China’s dark side of the moon mission has now reached lunar orbit.
China’s four-ton lander entered lunar orbit on Wednesday. They should be landing on the moon January 3rd, 2019. If the landing and operation is successful, this will be the first time a lunar rover lands on the far side of the moon.
China has another satellite in lunar orbit to relay communications from Earth to the rover. The Queqiao relay satellite is at the second Lagrange point (L2).
China plans to launch Chang’e-5 in 2019. It would be an unmanned lunar sample return mission.
China plans a permanent robotic lunar outpost in about 10 years. There could be European Space Agency partnership with China’s moon base.
China’s manned moon mission could be around 2035.
They have a steady space program that does not shift. They are the tortoise to the US hare.
If US commercial space continues to make massive progress, then the race for achievements with manned and unmanned missions will be with SpaceX and other New Space companies.
At the inaugural Morgan Stanley Space Summit Wednesday, 10 out of the 12 presenters believed China will be the next to put a human on the moon, before the US.
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) December 12, 2018
The US unmanned missions and bases can be set up by commercial companies before 2025.
A SpaceX Super Heavy Starship could land manned missions on the moon before 2030.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
That album was absolutely correct in all aspects.
It’s like the joke about the roof – it’s way over your head.
So you’re saying that the guy on the Pink Floyd album had it right after all?
Ha ha!
No, wait. You started a joke but didn’t get to a punchline.
Or… maybe they actually know what the phrase means?
Hint: “Dark” can mean “unseen”.
“Dark” has more than one meaning.
Yes, in late 20th, early 21st century common usage it usually only means “no light” but for a long time it also meant “unseen or unknown”. Hence the “dark side of the moon” is the one we can’t see.
We have gone to war over far less.
Again, it’s all about how badly our government wants something or not. If it does, it will go to war. It can take/destroy OS assets, etc.
Actually destroying competing nations’ space probes, particularly if they were manned, would be a cause of war. For now, we can get by, by just out-competing them by a wide margin.
But only if our government were motivated to do so. As it is, we’re lucky that our government just doesn’t hobble SpaceX too much. Affirmatively working to advance our conquest (Not “exploration”) of space is probably a bridge too far.
So? How does that economically justify prospecting and mining He3 on the moon now?
Hence why I qualified my statement as: In reality, it does. Just like it owns pretty much everything else it decides that it wants badly enough. For everything it does not want badly enough, it still RESERVES the right to taking it later on. That’s one of those baked-in-the-cake rules for any superpower. In this case tho, this aforementioned distinction probably doesn’t mean much given how it presently doesn’t want the Moon badly enough. So yes, others can go there.
As Brett below points out, omnipotence is not required.
The US CAN TAKE ownership (who cares about ‘claiming’) of whatever it likes, pretty much how badly it really wants it.
Really? The US is quite capable in preventing others from entering LEO from Earth’s surface in the first place. That right there would prevent others from reaching the Moon also. And if others did take part of the Moon that the US didn’t want them to, it could destroy that holding as well.
Again, omnipotence not required.
“Next”? Doesn’t there have to be an actual “first”?
D-He3 reactors aren’t really aneutronic; You get D-D reactions, and end up with neutrons anyway. Just not as many. But, of course, a D-He3 reactor really relies on neutrons, because you need to breed more He3. Mining it isn’t really feasible.
Nah, the US could much sooner claim exclusive ownership over the Moon than it could Alpha Centauri, because the US can REACH the Moon, where it can’t presently reach Alpha Centauri. If we made it a serious goal, we could have control over the Moon within a decade or two, long before other countries would have the chance to do more than land a few probes.
I’m not advising this as a policy, we’d be better off just identifying and claiming the better bits, (The poles and any notable mineral deposits.) and leave the worse bits for other nations to have as a consolation prize for reaching there.
Greenbone@ I did not think of that, on the farside they can hide any failure if the lander.
That’s why I said it was a terrible idea putting “big” windows on a spacecraft. Humans do have this drive to directly see their environment. But there’s a difference between a couple of observation blisters and a picture window larger than a house.
They look like they were Photoshopped in later… very poorly. Note the lack of shadow of the right one.
Well, researchers are slowly getting closer and closer to fusion energy. I think the answer will be found before 2050.
You’re being silly. Being a superpower is not the same as being omnipotent. The US can no sooner claim exclusive ownership over the Moon than it can over Alpha Centauri. The US has no way of preventing any other capable power from making use of the Moon. What would it do – detonate an ASAT weapon? Don’t be ridiculous – that would make the Moon off-limits for everybody, including the US itself.
