American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

clark · 2003-07-01 09:24:05

Thanks Shaun,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,1 … 12,00.html

US-based missiles to have global reach
Julian Borger in Washington
Tuesday July 1, 2003

The Pentagon is planning a new generation of weapons, including huge hypersonic drones and bombs dropped from space, that will allow the US to strike its enemies at lightning speed from its own territory.

The new weapons are being developed under a programme codenamed Falcon (Force Application and Launch from the Continental US).

The Falcon technology would "free the US military from reliance on forward basing to enable it to react promptly and decisively to destabilising or threatening actions by hostile countries and terrorist organisations", according to the Darpa invitation for bids. The ultimate goal would be a "reusable hypersonic cruise vehicle (HCV) ... capable of taking off from a conventional military runway and striking targets 9,000 nautical miles distant in less than two hours".
The unmanned HCV would carry a payload of up to 12,000 lbs and could ultimately fly at speeds of up to 10 times the speed of sound, according to Daniel Goure, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute in Washington.

The Cav could carry 1,000 lbs of explosives but at those speeds explosives may not be necessary. A simple titanium rod would be able to penetrate 70 feet of solid rock and the shock wave would have enormous destructive force. It could be used against deeply buried bunkers, the sort of target the air force is looking for new ways to attack.
Jane's Defence Weekly reported that the first Cav flight demonstration is provisionally scheduled by mid-2006, and the first SLV flight exercise would take place the next year. A test of the two systems combined would be carried out by late 2007.
A prototype demonstrating HCV technology would be tested in 2009.
SLV rockets will also give the air force a cheap and flexible means to launch military satellites at short notice, within weeks, days or even hours of a crisis developing.
The SLV-Cav combination, according to the Darpa document, "will provide a near-term (approximately 2010) operational capability for prompt global strike from Consus (the continental US) while also enabling future development of a reusable HCV for the far-term (approximately 2025)". The range of this weapon is unclear.

Bill White · 2003-07-01 09:48:54

Heh!

The Cav could carry 1,000 lbs of explosives but at those speeds explosives may not be necessary. A simple titanium rod would be able to penetrate 70 feet of solid rock and the shock wave would have enormous destructive force. It could be used against deeply buried bunkers, the sort of target the air force is looking for new ways to attack.

For years (on various space advocacy message boards) I have been suggesting that cheap access to space is a national security issue and the pro space folks have routinely rejected that opinion.

The Pentagon, Tom Ridge and the US government in general won't much like the idea of anybody being able to deliver large hardened lawn darts to the contintental United States, or Alaska or Hawai'i for that matter. (A few well placed 2000 kg titanium lawn darts could wreak havoc to Diego Garcia, Guam or the Centcom HQ in Qatar as well as Pearl Harbor).

Cheap access to space (a National Space Society mantra) is contrary to the national security interests of the United States. A Chinese base on the moon can ship He3 or other resoures back to LEO, or it can conceal hardened lawn darts in the payload.

The idea is old - Heinlien did it in his book Harsh Mistress - yet kinetic weapons remain very real, IMHO.

clark · 2003-07-01 10:07:24

Well folks, time to put some things together...

I posted about Mr. Musk on April 16th, 2003 in a seperate thread in the science and discovery forum, here:

Low Cost rockets being developed, SpaceX - Falcon $6 million dollar rocket

Notice the name of the rocket, Falcon.

Okay, dosen't mean much, right?

If you go look at the web page that does an interview with Mr. Musk about his rocket company at:

Internet Entrepreneur Sets His Sights on the Satellite Launch Market

From the interview:

Already, SpaceX has received verbal commitment to buy a ride on the Falcon rocket from a U.S. Department of Defense customer. Also, the firm has a written commitment from a foreign government wanting to plop a payload atop the company's booster. "And this is before we have built the vehicle," Musk said. Numbers of other prospective customers have voiced interest in Falcon too, he said.

Sure, nothing concrete, however, the 6 million dollar rocket is designed to loft half a ton to orbit.

"I do think that there's a clear market," Musk told SPACE.com during the Space Foundation's symposium held here. "You can do a lot with that size satellite, be it science experiments, space observation, or communications. In fact, I don't know what you couldn't do with a 1,000-pound satellite," he said.

And this will all start happening very, very soon:

If all goes as planned, Falcon is to fly in the fourth quarter of this year [2003], subject to Air Force, NASA, and Federal Aviation Administration approvals. The rocket can be launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida and from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, according to company fact sheets.

