Why is it that NASA won't launch another maned moon landing?

Question

I don't believe it's because it cost too much, nothings too much when they want it!

And how many RC rovers are operating on mars?

Moon landing has a lot of benefits!
A lot more than sending Soldiers to Iraq for their oil! If there were oil in the moon i think america will send it's men there too!

Answer 1

Too expensive, with no real benifit!!

Answer 2

Nothing is too much when they want it, but who is 'they' and do they want it?

NASA's funding has to be approved by the US congress, and no congressman is going to approve a massive budget for NASA that the public won't support. Further, NASA is not simply given a pile of money to do with as it wishes. The funding is divided up into the various projects that NASA is running.

In order to launch a manned lunar landing they need to develop the hardware to do it, and they don't have it any more. Contrary to popular belief they can't just get out the old Apollo drawings and recreate that hardware. They have to start almost from scratch, and that costs a lot of money. In real terms NASA's budget now is far lower than it ever was during Apollo, but they are being asked to run a very similar project with a much greater scope. It's going to take time unless they are given more money, and they won't be given more money unless the public can be convinced that it is a worthwhile use of their taxes.

Answer 3

even regardless of the shown fact that my spouse's father complete gas calculations for the unique Apollo landing, i will spare you that speech. instead, i will motivate you to video exhibit 2 classes. the 1st tutor is termed Conspiracy Moon landing that it at present showing on the national Geographic Channel and it fairly plenty obliterates all the favourite conspiracy theories. i'd additionally motivate you to video exhibit a movie called Capricorn One. Made it 1978, that's a fictional tale a pair of fake undertaking to Mars. even regardless of the shown fact that that's a technological information fiction tale, that's a stable occasion of ways fully impossible it would be to faux a moon landing for any length of time. 12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we've neither the factors nor the technologies to drag off that massive of a hoax for thus long. thousands of thousands of people have worked on the gap software. it would be far much less complicated to place somebody on the moon than to objective and fake it and save it secret for just about 40 years. The landings got here at a time whilst our area software became extremely aggressive with the former Soviet Union. submit to in innovations how massive of a deal it became whilst Sputnik became placed into orbit? that they had the technologies to video exhibit our moon photos and transmissions. do no longer you think of they'd have called us out if that they had info that it became all fake? possibly the main definitive evidence of our holiday to the moon is what we left at the back of. For the final 35+ years, scientists have been beaming lasers to the moon and measuring the return situations. How are they doing this? The beams are pondered lower back with the help of kit left on the moon on at 3 different places. Case closed.

Answer 4

The primary reason we do not have the capability to launch a manned moon mission is that the rockets we have now do not have suffecient capacity. Essentially, we don't have big enough rockets. Manned missions require life support and other bulky, massive equipment that require much larger launch vehicles than the ones we have in inventory (Atlas, Titan V, Delta IV)

The first stage rocket we used in the 60's and 70's, the Saturn V, exists only as museum pieces. The other problem is that all the launch sites capable of handling the massive Saturn V have been abandoned or converted into platforms for other launch vehicles.

Answer 5

The US government isn't in the habit of doing things for no reason. The main impetus behind the Apollo programme was to beat the Soviet Union and win a propaganda battle. With that done, further missions of that kind 'flag and footprint' missions as it were, serve no purpose. NASA does have plans to return to the moon, but only on a large scale, sustainable basis. Ultimately, a moon mission these days, has to be able to justify its cost. This requires that settlements and mining operations can be set up, in order to gain genuine financial benefit from the effort.

Answer 6

there is something about the moon that nasa is afraid of. when armstrong went up there, that mission bought back an unknown substance that has had classified results....
the substance is at area 51 and has now and is still baffling nasa experts as to which life form it belongs. they cannot risk another landing in case (they believe this has already happened) the substance has now evolved into something more deadly.

Answer 7

Space races are now focusing on colonising other planets, including the moon. That may be the problem ; maybe some-thing up there/ intelligent life is resisting the colonisation.

