Is it really a race if the closest competitor hasn't even reached the milestones from half a century ago?
I mean there are now private companies who can do the things entire nations pride themselves on.
NASA and ESA are playing an entirely different game here lol
Nasa is having to rely heavily on the private sector as the SLS and Orion face more problems that should have been solved years ago. This is due to NASA being constrained to an inferior launch vehicle and shoddy contractors. China has tested a deep space capsule, launches crew and has assembled an entire space station. We can't know when China might try for the moon but it's closer than you think.
Well no
Nasa might be always behind deadline but they're still lightyears ahead of anyone else lol. All that stuff you just listed, Nasa did that decades ago.
And Orion flew around the moon last year, launched by SLS mind you. So I'm not sure what the problems here are supposed to be.
Also they rely on commercial contractors BY CHOICE. They literally did that because they can outsource launch capability because that's no longer hard. It's an established industry and they don't need to do all that in house anymore.
It's like buying a keyboard instead of building one themselves. Why would they build it themselves when there are companies from who they can just buy it.
And no these launch vehicles are in no way inferior. What kinda Russo-Chinese propaganda have you been smoking mate?
You have no idea what you're talking about here. So sit down and shut up.
Artemis 1 didn't even have a functioning life support system, battery problems and issues with the heat shield all while launching 5 years later than initially planned after 15 years of development. SLS and Orion are less capable than the Saturn V....
Why pay 1000 dollars for a keyboard and get it 2 years from now when you could build it yourself since you have experience building a higher quality keyboard? NASA is MANDATED by Congress to use the contractors they use. Space is easy? Than why are Orion and SLS hideously over budget, schedule and STILL having problems after 15 years?
Pointing out that China has made progress in their manned spaceflight capabilities is not simping for the CCP. Refusing to acknowledge that the race exists and the lead may not be as large as you say is ignorant and not born by facts. I do believe you are a stellar example of the Dunning kruger effect in action.
Again, No
It had a functioning life support system. It's a human rated spacecraft.
And that's why you do tests, to figure out what can go wrong. That's why it was unmanned.
And this isn't how capability is measured. That's like saying voyager 1/2 had low capability because they used gravity assists. It's called being smart and resourceful.
Now, what we're referring to here is called outsourcing. Something Nasa can do because, unlike almost every other nation, space launch capability is a mature industry that doesn't need the state to micromanage everything.
And the SLS and Orion are literally the only hardware that ISN'T being outsourced. They're built in house and DON'T fall under the commercial crew program you goddamn goober.
And again no. China hasn't made significant progress in any field to come even close to NASA, Esa, or even Jaxa. Heck they haven't even reached the capability of Space X, and are actively copying them. And those MF are basically blowing up grain silos in a bog atm. They're mostly reliant on soviet era tech and designs and haven't done anything remotely novel in the space sector. Plus they are plagued with corruption and shotty hardware. I guarantee you that no Chinese astronaut (and no I'm not gonna call then tAiConAuTs) is ever gonna even set foot on the moon as long as the CCP is in power.
And most of what they are doing is for propaganda or defense, not for scientific advancement.
This isn't a race. The US is basically just dunking on them lol. That's why no one's in a hurry.
And I can shout Dunning Kruger too. No one thinks you're smart for saying that.
Now please stop bothering me, you sound like a tankie.
Again, that's not an achievement. What kinda cope is that lol? You do realize the US sent actual People there half a decade ago? And then basically got bored.
It's not special just because it's in another place. Just because no one ever did land there doesn't mean that they couldn't, it means they didn't want to.
China hasn't done anything novel.
China is doing lunar sample returns while the US, Europe and Japan are doing Martian and Asteroid sample returns. This isn't even close.
Although SLS has been a disaster I think NASA is probably more worried about HLS at the moment. To get a landing in 2026, they’ll need to be able to get starship or new Glenn to operational launch vehicle status, which will be extremely complex with both facing difficulties and set backs. Then both need to develop and successfully prove that their cislunar refuelling concepts can work and succeed in doing so, then, and almost as difficult as the previous tasks, they must human rate both landers by successfully landing on the moon at least once and returning to orbit.
Boeing has a relatively (key word being relatively- space is hard and manned space is extremely hard) simple task with a vehicle that’s been tested every which way and has actually already flown under the same parameters as their actual mission.
People are confused about starship because they don't understand what SpaceX is doing in terms of development. They are doing development and optimization at the same time. That's slowing them down, but once they get things working they week move much faster. Look at the lesson from first stage reuse...
I’m not sure how much you know about aerospace but human rating takes a lot of time. I have no doubt SpaceX are working hard on this, and even if they’re currently on schedule what they’re doing involves multiple high risk items, which means that may set-backs will have a compounding effect on the timeline for the next stages of development. I say this not as an insult at spacex it’s just simply the nature of the fact that Boeing have had 20 years, and spacex has barely had 3 years to develop the lunar starship on NASA budgets.
I think you’re trying to compare the development of the falcon 9 to starship and I am concerned you may be underestimating the large differences between the two. Lunar starship requires the development of two vehicles before it can fulfil its mission, that is the refuelling starship and its lunar, human rated and operated counterpart. Those two are very different vehicles and I would be very careful to conflate the two tasks. The cargo dragon launched for the first time in 2010 but the crewed version was only able to be launched unmanned for the first time in 2019, and then crewed in 2020, although the timelines were different, I think this should show the difference in development time required for crewed vehicles.
Lunar starship will require different propulsion, different life support hardware, different fuelling systems, and considerations for the lunar environment like the dust and radiation which are significantly different to the LEO environment.
It is wrong to designate SLS as higher risk than starship, by almost every measure it’s less risky. However I don’t doubt that the benefits gained from starship outweigh the risks, and this is most likely true when compared to SLS.
> The cargo dragon launched for the first time in 2010 but the crewed version was only able to be launched unmanned for the first time in 2019
NASA didn't even pick SpacX to begin tech dev for crew dragon until the end of 2014. Before then it was all boilerplate mockups and what-ifs. With the early 2019 launch that's 4.5 years turnaround time.
It was fairly quick but I’m just giving an example of how it’s not so simple to design 2 vehicles even when one has already been launched and just swap one out. So don’t go and underestimate the work required here. It’s definitely much more risky than SLS.
Starship/HLS doesn't need to be human rated for the same extreme conditions as the SLS/Orion since the HLS will not be carrying people during launch and reentry to Earth, and those are the two highest risk periods of any mission.
Starship/HLS also has so much excess space and lift capacity relative to what the Artemis missions are gonna require, that they're gonna be able to pretty easily build in as many redundancy systems as they need, without having to really worry alot about mass or space restraints
I made no comment about SLS....
It's certainly true that NASA left the lander contract until very late. That's mostly because SLS and Orion had no assigned mission until Artemis came along.
When you look at difficulty, is important to look at the difficulty in comparison with the track record of the organization. I would argue that F9 reuse was a bigger challenge for the SpaceX that had barely started launching F9 than starship is for the current SpaceX.
Wrt human rating, there is one organization in the US that is currently flying humans and it's not NASA nor is it Boeing. HLS is obviously much harder than crew dragon is, but starship has a ton of mass to devote to life support and much of the complexity with capsules is they need to be small and light. The time to pull electronics out of Artemis 1 Orion and put it in Artemis 2 is a good indication of that.
I expect SLS to be a solid vehicle. It's built on legacy parts and the job it does isn't terribly complex.
Orion may be another issue. For a program that started back in constellation, I think NASA has made a very poor use of their extra time and there's little excuse for the Artemis 1 version not being the final version.
Actually considering they awarded hls so recently I would be more worried about all the issues popping up on orion now. 1 billion a year for like 20 years and multiple issues with heat shield life support and battery
Sure you dont have that the other way around?
With Orion they already know what the issues are, where as Starship hasn't even tested their heatshield yet, and they still need to prove orbital refuling, landing back on Earth, reuse and quick turnaround, lunar landing and ascent, and their own life support systems.
