Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The race into space - Is the U.S. in it?
Washington Times ^ | May 29, 2003 | Robert S. Walker

Posted on 05/29/2003 3:07:05 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

Edited on 07/12/2004 4:03:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Are the Chinese serious about human space flight? Most definitely. And they are interested in doing more than simply going to low Earth orbit. They are headed for the moon.

For most of last year, the Commission on the Future of the U.S. Aerospace Industry looked at our nation's position relative to our global competition. Clearly, the Europeans are determined to challenge our preeminence in commercial aviation, and the challenge to our leadership in space is coming from the Pacific Rim.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; nasa; nationalsecurity; space; spaceexploration
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last
To: brityank
Even if we started today, I doubt we could have a functioning base on the Moon in ten years -- but damnit, we should try.

We can have a lunar campsite in five years. We can have a permanent outpost within ten years with a nuclear power source buried in lunar soil. With a nuke propulsion system we could be on Mars within twelve years. These are not my opinions. These are the conclusions of three major aerospace contractors twelve years ago. The estimated costs ranged from about $100B-$120B (1991 dollars) up to and including the first Mars mission.

21 posted on 05/29/2003 4:29:21 AM PDT by Movemout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Movemout
Heck; we can't even get a net new nuclear power plant sited in this country -- you think that we could 'contaminate' the Moon with one, let alone fly it through the skies to get one up there?
22 posted on 05/29/2003 4:42:46 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus
"That's highly debatable, but suppose for a moment I grant you that. What are you going to do with the 3He you harvest?"

Uh, you did catch the part about fuel for fusion reactors?? Fusion between He3 and H1 (protons) to yield He4 is one of the "easier" ones to initiate, with the benefit that the product of the reaction isn't itself radioactive.

23 posted on 05/29/2003 4:44:05 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Fusion between He3 and H1 (protons) to yield He4 is one of the "easier" ones to initiate

Nope. Deuterium-3He fusion is an order of magnitude more difficult to initiate than deuterium-tritium fusion; it requires much higher confining pressures and temperatures. And we haven't even reached break even (power in = power out) on D-T fusion yet! This is the part that Schmitt always leaves out of his spiel.

24 posted on 05/29/2003 4:50:59 AM PDT by Cincinatus (Omnia relinquit servare Republicam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: brityank
"Heck; we can't even get a net new nuclear power plant sited in this country -- you think that we could 'contaminate' the Moon with one, let alone fly it through the skies to get one up there? "

Funny you should mention that. About the time we asked Baechtel to tell us what kind of heavy machinery could be modified to operate in a lunar environment, we started getting letters from various enviro-weenies alleging that we would pollute the moon with our efforts to explore the solar system. I'm still not sure how you can pollute a lifeless landscape but they seemed earnest.

25 posted on 05/29/2003 4:51:05 AM PDT by Movemout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Does anyone know what is the military/strategic value of a moon base? Can things be done from the moon that can't be done from Earth orbit?
26 posted on 05/29/2003 5:18:47 AM PDT by doc30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc30
It's strategic value is primarily as a logistics depot. We now know that water ice exists at the poles of the Moon (in considerable quantity). We can use that water to manufacture rocket propellant in space. Getting propellant off the Moon is six times easier than launching it from Earth. The propellant can be used to fuel various spacecraft for a variety of missions of strategic value.

Although the water is priority one, the Moon also contains abundant metals (for building large structures in space) and the plain soil has value as bulk mass for things like shielding from radiation. Also, energy can be collected on the Moon for solar electric arrays made on the lunar surface and beamed (by laser or microwave) to a variety of locations in Earth-Moon space.

27 posted on 05/29/2003 5:32:10 AM PDT by Cincinatus (Omnia relinquit servare Republicam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Dear China:

Please go into space. Please go to the moon.

Please try to knock out some of our communications satellites.

(steely) (born too late to participate in our first space race)

28 posted on 05/29/2003 5:37:40 AM PDT by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
That's one way. I'm glad Donald Rumsfield has such a great background and concern for this aspect of our national security.
29 posted on 05/29/2003 6:27:22 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Even if we started today, I doubt we could have a functioning base on the Moon in ten years -- but damnit, we should try.

I hope everyone interested in putting a U.S. flag up on the moon again writes personal checks and sends them to NASA with a memo what it's for. Personally, I can't afford your pipe dreams, I have some debts here on earth to take care of before shoveling more money into the bureaucracy to feel better about the accomplishments of the tribe.

30 posted on 05/29/2003 6:27:38 AM PDT by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: brityank
re: tourism--NASA has already [TWICE] thrown that baby out; indeed they had such a snit they forbad the tourist access to 'thier side' of the space station. Even if we started today, I doubt we could have a functioning base on the Moon in ten years -- but damnit, we should try.)))

