I'm sorry but what is it you think is missing between a version of a manned mission to the moon and an unmanned mission to the moon? The only thing you need to provide for the astronauts is extra oxygen to be there to go out the door when it lands on the moon. This is not rocket science actually, the moon is actually really easy to reach. It's when you decide to send science experiments and other complex things to actually start analyzing the moon and determining which parts you want to claim and which parts have the highest levels of helium 3, do you even understand why we go to the moon in the first place?? This is why the mods here remove people that are retarded on site. Why would you go to the moon? Answer that question for me
One other point: You are either dramatically underselling the difficulty of putting HUMANS in space or are unaware of them.
Humans need more than oxygen (although that's a big damn deal, really: the tanks and the nearly bullet-proof containment required in space, along with designing with the fire danger in mind aren't trivial and add quite a bit of weight) -- humans also need bathroom facilities, they need food, they need radiation shielding, they need G-force consideration for launch and maneuvers, they need tools and suits and much more. And going to and from the moon, plus of course STAYING there for even a short but useful time, makes this all much more difficult than just lobbing someone up for a space ride or taking them to the space station.
Is it really "retarded" to wonder if we actually had the technology to go to the moon with the much cruder tech we had 55 years ago?
The highest G-Force in astronaut experiences is 7 G's during reentry which they do pretty easily no problems because they are lying down.
It's actually easier to send humans in space and they're in a lunar module. The module has to be completely sealed like a submarine so it's pretty easy to keep the astronauts alive. All systems have carbon dioxide scrubbers and oxygen emitters
I'm not retarded, catsfive. And I didn't say we didn't go to the moon, but there ARE details and other reasons that make me wonder . . . not that I'd expect the government to ever LIE to us, of course.
One reason I wonder about whether we've been getting the truth about the Apollo missions is that we DO send humans into space -- we had the whole Space Shuttle program and we've had at least two space stations (one of which came down in flames after a number of years), so there are reasons good enough (to some with the power and money to make it happen) to PUT people in space, but for MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY we haven't even attempted to put anyone on the Moon -- where a base would be exceptionally useful, according to many (and to common sense). Elon and others are working on going to Mars, for heaven's sake, but NOBODY has tried to put a human on the Moon in all the time since Apollo shut down?
Elon is working on going to the moon as well but he is letting that be the NASA Artemis mission which SpaceX will be a big participant in through secondary launches
Ever been to Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho? Very sobering terrain, from horizon to horizon. I visited it in the summer of 1969 or 1970 (hazy memory) and haven't returned for a second look. Gee, that is as long as we haven't returned to the Moon. Is it more important to return to the Moon, than it is to return to Craters of the Moon?
I'm sorry but what is it you think is missing between a version of a manned mission to the moon and an unmanned mission to the moon? The only thing you need to provide for the astronauts is extra oxygen to be there to go out the door when it lands on the moon. This is not rocket science actually, the moon is actually really easy to reach. It's when you decide to send science experiments and other complex things to actually start analyzing the moon and determining which parts you want to claim and which parts have the highest levels of helium 3, do you even understand why we go to the moon in the first place?? This is why the mods here remove people that are retarded on site. Why would you go to the moon? Answer that question for me
One other point: You are either dramatically underselling the difficulty of putting HUMANS in space or are unaware of them.
Humans need more than oxygen (although that's a big damn deal, really: the tanks and the nearly bullet-proof containment required in space, along with designing with the fire danger in mind aren't trivial and add quite a bit of weight) -- humans also need bathroom facilities, they need food, they need radiation shielding, they need G-force consideration for launch and maneuvers, they need tools and suits and much more. And going to and from the moon, plus of course STAYING there for even a short but useful time, makes this all much more difficult than just lobbing someone up for a space ride or taking them to the space station.
Is it really "retarded" to wonder if we actually had the technology to go to the moon with the much cruder tech we had 55 years ago?
Maybe we did, but I'm not convinced.
The highest G-Force in astronaut experiences is 7 G's during reentry which they do pretty easily no problems because they are lying down.
It's actually easier to send humans in space and they're in a lunar module. The module has to be completely sealed like a submarine so it's pretty easy to keep the astronauts alive. All systems have carbon dioxide scrubbers and oxygen emitters
I'm not retarded, catsfive. And I didn't say we didn't go to the moon, but there ARE details and other reasons that make me wonder . . . not that I'd expect the government to ever LIE to us, of course.
One reason I wonder about whether we've been getting the truth about the Apollo missions is that we DO send humans into space -- we had the whole Space Shuttle program and we've had at least two space stations (one of which came down in flames after a number of years), so there are reasons good enough (to some with the power and money to make it happen) to PUT people in space, but for MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY we haven't even attempted to put anyone on the Moon -- where a base would be exceptionally useful, according to many (and to common sense). Elon and others are working on going to Mars, for heaven's sake, but NOBODY has tried to put a human on the Moon in all the time since Apollo shut down?
That's not proof, but it isn't nothing, either.
Elon is working on going to the moon as well but he is letting that be the NASA Artemis mission which SpaceX will be a big participant in through secondary launches
Ever been to Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho? Very sobering terrain, from horizon to horizon. I visited it in the summer of 1969 or 1970 (hazy memory) and haven't returned for a second look. Gee, that is as long as we haven't returned to the Moon. Is it more important to return to the Moon, than it is to return to Craters of the Moon?