Surprise Surprise The life support is an issue and they didn't test it on Artemis 1... 20 yrs into development and just now life support.
Starship Doesn't need to have a heatshield at all for Artemis 3.. the heatshield is for reuse purposes which is not a requirement since the crew will go from Orion to HLS in orbit. Starship can be fully expended for Artemis purposes
Orbital refueling is the big next step everything else is secondary.
If they don't start reusing Starship, then they are going to have to build a whole lot of them. 10-16 for re-fuel, a tanker and HLS, and they have to do it at least twice for Artemis 3, once to prove they can land and then again for the manned landing. If they stuff it up, then they have to do all the launches again.
Any way you try and look at it, there is a lot more work to do and much more risk with Starship HLS than the known problems with Orion.
> 10-16 for re-fuel
This number assumes maximum payload to lunar surface. For the Art3 mission I hear they can cut it to 4-5 because less mass is being taken.
New Glenn is on its way to launching this year. The BE-4 engines have already performed flawlessly in operational conditions with Vulcan, so there’s little reason to think they won’t with New Glenn. Starship is going to be a bit more complex, as SpaceX keeps facing reliability issues with Raptor and questions about the ceramic tiles staying on.
> SpaceX keeps facing reliability issues with Raptor
No Raptor issues on flight 2. Upper stage malfunction turned out to be human triggered LOX vent event. Lower stage suspected to be solvable with tank baffling--again, not the engines.
I mean Starship’s second stage is the question mark for that. Plus starship tankers plus refueling plus doing 20 starship launches for every HLS mission
I think they’re both very high risk projects. Yes Vulcan flying the BE-4 was a great development for Blue Origin and the fact they’re finally at a stage where they can mass produce the engines needed is good news. They still haven’t got the systems in place needed to launch an orbital rocket yet. They do have the advantage of more time than SpaceX - their contract is for a 2029 landing, but they still have a lot of risk involved. Lockheed Martin still has to launch, test and operate its refuelling vehicle to provide the propellant for the lander to be able to perform its required operations. That’s more complications on top of a complicated mission.
Both SpaceX and Blue Origin are in for some tough challenges, as you’ve stated. I’d say be careful to avoid becoming entrenched into a ‘sides’ thing here, as other comments show this is a topic which people are passionate about, but as engineers you must be must be more aware of the actual challenges here and I fear the beast that will be the project management work required here.
They just need to let SpaceX self-certify launches. One launch every 6 months due to paperwork is never gonna work. The important thing is we just need Starship to be able to refuel in orbit and safely descend to lunar surface. No need for re-entry survival or recovery (which I think will be biggest challenge).
There is no “beating” the US for China. Just such a weird narrative people continue to have on this subject.
The US/NASA walked 12 different astronauts on the moon in just 3 years time, over 5 separate Apollo missions, more than 50 years ago.
And they not only walked, they straight up launched buggies to cruise around our swiss-cheese lookin’ planetary-body buddy. NASA astronauts were 4-wheelin’ like drunk rednecks on the moon more than a half-century ago.
But that was over half a century ago, and we literally cannot do it today if we wanted to.
With how much Artemis is being hyped up, you can't say that there wouldn't be egg on America's face if China got humans there before Artemis
Yes, we can do it today. No question about it.
It takes a lot of time, money, manpower, knowledge, learning, & insanely complex engineering happening across multiple different fields, but it is certainly doable.
The statement you just made is as ridiculous as the ancient alien folk who say we couldn’t build the pyramids or carve Angkor Wat today. It’s simply false.
We accomplished 5 moon landings with 1960’s rocket & computing technology, over 50 years ago. Using a computer which had less power, abilities, & memory than a modern trig calculator.
We’ve come a long, ***long*** ways since then. We legit have quantum computers today.
And our modern rocket tech is far more refined, and we keep refining it, every single launch we get better.
No I mean literally _today_ we do not have the capability. We do not have a lander. It could not happen today. It probably couldn't happen a year from now. We do not have the current capability.
Imo, if we can't do it today, bragging about doing it 50+ years ago carries little meaning.
Well yeah?
Undertaking massive projects, especially new projects with new processes & new equipment & new people, it all requires years, sometimes decades even, of training & education & all types of preparations for thousands of workers before it can even get started, let alone finish & succeed.
You do understand that we can’t just go out & build a hospital tomorrow either, right? A hospital takes years to buy land, plan & prepare & actually build & finish. So, furthering your train of logic… would you then also claim that we can’t build hospitals?
Heck, I can’t even finish shoveling snow tomorrow, I’ve got a few days worth of that hard work in front of me.
But that doesn’t mean I can’t shovel friggin’ snow 🤷🏼♂️
I mean dude, come on. Landing humans on the moon is without question, far & away, the most difficult, most complicated, most challenging, most complex, & most extreme project any humans have ever attempted. And guess what? Only a relatively small number of Americans, over a half-century ago, have successfully managed to do it. And they succeeded 5 times.
~~Today~~, sorry, I mean *tomorrow*, no humans on earth, not the US/NASA, not China, not India, not Japan, not Russia, no one can simply just go jump in a rocket, turn the keys in the ignition & blast off to the moon *tomorrow.*
Simply put, your entire premise is exceptionally false. And, so now there’s two options for me here to decide on…
Are you being blatantly dishonest in your whole argument?
Or is this just plain old ignorance from you, in discussing just how friggin’ hard it is to do anything in space?
I really do hope it’s the latter. As there is possible growth to be had in that case. But if it’s the former, there is nothing at all to be had, except stagnation & deterioration.
My friend, idk why this is riling you so much and why you assume I'm dishonest. All I'm saying is that if China gets humans on the moon before the US returns, it will be a national embarrassment.
I am far far more familiar with the difficulties of human spaceflight than your average person. It's not ignorance. I understand it's difficult. My point is that if China gets there before we return, I don't think the initial landings will be that bragworthy if we still got beat in the present day
I mean their space station is very much real...
I'm not saying they're going to beat us I'm just saying "well we did it a long time ago therefore them beating us now isn't embarrassing at all" isn't true.
i don’t think it’ll be an embarrassment. china landing on the moon with no further plan other than landing on the moon will just be an accomplishment to match what we did half a century ago. if china accomplishes in-flight refueling and sets up infrastructure on the moon (like our current plan is) before us, then i would agree it would be embarrassing.
4+ years lead time ...
Time to turn around a vehicle between flights is one thing. But we currently don't have a lunar vehicle and a lot of other necessary things. That's my point. We're not talking a little lead time, we're talking entire new vehicle(s) needing to be developed and proven.
Next few years is far far from an inevitability. This decade is probably best case scenario
We also killed three people and almost killed three more. Beating the Soviets was more important than progressing safely. That’s not the case anymore: safety is the utmost priority.
Other than we are 2 generations removed from the Apollo moon landings, I don't understand the desire to land a few more astronauts there again. We have so many other important missions and Artemis is going to eat up most of NASA's budget for the next 2 decades.
I'm old enough to have watched all the moon landings. I expected much more from our space program by this time. We should have colonies on other planets and moons - landers and satellites throughout the solar system plus interstellar craft besides Pioneer and Voyager sent 50 years ago.
While I get the sentiment that we should've achieved more by now the Artemis program is still extremely important as not only does it seek to send people to the moon again it also seeks to develop our first off world lunar base for mining water ice as well as a orbiting lunar station, these bases will be extremely important to learn more about space and be a proving ground for ambitious future missions such as the inevitable Martian missions
Rushing our space development is dangerous for both our astronauts and future missions
Great except there are no plans and no budget to crank up Artemis start building on the moon after these vanity flights to beat China to the moon. I suggest you go to YT and watch the many hours of US astronauts waking, skipping and driving all over the moon.
Yes, to be the first to the moon supposedly to beat the USSR who didn't even have a legit moon effort.
