The First to Mars - Who will it be?

PurduesUSAFguy · 2004-04-22 11:37:48

As far as the 'decline' of America I find that a moot point. We finally have leaders that recognize the importance of the military, and especially R and D. Our economy is second to none and is the most robust and fastest growing in the western world. We continue to produce and develop science and technology because of our universities, national labs, and space program. We are not on the eve of the end of the American Hegeonomy; we are merely at its dawn.
Demographics is destiny. In a 200 year race, raising children is more important that raising space navies.
The next great space race will be over which society is best able to establish self-sustaining growing colonies off of the Earth.
I hope we westerners win that one since I am rather partial to Western Civilization. I have a hard time being sanguine, however.

I was referring to in terms of near term military applications, in an us vs. them mind set.

You do make a very interesting point however that I didn't think of, I don't think it will be necessarily valid in space (I'd guess Americans in space will be just as inclined to start families as Chinese in space) but it could come into play very seriously here on Earth, the western world has low and declining birthrates and in many parts of Europe are experience negative population growth. This would be true here except for immigration. We could be sowing the seeds of our own unmaking just by one or no children familes. Isn't one of the main tenets of evolution expand or die?

In any event I still believe that the US will take the lead in space development and colonization. If nothing else we should be motivated to beat the Chinese and others, and eventually to claim and defend territory for miners and settlers. Once we have cheap access to space I see the settlement of near space to happen very analogously to the American west (well sans the complication of an indigenous population)

Bill White · 2004-04-22 12:04:06

Hee! Hee! Let me play the troublemaker, Purdue.

What percentage of Bush supporters believe The Rapture shall end ALL human history withiin the next 100 years?

PurduesUSAFguy · 2004-04-22 12:14:09

Hee! Hee! Let me play the troublemaker, Purdue.
What percentage of Bush supporters believe The Rapture shall end ALL human history withiin the next 100 years?

ROFLMAO

Not going to touch that one White, not at all.

If I didn't find it so funny I would be insulted by it being a card carrying Republican and a christian.

Bill White · 2004-04-22 13:11:48

Hee! Hee! Let me play the troublemaker, Purdue.
What percentage of Bush supporters believe The Rapture shall end ALL human history withiin the next 100 years?
ROFLMAO
Not going to touch that one White, not at all.
If I didn't find it so funny I would be insulted by it being a card carrying Republican and a christian.

For the record, I consider myself a free thinking Roman Catholic. Okay, I know, oxymoron time.

As for politics, stupid Democrats are often less of a threat (IMHO) than too-assured Republicans going the wrong way.

idiom · 2004-04-22 17:39:36

See, if you knew the date, then you could rack up a huge deficit going to Mars and just not care.

:hm:

Uh oh...

Anyway - Lookin at the poll it would seem that some think that America could pullit off on their own and Russia could not. But the majority think it will require Russia's help to get there?

Or is that all the sagans out there hoping for universal love and happiness?

Mundaka · 2004-04-23 01:13:34

Trebuchet · 2004-04-28 00:04:30

I intend to start no debate, but I think that the US is in comparatively excellent shape for the long term and is certainly not in decline. The US has always been crass, crude, and manages to do the impossible by alternating between appearing like dumb parochial moralistic hicks and decadent, wasteful lazy bums. Selling the US short has always been a popular pasttime in the world (witness WWI and WWII Germany) and if the Chinese believe the fire has gone out of the US, the reception Osama got for acting on the same assumption would make them rethink that.

However, even if the US was in relative decline, I would think the US would jump to Mars first. There's too much national pride on the line for anything else to happen. I remarked to a friend, upon hearing Bush's new marching orders to NASA, that the goal seemed to be that when the Chinese arrived on the Moon, we would have a McDonald's set up so they could buy a burger there. As even Dean, who I was no fan of, chimed in with his own large scale space vision at the time, the feeling is bipartisan. In a sense, the Chinese could be the fuel that launches us to Mars and the Moon, simply because they actually force NASA to move.

