@mikearpowell Yup, I never had "the right stuff". But this is a world of ever falling standards so who knows. 😂

@mikearpowell Alan Shepard.. that's what spawned my original question.

@skanman If I'd piloted the Apollo 10 LM, I'd have landed the thing. Do you know whether Apollo 10 could have been landed by a mutinous crew?

@mikearpowell yes it could have due to redundancy protocols

@skanman Wow! Forever famous they would have returned to courts marshall though.

@mikearpowell I'm sure there were scenarios that would have been justifiable. If you memorize the protocols, you also remember what they forgot to write.

@LouisIngenthron that must have been pretty awkward wearing the oxygen tanks with that little gravity. Even with less weight the imbalance is the same.

@skanman Yep. Plus it seems like a lot of times, they were just scared of over-correcting. Last thing they needed was to be stuck like a turtle on its back on the moon.

@LouisIngenthron I think a trip back to the moon while maybe not that necessary, with all the new materials and technology for astronauts available, their ability to learn more, and do more is greatly expanded. On the flip side of the argument, sending robots expands that even further, at far less risk and cost. I think the new moon mission is just for bragging rights / fun.

@skanman Disagree. The fact that it's easier to send a machine is exactly why we shouldn't do that. The higher requirements for sending humans induces us to push our boundaries in ways that robots wouldn't.
Exploring new frontiers drives new innovation and technologies second only to war. And the former is obviously far more preferable.

@LouisIngenthron That's an excellent perspective! I forgot about all the advancements we've made from humanoid space travel. Very well written toot as well. 😀