Just to interject here. For those wondering the actual thing holding up the lander and liftoff lunar vehicle is a really sore spot. Because what’s stopping us isn’t some technical challenge.
SpaceX owned by Elon Musk and Blue Origin owned by Jeff Bezos are having a spat over who gets to build the HLS. And the objecting and complaining to courts that NASA isn’t being fair to (insert either of these players) has easily set back going back to the moon at least half a decade if not moreso.
So this pretty specific part of the whole moon landing has actually held up a lot surprisingly but mostly because we’ve got two very rich people having a very visible cat fight that’s slowing everything else related to moon travel down to a crawl.
In the 1960s we built a moon rocket. Single purpose built for going to the moon and back.
Today, companies are trying to build general purpose ultra heavy lift rockets and slapping a moon mission on them. Starship? Not a moon rocket. New Glenn? Not a moon rocket.
Its like living in an RV and saying “living in it isnt the problem, its the plumbing!” Plumbing is an easy solved problem for fixed houses. You’ve only made the situation harder on yourself by trying to be dual purpose
We did it using analoge technology that is no longer produced and with security standards much lower than is acceptable today. The tech that we are “missing” is modern tech used for the same purposes with acceptable reliability and security. One hurdle with digital over analog is that radiation affects it a lot more. Not insurmountable, but requires work to prove it lives up to modern standards.
Sure there are technical challenges in getting to the Moon, landing, relaunching, and returning to Earth, but none of them are particularly insurmountable. The reason we haven’t really been back to the Moon is that public and political interest in space practically disappeared and funding along with it. And now space agencies have to either wait for some petty billionaire twats to stop cat-fighting or somehow scrape together enough of a budget out of countless other, arguably more important missions.
Also, just because something seemed fake on tv, it does NOT indicate that it is actually fake. Moon-landing hoax conspiracies have been torn apart numerous times and are all over YouTube, buried under all the hoax videos. We also have physical evidence such as Moon rocks that we use for research and reflectors placed on the Moon that we can shoot lasers at. You can even visit the Saturn V in a museum (can’t remember which one off the top of my head). The real question is why fake the Moon landing? Why spend billions of dollars on R/D, hardware, and technology as well as employ thousands of people for decades just to not do the thing? Occam’s razor is particularly relevant here, the simplest explanation is almost certainly the correct one.
We know how it’s just no one’s doing it. The honest program is working up to that but it’s going to be a while, if you wanted to go faster bug your Congressman about NASA funding versus military funding
Removed by mod
Just to interject here. For those wondering the actual thing holding up the lander and liftoff lunar vehicle is a really sore spot. Because what’s stopping us isn’t some technical challenge.
SpaceX owned by Elon Musk and Blue Origin owned by Jeff Bezos are having a spat over who gets to build the HLS. And the objecting and complaining to courts that NASA isn’t being fair to (insert either of these players) has easily set back going back to the moon at least half a decade if not moreso.
So this pretty specific part of the whole moon landing has actually held up a lot surprisingly but mostly because we’ve got two very rich people having a very visible cat fight that’s slowing everything else related to moon travel down to a crawl.
Removed by mod
Who was claiming that “easily” was how we did it?
Lamo it was not easy. It was rigorously planned and quadruple checked. Many lab tests and smaller satilite launch to test rockets.
Removed by mod
In the 1960s we built a moon rocket. Single purpose built for going to the moon and back.
Today, companies are trying to build general purpose ultra heavy lift rockets and slapping a moon mission on them. Starship? Not a moon rocket. New Glenn? Not a moon rocket.
Its like living in an RV and saying “living in it isnt the problem, its the plumbing!” Plumbing is an easy solved problem for fixed houses. You’ve only made the situation harder on yourself by trying to be dual purpose
Removed by mod
We did it using analoge technology that is no longer produced and with security standards much lower than is acceptable today. The tech that we are “missing” is modern tech used for the same purposes with acceptable reliability and security. One hurdle with digital over analog is that radiation affects it a lot more. Not insurmountable, but requires work to prove it lives up to modern standards.
Sure there are technical challenges in getting to the Moon, landing, relaunching, and returning to Earth, but none of them are particularly insurmountable. The reason we haven’t really been back to the Moon is that public and political interest in space practically disappeared and funding along with it. And now space agencies have to either wait for some petty billionaire twats to stop cat-fighting or somehow scrape together enough of a budget out of countless other, arguably more important missions.
Also, just because something seemed fake on tv, it does NOT indicate that it is actually fake. Moon-landing hoax conspiracies have been torn apart numerous times and are all over YouTube, buried under all the hoax videos. We also have physical evidence such as Moon rocks that we use for research and reflectors placed on the Moon that we can shoot lasers at. You can even visit the Saturn V in a museum (can’t remember which one off the top of my head). The real question is why fake the Moon landing? Why spend billions of dollars on R/D, hardware, and technology as well as employ thousands of people for decades just to not do the thing? Occam’s razor is particularly relevant here, the simplest explanation is almost certainly the correct one.
We know how it’s just no one’s doing it. The honest program is working up to that but it’s going to be a while, if you wanted to go faster bug your Congressman about NASA funding versus military funding
Removed by mod