Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
#4606931 - 08/26/22 08:24 PM Back to the moon  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 10,113
KraziKanuK Offline
Veteran
KraziKanuK  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 10,113
Ottawa Canada
The president directed NASA to land American astronauts on the Moon by 2024, and the agency is working to accelerate humanity’s return to the lunar surface by all means necessary.

“We’ve been given an ambitious and exciting goal. History has proven when we’re given a task by the president, along with the resources and the tools, we can deliver,” said NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine. “We are committed to making this happen. We have the people to achieve it. Now, we just need bipartisan support and the resources to get this done.”

Bridenstine confirmed at the 35th Space Symposium on April 9, 2019, that the agency’s proposed human lunar landing system architecture remains the plan to return crew to the surface as quickly as possible. The human lunar lander will be a public-private partnership working directly with American companies to expedite the return of Astronauts to the Moon’s surface by 2024. The South Pole continues to be the target of our exploration.

In order to best accomplish our goals in the next five years, NASA is now going forward to the Moon in two phases.

“First, we are focused on speed to land the next man, and first woman, on the Moon by 2024. Second, we will establish sustainable missions by 2028. To do that, we need our powerful Space Launch System to put the mass of reusable systems into deep space,” he said.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/sending-american-astronauts-to-moon-in-2024-nasa-accepts-challenge/#:~:text=The%20human%20lunar%20lander%20will%20be%20a%20public-private,going%20forward%20to%20the%20Moon%20in%20two%20phases.


There was only 16 squadrons of RAF fighters that used 100 octane during the BoB.
The Fw190A could not fly with the outer cannon removed.
There was no Fw190A-8s flying with the JGs in 1945.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4606932 - 08/26/22 08:48 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,072
semmern Offline
Veteran
semmern  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,072
Oslo, Norway
I am filled with childish enthusiasm by the thought of experiencing a Moon landing in my lifetime. The day it will happen, I will cancel everything, turn my phone off and call in sick for work if I have to. I am NOT going to miss that!


In all my years I've never seen the like. It has to be more than a hundred sea miles and he brings us up on his tail. That's seamanship, Mr. Pullings. My God, that's seamanship!
#4606937 - 08/26/22 09:32 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: semmern]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by semmern
I am filled with childish enthusiasm by the thought of experiencing a Moon landing in my lifetime. The day it will happen, I will cancel everything, turn my phone off and call in sick for work if I have to. I am NOT going to miss that!



I was 7 years old when Armstrong took his "one small step". As a young man I had hoped to be around when a human set foot on Mars, then as years passed I just hoped to be around to see humans return to the Moon. As decades passed I began to think I wouldn't live to see either. Now, maybe, just maybe I can see both. Largely thanks to (IMO) SpaceX.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4606946 - 08/26/22 10:01 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
LB4LB Offline
Still lurking about
LB4LB  Offline
Still lurking about
Hotshot

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
Detroit Burbs
One of my lifelong friends called me the other day. He was beaming with pride and just had to tell someone. His oldest daughter had graduated with a masters in engineering from Purdue University a few years back and landed a job with NASA. He told me that she just informed him that she was working on a moon landing project. She was doing something with the issue of moon dust creating problems for the outside and inside of the landing craft. He didn't have much details, but you could tell that having a child work on this new endeavor to the moon filled him with joy.

Last edited by LB4LB; 08/26/22 10:02 PM.
#4606950 - 08/26/22 11:00 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Friday Offline
Member
Friday  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Sevenoaks, England.
Yes, this news has excited me, I too am looking forward to experiencing a moon landing, I can't wait to see mankind pushing boundaries again, imagine seeing the first colony on Mars, out of all the news in the last few years, this is the first that's really exciting.


That Farrow bloke you executed today, are you sure he's dead?
Well I chopped his head off, that usually does the trick.
Yes, don't get clever with me Baldrick. I just thought you might have lopped off a leg or something by mistake.
No, the thing I chopped off had a nose.
#4606970 - 08/27/22 07:06 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by semmern
I am filled with childish enthusiasm by the thought of experiencing a Moon landing in my lifetime. The day it will happen, I will cancel everything, turn my phone off and call in sick for work if I have to. I am NOT going to miss that!



I was 7 years old when Armstrong took his "one small step". As a young man I had hoped to be around when a human set foot on Mars, then as years passed I just hoped to be around to see humans return to the Moon. As decades passed I began to think I wouldn't live to see either. Now, maybe, just maybe I can see both. Largely thanks to (IMO) SpaceX.


Elon Musk has nothing to do with this. This is NASA, not SpaceX. And Elon Musk isn't the one authorizing the funding. You know who is.

That said, Elon Musk is a BALLER!

#4606975 - 08/27/22 11:12 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Zamzow]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by Zamzow
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by semmern
I am filled with childish enthusiasm by the thought of experiencing a Moon landing in my lifetime. The day it will happen, I will cancel everything, turn my phone off and call in sick for work if I have to. I am NOT going to miss that!



I was 7 years old when Armstrong took his "one small step". As a young man I had hoped to be around when a human set foot on Mars, then as years passed I just hoped to be around to see humans return to the Moon. As decades passed I began to think I wouldn't live to see either. Now, maybe, just maybe I can see both. Largely thanks to (IMO) SpaceX.


Elon Musk has nothing to do with this. This is NASA, not SpaceX. And Elon Musk isn't the one authorizing the funding. You know who is.

That said, Elon Musk is a BALLER!


SpaceX is building the Moon lander.

And SLS, at $4 billion per launch, is unsustainable. Hope it is cancelled very soon and the entire mission can then be flown by Starship for much, MUCH less cost.

As for Mars (which was also part of my statement) SpaceX is the only one with anything close to a reasonable chance of sending humans there within the next 10-20 years.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4606981 - 08/27/22 12:45 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
It's pretty cool that this gets folks excited.I wish I were one.

Instead, I am convinced it will all be a massive boondoggle, with NASA unable to get out of their own way as the cost overruns four-fold and delays add years to the target. They'll probably still end up on the moon, but with a return far short of the investment.