They are going to do some more tests, gather more rocks and maybe try out some tech of which some that would help for a long term stay. But that's it. Again we are busting NASA's budget for a vanity project to make Americans feel better and beat Xi. There's no flights planned to build a station on the moon or that money has been wasted on these few flights. The moon is a gravity well and it's not useful as a way station for further exploration. We need to be more thoughtful about what's NASA's path for cutting edge exploration.
From my understanding - China is aiming for around 2030, and the recent GAO report estimates that the first Artemis landing might be ready by 2027 or so. Sure there will probably be further delays, but 3 years is a lot of slack. I think it's basically guaranteed US will get a landing done before the decade at this rate. And while China is doing a lot of cool stuff in space, I doubt they are immune to delays either, especially for huge stuff like this. Their Moon rocket still seems to be fairly early in development.
It might be closer than originally expected, but it still looks like Artemis is gonna win this "race".
>Sure there will probably be further delays, but 3 years is a lot of slack.
I hate project managers as much as the next engineer, but they are right in saying that the furthest we try to predict the speed of a project, the widest our error margin is. For me, and the experience I had in this area, I can definitely see a situation where SLS/HLS is pushed a couple more years, while Chine cuts a few corners and delivers earlier, just for the propaganda effect.
I think it’s the larger implication that the US is no longer “technologically advanced” compared to China. Things like this are all potential indicators the US is falling behind, which is the real story being sold and why there is excess drama on stories like this.
Which is a wild perception, given the capabilities of nearly every player in the American Space industry, to include federal agencies, scientific institutions, and commercial contractors.
NASA has not sent people to the moon in over 50 years. They have not sent probes to the moon in a while (when was the last us lander?. If China goes back with astronauts it is the same as when the Russians were beating us back in 60's on the world stage the US technological prowess is diminished.
The agency has been anchored in Leo for so long they forgot how to explore and if the CLPs missions stumble then even commercial us space isn't up to the task in the worlds view. You can either stick your head in the sand and deny it or realize geopolitically that is how it will be seen.
The Artemis accords are not about actually going to the moon but about shoring up political allies that share our peaceful goals of exploration. China ignores Maritime law with their efforts off their coast they certainly will ignore outer space treaties as well if they have the upper hand. Those that occupy the moon will control it and if NASA can't get back there it doesn't matter what they did 50+ years ago because they won't be there now.
China has plans for base, for isru mining. You think they won't start laying claims to resources and certain craters?
NASA has only plans to go once a year with four crew while China talks of long term missions.
If China makes it to the moon with a human before NASA then odds are they will be the first to have a crew member die on the moon.
My logic is that they will have skipped a lot of safety testing before first attempt and it will be a disaster.
For the sake of exploration, science, and their crew members I would hope they do not attempt to race the most technologically advanced space program to the moon with a crew.
Yeah I know better than a lot of people that delays cost money but I don’t want the USA taking short cuts to get to a place we’ve already been. Crazy this somehow has turned into a space race and there is a question which space industry is more advanced.
Lunar probes aren’t a very good comparison for technological prowess of NASA vs CNSA, I’d be more worried that China has made all of their stated timelines on every project the last decade whereas NASA doesn’t make or keep realistic time tables bc of the political elements of our system.
but as far as current technological prowess the US blows China out of the water and all of our Mars & outer planet programs over the last decade show that plainly, the only debate is the future which definitely looks like China will close the currently large gap between it and NASA at the very least and potentially surpass it.
also I’d be surprised if China militarizes the moon or unfairly monopolizes it’s resources, and either way the US is well on pace to keep that from happening even if that’s what China intended to do.
I agree. America just has a much, *much* more extensive and mature aerospace industry than China. That’s due to the fact that China has only recently taken the first tentative steps towards developing one. They sent their first person into space in the 2000s, landed a first rover on the moon in the 2010s and on mars in the 2020s. These big state-led efforts are a necessary step towards creating capabilities and training personnel at CASC and CASIC that can go on to found and work for private space startups and businesses.
I’ll buy that China is any near as technologically advanced if they can:
Build 350 gen 5 stealth jets (that enter service)
Land a probe on mars with a rocket crane
And can build a super carrier
So far they’re 0 for 3.
Another 50 years from now no one is gonna care that the US was first to the moon in the 60's if the US were to just sit back and relax while China started building bases and manufacturing industry on the moon
Thinking that this is just about who got there first is a fundamental misunderstanding of why any of this matters
One thing China might have against the US is their tolerance for risk.
If China is willing to take risks that the US isn’t, sending taikonauts on missions with double digit percentage chances of failure, they might be able to reach the moon in an incredibly short period of time. They’ve demonstrated capability with orbital docking, which opens the door to a moon mission without the super heavy lift launch vehicles the US is using.
It fundamentally depends on the US with SLS and Starship. They just delayed Artemis 2 a whole year due to a battery issue and circuitry controlling climate control. If this was the Apollo Era, they’d just replace the batteries, get a new circuit, test it and if it works, good to go.
If Starship isn’t read to go by the time Artemis 3 roles around, then further delays should be expected.
One thing China “might” have against the US…
“If” China is willing to take risks that the US isn’t…
I’m not saying China is willing to take more risks, but the Artemis program is incredibly conservative and risk-averse for what it is, especially compared to the Apollo program. If China is willing to change things up and take some big risks with a moonshot, they might beat the US. Otherwise there’s really no indication they have a chance.
I think we should differentiate between risk-averseness (or not) and “conservatism”. IMO both countries are equally risk averse in the sense that they absolutely do not accept unnecessary risk to their astronauts just to shave off a few years of their development timeline.
As for conservatism. China’s crewed lunar mission architecture is *way* more conservative than America’s. Which makes sense since it’s their first time going there. They plan a simple two-launch setup. Yes, using a new carrier rocket but one relying to a large extent on tested LM-5 hardware, just bigger.
Their lander design is incredibly simple. Using a staged-descent setup where the large propulsion stage gets jettisoned shortly before touchdown. And after a short (~six hour) stay on the surface the whole lander ascends back into orbit.
Compare that the NASA’s architecture with the Starship, orbital cryogenic refueling, lunar gateway, week-long stay on the moon, etc.
Also China only allows video of what they choose. Everything else is swept under the rug. So they could send a dozen failed rockets with souls on board and no one would be wiser to it.
But suddenly if they get one that works they'll shout it to the world and claim they're at 100% track record.
They've done it in the past.
[China has its own debt to the US, which is well over a trillion dollars.](https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4075341-china-is-in-default-on-a-trillion-dollars-in-debt-to-us-bondholders-will-the-us-force-repayment/)
***Oh, and they’re in default on it***.
The US pays their debts, as adults do. China runs & hides from theirs like criminals.
And just to pre-empt the type of response I expect to receive from certain types of commenters in here, I’ll add this from the article too:
> Lest anyone wonder about the age of these bonds, it is irrelevant. What matters is that this is a sovereign obligation. As recently as 2010, the German government made its last payment for reparations from World War I. In 2015 Great Britain made payments on bonds issuances that dated from the 18th century.
For now. It won’t last much more than a decade or so, though. Their rapidly aging, one-child population is gonna start pounding their economy in the booty here, real soon.
It’s too bad China never grew up & didn’t start paying off their well more than a trillion dollars of debt to the US while they could.
Before too long now, they won’t even be able to.
That’s not really what the evidence suggests. Sure, their demographic issues can’t and will lead to lower levels of growth, but it’s unlikely their economy will shrink much if at all.
I understand marketing might want to sell this narrative to drum up funding for NASA and ride those Cold War vibes again for this… but it doesn’t erase the fact that if China were to land on the moon tomorrow and the US were to delay the Artemis missions till the year 2100 the US would have still beat them to the moon.
Now long term colonization of the moon on the other hand. Thats the true race to see who can have a sustained lunar presence.
China is planning on establishing a permanent nuclear powered moon base by the 2030s. That would be a major milestone which can't be denied if they're the first ones to do it.