I just wish they would move faster, you know? But early signs are promising on the space front... I think that once the shuttle gets retired, things will really move fast.

dicktice · 2004-04-28 08:58:15

I don't know why, but the U.S. always seems to need someone--or something--to catch-up with and then pass, before petering out to wait for the next "challange" to appear on the horizon. We can thank the Russians, and now the Chinese, for continuing to shove the U.S. kicking and screaming in the direction and urgency that we fans of space travel are craving for them to take.

clark · 2004-04-28 08:59:06

Thank you Communist Russia and China.

deagleninja · 2004-04-29 06:19:05

Hmm, I would have to say either private or Russia. I'm leaning towards private becuase I can see the Hilton or Hyatt on the Moon in the next 15-20 years. When this happens, when the world realizes that money CAN and is being made in space, then infastructure will be set up to get people to the Moon safely and quickly. After that, Mars can't be but maybe 15 years away after that and you are still looking at a total of 35 years which I don't think NASA can beat unless major changes are made to it and our country.

nirgal2002 · 2004-04-30 11:22:19

I don't see Europe leading any mission to Mars. They can hardly agree on monetary issues or even something as cheap as Beagle and Mars Express. I don't see them being a vital part of any mission to Mars, because they would cripple it. I see maybe a token member on the team and some monetary or equipment contributions.

JammerG55 · 2004-04-30 12:30:45

I don't see Europe leading any mission to Mars. They can hardly agree on monetary issues or even something as cheap as Beagle and Mars Express. I don't see them being a vital part of any mission to Mars, because they would cripple it. I see maybe a token member on the team and some monetary or equipment contributions.

I argree. The state of world affars being what it is does not lend itself any european first mars landing.

JammerG55 · 2004-04-30 12:31:48

Ps.
Does that include England?

nirgal2002 · 2004-04-30 12:53:37

In my mind this is the only type of configuration that would have a chance of working:

US, UK, and Russia (maybe at ESA as a token participant)

US funds 35%
Russia funds 35%
UK funds 15%
anyone else who wants to get there name on funds 15%

A crew of 7 would have 3 US, 3 Russian, and 1 UK

Equipment could be provided as a contribution from other countries.

The Rocket could be a joint US-Russian development

The vehicle(s) could be a joint US-UK development (better industrial ties)

And there you have an international mission to Mars where it makes it easier for the participants to cooperate.

bolbuyk · 2004-05-03 07:10:04

UK and manned spaceflight? They contribute very low to the ESA (about 6%) and till today just one has been in space (Helen Sharman) even less tahn Holland, Belgium or Bulgary.

Rxke · 2004-05-03 07:43:30

Yes, read the British spacemags: the editorials are full of how bad government treats spacebusiness there, despite the public interest in the matter and the private startups (like Starchaser)

Remember Beagle didn't get any money from the Govnmnt, it was mostly private money if at all (poor Pillinger guy is broke, so i've read. Shame on them.)

And i wouldn't be too sure 'bout ESA/RSA not playing any role... Soyuz at Guyana... Sounds very promising.

bolbuyk · 2004-05-06 06:37:08

Yes, read the British spacemags: the editorials are full of how bad government treats spacebusiness there, despite the public interest in the matter and the private startups (like Starchaser)
Remember Beagle didn't get any money from the Govnmnt, it was mostly private money if at all (poor Pillinger guy is broke, so i've read. Shame on them.)
And i wouldn't be too sure 'bout ESA/RSA not playing any role... Soyuz at Guyana... Sounds very promising.

O yes, I very enthousiastically believe in RSA/ESA!!!

But UK?

Algol · 2004-05-11 08:12:12

though this link should probably be posted here too.

http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id … t=0]RUSSIA, WESTERN EUROPE MAY UNITE INTO LARGEST SPACE ASSOCIATION

Would make for a very interesting combination

Mad Grad Student · 2004-05-13 22:49:09

I voted ESA. It seems reasonable that in the near future the RSA will become a part of the ESA. When that happens the ESA will easily be the most powerful space agency on/off the planet. With Russia's know-how and the EU's funding, there will be no stopping the new ESA once Russia becomes a part of it.