From the SpaceX website, at: http://www.spacex.com/ (under Updates)

First launch date
We are driving towards a December 17th launch this year from our launchpad at Vandenberg and now have that date reserved with the Air Force range authority. At this point, there are no technical issues that would prevent us from meeting that schedule, although all necessary caveats should be inserted here. Several external dependencies could affect that date, including weather, environmental & range safety approval or satellite readiness.

clark · 2003-07-02 08:39:18

Boeing To Build Space-borne Power Generator
PRESS RELEASE
Date Released: Tuesday, July 01, 2003

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12000

ST. LOUIS, July 1, 2003 - Boeing [NYSE:BA] has been named by the Department of Energy (DOE) to lead in the creation of a next-generation power system for future Mars surface missions and the exploration of deep space.
Boeing Rocketdyne Propulsion and Power in Canoga Park, Calif., is teamed with Teledyne Energy Systems, Inc. to develop, qualify, and deliver electrical power generation systems for interplanetary missions and probes. The new compact power system, a multi-mission radioisotope thermoelectric generator (MMRTG), will provide unique in-space and planetary surface power capability.
The announcement follows the successful launch of the Boeing Delta II, powered by the Rocketdyne RS-27A engine, which sent Mars Exploration Rovers A, otherwise known as "Unity", on its way to the red planet.
Missions already targeted to use the new power system are the Mars Science Laboratory, a mobile laboratory rover that will be sent to the Red Planet in 2009; an Outer Planets Probe set for launch in 2011; and the Mars Sample Return mission, planned for launch in 2013.
The MMRTG will supply electric power for mobility, data acquisition, and communication. It will have a 14-year design life, including three years on the surface of Mars.
A flight version would be capable of generating power levels of about 110 watts by using a radioisotope heat source to drive thermoelectric power converters to create electric power.
An MMRTG-powered rover will be able to land and go anywhere on the surface of Mars, from the polar caps to deep, dark canyons, and will safely provide full power during night and day under all types of environmental conditions.
"This next-generation MMRTG technology will be based on a proven heritage design that has been demonstrated by earlier efforts on the surface of Mars and in deep space," said Rich Rovang, program manager for the MMRTG team. "All of the Viking and Pioneer spacecrafts used Teledyne RTG design technologies," he said. "The RTG on Pioneer 10 operated over 30 years and over seven billion miles from Earth."
Boeing Rocketdyne's Power Systems group will lead the project and perform systems integration for a prototype system that would employ a non-nuclear heat source for local testing and systems demonstrations. For its part, Teledyne Energy Systems will supply a new series of thermoelectric generators and related technologies. Fueling and final testing of the qualification and flight units will be performed by the DOE.
Boeing Rocketdyne is also working several related technology contracts that will eventually lead to even higher power and more efficient systems to enable future deep space propulsion systems. Implementation of these advanced propulsion systems could dramatically shorten the times required to visit planets and their moons and enable future missions to explore multiple destinations in a single voyage. These technologies are part of NASA's Project Prometheus, which seeks to create new, more capable power and propulsion systems.

sethmckiness · 2003-07-02 10:08:27

A flight version would be capable of generating power levels of about 110 watts by using a radioisotope heat source to drive thermoelectric power converters to create electric power.

My main experience is Satellite Communications, working ground stations with high gain antennas.. I also have worked with Super high bandwidth Common Data Link Terminals. This is not very much power. Unless I am missing something big here. That is barely enough power to power up a super low power Traveling Wave Tube or Klystron. So, I must be missing something.

clark · 2003-07-03 10:22:01

http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:Px … n&ie=UTF-8

Space Scientists Say China's Mars Probe 'Years Away'
Senior space scientists said Wednesday China is light years away from launching Mars exploration programmes at present, but preparation for investigating the Red Planet will be accelerated

Ouyang Ziyuan, a colleague of Liu, said in March that China could send its first unmanned probe to the Moon in a couple of years.
Outlining China's space activities in the 21st century, Luan Enjie, director of the China National Space Administration, said China is aiming for a landing on the Moon and participating in international activities on Mars exploration.
Luan later said the first phase of lunar exploration will be finished by 2010. But he did not disclose any timeline for the Mars programme.
"Technically speaking, the experience and expertise accumulated in the course of implementing the lunar probe programme will help China's exploration of Mars,'' said Ouyang, chief scientist of China's lunar exploration programme.
But the differences between the two explorations are greater than the similarities, suggesting the Mars probe may be years away even if the country's Moon missions are successful.
Liu insisted a pre-study of Mars exploration should proceed in spite of this, as the country has pledged to deepen its exploration and utilization of outer space.
The scientist said the probe programme would consist of three stages: orbiting, landing and returning from the Mars.

