Posted on 03/17/2007 11:43:10 AM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
China has two things in their favor.
1. They have an ancient history of technical competence and world exploration.
2. They are ascending.
However, in this instance, I agree with sam_paine. The Chinese cannot beat us to the moon since we were already there 38 years ago.
I know they are wanting to get to the moon the first time, and probably before we get back is their intent. Whether they can achieve that, we shall have to wait and see. Lots of ground between here and there...err, space...frot with danger and risk, particularly for them since they have never done it.
Bu tthat does not mean they will not try and are not willing to pay the price, however steep to get there. Probably (and sadly) more willing to pay the price in terms of life and treasure at this point than we are IMHO..
We should have stayed with the moon all these years and by now we would have working bases and factories there, and a permanent presence. I bet the chinese will not repeat that mistake if they do get there...and we shouldn't either if and when we get back.
You good sir have your head firmly implanted in your rectum. Do you know what NASA's budget currently is? Do you know what our current space flight capabilities outside of LEO are? I'll give you a hint, not enough and NIL, in that order. Right now there will be a 4 to 5 year gap in manned American space flight. If current funding levels are not increased. There is a 500 million dollar shortfall in the Exploration Systems budget this year. That set the first manned launch of Orion back to Q1 of FY2015.
Read this:
MIKULSKI CALLS FOR BIPARTISAN SUMMIT WITH WHITE HOUSE ON FUTURE OF SPACE
PROGRAM
Pledges to reintroduce Mikulski-Hutchison $1 billion NASA amendment
WASHINGTON, D.C. - At today's final Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS)
Appropriations Subcommittee hearing focused on innovation, Chairman
Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) noted her concern for the future of NASA's
budget and the nation's space program, pledging to fight again with
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) for a $1 billion increase to
NASA's top line. At today's hearing, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin
presented his priorities as the subcommittee considers President Bush's
FY 2008 budget requests.
"With almost no real growth in NASA's budget, there is no margin for
errors. If there are cost overruns, other NASA programs will suffer.
There is simply too much pressure on NASA's budget - now and in the
future," said Senator Mikulski. "The only way to reduce the pressure on
the budget, and maintain a balanced space program, is to raise the top
line for NASA."
Senator Mikulski called for a bipartisan, bicameral space summit with
the White House. She cited a similar meeting 17 years ago, with then
President George W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle, which paved the
way for the creation of the Mission to Planet Earth.
"There is no more visible sign of American global leadership than our
space program. To lose that position to other countries would be a
tragedy," said Senator Mikulski. "We need a new dialogue with the
President and his administration. We need a national commitment to our
space program to put it on a path for success. Only through the active
cooperation of the White House and the Congress, can we have a healthy,
robust and balanced space program."
Senator Mikulski's opening statement, as prepared, is below:
"Good morning and welcome. This is our final hearing on innovation. It
is appropriate that we conclude this series of hearings with NASA. No
other agency epitomizes the innovative and competitive spirit of America
than NASA. Today we will hear from the NASA Administrator, Dr. Griffin
about the agency's budget and priorities.
"Since our hearing last year, a NASA civil servant - Dr. John Mather -
won the Nobel Prize. The Mission to Pluto has given us magnificent new
pictures of Jupiter on its way to Pluto, Cassini continues to give use
dramatic images of Saturn and Hubble continues its extraordinary
contributions to science. We have successfully and safely returned the
Space Shuttle to flight, and laid the foundation to return to the Moon,
and eventually to Mars.
"For 2008, the President's budget funds NASA at $17.3 billion, a 6.8
percent increase over the FY 07 CR [continuing resolution] level. When
compared to the President's FY 07 budget request (as opposed to the CR),
the budget request represents a 3 percent increase over last year. To
put NASA's budget in perspective, $17.3 billion represents just 7/10's
of 1 percent of the entire federal budget.
"In Science, the budget request totals $5.5 billion, a $300 million
increase over the FY 07 CR and a $50 million increase when compared to
the President's 07 budget request. The budget for science includes
funding for the Hubble servicing mission, and the continued development
of the Webb telescope. While I'm pleased that these missions are
properly funded in 2008, I see a significant problem with future science
budgets. From 2008 through 2011, the science budget grows by just 1
percent per year.
"Even worse, the budget for Earth Science actually shows a cut in
funding starting next year. By 2012, the budget for earth science will
decline to $1.3 billion- $200 million less than the earth science budget
in 2008.
"The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently released its report on
the future of earth science, calling for 14 new earth science missions
by NASA over the next decade. Yet, NASA's budget will not accommodate
any of these new missions. At a time when we are facing possibly the
significant threats to our planet earth - like global warming and severe
weather - we need sound science to inform our policy decisions, and we
need NASA to provide that science.
"In 1998, the aeronautics budget at NASA was $1.5 billion. Today, it's
just $554 million. Every commercial aircraft flying today uses
technology developed by NASA. If we are going to continue to dominate
the aerospace industry, then we should be increasing our investment in
aeronautics, not decreasing it.
"The President's budget for the Space Shuttle is $4 billion, the same as
the FY 07 funding level. The Administration's budget calls for 14
additional flights to the space station by 2010 and one flight to
service the Hubble Telescope. As our space shuttles returns to flight,
the safety of our astronauts must remain the number one priority for
NASA. I will continue to do everything possible to ensure the safety of
our astronauts as we continue to fly the Shuttle and develop the next
generation launch vehicles
"For FY 08, the President's budget provides $3.9 billion for
exploration, a $500 million increase over the 07 CR funding level. I am
absolutely committed to the goal of returning to the Moon and staying
there. With the emergence of other countries expanding their presence
in space, returning to the Moon now has strategic significance. NASA
estimates it will cost $16 billion to build the Ares and Orion launch
system by the year 2012. While this is a significant investment, there
will still be a four-year delay between the retirement of the space
shuttle and the launch of Orion and Ares. This delay is not caused by
the Congress, but by the Administration's own budget, because under the
President's budget, Orion and Ares won't be ready until 2014.
