The thread for space cadets!

Winner said:
plus Russia doesn't have the money to be a real competitor any more.
Click to expand...

This is the most important point, I feel. They can be pretty safely written off as a real threat.

A shame, as they certainly pulled their weight in the sciences back in the day, but alas. ._.
 
Crezth said:
This is the most important point, I feel. They can be pretty safely written off as a real threat.

A shame, as they certainly pulled their weight in the sciences back in the day, but alas. ._.
Click to expand...

Yeah, all their best Aero Engineers work for us now.
 
Here's a random picture of the anticipated Chinese Space Station.
658px-Chinese_large_orbital_station.png

Has anyone heard anything about their Taikonauts on the Moon plan? It seemed like the Chinese and GW Bush were one-upping each other for a while, each side saying they were going to get there before the other. Then when Obama cancelled the moonshot, it seems the Chinese forgot they ever said they were going.
 
The Chinese still have an active unmanned moon program (at least, last time I checked, about a year ago), and they are also still sending people into orbit. I believe they are still planning on combining those two things.
 
Anything specific?

At the time Bush said Moon in 2020, they said Moon in 2019. Then I think Bush said Moon in 2017, and so on. I lost track, but the whole thing suddenly fell off the radar when the US stopped trying to rhetorically one-upping the Chinese and admitted we weren't going to the Moon at all.
 
dutchfire said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Lunar_Exploration_Program#Program_structure

Plan seems to be:

Phase 1: Orbit the moon. Completed
Phase 2: Land on the moon. Planned for 2013
Phase 3: Land on the moon and manege to send something back. Planned for 2017
Phase 4: Humans!
Click to expand...

The important thing to add here is that human landing on the Moon isn't what China has officially committed itself to, not yet anyway. The media hype about an imminent Chinese human lunar landing is based mostly on US conjecture and misinterpretation of what the Chinese officials have said.

I don't think they have any concrete plans to land humans on the Moon by 2020. They are probably going to focus on the space station first and decide based on the results of that programme.

Also, they would have to do it with much smaller launchers than the US Saturn-V (~120 tonnes to LEO) - the most powerful Chinese rocket will be LM-5 with max. payload to LEO of about 25 tonnes. This means every Chinese venture to the lunar surface would require 4-6 LM-5s, depending on what they wanted to do there.

They could of course invest into a bigger rocket, but there is no indication yet that's what they are doing. There has only been an announcement that they're "studying" the possibility of developing a Saturn-V-class rocket. But, judging from how long it took them to develop LM-5 (and it is still yet to fly, probably in 2014), they won't make it by 2020.

I dislike how certain people in the US use the "threat" of a Chinese landing to whip the politicians into giving NASA more money and greater mandate. Lying about what China is doing won't help the US programme, on the contrary.
 
Winner said:
I dislike how certain people in the US use the "threat" of a Chinese landing to whip the politicians into giving NASA more money and greater mandate. Lying about what China is doing won't help the US programme, on the contrary.
Click to expand...

Huh? This is why we did it the first time though.
 
hobbsyoyo said:
We used the threat of a Soviet landing to whip up political support to get there first. As well as the general threat of Soviet advance in space that left us behind.
Click to expand...

Not really. Before Kennedy's proclamation, there was never any threat that the Soviets might land on the Moon and he knew it. The Soviet programme started only after the US one had kicked off. The US basically wanted to show the world that is was the leader in technology, organization, economy, and spirit, and it chose to demonstrate it in space.

Nowadays, using the "red threat" that simply isn't there and everybody knows it won't work. Lying about it is a sure way of losing credibility, same as the US in general lost credibility as the world's "policeman" after the WMD fiasco in Iraq.

I am saying that because I've heard arguments like "we need to go back to the Moon, because the Chinese are going to land there soon", which are based on false information.
 
Winner said:
Not really. Before Kennedy's proclamation, there was never any threat that the Soviets might land on the Moon and he knew it. The Soviet programme started only after the US one had kicked off. The US basically wanted to show the world that is was the leader in technology, organization, economy, and spirit, and it chose to demonstrate it in space.
Click to expand...
The public didn't know the Soviets didn't have a Moonshot program, and I doubt the Politicians cared if they knew it. If it was a lie, it surely worked. In any case, I don't think we 'knew' they didn't have a lunar program for sure. We weren't even sure they had one when they did, hell, Sputnik surprised us.