Answer 8

Apollo cost 28 Billion dollars. NASA is not have a love affair with congress right now. They can't even fix the Hubble. Plus the technology is no longer here and way too obsolete to use. It's a start from scratch.

Answer 9

This is a complex question that requires a complex answer. I am reticent to get into this because it requires research, an open mind, and above all, questions the very axioms that the information purveyors have provided. There are so many presuppositions about the moon that it would take a plethora of points and counterpoints to start from. However, why not? I'll only hit upon a few that need to be answered and I'll give you some food for thought as to why we haven't been back to the moon?
The moon is truly an enigmatic ever-changing constant, such as: it is 11.5 degrees off the solar plane as compared to other moons that are juxtaposed on the solar plane; the moon does not rotate; the moon may be hollow or have huge mascons (void chambers) as evidenced by the impacts from the probes and LEMS that have crashed on the moon. NASA has recorded the loud bonging sounds that went on for hours following a LEM impact on a couple of occasions; despite the "dead moon theory" NASA has detected WATER and CLOUDS through their telescopes and was confirmed in the 90's. That means an atmosphere. Astronomers in the 1920's had already discovered this and for some reason was hushed up. FACT!; the moon is ONE BILLION years older than the earth. This was even reported in the New York Times Science Times; the moon's surface is thick in titanium as compared to the earth's, whereupon, titanium is found only in the interior of our planet!; according to many of the ancient texts, it has been recorded that there was no moon in the night sky, and that the moon had appeared without rhyme or reason on one particular night!; Now get ready for this. Many of our early astronomers upon viewing the moon had seen strange anomalous activity in the form of bright lights, OVERNIGHT topographical changes to parts of the moon, and large objects traversing the lunar surface on occasions!; probes and "manned[?]" lunar missions have seen and photographed objects such as tall spires, domes, tower like structures, bridges and stitch-like tracks on the opposite side of the moon! I did not say "Dark" side of the moon because it is not dark?; astronauts, probes and astronomers have witnessed anomalous intelligently controlled craft (UFO's) pacing our craft to and from earth and at the moon itself! All this can be checked out by the sources listed below.
As for the reason for not going back to the moon because of financial considerations is pure hogwash. Why? Keep in mind that Jack Kennedy's and our nation's reason for going to the moon was to beat the Soviets from getting there first and claiming it as a territory of their own. FACT! Why haven't the Soviets made the effort to put a man on the moon? If you think they were considering the financial plight of their people, think again. Communist Russia never considered the welfare of its people in the Cold War race. If you say that we did not go back because of the cost of the space program, think again. Hasn't this war in Iraq, and god knows elsewhere, proven that we GRANT out money with no stipulation of having the monies paid back? To say that we abondoned the chance of having the moon as a possession of the United States because we could not afford it is pure disinformation designed to hide the fact that something else impeded us from going back. But what or why? Why are we promulgating now that we are going to set up a moon base after so many years exploiting the taxpayer's monies on such wasteful programs as a space station and the shuttle programs, when the logical course would have been to setup one up on the moon in the first place? The argument of not going back to the moon must also take in account that NASA destroyed all the Saturn rocket blueprints after the final Apollo mission. Why? Is it because we are now and have been cooperating with the Russians to launch our heavy loads in Kazakhstan, respective to information about the moon, that both sides have agreed to hide from the people of earth. Is that why the Soviets never tried to go to the moon? What Americans have to realize is that there was another tier to the moon race that was political in nature and best explains the abandoment of that race by the former Soviet Union, the United States and other space-faring nations endeavoring to get to the moon. That agenda unfortunately does not include the people of this earth at this moment. For it is known in the world's military, science and intelligence community that "WE WERE WARNED OFF!"

Answer 10

We went to the Moon because it was there. JFK
We found nothing that would pay for the trip. What we did find is here already. Transportation cost would give new meaning to the S&H charges.

Answer 11

They've "proven" what they had to during the cold war era, and now with costs as they are, and no real mission, there's no point to it. Space will become interesting again at some point in the future, especially as other nations are entering the race - then the Yanks will gear up to some new mission to keep up.