Fifty Years On...

[jjpor]

You know, you can be as cynical as you like about the politics surrounding the space race (and you'd be right!) and there are certainly serious arguments as to why we just don't need manned spaceflight, but my inner space cadet can't help thinking "Fifty years, and we're still tooling around in low orbit?" Apart from the moon landings, of course, but they were a long time ago too...

Plus great big rockets are really cool! ;D

Hopefully, though, to strike a sickeningly utopian retro-sf note, when people look back in centuries to come the Cold War will seem like a curiosity and Gagarin and the other space pioneers will be remembered as great figures in human history. Hopefully.

Comments

[jjpor.livejournal.com]

Well, time will tell... In my more pessimistic moments, I sometimes think that that's it as far as the great days of manned spaceflight are concerned. It's true that it's horrendously expensive - most of the money and technical difficulties experiences over the years relate to a) getting people up there alive, b) keeping them alive while they're up there and c) bringing them back down alive. With unmanned probes, you have none of that sort of hassle, and as technology advances, unmanned probes can do practically all of the things that a manned expedition could do (apart from, like, repairing themselves if they develop a minor mechanical fault, of course ;D), at a fraction of the cost and risk.

However... Without wanting to sound like some sort of dreamer, what's the point in only doing things that are practical and safe? It's not as if the governments of the world are ever spontaneously going to decide to spend their billions on ending world poverty and hunger, so they may as well spend some of what they'd only blow on more wars or nuclear weapons or whatever on doing something that will inspire people and make their lives a bit brighter. Sure, most of the big achievements in spaceflight during the 60s were done for the basest of political reasons, yet somehow they ended up being positive and poetic and inspiring almost in spite of themselves. I think it's good for the soul or whatever to hear tales of daring pioneers achieving amazing things at great risk and pushing the bleeding edge of technology. Or is that just me? ;D

Thanks for the link. It makes interesting reading. It's sad, if understandable, that the current US govt has severely cut back the Bush administration's grandiose Moon-by-2020 plans (if you can call them plans), not that they could justify going ahead with it in the current economic climate probably. So, we're waiting on China to do something amazing, then... :D

[gibbous.livejournal.com]

It's most assuredly not you alone. All over the world, fans of exploration (for exploration's sake), science, science fiction, and other associated fields are pumping their fists in agreement (or, at least, that's the way I like to see it, because I'm hopeless). Even from a logical point of view: why did we spend the money on extra weight and life-support if we don't intend on distilling further methods of supporting life in space? If the "final frontier" is only going to be tread upon by robots and the like, then why are we exploring it to begin with? Even here, sending unmanned crafts down to explore hydrothermal vents in the Earth's crust to study the life around them isn't just for the sake of biology - it's to allow us insight into other ecological systems so we know how to place ourselves if that situation ever arose whereupon we needed to place ourselves. No research or exploration, in my opinion, is done for the benefit of the hard science itself - it's to prepare us for physical advancement.

In that same vein (yet oddly contrary), I doubt any government would approve such research solely on the basis of improving human morale (as much as I would love that to be true). I'm completely fascinated and full of admiration for those who take first steps on new territory; I adore the idea of cutting paths into the unknown for future generations. (Unless you break axles, kill your oxen, die of dysentery ... ;D) But for most governments to approve such ventures, there usually has to be a promise of return - be it through territory, materials, or other goods. One example is the fumbling fight to introduce democracy to Middle Eastern nations ... I doubt the West would be so eager to persevere in humanitarian efforts if these places didn't happen to be sitting on a cubic arsetonne of oil ... but that's another rant for another time. :P (tl;dr - I'm praying for an excuse of some sort that will make manned space exploration indispensable. Because really, more kids need to say "I want to be an astronaut when I grow up ...")

It is sad that not only the US, but many other influential nations across the globe have misappropriated their funds so. We could totally have clean-burning space cars and timeshares on Ceres if everyone just got along. ;D

[jjpor.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I'm in complete agreement. All of these programmes are undertaken with at least the implication that they are preparation for bigger things. Right from the start of the space race, people like Korolev and von Braun (someone should write one of those semi-factual sort of novels about the life and times of Wernher von Braun - a man of fascinating contradictions. A blue-skies idealist who flirted with people like Heinrich Himmler to get his dreams realised...) were dreaming of Mars. Well, Mars is still just as far away... But yes, what's the point if only the robots get to see any of this at close quarters?

Well yeah, applications, strategy, profit etc. The thing is, all the stuff that's militarily useful or commercially profitable takes place in low orbit - satellites, and more satellites. There's been talk over the years, of course, of orbiting solar power arrays and mining and low-g manufacturing, but the fact remains that the costs to get to orbit are so astronomical that there's practically nothing you can do in space that you can't do more profitably here on Earth... So unless someone invents some radical launch technology that massively reduces the costs (which is hard to see in the short term)...

The thing a lot of space cadets talk about nowadays is Helium 3 - the great solution to our energy problems, allegedly. The thing is, not only is it unclear that we will ever develop practical fusion reactors, given that it's something that's been "twenty years away" since about 1950, He3 reactors are actually probably more technically complex and inefficient than many of the less kewl (less space-reliant) designs. And even if someone did develop a practical He3 reactor and sell the world on it, it's probably more efficient and less costly to extract He3 from seawater than mining it on the Moon or from gas giant atmospheres... So, another dream punctured...

I'm starting to think that space tourism for the mega-rich might be the thing that drives any serious manned space exploration/colonisation effort. You know, as technology becomes cheaper over time and if/when these space tourism companies become more established and generate more capital, you could see them eventually offering trips to the Moon, maybe even Mars by the end of the century... But again, it's like the robots - what's the point of commercial flights to Mars if you have to be Bill Gates to afford the fare?

Hey maybe the Singularity will happen and we'll all become cyborg demigods who can have their own individual Mars ships? Nah... XD

Yes, if people could just get along! ;D No, really. I sort of hope China will see the prestige and bragging rights as sufficient justification for at least a Lunar programme, just to see honest-to-god people walking around there in my own lifetime. Maybe they could get caught up in another ridiculous decade-long space race with India and Japan... We might even get a Mars flight out of it this time... That's not too much to ask for surely? :D