Hopefully, because with all the fucking funding we spend on secret military tech, no way should China outdo us in space. I strongly suspect our real space assets our way more developed then public is led to believe.
I don't think people understand that the next step is trying to have a semi permanent presence on the moon. The cost alone has made the ISS look like a bargain until recently, and commercial crew has been a huge factor there.
Until technology advances more, stockpiling a moon base for deep space exploration is the best way to get to Mars and beyond.
There isn't much in the way of useful material on the moon. Unless we lick this fusion thing and start harvesting He3 from the lunar regolith there just isn't much there you need to go to other places. It doesn't really make sense to spend the giant amount of energy you need to get out of Earth's gravity, then land on the moon, to go somewhere else. A low earth orbit station would be a better staging point for long range missions then a lunar base.
You could make a case it could be worth ice harvesting on the moon for the production of reaction mass, but there's no real need for people to be there for bots to collect ice and mass driver it to orbit.
Yes but what is on the moon for us to launch into space that we didn't already have to launch from Earth in the first place?
The whole point they're making is it makes no sense to lob shit into space, then land it on the moon, only to launch it *again*. Just launch the first time and be done with it.
If they refuel on the moon wouldn't they be able to take off with more weight/fuel than when they left earth? That seems like a huge bonus for space exploration
Like theoretically maybe, I don't want to say that's a totally bogus idea. But we still have to also get all that extra fuel there.
Again, why not just store this stuff in orbit and do it that way? What is the benefit of doing it on a Moon base and having to completely re-launch, vs *already* having orbital speed and refueling at said speed from a refueling station in orbit?
I feel like all the lunar dust couldn't exactly make shit simpler. That stuff is abrasive and gets all over/into everything (not to mention you now are potentially dragging lunar dust off with you to Mars and contaminating the planet with it).
storing fuel in space is anything but easy
(your other arguments are all on point. just wanted to answer the question, storing fuel in orbit is also not really an option)
Because it takes a lot of energy to get off the planet and out of Earth's gravity well. That means you can only send a relatively small payload. But the moon has way less gravity and so if you can set up facilities there you can launch massive payloads to anywhere else in the solar system for a fraction of the energy cost it would take to send it from the Earth. Again, it takes less energy to go from the moon to any other body in the solar system than it does to launch something from the Earth to the Moon. Build things on site there.
Water outside the Earth’s gravity well is immensely valuable. H3 is a future pipe dream, but water is usable now.
And infrastructure ain’t maintaining itself. If there’s going to be industry on the Moon, telescopes will soon follow, and both the industrial and scientific infrastructure are going to have to be manned to some degree for on site maintenance. The moon will eat robots for lunch.
I thought the whole point of a moon base was to figure out how to build a base on another body then you can go do it again on Mars.
Its much cheaper to test on the moon than go to Mars and fail there. And going to Mars will require a base because of how long the journey is there and back.
The race never finished. The players just changed.
The US just assumed it won (I guess it briefly did) and bailed on the Moon for 40 years, and it’s only China’s frankly insane progress over the last 20 or so years that have lit a fire under America’s arse again and motivated them to go back.
It’s a relay, not a sprint. The finishing line isn’t even within sight.
There’s always a bigger hill, and there’s always someone who wants to stand on it.
This NASA chief actually thinks the dark side of the moon is perpetually in the dark and that they know nothing about what's there.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/1cix0wp/bill\_nelson\_says\_the\_back\_side\_of\_the\_moon\_is/](https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/1cix0wp/bill_nelson_says_the_back_side_of_the_moon_is/)
You hate to tell him anything.
Yes and No. Whichever country builds a permanent lunar base first will have a massive advantage in Space colonization and economy. The goal is to build either manufacturing facilities on the moon or in CIS Lunar orbit, as the major cost of space travel is the amount and weight of fuel to get to leave our atmosphere. The cost is lower on Luna, and almost nothing in orbit.
From the national level perspective it's a matter of dibs, basically. Whoever gets there first can claim the best regions as 'theirs' (no matter what past treaties might say,) and take measures to keep others out. That's important because the areas which have water-ice are, as far as we've seen to this point, quite limited.
If there was a lot more to learn, we would’ve already established a research base or something. The fact that we are wasting much more resources on mars when the moon is much closer just speaks volumes to either incompetence or propaganda
I know this is supposed to be a joke, but just in case people are taking it seriously, chandraayan 2 which is the Indian space shuttle which went to the moon in 2021 actually took pics of Apollo 11 and 12 as it flew over the landing site.
Really neat stuff.
[click here to see the Reddit post about it ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ISRO/comments/167hcnz/isro_chandrayaan2s_photos_of_apollo_11_12_landing/)
I tell this to all my dubious friends. Near the height of the Cold war, the Soviet Union would have done literally anything in their power to prove America had lied to the world
So this would be the 7th time the US lands people on the moon - why do they care that the 7th time is before China's first time. Race was finished a long time ago and still no other nation has landed a single person on the moon
The race is for a lunar colony and sustainable mining, manufacturing, and launch industry hub. Arriving first in this competition is merely the first of many steps in this race. The title is written poorly.
