When will we reach the Moon, Mars, Jupiter, another star and another galaxy...

Kodiak · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:28

Vita said:
If they could land on the moon like 40 years ago. How come they haven't since then? Is it a really hard mission? I'm sure their technology has advanced loads.

I think the bill for landing on the moon was about $26 billion (thats 60's dollars).

With a huge cost like that, your gonna need a damn good reason to go back. And landing on the moon 'Just for the luls' doesnt count.

-edit-

Code:

TOTAL COST PER APOLLO MISSION:
-----------------------------

              Year   ($M)   (94$M)
Apollo 7      1968   $145    $575
Apollo 8      1968   $310  $1 230
Apollo 9      1969   $340  $1 303
Apollo 10     1969   $350  $1 341
Apollo 11     1969   $355  $1 360
Apollo 12     1970   $375  $1 389
Apollo 13     1970   $375  $1 389
Apollo 14     1971   $400  $1 421
Apollo 15     1971   $445  $1 581
Apollo 16     1972   $445  $1 519
Apollo 17     1972   $450  $1 536
---------------------------------
                   $3,990 $14,644

The Apollo LM was conceived in June 1962 when NASA decided to use the lunar orbit rendezvous technique rather than land the CSM on the Moon. Grumman won the contract in September 1962. The first unmanned tests took place in Earth orbit in 1968 (Apollo 5, 6). Nine manned LMs were launched in 1969-72.

ESTIMATED COST: $2-3 billion.
TOTAL COST: $11 billion.
PEAK FUNDING: $2 billion in 1967.
COST PER SPACECRAFT: $170 million.

Although not part of the lunar program, the Skylab space station was nevertheless based on surplus Apollo hardware. The Skylab 1 laboratory cost about $7 billion, while the total cost of the three Apollo/Saturn IB flights to the station probably cost approx. $2 billion. Although NASA constructed two Skylabs, it could afford to launch only one of them. Launching the second would have cost only $1.1 billion, plus $1.3 billion for two 2-month Apollo missions in 1974-76.

from http://www.asi.org/adb/m/02/07/apollo-cost.html

JRS · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:29

Vita said:
If they could land on the moon like 40 years ago. How come they haven't since then? Is it a really hard mission? I'm sure their technology has advanced loads.

They went and concentrated on the space shuttle and station programmes. Getting to the Moon is an expensive hobby, and not exactly a safe one either. They lost three astronauts before they even managed a manned flight with Apollo, and nearly lost three more on 13.

As for the technology - that was never really the problem. They had a flightplan worked out to do a manned flyby of Venus using Apollo hardware. The trip is just inherently difficult, no matter how reliable your craft is.

4T5 · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:29

magick said:
I've posted this in another thread. Allegedly there was a base or some sort of ET presence up there and they followed the astronauts all the way back to earth. Some sort of warning was given to those concerned that humans wouldn't be welcome on other planets with our current level of ethics.

There prepared to let us kill, conqour, invade, play wargames, rape the earth of it's resources on our own planet, but they won't let us collectively go out and do the same to other planets.

The blowing up of the Challenger space shuttle was also done as a symbolic warning by ETs that we're in no position to 'challenge' space.

Good to see you back on form Lad. :cool:

JRS · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:34

magick said:
The blowing up of the Challenger space shuttle was also done as a symbolic warning by ETs that we're in no position to 'challenge' space.

Challenger blew up because an O-ring failed in one of the SRBs. Not because of aliens. Though at least your version is rather less anger-inducing than Bill Kaysing's (God bless him, because no other ****** would) theory that NASA blew it up themselves because the astronauts might tell The Truth™ about the manned spaceflight programme.

Lightnix · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:38

magick said:
I've posted this in another thread. Allegedly there was a base or some sort of ET presence up there and they followed the astronauts all the way back to earth. Some sort of warning was given to those concerned that humans wouldn't be welcome on other planets with our current level of ethics.

There prepared to let us kill, conqour, invade, play wargames, rape the earth of it's resources on our own planet, but they won't let us collectively go out and do the same to other planets.

The blowing up of the Challenger space shuttle was also done as a symbolic warning by ETs that we're in no position to 'challenge' space.

I think we're better at war than them. We've had a lot of practice. We're really good at it.

Skidder · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:40

Freefaller said:
Blind optimism! It's good to see some people so eager and positive.

I'm not particularly optimistic on many subjects, but this is one I feel strongly about and really want to see some serious space exploration happen in my lifetime. As such, I will ignore the evidence and plough on with blind positivity

magick · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:46

malc30 said:
Good to see you back on form Lad.

Thanks

Lightnix said:
I think we're better at war than them. We've had a lot of practice. We're really good at it.

LOL, probably so. But to any speices capable of faster than light travel I imgaine AK47s, tanks, planes, even nukes don't pose much of a threat.

Nix · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:48

magick said:
I've posted this in another thread. Allegedly there was a base or some sort of ET presence up there and they followed the astronauts all the way back to earth. Some sort of warning was given to those concerned that humans wouldn't be welcome on other planets with our current level of ethics.

[...]