Market has dried up. There has been space tourism for quite a while now, which has done little but give the Russians some pocket money while a few aviation-addled have made some commissions and consultation fees. There just aren't enough millionaires who want to ride, these days. Costs 15M a pop. Although you can fly a mig for a couple ten grand...

The whole focus has been on riding. Why? The probes accomplish much more, bring us much information. The thinking is that the public will not get excited without the rides. That shows a severe lack of imagination. And if NASA does not want to explore, but just wants to be the Master of the Great Ride, I don't want to pay for it. Shut it down, if its mission is no longer science.

31 posted on 05/29/2003 6:33:13 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
The thinking is that the public will not get excited without the rides.

It's also reality. Remember the human repair of Hubble? People couldn't get enough of it. People need to go, people always need to go. Robots can be useful but they won't replace human ingenuity and imagination.

32 posted on 05/29/2003 6:47:53 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus
"Nope. Deuterium-3He fusion is an order of magnitude more difficult to initiate than deuterium-tritium fusion; it requires much higher confining pressures and temperatures."

I stand corrected. I was recalling that there is/was supposed to be some particular advantage to that fuel combination--it may have be that the reaction yields non-radioactive final products.

33 posted on 05/29/2003 7:01:11 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The hangup about riding gave NASA lots of funding and publicity, but it's not working anymore. Even the rides don't get the attn. Then they blow up, and the program is stuck for months and years in anguished debriefings. A helicopter full of park rangers crashed in Texas, killing all inside, just looking for debris from the Columbia. Waste, waste--

If they used their imaginations, they could find a way to make the probes more exciting to the public, if that's so very essential to continued exploration. And if it is, perhaps we ought to rethink the whole thing. This isn't Hollywood, and I'm sick of the spacemen celebrities.

Besides, given the recent accounts of Columbia, looks to me like very little human ingenuity and imagination were used. Looks to me like they gave up mighty quick.

34 posted on 05/29/2003 7:02:19 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
"The whole focus has been on riding. Why?"

Because people "on site" can do much more in a shorter time than any possible robotic probe. What the US needs to be focussing on right now is an advanced system for reaching LEO (i.e. "Shuttle II") that is less expensive to run and more reliable thatn Shuttle I.

35 posted on 05/29/2003 7:03:45 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Remember after the loss of the Challenger, Rockwell offered to pay for a replacement Orbiter if they could rent it out?

NASA (of course) refused. They will never release their death-grip on the U.S. manned space program.

36 posted on 05/29/2003 7:05:51 AM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
You give humans so little credit and are so ready to dump on the manned program. Good thing you won't be going.
37 posted on 05/29/2003 7:06:36 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Do much more? What do they DO? They maintain the Space Ferry and the Ferry Dock. Mostly they get rewarded for ethnicity, nationality, or contribution to the Clinton White House Corruption Coverup--with a ride, a la John Glenn.

The exciting stuff is not this interminable, dangerous FERRYING.

Go to the Jet Propulsion Lab site, out of Palo Alto, for some real eye candy! And, thankfully, not a wannabe, egotistical jockey in sight, just engineers and physicists and the cool stuff they're building.

Cut out the seats and the life-support supplies, and see what we could send. Why send a probe to Mars, just a probe?

Why not send an ARMADA of probes to Mars, en masse, to disperse and return data? Such a lack of inspiration...

38 posted on 05/29/2003 7:10:12 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Do much more? What do they DO? They maintain the Space Ferry and the Ferry Dock. Mostly they get rewarded for ethnicity, nationality, or contribution to the Clinton White House Corruption Coverup--with a ride, a la John Glenn.

The exciting stuff is not this interminable, dangerous FERRYING.

Go to the Jet Propulsion Lab site, out of Palo Alto, for some real eye candy! And, thankfully, not a wannabe, egotistical jockey in sight, just engineers and physicists and the cool stuff they're building.

Cut out the seats and the life-support supplies, and see what we could send. Why send a probe to Mars, just a probe?

Why not send an ARMADA of probes to Mars, en masse, to disperse and return data? Such a lack of inspiration...

39 posted on 05/29/2003 7:10:14 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The manned program exist for the men, and the vicarious aviators. It is wasteful. Given the advances in robotics just in the last ten years, if all focus was turned to taking advantage of those advances--what we could find out, where we all could go, electronically.

Instead, resources will go to trying to maintain that lucky celebrity who gets to ride.

All evidence points to the inability of humans to live long-term in space, anyway, no matter how many zillions we spend to manage that fact.

40 posted on 05/29/2003 7:13:47 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson