Do you think?

[Dren]

Do you think we will ever go back to the moon before 2036?

Edited October 24, 2013 by Dren

[UNSA]

The United States/NASA specifically? Probably not. Everyone seems focused on Mars, and there is barely even any political will or funding for that as is. I don't have alot of confidence Congress wont kill Orion/SLS just like it did Constellation or EVERY OTHER attempt to get out of LEO since Apollo.

Humanity? I'd say 50/50. Id bet a joint Chinese/ESA/Russian effort could pull it off. The US is too paranoid about tech-theft to cooperate with Chinese initiatives, but the ESA (particularly Germany), and Russia have made some inroads. China seems to have alot of ambition to stake its claim as a superpower, so I could see a journey to the moon to be a nice feather in their cap towards that pursuit.

Overall though, alot of its pointless unless we establish an atleast semi-permanent presence there. Personally I'd like to more effort towards orbital construction practices that the Russians have talked about.

[razark]

What would be the point of going to the moon in 2036? To prove that we could do the same thing we did 67 years before?

It would serve the same purpose as building the Wright Flyer in 1970.

[Mr. Scruffy]

[...] China seems to have alot of ambition to stake its claim as a superpower, so I could see a journey to the moon to be a nice feather in their cap towards that pursuit.

[...]

The chinese pavillion during the Expo2000 in Hannover actually featured a remake of the apollo landing scene with all american flags replaced by chienese ones, basically. It was sort of funny, with all this stereotype of chinese copy-mania, but on the other hand sad, in realizing, that yeah, if someone will make it these days, it´s gonna be them.

BTW: I heard that for the chinese, copying stuff is nothing bad or dishonorable - quite to the contrary: If your design gets copied by a chinese, it´s the highest compliment for your product, and you are supposed to feel honered, that your design was picked over any other. In that sense, their expo2000 pavillion was a high tribute to NASA´s past achievements and in retrospective, i maybe shouldnt have smirked all that broadly when i walked through it - when was the last time any western country had the balls to openly acknowledge any chinese achievement (except the wall) so openly?

[Rjhere]

I heard that India is also aiming for the moon within this decade... Not the chinese, heard they are busy with their space station...

Although the russians is also planning within this decade/early next!

[Drunkrobot]

What would be the point of going to the moon in 2036? To prove that we could do the same thing we did 67 years before?

It would serve the same purpose as building the Wright Flyer in 1970.

When we do return to the Moon, it would be less like the Wright Flyer and more like an Airbus. The point of doing it again is to do it better than last time, stay there longer, go farther from home base, more samles and scientific experiments, and practising processes to make the whole process better (producing conseumables from the Lunar regolith, for example).

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

I think we will go back to the moon whenever it becomes economically interesting for whatever reason. But I really would like a manned mission to the moon... I wasn't around the first time. If it ever will happen, be it Mars or the moon, I will be glued to my screen to watch the whole thing. Think of it: a manned mission so far out, that's a pretty big achievement

[DanimalXIII]

The US won't go back to the moon, well; private companies may but NASA won't.

Other countries may go to the moon, I imagine 'Space Tourism' will be functional in 23 years, and who knows an orbit of the moon may be a package.

[DisarmingBaton5]

When we do return to the Moon, it would be less like the Wright Flyer and more like an Airbus. The point of doing it again is to do it better than last time, stay there longer, go farther from home base, more samles and scientific experiments, and practising processes to make the whole process better (producing conseumables from the Lunar regolith, for example).

So... More like a DC-3 built in 1970.

I really would like to see a lunar mission in that time.

[Dren]

http://www.space.com/18380-nasa-moon-missions-obama-election.html This is from the orion spacecraft and i think it might happen.

[Dren]

Here is a mockup of the Orion and CSM capsules

[Kryten]

I heard that India is also aiming for the moon within this decade... Not the chinese, heard they are busy with their space station...

Although the russians is also planning within this decade/early next!

The Indians are aiming for a robotic landing this decade, as are the Russians. The Indians have no official plans beyond first crewed flight in the mid 2020s, and the Russians won't be able to perform any kind of crewed landing until their new SHLV is ready, set to be sometime well into the 2030s.

[razark]

When we do return to the Moon, it would be less like the Wright Flyer and more like an Airbus. The point of doing it again is to do it better than last time, stay there longer, go farther from home base, more samles and scientific experiments, and practising processes to make the whole process better (producing conseumables from the Lunar regolith, for example).

I don't see much point in going to the moon at this point. We've been there, we know we can do it again. But there's no purpose to it. Going to the moon will give us knowledge on how to go to the moon better, true. But at the end of the trip, you're still on the moon with nothing to do. If someone can find a viable reason, even if it's nothing more than tourism, then we go back. It's time to set further targets.

[Papa_Joe]

I don't see much point in going to the moon at this point. We've been there, we know we can do it again. But there's no purpose to it. Going to the moon will give us knowledge on how to go to the moon better, true. But at the end of the trip, you're still on the moon with nothing to do. If someone can find a viable reason, even if it's nothing more than tourism, then we go back. It's time to set further targets.

The biggest reason of all... natural resources (like precious metals).

some other heavy hitters...

- science for near body base establishment and permanent presence. Lots of science in that.

- tourism

- colonization ( tho this one will take great political will... )

I see the commercialization of the moon within 50 years. I only hope I live long enough...

Edited October 25, 2013 by Papa_Joe
spelling

[razark]

The biggest reason of all... natural resources (like precious metals).

some other heavy hitters...

- science for near body base establishment and permanent presence. Lots of science in that.

- tourism

- colonization ( tho this one will take great political will... )

I see the commercialization of the moon within 50 years. I only hope I live long enough...

Natural resources/precious metals: Are they there? Is it even close to economically viable to extract them?

Science: We gain knowledge on how to live and work on the moon. That's great, if we ever come up with a reason to live and work on the moon.

Tourism: Is it economically viable?

Colonization: Is it possible to create a self-sufficient moon colony in the semi-near future? Is it economically viable to support such a colony? And again: what purpose would it serve, other than national prestige?