Russia will begin Moon colonization in 2030 - draft space program
109 replies, posted
From the same directors as "nazies from space"...
Commies from space!
[QUOTE=AntonioR;44764724]Speaking of Moon colonization... how is the land up there divided ? Technically if the Russians send a person there the complete moon is theirs(First come,first served?), until someone sends their conquistadors up there and starts a war or something.[/QUOTE]
Technically it belongs to everyone. I imagine the first colonies will work together or keep to themselves. Waste of resources to pit military assets up there when you could use those launches for more support systems. There are more resources in space than we can imagine so starting a war over one rock would be a stupid selfish waste of human life.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;44764724]Speaking of Moon colonization... how is the land up there divided ? Technically if the Russians send a person there the complete moon is theirs(First come,first served?), until someone sends their conquistadors up there and starts a war or something.[/QUOTE]
treaties prevent us from really claiming land off of earth, but NASA does hold the belief that the apollo landing sites are U.S. Historic sites and must be preserved for scientific purposes and human history.
Space race. Oh yes, it's about time.
And it will benefit all humanity - much better than a nuclear race anyway.
First Crimea. Now the moon.
[IMG]http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130128025044/cnc/images/d/da/RA2_ToTheMoon_cutscene.jpg[/IMG]
It begins.
[QUOTE=OvB;44764770]Technically it belongs to everyone. I imagine the first colonies will work together or keep to themselves. Waste of resources to pit military assets up there when you could use those launches for more support systems. There are more resources in space than we can imagine so starting a war over one rock would be a stupid selfish waste of human life.[/QUOTE]
and i don't imagine most if any astronauts would be alright with shooting each other unless they were specifically selected for that purpose. some might have military ties, but they've never come to blows, they've never carried weapons against each other, and for as long as the ISS has been floating, they've been almost above nationality, except as representatives for their country. having astronauts fight and kill each other would be like having a shootout at the Olympic games, and it would stain the name and prestige for a long time coming.
[editline]9th May[/editline]
the only time they've ever had weapons was in a few Russian missions, one where some military goons mounted an AA gun on a fucking space station (it didn't work), and one where they only had the gun in case they landed in the wilderness and had to hunt or protect themselves against wild animals. maybe they'll fight in the future, but for now everyone has a higher duty than that.
Hoping for Space Race 2.0: Electric Boogaloo
If I were an astronaut I'd be down with shooting cosmonauts. Haven't you seen [i]Moonraker[/i]? Coolest firefight ever.
With Russia nearing being soviet like again this could mean space races again?
Here's to hoping they have better luck than they did the last couple decades or so.
Nothing like having a disastrous triple-launch failure that wipes out your entire launch facility, including the deaths of high-level military brass and irreplaceable rocket scientists :v:
Oh, and not to mention the fact that their Space Shuttle clone was destroyed by a collapsing hanger. Just the shittiest of luck.
We all know the moon is historically Russian so it only makes sense.
nobody will go to the moon because of its aluminum, iron or even titanium.
if they'll decide to colonise and mine it, that would mean that they found a proffitable venue there.curious as to what that might be.
[QUOTE=godfatherk;44765603]nobody will go to the moon because of its aluminum, iron or even titanium.
if they'll decide to colonise and mine it, that would mean that they found a proffitable venue there.curious as to what that might be.[/QUOTE]
Maybe because of aluminum, iron, titanium, and helium-3? There's not just a few pounds on the moon you know, more like hundreds of thousands of tons, if not millions of tons of useful materials below the surface.
hey aluminium is so common nowadays that you get it wrapped around your sandvich for free when you buy one. hundreds of years ago, it is said that napoleon rejected gold and silver cutlery, and instead he used only aluminium ones. they were that rare and precious.
p.s. it's not because it has magically apeared out of nowhere, but that we've gotten more efficient at mining& smelting it, and we've found that there's an abbundance of it.
[QUOTE=Sableye;44764291]what are they going to launch on, the proton? its reliability is very questionable
Russia hasn't built a new booster since the Soviet union's energia and the facilities to build that dont exist anymore
this is something NASA's new heavy rocket is perfect for but the congressmen and president would rather talk about capabilities than actual milestones
[editline]9th May 2014[/editline]
also the proton is a lightweight compared to what's coming down the pipeline from commercial space[/QUOTE]
How come every thread about the Russian space program always has you posting some stupid bullshit.
"Russia hasn't built a new booster since the USSR"
Well, actually they have. Angara.
This is what NASA needs!
[QUOTE=laserguided;44768533]How come every thread about the Russian space program always has you posting some stupid bullshit.
"Russia hasn't built a new booster since the USSR"
Well, actually they have. Angara.[/QUOTE]
Has that even launched yet? They've been developing it for like a decade.
[QUOTE=OvB;44768700]Has that even launched yet? They've been developing it for like a decade.[/QUOTE]
Not yet, but South Korea uses a derivative of Angara's first state in their Naro-1. Supposedly its going to launch in late 2014.
I don't see why people think this is going to make a new space race. If anything, the entire Ukraine debacle will cause congress to remove funding from 'unimportant services' like NASA in order to give Defense more money.
Remember, the success of a nation isn't decided on who builds the best rockets anymore.
imagine if giant moles lived inside the moon
Time to start the application for Russian citizenship...
You think it'd be a bonus towards my cause, considering the friction between the US and Russia?
I figure either they'll hail me as a sensible Westerner and welcome me with open arms.... or they'll condemn me a spy and lock me away :v:
But seriously, good for Russia if they actually go through with it. I mean, Bush wanted to go to the Moon and Mars, too.. but we see how that went.
Space race 2.0, this is a good thing.
What's the point of colonizing the moon btw ? Does it really worth all the money ?
[QUOTE=426_Hemi;44771731]What's the point of colonizing the moon btw ? Does it really worth all the money ?[/QUOTE]
To satisfy our innate curiosity and explore the universe? Mining for resources, establishing a base and launching spacecraft from the moon would be a lot better than launching them from earth, since there's no gravity.
[QUOTE=426_Hemi;44771731]What's the point of colonizing the moon btw ? Does it really worth all the money ?[/QUOTE]
The Earth is getting increasingly small for us, and we're going to need to expand beyond this planet pretty soon.
The moon is a good start.
[QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;44774175]The Earth is getting increasingly small for us, and we're going to need to expand beyond this planet pretty soon.
The moon is a good start.[/QUOTE]
colonization mostly isn't really a very good solution for overpopulation, because being born in low gravity, as far as we know, really messes up the human body. you get lower bone density, rickets, eye problems, you can't balance very well due to the inner ear forming strangely, your heart becomes significantly more spherical (which reduces its pumping efficiency), and you would basically die if you tried to live on Earth. anyone born on the moon is going to have a tough time being the future of the human race.
[QUOTE=Cone;44775116]colonization mostly isn't really a very good solution for overpopulation, because being born in low gravity, as far as we know, really messes up the human body. you get lower bone density, rickets, eye problems, you can't balance very well due to the inner ear forming strangely, your heart becomes significantly more spherical (which reduces its pumping efficiency), and you would basically die if you tried to live on Earth. anyone born on the moon is going to have a tough time being the future of the human race.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying we're going to have generations of people raised on the moon. I just think we need to practice having people colonize on the moon before we find and set out toward a more habitable, earthlike planet
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
