Moon Dust Between Their Toes

[rockhopper penguin 2,265]

The only people left who have set foot on a world beyond the Earth. They are pretty healthy looking (no surprise I suppose given what they were chosen for) but I've gone for John Young.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218]

Buzz.

This year looks to be a year of ending eras.

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

I voted for Mr Bean

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218]

I voted for Mr Bean

Kid, you are funny when you are NOT being funny.

Ok?

[RIP Wee Jum 1,559]

Eugene Cernan for no apparent reason

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

 

I voted for Mr Bean

 

I have no sense of homour and I am gay for cat o'falk.

Ok?

translated

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218]

 

 

I voted for Mr Bean

I have no sense of homour and I am gay for cat o'falk.

Ok?

translated

 

its HUMOUR kid, H U M O U R.

Doh!!!

[RadGuy 1,614]

Buzz.

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

 

 

 

I voted for Mr Bean

 

I have no sense of homour and I am gay for cat o'falk.

Ok?

translated

its HUMOUR kid, H U M O U R.

Doh!!!

what are you mad at me for its your failure lol.

[Cat O'Falk 3,290]

Who's Carol and why is she canning Ian Brady?

[Toast 16,129]

 

 

I voted for Mr Bean

I have no sense of homour and I am gay for cat o'falk.

Ok?

translated

 

 

On the contrary, I consider LFN to be a most homourable fellow.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Went for Aldrin. 2016 seems set to go into big name overdrive and Aldrin's 86 and had his share of wild living.

[maryportfuncity 10,641]

Young, because he ain't, anymore.

 

Probably a more interesting question; will we ever run out of moonwalkers or will there be new additions to the collection before the last of the old guard shuffles off?

[Sir Creep 7,070]

Mr Bean

 

I mean c'mon....

[Cat O'Falk 3,290]

I'd vote for Wallace as he's 95 but he ain't on the list, so I voted for Cernan.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Probably a more interesting question; will we ever run out of moonwalkers or will there be new additions to the collection before the last of the old guard shuffles off?

 

Very interesting question. As I recently posted on the Astronauts thread, the youngest moonwalkers are now 80 and the oldest is 86. So, barring any of them living to the ripe old age of 100, they'll all be dead before 2036. So the question is will any human set foot on the moon before 2036? Right now, I'd say it's unlikely, but at the same time, it's such a long time that surely someone's got to get there sooner or later. Not sure it will be another American though. Chinese maybe, Russians. Someone random like the Indians.

 

Maybe it's a possibility that before the last moonwalker dies we may see the first interplanetary walker if we get to Mars. They keep saying it's relatively feasible, so 20 years is a pretty sizeable length of time.

 

Gosh maryport, you've really got me thinking now....

[The Unknown Man 584]

I voted for Buzz Aldrin.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

 

Probably a more interesting question; will we ever run out of moonwalkers or will there be new additions to the collection before the last of the old guard shuffles off?

 

Very interesting question. As I recently posted on the Astronauts thread, the youngest moonwalkers are now 80 and the oldest is 86. So, barring any of them living to the ripe old age of 100, they'll all be dead before 2036. So the question is will any human set foot on the moon before 2036? Right now, I'd say it's unlikely, but at the same time, it's such a long time that surely someone's got to get there sooner or later. Not sure it will be another American though. Chinese maybe, Russians. Someone random like the Indians.

 

Maybe it's a possibility that before the last moonwalker dies we may see the first interplanetary walker if we get to Mars. They keep saying it's relatively feasible, so 20 years is a pretty sizeable length of time.

 

Gosh maryport, you've really got me thinking now....

 

 

If a large nation is prepared to put the effort and treasure in it, it can be done in decade, so why not? Mars is quite a bit farther. To get people there is not technically feasable now. On the other hand the Moon: been there, done that.

 

I've always thought the Moon will be a first target for something like permanent habitation, but I may be proved wrong.

 

PS: Schmitt, cause he's daft.

[Lard Bazaar 3,799]

I always thought Cat O'Falk was a girl.

[Cat O'Falk 3,290]

I always thought Cat O'Falk was a girl.

I'm more of a woman than you'll ever be and more of a man than you'll ever have!

[Youwanticewiththat 611]

I always thought Cat O'Falk was a girl.

A very pretty gurl at that.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

 

 

Probably a more interesting question; will we ever run out of moonwalkers or will there be new additions to the collection before the last of the old guard shuffles off?

