US fails to land on the Moon

[PirateMk1]

China isnt taking the lead. The lunar lander they did was just a miniature version of Apollo, and unmanned too.

And I wouldnt trust any words coming from China. Theyre known liars, and even their economy is rumored to be 60% smaller than what it actually is.

They couldnt because it costs money, which is something you cant grasp. lol

Are you referring to Apollo 13? The launch went smoothly, which meant that Saturn V did its job perfectly. The problem was in the Apollo command module, not the SLS rocket.

Theyve still got the blueprints dont they? I dont mean they copy the exact same thing, rather use S-V as a base template like what the Russians did with Soyuz.

So you admit they didnt test them properly. Thanks for proving my point.

Here's the problem, engineers and technicians are not trained the same over the generations. Take a computer engineer, say a genX guy who grew up on commador 64 and such. Now take our new gen z computer engineer who grew up with XBOX internet and smartphones and devices. They have two completely different backgrounds and bases of knowledge. These sorts of projects have what is known as institutional knowledge. Its knowledge that's common amongst the project participants at the time a lot of which is not documented or documented well. These two things in combination tend to conspire to make revivals or late derivatives of a revival project more difficult to do because a lot of the details necessary but undocumented to make things work well or efficiently have to be relearned. Can they start with a basic template yes. Will it be best who knows.

 

[slavablueberryjam]

So you admit they didnt test them properly. Thanks for proving my point.

What was your point? Everything revolved around China, for you bot. China had nothing to do with this.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The US's moon mission now has 'no chance' of landing on the moon after a fuel leak that started hours following the launch

Peregrine, a lunar lander meant to land on the moon, is leaking fuel and won't reach its target, according to Astrobotic, which built it.

www.businessinsider.com

You can find dozens of articles announcing the launch of "Peregrine" but pretty much nothing about its failure. In my opinion, US citizens should be outraged that despite huge advances in technology, the US is stumbling in the attempt to repeat what they did fifty years ago. I think it's hugely unlikely that the human missions will continue on schedule.

Note though, that in space nomenclature the mission was not a "failure." It was a "partial success" because it didn't outright blow up.

China says its moon mission is on track as Nasa suffers setbacks - Times of India

China News: China said its lunar exploration program is on track to hit a target to launch in coming months, with its confident update contrasting with two high-p.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It's likely that China will set the next milestone: soft landing and return with samples, from the far side of the Moon.

The thing no one likes to talk about, is that there’s a massive regression crisis in technology right now, I made up the term but I haven’t seen a good one for it. But here’s what I mean by “regression crisis”

Simply that older forms of successful technology and industry are gone from America with time, were not adequately replaced, and our education system which focused on graduating mediocre arts students for college has not produced those with technical skills needed to work on practical technology.

An example was last week an Air Force general admitted that there is no one alive who can actually fully service a minuteman III, our primary nuclear missile. The drawings are generations old using a different system, the engineers who designed them are all dead, and no one was actually trained for them in recent decades. This doesn’t mean the missiles don’t work, but if they need serious repairs they can’t be fixed.

Another example is steam boilers. A friend of mine is a retired merchant ship engineer, he has a steam license, in the gulf war he went to Suisin bay California where a massive naval reserve fleet was because the navy didn’t have enough steam engineers to start all these ships, he worked on contract starting this ships. He was 40 when this happened he’s now 72 and fully retired. He won’t be starting boilers again in his life.

We used to have all the brain trust needed to shoot missiles into space. But all of it was gone by the 90s. Remember a lot of German scientists got us into space but by the 70s the proto woke forced them all out of NASA and now operation paper clip, the single most important and successful world war 2 operation is now reviled in popular history

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Theyve still got the blueprints dont they? I dont mean they copy the exact same thing, rather use S-V as a base template like what the Russians did with Soyuz.

So you admit they didnt test them properly. Thanks for proving my point.

Well having the blueprints doesn’t mean you can just do it.

You ever tried an extensive automotive repair youd never done before using just the book? Do you feel you can rebuild your car engine with no experience based just on reading a technical manual?

