Which nation will most likely be the one to return people to the surface of the moon?
Which nation will most likely be the one to return people to the surface of the moon?
I put America, though China might do it just to show off.
China, by the looks of thing they are very keen to catch up.
I'm curious about the 'other' vote?
I assume "Other" means some private entity. Which is what I would vote for, if the question were "Who would be most likely to place first person on Mars?" But here I voted US.
Other could also be an international effort, like China and the US.Originally Posted by banquo's_bumble_puppy
But I voted for China.
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)
All moderation in purple - The rules
Or uhm, ESA? They tend to do space thingies from time to time .Originally Posted by Swift
My vote goes for China. They seem abit more focused than the U.S.A.
NASA is just too volatile right now to guarantee another moon landing. Well, not NASA per se, but I can't see this being pulled of unless NASA starts getting some real funding. They'll have to drop so many projects to do another moon landing that no good science will be done.
China has the advantage like the US/Russia space race of old. They can stay focused on this particular goal. The US plan just sounds like a political side note.
ESA has come a long way in the space sciences. Do they have any plans to develop a craft to get people into space, or are they just going to keep hitchhiking rides from the US/Russia? Or just Russia at the moment.Originally Posted by Nicolas
Japan doesn't have the will to do it. Europe doesn't have the money. India and China will get there with enough money invested and trial and error research done, but the US can do it when ever we want to. The US only requires the sustained will to do it. I think the US will get back to the Moon first, but I think private enterprises will get us on the Moon for good. Mining the minerals and utilizing the Moon's resources will have an ever increasing importance as this world fills up and more and more resources are claimed and put to use. The titanium in the Sea of Tranquility on the Moon is reason enough to go back and stay.
I can only hope that China's projected date for a moon landing lights a fire under NASA. 2018 seems like an extremely long goal considering we've drummed up the rescources to do it before.
Of course we're not going to get anywhere in space at all until more money is put into trying heavy lifting systems, I think, but that's a different topic.
Itll be China. NASA won't be able to recover from the damage thats been done in time, even if its recovery began now. The ESA is purely a small-unmanned-probe agency (a good one though, success through lack of ambition). The Russians are running on the momentum of the Soviet era still and aren't in a position to develop anything new.
It will be the Chinese, folks. They simply want it more- they'll do almost anything to loft a man in space, and by a certain date.
At this point, they probably just need to reverse-engineer an Apollo-like command module & lander to make the trip. They are running off of considerable nationalistic momentum, and have no real budget constraints (as they are running their whole space exploration project on the cheap). The United States, on the other hand, has no real drive to get to the Moon, apart from a couple of speeches from George W., who'll be long out of office, before the effort starts in earnest. Also, insistence on building a new command module- the 'CEV', and massive safety problems are considerable problems for NASA to overcome. And all of this effort is against the backdrop of the insane 'borrow-and-spend' economic policies of the last 5 years. There simply won't be any funding available after all of the budget cuts on the horizon (you just know there won't be any tax increases).
I put China firmly out in front, with the USA a distant, distant second. Much further behind is the ESA which hasn't even planned to put a man in orbit from an indigenous facility, and has major budget and technology constraints. JAXA could conceivably push hard to put a man into space / on the Moon, but hasn't shown much interest, and also has existing budget concerns. India is out, since their rocket technology drive is aimed towards 'less peaceful' purposes, at present. As for private entities, I am extremely impressed with the path and progress the private sector is making towards space, but I just don't think they'll have their act together enough for a Moon mission before the Chinese get it done.
I put other. It is a come-from-behind effort, but Honduras will pull it off.
How is the insistence on building the CEV a problem? It's a requirement. You can't get to the moon with the shuttle. The safety problems are with the shuttle, it has nothing specific to do with a moon mission.Originally Posted by Huevos Grandes
And where do you get the idea that the Indian rocket program has sinister implications? They have developed the PSLV and GSLV in recent years. Both of which are designed to launch commercial and scientific satellites. They are currently working on a medium/heavy version of the GSLV. It is designed to help them compete in the commercial GEO comsat market. It would be totally unsuited for military purposes (other than launching recon satellites maybe).
