NationStates Jolt Archive

On board was the largest telecommunications satellite ever to be placed into geostationary transfer orbit.
And 40 satelites are waiting for launch, a full orderbook.
Congrets to ESA. Spaceshuttle is prehistory compared to this unmanned system.

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Launchers_Home/SEMA4U808BE_0.html

Aren't the Ariane 5 rockets the ones that kept blowing up?

The same could be said about the shuttles, though...

Impressive. Now if only NASA could stop delaying those space shuttle mission....

Wait a minute! I posted about seven posts on this forum and they're showing only one? There's something wrong.

Well I welcome ESA to space, but these kind of missions have been going on for what, 40 years, by NASA? NASA has sent more shit up to space than any other countries put together. Two out of hundreds blow up and the world criticizes. Sheesh. I thought scientific research was supposed to surpass political quarrels.

Aren't the Ariane 5 rockets the ones that kept blowing up?...
How, gravedigging. Yep it did with the first launch, but now the system has prooven itself several times.

The same could be said about the shuttles, though...

Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14

Well I welcome ESA to space
You welcome them? hahaha, they're there since the early seventies.

NASA has sent more shit up to space than any other countries put together.

Well, since years now, ESA is the leader on the market.

:mad:
Now with the talk of the reduced shuttle missions the European science module of the ISS may not ever get into space. It sort of defeats the point of an international space station if NASA is just going to get the american modules up there.
Still maybe the Russians can pull of their new design for a manned launcher, so the international comunity dont have to deal with the political bull which is holding the space program back!

How, gravedigging.

What?

Yep it did with the first launch, but now the system has prooven itself several times.

That's not the only time it did that. I count at least as many failures as the shuttle has had.

Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14

Yeah, that's not really impressive of the Ariane, because it doesn't actually carry people. Are you trolling?

Oh wow, you've gotten a spaceship into space.

We could easily send an un-manned spaceship into space if we just wanted to transport things. But we are explorers. We want to be there when we land on the moon again, not have some robot made in Germany landing on the moon. We want to go to the moon. Of course, the Space Shuttle won't get us there, but just getting a bunch of sattelites in space doesn't seem like the big milestone you think is.

Well I welcome ESA to space, but these kind of missions have been going on for what, 40 years, by NASA?

And by ESA, and by the Russians. Welcoming anyone to space is really passé, but even so would be the Russian thing to do, since they were first, you know...

You welcome them? hahaha, they're there since the early seventies.



Well, since years now, ESA is the leader on the market.

NASA sends stuff up all the time still, they just don't run around bragging that they got a satellite up into orbit. They send unmanned missions to fix/return those things all the time. You should read their projects page. It's not all about Shuttle missions. Those are just the only ones they publicize.

BTW when was the last manned European vehicle in space?

Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14

Interestingly enough, NASA's unmanned space program has zero casualties as well.

Yeah, that's not really impressive of the Ariane, because it doesn't actually carry people. Are you trolling?
Listen moron,, I started this thread so you must be the troll.
Wow, you just found out that Ariane is unmanned? They allways were and that is the beauty of it. The system prooved itself many imes, fact, wether you like it or not.

And by ESA, and by the Russians. Welcoming anyone to space is really passé, but even so would be the Russian thing to do, since they were first, you know...
If we're talking about sending stuff up to orbit, there was actually account, I believe, about Chinese doing it in the 1000s. I'd have to check some of my books.

Interestingly enough, NASA's unmanned space program has zero casualties as well.

I love the way you put it. You always have such a way with words. :)

Havent you ever heard of joint ventures? While you're bitching and hating the United States, ESA is having a pow wow with NASA and getting more done than you'll ever dream of doing, you little punk.

If we're talking about sending stuff up to orbit, there was actually account, I believe, about Chinese doing it in the 1000s. I'd have to check some of my books.

In either case, welcoming anyone to space would still be somewhat silly of you.

In either case, welcoming anyone to space would still be somewhat silly of you.

I love how no one ever picks up on sarcasm, unless it gets the *coughcoughsarcasmcoughcough* behind it. Goodness people.

Very nice. Now is it able to get parts of the ISS up there as well?

NASA sends stuff up all the time still They send unmanned missions to fix/return those things all the time.

What a joke, compare the numbers with ESA and it does not mean much.
Nice marsrobot that is true! But the latest information came from ESA (the fozen water pictures in the crater).

On board was the largest telecommunications satellite ever to be placed into geostationary transfer orbit.What's a geostationary transfer orbit? Where's it going to transfer to while it remains geostationary?

Reading the article, it only mentioned that they sent up the largest telecommunications satellite. The actual payload itself only weighed 6500kg - or a little less than 7 1/2 tons. The Space Shuttle has a payload limit of 28,800kg. Skylab, which was sent up in one piece by a modified Saturn V rocket of course, weighed 77,088kg.

If we're talking about sending stuff up to orbit, there was actually account, I believe, about Chinese doing it in the 1000s. I'd have to check some of my books.NASA did most of its best work in the 1000s...

Listen moron,, I started this thread so you must be the troll.

Having started the thread is not something which precludes you from being the troll that comment shows you so clearly are.

Wow, you just found out that Ariane is unmanned?

Which makes the death toll completely unimpressive and irrelevant. When ESA starts sending people up there in the same frequency as NASA, then you'll be able to reference it.

They allways were and that is the beauty of it. The system prooved itself many imes, fact, wether you like it or not.

As has the Space Shuttle. Again, I count as many failures as that of Ariane 5. Really, Ariane 5 doesn't impress very much because it doesn't actually do anything anyone else already doesn't. So it carried a heavy satellite up there? Big whoop...

Though, less bitchin' and more proposin' now. So out of curiosity, this who's better than who shit behind, what types of propulsion system has ESA been researching? I haven't read to much about their future plans yet. They have companies working on solar sails also, or do they have something else in mind?

What a joke, compare the numbers with ESA and it does not mean much.
Nice marsrobot that is true! But the latest information came from ESA (the fozen water pictures in the crater).
*blinks* Uh... ok... ESA has done some remarkable things as of late, but much of the major space events have been NASA, and not just the manned program, but NASA probes are gone father and seen more than ESA.

And we knew the Martian polar ice cape contained water, the point of sending the two bots to Mars was to see if water had ever been elsewhere.

Tell me how much of that Arianne 5 actually has "Made in Soviet Union" stamped on the sticker.

Oh wow, you've gotten a spaceship into space.

We could easily send an un-manned spaceship into space if we just wanted to transport things. But we are explorers. We want to be there when we land on the moon again, not have some robot made in Germany landing on the moon. We want to go to the moon. Of course, the Space Shuttle won't get us there, but just getting a bunch of sattelites in space doesn't seem like the big milestone you think is.See, this is the shame of it. ESA announce a successful launch, and immediately Americans (at least, those not actually involved with the space programme) go on the defensive, thinking that another country's success must by definition be a threat or an insult to them.

