The current US administration's plans were to send astronauts to Mars. That's now been dropped, and the emphasis will now be to compete with China and try to build a base before them. Who starts a lunar base first matters. Although the Outer Space Treaty prohibits anyone from claiming lunar territory, whoever sets up a base can claim some sort of rights to the site and its vicinity.

The best site will be somewhere on the south pole (this means almost continuous sunlight) with access to frozen water at the bottom of craters. It's possible that extensive lava tubes for radiation protection will be important, too. China's plans envision its base being built inside these. The number of places with easy access to water and lots of lava tubes may be very small, and some much better than others. Presumably whoever gets there first will get the best spot.

Who will get there first? It remains to be seen. The US's weakness is that it is relying on SpaceX's Starship to first achieve a huge number of technical goals, and so far, SpaceX is far behind schedule on those.

top 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 10 months ago (9 children)

I was listening to a podcast and the guy was saying that the United States aimlessly pursues goals to outperform other countries. For example, the US wants to have the biggest military. The US wants to have the largest GDP. Chasing a goal for the sake of competition does not benefit the US at all. We should work towards fulfilling our own interests but there is no point in blindly pursuing every metric. BTW the US doesn't try to outperform other countries in health care or education or any semblance of happiness.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    The US wants to have the largest GDP. Chasing a goal for the sake of competition does not benefit the US at all.

    Ironically, the two examples you listed are cases where the US did benefit immensely from winning the race. The US also benefited hugely from the Apollo space race, even if that wasn't the intention.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    As I understand, chasing a measurement of GDP is an effort to show work capacity. This capacity can be utilized in wartime to produce weapons and bolster security. Increasing work for the sake of increasing work does not benefit workers- it does not provide fair wages or safe workplace environments. It does not make citizens lives better. Similarly, there is an amount which must be spent on military for protection and to act as a deterrent, but engaging in a spending race is not beneficial to people. Those efforts could be used towards education, health, transportation and quality of life. I don't see how you can argue that the US's goals should be to work the hardest and spend the most on military.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    I'm not making the argument that it should be chasing those specific goals, or that they benefited the citizens. I'm drawing a distinction between the country and the people - as far as the leaders of the country are concerned, winning those races gave them exactly what they wanted, and the country (the aspects of it they care about) benefited.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago*

    So when you say that the US benefited immensely, you really mean that a few people (politicians and the ultra rich) benefited. I can understand that you're saying that the US was successful in achieving it's goals i just don't agree that the result was beneficial compared to a more strategic focused approach

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    The US has benefited greatly, it's the poors who get the stick.

    But that happens anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    No, they are not, nor they have ever been.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago

    I always thought we should have done more on the moon. we should be working out automated construction and things likespace elevators. Things to push technology forward and just use the moon as a nice safe (in the sense that if things go wrong no one gets hurt) and relatively close mass of stuff. If we can do everything we might want to do there then the technology is that much more along for the next steps.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    As much as technology has improved, building a base on Mars first is still stupid based on economics. If you're going just to plant a flag, then fly once and be done. If you want a base, build manufacturing on the moon first, where the equivalent of a bottle rocket can get you to Mars.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    where the equivalent of a bottle rocket can get you to Mars.

    You've got your delta v wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    I've never figured out how to read these diagrams. Do you really just add the Delta-Vs of the partial steps together? Or is it more complicated than that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Christ what if humans worked together 🙄

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child)

    I mean, it makes sense anyway, since the moon is closer and doesn't have that difficult atmosphere.

    But... sigh...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Time to get boobs on the moon.

    Turning out to be a prophetic show. I just hope John Malkovich gets to be part of it all.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The USA keeps changing focus between Mars and the Moon, and the current administration let go of hundreds of NASA employees.

    I wish the folks at NASA success but fear it's going to be difficult with their current management.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Although the Outer Space Treaty prohibits anyone from claiming lunar territory, whoever sets up a base can claim some sort of rights to the site and its vicinity.

    I think what the Outer Space Treaty and its contemporary interpretation says is this:

    • Claiming a whole celestial body (e.g. Moon, Mars) is NOT allowed
    • Claiming a small territory (1 km² max) IS allowed, if you can set foot there and meaningfully utilize the land area (e.g. excavation)
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Right, I'm pretty sure the outer space treaty is based on the Antarctica Treaty, and countries can still establish research facilities down there. This feels similar

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    The thing is that contemporary interpretations of the outer space treaty differ significantly from what's actually written in the text. In the text, it just says that "no nation can claim a celestial body for itself".

    This contains not only one, but two fallacies:

    • that it's only "nations" that could possibly reach a celestial body to claim it
    • and that only a whole celestial body could be claimed at once

    both are wrong. and that's why we have contemporary interpreters today saying that the paper is total bullshit and should be completely overhauled/rewritten.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    Honestly, if it doesn't involve practical satelites, rockets, or somehow harvesting more raw solar energy or something, fuck the space tech and the space race. It is a fucking waste of resources built on romanticizing breaking away from Earth. It's not happening. Travel times are too long and fuel costs too high. There is nothing particularly useful on the moon. There is nothing particularly useful on Mars. And before anyone suggests the bullshit that is terraforming, how about we start with terraforming our own planet and unfucking deforestation, desert expansion, melting ice caps, etc.

  • source