Saturn V Fallen on Hard Times 355
n9fzx writes "The best remaining artifact of the Apollo Program, Huntsville's Saturn V, is 'pocked with pits and cracks, and patches of mold and mildew', having survived for forty years outdoors. Alabama's U.S. Space and Rocket Center is trying to raise a measly $5 million in order to preserve the beast, with $1.5 million in the kitty so far. Paypal, anyone?"
never should have been left to rot (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:5, Informative)
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:2)
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:4, Informative)
A few years ago, the Space and Rocket Center, paid way too much money for a BEAUTIFUL fiberglass replica shell to be built and stod up. It is life size and is accurate. It's a wonderufl sight to see coming in 565 or landing at the airport in the afternoon. This thing is I believe the second tallest structure in the state of Alabama, and it stands out like a giant sundial when you are at 1-2000 ft.
Regardless, the original post was about the real hardware which was laid on it's side 40 years ago, and is viewable to this day. Ignoring the 'left to rot' aspect, the hardware was Unusable within a very short time, and it was understood when it was first laid down that it would never be considered flight worthy again. The $5 Mill. is merely to restore and preserve it so it looks nice. (and I do support the project to preserve it, even if I may sound like I don't)
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:3, Informative)
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:2)
It's not my business where they com down..."
-- Herr Doktor W.. Von Braun
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:4, Informative)
That's not my department," said Wernher von Braun.
von Braun started working on rockets in the 1930s and went on to build the A-4, later renamed the V-2, which was the first successful ballistic missile and later served to launch scientific instruments and cameras to the edge of space (it could not reach orbit.) One of the X-Prize entrants, the Canadian Arrow, uses the V-2 design with a second stage added so that it can launch three people on a suborbital trajectory. von Braun himself wanted to build something similar in the 1940s, but it never happened.
He went on to design the Redstone rocket used to launch the first two Mercury flights, the Jupiter rocket which launched Explorer 1, and famously the Saturn family of rockets, obviously including the Saturn 5.
He died in 1973 or 1974, I forget which. He always saw his funding during his years in Germany as a way to build rockets that would send people to the stars. Lehrer had that part right.
"Don't say that he's hypocritical
Say rather that he's apolitical."
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:4, Insightful)
-philski-
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:5, Informative)
If I remember correctly, two complete Saturn V's were available when the program was cancelled. One of them was turned into Skylab and another into this showpiece. Apollo 20 was never assembled.
Correction (Score:5, Informative)
Apollo 20 was indeed assembled and serves as a memorial to the workers at the Michoud Assembly Plant near New Orleans. The first and second stages on display in Houston were originally slated for Apollo 19. The booster used for Skylab was that of the Apollo 18.
Re:Correction (Score:3, Informative)
Fly them? I couldn't agree more (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not convinced at all that we should be spending billions of dollars of government money on new launchers when we have a system sitting around that works very nicely, thank you very much.
Sure, a brand new system would be better, but between the brevity of our pass by-with Mars, the vitality of private space programs, and our humbled and abused government finances, perhaps the Saturn should be more then a five million dollar paperweight and conversation piece.
And even beyond that, nothing gives perspective on a subject liking getting to look up close and personal at the gear used to do it. Especially since leading-edge gear from the seventies and earlier (like, say, the Spirit of St. Louis) always looks so DIY to anybody who pays attention.
I found it very energizing when I was a kid to see the Kennedy Space Center Saturn and think "hmm.... that wouldn't be so hard to build at all".
Rustin
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:5, Informative)
Part one: Capability of original Saturn V.
Part two: With improved efficiency F1 main engines.
Part 3: Improved F1 engines burning high efficiency kerosene/nanoaluminum powder fuels.
Saturn V basic specs:
Empty weight: 250 tons.
Empty weight of first stage: 100 tons.
Fueled weight 3000 tons.
Takeoff thrust: 3750 tons.
Takeoff weight / thrust ratio: 80/100.
Thrust of each main first F1 engine: 750 tons.
Efficiency of each F1 engine: 250:1
Fuel consumption of each F1 engine: 3 tons/second.
Ratio of LO2/Kerosene: 2 tons/1 ton/ second.
Total mass of fuel consumed at and of first stage cutoff: 2250 tons
Mass of all upper stages at seperation:650 tons.