And I also said:
As well as the general threat of Soviet advance in space that left us behind
Click to expand...
which is true.

Nowadays, using the "red threat" that simply isn't there and everybody knows it won't work. Lying about it is a sure way of losing credibility, same as the US in general lost credibility as the world's "policeman" after the WMD fiasco in Iraq.
Click to expand...
That is not at all a fair comparison and you know it. No one really cares if we lie to ourselves about China beating us there. Besides, if we do this, that will spur the Chinese to actually try for it like the Soviets.


I am saying that because I've heard arguments like "we need to go back to the Moon, because the Chinese are going to land there soon", which are based on false information.
Click to expand...
And if this leads us to take our Space Program seriously again, how is this bad?

And I also think the whole line of argument that we are lying to ourselves that they are going to beat us is a bit premature. Most Americans don't know anything about their space program nor do they care.
 
Don't mean to be pessimistic tonight, but....

We are pretty much our own worst enemies.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-humans-may-biggest-hurdle-interstellar-travel-115958065.html
The biggest challenge in mounting a space mission to another star may not be technology, but people, experts say.

Scientists, engineers, philosophers, psychologists and leaders in many other fields gathered in Houston last week for the 100 Year Starship Symposium, a meeting to discuss launching an interstellar voyage within 100 years.

"It seems like it would be so hard, and the biggest obstacle is ourselves. Once we get out of our way, once we commit to this, then it's a done deal," said former "Star Trek: The Next Generation" actor LeVar Burton, who is serving on the advisory committee of the 100 Year Starship project.
Click to expand...

Alien Super-Earths may not be able to bear life after all.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-super-earth-alien-worlds-may-unlikely-support-223203170.html
So-called "super-Earth" alien worlds may bear little resemblance to our own home planet and thus could be less likely to support life than previously believed, a new study suggests.

Super-Earths — alien planets bigger than Earth, but containing less than 10 times its mass — may be undifferentiated hunks of rock, possessing neither a mantle nor a core, researchers found. Super-Earths may also lack magnetic fields, which help protect life on our planet by shielding it from harmful radiation.
Click to expand...

Yes, Yahoo news. stfu. :p
 
hobbsyoyo said:
That is not at all a fair comparison and you know it. No one really cares if we lie to ourselves about China beating us there. Besides, if we do this, that will spur the Chinese to actually try for it like the Soviets.
Click to expand...

I am demonstrating a principle. If you base a programme on a lie ("ZOMG, we have to beat the Chinese who are gonna land ASAP!") and then the truth (inevitably) surfaces since we live in the age of investigative journalism and fierce political competition (and China is not so stupid to be dragged into a space race it cannot win), then the whole programme collapses like a house of cards with HUGE fallout for the credibility of the whole space community. Just as now when the US (rightly) says that Iran is building a nuclear weapon, that claim is being taken with a huge amount of suspicion abroad and even in the US itself. That's because some people lied about a similar thing not that long ago.

I want a space programme build on a realistic base, sustainability, and achievable goals. I don't want to go to the Moon to beat China, I want to go there to establish science and fuel processing bases that will help us later. Hell, I'd be happy even if the first base there was a kind of Disney land for the filthy rich. Just please, let it be sustainable and not another flags and footprints kind of nonsense (that was NOT a comment disparaging Apollo, BTW!).

And if this leads us to take our Space Program seriously again, how is this bad?
Click to expand...

See above.

And I also think the whole line of argument that we are lying to ourselves that they are going to beat us is a bit premature. Most Americans don't know anything about their space program nor do they care.
Click to expand...

Then make them. People have to understand that the space programme isn't just overgrown boys playing in the orbit. They should be reminded of the many benefits it brings to them, the taxpayers. New technologies, education, innovation that creates jobs and keeps the US ahead of countries that don't innovate, and prestige that makes them feel better about being Americans (Gods know that's needed these days).

Just don't lie to people or whip them into action by drumming non-existent threats and then expect them to take you seriously in the future.

PlutonianEmpire said:
Don't mean to be pessimistic tonight, but....

