Originally Posted by wingman
Originally Posted by Mr PotatoHead
Stunning, simply stunning. For me, an older guy it almost seems unreal to see this much tech at work.


It's super cool, don't get me wrong.

But the basic functionality of the rocket hasn't changed that much from what they were doing in the 60s and early 70s with 1/100,000th of the computing power.

Everyone thinks the "landing" part is so revolutionary. In fact, the reason they didn't land the rocket back then was because there was no point--not because the tech wasn't there to do it. The basic math is the same that they used to land on the moon.

1) They didn't want to carry the extra fuel (weight) needed to do a powered landing.
2) It was the Cold War Space Race, so cost savings was not important.

It's cool, yes. But as fast as tech was moving in the early days, it's a little disappointing how little certain aspects of space flight have changed form the 80s until now.

I want my flying car, dang it!


I don't quite agree, you are excluding any external uncontrollable aero loading (winds), which did not exist on the moon, and in landing on earth, the launch aero design is basically in complete chaos in that you can't depend on using any aero loading at the slowest speed, center of pressure is completely different vs launch, and center of gravity is also greatly changed with the reduced fuel load upon landing, all very important aspects to maintain directional stability.

Maybe like trying to reload a fired shell back into a cannon? biggrin


Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.