Bigger and Better Saturn V Rockets that Weren't
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 кві 2017
- There was a lot of logic to extending the Saturn V rocket, saving money and extending our reach into the Solar System. But we didn't do it. If you're curious, the authors are Ronald D. Scott and
William L. Corcoran... if you want to find the paper yourself!
Want weekly, classic, straight-up educational Vintage Space episodes? They go up every Monday (schedule and Internet issues permitting) so don't forget to subscribe! / @amyshirateitel
And more even older space in my book, BREAKING THE CHAINS OF GRAVITY! You can order your copy on Amazon: bit.ly/astbtcog
Or get a signed hardcover edition on my website! www.amyshirateitel.com/store.html - IT'S BACK ONLINE! :) (But orders are slow for the moment - waiting for books from my publisher!)
My blog archives has lots of awesome olde timey space, too (and I'm looking for a new home for it, too!): www.popsci.com/blog-network/vi...
I've also got a PATREON PAGE! Want to listen to a Vintage Space Podcast or get awesome merch like t-shirts? Please consider becoming a patron! I've set up a Patreon account so I can raise funds to buy the gear I'll need to make an awesome podcast and also work with professionals to make better content all around. Any help is so hugely appreciated. / amyshirateitel
Connect on Facebook: / amyshirateitel
Google+: plus.google.com/u/0/+AmyShira...
Instagram: / astvintagespace
Twitter: / astvintagespace - Наука та технологія
I think the Saturn V is a really very good looking object. Aesthetically pleasing in every way.
i know something else that's too..
I like the look of the "A Derivative." Looks like a shorter, necked-down Saturn V.
I remember looking at the nozzles in Houston and thinking that you could garage a vw bug in one.
I've thought about that, too, and I decided it's those stubby fins that just set the whole thing off. Most launch vehicles don't have fins, but the Saturn family all had them. The fins on the Saturn I were a bit too much, but the Saturn IB looked better and the Saturn V was perfect to the eye. It looked high tech, futuristic, and stayed grounded aesthetically with its proportions and fins, plus the giant F1 engine nozzles gave it a muscular look.
So is Amy.
Sorry Amy, I couldn't help it. LOL
I know an Apollo engineer that left the program because he could see that the future Shuttle program was inherently flawed. If we would've kept flying the Saturn V like the Soviets kept flying their Soyuz, we'd be WAY ahead of the game now with a much more sustainable budget. I'm not sure that Congress/Nixon was really capable of grasping the concept of fixed vs variable costs, as well as the extreme risk of trying an unproven concept.
Oh, I'm absolutely sure that Congress/Nixon WASN'T capable of grasping the concept of fixed vs variable costs.
Also the military got way too involved in this (supposedly) civilian space program.
+Keyboard runner It's not that Nixon wasn't capable of grasping the concept. He just had personal antipathy to the Saturn V. I'll defend Nixon on a lot, but he was really petty about the space program. He did't like that the Saturn Vs made people think fondly of his arch rival JFK.
@Michael Maston, let alone now having to do the same with SpaceX and in 2021(?), Boeing. Project Constellation would have had Orion flying astronauts to the ISS (on the Ares I) within 5 years of the Shuttle's retirement, but Barry Soroeto killed it upon recommendation from the Augustine Commission.
@@rwboa22 Barry was a disgrace to the US.
@@trespire, if so, Cheeto Assolini is a disgrace to all humankind.
That potato head on the shelf is staring into my soul.
Potato Head shares a room with Humpy Cat
He's seen things...
Terrible things...
lmao
Don't blink!
Hold on, I'm pretty sure I've got a collection of DVD commentaries that could help.
@@StuSaville Is that why he looks like he's had a stroke?
Yay Saturn V! I get shivers when I walk into the Apollo Building at Kennedy and see the glorious beast suspended from the ceiling. Who else is super looking forward to the Lego Ideas set coming out in June!
Always thought it was a crying shame that we didn't make better use of this wonderful vehicle after the last Apollo missions. In the end, we could have developed a reuse-able spacecraft to go with it that would have been cheaper than the Shuttle Program proved to be. The Soviets are still using the same rocket that launched the first Soyuz in 1967. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. How wasteful that two Saturn V rockets were never even used. One until recently was wasting away in Houston, while the other is a museum piece at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Razorusskie when u go to the rocket museum and u hear a rumble... GOD DANM
The Shuttle was a waste. They canned the more capable Saturn V to make way for the much less capable and much more costly Space Shuttle. It was supposed to pay for itself and make money for the government, but when was the last time anything actually did that?