We are humans, people. We call ourselves by different names and draws lines on maps, but we are human. We share one Earth, and our major task at this stage in our development is surely to find a way off it and thus ensure our future survival. If that can be achieved by NASA, by ESA, by China, the Russian, or yes, even Germany, then so be it. Better still if it can be achieved by all of us working in concert.

But this is just a comms satellite. It's no big deal. It might be a big deal for the ESA by their payload standards, but that doesn't mean anyone's out to 'get' NASA, or run down the Americans. NASA have an incredible record of achievement - but I don't see them running around spitting and behaving all paranoid. In fact, generally speaking I've always seen them as being pretty supportive of other agencies' efforts - how else would we have an ISS at all?

I suggest some people calm down and grab a big box of perspective.

the point of ESA is that theu do more real science than NASA by a long way, NASAs has always been about manned space flight, ESA doesn't have the funds, since its budget is a mere 3billion Euros a year compared to NASAs 50billion dollars, with the money it has ESA has achieved a huge amount, Ariane V is the latest triumph.

Tell me how much of that Arianne 5 actually has "Made in Soviet Union" stamped on the sticker.
You can see on their website that there is not.
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Launchers_Home/SEMY9I1PGQD_0.html
How about the next astronaut bbc with a 1970 technology shuttle?

I suggest some people calm down and grab a big box of perspective.

Perspective such as "Eat this NASA!" and "Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14"? The original poster has clearly demonstrated that he is less concerned with highlighting Europe's achievements and more concerned with mocking NASA's failures.

Perspective such as "Eat this NASA!" and "Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14"? The original poster has clearly demonstrated that he is less concerned with highlighting Europe's achievements and more concerned with mocking NASA's failures.

Listen asshole, the original poster (me) answered morons that posted bull like:

Aren't the Ariane 5 rockets the ones that kept blowing up?...

and
Well I welcome ESA to space, but these kind of missions have been going on for what, 40 years, by NASA? NASA has sent more shit up to space...

Perspective such as "Eat this NASA!" and "Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14"? The original poster has clearly demonstrated that he is less concerned with highlighting Europe's achievements and more concerned with mocking NASA's failures.

Number of people the ESA has launched into space: 0.

Maybe they'll get up there before India... but I wouldn't count on it.

Perspective such as "Eat this NASA!" and "Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14"? The original poster has clearly demonstrated that he is less concerned with highlighting Europe's achievements and more concerned with mocking NASA's failures.

Very true, and we could all make this a better Thread by not responding to his/others ignorance and lack of gratitude toward scientific discovery done by Americans. I would be willing to bet that some of these enlist in the 'I hate America' threads everyday. Why don't we make this a progressive thread and discuss the futures of world space travel. Or at least how to ensure that Lance Bass's shuttle blows up.

the point of ESA is that theu do more real science than NASA by a long way, NASAs has always been about manned space flight.
NASA has performed more science missions than any other space agency over the years. ESA, if memory serves, was supposed to be a comercial venture allowing Europe to place comerical sats up without having to worry their launch would be prempted by American military launches (which happend and was one of the reasons, another was the price NASA wanted, and the worry of advanced sats or military sats being pawed over by NASA and American military).

But in actuality, the manned program is a very, very small part of NASA.

Listen asshole, the original poster (me) answered morons that posted bull like:


and

Hey hey hey, name calling is a way of the barbarians. Let's be civilized here. Only the beaten resort to namecalling.

Number of people the ESA has launched into space: 0.

Maybe they'll get up there before India... but I wouldn't count on it.

They never wanted to and will never. If they wanted would have been no prob at all.

put it in perspective, we're sending people thousands of miles into space on what is essentally a giant missile and then when they come back they are exposed to temperatures that make the surface of the sun looka balmmy. Space travel is dangerous, and people have to accept that, unfortunatley the American people have forgoten that, and go in to histerics when thier is a death. The deaths are unfortunate but they died trying to expand human knowledge and the program should be continued in thier honour, not scraped for being to dangerous.
And NASA have to get away from the American viewpoint of 'doing it on thier own' and embark on more joint projects with the other space agencies of the world.

You can see on their website that there is not.
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Launchers_Home/SEMY9I1PGQD_0.html
How about the next astronaut bbc with a 1970 technology shuttle?

In WW2 the Russians had russian made "jeeps" that looked very much like the Americans' jeeps. just had the manufacturer plates removed.
Oh, but you're a liar, like you put in your name, so you wouldn't admit to that.

In the 1990's the Russians made record sales of their heavy lift Proton rockets to the ESA and some to NASA. ESA wouldn't have the ability if it wasn't for Russian tech. And I know you can't prove me wrong.

Shuttle first flew in 1980 and is 1980's technology. Get your facts straight. It's still newer technology than ESA has. But you just want to hate americans, so you're a lying hyena.

We are humans, people. We call ourselves by different names and draws lines on maps, but we are human. We share one Earth, and our major task at this stage in our development is surely to find a way off it and thus ensure our future survival. If that can be achieved by NASA, by ESA, by China, the Russian, or yes, even Germany, then so be it. Better still if it can be achieved by all of us working in concert.

I suggest some people calm down and grab a big box of perspective.

Hear hear.

ESA got a telecom satelite up - NASA is as we speak launching an unmanned craft nearly the size of a bus to MARS. Im european, and im impressed by both. Besides NASA got the shuttle up and back (most of the time) and thats a glorified Transit van with wings. Who cant be impressed by that piece of kit? Its got flaws, many flaws, but its the best on the planet at the moment - but with that kinda budget, the US would be expected to have the best.

Space exploration is in international endeaver, stop arguing that "my rockets better than yours".

Arians engine is Vulcan not Proton :D

put it in perspective, we're sending people thousands of miles into space on what is essentally a giant missile and then when they come back they are exposed to temperatures that make the surface of the sun looka balmmy. Space travel is dangerous, and people have to accept that, unfortunatley the American people have forgoten that, and go in to histerics when thier is a death. The deaths are unfortunate but they died trying to expand human knowledge and the program should be continued in thier honour, not scraped for being to dangerous.
And NASA have to get away from the American viewpoint of 'doing it on thier own' and embark on more joint projects with the other space agencies of the world.
America has spent a lot of money building other nation's space programs, especially Russia's, in order that one day it can. It's just not that day yet. But I like your unity idea, definately needs to happen.

Not to insult but
(thier)->their
(histerics)->hysterics

I'm just really OCD sorry

Space exploration is in international endeaver, stop arguing that "my rockets better than yours".

Props and thanks to you for saying that.