I have no faith at all in NASA.


No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4606988 - 08/27/22 02:06 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: DBond]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by DBond
It's pretty cool that this gets folks excited.I wish I were one.

Instead, I am convinced it will all be a massive boondoggle, with NASA unable to get out of their own way as the cost overruns four-fold and delays add years to the target. They'll probably still end up on the moon, but with a return far short of the investment.

I have no faith at all in NASA.



+1

NASA spends 72 cents of every SLS dollar on overhead costs

NASA does not deny the “over $2 billion” cost of a single SLS launch

Quote
Adding all of this up, the true cost of a Space Launch System mission with Orion on top in the 2020s, including the rocket's development but excluding ground systems and Orion development costs, appears to be in the ballpark of $5 billion per flight.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607094 - 08/29/22 05:05 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 15,786
Haggart Offline
I Fought Diablo
Haggart  Offline
I Fought Diablo
Veteran

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 15,786
The Lone Star State
Why we going back to the moon - did someone find massive quantities of Lithium for making electric car batteries and we don't want the Chinese to get it first ?


"everything lives by a law, a central balance sustains all"
#4607096 - 08/29/22 06:22 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: semmern]  
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 9,703
Blade_RJ Offline
Simhq Weather man, dropping rain in your parade
Blade_RJ  Offline
Simhq Weather man, dropping rain in your parade
Hotshot

Joined: May 2005
Posts: 9,703
brasil
Originally Posted by semmern
I am filled with childish enthusiasm by the thought of experiencing a Moon landing in my lifetime. The day it will happen, I will cancel everything, turn my phone off and call in sick for work if I have to. I am NOT going to miss that!


are you insane ? did you not see the documentary ? there are evil nanobots on the moon

#4607100 - 08/29/22 09:52 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,082
McGonigle Offline
Motorius Emeritus
McGonigle  Offline
Motorius Emeritus
Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,082
Copenhagen, Denmark
I'm pretty excited too. The biggest baddest rocket ever. That is an epic sight and I hope it will be a 100% successful flight. The entire future of NASA might well depend on it. If they fail chances are, the agency and thereby the control of travel to the Moon will fall to private corporations such as SpaceX, and foreign powers such as China, India and perhaps Japan. The loss of US prestige would be devastating.

I can't escape the feeling that one of the biggest motivating factors for it happening now is that China is flexing its muscles and expanding its ambitions towards space. In effect I think we are seeing a repeat of the race to the Moon from the sixties only with China taking the role of the Defunct Soviet Union. Can't risk letting the Chinese establish an undisputed presence on the Moon.

There are strong indications that water is present on the Moon and with some technical wizardry, this water can be converted to fuel thus enabling travel to Mars and beyond. My personal opinion is that especially in these dreary times, humanity desperately needs a positive and shared vision of the future, a catalyst for innovation, engineering and science. I hope a renewed focus on space will become such a project.

Artemis is however also a job creating scheme. Based on the remnants of the Cancelled Constellation project and utilizing principles dating back to the Apollo Era as well as equipment from the Shuttle programme, - the engines used are actually old, flown Shuttle engines, the SRB boosters enlarged Shuttle boosters (I hope they fixed the o-rings) - it is my opinion that the programme is technologically obsolete. Especially viewed in comparison to SpaceX, Artemis seems like old technology and I fear it might turn out to be more a quick fix to achieve the objective in the shortest time possible, not so much a hack but more a botch.

The launch complex apparently will only be used for 3 missions. From Artemis 4 and onwards, a new one will be needed, and that one is far from completed. It is rather in its infant stages of construction.

And Artemis is already over budget and over time.

Nevertheless, I'll be watching with bated breath and the proper amount of go-fever. Godspeed Artemis!

Last edited by McGonigle; 08/29/22 09:53 AM.

Jens C. Lindblad


Sent from my Desktop
#4607102 - 08/29/22 10:01 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: McGonigle]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by McGonigle
..... control of travel to the Moon will fall to private corporations such as SpaceX.....


That is a feature, not a bug.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607104 - 08/29/22 10:29 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by McGonigle
..... control of travel to the Moon will fall to private corporations such as SpaceX.....


That is a feature, not a bug.



Agreed. I work (indirectly) for a government agency and I see the daily incompetence first hand.

Last edited by PanzerMeyer; 08/29/22 10:29 AM.

“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607121 - 08/29/22 12:33 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 19,381
Ajay Offline
newbie
Ajay  Offline
newbie
Veteran

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 19,381
Brisbane OZ
Ready and waiting for launch here!


My il2 page
Seelowe Campaign
Cliffs of Dover page
CloD
My Models
Tanks/Planes/Ships


#4607127 - 08/29/22 01:36 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,622
Wigean Online content
Member
Wigean  Online Content
Member

Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,622
Oslo
Scrubbed.
Next window friday Sep. 2.
Better safe than sorry. smile


“We are still in the age of legends. You and I will not enter the promised land. We who have begun always perish before Jericho falls.”
#4607128 - 08/29/22 01:43 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/29/nas...unch-due-to-issues-during-countdown.html


"NASA was unable to resolve a temperature problem identified with one of the four liquid-fueled engines."


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607132 - 08/29/22 02:10 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
The official line from NASA is that the launch has been put on hold due to “technical issues.”

Is anyone surprised?

This is the perfect start if you are fashioning a boondoggle. Well done, NASA, you've met my expectations, now, exceed them..


No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4607138 - 08/29/22 03:33 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: PanzerMeyer]  
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 9,703
Blade_RJ Offline
Simhq Weather man, dropping rain in your parade
Blade_RJ  Offline
Simhq Weather man, dropping rain in your parade
Hotshot

Joined: May 2005
Posts: 9,703
brasil
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by McGonigle
..... control of travel to the Moon will fall to private corporations such as SpaceX.....


That is a feature, not a bug.



Agreed. I work (indirectly) for a government agency and I see the daily incompetence first hand.


wow panzermeyer. i never expected you of all people to be so self aware and self deprecating. you grew in my concept buddy, you are so brave, this is but the first step, march on.

