Engine That Almost Launched Apollo 8 Moonshot Found 40 Years Later

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wick07

Guest
<p>http://www.space.com/news/cs-081222-apollo8-engine-found.html</p><p>Just a excerpt from the article that I found amusing:</p><p><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"><em>"However, the engine was never re-allocated to another stage," said Lawrie. "Instead, it was shipped to Michoud where it was used to verify the effects of long term storage on F-1 engines. It remained at Michoud for over 20 years."</em></span></p><p><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Is this the bureaucratic way of saying "We lost it."?</span></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#3366ff"><strong>_______________________________<em> </em></strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"</em>If you are surrounded by those who constatly agree with you, then you're in an intellectual vacuum.  If you feel like trying to make a difference, you have to BE different.  How can you do that without interacting with those who are different from yourself?"</font></p><p><font color="#0000ff">-  a_lost_packet_</font></p> </div>
 
O

oklahoman

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>http://www.space.com/news/cs-081222-apollo8-engine-found.htmlJust a excerpt from the article that I found amusing:"However, the engine was never re-allocated to another stage," said Lawrie. "Instead, it was shipped to Michoud where it was used to verify the effects of long term storage on F-1 engines. It remained at Michoud for over 20 years."Is this the bureaucratic way of saying "We lost it."? <br /> Posted by wick07</DIV></p><p>Its a way of saying "we paid a lot of money for it, but do not want to let the public know it was for nothing". </p><p>I have a similar situation where I work. </p><p>My former boss was crazy, and kept coming up with new ways to expand his departments responsibilities. He kept buying very expensive things that had little use.&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Its a way of saying "we paid a lot of money for it, but do not want to let the public know it was for nothing". I have a similar situation where I work. My former boss was crazy, and kept coming up with new ways to expand his departments responsibilities. He kept buying very expensive things that had little use.&nbsp; Posted by oklahoman</DIV></p><p>I had a friend of mine like that.&nbsp; He called it "Expanding his Empire."&nbsp; He would purposefully get as many people assigned under him as possible to expand his "department."&nbsp; I wouldn't have been surprised if he had said "<em>All basket-weaving related activities should come under the head of my department because, we don't do anything like that but are extremely familiar with what departments who don't do anything like that do and we routinely handle such activities.</em>" .... </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
S

steve82

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I had a friend of mine like that.&nbsp; He called it "Expanding his Empire."&nbsp; He would purposefully get as many people assigned under him as possible to expand his "department."&nbsp; I wouldn't have been surprised if he had said "All basket-weaving related activities should come under the head of my department because, we don't do anything like that but are extremely familiar with what departments who don't do anything like that do and we routinely handle such activities." .... <br />Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV>I was at a Conf. a few years back where they noted the phenomena and referred to such things as "Flight Magazine Tools."&nbsp; Expensive useless products, mostly software packages, that the boss read about in an in-flight magazine while on a business trip.</p>
 
J

jim48

Guest
<strong><font size="2">Wouldn't it be nice if they found a few Saturn Vs in storage somewhere? Having said that, what's the latest on the new moon rocket? When is it supposed to be ready? What do y'all think about keeping&nbsp;two shuttles flying for an extra year or so?</font></strong> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
J

jimglenn

Guest
<p>That new sucka rocket's gonna shake the astro's haids off.&nbsp; We could design a better one here. Let's git goin!</p><p>Who's got a nozzle?&nbsp; I can make the flight computer. Just need some tanks and structural components.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2 class="date">June 16, 2008</h2> <h3 class="title">Ares Family Problems</h3> <p><img src="http://images.spaceref.com/astro/arrow.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <strong> Editor's note:</strong> It would seem that ESMD's implementation of the exploration architecture put forth in the ESAS study is not going smoothly . The original <font style="color:blue!important;font-family:'TrebuchetMS',Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:400;font-size:14px" color="blue"><span style="color:blue!important;font-family:'TrebuchetMS',Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:400;font-size:14px" class="kLink">Ares</span></font> V concept (named/modeled after Apollo's 5 engine Saturn V) was not capable of launching what NASA needs to launch. So, an internal study recommends adding a 6th engine to Ares V and stretching everything else to boost performance. Meanwhile, the vibration problems that have plagued Ares 1 have not been solved. Stay tuned for some bad news and another schedule slip in the near future.</p><p>http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2008/06/ares_family_pro.html</p><p>I think what we are all failing to realize is this: NASA does not belong in the launch provider industry. Mike Griffin himself has supported the previous statement many, many times. It goes something like this, "NASA would like to purchase services and space on rockets from the private sector."</p> <p>Yeah, like that will ever happen. NASA has too much desire to be in control. As one person said, they like to play landlord in space. Just take a look at the history of NASA investment in the private sector. Does the DC-X ring a bell to anyone? Sure, NASA was enthusiastic to take part in that program. But for one reason only: it was becoming a viable threat to the <font style="color:blue!important;font-family:'TrebuchetMS',Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:400;font-size:13px" color="blue"><span style="border-bottom:1pxsolidblue;color:blue!important;font-family:'TrebuchetMS',Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:400;font-size:13px;background-color:transparent" class="kLink">Space </span><span style="border-bottom:1pxsolidblue;color:blue!important;font-family:'TrebuchetMS',Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:400;font-size:13px;background-color:transparent" class="kLink">Shuttle</span></font><span style=""><div id="preLoadLayer5" style="display:none"><img style="border:0pxnone" src="http://kona.kontera.com/javascript/lib/imgs/grey_loader.gif" alt="" /></div></span>. However, they couldn't let that be known (although it was common knowledge already) because NASA would look like the playground bully that it really is. Instead, they throw a little chump change into the program for the rights to say "Look America, NASA does support commercial access to space."</p> <p>However, what Joe taxpayer fails to see is that they slowly bled the DC-X program until it finally collapsed. The same thing is currently taking place with the COTS program. NASA is investing a relatively small amount in commercial companies intent on developing launch vehicles. There's only one small problem. NASA's plan has backfired this time. If all goes according to plan, Elon Musk and SpaceX will have routine access to space and the re-supply of ISS by 2011. Even if they don't exercise COTS Option D, NASA won't be able to stomp out a company who has more private capital than the COTS contract has invested.</p> <p>And when that day comes, when a Falcon 9 carrying a Dragon module lifts off the pad toward ISS, the question will be: Are there any NASA astronauts on-board? It is up to NASA to answer that question. If they choose to play bully yet again, I hope the answer will be no. At some point, NASA needs to learn how to play nice. There is no better time in history than the present.</p><p> <span class="comments-post">Posted by: I want to go to the Moon! </span></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h3 class="title">Bush Says No to Space Cooperation With China - Update</h3> <div class="asset-meta"> Posted by kcowing at 8:39 PM | Comments (24) <br /> </div> <p>Bush Administration Nixed NASA's U.S.-China, Aviation Week</p> <p><em>"NASA tried and failed to obtain Bush administration approval of an overture to China for a cooperative U.S.-China space mission, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin tells Aviation Week & Space Technology. The White House believes that a higher level of cooperation is too great a reward to China for its human rights and arms-trafficking violations of international law. But the new Obama administration may resurrect the idea."</em></p>http://www.nasawatch.com/<p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
Replies
11
Views
950
Astronomy
MeteorWayne
M
D
Replies
3
Views
706
P

Latest posts