Growing more sceptical about Lunar landing.

[Grump Martian]

I remember the Apollo era Moon landings. I would love to see it happen again. I often wonder why it has not happened sooner.

I watch with interest the Artemis programme and the proposed Space X landing system. Also the Lunar Gateway project. Am I the only person felling sceptical about the whole project becoming reality? I have attached a  video about this. I don't know if what is being said is true. But it resonates with my increasing scepticism. I hope that I am proved wrong and the projects all come together very quickly and we see a sustainable Lunar landing programme come to fruition.

 

[Tomatobro]

At its peak the Apollo program employed 400000 people and efforts were directed to meet a deadline set by JFK.  The objectives were to get there, land and get back.

Artemis has around 100000 people, 70000 in the USA the rest split over 5 countries. There is no deadline and the goals are very different to that of the Apollo program.

For us "old uns" the pace of progress seems slow but I am sure it will get there in the end

[SwiMatt]

In addition to the very good point raised by @Tomatobro, the way NASA and ESA are financed is always subjected to political and public opinion whims. NASA's Artemis started in the early 2000s, and funding was cut and re-instated by different presidents. Additionally, giving different tasks to private commercial enterprises (such as Space-X) will always be an inherent risk as the primary goal of those is not progress or landing on the Moon, but making money (this goes beyond my personal feelings about the dude at the top) - any change of mind on their side, or extra unpredictable costs (normal in such a complex and dangerous endeavor, as the US and soviet programs taught us) will lead to delays.

For ESA, the situation is even worse: the Aurora program to explore Mars was launched in 2001 or so, and I remember as a teenager being very excited and very disappointed about having to wait 20 years to see humans on Mars... but some of the countries that provode major funding to ESA are against human exploration (too costly, too risky, not necessary for scientific/commercial purposes) - which put the whole Aurora program in jeopardy and now no-one remembers about it except those of us who were nerds of it back in the day. 

Fundamentally, as long as space exploration doesn't have a defendable and materialistic raison d'être (commercial, geopolitical, warfare...), it will never be a priority for anyone. Will we get there? Possibly, I think for the first time in years we are very close to it happening (should happen next year!), but any set-back, accident, new war might set us back years or decades.

Actually, one of the criticisms in the early parts of the video - the project is too decentralized, too many actors, too many parts are given to third parties to develop - is a bit naif: this has been done for decades and we keep going to space with very few accidents. I think the real problem is financing. And also, again, commercial enterprises don't care about the Moon or Mars. They do it for branding and because any technology they will develop thanks to big countries subsidies they will be able to sell without any money every getting back to the tax payers who provided the money for those subsidies... just saying.

Edited May 27 by SwiMatt
Addition

[Earl]

Its all nice but I think there are more pressing matters to invest the time, energy and funds into.

Edited May 27 by Earl

[TiffsAndAstro]

11 minutes ago, Earl said:

Its all nice but I think there are more pressing matters to invest the time, energy and funds into.

Getting all our eggs out of our single very very fragile basket is surely the highest priority there could ever be though?

Moonbase etc would be a start on that.

[Earl]

1 minute ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

Getting all our eggs out of our single very very fragile basket is surely the highest priority there could ever be though?

Moonbase etc would be a start on that.

Id go with clean runnig water, sanitation, food globally, ... you know important things for everone.

[malc-c]

I find it amusing that in this day and age people still think America didn't go to the moon back in the late 60's early 70's.  Why?, because several other countries have had the technology and funds to send their own probes to the moon which would an ideal opportunity to disprove the subject and publish images of the Apollo landing sites void of any evidence and  shame the US as the result it proved that it never happened.   Instead, probes from Japan, etc have confirmed the landings took place by showing identical images to those high detail that the Luna recognisance craft took which shows these sites are exactly as they were when the Apollo LEM blasted off to dock with the command modules.

What has happened is that Musk and Space X has now become an established "commercial" service, and its cheaper for NASA to purchase missions from Space X rather than try and develop their own systems.  SpaceX have now become very profitable, and able to invest the profits into Starship.  The pace as which that program is being developed and tested could not be matched by a government funded project.

