International The Space, Science, Technology thread: America back in space

In space, the US sees a rival in China
6 Jan 2019

d30786c2e2c67caa6367e2928991a7c9d800c03e.jpg
AFP/File / STRA Chinese Long March 3B rocket lifting off on December 8, 2018, carrying a rover that landed on the dark side of the Moon
During the Cold War, US eyes were riveted on the Soviet Union's rockets and satellites. But in recent years, it has been China's space programs that have most worried US strategists.

China, whose space effort is run by the People's Liberation Army, today launches more rockets into space than any other country -- 39 last year, compared to 31 by the United States, 20 by Russia and eight by Europe.

On Thursday it landed a space rover on the dark side of the Moon -- a first by any country -- and plans to build an orbiting space station in the coming decade. In the decade after that, it hopes to put a Chinese "taikonaut" on the Moon to make the first moonwalk since 1972.

China now spends more on its civil and military space programs than do Russia and Japan. Although opaque, its 2017 budget was estimated at $8.4 billion by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

That's far less than the $48 billion the United States spends on its military and civilian space programs, says analyst Phil Smith of consulting firm Bryce Space and Technology. But it is more than double Russia's civilian space budget, which has been slashed to $3 billion.

79226b963496d207de29e16a59ccbd94511eaf70.jpg
AFP/File / Laurent EMMANUEL
The mining of minerals or water on the Moon or on asteroids is still a long way off, but American start-ups are already working on it

Overcoming a lag of several decades, China's leaders have very methodically replicated the stages of space development achieved by other great nations: a first satellite in 1970, its first manned space mission in 2003, the first docking of a manned spacecraft to an orbiting module in 2012, and activation of the BeiDou satellite navigation system, China's answer to GPS.

"If they continue on this trajectory, they're going to quickly eclipse Russia in terms of their space technology capabilities," said Todd Harrison, an expert on military space programs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

- Lunar resources -

China currently poses no threat to the commercial satellite launch market, which remains dominated by companies including US-based SpaceX and Europe's Arianespace, and Russia.

Nor has China's progress in space exploration eclipsed that of the US.

560c4192d91e9f505af1563ca3e550c9a3bccbbe.jpg
China National Space Administration (CNSA) via CNS/AFP/File / China National Space Administration (CNSA) via CNS

China's Jade Rabbit-2 rover drove on the far side of the Moon on January 3, 2018, a mission no other space mission has ever accomplished
NASA's head congratulated China on its Chang'e-4 Moon landing but a 2011 US law bars space cooperation with Beijing, although Congress could lift that restriction.

The real rivalry is in two areas: in the short term, military uses of space; and long-term, the exploitation of resources in space.

The mining of minerals or water on the Moon or on asteroids, notably to produce fuel for rockets, is still a long way off, but American start-ups are already working on it.

Unlike the Cold War, the new conquest of space is unfolding largely in a legal vacuum.

In the 1960s and '70s, Washington and Moscow negotiated several treaties on space, principally to guarantee scientific cooperation and to ban weapons of mass destruction in space.

"The treaties are too vague to be really certain what the legal result is for something like space mining," said Frans von der Dunk, a professor of space law at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

- War in space -

Moreover, they have been overtaken by new military technologies: anti-satellite lasers, cyberattacks, electronic jamming, and land-based anti-satellite missiles -- like the one China tested in 2007.

Laws of war govern conflicts on Earth, but there is no equivalent for space. And unanswered questions abound.

4bc2a8685a9baef4df724a8beae54d120c61d0b7.jpg
AFP / Laurence CHU Chinese lander on the 'dark side of the Moon'

If one satellite collides with another in space, does that constitute an "attack"? What would be a proportional response? Civilian satellites should be protected from reprisals but what about satellites with dual civilian and military uses? How does a nation respond to a cyberattack of uncertain origin?

"It's very hard to distinguish between weapons and non weapons in space," said Jack Beard, a professor in the University of Nebraska's space law program.

"It's unfortunately hard to envision any major armed conflict on Earth not extending into space," he added. "The Chinese have been preparing for whatever eventuality may be in the future, and... they have been experimenting with systems to interfere with our communications, our transmissions from satellites to drones."

Harrison concurs: "The United States has not been keeping pace with the threats against our space systems," and that has left the US vulnerable.

Meanwhile, US dialogue with Beijing is virtually nil, in contrast with Washington's exchanges with Moscow during the Cold War.

