Going to the moon in 2024

[Irving]

Pretty disappointed in all the space dorks on here. Is anyone excited? Not sure which source to post. Doesn't matter, it will be all we hear about for the next week.

https://www.space.com/2024-moon-land...nas-chief.html

[Wulf202]

Why the hell we are wasting money and time on this again is beyond me.

[Ridge]

Why the hell we are wasting money and time on this again is beyond me.

We've fucked this planet up, if we want to survive another couple hundred years, we'll need to expand and ruin some others.

[Bailey Guns]

I'm all for it. The Apollo era was a time of greatness and achievement of this country. Bout damn time we got back to that.

[Irving]

They are going to make a space station on the moon.

I've been having fun responding to dumb stuff people are saying on Twitter.

[Gman]

I'd rather they sent robonauts to the moon and had them build the infrastructure. That's likely the path forward for interplanetary manned missions.

[ChickNorris]

Robonauts!

[theGinsue]

Why the hell we are wasting money and time on this again is beyond me.

I'm all for it. The Apollo era was a time of greatness and achievement of this country. Bout damn time we got back to that.

Carl's response somewhat answers your question.

The technological achievements/breakthroughs achieved from the space program, and our moon landings in particular, transferred to other industries such as medical, automotive, military, computers, etc. Just being able to have a mobile phone or a home computer are due in large part to the technology developed for NASA.

It's been said that what we have lost the knowledge we used to originally make moon landings and to get ourselves back to the moon we have to re-learn what's required. In doing so, we can expect further technological leaps and bounds which we can expect to benefit other industries once again. While many may not care specifically about returning to the moon, we can all expect to benefit from what we learn through the process.

An added bonus is a result of excitement for this sort of achievement which initiates greatness from others. It gets people thinking of new and better ways to do things - even things far removed from the space industry. It can be an amazing motivational tool to spur bright minds into action.


Now, as far as establishing an outpost/space station on the moon, I don't see that happening within our life time. With the retirement of the shuttle program the only way we have of getting the required infrastructure to the moons surface is through "heavy" booster rockets which really don't carry enough cargo without having to launch hundreds or thousands of rockets. That takes lots of time and money. I just don't see it happening.

[Justin]

Carl's response somewhat answers your question.

The technological achievements/breakthroughs achieved from the space program, and our moon landings in particular, transferred to other industries such as medical, automotive, military, computers, etc. Just being able to have a mobile phone or a home computer are due in large part to the technology developed for NASA.

It's been said that what we have lost the knowledge we used to originally make moon landings and to get ourselves back to the moon we have to re-learn what's required. In doing so, we can expect further technological leaps and bounds which we can expect to benefit other industries once again. While many may not care specifically about returning to the moon, we can all expect to benefit from what we learn through the process.

An added bonus is a result of excitement for this sort of achievement which initiates greatness from others. It gets people thinking of new and better ways to do things - even things far removed from the space industry. It can be an amazing motivational tool to spur bright minds into action.


Now, as far as establishing an outpost/space station on the moon, I don't see that happening within our life time. With the retirement of the shuttle program the only way we have of getting the required infrastructure to the moons surface is through "heavy" booster rockets which really don't carry enough cargo without having to launch hundreds or thousands of rockets. That takes lots of time and money. I just don't see it happening.

NASA has been developing such a heavy lift vehicle for the better part of a decade. It's called the Space Launch System, and it's tremendously huge, capable of putting a lot of mass into space destined for the moon, and, being based on shuttle booster technology, also needlessly complex, horrendously expensive, and a one-time-use disposable solution.

In other words, it's a complete goddamned boondoggle, but there it is.

In the offing, however, SpaceX is currently building not one, but 3*! prototypes for testing their super-heavy Starship launch system, having just conducted the first hot-fire, tethered test of the Raptor engine on a non-orbital hopper prototype a couple of weeks ago. If things go as planned, SpaceX is going to be launching absolutely mind-boggling amounts of mass into space at Walmart-level costs.

Jeff Bezos also just recently unveiled that they've been working on a lunar lander for the last 3 years, and it's designed to mate up with their proposed heavy-lift New Glenn launch vehicle.

Suffice it to say, I think SLS is going to fly a couple of times, but for regular flights to the moon, there's no reason why Falcon Heavy can't be utilized for payloads smaller than Orion, and once Starship comes online, assuming it's a success, SLS will be shown to be nothing more than a shambling zombie.


*Including two orbital prototypes, and a non-orbital "hopper" for testing.

[Irving]

How am I supposed to become the moon's first solar salesperson then?