Sign in to follow this  
xenomorph555

Who is the #2 space power-poll

#2 Power  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. #2 Power

    • Russia
      17
    • China
      4
    • ESA
      14


Recommended Posts

Now I won't start an argument about who is #1 when it comes to space because US is obvious winner despite many flaws with it's program.

However a much more productive argument is who is the #2 space power, the 3 contenders are Russia, China and ESA.

Here's my personal crackdown on the individual nations:

Russia:They are very good in the sat market and simple LEO human transport, their rocket tech is decent but old and they are quite bad at developing new stuff, also growing reliability problem. Same thing with manned program, it's been a disaster developing the new ship and station componants (nauka for example), unsure if OPSEK will become a reality. As for deep space exploration, quite simply they suck bad, not much more to say. To summarize I think the Russians have degraded quite bit and one main problem I believe is because they can't decide what they want to be, a NASA racer, a LEO contractor, their own thing, etc.I could actually go on for a while but I think it's best to save for a dedicated Russia thread.

China: Well not much to say apart from great all round, good sat market, good rocket tech, good manned program, good deep space, etc. Everything we see today is only a precursor when it comes to Chinese, they will only improve in all areas, soon they will have their own personal space lab, the worlds best rocket (lm-5, until FH), advanced robotic missions to moon and mars (chang'e 5, yinghuo 2?). Probably got this far with slow logical tortoise development doing "their own thing" and not racing.

ESA: Good in everything except manned, but have gone into a very slow development curve. Not degrading just lagging.

Personally I would say that China has leapfrogged past everyone into 2nd place although I wouldn't exactly call them NASA's main competitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly The United States of America is #2... but it isn't a choice?

Soviet Union/Russia is arguably #1 due to the following reasons:

First Satellite to Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First Animal in Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First Human in Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First human mission to last a full day: Soviet Union/Russia

First Woman in Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First Satellite to fly by the Moon: Soviet Union/Russia

First Satellite to impact the Moon: Soviet Union/Russia

First Soft landing on the Moon: Soviet Union/Russia

Longest Space Flight for one Human: Soviet Union/Russia

Human with the most Space flight time: Soviet Union/Russia

Top 23 humans with the most Space flight time: Soviet Union/Russia

Country with the most Manned Space flight hours: Soviet Union/Russia

Country currently providing manned space flight to the United States: Soviet Union/Russia

Edited by JedTech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly The United States of America is #2... but it isn't a choice?

Soviet Union/Russia is arguably #1 due to the following reasons:

First Satellite to Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First Animal in Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First Human in Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First human mission to last a full day: Soviet Union/Russia

First Woman in Space: Soviet Union/Russia

First Satellite to fly by the Moon: Soviet Union/Russia

First Satellite to impact the Moon: Soviet Union/Russia

First Soft landing on the Moon: Soviet Union/Russia

Longest Space Flight for one Human: Soviet Union/Russia

Human with the most Space flight time: Soviet Union/Russia

Top 23 humans with the most Space flight time: Soviet Union/Russia

Country with the most Manned Space flight hours: Soviet Union/Russia

Country currently providing manned space flight to the United States: Soviet Union/Russia

Yeah the US should probably be an option, since we can't space right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a loaded question. How do you rate space programs? Achievements? Firsts? Mosts? Leasts? Its not a very objective question. You certainly started well by looking at all the programs' strengths and weaknesses, but they're not really comparable after that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's how I'd rank it.

Russia

US

ESA

China

Japan

India

Canada

Israel

Iran

Poland

Me

North Korea.

There's really no way to say my list is wrong unless there's some more details on what we're ranking them by.

Edited by ZedNova

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would put China ahead of the US but behind Russia then ESA and JAXA and then India. In terms of history it's hard to ignore the US and Russia. China comes in second IMHO because of manned launch capability and having rovers on the moon. The US and China are both developing heavy lift rockets though so it's a close call. ESA comes in fourth because of Ariane rockets and the probes they currently have out of Earth orbit. 5th is Japan because they have some comet probes. Something we really should know more about. India comes in 6th due to its recent Mars mission. Everything past this has no launch capabilities as far as I know (Except DPRK). DPRK comes in at 7th because of the satellite they launched not that long ago on their own. They kind of are put down by others but they seem to be moving forward although behind. The rest is just Cut and paste from the list above on the end of this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only advantage Roscosmos has is their Soyuz, they can send people to the ISS but not anything beyond that.That's where there advantage ends.

NASA doesn't have the ready-to-use system to get people in orbit but it actually has an active solar system science program.