The problem is most of this stuff requires a lot of institutional knowledge and assumptions that the people working on these systems have practical understanding of it. It’s not just that, but then a lot of complex systems require parts that need to be fabricated or machined, that tooling that build these parts may not be available, so now you have to reverse engineer the factory, which means you have to train people to work in the factory and how do you do that if you don’t have recent workers skilled in those professions?

Even simple systems like diesel electric engines on ferry boats, my friend in his 70s just retired from Washington state ferries where he was an engineer, he was 5 years past when he wanted to retire ths state just kept throwing bonuses and money at him to stay because they literally don’t have a pipeline of people to put in these jobs so they’re throwing massive raises and bonuses at 70 year old workers to stay

 

[Isidore]

Are you referring to Apollo 13? The launch went smoothly, which meant that Saturn V did its job perfectly. The problem was in the Apollo command module, not the SLS rocket.

And what happened on this recent mission?

Peregrine successfully lifted off on a Vulcan Centaur rocket – a new type of methane-fuelled rocket – from the Cape Canaveral space station in Florida at 2.18am ET (7.18am GMT) on Monday. Approximately 50 minutes after launch, and at an altitude of 500km (311 miles) above the Earth, the lander separated from the rocket and continued on its journey.​

​

The first sign of trouble came about 7 hours after launch, when the spacecraft was unable to reorient its solar panels to point at the sun, so its batteries could charge. The ground-based engineering team eventually managed to turn them, only for further problems to develop.​

​

First, Astrobotic reported that it considered the root of the problem to be a failure within the vehicle’s propulsion system. Then it said this failure was causing a critical loss of propellant. “Given the situation, we have prioritised maximising the science and data we can capture,” the company said. Soon afterwards, Astrobotic shared the first image of the Peregrine lander in space, showing that its outer layers of insulation were crinkled.​

​

On Monday evening, the company announced that the fuel leak was causing the thrusters of Peregrine’s attitude control system – designed to precisely align the lander – to “operate well beyond their expected service life cycles to keep the lander from an uncontrollable tumble”. Based on current fuel consumption, it said, the thrusters were only likely to continue operating for 40 more hours at most.​

​

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/jan/09/what-happened-to-the-peregrine-lander-and-what-does-it-mean-for-moon-missions​

That sounds like the problem is in the lander module, not the rocket.

If NASA wants a guaranteed no glitch tech to take to the moon, then they ought to start building Saturn Vs all over again. Those rockets have a 100% success rate.

 

[beefheart]

They dont know how to produce them anymore. All the people are retired or dead and the knowledge went with them. These sorts of projects have institutional knowledge which goes away when they end. Same with the old nukes or airframes even the F-22. We have tooling sitting in Herlong CA and elsewhere in crates exposed to the elements. Basically you would be starting from scratch and trying to reverse engineer the tech. A lot of times its quicker to start a new project altogether.

Why would anyone want to re-make a 55 year old rocket with the stone age tech.

Rockets have gotten better since then, hell, look at a Falcon heavy, synching 27 rockets together takes precision.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Why would anyone want to re-make a 55 year old rocket with the stone age tech.

Rockets have gotten better since then, hell, look at a Falcon heavy, synching 27 rockets together takes precision.

Lol. Lefty believes rocket that went to the moon is “stone aged tech”

“yeah I mean Fred flint stone can fly a Saturn 5” lol

 

[EMNofSeattle]

This is why private industry will do better.

Not because private industry is better, but because people do not accept it when the government fails.

If the government had one of the failures that SpaceX has had, people would be calling for NASA to be dissolved.

The real issue is that worthy projects like space exploration cost money and require competence, nearly all the people with the competence are white and asian men, these are not constituencies of the left regime, and every dollar spent on NASA can’t be spent on wealth redistribution to leftist voting blocs.

So they can make no-show do nothing diversity jobs at NASA, but that makes failure, or they can just not fund it at all and spend the money elsewhere

 

[beefheart]

Lol. Lefty believes rocket that went to the moon is “stone aged tech”

“yeah I mean Fred flint stone can fly a Saturn 5” lol

This isn't a left or right thing, so knock it off.
As for all that "the blueprints are gone" nonsense, you don't want to make an ancient analog tech anymore. Modern rocket engines have come a long way, newer materials, better sensors and computers.