Thrust of second stage:600 tons.
Net weight of two stage orbit capability, based on skylab data: 90 tons.
Net weight of 2.5 stage orbit capability, based on moon launches: 150 tons.
Net capacity escape to moon: 45-50 tons.
Part two: Improved F1 engines:
The russians designed during the Moon landing era LO2/kerosene engines with efficiencies of 333, sea level, which is 33% greater than the existing F1.
That means the redesigned F1 engines could have produced 2 million pounds of thrust ( 1000 tons) at the same 3 tons per second consumption. That means that take off thrust of 5000 tons versus 3750 tons, an increased thow upper stage total weight jumping from 650 tons to 1650 tons and a probable doubling of mass to orbit:
2 stage mass: 180-200 tons.
2.5 stage mass: 300 tons
3 stage escape mass to moon: 90-100 tons.
So a conventional but improved F1 engine could hav e allowed supporting an early small manned colony on the moon.
Part three: Use of NanoAlumimum powder in Kerosene fuels: Link: http://www.argonide.com/gun_propellants.html
Based on the article, efficiency could increase at least 50%. If so then the 333 ISP of the 1970's technology could have been raised to 450.
Thus, a possible F3 engine, designed for high efficiency and high energy fuels could have an efficiency rating of 450-500. That means that the Saturn V could have evolved into a rocket that could have placed:
2 stage orbit: 300 tons
2.5 stage orbit: 450 tons.
3 stage escape: 150 tons.
All this without resorting to adding side boosters to the Saturn vehicle. If side boosters of equal or better design than that used by the current space shuttle could have been added to the Saturn V then that vehicle could have evolved to place in orbit perhaps 600 to 1000 tons and have capacity to put into escape 300 tons.
The mass of the current space station is now 200 tons and if core completed will weight 300 tons. It is estimated that the requried mass of a mars expedition space ship will be 300 tons.
The world could have been colonizing the moon right now and be on the verge this year of making the jump to mars.
Hundreds of years ago the Chinese sent a huge fleet to colonize the world. It went entirely around the world leaving historical evidence everywhere and bring home innformation. The Mandarins then dismantled the entire fleet, forbid exploration and became a closed society until Admiral Perry forcibly opened them up to the world.
Why does the high sounding Bush administration's new space vision really feel like a mandarins sleight of hand maneuver to gut the space program like they are gutting everything else.
Folks, the technology exists NOW. The means is there. But will the politicos actually allow the opportunity?
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:3, Informative)
As a piece of porcelain in any antique shop will show you, China was never an entirely closed country, it continued to trade with the West through to the modern era.
Admiral Perr
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:4, Informative)
But you got the stories of the great chinese fleet and Perry expedition wrong.
Commodore Perry's [japan-society.org] mission opened up Japan, not China. Japan != China.
Archeological evidence that the great Chinese fleet circumnavigated the world? Here is an article [chinapage.org] with a map [chinapage.org], showing they got as far as the Horn of Africa. A great accomplishment, but not world-girdling.
so, the facts you gave about the improved Saturn V? They are more accurate than those you offered on the history of maritime explorations?
Re:One Problem: You're Wrong (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.space.com/news/spacehistory/saturn_fiv
Jon Acheson
Re:never should have been left to rot (Score:2, Informative)
"The Saturn V on display at the United States Space and Rocket Center is the actual test rocket that was used in dynamic testing of the Saturn facilities at Marshall. The stages of the rocket were used to check out all the Saturn facilities at Huntsville. Although the rocket was not intended to be flown, it was a working vehicle that prepared the way for the Apollo expeditions to the moon."
"Officials from the Department of the Interior referred to t
Jerry Pournelle put it best (Score:3, Informative)
Why not just cover it.... (Score:3, Funny)
*ducks*
Re:Why not just cover it.... (Score:2, Funny)
Looks like a nice fixer-upper. (Score:3, Funny)
I remember that thing (Score:5, Interesting)
It looks big in person... looked even bigger as a kid... truly an impressive sight.
Re:I remember that thing (Score:5, Informative)
It's big, indeed.