They never wanted to and will never. If they wanted would have been no prob at all.

Easy to say. As with building the Panama Canal, not so easy to do. Until ESA actually launches someone, I think we'd be better off not comparing death ratios, eh?

America has spent a lot of money building other nation's space programs, especially Russia's, in order that one day it can. It's just not that day yet. But I like your unity idea, definately needs to happen.

Not to insult but
(thier)->their
(histerics)->hysterics

I'm just really OCD sorry



No problems, I’m a physicist, only got a C for higher English. :cool:

Besides NASA got the shuttle up and back (most of the time) and thats a glorified Transit van with wings.
Nope, you got to get your terminology right. According to the test pilot of Enterprise, the space shuttle is a flying brick, with wings. ;)

Space exploration is in international endeaver, stop arguing that "my rockets better than yours".
YES! Space is too dangerous to be playing that game.

By the way, my question on if the ESA could lift ISS modules is valid, I wasn't attempting to put the rocket down, I am actually wondering.

No problems, I’m a physicist, only got a C for higher English. :cool:

hey so am I where at?

In the 1990's the Russians made record sales of their heavy lift Proton rockets to the ESA and some to NASA. ESA wouldn't have the ability if it wasn't for Russian tech. And I know you can't prove me wrong..
But you are and you well know it, Mr Goebbels. Wich of the Arianes flies with Proton? Ariane4, was the workhorse of ESA and with its 111 launches it delt with 50% of all launches in the world during its active life.That was Vulcan, perhaps you speak about the old Ar.1 that has not been launched often?

Shuttle first flew in 1980 and is 1980's technology. Get your facts straight. It's still newer technology than ESA has..
Have not they learned you at school that it takes time to develop something like a space shuttle? You're simple brain thinks that it only takes a year to develop one and make it fly (1980). It is 1970'ies tech.

But you just want to hate americans, so you're a lying hyena.

While your anti Europeanism is obvious again and aparently in prime shape regarding your flaiming and namecalling here, you don't have to say that I am anti US, because I am not.
Try better next time.

hey so am I where at?
Universtiy of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Final year of my course, you?

Universtiy of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Final year of my course, you?

University of Cincinnati (Ohio,USA) 4th year
Right now I'm designing circuitboards for my professor's SET experiments.

University of Cincinnati (Ohio,USA) 4th year
Right now I'm designing circuitboards for my professor's SET experiments.
Well at least its sunnier than Scotland.
On a summer placement the now, so i don't know what my final year project will be, hope its something good.

Well at least its sunnier than Scotland.
On a summer placement the now, so i don't know what my final year project will be, hope its something good.

Where are you looking to study for grad school?

Where are you looking to study for grad school?

You mean for a Phd? Don't know how it works over there, but i'll get an honours degree (4 years) when I graduate next year.
I'm thinking of doing a Phd in Astronomy or Astrophysics in the US or Canada. Not decided yet.

Well congratulations ESA, another record in heavy wait satelites.

When will that Soyuz2 they were talking about will be launched on the island? Said that it will be ablle to carry more there then from Baikonur.

You mean for a Phd? Don't know how it works over there, but i'll get an honours degree (4 years) when I graduate next year.
I'm thinking of doing a Phd in Astronomy or Astrophysics in the US or Canada. Not decided yet.

Here, 4 years is a BS(Bachelor's of Science)
for an extra 1-1/2 to 2 years more you can get an MS(Masters of Science)
then you take a qualifying exam (written and oral) to be eligible for a doctoral program. Then onward to the PhD.

I hope to get accepted into MIT, also thought about applying to Oxford for the hell of it.

So you like astrophysics? If you ever come across papers by Dr. Margaret Hanson or Dr. Michael Sitko, those are some of our people.

Perspective such as "Eat this NASA!" and "Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14"? The original poster has clearly demonstrated that he is less concerned with highlighting Europe's achievements and more concerned with mocking NASA's failures.


Clearly.
Rather than a celebration of achievement, the purpose of the thread was spiteful and mean-spirited.
Luckily, it was made to be offensive toward Americans. And we're used to these petty antics.

Hi to the community as a whole!

Hemingsofty and Gallagrad, can't you guys PM for lovedeclarations instead of posting them here? :p

Here, 4 years is a BS(Bachelor's of Science)
for an extra 1-1/2 to 2 years more you can get an MS(Masters of Science)
then you take a qualifying exam (written and oral) to be eligible for a doctoral program. Then onward to the PhD.

I hope to get accepted into MIT, also thought about applying to Oxford for the hell of it.

So you like astrophysics? If you ever come across papers by Dr. Margaret Hanson or Dr. Michael Sitko, those are some of our people.

No i haven't but i'll be sure to look out for their papers.
Over here you work 3 years on a degree for a bachelor's of Science, a further year for an bachelor of Physics with honours or a further two years for a Masters of Science. Similarly you have to take entrance exams and interviews to qualify to undertake a Phd, and generally you won't be considered if you have less than a 2:1

Listen asshole, the original poster (me) answered morons that posted bull like:



Amazing. Truly amazing.

No i haven't but i'll be sure to look out for their papers.
Over here you work 3 years on a degree for a bachelor's of Science, a further year for an bachelor of Physics with honours or a further two years for a Masters of Science. Similarly you have to take entrance exams and interviews to qualify to undertake a Phd, and generally you won't be considered if you have less than a 2:1

So you almost have a masters? Usually here, the masters gets tossed in with the PhD idea. Very few stop with masters.

A small point, I'm from the UK so i'm European.
I like America and am planning to move there in the future, I have nothing against NASA or the US people in general. I just don't like the moronic politics which hold back progress for manned space flight!

How, gravedigging. Yep it did with the first launch, but now the system has prooven itself several times.

Actually its blown up a couple of times after that.

Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14

Does the Ariane actually carry people? If not then you can't compare them

Well, since years now, ESA is the leader on the market.

Proof of this please?

Amazing. Truly amazing.

Hmm, but they attacked him first IMHO.
BTW, I don't see anything wrong with that 14/0 stand, it is reality. When I see what US posters write on NS, this is even friendly.

Actually its blown up a couple of times after that.



Does the Ariane actually carry people? If not then you can't compare them

I WANT TO ANNOUNCE THIS FOR NEWCOMERS AND OLDCOMERS.
WE GET THE POINT THE ESA DOES NOT LAUNCH PEOPLE.
LET BE PRODUCTIVE WITH THESE ARGUMENTS

Proof of this please?

Corny, it has been posted that the type 4 on its own launched 50% of the sattelites in the world during lifetime ;)

ESA will be sorry once NASA finishes construction of thier "Death Star."

So you almost have a masters? Usually here, the masters gets tossed in with the PhD idea. Very few stop with masters.

