We are going back to the moon (again?)

[Disoblige]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

After the space shuttle NASA did not have a heavy launch vehicle. They lost of on 20+ years of rocket development. The Shuttle was a shit design. You cant use wings in space FFS.

Erm, the wings weren't meant to be used in space. It was meant to be used in atmosphere to land on a runway.

[HiTempguy1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

New rockets? Just dust off the blueprints for the Saturn Vs. I'd be there with a diamond hardon watching the launch.

The thing is, there are no "blueprints" for the Saturn V's to be dusted off. It's literally a design lost to history. Many things were custom/one off/built on time. The documentation/drawings were all by hand in what was essentially a R&D facility with iterations happening on the fly.

You can't simply go and build a Saturn V anymore, nobody knows how to.

The point about "wings in space" is that for a vehicle that spends its majority of its time in space to have wings is silly. In theory (as with everything) it was a good idea, but the reality is it led to a ton of complications. On top of that, look at SpaceX, they designed a system that didn't require wings that practically does the same thing.

[The_Penguin]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Technically speaking, if you adhere to the scientific method it is totally irresponsible for anyone under the age of 45 to say that they "know" that man landed on the moon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_...ing_experiment

[tonytiger55]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Erm, the wings weren't meant to be used in space. It was meant to be used in atmosphere to land on a runway.

That is true. But you have to carry that weight with you to orbit. It makes no sense. Also if something went wrong (and it did twice) your dead. The explosions did the not kill the Astronauts, the impact hitting the water did. Where as rockets had a escape system that pushes them away.

The shuttle was not efficient, even the Russians did not have one. They (Russians) only built one later (the Buran) that never flew. They thought the Americans must have a advantage on something they could not figure out.
The shuttle is a engineering feat in itself I suppose. But its not the way forward for now.

There was some interesting discussion on reddit ages about it. The discussion explores it. It makes for a interesting read and considerations engineers have to take into account. Made me ponder..

' The problem with the Shuttle wasn't so much that it was an old design but that the basic idea of the Shuttle is painfully inefficient.

It takes a lot of energy to move mass high enough & fast enough to even start orbiting the Earth. If you want to travel away from the earth, there's even more energy involved. The Space Shuttle orbiter weighted 150,000 pounds empty - by comparison, the new Orion capsules are only about 20,000 pounds. That's 130,000 pound of "it's cool to fly like a plane when you're landing" which complicates everything about space travel.'

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlike...y_so_bad_that/

[tonytiger55]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_...ing_experiment

I had this debate with the local hoot rat when I lived in London. He argued the moon landings were fake.
I gave him that exact example you posted. He looked confused.

I tried to explain, dont just watch the documentaries.. have a read on the science that was conducted and the Gemini missions prior to it.