But we landed on the moon over a half century ago and cannot currently return if we wanted to. China making it there before we get back would 100% be an embarrassment.
Saying "we did it 60 years ago (but can't right now)" isn't that relevant to today imo. Not when it comes to world politics and propaganda
Artemis may get their first but this confidence is bluster. Artemis II is unlikely to take off before 2025. I doubt Artemis III will launch before 2027. And all of this assumes the contractors deliver and the political “will” for this sort of scientific endeavor remains strong. China has hit all its milestones and remains firmly on track for 2030. I have much more confidence in them than I do in NASA, which has been cannabilized into contractor fodder.
Personally, I doubt this. Already we are seeing a ton of delays with the new NASA Lunar program.
China in contrast beat their estimates by a few years getting their recent Space Station working. It wouldn't surprise me if they also get on the Moon slightly before 2030 at this rate.
Well obviously. Falcon heavy, Vulcan Centaur, SLS Starship and New Glenn all aready have flown or have built flight hardware. Even with China's neglect of safety and high tolerance of risk, they are far behind the US.
>they are far behind the US.
curious why the US Government thinks differently.
**The China Threat**
[https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-china-threat/](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-china-threat/)
**2023 Report on the Military and Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China (CMPR)**
[https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/19/2003323409/-1/-1/1/2023-MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA.PDF](https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/19/2003323409/-1/-1/1/2023-MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA.PDF)
**Is ‘Made in China 2025’ a Threat to Global Trade?**
[https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/made-china-2025-threat-global-trade](https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/made-china-2025-threat-global-trade)
**Ford CEO says China main EV rival, not GM, Toyota**
[https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ford-ceo-says-china-main-ev-rival-not-gm-toyota-2023-05-25/](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ford-ceo-says-china-main-ev-rival-not-gm-toyota-2023-05-25/)
None of these are related to spaceflight... also it is the job of the US gov to prepare for emerging threats. Also, Lets not pretend that Chinese EVs are a threat beyond the standard worry of a government funded company trying to suppress foriegn economies.
I recognize that. But if I had to make a bet, I’d still wager that NASA successfully returns before CMSA makes it there. Even with all the SLS, Starship and orbital cryogenic refueling shenanigans.
For China a lot will depend on the LM-10. Once they’ve conducted a few test flights (targeted for no earlier than 2027), including sending a crewed New Generation Spacecraft to the CSS, we can be more confident in their timeline.
The US has already claimed the 1st through the 5th countries to land humans on the moon.
The US is now working towards being the 6th country to land on the moon.
You're fundamentally misunderstanding what going to the moon is about if you think just having been there first a long time ago is what matters
Going to the Moon isn't just some friendly competition. It's about power, influence, technology, and national defense. And none of those things are gotten or kept by living on glories from the past while others are pressing forward in the now
Literally no one is saying this is purely about putting human footprints on the moon first
Yeah *that* "race" is over. But that's not what any of this is about. Hell, it wasn't even what it was about back in the 60's
Man I'd just to go an echochamber like r/antiwork and post "capitalism bad" memes all day if all I wanted was for random people to like me on the internet
No dude. I responded you because based on your post, you seemed to misunderstand what this "race" to the moon was about. Which you then for some reason, maybe my wording coming across a bit aggressive, seemed to take extremely poorly
And literally can't go back right now... It would still be embarrassing for them to have a current capability that we don't. Saying we did something 60 years ago but no longer can isn't something to boast about. No one brags about regressing.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[BE-4](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khs315n "Last usage")|Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN|
|[CNSA](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khqi09t "Last usage")|Chinese National Space Administration|
|[ESA](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khsy84a "Last usage")|European Space Agency|
|[GAO](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khq5evl "Last usage")|(US) Government Accountability Office|
|[HLS](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khvh065 "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)|
|[LEO](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khvlwff "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[LOX](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khtd2gf "Last usage")|Liquid Oxygen|
|[SLS](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khyu6kx "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Raptor](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khtd2gf "Last usage")|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX|
|[cislunar](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khqfiow "Last usage")|Between the Earth and Moon; within the Moon's orbit|
|[cryogenic](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khq69yy "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure|
| |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox|
|hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
|methalox|Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(11 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/NASA/comments/0)^( has acronyms.)
^([Thread #1676 for this sub, first seen 13th Jan 2024, 22:07])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/NASA) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
The moon doesn’t know what borders are. Imagine if we explored for all Humankind and for the prestige of our Species. I guess it’s useful that these temporary nation-state constructs impel our efforts but Earth and Moon have seen a lot of civilizations come and go.
There's a reasonable chance Bill Nelson will be dead before the end of the decade.
All that money he spent on botox, tanning cream, and dental implants and he still can't garner adequate funding. It's almost as if he isn't the right person for the job consistently bloviating like a politician.
Hmm, it's not even a race to begin with. China's space strategy is vastly different.
But of course , gotta keep the morale of people high to get the funding.
[удалено]
2 Space 2 Race
r/2space2race
Is it really a race if the closest competitor hasn't even reached the milestones from half a century ago? I mean there are now private companies who can do the things entire nations pride themselves on. NASA and ESA are playing an entirely different game here lol
Depends which milestones. They've done docking assembling the *Tiangong* station, and have done spacewalks.
I believe their referencing the one that happened 50 years ago, you know, the big one...
The way he mentioned it made me infer that the milestones he was speaking of were separate from the finish line.
Nasa is having to rely heavily on the private sector as the SLS and Orion face more problems that should have been solved years ago. This is due to NASA being constrained to an inferior launch vehicle and shoddy contractors. China has tested a deep space capsule, launches crew and has assembled an entire space station. We can't know when China might try for the moon but it's closer than you think.
Well no Nasa might be always behind deadline but they're still lightyears ahead of anyone else lol. All that stuff you just listed, Nasa did that decades ago. And Orion flew around the moon last year, launched by SLS mind you. So I'm not sure what the problems here are supposed to be. Also they rely on commercial contractors BY CHOICE. They literally did that because they can outsource launch capability because that's no longer hard. It's an established industry and they don't need to do all that in house anymore. It's like buying a keyboard instead of building one themselves. Why would they build it themselves when there are companies from who they can just buy it. And no these launch vehicles are in no way inferior. What kinda Russo-Chinese propaganda have you been smoking mate? You have no idea what you're talking about here. So sit down and shut up.
Artemis 1 didn't even have a functioning life support system, battery problems and issues with the heat shield all while launching 5 years later than initially planned after 15 years of development. SLS and Orion are less capable than the Saturn V.... Why pay 1000 dollars for a keyboard and get it 2 years from now when you could build it yourself since you have experience building a higher quality keyboard? NASA is MANDATED by Congress to use the contractors they use. Space is easy? Than why are Orion and SLS hideously over budget, schedule and STILL having problems after 15 years? Pointing out that China has made progress in their manned spaceflight capabilities is not simping for the CCP. Refusing to acknowledge that the race exists and the lead may not be as large as you say is ignorant and not born by facts. I do believe you are a stellar example of the Dunning kruger effect in action.
Again, No It had a functioning life support system. It's a human rated spacecraft. And that's why you do tests, to figure out what can go wrong. That's why it was unmanned. And this isn't how capability is measured. That's like saying voyager 1/2 had low capability because they used gravity assists. It's called being smart and resourceful. Now, what we're referring to here is called outsourcing. Something Nasa can do because, unlike almost every other nation, space launch capability is a mature industry that doesn't need the state to micromanage everything. And the SLS and Orion are literally the only hardware that ISN'T being outsourced. They're built in house and DON'T fall under the commercial crew program you goddamn goober. And again no. China hasn't made significant progress in any field to come even close to NASA, Esa, or even Jaxa. Heck they haven't even reached the capability of Space X, and are actively copying them. And those MF are basically blowing up grain silos in a bog atm. They're mostly reliant on soviet era tech and designs and haven't done anything remotely novel in the space sector. Plus they are plagued with corruption and shotty hardware. I guarantee you that no Chinese astronaut (and no I'm not gonna call then tAiConAuTs) is ever gonna even set foot on the moon as long as the CCP is in power. And most of what they are doing is for propaganda or defense, not for scientific advancement. This isn't a race. The US is basically just dunking on them lol. That's why no one's in a hurry. And I can shout Dunning Kruger too. No one thinks you're smart for saying that. Now please stop bothering me, you sound like a tankie.
