As America pulls out from space, China prepares to go to the Moon

[Winner]

It was inevitable:

US lunar pull-out leaves China shooting for moon

by Staff Writers
Beijing (AFP) Feb 21, 2010

China aims to land its first astronauts on the moon within a decade at the dawn of a new era of manned space exploration -- a race it now leads thanks to the US decision to drop its lunar programme.

US President Barack Obama earlier this month said he planned to drop the costly Constellation space programme, a budget move that would kill off future moon exploration if it is approved by Congress.

In contrast, China has a fast-growing human spaceflight project that has notched one success after another, including a spacewalk by astronauts in 2008, with plans for a manned lunar mission by around 2020.

The turnaround is viewed as yet another example of the Asian power's rising profile and technical prowess.

"Overall, China is behind the US in technology and in actual presence in space -- the US operates dozens of satellites, the Chinese only a few," said James Lewis, of the US-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies.

"The real concern is the trend: China's capacities are increasing while the US, despite spending billions of dollars, appears to be stuck in a rut."

The Americans have achieved the only manned lunar missions, making six trips from 1969 to 1972.

But China has been gaining in the space race after launching a manned programme in 1992, and sending its first astronaut into space in 2003.

Only Russia and the United States had previously put a man into space independently.

China aims to launch an unmanned rover on the moon's surface by 2012 ahead of the manned lunar mission a decade from now.

"It is not a very expensive space programme but it is relatively well worked out in terms of autonomy, efficiency and independence," said Isabelle Sourbes-Verger, a France-based specialist on the Chinese space programme.

Some experts have questioned Beijing's timeframe for landing a man on the moon, but Peter Cugley, a China specialist at the non-profit research centre CNA in the United States, says the actual timing is not that relevant.

"Even if a PRC (Chinese) manned lunar landing doesn't happen in the timeframe initially established, the technical expertise gained and boost in national prestige is what the Chinese Communist Party is most interested in," he said.

China sees its space programme as a symbol of its global stature, growing technical expertise, and the Communist Party's success in turning around the fortunes of the formerly poverty-stricken nation.

Experts see its push for the moon, while Washington backs off, as further confirmation of its emergence as a superpower.

"I see it as a confirmation of America's decline," said Lewis.

"Perhaps this decline is temporary, the product of many errors under (former US president George W.) Bush."

China also has pursued its space ambitions efficiently. The Constellation programme had already cost 10 billion dollars, or nearly 10 times more than the entire Chinese space programme, according to official data.

Fu Song, the vice dean of the School of Aerospace at Tsinghua University in Beijing, said Obama's decision was unlikely to spur China to ramp up its space programme, saying its development would remain on a steady course.

But Beijing has other significant Asian competitors to reckon with as it vies to become the second nation to put a man on the moon.

India landed a lunar probe in 2008, and a top official said last month it was targeting a manned space mission in 2016. Japan, meanwhile, launched its first lunar satellite in June last year.

Both developments marked dramatic steps forward for both countries.

But regardless of who gets to the moon next, the sight of Chinese astronauts treading the lunar surface would be a watershed moment for the country, Sourbes-Verger said.

Source

See also: Rocket To Go To Moon Under Design

Go China. Someone needs to show those bloody democratic politicians that there is a price to pay for cuts in space exploration budgets

It strikes me that the name the Chinese gave to their rockets - Long March (after the commie ordeal in 1930s) - is fitting. Chinese don't do things in the American way, with pomp and spotlights. They don't get excited, do great things, and then stop just because the public lost interest or the politicians needed the money elsewhere. Their progress in space is a like a tsunami, a low-profile, but relentless wave.

They're still far behind other space powers. If the US, Europe and even Russia committed enough money to the project, they could return to the Moon in less than a decade. But they won't because they're crippled by budget cuts, political bickering and a lack of long-term vision for space exploration. That's why China will win. I almost hope it does, because the rest of the world needs a wake-up call.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Yeah man. The West needs to realize that it can't let those yellow bastards be their equal.

 

[Cutlass]

America hasn't pulled out of space. One useless project was canceled for being useless and too expensive.

 

[Tee Kay]

Useless in what sense? There's more to space exploration than earth's orbit...

 

[Cutlass]

Which is why most of NASA's budget goes to deep space probes and astronomy. There isn't anything of significance to be learned on a manned mission to the moon at this point. And the cost of it makes no sense. It was only planned for political reasons, not scientific ones.

