>Humanity doesn't have the tech capability to build a Saturn V rocket today
>yfw
What went wrong?
Better tech
>>68075563
But we do have the tech. Do you think they threw the plans away?
>>68075666
this, OP is a retard
>>68075666
Likely, yes.
>>68075563
>what is spaceX
>what is soyuz
>>68075723
America may have lost the ability to go to the Moon, but their cheeseburger tech is highly advanced.
>>68075862
They can launch a manned spacecraft to the Moon, right?
>>68076129
Yes, but they don't bother because only China cares about the moon these days.
>>68075563
Moon landing was faked, desu.
We'd rather spend billions of dollars on F-35 Planes that don't even work than go to the moon again. There's nothing up there for humans to do. It's a bad environment for humans, and long-term stays would show that it would be detrimental to human health. Send robots or remotely controlled vehicles to mine the Helium-3 there, not humans.
>>68076312
So, we went a handful of times and pretty much figured everything out about the moon?
>>68076312
Yea, muricans only care about helping out their banking friends and blacks.
>>68076554
No but there's no Soviet Russia to compete with and Obongo cut funding to NASA. Moon is rich in Helium 3, anyone smart enough to mine the moonrock and extract it would make a fortune
>>68076554
Most of actual moon exploration and science was discovered by unmanned probes like USA's Surveyor and the Luna and remote-controlled Lunar rover programs of the Soviet Union before man even stepped foot there.
>>68075563
We do. We just don't have the resources, which are being wasted by liberals on "free" shit.
>>68075563
Various national governments and various private corporations in America are making rockets and you honestly thing the technology is lost? Really?
>>68077175
What are these "rockets"?
Blame Nixon, he wanted his precious Space Shuttle and no other rocket mattered.
>>68075563
Are you dumb?
No one is building rockets that big right now because there's no need for them.
However, the core technology is still there and is now far more advanced than back when this thing was built.
>>68077326
I'm confused. Are you asking about a specific model? A generic term? And what does that have to do with the assertion about "lost technology?"
>>68077326
Quit whining, fellow Canadian. We don't need heavy lifters like the Saturn V anymore when there's weed-man to praise and minorities to help...
>>68075563
we don't need any new designs for ICBMs. therefore, we don't need a space program to improve on "payload carrying" rocket technology.
>>68077175
Name a rocket operational today with even half the lifting capability of a Saturn V.
>>68075563
Right, but we have the Delta-IV and other heavy lift rockets that could do the same job with minor alteration
>>68077447
How can the "core technology" be there when it's not put to practice? It's just theory then.
>>68077617
It was a rhetorical question. USA doesn't even have the capability to put a man in Space. But I'm sure the """""""CORE TECHNOLOGY""""""" is still there.
>>68075563
We are probably already capable of high-speed UFO-like travel through fission, magnets, or etc, but some group keeps it secret to elongate their profit off of alternatives.
>>68077961
It doesn't have the capacity because it doesn't have the money to waste on science when there's minorites to gibsmedat and jews to pay
>>68077871
Saturn V had nothing to do with US ICBM capability.
>>68077910
>Name a rocket operational today
Moving the goalposts? The assertion was:
>Humanity doesn't have the tech capability to build a Saturn V rocket today
Just because NASA doesn't have hundreds of millions to throw away per launch does not support a claim that the technology is not available if the funding was.
>>68075741
So you're just dumb. Got it.
>>68075666
>>68075723
>>68075741
My understanding is that the plans are on those old-timey tapes and they can't be read anymore because no OS or hardware anymore.
But we could still build a rocket, duh. Just not an identical one without reverse engineering it.
>>68077961
Hey buddy, The core technology is still there as USA still uses rocket technology like the Delta and Atlas. One of the original configurations of the Atlas was the fucking rocket the USA sent men into orbit. Therefore the "CORE TECH" is still there. The theory is LOTS OF DELTA V=PEOPLE IN SPACE. It's been in practice since the 1950's, guy.
Fucking Canadians.
>>68075563
The SLS will have almost the same capacity. Will be ready this decade this time for sure!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System
>>68078151
>>Humanity doesn't have the tech capability to build a Saturn V rocket today
Which is 100% true. The infrastructure necessary to build a Saturn V rocket no longer exists. Yes, with enough funding you could rebuild that infrastructure, and anyway supposedly SLS Block II will have the equivalent lifting weight in the unlikely event it isn't cancelled by them, but the statement that no one could build a Saturn V today is true.
>>68078309
??? By "old-timey-tapes" do you mean microfiche? Its just film with the diagrams/writing written very small, light is projected through.
When plans for Saturn-V were being developed, there were no computers that could store data other than sequences of numbers.
>>68078539
>infrastructure
>technology
Pick one. Actually, nevermind. It is clear to me I am retarded to extend you the benefit of doubt that you can stay topical and discuss this like an adult.
>>68078097
You're describing what's contributing to murica losing its tech. It's a secondary question. The main issue is murica is actually going backwards in terms of its tech capabilities.