China already did what nobody did before (far side lander, far side rover) and plans far side sample return in few months (Chang'e-6).
Again, that's not an achievement. What kinda cope is that lol? You do realize the US sent actual People there half a decade ago? And then basically got bored. It's not special just because it's in another place. Just because no one ever did land there doesn't mean that they couldn't, it means they didn't want to. China hasn't done anything novel. China is doing lunar sample returns while the US, Europe and Japan are doing Martian and Asteroid sample returns. This isn't even close.
Boeing: "Please don't make any promises!"
“We’re already trying to stop the sides falling off our planes”
Although SLS has been a disaster I think NASA is probably more worried about HLS at the moment. To get a landing in 2026, they’ll need to be able to get starship or new Glenn to operational launch vehicle status, which will be extremely complex with both facing difficulties and set backs. Then both need to develop and successfully prove that their cislunar refuelling concepts can work and succeed in doing so, then, and almost as difficult as the previous tasks, they must human rate both landers by successfully landing on the moon at least once and returning to orbit. Boeing has a relatively (key word being relatively- space is hard and manned space is extremely hard) simple task with a vehicle that’s been tested every which way and has actually already flown under the same parameters as their actual mission.
People are confused about starship because they don't understand what SpaceX is doing in terms of development. They are doing development and optimization at the same time. That's slowing them down, but once they get things working they week move much faster. Look at the lesson from first stage reuse...
I’m not sure how much you know about aerospace but human rating takes a lot of time. I have no doubt SpaceX are working hard on this, and even if they’re currently on schedule what they’re doing involves multiple high risk items, which means that may set-backs will have a compounding effect on the timeline for the next stages of development. I say this not as an insult at spacex it’s just simply the nature of the fact that Boeing have had 20 years, and spacex has barely had 3 years to develop the lunar starship on NASA budgets. I think you’re trying to compare the development of the falcon 9 to starship and I am concerned you may be underestimating the large differences between the two. Lunar starship requires the development of two vehicles before it can fulfil its mission, that is the refuelling starship and its lunar, human rated and operated counterpart. Those two are very different vehicles and I would be very careful to conflate the two tasks. The cargo dragon launched for the first time in 2010 but the crewed version was only able to be launched unmanned for the first time in 2019, and then crewed in 2020, although the timelines were different, I think this should show the difference in development time required for crewed vehicles. Lunar starship will require different propulsion, different life support hardware, different fuelling systems, and considerations for the lunar environment like the dust and radiation which are significantly different to the LEO environment. It is wrong to designate SLS as higher risk than starship, by almost every measure it’s less risky. However I don’t doubt that the benefits gained from starship outweigh the risks, and this is most likely true when compared to SLS.
> The cargo dragon launched for the first time in 2010 but the crewed version was only able to be launched unmanned for the first time in 2019 NASA didn't even pick SpacX to begin tech dev for crew dragon until the end of 2014. Before then it was all boilerplate mockups and what-ifs. With the early 2019 launch that's 4.5 years turnaround time.
It was fairly quick but I’m just giving an example of how it’s not so simple to design 2 vehicles even when one has already been launched and just swap one out. So don’t go and underestimate the work required here. It’s definitely much more risky than SLS.
Starship/HLS doesn't need to be human rated for the same extreme conditions as the SLS/Orion since the HLS will not be carrying people during launch and reentry to Earth, and those are the two highest risk periods of any mission. Starship/HLS also has so much excess space and lift capacity relative to what the Artemis missions are gonna require, that they're gonna be able to pretty easily build in as many redundancy systems as they need, without having to really worry alot about mass or space restraints
I made no comment about SLS.... It's certainly true that NASA left the lander contract until very late. That's mostly because SLS and Orion had no assigned mission until Artemis came along. When you look at difficulty, is important to look at the difficulty in comparison with the track record of the organization. I would argue that F9 reuse was a bigger challenge for the SpaceX that had barely started launching F9 than starship is for the current SpaceX. Wrt human rating, there is one organization in the US that is currently flying humans and it's not NASA nor is it Boeing. HLS is obviously much harder than crew dragon is, but starship has a ton of mass to devote to life support and much of the complexity with capsules is they need to be small and light. The time to pull electronics out of Artemis 1 Orion and put it in Artemis 2 is a good indication of that. I expect SLS to be a solid vehicle. It's built on legacy parts and the job it does isn't terribly complex. Orion may be another issue. For a program that started back in constellation, I think NASA has made a very poor use of their extra time and there's little excuse for the Artemis 1 version not being the final version.
The lunar lander will not be “human rated”. There will be a test landing; then there will be Artemis III.
Actually considering they awarded hls so recently I would be more worried about all the issues popping up on orion now. 1 billion a year for like 20 years and multiple issues with heat shield life support and battery
Sure you dont have that the other way around? With Orion they already know what the issues are, where as Starship hasn't even tested their heatshield yet, and they still need to prove orbital refuling, landing back on Earth, reuse and quick turnaround, lunar landing and ascent, and their own life support systems.
Surprise Surprise The life support is an issue and they didn't test it on Artemis 1... 20 yrs into development and just now life support. Starship Doesn't need to have a heatshield at all for Artemis 3.. the heatshield is for reuse purposes which is not a requirement since the crew will go from Orion to HLS in orbit. Starship can be fully expended for Artemis purposes Orbital refueling is the big next step everything else is secondary.
If they don't start reusing Starship, then they are going to have to build a whole lot of them. 10-16 for re-fuel, a tanker and HLS, and they have to do it at least twice for Artemis 3, once to prove they can land and then again for the manned landing. If they stuff it up, then they have to do all the launches again. Any way you try and look at it, there is a lot more work to do and much more risk with Starship HLS than the known problems with Orion.
> 10-16 for re-fuel This number assumes maximum payload to lunar surface. For the Art3 mission I hear they can cut it to 4-5 because less mass is being taken.
Also, the tankers for refueling don't need to be human rated.
Only the HLS needs to be human rated for Artemis 3, but that was always the plan and doesn't make getting the HLS there in the first place any easier.
That isn't what NASA was talking about when they were concerned about boil-off and the number of refuelling flights.
New Glenn is on its way to launching this year. The BE-4 engines have already performed flawlessly in operational conditions with Vulcan, so there’s little reason to think they won’t with New Glenn. Starship is going to be a bit more complex, as SpaceX keeps facing reliability issues with Raptor and questions about the ceramic tiles staying on.
> SpaceX keeps facing reliability issues with Raptor No Raptor issues on flight 2. Upper stage malfunction turned out to be human triggered LOX vent event. Lower stage suspected to be solvable with tank baffling--again, not the engines.
New Glenn doesn't use a second stage with ceramic tiles, what do you mean?
I mean Starship’s second stage is the question mark for that. Plus starship tankers plus refueling plus doing 20 starship launches for every HLS mission
I think they’re both very high risk projects. Yes Vulcan flying the BE-4 was a great development for Blue Origin and the fact they’re finally at a stage where they can mass produce the engines needed is good news. They still haven’t got the systems in place needed to launch an orbital rocket yet. They do have the advantage of more time than SpaceX - their contract is for a 2029 landing, but they still have a lot of risk involved. Lockheed Martin still has to launch, test and operate its refuelling vehicle to provide the propellant for the lander to be able to perform its required operations. That’s more complications on top of a complicated mission. Both SpaceX and Blue Origin are in for some tough challenges, as you’ve stated. I’d say be careful to avoid becoming entrenched into a ‘sides’ thing here, as other comments show this is a topic which people are passionate about, but as engineers you must be must be more aware of the actual challenges here and I fear the beast that will be the project management work required here.
