What gets me is the inability to repeat this. Not that they actually went there, but why we haven't successfully gone back with more advanced tech available to us as there is today? The original crew of travelers had a Radio Shack parts bin thrown together and wrapped it up in a layer of tin foil and they made it there.
Cost-prohibitive today? More capital available to us than ever. Motivation? More people today than ever would love to see a successful human re-visitation of a celestial body -- not just an unmanned probe or vehicle. Priorities? Wouldn't you as a nation love to demonstrate your grasp on the cosmos by going there again?
I guess Artemis is attempting a manned re-visitation of the moon's surface, but it's just staggering to me how it took this long to repeat something that came out of an exponentially more rudimentary period of time. Something doesn't add up. I'm the most curious what sort of tech is being hidden from us, tbh.
More than HALF A CENTURY after the 1969 moon landing, we haven't been back and even the rare UNMANNED landings on the moon sometimes have problems.
Fifty-five years of scientific and tech progress have taken us from primitive computers the size of a small room to wristwatches with far more computing power and memory (not to mention graphics capability) than could be bought for any price in 1969. We've gone from bulky low-res CRTs to "retina" resolution LCDs and other flatscreens; from smog-belching cars to gasoline vehicles whose exhaust is often cleaner than the surrounding air.
But we just can't seem to put humans on the moon again.
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
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?
What gets me is the inability to repeat this. Not that they actually went there, but why we haven't successfully gone back with more advanced tech available to us as there is today? The original crew of travelers had a Radio Shack parts bin thrown together and wrapped it up in a layer of tin foil and they made it there.
Cost-prohibitive today? More capital available to us than ever. Motivation? More people today than ever would love to see a successful human re-visitation of a celestial body -- not just an unmanned probe or vehicle. Priorities? Wouldn't you as a nation love to demonstrate your grasp on the cosmos by going there again?
I guess Artemis is attempting a manned re-visitation of the moon's surface, but it's just staggering to me how it took this long to repeat something that came out of an exponentially more rudimentary period of time. Something doesn't add up. I'm the most curious what sort of tech is being hidden from us, tbh.
Great point, LordK.
More than HALF A CENTURY after the 1969 moon landing, we haven't been back and even the rare UNMANNED landings on the moon sometimes have problems.
Fifty-five years of scientific and tech progress have taken us from primitive computers the size of a small room to wristwatches with far more computing power and memory (not to mention graphics capability) than could be bought for any price in 1969. We've gone from bulky low-res CRTs to "retina" resolution LCDs and other flatscreens; from smog-belching cars to gasoline vehicles whose exhaust is often cleaner than the surrounding air.
But we just can't seem to put humans on the moon again.
Something is off here.
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
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?