Don't get me wrong, aspects of it seem super fishy. But nothing seems fishier than it staying a secret for 50 years given the massive scale of it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36301598)

"How many decades can pass, after all, without anyone coming even close to a reenactment before people start to catch on? Four obviously haven’t been enough, but how about five, or six, or seven? How about when we hit the 100-year anniversary?

If the first trans-Atlantic flight had not been followed up with another one for over forty years, would anyone have found that unusual? If during the early days of the automobile, when folks were happily cruising along in their Model T’s at a top speed of 40 MPH, someone had suddenly developed a car that could be driven safely at 500 MPH, and then after a few years that car disappeared and for many decades thereafter, despite tremendous advances in automotive technology, no one ever again came close to building a car that could perform like that, would that seem at all odd?"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36301677)

By far the most costly part of a moon mission is the rocket. Seeing as there would be literally no other reason to build a rocket that powerful except for a moon landing, and the fact that there's no economy of scale, governments have understandably been wary of spending that kind of cash.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36301696)

https://goo.gl/images/r4ouzf

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36301713)

six times. 50 years ago.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36301718)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36301719)

its not just cost (obviously).

nasa will explicitly tell you we lack the capability.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303112)

btw nixon went six times. six (6).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303101)

Then they would keep improving the tech until it got there. It definitely wasn't there when the space race started. The whole thing was a series of one-upmanship.

"You really think the Soviet Union wouldn't jump at the chance to shut that shit down and save billions of dollars per year the second they had a publicly acceptable excuse to do so?"

No, they would just keep pushing until they won. After the moon landing the space race turned to space stations and shit like star wars.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303142)

Just do improve rocket engine isp 3x to allow for the greater shielding needed to adequately protect the astronauts

Just do improve battery technology 10x to provide sufficient power for the computers/AC/communications/etc

All before 1970, of course

Look, if the tech wasn't there, it wasn't there, and a couple years of intense funding would not be sufficient.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303363)

You're making shit up.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303442)

Haven't taken one in the last few years (why would I?)

225 * 3

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303545)

Probably some secret American commies in NASA who would have been happy to help.

And the risk of exposure is so high that anyone smart enough to pull off what was alleged would be smart enough not to try

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303134)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303124)

nixon doing a million fucking moon landings completely disproves the "uhhh its just too hard/expensive for anyone else to bother once in the next FIFTY FUCKING YEARS AS TECHNOLOGY GOT MASSIVELY BETTER"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303656)

The Concorde

The Space Shuttle

SDI

Nuclear power (winding down)

-The problem isn't that it's too hard/expensive, the problem is that we've become a nation of risk-averse faggots that would rather spend billions of dollars on a hundred diversity deans at a public university than send a fucking human to another planet again

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303909)

(libs)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36441742)

They could install a fuckin' zipline or something and it would be 180 af.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303543)

fuck welfare but i would pay for another manned mission to the moon this time with modern HD video feeds

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303592)

we cant do it. it is NOT a question of technology (which is orders of magnitude better today of course). gun to their heads, nasa could not get a man to the moon right now. they admit this. it is not "sure, give me a billion dollar rocket"--its "uhhh, well, we need to do more research, give me a 15 year window and maybe well solve the problems..."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303603)

You can’t duplicate the conditions on the Moon here at home, you see, or even provide a rough approximation. And since no one had ever been to the Moon, they didn’t know exactly what to replicate anyway, so this part of the mission was pretty much of a crapshoot. Conditions on the Moon are, to say the least, a bit different than here on Earth. The gravitational pull is only about 1/6 of what it is here. And then there is that whole ‘lack of atmosphere’ thing. And the decidedly unearthly temperatures. And then, of course, there are the high levels of space radiation.

I’m quite sure that we had the best minds available working on the Apollo project, but none of them could have accurately predicted and compensated for how all those unearthly conditions would combine to affect the flight potential of the lunar modules. So the ability of the modules to actually blast off from the Moon and fly was, at best, a theoretical concept.

It is also important to remember that, unlike the initial blast-off from Earth (seen above), which involved the collective efforts of thousands of people and the use of all types of peripheral equipment, the astronauts taking off from the Moon had only themselves and a strange vessel that looked like it had been salvaged from the set of Lost in Space. What would you be thinking, by the way, if you suddenly found yourself on the surface of the Moon with what looked like a cheap movie prop as your only way home? Would you feel comfortable hanging around for a few days doing experiments, confident that, when the time came, the untested contraption behind you would actually get you back home from the Moon? Or would the words “bad career choice” be running through your head?

But as it turns out, America kicked ass back then and those lunar modules performed like champions every single time! They didn’t even need any modifications! Despite the completely foreign environment, they worked perfectly the very first time and every time thereafter!

On Earth, it took many long years of trial and error, many failed test flights, many unfortunate accidents, and many, many trips back to the drawing board before we could safely and reliably launch men into low-Earth orbit. But on the Moon? We nailed that shit the very first time.

Today, of course, we can’t even launch a space shuttle from right here on planet Earth without occasionally blowing one up, even though we have lowered our sights considerably. After all, sending spacecraft into low-Earth orbit is considerably easier than sending spacecraft all the way to the friggin’ Moon and back. It would appear then that we can draw the following conclusion: although technology has advanced immeasurably since the first Apollo Moon landing and we have significantly downgraded our goals in space, we can’t come close to matching the kick-ass safety record we had in the Apollo days.

The thing is that, back in the frontier days, we didn’t need all that fancy technology and book-learnin’ to send Buzz and the boys to the Moon and back. Back then, we had that American can-do spirit and we just cowboyed up and MacGyvered those spaceships to the Moon. All we needed was an old Volkswagen engine, some duct tape and a roll of bailing wire. Throw a roll of butt-wipe and a little Tang on board and you were good to go.

And how about the speed with which we cranked out those Apollo spacecraft? Once we figured out how to make them, we were stamping them out like Coke cans. We fired off seven of them in just under three-and-a-half years, or about one every six months. Given the extreme complexity of those vessels, and the fact that every component had to perform flawlessly under largely unknown conditions, that is a pretty impressive production schedule. America, I think it is safe to say, totally rocked back then!

heres ur lunar module bros: https://airandspace.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/slideshow_xlg/public/images/image-albums/99-15232h.jpg?itok=CqQ_B9qB

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36303796)

TRUMP is the one who will make space great (for the first time)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4009279&forum_id=2#36314143)