Apollo’s Legacy

Thus proving once again that it's all about politics and getting elected. We are headed down that road with a couple of "throw money at it - FREE STUFF" proposals by some candidates now.
 
Free. . .I was aircrew on USAF aircraft built when I was in first grade - 30 years later. Beat up, worn out, suspect. . .my son is in the same situation, decades later. He's walking away, and his kids aren't being encouraged by either of us to put on boots when the time comes.
 
We found out it was not made of cheese. We got Tang and Velcro and smaller computers. So why go back, what more do we need?
 
Sundancer said:
Free. . .I was aircrew on USAF aircraft built when I was in first grade - 30 years later. Beat up, worn out, suspect. . .my son is in the same situation, decades later. He's walking away, and his kids aren't being encouraged by either of us to put on boots when the time comes.
Click to expand...

That’s sad but it’s one of those “the money is going somewhere” problems. Can’t get to $24T in debt flying thirty year old airframes, so it went somewhere...

Only the best for our troops, eh?

I hate politicians... have I mentioned that before? :)
 
yetti said:
We found out it was not made of cheese. We got Tang and Velcro and smaller computers. So why go back, what more do we need?
Click to expand...

We go back for the exploration, for the experience and the ability to travel. Because eventually mankind must leave the earth, there won’t be enough space here. Because we want to know what’s out there and we will never travel to other stars if we never travel to our own moon or to our nearest planet.

Your question could be be also asked - why did explorers seek out new lands anywhere? Why did the Polynesian people get on boats and find new islands, why did the Vikings explore Greenland, Iceland and North America? Should all of these people have said “nah, why go?”
 
bflynn said:
Your question could be be also asked - why did explorers seek out new lands anywhere? Why did the Polynesian people get on boats and find new islands, why did the Vikings explore Greenland, Iceland and North America? Should all of these people have said “nah, why go?”
Click to expand...

I heard they all had nagging wives at home.

Why else would you get into a boat and sail off toward certain doom at the end of the ocean unless you had nothing to lose?

LOL! :)
 
DaleB said:
Yes. And it would be almost completely superfluous if we were not in desperate need of resources that keep us in constant conflict with large swaths of the world. Those hundreds of billions of tax dollars could be much better spent.

I’m as techie as the next guy, but programs like that don’t make me smile.
Click to expand...
Old news. As of a few months ago, the US is a net exporter of petroleum. In other words, we'd have a surplus even if we stopped importing oil.
 
bflynn said:
Your question could be be also asked - why did explorers seek out new lands anywhere?
Click to expand...
Columbus was looking for a trade route, Cortez was looking for gold, Drake was looking to plunder Spanish ships...

Notice a trend?
 
Those not of a certain age probably don't realize that the moon program was a unifying national effort to close the real or perceived technology gap with our geopolitical rival, the USSR. That was the glue that held together the commitment to the space program in the 50s and early 60s. While interest waned a bit as we caught up technology-wise, and distractions like Viet Nam took over the national psyche in the mid-to-late 60s, the space program commanded broad national and international support and admiration. The technology acceleration catalyzed by the program helped to propel the US into a leadership position in science and engineering. There was a flood of folks into STEM careers as a result of that national commitment.

Sadly, we have become lax as a nation in investing in science and technology. It will take another technology gap come-to-Jesus moment, I fear, to get our national leadership to re-invest in science and technology. And there is no advance in technology without science. The paradigm-changing discoveries come not from applied technology, but rather the discovery of novel, unusual, and surprising findings in basic research. I could cite numerous examples in the physical sciences that have dramatically affected everyday life. Unfortunately, the "Golden Age" of basic research in the US has passed--I've seen this in my career as a researcher and educator. I wouldn't want to be starting a scientific research career now: it was much better in the 80s and 90s, and we reaped enormous rewards in discovery in that era of investment. Many core technologies we take for granted today emerged from that basic research commitment.
 
asicer said:
Columbus was looking for a trade route, Cortez was looking for gold, Drake was looking to plunder Spanish ships...

Notice a trend?
Click to expand...

They all had really good excuses to get away from their wives? :)

chemgeek said:
Those not of a certain age probably don't realize that the moon program was a unifying national effort to close the real or perceived technology gap with our geopolitical rival, the USSR.
Click to expand...

That was exactly what she said in the video, along with explaining how it survived as a program past the death of Kennedy who actually tried to kill it, a month before his assassination.

LBJ had the public fear of the USSR *and* the use of a dead President’s speech, since Kennedy never got a chance to actually kill the program.
 
asicer said:
Columbus was looking for a trade route, Cortez was looking for gold, Drake was looking to plunder Spanish ships...

Notice a trend?
Click to expand...

Yes, you are cherry picking.
 
They were talking about Saturn and saying it was 5000 degrees or something and that life could not be supported. Why not change the definition of life instead of measuring it in our standards. Then see if life can exist. Have not had tang since the Apollo program days.
 