Earl, I read an article which stated that if the top 6 wealthiest people all got together and emptied their pockets there would be enough money to resolve all the issues 3rd world countries have.  The wealth of these people is more then some countries GDP... But in reality that would never happen.   Governments are always saying that they haven't the money to resolve strikes from medical staff over pay, or increase budgets for XYor Z, yet can then find millions or even billions at short notice to help Ukraine, or in Aid to help in some crisis.  I think a lot of Americans think the same about the investment in NASA and their space program, both now and at the time of Apollo.

 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

24 minutes ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

Getting all our eggs out of our single very very fragile basket is surely the highest priority there could ever be though?

Moonbase etc would be a start on that.

Earth is not 'very very fragile" though is it? What is fragile, is human civilisation. Mostly due to our own endeavours to ruin the planet and kill ourselves.

The highest priority for the influential mega rich and governments should be clean air, water, etc for all and not the greedy planet ruining systems we have now.

Moving a few thousand people to another planet we are not evolved to live on won't change the above. 

Do you really believe Elon Musk when he states he is aiming Mars for the good of the human race? No, it's about resources n business.

I hope we can get to the moon and learn to live there but will doing so actually benefit all of us in the longer term? Probably not.

 

Edited May 27 by ScouseSpaceCadet

[Earl]

People doubt things as authority has a proven track record of been liars, its not rocket science 🤣🤣

[TiffsAndAstro]

37 minutes ago, Earl said:

Id go with clean runnig water, sanitation, food globally, ... you know important things for everone.

I'm not convinced the two are mutually exclusive.

[TiffsAndAstro]

26 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Earth is not 'very very fragile" though is it? What is fragile, is human civilisation. Mostly due to our own endeavours to ruin the planet and kill ourselves.

The highest priority for the influential mega rich and governments should be clean air, water, etc for all and not the greedy planet ruining systems we have now.

Moving a few thousand people to another planet we are not evolved to live on won't change the above. 

Do you really believe Elon Musk when he states he is aiming Mars for the good of the human race? No, it's about resources n business.

I hope we can get to the moon and learn to live there but will doing so actually benefit all of us in the longer term? Probably not.

 

I don't have a high opinion of musk for many reasons, I think he's a clown.

The moon is just a stepping stone along the way. A potential source of fusion fuel, rocket fuel, cheap solar energy, that kind of thing 

Edited May 27 by TiffsAndAstro

[TiffsAndAstro]

28 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Earth is not 'very very fragile" though is it? What is fragile, is human civilisation. Mostly due to our own endeavours to ruin the planet and kill ourselves.

The highest priority for the influential mega rich and governments should be clean air, water, etc for all and not the greedy planet ruining systems we have now.

Moving a few thousand people to another planet we are not evolved to live on won't change the above. 

Do you really believe Elon Musk when he states he is aiming Mars for the good of the human race? No, it's about resources n business.

I hope we can get to the moon and learn to live there but will doing so actually benefit all of us in the longer term? Probably not.

 

Earth is incredibly fragile. As far as we can tell, the only place in the entire universe where life exists. Asteroid impacts, nearby supernovas, jellystone exploding, nuclear wars and I'm sure there's more.

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

22 minutes ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

Earth is incredibly fragile. As far as we can tell, the only place in the entire universe where life exists. Asteroid impacts, nearby supernovas, jellystone exploding, nuclear wars and I'm sure there's more.

As I said, the planet is not fragile, human civilization is, almost totally because of our own actions. Those activities will be taken with us.

Life crushing asteroid impacts millions of years apart likely won't bother us. In fact the last big one gave our furry ancestors a boost by wiping out the competition. 

Nearby supernovas really? Sorry but again not likely during the course of our civilisation and moving to Mars won't help!

Volcanism is something we just have to live with.  Sending a few people to an irradiated rock won't make a difference.

 

[TiffsAndAstro]

14 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

As I said, the planet is not fragile, human civilization is, almost totally because of our own actions. Those activities will be taken with us.

Life crushing asteroid impacts millions of years apart likely won't bother us. In fact the last big one gave our furry ancestors a boost by wiping out the competition. 

Nearby supernovas really? Sorry but again not likely during the course of our civilisation and moving to Mars won't help!

Volcanism is something we just have to live with.  Sending a few people to an irradiated rock won't make a difference.

 

One step at a time.

We can wait until we have ftl and other magic, but that just leaves us exposed to multiple low to high risk events occuring in the meantime.

