Which is best NASA Space Program???

[ZooNamedGames]

There was a brief plan to send the backup of Skylab to lunar orbit, but it was decided there wasn't enough purpose to it to warrant the cost. Beyond that, I don't think so.

Ah ok, but was there ever any plan to DESIGN a station in LO? Like a ISS but lunar?

[NovaSilisko]

Ah ok, but was there ever any plan to DESIGN a station in LO? Like a ISS but lunar?

No. Modular space stations like the ISS weren't really thought of much until the 70s - such as the plans to expand the original skylab. The rough plan there was to keep skylab in orbit til the shuttle could rendezvous and boost it up, then add bits and pieces to it over time. But the shuttle was delayed, and skylab's orbit decayed in '79. There was also a plan to reboost it during a normal crew mission, but that never happened either, despite a crew being trained for it.

[ZooNamedGames]

No. Modular space stations like the ISS weren't really thought of much until the 70s - such as the plans to expand the original skylab. The rough plan there was to keep skylab in orbit til the shuttle could rendezvous and boost it up, then add bits and pieces to it over time. But the shuttle was delayed, and skylab's orbit decayed in '79. There was also a plan to reboost it during a normal crew mission, but that never happened either, despite a crew being trained for it.

Ah I see. The modular SS also makes since as Big G is a prefect example of it. Big G is just a Gemini capsule with a giant lab behind it as is MOL (kind of, there are differences). So I understand, because I have a thing in my ksp called the Apollo Moon Station and as I said, it's a Apollo CSM with a docking adaptor and then a RCS module, and so on. You can see in the pic below.

I designed it so that it uses only Apollo era equipment so theoretically, it's 100% historically accurate, just not thought of... Am I right to say that?

Edit: That part on the other end of the Solar Array is my probe docking pug (actually a refueling probe misused) so discard that from the image. It should be on the docking array but I never got to it...

Edited March 31, 2014 by ZooNamedGames

[Skyrunner27]

I should have selected the Mercury now that I look back. I selected the ATSP as a close second. The reason is it was the most successful with Gemini being close in rating. Most of the Apollo missions were near failure and I just can't accept a badly built spacecraft. If I had to rank the programs they would go something like this...

1. Mercury(First American excursions in space and most successful. Gave the MCC basic experience.)

2. ATSP (Changed the perception of space flight as single nations competing)

3. Gemini (Tested many of the techniques used in NASA today. MCC got its experience in crisis and accident detection)

4.Space Shuttle (Allowed for the construction of the ISS and valuable research in space habitation)

5.Skylab (Valuable research in human long duration space flights)

6.Apollo (Sure it went to another body but it was a near disaster on all but the last flight)

7. Orion (Can't judge so I put it here based on what it is currently doing)

8. Pre-NASA (Don't know enough to judge this period)

[bigdad84]

Most of the Apollo missions were near failure and I just can't accept a badly built spacecraft.

How do you come up with that? How were they close to near failure? The only one nearly close to being an "oops" moment was Apollo 13.

[ZooNamedGames]

I should have selected the Mercury now that I look back. I selected the ATSP as a close second. The reason is it was the most successful with Gemini being close in rating. Most of the Apollo missions were near failure and I just can't accept a badly built spacecraft. If I had to rank the programs they would go something like this...

1. Mercury(First American excursions in space and most successful. Gave the MCC basic experience.)

2. ATSP (Changed the perception of space flight as single nations competing)

3. Gemini (Tested many of the techniques used in NASA today. MCC got its experience in crisis and accident detection)

4.Space Shuttle (Allowed for the construction of the ISS and valuable research in space habitation)

5.Skylab (Valuable research in human long duration space flights)

6.Apollo (Sure it went to another body but it was a near disaster on all but the last flight)

7. Orion (Can't judge so I put it here based on what it is currently doing)

8. Pre-NASA (Don't know enough to judge this period)

I can agree with those points I like Gemini more because even though Mercury was cool and all, one of the bigger problems that I can't ignore is how Scott Carpenter and Gus both nearly died (Scott's was a miss, Gus' was pure endurance), I can't believe how close they came to dying... but anyways. Mercury is definitely my second and Apollo comes behind both SS and ASTP because they truly had a bigger impact all the way and were more successful.

The Apollo missions (as far as I'm aware of) that had even the slightest problems were:

Apollo 9

Apollo 11

Apollo 12

Apollo 13

Apollo 14

Apollo 16

I dont know much of Apollos 7, 8, 10, 15-17 so don't call me on those. But those are the Apollo missions that had problems in them (I see your point, more than half had problems) But I say that the LM out preformed it's job in more ways than one.