 

[TheLastOne36]

First man on Mars will be Chinese.

 

[Cutlass]

And if so, I bet that man does not get back to Earth alive

 

[Tee Kay]

There isn't anything of significance to be learned on a manned mission to the moon at this point.

I don't know, maybe actually learn to organize and coordinate long missions and live in space?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Yeah man. The West needs to realize that it can't let those yellow bastards be their equal.

Not yellow bastards. Autocratic bastards.
And yes I approve the effort of trying to keep down Autocratic bastards.

 

[Cutlass]

That can be simulated on Earth for a fraction of the price.

The question is, what do we learn for what we pay? The moon missions in the past were primarily about pushing the Soviets and winning a propaganda war. As such, they had an emergency military budget: Spend whatever it takes. That's no longer true. So what is to be gained that cannot be gained by unmanned probes? The fact is, we don't know how to do a mission that can last a year in space without direct support from earth. The sealed habitats have been failures. So if we can't do those on Earth, we cannot do them on the moon. So it's just there and back again, and bring a bag of rocks. Robots can do that for a fraction of the cost. The rest should wait until we master the basics better. In the meantime, basic research simply delivers more bang for the buck.

 

[Grimz101]

The PRC are so smart, I mean spending their money on a trip to a giant rock in space instead of on the millions in poverty & maybe reducing their carbon emissions, you know green technology to stop the biggest polluter in the world turning it's rivers toxic.

 

[Lillefix]

Let's see here:

Nasa budget: $17.6 billion
United States armed forces budget: $664 billion

I could come with a sarcstic comment now, but I won't.

 

[Tekee]

has there ever been a black woman in space? We need more diversity in the space travel game.

 

[Grimz101]

Let's see here:

Nasa budget: $17.6 billion
United States armed forces budget: $664 billion

I could come with a sarcstic comment now, but I won't.

The army actually does something productive.
The point of sending someone to the moon in this day and age, apart from "We're better then you" is?

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

The army actually does something productive.
The point of sending someone to the moon in this day and age, apart from "We're better then you" is?

Yup, killing non-Americans is productive. It shows that USA #1.

 

[bhsup]

Just a nitpick, but they aren't leading YET. *scans moon for their flag...nope...not there yet*

 

[Yared]

has there ever been a black woman in space? We need more diversity in the space travel game.

I think that they have been to space.

-

BTW http://www.nasa.gov/missions/current/index.html

 

[Winner]

America hasn't pulled out of space. One useless project was canceled for being useless and too expensive.

Constellation was perhaps a bit old-fashioned and needed to be adjusted. But cancelling it altogether (bye bye you 10 already-spent billions of dollars) citing budgetary restrictions is a pathetic excuse and nothing more. NASA budget is nothing, seriously nothing compared to the money you guys waste in your military adventures and other things. Obama claims he actually gave NASA a raise. That's true, but he fails to mention that even with this little raise, it's funding counted as a fraction of the US GDP is still getting smaller. At the same time, the military again got a large boost. Yeehaa. Of course you will also have to pay more money when you terminate the Constellation-related programmes, that's $ 3-5 billion more going down the drain.

You could have just as well taken all this money and put it on a pile under your last Space Shuttle when it blasts off. It would be a nice visualization of your "efficiency".

This at the time when the Chinese are rapidly increasing the amount of money they invest in their space programme. So, don't be surprised when you find yourselves relegated to a second or even third place in space in the next 20 years.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Is there any reason to go to the moon except prestige ? I see how it was important during the cold war because it showed off one's ability to build ICBMs but it's not such a big deal any more.
I don't see much point in space exploration until we have other necessary technologies to turn into a tangible advantage like terraforming mars or a theoretically sound method of FTL travel.

 

[Grimz101]

Personally I can find no real advantage on spending billions on space travel. If America ends up in 2nd/3rd place the question is so what?

Yup, killing non-Americans is productive. It shows that USA #1.

It helps keep unemployment down . Not to mention all the R&D on Military spending that has been transfered to the Civilian market.
And before someone comes in and points all the R&D NASA has done and how some of it has been transfered to the real world (Look at Formula 1 racing). Wouldn't the money be more effective in funding R&D in Universities & maybe fusion power for instance?