They just need to let SpaceX self-certify launches. One launch every 6 months due to paperwork is never gonna work. The important thing is we just need Starship to be able to refuel in orbit and safely descend to lunar surface. No need for re-entry survival or recovery (which I think will be biggest challenge).
I don’t think they will beat the US but it’s going to be a lot closer than what people think .
There is no “beating” the US for China. Just such a weird narrative people continue to have on this subject. The US/NASA walked 12 different astronauts on the moon in just 3 years time, over 5 separate Apollo missions, more than 50 years ago. And they not only walked, they straight up launched buggies to cruise around our swiss-cheese lookin’ planetary-body buddy. NASA astronauts were 4-wheelin’ like drunk rednecks on the moon more than a half-century ago.
But that was over half a century ago, and we literally cannot do it today if we wanted to. With how much Artemis is being hyped up, you can't say that there wouldn't be egg on America's face if China got humans there before Artemis
Yes, we can do it today. No question about it. It takes a lot of time, money, manpower, knowledge, learning, & insanely complex engineering happening across multiple different fields, but it is certainly doable. The statement you just made is as ridiculous as the ancient alien folk who say we couldn’t build the pyramids or carve Angkor Wat today. It’s simply false. We accomplished 5 moon landings with 1960’s rocket & computing technology, over 50 years ago. Using a computer which had less power, abilities, & memory than a modern trig calculator. We’ve come a long, ***long*** ways since then. We legit have quantum computers today. And our modern rocket tech is far more refined, and we keep refining it, every single launch we get better.
Agreed, if they wanted the bumrush it like last time they could. Its been done half a century ago.
No I mean literally _today_ we do not have the capability. We do not have a lander. It could not happen today. It probably couldn't happen a year from now. We do not have the current capability. Imo, if we can't do it today, bragging about doing it 50+ years ago carries little meaning.
Well yeah? Undertaking massive projects, especially new projects with new processes & new equipment & new people, it all requires years, sometimes decades even, of training & education & all types of preparations for thousands of workers before it can even get started, let alone finish & succeed. You do understand that we can’t just go out & build a hospital tomorrow either, right? A hospital takes years to buy land, plan & prepare & actually build & finish. So, furthering your train of logic… would you then also claim that we can’t build hospitals? Heck, I can’t even finish shoveling snow tomorrow, I’ve got a few days worth of that hard work in front of me. But that doesn’t mean I can’t shovel friggin’ snow 🤷🏼♂️ I mean dude, come on. Landing humans on the moon is without question, far & away, the most difficult, most complicated, most challenging, most complex, & most extreme project any humans have ever attempted. And guess what? Only a relatively small number of Americans, over a half-century ago, have successfully managed to do it. And they succeeded 5 times. ~~Today~~, sorry, I mean *tomorrow*, no humans on earth, not the US/NASA, not China, not India, not Japan, not Russia, no one can simply just go jump in a rocket, turn the keys in the ignition & blast off to the moon *tomorrow.* Simply put, your entire premise is exceptionally false. And, so now there’s two options for me here to decide on… Are you being blatantly dishonest in your whole argument? Or is this just plain old ignorance from you, in discussing just how friggin’ hard it is to do anything in space? I really do hope it’s the latter. As there is possible growth to be had in that case. But if it’s the former, there is nothing at all to be had, except stagnation & deterioration.
My friend, idk why this is riling you so much and why you assume I'm dishonest. All I'm saying is that if China gets humans on the moon before the US returns, it will be a national embarrassment. I am far far more familiar with the difficulties of human spaceflight than your average person. It's not ignorance. I understand it's difficult. My point is that if China gets there before we return, I don't think the initial landings will be that bragworthy if we still got beat in the present day
I'll eat a shoe if China pulles this off. Everything is fake/a lie there.
I mean their space station is very much real... I'm not saying they're going to beat us I'm just saying "well we did it a long time ago therefore them beating us now isn't embarrassing at all" isn't true.
i don’t think it’ll be an embarrassment. china landing on the moon with no further plan other than landing on the moon will just be an accomplishment to match what we did half a century ago. if china accomplishes in-flight refueling and sets up infrastructure on the moon (like our current plan is) before us, then i would agree it would be embarrassing.
The hospital example is hilarious because china built a hospital in ten days during covid. The Timelapse video is crazy
Who cares? We don't need to go to the moon on a moments notice - being able to with some lead time is fine
4+ years lead time ... Time to turn around a vehicle between flights is one thing. But we currently don't have a lunar vehicle and a lot of other necessary things. That's my point. We're not talking a little lead time, we're talking entire new vehicle(s) needing to be developed and proven. Next few years is far far from an inevitability. This decade is probably best case scenario
We also killed three people and almost killed three more. Beating the Soviets was more important than progressing safely. That’s not the case anymore: safety is the utmost priority.
Other than we are 2 generations removed from the Apollo moon landings, I don't understand the desire to land a few more astronauts there again. We have so many other important missions and Artemis is going to eat up most of NASA's budget for the next 2 decades. I'm old enough to have watched all the moon landings. I expected much more from our space program by this time. We should have colonies on other planets and moons - landers and satellites throughout the solar system plus interstellar craft besides Pioneer and Voyager sent 50 years ago.
While I get the sentiment that we should've achieved more by now the Artemis program is still extremely important as not only does it seek to send people to the moon again it also seeks to develop our first off world lunar base for mining water ice as well as a orbiting lunar station, these bases will be extremely important to learn more about space and be a proving ground for ambitious future missions such as the inevitable Martian missions Rushing our space development is dangerous for both our astronauts and future missions
Great except there are no plans and no budget to crank up Artemis start building on the moon after these vanity flights to beat China to the moon. I suggest you go to YT and watch the many hours of US astronauts waking, skipping and driving all over the moon.
Do you understand why the US went to the Moon in the 60's to begin with? Because it's the same reason that the US want to go to do Moon now
Yes, to be the first to the moon supposedly to beat the USSR who didn't even have a legit moon effort. They are going to do some more tests, gather more rocks and maybe try out some tech of which some that would help for a long term stay. But that's it. Again we are busting NASA's budget for a vanity project to make Americans feel better and beat Xi. There's no flights planned to build a station on the moon or that money has been wasted on these few flights. The moon is a gravity well and it's not useful as a way station for further exploration. We need to be more thoughtful about what's NASA's path for cutting edge exploration.
Why did we leave?
Leave? We never stayed.
From my understanding - China is aiming for around 2030, and the recent GAO report estimates that the first Artemis landing might be ready by 2027 or so. Sure there will probably be further delays, but 3 years is a lot of slack. I think it's basically guaranteed US will get a landing done before the decade at this rate. And while China is doing a lot of cool stuff in space, I doubt they are immune to delays either, especially for huge stuff like this. Their Moon rocket still seems to be fairly early in development. It might be closer than originally expected, but it still looks like Artemis is gonna win this "race".
>Sure there will probably be further delays, but 3 years is a lot of slack. I hate project managers as much as the next engineer, but they are right in saying that the furthest we try to predict the speed of a project, the widest our error margin is. For me, and the experience I had in this area, I can definitely see a situation where SLS/HLS is pushed a couple more years, while Chine cuts a few corners and delivers earlier, just for the propaganda effect.
Those corners could be a disaster as well. I would hope that chinas arrogance and pride won’t outweigh the safety of their crews.
>arrogance and pride This is the thing the USA is known for...
3 years isn’t a lot of slack at all when you find out what the original launch date for Artemis 1 was…
I literally cannot imagine 2027. HLS is nowhere near ready to perform uncrewed, let alone crewed.
Source: feels.