It’s a race to build up a program that ultimately can establish permanent residency on the Moon. No one under the age of 55 remembers the Apollo missions and not many are motivated about space travel and exploration because those missions happened so long ago. A Moon landing in this decade for *any* country, including the US, might as well be the first one ever given the public reception that will likely come from it, especially in our modern world where everything is so connected by technology. The next manned Moon landing I believe will lead to an increase in interest *and* funding for space programs around the world, and I think will be the catalyst for us finally branching humans out from this planet.
Without some form of Space Elevator or extremely cheap, high thrust fuel there's basically no hope of ever doing anything at any real scale just due to the amount of money, and very soon our finite fuel sources that it's going to drain.
The short term problem is finding the solution to cost and/or availability of resources to just move things out of the atmosphere, and then getting materials back, preferably in bulk, intact. The long term problem is getting a return on anything this century for any celestial body that isn't the moon or a nearby asteroid. Takes too long to get to anywhere else and there's no return on anything besides science if you're not planning an actual return leg.
Other comments replying to this person gave real reasons. Not this absolute nonsense.
Artemis program has been in motion for over a decade. There is nothing surprising about this or unusual. There’s also a huge difference between the previous missions in the 70s. They could only be on the moon for a couple days at a time before having to leave. Artemis is aiming for a permanent human presence on the moon. Something that was impossible then.
It’s a “race” because space on the moon for a viable colony is limited so just one theoretical area. The lunar South Pole. As it’s one of the places most likely to have enough water particles for a colony.
No one is spending trillions because they feel “threatened” lmao
Not saying Americans don’t also have legitimate reasons to go to the moon, I’m talking about turning it into a race part.
The chinese have a clearly set out plan with dates and milestones that have been set for some time and follow their plan methodically. Neither the chinese govt nor chinese media talk about this being a race against America - that’s all on the American side. They just go quietly about their business and if they do mention the Americans, it usually in response to numerous western articles and media reports about a “race”. The chinese usually clearly acknowledge the Americans advantage in technology and the fact they already visited the moon a generation ago. But they also warn that the Americans maybe setting too optimistic of a timetable and this may come back to bite them .
Perhaps it’s a function of the difference between the two countries media, but the result is the same, the USA hyping the situation and creating a narrative of a race, while the chinese just go about hitting milestones per their plan.
Again, space on moon is limited. There is a location on the moon with the best possible conditions for a colony and they both have their eyes on it. We do not know how much space a colony needs for its life support systems to be self sufficient with nothing but lunar resources, nor do we know how many resources are needed per person. Maybe there’s room for both or maybe not.
That’s why there’s a “race” narrative being spun by entities that do not represent either the Chinese nor the US governments. NASA has valid reasons that involve other celestial bodies, and I’m sure China has its own valid interests.
My original point though, is the original commentator questioned why the US would return to the moon when we did it 50 years ago.
Saying it’s due to China and US feeling insecure is incorrect and disingenuous
The correct answer is, the lunar missions 50 years ago are irrelevant to todays lunar programs with completely different technology as well as a scope so different that what’s happening today was impossible to do in the 70s. The SLS program and NASAs idea for Orion, lunar gateway, etc. are over 13 years in the making and none of this is newsworthy in the slightest until Artemis 2 or 3 launches.
Hey shardas, you make some very good points and agree with much of it.
But again, my point is about this turning into a space race thing is coming basically from one side - the USA side. Why they got to do that ?
And for the argument there is not enough real estate on the moon for the two countries to set up their own respective lunar bases sounds pretty weak. The South Pole has literally thousands of square kilometres of moonscape to choose from, proximal to the pole, not like it’s one square km and that’s it.
And why do the Americans wanna be so far away anyway? It seems ridiculous to me that two groups of the same species from the same planet wouldn’t wanna set up their lunar bases close to each other, no? If for no other reason than for an extra level of security in the event shit hits the fan on one base and they can receive assistance from the other base.
And that’s chinas whole point. What is this deep desire of the Americans to always try to subjugate every other country to their design and control? What’s wrong with a little cooperation?
China has said many times in many contexts (not just space), that the two sides will each get further and be more successful, aka a win- win situation, if they work together and cooperate, rather than treat each other as adversaries. And interestingly, the chinese also subtlety warn the Americans, that the American’s pathway to try to beat and subjugate and even destroy any country that threatens their supremacy, will in the end, result in their own interests being hurt more. It will result in almost like an American self fulfilling prophecy in which they are seeing the chinese as being this huge competitive threat eventually eclipsing them; that then actually turns into reality.
I'm really pesimistic about the US space race.