- - - Updated - - -

How do you come up with that? How were they close to near failure? The only one nearly close to being an "oops" moment was Apollo 13.

Read the list and weep bro, Apollo was a SERIOUS failure hog. All the problems in Gemini+Mercury don't add up to the problems in Apollo...

[Skyrunner27]

How do you come up with that? How were they close to near failure? The only one nearly close to being an "oops" moment was Apollo 13.

Apoll0-1 (Fire on the pad)

Apollo-7 (Went okay except for the mutiny)

Apollo-8 (Again went okay)

Apollo-9 (Okay)

Apollo-10(Okay)

Then everything changed

Apollo-11 (1202 and 1201 errors would have led to an abort if mission control did not get that final practice in)

Apollo-12 (Lightning strike brings it dangerously close to abort)

Apollo-13 (Oxygen tank explodes full mission failure)

Apollo-14 (Docking mechanism had to be rammed into and their was a problem with the abort detector leading to a near abort with meters left till reaching the ground)

Apollo-15 (Redocking almost killed the crew due to depressurization this happened in the months after Soyuz-11, and the LM almost tipped over during landing)

Apollo-16 (A TVC problem almost created another abort)

Apollo-17 (Okay unless Gene Kranz was just being symbolic of the events and did not talk about it in his book)

If we continue...

Skylab-1 (Micrometeorite shield and a solar array torn off during launch)

Skylab-2 (Okay except for the EVA's but you can't blame that)

Skylab-3 (Almost abandoned for the theoretical Skylab Rescue)

Skylab-4 (Okay)

ATSP (Almost killed the crew prior to rentry when Monopropellent was vented into the capsule after undocking)

[ZooNamedGames]

Apoll0-1 (Fire on the pad)

Apollo-7 (Went okay except for the mutiny)

Apollo-8 (Again went okay)

Apollo-9 (Okay)

Apollo-10(Okay)

Then everything changed

Apollo-11 (1202 and 1201 errors would have led to an abort if mission control did not get that final practice in)

Apollo-12 (Lightning strike brings it dangerously close to abort)

Apollo-13 (Oxygen tank explodes full mission failure)

Apollo-14 (Docking mechanism had to be rammed into and their was a problem with the abort detector leading to a near abort with meters left till reaching the ground)

Apollo-15 (Redocking almost killed the crew due to depressurization this happened in the months after Soyuz-11, and the LM almost tipped over during landing)

Apollo-16 (A TVC problem almost created another abort)

Apollo-17 (Okay unless Gene Kranz was just being symbolic of the events and did not talk about it in his book)

If we continue...

Skylab-1 (Micrometeorite shield and a solar array torn off during launch)

Skylab-2 (Okay except for the EVA's but you can't blame that)

Skylab-3 (Almost abandoned for the theoretical Skylab Rescue)

Skylab-4 (Okay)

ATSP (Almost killed the crew prior to rentry when Monopropellent was vented into the capsule after undocking)

exactly my point, thank you.

[bigdad84]

Apoll0-1 (Fire on the pad)

Apollo-7 (Went okay except for the mutiny)

Apollo-8 (Again went okay)

Apollo-9 (Okay)

Apollo-10(Okay)

Then everything changed

Apollo-11 (1202 and 1201 errors would have led to an abort if mission control did not get that final practice in)

Apollo-12 (Lightning strike brings it dangerously close to abort)

Apollo-13 (Oxygen tank explodes full mission failure)

Apollo-14 (Docking mechanism had to be rammed into and their was a problem with the abort detector leading to a near abort with meters left till reaching the ground)

Apollo-15 (Redocking almost killed the crew due to depressurization this happened in the months after Soyuz-11, and the LM almost tipped over during landing)

Apollo-16 (A TVC problem almost created another abort)

Apollo-17 (Okay unless Gene Kranz was just being symbolic of the events and did not talk about it in his book)

If we continue...

Skylab-1 (Micrometeorite shield and a solar array torn off during launch)

Skylab-2 (Okay except for the EVA's but you can't blame that)

Skylab-3 (Almost abandoned for the theoretical Skylab Rescue)

Skylab-4 (Okay)

ATSP (Almost killed the crew prior to rentry when Monopropellent was vented into the capsule after undocking)

Sources? Especially for Apollo 15. Never heard of a LM almost tipping over.

[LtHeckard]

Mars Science Laboratory.

[Kryten]

Mars Science Laboratory.

The actual program associated with that is Flagship; it's (so far) MSL, Cassini, Galileo, and Voyager's 1 and 2. I'd say it's a pretty serious contender.