"For FY 08, the Space Station will receive $2.2 billion, an increase of
$300 million over last year. The 2005 NASA Authorization bill
designated the Space Station as a National Laboratory. We should make
full use of the Space Station for science and to fulfill our
international commitments. We also need to solve the issue of how to
re-supply the station once the Shuttle is retired. I fully support the
COTS program, which is funded in this budget at $236 million to develop
a commercial re-supply capability for the space station once the shuttle
is retired.
"With almost no real growth in NASA's budget, there is no margin for
errors in NASA's budgets. If there are cost overruns, other NASA
programs will suffer. There is simply too much pressure on NASA's
budget - now and in the future. The only way to reduce the pressure on
the budget, and maintain a balanced space program, is to raise the top
line for NASA.
"Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and I are firmly committed to increasing
NASA's top line by $1 billion this year. NASA has still not been
re-paid for the costs of repairing the space shuttle following the loss
of Columbia. The agency was forced to cut $2 billion from science,
aeronautics and the space station programs to help pay for the shuttle
repairs. This put NASA in an even deeper financial hole. The
Mikulski-Hutchison Amendment would fill this hole and help repair NASA
budget. But this is a short term solution. We need a longer term
solution to fix NASA's budget shortfall.
"The long term solution is to have NASA included in the Administration's
Competitiveness Initiative. Whether it's inspiring our next generation
of scientists or creating cutting edge technologies with civilian
applications, NASA is the original innovation agency. The America
Competes Act, recently introduced by Senator Hutchison and Nelson and of
which I am an original co-sponsor, authorizes NASA's inclusion in a
national competitiveness initiative. While we together to move this
legislation forward, we need the Administration to come to the table.
"That is why I believe it is time for space summit with the President.
Seventeen years ago, I went to the White House and I met with then
President Bush and Vice President Quayle to talk about our space
program. We set out an agenda for space - an agenda that was bipartisan
and had broad support. The Vice President was put in charge of
overseeing our space program. That summit paved the way for the
creation of the Mission to Planet Earth. Today, with countries such as
China, Iran and other seeking to establish their footprint in space,
with a four-year delay in our ability to launch astronauts into orbit,
and the need to maintain a balanced space program and promote
innovation, we need a new dialogue with the President and the
Administration. We need a national commitment to our space program to
put it on a path for success. Only through the active cooperation of
the White House and the Congress, can we have a healthy, robust and
balanced space program.
"I hope we will be able to meet with the President, the future of our
space program depends upon it. There is no more visible sign of
American global leadership than our space program. To lose that
position to other countries would be a tragedy. I will do everything in
my power to see that doesn't happen. But I can't do it alone, and
neither can my colleagues sitting here today."
NASA budget is more than all other space agencies of all other countries combined.
On the plus side, NASA is finally taking proposals for autonomous intelligence systems. Stay tuned for that since it will be the biggest leap in space exploration so far, even counting the semi-autonomous Mars Rovers and all.
"been there...done that."
Good thing the people who explored America did not say that eh?
China knows that the nations that lead on the frontier, will dictate the course of human history.
It is far more then a symbolic thing.
It is a long term strategic plan.
Let's see...here's a short list:
Velcro Laptop Computers (Google GRID Compass)
You know what...here...I'm tired of trying to lead the willfully ignorant: CLICK ME
The race to the moon is all about Helium-3, which can be used to fuel nuclear fusion reactors. China is thinking ahead in all areas of energy policy: resources, trade routes, pipelines, technology.
Here is on of many articles about Helium-3 on the moon:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html
They have a strategic plan to dominate the world economically and politically.
China can employ three times as many space techs at 1/3 the cost. Eventually they will want serious income, but for now they are happy just to be working on China's space program.
So? It's quite obviously not enough. And by the speed of your reply you didn't read the article that I posted. Some people (Sen. Hutchinson) realize the importance of space exploration. Who is the only other nation with a constant presence in space? Russia. How can a broken-down, beat up old Soviet hold over be launching more vehicles more often and with a better safety rate than the greatest (talking Soyuz vs. Shuttle here, no other systems and nothing pre-1980), most powerful nation in the world? With a smaller budget no less. We had something great with Saturn/Apollo. We could be LIVING on the Moon and Mars right now. But someone decided that confining us to ONE planet was plenty. Where is the sense of adventure? Where is the nationalism? It's not here.
Chimeric He3 is no justification at all. If we were to increase the fusion research budget and get maybe ten times the engineers working on it we might actually get something going before the lights go out.
It is just incredible. From now on I am going to resort to calling these idiots what they deserve to be called because that the only way to address them.
Just go away idiot. I am not going to accept your stupid analysis and tell me that our space program is not far superior to any, in particular to that of the Chinese. I had with extreme stupidity and negativism on this forum, putting our country down all the time, I just had it.
As long as the Treaty is in place there will be no development of space resources. The legal decision today means that no private firm will be allowed to claim any space resources, which is just as big a decision as the 2nd Amend decision this week.
Don't overlook the new Dubai spaceport. Outer space is not long going to be an American sea. We're going to have to sweat for it from now on.
I got about to here: "At today's final Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Appropriations Subcommittee hearing focused on innovation, Chairman Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.)"
You never read "The Tortoise and the Hare" as a child, did you? Have another carrot.
"been there...done that."
Chinese:
Gonna go there... Gonna keep that.
We could have China build us some moon rockets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.