Moon landings



Billy Smart's Circus said:
I struggle to understand why something like 50 years has elapsed without a manned landing.

When considering the extent that technology has moved on over that time, would it not be relatively easier a feat now than it must’ve been in 60’s?

Would other countries not want the kudos of having achieved moon landings themselves even if there was no financial profit to be had?
Click to expand...
Health and safety gone mad. Can’t do it nowadays, astronauts would need to wear hi vis vests and need 45 minutes wellness breaks each day
 
There was a series broadcast on BBC4 called Chasing the Moon Chasing the Moon (TV series) - Wikipedia which showed masses of archive footage of the early Gemini launches as well as the early Apollo missions. It was absolutely brilliant.
One of the most haunting things was the footage of the Apollo 1 astronauts getting into the craft immediately prior to their deaths and the broadcast sound of them telling the outside that there was a fire. I’m sure there are pictures too but they didn’t show that which was good as no one wants to see that.
Of course man went to the moon. As someone said on here before, at a time when all human knowledge is available via the internet to most people, there are plenty of bellends around who won’t believe it. Oh the footage also clearly showed the earth isn’t actually flat oddly😀
 
Believe at the time of landing the Americans activated a beacon that gave signal out . This was watched live on BBC TV "The Sky at Night " programme with Patrick Moore .
 
Tadger said:
Aside from all of the other evidence that debunks the usual whopper talking points, the biggest indicator that it was genuine remains that the Soviet Union, who monitored the entire thing from start to finish, never gave any indication that they thought it was faked.
Click to expand...
All news is censored by the lizard people ;)
0verlord44 said:
please go on.

explain how the feather fell without floating down while you are at it.
Click to expand...
Lead feather:lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Last edited:
Billy Smart's Circus said:
I struggle to understand why something like 50 years has elapsed without a manned landing.

When considering the extent that technology has moved on over that time, would it not be relatively easier a feat now than it must’ve been in 60’s?

Would other countries not want the kudos of having achieved moon landings themselves even if there was no financial profit to be had?
Click to expand...

Main reason is that the Apollo mission were driven by the space race with the USSR. The USA won and since then there was never any reason to go back. The concentration turned to manned low earth orbit mission and planetary probes.

Getting to the moon is relatively easy. Point a rocket in the right direction and let physics do the rest. The hard thing is stopping there which is why the missions in the 60s only lasted a few days. Now with the recent discovery of water there is now the possibility of longer term missions leading to permanent settlement and the chance to make some money.
 
Billy Smart's Circus said:
I struggle to understand why something like 50 years has elapsed without a manned landing.

When considering the extent that technology has moved on over that time, would it not be relatively easier a feat now than it must’ve been in 60’s?

Would other countries not want the kudos of having achieved moon landings themselves even if there was no financial profit to be had?
Click to expand...
Answered your own question i think
 
Billy Smart's Circus said:
I struggle to understand why something like 50 years has elapsed without a manned landing.

When considering the extent that technology has moved on over that time, would it not be relatively easier a feat now than it must’ve been in 60’s?

Would other countries not want the kudos of having achieved moon landings themselves even if there was no financial profit to be had?
Click to expand...
Money, money , money - the US put 2.5% of their entire GDP into the moon landing project annually in the 1960s, it was seen as matter of national importance during the cold war after Sputnik spooked the yanks in 1957.

Just to put that into perspective, that would amount to 560 billion dollars annually in today's money. If that sort of money was still being put into space programmes they would have been to Mars by now
 
Rizla said:
Just to put that into perspective, that would amount to 560 billion dollars annually in today's money. If that sort of money was still being put into space programmes they would have been to Mars by now
Click to expand...

Which is exactly the plot of "For All Mankind" on Apple TV. An alternate history where the space race never ended. Well worth watching.
 
The Apollo missions would never of happened today.

They were just way too risky and would be considered totally unacceptable.

However, the Space Race was part of the (not so) Cold War, all of the crews were ex-military, so the risks were accepted.

At the end of the day, regardless of the other technology, you still need a massive rocket to escape earths gravity, which i neither cheap or easy to build.
 
Billy Smart's Circus said:
I struggle to understand why something like 50 years has elapsed without a manned landing.

When considering the extent that technology has moved on over that time, would it not be relatively easier a feat now than it must’ve been in 60’s?

Would other countries not want the kudos of having achieved moon landings themselves even if there was no financial profit to be had?
Click to expand...
I thought it would be obvious really. There was a space race to win to prove which superpower was the superior, most technically advanced nation. The US emerged as the worlds only superpower so what was the point in wasting billions.
 

Back
Top