Why Apollo program stopped? Reasons
- Safety issues?
With all due respect: only a few people died. Thousands
are dying in car and other accidents, by murder, war etc.
Technical means were enough tested. Before Apollo 11
there were 65 missions to the moon accomplished. So
technical means were not that bad at all. Safety issues could not have been the reason.
To be clear: We do not underestimate the risks. To give an example: The moon has no atmosphere and it has gravity. So lunar landers would
certainly crash without the necessary stabilization and braking systems. The lunar surface is also not very suitable for landing. However, communication
via radio and video happens at the speed of light. It takes about 1.3 seconds for the signals to reach the earth. So troubleshooting can go fast.
In short, we cannot believe that after several decades no answer has been found to the problems that arose in the 1960s (problems that weren't big enough to stop the launch of one Apollo-mission after another).
- Health concerns for astronauts?
We don’t think so. Men who reached the moon mostly were/are in great condition
after more than 40 years. We could
give many examples ten times less important than a moonbase
where human lifes seem to be very cheap.
- Was money shortage the reason?
No. Governments, banks and private investors worldwide have
thrown masses of money out of the windows and that during forty years.
They dumped their money in every thinkable project but for the
moon landings there was nothing left? Come on.
Don’t believe that a moon landing costs -let's say-
a hundred of billions of dollars. That is simply not true. Why else
private investigators now planning moon trips for a fraction
of what NASA made us believe a moon landing costs? Richard Bransom, Elon Musk
... we think that if they would have been allowed to go their own way by the real rulers they already would
have walked on the moon.
They are great men but ho so tiny bunnies compared to the real powerful
men. Bransom and others have plans to explore space, make tourist
tours in space, build hotels, and yes they plan to visit the moon.
But be sure they will encounter 'misfortune' on their way.
Besides: visiting the moon? It would be under extreme supervision of the real rulers.
And we are not sure if Bransom with his rebellious image will accept that.
Visiting the moon will not happen with him in pole position, if you ask us.
Private missions –if they ever will be allowed- will be followed
very closely by the real rulers.
By the way: Strange that NASA's budget has hit rock bottom
after the moon landings. We think we know why.
Robert Shapiro (University of New York) once
said (we paraphrase) that a moonbase would be a gift to humanity.
Money is in this context just accessory.
The moon is the best place for scanning space,
detecting dangerous comets, scientific research ...
But as a bonus, a
moonbase offers an extra survival chance for humans, if a worldwide disaster
hits earth.
We even found another reason that on its own we think is strong enough to build a moonbase:
a moonbase could be used to launch rockets to the space stations. There would be almost no gravity to overcome. And
for astronauts it would be possible to recover and gain bone strenght on the moon, because today without special exercises they lose 1.5 percent of bone mass every month.
Yes, a moonbase would eliminate a great problem: earth's gravity.
Next
Tip: maybe it goes quicker if you click the return key on
your keyboard.