Sputnik

[Dandy]

metalman wrote:
@Karlos

Read the article!

Do you mean this one?:

"According to latest scientific perceptions smoking isn't even dangerous to your health!

signed:
Dr. Marlborough"
 :lol:

[Cymric]

metalman wrote:
The Soviets got to spend a few years exulting in the “missile gap.” and demonstrating showy space firsts, the US quietly built a mlitary space-based reconnaissance system to monitor the Soviets.

I despise this rewriting of history to make the US look good on all occasions. The truth is: the Russians beat you, and beat you hard. End of story.

The pride of the US arsenal, Vanguard, crashed and burned on nearly every occasion, and IIRC, was pre-empted by another make of rocket to launch Explorer-1 before it was finally succesful. I find it extremely bad taste that the Russian firsts in space are called 'showy', when they in fact were firsts, and ones to be justly proud of given the state of technology in those days: first satellite in orbit, first living animal in orbit, first living human in genuine orbit (Alan Shepard just made a big jump, whereas Yuri Gagarin travelled around the world), first woman in orbit (Valentina Tjereskova), first pictures of the far side of the Moon, first lunar landing with succesful deployment of a robotic vehicle, first succesful landing on Venus. In addition, the Russians could handle much heavier payloads, and if it weren't for the genius of Werner von Braun---an ex-Nazi, adding insult to injury---the US would never have gotten its Apollos off the ground.

My, how it must gall any proud American citizen living in the past that these 'showy space firsts' were not theirs. The only 'showy space firsts' the US have to show for themselves at the time were the discovery of the Van Allen-belts, the first communication sattelite, the first succesful landing on Mars, and the Apollo-project. Quite surprisingly, despite its breathtaking audacity the latter was nothing short of a major and extremely expensive PR stunt to claw back prestige lost to the Russians---in other words, the showiest space first of all was orchestrated by the Americans.

But if it's any consolation: don't worry, you are once again firmly in the lead with space technology. (However, a certain thick-headed president who shall remain nameless sees fit to launch a major showy PR offensive by pouring billions of dollars into a project aiming to get people to walk on Mars. That the radiation and lack of gravity will surely kill them, and the isolation lasting over 3 years will test human physiology and psychology to breaking point, is apparently of no concern.)

@Cymric

[PMC]

@Cymric

Apparently the US Congress has relaxed the rules and theoretically allowed NASA to buy Russian Soyuz capsules...  Previously the US wouldn't deal with any countries suspected of supplying Nuclear secrets to Iran (ie Russia) but in the light of the shuttle fleet grounding the regulations have been reviewed.  

The Russians are only obliged to provide the US one more seat on a Soyuz mission and the Shuttle will be grounded until further notice.  Meanwhile, a half-built ISS circles above us waiting for resupply and assembly.  Either the US will cut back on manned spaceflight (a huge morale blow especially in the light of Bush's moon pledge).

Perhaps we'll see a white painted Soyuz with "USA" printed on the side, who'd have thought that forty years ago?

[metalman]

Cymric wrote:

I despise this rewriting of history to make the US look good on all occasions. The truth is: the Russians beat you, and beat you hard. End of story.

what year was it that the Soviets had a man walk on the moon???

[X-ray]

Look, dudes...

Advances have been made by almost every nation in almost every field, at one time or another. Many of these advances were as a result of necessity, and all of them were affected by economics in one way or another (the development or the manufacture/implimentation). And there are peaks...pinnacles of excellence. Nobody can guarantee to be the best all the time.
There were many 'firsts' in SA for example. The research of Chris Barnard resulted in the first heart transplant. At the time, SA was arguably ahead of the world in that field (but behind the world in many other fields). And despite Chris Barnard's work and achievements, SA may not necessarily be top of the stack for heart transplants at the moment.
I think we have to accept that changes in politics and economics (look at all the developments that were made out of necessity as a result of sanctions against SA in the Apartheid era) will affect where the emphasis is and the amount of R&D that goes into an endeavour. SA had to make its own weapons and came up with several brilliant designs all because they couldn't buy weapons from the US or from Europe. But now the situation is different. SA is back in the 'fold' now and so that need is no longer present.

Civilization is constantly changing to meet its needs and nobody can guarantee that they will be top of the stack in any field, for ever. We can't begrudge a particular nation a milestone achievement just because there has been friction or rivalry between us and that nation.

[Cymric]

metalman wrote:
what year was it that the Soviets had a man walk on the moon???

I understand completely that you had no meaningful response so instead you change the subject and ignore my reply. That is the standard reaction for those with cognitive dissonance, be them creationists, intelligent designers, Jehovahs Witnesses, fundamentalistic muslims, historic apologetics, conspiracy theorists, and more.

Space technology does not need your kind. It's already a disgrace that this certain thick-headed president is ignoring basic laws of physics. (I fear that he threatened to cut off much of NASAs funding if they didn't cooperate, because I can honestly not think of a good reason why these intelligent people would commit themselves to this lunacy otherwise. Better to have funding than to have none at all.)

