Apollo 21

[jarmund]

First of all, a disclaimer:

I cannot remember what my source for the info in the premise is, I only remember reading it somewhere (I believe it had something to do with launching nukes against an incoming asteroid), so if someone can verify or debunk something in the premise, please let me know.

 

Premise:

Plans, drawings, schematics, and software for the Apollo programme simply doesn't exist any more. It's mostly been destroyed, forgotten, scrapped, and in general disposed of. (WHY???!!!)

 

The question:

Let's say an eccentric wealthy person (Not Elon Musk, he's got too much relevant background.) was to influence relevant politicians to continue the Apollo programme today and get the gears in motion for Apollo 21 and therefore returning to the moon. When a design has been proven to work, change is discouraged, so we're talking hardware as close as possible to the original Saturn V vehicles as possible. Is it possible today to build a fully functional Saturn V with required infrastructure for a 7th (if my counting is correct) moonlanding? How close would we be able to get to a design indistinguishable from the original? Are there any parts/components/systems that are simply not possible anymore?

 

[razark]

Apollo 21?

[jarmund]

7 minutes ago, razark said:

Apollo 21?

Apollo 18, 19, and 20 were cancelled, and Apollo 20 launch vehicle was used for SkyLab instead.

[cubinator]

Well, we do have a couple of fully assembled Saturn V rockets which could be scrutinized, disassembled, and copied if need be. 

[razark]

3 hours ago, jarmund said:

Plans, drawings, schematics, and software for the Apollo programme simply doesn't exist any more. It's mostly been destroyed, forgotten, scrapped, and in general disposed of. (WHY???!!!)

However you want to number them, much of the basic documentation still exists.  A lot of the more detailed stuff pertaining to individual implementations of the Saturn V and other Apollo hardware were destroyed, however.  Why?  Because it would have been too expensive to keep.  Storage and proper treatment for rail-cars worth of documents costs a lot.

As mentioned above, there are existing examples of the hardware that could be taken apart and reverse engineered.  It would probably be easier to just design the Saturn V anew from existing documents and knowledge, using modern materials, electronics, etc.

[ZooNamedGames]

Issue is the Saturn V is a very very dated piece of hardware, for example the Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC) and the Apollo Guidance Unit (AGU) were so weak that the new Blackberry computer is x1000 times more powerful. They take far more space and were far too simple to do anything worth while. 

Nasa has considered reviving the Saturn V, it's called the SLS. It's using similar technology for the booster core, just adding the SRBs from the space shuttle plus one additional segment to them.

[Brainlord Mesomorph]

If you ask me, the current "Orion spacecraft"  is Apollo redux.

 

[Bill Phil]

The Saturn V was a rocket of the 60s. The engines were sub par for today's standards, the computer was heavy but hilariously simple, it had fins, it's very outdated. Building it today would necessitate new engines, new tooling to build them, gotta get rid of those fins... A new computer would be needed.

[TheKosanianMethod]

The Saturn V is feasible,  but it would completely change. The AGU and AGC could be run from a much smaller computer, and most of the flight, including liftoff, most or maybe all burns, landing, and docking could be done automatically. The engines would be completely changed. Many systems could be made much lighter and smaller. Instead if a myriad of switches, the CM and LM controls would probably be on a much smaller UI, possibly be on a large touchscreen. And the space food would be better. Mountain House meals FTW!

[Camacha]

You probably would have to man-rate everything all over, and safety requirements are probably quite a bit more strict.