4 ms·

>It's largely a rehashing of very old arguments that basically views Apollo as somehow the height of technology. I think this kind of misses the point of the v

>It's largely a rehashing of very old arguments that basically views Apollo as somehow the height of technology. I think this kind of misses the point of the video, which was not about the technology of Apollo as much as it was the design principles that went into making the mission a success. Technology obviously is involved in that, but the argument for "do it like Apollo" is more a long form version of "keep it simple, stupid". A good example of this is when Destin brought up the Apollo 1 capsule fire[1] which changed the speed and safety considerations at NASA. He cautions that now, before a catastrophic accident, is the time to make sure the best possible plan is being followed, simplify things that can be simplified, and get people to the moon and back safely. Something as simple as the choice to not use hypergolic fuels means there will need to be extra equipment to reignite the engines and redundant mechanisms for such a system. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_1#Accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_1#Accident

nynx 3y ago
It’s a rehashing because it misses the point that we’re not going back to the moon just to say we can do it. We’re going back to stay, to mine, to live there. Just swapping to an updated version of the LEM gets us nowhere and we would learn very little.
- consumer451 3y ago
  I agree with much of the criticism of the video, but I was left with one major question. Why did we design a system where Orion does not have enough delta-v to achieve a circularized low lunar orbit? Is it because, for whatever reason, we didn't get the Exploration Upper Stage done?
  - mlindner 3y ago
    > Why did we design a system where Orion does not have enough delta-v to achieve a circularized low lunar orbit? Because Orion was not designed to go to the moon. It was designed, ostensibly, to go visit asteroids, or if you're being more cynical, it was designed to distribute tax dollars to as many districts as possible. > Is it because, for whatever reason, we didn't get the Exploration Upper Stage done? Reaching NRHO actually requires the Exploration Upper Stage, which is still happening.

nynx 3y ago

It’s a rehashing because it misses the point that we’re not going back to the moon just to say we can do it. We’re going back to stay, to mine, to live there. Just swapping to an updated version of the LEM gets us nowhere and we would learn very little.

consumer451 3y ago
I agree with much of the criticism of the video, but I was left with one major question. Why did we design a system where Orion does not have enough delta-v to achieve a circularized low lunar orbit? Is it because, for whatever reason, we didn't get the Exploration Upper Stage done?
- mlindner 3y ago
  > Why did we design a system where Orion does not have enough delta-v to achieve a circularized low lunar orbit? Because Orion was not designed to go to the moon. It was designed, ostensibly, to go visit asteroids, or if you're being more cynical, it was designed to distribute tax dollars to as many districts as possible. > Is it because, for whatever reason, we didn't get the Exploration Upper Stage done? Reaching NRHO actually requires the Exploration Upper Stage, which is still happening.