Re:I remember that thing (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I remember that thing (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I remember that thing (Score:2)
I don't know that the rocket is worth $5 million dollars to save, but it sure was cool to see. When you take into account the PR value of having such a beast
For $5 million bucks... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:For $5 million bucks... (Score:2)
We carry a harpoon.
But there ain't no whales
So we tell tall tales
And sing our whaling tune.
Re:Whalers on the moon (Score:2)
Oh, crap!
Something better to do with the money (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:5, Insightful)
Hubble's successor is launched in 2010 [physicsweb.org] and any money is definitely better spent on the successor rather than the old Hubble.
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Informative)
For that matter, what do you think its chances are of ever getting launched at all?
In the current economy, it's not too clever to quit your IT job unless you've got a firm, unreversable commitment for a new one to switch to with an absolutely definite start date that can't be postponed by the new employer. Similarly I don't think it's clever to abandon the Hubble til the Webb is launched and operational.
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Interesting)
How is that at all relevant to the fact that we need to service Hubble now? It's not like the costs of servicing it (which is supposed to be a regular thing) and the costs of launching a replacement are even comparable. NASA even admitted [slashdot.org] that they aren't refraining from servicing Hubble for cost reasons. We will lose Hubble if it isn't serviced, and then we would have nothing until 2010, assuming that the successor
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:2)
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:5, Insightful)
While it would only take $40 million to service hubble, $3.5 million is alot easier to raise than the additional $38.5 million for hubble.
So the choice is not really between fix up Saturn V or service hubble but rather between man on mars or servicing hubble.
What would you rather have, a man on mars collecting samples (that may be done by a robot for a fraction of the cost) or all the scientific discoveries of the universe that are continuosly made by hubble?
It's a safe bet that because of George W. Bush "man on mars" initiative any Saturn V repairs are going to be completely off the radar as well, unless maybe you get a bunch of schoolchildren to toss in their dollars (as they did for the statue of liberty).
If I were an astromoner, I'd be pretty mad too.
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Informative)
I beg to differ. The most important geological findings on the moon were done precisely because of human intuition and the capability to make observations and on-the-spot changes in the original mission plan.
For further reference, read Andrew Chaikin's "A Man on the Moon" [amazon.com].
It's a sad state of affairs when people actually start to believe that robots could ever replace human explorers.
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree. We need to go to Mars and learn about other worlds.
The sad thing is, all that we've been spending on "space science" all this time in LEO... IMO, a large amount of it could be done better and cheaper by robots. All of these "what patterns of ash does fire make on this glass" and "how does this kind of crystal grow" could be cheaply put into space by Delta IV or Ariane and observed
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Insightful)
It is my belief that with the experiment load carried upon the Shuttle science missions, the people are acting pretty much like robots. Sure, I've seen cases when shuttle/space station astronauts have successfully troubleshooted experiments and have gotten them to run. But despite the often-hear
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Interesting)
Alot of space travel fanboys are going to say "it's not the same as being there."
Maybe not, but these people need to get a sense of reality. Former astronaut (and senator) John Glen estimates [wkbn.com] it will cost one trillion dollars
Does Bush have a sense of reality? "He wants to build like a space station on the moon, and then
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:2)
Heh, I guess that makes me "unpatriotic."
Now, you do realize there is a 2-hour radio delay between here and mars, correct? Just think of the agony of finding and picking up rocks, then bringing them home with a 2 hour delay.
Boy, if something were to go wrong, we couldn't help the astronaut. Even travelling at the speed of light.
To think the nation can foot a "90 billion a year" bill for a man on mars not only shows dedication
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:2)
"Boy, if something were to go wrong, we couldn't help the astronaut. Even travelling at the speed of light."
I have never understood that reasoning, peronally to me the idea of never sending people away from earth because something bad might happen to them is the moral equivalent of someone afraid to walk out their front door because something bad might happen to them.
And finally, yes we most certainly can foot a 90 bil
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:2)
We spend $300 billion a year on interest payments.
We have spent more than $5 trillion since 1970 on societal programs.
We spend over $400 billion a year on Social Security and over $200 billion a year on Medicare.
Yet, whenever the space program is mentioned, suddenly everyone starts carping about the cost.
