"WHY landing on the MOON is proving more difficult today than FIFTY years ago!!!!!

[Skylinerd1]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...n-50-years-ago



Its coz they lost the dna samples to clone Stanley Kubrick.

[freeheeler]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...n-50-years-ago



Its coz they lost the dna samples to clone Stanley Kubrick.

Let me guess as it’s the guardian

Global warming
Climate change
Gas prices
Mean tweets
Trump
Texas
Book banning
Abortion rights for women
Trump again
Critical race theory

Anything else?

[JT11RTR]

There is no way they landed on the moon. Making excuses why it can't be done today with a million times more technology.

[bluebeltATT]

Well duh! They lost the technology!


If they were smart they would use CGI to create a moon landing the way China does.


It would be way more believable today due to the better graphics technology


No more grainy video FTW!

[HayZues Christi]

Wehttps://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00151-3


Why do the same mental midgets believe every single CT? Srs

OP used to spam sydney powell "kraken" threads. What happened??



Honestly the moon landing fake is one of the more
Believable CTs, but my question remains. Why do people like OP (likely a bot) who believe one CT, believe all CTs?

Simple nPr math will tell you how unreasonable and illogical a conclusion that is. The chances of any given CT being true is long odds. 5 for 5 is astronomical. All of them is chimpanzees creating Shakespeare level. Srs

[alain]

It's because all the Nazi Scientists they used to get to the moon are dead Srs. You've lost the knowledge and need to find it again.

In B4 'they didn't have much to do with it blah blah'

[MajorTendonitis]

There is no way they landed on the moon. Making excuses why it can't be done today with a million times more technology.

Not really , you’re not taking into account diversity hires . There’s no way we could pull it off now

[Seatard]

It's further away now too.

[chacha15]

It was on live tv back when it happened. The launch looked real i wasn't around at the time but the take off and the landing happened.

[bluebeltATT]

It was on live tv back when it happened. The launch looked real i wasn't around at the time but the take off and the landing happened.

Not to mention they even made a phone call from the friggin moon ! Nixon spoke to Buzz or Neil way back before cell phone towers were invented so yeah totally legit

[nkiritsis13]

One fundamental challenge, says Jan Wörner, a former director general of the European Space Agency (Esa), is weight. “You are always close to failure because you have to be light or the spacecraft will not fly. You cannot have a big safety margin.”

Added to that, almost every spacecraft is a prototype. Apart from rare cases, such as the Galileo communications satellites, spacecraft are bespoke machines. They are not mass produced with the same tried and tested systems and designs. And once they are deployed in space, they are on their own. “If you have trouble with your car, you can have it repaired, but in space there’s no opportunity,” says Wörner. “Space is a different dimension.”

The moon itself presents its own problems. There is gravity – one-sixth as strong as on Earth – but no atmosphere. Unlike Mars, where spacecraft can fly to their destination and brake with parachutes, moon landings depend entirely on engines. If you have a single engine, as smaller probes tend to, it must be steerable, because there is no other way to control the descent.

To complicate matters, the engine must have a throttle, allowing the thrust to be dialled up and down. “Usually you ignite them and they provide a steady state thrust,” says Nico Dettmann, Esa’s lunar exploration group leader. “To change the thrust during operations adds a lot more complexity.”


And yet, with the first lunar landings back in the 60s, it can be hard to grasp why the moon remains such a tough destination.

Moon mission records provide a clue: soon after the Apollo programme, lunar landers fell out of favour. When China’s Chang’e 3 spacecraft touched down in 2013, it chalked up the first soft landing on the moon since the Soviet’s Luna 24 in 1976.

“There were decades when people were not developing landers,” says Dettmann. “The technology is not that common that you can easily learn from others.”

Testing, then, is critical. But while rockets can be bolted down and put through their paces, the options are more limited for spacecraft. Tests can check whether power and propulsion, navigation, communications and instruments work, and spacecraft are shaken to ensure they can endure the intense vibrations of launch, but there is no good way to simulate a moon landing. “It is much harder to qualify and validate a lunar lander than many other space systems,” says Dettmann.

During the space race, Nasa spent a staggering $25bn on Apollo. It still clocked up failure after failure before it reached the moon. It now has 70 years of institutional knowledge and a culture geared towards designing, building and testing spacecraft. Under its new Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) scheme, however, the agency is looking to slash costs and stimulate the US space industry by paying private companies, such as Astrobotic and the Houston-based Intuitive Machines, to deliver its instruments to the moon.

The trade-off is a greater risk of failure, so more lost missions should be expected. “These companies are all relatively new. And comparatively, they are doing these missions on pocket change,” says Dr Joshua Rasera, a research associate at Imperial College London. But the strategy should pay off, he says, because companies learn from their failures. “It still ends up being cheaper over the total number of missions,” he says, “even if the first few maybe crash.”

I dunno, sounds kinda fücky.

My guess:

https://www.nasa.gov/careers/

Too much diversity, not enough space Nazis hellbent on reviving the fourth reich.

Let me guess as it’s the guardian

Global warming
Climate change
Gas prices
Mean tweets
Trump
Texas
Book banning
Abortion rights for women
Trump again
Critical race theory

Anything else?

I'm honestly shocked at how the article is not only politically neutral, but positive towards the prospects of shifting endeavors towards the private sector.

...

Schit, moon landing was fake then, wasn't it?


Jokes aside, it is strange how when it comes to landing on the fücking moon, zero qualms about the tons and tons of fuel being burned, the number of expected failures, and therefore the amount of planned tons and tons of even more fuel they anticipate burning. Oh, but god forbid you have a gas stove, pleb.

[skier!]

“If you have trouble with your car, you can have it repaired, but in space there’s no opportunity,” says Wörner. “Space is a different dimension.”

[S0Jack3d]

Moon landing is so fake…. How did they have enough oxygen for the entire event?

[Seatard]

Moon landing is so fake…. How did they have enough oxygen for the entire event?

It's impossible to store compressed oxygen in a tank and bring it with, so good question.

[alain]

Americans went to the moon, they used German V2 rocket technology. If it were faked the Russians would have done everything in their power to prove it just to embarrass the Americans

[Destor]

The original Apollo program price tag was like $300billion in today’s dollars

NASA’s funding today is like $25billion per year

The original moon landing was an absolutely massive undertaking, clearly, that’s why it was so remarkable and why some people today still question that it even actually happened

[MajorTendonitis]

It's impossible to store compressed oxygen in a tank and bring it with, so good question.

I think it’s a great question and one I never took into account. I had a Scott pack that had a fairly large tank you strapped to your back , and it only let you breath for a maximum of 20 minutes .
So how in the hell did they have enough for over 8 days ? I don’t think they had the tech back then for rebreathers etc

[DeshaunWatson]

I think it’s a great question and one I never took into account. I had a Scott pack that had a fairly large tank you strapped to your back , and it only let you breath for a maximum of 20 minutes .
So how in the hell did they have enough for over 8 days ? I don’t think they had the tech back then for rebreathers etc

If they didn’t have enough oxygen they sure as hell didn’t make a fkin call to the POTUS lmao. I laugh at the photos and videos. So fkin fake.

[Seatard]

I think it’s a great question and one I never took into account. I had a Scott pack that had a fairly large tank you strapped to your back , and it only let you breath for a maximum of 20 minutes .
So how in the hell did they have enough for over 8 days ? I don’t think they had the tech back then for rebreathers etc

Come on now, oxygen wasn’t an issue. They had large high pressure tanks that carried pure oxygen. Google says their moonwalk suits had little 2lb tanks at 1500-ish psi that would last 4-8 hours depending on how they used it.