1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ASTRO.AMATEUR

  • Re: the new automated shuttle. U.S. going backwards?

    From Mikko@21:1/5 to Rich on Fri Feb 2 12:31:40 2024
    On 2024-02-02 05:05:22 +0000, Rich said:

    First, they decide (at taxpayer's massive expense) to go back to the
    moon, though honestly why isn't clear. So, instead using old, PROVEN technology, they decide to go from a cold-start and do it all again, 50
    years later.

    The technology of the Moon missions 50 years ago is by modern standards
    too risky and too expensive.

    Mikko

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris L Peterson@21:1/5 to All on Sat Feb 3 07:28:16 2024
    On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 21:15:08 -0800 (PST), Rich <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Friday 2 February 2024 at 05:31:44 UTC-5, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-02-02 05:05:22 +0000, Rich said:

    First, they decide (at taxpayer's massive expense) to go back to the
    moon, though honestly why isn't clear. So, instead using old, PROVEN
    technology, they decide to go from a cold-start and do it all again, 50
    years later.
    The technology of the Moon missions 50 years ago is by modern standards
    too risky and too expensive.

    Mikko

    Compared to what? Space-X's self-nuking starship or the Virgin Galactic debacle, or the two Shuttles that through complexity and
    human incompetence blew-up/disintegrated? The Apollo ships, even though the entire program was really a second choice worked very well. 1 problem in all the launches. Pretty good for the Stone-Age electronics they had to work with then.

    The Space-X rockets are much more reliable than any of the old NASA
    rockets. Not so much electronics, but materials.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)