#4607141 - 08/29/22 04:07 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
LB4LB Offline
Still lurking about
LB4LB  Offline
Still lurking about
Hotshot

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
Detroit Burbs
NASA BOONDOGGLE Shows How US Lost Its Way After Apollo Program


#4607142 - 08/29/22 04:18 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Blade_RJ]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by Blade_RJ


wow panzermeyer. i never expected you of all people to be so self aware and self deprecating. you grew in my concept buddy, you are so brave, this is but the first step, march on.


I realize English is not your native language so please elaborate on your point because right now I don't see any.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607145 - 08/29/22 04:47 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Different philosophies:

-“Our spacecraft is the most complex machine in the world!” - NASA


-“The best part is no part.” - SpaceX


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607149 - 08/29/22 06:45 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: DBond]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
Originally Posted by DBond
I am convinced it will all be a massive boondoggle, with NASA unable to get out of their own way as the cost overruns four-fold and delays add years to the target. They'll probably still end up on the moon, but with a return far short of the investment.

I have no faith at all in NASA.



I should pay more attention, but then again I had it right, just that I'm already way behind on the predictions as I read that this project is already years behind schedule and billions over budget.

The piece I read said that the projected cost for this moondoggle is 93 billion. Dollars.

And you can bet that if this is the published figure, the actual cost to American taxpayers is way more than that. And it's far from done running over.

For her part Kamala Harris, who somehow has a part to play in this by being in charge of the space council on space said

"We come together in this space to see how much space there is, and how much space there will be. Space is our history and our future. Our today and yesterday. But most importantly, space is our future, today. Space is big, But together, we can make space a little smaller. We remain committed in our resolve about space, because space is the place, together"


No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4607154 - 08/29/22 07:45 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
LB4LB Offline
Still lurking about
LB4LB  Offline
Still lurking about
Hotshot

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
Detroit Burbs
Just compare the timeline of progress of the Apollo missions. Far less advanced technologies and unexpected accidents all the while we were going thru one of the most turbulent times in our country's history.

#4607163 - 08/29/22 09:01 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: LB4LB]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida
Originally Posted by LB4LB
Just compare the timeline of progress of the Apollo missions. Far less advanced technologies and unexpected accidents all the while we were going thru one of the most turbulent times in our country's history.


It's a reflection of the time we are in. More averse to risk, and far less averse to spending money (that we don't have).

#4607165 - 08/29/22 09:07 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Blade_RJ]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida
Originally Posted by Blade_RJ
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by McGonigle
..... control of travel to the Moon will fall to private corporations such as SpaceX.....


That is a feature, not a bug.



Agreed. I work (indirectly) for a government agency and I see the daily incompetence first hand.


wow panzermeyer. i never expected you of all people to be so self aware and self deprecating. you grew in my concept buddy, you are so brave, this is but the first step, march on.


Ummm... what are you getting at? That post seems to be a non-sequiter.

#4607168 - 08/29/22 09:51 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by McGonigle
..... control of travel to the Moon will fall to private corporations such as SpaceX.....


That is a feature, not a bug.


Ayup! NASA will have a part to play for some time to come, even if Artemis doesn't pan out. The knowledge/experience and facilities are too important to just throw away.

I will watch the launch(es) with interest, and hope things go well, as the money is already spent/committed. I think SpaceX has a better approach and ultimately will be the workhorse needed to make us multi-planetary. Plus, as a general principle, I prefer to see private enterprise step up and have government activity curtailed to things that only government can accomplish.

In fairness to NASA, they could not have been certain that SpaceX would have been as successful as it is back when Artemis was conceived... but somewhere along the line they probably could have switched horses, except for the political realities of various parts of the project spending money in numerous different congressional districts. So it goes.

Hopefully they get some bang for the ridiculous amount of bucks that has been poured into Artemis, and hopefully some sort of long term value is derived from spending more time on the moon. Personally, I'm far more interested in seeing a presence established on Mars. (It would be nice if Buzz Aldrin lived to see us set foot on Mars.)

#4607173 - 08/29/22 10:58 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: CyBerkut]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by CyBerkut
(It would be nice if Buzz Aldrin lived to see us set foot on Mars.)


Yep.

But I'm also pulling for Charlie Duke because he's the only South Carolina Moonwalker and I have his autograph (actually a nice letter), and he's the youngest Moonwalker so he stands a good chance of being the last Apollo Moonwalker to leave us.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607176 - 08/30/22 12:12 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 6,530
NoFlyBoy Offline
Hotshot
NoFlyBoy  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 6,530
Why they didn't try sooner in last 53 years?

When we had the space shuttle, could had been very easy to land on the moon with it.

#4607177 - 08/30/22 01:29 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Whaa ?


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4607187 - 08/30/22 04:14 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: NoFlyBoy]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 10,113
KraziKanuK Offline
Veteran
KraziKanuK  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 10,113
Ottawa Canada
Originally Posted by NoFlyBoy
Why they didn't try sooner in last 53 years?

When we had the space shuttle, could had been very easy to land on the moon with it.


NFB, do you think before you post?

Where is the big long runway? No air on the moon either.


There was only 16 squadrons of RAF fighters that used 100 octane during the BoB.
The Fw190A could not fly with the outer cannon removed.
There was no Fw190A-8s flying with the JGs in 1945.
#4607188 - 08/30/22 04:59 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
I wasn't sure this was worthy of its own thread, and it seemed to fit in with this general topic - video of all of the Apollo Moon landings from the Lunar Landers. There was a lot of actual piloting going on with those landings, and I am not sure people are really aware of that anymore.



Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4607189 - 08/30/22 05:19 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: NoFlyBoy]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Mr_Blastman Offline
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Atlanta, GA
Originally Posted by NoFlyBoy
Why they didn't try sooner in last 53 years?

When we had the space shuttle, could had been very easy to land on the moon with it.



[Linked Image]

#4607197 - 08/30/22 10:26 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: oldgrognard]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by oldgrognard
Whaa ?



