The moon landings in the 1960s and 1970s were a monumental achievement in space travel. Now, exactly fifty years after the first Apollo 11 landing, it is still unmatched. Were the Americans that far ahead of their time? And will there be new steps on the moon?
A roaring Saturn V rocket shot Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins straight into the history books on July 16, 1969. Half the world watched as Armstrong and Aldrin became the first humans to step into the powdery lunar surface on July 21, 1969 (Dutch time). Collins continued to orbit the moon in a capsule before returning to Earth.
Exactly fifty years later, space enthusiasts look back on that time with nostalgia. A period in which the escalating Cold War forced the United States to take drastic measures. Beaten by arch-enemy Soviet Union at almost every point in the space race, NASA has more or less been given a blank check to win the ultimate prize:the first human landing on the moon.
In the end, between 1969 and 1972, twelve Americans landed on the moon during six space missions. But as quickly as the Apollo program was set up, just as quickly it was demolished. Due to waning public interest, and expensive American 'terrestrial problems' such as the Vietnam War, the last planned moon missions were canceled. It was the last time people walked on the moon.
Will that change soon? If you follow the news, there seems to be plenty going on. NASA announced this spring that it plans to return to the moon in five years' time. In recent years, the Chinese have let robots land there and eventually say they want to send astronauts. India joins the fray. And ultra-wealthy entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are setting up spectacular moon missions for their supporters. Is the space race back half a century later?
A mission with funding
It should happen in 2024. This spring, Vice President of the United States Mike Pence announced that NASA will put people on the moon that year, including the first woman on the moon. That is faster than the previously planned 2028 and would still fall neatly within a possible second term of President Donald Trump. Trump backed up the claim by saying he will earmark $1.4 billion for the trip.
Trump says NASA will do "great things" again under his leadership. But big things come with big budgets. Extremely large budgets, which also require approval from the US Congress every year. NASA calls the 1.4 billion a "deposit." A quick look at the cash flows within the Apollo program confirms this. The lunar missions cost about $25 billion at the time. If you convert that to current standards, the counter will exceed 150 billion.
There seems to be a cycle going on here:for thirty years now (with the exception of President Bill Clinton) presidents have been announcing plans to go (again) with people to the moon or Mars. Despite those words, the plans forged are invariably canceled or modified by the next president. There is no real line, so you have to conclude that there is currently no political will to finance such an extremely expensive plan.
To make matters worse, things don't really go smoothly with the hardware of Americans needed for such a journey. The giant SLS rocket under development (Space Launch System ) should rival the Saturn V moon rocket, but the project has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. The very first test flight has been pushed back for a few years, to next year at the earliest. On top of that rocket comes the Orion capsule that should eventually be able to take the astronauts deep into space. Its only (successful) test flight was in 2014.
Plans in the East
Also on the other side of the Pacific, in China, people look up and the arrows are aimed at the moon. For the time being, manned space travel takes place exclusively in orbit around the Earth, two Chinese robots with moon carts have now landed on the moon. If you can believe the Chinese, there are plans to go with people too, but we don't have to expect those missions in the next ten years.
India is also getting involved in the space battle. For communications and military purposes, they are fairly experienced in launching satellites. And they also showed this year that they have the military capability to out shooting into space, to the dismay of other space powers. Manned Indian spaceflight is planned, but it is still in its infancy. Unmanned exploration of the moon, according to the current Chinese model, is likely to happen sooner. Just this week it became clear that India had to stop launching its moon car Chandrayaan-2.
Around the moon
If there is one thing that is different from fifty years ago, it is that commercial parties are explicitly involved in making space plans. Plans to launch humans and to go to the moon. The most advanced seems to be SpaceX with frontman Elon Musk. In 2017, he announced that he had customers who would like to fly around the moon in a spaceship. In the end it turned out to be the wealthy Japanese businessman Yusaku Maezawa. In order to realize this as planned in 2023 or 2024, the rocket and capsule still have to be tested extensively, but it does not seem inconceivable that this will actually happen. It is not known how much Maezawa will pay for the ride.
And then there's Jeff Bezos. The richest man on Earth would put a billion dollars into his space company Blue Origin every year. Last May, he unveiled his own lunar lander. Well, a somewhat coarse-looking model of it in any case. But according to Bezos, a real version should softly crash on the moon around 2023 with several lunar carts on board. Perhaps Bezos is cleverly responding to NASA's moon plans and hopes that the space agency will do this together with his company.
Jeff Bezos unveils a model of a lunar lander that his company Blue Origin will develop in the coming years.
Leave people at home
If you put everything together, it seems quite busy on and around the moon. “Cautiously, a moon race is underway,” says Rob van den Berg, director of the space museum and ESA's Space Expo visitor center in Noordwijk. "The soft landing of the Chinese Chang'e 3 in 2013 was the first since that of the Russian Luna 24 in 1976. In addition, there are plenty of plans for (un)manned landing missions." And yet:for the time being, the contours of a new Apollo program with sufficient money are nowhere to be seen.
Featured by the editors
MedicineWhat are the microplastics doing in my sunscreen?!
AstronomySun, sea and science
BiologyExpedition to melting land
Are manned trips to the moon smart at all? “Some people in aerospace say that you can do much better with robots, in any case it is much cheaper,” says Van den Berg. “By the way, I don't think robots can do everything as well as humans, such as anticipating unexpected situations in an unfamiliar environment.” And then there's prestige, the main argument for Apollo. “If you send people with a flag, you can immediately 'claim' it. When it comes to emotional reasons like this, you better send someone to the moon again. Whichever way you look at it, that plays a major role in politics.”
There are even more motives to think of. In the Cold War era, what if the 400,000 people allegedly engaged in the Apollo program had put their energies into building weapons? And it is difficult to measure, but the moon landings probably inspired a lot of people and made them choose a technical or scientific profession.
Inflaming space race
Ultimately, it's obvious that NASA and companies like SpaceX will join forces to put humans back on the moon. “These types of companies are following in the wake of NASA for the money that can be made from them. That is good for the space organization because the companies can usually launch cheaper,” says Van den Berg. “It is true that those companies first shout very loudly and then have to work hard at the back to make it happen. We may need to adjust our expectations, but I think this will eventually happen.”
There probably won't be an American moon rocket off the ground until the United States is really threatened by other space superpowers. That could take quite a while with the steady progress of the other players in the field. That's why the space race just won't ignite like it did in the 60s.