Interesting developments.

Even if this is 'years' away, pressure is building. I might imagine that they are developing the capabilities so they cannot be denied any future involvement with international space efforts. Not to mention developing the means to counter act any national policy of space access negation.

If this continues, I believe NASA budgets will benefit...

Josh Cryer · 2003-07-03 15:31:49

My bet is still quite safe.

And Shaun, I didn't see your post until now (just reading up on clark's thread, ensuring that I'm not going to be shelling out a bit of money in the forseeable future). I think, nah, I mean, even if the context was domination, I can still see quite a few people in Hollywood I wouldn't mind dominating me, and I think this goes for just about every straight guy out there, really. I was basically replying to a generalization with another generalization. ?Liberals are boring and gross and no one fantasizes about them? But Hollywood is full of liberals (and they are generally interesting and hot) and a lot of people fantasize about them!? So, either Hollywood isn't full of liberals (and somehow magically all the hot interesting people are conservatives), or liberals can be quite hot and could certainly meet the criteria for the joke.

Certain contridictions like that amuse me to no end.

(BTW, he explicitly referred to Nazis' because he wanted to put liberals below the level of Nazis. A common tactic, I have noticed, in fringe conservative thinking. Ever hear of Ann Coulter?)

My main gripe with the joke is that, hey, I don't recall one attractive Nazi. The only attractive girl I've ever seen within Nazi circles was a poor daughter of a hickish Nazi-preaching white-supremacist, which I guarantee is praying for the day they're free of the insanity. (Heh, and another note, I wanted to make- Nazis, psychologically speaking, were quite ?weak? given that they were prone to, you know, living under a dictator and not, um, thinking for themselves- ie, allowing propaganda to brainwash them into being weak followers.)

Anyway, many apologies, clark, didn't mean to let it get this long.

clark · 2003-07-03 16:00:37

Thanks Josh,

Our bet has a rather long window, which I think at least gives me a little more breathing room for 'optimisim'.

I must admit though I do get a kick out of making you sweat a little, not that I think you would mind too terribly if you lost anyway. :laugh:

A appreciate everyone's restraint in trying to maintain this thread 'on topic' (as much as is possible for this community! ). And I appreciate any input from others on this matter, so feel free to show how this idea is misguided, or perhaps on track... ???

clark · 2003-07-14 10:18:28

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/robot-03k.html

Humans, Robots Work Together To Test Spacewalk Squad
Houston - Jul 14, 2003

Humans and robots worked side-by-side this summer at NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston to evaluate the concept of using human-robotic teams to improve the productivity of astronauts working outside the International Space Station, other space vehicles, or on the surface of other planets.

Currie wore an advanced-concept space suit designed for use on other planets. The suit is half as heavy as a standard Shuttle Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) and easier to maneuver in Earth's gravity.
The "I-suit," developed for NASA by ILC Dover, Inc., is one of several different advanced space suit assemblies being used to compare the relative merits and liabilities of various suit components.

Robonauts of the future could be used for a variety of jobs, including assembly of orbital telescopes, remote Earth observatories and interplanetary transit vehicles, all of which could require work beyond low-Earth orbit.
"We're looking at what new machines we need to build and how we need to team them up to help the astronauts get more work done," Ambrose said. "The technology could be ready for International Space Station jobs in the next three to four years."

Tele operated robots capable of constructing large space based infrastructure in just a few years...

For some pictures and additional background information on the Robonauts:

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/ju … ncept.html

More pictures:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery....e1.html

clark · 2003-07-14 12:50:30

More on American military ambitions in space for the next 25 years.

http://www.sundayherald.com/34768

Revealed: US plan to 'own' space

As part of a plan to ensure its total military supremacy, the US is preparing to complete the domination of space -- by any means necessary. Neil Mackay explains the terrifying new face of global warfare

The rush to militarise space will also see domestic laws and foreign agreements torn up. As the document warns: 'To fully develop and exploit [space] ... some US policies and international treaties may need to be reviewed and modified'.

The document also lays the groundwork for the development of '21st century space warriors' -- a new military cadre tasked solely to fight 'from and in' space. The SMP says this Space Corps 'is just as crucial to the success of our vision as employing new technologies'.

The (SMP) says: 'Effective use of space-based resources provides a continual and global presence over key areas of the world ... military forces have always viewed the 'high ground' position as one of dominance. With rare exception, whoever owned the high ground owned the fight. Space is the ultimate high ground of US military operations.
'Today, control of this high ground means superiority ... and significant force enhancement. Tomorrow, ownership may mean instant engagement anywhere in the world.'

