122
NASA to lay off more than 500 employees
(www.nasa.gov)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
122 points (100.0% liked)
news
23514 readers
856 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Most of the fundamental technology breakthroughs were achieved by NASA in the 90's but due to various issues, the space shuttle being the obvious one (thanks Nixon/Agnew), they were not followed up on. Also NASA has worked very closely with SpaceX essentially from the beginning, just another case of the government selling off technology to a private company because it's the only way things change in this country.
NASA has never built rockets or passenger carrying spacecraft. They have always contracted them out, yes even the Saturn V, with NASA oversight/management. Also you literally bring up Artemis so not sure what you're talking about.
You'll notice how they haven't had an accident since either but you can literally thank Obama for SLS.
Which itself is based on old Soviet and Aerojet Rocketdyne designs. Just like how Starship's design is inspired by the N1.
It was never there. Apollo only got funded as a way to 'peacefully' develop ICBM and related technologies. If China manages to land on the Moon before the US does again then perhaps there might be a similar program for Mars or an effort to industrialize LEO but while China is making progress in space they don't seem to be making it a priority and I would be genuinely surprised if they manage to make it to the Moon before the US/SpaceX does.
Edit: Also even if China did manage to somehow beat the US to the moon they don't have a fully reusable superheavy rocket (even their plans talk about the 2040's) so it would be a significant but ultimately very temporary victory.
Again, none of this disagrees with what I wrote. You aren’t going to see any breakthroughs soon, either from NASA or SpaceX.
However, I do find this comment a bit strange:
A fundamental design flaw is a fundamental design flaw. You can say that they have since fixed and strengthened the O-ring until the final cancellation of the Space Shuttle program, but that doesn’t change the fact that it poses significant risks to the crew. Just because a poorly designed car hasn’t run into accident, doesn’t mean it’s a safe vehicle. When the accident eventually happens, you’re more likely to be dead than alive.
Furthermore, solid rockets shouldn’t be used for manned space flights, especially for a country as rich as the US. The only reasons to use them is because it’s cheap, and easy to build, and can be stored for years, yes. But there’s a reason the Russians use liquid propellant rockets for their manned space flights. Solid rockets cannot be throttled, and if it explodes, there’s no way to abort the crew safely.
I mean ... you're disagreeing with what you wrote so I don't know what to tell you.
To begrudgingly defend SpaceX here, if Starship actually works as advertised it actually is a game changer. Their intended launch cadence makes things like Skyhooks a realistic consideration which in turn would make Sci-Fi levels of interplanetary activity possible. Even the semi-reusable Falcon 9 has made a big difference in the launch market, for better or worse, Starlink and the other satellite constellations would not have been anywhere near the realm of profitability without it.
For the Shuttle yeah but Orion has launch abort capability. I agree they shouldn't be used on principle but SLS is a jobs program that happens to build rockets, not the other way around.