No Red Space Menace

That's the title of a column I have today at NRO:

http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0310150845.asp

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
That's the title of a column I have today at NRO:

http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0310150845.asp


Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon. If the
Chinese were to announce they were to land a man on the moon, would the U.S.
jump into action? You could well argue that no specific military advantage
would be gained from landing a man on the moon, especially with our current
knowledge, ergo we would not need to act. Yet I doubt that public opinion
would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.

Now how about the Chinese announcing that they are to land a man on Mars
within a decade, perhaps because they've found a novel way to let an
astronaut 'hibernate' on his way to Mars. Would the U.S. argue that nothing
could be gained from it and that we needn't put a rival program on the
tracks? Ha! I doubt it.

I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space race
will be afoot. Once they reach our milestones it will be easy for them to
surpass them. Perhaps they're already planning something along the lines of
a deep-space mission to land a man on an astroid. Nothing could be gained
from that either, but I'll be curious what the U.S. response will be.

"Dr. O" escribió en el mensaje
...
|
| "Rand Simberg" wrote in message
| ...
| That's the title of a column I have today at NRO:
|
| http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0310150845.asp
|
|
| Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon. If the
| Chinese were to announce they were to land a man on the moon, would the
U.S.
| jump into action? You could well argue that no specific military advantage
| would be gained from landing a man on the moon, especially with our
current
| knowledge, ergo we would not need to act. Yet I doubt that public opinion
| would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.
|
| Now how about the Chinese announcing that they are to land a man on Mars
| within a decade, perhaps because they've found a novel way to let an
| astronaut 'hibernate' on his way to Mars. Would the U.S. argue that
nothing
| could be gained from it and that we needn't put a rival program on the
| tracks? Ha! I doubt it.
|
| I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space
race
| will be afoot. Once they reach our milestones it will be easy for them to
| surpass them. Perhaps they're already planning something along the lines
of
| a deep-space mission to land a man on an astroid. Nothing could be gained
| from that either, but I'll be curious what the U.S. response will be.
|
|
|

I doubt the Chinese might try the Moon. It's a 'non-virgin peak', after all.
Their real milestone in history would be a Mars landing. You need no
hibernation for that. It's a massive project and very expensive, but can be
done with present technology. And the Chinese are used to massive and
expensive projects...

Regards

Javier


|

"J.S." wrote in message
...

"Dr. O" escribió en el mensaje
...
|
| "Rand Simberg" wrote in message
| ...
| That's the title of a column I have today at NRO:
|
| http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0310150845.asp
|
|
| Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon. If the
| Chinese were to announce they were to land a man on the moon, would the
U.S.
| jump into action? You could well argue that no specific military
advantage
| would be gained from landing a man on the moon, especially with our
current
| knowledge, ergo we would not need to act. Yet I doubt that public
opinion
| would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.
|
| Now how about the Chinese announcing that they are to land a man on Mars
| within a decade, perhaps because they've found a novel way to let an
| astronaut 'hibernate' on his way to Mars. Would the U.S. argue that
nothing
| could be gained from it and that we needn't put a rival program on the
| tracks? Ha! I doubt it.
|
| I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space
race
| will be afoot. Once they reach our milestones it will be easy for them
to
| surpass them. Perhaps they're already planning something along the lines
of
| a deep-space mission to land a man on an astroid. Nothing could be
gained
| from that either, but I'll be curious what the U.S. response will be.
|
|
|

I doubt the Chinese might try the Moon. It's a 'non-virgin peak', after
all.
Their real milestone in history would be a Mars landing. You need no
hibernation for that. It's a massive project and very expensive, but can
be
done with present technology. And the Chinese are used to massive and
expensive projects...

One thing that has not been done, is making something in space from local
resources. The moon strikes me as the ideal place for that. That is a
virgin mission that might interest the Chinese and if they became good at
making things in space, they would have a clear edge over the US.

If it was up to me, I would scrap the Shuttle, Orbital Space Plane, and ISS
and go back to the moon. I would send robots first, but their mission would
be to build a hotel on the moon. The hotel would be used by more than
joy-riding tourists. It would be used by scientists and businessmen as
well. I haven't heard anything about the moon from Bush or any of his
opponents, so it sounds like we won't start anytime soon.

In article ,
Dr. O wrote:
Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon...
...I doubt that public opinion
would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.

Why not? It was perfectly happy to let NASA stand by idle, or nearly so,
when the Soviets established the first permanently-manned space station.
And that was back when the Cold War was still more or less on.

I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space race
will be afoot.

You're fantasizing, doubly so: that China will land on the Moon any time
soon, and that the US will decide that its manhood has been insulted and
desperately try to respond. Even the former has little basis in fact.
(Yes, they have expressed mild interest in going to the Moon... someday.)
The latter is sheer moonshine.

The nation which just possibly might feel compelled to try to match China
in space (that is, by putting astronauts in low Earth orbit) is not the
US, but India.
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |

In sci.space.policy Henry Spencer wrote:

The nation which just possibly might feel compelled to try to match China
in space (that is, by putting astronauts in low Earth orbit) is not the
US, but India.

You forget Pakistan - but to do it before India, not to match China. Though
Pakistan might just (mostly) re-use Chinese technology. Or they might
co-develop a gen2 manned launcher that both will use.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"Dr. O" writes:

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
That's the title of a column I have today at NRO:

http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0310150845.asp


Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon. If the
Chinese were to announce they were to land a man on the moon, would the U.S.
jump into action? You could well argue that no specific military advantage
would be gained from landing a man on the moon, especially with our current
knowledge, ergo we would not need to act. Yet I doubt that public opinion
would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.

Now how about the Chinese announcing that they are to land a man on Mars
within a decade, perhaps because they've found a novel way to let an
astronaut 'hibernate' on his way to Mars.