The document proclaims US aspirations to 'global vigilance, reach and power', and Space Command says its vision 'looks 25 years into the future and is summed up as follows: space warfighting forces providing continuous deterrence and prompt global engagement for America ... through the control and exploitation of space'.
The aim, the SMP says, is to:

'Extend the reach, precision and intensity of US military power and operations.'
'Ensure the ability to apply space forces when and where we need them and that our adversary understands the advantage we possess.'
'Use our space capabilities at our discretion while at the same time denying our adversaries access to space assets at their disposal.'

The SMP also shows how the US fears advances in space technology among other nations -- including its European allies. 'Space capabilities are proliferating internationally,' it says, 'a trend that can reduce the advantages we currently enjoy.' It points out that Space Command has no control over the European Galileo satellite system .

A list of strategies and objectives detail the goals of Space Command in the coming years. These include:

creating an instantaneous global strike force.
Total monitoring of the Earth by 'real-time global situation awareness.'
a nuclear arsenal in space.
the development of exotic new weapons.
the maintenance of US military dominance. The doctrine declares: 'when challenged, pursue superiority in space through robust ... defensive and offensive capabilities.'
a fully integrated 'land, sea, air and space war-fighting system.'
integrating civil and commercial space operations with military ones.

One of the exotic weapons in development is known as the Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI). This would be a tracking device, based in space, which could pinpoint and follow the smallest of targets on earth . GMTI, the document says, will improve the ability to 'detect, locate, identify and track a wide range of strategic and tactical targets we currently have minimal ability to detect, such as nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and activities, hidden targets and moving air targets'.

clark · 2003-07-15 14:04:29

http://www.space.com/spacenews/spacenew … 0714a.html

U.S. Air Force Sees Quick and Frequent Launches in its Future

By: Jeremy Singer
Space News Staff Writer

The future of military spaceflight could also involve new missions such as placing military personnel in orbit, Baird said. Military officers have flown to space to take part in NASA missions, but the Air Force has yet to conduct its own manned spaceflight operations. The first program designed to place military personnel in space ? the Manned Orbiting Laboratory ? was canceled in the 1960s.

The Air Force may want to keep officers in space for long periods in a space station to make continuous observations of the Earth and objects in space that could threaten U.S. assets, or launch manned spacecraft for quick observations in a crisis situation, Baird said.
As the U.S. Air Force pushes forward with new space programs in the years to come, its strategic planners will need to be mindful that other countries may make great strides as well, said Deborah Westphal, a partner in the Manchester, Mass.-based consulting firm Toeffler Associates.

?I think right now we are the one and only superpower and I don?t think that will continue,? Westphal said. ?I think we will move toward having another superpower out there. Whoever that is will have to share in the control of space or control it.?

The Air Force recently began development of systems intended to temporarily disable enemy communications and reconnaissance satellites, and has not ruled out the development of systems to destroy spacecraft used by the enemy.
However, the missile defense interceptors under development at the Pentagon could be easily reconfigured to strike satellites, and may also encourage other countries to develop capabilities to strike satellites.
?The ground-based missile defense interceptors will be a lousy missile defense system, but a great anti-satellite system,? Cirincione said, pointing to the relative ease of targeting satellites in predictable orbits versus unanticipated ballistic missile launches.

I've had a sneaking suspicion that Missile Defense was really intended for denying space launch and space assets of US adversaries.

It would make much more sense to pursue this technology for controlling space, not to shoot down incoming war heads?

prometheusunbound · 2003-07-16 06:53:18

clark, I think your moon base proposal and space race w/ china is forgeting one thing.

After 1945 american and russian troops faced across the border of europe and prepared for battle.

We don't have such a conflict with china right now (except the possiblity of an Korean Intervention) and most americans don't care about china in the least bit. They won't care unless some poor neighbor of theirs dies in a battle against china. (or in some land that china claims is theirs)

I don't see the motive for a space race. Just because china is doing it dosen't mean the whole world will jump in and do it (unless china 'steals' my asteroid mining plan. . .www.parksweb.com/nateweb).

The american public doesn't care, the american public thinks space is for damn-fool idiots that are rich members of the establishment. America is 'planet-locked' so to speak and that mentality doesn't change unless it aint planet-locked no more. . . .