>>68078151
>if
That's the key word. However, you need to learn to accept reality and not live in fantasy land.
>>68075563
Why send a ship in 2016 to arrive in 2116 when we can send a ship in 2114 to arrive in 2115? We're waiting for Google DeepMind to discover consciousness and send our shit a rollin
>>68078510
20% more thrust than Saturn V
>>68078718
With enough money they could build more, the tech still exists
>>68078718
>>if
Quoting a word that was not actually in the post quoted from.
>>68078510
SLS is the stupidest idea on the planet that was developed just to keep Shuttle contractors in business.
Fun fact: none of the Shuttles on display have their original engines installed, just shitty replicas. Because the originals are going to be used in SLS (and end up in the fucking ocean after all the sweat pored into them to make them reusable). And then they're going to build even more just to throw away too. All for a rocket so fucking expensive NASA had admitted only a massive increase in funding (good luck with that) would ever allow them to actually budget a mission for it.
Please fucking save us Raptor!
>>68075666
I hope not. But even then, I'd guess the plans would be very difficult to follow if there are no more engineers with experience on the design, and the same parts and tools no longer being manufactured, etc.
SLS is literally under construction right now.
>>68078713
Are you fucking retarded? Suddenly machine tools are not fucking technology?
Again: nobody has the technology to build a Saturn V today: 100% true.
A reminder that if Obama didn't cancel the programme when he was elected, America would be back on the Moon by 2018.
>>68079035
This is actually true. Killed the constellation program for purely political reasons
>>68079023
>Are you fucking retarded? Suddenly machine tools are not fucking technology?
Are you fucking stupid? What you are arguing is similar to arguing we don't have the technology to make STEAM LOCOMOTIVES because we don't have the infrastructure.
The two are completely different things.
>>68078858
Stupidest idea on the planet? C'mon dude. There are way worse ideas than the SLS. Like NERVA or Project Orion (unless it launched conventionally beyond Earth atmosphere)
>>68079035
>back to the moon
>really nothing to do on the moon
>fund my programs anyway
there is a book that exists which documents every piece of technology, machinery, process, medicine, invention... skill, etc in the world
>>68079082
RIP. Altair lander design was so cool looking. At least Orion Capsule survived.
>>68079023
Machines that can be built if they had money, clearly you're a chink or something as you can't understand English
>>68078713
>Pick one.
No, it's the same thing.
>>68078812
SLS might turn out to be F-35 2.0
>>68078836
>Just because NASA doesn't have hundreds of millions to throw away per launch does not support a claim that the technology is not available if the funding was.
>does not support a claim that the technology is not available if the funding was.
>the technology is not available if the funding was.
>if the funding was.
>if
>if
>if
>if
>if
>if
>>68075563
Nothing went wrong. We literally invented the internet.
>>68079122
>NERVA
>Stupid
Fight me IRL.
>>68076744
Actually NASA funding was increased more than they requested
>>68079346
>No, it's the same thing.
See >>68079113
You are both "fucking stupid." Simply because we did not preserve the means or the tools does not mean we did not preserve (or build upon and beyond) the technology.
NASA is a shitshow of government bureaucracy & political interference
They physically cannot accomplish anything.
Apollo project was a giant waste of money, hundreds of billions pissed down the drain with nothing to show for it
Shuttle was even worse, actually going backwards, costing more & doing less
Constellation spent billions with nothing to show for it
And the SLS will likely be canceled before it does anything, since Space X will have a fully reusable rocket that costs 1/10th of the SLS soon enough.
>>68079157
Getting back to the Moon was only the first step in Bush' master plan.
It was back tot he Moon for 2018. A Lunar base for 2024 and a man on Mars for 2034.
But boss nigger killed that dream.
>>68075563
Russia china and north america can all launch better rockets today. And maybe even places like india.
>>68078718
Then the technology is there, just not the funding. Glad that was established.
>>68079353
In the 60's too. That was the peak of human civilization. Now we're regressing.
>>68079310
>Machines that can be built if they had money
So in other words, first you'd have to build the machine tools. So no one can build a Saturn V today. Thank you
>>68079113
Yes, it is true we don't have the technology to build at least certain kinds of steam locomotives. The difference being there being a diesel one can match or exceed the performance, while again, even if Falcon Heavy works later this year it'll only reach a third of a Saturn V's performance.
>>68079388
Well, it wasn't stupid idea, but they couldn't perfect it enough.
>leafs making mericucks look intelligent
What the fuck is going on
>>68078858
>SLS is the stupidest idea on the planet that was developed just to keep Shuttle contractors in business.
Oh. Eh yeah, I'd believe that. :/
It's still cheaper than Saturn V launches though supposedly (according to that wikipedia page). But I guess it should be less expensive still given the technological progresses since then...
>>68079523
>Yes, it is true we don't have the technology to build at least certain kinds of steam locomotives.
>technology
I can build a steam locomotive in my garage. I'm done with your idiocy. You have proven it beyond question that you are incapable of discussing this like an adult.
