←back to thread

404 points voxleone | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
allenrb ◴[] No.45661384[source]
There is just so much wrong with this from start to finish. Here are a few things, by no means inclusive:

1. We’ve already beaten China to the moon by 56 years, 3 months, and some change. And counting.

2. Nothing based around SLS is remotely serious. The cost and timeline of doing anything with it are unreasonable. It is an absolute dead-end. The SpaceX Super Heavy has been more capable arguably as early as the second flight test and certainly now. They could have built a “dumb” second stage at any time, but aren’t that short-sighted.

3. Blue Origin? I’ve had high hopes for the guys for two decades now. Don’t hold your breath.

4. Anyone else? Really, really don’t hold your breath.

This whole “race to the moon, part II” is almost criminally stupid. Land on the moon when we can accomplish something there, not just to prove we haven’t lost our mojo since Apollo.

replies(37): >>45661569 #>>45661650 #>>45661812 #>>45661864 #>>45662019 #>>45662078 #>>45662268 #>>45662530 #>>45662636 #>>45662805 #>>45662869 #>>45663083 #>>45663232 #>>45663254 #>>45664108 #>>45664333 #>>45664434 #>>45664870 #>>45665102 #>>45665180 #>>45665389 #>>45665607 #>>45665948 #>>45666137 #>>45666225 #>>45666739 #>>45667016 #>>45667353 #>>45667484 #>>45667622 #>>45668139 #>>45668273 #>>45671330 #>>45671920 #>>45674500 #>>45674624 #>>45680644 #
Waterluvian ◴[] No.45662078[source]
Re: 1. I think the America of Theseus mindset is a bit troubling. A lot of people like to identify with achievements that they played no role in. Based on zero expertise whatsoever, I have a sense that this is a bit self defeating. To be born a winner, to be taught you’re a winner… how can that be healthy?

Today’s America scores zero points for its accomplishments of the past. But I think one way it can be a good thing is the, “we’ve done it before, we can do it again” attitude. Which is somewhat opposite to “we already won!”

replies(11): >>45662345 #>>45662614 #>>45662879 #>>45663082 #>>45663420 #>>45663980 #>>45665687 #>>45666641 #>>45667851 #>>45668570 #>>45670573 #
zdragnar ◴[] No.45662614[source]
America cannot possibly win the space race again, because it has already been won. The first to get there has already happened.

The idea that we need to land on the moon once a generation just to say that we are as good at landing on the moon as our parents is absurd.

replies(15): >>45662767 #>>45663475 #>>45663477 #>>45663543 #>>45663640 #>>45663668 #>>45663850 #>>45663882 #>>45663981 #>>45664259 #>>45664826 #>>45665284 #>>45666104 #>>45666433 #>>45667087 #
themgt ◴[] No.45663640[source]
America cannot possibly win the space race again, because it has already been won.

This is sort of like saying Leif Erikson and the Icelandic Commonwealth won the "the new world race" in 1000AD. Whatever Columbus et al were up to would surely be of trifling concern to future generations.

replies(1): >>45663729 #
Yeul ◴[] No.45663729{3}[source]
It also ignores the fact that empires can decline.

(Although I think the moon landing is ridiculous there is no scientific reason for it).

replies(4): >>45663998 #>>45664669 #>>45664814 #>>45666452 #
cratermoon ◴[] No.45664669{4}[source]
What do you mean "there is no scientific reason for it"?
replies(3): >>45665057 #>>45665106 #>>45667218 #
1. bregma ◴[] No.45667218{5}[source]
What they mean is all the spinoffs of getting there do not count. Microelectronics, computers, leaps in materials science, massive advances in medical and health sciences, and techniques and processes for very-large-scale project planning and implementation hardly count as benefits, especially if you don't count them as benefits.

After all, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Not one dollar was spent in space during the first space race.

replies(1): >>45669077 #
2. trenchpilgrim ◴[] No.45669077[source]
If you want massive returns on medical and health sciences, you get far better returns investing in medical research and public health programs. Same with technology - if you want better materials and electronics, invest in physics research.
replies(1): >>45669724 #
3. wredcoll ◴[] No.45669724[source]
Isn't that basically what they did? The moon landing was just a big test of the research.
replies(1): >>45669843 #
4. trenchpilgrim ◴[] No.45669843{3}[source]
The US spent 6% of its GDP to land on the moon, much of that money going into military and aerospace companies . It is far more efficient to spend that money on medical, health and physics research directly; the moon landing accomplished political and cultural objectives.
replies(1): >>45673604 #
5. wredcoll ◴[] No.45673604{4}[source]
> money on medical, health and physics research directly

What precisely is the difference? Where was space-race money spent that shouls be reallocated? My point is you eventually need to put the research into practice.