The Real Reason Why We Haven't Been Back To The Moon

[Earthnut]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIW2cLOgMl8&feature=related

[ethsnafu]

I've seen a great many documentaries around moon conspiracies and the moon landing 'hoax' in particular and they make incredible claims but claims that seem to have some foundation in truth if the evidence is to be believed. The Van Allen radiation belt alone is a reason to suspect that people didn't make the journey at all. It's one if the few conspiracy theories I have some slight belief in.

Of course, there are aliens on the moon as well which doesn't help.

Eth

[TranshumanOwl2012]

Hi, everyone. This is my first post. As a scientist I am willing to entertain any notion. However, I honestly believe that cost is a major factor. Currently, the cost of a mission is about $200K/lb. Manned lunar missions are extremely expensive due to the high mass involved.

If anything will get us back to the moon (and near by asteroids) it will be the continuing shortage in precious metals. This may be enough to raise mission profit over mission cost. Furthermore, we need to find a balance between engines that are both fuel efficient and provide moderate thrust.

Oh, I almost forgot: the space faring nations currently have high-risk aversion. People are going to die in space(sometimes in a really nasty and painful manner). At this time it seems we do not have the political or social will to accept this.

[Earthnut]

First of all, welcome to the group Transhuman... Hope we see a lot of you here.

Your post reminded me of a quote I heard in a Outer Limits episode:

Mankind will forever be doomed if it continues to ask for the truth, and then refuse to listen. (Outer Limits)

[The Old Man]

Hi, everyone. This is my first post. As a scientist I am willing to entertain any notion. However, I honestly believe that cost is a major factor. Currently, the cost of a mission is about $200K/lb. Manned lunar missions are extremely expensive due to the high mass involved.

If anything will get us back to the moon (and near by asteroids) it will be the continuing shortage in precious metals. This may be enough to raise mission profit over mission cost. Furthermore, we need to find a balance between engines that are both fuel efficient and provide moderate thrust.

Oh, I almost forgot: the space faring nations currently have high-risk aversion. People are going to die in space(sometimes in a really nasty and painful manner). At this time it seems we do not have the political or social will to accept this.

Welcome to the forums! Great first post, what you said makes a lot of sense to me.

[Libby]

Welcome, Transhuman (great screen name!).

I'd thought for a long time that the reason for not going back was financial, and also there isn't the same "space-race" factor involved these days. I hadn't thought about the risk aspect which is an even more compelling reason for not going back.

I had also thought that the reason for not carrying out the last service of the Hubble telescope was financial, but according to wikipedia it had been cancelled following the Columbia disaster because of the risk to astronauts but was subsequently reinstated.

This is an interesting discussion. I can vaguely recall Sputnik and Yuri Gargarin, and then Apollo 11 and how the concept of landing men on the moon was very difficult for some to comprehend but not at all difficult for those who had been following the various space programmes from Sputnik onwards. I recall there was one particular school in the UK that had an enthusiastic teacher who got pupils interested by building equipment to pick up various radio signals and track them. From memory, that school became quite famous for that.

I also remember (this time quite vividly) carefully building and painting an Airfix kit of the lunar landing module, which most some people thought was weird.