Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

UdderSuckage t1_iv2k98h wrote

I'm curious why you posted a four-month old article about a launch that happened fifty years ago.

12

therealdannyking t1_iv2kpil wrote

It's a version of whataboutism due to China's recent uncontrolled deorbit of their booster.

26

404_Gordon_Not_Found t1_iv2l9is wrote

Did those stages fall uncontrollably or was there a de-orbit burn?

Even then, are the Chinese really contempt to be compared to USA in the 70s?

6

therealdannyking t1_iv2m71b wrote

They fell uncontrollably as far as I'm aware. I see your second question, I have no idea.

4

ye_olde_astronaut OP t1_iv2vxgj wrote

> Did those stages fall uncontrollably or was there a de-orbit burn?

I did a bit of digging and found that a total of six S-IV stages launched by NASA using the Saturn I in 1964 and 1965 were left to make uncontrolled reentries (each with a mass of about 10 tons including attached payloads). Likewise, the S-IVB stages from the Apollo 5, 6, and 7 missions were left in orbit to make uncontrolled reentries (with masses of 10 tons or even more when residual propellant loads are included).

After that, NASA made sure to safely dispose of the spent Saturn S-IVB stages because of the hazards of uncontrolled reentries. For the three manned Skylab missions as well as ASTP, changes were made to the S-IVB plumbing and operation procedures to deorbit the spent S-IVB stages over the Pacific to minimize the risk of falling debris.

> Even then, are the Chinese really contempt to be compared to USA in the 70s?

Despite the fact NASA was fully aware by 1973 of the hazards of the uncontrolled reentry of large stages (which is why they started controlled deorbiting spent S-IVB stages in 1973), it was deemed not worth the expense and effort to modify the S-II second stage of the Saturn V to safely deorbit the spent stage for a one-off launch of the Skylab station. NASA decided to accept the known risks... just as the Chinese have decided to accept the risks of uncontrolled reentries of the LM-5B core stage today.

−4

Cartz1337 t1_iv5xemj wrote

‘Accepting the risks’ 50 years later on a far superior modern platform doesn’t seem right to me.

It’s somewhat different then NASA not redesigning a rocket for a one off mission. Seems like everyone could do better here.

5

cratermoon t1_iv42itk wrote

What's the deal with demonizing China so much? Are people buying into some kind of warmongering narrative?

−5

CmdrPatHealy t1_iv5ms17 wrote

Interesting that OP is digging up 50 year old events to demonize the US, and you’re worried about demonizing China.

11

cratermoon t1_iv63950 wrote

What, exactly, is demonizing about this story? It gives context for current events.

−5

Polygnom t1_iv6krif wrote

The article is very carefully crafted to word things in a supposedly neutral way, but fails to provide the proper context, actually.

The proper context would be to say that back in the days, people were just learning about space exploration, and many lessons were learned -- some of them quite bloody I might add. Skylab being plastered all over Australia was kind of an event that led to huge changes in how disposal is approach today by almost all nations.

The proper context to provide would be to highlight which changes were implemented after each of these events and how nowadays you are supposed to make sure this doesn't happen again, because it is obvious a bad thing if debris falls down uncontrolled.

The articles that get posted again and again -- and this one is no exception -- fail to provide that context and instead under a guise of neutrality try to provide a platform to justify that China doesn't care about proper disposal.

This is an article that carefully tries to shape opinion, and does so expertly I might add, as the comments here show.

2

Anderopolis t1_iv7ongk wrote

Valid criticism of China not doing the Bare minimum for Safety with their rockets is apparently demonizing these days.

2

Safe-Dust-2190 t1_iv5295r wrote

I would like to know as well. It seems like people are really lusting for WW3. Especially on this subreddit for some reason…

−2

cratermoon t1_iv7hmdb wrote

There's clearly something going on. Perhaps the military contractors are looking for something to replace the endless middle east wars? I'm 100% sure there are people in this sub more than willing to amplify the rhetoric. The US space program grew out of military missile programs, starting with von Braun, and continuing to this day through Boeing. Boeing itself bloated to its current dominance by buying up McDonnell Douglas‎, North American Aviation‎, Rocketdyne, Hughes Aircraft Company, Hawker De Havilland Aerospace, and a couple dozen more.

−2

Anderopolis t1_iv7oxrd wrote

Of course, the Reason people don't want uncontrolled rocket reentries is because of the evil Amerikansky Military Industrial Complex.

Priviet Comrade, take your little red book and continue to spread the good word.

1

Falcon3492 t1_iv5wfw8 wrote

Lot happened in rocketry over the last 50 years since Skylab, regarding de orbit burns. It's surprising that China seems to still be using the technology that was prevalent in the 60's and early 70's. I guess they haven't been able to figure out or steal the information needed to bring down their rockets or spent stages safely where they want or need to. Either that or they don't care where they come down.

6