CNSA can send people to space and has an active probe on the moon.

ESA, ISRO and JAXA both have an active solar system science program.

So if you think of "space power" to be able to send people in to space then the list would be like this:

1 Roscosmos

2 CNSA

3 NASA

If you think exploration is the real meaning of "space power" then the list would look like this:

1 NASA

2 ESA

3 JAXA and ISRO

4 Roscosmos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i generally dont like these kinds of threads because its wide open for debate. the soviets had us beat early on but messed up the end game with their n1 and left it wide open for apollo. we have been able to gather much data about the solar system and the universe with our robotic missions. but we have utterly failed at manned flight by using roscosmos as a taxi service. all space agencies have had their successes and failures and who is best, second best, etc is very subjective. when it comes right down to it the space race was about proving our abilitys to nuke our enemies, which both the usa and russia pulled off. the real winner is everyone because mad pretty much ensured we didnt have a nuclear war and let us use our space tech for more productive purposes.

Here's how I'd rank it.

...

Poland

Me

North Korea.

...

you win one internet.

Edited by Nuke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember right, India has an active probe around Mars...

I'd say they are for the moment high in ranking if you look at number of successfull misions compared to total number of missions. Also if you look at amount of km travelled per dollar put into the mission...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might not be really fair to compare it on cost, as cost depends on the country, it's policies and what the actual hardware can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now i would place my bet on ESA, because russians had many failures and no success in their space probe missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's how I'd rank it.

Russia

US

ESA

China

Japan

India

Canada

Israel

Iran

Poland

Me

North Korea.

There's really no way to say my list is wrong unless there's some more details on what we're ranking them by.

Your list is wrong.

1) Poland is a part of ESA.

2) You are missing two important players: Brasil and Uganda. ;)

Russia:They are very good in the sat market and simple LEO human transport, their rocket tech is decent but old and they are quite bad at developing new stuff, also growing reliability problem. Same thing with manned program, it's been a disaster developing the new ship and station componants (nauka for example), unsure if OPSEK will become a reality. As for deep space exploration, quite simply they suck bad, not much more to say. To summarize I think the Russians have degraded quite bit and one main problem I believe is because they can't decide what they want to be, a NASA racer, a LEO contractor, their own thing, etc.I could actually go on for a while but I think it's best to save for a dedicated Russia thread.

China: Well not much to say apart from great all round, good sat market, good rocket tech, good manned program, good deep space, etc. Everything we see today is only a precursor when it comes to Chinese, they will only improve in all areas, soon they will have their own personal space lab, the worlds best rocket (lm-5, until FH), advanced robotic missions to moon and mars (chang'e 5, yinghuo 2?). Probably got this far with slow logical tortoise development doing "their own thing" and not racing.

ESA: Good in everything except manned, but have gone into a very slow development curve. Not degrading just lagging.

- Russia - heard the news? Seems like their latest Proton launch got problems with the upper stage delivering their super-satellite to the wrong orbit. It'll recover, but at a cost of propellant that they were suppose to use for long-term station-keeping.

- China doesn't have any deep space exploration programme. The furthest they go is to the moon, but that's about it. Their only mission to another planet ended up with a disaster (not their fault, but still it didn't go anywhere). To use words you used yourself about Russia: "they suck bad". Japan is way ahead of China in deep space exploration, so is India, not even to mention ESA.

- ESA doesn't have a "slow development curve" - they're not any slower than US is - actually in some cases they're faster. They just have a very limited budget comparing to NASA (even despite of ranking 2nd in the world - they're still miles behind NASA in terms of raw cash they receive).

The true strength of ESA is in ability to allocate long-term budgets. As a result: they get things done. ESA doesn't have a huge weakness that NASA does - need to shuffle with their budget on a yearly basis and a huge earthquake each time US budget needs cash or US president changes. ESA since it's creation got pretty much only one such earthquake - German unification (notable result being a cancellation of Hermes and two Columbus free-flying laboratories) and that's about it. NASA portfolio of cancelled projects is longer than their portfolio of completed projects (which is why ESA looks surprisingly good comparing to NASA when you take budget constrains into account).

- If you make a poll and want objective results - it's be good to abstain from leaving comments like that and adding more countries - including mentioned USA, so people would have a freedom of choice. You are free to leave comment on your likings later on, butt throwing such a clear statement right in a very first post smells fishy. ;)

Edited by Sky_walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see thank you for your wisdom.