 

Very interesting question. As I recently posted on the Astronauts thread, the youngest moonwalkers are now 80 and the oldest is 86. So, barring any of them living to the ripe old age of 100, they'll all be dead before 2036. So the questiion is will any human set foot on the moon before 2036? Right now, I'd say it's unlikely, but at the same time, it's such a long time that surely someone's got to get there sooner or later. Not sure it will be another American though. Chinese maybe, Russians. Someone random like the Indians.

 

Maybe it's a possibility that before the last moonwalker dies we may see the first interplanetary walker if we get to Mars. They keep saying it's relatively feasible, so 20 years is a pretty sizeable length of time.

 

Gosh maryport, you've really got me thinking now....

If a large nation is prepared to put the effort and treasure in it, it can be done in decade, so why not? Mars is quite a bit farther. To get people there is not technically feasable now. On the other hand the Moon: been there, done that.

 

I've always thought the Moon will be a first target for something like permanent habitation, but I may be proved wrong.

 

PS: Schmitt, cause he's daft.

I do agree that Mars is not quite there yet, but all the planning and research is being put into getting to Mars, not the Moon. I also agree that the Moon makes far more sense in terms of at least getting there and seeing how easy we can make it now, and maybe establishing some kind of human presence there if possible but I think, based solely on what I've vaguely read and seen, a lot of the people working in this field see it as 'Moon or Mars' rather than 'Moon then Mars', which would seem to make more sense.

 

Regarding the large nation bit, I think you're right in terms of it being feasible within a decade (if it was in the 60s it sure is now) but it's whether there's the will to commit that kind of money to the project. In the U.S. it would have to come from the private sector, someone like SpaceX, in collaboration with NASA, but NASA seem more keen on the ISS and probes than human space flight. Russia's economy is not in great shape so it's hard to see how they finance such a project, even with Putin's Soviet-era personality cult. China would be the most obvious candidate but I can't say I know too much about their space program (I know they've landed a rover on the Moon, maybe one on Mars too? They also have a small space station unless 'Gravity' lied to me...) and not to mention the long awaited downturn in the Chinese economy.

 

But it's an interesting discussion. Personally, I think it would be wonderful to go back to the Moon, but the politics and economics of it seem to put most governments off.

[Sean 6,311]

Aldrin

[Rotten Ali 600]

<---- another vote for Cernan.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

Regarding the large nation bit, I think you're right in terms of it being feasible within a decade (if it was in the 60s it sure is now) but it's whether there's the will to commit that kind of money to the project. In the U.S. it would have to come from the private sector, someone like SpaceX, in collaboration with NASA, but NASA seem more keen on the ISS and probes than human space flight. Russia's economy is not in great shape so it's hard to see how they finance such a project, even with Putin's Soviet-era personality cult. China would be the most obvious candidate but I can't say I know too much about their space program (I know they've landed a rover on the Moon, maybe one on Mars too? They also have a small space station unless 'Gravity' lied to me...) and not to mention the long awaited downturn in the Chinese economy.

According to the ever accurate Wikipedia, the Apollo Program set back the American taxpayers $25 billion, presumably dollars of 1973, $133 billion when indexed to 2015. The same article quotes a 2009 estimate by NASA of the Apollo program costs in 2005 dollars as roughly $170 billion. That's a hefty bill, whichever way you calculate it. Elsewhere on Wikipedia it's claimed that the program consumed roughly 4% of federal spending 1964-66. I can't be arsed to look up what that would amount to in the current US budget, but it would be several hundred of billions.

 

I don't see NASA doing it. Manned space flight works well for prestige and national pride and the imagination, but it's not the best exploration available for the money. I'm glad NASA put the money in probes and space telescopes. For prestige and national pride the Moon is not attractive anymore, Mars is. If the Chinse get their finances in order, they might find it attractive enough. It seems to me the Russians lost their appetite (or the budget, or both).

 

But it's an interesting discussion. Personally, I think it would be wonderful to go back to the Moon, but the politics and economics of it seem to put most governments off.

The big problem is of course economics. Only nations can bill manned space flight. The only inroad for commercial space flight is tourism. It might help, but it's a trip only few can afford. Otherwise: there's nothing out there worth the cost of taking it and selling it dirtside. A penal colony, perhaps?