I didn't see the original postings, but a whole infrastructure needs to be
built that can handle going to the moon. Currently, I believe the heaviest
booster is the Titan with strap-on booster which could make a payload trip;
however, it is still insufficient to do a job the size of continuly going to
the moon.

It's is technically possible, but look at what is needs: very-heavy
boosters, that are more efficient and less costly to lauch and service, that
are reusable. Something capable of at a minimum of acheiving high earth
orbit to a space station for transfer to the Moon, or just being able to go
straight there with payload and manned space ships, not shuttle, no need for
aerodynamics and the weight. Cargos that aren't time constrained may
benefit by use of ion and solar propulsion systems.

Non-the-less, going to the Moon, which I favor as a staging point for Mars,
involves a whole new industry's and it's infrastructure, and would be the
testing grounds for mission beyond.

davon96720

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
oups.com...
I was arguing with a friend that the lunar landing required very little
new science but merely extrapolations of existing technology. This
leads to: If it had been necessary, and cost was no object, what would
be the earliest time that a lunar landing would have been possible. I
argue that the Germans could have done it with their 1940s technology.

"It depends".

You can look at the Saturn V as a scale-up of the V-2. Just a much bigger
rocket.

That is of course an extremely simplified look at things. Getting the F-1
engines to burn stablely was itself a large task.

Then of course you have things like the IU and on-board computation. Even
with the advances there, much of the navigation was helped out by the
ground.

And of course things like fuel cells. While the science had been around
for
I think about a century, making it work effectively was part of the
problem.

Ultimately I think it comes down to, "how much brute force and money are
you
willing to throw at the problem?"