SLS or Constellation?

[B787_300]

* In the long term; currently we can barely afford small station 300km above the ground.

Thats because we are not funding the space agencies as we should... the US Military budget is much larger than all the space budgets combined... we can afford it, politicians choose not to, Its a sad world

[czokletmuss]

Yeah, I know:

- Let's spend few hundred billions on a war, no, two wars in the Middle East. Or maybe three, you never know what Iran is going to do.

- Okay.

- Let's spend few billions to send people back to the Moon.

- This is truly irresponsible in these tough times, our economy is in serious debt and our spendings (blah blah)

Funny thing though - it's much easier to justify killing other people outside our borders than going out to space

But it's not only the problem of USA, most countries doesn't care about the space since all the voters are down here and they want "free" health care, "free" education system, "free" highways, social care etc. It's really easy to justify almost everything before you will convince someone to spend some money on a space exploration. Not that I'm judging the USA, I too would have some doubts about funding NASA if my country has such big problems with the economy (even if this is half a penny for every dollar).

Edited April 21, 2013 by czokletmuss

[Nibb31]

Yeah, I know:

- Let's spend few hundred billions on a war, no, two wars in the Middle East. Or maybe three, you never know what Iran is going to do.

- Okay.

- Let's spend few billions to send people back to the Moon.

- This is truly irresponsible in these tough times, our economy is in serious debt and our spendings (blah blah)

Funny thing though - it's much easier to justify killing other people outside our borders than going out to space

But it's not only the problem of USA, most countries doesn't care about the space since all the voters are down here and they want "free" health care, "free" education system, "free" highways, social care etc. It's really easy to justify almost everything before you will convince someone to spend some money on a space exploration. Not that I'm judging the USA, I too would have some doubts about funding NASA if my country has such big problems with the economy (even if this is half a penny for every dollar).

Health care, education, highways, social care, are slightly more essential than "free" space exploration.

I see no reason why we couldn't have all of those things.

However, colonization will not happen within my (or your) lifetime. Simply because there is no reason for it. There are plenty of empty places on Earth that are easier and more productive to colonize than Mars. Space is big and there is nowhere else where we can live.

Yes, there is the survival of the species issue, but you are completely misguided if you believe that we, as a species are any more significant in the universe than a cockroach or a gnat or a pile of rubble on some other planet. We have only existed for a few thousand years and in that time, our population has exploded and we've eaten up most of the resources that were available. In the grand scheme of the universe, or in the life of planet Earth, we are nothing more than a virus or a rash. If we destroy our host or kill ourselves, it won't make any difference.

[czokletmuss]

However, colonization will not happen within my (or your) lifetime. Simply because there is no reason for it. There are plenty of empty places on Earth that are easier and more productive to colonize than Mars. Space is big and there is nowhere else where we can live.

Yeah, I know. I'm not waiting for the Moon colony in 2030 or something like that, I was talking about the long term.

Yes, there is the survival of the species issue, but you are completely misguided if you believe that we, as a species are any more significant in the universe than a cockroach or a gnat or a pile of rubble on some other planet. We have only existed for a few thousand years and in that time, our population has exploded and we've eaten up most of the resources that were available. In the grand scheme of the universe, or in the life of planet Earth, we are nothing more than a virus or a rash. If we destroy our host or kill ourselves, it won't make any difference.

From a certain point of view, sure. But the same applies to individuals - you think you or me are so important in the "grand scheme of the humanity"? There is 7 bilion more poeople here. So why do you get up every day? Because you're not a philosophical point of view, you're a living being. And so humanity (probably) won't just sit here and wait for the exctinction. Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'

[NASAFanboy]

...you haven't given anything we'd actually get out of it. It wouldn't even be useful for lunar geology, because you'd be stuck looking at one location; you could fund a huge number of Chang'e 5-type missions to differing outcrops for the same price.

Health care, education, highways, social care, are slightly more essential than "free" space exploration.

I see no reason why we couldn't have all of those things.

However, colonization will not happen within my (or your) lifetime. Simply because there is no reason for it. There are plenty of empty places on Earth that are easier and more productive to colonize than Mars. Space is big and there is nowhere else where we can live.

