final product was just as impure. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32867/fogbank-is-mysterious-material-used-in-nukes-thats-so-secret-nobody-can-say-what-it-is https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32867/fogbank-is-myste...
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "undoubtably there is some things that slipped through the cracks and were never written down." I dont think they slip through the cracks as much as people today have different skils. It's like trying to get. Bunch of Node-JS developers to get a mainframe-based system from the 80s working.

CountSessine 5y ago

Technical know how, mostly. But in expected ways. Machining and engineering skills as they relate to manufacturing are different now. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ovD0aLdRUs0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ovD0aLdRUs0

edgyquant 5y ago

The phrase, “we couldn’t build one if we wanted to,” is misleading. We could build the exact vehicle but we could build one that looks similar and does the same thing.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
We could not get it working in 5 years, maybe in 10. At that point you are not building, you are reverse engineering and re-engineering
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  With money and political will they absolutely could build one in 5 years. I'm not sure why people are stuck on this "we just can't accomplish what they did in the good ol' days"
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    Because they look at how uk or california take 20 years to build a railway or any other infrastructure project and draw conclusions