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:3, Informative)
With the focus on retiring the shuttle to permit construction of the Crew Exploration Vehicle, this really does
Wrong Figures (500+41) (Score:2)
The $41 million number I gave was an estimate from O'Keefe to develop SM4 to completion. But it must be missing the launch costs, because those run $500 million additionally. NASA folks aren't certain where he got this number from, and this might even indicate he didn't fully think through his decision to terminate the Hubble program.
Anyway, though, I still believe this is a small cost to maintain and greatly improve upon the Hubble, as compared to the rest of NASA's b
Re:Something better to do with the money (Score:2)
one way trip to mars, anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
If Stephen Baxter could use the Saturn V for a one way trip to Titan [sfsite.com], I see no reason why we can't use it for Mars instead! Baxter has even done the research [scifi.com] :-)
And just for the record, yes the book does drag, but it also has a great story of a dilapidated American space program doing something heroic which I found a tale worth reading.
sheesh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh wait, that doesn't make sense at all.
Too bad I don't have an extra $1.5M lying around somewhere. Maybe I could talk to Capital One about raising my credit limit? ;)
Anyway, it was truly a remarkable construction. Everything about the Saturn V was huge. From the buildings involved in construction to the enormous crawler built to haul the damn thing. We're talking an absolutely massive scale... In fact, according to the history channel's show Modern Marvels, the only human-produced sound louder than a Saturn V at lift-off is the detonation of an atomic bomb.
It is a historical irony that space exploration takes second place to mass destruction in decibel output, though. Perhaps that says something about human nature?
Yah (Score:2)
It is a historical irony that space exploration takes second place to mass destruction in decibel output, though. Perhaps that says something about human nature?
To me, it says that when we're gonna murder hundreds of thousands of people practically all at once, we couldn't give a shit less how loud the boom is.
Re:Yah (Score:2)
Interesting stuff about Saturn V (Score:5, Interesting)
Weighed 5 million pounds fueled
Main engines burned for less than 2.5 minutes
Was travelling 6,000mph at burnout
Was slightly more fuel efficient than a Crystler SUV
Re:Interesting stuff about Saturn V (Score:4, Interesting)
Needs a Large Roll_Down Rubber Protector (Score:3, Funny)
ls
Save the tower too (Score:4, Interesting)
I really can't get my head around how a society could undertake such a massive project as Apollo, then fail to preserve the artifacts for future generations. Heck, I am a future generation. I was only one year old when the last Saturn flew. I've seen the Saturn V in Houston, it's really astonishing. I can only imagine what it would look like standing next to the LUT.
Historical Perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember Columbus' sailing ships?
Remember the Conestoga wagons?
Remember the first steps off this planet?
and onto another world?
It tells who we are, like it, or not.
Send it back to Hollywood (Score:2, Funny)
Use the money elsewhere?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, while we're at it, if the Statue of Liberty begins to fall apart, no worries, we'll just let it fall over.
Effiel Tower? Nah, France surrenders.
Big Ben? I already have a watch!
Taj Mahal? Whatever, we can just visit it virtually since they scanned it with 3D lasers or whatever...
</sarcasm>
What's with all the "who cares" posts? If you don't care, don't donate to fix the rocket. Go feed the hungry or whatever. Jeez, I've said this twice before in the last 24 hours, but geeks/engeneers really will find a way to disagree with anything just for the sake of argument. It's the god damned Saturn V! This ain't just America's history, this machine brought the first MAN to the moon. I say preserve it at all costs!
But it's not the only Saturn V (Score:2)
Re:Use the money elsewhere?!? (Score:5, Funny)
No we dont.
Will it get a new bad paint job? (Score:3, Informative)
The good places will carefully restore what is needed and replace pipes when needed and put them back to where they had been and they leave all the serail number plates on parts so they can be read.
Spoiled rotten (Score:2)
I wonder if they are going to have the Cosmosphere do the restoration work on the Saturn 5?
Heck, I'd bet they'd do the work for the US$1.5 they have now, if the would let the Cosmosphere display it....
There is one in FL (Score:5, Informative)
Left outside? (Score:3, Insightful)
It should be restored to all its glory and made into a prominent display. I went to the Saturn V center at Kennedy just a few months ago, and you can almost hear people's jaws drop when they step into the Saturn V display. It's possibly one of the most historically important machines man has ever built, it should not be allowed to rot and decay outside.