Yes, there is the survival of the species issue, but you are completely misguided if you believe that we, as a species are any more significant in the universe than a cockroach or a gnat or a pile of rubble on some other planet. We have only existed for a few thousand years and in that time, our population has exploded and we've eaten up most of the resources that were available. In the grand scheme of the universe, or in the life of planet Earth, we are nothing more than a virus or a rash. If we destroy our host or kill ourselves, it won't make any difference.

Colonization will happen in our lifetime, and I will make sure of it. I am no stranger to extreme measures, so don't test me. Hell, Bigelow, China, and Russia all have moonbase plans. while the US changes direction every four years (But NASA is.probably going to rent a moonbase from Bigelow and go in private lunar landers.). Face it, humanity is special, we advance quickly.

People like you are those who will probably make our spieces extinct. What you are implying is that humanity is useless and has no.purpose. If so, why not everyone put a gun to their head and press the trigger?

[Kryten]

Could you give any proof to your claim that either China or Russia have moonbase plans?

[NASAFanboy]

It's a speculation with 100% of occuring. Just search it up. Not too hard.

[Nibb31]

Colonization will happen in our lifetime, and I will make sure of it. I am no stranger to extreme measures, so don't test me.

lol.

Hell, Bigelow, China, and Russia all have moonbase plans. while the US changes direction every four years (But NASA is.probably going to rent a moonbase from Bigelow and go in private lunar landers.). Face it, humanity is special, we advance quickly.

Humanity has had Moon base plans since long before even Jules Verne wrote about flying to the Moon. As far as space-flight goes, we advanced quickly during the cold war, but we have been on a bit of a plateau for several decades now. It's a typical learning curve. We might make progress, but we might also hit economical or technological boundaries that make progress impossible.

Also, don't forget that History has seen ages of rapid advancement followed by dark ages of limited advancement. With the current economy, the stupidity of politicians and those who elect them, and the rise of religious ignorance (even in so-called developed countries), we might be heading into one of those dark ages again.

Back to Moon bases, there are no serious plans for any. There might be some Powerpoint studies, but no serious projects with any political backing or funding.

There is also no real reason for one. A scientific outpost, ala McMurdo in Antarcticta, would be nice, but there really isn't much point. Robotic missions could do better scientific research by being sent to many different locations. Economically, it just doesn't make sense.

People like you are those who will probably make our spieces extinct. What you are implying is that humanity is useless and has no.purpose.

Absolutely. What purpose do you think we have? As an American kid from the 21st Century brought up on science fiction and video games, you might have a few ideas, but those are not values that have been universally shared by all Humanity throughout all of its existence.

Humanity as we know it is only a few thousand years old. We won't live forever because nothing does. We will either go extinct or evolve into something different. If you check back in 10000 years, you will probably have difficulty recognizing our descendants as human because they will have evolved, physiologically, culturally and socially, into something completely alien to you.

Nature doesn't have a purpose or a final goal. There is no "right" or "wrong", just evolution. A species only survives if it is suited to its environment. If we disappear, it will be because we weren't suited to our environment. Life will go on without us, and in a few million years something might emerge that is better suited to

Clinging on to some western first-world idea of what mankind should be is just as ignorant as our 17th Century ancestors who thought that they had a divine mission to civilize and colonize the rest of the World into submission.

If so, why not everyone put a gun to their head and press the trigger?

As a species, that might be exactly what we are doing...

However, we are alive, so we might as well sit back and enjoy the ride. Our purpose is to enjoy life, to try to be decent human beings to each other and try to leave a decent heritage to our children. Anything more than that is delusional ethnocentrism and ignorance.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Nibb31

[Kryten]

I can, and I can see in both countries nothing exists for landing, never mind bases, except initial studies with a trickle of funding.

[B787_300]

Lets face it, the first base on the moon is going to be private, no government will spend the money to put a base there

[Nibb31]

Lets face it, the first base on the moon is going to be private, no government will spend the money to put a base there

Neither will any private company. There is no money to be made on the Moon in the foreseeable future.