The government is in the business of spending lots of money, not making money.
The next flight (generation/iteration) of Apollo capsules would have been at least 70% reusable, replacing only things like heat shields, environmental components, expendables and seals. Instead we got the Shuttle, which was only about 70% reusable...
The Shuttle external fuel tank was built at the same facility as the Saturn booster sections. Much of the same access platforms and build facilities were used since the two were similar in diameter. It was strange to look up on the walkway above and see the remnants of dozens of test cables and fluid and gas tubes that Saturn boosters required. Ghost in the buildings!
Almost criminal scrapping the whole Saturn program, wasted 40 years only to have to reinvent the wheel.
Totally agree.
I was a teenage kid when they scrapped the Apollo program and the Saturn-V, broke my heart.
No it was criminal for kenedy to scrap orion. Apollo shouldn't have even been built.
And the "Hiller Air Tug" to make it all reusable ua-cam.com/video/TlZuskXJyiE/v-deo.html The "Tug "also might have been able to rescue the folks trapped about the flame at the World Trade Center during 9-11 using a sling loaded barge as the recuse platform . ( If both had been available.) Patents 3116040, 3190554, 672256 .
The Saturn 1 program ( the Saturn 5's little brother) was also very successful. All Saturn 1 and 5 launches were good.
given that the Saturn was the first launch vehicle Nasa had that wasn't just a borrowed ICBM, it's a shame they jettisoned it so soon. it should have become what Karolevs R7 was to the Soviets.
Wellll, how long are Russians using R7 derivatives? And they are realizing that it has hit its limits long ago - the same would've happened with Saturn derivatives.
@@HalNordmann That’s because the R7 only had 4 stages in its highest-capability configuration. If you added 2, 4, 6 more boosters to R7, if you added a nuclear stage to R7, if you remove 2 boosters from R7, you have a completely modular system that can serve as a Cubesat launcher or a heavy-lift launch vehicle.
@@HalNordmann The MLV Saturn V had the same philosophy, if you added more engines, if you put a bunch of AJ260 SRBs on the side, if you extended the length of the tanks, if you add a 12-meter fairing, so many configurations. There are some modifications you can make to exceed the lift capability of a Sea Dragon using existing technology.
@@HalNordmann they are still using them
@@pikpikgamer1012 Doesn't mean they don't want to get rid of it. Do you know how many times they tried that?
You read my mind Amy! I was going to ask your thoughts on what the Saturn V might have accomplished had the design been allowed to evolve rather than be replaced, and whether it might have been more economical/versatile than developing the new SLS. From this video, and what we know about SLS, it sounds like the lessons have been learned. Just a shame it took so long.
In the novel "Voyage" a manned mission to Mars set in the 1980's used a Saturn V derivative with great schematics at the end of the novel
I recall in your book that Wernher von Braun collaborated with Disney to offer a vision of what a Mars mission would look like. Could you go into more detail about that, and how does von Braun's concept compare to modern concepts of a Mars mission (NASA and private industry). Great channel as always!
NASA should have maintained the lunar landing program with a lunar orbiting station while developing Von Braun's NOVA rocket.
Scrapping the Saturn V should be one of the biggest mistakes this country's body politic ever made.
Amy:
Thank you for, essentially, bringing the early space program back to life, with such things as the news of these Saturn V derivatives! In a sense (albeit, a bit obliquely), it's almost as if the program remains open; in educating us on such things, it lets one continue to expand on unrealized ideas!
I, for one, am happy to be able to rethink the Apollo program!
There are few things that carry more influence than a well educated and passionate person that is willing and capable of spreading their message. I can't wait to learn more.
Very interesting. I always liked the function/design of the Saturn 1B. The forethought of the Saturn designers for the future was very innovative.
Great summation of "what might have been"! I could see some of the mid range lifters being used to loft a much simpler version of the shuttle (like Buran...no lift engines required) . Launching with an empty bay, could retrieve or repair satellites that had been launched on cheaper rockets, as well as being used as a transport for station/project crews. Continued development would have seen improved efficiency in engines and structures.