We are pretty much our own worst enemies.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-humans-may-biggest-hurdle-interstellar-travel-115958065.html
Click to expand...

Well, duh. But since we can't do it without the 'we' part, I fail to see what makes this 'discovery' so revolutionary ;)

Alien Super-Earths may not be able to bear life after all.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-super-earth-alien-worlds-may-unlikely-support-223203170.html
Click to expand...

So what?

1) Who would like to live there anyway? I mean, I want to live in a world with less gravity, not more. 0.7g would suit me quite well.
2) It's the media's fault as usual - calling this Neptune-sized planets superearths creates unrealistic expectations. They should have been called supervenuses to give people a better idea of how habitable most of them are :lol:
3) The fact that they can't support Earth-like life doesn't mean they can't support some other forms of life. Let's not be narrow-minded, please.
4) There is no reason to believe superterrestrial planets are more common than more Earth or even Mars-sized planets. Again we have a huge selection bias here because our ways of finding planets favour big ones orbiting close to their parent stars. As we get better at finding and perhaps directly imaging smaller objects, we'll get a better idea of what the prevalence of truly Earth-like planets is.
5) Interstellar travel is ceeeeeentuuuuuuriiiiieeeeesss away. Ergo, I don't care much, I know I won't live long to see it. I am more focused on making some decent headway in this Solar System.
 
Winner said:
I am demonstrating a principle. If you base a programme on a lie ("ZOMG, we have to beat the Chinese who are gonna land ASAP!") and then the truth (inevitably) surfaces since we live in the age of investigative journalism and fierce political competition (and China is not so stupid to be dragged into a space race it cannot win), then the whole programme collapses like a house of cards with HUGE fallout for the credibility of the whole space community. Just as now when the US (rightly) says that Iran is building a nuclear weapon, that claim is being taken with a huge amount of suspicion abroad and even in the US itself. That's because some people lied about a similar thing not that long ago.
Click to expand...
WMD/Iran is on an entirely different plane than lying about a Chinese moon program. I really don't care for this analogy as it puts space exploration (and the motivations for it) in the same light as Iraq II. The two really aren't comparable.

Having said that, I don't disagree that making things up to force a space race could definately hurt in the long run.

I want a space programme build on a realistic base, sustainability, and achievable goals. I don't want to go to the Moon to beat China, I want to go there to establish science and fuel processing bases that will help us later. Hell, I'd be happy even if the first base there was a kind of Disney land for the filthy rich. Just please, let it be sustainable and not another flags and footprints kind of nonsense (that was NOT a comment disparaging Apollo, BTW!).
Click to expand...
I didn't read that as disparaging Apollo, I know exactly what you mean. I don't really disagree that making this a international race is probably a bad thing in the long run, especially if there is lying about the status of said 'race'.

I just want people to get excited about space first and foremost, and care less about how it's done. I also think it's kind of inevitable that this will happen. They are already talking about an 'asian space race'; and no matter how you cut it, countries are going to compete just to compete. Chances are, they won't have to make up stuff about the progress of the Chinese, Indian, Korean or Japanese space programs. They are all making progress, and people are going to start comparing our programs soon enough - you can't stop people from talking. Plus, this is USA#1, we make a competition out of everything.

But I do agree with you that unless the fundamentals are shifted to profit making (asteroid mining, Lunar DisneyLand), the will to go do big things in space and stay there will evaporate. So I agree that political motivations could hurt in the long run, I just hope they will spark longer-term aspirations.

I would like to point out that although the Apollo program and that whole race was short lived, it's not like it really dead-ended the whole space exploration effort. It was a major achievement, and neither side stopped exploring after the fact. They just toned down the emphasis (and budget allocations) after it was 'won'.


Then make them. People have to understand that the space programme isn't just overgrown boys playing in the orbit. They should be reminded of the many benefits it brings to them, the taxpayers. New technologies, education, innovation that creates jobs and keeps the US ahead of countries that don't innovate, and prestige that makes them feel better about being Americans (Gods know that's needed these days).
Click to expand...
Agreed. We are doing a crappy job of this right now in the US. NASA is a source of prestige, but it could be so much more.

