Back to the landing sites?

[brotherofthemoon]

While there's no real reason to send astronauts to explore parts of the moon that have been already explored, I wonder what benefits there might be to returning to one of the original Apollo landing sites when we return to the Moon sometime around 2020. I'm thinking about Apollo 12, where the Surveyor probe was used as a target for a precision landing, and Pete Conrad and Al Bean retrieved parts of the probe so scientists back on Earth could examine the effects of 2 1/2 years of exposure on the lunar surface.

Would it make sense to land near, say, the Apollo 16 site, and return pieces of the descent stage, rover, scientific experiments, etc., so the effects of almost 50 years could be examined? Surely such information would be useful in designing future lunar colonies. And imagine the publicity coup when the astronauts photographed the site, showing all of the bootprints in the same locations they were in the original photos! That, or the HBs will just say that the bootprints were placed there by an automated boot-printing robot.

[scooter]

Any trip like that would be terrificly expensive, too much for just finding out the effect of 50 years exposure. Very interesting to be sure, but it just wouldn't be worth the cost.

It would be something to see the old hardware sitting there quietly after all these years. Maybe someday...

[Bob B.]

brotherofthemoon said:

That, or the HBs will just say that the bootprints were placed there by an automated boot-printing robot.

NASA will just use the old 1972 stage set when they fake the new missions.

[Jason]

The Apollo 11 landing site should probably be preserved as a historic site and not disturbed.
Future generations will be able to visit the Apollo museum and see the walled-off area with the descent stage of the lander and perfectly preserved footprints of the astronauts right where they left them.

[furi]

it would of reasonable scientific interest, to visit a previous site, and examine the effects of Hard vacuum and radiation, on material, making discrete measurements whilst preserving the site... there is enough free land for people to squabble over later, lets keep the few human heritage sites, almost inviolate.

While I believe we have advanced more than sufficiently to not only predict current expected changes but further aspects of the materials behaviour and interaction with surrounding Rocks/atmosphere... there is nothing more satisfying than a little physical proof (especially if it is in the affirmation of a proposal)

[PhantomWolf]

NASA will just use the old 1972 stage set when they fake the new missions.

You mean like they did for the Surveyor 3 and Apollo 12 missions.

Actually I think if anywhere was revisited that Hadley would be the place, there was so much more to do there that even the Astronauts at the time suggested that another mission should go back there and do more.

[Data Cable]

jason said:

Future generations will be able to visit the Apollo museum and see the walled-off area with the descent stage of the lander and perfectly preserved footprints of the astronauts right where they left them.

Better yet, suspend a clear plastic floor 6-12" above the ground over the entire area.