LOL In this case I really hope NFB is just trolling and is not actually serious.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607199 - 08/30/22 10:29 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,829
mikew Offline
Senior Member
mikew  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,829
UK
I kind of like NFB's posts, and he may have a point as this Newspaper headline from 1988 attests:
[Linked Image]

#4607200 - 08/30/22 10:31 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
I wonder what that girl in the upper right corner looks like now?


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607222 - 08/30/22 03:20 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Uhhmmm, that’s not a B-52.


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4607226 - 08/30/22 03:32 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Mr_Blastman Offline
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Atlanta, GA
I used to love reading the Weekly World News whenever we went over to my grandfather's house as a kid. He had stacks of them. We all knew they were a farce, but the satire was often grand.

#4607273 - 08/31/22 12:56 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: mikew]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
Originally Posted by mikew
I kind of like NFB's posts


That's interesting, and there's no accounting for taste, as this forum repeatedly proves.

For me, he's interesting because I've never seen anyone who knows less about everything. No matter the subject, he's never heard of it before. So much so that a few years ago I speculated in a post that NFB was actually cryogenically frozen in the 1930s and recently thawed out. As he awoke from his frozen slumber he found in front of him a PC with SimHQ and Wikipedia bookmarked. And since then we've all been taken along on his journey of discovery.


No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4607274 - 08/31/22 12:59 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
LMAO. That's a great analogy DBond.

On a related note, I really do find it fascinating how much this site has changed over the past 21 years. No doubt much of that change has to do with the changing ownership of the website but I think it's mostly due to the declining popularity of message boards in favor of other platforms like Reddit.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607276 - 08/31/22 01:17 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,829
mikew Offline
Senior Member
mikew  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,829
UK
Don't you own it now? SimHQ's IP address seems to emanate from Miami which is all the evidence I need. smile

I really don't know why I still visit here. It's certainly not for the sims. But I joined over 20 years ago, so probably a mixture of nostalgia and not enough work to do.

#4607277 - 08/31/22 01:20 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: PanzerMeyer]  
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,970
wormfood Offline
Member
wormfood  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,970
Texas
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer

On a related note, I really do find it fascinating how much this site has changed over the past 21 years. No doubt much of that change has to do with the changing ownership of the website but I think it's mostly due to the declining popularity of message boards in favor of other platforms like Reddit.


Reddit is so two years ago old man, it's all about Discord these days.

#4607279 - 08/31/22 01:26 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: wormfood]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by wormfood


Reddit is so two years ago old man, it's all about Discord these days.


Well, there you go! Just goes to show how one trend replaces another trend eventually.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607280 - 08/31/22 01:26 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
SimHQ will come back in to vogue like white wall tires....

Bad example?


No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4607281 - 08/31/22 01:28 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: DBond]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by DBond
SimHQ will come back in to vogue like white wall tires....

Bad example?



Yeah. I'd say a better comparison is it will come back like vinyl records!


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607282 - 08/31/22 01:30 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
Makin' it great like 78s!


No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4607284 - 08/31/22 01:58 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: DBond]  
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
LB4LB Offline
Still lurking about
LB4LB  Offline
Still lurking about
Hotshot

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
Detroit Burbs
Originally Posted by DBond
SimHQ will come back in to vogue like white wall tires....

Bad example?


There are people trying to make them come back. All they need is some rapper to have a car with them on (insert whatever social media platform is in at the time), and they'll be back.


#4607309 - 08/31/22 10:50 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: DBond]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by DBond
SimHQ will come back in to vogue like white wall tires....

Bad example?



I'm hoping for a Red Line tire resurgence myself wink


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607310 - 08/31/22 10:52 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Stick shifts


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4607312 - 08/31/22 11:36 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
LB4LB Offline
Still lurking about
LB4LB  Offline
Still lurking about
Hotshot

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,420
Detroit Burbs
Drove a stick shift from 16 years old until I blew my left knee out at age 40 playing drop in hockey. After the surgery, working a clutch, even a smooth one on a Toyota, was too much for me. To this day whenever I get in the driver seat my left foot instinctively looks for the clutch and my right hand looks for the gear knob.

Last edited by LB4LB; 08/31/22 11:39 PM.
#4607323 - 09/01/22 01:52 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: LB4LB]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 10,113
KraziKanuK Offline
Veteran
KraziKanuK  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 10,113
Ottawa Canada
Originally Posted by LB4LB
Drove a stick shift from 16 years old until I blew my left knee out at age 40 playing drop in hockey. After the surgery, working a clutch, even a smooth one on a Toyota, was too much for me. To this day whenever I get in the driver seat my left foot instinctively looks for the clutch and my right hand looks for the gear knob.


Back in the day took the brothers Vette out for a run, with his permission. It was an auto. I almost wrecked it when I stepped on the brake and grabbed the lever to shift down. I was driving a standard trany vehicle at the time. I didn't tell him for many years.


There was only 16 squadrons of RAF fighters that used 100 octane during the BoB.
The Fw190A could not fly with the outer cannon removed.
There was no Fw190A-8s flying with the JGs in 1945.
#4607326 - 09/01/22 02:52 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
What's with all the hating on NASA in this thread? They've (as far as I'm aware) have had far, far more successes than failures over their history. True it almost always ended up costing more than projected, but to me that's kind of like how moving to another house is almost always more of a hassle than you expect - even if you've done it a lot of times and you get really generous about time estimation in advance.

And on the money - NASA's budget is spare pocket change compared to what America spends on everything else - there are a lot of WAY "bigger fish to fry" if you want to complain about government spending...

Anyone seen some of the latest photos where they used both James Webb and Hubble in tandem? Incredible!

#4607335 - 09/01/22 06:38 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida
I don't hate NASA, and I doubt anybody else posting in this thread does either.

I despise wasteful government spending / ridiculous cost overruns that were entirely predictable. The contract system and the politics behind it, is severely broken. It's one thing for government to do important things that private enterprise can not. Once it becomes apparent that a private enterprise can get the important task done more efficiently, it's time to switch horses and be better stewards of the taxpayer's money.

