this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2025
101 points (99.0% liked)
Space
1812 readers
148 users here now
A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics
Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes, but they threw away the entire rocket each time. That's why we haven't been back since 1972. If orbital refueling with a fully reusble launch vehicle can be unlocked, that will be a game changer for space exploration. China would win the sprint but lose the marathon.
Also the fact space rendezvous havent even been achieved when the Apollo program begun. It wasnt until Gemini missions that proved it can be done. Until then, even the lander was being designed to ascent from the lunar surface and go home without any rendezvous maneuver. But that was scrapped for the more economical lunar module and command module design.