No Saturn V ever blew up on take off. Of course, Apollo 13 is an exception, but that was during Cis Lunar travel. Even Apollo 12 was able to overcome a few lightning strikes. Thank God for that ACS to AUX switch that some young guy on the ground remembered. I miss the Saturn V.
A pity we didn't go this route. The shuttle turned out to cost a lot more per launch, and couldn't begin to match the Saturn V payload.
BTW, the F1 engine as built was for all practical purposes, reuseable. Some test articles had accumulated around 8,000 seconds firing time.
Can I just say how much I appreciate and enjoy your channel? This video, like all of them, is awesome. Thank you!
I've got a video request: All of the Apollo footage gives the illusion that there is a huge amount of space in the capsule and lander, but I know that the quarters were really cramped. Can you do a video on the interior dimensions of the vehicles, especially the lunar landers, and give your audience some sense of how cramped it was and how much freedom of movement the astronauts had?
Can you make a Video about the sea dragon? :)
Yes! I'd love to see a video on that
yes please. SEA DRAGON
+STRYKA FPV yes i already knew that Video! it is great! but another Video is always great, maybe amy could get some different sources and informations! :)
The Sea Dragon is about Five Hundred Tonnes to LEO (500 T) and is reusable. And like the Great Eastern the rocket may be to big for the market place. tjl
Yes, please! with an explanation, if any, about why big simple pressure fed engines never became fashionable.
absolutely love the saturn v rocket!
I love Vintage Space!!! 😊😊
4:30 reminds me of the early Atlas boosters. Outboard engines fell away and if they could be recovered, what a bonus. W really missed the boat going to the STS. Thanks again Nixon!
Dang. Your historical detail is second to none.
I really like the idea of a habitat module in the LM adapter for the Venus mission. Pity none of this was ever done!
I always thought the Saturn family of rockets could have been a very versatile work horse. This video proves that with the plans they considered. I've had a big fascination with the Saturn rockets. Thank you for this video.
I recently read this study and quickly found myself in front of a spreadsheet calculating the different possible configurations of 1, 2 & 3 stage rockets using the F-1, J-2, F-1A, J-2S, M-1, M-1A, HG-3 and RL-10 engines. This was not only great nerd-fun but also quite instructive.
First, a thrust plate of n engine mounts made of a ring with an even number of engine mounts (n-1) plus a single central mount can have any number of engines less than n attached to it such that the thrust is symeteric. Double rings also work, as long as there are an even number of mounts on the rings. Example, a central engine plus a ring of six, plus a outer rivng of twelve engine mounts (1+6+12=19) can have any number of engines from 1 to 19 attached and still have the thrust be symmetric. Try it for yourself.
With this knowledge, three types of engines --small, medium and large thrust-- each modifiable with sea level or vacuum expansion cones, combined with a set of seven-mount thrust plates (6 in a ring, 1 centered) for each type of engine, and liquid fuel tanks manufactured from equal volume segments (rings and half spheres) can be configured to launch anything from 0.5 tonnes to 500 tonnes.
Modularity can be impressive.
Hi Amy, I think you missed one. Years ago I saw a concept picture of a Saturn with wings. Al I can remember is they wanted to use as much Saturn infrastructure for the future shuttle program. I would love to know how far that idea went.
I could watch your videos all day! even if 1/2 the material is over my head
This was a very interesting video. Thanks for digging into the history of space.
brilliantly presented, Amy. thanks!
Vintage Space 🚀 lol
Also I like your large posters in the background. #AdamYoungScores I believe I was the one who introduced you to his work back during your Apollo 15 live-Tweet. Glad you like them! :)
I have just found your channel, and I am really enjoying your videos.
I cry for what could have been. And weep for what we are getting.
More excellent NASA history, thank you! For many years I've had a fascination with aircraft from WWII, and I found after a while that some of the most interesting bits were digging into all the design studies and prototypes that _didn't_ make it into production, seeing all the different ways the designers tried to solve the problems they faced... and you bring exactly that same kind of extremely compelling behind-the-scenes view to us, focused on NASA's little known corners. Thank you for doing this, I really enjoy and appreciate your shows.
Also, I have to take a moment to say, you are really rocking the vintage look - like a young Audrey Hepburn - and you wear it well, very flattering. Bravo!
Amy, when you're mentioning weights and heights, could you please add the metric amount, rather than just giving the imperial units.