To its credit, NASA has made a major shift in partnering with private enterprise which has restored American lift capability to the I.S.S.. Nonetheless, the runaway costs on the Artemis program is a major black eye, and a waste of funds that could have been better utilized. NASA has been in this game for decades... they should be better at it by now, but they may be handcuffed by political considerations (ie. spreading the Congressional lard to the proper districts/ states).

As for taking issue with bigger budget items outside of NASA, I do that too. Bigger wastes do not preclude, nor excuse the smaller wastes. This thread however, is dealing with getting to the moon / Artemis / NASA. Let's not drive this into PWEC.

#4607336 - 09/01/22 06:53 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Mr_Blastman Offline
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Atlanta, GA
All the good people left NASA when they ended the shuttle program. The organization is an incompetent mess now and they need to do a top to bottom firing of management. Boeing is also a disaster. They are a company made half of contractors which doesn't help things, either.

#4607340 - 09/01/22 10:34 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Zamzow]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by Zamzow


And on the money - NASA's budget is spare pocket change compared to what America spends on everything else - there are a lot of WAY "bigger fish to fry" if you want to complain about government spending...

!



This is a valid point. NASA's budget is roughly about 1 percent of the total Federal budget.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607345 - 09/01/22 10:43 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,622
Wigean Online content
Member
Wigean  Online Content
Member

Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,622
Oslo


“We are still in the age of legends. You and I will not enter the promised land. We who have begun always perish before Jericho falls.”
#4607346 - 09/01/22 10:50 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,751
rwatson Offline
Hotshot
rwatson  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,751
New Concord, Ohio


Russ
Semper Fi
#4607349 - 09/01/22 11:02 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: PanzerMeyer]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer
Originally Posted by Zamzow


And on the money - NASA's budget is spare pocket change compared to what America spends on everything else - there are a lot of WAY "bigger fish to fry" if you want to complain about government spending...

!



This is a valid point. NASA's budget is roughly about 1 percent of the total Federal budget.


Irrelevant.

$25 billion is $25 billion. It should be spent responsibly if it is spent at all.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607381 - 09/01/22 02:02 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,829
mikew Offline
Senior Member
mikew  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,829
UK
It's pretty clear that SLS has survived by being mainly a 'jobs program', but out of that you've got an awesome rocket that has a fair chance of working as designed.
Maybe that's the best compromise that could be achieved in this particular society at this particular time.

When the ancient Egyptians built the pyramids, it was largely a 'jobs program' during the times of year that people weren't working the fields or fighting the neighbours.

Can you really compare SLS with a pyramid? I think so, as both endeavours are expensive for the society, produce an awesome result but give little direct benefit to the average citizen. Somehow, society as a whole is enriched by these achievements though.

Hmmn, I think I've been playing too many Civ type games...

#4607383 - 09/01/22 02:08 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: mikew]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by mikew


Can you really compare SLS with a pyramid? I think so, as both endeavours are expensive for the society, produce an awesome result but give little direct benefit to the average citizen. Somehow, society as a whole is enriched by these achievements though.

Hmmn, I think I've been playing too many Civ type games...


The Romans thought that the Egyptian pyramids were a massive waste of time and impractical. I tend to agree. biggrin


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607388 - 09/01/22 02:56 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Mr_Blastman Offline
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Atlanta, GA
I consider success inspirational. Continual failure to get a rocket off the ground when private enterprise competition sets new records is anything but inspirational. On the other hand, Elon has done a lot of good for space and I'm glad we have him and his ventures around.

#4607390 - 09/01/22 04:12 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Mr_Blastman]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by Mr_Blastman
I consider success inspirational. Continual failure to get a rocket off the ground when private enterprise competition sets new records is anything but inspirational. On the other hand, Elon has done a lot of good for space and I'm glad we have him and his ventures around.



+1 I have the highest admiration for Elon. I need to know his secret of how he can function with no sleeping. This guy obviously doesn't sleep. biggrin


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4607391 - 09/01/22 04:24 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Zamzow]  
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
DBond Offline
Strategerizer
DBond  Offline
Strategerizer
Veteran

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 13,199
NooJoyzee
Originally Posted by Zamzow
What's with all the hating on NASA in this thread?


Hating is the wrong word here. Criticism would have done.

I don't hate NASA, but I am very critical of this bloated, largely ineffective agency that hoovers up billions of dollars in taxpayer money with little to show for it, and even less benefit for Americans.

Everything NASA does would be better done in the private sector in my view.

This moondoggle was originally projected to cost 35 billion. That was the figure sold to the public. But it's already triple that number and no sign of slowing, and no one has been to the moon yet. What would have happened if instead the program had been pitched with a 100 billion dollar price tag? 150 billion?

And that money is just development. Each time they launch the SLS it is projected it will cost nearly 5 billion. They built a rocket that is not reusable, which is what you do when it's not your own skin in this game.




No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
#4607402 - 09/01/22 07:53 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: mikew]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by mikew
.... but out of that you've got an awesome rocket that has a fair chance of working as designed.



Any rocket, car, airplane, ship etc that costs an order of magnitude more to operate than available alternatives that can perform a given task as well or better is not "awesome".


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607425 - 09/01/22 11:32 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by mikew
.... but out of that you've got an awesome rocket that has a fair chance of working as designed.



Any rocket, car, airplane, ship etc that costs an order of magnitude more to operate than available alternatives that can perform a given task as well or better is not "awesome".


Available alternatives?!?

#4607426 - 09/02/22 12:47 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Zamzow]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Mr_Blastman Offline
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Atlanta, GA
Originally Posted by Zamzow
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by mikew
.... but out of that you've got an awesome rocket that has a fair chance of working as designed.



Any rocket, car, airplane, ship etc that costs an order of magnitude more to operate than available alternatives that can perform a given task as well or better is not "awesome".


Available alternatives?!?


Like, SpaceX, dude.

