Recent comments in /f/space

earlgreyhot1701 t1_j6p40cj wrote

Reply to comment by stellarinterstitium in A spaceflight disaster was narrowly avoided in 1972. A series of intense solar flares exploded in August, just months before the launch of Apollo 17. Any astronauts on the moon at that time would have died from radiation. As NASA's new lunar missions progress, the threat of radiation still looms. by EricFromOuterSpace

And it was wild. I really wonder if regolith would dance like that.

30

Kellymcdonald78 t1_j6p1j6u wrote

Reply to If the concepts of Project Orion were proven, why don't we use them for space guns? by [deleted]

Research was most definitely not “done” for Orion. From miniature warheads, to a system capable of delivering them reliably, to the shock absorbers. It was a high level concept that was simply validated as an avenue of research with potential. Years of additional research and billions of dollars would be been needed to actually design and build an actual vehicle. It’s the difference between Robert Goddard’s experiments and the Saturn V

1

BallessPacman t1_j6oz4d2 wrote

Reply to comment by lilrabbitfoofoo in A spaceflight disaster was narrowly avoided in 1972. A series of intense solar flares exploded in August, just months before the launch of Apollo 17. Any astronauts on the moon at that time would have died from radiation. As NASA's new lunar missions progress, the threat of radiation still looms. by EricFromOuterSpace

I disagree, I think it is more likely we progress like how they did in the "Expanse" Novel/TV Show. Further exploration would be made by charting out with near 1c probes followed by near 1c ships abusing time dilation.

4

entered_bubble_50 t1_j6oxz72 wrote

Reply to A spaceflight disaster was narrowly avoided in 1972. A series of intense solar flares exploded in August, just months before the launch of Apollo 17. Any astronauts on the moon at that time would have died from radiation. As NASA's new lunar missions progress, the threat of radiation still looms. by EricFromOuterSpace

Fortunately, even the relatively thin wall of the Apollo spacecraft would have attenuated the radiation significantly, since the radiation from solar storms is mostly beta:

> The solar storm of August 1972 is legendary at NASA because it occurred in between two Apollo missions: the crew of Apollo 16 had returned to Earth in April and the crew of Apollo 17 was preparing for a moon landing in December.

> Cucinotta estimates that a moonwalker caught in the August 1972 storm might have absorbed 400 rem. Deadly? "Not necessarily," he says. A quick trip back to Earth for medical care could have saved the hypothetical astronaut's life.

> Surely, though, no astronaut is going to walk around on the moon when there's a giant sunspot threatening to explode. "They're going to stay inside their spaceship (or habitat)," according to Cucinotta. An Apollo command module with its aluminum hull would have attenuated the 1972 storm from 400 rem to less than 35 rem at the astronaut's blood-forming organs. That's the difference between needing a bone marrow transplant, or having a headache.

Courtesy of NASA

27

VoraciousTrees t1_j6owvni wrote

Reply to comment by H-K_47 in A spaceflight disaster was narrowly avoided in 1972. A series of intense solar flares exploded in August, just months before the launch of Apollo 17. Any astronauts on the moon at that time would have died from radiation. As NASA's new lunar missions progress, the threat of radiation still looms. by EricFromOuterSpace

Yeah, but the lander equipment still needs to be functional afterwards as well.

2