So show me the motive for a moon base and space race (I'm all in favor of another one!) as I am curious to see what motive the US of A would have to race china.

clark · 2003-07-16 08:46:04

We don't have such a conflict with china right now (except the possiblity of an Korean Intervention) and most americans don't care about china in the least bit. They won't care unless some poor neighbor of theirs dies in a battle against china. (or in some land that china claims is theirs)

Let's hope it never comes to something like this.

With that said, current tensions exsist between China and the US. US support of Taiwain is one instance, and a very dangerous one at that. The current President has declared that the US will do 'whatever is neccessary' to defend Tawian from agression.

Other instances occur on a daily basis, you can be reminded of this fact by the recent EP3 military spy plane that was forced to land in China after a Chinese jet clipped it. It took 11 days to get the crew back, and several more weeks to get the plane.

China is also looking to become a super power in it's own right, and is currently working on developing it's regional influence in south east asia and the pacific rim. China wants the US out of it's spehere of influence the same way the USA maintains it's sphere of influence over the Western Hemisphere.

China also has a lot of ongoing disputes in the South seas over 'rights' of certain fishing and mineral rich areas. These are all flashpoints. It may not affect the US directly per se, but it directly affects our allies and our interests in the area.

If you do a little research, you will see that current military strategy is to develop space based technologies and abilities to counter the US militaries reliance on space as a force multiplier. China is developing ASAT (anti sat weapons) capabilities. Why? What for? To what end?

I don't see the motive for a space race. Just because china is doing it dosen't mean the whole world will jump in and do it

No? There is somethign of a minor space race between India and China now. India now openly discussing sending probes to the moon and expanding their abilities in space launch.

The ESA has just declared the importance of space, and the neccessity of developing abilties to independantly access space for economic and national security. US leaders and policy makers are saying the same thing.

We are now fast approaching the point where private business will be doing sub-orbital launches. This didn't exsist during the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, or 90's. But it will exsist very soon. Heck, one of the X-prize contestants is gearing up for the first launch sometime this year or next.

The american public doesn't care, the american public thinks space is for damn-fool idiots that are rich members of the establishment. America is 'planet-locked' so to speak and that mentality doesn't change unless it aint planet-locked no more. . .

The American public dosen't care? I don't think you can legitimatley qualify that statement. The American public does care about space, just not as much as you or I might wish. Why don't they care more? Because, by and large, space does not affect them- but that is changing.

Look at all the news reports regarding our recent victories in war- everything is about the importance of space and technology. Our faster, leaner, meaner military is based on space. It is important now for no other reason than space is being used to protect our freedoms.

Now, my question to you: When did the Space Race start with the USSR? It started with the launch of Sputnik. Soviets leaped ahead of America- we were no longer the most sophisticated or advanced people. The Russians also showed they now had the ability to launch 'something' and have it land anywhere they wanted... not a pleasant thought to contemplate in a world with a new nuclear weapon.

What is going to occur in October/December of 2003?
China will launch it's Taikanouts. More than likely, the US will not have the Shuttle working by then. What does that mean? It means China will have independant launch capabilities that the US cannot match. It's Sputnik all over again.

Current US National Security policy is to maintain a 'one generatiion' ahead strategy for our military, science, and technology of all advesaries and allies. ESA is in the works to put their own GPS up- the USA is planning on leapfrogging the ESA GPS system with a new constellation of US GPS (GPS III).

We are now looking at nuclear propulsion- why? What's the rush to get anywhere in space anytime soon?

New competition, and the neccessity to stay ahead of the pack.

By and large, the US could ignore space becuase the US and Russia were the only ones playing in it. The Russian's weren't in a rush- so why would the USA spend needlesly to race itself to a destination or to an achievement that could be done at a later time? With the fall of the USSR, there was even LESS impetus to go anywhere. Why? There's plenty to do on Earth without going off on some rocket mission with dubious benefits because the cost of 'new' technology was so great.

But again, this is all changing now. The dynamics are different. The Geo-politcs are different. World technology levels are different.

Right now, NASA is in the midst of a management reshuffle. TOday, they announced the creation of a saftey board over in Virgina (it's to be modeled after the saftey board for nuclear subs in the military). The reccomendations from the Columbia investigation have been pushed back for release in August....by which time, the management reshuffle will be complete. Yesterday, Sean O'Keefe called for a speed up in development of the OSP by 2 years (now to be ready in 2008).

Bill White · 2003-07-16 09:02:33

Who are the "racers" and where is the finish line?

A race between the political regime centered in Washington DC and the political regime centered in Beijing may be unlikely or clark may be correct, I do not know.

