Nasa, Ares and the gratuitous Monty Python joke

  • Context: Python 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mgb_phys
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nasa Python
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around NASA's challenges with the Ares rocket program, particularly the Ares-I and Ares-V models, and includes humorous commentary on the historical context of rocket design, specifically the Saturn V. Participants explore issues related to engineering, cost, and the implications of reusability in space technology.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern that the Ares-V may be too heavy for the launchpad, potentially leading to structural failures.
  • There is a humorous suggestion to consult historical figures like Wernher von Braun regarding rocket design, highlighting a perceived loss of valuable designs like the Saturn V.
  • One participant notes that the destruction of Saturn V designs in the 70s was a mistake, implying that they could have been useful for current projects.
  • Several comments critique the cost-effectiveness of reusable rockets, suggesting that government decisions have made reusability more expensive than disposable options.
  • Another participant humorously remarks on the absurdity of building a space center in a swamp, referencing the challenges of infrastructure in relation to rocket launches.
  • A participant shares a link to a report on NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program, indicating ongoing projects and assessments related to space exploration technologies.
  • There is a disagreement about the use of humor in the discussion, with one participant defending the relevance of a Monty Python joke while another finds it gratuitous.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of humorous commentary and serious concerns regarding NASA's rocket programs. There is no consensus on the appropriateness of humor in the discussion or on the implications of the Ares program's challenges.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical decisions and design choices that may have long-term impacts on current space exploration efforts. The discussion includes varying opinions on the cost dynamics of reusable versus disposable rockets, which remain unresolved.

mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
7,906
Reaction score
15
Nasa is facing more problems with it's Shuttle replacement. following Ares-I being too small to lift anything the Ares-V looks like it is too heavy for the road to the launchpad.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/08/21/314931/nasa-faces-budget-busting-crawlerway-rebuild-for-ares-v.html

There is a concern that a collapsing roadway might cause the Ares to - fall over burn down and then sink into the swamp.
(And they said I were mad to build a space centre on a swamp...)
 
Technology news on Phys.org
Obviously time to get the ouija board out to consult dear old Wernher...

Pity they destroyed the designs for the Saturn V back in the 70s...

"Oh, we'll never need those ever again"...:smile:
 
zeitghost said:
Pity they destroyed the designs for the Saturn V back in the 70s...

:biggrin: It is an ex-rocket! :biggrin:​

Ay'up mgb_phys! :smile:

Swamp? :approve: That were luxury!:rolleyes:

We 'ad to build our space centre inside a collapsed mine-shaft three miles under t'North Sea! o:)
 
This thread should be renamed "Nasa, Ares, and the gratuitous use of duct tape."
Seriously though, the only reason they got rid of the Saturn V rockets was they weren't expensive enough. Oh and they wouldn't carry military satellites back down to earth.

Only the government could make something reusable much more expensive than something disposable.
 
chayced said:
Only the government could make something reusable much more expensive than something disposable.

Things that are reusable normally are more expensive than disposable ones. :wink:

CS
 
stewartcs said:
Things that are reusable normally are more expensive than disposable ones. :wink:
Yes, the trick with the shuttle was making each reuse cost more than a disposable one!
 
FYI -

http://sites.nationalacademies.org/deps/DEPS_041874

Division on Engineering and Physical Science
Space - Reports and Report Summaries

Review of NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program: An Interim Report (ASEB)

Released 04.10.2008

To meet the objectives of the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), NASA must develop a wide array of enabling technologies. For this purpose, NASA established the Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP). Currently, ETDP has 22 projects underway. In the report accompanying the House-passed version of the FY2007 appropriations bill, the agency was directed to request from the NRC an independent assessment of the ETDP. This interim report provides an assessment of each of the 22 projects including a quality rating, an analysis of how effectively the research is being carried out, and the degree to which the research is aligned with the VSE. To the extent possible, the identification and discussion of various cross-cutting issues are also presented. Those issues will be explored and discussed in more detail in the final report.
Perhaps the final report was just released.
 
mgb_phys said:
There is a concern that a collapsing roadway might cause the Ares to - fall over burn down and then sink into the swamp.
(And they said I were mad to build a space centre on a swamp...)
I found nothing gratuitous about that. It pertained to the topic and it was damned funny.

...But the 4th rocket...