Thanks, love the videos. :)
Good God Amy you are freaking awesome at telling a good story please keep up the good work
Awesome job as always Amy, Thank you
And this is why I’m so sad that the Saturn V program was cancelled. Just imagine what could’ve happened if it wasn’t
Splendid video Amy. I eagerly await a video about NERVA.
Really liked this one. Very interesting. Good job.
Great job Amy!
Gotta love the "what if" factor here especially as it applies to rocket technology. Would be nice to see more of it.
For example the half-stage booster is a lot like the Atlas used in the Mercury program.
Amy, if you take requests please do a video on the Atlas system, from ICBM to Pluto New Horizons.
These edit "mistakes" are a very unusual signature. Now you got me watching for them. haha
I read there was also a plan to omit the fins on the next batch of standard Saturn Vs.
Robert Cornhole Never heard that, but they were for emergency use, the engines gymboled to keep rocket on target
I guess the conclusion was they weren't worth the extra weight.
This is an awesome channel. Please keep up the good work.
I'm old enough to have seen the apollo 11. And several other interesting space missions. So I'm going to check out all.
Have you done anything on the apollo soyuz mission (1975) yet?
I can see a dangerous drinking game every time Amy says "Stage"... :P That aside a really cool video, never knew they had such plans for the Saturn V.
When you study the Saturn 5 -- a vehicle drawn up in part with slide rules almost 50 years ago - the stats are STILL astonishing! In Arthur C. Clarke's "Prelude To Space" he mentions how the massive engines that push the largest ocean liners at the time lacked the power just to run the FUEL PUMPS of the Saturn 5, and when it lifted off it was like the mass of a fully laden WWII destroyer rising off the ground -- figures no one would've believed even a few years before.
We NEVER should have just stopped and mothballed the amazing mighty "proven" Saturn V, when it could have been upgraded updated and modified as years went by to do any of a number of feats. Now I've heard we don't have the ability to recreate it if we wanted to for numerous reasons. And by the time this SLS ever gets off the ground, if ever, it'll be outdated. How sad. :(
where is Pete? we miss humpy cat
I have this old encyclopedia for kids from the 60's. It talked about how the NOVA rocket proposal was the be all end all of rockets.
I think stopping Apollo, the Apollo Applications Program, and continued development of the Saturn Program resulted in a lost Mars, a lost Venus, and a lost Moonlab/Moonbase. In return, we got a Grand Tour, robots, and an extremely expensive lock into LEO.
For some reason, I was hoping to find a video about Günter Wendt somewhere on your channel. But I guess if you started focusing on specific, awesome people who worked on these programs, you'd have to make thousands of videos!
Also, I really want to read "The Unbroken Chain," but it's going to have to wait a bit until I can budget it, since it only seems to be out of print and the people who're selling their copies want a fair bit of money for it.
Amy- NASA studied the possibility of recovering and reusing the stages of the Saturn V to bring down costs of an extended program. It might be interesting if you could talk about this sometime, especially in the light of Space X's recent success in this area. Also, I don't recall you having done a video on Project Orion- the 1950's era study of a spaceship powered by nuclear bombs.
I guess my favorite would be the project to make the third stage powered by a nuclear thermal rocket engine. Have you done videos on NERVA and project Rover?
zapfanzapfan - I'd be interested in more about NERVA, too.
Don't forget the Aerojet AJ-260 solid rocket motor as a possible replacement for the liquid first stage of the S-1C
Very interesting, indeed. Thanks for sharing.
Kind of telling that we wound up doing largely the same thing with the old shuttle bits to get our new SLS system. Nice video!
Mr. Potato Head had me thinking of adding a nose and ears to the Saturn V as derivatives.
Keeping the Saturn rocket program could have evolved into a continuous improvement program, refining engines, simplifying construction, taking advantage of economy of scale, etc.
thanks for this video, I'm doing a project on the Saturn V and I need more information on it
You know why I love Your channel? It's the wink at 1:00 in this video and all the rest of the flirtatious Flirty Mcflirtyface stuff You do.
; )
Amy, thank you for this wonderful series. I have seen comments as to how fast you talk. Just fine with me. Shows a true knowledge of the subject matter and the confidence to present it. I was born in 1944 and grew up in the "Space Age". What a wonderful time. I was a young man when Apollo 11 landed on the moon and I was sure I would be alive to see us reach Mars. I am now 72 years old and it is getting very iffy that I will see the first Mars Landing. I have been a serious amateur astronomer since 1956, working with several college's and pro. astronomers which has been a high point of my life, but I sure wished we had kept the Saturn program going, I am sure we would be on Mars now and reaching ever deeper in the Solar System. Keep up the great work and congratulations on your book. I will really have to get a copy. I am sure it will just great, like all your other work.
