Lets see how far we've come

[ONETINSOLDIER 2]

105 years ago today, man slipped the bonds of earth,

from the wright flyer to the f-22, and farther,

simply amazing

[Guest 531_Ghost]

And what an amazing journey it's been and will continue to be!

[column5 62]

What's even more amazing is that it only took 66 years to go from first flight to landing on the moon. I just wish we had been able to keep up that pace--imagine where we would be today.

[+Stary 2,427]

What's even more amazing is that it only took 66 years to go from first flight to landing on the moon. I just wish we had been able to keep up that pace--imagine where we would be today.

 

Not farther than half way to Mars maybe

[column5 62]

Not farther than half way to Mars maybe

 

 

I think perhaps farther than that...almost 30 years have elapsed since 1969...

[Jeremiah Weed 0]

I think perhaps farther than that...almost 30 years have elapsed since 1969...

 

I think you need to check you calendar

[FastCargo 412]

Not farther than half way to Mars maybe

 

Actually, depending, we could have landed on Mars back in the mid 1980s using evolved Saturn 5 technology.

 

For interesting reading, read Voyage by Stephen Baxter. He's a math and engineering major turned science fiction author. His novel deals with an alternate history where we reach Mars in the Reagan era in an Apollo type program and using technology not much more advanced than the Saturn 5.

 

However, several things were sacrificed...Apollo missions were stopped after Apollo 14, other unmanned probes put on hold and most interestingly, the Space Shuttle was never developed.

 

FC

[Fubar512 1,350]

On the 10th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing, there was an article in the science section of the NY Times, where they interviewed a scientist who'd been involved with NASA and the Apollo program. He stated that the Apollo 11 mission was a bold step, tantamount to "Columbus having tried to circumnavigate the globe on his first voyage, rather then having settled for an Atlantic crossing".

[Rambler 1-1 9]

who needs space? I'm perfectly happy strapped in to a Citabria or a 172, or even a cub! Although I would prefer an F-35 or -14 or something of the like.

[+streakeagle 866]

Had the money kept rolling in and NASA continued to be lucky in terms of avoiding fatal accidents, we were supposed to have a permanent moon base by 1980 and be attempting a trip to Mars by 2010. Living on the moon would have accelerated the R&D necessary to survive an extended trip to mars as well as providing a great staging area/launch platform. Even with the current space station in place, the limited budget has kept the pace of advancement down to a crawl compared to the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo whirlwind. Space travel costs, how far do you want to go? I am of the opinion that it is critical to the survival of the human race for people to permanently live on Mars and/or any othe inhabitable body in our Solar system independent of all support from Earth. That way if a catastrophic disaster kills off everyone on Earth, humanity will still be around. Of course, if we are able to spread to other locations in our solar system, then our next goal should be to get to another star system before our Solar system dies. We need to simultaneously dump a ton of resources in Mars colonization via conventional technology and alternative sub-atomic faster-than-light theories that might be extendable to the macro world. It would be cool if before we could build a conventional spaceship to get to Mars, we figured out how to instantly jump there within the next 10 or 20 years

Edited December 18, 2008 by streakeagle

[+streakeagle 866]

For perspective on aircraft technology, consider the time it took to develop and produce the A-12/SR-71 compared to the F-22.

Sure the F-22 takes advantage of modern materials and micro-miniature electronic technology, but the idea for this aircraft started around 1980 and they are just now entering service in significant numbers over 25 years later.

The A-12/SR-71 is in some ways still a more advanced airframe and propulsion system. It was conceived around 1958 and flying operational sorties by 1963.

To me, the aerospace technology explosion peaked with the light-weight fighter program (F-16/F-17) and the last Apollo mission.

The space shuttle was under-funded and as a result lacked the performance that would have made it truly useful and cost-effective compared to conventional rockets.

Now the budget has shrunk so much, we are taking a step backwards to Apollo-like conventional rockets and to do so, we first have to ground the space shuttle so we can spend a few years funding development for its replacement. Imagine if the USAF had to ground the F-4 in the middle of Vietnam to afford development of the F-15 and that the end result was a based on the previous generation, the F-86. That is the direction our manned space program is heading. Fortunately, the commerical space industry is finally going the direction that NASA originally wanted: an orbiter with reliability, maintenance requirements, and turn-around time little different from an airliner... and if they succeed, not only will they have done it on a fraction of the budget NASA has ever had, but they will actually make a profit once fully operational. If anyone can pull this off, Burt Rutan can. He is already an aerospace engineering legend, but if his work on a commercial space shuttle is as successful as it promises to be, it could put him up there with Werner Von Braun and Kelly Johnson.

