Why haven't we returned to the moon?

Question

On July 29th, 1969... Apollo 11 first touched down on the moon. And following that that were subsequent missions up to 1972. Understandably these days we might not have the money to burn on such an extravagant undertaking. But is there a bigger reason why we haven't returned? Did we ever go in the first place? Surely there is more that we can learn. The chinese seem to think so. I'm not sure if its true... but aren't they planning to construct a permanent facility on the moon? So the question remains why haven't we gone back?

Answer 1

Well--we did go to the moon. The conspiracy theorists are basically trolls pounding on their keyboards in their mommy's basements. :)

As to why we haven't been back--tha'ts a complicated question. Its not mony--it wouldn't be nearly as expensive--or risky--today. But here's a brief overview--organized as a timeline:

>1972. NASA, seen as part of the "military-industrial complex" suffered from public perception that thegovernment had neglected domestic needs due to Vietnam. The result was that the Nixon administration and Congress de-prioritized the space program
>1972-also, the decision was made to focus on a program to develop an advanced, reuseable spacecraft. The thinking was that this would enable MORE--and cheaper and safer--space exploration as well as starting to exploit the commercial/industrial possibilities.
However, Congress rejected the design proposed by NASA in favor of the Space Shuttle, ignoring engineers' warnings that, while the Shuttle would be cheaper to develop, it would be less reliable and have much higher operating expenses.
>1970s Following Skylab, the Saturn V booster was abandoned, along with the Apollo spacecraft. Skylab was allowed to burn up on reentry and plans for a permanant space station building on Skylab had to be scrapped. This was not NASA's idea--Congress cut the funds.
>1981-1986. Early on, problems with the Shuttle showed the engineer's warnings had been correct. The Shuttle could not fly often enough or cheaply enough to support the planned projects. Plans for a return to the moon were scrapped. Congress continued to cut NASA funding.
>1986 The Challenger disaster shut down the program for 3 years. Corporations withdrew from an agreement to begin orbital manufacturing projects, citing the Shuttle's unreliability.
1992-4>DOD/NASA efforts to develop an advanced spacecraft (the "Delta Clipper") scrapped by Congress. The ISS delayed by budget cuts and lack of launch capacity
1998>Congressscraps VentureStar program for replacement for the Shuttle
2001-2003
Bush administration cancels safety upgrades to the Shuttle, cuts funding for the "lifeboat" emergency re-entry vehicle for the ISS
2003 Columbia disaster
Bush ccalls for a "return to the moon" but refuses to support increased funding for NASA
2006 Bush policy directive shuts down all ISS research except for "Mars mission research" and military research related to combating terrorism
Contract for "replacement" for shuttle awarded for booster (a modified Shuttle Solid rocket booster) and second stage (a Shuttle-type engine and modified fuel tank) --ironically touted as a "new" system
2007
No cntract yet awarded for the crew capsule for this replacement
No funding for a proposed return to the moon mission
Just befor leaving office, te last Congress again cut NASA funds.

BTW--Its not jus tChina. Russia and India are also planning for lunar missions, hopefully in the 2020's

Answer 2

on no account in the 2010s and specific no longer in the 2020s. at contemporary there's a moon application underway, yet via funds cuts they do no longer probably have not got the money mandatory to advance and sustain the type of application. at contemporary, the present moon shape is fairly in basic terms waiting to be canceled, if no longer in 2010, then some years sooner or later. there is obviously the distant desire that Obama and congress will supply the extra 3 billion/3 hundred and sixty 5 days it is going to take to make this application paintings, yet this is a protracted shot in the present monetary climate. additionally, you are able to desire that the chinese language or somebody commence yet another moon race, yet this is a superb longer shot.

Answer 3

At the moment, there is no pressing reason to go to the moon.

During the Apollo missions, a lot was learned about it, as well as the prestige of being the first there.

I daresay things might be different if oil was discovered there.

Answer 4

In the 70's people were concentrating on ending the Viet Nam war and starting to focus on social issues like poverty and were not thrilled with spending a few billion dollars per trip to the moon.

Answer 5

Being the cynical fool I am, I would say it was because they never went in the first place. Yes it costs a lot but something for me doesnt ring true in that nobody has ever returned especially in an age with so much new and better technology since the last time they "went".

Answer 6

i dont know, but i heard theres some heluim isotopes up there that we could use for fusion power.

And yes, we did go to the moon in the first place. The government ISNT SMART enough to keep up a elaborate hoax for decades. didnt 9/11 teach you that?

Answer 7

And the answer remains... for the 1,000th time.

It's VERY EXPENSIVE!!!! It's also very dangerous every time you send people up.

And there is almost nothing to do there that a probe can't do, pick up samples.

Answer 8

i believe we made a global agreement in the mid seventies that no one would return to the moon i was in highschool at the time

Answer 9

I my opinion ,the man never step there. It's easy to understand for me because there's not an answer for your question , mine and all people in this world....38 years and nothing about this.