Maybe I'm just too risk averse when the potential stake is so high.

Also I'm far from convinced that a lack of the very basics such as clean water, food and education is due to spending too many of our resources on technology. Certainly from a historical perspective, that seems to be more due to our/the west simply not giving a s*&t about it.

Oh and of course capitalism, I'm alright Joe etc. remember it wasn't that long ago the UK was forcing heroin on china down the barrel of a gun.

This lack of interest in other nations seems to be mellowing a little over time, maybe as comntech has improved. Which at least is one positive trend.

Edited May 27 by TiffsAndAstro

[tomato]

Although I was barely old enough to appreciate it, today's slow progress makes me realise just how ambitious the JFK challenge was and equally how committed the USA as an entity was to delivering it. In today's fractious age I doubt we will see the likes of it again.

[maw lod qan]

I congratulate Mr. Musk for the advances he and SpaceX have accomplished.

I believe we should continue moving forward in every endeavor of space exploration including establishing bases on the Moon and Mars.

At the same time work at bettering the living conditions for those hete.

We can do this, but not with the continuing mentality that goes back thousands of years.

Like the incredible song writer said.

"Give peace a chance!"

Working together we could do everything!

[Grump Martian]

2 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

 

Volcanism is something we just have to live with.  Sending a few people to an irradiated rock won't make a difference.

 

Vulcanism! I just can't get the hand greeting right.

[maw lod qan]

3 hours ago, Grump Martian said:

Vulcanism! I just can't get the hand greeting right.

Takes practice.

[John]

I've no doubts whatsoever that the Apollo missions 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 landed on the Moon during the period 1969 to 1972. 

Whether humans will set foot there again in the near future, I do have my doubts about. 

 

 

[malc-c]

4 hours ago, tomato said:

Although I was barely old enough to appreciate it, today's slow progress makes me realise just how ambitious the JFK challenge was and equally how committed the USA as an entity was to delivering it. In today's fractious age I doubt we will see the likes of it again.

From what I can gather it wasn't quite like that.   Whilst a lot of Americans at the time were behind the project even if it was only to get one over on the Russians, but also there was a good chunk of the population that was against the project given the huge cost, and that the return of putting a dozen men on the Moon achieved little or nothing for the everyday American.  Coupled with the its involvement in the Vietnam war, which again was seen as a waste of money and lives, it certainly wasn't quite the image that is often portrayed in media.   

I don't think todays progress in spaceflight  is slow .. The rate at which Space X is developing and testing prototype Starships is outperforming any space program that preceded it.    One thing I will agree on is JFK's ambition, and being one of those personalities that when he said "jump" others would ask "how high".  He certainly had a huge following, and there was so much outpouring of emotion when he was assassinated. 

[TiffsAndAstro]

4 hours ago, Grump Martian said:

Vulcanism! I just can't get the hand greeting right.

Live long and prospect, as Vulcan miners say.

[tomato]

Yes, the Apollo Programme had its detractors, but at least those dollars were being spent on something positive rather bombing parts of SE Asia. There was the deep philosophical reaction to the Apollo 8 “Earthrise” photo at the end of a turbulent 1968, and I remember the way the whole world seemed to get behind the rescue effort for Apollo 13. I’m inclined to agree with Gene Kranz that it was NASA’s finest hour.

[Ags]

we should go to the Moon and Mars, and further out than that too! The small and insufficient investment in space exploration is not the reason we have not fixed the problems on Earth. The 'lets fix Earth first' argument sounds a bit like saying 'lets shut down all research projects so we can buy food aid'. If we really wanted to sort out our problems, we could stop wasting money on things with truly zero or negative value, like sport, alcohol, cosmetics, gambling etc etc. Leave my rockets alone!

[Grump Martian]

I am beginning to feel that major problems with civilisation,wars etc may prevent this generation from continuing space exploration. If we survive, more advance technology will make it easier and safer to expand into the solar system sometime further into the future.

[saac]

9 minutes ago, Grump Martian said:

I am beginning to feel that major problems with civilisation,wars etc may prevent this generation from continuing space exploration. If we survive, more advance technology will make it easier and safer to expand into the solar system sometime further into the future.

Is the situation today not that dissimilar to that in the 60s re wars and instability?  Once clear commercial opportunities open I think we will see some movement. 

Jim