[Jeremiah Weed 0]

who needs space? I'm perfectly happy strapped in to a Citabria or a 172, or even a cub! Although I would prefer an F-35 or -14 or something of the like.

 

You do, every time you watch TV, use a GPS, etc.

[+streakeagle 866]

While I would be happy to fly a Cessna 152, Piper Cub (especially a tricked out Super Cub), or better yet a Pitts Special biplane...

But I think getting the chance to fly the X-15 would be the ultimate: a spaceplane. The X-15 was to the space shuttle what Project Mercury was to Project Apollo. It was the small, sports car version of the shuttle. Like the SR-71, it looks advanced enough to be featured in modern sci-fi movies as a space ship. Space... the final frontier...

Air is good, space is better

[+Julhelm 266]

Also there is the whole issue of national prestige that sort of disappeared once the Soviets had been beaten to the Moon. Without the space race as it evolved, I personally do not believe we would have ever seen the level of funding that enabled NASA to land men on the moon.

 

Now, if I were in charge, I'd just cut down on the US military budget and pour that into funding the space program instead - the potential technological benefits are immense.

[DWCAce 19]

Julhelm, ya can't cut down what's not there! (I don't have the numbers, but the defense budget is a mere shadow of what it should be). I say we should spend more on space and other R&D than foreign aid! ...now there's a can of worms!

[serverandenforcer 33]

Ya know, if Russia re-energized their space program to reach the Moon and a mission to land on Mars, I'm pretty sure that a heck of a lot more funding would be dumped into NASA's lap to beat them to it. We've seem to have gotten comfortable and cozy in our current position and lack motivation to push farther ahead.

[eraser_tr 29]

Well the actual price of doing things has gone up dramatically. Until the F-15 and it's generation came around, we built and bought aircraft in the thousands. Now there won't even be 300 F-22s since they're over 100 million each. I wonder how much it would cost to build a new F-4 phantom today compared to the 60s?

[Silverbolt 104]

Evolved Saturn 5??

 

i think it should had the Taipei 101 size.

[sparkomatic 7]

- could we have a thread and not argue?

 

- how about do the math...F-4 first flight=27 May 1958...and it is still in flying today...if you start the clock on Dec 17 1903 then roughly 55 years passed before the double ugly...and that legendary has been flying for 50 years (in some capacity)

 

- in that same thought, the B-52 first chipped away at the ozone layer on 15 April 1952, so about 49 years after Kitty Hawk and has been flying for the 56 years past.

 

- it is rather interesting to note that both of them have been flying for about half as long as modern powered flight

 

- and better still the legendary DC-3 took off on 17 Dec 1935 and there are some still flying

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Yep. 55 years of "higher faster farther" and then it died, replaced by ballistic missiles.

 

"stealth" does not interest the public. Performance does. Another thing that has made the public lose interest in military aviation is the declining pilot/population ratio. Used to be, near abouts every small town could claim the origin of a military pilot. Not any more.

 

Another thing I thought about, the strange reality of Vietnam tarnished the shiny polished image of military jet finish for much of the public. Interestingly that's when the big move to cammo skins was made, to replace classical era aluminumnumnum.

 

I've been wondering if man cannot live in space for any real length of time, and NASA knows something. Just a guess in the dark, and one I don't like, but there it is.

 

...oh, and one more thing...the missiles DON'T HAVE FINS ANYMORE, or very small fins. Not very inspiring.

[ONETINSOLDIER 2]

I bet you drive an old cadillac with the big fins on it,,huh?

[TX3RN0BILL 3]

Ya know, if Russia re-energized their space program to reach the Moon and a mission to land on Mars, I'm pretty sure that a heck of a lot more funding would be dumped into NASA's lap to beat them to it. We've seem to have gotten comfortable and cozy in our current position and lack motivation to push farther ahead.

 

The chinese have sent people around an orbit of Earth, and are bent on devoting resources on flying to Mars. My bet is any next "Space Race" will be between China and the US, not Russia vs US.

[Silverbolt 104]

Maybe China Vs US and Russia?

 

 

AFAIK Russian Spacel program and NASA are walking togeder... and very well, when the shuttle weren't avaible both work fine .

[+Viggen 615]

Great observations their Sparko. It really is amazing, how far we've gone in a little over 100 years.

 

Sparko's first observation/request should say something though....

 

- could we have a thread and not argue?

[The_Nephilim 0]

However, several things were sacrificed...Apollo missions were stopped after Apollo 14, other unmanned probes put on hold and most interestingly, the Space Shuttle was never developed.

 

FC

 

 

Hi, Wasn't the Appolo 17 the Last to go to the moon?? Says so at wikipedia and my Old World records Book from 1980?:

 

 

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_17

 

I thought China did put a man in orbit??

Edited December 19, 2008 by The_Nephilim