>>68078930
Didn't King Obongo cancel it though? I can't even find a clear answer online
>>68079485
Constellation managed to spend literally billions of dollars with NOTHING accomplished.
The only thing to criticize Obama for is he didn't have the nerve to kill it completely and instead let the Senate create the awaiting disaster that is SLS.
>>68079485
?
Nasa had 5 years
They accomplished nothing in those 5 years
That ain't obongo's fault
It doesn't take that fucking long to build a rocket.
>>68075563
>>68075741
>>68079514
>>68079353
>>68079393
>>68079480
Gee, I wonder why the NASA stagnated.
>>68079541
Because we elected fucking weed man. Of course the Americans seem more intelligent, we're too high and have no memory.
>>68079523
>Yes, it is true we don't have the technology to build at least certain kinds of steam locomotives. The difference being there being a diesel one can match or exceed the performance, while again, even if Falcon Heavy works later this year it'll only reach a third of a Saturn V's performance.
By that logic we can ignore Saturn V too as there are better rockets around and in development now
>>68079664
>I can build a steam locomotive in my garage
Great. What did I fucking say?
>certain kinds of
But I'm glad you're going to go away because I'm not going to respond anymore to someone who ignores what I fucking say.
>>68079514
Inb4 china make some elysium type shit
>>68079759
Underated post
>>68079667
obongo canceled the constallation program which started under bush
then they started up the SLS program, which was forced to use shuttle parts just to keep shuttle contractor money flowing
>>68079629
since they are only doing 1 launch every 4-5 years, as planned, the cost per launch might be over 5+ billion for the SLS
It won't last long before being cancelled.
They don't even have any real plans or missions for it yet either
>>68079485
Shame bush blew a trillion on stirring up a shitstorm in the middle east and there wasn't enough money to go to the moon for...Reasons?
>>68079775
Did you fucking ignore what I said? There is no rocket anywhere today that can match even half the Saturn V's performance (and that's being generous and counting Falcon Heavy as already done, otherwise I could drop that down to "even a third of").
>>68079458
No man, it's a retarded argument. You either have Moon launch capability or you don't. Ifs, coulds and woulds don't apply here. Same thing happened with the Roman Empire: their road construction tech was so advanced that the Europeans only started to build roads to a similar standard by the end of 19th century. You just have this HURR MURICA STRONG READING IS FOR FAGS mentality and don't even realize that there are historical precedents of humanity going backwards in terms of tech development.
>>68079759
Those niggers there are debating all day and telling the engineers to anhero.
>>68079480
>Shuttle was even worse, actually going backwards, costing more & doing less
Yeah, expensive, but it didn't *bankrupt* the US. It might have helped collapsing the USSR though since they tried to make one too.
>>68079672
Nothing accomplished? You realize you are factually wrong?
>>68078597
>>68075666
Most of the tech that went into building the turbopumps and thruster bells is lost because much of it wasn't written down. The program was rushed and proper documentation for posterity was not a priority. NASA recently took some examples from Smithsonian to try and reverse engineer and rediscover how they were made. It took them 8 years to figure out how to build F-1 engines again because a good rocket engine turbopump is an immensely complicated thing to make and the ones on the Saturn rocket were exceptional for reasons that were unknown until recently.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/146829-nasa-resurrects-its-most-powerful-rocket-engine-after-40-years-for-science
>>68079875
Oil
>>68079759
>>68079629
>It's still cheaper than Saturn V launches though supposedly (according to that wikipedia page).
Those are projected costs. Go look up projected Shuttle launch costs in the 1970s to give an idea of how well those will line up with reality.
>>68079841
Wasn't constellation program going to use surplus shuttle engine and SRBs as well?
>>68079979
>No man, it's a retarded argument.
Can you explain how it is retarded or are you merely presenting your arbitrary conclusion because you cannot address it properly?
>You either have Moon launch capability or you don't.
Do you not understand what the term "technology" means are you trying to move the goalposts from your initial assertion?
>>68080003
They almost finished it too
>>68080165
This is Mars direct you're thinking of
>>68080220
RIP Energia and Buran
>Space post on /pol/
I bet this will be full of incorrect information
Five facts that everyone should know here:
I. Apollo program was cancelled because Nixon was an idiot
II. The STS, Space Shuttle, was a bad design, too expensive, couldn't do what NASA promised, and no, the Air Force wasn't to blame. NASA is the one that tried to get the Air Force on board, and in doing so, gimped the shuttle.
III. The Constellation Program under Bush was woefully underfunded and had some really bad politically guided decisions that ultimately doomed it
IV. The SLS won't be cancelled because congress LOVES it.
V. SpaceX isn't sending humans to Mars anytime soon.
>>68079346
That picture looks fake as fuck. The strong contrast between the sand...the aluminum foil on the lander...fuck man. Fake.
Space is so fucking cool and it pisses me off that almost everybody doesn't give a single shit about it.
>>68077924
The Delta-IV can barely launch a fraction of a saturn V.
>>68080170
>Do you not understand what the term "technology" means are you trying to move the goalposts from your initial assertion?