But and/or And,

China as a culture/civilization (see Sam Huntington) has existed for 3500 years. China will survive Marx/Mao and remain uniquely Chinese. Its not China versus the USA but China versus Western civilization (Judeo-Christian/secular humanism).

Next, where is the finish line? 10 years from now, 50 years from now, 150 years from now? Chinese technology is decades behind our technology but if the hare is sleeping it doesn't matter how slow the tortoise walks.

IMHO the race is to put permanent settlers in space and have them make babies. The finish line may be 100 years away or even farther, especially if the Western hare decides to nap.

But if China gets settlers out there before the West and we Westerners decide to focus on military space and robotic strip mining, while the Chinese send unarmed miners and farmers to Mars and the asteroids, then 500 years from now, all of our descendants will be speaking mandarin.

prometheusunbound · 2003-07-16 11:02:12

Ok, I see what you are saying now.

but

Now, my question to you: When did the Space Race start with the USSR? It started with the launch of Sputnik. Soviets leaped ahead of America- we were no longer the most sophisticated or advanced people. The Russians also showed they now had the ability to launch 'something' and have it land anywhere they wanted... not a pleasant thought to contemplate in a world with a new nuclear weapon.

I don't entirely agree with. As it stands right now, the american public at large doesn't see the threat of china in space. They hear only that china is doing technology from the 1960s and I know that NASA hasen't really advanced far from the technology of the 1970s. . .

but the american public doesn't know that. Most of them still think that the space shuttle can go to the moon (it can't) and that NASA is overflowing with bleeding edge technology of our day.

The public just doesn't see it, and if china lanches some rockets, they won't care because of the preconcieved notion that NASA is more modern in its technology. Of course, there is some racist element that refuses to admit the chinese might beat us at the space game.

China is also looking to become a super power in it's own right, and is currently working on developing it's regional influence in south east asia and the pacific rim. China wants the US out of it's spehere of influence the same way the USA maintains it's sphere of influence over the Western Hemisphere.

is china a superpower right now? economically, to some degree it is. but russia in 1950 was fresh off defeating the most advanced armies in the world, and was considered the greatest miltary power in the world. China does not stand like that at all today. While their armies are quickly modernizing, they have not proven themselves as a miltary power. the american public won't reconize china as a miltary power unless china proves itself to be a miltary power, nukes or no nukes. The only way americans will wake up to chinas power is if china invades some country. The public at large just doesn't see china as a threat despite the e-11 incident. . .

Bill White · 2003-07-16 11:04:45

I don't entirely agree with. As it stands right now, the american public at large doesn't see the threat of china in space. They hear only that china is doing technology from the 1960s and I know that NASA hasen't really advanced far from the technology of the 1970s. . .
but the american public doesn't know that. Most of them still think that the space shuttle can go to the moon (it can't) and that NASA is overflowing with bleeding edge technology of our day.

Plodding tortoises and sleeping hares. . .

clark · 2003-07-16 11:15:43

I don't entirely agree with. As it stands right now, the american public at large doesn't see the threat of china in space.

No, the american public does not see a threat from China becuase China is NOT in space yet.

However, the US military, and National Security wonks DO see a threat based on future scenerio's, which require that we preapre today. American's didn't wake up one day and say, "Hey, Space is important, we need to get somebody on the Moon pronto!". No, the US leaders of the time made that decision, and LED the American populace, and then educated them to the neccessity.

That education is begining again today.

They hear only that china is doing technology from the 1960s and I know that NASA hasen't really advanced far from the technology of the 1970s. . .

The US is using technology from the 60's and 70's. If China catches up, there is no qualitative difference between our capabilities. That undermines our space superiority- which if you read the links and posts in this thread, you will see how important our lead in space is to our current domination and super power status.

The public just doesn't see it, and if china lanches some rockets, they won't care because of the preconcieved notion that NASA is more modern in its technology.

Of course. But look what's GOING TO HAPPEN, China will launch some rockets filled with astronauts. The US, will not be able to launch ANY astronauts for another 6 to 9 months (Seab O'Keefe today made the statement).

The only TWO countries in the world capable of reaching the ISS now is Russia, and soon, China. Think about the ramifications of what this means. Americans have never taken 'second place' lightly, and historically, have met such fates by refocusing and trying to work at becoming 'first' again.

It's part of our stated national security policy.

China does not stand like that at all today. While their armies are quickly modernizing, they have not proven themselves as a miltary power.

Let's hope they never do prove their ability. It's not ability that matters, it's capability that counts.

