Jump to content

Vice President tells NASA to get to the Moon in 5 years.


atomheartbevo

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Watched it as it happened. A few issues but FUCK YEAH! GO Odysseus.

 

I am glad this was successful. We need to be doing more of this as a country because it promotes and produces highly intelligent people who push us forward into a hopefully better future. I have no doubt that we have people who want to contribute their expertise in science and space to the greater good, but they need ample opportunities to be able to do that. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

I am glad this was successful. We need to be doing more of this as a country because it promotes and produces highly intelligent people who push us forward into a hopefully better future. I have no doubt that we have people who want to contribute their expertise in science and space to the greater good, but they need ample opportunities to be able to do that. 

My daughter studies aerospace engineering on the east coast. She is so excited about this and of course Artemis. Lets keep going.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

My daughter studies aerospace engineering on the east coast. She is so excited about this and of course Artemis. Lets keep going.

I am very concerned about Artemis. Their mission planning has more holes in than swiss cheese, and none of the NASA leadership are willing to say the emperor has no clothes. They still haven't even had a successful full stack systems test, much less a single flight that completed all of its primary mission objectives. 

And each time they light a candle, it's one of the most expensive rockets ever launched.

 

It's a boondoggle as it stands, and they have been producing far more failures than successes for the last decade. In the same timeframe it took us to go from Mercury to Apollo to men on the moon, Artemis hasn't even been able to get humans into their capsule for a flight. It's maddening.

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

I am glad this was successful. We need to be doing more of this as a country because it promotes and produces highly intelligent people who push us forward into a hopefully better future. I have no doubt that we have people who want to contribute their expertise in science and space to the greater good, but they need ample opportunities to be able to do that. 

Well, it appears this Moon lander tipped over at touch down.

 

94C24ACA-5982-4C78-9122-CF526B07FAC3.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very concerned about Artemis. Their mission planning has more holes in than swiss cheese, and none of the NASA leadership are willing to say the emperor has no clothes. They still haven't even had a successful full stack systems test, much less a single flight that completed all of its primary mission objectives. 
And each time they light a candle, it's one of the most expensive rockets ever launched.
 
It's a boondoggle as it stands, and they have been producing far more failures than successes for the last decade. In the same timeframe it took us to go from Mercury to Apollo to men on the moon, Artemis hasn't even been able to get humans into their capsule for a flight. It's maddening.

giphy.gif

Yeah it’s tough because as a nation, we fully embraced the space race of the 60’s. Now we fucking hate each other and anything the other side wants/believes in. Artemis could very well be the key to our species surviving but fuck that shit because I shouldn’t have to pay taxes for it, etc etc blah blah.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slow your roll on the "it was successful" parade. We've fallen well short on "mission success" when the lander can't, well, land.

Kinda like a SpaceX booster that doesn't, well, boost.

You can say "we learned a lot" until the cows come home, but you didn't have a successful mission. You never should plan success to be a failure.

This is endemic across the board these days and people will die as a result.

Do. Better.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we all want to be back, and we point to how fast we did it 60 years ago, but no one mentions we killed 7-8 astronauts trying to get things off the ground then versus zero now. Safety culture in all industries is different now, and that’s a good thing, but it also comes with more caution and slower progress. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Back in my day people went to the moon in basically a giant tin can that was piloted by the computing power of a timex digital watch

There was a completely different culture then.  NASA attracted some of the best and brightest back then.  Then it became bloated and bureaucratic, to the point they had engineers that KNEW the o-rings were a problem in the cold and they didn't speak up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My brother’s BIL was one of the Morton-Thiokol engineers who wrote the manuals for the Space Shuttle solid boosters. 
The team leader (Boisjoly) did warn about O-ring performance limitations in cold weather and recommended a no-go before the Challenger launch, but the NASA staff ignored them. 
Of course M/T bore the brunt of the blame and their engineers were fired.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

It's a shame no one had the foresight to write down all the steps we took to do this 55 years ago.

They literally did that with NASA-SP-287

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19720005243

It's a publication by NASA titled "What Made Apollo a Success?" It's an 86 page playbook that does not really track to any of our current mission planning or strategy. 

Edited by Captainant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2024 at 6:00 PM, Armybrat said:

Well, it appears this Moon lander tipped over at touch down.

 

94C24ACA-5982-4C78-9122-CF526B07FAC3.gif

I have watched a lot of  Battlebots, and everyone knows they need a self righting flipper.   This isn’t rocket science peop …. Ugh, well.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Armybrat said:

My brother’s BIL was one of the Morton-Thiokol engineers who wrote the manuals for the Space Shuttle solid boosters. 
The team leader (Boisjoly) did warn about O-ring performance limitations in cold weather and recommended a no-go before the Challenger launch, but the NASA staff ignored them. 
Of course M/T bore the brunt of the blame and their engineers were fired.

 

I was once blamed for a project that was a bit of a mess.  The client fracked into a fault that cut across all of their lateral wells.  I told the engineer who was with the client, I reported it to my boss.  I reported it a few different times.  They finally shut me up with "yeah we told them, no one cares."  Then they went to produce the well and suddenly everyone cared.   I could have bitched more, but this wasn't about life and death.     If it was about life and death, I would have bitched more.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2024 at 2:20 PM, Armybrat said:

My brother’s BIL was one of the Morton-Thiokol engineers who wrote the manuals for the Space Shuttle solid boosters. 
The team leader (Boisjoly) did warn about O-ring performance limitations in cold weather and recommended a no-go before the Challenger launch, but the NASA staff ignored them. 
Of course M/T bore the brunt of the blame and their engineers were fired.

 

As with a lot of things, the Challenger Accident was far more complex than just that.

Yes - the SRB O-Ring design was not made to withstand the sustained low temperatures and then launch/hold the joint seal.  HOWEVER - that was outside the design specifications, so blaming Morton-Thiokol *solely* for this was not the way the Rogers Commission report went down.  Sure, the joint failure was the root cause of the *physical* incident, but it was the personnel issues - especially cultural and managerial - that were every bit to blame up and down the NASA chain. 

Thiokol was a convenient public scapegoat for the media, and when Richard Feynman dipped an o-ring segment into a glass of ice water - and CNN covered it live (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TInWPDJhjU) - that's practically all the subsequent coverage centered on.  Internal to NASA, though - we knew who the decision-makers were, and they weren't in those roles for much longer after that (voluntarily or not).  

We went through a lot of soul-searching, including lots of training and process improvements - did some good "cockpit resource management" and "breaking the error chain" training during that down time.  Sadly ... some of those errors crept back into the NASA culture for poor decisions made that led to the loss of Columbia less than 20 years later.

If you want to really dive into it, the report is online here (PDF).  I still have my official bound copy that pretty much all of us had as a reminder of the failures of *people* as well as *technology* that led to that horrible day.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...