The Moon

[caplan1]

With all of the space talk, i wanted to get everyones opinion on us landing on the moon.

[GalvestonDuck]

Is there a doubt?

[CaptinCrunch]

I say yes to landing on the moon, but what I really want to know is why haven"t we gone back?? and why are we still committed to using the old a$$ space shuttel instead of using our resources to build a new ship that can take our space program to the next level.

[GalvestonDuck]

I say yes to landing on the moon, but what I really want to know is why haven"t we gone back?? and why are we still committed to using the old a$$ space shuttel instead of using our resources to build a new ship that can take our space program to the next level.

My guess is that part of those resources are being redirected to provide arms to our military so as to battle a group of sheep who are blindly following a no-good, power-hungry cult led by a sorry excuse of a religious leader who is cowardly and weak, yet has enough mind control over the sheep to send them to commit suicide.

[HurryKane]

I say yes to landing on the moon, but what I really want to know is why haven"t we gone back?? and why are we still committed to using the old a$$ space shuttel instead of using our resources to build a new ship that can take our space program to the next level.

They are working on the next spacecraft to carry humans into space--but it's not something that can be created quickly, and the shuttle has always been scheduled to be EOLed around 2010. NASA came up with specifications for the Crew Exploration Vehicle recently; it [self-correction] was supposed to be more like the Apollo era in that it would be a crew module on top of a non-reusable launch rocket instead of a reusable bird like the shuttle...but the new NASA administrator prefers a shuttle-type launch vehicle.

You can read about the proposed Crew Exploration Vehicle here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Exploration_Vehicle

Some fun reading about Saturn V and the Space Shuttle. There's some particularly interesting statements in the Saturn V write-up in the section "Later Use for Saturn V Systems"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_shuttle#Retrospect

[CaptinCrunch]

the shuttle has always been scheduled to be EOLed around 2010.

That is not true, the space shuttle was only to fly for about 10 to 12 years. By 1995 the Shuttle had seen it's life span.

Space Shuttle Columbia lifted off from Kennedy Space Center, Fla., on April 12, 1981, at 6 a.m. CST (12:00 GMT) to begin the first shuttle mission, STS-1.

The $400 million COST arises from the operational details of maintaining and servicing the Shuttle fleet, which have turned out to be tremendously more expensive than anticipated. Some of this can be attributed to operating beyond the 10 year anticipated lifespan of each Shuttle.

[HurryKane]

the shuttle has always been scheduled to be EOLed around 2010.

That is not true, the space shuttle was only to fly for about 10 to 12 years. By 1995 the Shuttle had seen it's life span.

My mistake. My point, however, was that they've known the end of the shuttle's service was coming for a long time and have been trying to find replacements for it. They haven't just been sitting around with their thumbs up their butts.

[JenBayles]

Is there a doubt?

According to my mother-in-law, it never happened. It was all propaganda to counter a communist plot.

[Kim_in_MN]

Is there a doubt?

According to my mother-in-law, it never happened. It was all propaganda to counter a communist plot.

About a year before my divorce I found out that my ex-husband doesn't believe they landed on the moon. I kept finding out little things that made me believe he wasn't as normal as he had convinced me at first

Kim

[wxmann_91]

Ask any of the astronauts who were involved and they would say yes. We all know that it's true.

[Pebbles]

Has the space shuttle even ever gone around the moon? Maybe they found out the space shuttle can't do a mission to the moon and thus why we haven't?

[GalvestonDuck]

Has the space shuttle even ever gone around the moon? Maybe they found out the space shuttle can't do a mission to the moon and thus why we haven't?

The shuttle is also technically known as an "orbiter." It was designed for missions, deliveries, and crew recoveries for other orbiting systems (the Space Station, the Hubble telescope, satellites) in what's known as "low earth orbit."

Also, each orbiter was designed for up to 100 launches. Time is not necessarily a factor. To date, Challenger made 10 flights, Columbia 28, Discovery 30, Endeavor 19, and Atlantis 26. So, the three remaining orbiters still have a good 2/3 or more of their flight life left.

[gtalum]

We landed on the moon. End of story.