Almost, but I'm going to stop with my Honours and then take the Masters Postgrad, my physics department don't have an astronomy section so I have to go else were to get a masters in Astrophysics. I'm figuring on doing my masters and then continuing onto my Phd, most of the postgrad masters are like that, similar to what you have over there.

ESA will be sorry once NASA finishes construction of thier "Death Star."

The General Electric corporation can neither confirm nor deny the existance of this project.

What a joke, compare the numbers with ESA and it does not mean much.
Nice marsrobot that is true! But the latest information came from ESA (the fozen water pictures in the crater).

I suggest you go back through those numbers. NASA has been sending stuff up since the 1950s and we are still sending stuff up by the ATLAS and OTHER ROCKETS and not just the space shuttle.

What's a geostationary transfer orbit? Where's it going to transfer to while it remains geostationary?Yes, a slightly ambiguous term. The operative term is 'transfer'.

GTO is the elipctical orbit that reaches from LEO (low-Earth orbit) to GEO (geostationary), or slightly above. Getting a satelite into GTO means that it's just one step away (usually by a burn from the satelite itself) from making a burn at the appropriate point to plant it into the GEO slot. Thus the final stage of the launcher placing the satelite into GTO is a success for the launcher (though the satelite may still fail to get into its own slot).

Give or take a fact, I think I'm right in the above (and am correcty that GSO is used for the looser 'geosynchronous', for example). Feel free to correct me, anyone who isn't merely an armchair astrophile... ;)

A small point, I'm from the UK so i'm European.
I like America and am planning to move there in the future, I have nothing against NASA or the US people in general. I just don't like the moronic politics which hold back progress for manned space flight!

Absolutely wright. Perhaps all agencies should work together for Mars. But what is the point of interest in Mars exactly? I prefer only commercial launching of sats. Space never brought us the great medecines aso that we expected.
BTW, you are the first Britt on NS that says he is EU. Most see themselves as a case apart. :)

Hmm, but they attacked him first IMHO.
BTW, I don't see anything wrong with that 14/0 stand, it is reality. When I see what US posters write on NS, this is even friendly.

Attacking his deliberately inflammatory thread? And he responds by calling someone an asshole?

Absolutely wright. Perhaps all agencies should work together for Mars. But what is the point of interest in Mars exactly? I prefer only commercial launching of sats. Space never brought us the great medecines aso that we expected.
BTW, you are the first Britt on NS that says he is EU. Most see themselves as a case apart. :)

Well i'm Scotish so we're not as uptight as our neighbours south of the Border, but as much as some of my countrymen and women, want to argue that we're not part of Europe the more it drives me nuts!
So yeah i guess we're european, after all the UK is part of the ESA!

Attacking his deliberately inflammatory thread? And he responds by calling someone an asshole?

Stop mourning and ditching around all of you and stay on topic. :)

Just as an interesting note.

I was just perusing both the ESA and the NASA websites. I just find it funny that the ESA page plasters every launch in a surprisingly large list (I'll give credit where credit due), wheres NASA's page is all about educating the reader in the idea of space travel.

Don't hate me due to observations

See, this is the shame of it. ESA announce a successful launch, and immediately Americans (at least, those not actually involved with the space programme) go on the defensive, thinking that another country's success must by definition be a threat or an insult to them.

And how many successful launches has the US have? Way to many to count. I applaud the satellite launch but then again, we've been tossing things into Geo orbit a hell of alot longer than the ESA. Keep up the good work ESA. Soon you'll be tossing people into orbit.

We are humans, people. We call ourselves by different names and draws lines on maps, but we are human. We share one Earth, and our major task at this stage in our development is surely to find a way off it and thus ensure our future survival. If that can be achieved by NASA, by ESA, by China, the Russian, or yes, even Germany, then so be it. Better still if it can be achieved by all of us working in concert.

Well said. Very well said indeed :)

But this is just a comms satellite. It's no big deal. It might be a big deal for the ESA by their payload standards, but that doesn't mean anyone's out to 'get' NASA, or run down the Americans.

Tell that to the original poster of this thread since the title has "EAT THIS NASA"

NASA have an incredible record of achievement - but I don't see them running around spitting and behaving all paranoid. In fact, generally speaking I've always seen them as being pretty supportive of other agencies' efforts - how else would we have an ISS at all?

No we don't. One thing I noticed about space agencies is that they keep tabs on eachother. I know the USSR and the USA had a race going but when it was over, the 2 agencies slowly began to cooperate with eachother. Cooperation is the key here. More cooperation means more opportunities to explore space. That is what we need. The statement I quoted says it all.

I suggest some people calm down and grab a big box of perspective.

Hear Hear

PS: The US is launching a Mars orbiter today!

Well i'm Scotish so we're not as uptight as our neighbours south of the Border, but as much as some of my countrymen and women, want to argue that we're not part of Europe the more it drives me nuts!
So yeah i guess we're european, after all the UK is part of the ESA!

Aha a real clan man!
Do you really want us to pay for manned space with ESA? I don't see the interest of it. Does robbots and telescopes are doing fine. What have all the tests in space brought us but academic knowledge. Some projects have seen a functional project on earth but very few.

Just as an interesting note.

I was just perusing both the ESA and the NASA websites. I just find it funny that the ESA page plasters every launch in a surprisingly large list (I'll give credit where credit due), wheres NASA's page is all about educating the reader in the idea of space travel.

Don't hate me due to observations

I watched them to but we have seen a different site I guess. I for example checked the above cited 110 launches of Ariane 4 but I did not see like you say "a list of every launch" Don't lie yourself to, naughty boy ;)

Very interesting site, specialy the kids section :)

So, They put up a comm satellite that is what? Like 1/3 of how much the shuttle can carry?

Stop mourning and ditching around all of you and stay on topic. :)

You worry about your own yap.

the point of ESA is that theu do more real science than NASA by a long way, NASAs has always been about manned space flight, ESA doesn't have the funds, since its budget is a mere 3billion Euros a year compared to NASAs 50billion dollars, with the money it has ESA has achieved a huge amount, Ariane V is the latest triumph.

Then why is nasa still launching unmanned probes and satellites into orbit and the farthest reaches of the solar system and BEYOND it?

I watched them to but we have seen a different site I guess. I for example checked the above cited 110 launches of Ariane 4 but I did not see like you say "a list of every launch" Don't lie yourself to, naughty boy ;)

Very interesting site, specialy the kids section :)

Naughty boy!?!?!?

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Launchers_Home/SEMJSI67ESD_0.html

Look harder in the section called 'PREVIOUS LAUNCHES'

Well stuff this. ESA? NASA? Kneel in awe of the British Space Programme - yay Beagle!

Beagle?

Beeeeeeeeea-gle?!