Re:Left outside? (Score:3, Interesting)
The 5 million would be better spent on the X prize (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The 5 million would be better spent on the X pr (Score:2)
Re:better spent on just about anything (Score:2)
On the other hand, if Carmack said he was selling shares in his aerospace company because he needs 100 million to get an orbiter up and back, then you can safely sign me and a whole bunch of other geeks up. Think of it as PayPal with something in return.
5 million? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:5 million? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure they do. The one at Kennedy is in beautiful shape. If we're going back to the moon and need a heavy launch rocket I wouldn't be suprised if they reverse engineer some stuff from the Saturn V down there (since supposedly the plans have all been lost to time). Personally I would think that if they could build a Saturn V rocket in the 1960's then today's rocket scientist
Paypal... (Score:2)
Obvious solution... (Score:5, Funny)
Damn, my living room museum needs a brick from the Berlin Wall, a chunk of the Biggest Rocket Ever Built, and a single hard-copy SCO share to go along with my original mint-condition 20-diskette pack of IBM's OS/2 (which never flew, either).
JSC Saturn V (Score:5, Interesting)
It's an impressive thing up close. From our parking lot at work, it didn't look that impressive. But when you got up close to it, it was another story.
However, the Saturn V at JSC is also in pretty poor shape - it's corroded right through in places if you look closely. The white paintwork on the CM is badly cracked. Apparently, it also became a home for some owls (which is not a bad thing really).
The best artifact inside JSC is an Apollo capsule that went to the moon and back. You can actually (or could when I was last there) touch the heat shield - it's neat touching something that's been to the Moon and back. When you look at it closely, with its primitive electronics and its small size, you wonder how they ever did it.
Re:JSC Saturn V (Score:2, Informative)
You mean it went to lunar orbit and back, but yeah that must be pretty cool to see.
Re:JSC Saturn V (Score:2)
Just wait until they finally figure out how to launch it...
Auction it off (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe they can at least save some of the museum. (Score:4, Interesting)
Tom Sawyer (Score:2)
Poor Governorship - Take Back The Rockets (Score:4, Interesting)
Instead of seeing the museum as an expense they should view it as a moneymaker ($tourism). Alabama politicians must be just plain stupid to let the U.S. Space and Rocket Center fall apart. Maybe the federal government should step in and confiscate these national treasures?
Why did they build it? (Score:2)
Never should have gotten to this point. (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, it is largely the Rocket Center's fault that things got so bad. I worked there for 2 years as a counselor about a decade ago and the condition of the exhibit then was the same as it is now (minus another 10 layers of paint and mildew/moss/etc). Guess what their idea of maintaining the exhibit was to go out every year and paint over the past year's mildew with a new layer of paint. Anyone who knows about paint, mold and mildew will realize what decades of overpainting will do. I'm sure that covering the exhibit with a simple structure like a tent-roof, while expensive, would have cost less than $5m when they first set up the exhibit, even counting for inflation since then, especially if they had leveraged their relationship with the army engineers on Redstone Arsenal.
Of course, the USSRC had very short-sighted management throughout the time I worked there as well as for at least a few years before and after I left. They continuously had smaller exhibits break down and their maintenance was horrible. They had great exhibits, but didn't do a good job of keeping them up.
Other examples? Sure:
* The simulator used for Space Camp (elementary age
* Most of the other rockets in the park have a similar problem and undergo the same painting "refresh". The difference is they are mostly upright and so it is not as visible (and they're alot smaller). Except for their shuttle mockup, which is going to have the same issues in a few years as the SV exhibit.
* The Shuttle tank usually has pennies and pencils stuck in it from kids tossing them into it. They usually clean them out about once a year. Not sure what the solution for this would be, but even a sign saying "hey, please don't deface this exhibit" would have been useful.
* The "centrifuge" exhibit/ride continuously broke down. It sometimes was down for a week or more. It was very popular, but instead of getting a real overhaul one year they just shut it down and scrapped it.
Additionally
- Space Camp programs, during the years I was there, brought in a tidy profit. However, the museum was in such disrepair that it was a loss center. So, instead of Space Camp programs being able to expand and fix things properly, money was diverted to the museum to keep it afloat.
- During the years I was there it was standard practice to lay off everyone they could during the holiday months. While this is practical it also had the add bonus (to the center) of marking all of us as Seasonal employees. This meant that we didn't have to be paid benefits.