SATURN V BLUEPRINTS

In his review of several books on the Apollo space program (Book Review, July 3, 1994), writer Terry Bisson claims, "Neither America nor Russia could (put a man on the moon) today.

www.latimes.com

In his review of several books on the Apollo space program (Book Review, July 3, 1994), writer Terry Bisson claims, “Neither America nor Russia could (put a man on the moon) today. The blueprints for the F-1 engines are lost . . . “ The belief that the blueprints for the Saturn V engines (and the rocket itself) have been lost is nothing more than a continually propagated misconception.

The blueprints for the Saturn V rocket are stored on microfilm at Marshall Space Flight Center, and the Federal Archives in East Point, Ga., also house 2,900 cubic feet of Saturn documents. Rocketdyne has archived dozens of volumes from its Knowledge Retention Program, which was initiated in the late ‘60s to document every facet of F-1 and J-2 engine production and assist in any future restart.

The main problem in re-creating a Saturn V rocket would not be in locating the blueprints, but in finding vendors who could still supply the hardware. And even if we were to go to the trouble of building another Saturn V, we still wouldn’t have any place to launch it from, as all the available launch pads have been converted for use with the Space Shuttle.

 

[beefheart]

Here is the flight manual for Saturn V. Have fun building it, btw, the tooling for the rocket is all gone, just like the tooling for Studebaker cars, why would you want to bring it back?

https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap08fj/pdf/sa503-flightmanual.pdf

 

[beefheart]

The Saturn V was principally designed by the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, although numerous major systems, including propulsion, were designed by subcontractors. It used the powerful F-1 and J-2 rocket engines for propulsion; they shattered the windows of nearby houses when they were tested at Stennis Space Center.[53] Designers decided early on to attempt to use as much technology from the Saturn I program as possible. Consequently, the S-IVB-500 third stage of the Saturn V was based on the S-IVB-200 second stage of the Saturn IB. The instrument unit that controlled the Saturn V shared characteristics with the one carried by the Saturn IB.[54]

The Saturn V was primarily constructed of aluminum. It was also made of titanium, polyurethane, cork and asbestos.[55] Blueprints and other Saturn V plans are available on microfilm at the Marshall Space Flight Center.[56]

Saturn V - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Moon]

Lol. Lefty believes rocket that went to the moon is “stone aged tech”

“yeah I mean Fred flint stone can fly a Saturn 5” lol

lol, Lefty is correct.

 

[beefheart]

SPACE.com -- Saturn 5 Blueprints Safely in Storage

A NASA official has denied a claim made by a book author that blueprints for the mighty Saturn 5 rocket used to push Apollo astronauts to the moon were lost.

web.archive.org

A NASA official has denied a claim made by a book author that blueprints for the mighty Saturn 5 rocket used to push Apollo astronauts to the moon were lost.

The denial came in response to a recent story in SPACE.com that reported on a claim John Lewis made in his 1996 book, Mining the Sky, that he went looking for the Saturn 5 blueprints a few years ago and concluded, incredibly, they had been "lost."

Paul Shawcross, from NASA's Office of Inspector General, came to the agency's defense in comments published on CCNet -- a scholarly electronic newsletter covering the threat of asteroids and comets. Shawcross said the Saturn 5 blueprints are held at the Marshall Space Flight Center on microfilm.
"The Federal Archives in East Point, Georgia, also has 2,900 cubic feet of Saturn documents," he said. "Rocketdyne has in its archives dozens of volumes from its Knowledge Retention Program. This effort was initiated in the late '60s to document every facet of F 1 and J 2 engine production to assist in any future restart."

Shawcross cautioned that rebuilding a Saturn 5 would require more than good blueprints.

"The problem in recreating the Saturn 5 is not finding the drawings, it is finding vendors who can supply mid-1960's vintage hardware," he wrote, "and the fact that the launch pads and vehicle assembly buildings have been converted to space shuttle use, so you have no place to launch from.

"By the time you redesign to accommodate available hardware and re-modify the launch pads, you may as well have started from scratch with a clean sheet design," he wrote.

