CHUD.com Community › Forums › CULTURE, HUMOR, & FREE FORM › Misc. Culture › The New Apace race
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New Apace race

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
India goes to the Moon. (Well, around it for a couple of years)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...fset=12&page=2

Space buffs: Any idea as to why it will take so long - 2020 at the earliest - to go back to the moon? Nearly 50 years ago it only took 8 years!
post #2 of 10
Well I would guess becsuse all of this technology is reslly expensive snd complex, especislly in countries where they hsve such s new Spsce Explorstion infrsstructure. It's ssd thst Smerics isn't in s position to be doing more in this field.
post #3 of 10
Let me know when there's a new Sioux race.
post #4 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renn Brown View Post
Well I would guess becsuse all of this technology is reslly expensive snd complex, especislly in countries where they hsve such s new Spsce Explorstion infrsstructure. It's ssd thst Smerics isn't in s position to be doing more in this field.
Why the fuck do I never spellcheck my titles?

Seriously, I'm including America. They won't get there for at least another 10-12 years. They've got the technology. Why so long?
post #5 of 10
It's not like there's a bunch of Saturn rockets and Apollo capsules left over from the moon program. So they either have to start building those again, or come up with a new plan. Neither way is going to be fast. Or cheap.
post #6 of 10
Thread Starter 
Sure, I realise they have to design new rockets. But they first announced the return in 2004. 15 years just seems quite long, considering they went a couple of times a year in the late 60s, early 70s.

I suppose if you account for inflation then they aren't spending nearly as much.
post #7 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluelouboyle View Post
Sure, I realise they have to design new rockets. But they first announced the return in 2004. 15 years just seems quite long, considering they went a couple of times a year in the late 60s, early 70s.

I suppose if you account for inflation then they aren't spending nearly as much.
The $$$ is most likely the reason - I was watching a special on the Columbia disaster recently, and it was due to $$$ and government priorities (mostly Defense Dept. wanting to get more military sattelites up) that NASA stopped focusing on the moon - this started sometime around the Nixon administration. Over time, it became cheaper to use multi-stage rockets than the shuttle, so they're going back to that model (it's also safer for the astronauts - the top of the rocket were the capsule goes has auxillary rockets to lift just the capsule off in case anything happens to the main rocket below).
post #8 of 10
I say CNN puts a hologram of D.L. Hughley on Mars by next Easter. Flag Day, tops!
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
It's not like there's a bunch of Saturn rockets ...
Actually, there ARE 2, at least...(SA-514 and SA-515 ).

There would of been 3, but they used that one for SkyLab.
post #10 of 10
The problem is Presidential administrations like to make grand sweeping statements about going back to the moon and to Mars but they don't put the funding into it. They make hollow statements and announcements and then they along with Congress cut NASA's budget.

No bucks, no Buck Rogers.

The Ansari Prize for getting to the moon might have something there fromt he US before the government does, which will be just another slap in the face.

We need a President who really wants to go to the Moon and to Mars and further space exploration. But people are going to have to realize it requires funds. Then again, there can be huge benefits from investing so much in engineering and science.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Misc. Culture
CHUD.com Community › Forums › CULTURE, HUMOR, & FREE FORM › Misc. Culture › The New Apace race