..and as usual PoA has sent me down a rabbit hole as I wait for an SQL to finish cranking

Velocity173 said:
Oh I was a huge Battlestar Galactica fan. Watched it every week as a kid.
Click to expand...
..I grew up with an older brother who loved watching the original Star Trek series.., I never saw BSG until recently Amazon recommended the 2004-2009 series to me and I immediately got hooked.. granted, I know the original series goes back to 1978 and there have been various adaptations.. I'll have to go further down the BSG rabbit hole!

asicer said:
I think he's saying that millennials can't figure it out. ;)
Click to expand...
so... two things:
(A) the smarter among us can figure a lot of things out, I'm often impressed with my friends.. so we're not all dimwits.. although I do fly a #Cirrus
(B) a lot of it isn't really passed down.. sure it was recorded, but you have to go find that stuff on your own. Unfortunately the zeitgeist has passed and it's true, people are more interested in aggressive partisanship, competing for more likes and followers on Instagram, "mindfulness" (whatever that is?) and "finding your bliss" - geeking out on 1960s space memorabilia doesn't help with those goals unfortunately.. so it leaves only the proper geeks out there to really read up on the stuff. Most people hear "space" and they think of Musk and Tesla and SpaceX

Pugs said:
And what gets labeled "defense" and stuck in DoD budget that's...... suspect.
Click to expand...
I've often wondered about this.. do the rolls of toilet paper on a military base (for example) get categorized as DoD budget? The US military is a massive employer, with 1.4 million serving in the armed forces.. The military budget is not all just weaponry, it actively "employs" a huge portion of the US population and creates employment and gives jobs to the people at Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

yetti said:
Have not had tang since the Apollo program days.
Click to expand...
I forget ALL about Tang... my mom used to buy that stuff.. tasted a bit like Sunny Delight
 
Tantalum said:
[snip]
I've often wondered about this.. do the rolls of toilet paper on a military base (for example) get categorized as DoD budget? The US military is a massive employer, with 1.4 million serving in the armed forces.. The military budget is not all just weaponry, it actively "employs" a huge portion of the US population and creates employment and gives jobs to the people at Boeing, Lockheed, etc.
[snip]
Click to expand...

The DoD budget covers all that stuff, including maintenance, supplies, services as well as research and development. All that other stuff is referred to as the logistics tail. You will occasionally hear military folks talk about the "tooth to tail" ratio. That's how much support it takes to put armed forces in the field. There has been a major shift since the the early 1990's (at least in the Army) away from organic support capabilities and toward contractor support. A former colleague of mine who deployed in Desert Storm talked about having military staffed showers, mess tests, etc. during the first Gulf War, but in Operation Enduring Freedom, all that was now contractor support. It makes the permanent forces tooth to tail ratio look better, but wow do those bills pile up during war time.

Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

John
 
Tantalum said:
so... two things:
(A) the smarter among us can figure a lot of things out, I'm often impressed with my friends.. so we're not all dimwits.. although I do fly a #Cirrus
(B) a lot of it isn't really passed down.. sure it was recorded, but you have to go find that stuff on your own. Unfortunately the zeitgeist has passed and it's true, people are more interested in aggressive partisanship, competing for more likes and followers on Instagram, "mindfulness" (whatever that is?) and "finding your bliss" - geeking out on 1960s space memorabilia doesn't help with those goals unfortunately.. so it leaves only the proper geeks out there to really read up on the stuff.
Click to expand...
That was with the smiley before. Now without...

1. I wasn't there, but from what I hear the 1960's weren't exactly the paragon of getting-alongness compared with today.

2. Our tools are way beyond advanced compared to back then. I'm guessing that whatever wasn't written down can be filled in pretty quickly versus a few years ago.
 
jsstevens said:
Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.
Click to expand...

Logistics wins wars. Even private ones in business. Apple isn’t great at making computers. They’re great at marketing and logistics. Their computers are just cheap PCs at this point with a mediocre Unix on them.
 
Here's before and after pics of my souvenir from AirVenture this year. Sooooo tedious to assemble, especially the thrusters, as each cone has to be curled up with round nose pliers. Very much a sheet-metal origami project (as was the original LEM, in some respects).

IMG_4317.jpg IMG_4320.jpg
 
Bookstore more likely. My son made me a 172 and a P-51D a few years ago, same type of metal kit.
 
DaleB said:
Bookstore more likely. My son made me a 172 and a P-51D a few years ago, same type of metal kit.
Click to expand...

Cool. Now I’ll know to look there. You mean the bookstore over at the museum? Or is there another bookstore I’m missing?
 
denverpilot said:
Cool. Now I’ll know to look there. You mean the bookstore over at the museum? Or is there another bookstore I’m missing?
Click to expand...
Well, they're not hard to find. Ah, here we go: http://www.fascinations.com/aviation

At Airventure, I think I saw them at the huge book/T-shirt/souvenir/kitsch building, forget what it's called.
 
denverpilot said:
That’s nifty. Find it in the FlyMart?
Click to expand...

Over in the museum gift shop. I hadn't been to the museum in my previous Osh trips, and it's really worth a visit...aircraft, displays and lighting are top-tier. There was a Frank Borman exhibit with some of his astronaut gear that I found especially interesting, as I had just finished reading Apollo 8.
 
denverpilot said:
And most folks don’t know Kennedy asked to cancel Apollo right before he was assassinated...
Click to expand...
This is misinterpreted, vastly overblown.
This was a 1963 UN political "what if" speech, nobody seriously expected that this will lead to anything... nobody (including probably Kennedy) seriously entertained idea that Apollo will be "cancelled".
 
olasek said:
This is misinterpreted, vastly overblown.
This was a 1963 UN political "what if" speech, nobody seriously expected that this will lead to anything... nobody (including probably Kennedy) seriously entertained idea that Apollo will be "cancelled".
Click to expand...

Tell the lady with multiple degrees in tech history who’s researched it.
 
denverpilot said:
Tell the lady with multiple degrees in tech history who’s researched it.
Click to expand...
I like this lady, I have seen her many times. I value her videos.
I am not denying that Kennedy launched a "trial" balloon to get Soviets to participate. It is a historical fact.
Lets quote key words used in his speech "I include among these possibilities, a joint expedition to the Moon."
But we also know that Soviets promptly said "Nyet" - another fact.
Now there is zero evidence that in the weeks following the Soviet's rejection Kennedy contemplated 'cancellation' of Apollo program.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top