[Kryten]

How the heck is a corporation supposed to get that money? Especially for something with effectively no potential for revenue.

[B787_300]

Tourism.... It will be huge once Bigelow gets their space hotel and the cost of spaceflight comes down, I mean we will have the Boeing CST 100, Blue Origin, SpaceX Dragon, and i think that Orbital will be making a crew rocket, plus the russians, and maybe the europeans iff they get their act together. with so many ways to get up there, costs will come down, with a base in LEO, it should be simple enough to get from LEO to the Moon and to a base there for vacations.

[Kryten]

Do you know what the prices are predicted to be to put two people on the lunar surface and back, with spacex launch, according to the people who actually plan to do it?$1.5 billion. Space adventures can't even get another person to pay $150 million for their lunar flyby.

[B787_300]

Costs will come down, they have to

[Kryten]

Why? Do you expect the rocket equation to stop applying?

[B787_300]

No i expect, and will be learning, about ways to get to orbit that are cheaper and more reliable. Look at Heavier than Air Flight. 1903, we get off the ground for the first time, from then to the first world war, who flew? (The rich and the experimenters) After the war(s) (interwar only really rich people flew, big slump in the enconomy), it was still something special and expensive, and then all the sudden, flying is cheap and everyone does it with out a second thought.

The same thing will happen to space travel, we are in the war periods right now, only the rich and experimenters can go into space, but soon every will be able to go.

[czokletmuss]

No i expect, and will be learning, about ways to get to orbit that are cheaper and more reliable. Look at Heavier than Air Flight (...)The same thing will happen to space travel, we are in the war periods right now, only the rich and experimenters can go into space, but soon every will be able to go.

Nope. Buy some Coca-Cola in a can (seriously, there is a good comparison between coke and rocket fuel tanks in the text) and read this: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/tryanny.html

Leaving the Earth's gravity well won't be as cheap as flight from Europe to USA in the forseeable future.

[Kryten]

The first aircraft was built by two people, in a shed. People have been homebuilding aircraft since the 1910s. It's not comparable to spaceflight, and it's not remotely comparable to lunar spaceflight.

[B787_300]

and where were the first rockets built? In a shed by Robert Goddard and others...

[Nibb31]

Folks need to stop applying pseudo-historical analogies to space. Space is the not the American Far West. Space is not a new continent. Spaceships aren't airplanes or sail ships. Colonizing the Moon or Mars is nothing like colonizing America or Australia. History doesn't repeat itself.

For one example of "heavier than air flight", there are hundreds of examples of other technologies that ended up being dead ends because they simply weren't practical or they ended up being useless.

Air travel is a bad example, because there were destinations, places where people wanted to go. There was a massive demand for people to travel before there was an economical offer. In space, there is no habitable place for the masses to go, no destination. At a stretch, you might one day be able to build a Moon base or an orbital hotel for a few hundred people, but a few hundred travellers a year is not going to bring the prices down.

Space flight will never be cheap, because the amount of energy that is required to accelerate a given mass from zero to orbital velocity will always be the same. There is no evidence that energy will ever be cheap. The price might go down, but even if it is divided by 10, it will still be too expensive for the masses.

[B787_300]

Ah but there are destinations that people will want to go to, the moon, mars, Other star systems eventually

[Nibb31]

No, because you can't live on the Moon or Mars. There is nothing to do there. There are no people to visit. There is nothing that you can do find there that you couldn't find for a fraction of the price on Earth. There is no massive demand that could justify the huge economical expense of building a hotel on Mars, and not many people are going to take a 2 year vacation to go there.

Two weeks living in a tin can on the surface of Mars, looking out of a porthole, and drinking recycled pee will get boring fast. You're going to have a hard time selling that as a fun vacation for the masses.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Nibb31

[Kryten]

We're talking about crewed spaceflight here. Nothing goddard built would even cut it as a sounding rocket, even the late ones built with-get this-government funding.

[B787_300]

and yet we have a couple of companies that have developed rockets without too much government funding (SpaceX and Orbital), now i know that they both received some money from the US gov, but they had their rocket pretty well in the final stages of design. Also dont forget about Falcon 1, completely in house design and funded.