0 votes
in Living by
At 12:56 p.m. Houston time forty-five years ago today, a little ship named Eagle lifted off from the moon. It had spent more than 21 hours on the surface. For two and a half of those hours, two men walked that surface and left the first of six sets of experiments.

These first explorers proved two important things: that they could walk on the moon without any trouble, and that they could get off it and come back alive.

Five more teams would land on the moon and come back. (Another team would make a try for the moon, but have to come back early after a fuel cell blew up on them.)

The problem: the last such team landed and took off again in 1972. That was forty-two years ago. NASA had planned at least six more missions, to build a permanent base.

What say you? Will we come back? Should we?

CONSERVATIVENEWSANDVIEWS.COM reports:
Forty-five years ago today, the first men to walk on another world (the moon), started the other important part of Apollo 11: returning.


reports forty-five years walk world moon important apollo 11 returning

Your answer

Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

35 Answers

0 votes
by
We will definitely go back to the Moon. The only question is will it be as a Government funded enterprise, or a Privately funded.
0 votes
by
Ha! I just posted private enterprise.
0 votes
by
She would take twwenty years to develop, design, and build. Suggested budget: $50 billion a year for twenty years. He suggested that would amount to 0.27 percent of GDP. Now to get that, we need to expand GDP.

His model ******* all government funding. If SpaceX and Virgin Galactic took an interest, that price could come down rapidlly, and the project might not take so long to build.

Imagine--as I have already mentioned elsewhere--an expansion of the airline industry:

American Space Lines.

U.S. Spaceways.

British Spaceways. (And similar renamings of other national-flag airlines.)

And the following irregular renamings:

Spas Lingus.

Espace France.

Weltraumhansa.

Kosmoflot.

See what I mean?

A market that big might support the development of some of the concepts of "Build the Enterprise" ahead of the projected schedule.
0 votes
by
I agree with you. I wasn't meaning to make it sound like I didn't.

The only thing I don't totally agree on is the Government staying involved in the Project.

I've actually invested in one of the Companies that's involved. I don't really expect to see a good return on my Money, but my ******** might. I can almost Guarantee though that with the Government involved they will slow the process down rather than speed it up, and it will wind up costing 10 times what they claim it will.
0 votes
by
I understand completely. The government promises long-term involvement and stick-to-it-iveness. They maintain you don't get that in the private sector and especially in the for-profit sector.

Well, a democratic republic cannot promise any longer-term commitment than can a joint-stock corporation or corporate group. Especially when the constitution of said republic declares that no person shall be eligible as chief executive more than twice!

And the government manages to foul up even its **** functions of policing, the military, and the courts.

Project Apollo achieved the sonorous-sounding goal of John F Kennedy. But--well, here's what Hal Holbrook, as Dr. Kellaway (head of NASA) in Capricorn One, said:

"I remember when [Col. John H.] Glenn made his first orbit in [Project] Mercury....they set up TVs all over Grand Central Station! Thousands of commuters missed their trains to watch! But when Apollo 17 landed, people were calling up the networks to [kvetch] that the reruns of I Love Lucy were being pre-empted. Reruns!"

The chief obstacle to the private sector is: commanding enough resources to get the project done in enough time for the investors, or foundation members, or whoever, to hold their interest. Fifty billion dollars a year is one **** of a lot of dough to raise.

It might t...



I understand completely. The government promises long-term involvement and stick-to-it-iveness. They maintain you don't get that in the private sector and especially in the for-profit sector.

Well, a democratic republic cannot promise any longer-term commitment than can a joint-stock corporation or corporate group. Especially when the constitution of said republic declares that no person shall be eligible as chief executive more than twice!

And the government manages to foul up even its **** functions of policing, the military, and the courts.

Project Apollo achieved the sonorous-sounding goal of John F Kennedy. But--well, here's what Hal Holbrook, as Dr. Kellaway (head of NASA) in Capricorn One, said:

"I remember when [Col. John H.] Glenn made his first orbit in [Project] Mercury....they set up TVs all over Grand Central Station! Thousands of commuters missed their trains to watch! But when Apollo 17 landed, people were calling up the networks to [kvetch] that the reruns of I Love Lucy were being pre-empted. Reruns!"

