3 ms·
Well, whether you want to call it 8/9 years ('61-'69) or 14 ('55-'69), I don't think NASA looks too shabby landing men on the moon in that time frame without th
by HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
Well, whether you want to call it 8/9 years ('61-'69) or 14 ('55-'69), I don't think NASA looks too shabby landing men on the moon in that time frame without the decades of experience we have to draw on today, and with 1950's/60's technology, and so far no-one else has done it.
- ben_w 3y agoThe Apollo missions were certainly an achievement worthy of getting memorialised. I also think that, given the size of the Apollo landers, if SpaceX had actually wanted to they could've redone those missions years ago with a Falcon Heavy and a variant of the Crew Dragon design.
- electriclove 3y agoThe NASA of that time has been long gone for decades
- panick21_ 3y agoNobody said it was 'shabby'.
- chrisco255 3y agoYeah they did less than 20 launches, had 6 successful missions, and then had to kill the program because the costs were too high at a $500B equivalent annual budget. Apollo 1 also burnt up and killed 3 astronauts on the ground. Modern day NASA could not redo the Saturn V missions again. They lost the talent that achieved those missions a long time ago.