Congress has defunded NASA for so long that they've allowed private enterprise to come and fill gaps. So now companies like SpaceX and Boeing play major rolls in the US space process. These companies are not well run, and have different goals than NASA, like profit.
lol, Boeing built the first stage of the Saturn V. Companies have always played a part in this.
The difference is that more responsibility is being placed on these companies, both fiscally and developmentally. This has been functional to varying degrees of success… with SpaceX’s performance in Commercial Cargo and Crew being an example of the best, and Boeing Starliner, the worst.
I would like you to elaborate on how both Spacex and Boeing are poorly run. I wish NASA hadn't been so terribly underfunded and could work on a program that didn't have to worry about surviving political administrations. I just don't necessarily agree with your second point.
Well Boeing for instance has a series of plane failures due to changing out leadership and cutting costs. Yes, yes, aviation is a different department, but it's an example of the kind corporate profit drive that can cause these issues, inside of the same company.
SpaceX in an effort to do things cheaply is burning up satelittes in orbit and many scientist believe this has a negative effect on the ozone layer.
These are just a few examples.
NASA doesn't worry about profit, they can focus on what is going to advance technology and space exploration, without that burden. It being funded through tax dollars was a wonderful thing that keeps it isolated from private profit drive. Or at least, it did.
I've heard the Boeing arguments sure, the McDonald's Douglas merger in the 1990s has gotten us to the point where planes are falling out of the sky.
With regards to Spacex, their satellites are burning up because that's what they are designed to do. If they were in higher orbits they would stay as junk far longer should a collision happen. Satellites burning up on re-entry do not harm the ozone layer. I have seen an argument made that thousands of satellites would interfere with astronomy due to reflection however those concerns are being addressed with reflection mitigation coatings on the earth facing sides of the satellites.
NASA is not for profit but they need to spend money to pay for services they may not be able to provide themselves because they don't have any funds to allocate. Look at the Commercial Crew program for example. Spacex and Boeing were contracted to develop a spacecraft capable of delivering crew to and from the ISS for 6 months at a time. Spacex received roughly 2.5 billion dollars while Boeing received over 5 billion. Even though both companies were neck and neck back in 2019, Spacex is on their 8th ISS mission not counting Demo-2 or Axiom 1,2 and 3 and Inspiration 4. They are about to send 4 people to do the highest earth orbit flown with crew and the first spacewalk with a privately developed suit. Boeing is having trouble with their crewed demonstration mission right now, not even a full service mission and they are 1 billion dollars in the hole.
Point is, for profit isn't always bad when it comes to spaceflight because not every company shares the same values or long term goals. Capitalism is a double edged sword but sometimes it's what we have to work with if Congress will not give NASA what it needs to see an ambitious project through.
So it's a race again, is it? That's stupid.
It's supposed to be science. We should cooperate, share results, and not hurry. We all know it can be done.
It begs the question: what value is there in having TWO programs? What will one achieve that the other won't?
Honestly I hope China "wins" in this race so everyone in America can shut the hell up about putting a man on the moon, dispite being late towards everything else moon related.
How did humanity lose so much technology and knowledge from the 60's till now?
Decades ago the US put people on the moon, missions with zero casualties using computing power much less powerful than a Samsung smart fridge.
And now we have trouble even getting people back from orbit...
Well, we didn’t put people on the moon with zero casualties. Nobody died in Apollo 11 but there were plenty of casualties before that and a few since.
In 1969, NASA was 4% of the US budget. Today, it’s under 0.5%. I’m sure putting people on the moon would be extremely smooth if it were still that big a priority in the budget. Instead we pinch pennies.
Boomers have fucking gutted science in this country and then bitch and moan that China is catching up.
everything here has to be about profit now. If someone isn't getting rich off of it, no one backs it.
and we have to raise tariffs to 100% in order to compete and prevent us from seeing that we already lost.
I’m a firm believer that if NASA was continually given 4% of the US budget the last 60 years we would easily be 25 years ahead of where we are technologically.
> How did humanity lose so much technology and knowledge from the 60's till now?
“Humanity” is doing just fine.
Not an exhaustive list, but China, India, Singapore, South Korea, Brazil, and South Africa are among the nations that have made remarkable strides in technology and knowledge development in recent decades. Sticking with space shit, China recently achieved the historic feat of retrieving rocks from the far side of the moon, which is objectively a notable achievement. To disregard or deny this would be hypocritical and disingenuous.
Because the systems are not the same, and the factor of safety is far higher now than it was then. This means more complicated systems with more points of failure to work out. The difference is those failures won't lead to catastrophic events like they used to.
No technology was lost.
Also. Nobody has trouble to do it? The only question is why would you waste immense amounts of resources and man power to do something nobody needs or even wants?