In years past, rumors have abounded that in the 1970s the White House or Congress had the Saturn 5 plans destroyed "to prevent the technology from falling into the wrong hands".

That seems doubtful -- it would be a formidable terrorist group that decided to build a Saturn 5 to wreak havoc on the world, or build a lunar base. Also, by the1970s, the Soviets apparently had given up on the race to the moon.

Geoffrey Hughes from the Rotary Rocket Company supported Shawcross's view.

"There is no point in even contemplating trying to rebuild the Saturn 5," he said. "Having a complete set of Saturn 5 blueprints would do us no good whatsoever. True, we would still be able to bend the big pieces of metal fairly easily. But they are not the problem.

"The real problem is the hundreds of thousands of other parts, some as apparently insignificant as a bolt or a washer, that are simply not manufactured any more. Everything would have to be redone. So a simple rebuild would be impossible. The only real answer would be to start from scratch and build anew using modern parts and processes. Yet another immense challenge!"

 

[beefheart]

lol, Lefty is correct.

LOL, I love it when someone enters into a non political discussion, then shows their ignorance about the subject by throwing around political invective.

Its really a piss poor way to debate, and the poster who did it just exposed their ignorance.

 

[beefheart]

Lol. Lefty believes rocket that went to the moon is “stone aged tech”

“yeah I mean Fred flint stone can fly a Saturn 5” lol

You obviously don't understand what I am talking about. By saying "stone age tech" of course I am exaggerating, but for effect.

Trust me, we don't want, nor need to build anything that old, it would be a huge waste of time, I suppose you want us to build a Univac computer too, because..."gosh darn it they sure worked great back in the day..."

 

[PirateMk1]

Why would anyone want to re-make a 55 year old rocket with the stone age tech.

Rockets have gotten better since then, hell, look at a Falcon heavy, synching 27 rockets together takes precision.

There are alot of little undocumented details and knowledge that would make upgrades and refurbishments easier to accomplish if they were still known. Thats why I said do a new project alot of times is simply easier.

 

[beefheart]

There are alot of little undocumented details and knowledge that would make upgrades and refurbishments easier to accomplish if they were still known. Thats why I said do a new project alot of times is simply easier.

Much easier, much more efficient and much cheaper.

I see people pushing the lie of "we don't even have the blueprints" all the time, its pure bullshit.

 

[PirateMk1]

Much easier, much more efficient and much cheaper.

I see people pushing the lie of "we don't even have the blueprints" all the time, its pure bullshit.

I have seen the tooling to projects sitting out in the high desert. They do have alot of the documentation however the problem the education and knowledge base of the engineers differ greatly between generations. To decipher older projects require the older engineers and their knowledge base. Think of the premise of the movie space cowboys. I use older engineers to train and pass on their hard won knowledge. A lot of time new processes are just simply better. However there are occasions where old school beats new school.

 

[samiam5211]

The real issue is that worthy projects like space exploration cost money and require competence, nearly all the people with the competence are white and asian men, these are not constituencies of the left regime, and every dollar spent on NASA can’t be spent on wealth redistribution to leftist voting blocs.

So they can make no-show do nothing diversity jobs at NASA, but that makes failure, or they can just not fund it at all and spend the money elsewhere

That is just nonsense.

 

[PoS]

Here's the problem, engineers and technicians are not trained the same over the generations. Take a computer engineer, say a genX guy who grew up on commador 64 and such. Now take our new gen z computer engineer who grew up with XBOX internet and smartphones and devices. They have two completely different backgrounds and bases of knowledge. These sorts of projects have what is known as institutional knowledge. Its knowledge that's common amongst the project participants at the time a lot of which is not documented or documented well. These two things in combination tend to conspire to make revivals or late derivatives of a revival project more difficult to do because a lot of the details necessary but undocumented to make things work well or efficiently have to be relearned. Can they start with a basic template yes. Will it be best who knows.

If the Russians and Euos did it with Soyuz and Ariane respectively which are themselves 40+ year old tech, then I think its doable. Sure, theyrll be problems, but its only natural.

And what happened on this recent mission?

​

Um, that doesnt refute what I stated.

What was your point? Everything revolved around China, for you bot. China had nothing to do with this.

