Got to ask, has it always been like this, even back in the 60s?"That Von Braun's come up with a monster rocket, we don't need it!"?
Quote from: Jim on 04/23/2012 04:09 pmhttp://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Space-Launch-System-is-a-threat-to-JSC-Texas-jobs-3498836.phpThis article did hit on a point I've been thinking about for a while.When you look at NASA's internal expertise in mission operations vs. its expertise in launch vehicle development, it's pretty clear that its expertise in mission operations is far more valuable and unique than its launcher development. There are several industry groups with a far better demonstrated track record of recent launch vehicle development (LM/Boeing/ULA, Orbital, SpaceX, etc), but almost nobody with experience comparable to what we're losing at JSC and with USA being dissolved.Why are we throwing most of the NASA HSF money at saving the most redundant part of NASA's manned spaceflight capacity (launcher development), while sacrificing the truly unique part (manned operations)?~Jon
http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Space-Launch-System-is-a-threat-to-JSC-Texas-jobs-3498836.php
Quote from: Chris Bergin on 04/24/2012 12:49 amGot to ask, has it always been like this, even back in the 60s?"That Von Braun's come up with a monster rocket, we don't need it!"?Haha, another case of history being written by the victors. von Braun was the biggest skeptic of the F1, which was actually under development since the 50s!His focus was on reusability, and he preferred space storable propellants like N2O4/UDMH because density makes reusability easier and stockpiling propellant is easier when it doesn't boil off (on the ground, or in space).The Saturn vehicles were one hack on top of another.. only the engineer's mother could love them. As was the entire Apollo stack.. it was a "rush job" from start to finish and represents the bottom of the rung to mature technology, not the top.
Edit : Just saw the JSC depot study thread lol