The chief obstacle to the private sector is: commanding enough resources to get the project done in enough time for the investors, or foundation members, or whoever, to hold their interest. Fifty billion dollars a year is one **** of a lot of dough to raise.

It might take the leadership of one who, having been elected President of the United States, oversees the systematic dismantling of our overweening government, with a reduction of the debt and tax burdens. As a result, the government would get on a track to repay the national debt--not all at once, certainly. It would take decades. But let's say this hypothetical President, and an equally willing Congress, could achieve a surplus of, say, fifty billion dollars a year. And put in place an ironclad provision to maintain it until the debt is fully repaid!

This President then does something dramatic: resigns after the midterm day of his second term has passed, turning things over to his Vice-President (who then would stay eligible for two full terms under the Twenty-second Amendment), and announces his intention to take over the Project Enterprise Group as its Chief Executive Officer. Now what happens? Holders of U.S. debt, seeing prices on the debt auction rising because the government intends repayment by attrition, will be looking for other long-term bonds to buy. The bonds of the Project Enterprise Group would suddenly look very attractive, and would be inherently sounder and more transparent. With a former POTUS to sell them, those bonds would sell well.

Well enough to finance a space-to-space ship and everything connected with it. And to attract enough attention to induce the airlines to try to get some of that Virgin Galactic business; hence Spas Lingus, Espace France, Weltraumhansa, and Kosmoflot, as I described last time.
(more)
0 votes
by
Actually I think that they will be commercially viable sooner than you think.

The Government will be their primary customer at first just like they already are, but if they can create a Space Station themselves, or expand the International Space Station to accommodate visitors, they would start generating income from tourism. That along with Launching Satellites for Communications and TV will mean that they could be profitable in the near future.

However it happens though I know it will happen. You can't stuff the Genni Back in the Bottle, so to speak. People know it can be done, and there are those that will demand that it be done.
0 votes
by
I'll give you this much: Dan the Enterprise Man specifically said you build a ship as big as he envisioned (and to accommodate up to a thousand souls on board at any given time!) specifically to let people play tourist. He suggested just walking the cylindrical gravity-spinning deck would be enough of a thrill. But he also proposed excursions, as far away as the Moon, anyway, when the ship was not otherwise occupied on the major mission profiles he outlined.

He did not specifically mention the other countries of the world adding space service to their national-flag airlines. But he did design his ship with three docking bays, to accommodate as many as three Single Stage To Orbit (SSTO) craft at once. Recall his Mission Profile One: combination of space station and space port.

He (that is, Dan the Enterprise Man) proposed offering these rides by lot, "because, after all, they're paying for the Enterprise." But that depended on financing the vessel's research, development and construction with a tax. Under your proposed model, the Project Enterprise Group would sell tickets. As Virgin Galactic now does.

More to the point, recall the things Dan sought to accomplish:

Permanent cities on the Moon (Cynthiopolis, Selenopolis, or Luna City) and Mars (Areopolis).

An atmospheric recon of Ven...







I'll give you this much: Dan the Enterprise Man specifically said you build a ship as big as he envisioned (and to accommodate up to a thousand souls on board at any given time!) specifically to let people play tourist. He suggested just walking the cylindrical gravity-spinning deck would be enough of a thrill. But he also proposed excursions, as far away as the Moon, anyway, when the ship was not otherwise occupied on the major mission profiles he outlined.

He did not specifically mention the other countries of the world adding space service to their national-flag airlines. But he did design his ship with three docking bays, to accommodate as many as three Single Stage To Orbit (SSTO) craft at once. Recall his Mission Profile One: combination of space station and space port.

He (that is, Dan the Enterprise Man) proposed offering these rides by lot, "because, after all, they're paying for the Enterprise." But that depended on financing the vessel's research, development and construction with a tax. Under your proposed model, the Project Enterprise Group would sell tickets. As Virgin Galactic now does.

More to the point, recall the things Dan sought to accomplish:

Permanent cities on the Moon (Cynthiopolis, Selenopolis, or Luna City) and Mars (Areopolis).

An atmospheric recon of Venus, looking ahead to the building of a city in the Venerean clouds. (Call it Cytheriopolis, Venus City, or Nephelopolis--Cloud City)

A model for diverting asteroids or comets before they could fall to earth and cause damage.