Perhaps you ought to try to understand what I wrote before replying. If you cant try taking a reading comprehension class.

 

[Glitch]

The US's moon mission now has 'no chance' of landing on the moon after a fuel leak that started hours following the launch

Peregrine, a lunar lander meant to land on the moon, is leaking fuel and won't reach its target, according to Astrobotic, which built it.

www.businessinsider.com

You can find dozens of articles announcing the launch of "Peregrine" but pretty much nothing about its failure. In my opinion, US citizens should be outraged that despite huge advances in technology, the US is stumbling in the attempt to repeat what they did fifty years ago. I think it's hugely unlikely that the human missions will continue on schedule.

Note though, that in space nomenclature the mission was not a "failure." It was a "partial success" because it didn't outright blow up.

China says its moon mission is on track as Nasa suffers setbacks - Times of India

China News: China said its lunar exploration program is on track to hit a target to launch in coming months, with its confident update contrasting with two high-p.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It's likely that China will set the next milestone: soft landing and return with samples, from the far side of the Moon.

NASA’s CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) initiative aims to deliver science and technology to the Moon to advance our capabilities in lunar exploration. Shortly after launch, Astrobotic’s Peregrine lander experienced a failure in the propulsion system, causing a critical loss of propellent. Astrobotic announced due to the failure, Peregrine will not achieve a soft lunar landing for this mission. Efforts by the Astrobotic team have recovered the spacecraft and allowed Peregrine to remain operationally stable collecting data about the interplanetary environment. All NASA payloads that can power on have received power and are effectively gathering data, although interpreting the results will require some time.

Source:
NASA Science, Data Collection Ongoing Aboard Peregrine Mission One - NASA, January 11, 2024

While there has indeed been technological advances since 1973, none of those advances have resolved the on-going issue with solar and cosmic radiation. During Solar Cycle 20 NASA managed to squeeze in all the lunar landings between 1969 and 1973, while the sun was not yet at its peak. Solar Cycle 20 lasted from 1964 until 1976, and peaked from 1973 until 1975.

Currently we are experiencing Solar Cycle 25, which will peak from 2025 until 2026. It is already much higher than predicted. Sending a manned-mission outside of the protection of low-Earth orbit during 2025 or 2026 is tantamount to murder. They know the astronauts will not survive even an M-class solar flare.

This is why there have been no manned-missions beyond low-Earth orbit since in 1973.

 

[beefheart]

Source:
NASA Science, Data Collection Ongoing Aboard Peregrine Mission One - NASA, January 11, 2024

While there has indeed been technological advances since 1973, none of those advances have resolved the on-going issue with solar and cosmic radiation. During Solar Cycle 20 NASA managed to squeeze in all the lunar landings between 1969 and 1973, while the sun was not yet at its peak. Solar Cycle 20 lasted from 1964 until 1976, and peaked from 1973 until 1975.

Currently we are experiencing Solar Cycle 25, which will peak from 2025 until 2026. It is already much higher than predicted. Sending a manned-mission outside of the protection of low-Earth orbit during 2025 or 2026 is tantamount to murder. They know the astronauts will not survive even an M-class solar flare.

This is why there have been no manned-missions beyond low-Earth orbit since in 1973.

Are you spreading this conspiratorial bullshit again?

 

[Glitch]

Are you spreading this conspiratorial bullshit again?

You think solar cycles are a conspiracy? That truly demonstrates your lack education.

 

[beefheart]

You think solar cycles are a conspiracy? That truly demonstrates your lack education.

We had this whole conversation before, and several posters presented all the data to show that your argument was wrong.
You always do this, you make assertions, and never back it up. Just stop.

 

[Glitch]

We had this whole conversation before, and several posters presented all the data to show that your argument was wrong.
You always do this, you make assertions, and never back it up. Just stop.

So now your having delusions of conversations that never happened. This is all indicative of the symptoms of a mental disorder, common among leftists who have lost touch with reality. Why is it that leftists are always so eager to demonstrate just how little they know? Tell us about this solar cycle conspiracy of yours. Or are you one of those leftist science deniers who think the Earth is flat and NASA is making everything up?