Technology isn't a straight line, and it's less that we're lacking the knowledge and technology, more the capability. Fabricating stuff like that requires very skilled laborers working on highly refined products. For those laborers to acquire those skills they'll need to burn through a decent chunk of those refined products to understand how to work with them. And the same goes for the workers to produce the refined products.
We might have the blueprints and the compositions for the heat sheilding they used, but the factory used to produce the alloys will have been shut down and moved to China, same goes for the factory that fabricated the alloys into parts. The workers who worked those jobs will have retired or reskilled into something else. The savings from those factories getting closed down will have already been spent on cocaine in the 80s
we didn't. look at how much money the Apollo program costs. it's a fraction of NASA's budget today. on top of that, we've put contractors like Boeing in charge with cost plus contracts, meaning they have no real incentive to ever deliver rockets on time.
Who owns the moon? What dismisses claims if a part of the moon becomes a permanent station for whatever country? It's not that it is going to be colonized, but it will become a real-estate when you have more than one country exploring, but you cannot come within 10 feet. Serious things to consider.
What about if you want to mine a comet (Psyche-16). Who claims what and where?
If they can bring back all of the Hasselblads they left up there I’m sure they could auction them off and make a pretty penny to go towards funding more cool space stuff… or put them in the Smithsonian where they belong.
What year is it?
Some Cold War year
I'd rather have this than them blowing us up over it.
That's all done through proxies nowadays anyways
Fuck those people am I rite or wat?
I think you need to read a bit more about the Cold War if you think proxy wars are new policy
Wasn’t it whole point of Cold War?
China is not going to blow up it's best customer.
Agreed, if a dick measuring contest is the stress relief valve, I'm all for it
so every year since may 1945? that narrows it down
We are so back
Clearly 1968 you noob
Woot! SUMMER OF LOVE!
Huge concert at happening Atlamont. Must be front row!!
"Having landed people on the moon in July of 1969 it seems unlikely China will manage to land first, unless they have a goddamn time machine."
Elvis' Hawaii special will have more people watching than the moon landing.
I think you mean holographic AI special lolz
Know then, that it is the year 10191.
I mean, it could be depending on when you start the clock
Well it was brand new.
Thought the news come from canceled Apple TV show space force
That was Netflix.
For All Mankind. Great show.
I think they’re doing a spoof on an Apple show. I felt so bad for Tracy and that guy. (If you know, you know.)
“It’s good to be black on the moon.” Space Force was great.
It was wasn’t it! Really wish they’d have continued it
Yes, started slow but by the end of season 2, I wanted more.
If for nothing else than more scenes with John Malkovich.
If something is actually good it gets cancelled
[удалено]
Yes but this is part 2: the race continues. I think it's going to be a trilogy.
Correct. We’re at Moon 2: Electric Moongaloo
Moongaloo sounds like a kids shampoo with a crazy bottle design.
Get L’Oréal Kids on the phone!
Waiting on Moon 3: Phobos & Deimos
Edward Norton was in the first one. I don’t doubt he’ll reprise the role. I’ll call Clint Mansell and get him working on a new song or two
Pt III ends with us blowing the moon up
[удалено]
[We are the Mooninites from the center of the Moon.](https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.5021536104.7456/flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.jpg)
So we’re following the timeline in The Time Machine I see.
Depends how WW Part 3 pans out
Somehow the moon returned.
Do we open doors with a vocal “woosh” command?
In part 3 we find out the Nazis secretly had a moonbase since ww2 on the dark side, oh wait maybe that was a movie I saw...
The Moon Landing. Again. 25 years later The Moon Landing. Again.Again.
Hopefully, because with all the fucking funding we spend on secret military tech, no way should China outdo us in space. I strongly suspect our real space assets our way more developed then public is led to believe.
People say this about everything American lol
I don't think people understand that the next step is trying to have a semi permanent presence on the moon. The cost alone has made the ISS look like a bargain until recently, and commercial crew has been a huge factor there. Until technology advances more, stockpiling a moon base for deep space exploration is the best way to get to Mars and beyond.
There isn't much in the way of useful material on the moon. Unless we lick this fusion thing and start harvesting He3 from the lunar regolith there just isn't much there you need to go to other places. It doesn't really make sense to spend the giant amount of energy you need to get out of Earth's gravity, then land on the moon, to go somewhere else. A low earth orbit station would be a better staging point for long range missions then a lunar base. You could make a case it could be worth ice harvesting on the moon for the production of reaction mass, but there's no real need for people to be there for bots to collect ice and mass driver it to orbit.
It's energetically easier to get from the Moon to virtually every other body in the solar system than it is to get out of Earth orbit to the Moon.
Yes but what is on the moon for us to launch into space that we didn't already have to launch from Earth in the first place? The whole point they're making is it makes no sense to lob shit into space, then land it on the moon, only to launch it *again*. Just launch the first time and be done with it.