The Space Shuttle system was obsolete before Columbia ever launched the first time, and a replacement should have been in the works in the early 1980's. The system was the 6th or 7th best choice available at the time and was chosen primarily because the DoD demanded a system that would work as a war platform, so it's inefficient as a science platform. In reality they should have just developed two separate systems.

Our space program has effectively been stuck in neutral (and indeed we've gone backwards) since the late 1960's. President Bush's push to go to Mars is definitely one of the more positive aspects of his administration, and should be redoubled. It could start with a return to the moon. An effective space station will be necessary for a mission to Mars, as it'd be extremely difficult and inefficient to lift a spacecraft of sufficient size into orbit in one piece. It needs to be assembled in orbit.

Beyond Mars, the resources of the asteroiud belt will undoubtedly become absolutely necessary for economic survival as we use up some of the more easily accessible resources here on Earth. It sounds like science fiction, but our long-term survival as a civilization may well depend on space travel.

What I'd really like to see is private space exploration, and with the success of the X-Prize this year, we may finally see some progress towards that goal.

If anyone here has read Ben Bova's books, you may find that his work is somewhat prophetic.

[Pebbles]

Well there ya go.. Believe it or not I did a science project in 6th grade on space shuttles (that was a LONNNNNG time ago lol). That's right people If you want some prospective on how old the spaceshuttle is. Before the internet, ipod, heck even before CD's were making big for music (everyone still used records and tapes). My my own child is now past the 6th grade. Wierd stuff to think about .... the shuttle has lasted over a generation.

[beachbum_al]

I think we did! Of course that was before I was born. (I think)

[CaptinCrunch]

We landed on the moon. End of story.

The Space Shuttle system was obsolete before Columbia ever launched the first time, and a replacement should have been in the works in the early 1980's. The system was the 6th or 7th best choice available at the time and was chosen primarily because the DoD demanded a system that would work as a war platform, so it's inefficient as a science platform. In reality they should have just developed two separate systems.

Our space program has effectively been stuck in neutral (and indeed we've gone backwards) since the late 1960's. President Bush's push to go to Mars is definitely one of the more positive aspects of his administration, and should be redoubled. It could start with a return to the moon. An effective space station will be necessary for a mission to Mars, as it'd be extremely difficult and inefficient to lift a spacecraft of sufficient size into orbit in one piece. It needs to be assembled in orbit.

Beyond Mars, the resources of the asteroiud belt will undoubtedly become absolutely necessary for economic survival as we use up some of the more easily accessible resources here on Earth. It sounds like science fiction, but our long-term survival as a civilization may well depend on space travel.

What I'd really like to see is private space exploration, and with the success of the X-Prize this year, we may finally see some progress towards that goal.

If anyone here has read Ben Bova's books, you may find that his work is somewhat prophetic.

private space exploration is the future. At $400 million a space flight for the Shuttle Donald Trump could afford to go to the moon a couple times each year just to get away from it all.

[kevin]

Has the space shuttle even ever gone around the moon? Maybe they found out the space shuttle can't do a mission to the moon and thus why we haven't?

The shuttle is also technically known as an "orbiter." It was designed for missions, deliveries, and crew recoveries for other orbiting systems (the Space Station, the Hubble telescope, satellites) in what's known as "low earth orbit."

Also, each orbiter was designed for up to 100 launches. Time is not necessarily a factor. To date, Challenger made 10 flights, Columbia 28, Discovery 30, Endeavor 19, and Atlantis 26. So, the three remaining orbiters still have a good 2/3 or more of their flight life left.

Apparently, here's just a wild idea out there.... the lifetime isn't as much as egg heads thought it was! Seeing as 40% of the shuttle fleet has blown up before reaching half of its expected lifetime.

[Hurricaneman]

I think its pretty obvious we did

[coriolis]

It would have taken a pretty good conspiracy to fake that.

I think that NASA should stress robotic missions over live astronauts. Technology is growing by leaps and bounds and we can develop better and better unmanned machines.

[Swimdude]

Yes we did.

But then again, I DO believe in the idea that Area 51 has aliens.