2 ms·

Eg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_forming https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_forming of upper and lower parts of the fuel and oxidizer tanks w

by ein0p 3y ago

Eg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_forming https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_forming of upper and lower parts of the fuel and oxidizer tanks with extremely tight restrictions on the weight of the part, and its structural integrity. This is but one example - there’s a great book on this, “Saturn-V, Owner’s workshop manual”. Your mind will be blown literally on every page. Buy it and read it just to see how incredible the engineering was, and how unrealistic it is to reproduce today, when NASA can’t even get humans to LEO on its own.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
We’re building lighter and stronger pressure vessels—more reliably, at larger scale and, inflation adjusted, probably cheaper—today than those tanks. We’re entering a halcyon of American space flight, with multiple teams doing what others cannot and Apollo-era engineers could only dream of. It’s mind-boggling to see the disconnect between a lunar landing alongside a caricature of American industrial decline.
- ein0p 3y ago
  Until we successfully land people on the Moon again we by definition haven’t surpassed the Apollo program. And don’t latch onto just this one example. Read the book. There are a thousand more things like that there.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Until we successfully land people on the Moon again we by definition haven’t surpassed the Apollo program That’s an application, not a capability. It would be like arguing iPhones never surpassed ENIAC because mine hasn’t simulated a thermonuclear detonation. > Read the book. There are a thousand more things like that there. I asked you to name one. Explosive forming is something (a) we can still do but (b) that nobody does because we have better materials and processes. The engineering of the Apollo era was remarkable. But the problem with promulgating this myth of lost capability is it stunts our ability to get things done today.
  - capitainenemo 3y ago
    The reason NASA's current plan is taking a bit longer is it is considerably more ambitious than the Apollo program. If they were only trying to replicate Apollo it would be far easier to do. Smarter Every Day had a rather interesting video on his concerns with the program. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU and they were more about a program design that requires over 15 fueling launches for every trip to the moon, and concerns about management and transparency. I don't think anyone is claiming this issues are lost technology though.
    - ein0p 3y ago
      The proof is in the pudding. The pudding is that NASA of 2024 has no human space flight capability at all.
      - marssaxman 3y ago
        NASA of 2024 does not need human space flight capability, because that has been successfully commercialized.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > proof is in the pudding. The pudding is that NASA of 2024 has no human space flight capability Stupidity and ignorance sometimes tread into troll territory. Nobody has gone back to the Moon since America. That’s not because of a simultaneous global coma. It’s because nobody bothered. If your understanding of aeronautics and mechanics is so base as to propose that we, America, cannot lap what we did in the 60s today, there might be better reading material available than anecdotes [1]. If your complaint is literally a private v public one, that’s beyond me and my cat. [1] https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Aerospace_Engineering/Fundamentals_of_Aerospace_Engineering_(Arnedo) https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Aerospace_Engineering...

by ein0p 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

We’re building lighter and stronger pressure vessels—more reliably, at larger scale and, inflation adjusted, probably cheaper—today than those tanks. We’re entering a halcyon of American space flight, with multiple teams doing what others cannot and Apollo-era engineers could only dream of. It’s mind-boggling to see the disconnect between a lunar landing alongside a caricature of American industrial decline.

ein0p 3y ago
Until we successfully land people on the Moon again we by definition haven’t surpassed the Apollo program. And don’t latch onto just this one example. Read the book. There are a thousand more things like that there.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Until we successfully land people on the Moon again we by definition haven’t surpassed the Apollo program That’s an application, not a capability. It would be like arguing iPhones never surpassed ENIAC because mine hasn’t simulated a thermonuclear detonation. > Read the book. There are a thousand more things like that there. I asked you to name one. Explosive forming is something (a) we can still do but (b) that nobody does because we have better materials and processes. The engineering of the Apollo era was remarkable. But the problem with promulgating this myth of lost capability is it stunts our ability to get things done today.
- capitainenemo 3y ago
  The reason NASA's current plan is taking a bit longer is it is considerably more ambitious than the Apollo program. If they were only trying to replicate Apollo it would be far easier to do. Smarter Every Day had a rather interesting video on his concerns with the program. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU and they were more about a program design that requires over 15 fueling launches for every trip to the moon, and concerns about management and transparency. I don't think anyone is claiming this issues are lost technology though.
  - ein0p 3y ago
    The proof is in the pudding. The pudding is that NASA of 2024 has no human space flight capability at all.
    - marssaxman 3y ago
      NASA of 2024 does not need human space flight capability, because that has been successfully commercialized.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > proof is in the pudding. The pudding is that NASA of 2024 has no human space flight capability Stupidity and ignorance sometimes tread into troll territory. Nobody has gone back to the Moon since America. That’s not because of a simultaneous global coma. It’s because nobody bothered. If your understanding of aeronautics and mechanics is so base as to propose that we, America, cannot lap what we did in the 60s today, there might be better reading material available than anecdotes [1]. If your complaint is literally a private v public one, that’s beyond me and my cat. [1] https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Aerospace_Engineering/Fundamentals_of_Aerospace_Engineering_(Arnedo) https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Aerospace_Engineering...