Going to the moon in 2024

[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.

[Gman]

I think we should do more deep sea exploration We know very little about our own planet.

I agree. Most of this planet is covered by water and the depths are very difficult to explore.

[hatidua]

Why not do both? I don't get it.

$

[Justin]

James Cameron already went to the bottom of the ocean.

There's nothing there, and even if there were any resources worth exploiting, I guarantee you that any development would be put to a halt on environmental conservation grounds.

[Irving]

$

Well of course, but there is no single issue that outweighs everything else. Cancer isn't the only thing.

[CS1983]

So we just muck up space instead? (well, we already are with all the trash circling our planet, but I digress)

[Justin]

I assume you're joking, but a trillion humans operating all over the solar system wouldn't even have a noticeable impact on any sort of rational scale of measurement.

[CS1983]

I dunno man. An insignificant number of Spaniards unintentionally wiped out huge civilizations by breathing on them. We don't know what we don't know. And presently, we know very little about human impacts on other environments having no real good data or awareness of them aside from speculation.

I find it to be a certainly risible level of hubris to think that the very species which has mucked it up (well, supposedly), through the same motivating factors as those which motivate the current drive to explore space (read: profit -- altruism in the main players is a myth), shall accomplish a different result (if the present's result is to truly be believed as anthropomorphic).

[Justin]

There are no natives on the moon or anywhere else in the solar system, dude.

Any reasonable expectation of having humans exist as a long-term species will absolutely require that we become multi-planetary.

Anything else is just sitting around waiting for The Great Filter.

[Irving]

I dunno man. An insignificant number of Spaniards unintentionally wiped out huge civilizations by breathing on them. We don't know what we don't know. And presently, we know very little about human impacts on other environments having no real good data or awareness of them aside from speculation.

I find it to be a certainly risible level of hubris to think that the very species which has mucked it up (well, supposedly), through the same motivating factors as those which motivate the current drive to explore space (read: profit -- altruism in the main players is a myth), shall accomplish a different result (if the present's result is to truly be believed as anthropomorphic).

Your desire to forge forward into the last bastion of stuff we can f' up on our own planet doesn't follow circular logic.