Rxke · 2004-05-14 13:06:28

... exept for the EU's love to smother every thing in tons of paperwork...

We used to laugh with the communists' way of handling things (bureaucracy) but we're heading the same way...

bolbuyk · 2004-05-15 05:13:07

It's also surprising that the cosmonauts seem to be less hierarchic than the astronauts. Maybe communism does really work in spaceflight.

Gennaro · 2004-05-15 21:41:07

Maybe ESA or ESA/RSA could do it just as easily as NASA, but that requires changes to the entire political system. Not merely the system, but the kind of people and ideals it produces.
Same thing in the US.

Our present system seems to give birth to nothing but professional sophistic politicians who are all copies of each other according to the prevailing PC-blueprint. They have very little knowledge, understanding or even education outside what is required to say 'yes' during meetings and scratch the backs of the right people. Anyone not decidedly self-interested will get weeded out during the long march from youth organization to government simply because they are honest or in other ways uncomfortable.
It's a machine, relying on specialization and standardization like everything else in a mature setting of industrial capitalism.

By the same token those people who are educated, used to objective thinking and thus could make a difference in our societies are essentially powerless.

Maybe this sort of aimless grazing makes for relative stability and safeguarded rights, but it's not the kind of society that aims for the stars.

Russia and China lack the burden of long-time democracy so maybe they will do it. On the other hand they seem to lack either the resources or technology or be hampered by rampant corruption which in itself destroys the potentials for resolve.

So I guess I really don't know.

Rxke · 2004-05-16 01:40:50

Just thinking out loud...
What could RSA accomplish when using ESA's budget?

(And equatorial launch infrastructure at French Guyana)

Could they do a MarsDirect, or a Mars24? Europe has the ATV, Ariane, but virtually no experience with manned stuff.
Russia has Soyuz and Progress... A half finished MIRII lying around, arguably the most experience in th world regarding manned spaceflight, lotsa plans but no money.

Could ESA/RSA look eachother in the eye as equal partners? That would be necc. to do somethin SANE, not the one dictating the other...

bolbuyk · 2004-05-17 06:35:14

Yes, that's what I really believe. I think this would be possible!!

Rxke · 2004-05-17 12:25:24

Big problem i see with ESA/RSA: politics: the new EU members are all ex-soviet 'traumatized' and working together will be hard, esp. in the beginning... Politicians of these countries will have a *very* hard time to sell the idea to 'the common man' that part of their tax-money goes (indirectly) to Russia...

Of course, nowadays ESA is mostly France, Germany Ìtaly,... you get the picture. The newcomers don't have a lot of 'space-industry' but they could grow into it...

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-04-22 11:37:48

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#27 2004-04-22 12:04:06

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#28 2004-04-22 12:14:09

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#29 2004-04-22 13:11:48

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#30 2004-04-22 17:39:36

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#31 2004-04-23 01:13:34

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#32 2004-04-28 00:04:30

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#33 2004-04-28 08:58:15

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#34 2004-04-28 08:59:06

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#35 2004-04-29 06:19:05

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#36 2004-04-30 11:22:19

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#37 2004-04-30 12:30:45

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#38 2004-04-30 12:31:48

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#39 2004-04-30 12:53:37

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#40 2004-05-03 07:10:04

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#41 2004-05-03 07:43:30

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#42 2004-05-06 06:37:08

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#43 2004-05-11 08:12:12

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#44 2004-05-13 22:49:09

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#45 2004-05-14 13:06:28

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#46 2004-05-15 05:13:07

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#47 2004-05-15 21:41:07

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#48 2004-05-16 01:40:50

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#49 2004-05-17 06:35:14

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

#50 2004-05-17 12:25:24

Re: The First to Mars - Who will it be?

Board footer