this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2023
1120 points (96.8% liked)

Political Memes

5457 readers
2215 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tygerprints@kbin.social -4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

But according to Nasa channel's own programs, the challenge of getting to the moon is not the challenge of getting there, it's how to get back again. Which puzzles me, since the claim is we easily did it in 1969 (though the return part of the trip was very much not talked about). I'm not claiming the moon landing didn't happen, I sure want to believe it did. I just find it weird that this could be true.

And I'm very much a cheerleader for getting us back there and beyond. I want my little yellow starship vest with crew insignia on it.

[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago

Who was claiming that "easily" was how we did it?

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Lamo it was not easy. It was rigorously planned and quadruple checked. Many lab tests and smaller satilite launch to test rockets.

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

I know they spent years planning it and testing it all, so I'm not saying it wasn't possible. I just thought it was a little too "smooth" and predictable, the way it all went without much of a hitch. But - I'm hoping that will be how it goes the next time we make a landing there.

[–] bisby@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In the 1960s we built a moon rocket. Single purpose built for going to the moon and back.

Today, companies are trying to build general purpose ultra heavy lift rockets and slapping a moon mission on them. Starship? Not a moon rocket. New Glenn? Not a moon rocket.

Its like living in an RV and saying "living in it isnt the problem, its the plumbing!" Plumbing is an easy solved problem for fixed houses. You've only made the situation harder on yourself by trying to be dual purpose

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

Hmm good point. I think with today's technology there CAN be more they can do in terms of making it multi-purpose, and hopefully they can work out all the kinks. I would love see us back on the moon in the next decade or so.

[–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

We did it using analoge technology that is no longer produced and with security standards much lower than is acceptable today. The tech that we are "missing" is modern tech used for the same purposes with acceptable reliability and security. One hurdle with digital over analog is that radiation affects it a lot more. Not insurmountable, but requires work to prove it lives up to modern standards.