A recon of Europa, which might--or might not--have a subglacial ocean.

In addition to the minor matter of clearing junk from space. You can imagine sending the Enterprise to plow through an orbital pathway on a forced orbit, catching space junk in a net or vaporizing it with its primary weapon--a laser cannon. That's right: this vessel would be armed. It adds to the mystique of the project, and might have a practical use.

So I would imagine that maybe a few organizations would pay dearly for a "litter police" mission, in addition to--maybe--buying real estate on the Moon or Mars, or either of its new cities.
(more)
0 votes
by
I'm not convinced. Most of the commercial activity in space is aimed at the most lucrative market segments, in other words, they want to cherry pick the market while leaving the government funded programs to cover the costs of the basic science part of the program. Result? Higher costs to the taxpayer. The cheapest flights so far sell for about $200,000 a seat, if there were as many as 20,000 person willing to fork that amount over, that would bring in $4 billion gross. The current world budget, not counting military, is $25 billion. We are a long way from the commercialization of space.
0 votes
by
0 votes
by
The proposed space-to-space ship

http://www.buildtheenterprise...

could make the trip on its own steam. So you load your equipment aboard her while she's in earth orbit. Then she does TLI and LOI and can land the equipment as easy as you please.
0 votes
by
Very interesting, that's a nice looking ship too.. If there's a market for it and I think there is, the private sector will get it done.
0 votes
by
That's why I said Private Industry is already working on Space exploration. That's also why I'm sure that we will eventually return to the Moon.

Just knowing that it can be done means that someone will do it, and others will follow.
0 votes
by
I agree
0 votes
by
Let's get the issues here resolved before trying to conquer another sphere.
0 votes
by
Have you seen the Cadillac ELR commercial? It fits with the topic. talking about the moon, "we've even got a car up there, left the keys in it. You wanna know why? Cause we're the only ones going back!" ROFL LOVE this commercial! I can't get the add video to work. You can see it here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
0 votes
by
This is not a forward thinking man. Gainful & meaningful employment of engineers is not his idea of infrastructure!
0 votes
by
Nice. I hadn't heard of that one.
0 votes
by
Falcon Heavy is the world’s most powerful rocket, a launch vehicle of scale and capability unequaled by any other currently flying. With the ability to lift into orbit over 53 metric tons (117,000 lb)--a mass equivalent to a 737 jetliner loaded with passengers, crew, luggage and fuel--Falcon Heavy can lift more than twice the payload of the next closest operational vehicle, the Delta IV Heavy, at one-third the cost. Falcon Heavy draws upon the proven heritage and reliability of Falcon 9. Its first stage is composed of three Falcon 9 nine engine ***** whose 27 Merlin engines together generate nearly 4 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. Only the Saturn V moon rocket, last flown in 1973, delivered more payload to orbit. Falcon Heavy was designed from the outset to carry humans into space and restores the possibility of flying missions with crew to the Moon or Mars.

Notice it says only the Saturn V moon rocket was capable of more payload to orbit.

Now imagine what could be accomplished with the Space Station as a waypoint for getting to the Moon. The Launch Vehicle would not need to cary everything necessary to reach the Moon from the surface of the Earth.

The Vehicle necessary to carry us to the Moon from the Space Station, would not be nearly as massive as that needed to reach the Space Station.

We could return to the moon in the near future if people really wanted to. It's really just a matter of time before we do.
0 votes
by
I see folks have been blaming President Obama. No surprise there. I don't recall any conservatives blasting Cheney-Bush for cancelling two NASA missions (one was the Europa IcePIC mission to discover what might swim in Europa's ocean[s]).

Of course, Cheney-Bush had to save money for their two wars. Although I am disappointing in the cancellation, President Obama has a better reason:
------------------------
From http://nasawatch.com/archives...

[T]he program was over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technologies. Using a broad range of criteria an independent review panel determined that even if fully funded, NASA's program to repeat many of the achievements of the Apollo era, 50 years later, was the least attractive approach to space exploration as compared to potential alternatives.

