Product Design & Development
 Share
RSS Feed 

At Issue

We Landed On The Moon, Big Deal

 Permanent link

All of a sudden people care about NASA again, it’ll pass. David Mantey

by David Mantey, Editor, PD&D

I don’t remember where I was when we landed on the moon. This can be attributed to the fact that my mother was only 10 at the time and still years away from her public school lesson on baby-making.

I do, however, remember where I was when Fox aired one of the first conspiratorial specials on whether the moon landing was faked: Instead of sitting together as a family to watch this great accomplishment, which would motivate thousands of engineers around the nation and invigorate overwhelming nationalism, I watched "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?" the 2001 Fox TV documentary that featured inconsistencies in NASA's Apollo images and TV footage.  

I became more excited about the possibility of a hoax. Landing on the moon was one feat, but faking it and pulling it off? What a testament to the power of the PR machine.   

I didn’t grow up with NASA heroics. We didn’t have space shuttle toys or Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong action figures. I heard we landed on the moon, thought it was pretty interesting and then put down the issue of 3-2-1 Contact before I finished the article. I have become more interested in Buzz ever since he smoked Michael Moore wannabe, Bart Sibrel with a better jab than I’ll ever muster.

It’s not that landing on the moon or space exploration isn’t interesting, I just think most people don’t care – unless they have $200K to hitch a ride into space on Virgin Galactic, one of Branson’s latest ventures.

The 40th anniversary makes for good nostalgia-stoking, water-cooler fodder and time-filling segments on news outlets, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves. The 40th will not jump-start a newfound passion to reach the final frontier – J.J. Abrams did a better job with his Star Trek revamp.   

Our society is too Hollywood, too commercial, too individualistic. We want to buy a ticket to space or turn a blind eye to the opportunity if it’s out of our price range. Instead, we’ll watch a young space cowboy befriend a pointy-eared alien for $10 and imagine our role as a button-pushing extra — maybe a sickbay male nurse.  

Who’s to blame when the movie Armageddon fires people up more than NASA had in 30+ years? Who knows? Maybe we just need a more charismatic crew. Put an astronaut up on the podium at a press conference and get him to sign off with “Yippee-kai-yay.”  

The media is equally to blame. NASA’s failures simply drive more traffic. The shuttle launch is a success, whoo. But did you hear about the foam?

I wish I could hire the narrator who worked on the trailers for the old monster flicks. We’ll give it a spooky soundtrack and it’ll go viral on YouTube. Now that’s sensationalism.  

Will they make it? Did it damage the fuel tanks again? To drum up any interest in NASA, we need life-or-death implications – or a jazzy Aerosmith number and a pre-Bennifer Ben Affleck with a box of Animal Crackers. Yes, I know entirely too much about the movie, it’s inexcusable.  

From all of the coverage that I have read, I have learned one thing: In this economy, the majority would like cash to stay on this planet. That chunk of foam probably accounted for enough resources to build a new school in my hometown. We didn’t have media outlets scrutinizing the bottom line 40 years ago. Landing on the moon didn’t have a price tag; and we didn’t have analysts re-appropriating the funds to “worthier” causes.      

So we landed on the moon 40 years ago, big deal.

For the verbal lashing, post comments below, but I understand that many of you still prefer an abnormal, Jersey-like amount of cussing in your responses. To you, my email is always available, david.mantey@advantagemedia.com.


Pretty harsh for someone who works for Product Design and Development! While I agree there are huge costs for these R&D programs that some argue should be spent elsewhere, how many technologies do we use today that are a direct result of the space program of the 60s? Maybe everyone should take up acting so we could all have movie prop computers and a spiffy Dick Tracy video wrist phone... You may disagree, but I think there are a few people out there who believe it "was" a big deal.
Posted by: Yamaholic at 7/21/2009 2:49 PM


I’m pointing at the generational mindset. While I agree that landing on the moon and the space program contributed to an uptick in innovation, I think landing on the moon was more of the end than the beginning.
Posted by: djamesmanny at 7/21/2009 3:05 PM


Oh I so disagree, David! I realize you 'younger' folk live much more for the here and now, but we need to go back to the moon to develop our capabilities for surviving there, and then take those to Mars, which is going to look a heck of a lot more inviting when we overpopulate and overpollute the Earth we've chosen to stay on and need someplace else to go to ensure the survival of the human race!
Posted by: lynn manning at 7/21/2009 3:10 PM


David, I disagree with your mindset. You will never appreciate the technology unless you innovate. Put it bluntly, lead, follow or get out of the way. I thank god and the people who served in Normandy, Incheon, Iraq, etc. that I may freely talk about our freedom to explore and advance our knowledge.
Posted by: dale at 7/21/2009 4:13 PM


David, I read your article and I am really having a hard time not spewing forth foul language. I reminds me of a time when I had a verbal fight with a machinist I worked with who was stupid enough to believe the FOX hoax TV broadcast. I see the lunar missions as an incredible feat of engineering & teamwork. I see the impact in engineering and product development for decades after the missions ended. The crying shame is that kids like yourself and my childeren were/are not taught what takes to put a mission like this (I mean the nitty-gritty) so that it can be appretiated, as well as bring pride in our nation.

