Not two men. Not two landings. Not a permanent presence. Mission accomplished.
This is the problem with government programs. The government should just get out of the way and let private enterprise take over. It has to happen sooner or later, why not now?
How about the Fed gov't withdrawing from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty and taking claims for private property rights on the moon?
Good luck for NASA!
I really hope you succeed.
Ilan Ramon was the first Israeli astronaut. He was a great skilled fighter pilot who "was born with the stick in his hands". Also Ilan was one of the 8 pilots who bombed the Iraqi Osiraq nuclear reactor in June 7, 1981.
The first Israeli astronaut, Ilan Ramon, died in his first flight when the Columbia Space Shuttle STS-107 exploded together with other 7 brave American souls.
I really hope that the 4th (I hope you all know about China's first astronaut lol) country to send a human into space by its own space program will be Israel. We have the brain, skills, the technology, and we only need to arange the money and build a NOT expensive space vehicle and a good saving space progrem. IAF and ISA (Israeli Space Agency) sure know how to operate in 200% succeess with tight budgets (See: Israeli spy satellites and Israel's military technology).
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 we have ignition and liftoff of the first Israeli space-craft into space!
Not true. The technology was just fine -- and in some areas superior to what we deal with today. Not because we can't do it the same or better now, but because they took the time to really to the job right.
Just one example: the user interface I used when I sat at one of the old green consoles in Mission Control is still by far the best I've ever used. It was mechanical and became impossible to maintain after a while, but the human factors things -- ergonomics, data presentation, processing flow, etc. -- are far superior to anything I've seen on any system I've used since.
As for the Saturn V, it was and is a splendid technological achievement. The reason it's not in around today is simple: there was (and is) no market for a booster that could heft that much mass into orbit at a single shot.
Nevertheless, there is a lot of technical heritage in use from Apollo.
However, it was a political, and not a technical decision that led to the end of Apollo. Just like it will be a political decision to go back to the moon.
And that brings us to the hardest question of all: "Why are we doing this?" There has to be a solid, really concrete answer to that question.
The usual old chestnut about "it's human nature to explore" sounds plausible to some, but it doesn't stand up for long (if it did, there'd have been no political decision to kill Apollo....)
Ahhh, we went several times even took a little car and drove it about and each time TWO men walked on the moon at the same time.
Better brush up on your history a bit.