Also I should have pointed out that this poll is based on CURRENT capabilities, by that I mean excluding events that happened 40 years ago, what capability do they have now.

Also yes looking back on it I would say ESA is probably #2, they are quite impressive, then again their made up of many countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the others here. USA is not #1 at the moment because we can't put astronauts in space.

Best,

-Slashy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- Russia - heard the news? Seems like their latest Proton launch got problems with the upper stage delivering their super-satellite to the wrong orbit. It'll recover, but at a cost of propellant that they were suppose to use for long-term station-keeping.

Your info is not exactly accurate as well. First, deviations for all Briz-M burn durations were marginal and to be expected. Second, Express-AM6 has new high-pressure xenon tanks exactly for such scenario. No lifetime decrease expected.

As usual, stupid journalists made a mountain out of a molehill.

Edited by J.Random

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's tough.

For science, I have to put the US top, Europe second, and maybe Japan third. NASA and ESA both have a bunch of awesome science missions operational and planned, NASA's bunch being rather larger. I've heard less about JAXA recently, compared to say Chinese and Indian projects, but still reckon the Japanese will be more advanced.

For manned spaceflight it's Russia, China, US. The US is operating half of the ISS, let's not discount that, but right now they can't even launch people to it.

For commercial satellites and launches, I'm not sure. I'd guess US first, then Russia and Europe in some order, they're the three big players at least.

For the military, well military space operations are likely to be highly covert. I'd put money on the US having the most and best spy satellites but reckon the Russians or Chinese might be stronger in the area of anti-satellite weaponry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my mind U.S. started being number one with Gemini, and stopped being number one with the discontinuation of the Apollo Applications Program. Russia has been consistent with it's space program and ultimately went for the more pertinent issues in my mind (long term space exploration vs. reusable spaceplanes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia has a lot of capability, but it's relict. Development is slow in some areas and absent in others, with the only tangible progress taking place in engines and, to a lesser extent, while launch vehicles. China is rapidly advancing in a lot of fields (engines, LVs, communications, earth observations), but are still behind the Russian state-of-the-art in most areas. I'd say Russia now, but China likely in the near future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are we looking at for current capability? Is it just launch or something else like probes? Having a few active Mars probes along with a Saturn probe, two Interstellar probes and a huge orbital telescope gives the US a great capability to actively gather data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What are we looking at for current capability? Is it just launch or something else like probes? Having a few active Mars probes along with a Saturn probe, two Interstellar probes and a huge orbital telescope gives the US a great capability to actively gather data.

When I sat current capability, I'm talking about launch cap, manned cap, deep space cap, market cap, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only advantage Roscosmos has is their Soyuz, they can send people to the ISS but not anything beyond that.That's where there advantage ends.

NASA doesn't have the ready-to-use system to get people in orbit but it actually has an active solar system science program.

CNSA can send people to space and has an active probe on the moon.

ESA, ISRO and JAXA both have an active solar system science program.

So if you think of "space power" to be able to send people in to space then the list would be like this:

1 Roscosmos

2 CNSA

3 NASA

If you think exploration is the real meaning of "space power" then the list would look like this:

1 NASA

2 ESA

3 JAXA and ISRO

4 Roscosmos

I generally dislike these nationalistic popularity contests, but well stated. Given the typical responses every time this topic comes up in the forums I'm gathering that most people think that sending people to LEO is the more important component of being a "space power" than space telescopes and robotic probes, or blue-sky technology development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Commerical Crew coming along nicely, I would put little weight on Russia's ability to use 1970's-era technology to send crews to space. It is only a temporary arrangement and will benifit the USA more in the long term, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With Commerical Crew coming along nicely, I would put little weight on Russia's ability to use 1970's-era technology to send crews to space. It is only a temporary arrangement and will benifit the USA more in the long term, after all.

I dunno, the Russians have manned capability now. NASA will in a year or two, if the designs work, if it doesn't go over budget, if the funding isn't cut, etc. Commercial Crew is not a sure thing. I do think that NASA is on the cusp of regaining the lead in launch vehicles with it and SLS, but they're not there yet.

When you come down to it, everyone uses 1970s (or earlier) tech in their lifters. It's all still staged chemical rockets; they've been refined by all users but nothing fundamental has changed. That old Russian design is one of the most successful rockets ever, I wouldn't dismiss it so casually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and the Russian Space Program and all space programs have to work under the constrains of a budget. Saying that the budget could collapse is a far cry from what is going to happen. The first missions are too close for funding to be cut. It would be a bad political move currently as everyone is starting to get hyped about space taxis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this