#4607522 - 09/03/22 05:58 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Mr_Blastman]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Originally Posted by Mr_Blastman
Originally Posted by Zamzow
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by mikew
.... but out of that you've got an awesome rocket that has a fair chance of working as designed.



Any rocket, car, airplane, ship etc that costs an order of magnitude more to operate than available alternatives that can perform a given task as well or better is not "awesome".


Available alternatives?!?


Like, SpaceX, dude.



But AVAILABLE? I wasn't aware SpaceX had an AVAILABLE alternative to the SLS and Orion capsule...

#4607528 - 09/03/22 09:35 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: Zamzow]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida
Originally Posted by Zamzow
Originally Posted by Mr_Blastman
Originally Posted by Zamzow
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by mikew
.... but out of that you've got an awesome rocket that has a fair chance of working as designed.



Any rocket, car, airplane, ship etc that costs an order of magnitude more to operate than available alternatives that can perform a given task as well or better is not "awesome".


Available alternatives?!?


Like, SpaceX, dude.



But AVAILABLE? I wasn't aware SpaceX had an AVAILABLE alternative to the SLS and Orion capsule...


The Crew Dragon capsule is probably sufficient for going to the moon. With reusable boosters, SpaceX could utilize multiple launches if needed, and still get it done way cheaper. The Falcon heavy is not man-rated (yet) as far as I know, but probably could have been if that was the goal. Even if not, launch the Crew Dragon on a Falcon 9 after pre-positioning whatever else is needed via Falcon Heavy or Falcon 9, dock up as needed and go.

#4607541 - 09/03/22 12:07 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
I’m driving to watch the launch today. Hopefully it will be a go.


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4607544 - 09/03/22 12:15 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: oldgrognard]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,325
RossUK Offline
RossUK  Offline

Member

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,325
Eastbourne, UK
Originally Posted by oldgrognard
I’m driving to watch the launch today. Hopefully it will be a go.


Fingers crossed it's a go. I'm a tad jealous.

Enjoy it.

#4607566 - 09/03/22 03:00 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,612
KRT_Bong Offline
It's KRT not Kurt
KRT_Bong  Offline
It's KRT not Kurt
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,612
Sarasota, Florida
It's not looking good ATM they are 2 hours behind because of a Hydrogen leak


Windows 10 Pro
Gigabyte 970A DS3P FX
AMD FX6300 Vishera 3.5 Ghz
ASUS STRIX GeForce GTX 970 Overclocked 4 GB DDR5
16Gb Patriot Viper 3 RAM DDR3 1866Mhz
Onikuma Gaming Headset (has annoying blue lights I don't use)
#4607567 - 09/03/22 03:12 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KRT_Bong]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Originally Posted by KRT_Bong
It's not looking good ATM they are 2 hours behind because of a Hydrogen leak



“Use the Shuttle engines, get the Shuttle constraints.” - Wayne Hale, NASA engineer and Shuttle program manager

The shuttle fought hydrogen leaks for it's entire history, hydrogen is just naturally hard to contain and it will find any way to escape it if there is any spot with the slightest chance of escape hydrogen will find it.

Now look at China, they are not copying SLS: https://spacenews.com/china-plans-reusable-long-march-2d/

Reusable / methane... sounds a lot like SpaceX Starship


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4607572 - 09/03/22 03:43 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Ok, wife and I are here to see it but it is scrubbed. Guess we’ll find a nice restaurant on the beach, have a couple drinks and lunch. No launch, but still a good day.


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4607589 - 09/03/22 06:59 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida

#4607613 - 09/03/22 10:20 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Online content
Administrator
oldgrognard  Online Content
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Here is where we were, ready for the launch. Very good location. Right on the border of the grounds. We could see the Big NASA buildings but they hid the actual rocket from our view. This is close enough that you can feel the launch and get amazed at the sound. And they say that Artemis will be more impressive than the shuttle launches.

[Linked Image]

And having lunch watching the cruise ships. Nice day and decent food so it was a good day even though the launch didn’t go.


[Linked Image]


Shame it was scrubbed. Looks like it is delayed more than a couple days. Could be a couple weeks. The wife and I have seen 6 or more shuttle launches. We will be back to see Artemis.




Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4607628 - 09/04/22 01:40 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 19,381
Ajay Offline
newbie
Ajay  Offline
newbie
Veteran

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 19,381
Brisbane OZ
Still worth the drive for a good feed feed and nice weather. Get us all some nice launch shots next time Grog.


My il2 page
Seelowe Campaign
Cliffs of Dover page
CloD
My Models
Tanks/Planes/Ships


#4607669 - 09/04/22 04:02 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Years after shuttle, NASA rediscovers the perils of liquid hydrogen


Quote
So why does NASA use liquid hydrogen as a fuel for its rockets, if it is so difficult to work with, and there are easier to handle alternatives such as methane or kerosene? One reason is that hydrogen is a very efficient fuel, meaning that it provides better "gas mileage" when used in rocket engines. However, the real answer is that Congress mandated that NASA continue to use space shuttle main engines as part of the SLS rocket program.

In 2010, when Congress wrote the authorization bill for NASA that led to creation of the Space Launch System, it directed the agency to "utilize existing contracts, investments, workforce, industrial base, and capabilities from the Space Shuttle and Orion and Ares 1 projects, including ... existing United States propulsion systems, including liquid fuel engines, external tank or tank related capability, and solid rocket motor engines."

During a news conference on Saturday, Ars asked NASA Administrator Bill Nelson whether it was the right decision for NASA to continue working with hydrogen after the agency's experience with the space shuttle. In 2010, Nelson was a US Senator from Florida, and ringleader of the space authorization bill alongside US Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, of Texas. "We deferred to the experts," Nelson said.

By this Nelson meant that the Senate worked alongside some officials at NASA, and within industry, to design the SLS rocket. These industry officials, who would continue to win lucrative contracts from NASA for their work on shuttle-related hardware, were only too happy to support the new rocket design.