- Along with no benefits, even though some counselors had been there for years, there was also no overtime. Think that being scheduled for 80+ hours a week (a few of us worked 2 programs, and I know of at least 4 people including myself who -averaged- 80 hours in the summer and sometimes hit 100 hours
Nah, buy your own! (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.apogeerockets.com/Saturn5.asp
Why 5 million? (Score:2)
Obligatory Bob the builder quote... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Obligatory Bob the builder quote... (Score:2)
Don't paypal these guys anything. (Score:2, Insightful)
If you want to fix it, get a group of volunteers that are willing to fix it themselves and then offer to do it.
Re:Don't paypal these guys anything. (Score:3, Insightful)
Moderators: this was Insightful? please...
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:5, Insightful)
Space exploration (or historic preservation) and removing world poverty are not mutually exclusive. Ending world poverty requires removing corruption and improving logictics in 3rd world countries, pumping money at them will not solve these problems, it will sustain them.
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:2)
Look at this example [bbc.co.uk]
The fact is, while the gap between rich and poor has widened in the past 50, 100, 200 years, the poor have got richer too. Far, far fewer people in Africa are starving now than was the case 50 years ago.
Don't think I'm knocking charities at all - many of their people are extremely committed, and do a great job which I could never do.
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:2, Funny)
Since I'm not a self rightous middle class twat with delusions of saving the poor down-trodden masses, I'd say the 7,000 refugees/famine victims aren't being used for anything useful either so they can 'depart' as well.
We can keep the 'feed the world' t-shirts, USA for Africa videos, etc, and generations of the 'future' can reconstruct your tedious "I'm such a virtous wanker" pomposity through virtual reality whenever they feel the need.
That's merely my opinion, though.
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:5, Insightful)
In a short-sighted, cold and logical sort of way, you are absolutely correct. However, we as a species like to think that we are both social and moral creatures and our actions today affect our lives tomorrow. Therefore, just letting the 3rd world starve is not just wrong in a moral sense, it's not smart considering what will happen a few years down the road when the remaining billions come for our throats.
Then again, we (the peoples of the "West") really need to have this discussion. We've needed it for over a hundred years, but no one has been willing to pick it up, for various reasons. USA for Africa is just a Band-Aid (in your face, Bob Geldof!), but we will need to help them somehow, and soon - if for no other reason than our own long-term survival on this planet. The present state of affairs is not sustainable.
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:2, Insightful)
We all save 0.00007c of taxes, they get to give their children a chance to be IPO pump and dump scamsters, everybody wins!
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:4, Insightful)
And don't pretend like the Apollos are ancient history. It may not seem like it now, but there will be a time when we need that technology again. Shuttles are one thing, but if we want another manned mission to the Moon, we're going to need the old, powerful rocket technology found in the Apollos. We haven't built them in 30 years, so letting our final working model turn into rust would be foolish.
As for the 7,000 starving people, they don't amount to much. If we feed 'em for a year, they'll die after that anyway. They won't contribute to mankind's future in space. This is the callous part, and many (religious) people probably wouldn't agree with me here, but a rocket is worth more than the lives of 7,000 starving 3rd-world-country-dwellers who will never amount to anything. Think of it in another way: a lot more than 7,000-lives-worth of effort went into the Apollo program, so letting all of that go to waste over only 7,000 current lives wouldn't be worth it.
Re:Feed The Hungry (Score:2)
and what about these other wastes of money like the memorial to be built in new york where the World Trade Center towers stood?
to hell with symbols of freedom, achievement, and rememberance as nobody cares about that crap anyways...
do you realize how mu
Natural formations? (Score:2)
After all, the human species is so singular, so important, with such a manifest destiny, that it's only to be expected that "life" will always look like us.
I'm just curious. If you saw a rock on Mars that looked like an elephant, would you immediately assume th
... thinking like an athiest?! (Score:2)
And don't flatter yourself, mr. Coward, you were never like me.
Choo choo bear! (Score:2)
inevitable (Score:3, Insightful)
by Percy Bysshe Shelley
I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said--"Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert . . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandius, King of Kings,
Look on my Works,
Re:Wait until the flag comes back (Score:3, Insightful)