← Back to context

Comment by gerdesj

14 hours ago

There will always be issues on something a mad as putting some people on a firework and shooting them at a moving target 100,000 miles away from a moving platform.

The heat shield failure was a test and the result was a working heat shield, when it counted. That's the point of tests. NASA already had several working heat shields from the old missions but the new one needed testing - for the shape of the craft etc. They already had a lot of data from the old efforts (that worked).

I think that exit and re-entry are almost routine now, provided your rocket doesn't explode. The tricky bit is out there in space and trying to make the moon a resource of some sort.

The new one failed in ways it was not designed to fail. In C-compiler terms it was "undefined behavior." In Donald Rumsfeld terms it was an "unknown unknown."

The mere fact that the outcome was successful does not inherently indicate that the decision-making was safe: the O-rings "worked" for 24 missions and the foam/tiles "worked" for 111. Nevertheless there were ample warnings and close calls.

Reentry from the Moon is not routine. Re-entry speed was about 40% faster than from low earth orbit, and kinetic energy goes up by the square, so about double.