Indeed. Skylab had *a* window, only because the astronauts fought for it…and spent a lot of off-time at it.
You mean for the non-existent aneutronic D-He3 fusion reactors that uses that fuel?
SpaceX itself doesn’t want to go to the moon, but others (private/NASA) might pay them to. Blue Origin on the other hand does want to go there. If the chinese land humans though, expect other countries to try via public/private means in about 5 years or so using private providers/technology.
I think we can safely discount links to any articles that refer to “the dark side of the moon”.
First one there gets to stake out the best frozen water mines.
Prospecting for Helium3
For countries, wherever they can go, settle and defend is theirs.
The Moon has nobody living there yet, ergo anyone that is willing and able to go and makes a camp on it can call the area theirs.
Not all of it, because they couldn’t reasonably defend it and prevent others from landing and doing the same, but the area surrounding their camp certainly yes.
And this regardless of any feel good treaty from the 60s.
The advantage of this first settler being the USA, is that anyone that plays well with others and has no trade sanctions will be able to go and invest money there with the USA developed infrastructure and companies, if they have the coin and will to do it.
Of course, as soon as America does it, several other powers will want their own piece of the cake and rush manned missions and settlements too (I see China doing it soon). Which is a good thing overall for humanity, albeit the source of a lot of future national power games and dramas.
Skylights more likely.
Common for lunar hab designs. Particularly if they want to grow food in them.
In reality, it does. Just like it owns pretty much everything else it decides that it wants badly enough.
For everything it does not want badly enough, it still RESERVES the right to taking it later on.
That’s one of those baked-in-the-cake rules for any superpower. Just ask the Brits, the Spanish, the French, the Romans, et al. that preceded America’s hegemony.
Not good enough historical examples? Check out the BINDING treaties the US made with Native Americans that ‘secured’ their ownership of what is now Florida, Oklahoma, both Dakotas, etc. ALL of them ignored when the US decided it renege on them and take their land.
In this case tho, this aforementioned distinction probably doesn’t mean much given how it presently doesn’t want the Moon badly enough. So yes, others can go there. Even Next Big China!
#AmericaFirst
“A gently reminder that if the USA doesn’t return to the Moon, others will.”
Is that a threat?
The USA does not own the moon, so what if others go there.
Back side of the moon for “plausible deniability.” A very good idea considering who is doing it.
What? No pictures? Don’t those spacecraft have cameras?
Here’s an idea, cancel SLS and use the savings to pay SpaceX to do it.
E. Musk seems to be pursuing a romantic, tourist-like vision for BFR/Starship.
Vision that may soon be proven wrong for the needs and realities of space travel.
The spaceship with big windows certainly looks cool and science fictional, but if the safety will go down or be compromised, they will have to remove them.
But I don’t believe they will remove them completely, changing them for smaller, fewer ones instead, because people do want to be able to look outside with their own eyes and it may be good for long term passenger and crew morale.
Incentives … we need something like a US Commerce Dept funded prize … say $10B for a US company to deliver and house a crew of 3 US citizens to the lunar surface for 6 months and return them safely to Earth. After that $1B per 3 person/6 month for the next 10 turns. That is some serious $, but it will require some serious $ to really do this. At the moment there is no commercial incentive for profit seeking companies to create this solution. Just reprogram SLS and/or Gateway money to the Commerce Dept. Obviously we can’t let NASA run this after the SLS, JWST and Commercial Crew fiascos.
A gently reminder that if the USA doesn’t return to the Moon, others will.
Hopefully enough motivation to change the lunar gateway plans for a legit lunar settlement. Nevertheless that will need some credible manned lander capabilities, given SLS won’t provide those, at least not without spending a horrifying amount of money and additional time building it.
Fortunately SpaceX may soon have those capabilities and will be happy to take the USA and NASA back to the Moon for a fee.
In practice you’d have cameras, or maybe fiber optics. Windows make no sense in space, except for places where a view even if there are technical issues is essential.
That’s one of my complaints about the BFR renderings. Terrible idea putting big windows on space craft.
By the way, if they really want to visit the “dark” side of the Moon, they could just land on the visible side, and wait for night…
Modeled after the ISS windows, I think, with retractable thick metal covers for radiation protection when you’re not looking out.
In practice, that dirt cover will probably be a lot thicker, so no windows. These are artist renderings.
Are those…WINDOWS on the habitats?