[Sun]

Apollo because we went to the moon, collected rocks (and SCIENCE!) and came back.

[NovaSilisko]

Read the list and weep bro, Apollo was a SERIOUS failure hog. All the problems in Gemini+Mercury don't add up to the problems in Apollo...

Because Apollo was far more ambitious. You can't do big things without having problems. It's just not possible. The only time(s) an Apollo mission* failed to achieve its goals was on Apollo 13 and arguably Apollo 1. I'm hesitant to include 1 in that though, because it happened during ground testing and not during an actual mission.

*a full up manned mission, in particular. Interestingly that list earlier left out the issues encountered on the unmanned flights. The Saturn V on Apollo 6 could've exploded from pogo oscillation, and there were issues with restarting the S-IVB initially

Edited April 1, 2014 by NovaSilisko

[ZooNamedGames]

Because Apollo was far more ambitious. You can't do big things without having problems. It's just not possible. The only time(s) an Apollo mission* failed to achieve its goals was on Apollo 13 and arguably Apollo 1. I'm hesitant to include 1 in that though, because it happened during ground testing and not during an actual mission.

*a full up manned mission, in particular. Interestingly that list earlier left out the issues encountered on the unmanned flights. The Saturn V on Apollo 6 could've exploded from pogo oscillation, and there were issues with restarting the S-IVB initially

True, bigger the ambition, bigger the risks. The rushed LM doesn't make any of the missions better, but it did over preform especially acting a lifeboat for 13. The most stable (knowing of its prior flaws) part of the spacecraft had to be the LM. It was fixable even when it meant the misson (Apollo 15)

[woot]

Because Apollo was far more ambitious. You can't do big things without having problems. It's just not possible. The only time(s) an Apollo mission* failed to achieve its goals was on Apollo 13 and arguably Apollo 1. I'm hesitant to include 1 in that though, because it happened during ground testing and not during an actual mission.

*a full up manned mission, in particular. Interestingly that list earlier left out the issues encountered on the unmanned flights. The Saturn V on Apollo 6 could've exploded from pogo oscillation, and there were issues with restarting the S-IVB initially

Yeah I can't believe anyone would say that Apollo was particularly failure-prone or the result of bad engineering. Relative to what? The missions were many times longer and more ambitious than anything previously tried. Obviously it was bound to have issues. But it's still the greatest engineering achievement in human history.

[Helix935]

I still say Gemini <.< >.>

yeah my personal favorite is also Gemini because it was to a degree more advanced than Apollo and is utterly cool

[NovaSilisko]

Note - I won't say that Gemini wasn't cool, it was damn cool.

The rushed LM doesn't make any of the missions better, but it did over preform especially acting a lifeboat for 13. The most stable (knowing of its prior flaws) part of the spacecraft had to be the LM. It was fixable even when it meant the misson (Apollo 15)

Indeed, Grumman really outdid themselves on the LM. The makers of the spacesuit for apollo deserve praise as well, IIRC they developed it on a massively tight schedule.

[Deathsoul097]

Constellation FTW. Even with all of the problems and impossibilities in the program, it is still my favourite. It could've worked, eventually. Just not exactly the way it was planned.

[Space_Kraken]

Oh, how we mourn the loss of the Saturn Line of rockets, who could of carried us to Venus

and Mars if not for Wernher Von Kerman's (Oops, Von Braun, too much ksp!) death and major budget cuts.

[Kryten]

Oh, how we mourn the loss of the Saturn Line of rockets, who could of carried us to Venus

and Mars if not for Wernher Von Kerman's (Oops, Von Braun, too much ksp!) death and major budget cuts.

Von Braun died in '77, Saturn was long dead by then.

[robogungt8]

But... Constellation... Yeah, it was canceled, but it's still probably one of the most ambitious goals in recent history, and given enough funding, it would've worked too

[NovaSilisko]

given enough funding, it would've worked too

Maybe. There were considerable issues with Ares I though. They really had no business developing a totally new vehicle for crew launch, they should've instead put their efforts toward man-rating the Delta IV, and then Ares V for cargo launch.

[vericon1]

Orion program. For the future!

[maccollo]

I hope I will look at another poll like this at some point in the future and vote for something other than Apollo

[78stonewobble]

I voted Gemini because, while Apollo's achievements are unmatchable, Gemini was relatively quick and dirty thrown together and mostly just did it's job.

The vehicle itself wasn't particular usefull for any future development, but you cannot underestimate the practice it gave everyone associated with the spaceprogram.