We Still Need To Go Back To The Moon

I'm convinced, now convince the President.
Yes you can!

These are good reasons to go to Near Earth Objects, and to focus on space-based solar (not mentioned in the new NASA policy), but NOT specifically to go to the Moon. Why do we have this need to walk around on a planetary, or planet-like, surface? Because our ancestors evolved on a planetary surface and we like to know which way is up? My prediction is our children will be living in space habitats and/or on (or in) asteroids long before anyone ventures back to the Moon or Mars.

Agreed agreed agreed!

Aldrin needs to listen to this man!

It is so important that we do things that inspire, how can kids get inspired about the "Merchant 7"? LOL

America needs to dream big and do big!

We need goals worthy of a nation born of the frontiers.

All good points except for the terrorism point - that seems like quite a stretch. He should cut it to 5 points to remain more credible and poignant.

Not a single one of Mr. Hickham's reasons is exclusively applicable to "going to the moon". All can be met, most likely more directly, by other activities. Number 3 (teaching our young people how to succeed) is quite ironic, since Constellation seemed to be well on the course to doing the opposite: teaching our young people how to fail.

Buzz would say that we had a Moon-centered program and policy for six years and the public's response? A big yawn. Other than those immediately involved, quite frankly the public was uninterested and could care less. That's the unpleasant truth. What they thought (when they thought at all) about it? Been there, done that. As Buzz told me recently, "People should be reminded we won the Moon race 40 years ago-why do it again?"

So if Moon missions got a big yawn since we did that 40 years ago, what makes people think that more of the same (LEO) will inspire our youth? Most of our youth has been seeing the just that since the day they were born. How is it now exciting because its now company X, Y, and Z are getting us there? The new R&D is going to inspire our youth? I just don't buy it.

I felt totally uninspired about this new plan, and I am still fairly young.

A real program, with a defined goals, and people working toward that goal is what will inspire people. Much like Homer said, but it doesn't have to be the Moon in my opinion. NEOs, Phobos\Deimos, etc. Anything besides a program that is nothing but taxi to LEO please.

For NASA HSF to do anything that requires a lot of money over a long time, it will need to address the American public's concerns both broadly, and deeply.

Like Apollo did and Constellation didn't.

When someone figures out what those concerns that require astronauts might be then you can formulate a HSF program to address them.

Until then, it is probably better for NASA to do HSF R&D work; it's easier to sell.

CEO's of the NewSpace 7 do not need to address in a broad or deep fashion the American public's concerns, only their own. This makes it easier for them than NASA to spend mega bucks over a long period of time.

WE HAVE ALREADY RETURNED TO THE MOON! LRO and other international missions are there now. And we need to build upon this robotic effort. If it wasn't for robotic spacecraft exploring every niche and cranny of the solar system, NASA would not exist. Those robotic vehicles work for peanuts while the manned program expends 100x more for 100x less return on investment. The finest manned missions of the Shuttle era were to Hubble to repair and upgrade one of the great space telescopes and robotic S/C.

Face it, we need better technology and the development of an international space program. Ion Propulsion is maturing and could propel humans soon to Mars in 2 months rather than 7 and reduce risk and cost tremendously. Ion propulsion could send robotic vehicles all over the solar system in a matter of weeks and months rather than years or decades.

The cost of an on-going to permanent presence on the Moon and trips to Mars will require the resources of a consortium of Nations. And such an effort will be a very important building block towards a United Earth in the 22nd century. Visionaries and exploration go hand in hand. Through world-wide telecommunications, the sharing of new knowledge of our solar system and our place in it, international cooperation that started with Apollo-Soyuz, NASA is a pathway to much more than returning Americans to the Moon.

Obama is taking the right steps. Constellation for the purpose of LEO, the Moon and Mars is a White Elephant. Halting Constellation is what should have been done to ISS in the late 80's or to the Shuttle early on. We are trying to leapfrog to a Buck Rogers, 2001 Space Odyssey space presence and we cannot do it alone. Proof of concept could have been achieved with a Space Shuttle to carry only humans to LEO, leaving cargo to unmanned commercial launch vehicles which did exist after the Saturn program was shutdown.

As for me, I'm bummed out by this decision. I was 19 when I watched Buzz on the moon, and I thought we'd be at Mars by the time I was 45. Guess that didn't happen!

What bothers me is that it wasn't a course correction, which happens all the time. This was we're not going.

So the dream is dead.

And No, we can't!

And those of you that think we could go other places rather than the moon, consider this. If we can't delevop the technology, and the political will to go camp out on the moon for a week or so, what chance is there of going to asteroids, lagrange points or Mars for that matter?

It is hard to do.

We choose to go to the moon and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are HARD!

Truly bummed. It's true commercial spaceflight will get us there one day, but I'll be dead by the time it happens.

We could go back to the Moon with NASA's usual command economy approach, but I think its better to go WHEREVER entrepreneurs take us in space. Ultimately, that's THE ONLY WAY to make "human expansion into the solar system" (the Augustine Commission's stated overall goal of America's human space flight program) SUSTAINABLE. As with early aircraft, or building the transcontinental railroad, or even the earliest attempts by England to explore and colonize North America -- all were underwritten by private investors, but there interest was catalyzed by government incentives (respectively: US mail delivery ocntracts, ceding land rights along the RR, and the crown's promise of monopoly rights to whatever resources were found the those early explorers to the New World). One think I would like to see in the White House's plans for human space flight is a promise to renegotiate the UN Space Treaty to allow individuals and corporations clear rights of ownership for any off-world territory where they make a claim, establish at least periodic human presence, and seriously exploit in-situ resources. I'd invest to own a piece of a Near Earth Asteroid a mile across that contains $20 trillion dollars worth of metal...

Frank Sietzen:

Get a little serious, please. No, "the kids" are not getting to go. The average American didn't have the flight experience or technical training that Mercury, Gemni, and Apollo astronauts had. The aerage American doesn't have the training for flying on Shuttle or in the Space Station. The average American wouldn't have been qualified to set a foot in an Orion capsule, if they had ever been built. And the average American isn't going to be qualified for a crew slot in any of the ninety-eleven possible spacecraft NASA's "commercial" builders choose to build, any more than the average American is qualified to race at Le Mans.

Will there be opportunity for "average" non-space-qualified billionaires to get into space in the not so distant future? Maybe, in ten to twenty years if Bigelow's plans work out. Opportunity for truly average "average" people with mortgages and dental bills to pay? Probably not this century, unless near the very end. It's going to be a long till we build rockets large enough to carry hordes of passengers; it's going to be a long time before we build destinations where those passengers can travel. You surely know this!

Or are you just saying, we can all follow the "real" astronauts by their tweets? You think that'll keep The Kids mesmerized for a couple decades?

I agree with OldMike. When the Chinese land on the moon in this decade, bring back some of the Apollo hardware,and sell it on e-bay,maybe the American people will wake up.

Entrepreneurs will take us to where they see a potential market. Other than the ISS, what market is there that requires HSF? None.

One of the key points to me is "If we accomplish great engineering and scientific tasks" It doesn't take the moon for this. It takes engineers and scientists. And a good balance. To me, Constellation was an engineering task. Like building the Golden Gate Bridge or Hoover Dam. And I wanted NASA to succeed at this because it would show me NASA was capable of an engineering task. Why did I want this? NASA is at the top of the food chain. They run the show. If NASA management lacks the engineering skills and mind set, the commercial companies (the Lockheeds, Boeings, etc.) will take them for a joy ride.

What a load of nonsense. We don't need to go to the moon, we want to. Badly. Whether that's good enough of a reason to have other people pay for it is ... debatable.