Technology is some form of practical knowledge/means of production that can be used in practice to achieve the desired goal. In our case desired goal is going to the Moon: where is the practical knowledge/means of production for that?
>>68080220
What? They launched it into space. It was completed, but they decided it wasn't worth it.
>>68080308
SpaceX will be sending people to mars sooner than nasa
SLS will be cancelled when the falcon heavy does the same thing, while being 1/10th the cost or less, and being fully reusable before the first SLS launch.
>>68080270
Ah yeah Constellation was the one that expanded on the shuttle tech instead of just using it again.
>>68079979
No, its not. And you're retarded.
Just because you're not doing something doesn't mean you can't do it, or lack the tech to do it.
For example, if you lived next door to me, I could build a giant slingshot and hurl flaming bags of dogshit at your house. Just because I don't doesn't mean I lack the technology or capability.
We have well beyond the apollo program tech available. Advances in materials science and computers would trivialize many of the problems that Apollo had.
Realize, the space shuttle had about a 1 percent critical mission failure rate. Apollo's data set is to small, but was likely higher than that. There's just no point to spending a zillion dollars so 3 dudes can shit in diapers, eat food from toothpaste tubes, and have 2 of them go hit golf balls and bring back 200 pounds of moon rocks that are exactly like the other 200 pounds of moon rocks we already have...
>>68079759
>We're never going to colonize the galaxy because of "muh feminism"
Fuck everything
>>68080308
SpaceX is capable of sending supplies to ISS though.
>>68075563
Because soviet union fell apart.
With american help.
>>68080565
No one is going to Mars I assure you
>>68080003
Different means to the same end, my friend...
>>68079759
>Gee, I wonder why the NASA stagnated.
Maybe because it's a non-profit AND government organization?
I live in the same city as the Plum Brook testing facility, NASA should stop being funded and have all of it's assets sold off.
>>68080165
Potentially, The Ares I was going to use a solid rocket for crew launches, and the Ares V for cargo launches was going to use shuttle derived boosters plus either RS-68 or RS-25(Shuttle) engines.
>>68080480
>Technology is some form of practical knowledge/means of production that can be used in practice to achieve the desired goal.
Cherry-pick your definitions much?
We could devolve this into a semantical argument and prioritizing definitions but I'd rather actually present an argument that might actually progress the discussion.
Can you look up the information to manufacture your own internal combustion engine at the local public library or even online in your home? Yes. Can you make it at your own home or at your local public library? No, because you don't have the capacity to do so. Clearly one can have the technology available to them but not have the capacity (or infrastructure) to put it into practice.
How stupid are you? Of course we could build a Saturn V today. We could even build one that's 10 times more efficient and powerful.
Just because we don't go to deep space anymore, doesn't mean we can't. Manned exploration is a dick-waving issue, probes are much cheaper and efficient.
I get what OP is saying. If we look at the perspective of some historian from the future, an easy way to summarize things would be "This nation was putting people to walk on the moon in the 1960s. Five decades later, they were not anymore."
Similarly to how today we regard the romans "Classic Rome was building huge arqueducts and the Colosseum. Late Rome was not, because they were a decaying civilization."
>>68075563
>>68080662
It will be fun if they attempt to. People launched will be doomed, but at least we will have some new data through their experience.
>>68080399
sending humans into space is a waste of time at the moment
more probes
more space telescopes
more satellites
more asteroid detection systems
the only thing we need to keep up is the ISS which is used purely for scientific endeavours like testing the effect of microgravity on various things
>>68080662
Yes you seem to have the credentials to assure anyone on anything space related.
> LEAF
Everything checks ooot
>>68080597
>We have well beyond the apollo program tech available. Advances in materials science and computers would trivialize many of the problems that Apollo had.
Jesus fucking Christ. I feel like I'm talking to some fly-over country wannabe big-shot lawyer here. Buddy, it works like this: either all this tech produces a result or it doesn't. Pretty fucking simple shit. You can want and know whatever you want: no one gives a fuck. The main question is what is the end result?
>>68080795
>We could even build one that's 10 times more efficient and powerful.
Go ahead and post the rocket engine that is 10 times more efficient or powerful than a F-1.
>>68080616
What you don't realize is that the reason all these women were subsidized into NASA is because the state knows that it's survival is more important than its space exploration program. In the 1960s the space race itself meant national survival.
Now, having lots of women in STEM fields means national survival. This is just a fact at this point.
>>68080620
SpaceX will be able to send crews in addition to supplies soon.
The thing about going to Mars is you can't do it in a single launch like the Apollo missions. You need multiple launches with heavy lift rockets to construct a transfer vehicle in orbit.
>>68080597
Building big complicated things that have no room for errors takes time & know how
That know-how doesn't exist, and the whole space industry is filled with cost plus government contractors.
No, they LITERALLY would not be capable of building a saturn V today, not without 15+ years of time to do it.
>>68075563
We needed more money for dem programs>>68075666
>>68075563
There is a difference between lost tech and obsolete tech that remains secret.