Among the idea's opponents was Lori Garver, who served as NASA's deputy administrator at the time. She said the decision to use space shuttle components for the agency's next generation rocket seemed like a terrible idea, given the challenges of working with hydrogen demonstrated over the previous three decades.

"They took finicky, expensive programs that couldn't fly very often, stacked them together differently, and said now, all of a sudden, it's going to be cheap and easy," she told Ars in August. "Yeah, we've flown them before, but they've proven to be problematic and challenging. This is one of the things that boggled my mind. What about it was going to change? I attribute it to this sort of group think, the contractors and the self-licking ice cream cone."

Now, NASA faces the challenge of managing this finicky hardware through more inspections and tests after so many already. The rocket's core stage, manufactured by Boeing, was shipped from its factory in Louisiana more than two and a half years ago. It underwent nearly a year of testing in Mississippi before arriving at Kennedy Space Center in April 2021. Since then, NASA and its contractors have been assembling the complete rocket and testing it on the launch pad.

Effectively, Saturday's "launch" attempt was the sixth time NASA has tried to completely fuel the first and second stages of the rocket, and then get deep into the countdown. To date, it has not succeeded with any of these fueling tests, known as wet dress rehearsals. On Saturday, the core stage's massive liquid hydrogen tank, with a capacity of more than 500,000 gallons, was only 11 percent full when the scrub was called.

Perhaps the seventh time will be a charm.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4627547 - 05/27/23 12:50 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida

#4627563 - 05/27/23 06:25 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
A new report finds NASA has spent an obscene amount of money on SLS propulsion

Quote
An independent report published Thursday contained troubling findings about the money spent by the agency on propulsion for the Space Launch System rocket. Moreover, the report by NASA Inspector General Paul Martin warns that if these costs are not controlled, it could jeopardize plans to return to the Moon.

.....

The report found that efforts to refurbish RS-25 engines, manufacture new ones, and produce solid rocket boosters for the initial Artemis missions have resulted in about $6 billion in cost increases and more than six years in schedule delays compared to NASA's original projections.

To put this into perspective, Martin is talking about the cost increases, not the total cost of the engines and boosters. This means that overruns for the propulsion system of the SLS rocket alone are costing the space agency about as much as it will spend on developing two reusable lunar landers—SpaceX's Starship and Blue Origin's Blue Moon.

......

There are other head-scratching issues raised by the report. For example, the current cost of manufacturing a new RS-25 main engine—which will be used for the Artemis V mission and onward—is about $100 million. NASA and Aerojet are trying to achieve a 30 percent cost savings by the end of this decade, bringing the cost down to $70.5 million.

However, in projecting these savings, Martin notes that NASA neglected to include some costs: "When calculating the total cost of the new RS-25 engines, NASA and Aerojet are only including material, engineering support, and touch labor (hands-on labor effort), while project management and overhead costs are excluded." Who knows, maybe Aerojet's managers will work for free for a few years.

Compared to the private sector, even getting the cost of an RS-25 engine down to $70.5 million is a preposterously high price. Blue Origin manufactures engines of comparable power and size, the BE-4, for less than $20 million. And SpaceX is seeking to push the similarly powerful Raptor rocket engine costs even lower, to less than $1 million per engine.

Based on all of the new data in his latest report, Martin said his office has had to revise its estimate of the total cost of a Space System Launch, inclusive of ground systems and the Orion spacecraft. It is now $4.2 billion.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4627662 - 05/30/23 11:25 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
Meanwhile the entire cost of SpaceX Starship development is less than the cost of a single SLS mission.

SpaceX investment in Starship approaches $5 billion

Quote
He specifically noted that since a 2014 “record of decision” by the FAA, allowing SpaceX to develop launch facilities at Boca Chica (originally for the Falcon family of launch vehicles), “SpaceX has invested more than $3 billion into developing the Boca Chica launch facility and Starship/Super Heavy launch system.”

The statement did not break out the investment between the launch vehicle itself and infrastructure. SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk, in an April 29 online discussion on Twitter, the social media network he also owns, estimated that the company would spend about $2 billion on Starship this year.

“It’ll probably be a couple billion dollars this year, two billion dollars-ish, all in on Starship,” he said, adding that he did not expect to have to raise funding to finance that work. He also said in that conversation that he expected Starship to launch four to five more times this year and “would be surprised” if the company didn’t achieve orbit by the end of the year.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4627663 - 05/30/23 11:29 AM Re: Back to the moon [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,387
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Meanwhile the entire cost of SpaceX Starship development is less than the cost of a single SLS mission.



SpaceX doesn't have the benefit of a so-called "debt ceiling" that can just be raised higher and higher at will. wink


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4629965 - 06/27/23 06:30 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,620
Florida

SpaceX making more than 1,000 changes to next Starship rocket

Quote


STARSHIP V0.2? —
SpaceX making more than 1,000 changes to next Starship rocket
"Hot staging" and engine upgrade to debut on SpaceX's next Starship test flight.
STEPHEN CLARK - 6/26/2023, 6:27 PM

[Linked Image]
The upper stage for SpaceX's next Starship test fight, named Ship 25, undergoes testing earlier this month in Texas.

SpaceX will debut numerous upgrades on the second launch of its full-scale Starship mega-rocket. Those upgrades include a major change in how the rocket’s two stages separate, propulsion system improvements, and a beefed-up launch pad in South Texas that should better withstand the blast from 33 main engines.

“There are really a tremendous number of changes between the last Starship flight and this one, well over a thousand,” said Elon Musk, SpaceX’s founder and CEO. “So I think the probability of this next flight working, getting to orbit, is much higher than the last one. Maybe it's like 60 percent. It depends on how well we do at stage separation.”

Musk outlined some of the Starship rocket modifications in a Twitter Spaces discussion on Saturday with journalist Ashlee Vance. He said the next Starship rocket and upgrades to the launch pad at the Starbase facility in South Texas should be ready for the next test flight in about six weeks. “That’s just the best of our knowledge right now,” Musk said.