Informative!
With the eventual high per flight costs and low flight rate of STS, in hindsight, it seems like it would have been more economical to stick to the Saturn V derivative. Too bad, really.
sadly, once the program was scrapped, and we went with the DoD modified shuttle (remember, NASA's design was 2/3 the size of what we finally got, and thus far far cheaper), virtually all the infrastructure behind the Saturn V was scrapped or abandoned.
"They tore everything down. The Lunar Receiving Lab, all the good stuff we had,... they just ripped it up and threw it away. I can't believe the country would do that, and I don't forgive 'em.... EVER!"
- John Llewellyn (flight controller)
The real reason behind scrapping the Saturn V has nothing to do with economics or anything else that might be logical.
It was simply because Nixon wanted to remove as much of JFK's legacy as possible. The only way he agreed to NASA being allowed to develop the shuttle was if they destroyed all plans and blueprints relating to the Saturn V.
Nasty man... he put the space program back decades through sheer spite.
"NASA's design was 2/3 the size of what we finally got"
No, initial design (double space plane, straight wing) by Max Faget was in fact larger. Had more engines too, opting for hydrolox only engines has that effect.
DoD's main contribution was requirement for crossrange sufficient for single polar orbit flight. Even then, double delta wing turned out to be preferrable from aerothermodynamics point of view. Width and, to some extent, length of payload bay was dictated by NASAs expected missions, including construction of modular orbital station.
Smaller spaceplane launched by a fully expendable Titan III derivative was proposed by Nixon's OMB as cost-cutting measure, but NASA seen no point in that since it's minimal payload capacity meant that it did not promise significant reduction in cost-per-flight or any meaningful payload capability.
Well That the blueprints of the Saturn V supposedly were destroyed is actually completely untrue. The Marshall spaceflight center has them all stored on microfilm. And the Federal Archives in Georgia has 2,900 cubic feet of stored Saturn documents.
I'm talking production proposal design, not concept design. Though, I'd love to see your source material on this. Everything I've found had shown the structure (and payload bay) was enlarged at DoD's request, not only to deploy military payloads, but to potentially capture and retrieve Soviet satellites (potentially even Salyuts, though I doubt it) and bring them down in that single orbit cross-range capability
Hey, you should do a video on the SeaDragon.
Love your channel.
I wish I could have seen one of these magnificent beasts take off up close. My grandparents lived in FL at the time and they used to tell me how they would light up the sky
I like big rockets and I cannot lie.
As a kid I just took it for granted that the shuttle was the inevitable economized development of space launch but learning about all the momentum that was scrapped to make the shuttle has really coloured my opinion of it. Hopefully more of the public will see shows like this and realize that a dynamic space program is absolutely attainable.
Fun fact: Originally, the Space Shuttle had a two-stage fully-reusable flyback design, but that was too expensive to develop on NASA's shoestring post-Apollo budget.
I liked this a lot!
Another excellent video.
Your beautifull and professional.
Having grown up in Huntsville, AL in the '70s, and living across the street from the Space and Rocket Center, in the shadow of the Saturn V on display there, the Saturn V has a special place in my heart. Many of my neighbors were on the von Braun (and subsequent) team, and I heard story after story of the golden days of space.
Now I know that technology has far surpassed that of the '60s, and to revive a program like SV would be an astronomical task, but can anyone compare/contrast the lift capabilities (and associated costs) of the Saturn V vs. something like the Deltas used today?
I know you don't much like the space shuttle, but have you ever heard about the "Saturn Shuttle" project? Imagine a Saturn S-1C stage with a big orange shuttle fuel tank mounted directly on top of it. Then the shuttle mounted to its fuel tank in the normal way. The base of the shuttle would of course be higher above the ground due to the height of the S-1C. The whole point of this was to obviate the need for the dangerously uncontrollable solid rocket boosters that the shuttle ended up using instead.