Damn thing. Where's it gone...

:D

Seriously - good to see both ESA and NASA having successful missions. Long may it continue and here's to plenty of co-operation between all space programmes.

So, They put up a comm satellite that is what? Like 1/3 of how much the shuttle can carry?

It is even 1/5th a shuttle can carry 30 tons or so, Ariane5 6.5tons.
But there are no satelites of 10 tons or so so they don't need bigger (satellite-)launchers.

No we don't. One thing I noticed about space agencies is that they keep tabs on eachother. I know the USSR and the USA had a race going but when it was over, the 2 agencies slowly began to cooperate with eachother. Cooperation is the key here. More cooperation means more opportunities to explore space. That is what we need. The statement I quoted says it all.



The cooperation and support of each other in space is refreshing and encouraging to see.
And while Russia may have a cash problem, they are not suffering from a lack of great minds and brave people.

Naughty boy!?!?!?

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Launchers_Home/SEMJSI67ESD_0.html

Look harder in the section called 'PREVIOUS LAUNCHES'
Oops, I am sorry, was looking at the history part of the types where it only was mentioned.
Awsome list.

How, gravedigging. Yep it did with the first launch, but now the system has prooven itself several times.



Deaths in the Arianeprogramme: 0
Deaths in the Space Shuttle program: 14

That's great! Now let's see them re-use the same vehicle, with people in it!

Oh, wait...

You know, probably the saddest part of all this is the scientists. They work hard, with little or no political objective, to get things into space. It's great that the ESA got an unmanned flight into space with a huge sattelite on board. Hopefully, that satellite will provide great open source information to people and won't be a military tracking device.

Manned space flight is of the utmost importance. To explore Mars, set up a base on the moon for the International Space Station to store goods, to find more feasible ways to travel through space, that's what the scientists want. Who cares what flag is on the side of the craft that goes up.

Say what you will about the shuttle. There are no other dependable multi-faceted space vehicles ready for launch at this time...or within the next 2 or 3 years. The Ariane rocket is simply an outbuild of the Gemini rockets NASA originally used. Both modes are outdated.

Maybe if we teach our kids more about astronomy, astro-physics, an science in general, and stop wasting their and our time playing god games and political hop scotch, we can foster a future scientific community that supports and funds projects for the betterment of space exploration techniques.

Aha a real clan man!
Do you really want us to pay for manned space with ESA? I don't see the interest of it. Does robbots and telescopes are doing fine. What have all the tests in space brought us but academic knowledge. Some projects have seen a functional project on earth but very few.

I've had this argument with my brother and believe it or not I used to be on your side! But robots and machines only tell us the cold hard facts, by sending someone up they can tell us what it feels, what its like to be up there, we need explorers. Okay so few people will ever go to space, but hey, its something to strive for. :D

Enough of astronomy for the moment, going to do something on the gastronomy front :)
*very hungry*

I WANT TO ANNOUNCE THIS FOR NEWCOMERS AND OLDCOMERS.
WE GET THE POINT THE ESA DOES NOT LAUNCH PEOPLE.
LET BE PRODUCTIVE WITH THESE ARGUMENTS

I only saw that after I joined the thread. Sorry.

Maybe if we teach our kids more about astronomy, astro-physics, an science in general, and stop wasting their and our time playing god games and political hop scotch, we can foster a future scientific community that supports and funds projects for the betterment of space exploration techniques.

Not going to happen anytime soon, unfortunately. Modern culture isn't very conducive to learning.

Not going to happen anytime soon, unfortunately. Modern culture isn't very conducive to learning.

I like it that way, cause then I know I'm smarter than the rest. :D

Just as an interesting note.

I was just perusing both the ESA and the NASA websites. I just find it funny that the ESA page plasters every launch in a surprisingly large list (I'll give credit where credit due), wheres NASA's page is all about educating the reader in the idea of space travel.

Don't hate me due to observations

And if you continue to look, you'll find a list of Launches on the NASA website including what time, the place, and launchpad as well as clicking on a link to see the mission profile.

And if you continue to look, you'll find a list of Launches on the NASA website including what time, the place, and launchpad as well as clicking on a link to see the mission profile.

cool, I'll check it out thanks.

cool, I'll check it out thanks.

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/highlights/schedule.html

There you go :)

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/highlights/schedule.html

There you go :)

Hey between the two of us, we are getting these info-deprived people seeing some facts :D

Not going to happen anytime soon, unfortunately. Modern culture isn't very conducive to learning.


Believe me I understand. Being a parent and a scientist of sorts (BS in CIS) I know that there is little scientific desire or push, especially in the US.

The question is, is the problem technology? It seems we get it quick and are abusing before we know what it does. But I also think that the need to get people up into space is superceded by religious dogma that says "god doesn't want you in the heavens, if he did he'd have given you wings". Horse hockey.

We need to get off this planet and leave the morons that ruined behind with their churches and oil fields.

cool, I'll check it out thanks.
Be careful! You can easily spend a half a day on the NASA site and if you wander onto the JPL page... we'll never see you again!

I like it that way, cause then I know I'm smarter than the rest. :D

I'd be quite happy to know I was dumber than everyone on the planet if I could also know we were making some real progress.

I'd be quite happy to know I was dumber than everyone on the planet if I could also know we were making some real progress.

Very true, that was just my arrogant side speaking ;)

Hey between the two of us, we are getting these info-deprived people seeing some facts :D

Amazing isn't it? I'm hoping NASA TV broadcasts the launch of the Mars probe.

Wait did I say probe? AHHHHH ITS UNMANNED RUN!!!!!!! :D:D:D

Be careful! You can easily spend a half a day on the NASA site and if you wander onto the JPL page... we'll never see you again!

But don't forget to read about the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program!

But don't forget to read about the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program!

Where is that in it?

I've seen some pretty nasty stuff on the NS forums... Including a post by someone that stated quite specifically, that he hoped Discovery blew up. I will attempt to stray from that kind of BS.

My views on NASA: NASA has the history, both good and bad. They are the ones who take the risks, and reap the benefits. We send men into space because no matter how many servos or computers control a robot, it will never be able to do anything as carefully and cleanly as we can.

There has always been causualties with NASA, that is part of the buissiness, especially when you want people in space. If we wanted to send unmanned misions into space, we would clearly be the winners, we would have the Saturn V... or we would come up with something more powerful, but that is not NASA's Aim.

If NASA were to scream ''OMFG WE GOT ANOTHER ONE UP!!!" every time we sent an unmanned probe or sattelite up, we would be SWAMPED with newscasts, I currently recieve e-mail every time a Non Military sattalite is launched into the air, because it is fascinating. I have learned shitloads about the process of how rockets have been designed and built.