Furthermore, NASA's attempts to pursue its moon goals, while inadequate to that task, had drawn funding away from other NASA programs, including robotic space exploration, science, and Earth observations. The President's Budget cancels Constellation and replaces it with a bold new approach that invests in the building blocks of a more capable approach to space exploration.
-----------------------------...
And remember, it is the anti-s...
I see folks have been blaming President Obama. No surprise there. I don't recall any conservatives blasting Cheney-Bush for cancelling two NASA missions (one was the Europa IcePIC mission to discover what might swim in Europa's ocean[s]).

Of course, Cheney-Bush had to save money for their two wars. Although I am disappointing in the cancellation, President Obama has a better reason:
------------------------
From http://nasawatch.com/archives...

[T]he program was over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technologies. Using a broad range of criteria an independent review panel determined that even if fully funded, NASA's program to repeat many of the achievements of the Apollo era, 50 years later, was the least attractive approach to space exploration as compared to potential alternatives.

Furthermore, NASA's attempts to pursue its moon goals, while inadequate to that task, had drawn funding away from other NASA programs, including robotic space exploration, science, and Earth observations. The President's Budget cancels Constellation and replaces it with a bold new approach that invests in the building blocks of a more capable approach to space exploration.
-----------------------------...
And remember, it is the anti-science Republican HOUSE that holds the purse strings. and the wealthy need more money.
(more)
0 votes
by
We will definitely go back to the Moon. The only question is will it be as a Government funded enterprise, or a Privately funded.
0 votes
by
Not only do we need to go back, but we need that colony
0 votes
by
Tem I lived in Houston from 64 till 92 I love those guys i have a space act agreement with NASA work with their life sciences division I OWN AN AGENCY TO HELP A NON PROFIT /SPACE CENTER WWW. SPACELEGACY.COM..I PERSONALLY KNOW BUZZ ALDRIN WHEN I WAS A WIDOW DATING HIS BEST FRIEND IN 89 . I can verify a lot some of my business partners were actually involved with the moon shot I even did a commemorative pen for the 40th at JSC
0 votes
by
I hope we will be back! Mankind has developed wonderful things. I pray we get to explore the science further!
0 votes
by
At some point we will be back but I fear it won't be until after we have lost our leading position.
Amazing the number of people nowadays that think the missions were a hoax.
0 votes
by
It might have nothing to do with any government, it might just be a private company with a first Space Resort with a view of the Marble.
0 votes
by
Apollo 11 ranks as one of the all time greatest human feats ever.
0 votes
by
I'd like to see it privately funded. Any idea on how that might come about? That is, can you envision it in detail?
0 votes
by
I just found out. The Falcon and Falcon Heavy are SpaceX's own inventions. And you read that right: Heavy. A heavy lifter.
0 votes
by
It's already being worked on. Private Enterprise is working on Space Vehicles right now. They just had one dock with the Space Station. They will eventually get around to sending people to the Moon.

I just hope that we can prevent all the petty politics from going with them.
0 votes
by
Government leeches
0 votes
by
Ah, yes: the Dragon capsule. That's the best part of this whole business.

I'd like to see SpaceX, or Virgin Galactic, develop a vehicle that could carry a man into the Middle Earth Orbit at 400 miles up. Then our astronauts could buy a ticket on the first true private "space line."

Eventually, you could see "American Space Lines," "Spas Lingus," "Weltraumhansa," "Espace France," name it...
0 votes
by
0 votes
by
The best part of this? SpaceX developed their own launch vehicle, in addition to the capsule. Isn't the Falcon their own design?
0 votes
by
I honestly don't know. I just remembered see an Article about a Comercial Launch to the Space Station and when I was reserching it this is what I found.

That's why I know that Private Enterprise will pick up what was started by the Government and find a way to make it profitable.

Honestly I would much rather they do so than the Government. The Government will only find a way to screw it up and cost the tax payer Trillions, just like they have everything they put their hands on.
0 votes
by
The photograph next to this vote option is of a proposed Orion lander. Notice those tanks: Orion was slated to carry a lot of fuel and oxygen. But Obama canceled the Constellation program of which it was a part.

If we want to go back there, we're going to need a President who doesn't think the way Obama does. Who doesn't say, "No, we can't": when it suits him.
...