... and all of the documentation has to be kept around for decades, same for the knowledge of how it was constructed and maintained. That's what makes missions like Voyager or even the ISS possible in the first place - a lot of the people who did the early work on either are probably dead now.
This is assuming generational knowledge can be sufficently passed down to be useful in future missions. I'd assume this is quite a niche/specialized skillset they developed for this particular machine. The utility of the knowledge has a limited timeframe which may not justify education of the next generation of scientists.
But regardless recording it would likely be helpful as most problems in engineerings seem to recur over time in different and new contexts.
None beyond the ama/username link That spare_account provided. It’s been 4-5 years at least, most of the stuff i read was about his work on the shuttle, people arguing with him about various engineering topics.
I agree with you on all points, but they are already disclosing the late 80s technology to the general public with the SR-72. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_SR-72) Allegedly, Ben Rich of Skunk Works after he retired in 1991 gave a presentation at UCLA chronicling his career and hinted at the Aurora and that "we now have the technology to send ET home" so we probably have some new type of propulsion system that makes planes interstellar. This is all speculation though.
What's really fascinating is the x-37b https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37 we have an autonomous space craft in orbit for years, yet I never head anything about it. It's part DARPA project so, it's probably some sort reconnaissance experiment.
I could go on and on, I just find this all fascinating.
There's a lot that's not written down. Didn't NASA try to coax Apollo engineers out of retirement for their new big space stuff? The engineers had knowledge that wasn't written down, wasn't accessible, or was simply lost.
Sure, with sufficient time you could recreate the knowledge with brand new engineers but you'd be rediscovering lost information.
Note that this mission was specced and designed ages ago too, so just as the observations it makes are views of the past, the engineering to do so is a time capsule too
Joined to say that my father, now deceased, worked on this project. He didn't talk about it until years later, when he saw documentaries on TV with project managers or other leadership discussing MOL. Guess he thought it was ok to talk about it if they were, but he was very angry at the time that they'd broken their secrecy vows.
He said some of the tech ended up in the space shuttle, so it wasn't a complete waste.
I wonder how often retired NASA engineers are consulted. Imagine as an Engineer having to troubleshoot something which launched into space before you were born.
Of course there must be perfect documentation, SOP along with replicas on land.
It does a bit, but on a positive note the documentation does still exist and they had a few engines to work from, including one perfectly preserved example. NASA has done well.
Long term, I'd hope and expect the Library of Congress to take over the storage and maintenance of documentation and artefacts relating to major public engineering works, so people can at least go back to the source to re-learn the lessons of the past.
Are there documentary crews at SpaceX right now?
reply