The blowing up of the Challenger space shuttle was also done as a symbolic warning by ETs that we're in no position to 'challenge' space.

Hypocrites much?

Anksy · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:52

NeilFawcett said:
Ummm... What version of photoshop would that be back in 1969 exactly?

Seriously, the lunar hoax folk are mentalists

well, you never know, who knows whats out there!!???!!

You Know im taking the ****

Vita · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:59

From what I've been told. When Neil Armstrong went up into outer space, landed on the moon, what have you not. He apparantley said, he heard the Muslim Prayer being called out. Has anyone else heard of this? I swear they dubbed him mental after that.

4T5 · 9 Jun 2009 at 11:59

magick said:
To any species capable of faster than light travel I imagine AK47s, tanks, planes, even nukes don't pose much of a threat.

You forgot Ally Keyboard, Mine is Lethal. :cool:

Jamesdavid3 · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:10

From the year it is now and from when man first went on the moon it does seem abit fake in terms of technology wise.

Isnt the next moon landing going to be in 2020? thats insane years of planning and possible with todays technology, however back in the 60/70's then had NONE of that. just look at there computers!!!

Lightnix · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:14

Jamesdavid3 said:
From the year it is now and from when man first went on the moon it does seem abit fake in terms of technology wise.

Isnt the next moon landing going to be in 2020? thats insane years of planning and possible with todays technology, however back in the 60/70's then had NONE of that. just look at there computers!!!

It's not because it's taking us a long time to plan, it's just that nobody's really aggressively pursuing the moon as a goal at the moment. It's kind of 'yeah, been there done that, might go again in a few years.'

RDM · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:22

Vita said:
From what I've been told. When Neil Armstrong went up into outer space, landed on the moon, what have you not. He apparantley said, he heard the Muslim Prayer being called out. Has anyone else heard of this? I swear they dubbed him mental after that.

Complete hoax with no truth in it whatsoever.

arc@css · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:28

JohnnyG said:
I have it on good authority that a few members here have already landed on various planets, mentally anyway.

I did once, long ago, though I was lucky enough to find my return ticket.

Cosimo · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:50

Jamesdavid3 said:
Isnt the next moon landing going to be in 2020? thats insane years of planning and possible with todays technology, however back in the 60/70's then had NONE of that. just look at there computers!!!

That is part of the plan under the Constellation program but it isn't insane years of planning when you consider that the program will use new rockets and spacecraft.

Read the program overview here:

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/163092main_constellation_program_overview.pdf

Visit the program site here:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/main/index.html

Another overview here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Constellation

As part of this plan the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbit will be launched on the 17th of June to conduct investigations that will prepare and support future manned exploration of the moon.

Read the mission overview here:

http://lunar.gsfc.nasa.gov/mission.html

Andy90 · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:55

- A human lands on the Moon again - about 10 to 20 years (depends on when the US can afford it again).

- A human lands on Mars - 20 - 40 years (again Depends on the state of US Economy)

- A human reaches Jupiter - well we could do it today if we wanted to - strap some criminals aboard a ballistic rocket and point it towards Jupiter... (in any event they couldn't land, they would be crushed by the enormous pressure before they got near anything vaguely solid)

- A probe or human reaches another star - 40,000 years. That is when Voyager 1 is scheduled to pass within 1.6 Light years of the star AC+79 3888

- A probe or human reaches another galaxy - Never

EvilOne · 9 Jun 2009 at 12:57

magick said:
I've posted this in another thread. Allegedly there was a base or some sort of ET presence up there and they followed the astronauts all the way back to earth. Some sort of warning was given to those concerned that humans wouldn't be welcome on other planets with our current level of ethics.

There prepared to let us kill, conqour, invade, play wargames, rape the earth of it's resources on our own planet, but they won't let us collectively go out and do the same to other planets.

The blowing up of the Challenger space shuttle was also done as a symbolic warning by ETs that we're in no position to 'challenge' space.

They should make a film about that, make call it "The earth stood still today".

Fusion · 9 Jun 2009 at 13:55

NeilFawcett said:
- A human lands on the Moon again ~2025
- A human lands on Mars ~2050
- A human reaches Jupiter Don't see why it's relevant or important

- A probe or human reaches another star I believe we'll have the technology to build a ship capable of travelling at 0.1c by the end of this Century, when launched it would take around 43 years to get there so 2140 or so

- A probe or human reaches another galaxy This one is interesting. Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy is 25,000 light years away from us, so it'd take at least this length of time to get there if travelling at the speed of light (impossible conventionally). If Alcubierre drive or creation of wormholes could be made possible before then, it will happen quicker. 25,000 years of expontential growth in our technology and capabilities will render pretty much anything possible, it may happen long before then.

snowdog · 9 Jun 2009 at 14:00

Bloody hurry up with going to Mars please, I want a colony, I want new raw resources, I want more land as earth is getting overpopulated.
Colonizing other planets is the way forward, we're dead if we stick to this rock we're on currently.
Hell, even pointless rocks like the moon can be VERY handy, eg. for dumping our nuclear waste or normal waste on

( if physically possible with it's mavity).