Urgent! Bush announced he wanted to go back to the Moon soon and eventually to Mars.?

Question

Kennedy announced we were going to the moon in the 60s and we took 8 years to do it. Bush announced in 2004 that we'd be back to the moon by 2020. Why does it take so long? Russians and Chinese have announced they will do it by 2025.

So the question is WHY DOES WE TAKE SO LONG to go back??

Answer 1

The way we did it in the 60's was remarkably inefficient. It took a rocket to size of the Empire State Building to get two people to the moon and back in 1969. That is, 6 million pounds of propellant to send two (3 counting the orbiter crewman) 180 lb people. Not a good ratio.

Now if a space plane can be built to fly to the space station and back, or a real space elevator can be built, space travel can begin for the rest of us. The space station can act as an intermediate location where non-aerodynamic structures can be built and already have orbital energy that won't have to be provided by old fashioned rockets.

A space elevator uses a weight at the end of a super long and strong tether. The weight is out in space and the rotation of the Earth keeps the tether taught like a kid swinging a weight on a string.

So the reason it takes so long to go back is the technology is in the conceptual stage. A real space plane that takes off and lands on a regular runway does not yet exist. The space elevator can't exist until a super strong and lightweight fiber is invented for the tether. It will likely be a belt of fiber diamond or fiber silicon carbide. Kennedy had the advantage of talking about a technology that did exist and just needed to be scaled up for the job. Bush is talking about technologies that do not yet exist.

Answer 2

The Apollo program was largely experimental and it was an exercise to mainly prove it could be done. The amount of scientific equipment and length of stay on the surface was limited. Apollo 17 spent three days there. Apollo 18, 19 and 20 were canceled for budgetary reasons. The next logical step after the lunar program ended at Apollo 20 would have been a Moon base. All new lunar landers and other equipment would have had to be designed for such a base. At the time this was deemed too expensive because the U.S. was heavily involved in the Viet Nam war.
.
The next lunar expeditions will be to a permanent base and the men eventually will stay there 6 months or more. To develop an entire system for a lunar base will take far longer than just proving that we can get there.
.

Answer 3

The intention (I believe) is to return to the moon and build a facility there to launch a manned space vehicle to mars from the moon where there is much less gravity (and then to retrace steps back to earth). Although all previous technology will greatly help with the design, considerable new material must start from scratch. Although the moon/mars mission will have its hazards NASA would demand least risk and backups for all possible contingencies. Before his fatal mission, Cmdr Scooby once told an audience in Albany NY that when a manned mission to outer space was launched there was no backup space craft ready for a rescue mission. He then amused the audience by saying that NASA had designed flexible spheres with handles that could be used to transfer crew members without space suits to a rescue craft. He then joked that what the astronauts hated was to be dribbled. Safety is a primary NASA concern and that takes a lot of time and testing to get it right because there are so many 'what if's?'

Answer 4

During the 60's, the government put a LOT of money into the space program. The Saturn V rocket that took us to the moon was not a re-usable device, so it was incredibly expensive to get to the moon.

Now, we don't have the same motivation to go (no ego thing against the Soviets), so we won't put the money into it that we did during the 60's. That means it will go slower. Also, we will be using more advanced materials, designs, etc and all of those have to be tested, put together, etc. If we really, really wanted to go back in 8 years, we could. But it would be riskier and cost more than anybody would tolerate at this point ( we didn't mind as much 40 years ago).

Answer 5

There has been so much contradictory data,according to the Ralph Rene scientific analysis that man went around the moon but never set foot on the Moon.
There is such a hard time proving other wise that there is a large volume of the population that believe that astronauts never went to the moon in the first prlace.
Now NASA is pushing the government for money in order to pay the trip for going to the moon for real just to prove That Ralph Rene was rong.

Right now there are many poverty elements of our society that would care less if we ever went to the moon in the first place or not . The people at very low poverty level would have to pay additional taxes for the Project. Perhaps even doing away with the Social security system payments.

Therefore the concern is that A program to support for the poverty element of our society is more important than the support for a moon project, and that Bush should not give too much heed to NASA's appetite for money.

Answer 6

This is typical political speech. He set goals. Goals are cheap and his goals are far enough to the future where his administration doesn't actually have to do anything or spend any significant quantities of money. Many voters will support a candidate that supports their goals. There are many space enthusiasts in the country. By making statements like this, even though he has no intention of actually funding such a program, Bush got free votes. Talk is cheap.
Bush also wants to reward defense contractors who undoubtably contributed generously to his campaign by awarding contracts to study the feasibiity of returning to the moon and going to Mars. Feasibility studies are considerably cheaper than actually building the hardware.

Answer 7

Not enough money, that's why. NASA could get back to the Moon much sooner if they had enough money. They have to finish building the space station, then retire the shuttle and then use the money saved by not flying shuttles any more to build the new rockets and space craft needed to go back to the Moon.

Answer 8

It's more than just money. We do need a totally new space flight system and to build one that is safe,reusable and reliable in this country will take a while.
Whats the hurry to go back to the moon it has no value while people commit mass murder in the name of religion and nuclear technology is being sold by desperate nations to a country that has a president that believes he can create a one world kingdom under his religions rule by starting an all out world nuclear war.

Answer 9

Firstly. If Bush will go without a space suit, I will gladly make a donation.
Since all the hardware is controlled by the US military it won't happen soon, They have more fun killing civilians and blowing children to bits.

Answer 10

We have almost nothing to send up there cuz we have no current/safe lunar equipment and lack of funds

The space shuttles need to be replace. not patched up with duct tape.