The much safer and more powerful kerosene fueled Saturn F-1 engines would be the primary booster stage. The liquid hydrogen fueled shuttle engines would also be ignited at launch, but at low power. Once the S-1C fuel had been expended, it would be jettisoned. The shuttle engines would then be throttled up to maximum, to serve as the second stage. The external fuel tank would be jettisoned as usual once the shuttle had achieved orbit.
Can you make a video about the Uragan (Enegia II)? after all it is the coolest rocket ever designed :P
Nice choice of shirt pattern !
I you were launched into LEO it would make in easy for telemetry cameras to track you :-)
LIES! WE don't *ALL* love the Saturn V rocket! I don't love it! ... oh, who am I kidding .. of course I love it .. argggg .. OK I admit it! I love you, you big adorable moon rocket! You coulda' been so much more!
This comment is an emotional rocket ship.
+The Child of Lost lol
Nice Saturn T-shirt
In addition, there were also designs for a version of the Saturn first stage that would have wings and fly back to the Cape for a runway landing, and of course there was a design for a nuclear-thermal-powered upper stage which would be like an S-IVb with really high specific impulse. There was even a proposal to use a Saturn derivative as the first stage for the Space Shuttle instead of the SRBs they wound up using. And NASA still has a bunch of perfectly good unused F1 engines in storage awaiting some future use.
You always do really interesting vids I just wish there were more of them :)
People working on the Saturn V family clearly took inspiration from Kerbal Space Program. The footprint is unmistakable.
0:26 Saturn V derivatives of the late 1960s: Two engineers at the Marshall Space Flight Center suggested manned missions to other planets. Bell Com worked on a manned flyby of Venus and Mars (1968).
There was also the Saturn-Shuttle, which would have mated the Space Shuttle (with "air launched" SSMEs) and External Tank in place of the S-II and S-IVB to the S-IC stage, virtually eliminating the SRBs and their associated issues.
There were also INT variants, as well as MLV variants. One example, the Saturn V-4X(U) was a true pipe dream of combining 4 S-1C modified to V-4S (S-1C stretched by 498 inches) standard with 4 stretched S-IVs. It was projected with over a ludicrous million pound payload (over 500 metric tons to be exact!)
Amy's outfit here was also originally inspired by the A4 rocket.
Not sure that I have a favorite variant, but I do like the modular concept. We got to see a form of that with the Skylab launch.
In my opinion, even if we had scaled back the expenditures for the space race significantly, we still could have had these derivatives and had a *real* space station decades earlier - and one designed to rotate for artificial gravity like seen in 2001 A Space Odyssey.
My favorite would have been the Saturn V-D, with four SRBs. Go big or stay planetside. :D
Forgot to zoom in at 6:03? Either way, Great video! Such a shame these never became a reality, We would've probably been a lot further in terms of space exploration today.
They Might Be Giants? Rockets that is.
EPISODE IDEA: Can you do an episode on the impact crater that the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter photographed, which some think is the impact of Apollo 16's S4b - which they lost contact with right before they expected it to impact the moon?
The decades-long life of the Soyuz capsule and its rocket booster shows what we could have had with the Apollo technology, or even Gemini (we could have landed on the Moon with modified Gemini capsules serving as both the command module and lander, saving the cost of developing the Apollo CM and LM), modified and upgraded with new technology over passing decades.
Amy, maybe a video in the story of the 'Damascus Accident' involving the explosion of a Titan and a nuclear warhead. I just got done watching the 'Command and Control' documentary.. crazy stuff!
Hey Amy, you should do a video on how the Saturn V changed over its development.
I know you talked about nova and did a (very) brief overview of the Saturn family, but it would be enlightening to see how one idea lead to another and the Saturn V ended up as a 3 stage rocket with an upper stage number 4. I've already seen a few comments here asking why that is.
I like how Mr. Potatohead seems to be fascinated by the idea of assembly from modular, interchangeable components.
Bellcomm also worked on a monolithic solid rocket concept. It would have been massive, requiring use of barges to transport to the launch platform because it would have been much too large for the crawler.
Sky lab was the 2nd iteration of the mighty Saturn 👍
Man!, this girl is smaaaaart! I bet there's hardly anything about the Apollo space program she doesn't know. Keep up the good work!
You are awesome
Still hoping for a project orion (pulsed fission fragment propulsion) video. It's vintage, it's bonkers, and would have really changed the course of history.
I didn't realize until recently that the VAB building was made to process four Saturn rockets. I thought that very interesting.