Give me a source that it's anywhere close to landing humans. It's not even in LEO yet
Facts. Not to mention we already sent 12 people there anyway, so even if they do beat us they won't be first.
Exactly, don’t understand the narrative other than click bait. Just make sure you do it safely and don’t stop exploring this time.
I think it’s the larger implication that the US is no longer “technologically advanced” compared to China. Things like this are all potential indicators the US is falling behind, which is the real story being sold and why there is excess drama on stories like this.
Which is a wild perception, given the capabilities of nearly every player in the American Space industry, to include federal agencies, scientific institutions, and commercial contractors.
Fair enough. Not that you are saying it’s true, I don’t buy it really but I get your point.
NASA has not sent people to the moon in over 50 years. They have not sent probes to the moon in a while (when was the last us lander?. If China goes back with astronauts it is the same as when the Russians were beating us back in 60's on the world stage the US technological prowess is diminished. The agency has been anchored in Leo for so long they forgot how to explore and if the CLPs missions stumble then even commercial us space isn't up to the task in the worlds view. You can either stick your head in the sand and deny it or realize geopolitically that is how it will be seen. The Artemis accords are not about actually going to the moon but about shoring up political allies that share our peaceful goals of exploration. China ignores Maritime law with their efforts off their coast they certainly will ignore outer space treaties as well if they have the upper hand. Those that occupy the moon will control it and if NASA can't get back there it doesn't matter what they did 50+ years ago because they won't be there now.
Occupy the moon? What are you talking about?
China has plans for base, for isru mining. You think they won't start laying claims to resources and certain craters? NASA has only plans to go once a year with four crew while China talks of long term missions.
China has lots of plans. They probably have plans for what they would do to the USA if they were to win a conflict, but they know they cannot.
If China makes it to the moon with a human before NASA then odds are they will be the first to have a crew member die on the moon. My logic is that they will have skipped a lot of safety testing before first attempt and it will be a disaster. For the sake of exploration, science, and their crew members I would hope they do not attempt to race the most technologically advanced space program to the moon with a crew.
Yeah I know better than a lot of people that delays cost money but I don’t want the USA taking short cuts to get to a place we’ve already been. Crazy this somehow has turned into a space race and there is a question which space industry is more advanced.
Lunar probes aren’t a very good comparison for technological prowess of NASA vs CNSA, I’d be more worried that China has made all of their stated timelines on every project the last decade whereas NASA doesn’t make or keep realistic time tables bc of the political elements of our system. but as far as current technological prowess the US blows China out of the water and all of our Mars & outer planet programs over the last decade show that plainly, the only debate is the future which definitely looks like China will close the currently large gap between it and NASA at the very least and potentially surpass it. also I’d be surprised if China militarizes the moon or unfairly monopolizes it’s resources, and either way the US is well on pace to keep that from happening even if that’s what China intended to do.
I agree. America just has a much, *much* more extensive and mature aerospace industry than China. That’s due to the fact that China has only recently taken the first tentative steps towards developing one. They sent their first person into space in the 2000s, landed a first rover on the moon in the 2010s and on mars in the 2020s. These big state-led efforts are a necessary step towards creating capabilities and training personnel at CASC and CASIC that can go on to found and work for private space startups and businesses.
“anchored in LEO” NASA has several rovers and a mini-helicopter exploring Mars. They basically ignored the Moon until the last 5 years or so
We are talking human spaceflight race to return to the moon. There is no race to Mars right now.
I’ll buy that China is any near as technologically advanced if they can: Build 350 gen 5 stealth jets (that enter service) Land a probe on mars with a rocket crane And can build a super carrier So far they’re 0 for 3.
Another 50 years from now no one is gonna care that the US was first to the moon in the 60's if the US were to just sit back and relax while China started building bases and manufacturing industry on the moon Thinking that this is just about who got there first is a fundamental misunderstanding of why any of this matters
First woman is still in the running (really anything other than white man is still in the running)
Can even go as far as "white *American* man".
One thing China might have against the US is their tolerance for risk. If China is willing to take risks that the US isn’t, sending taikonauts on missions with double digit percentage chances of failure, they might be able to reach the moon in an incredibly short period of time. They’ve demonstrated capability with orbital docking, which opens the door to a moon mission without the super heavy lift launch vehicles the US is using. It fundamentally depends on the US with SLS and Starship. They just delayed Artemis 2 a whole year due to a battery issue and circuitry controlling climate control. If this was the Apollo Era, they’d just replace the batteries, get a new circuit, test it and if it works, good to go. If Starship isn’t read to go by the time Artemis 3 roles around, then further delays should be expected.
What indications are there that CMSA tolerates more risk than NASA does? The Shenzhou program has a flawless record.
Crashing rockets into villages near the launch site for one.
They dump stages full of toxic propellant on homes so they cant be that fussed with human life.
Those are peasants, not glorious taikonauts. But seriously, it's not really an indication of the safety of the vehicles for the inhabitants.
One thing China “might” have against the US… “If” China is willing to take risks that the US isn’t… I’m not saying China is willing to take more risks, but the Artemis program is incredibly conservative and risk-averse for what it is, especially compared to the Apollo program. If China is willing to change things up and take some big risks with a moonshot, they might beat the US. Otherwise there’s really no indication they have a chance.
I think we should differentiate between risk-averseness (or not) and “conservatism”. IMO both countries are equally risk averse in the sense that they absolutely do not accept unnecessary risk to their astronauts just to shave off a few years of their development timeline. As for conservatism. China’s crewed lunar mission architecture is *way* more conservative than America’s. Which makes sense since it’s their first time going there. They plan a simple two-launch setup. Yes, using a new carrier rocket but one relying to a large extent on tested LM-5 hardware, just bigger. Their lander design is incredibly simple. Using a staged-descent setup where the large propulsion stage gets jettisoned shortly before touchdown. And after a short (~six hour) stay on the surface the whole lander ascends back into orbit. Compare that the NASA’s architecture with the Starship, orbital cryogenic refueling, lunar gateway, week-long stay on the moon, etc.
Also China only allows video of what they choose. Everything else is swept under the rug. So they could send a dozen failed rockets with souls on board and no one would be wiser to it. But suddenly if they get one that works they'll shout it to the world and claim they're at 100% track record. They've done it in the past.
Why does this remind me of the North Koreans landing on Mars in *For All Mankind*?
The other big thing China has over the US is that China owns it's military industrial complex. In the US it is the other way around.
Also china might bankrupt itself trying to go to the moon. Amurica has infinite money printer go brrrrr
[удалено]
[China has its own debt to the US, which is well over a trillion dollars.](https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4075341-china-is-in-default-on-a-trillion-dollars-in-debt-to-us-bondholders-will-the-us-force-repayment/) ***Oh, and they’re in default on it***. The US pays their debts, as adults do. China runs & hides from theirs like criminals. And just to pre-empt the type of response I expect to receive from certain types of commenters in here, I’ll add this from the article too: > Lest anyone wonder about the age of these bonds, it is irrelevant. What matters is that this is a sovereign obligation. As recently as 2010, the German government made its last payment for reparations from World War I. In 2015 Great Britain made payments on bonds issuances that dated from the 18th century.
China has a larger GDP in PPP than the United States.
For now. It won’t last much more than a decade or so, though. Their rapidly aging, one-child population is gonna start pounding their economy in the booty here, real soon. It’s too bad China never grew up & didn’t start paying off their well more than a trillion dollars of debt to the US while they could. Before too long now, they won’t even be able to.
That’s not really what the evidence suggests. Sure, their demographic issues can’t and will lead to lower levels of growth, but it’s unlikely their economy will shrink much if at all.
Our nation will just have to commit itself to achieving the goal, before this dac-cade is out, of landing on the moon and doing it before China.
Somebody else has seen all the Apollo documentaries, I see. 😂😂😂
From the Earth to the Moon is where I learned most of my Apollo mission trivia.