>>68080895
This is what the liberal feminazi sjw STEM cucks want you to think
>>68080138
Oh. Well shit.
IIRC though, the original plans for the shuttle had a lighter orbiter and that would have make it much more viable.
It was supposed to be able to go to the moon and back. Then they kept on adding crap to it and it all went to shit. I must be oversimplifying, but still, IIRC, there were design changes that contributed to making useless like that. The launches are expensive and risky, and dunno if it even could do anything other than reach LEO the way it was made. :/
Maybe the SLS won't be such a screw up.
>>68075563
Op. Saturn V rocket isn't being built because it's expensive and it's a one time use system... We were putting manned payloads in space with moon landing capability... Now days, it's just putting a few guys in orbit to swap out ISS crews or putting small satellites in space... Otherwise we're sending small Mars rovers. NASA budget is crap now due to the Space Shuttle programs that ended up being mediocre at best.
In short, we don't need powerful rockets for the things we are doing now.
>Guise, I just watched The Martian, I know what im talking about.
>>68080565
I don't believe they are going to do it any time soon, however.
1/10th the cost? No.
Cheaper? Yes, I'd agree. Not 1/10th the cost.
>>68080583
the SLS is literally just one phase of the Ares V under Constellation. It's the same shit. It just doesn't use the Ares I.
>>68080620
So?
>>68080720
the Ares I was a huge reason Constellation was canceled. It has massive vibration issues that could have killed the crew.
>>68081149
Actually the SLS was always supposed to be a waypoint vehicle for the space station freedom
>>68080950
This thread is strange. Why do people struggle with the idea of humanity ca. 1960's-1970's being more technologically advanced? It's sort of like how the human body grows olders: in the teens and 20's it can run very fast, but by 60's it can't run as fast and by 80 it can barely walk.
>>68076538
>We´d rather spend billions of dollars on Imported bulls and Bull shining oil
>>68081014
I just want to be alive to see another space miracle like the moon landing. :'(
>>68081149
>It was supposed to be able to go to the moon and back.
No it wasn't.
>>68081324
No it didn't. The vibration issue was resolved.
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=3fae1dcc-bbad-496a-916a-691ead980dc8
>>68080070
Thats interesting. I did not know that, but i do know this problem continues. When there was a push recently to "modernize" our nuclear stockpile, they realized that the procedures/plans to make "FOGBANK", the name for a classified aerogel material used in Hydrogen bombs had been lost as well. As far as i know they attempted the same sort of thing, reverse engineering, but didn't have great success.
>>68080616
>>68075563
>>68077725
>>68077924
>>68077961
>>68078539
>>68078718
>>68080795
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
>>68081371
Wow it's almost like history isn't a story of continuous progress isn't it?
>>68081416
Pathetic
>>68081371
The tech was not more advanced... They just built a huge fucking expensive rocket ... Bureaucrats now days would never allow money like that to be spent again.
>>68075563
what would happen if we spent 100% of our military budget on space exploration for say, 5 years?
>>68081371
>average 60 year old
>Being as athletic or healthy as the average 20 year old
do you even have grandparents?
>>68081324
Are you kidding me?
Space X will price the falcon heavy at 100 million
the SLS will be in the multiple billions per launch
If things go well, all their first stages will do powered landings, and they are working on making upper stages reusable too.
>>68081600
>what is the f35
>>68081638
holy shit I'm retarded
>>68081516
Try explaining this simple concept to muricans. Their response to being less technologically advanced than in the 60s and 70s is FUCK YEA WE ONLY GOT STRONGER USA USA USA
>>68081628
That would be 3 trillion dollars so a lot
>>68075661
first post best post
>>68081326
>>68081423
Hrm. Yeah, looks like I was wrong. :/
>>68077326
Judging by the rainbow I'll say gay?
>>68081092
It would also be difficult and expensive to build a brand new Model T too.
We have better technology than what was in the Saturn V, there's no reason to build one again.
>All these people who think rocket engines today are massive improvements over past ones
Blue Origin and Aerojet aren't even trying to match the performance of the 1980s RD-180 for the replacements they're designing for ULA.
SLS would reusing 1980s RS-25s (literally the same ones, they pulled them out of the shuttles) and that's for a rocket that won't reach its finalized design until the 2030s!
>>68081416
We've been witnessing crAzier epic shit than moon landing that humans have been doing on earth and in space. With HD cameras too.
Are you not even entertained.
>>68081600
Well, look at it this way: back then people didn't have iPhones and anime trap porn, they did the majority of calculations and design by hand and they somehow managed to go much farther in space than we can now.
>>68081559
How so? Wanting to see my country do great things again. Things no other country has a chance in hell of achieving, ahemm, aaaahhhheeeeemmmmm, canada.
Stay salty chinkshlomo
>>68081646
>Space X will price the falcon heavy at 100 million
.
The Falcon Heavy can't lift nearly as much as a SLS
The Falcon Heavy couldn't send much more than a single probe to Mars.