If they refuel on the moon wouldn't they be able to take off with more weight/fuel than when they left earth? That seems like a huge bonus for space exploration
yeah, if you can make fuel on the moon. thats a big IF
Like theoretically maybe, I don't want to say that's a totally bogus idea. But we still have to also get all that extra fuel there. Again, why not just store this stuff in orbit and do it that way? What is the benefit of doing it on a Moon base and having to completely re-launch, vs *already* having orbital speed and refueling at said speed from a refueling station in orbit? I feel like all the lunar dust couldn't exactly make shit simpler. That stuff is abrasive and gets all over/into everything (not to mention you now are potentially dragging lunar dust off with you to Mars and contaminating the planet with it).
storing fuel in space is anything but easy (your other arguments are all on point. just wanted to answer the question, storing fuel in orbit is also not really an option)
Because it takes a lot of energy to get off the planet and out of Earth's gravity well. That means you can only send a relatively small payload. But the moon has way less gravity and so if you can set up facilities there you can launch massive payloads to anywhere else in the solar system for a fraction of the energy cost it would take to send it from the Earth. Again, it takes less energy to go from the moon to any other body in the solar system than it does to launch something from the Earth to the Moon. Build things on site there.
Water outside the Earth’s gravity well is immensely valuable. H3 is a future pipe dream, but water is usable now. And infrastructure ain’t maintaining itself. If there’s going to be industry on the Moon, telescopes will soon follow, and both the industrial and scientific infrastructure are going to have to be manned to some degree for on site maintenance. The moon will eat robots for lunch.
I thought the whole point of a moon base was to figure out how to build a base on another body then you can go do it again on Mars. Its much cheaper to test on the moon than go to Mars and fail there. And going to Mars will require a base because of how long the journey is there and back.
You can use moon dust to make a surface suitable to place portals on.
The problem is the dust. Really look it up. Makes a permanent presence almost impossible.
We even put whalers up there
You was there?
But there ain't no whales.
Yeah but a lot of the people around back then are dead so we can do it again. Same with World Wars!
I guess you could say everyone involved has passed, except Buzz Aldrin is still alive.
Geez, what a trooper!
China and India are racing for 2nd while the US does a victory lap
The race never finished. The players just changed. The US just assumed it won (I guess it briefly did) and bailed on the Moon for 40 years, and it’s only China’s frankly insane progress over the last 20 or so years that have lit a fire under America’s arse again and motivated them to go back.
Crossing the finish line usually signals the end of a race.
It’s a relay, not a sprint. The finishing line isn’t even within sight. There’s always a bigger hill, and there’s always someone who wants to stand on it.
This NASA chief actually thinks the dark side of the moon is perpetually in the dark and that they know nothing about what's there. [https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/1cix0wp/bill\_nelson\_says\_the\_back\_side\_of\_the\_moon\_is/](https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/1cix0wp/bill_nelson_says_the_back_side_of_the_moon_is/) You hate to tell him anything.
Yes and No. Whichever country builds a permanent lunar base first will have a massive advantage in Space colonization and economy. The goal is to build either manufacturing facilities on the moon or in CIS Lunar orbit, as the major cost of space travel is the amount and weight of fuel to get to leave our atmosphere. The cost is lower on Luna, and almost nothing in orbit.
[удалено]
From the national level perspective it's a matter of dibs, basically. Whoever gets there first can claim the best regions as 'theirs' (no matter what past treaties might say,) and take measures to keep others out. That's important because the areas which have water-ice are, as far as we've seen to this point, quite limited.
It’s really not. Any country that lays claim to the moon will be sanctioned to exactly there and back by every other country on earth.
Let's talk about it.... the Space Race?
Good year….. pretty fond of the summer that year.
where were you when Nasa blown 3-0 lead for moon landing?
Race to put people on the moon but not to get people off the streets… priorities..priorities
Neat, Space Race II
Electric boogaloo
Not in a Boeing made rocket
If it’s Boeing we ain’t going
Let the helium 3 wars begin.
Begun the helium-3 wars have.
Cold war vibes intensifies
What are we racing for?
The Moon, I think.
I've seen this one before I think it's called For All Mankind
This is the question nobody is thinking about. If we really landed in the moon back then, why do we even care?
I'm sure there is a lot more to be learned about the moon, but it's probably more making sure we don't miss what everyone else is doing
If there was a lot more to learn, we would’ve already established a research base or something. The fact that we are wasting much more resources on mars when the moon is much closer just speaks volumes to either incompetence or propaganda
didn’t usa do this 50ish years ago ?
~~movie~~ technology today supposed to be better
I know this is supposed to be a joke, but just in case people are taking it seriously, chandraayan 2 which is the Indian space shuttle which went to the moon in 2021 actually took pics of Apollo 11 and 12 as it flew over the landing site. Really neat stuff. [click here to see the Reddit post about it ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ISRO/comments/167hcnz/isro_chandrayaan2s_photos_of_apollo_11_12_landing/)
The only proof needed to prove the moon landing wasn't fake is that the Soviets accepted it. The ISRO photos are icing on the cake.