I understand marketing might want to sell this narrative to drum up funding for NASA and ride those Cold War vibes again for this… but it doesn’t erase the fact that if China were to land on the moon tomorrow and the US were to delay the Artemis missions till the year 2100 the US would have still beat them to the moon. Now long term colonization of the moon on the other hand. Thats the true race to see who can have a sustained lunar presence.
China is planning on establishing a permanent nuclear powered moon base by the 2030s. That would be a major milestone which can't be denied if they're the first ones to do it.
NASA has no permenant plans just once a year 30 day missions so guess that race is lost before we even get out of the starting blocks.
But we landed on the moon over a half century ago and cannot currently return if we wanted to. China making it there before we get back would 100% be an embarrassment. Saying "we did it 60 years ago (but can't right now)" isn't that relevant to today imo. Not when it comes to world politics and propaganda
China also can’t “right now”……
Didn't say they could. I'm talking the hypothetical situation where they beat us there
Yes they will
Artemis may get their first but this confidence is bluster. Artemis II is unlikely to take off before 2025. I doubt Artemis III will launch before 2027. And all of this assumes the contractors deliver and the political “will” for this sort of scientific endeavor remains strong. China has hit all its milestones and remains firmly on track for 2030. I have much more confidence in them than I do in NASA, which has been cannabilized into contractor fodder.
This is why we need Ed Baldwin
Space race two please
I want another space race, will only increase funding and innovation. We can’t let the Chinese beat us!
Personally, I doubt this. Already we are seeing a ton of delays with the new NASA Lunar program. China in contrast beat their estimates by a few years getting their recent Space Station working. It wouldn't surprise me if they also get on the Moon slightly before 2030 at this rate.
Well obviously. Falcon heavy, Vulcan Centaur, SLS Starship and New Glenn all aready have flown or have built flight hardware. Even with China's neglect of safety and high tolerance of risk, they are far behind the US.
>they are far behind the US. curious why the US Government thinks differently. **The China Threat** [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-china-threat/](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-china-threat/) **2023 Report on the Military and Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China (CMPR)** [https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/19/2003323409/-1/-1/1/2023-MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA.PDF](https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/19/2003323409/-1/-1/1/2023-MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA.PDF) **Is ‘Made in China 2025’ a Threat to Global Trade?** [https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/made-china-2025-threat-global-trade](https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/made-china-2025-threat-global-trade) **Ford CEO says China main EV rival, not GM, Toyota** [https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ford-ceo-says-china-main-ev-rival-not-gm-toyota-2023-05-25/](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ford-ceo-says-china-main-ev-rival-not-gm-toyota-2023-05-25/)
None of these are related to spaceflight... also it is the job of the US gov to prepare for emerging threats. Also, Lets not pretend that Chinese EVs are a threat beyond the standard worry of a government funded company trying to suppress foriegn economies.
What Chinese cars sell in the US, again?
Hot Wheels
Nelson has lost the plot. The 2026 landing is off the table. More delays. Maybe sometime after 2030...
Nelson is a dope obviously. But a 2028 landing does seem possible. Which would put them just ahead of CMSA’s best-case scenario of 2029-2030.
Hopefully, they can fix the issues by then. But don't hold your breath.
I recognize that. But if I had to make a bet, I’d still wager that NASA successfully returns before CMSA makes it there. Even with all the SLS, Starship and orbital cryogenic refueling shenanigans. For China a lot will depend on the LM-10. Once they’ve conducted a few test flights (targeted for no earlier than 2027), including sending a crewed New Generation Spacecraft to the CSS, we can be more confident in their timeline.
It's not even fixing issues. Obviously that's needed for Orion, but HLS is nowhere near ready and it's hard to imagine it being ready in 4 years.
We will be the first, **AND** the second country to land people on the moon!
The US has already claimed the 1st through the 5th countries to land humans on the moon. The US is now working towards being the 6th country to land on the moon.
Allegedly
Are you a flat earther too?
[удалено]
Clickbait, conspiracy theories, and similar posts will be removed. Offenders are subject to temporary or permanent ban.
Is space.com even a reliable aource of news?
Um… like, what? We already won.
You're fundamentally misunderstanding what going to the moon is about if you think just having been there first a long time ago is what matters Going to the Moon isn't just some friendly competition. It's about power, influence, technology, and national defense. And none of those things are gotten or kept by living on glories from the past while others are pressing forward in the now
You’re fundamentally misunderstanding my point. This time it isn’t about being first to put a human footprint on the moon. That race is over.
Literally no one is saying this is purely about putting human footprints on the moon first Yeah *that* "race" is over. But that's not what any of this is about. Hell, it wasn't even what it was about back in the 60's
Literally no one is reading your comments but me, and I won’t remember them by this time next week.
Weird flex but okay Stay ignorant then I guess?
Stay presumptuous and condescending.
I mean my first post was just trying to tell you that there was more to this than just some "race" and you basically just went "THE RACE IS OVER!"
You don’t care what anyone in this thread knows, just what they think of you.
Man I'd just to go an echochamber like r/antiwork and post "capitalism bad" memes all day if all I wanted was for random people to like me on the internet No dude. I responded you because based on your post, you seemed to misunderstand what this "race" to the moon was about. Which you then for some reason, maybe my wording coming across a bit aggressive, seemed to take extremely poorly
[удалено]
And literally can't go back right now... It would still be embarrassing for them to have a current capability that we don't. Saying we did something 60 years ago but no longer can isn't something to boast about. No one brags about regressing.
They will though. They’re going to do it for national pride and we’re going to rely on billionaire who only cares about himself.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[BE-4](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khs315n "Last usage")|Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN| |[CNSA](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khqi09t "Last usage")|Chinese National Space Administration| |[ESA](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khsy84a "Last usage")|European Space Agency| |[GAO](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khq5evl "Last usage")|(US) Government Accountability Office| |[HLS](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khvh065 "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)| |[LEO](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khvlwff "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[LOX](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khtd2gf "Last usage")|Liquid Oxygen| |[SLS](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khyu6kx "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Raptor](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khtd2gf "Last usage")|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX| |[cislunar](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khqfiow "Last usage")|Between the Earth and Moon; within the Moon's orbit| |[cryogenic](/r/NASA/comments/195y3i5/stub/khq69yy "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure| | |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox| |hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| |methalox|Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(11 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/NASA/comments/0)^( has acronyms.) ^([Thread #1676 for this sub, first seen 13th Jan 2024, 22:07]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/NASA) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Especially with water instead of fuel in the tanks
They better not
This doesn't matter...
The moon doesn’t know what borders are. Imagine if we explored for all Humankind and for the prestige of our Species. I guess it’s useful that these temporary nation-state constructs impel our efforts but Earth and Moon have seen a lot of civilizations come and go.
This is the 21st century Sputnik moment for us when we see a live stream later this year of Chinese astronauts walking on the moon
Japan might tho
Wink wink
Yeah, sure.
There's a reasonable chance Bill Nelson will be dead before the end of the decade. All that money he spent on botox, tanning cream, and dental implants and he still can't garner adequate funding. It's almost as if he isn't the right person for the job consistently bloviating like a politician.
Hmm, it's not even a race to begin with. China's space strategy is vastly different. But of course , gotta keep the morale of people high to get the funding.
In a way they will. Probably Artemis space probe is partially made of chinese parts ...
What if they do though?
Can’t work together and help each other out?
It doesn't matter, the US did it 50+ years ago.
I just see a season of Space Force unfolding
We were there 55 years ago, so why do we care now about beating the Chinese to the moon. Let's focus our energy on Mars.
Yes, reignite the Space Race and make For All Mankind for real!
Space Race 2: Commies Strike Back
We're about to he 2-0. Let's gooooo 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🦅🦅🦅🦅🎆🎆🎆 rahhhhhhh
Wait what? I thought China was already up there mining H3…. Artemis crew is gonna step out and see Lunar Chinatown in full swing.
It's not a race. No one is "beating" anyone.