Quote:
I would like to hear your reasoning for why we didn't, and covered it up instead. How did you come around to that position?
-Adam
|
OK I'm new here and english is not my mother tongue. so be indulgent .
WELL I didn't read everything at this forum.
Franckly, I'm finding both pros and cons arguments sound.
BUT 2 points disturbing me:
1. the number "13":
this is well known unlucky number. NASA could have scipped it, doing Apollo 11, 12, 14 .... 18.
or simple coincidence ?? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]
2. Reliability:
I've read about soviet lunar stuff. they considered sending 2 unmanned QUALIFIYNG missions to the moon that are same as the ones to be manned. that may remain on moon and later be used as spare.
( at Ariane Space, they DO have qualifiying 2 launches, before accepted by insurance companies)
no such a reliability precautions/fears at NASA, knowing that NASA was not 100 % reliable with early Apollos ...
YET all 6 lunar Apolos worked , say 98 % trouble free. wowwwwwww !!! except one , probably caused by that famous number 13 !!! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]