I tell this to all my dubious friends. Near the height of the Cold war, the Soviet Union would have done literally anything in their power to prove America had lied to the world
You’re assuming facts matter to these people.
What do you mean by *these people*? /s
Clearly a multi-country conspiracy! /s
Thank you. Somehow I didn't know about those pictures. They're fantastic.
Stupid title
So this would be the 7th time the US lands people on the moon - why do they care that the 7th time is before China's first time. Race was finished a long time ago and still no other nation has landed a single person on the moon
The race is for a lunar colony and sustainable mining, manufacturing, and launch industry hub. Arriving first in this competition is merely the first of many steps in this race. The title is written poorly.
They did the first one so they can perfect ICBMs. Makes sense there’s another motive than just “beat ya”
Translation: it's a race to maximize the profit opportunities of the moon.
Since basically the beginning of civilization, yes you are correct.
It’s a race to build up a program that ultimately can establish permanent residency on the Moon. No one under the age of 55 remembers the Apollo missions and not many are motivated about space travel and exploration because those missions happened so long ago. A Moon landing in this decade for *any* country, including the US, might as well be the first one ever given the public reception that will likely come from it, especially in our modern world where everything is so connected by technology. The next manned Moon landing I believe will lead to an increase in interest *and* funding for space programs around the world, and I think will be the catalyst for us finally branching humans out from this planet.
Without some form of Space Elevator or extremely cheap, high thrust fuel there's basically no hope of ever doing anything at any real scale just due to the amount of money, and very soon our finite fuel sources that it's going to drain. The short term problem is finding the solution to cost and/or availability of resources to just move things out of the atmosphere, and then getting materials back, preferably in bulk, intact. The long term problem is getting a return on anything this century for any celestial body that isn't the moon or a nearby asteroid. Takes too long to get to anywhere else and there's no return on anything besides science if you're not planning an actual return leg.
Just because Columbus landed in North America doesn't mean it was to belong to Spain forever.
America is threatened by the upstart china - plain and simple.
Other comments replying to this person gave real reasons. Not this absolute nonsense. Artemis program has been in motion for over a decade. There is nothing surprising about this or unusual. There’s also a huge difference between the previous missions in the 70s. They could only be on the moon for a couple days at a time before having to leave. Artemis is aiming for a permanent human presence on the moon. Something that was impossible then. It’s a “race” because space on the moon for a viable colony is limited so just one theoretical area. The lunar South Pole. As it’s one of the places most likely to have enough water particles for a colony. No one is spending trillions because they feel “threatened” lmao
Not saying Americans don’t also have legitimate reasons to go to the moon, I’m talking about turning it into a race part. The chinese have a clearly set out plan with dates and milestones that have been set for some time and follow their plan methodically. Neither the chinese govt nor chinese media talk about this being a race against America - that’s all on the American side. They just go quietly about their business and if they do mention the Americans, it usually in response to numerous western articles and media reports about a “race”. The chinese usually clearly acknowledge the Americans advantage in technology and the fact they already visited the moon a generation ago. But they also warn that the Americans maybe setting too optimistic of a timetable and this may come back to bite them . Perhaps it’s a function of the difference between the two countries media, but the result is the same, the USA hyping the situation and creating a narrative of a race, while the chinese just go about hitting milestones per their plan.
Again, space on moon is limited. There is a location on the moon with the best possible conditions for a colony and they both have their eyes on it. We do not know how much space a colony needs for its life support systems to be self sufficient with nothing but lunar resources, nor do we know how many resources are needed per person. Maybe there’s room for both or maybe not. That’s why there’s a “race” narrative being spun by entities that do not represent either the Chinese nor the US governments. NASA has valid reasons that involve other celestial bodies, and I’m sure China has its own valid interests. My original point though, is the original commentator questioned why the US would return to the moon when we did it 50 years ago. Saying it’s due to China and US feeling insecure is incorrect and disingenuous The correct answer is, the lunar missions 50 years ago are irrelevant to todays lunar programs with completely different technology as well as a scope so different that what’s happening today was impossible to do in the 70s. The SLS program and NASAs idea for Orion, lunar gateway, etc. are over 13 years in the making and none of this is newsworthy in the slightest until Artemis 2 or 3 launches.
