|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
I didn't see the original postings, but a whole infrastructure needs to be
built that can handle going to the moon. Currently, I believe the heaviest booster is the Titan with strap-on booster which could make a payload trip; however, it is still insufficient to do a job the size of continuly going to the moon. It's is technically possible, but look at what is needs: very-heavy boosters, that are more efficient and less costly to lauch and service, that are reusable. Something capable of at a minimum of acheiving high earth orbit to a space station for transfer to the Moon, or just being able to go straight there with payload and manned space ships, not shuttle, no need for aerodynamics and the weight. Cargos that aren't time constrained may benefit by use of ion and solar propulsion systems. Non-the-less, going to the Moon, which I favor as a staging point for Mars, involves a whole new industry's and it's infrastructure, and would be the testing grounds for mission beyond. davon96720 "Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... I was arguing with a friend that the lunar landing required very little new science but merely extrapolations of existing technology. This leads to: If it had been necessary, and cost was no object, what would be the earliest time that a lunar landing would have been possible. I argue that the Germans could have done it with their 1940s technology. "It depends". You can look at the Saturn V as a scale-up of the V-2. Just a much bigger rocket. That is of course an extremely simplified look at things. Getting the F-1 engines to burn stablely was itself a large task. Then of course you have things like the IU and on-board computation. Even with the advances there, much of the navigation was helped out by the ground. And of course things like fuel cells. While the science had been around for I think about a century, making it work effectively was part of the problem. Ultimately I think it comes down to, "how much brute force and money are you willing to throw at the problem?" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ (is not spam) :-) | Nathan Jones | UK Astronomy | 8 | August 1st 04 09:08 PM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ (is not spam) :-) | Nathan Jones | Astronomy Misc | 5 | July 29th 04 06:14 AM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | darla | Misc | 10 | July 25th 04 02:57 PM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | darla | UK Astronomy | 11 | July 25th 04 02:57 PM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | Nathan Jones | Astronomy Misc | 5 | November 7th 03 08:53 PM |