Or more probably, find a way to accellerate constantly at 0.1 g.

I note that China has no ecologist to prevent them putting a nuclear
reactor in their space ships...

Would the U.S. argue that nothing
could be gained from it and that we needn't put a rival program on the
tracks? Ha! I doubt it.

I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space race
will be afoot. Once they reach our milestones it will be easy for them to
surpass them. Perhaps they're already planning something along the lines of
a deep-space mission to land a man on an astroid. Nothing could be gained
from that either, but I'll be curious what the U.S. response will be.


--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__
http://www.informatimago.com/
Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in reality.

Mike Rhino wrote:

"J.S." wrote in message
...

"Dr. O" escribió en el mensaje
...
|
| "Rand Simberg" wrote in message
| ...
| That's the title of a column I have today at NRO:
|
| http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0310150845.asp
|
|
| Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon. If the
| Chinese were to announce they were to land a man on the moon, would the
U.S.
| jump into action? You could well argue that no specific military
advantage
| would be gained from landing a man on the moon, especially with our
current
| knowledge, ergo we would not need to act. Yet I doubt that public
opinion
| would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.
|
| Now how about the Chinese announcing that they are to land a man on Mars
| within a decade, perhaps because they've found a novel way to let an
| astronaut 'hibernate' on his way to Mars. Would the U.S. argue that
nothing
| could be gained from it and that we needn't put a rival program on the
| tracks? Ha! I doubt it.
|
| I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space
race
| will be afoot. Once they reach our milestones it will be easy for them
to
| surpass them. Perhaps they're already planning something along the lines
of
| a deep-space mission to land a man on an astroid. Nothing could be
gained
| from that either, but I'll be curious what the U.S. response will be.
|
|
|

I doubt the Chinese might try the Moon. It's a 'non-virgin peak', after
all.
Their real milestone in history would be a Mars landing. You need no
hibernation for that. It's a massive project and very expensive, but can
be
done with present technology. And the Chinese are used to massive and
expensive projects...

One thing that has not been done, is making something in space from local
resources. The moon strikes me as the ideal place for that. That is a
virgin mission that might interest the Chinese and if they became good at
making things in space, they would have a clear edge over the US.

If it was up to me, I would scrap the Shuttle, Orbital Space Plane, and ISS
and go back to the moon. I would send robots first, but their mission would
be to build a hotel on the moon. The hotel would be used by more than
joy-riding tourists. It would be used by scientists and businessmen as
well.

Um, don't you want to develop the vehicles that can *get* people to
this hotel, and do so economically, first? There will be plenty to do
with them, while these kind of facilities are being built.

Some years ago, someone asked if it was better to build an orbital
hotel before the spacecraft to reach them, or vice-versa. I asserted the
opposite was clearly desirable. Until an orbiting hotel is built, you
can still use the ships for short-term orbital sightseeing, and that we
*already* had a space station whose utility is limited partly by our
inability to reach it on a regular, economical basis. (Had we gona ahead
with the Delta Clipper, or the other SSTO proposals of the time, it
would be operational now, and OSP would just be three letters of the
alphabet.)


And who would invest in orbital/Lunar hotels before appropriate
transportation, anyway?


I haven't heard anything about the moon from Bush or any of his
opponents, so it sounds like we won't start anytime soon.

No political gain in it for them....


--

You know what to remove, to reply....

In article ,
Sander Vesik wrote:
The nation which just possibly might feel compelled to try to match China
in space (that is, by putting astronauts in low Earth orbit) is not the
US, but India.

You forget Pakistan...

No, I didn't forget Pakistan, but it's not a serious contender. India
already has a space program, including its own satellites, spaceport, and
launchers; it's not very far away from being able to do a manned launch,
if it wanted to, and the idea has in fact been discussed. (And as far as
the spacecraft, India has long been on good terms with Russia...) Pakistan
would be starting pretty nearly from scratch.
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |

"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dr. O wrote:
Imagine a world where the U.S. had not landed a man on the moon...
...I doubt that public opinion
would allow NASA to stand by idle and watch the Chinese 'take the moon'.

Why not? It was perfectly happy to let NASA stand by idle, or nearly so,
when the Soviets established the first permanently-manned space station.
And that was back when the Cold War was still more or less on.

But the U.S. always claimed it had the first space station, by way of
Skylab, so there wasn't really much to give in to.


I'm convinced that once the Chinese land a man on the moon a new space
race
will be afoot.

You're fantasizing, doubly so: that China will land on the Moon any time
soon, and that the US will decide that its manhood has been insulted and
desperately try to respond. Even the former has little basis in fact.
(Yes, they have expressed mild interest in going to the Moon... someday.)
The latter is sheer moonshine.

A flyby is a very real possibillity, even in the not too distant future and
by itself would be a great PR stunt putting China well ahead of both the EU
and Russia. In the medium term a manned landing would be certainly doable as
the Apollo technology and knowledge is freely available.

Also, China spends only about $2billion a year on space, including satellite
launchings (both scientific, commercial and military). A similar Western
manned space project, say by the E.U., would cost at least ten times that
amount. In other words: the Chinese seem to have a distinct cost advantage
over any Western nation and they'll be able to do more with less money. That
means that a lunar or Mars mission could actually be financed by them, as
opposed to Europe and the U.S., where the cost of such a mission would
create political waves.


The nation which just possibly might feel compelled to try to match China
in space (that is, by putting astronauts in low Earth orbit) is not the
US, but India.

India has disqualified itself by calling the Chinese manned space mission 'a
joke'. The Indians are deeply jealous of the Chinese success, as the Indians
see themselves as a high-tech nation. I think they're very much misinformed.