Hey shardas, you make some very good points and agree with much of it. But again, my point is about this turning into a space race thing is coming basically from one side - the USA side. Why they got to do that ? And for the argument there is not enough real estate on the moon for the two countries to set up their own respective lunar bases sounds pretty weak. The South Pole has literally thousands of square kilometres of moonscape to choose from, proximal to the pole, not like it’s one square km and that’s it. And why do the Americans wanna be so far away anyway? It seems ridiculous to me that two groups of the same species from the same planet wouldn’t wanna set up their lunar bases close to each other, no? If for no other reason than for an extra level of security in the event shit hits the fan on one base and they can receive assistance from the other base. And that’s chinas whole point. What is this deep desire of the Americans to always try to subjugate every other country to their design and control? What’s wrong with a little cooperation? China has said many times in many contexts (not just space), that the two sides will each get further and be more successful, aka a win- win situation, if they work together and cooperate, rather than treat each other as adversaries. And interestingly, the chinese also subtlety warn the Americans, that the American’s pathway to try to beat and subjugate and even destroy any country that threatens their supremacy, will in the end, result in their own interests being hurt more. It will result in almost like an American self fulfilling prophecy in which they are seeing the chinese as being this huge competitive threat eventually eclipsing them; that then actually turns into reality.
I'm really pesimistic about the US space race. Congress has defunded NASA for so long that they've allowed private enterprise to come and fill gaps. So now companies like SpaceX and Boeing play major rolls in the US space process. These companies are not well run, and have different goals than NASA, like profit.
lol, Boeing built the first stage of the Saturn V. Companies have always played a part in this. The difference is that more responsibility is being placed on these companies, both fiscally and developmentally. This has been functional to varying degrees of success… with SpaceX’s performance in Commercial Cargo and Crew being an example of the best, and Boeing Starliner, the worst.
We're doing more launches now than ever before, at a substantially lower cost, almost single-handedly due to SpaceX.
I would like you to elaborate on how both Spacex and Boeing are poorly run. I wish NASA hadn't been so terribly underfunded and could work on a program that didn't have to worry about surviving political administrations. I just don't necessarily agree with your second point.
Well Boeing for instance has a series of plane failures due to changing out leadership and cutting costs. Yes, yes, aviation is a different department, but it's an example of the kind corporate profit drive that can cause these issues, inside of the same company. SpaceX in an effort to do things cheaply is burning up satelittes in orbit and many scientist believe this has a negative effect on the ozone layer. These are just a few examples. NASA doesn't worry about profit, they can focus on what is going to advance technology and space exploration, without that burden. It being funded through tax dollars was a wonderful thing that keeps it isolated from private profit drive. Or at least, it did.
I've heard the Boeing arguments sure, the McDonald's Douglas merger in the 1990s has gotten us to the point where planes are falling out of the sky. With regards to Spacex, their satellites are burning up because that's what they are designed to do. If they were in higher orbits they would stay as junk far longer should a collision happen. Satellites burning up on re-entry do not harm the ozone layer. I have seen an argument made that thousands of satellites would interfere with astronomy due to reflection however those concerns are being addressed with reflection mitigation coatings on the earth facing sides of the satellites. NASA is not for profit but they need to spend money to pay for services they may not be able to provide themselves because they don't have any funds to allocate. Look at the Commercial Crew program for example. Spacex and Boeing were contracted to develop a spacecraft capable of delivering crew to and from the ISS for 6 months at a time. Spacex received roughly 2.5 billion dollars while Boeing received over 5 billion. Even though both companies were neck and neck back in 2019, Spacex is on their 8th ISS mission not counting Demo-2 or Axiom 1,2 and 3 and Inspiration 4. They are about to send 4 people to do the highest earth orbit flown with crew and the first spacewalk with a privately developed suit. Boeing is having trouble with their crewed demonstration mission right now, not even a full service mission and they are 1 billion dollars in the hole. Point is, for profit isn't always bad when it comes to spaceflight because not every company shares the same values or long term goals. Capitalism is a double edged sword but sometimes it's what we have to work with if Congress will not give NASA what it needs to see an ambitious project through.
So it's a race again, is it? That's stupid. It's supposed to be science. We should cooperate, share results, and not hurry. We all know it can be done. It begs the question: what value is there in having TWO programs? What will one achieve that the other won't?
If China has a base the we can go over and ask for a cup of sugar every once in a while. Sounds like a basis for cooperation to me.
America has a law in place that prevents NASA from working with China, so its legally not possible.
I wish the US was “on schedule” to provide free or at the very least…affordable healthcare.
Unless Boeing is in charge of the launch platform
What is Boeing building for NASA?
For space nerds it would be best if China got their first. Curious to see the US going all in on the space race again
Good thing Boeing is on this! I can not forsee any issues with a company with such a stellar reputation.
Honestly I hope China "wins" in this race so everyone in America can shut the hell up about putting a man on the moon, dispite being late towards everything else moon related.
God these sequels are out of CONTROL latelu
Just not on a Boeing!
I didn't know it was a race. Shit when I found out china was going I thought it was cool. The thought of them "beating" us there was absent.
How did humanity lose so much technology and knowledge from the 60's till now? Decades ago the US put people on the moon, missions with zero casualties using computing power much less powerful than a Samsung smart fridge. And now we have trouble even getting people back from orbit...