Just don't lie to people or whip them into action by drumming non-existent threats and then expect them to take you seriously in the future.
Click to expand...
Dude, you really underestimate our capacity to swallow a lie hook, line and sinker.:lol: I agree, the whole thing needs to be put on a more solid footing. I just think competition is inevitable, and it could kick start our efforts to go out and do things. Given Obama's emphasis on the commercialization of space, I believe things will play out the way he intends them too. Companies will go out and make money in space, and find better and better ways to do so. NASA will push the boundaries and do the bigger things that aren't profitable yet. But right now, the whole thing is on the slow track and needs a good shove.

But, I am a hopeless optimist.


PlutonianEmpire said:
Don't mean to be pessimistic tonight, but....

We are pretty much our own worst enemies.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-humans-may-biggest-hurdle-interstellar-travel-115958065.html


Alien Super-Earths may not be able to bear life after all.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-super-earth-alien-worlds-may-unlikely-support-223203170.html


Yes, Yahoo news. stfu. :p
Click to expand...

I wouldn't get to disheartend about the extrasolar planets. The scientists are trying to make an implausible scenario work (life on unfit planets) with incomplete theories and data. Hell, we can't even directly see or take measurements of most aspects of these planets.

The news will get better as they perfect their tools.

On the push into outerspace and other solar systems - I'm actually optimistic it won't take centuries. A century, maybe; but our technology and economic prowess on a planetary scale are leaping forward faster and faster. I'm not understating the scale of the problem, I'm just emphasizing our growing ability to meet the challenge.
 
I don't know if I can make it through college to be an Aerospace Engineer. It's my life's work and it's all I want to do, but I absolutely am burnt out of college. I'm five years in without a bachelors, and I'm failing hard - even when I put in 150% effort.

I'm very jealous of Crezth right now and depressed. I don't know what to do, I'm a fraking failure.
 
Great article on the Russian space program on MSNBC today (also an article on a SpaceX engine test - space is hot news today:))
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49217472/ns/technology_and_science-space/
Selected excerpts:

...
A veteran Russian cosmonaut’s cynical and bitter words about the dire state of the Russian space industry seemed to spell his own career’s abrupt end after his return to Earth from the International Space Station. But within a week, his unprecedented public criticism was echoed and elaborated on by Russia's top space officials.
...
At the traditional Russian post-landing press conference on Sept. 21, cosmonaut Gennady Padalka complained about the "spartan" conditions aboard the Russian side of the station, especially as compared with the American side. The conditions were cold, noisy, overstuffed with equipment, and cramped — each Russian had about one-seventh the living space that the American astronauts had. "All of this gives serious inconvenience in the operation of the Russian segment," he said.
...
The equipment, he continued, was reliable and safe but was decades out of date. "Nothing has been done in the 20 years since the foundation of the new Russia," he complained. The Russian space technology is technologically bankrupt and "morally exhausted." It was, he told reporters, "frozen in the last century."

He contrasted those conditions with the spaciousness and modernity of the American modules, and praised the advanced technology he saw there: the robotics experiment ("As always, still under study in Russia") and SpaceX's commercial spacecraft docking, for example.
...
He also told the students that the current space workforce was too old — and too large. "The average age of a worker is 43.9 years," he said, "and only 20% are under 35." The age of scientific workers is even higher, he continued: The average age of Ph.D.'s, for example, is 59.2 years.
...
Click to expand...
I had no idea Russias contributions to the ISS were cramped and crappy. I kind of thought they would be on par with everyone elses or even better given their extensive experience with space stations.

Also, a guy who is in charge of reforming the Russian space program says Russia needs a goal to work towards and mentions a lunar base as a possible goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Plains-Cow
  • Locked
Off-Topic
Replies
4
Views
1K
lymond
lymond
T
A 5th Age: High Frontier O'Neill Style Space Colonization
Replies
4
Views
543
tman2000
T
T
The Argentina Thread
Replies
7
Views
933
1SDANi
1SDANi
Blake00
The Great Library Reborn - Civ3 Scenario/Mod Preservation Project Log
Replies
5
Views
809
Blake00
Blake00
T
Religious Victory Thread
Replies
9
Views
1K
Si No Hay Paz
Si No Hay Paz
Back
Top Bottom