"If there's a crisis in space involving China, it's not clear our military knows who to call," said Harrison.

But other observers take a more skeptical view of portraying China as an aggressive adversary of the United States.

Brian Weeden, of the Washington-based Secure World Foundation, said some proponents of the China-as-threat argument wield it as a way to get money for NASA out of a tight-fisted Congress.

They "think that will motivate the US to go off and do the stuff in space that they want to do," he said.

"They see the competition with China as a key to unlocking the political will and money to fund the projects they want to see."

https://www.afp.com/en/news/826/space-us-sees-rival-china-doc-1bz4i23
One wonders how much of their advancement in space exploration was thanks to industrial espionage.

Anyway the last part makes sense. Here's hoping it drives increased funding to NASA, but it seems more likely to end up going to Space Force (or it's current equivalent, the Air Force et al).

I'm reminded of this:
US military gives NASA two better-than-Hubble telescopes
In a surprise reminder that NASA is not the only US space program – nor likely the best-funded one – the US Department of Defense's National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) is giving the perennially underfunded space administration two better-than-Hubble-class space telescopes, prosaically named Telescope One and Telescope Two.

One would think that the space boffins would be overjoyed at receiving such delectable crumbs dropped from the military's overstocked table – after all, One and Two are not only equipped with the same 7.9-foot mirrors as is the Hubble, they're also fitted with secondary mirrors that improve focusing.

All well and good, to be sure – if NASA could afford to transform the no-longer-needed spy telescopes into scientific instruments, and then get the big ol' beasts into space. The agency isn't exactly flush with cashthese days.

When asked by Stars and Stripes if his spacey staffers were popping champagne corks in celebration of the NRO's unexpected munificence, NASA's science head John Grunsfeld moped, "We never pop champagne here; our budgets are too tight."

It's not just that NASA's budget doesn't include a launch vehicle for one, let alone two, Hubble-sized space telescopes. Another budget-buster is that the NRO telescopes are just that: telescopes, and just telescopes – they don't include any instruments such as cameras or spectrographs.

In addition, NASA has no staff to plan and man any missions for which they might be used. "The hardware is a significant cost item and it's a significant schedule item," Princeton astrophysicist David Spergel told Stars and Stripes. "The thing that takes the longest to build is the telescope." That's the good news. The bad news, he added, is that "A big cost of any mission is always just people."

Still, if NASA can figure out a way to get one of these birds into space, it could accomplish a stunning amount of science. Each of the two telescopes, Spergel said, would have 100 times the field of view of the Hubble – and the Hubble, of course, is nearing the end of its distinguished career, with no more NASA missions scheduled to service it.

"Instead of losing a terrific telescope," Spergel said, "you now have two telescopes even better to replace it with."

That is, of course, if NASA can afford to retrofit them and get them up into space – an Herculean task, what with the James Webb space telescope and its cost overruns tearing hefty chunks out of the space administration's beleaguered budget.

Perhaps the cash-flush US military could dig into its coffers and pay child support for the two telescopes it just offered up for adoption.
They are useless to NASA for the sole reason that they can't afford to run them. Get that? They can't even afford to make use of the military's hand-me-downs. Incidentally, this story also shows they don't need a fucking space force because the military already has one, effectively.
 
China is getting there.

Awesome post btw. I think @NoDak would like it too.

It's pretty cool although I don't see much in the whole "rivalry" thing tbh. No other country has even gotten a spacecraft of any variety beyond the asteroid belt for exploration and the US had already directly observed every planet in the solar system 30 years ago. There's been full fledged orbiters around Jupiter and Saturn, we're collecting data from Interstellar Space from probes that are over 40 years old (and the US was also putting landers on Mars that long ago).
 
NavCam-Earth-Moon-Bennu-Dec19-1024x780.jpg


Pretty cool pic from the OSIRIS-REx mission.

Right: Asteroid Bennu (from 27 miles away)

Left: Earth and Moon (from 70 million miles away - that's about 6 light minutes, slightly less than the distance Earth / Sun, which is 8)

https://www.asteroidmission.org/
 
Last edited:
Did the chinese find Nazis on the dark side of the moon?`

image-w1280.jpg
 
APL study is thinking about an interstellar precursor mission that could be launched before 2030. It would fly 6x faster than the Voyager vessels and should be capable of travelling 1000 AUs within 50 years.