The Starship vehicle is designed to be fully reusable, and SpaceX plans to use it for hauling satellites into orbit, constructing refueling tankers and propellant depots, and eventually transporting cargo and crew to the Moon and Mars. SpaceX’s long-term goal is to replace its workhorse Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon crew capsule with the privately funded Starship vehicle.

SpaceX officials were pleased with the outcome of the first full Starship test flight on April 20, which reached an altitude of about 24 miles (38 kilometers) before tumbling out of control after multiple engine failures and the loss of the rocket’s steering system. The test flight set the record for the largest and most powerful rocket ever flown—at 394 feet (120 meters) tall with some 15 million pounds of thrust from its methane-fueled Raptor engines.

The rocket is divided into two segments. A booster stage called Super Heavy with 33 Raptor engines is designed to power the vehicle through Earth’s atmosphere, then an upper stage with six engines—known simply as Starship—takes over to accelerate to orbital velocity. On operational missions, the Starship upper stage could serve as a propellant tanker, payload deployer, or crew cabin.

One of the most significant changes SpaceX is making to the Starship design is in separating the booster from the upper stage, an event that occurs about three minutes after liftoff. The Starship test flight in April did not reach the stage separation milestone.

“We made a sort of a late-breaking change that's really quite significant to the way that stage separation works, which is to use what's called ‘hot staging,’ where we light the engines of the upper stage, or ship, while the first stage, or booster stage, engines are still on,” Musk said.

Russian rockets, like the venerable Soyuz, have employed the hot staging technique for decades, but it’s not used on any modern US launch vehicle. Typically, rockets switch off their booster engines for a few seconds before jettisoning the first stage and lighting the upper stage engine.

Musk said SpaceX would shut down most of the Super Heavy booster’s engines, then fire the engines on the Starship upper stage simultaneously. The upshot of the change is it increases the Starship’s payload lift capability, which already amounted to more than 100 metric tons to low Earth orbit. But it means engineers must add shielding to the top of the stainless steel booster, which SpaceX wants to recover and reuse numerous times.

“Obviously, that results in kind of blasting the booster, so you've got to protect the top of the boost stage from getting incinerated by the upper stage engines,” Musk said, adding that the design change would add a roughly 10 percent improvement to the Starship rocket’s payload capacity.

Separating the rocket’s stages with the booster engines already shut down causes a loss in thrust. While the rocket temporarily continues climbing, the pull of Earth’s gravity starts to reduce its velocity.

“So you want to start the ship engines before you've completely shut down the booster engines,” Musk said.

SpaceX is adding an extension to the top of the Super Heavy booster with vents to allow super-hot gas from the upper stage engines to safely flow out of the rocket’s structure “and not just blow itself up,” Musk said. “This is the most risky thing, I think, for the next flight.”

Several of the 33 Raptor engines on the Super Heavy booster either failed to ignite or lost power during the April 20 test launch. Musk said the first Starship test flight used a “hodgepodge” of engines that were built and tested over a year.

For the Starship’s second test flight, SpaceX teams are modifying manifolds on the Raptor engines that direct hot methane-rich gas toward each engine’s combustion chamber for mixing with oxygen-rich gas. The previous design was susceptible to leaks, where the hot gas could seep through bolt holes used to attach the manifold to the engine. Engineers will introduce an improved manifold design and add more torque to bolts to address the concern about leakage of super-heated gas.

In previous comments, Musk outlined several other upgrades to debut on the next Starship test flight. Those include electric thrust vector controls to replace the hydraulic steering system used on the April 20 launch, along with stronger shielding around each of the booster’s 33 Raptor engines to protect them from explosions of nearby engines, a measure intended to reduce the chance of cascading failures.

One of the most visible areas of work at the Starbase launch site is the pouring of roughly 1,000 cubic meters of steel-reinforced concrete underneath the launch pad’s pedestal, where the Starship and its Super Heavy booster stand before liftoff. During the April launch, the powerful blast from the rocket’s Raptor engines carved a hole in the concrete slab below the launching stand, throwing chunks of material thousands of feet from the pad.

SpaceX will install two thick steel plates on top of the new layer of reinforced concrete, with channels routed through them to allow water to flow through and shoot out the top.

“Think of it like a gigantic upside-down shower head,” Musk said. “It’s basically going to blast water upwards while the rocket is over the pad to counteract the massive amount of heat from the booster.”

The plan for the next Starship test flight will also have the rocket linger on the pad for a shorter period of time, reducing the chance of damage. “We're actually going for overkill on the steel sandwich and the concrete,” Musk said. “That should leave the base of the pad in much better shape than last time.”

Dumping water onto a launch pad is not a new concept. SpaceX uses water to dampen acoustic energy on its Falcon 9 launch pads in Florida and California, but managers decided not to use a similar setup at the Starship launch pad in Texas.

“Hindsight is 20/20,” Musk said. “So yeah, of course, we have regrets.”

When asked about the most daunting technical challenge remaining for the Starship program, Musk demurred. He said the purpose of the Starship test flights is to “resolve the unknowns” about the rocket, many of which can’t be fixed until engineers gather data from an actual launch.

One topic Musk did not discuss during his Twitter Spaces chat was the review of the Starship rocket’s flight termination system, which took longer than expected to destroy the vehicle after it veered off its pre-planned flight corridor in April. The destruct system works by detonating pyrotechnic charges to split open the rocket’s fuel tanks and is supposed to cause the vehicle to quickly break apart before it threatens populated areas.

The Federal Aviation Administration, the regulatory agency charged with ensuring rocket launches don’t endanger the public, will need to review any changes to the destruct system.

The Starship test flight in April did not threaten any public areas, but Musk said in remarks soon after the April 20 test flight that it could take longer to “re-qualify” the flight termination system than to resolve the other issues on SpaceX’s docket before the next Starship launch.

Musk acknowledged Saturday that it may not be up to SpaceX when the next Starship test launch happens. “There are a lot of variables here that are outside of our control.”

#4629966 - 06/27/23 06:43 PM Re: Back to the moon [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,737
SC
The hot staging is interesting, the only previous US launch vehicle, manned at least, to do that was the Titan II I believe.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0