We're going to have to see what the BFR is going to cost before we try to guess how much SpaceX is going to spend on sending humans to Mars
>>68081371
>Why do people struggle with the idea of humanity ca. 1960's-1970's being more technologically advanced?
Because it's retarded. Modern technology builds on and beyond technology ca. 60s and 70s. For example, this thing your are posting on is only capable on technology built on and beyond the modems from ca. 60s and 70s.
>>68080399
K, reddit you can fuck off now.
>>68081898
>further in space
Curiosity went further than any saturn v
>>68081972
You don't actually care about real greatness you just want to relive a moment that you know others experiences but you didn't. You're like that highschool virgin who regrets it for the rest of thier life and ends up building a sexbot to compensate.
>>68081864
Eh. I guess KSP asparagus rockets are not going to happen anytime soon?
>>68082030
Falcon Heavy will take 53 tons to LEO
SLS will take 70 tons, any larger SLS is still on the drawing boards.
Falcon Heavy will likely be fully reusable before SLS launches twice
While costing massively less.
Why does anyone like Elon Musk or his companies? He is a fucking welfare queen that is rich because of funds from the government, aka your money. If you pay taxes, you are literally forced to give your money to that faggot to make him rich.
i would volunteer myself to be sent to mars even if it was just to die
>>68081684
Well to be fair, we SELL the f35.
>>68081864
Yes there are limits to how much performance you can get out of chemical rockets, but there have been improvements in the manufacturing and costs though, especially around 3D printing.
Also SLS will be running the RS-25's at higher thrust than the Shuttle did, due to the fact that they won't need to re-use them.
>>68081416
Well Orion will do a manned lunar flyby in a couple years provided shit doesn't got cancelled
>>68082139
Says curiosity but not voyager which is the farthest object and was made in the 70s faggot
>>68077326
the same
>>68082182
Elaborate. I thought he was rich because he made Paypal.
>>68081371
Cellphones and computers. People see faster computers and lighter cellphones and think that all technology is progressing.
What happened to the Rocketdyne F-1 engines is a tragedy though, if only they had hired one intern or something to write everything down as they were building the things humanity wouldn't have lost the end result of 20 years worth of rocket technology development by the best rocket scientists the world has ever known. Now NASA is forced to reverse engineer museum pieces in the hopes of figuring out how they were made.
Nobody knows exactly how to build RS-25 Space shuttle engines anymore either and those are more recent. They never saved the plans and the tools build to build them were scrapped. Have a higher ISP and higher thrust-weight ratio than the ones on the SLS or Dragon, but again, can't be built anymore so the money that went into research and development was wasted.
Should have been a law to document these research projects so nothing would be lost to time.
>>68082200
To be fair, we MAKE PEOPLE BUY the F-35. :/
>>68081863
You can't just fucking talk in generalities like that
Who has "better technology"?
The private sector space launch is just getting started, they can't build shit yet other than spacex
ULA is a government contractor that has to buy engines from Russia since they don't know how to build their own.
>>68082141
> canadians schooling anyone on greatness
Get fucked syrups. I do want to see it and I want to share it with my kids. Who the fuck are you to make generalisations like that?
So many leaves in this thread! I guess Canada cares more about America's space program than the burgers.
>>68082330
Yeah, but that doesn't matter.
Also, it's the least our NATO friends can do for making us spend all the god damn money on making bigger and better shit to tell Russia to fuck off with.
Oh BTW, NASA's goal for SLS is already up to just keeping it below 1 billion per launch. And I don't think that includes development costs.
http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/11/27/aerojet-rocketdyne-wins-propulsion-contracts-worth-nearly-1-4-billion/
>>68082292
He just knows how to sell himself and his ideas to people. In one case he sold Paypal. In the other he managed to get gubmint funding for SpaceX and Tesla. He is a marketing professional not some amazing tech guru though, people are always confused by this.
>>68082458
I'm here to add another
>LEAF
>>68082505
Yes. And soon the god-emperor will make them pay tribute!
>>68082458
its a waste of money. they missed the deadline to have a mars base that they claimed we would have by now. there wont be a nasa in 10 years probably
>>68082182
The amount of money SpaceX has gotten from the government is nothing compared to say the billion dollars a year ULA gets for doing literally nothing (well if you count not throwing away Delta as something then I guess they earn it).
>>68082539
Or operating costs since it'll cost them 1+ billion a year just to pay the salaries of employees/maintain launch pads/etc
Then when they launch once every 4-5 years... that adds up.
Meanwhile SpaceX showing us you can build rockets for a small fraction of that price... Fucking government contractors
>>68076744
> -500b$ budget deficit
>funding space travel
If he didn't cut it you would say obongo is wasting money on pointless liberal NASA
>>68082049
>For example, this thing your are posting on is only capable on technology built on and beyond the modems from ca. 60s and 70s.
Ok. I mean, the internet was developed in the 60's and some minor aspects of it got a little bit better since then, but touche. Why is this thing is primarily used for black twitter and trap porn though? How is that productive?