We have nukes, but don't use them. Their value is derived in the capability they provide. Military assesments look to capabilities, not 'ability'.

the american public won't reconize china as a miltary power unless china proves itself to be a miltary power, nukes or no nukes.

Every military scenerio involving future military conflicts are predicated on a conflict with China. The American public is not an issue in this.

The only way americans will wake up to chinas power is if china invades some country.

Or does something we cannot do, like go to the moon, or build their own independant space station.

prometheusunbound · 2003-07-16 11:36:11

I agree with your statements, but it is not gonna happen until it happens. The USA won't do jack until china displays a clear threat along the lines you are talking about. If things go like they are, it will.

clark · 2003-07-16 12:29:52

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-03zl.html

Marshall To Host Space Propulsion Conference
Huntsville - Jul 16, 2003

More than 2,500 leading space propulsion engineers, scientists and administrators will converge in Huntsville, Ala., next week to share ideas and discuss the role of aerospace research and technology in enabling global commerce and scientific discovery in years to come.
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, in conjunction with the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, will hold the 39th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit at the Von Braun Center in Huntsville July 20-23. The event is organized by AIAA, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the Society of Automotive Engineers and the American Society of Engineering Education.

Some of the propulsion technologies to be discussed during the conference's technical workshops and discussions may hold the key to long-term space exploration in the near future. Panel sessions include a 'town hall' meeting on propulsion; a session on fostering international cooperation in space travel; and a discussion on the use of nuclear and electric propulsion for long-term space travel.

The three-day event kicks off Sunday, July 20, at 6:30 p.m. with a reception in the lobby of the South Hall of the Von Braun Center. On Monday, July 21, at 8 a.m., a joint keynote address will be delivered by former Marshall Center Director Art Stephenson; Maj. Gen. Larry Dodgen, Commander, U.S. Army; Lt. Gen. Joseph Cosumano, Commander, U.S. Army; and Col. David Eichhorn, Commander, U.S. Air Force. The event's annual AIAA Awards Luncheon will be Tuesday, July 22, at noon.

Why is it that the key note speakers at this event are all former, or current military commanders?

This is about new propulsion for enabling commerce and scientific discovery, right? Right.

prometheusunbound · 2003-07-16 14:43:32

The miltary simply has the most interest, experience, and most importantly, the money for space endevours. They spend money because they don't need to worry about losing it like a private investor. besides, what is so bad about the USA maintaining its miltary superoirity?

I think privatization of space will come in its own good time.

clark · 2003-07-16 14:53:31

besides, what is so bad about the USA maintaining its miltary superoirity?

Nothing. As long as you're an American.

Josh Cryer · 2003-07-17 13:00:35

Or... alternatively... nothing, so long as manned space exploration and ultimately space colonization comes out of it.

Which it isn't and won't. Military is about control; space is just a place which will ultimately prove to be uncontrollable. Space is just going to be used by the military to control more of Earth.

clark · 2003-07-18 10:33:55

Military is about control; space is just a place which will ultimately prove to be uncontrollable.

I agree. However, humanity has a propensity for attempting the immpossible. Not that space advocates for colonization of space are any different.

Now, let's just say, for the sake of argument, someone wants to attempt to control space, what would be the best way in doing it?

I might imagine that haveing the means to destroy, or negate the ability of someone else to get into space is the first step.

That would go a long way in explaining our current plans for a missle defense system that will not work on it's intended target, i.e. missles. But it does work rather well on anything with a predictible launch or orbit...

The next step of course is to secure your very own assessts in space. I might imagine nano sats capable of orbiting very closely to other sats, to monitor them, would be a good start.

I guess that explains why the military is developing nano sats and is calling for launching more smaller sats in the very near future.

Of course, to really help out, becuase somehow, someway, sats will be destroyed, or damaged from something, somehow, we will need to be able to launch emergency repair or replacement missions. Something like that requires launch on demand.

I guess that explains why the military is developing, in conjunction with other government agencies (military and non) to develop the neccessary technology and infrastructure to make launch happen in a matter of days and hours, not weeks or months.

Yet all of this requires massive funding, becuase ultimetly, it's all being done and launched at the bottom of a huge gravity well.

So what's the best long-term strategy?

Develop a supporting infrastructure on the Moon to help reduce the cost, and response, to activities in LEO and GEO.

Now, people are going to object to a military outpost on the Moon. It's banned by more than one international treaty.

But like the ISS isn't a military outpost, it will still support military activities (ISS was involved with the recent War in Iraq). So to would any American Moon base, it will however be built and manned for different purposes.

What purposes?