Subcategory: The Shuttle

The shuttle is getting old... That is the plain fact. Soon it is simply going to fail to meet our requirements. If the happy power resided in me, I would have NASA spending allot of its research into a design that would work. Allowing a bigger payload, a new heatshield, and better onboard equipment.

I would also reinstate the Saturn V...


My views on the ESA:

The ESA is overglorifying this communication sattelite. It is impressive for their rockets, but not ours. It is hard to compare too... since private corporations usually send COMM systems into space now.

The ESA also has a smaller budget... not a good thing in my opinion. But that is the value the EU has placed on the operation. Maybe you should write a letter. But don't complain about it here, as noone here can fix that.

I don't pay much attention to the ESA to tell you the truth, I congradulate them on a good job with the COMM SAT but they are going to be overtaken by China, who already have a shuttle design and are gearing up for a major space effort. i am already recieving e-mails on Chinese launches, and they are more and more frequent.

Though, the shuttles use a very basic, yet effective, decelerating method. Anything losing that much kinetic energy is gonna heat up, especially in an atmosphere. I hope they maintain the broadside deceleration method. It works, they just need a more effective heat resistive method.

^just curious could you forward those emails abotu chinese launches to me too?^



Now, back on topic, i truly am ashamed that the guy who posted this thread is european he give sother europeans a bad name,...

^just curious could you forward those emails abotu chinese launches to me too?^



Now, back on topic, i truly am ashamed that the guy who posted this thread is european he give sother europeans a bad name,...

I'd have to find them. It's been ages since I read about them. Though confirmation is hard b/c they were claimed to happen hundreds of years ago.

-snip-
The ESA is overglorifying this communication sattelite. -snip-
Yeah. It's awful they mention they launched a rocket in their own site like that. Did you read the 'article'? Few measely lines about how they have broken their OWN record. Not really overglorifying anything, is it? They should overglorify it though - it's a business.

The ESA also has a smaller budget... not a good thing in my opinion. But that is the value the EU has placed on the operation. Maybe you should write a letter. But don't complain about it here, as noone here can fix that.
Far too small a budget, I agree.

If not for the most unfortunate choice of words the thread starter made, this could have been an educational thread. Loads of people with (at least some) knowledge about space stuff here on NS, it seems.

Eat this NASA![1] Ariane 5 lifts record payload into space[2]!

On board was the largest telecommunications satellite[3] ever to be placed into geostationary transfer orbit.
And 40 satelites are waiting for launch, a full orderbook.
Congrets to ESA. Spaceshuttle is prehistory compared to this unmanned system.[4]

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Launchers_Home/SEMA4U808BE_0.html

[1] Author in original post expresses point as a mock of NASA's manned programme againse a relatively new unmanned programme

[2] Author states this "record payload" as fact. Though this is factually incorrect. Skylab (at 77.5 tons) tons was the largest single payload ever sent into space, followled closely by the USSR's first MIR component, weighing in at ~22 tons.... The THAICOM 4 (IPSTAR) weight was 7.1 tons, while the largest TELECOMMUNICATIONS satalite; it is no where in the vacinity of being a "record payload".

[3] Sic ref. Above....

[4] Author declares the older system of unmanned payload launches accomplished by the ESA (which the same is accomplished by PRIVATE corporations in the United States, such as Rockwell Aerospace) which the United States has been, and has continues to do for countless decades; to a system of reusable manned launch and repair which is accomplished by NASA's manned programme...

The Author has been served....

August 12th, 2005

- Mars Reconnaissance Oribter NASA/JPL..... Atlas V

August 13th, 2005

- GOES-N NOAA Satalite, GODDARD/NOAA...... Delta IV

September 29th, 2005

- CALIPSO Weather Satalite JPL/GODDARD.... Delta II

January 11th, 2006

- Pluto Probe, "New Horizon"... NASA/APL...... Atlas V

February 11th, 2006

- STEREO (Solar TErrestrial RElations Observatory)... GODDARD/NASA........................ Delta II

February 28th, 2005

- SpaceTech5 - ColdThrust/X-Band/ULPR Test Satalite (JPL)...Pegasus XL

June 1st, 2006

- GOES-O, GODDARD/NOAA Weather Sat........ Delta IV

June 17th, 2006

-"Dawn": Ceres and Vesta Protoplanet Probe, JPL..... Delta II

September 29th, 2006

-AIM.. GODDARD/JPL... Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM) experiment
....... Pegasus XL

October 19th, 2006

- THEMIS magnetospheric substorm instability experiment (GODDARD)... Delta II

[2] Author states this "record payload" as fact. Though this is factually incorrect. Skylab (at 77.5 tons) tons was the largest single payload ever sent into space, followled closely by the USSR's first MIR component, weighing in at ~22 tons.... The THAICOM 4 (IPSTAR) weight was 7.1 tons, while the largest TELECOMMUNICATIONS satalite; it is no where in the vacinity of being a "record payload".


Can you give a link about that?
ESA itself broke its own record, don't see a bigger communicationsatelite ever launched.

Fact:

Ariane 5 lifts record payload into space


11 August 2005
This morning an Ariane 5G launcher lifted off from Europe’s Spaceport in French Guiana. On board was the largest telecommunications satellite ever to be placed into geostationary transfer orbit.

The mission was initially delayed during the two-hour-long launch window to verify telemetry readings from Ariane 5's mobile launch table, and the countdown subsequently resumed for an early morning takeoff from the ELA-3 launch zone.
The heavyweight THAICOM 4 (IPSTAR) satellite had a lift-off mass of almost 6500 kg. Before this morning’s launch, the record for the heaviest telecommunications satellite to be placed into orbit belonged to the Anik F2 satellite, launched by an Ariane 5 launcher in July 2004.

THAICOM 4, built for Shin Satellite Plc of Thailand, will provide businesses and consumers throughout Asia, Australia and New Zealand with various levels of Internet access services. The satellite has a total data throughput capacity of over 45 Gbps. This is the fourth Shin Satellite to be launched by an Ariane vehicle. An Ariane 4 vehicle launched the first satellite in 1993.

The next launch to take place from Europe’s Spaceport will be Flight 168, an Ariane 5G dual launch mission scheduled for 29 September

^just curious could you forward those emails abotu chinese launches to me too?^



Now, back on topic, i truly am ashamed that the guy who posted this thread is european he give sother europeans a bad name,...

E-Mail Address?... BTW, I only have one saved Chinese launch, but there is a link that may hold other launches.

He was just referring to the misleading title. Or so I would guess.