>>68082583
YOU ARE COMPLETELY AND 100% RIGHT OKAY GOD BLESS
>>68082709
Any money spent on scientific progress is not a waste of money, money spent on gibsmedats is a waste of money
>>68082414
>mfw first transwomen on Mars is a Canadian
>>68082934
Money pissed down the drain to fat government contractors that actively block real progress is also a waste.
>>68075563
Different approach to designing, testing and manufacturing than they had in the past.
They lost even the plans for the F1 engines, so they had to analyze the mothballed engines to figure out how they worked:
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/how-nasa-brought-the-monstrous-f-1-moon-rocket-back-to-life/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70u748VALt4
> mfw a single F1 engine outputs 12 gigawatts on full thrust
>>68082984
Which is why you nationalise them
>>68082779
>How is that productive?
Are you claiming that technological "advancement" is only based upon being "productive?" Or worse yet, that the internet is not a "productive medium?"
>>68078504
>DELTA V
What the fuck is delta-V anyways?
WE WERE WARNED OFF THE MOON, PEOPLE! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS!
>>68083062
SOCIALISM HANG HIM
>>68083062
No, it's why you give fixed cost, not cost plus contracts. Literally a single step that solves ALL your problems.
>>68082779
Or a far more "productive" medium than what we had back in the 60s and 70s, e.g. BBS boards?
>>68082352
The Saturn V was an entire system built on 1960's technology. It would not make sense to use the same designs in today's world.
It's not as if we are incapable of building a rocket equally or more powerful, there just isn't the political will or funding for it. SLS Block 2 will beat the Saturn V, it's just a matter of getting it funded.
It would also be more difficult and costly to build a 1960's car than a 2016 car.
>>68082639
Sadness. :(
The defense industry gets infinite money, and they cause tensions and wars to justify it.
If they could have funded them to colonize space instead (which may have been or could have become partly the same industries and interests), we would have something to show for it at least, and insured humanity's future, and a more peaceful world probably, and have a purpose for industrial overcapacity.
But nooo, space is dumb.
AND NO I DO NOT UNDERSTAND ECONOMICS.
>>68083157
National Socialism is the only correct government
>>68082971
Fucking love that man. The only good thing Canada has produced
>>68080070
We need based von Braun.
TO THE TIME MACHINE!
>>68083104
>>68083192
It's much easier to gather and exchange information with the help of the internet, I agree. However, it doesn't help our society to send a manned mission to the Moon...
>>68083327
>implying houbolt wasn't far more valuable to the moon landings than von braun
>>68082971
Lets see your face after your mom tells you shes pregnant again, with my babby. And then lets see your face when your dad tells you the same thing.
>>68081092
You are just jerking off to the idea "hurr durr can't build a saturn V anymore" despite ample evidence being given that a rocket of similar lift capacity could be constructed.
There's a lot of shit we can no longer make because it is outdated and its construction means are financially inefficient. We couldn't cheaply or quickly build a British Man of War, or the German Battleship Bismarck, but we can produce ships better than them. Making a Saturn V again is the equivalent of the US Navy trying to make another USS Independence...why the fuck would they do that?
Nobody is going to build a rocket big enough to go straight to Mars. Therefore any plan will involve constructing a vehicle in orbit first. Therefore recreating a Saturn V sized rocket like SLS Block II is completely pointless and a waste of literally tens of billions of dollars when you could just use literally buy dozens and dozens of Falcon Heavy's (assuming it matches price and performance goals) with that money spent just on SLS development, not on building any.
>>68083148
Delta = change
V = velocity
It literally means change in velocity.
>>68083366
>However, it doesn't help our society to send a manned mission to the Moon
Then we can agree that ca. 60s and 70s technology was not more advanced? Merely popular and political support and thus funding was greater?
>>68075563
America was mostly white back then. Today they would fill the Apollo program with spics and niggers to fill diversity quotas.
>>68079759
>>68080114
Fuck gg nasa, you're history now
>>68081371
this is too retarded to be real, people.
>>68083465
I meant the bucket
>>68083240
>The defense industry gets infinite money, and they cause tensions and wars to justify it.
Why do people say shit like this? The big defense contractors (aka Lockheed, Nothrop and Boeing) make their money off big ticket items. Those are the items that get cut during wars (see the cutbacks to the F-22 during the Iraq War as an example) and meanwhile all the extra money gets spread out because while not many people can build a fighter or a submarine a lot of people can build a MRAP.
>>68083413
Except NASA is trying to build a rocket like the Saturn V again, and they can't fucking do it until the 2030s.
>>68083589
Ah, I didn't expand the image.
>>68083148
Delta means change.
V means velocity,
therefore delta-V means change in velocity.
If it is said that a rocket has a lot of delta-V then it has a lot of fuel and is capable of changing its velocity be a large margin.
>>68083230
Yea the thing thats just on the drawing board and isn't even planned to fly before the 2030's.... totally will beat the saturn V
How many times more expensive will the SLS be compared to the Saturn V?
10 times? 20 times?
>>68083413
COULD BE?
sure
Anything COULD be done, conceivably
Who would do it? How many years would they need? How many billions? Is it even possible in todays political & regulatory environment?
