I've thought for a long time that Apollo and the Zheng He expeditions were similar, and not in a good way.
-
-
-
Neither was actual exploration; both were done mostly for prestige
-
Neither made any money.
-
The Zheng He mission both distributed gifts and collected tribute -- I'm not sure which was more, and I suspect the net even if positive fell far short of recouping the extraordinary costs. Timber on the Chinese coast was scarce.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No. But it should be done at a far more economical scale and cost than astronaut projects to date (if this means just robots, so be it), and without the economic fantasies that followed in the wake of Apollo and still distort space development.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Zheng He didn’t go anywhere new, and the Chinese later burned his ships and destroyed records of his trips. Not the analogy I would have used.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Space isn't happening until we find something worth the trip.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think a lot of the reason: when you insist on building a vehicle that size you work yourself into a corner where everything is expensive and you can't experiment to make a substantially better engine.
-
SpaceX built a business and a revolution in space launch around evolving the cancelled FASTRAC engine from the cancelled X-34 project back in the 90's.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
a lot of basic boring science was advanced by the space program. the kind of research that private industry wont see the benefits of for decades.
-
Like what?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.