> jbay808: * If a generation dies without passing on certain knowledge, it's lost and has to be rediscovered the hard way, and that can certainly happen to technological know-how just like anything else. *
> cbanek: Building the next [Saturn V] would be really hard
Leading edge technology isn't known by that many people to begin with, so it's easier to lose. Even though the organization that built Saturn V rockets was huge and lasted several years, there are still details that will take, as I understand it, a bit of archaeology to get at. If a technique doesn't become routine, can technology be said to have progressed up to that technique?
I'm not an expert, but from what I understand, the hard part wouldn't be the cutting edge rocket science (choice of fuels, valve design, etc) but the fabrication techniques.
The 1960s had a generation of highly skilled welders, machinists, and sheet metal workers that had honed their craft in the factories of the second world war. The USA today doesn't seem to have the same quantity of skilled workers and NASA has to design parts differently to allow automated tools to do the work.
But those fabrication techniques probably would have been considered routine at the time, although maybe above-average in complexity. So even a routine technology can be, in a sense, lost if it falls out of demand.
Yup that's what curious droid's video on this is saying as well [1]. Basically the plans all were off a little bit and each rocket engine was hand-tailored to the demands of the individual rocket by these skilled people you mentioned. They did document their changes but only on scrap notes that since were lost. The plans themselves that were archived don't contain those notes and even if they had them, you couldn't find people with such skills any more.
> cbanek: Building the next [Saturn V] would be really hard
Leading edge technology isn't known by that many people to begin with, so it's easier to lose. Even though the organization that built Saturn V rockets was huge and lasted several years, there are still details that will take, as I understand it, a bit of archaeology to get at. If a technique doesn't become routine, can technology be said to have progressed up to that technique?