[PMC]

metalman wrote:

what year was it that the Soviets had a man walk on the moon???

The Soviet moon race effectively died when Khruschev fell from power.  Kennedy and Khruschev were engaged in a game of one upmanship which the USA had hitherto lost.  Kennedy declared in 1961 "We choose to go to the moon" and efforts to get an American there took on an almost messianic momentum after Kennedy's death in 1963.  

I don't think that even Nikita Khruschev was prepared for the response of the American congress to fund the Apollo programme, certainly Russia's efforts in space after 1966 seemed to move toward robotic exploration of the moon (Luna probes actually soft landed on the moon and returned soil samples to Earth in the Early 70s, a feat not matched since) and to maintaining permanantly manned orbiting space stations (the Salyut series).

The Soviets took some terrifying risks, but ultimately the Soyuz vehicle is very highly evolved and Russian rockets are reliable launchers as a result.  Had the USA not tried to re-invent the wheel so many times (Vanguard, Redstone, Titan, Atlas, Saturn, Shuttle etc) then they too might not have the entire shuttle fleet grounded today.  

The fact remains that if NASA wants to go back to the moon, it's going to have to develop a new rocket platform in order to do so, while maintaining it's commitments to the ISS and winding down the massively expensive shuttles by 2010.

[Karlos]

metalman wrote:

what year was it that the Soviets had a man walk on the moon???

Don't take this personally, but this is why few people take your arguing skills seriously. You find some links, do a bit of copy and paste, post then and sit back thinking we should all agree. Then, should any of your posts are challenged, rather than formulate a genuine counter argument, you merely retort like this.

I read the link you posted about "the us letting the soviets beat them" at the start and found it highly amusing. It is about as credible as the "moon landings were fake", which is why I sought not to comment. It is simply someone's attempt to construct an alternate history to make themselves feel better that they weren't the first in something. The thing is, this isn't what you need to move forwards. If the soviets had gotten to the moon first and the US had never been, these people would be saying "we let the soviets get there first because ".

Do you think the majority of russians sat there reading articles about them letting you beat them to be the first on the moon? No. Instead they focused on other things. The first successful landings on venus etc.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

I have to agree with Karlos. This way there'll not be a serious discussion going on.

[cecilia]

people have a tendancy to lump what the politians said with what the scientists actually accomplished.

Sure, JFK and the russian shoe-banger were competing, but once NASA got the go-ahead, they took it where no politian can imagine. They sent intelligent, scientists (or trained by geologist, at least) up into space to learn as much as possible. All the while realizing that the rug could be pulled out from under them at any time.

each astronaut took his mission as a once in a lifetime opportunity. Not His lifetime, but humanities' lifetime. Yes, yes, they were told to plant american flags on the moon. But that was not the most important mission goal.
Figuring out how to get there, getting there, conducting experiments, EXPERIENCING being there.... That was the mission.
And that was when one could really be proud to be human - and proud even to be American. Something that isn't possible now.
We have been lucky enough to reap technological rewards from those efforts for decades, but with anti-logical and anti-science morons this will soon end. The future does not look good with people who have no respect for thinking, education and science.

[blobrana]

Indeed,
the benefits that it gave everyone today are one of the biggest accomplishments.

BTW, anyone else watching the Chinese CCTV channel 9 web cast last night?
They strangely broadcast the Shenzhou VI manned rocket launch - live..!!

Although, they did, as usual, launch a day early to confuse everyone (but those in the know, knew that they would)...

But congratulations go to the launch team for a successful launch.

[Doobrey]

blobrana wrote:
BTW, anyone else watching the Chinese CCTV channel 9 web cast last night?
They strangely broadcast the Shenzhou VI manned rocket launch - live..!!

I watched it on the BBC's website, forgot it was happening and was just catching up on some news when I spotted the link.
 Was is my imagination, or did the interior shots show the taikonauts looking a bit bored during the ride?

Still, at least I managed to see it.. I wanted to watch the last shuttle launch on NASA TV, saw the countdown was around 10 mins away and went to make a coffee, then got attacked by our 1 yr old labrador. By the time I got my foot out of his mouth and got back to the computer, there was just a little glowing dot in the sky  :madashell:

[Dan]

So who will get to Mars first?
The Chinese, the americans or a joint European-Russian-Japanese(and maybe Indian too) effort?
And just what is the point of sending humans there?

[Cyberus]

Dan wrote:
So who will get to Mars first?
The Chinese, the americans or a joint European-Russian-Japanese(and maybe Indian too) effort?
And just what is the point of sending humans there?

Good point, we should send a vanguard of chimps in order for humanity to make a 'fresh start'

[Dan]

Nah, leave it to the fishs...

.... wait a minute, it´s better to let the amoebas have it. Maybe some intelligent lifeform will evolve. :-P