MTU0Njk4MTU3Ng==


The Oort cloud, which is (assumed to be) home to trillions of comets, extends from 1000 through 10,000 AUs (1 AU is equovalent to the distance from the Earth to the Sun). If we (as mankind) ever want to consider true interstellar missions, we gotta know what expects us in the Oort cloud first.


https://www.space.com/42935-nasa-interstellar-probe-mission-idea.html
 
Microsoft is storing servers underwater to cool them. Maybe that is why the universe is so big. To hold all the coming data. Servers in space soon. Space is one huge empty hard drive. Space is a quantum computer too.

 
Last edited:
APL study is thinking about an interstellar precursor mission that could be launched before 2030. It would fly 6x faster than the Voyager vessels and should be capable of travelling 1000 AUs within 50 years.

MTU0Njk4MTU3Ng==


The Oort cloud, which is (assumed to be) home to trillions of comets, extends from 1000 through 10,000 AUs (1 AU is equovalent to the distance from the Earth to the Sun). If we (as mankind) ever want to consider true interstellar missions, we gotta know what expects us in the Oort cloud first.


https://www.space.com/42935-nasa-interstellar-probe-mission-idea.html


How many hours will it take for light to reach 1000AU?


Also I wonder how dark it is out there at that distance
 
How many hours will it take for light to reach 1000AU?


Also I wonder how dark it is out there at that distance

1 AU = 8 light minutes. So it would be about 8000 minutes or about 5-6 days.
 
Elon Musk's SpaceX Says It Is Laying Off 10 Percent of Its Workforce
klzc65kwdpvdcwrpfaao.jpg

Photo: Mark Brake (Getty)
Just days after Elon Musk unveiled the first images of his aerospace company’s Starship test rocket, SpaceX has announced that it is slimming down its workforce by roughly 10 percent.

“To continue delivering for our customers and to succeed in developing interplanetary spacecraft and a global space-based Internet, SpaceX must become a leaner company. Either of these developments, even when attempted separately, have bankrupted other organizations,” the company said in a statement to Gizmodo.

“This means we must part ways with some talented and hardworking members of our team. We are grateful for everything they have accomplished and their commitment to SpaceX’s mission. This action is taken only due to the extraordinarily difficult challenges ahead and would not otherwise be necessary.”

The cuts will be felt across the company, which employs roughly 6,000 people. But as the Los Angeles Times noted Friday, cuts have been intermittent at SpaceX. Musk was reportedly fired at least seven people last summer over disagreements about the performance speed of the company’s Starlink satellite program; all were reported to have been senior management staffers. SpaceX also in 2014 laid off a significant number of workers, with two former structural technicians later suing the company over claims that SpaceX violated labor laws by failing to properly notify them beforehand.

An internal email obtained by the Times from SpaceX President and Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell about the most recent round of layoffs called the move “a very difficult but necessary decision.” Employees hit by the layoffs will be offered “a minimum of eight weeks’ pay and other benefits,” the Times said, citing Shotwell’s email to staff.

The layoffs come at a pivot time for the company, which is preparing for several significant milestones in the coming year. In addition to the deployment of some of its first Starlink satellites following a demo launch last year, the company is also readying for hop tests of its Starship test-flight rocket. In a tweet last week, Musk said test flights of the prototype for a Mars-bound spacecraft would be happening in the next four to eight weeks.

Musk previously estimated that the cost of the development of the program would run the company between $2 and $10 billion. As part of its effort to fund its highly expensive programs in the coming years, the company raised an estimated $250 million in its first loan sale, the Wall Street Journal reported in November.

Despite the layoffs, SpaceX maintains that it is financially secure. As the Times noted, Shotwell told CNBC last year that SpaceX has had “many years” of profitability.

https://gizmodo.com/elon-musks-spacex-says-it-is-laying-off-10-percent-of-i-1831702738
 
I was watching something recently on SpaceX. They can put satellites into the sky at a fraction of the price of other companies. Here is the problem: a lot of these are government/military and they don't give a fuck about price. It's not their money.

 
Yeah, I got one of those.

He was not only one of the greatest minds but visionaries in all of recorded human history, easily one of the most significant figures of the 20th Century and equally indispensable at different periods to both the Third Reich and post-war American hegemon during global conflicts on the scale and level of World War II and Cold War. Just think about that for a second, to be so god damn relevant that it could almost make Albert Einstein blush.