Perhaps a joint Russia-China or Russia-USA or China -USA or Russia-China-USA mission.
I think the USA has the scientific knowlege but not the hands-on-know-how to return to the Moon on its own. It would get 'lost' in details and over-complicated dead ends.
I vote US, tho' it could be a US/Russia thing
They want to cooperate with the development of Kliper, and they had their Hermes craft (which looks a lot like Kliper btw) but it failed to match the Ariane 5 launch criteria. And there's the vehicle acronym thing for the ISS. So they sure try to do manned things; they also have their own astronaut corps and a "manned space" department. But for the moment, they haven't built a manned craft yet. And they're not immediately pursuing landing people on the moon like China does. So I don't think they will be first. But ESA might still play a role in manned space flight (in general) in the future, be it on their own or in a cooperation with other countries.Originally Posted by Metricyard
My vote is for the US, if only because they've proved they've got there before and also because (and I apologise if this is slightly political, but it comes from the lesson of the Cold War) as attention shifts from the terrorist threat, which will no doubt occur after the troop withdrawal (whenever that happens) the attention of those who authorise funding for this sort of thing will return to other countries pursuing their own space-faring activities and notions and the US will inevitably be keen to retain some sort of perceived pre-eminence within this realm.
Whether they do maintain such a pre-eminence is open to question and I don't believe it hinges on going back to the Moon. Indeed, a return to the Moon, if achieved for the wrong reasons, which it could well be done for, could end up being a similarly pyrrhic victory as to the moon landings of the Apollo era. (Granted, that is an over-simplification, but I think the chances of that outcome have increased as technology has advanced and public funding has decreased - at least in the short-medium term of the next 30 or so years)
I voted for China, who will probably spark a new (and possibly enduring?) space race from all this. The US and the Russians might soon follow. And when privatization of space goes into full swing, oh my!
- Maha "moon struck" Vailo
The only "joint" missions I see getting anywhere near the moon involve left handed cigarettes.
I'd put money on China doing an Apollo style touch and go before the US's return for long term operations.
China has serious problems that are going to slow them down before they make it to the Moon. It doesn't make the world news much but there are regions with riots numbering in the 100,000's a few times a year - mostly in rural China. The whole liberalization of the economy there has benefited the cities and mostly the people who were running the factories when it started, but its left the rural population (the vast majority of China's population) out in the cold. The first communist revolution there was the farmers against the cities where the power was held, and if the leadership in China doesn't find a way to bring the farmers into the growing prosperity then they may face a new revolution. That will put any Moon missions on hold for a few decades.
At the current pace and funding NASA is at, it's very likely that China could beat us to the moon. However, I believe that in the next couple years, we're going to see a lot of pressure for NASA to beat the Chinese. We're already starting to hear a few politicians complain that China will beat us to the moon if we don't speed things up, and that view is only going to spread as it becomes more obvious that China is serious. Once NASA has the proper funding and motivation to go to the moon, it shouldn't have too much difficulty landing first.
As for private organizations, I highly doubt them getting people on the moon before then. We'll probably see private organizations orbit and possibly land small probes on the moon, but I'd be surprised if they even got a human to orbit around the moon by that time.
Oh well, the google adds are talking about "Nostradamus online" and the "2006-2012 end times" so what are we worrying about .
Due to costs and political will
Already on the BA BLOG someone has reported that some part of congress is going to cancel all development on the CEV, so the money can go to clean up after Katrina. It seems to be call Operation Offset
It is a matter of priorities, and the moon is not even on the list.
That might be, but we will never know if it is the correct choiceOriginally Posted by Sticks
Hmm, didn't NASA just say a moon landing would cost around 100 million over the next 15 years? If so wouldn't that be a savings of money as the Shuttle has cost around 150 million over the past 15 years.
I think you need to add a few zeros to each of your cost figures...
Really! So the end times have moved around again! I thought they were supposed to be a few years ago, but don't they know Bladerunner is set in 2019?Originally Posted by Nicolas
You're right, I ment Billion, not millionOriginally Posted by montebianco
The thought still stands tho' a moon landing over the next 15 years would cost less then the shuttle has for the last 15