Because Boeing should have economy of scale benefits by selling $180B worth of aircraft, while Apollo 13 was a bespoke, single-use, cutting-edge spacecraft on a much smaller budget.
Wendover's video on Boeing - it's easy to see how costs spiral under their model, plus it's nice to see Sam - probably one of the biggest aviation geeks around - put the boot into Boeing.
20 Comments
jlh@lemmy.jlh.name · 58 pts · 2y
Apollo 13 budget: ~ $2.8B in 2023 usd
Boeing 737 MAX total program budget (excluding older 737 models): > $180B
Hildegarde@lemmy.world · 40 pts · 2y
Why are you comparing the budget of one single spacecraft with an entire production run of a model of airplane? That's not a reasonable comparison.
THE_ANTIHERO@lemmy.today · 20 pts · 2y
Yeah its too fair to boing because they are not sending shit tp fucking space
BakerBagel@midwest.social · 4 pts · 2y
Modern airplanes are also have crazy complicated systems compared to the Apollo program.
But also the MAX eas supotti be a quick and easy upgrade to the existing 737-800, so clearly theu fucked up along the way
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Hahahaha! Well nailed!
jlh@lemmy.jlh.name · 19 pts · 2y
Because Boeing should have economy of scale benefits by selling $180B worth of aircraft, while Apollo 13 was a bespoke, single-use, cutting-edge spacecraft on a much smaller budget.
gmtom@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Wasn't it exactly the same as most of the other apollo craft?
GBU_28@lemm.ee · 2 pts · 2y
Because this is Lemmy
PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk · 14 pts · 2y
https://youtu.be/URoVKPVDKPU?si=6wAXf8ckCXTPb_UY
Wendover's video on Boeing - it's easy to see how costs spiral under their model, plus it's nice to see Sam - probably one of the biggest aviation geeks around - put the boot into Boeing.
A good waste of 20+ mins.
edgemaster72@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
Sounds risky, might break a foot, he should've used a brick instead.
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
The bricks fell off due to a software error.
MeanEYE@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2y
Not to mention Apollo program invented a lot of new stuff never before seen, let alone used.
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2y
That explains how Boeing could afford 22 characters while NASA had to make do with 3.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net · 20 pts · 2y
What's the "No!" Button do?
altec@midwest.social · 19 pts · 2y
I believe it was a stage separation, so the No! was to keep them from accidently pressing it early.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net · 22 pts · 2y
Hmmm... I wonder if this technique would help me in KSP if I put a big "NO!" over the spacebar 🤔
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2y
Definitely worth a shot. How many passengers on your vessel? If it's <346 then you're beating average performance.
Ed: Damn I had no idea it was this bad
anarchy79@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2y
Don't ask, don't tell.
MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 2y
Of note is that if this is the command module, it was built by Rockwell, parts of which eventually become Boeing. So the stickies track.
Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee · 4 pts · 2y
Love the printed labels on the Apollo capsule.
perviouslyiner@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
anarchy79@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2y