Well, we didn’t put people on the moon with zero casualties. Nobody died in Apollo 11 but there were plenty of casualties before that and a few since. In 1969, NASA was 4% of the US budget. Today, it’s under 0.5%. I’m sure putting people on the moon would be extremely smooth if it were still that big a priority in the budget. Instead we pinch pennies. Boomers have fucking gutted science in this country and then bitch and moan that China is catching up.
The budget was that high because we were developing ICBMS in tandem during the Cold War
everything here has to be about profit now. If someone isn't getting rich off of it, no one backs it. and we have to raise tariffs to 100% in order to compete and prevent us from seeing that we already lost.
I’m a firm believer that if NASA was continually given 4% of the US budget the last 60 years we would easily be 25 years ahead of where we are technologically.
> How did humanity lose so much technology and knowledge from the 60's till now? “Humanity” is doing just fine. Not an exhaustive list, but China, India, Singapore, South Korea, Brazil, and South Africa are among the nations that have made remarkable strides in technology and knowledge development in recent decades. Sticking with space shit, China recently achieved the historic feat of retrieving rocks from the far side of the moon, which is objectively a notable achievement. To disregard or deny this would be hypocritical and disingenuous.
Because the systems are not the same, and the factor of safety is far higher now than it was then. This means more complicated systems with more points of failure to work out. The difference is those failures won't lead to catastrophic events like they used to.
No technology was lost. Also. Nobody has trouble to do it? The only question is why would you waste immense amounts of resources and man power to do something nobody needs or even wants?
Technology isn't a straight line, and it's less that we're lacking the knowledge and technology, more the capability. Fabricating stuff like that requires very skilled laborers working on highly refined products. For those laborers to acquire those skills they'll need to burn through a decent chunk of those refined products to understand how to work with them. And the same goes for the workers to produce the refined products. We might have the blueprints and the compositions for the heat sheilding they used, but the factory used to produce the alloys will have been shut down and moved to China, same goes for the factory that fabricated the alloys into parts. The workers who worked those jobs will have retired or reskilled into something else. The savings from those factories getting closed down will have already been spent on cocaine in the 80s
I had a buddy that got a job at space x as a welder. He told me he was one of three people in the country certified to do some of the welds needed.
we didn't. look at how much money the Apollo program costs. it's a fraction of NASA's budget today. on top of that, we've put contractors like Boeing in charge with cost plus contracts, meaning they have no real incentive to ever deliver rockets on time.
Sometimes America really comes off as the “let me one up you, look what I can do” kid
cheeky china planting a flag with a lander instead of a human.
Most people on this planet don’t give a fuck about the moon. Just let us live our lives in dignity by providing low cost of living and plenty of jobs.
The one we already landed on?
Well, it can't really be a race, given the Americans finished the race 55 years ago...
And I will be its king. The moon king
Does Jake Gyllanhallway play Neil Armstrong?
In before someone calls this just another in a long string of Hollywood reboots.
Wasn't this a fallout side mission? Find the remnants of the American Moon program before the Chinese do?
Oh hello 1960s
Getting them there is easy. Bringing them back alive is the challenge.
Space Race 2: electric boogaloo
Space Force marketing is getting crazy.
"a race we finished in 1969," he added.
Space race, proxy wars and Russians causing a panic in Cuba… were truly in coldwar 2 electric boogaloo huh
For real this time?
I’ve seen this before!
Are moon hoax people going to tell China that moon landing is impossible since everyone would die at the Van Allen belt?
Just a small problem of nothing to land them in.
Nothin like a good old fashioned space race
Oh this again
The moon rings like a bell when struck.
Lunar permanence is the name of the new race.
Is this how we settle every cold war now? "Alright motherfucker 1v1 me" "oh yeah? Just say where!" "The usual spot"
Who owns the moon? What dismisses claims if a part of the moon becomes a permanent station for whatever country? It's not that it is going to be colonized, but it will become a real-estate when you have more than one country exploring, but you cannot come within 10 feet. Serious things to consider. What about if you want to mine a comet (Psyche-16). Who claims what and where?
Goddammit John you were right in your proclamation we're finally gonna do it.
That’s no moon….
If they can bring back all of the Hasselblads they left up there I’m sure they could auction them off and make a pretty penny to go towards funding more cool space stuff… or put them in the Smithsonian where they belong.
Pretty sure we beat everybody already.
no, they are not.
So are we still pretending the world isn’t in Cold War 2.0?
bro we won that over 50 years ago
I mean we’ve done it before right? Right??
I mean, has anyone realized there's nothing but fucking dirt up there.
W goes to China if you keep using a Boeing Starliner.
Didn’t we win this race in 1969?
It's about time someone did it.
What if they met up there and had a space brawl?
Lol I doubt that. We'll be lucky if we aren't killing our friends and family next year at this rate. America will collapse before next June.
Just let them fucking have this. Jesus Christ, there's a million other things taxpayer money is better spent on.