>>68081001
>having lots of women in STEM fields
>national survival
Pick one and only one.
If you were in charge of the space program, what would you do? Where would you want the space program to do? Go to the noon again? Go to Mars?
>>68075862
Soyuz is a very small rocket. It can barely fly into space. It's about the same level as Delta 2
Proton is much larger but lacks capabilities for manned missions, and is still too small for going to Moon.
Manned moon missions require a launch system comparable with Saturn 5. Soviets tried to make it with N1 and failed miserably. Currently there is a development for an American system comparable in size and power, and technically even capable of manned Mars mission - SLS. SpaceX and Russians do not have anything comparable planned, Falcon Heavy, Angara 5, and also existing Delta 4 Heavy and Atlas 5 HLV aren't quite in the same category
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njb9Z2jX2fA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhzIWeZedJM
>>68083770
Ah, so it's just jargon for fuel
>>68075563
money was spend for food stamp and obamacare.
>>68083879
Build a Moonbase and colonize space one planet at a time.
>>68083648
Eh ok, interesting.
So I guess the Iraq war was more an oil and petro-dollar thing than a military industry thing? There was the reconstruction too which seemed corrupt as fuck.
Hrm...
>>68083413
>he doesn't want to build another Bismarck or more Saturn v
You are literally what is wrong with america
>>68083798
SLS is about 4x the cost of Saturn V per launch if adjusted for inflation. Much of the cost has to do with contractors and politics though, not the design.
Also the Saturn V was built for a very specific purpose, where as SLS is designed as a multi-purpose system.
>>68079667
There was a project Ares that was eventually canceled by Obama. However the tech from the project went into the SLS program which is currently ongoing. SLS should provide launch systems comparable with Saturn 5 and even exceeding it. The core block of SLS should be powered with 4x RS25 engines - same engines that were used on Space Shuttle orbiter (3x RS25). The boosters however are not quite decided yet, they speculated whether to use solid-fuel busters or develop new ones based on liquid fuel and using a modified F1b engine based on F1 engine design from Saturn program.
>>68084340
Iraq war was about a buncha fucking neo-con jews taking out an anti-israeli guy & destroying a potential threat to israel.
>>68083862
Gainfully employed women are the basis of modern society
>>68084357
What are you in here attacking superior people for chang? Get the fuck ooot and cook some noodles or something
>>68083879
Venus
Preferably Jupiter though
>>68084413
Sure except the Orion spacecraft can't land on the moon, so theres literally nowhere for it to go.
>>68079759
At some point every cuck society is going to have to be burnt absolutely to the ground to stop this crap. Otherwise forget any future. Maybe ISIS has the right idea.
>>68083897
The Soyuz was also designed in the 1960's and the Russians/Everyone still use it because it just works, and does the job it's suppose to do. Bring stuff/people to and from the ISS.
>>68084357
>>68084491
>>68084531
This LEAF right here is why Canadians are turning into strayans
>>68084659
It's just a return vehicle. Keep in mind people have no idea that space is complicated. They think Tom thanks just used a joystick and Kevin bacon got angry and pow. Moon
>>68082164
No, the Falcon heavy cannot do 53 tons to LEO.
>>68083991
AYO HOL UP
>>68084447
spot on, again, leaf.
>>68084749
My government didn't flood your space program with women
>>68084858
Wow, that's fat for the 1960's.
No one has been talented enough to build shit since the 60s which is why there is still nothing that has surpassed this ancient ass plane.
>>68084413
>Also the Saturn V was built for a very specific purpose, where as SLS is designed as a multi-purpose system.
There were a hundred and one suggested uses of Saturn V that were suggested. All were completely feasible, they were cancelled on cost grounds that look like a joke compared to SLS.
>>68084924
No I was referring to how youre flooding the board with smoke from your ass.
>>68084828
http://www.spacex.com/falcon-heavy
>With the ability to lift into orbit over 53 metric tons (117,000 lb)--a mass equivalent to a 737 jetliner loaded with passengers, crew, luggage and fuel--Falcon Heavy can lift more than twice the payload of the next closest operational vehicle, the Delta IV Heavy, at one-third the
>>68080616
We never will have the tech to leave either way.
>>68084491
Does it matter if they're women or not as long as more people are employed and taxed? (I get that women used to do a lot of UNTAXED housework which really left the government feeling like they were being robbed :/)
>>68084531
Venus is way harder to survive on than Mars. The pressure on the surface is 90 times greater than Earth. That's like being a kilometer underwater.
>>68085049
Ironically, some of the preceding designs were even faster...
>>68085127
Saturn v was going to be used to deliver components into space. Nixon fucked up clearly
>>68085472
Go hard or go home. Mars is also irradiated so you can't live there anyway.
>>68085049
The jews were gonna have McDonnell build a modified F-4 that could go nearly as fast.
What could have been...
>>68085548
Your mother fucked up when she shit you into the world.
>>68085548
>Nixon fucked up clearly
He does that...