How do you sell a massive investment in infrastructure like that? What do you tell people who ask hard questions, like, "Isn't this the moon base a front for supporting militarization and US control of space?"

You tell them, "Yes, it helps in protecting our national interests, but it is a scientific outpost to help further mans reach into space."

Then you point to the Men to Mars mission, or whatever that depend on the Moon Base to do what everyone agrees is a noble goal.

Meanwhile, the new US space forces pick up rocket fuel, energy, and monitor everything in LEO and GEO from the Moon.

Ever play three card Monty? It's not what you see, it's what you don't see.

See.

clark · 2003-07-24 13:36:10

http://www.space.com/spacelibrary/books … 30723.html

Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System

by Robert Godwin

As the Bush Administration moves ahead with initiatives aimed at bringing the U.S. military into the 21st century, the timely publication of Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System takes an encyclopedic look back at an aircraft that could have changed the whole tenor of the Cold War space race and whose concept and modus operandi may once again take flight.

We know this is highly speculative, but if Dyna-Soar had been brought into service as either a strategic nuclear bomber or a surveillance craft, how far ahead in the space race would it have put the U.S.?
If it had worked it would have probably changed everything. There were designs on the drawing board that might have used von Braun's Saturn and other launchers that used huge conglomerations of boosters strapped together. It is conceivable that in its advanced form it could have flown thousands of pounds of cargo to lunar orbit. As a bomber of course it could have changed the entire geo-political climate. It might even have been a totally destabilizing influence since it would have been virtually as unstoppable as an ICBM but with a much better guidance system, i.e. a pilot.

Under the current administration, the U.S. is looking at developing Project FALCON, a military program that could deliver weapons to anywhere on the globe in less than two hours using a hypersonic vehicle. Doesn't this sound a bit like history repeating itself?
In a way, except of course FALCON will be unmanned. However the cancelled International Space Station Crew Return Vehicle and the Orbital Space Plane in some of its manifestations look a lot like Dyna-Soar and so does the Russian's Cosmopolis, the proposed civilian space plane. Combine those designs with Project FALCON's mandate and you pretty much have what Dyna-Soar would have been.

clark · 2003-08-20 08:33:14

Well, it's offical now, India is sending it's first probe to the Moon!

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/in … 30819.html

India Approves Moon Mission
By K.S. Jayaraman
Special to SPACE.com
posted: 04:15 pm ET
19 August 2003

NEW DELHI, India -- India will send a spacecraft to the moon by 2008, prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee said in his Independence Day address to the nation Aug. 15. The announcement has put an end to suspense over the fate of the roughly $100 million project of the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) that was waiting for a formal sanction for over eight months.
The mission -- named Chandrayan-1 -- foresees placing a 1150 lb. (525 kilogram) satellite in a polar orbit 62 miles (100 kilometers) above the moon. The spacecraft will be launched by a modified version of India?s indigenous Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle. The lunar orbiter will be designed to operate for two years.

It should be noted that China and India are in something of a space race...

Also, Europe will be sending it's first probe to the Moon on August 28th of 2003:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3053319.stm

By Helen Briggs
BBC News Online science reporter

The probe will map the composition of the Moon in an attempt to solve the mystery of how it was born.
It will also pave the way for travelling faster and further into deep space.
Smart 1 is using an innovative form of propulsion - an ion thruster - that will take it on a 15-month journey to the Moon.

Interesting times ahead!

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#176 2003-07-01 09:24:05

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#177 2003-07-01 09:48:54

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#178 2003-07-01 10:07:24

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#179 2003-07-02 08:39:18

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#180 2003-07-02 10:08:27

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#181 2003-07-03 10:22:01

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#182 2003-07-03 15:31:49

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#183 2003-07-03 16:00:37

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#184 2003-07-14 10:18:28

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#185 2003-07-14 12:50:30

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#186 2003-07-15 14:04:29

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#187 2003-07-16 06:53:18

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#188 2003-07-16 08:46:04

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#189 2003-07-16 09:02:33

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#190 2003-07-16 11:02:12

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#191 2003-07-16 11:04:45

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#192 2003-07-16 11:15:43

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#193 2003-07-16 11:36:11

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#194 2003-07-16 12:29:52

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#195 2003-07-16 14:43:32

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#196 2003-07-16 14:53:31

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#197 2003-07-17 13:00:35

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#198 2003-07-18 10:33:55

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#199 2003-07-24 13:36:10

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

#200 2003-08-20 08:33:14

Re: American Moon Base prediction... - tell me what you think

Board footer