Title: Re: SPACE: Loss of the Saturn V
The blueprints are probably still around, probably on microfilm but maybe classified.  Unfortunately, the tooling is almost certainly gone, as are many of the wizards who made those engines.  That said, I'd love to fly to Houston and photograph Joe and co-workers making measurements out on the Saturn V at JSC!  Maybe some publicity on that event and you get the feds via congress to take another look.  I'd bet Joe could use some funding.

Gary

PS. Michael, your recollections of the early 1970s appear correct.  It was certainly an interesting time.


I seem to recall that in the wake of the Challenger accident, Hughes was working on something called a Jarvis launcher http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/jarvis.htm , which used components from the Saturn V. this would be very difficult if the tooling and blueprints were destroyed.
Michael Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > > We've been down this road before. Even if the folklore (?) about the
> > > blueprints being stored in a trailer that burned is true, there is at
> > least
> > > one Saturn V left--on display at Johnson Space Center in Houston,
possibly
> > > yet another in Huntley, Alabama--that could be reverse-engineered.
They
> > > were marvelous, flawless craft. That we have to go through so many
> > > contortions now to justify a probe to Europa is ample testimony that
the
> > > technology they represented is sorely missed. Blame Nixon--he's the
one
> > > that cancelled Apollo in favor of the Shuttle, on the dubious claim
that
> > > they would make great launch vehicles for spy satellites, etc. Maybe
they
> > > have, but I don't think s! o. Recall that Apollo was a JFK project, and
> > > Nixon was not one of his biggest fans. We all suffer now for the
> > > short-sighted views of a single, powerful man.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > > At 10:58 PM 9/5/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> > >
> > > >Robert,
> > > >
> > > >The biggest problem is that even if you had the blueprints it still
> > > >wouldn't work right. The techniques used in manufacturing the Saturn
> > > >are forever lost. We have newer (and supposedly better) ways of
> > > >building things. A lot of things have just changed too much.
> > > >
> > > >Now with that said, if the Rocketdyne people kept anything about how
the
> > > >engines were built, then we could design a HLLV (heavy lift launch
> > > >vehicle) that could lift significant! ly more than the Saturn did. We
now
> > > >have lightweight and strong composites. Even if the craft were not
> > > >reusable, at $250 Million a launch the craft would be cheap.
> > > >
> > > >Joe L.
> > > >
> > > >On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 16:55, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> > > > > The recent release of the CAIB report has caused both
> > > > > hearings in Congress as well as lots of speculations,
> > > > > e.g.:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/09/05/1731237&mode=thread&tid=
> > 134&tid=160&tid=98&tid=99
> > > > >
> > > > > I have heard that the Saturn 5 blueprints were destroyed -- does
> > anyone
> > > > > know if this claim is valid or an u! rban legend?
> > > > >
> > > > > If these claims are true, does anyone know who is most directly
> > > > > responsible for the termination of the knowledge of how to build
> > > > > a Saturn 5 -- and whether they are still alive -- because I'd
> > > > > certainly like to contact them and give them a piece of my mind.
> > > > >
> > > > > (A related but slightly different conversation vector is whether
or
> > > > > not Russia still has the ability to build the Energia since it is
> > > > > the most recently flown rocket that might be considered to have
> > > > > heavy lift capacity.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Robert
> > > > >
>


Sincerely
 
James McEnanly

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software


Reply via email to