I'm not really bothered about the USSR's admittedly impressive list of 'first's in space' for a couple different reasons and the Space Age did not start with the USA nor USSR, but in Germany during the 1940s with rockets engineered by Von Braun himself.

The V-2 was the first man-made object to cross beyond the Earth's atmosphere as well as photograph it from outer space. The foundation of Soviet rocket program was dependent on V-2 technology and Sergei Korolev's initial R1/R2 rockets were just larger copycats with heavy assistance from engineers they had taken out of Germany as part of their own post-war spoils.



Not only that, but it's worth noting that Wernher von Braun was initially working for the Department of Defense upon immigration to the United States, he wasn't even transferred to NASA until after the Soviet Union had already successfully launched the first satellite and animal into low Earth orbit. Korolev was most definitely brilliant in his own right but a man-rated SHLLV rocket to the moon was and is still is on a completely different level and he was simply no match for WvB.



If all that weren't enough, he's also quite easily the most important and influential popularizer of space exploration in history with everything from numerous features he wrote in Colliers Magazine to his friendship with famed English science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke which in turn inspired creative talents on the caliber of Stanley Kubrick, Pink Floyd, David Bowie and Elton John among others, with works that have become timeless artistic contributions to western culture on the whole. Not to mention he also founded the National Space Institute which was the first non-profit space exploration advocacy group of its kind, later merged with the L5 Society and still going.

Look familiar?

2292_image2_big.jpg

vonbraun_early_wheel_concept.jpg


He was awarded the National Medal of Science in 1975 and maybe even should've received the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his work as a Civil Rights activist. It sounds like a complete joke, but the dude actually moved real weight and had an incredible amount of pull at the highest levels. It isn't as if he'd of been out of a job had NASA decided to move the Marshall facility out of Alabama due to its abhorrent record on race - he was the greatest aerospace engineer of all-time - WvB didn't have to do a damn thing.

Wv_B1.jpg

Wv_B2.jpg


God Tier Genius.

618px-S-IC_engines_and_Von_Braun.jpg


Thanks for the post. It was a good read.
 
Heh heh we still talking about the solar system? But seriously, that just goes to show how dense the Sun must be.


Yup its almost in-comprehensible I think they say that the Sun is like 98% the mass of the entire solar system
 
Some interesting reads:

1) Daily Caller article about Cruz' role as the sole supporter of NASA's space exploration mission and how the author thinks Democrats may not support it for partisan reasons. It's Daily Caller, so to be taken with multiple grains of salt, but still worth a look.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/19/ted-cruz-space-program/

2) Asteroid impacts have increased in the last couple hundred million years:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunar-craters-show-spike-in-earth-pummeling-space-rocks/

3) A Russian company wants to launch many satellites and create giant billboards in space. May they fail I'm every way imaginable.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a25950681/startrocket-space-billboards/

4) Apparently, there are major technological issues with Russia's Proton-M follow-up rocket:

https://www.indiatoday.in/science/s...-lift-space-rocket-explode-1434395-2019-01-19

5) The space relationship between the U.S. and Russia could soon fall apart:

https://futurism.com/russia-america-space-partnership-end

6) NROL-71, a spy satellite, is getting launched today:

https://www.space.com/43057-spy-satellite-launch-nrol-71-launch-webcast.html
 
Some interesting reads:

1) Daily Caller article about Cruz' role as the sole supporter of NASA's space exploration mission and how the author thinks Democrats may not support it for partisan reasons. It's Daily Caller, so to be taken with multiple grains of salt, but still worth a look.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/19/ted-cruz-space-program/

2) Asteroid impacts have increased in the last couple hundred million years:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunar-craters-show-spike-in-earth-pummeling-space-rocks/

3) A Russian company wants to launch many satellites and create giant billboards in space. May they fail I'm every way imaginable.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a25950681/startrocket-space-billboards/

4) Apparently, there are major technological issues with Russia's Proton-M follow-up rocket:

https://www.indiatoday.in/science/s...-lift-space-rocket-explode-1434395-2019-01-19

5) The space relationship between the U.S. and Russia could soon fall apart:

https://futurism.com/russia-america-space-partnership-end

6) NROL-71, a spy satellite, is getting launched today:

https://www.space.com/43057-spy-satellite-launch-nrol-71-launch-webcast.html
Noice, but fuck the daily caller, and no, not giving them any clicks. But thanks.
 


Company from Luxembourg wants to launch a moon lander in 2021 and have a moon hydrogen gas station by 2040.
 
Back
Top