Yes, you did hit a sore nerve.
Posted by: HD at 7/21/2009 7:31 PM


Actually he is just trying to elicit a reaction from us in order to sell his magazine. He knows it was a big deal. So big in fact that product designers today can't design and build a machine to take a man to the moon and back like they did 40 years ago. Maybe he's a bit jealous of those that came before him or sadly he just doesn't care about great achievements, though not the sign of a good editor.
Posted by: cloew at 7/22/2009 1:33 PM


The "big deal" attitude is distressing, but common among people who weren't around during the Apollo program. They don't realize that we didn't just go down to the local Saturn dealer and get a Saturn 5 off the lot, stick a LM and a Command Module on top of it and blast off to the moon. If anyone wants a clue about why us old-timers make such a big deal about it, check out the human element. Read some of the interviews in the Oral History portal on the NASA website. Look up John Aaron in Wikipedia. Watch Tom Hanks' HBO production "From the Earth to the Moon". (My favorite episode is "Spider".) Apollo has become ancient history, but the fact that otherwise ordinary people did such a thing back then inspires me today.
Posted by: seki at 7/22/2009 1:35 PM


Clean out your desk and go home!

Not only did the Apollo program push mankind's reach to the nearest object in space, but it pioneered technologies and proved them to provide the foundation of technology we take for granted today. Finite element analysis, integrated circuitry, many materials, telemetry and formalized systems engineering methods are just a few of the countless advances that the space program/Apollo seeded, nurtured and demonstrated. You can argue about the cost/benefit, but it is anything but a so-what on any level.

Last but not least, the photographs of our blue marble in space, published in popular media because men (heroic men) were involved, forever changed the way thinking people regard the earth: as a small, finite very special place rather than an infinite environmment capable of absorbing any insult mankind can generate. Every man that journeyed to the moon experienced a profound change in personal perspective that impacted the balance of their lives, their writing and discourse.

Kennedy was profound and correct when he said that we should do this because it is hard... and we did it to prove to ourselves and the rest of humanity that we could do it. The doing of it brought great benefit to humanity and great credit and prestige to the engineering profession, something we seem to have far to little of today. Perhaps our prestige is low today because we aren't rising to great challenges and pushing out long-held frontiers and limits in a public arena.

It was truly a big deal, one of the biggest deals ever.
Posted by: Jack T at 7/22/2009 2:05 PM


Yes, it was a big deal.

But like it or not this article does represent a train of thought held by a number of people including, in all probability, a number of people who get to vote, (perhaps crucially), on future space spending. So, if you disagree, you'd better know your enemies and figure out how to deal with them.

And, in these fiscally challenging times, you'd better have a ready answer to David's heat shield or new school question.
Posted by: Pedal Power at 7/24/2009 11:51 PM


This article saddens me, mainly because there is truth in it. The US has not done a good job in preserving and advancing the legacy of our Apollo missions in terms of manned exploration of our solar system, and by failing to capture the importance of this mission has failed to inspire a generation of potential space-faring Americans. We are starting to see that the space industry must shift to private enterprise to push the envelope, and in that there is more than a few sparks of hope for a different future. I am also saddened by the fact that an Editor chose to fuel or be resigned to this malaise rather than find a way to help counteract it, especially for readers in the Product Design and Development industry; unless we want every industry to shift to China, Americans with a communication platform need to start to kick US companies and citizens in the pants to get off our entitled, instant gratfication butts and roll up their sleeves once again.

By the way, one need not shell out $200k for Virgin Galactic to get a taste of space; Zero Gravity offers weightless flights for less than $5,000 per trip and you get more weightless time than you will on Virgin Galactic while saving $195k. I've done it and it rocks!
Posted by: Fred K at 7/29/2009 3:39 PM


register or log in to comment on this blog!

At Issue

Quit Dragging Your Heels
Carrie Ellis, Editor, Chem.Info
Using Customer Ideas In Product Development
Mike Collins, Author, Saving American Manufacturing

Quick Links

Site Sponsors


Most Viewed

Videos & Webcasts

Save Your Fingers, Spare Your Body 3/11/2010
PSENopt safety light curtains and light barriers can be used for finger, hand and body protection in industrial applications. The muting function on the PSENopt total or partial is integrated directly, as is monitoring of the muting lamps.   Continue
Heineken Beer Robot 3/10/2010
The Heineken Bot was developed at the Autonomous Systems Lab in the Product Design and Engineering department of Middlesex University.   Continue
Energy Startup When Money Is Tight 3/10/2010
Company launches revolutionary light powered by both the sun and the wind. The only way to launch a start-up company with a lot of R&D was to have everyone (33 partners) throw a little bit into the hat.   Continue