Heh, I just recieved the e-mail from this launch...



http://www.agi.com/html_mail/launch_updates/images/Ariane5_launch.jpg

New Launch: 11 August 2005 0820 GMT
Site: Kourou
Launcher: Ariane 5G Std
International Number(s): 2005-028A

SSC Name Owner
28786 iPSTAR-1 Thailand

Also known as THAICOM-4,this satellite will provide internet access and broadband services to businesses and consumers covering 14 countries in the Asia-Pacific area. This is heaviest load launched by an Ariane 5 at 6,486.5 kg, of which approximately 3,100 kg are propellant.

AGI's Launch Notification e-mails will help you stay current with all new spacecraft launches. E-mails are sent after every launch and include key spacecraft information such as: the date, time, launch site, launcher, international number, name, and owner. Get more information on thousands of satellites and other vehicles by viewing STK models, animations, and our encyclopedic "Spacecraft Digest" database at www.agi.com/resources.

Overall any type of Space Exploration interests me, be it by NASA, the ESA, or the RSA....

However if one wants to criticize NASA's performance of late, you must also remember that there have been well over a hundred shuttle launches since 1981, with only 2 disasters...considering that you are in essence strapping a craft to giant rocket and shooting it at over 10,000 mph into orbit and then landing it on a runway on reentry, then reusing it, that its a fairly impressive track record. Of course the Russians seem just as capable with the Soyuz, and haven't had any real mishaps since the late-1970's with far less funding, so I have to send a lot of praise to the Russian Space Agency.

As for the European or Chinese space agency, if you want to really impress me, build and occupy a space station or put a man on the moon...

Though, less bitchin' and more proposin' now. So out of curiosity, this who's better than who shit behind, what types of propulsion system has ESA been researching? I haven't read to much about their future plans yet. They have companies working on solar sails also, or do they have something else in mind?

ESA are working on ion drive engines. Their first one got a little probe from Earth to the Moon in 18 months. But don't be put off by that as it was but little and a prototype. They're planning on scaling it up for Mars and Jupiter/Saturn missions and it will be able to get to those planets in approx 25% of the time a chemical rocket powered probe could.

As for the Nasa bashing, for fook's sake they've lost 2 out of a hundred odd launches. I'm prepared to bet that that's a better safety record than in any other exploration era, i.e. wooden sailing ships across the Atlantic or expeditions to the Poles.

-snip- Of course the Russians seem just as capable with the Soyuz -snip-

The Soyuz is a far cry from the Shuttle.... Though the Old Soviet Union did show promise with the Buran (Images below)

http://k26.com/buran/assets/images/landed1.jpg
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/rsa/gifs/buran_energiya.gif

The Buran had alot of desing problems and was really expensive.

But the coolest part was the fact that you didnt need a crew to fly it.

The Buran had alot of desing problems and was really expensive.

But the coolest part was the fact that you didnt need a crew to fly it.

And indeed: They never flew it with a crew. It only flew twice (the same airframe). The others never saw space.

Where is that in it?

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/

I would also reinstate the Saturn V...

Can't be done. Not only have all the remaining ones been rusting for 30 years, but the machining, blueprints, and launch pads are all lost. Literally, the US would have to start from scratch to build one.

For what it would cost to build a "classic" 1960s Saturn V, it would be much, much cheaper to build a new, modern one. (Saturn VI??)

The Soyuz is a far cry from the Shuttle.... Though the Old Soviet Union did show promise with the Buran (Images below)

http://k26.com/buran/assets/images/landed1.jpg
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/rsa/gifs/buran_energiya.gif

They used it once, but being the more intelligent, they realised that shuttles cost lives and are to expensive to use for them while they can do better with their launchers, bit like ESA.

They used it once, but being the more intelligent, they realised that shuttles cost lives and are to expensive to use for them while they can do better with their launchers, bit like ESA.

Expensive? Yes.
Cost lives? So did their own. :rolleyes:

The ESA, AGAIN, has never launched anyone into space. They are a second tier space power. A Buick: solid, but not a Cadillac.

. They are a second tier space power. A Buick: solid, but not a Cadillac. noop Buick and Cadillac are obsolete US products, BMW and Ferrari are EU, that is a better comparision.

They used it once, but being the more intelligent, they realised that shuttles cost lives and are to expensive to use for them while they can do better with their launchers, bit like ESA.
Pardon me, but...
L.O.L
Im sure the Russians were REALLY concerned about the lives of their cosmonauts (look into the Soviet space program a bit, you can see just how much they care). The expense is what got them, that and a ten year technology lag in the area.
Face it, the shuttles are doing a damn good job for thirty year old spacecraft designed to last, what, ten years.

The ESA, AGAIN, has never launched anyone into space.
Does that matter?
Clear is that the American Space Program is in all kinds of shit. They were supposed to do much work on the ISS, and they failed. The Russians had to do their work. The Shuttles are ancient, and no replacement is in sight.
ESA is doing what it's supposed to, it shoots commercial and scientific satelites into space, and it does so reliably.

I don't think competition helps at all, much rather would I see NASA, ESA, the Russians and the Chinese to get together and build a new Shuttle to replace those cans.

noop Buick and Cadillac are obsolete US products, BMW and Ferrari are EU, that is a better comparision.

:rolleyes:
Ok... the ESA is a SKODA against the US's or Russia's BMW 7 Series.

Pardon me, but...
L.O.L
Im sure the Russians were REALLY concerned about the lives of their cosmonauts.
Even more LOL. Have I said they were not! On the contrary. strange that a US rightwing extremist goes along with me for that.

Face it, the shuttles are doing a damn good job for thirty year old spacecraft designed to last, what, ten years.

They are a fine piece of old technology, but unsafe.You would accept the risk of dying on the road when it is 2/100? No you won't because we all know that flying in a plain is a risk of 1/1.000.000 or so.

LOL, I even made a revell scale modell 20 years ago of the Challenger. Nice design but the Shuttle, lik eyou said was ment for 10/15 years, we allready should be in a verry post shuttle era in space.

Im sure the Russians were REALLY concerned about the lives of their cosmonauts (look into the Soviet space program a bit, you can see just how much they care). The expense is what got them, that and a ten year technology lag in the area.
Actually, if you have a look, they didn't do any worse than the Americans did. For some time they were leading the race, and their Cosmonauts weren't really killed any more often than US Astronauts. It's just that in 1980 (way after the space race) a rocket exploded while it was being fuelled, and that killed a lot of people, so the casualty figures are skewed.

:rolleyes:
Ok... the ESA is a SKODA against the US's or Russia's BMW 7 Series.
Hey looser,BMW still is EU :D

Actually, if you have a look, they didn't do any worse than the Americans did. For some time they were leading the race, and their Cosmonauts weren't really killed any more often than US Astronauts. It's just that in 1980 (way after the space race) a rocket exploded while it was being fuelled, and that killed a lot of people, so the casualty figures are skewed.

I think you're a little off. No Americans "off the pad" until the Challenger incident in 1986.

The Soviets lost:

1967: Vladimir Komarov was killed on board Soyuz 1. His one day mission had been plagued by a series of mishaps with the new type of spacecraft, which culminated in the capsule's parachute not opening properly after re-entry.

1971: Soyuz 11, Georgi Dobrovolski, Viktor Patsayev and Vladislav Volkov were killed after undocking from space station Salyut 1 after a three week stay. A valve on their spacecraft had accidentally opened with the service module separated, allowing their air to leak out into space. The capsule re-entered and landed normally, and their deaths were only discovered when it was opened by the recovery team.

Hey looser,BMW still is EU :D

Hey, you're the one ignorant enough to call a Caddy obsolete, so I wanted to put it into terms you could understand. (I see that since you can't spell "loser" correctly, I was correct in doing so.)

And, before this is erupts into a pointless flamefest... I'm done.

velo,

get your facts straight regarding space. You have so many inaccuracies, it snot worth to dispell any of them.

Even more LOL. Have I said they were not! On the contrary. strange that a US rightwing extremist goes along with me for that.

They are a fine piece of old technology, but unsafe.You would accept the risk of dying on the road when it is 2/100? No you won't because we all know that flying in a plain is a risk of 1/1.000.000 or so.

LOL, I even made a revell scale modell 20 years ago of the Challenger. Nice design but the Shuttle, lik eyou said was ment for 10/15 years, we allready should be in a verry post shuttle era in space.

What Corneliu said.
Seriously, try researching a bit >_<

Can't be done. Not only have all the remaining ones been rusting for 30 years, but the machining, blueprints, and launch pads are all lost. Literally, the US would have to start from scratch to build one.

For what it would cost to build a "classic" 1960s Saturn V, it would be much, much cheaper to build a new, modern one. (Saturn VI??)

For one, all the Saturn V have been mothballed in a climate controlled area. I doubt they have so much as a spec of rust on them.

For two, of course we would implement some updates. But the Saturn V can life a shitload more than the shuttle could. Immagine the payload records there!

velo,

get your facts straight regarding space. You have so many inaccuracies, it snot worth to dispell any of them.
Look who is talking. While your theories and assumptions smell propaganda, better stay with the facts.
All your inaccuracies would overflow NS, and you well are aware of that. But phatological liars are sick people and lots of NS posters here know you are. (what function will you invent tommorow: "general", "pilot" ? :D )

Look who is talking. While your theories and assumptions smell propaganda, better stay with the facts.

Care to tell me what propaganda I have spouted please?

All your inaccuracies would overflow NS, and you well are aware of that. But phatological liars are sick people and lots of NS posters here know you are. (what function will you invent tommorow: "general", "pilot" ? :D )

The only liar here is you.

For one, all the Saturn V have been mothballed in a climate controlled area. I doubt they have so much as a spec of rust on them.

For two, of course we would implement some updates. But the Saturn V can life a shitload more than the shuttle could. Immagine the payload records there!

:confused: Where did you get that idea?

Of the Saturn V's: SA-514 & SA-515 were the only two unused, and they're at Kennedy Space Center and Johnson Space Center (one each). Both of these are lying on the ground, outside.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/s/sa/saturn_v.htm

Why update? Better to start off new. I wouldn't want to build a new Buick Riviera from a 1965 model from the standpoints of safety, fuel economy, or cost... I'd rather build with modern plans/ideas for the specific requirements.

I agree on lifting, of course. The shuttle is far inferior on that score.

I think you're a little off. No Americans "off the pad" until the Challenger incident in 1986.
So you don't mean fatalities per se, just special fatalities, that make the American Space Program look better?
At any rate, this is the total number of dead space travellers as of 2003.
http://www.mahatmarandy.com/astro/Astro.htm

And I like the Soviet Program cuz they shot "normal" people into space, like Valentina Tereshkova (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentina_Tereshkova), not just military people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_disaster

So you don't mean fatalities per se, just special fatalities, that make the American Space Program look better?
At any rate, this is the total number of dead space travellers as of 2003.
http://www.mahatmarandy.com/astro/Astro.htm

And I like the Soviet Program cuz they shot "normal" people into space, like Valentina Tereshkova (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentina_Tereshkova), not just military people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_disaster

Originally Posted by Leonstein
Actually, if you have a look, they didn't do any worse than the Americans did. For some time they were leading the race, and their Cosmonauts weren't really killed any more often than US Astronauts. It's just that in 1980 (way after the space race) a rocket exploded while it was being fuelled, and that killed a lot of people, so the casualty figures are skewed.

I was pointing out that until 1986 the US had zero space-faring deaths whereas the Soviets had four. That's all. (No, I don't count deaths on the ground... else we may as well count deaths of astronauts in trainer aircraft, etc... doesn't prove or disprove the vehicle, only the ground crew.)

All right, true, I was wrong. :D
At any rate though, the Russian program isn't any worse than the American one. And now the Chinese have shot a guy up there as well.
So I don't see why there is need for any competition. America is apparently unwilling to put any effort into it, so why not merge NASA with ESA, and work together with the Russians and Chinese?

No, I don't count deaths on the ground... else we may as well count deaths of astronauts in trainer aircraft, etc... doesn't prove or disprove the vehicle, only the ground crew.
Well, as was said in the Wiki-Article, strictly speaking the Soyus is just as safe as the Shuttle.
Plus: They've been flying, they've been working on the ISS, while the Shuttles were grounded.

I think the main reason we dont cooperate with the Chinese is that they plan on establishing a mine on the moon (or something along those lines) which would technically allow them to CLAIM the Moon, which would be very bad for us and most of the rest of the world.
I think most countries want to avoid having to fight over soil that isnt on this planet, it would be expensive and kill off lots of astronauts.

I think the main reason we dont cooperate with the Chinese is that they plan on establishing a mine on the moon (or something along those lines) which would technically allow them to CLAIM the Moon, which would be very bad for us and most of the rest of the world.
I think most countries want to avoid having to fight over soil that isnt on this planet, it would be expensive and kill off lots of astronauts.

We just beat them back, then. We may not have the designs for Saturn V's anymore, but we had the technology once and probably still have most of the inherent technology (including vast improvements on a bunch of things) that went into them, we could design something newer and better. The Chinese need to invent things on their own.

EDIT:

Better yet, bring along the equipment to build one of those massive terawatt lasers they have here on Earth. Then we can wipe out the Chinese landing party and blame it on the Moon aliens :)

I was seven years old when the US landed two men on the moon. I can still remember the entire event.

I read Robert Heinlein in Junior High and dreamed of space flight for tourists.

I'm 43 now and wonder where the dream went.

I want to go to outer space. I want to see the earth from orbit. I want to jump up and down on the moon.