Answer me this...

[captainhomer]

Why can't all the major countries just put their money together and build ONE spacecraft (a fleet maybe?) for them all to use? <br /><br />Bear with me here, I have no idea how much money is invloved here, so I'll just keep it simple.<br /><br />Ideal REALISTIC spacecraft with every technology that can possibly be installed in the best configuration (basically, think of a spacecraft being built with unlimited funding). Total cost: $100 billion.<br /><br />But depending on the number of contributing countries, the US would only have to pay $5-$10 billion or maybe even less. Just take that money out of the military budget for only one year and we're done.<br /><br />So instead of spending a full year's budget on something like the old school, space junk contributing CEV, the US would only have to pay a fraction of that for something much better. Thoughts?<br /><br />EDIT: My bad for saying more than I should have, but the technology isn't the point of this thread.

 

[docm]

Politics, safety and physics.<br /><br />Politics in that while there is international cooperation now, that situation may not last. Russia is feeling its oats now that it has petrodollars to re-light its military & space programs on its own and China has interests that one day will diverge from the West. We can hope not, but Pollyannish hopes are rarely a good idea.<br /><br />Safety in that no one is going to launch with nuclear rockets or with hot nuclear reactors on the ship. Not good. Another problem is that spaceplanes like the Shuttle, Kliper etc. are Earth orbit ships, not deep space ones. They also are not optimal for reentry from deep translunar or interplanetary velocities.<br /><br />Physics in that there is no form of artificial gravity that works other than rotating the spaceship, and that could make balancing it dicey. There is also no form of ion propulsion at an advanced enough state of development to be practical for manned missions because of the thrust/weight ratio. For light weight robotic missions they're fine. This may change if/when VASIMR or Dual-Stage 4-Grid (DS4G) arrayed thrusters come to fruition, but not now.<br /><br />Lessee....10 billion each from the US, EU, Russia, China and Japan (50 billion total) might be enough to design and build a few new concept car designs and bring them to production, but not a space fleet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[mithridates]

I think it could be done on a smaller scale in the same way that Wikipedia works. Create rocket and engine designs, license them under the Creative Commons license (IOW only requires attribution and nothing else), put them up online and let others use them. It would be similar to the open-source concept that gave birth to Open Office. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>----- </p><p>http://mithridates.blogspot.com</p> </div>

 

[no_way]

Why dont we put all our money together and build one perfect car that suits everyone ? Sounds like good idea, doesnt it ?

 

[nyarlathotep]

>"It would be similar to the open-source concept that gave birth to Open Office."<br /><br />Indeed. Tons of bloat, and crashes a lot.

 

[tronchaser]

I think a good name for the ship would be the ISS (International Space Ship) Neverdock.

 

[halman]

CaptainHomer, <br /><br />For one thing, and this seems to be something which many people overlook, space exploration is an effort to develop a new frontier. Whoever gets there first will have first choice of resources, locations, and processes. The Earth is a long way from acting as a single entity, seeking goals that would benefit all. The United States still puts national security ahead of everything else, which is probably why Boeing is not building space planes for sale to anyone with the cash to buy one. (Technology transfer restrictions never seem to interfere with airliner sales, do they?) If the U. S. had chosen to invest in space instead of the military, that is what would be happening, I think, because the U. S. would have created such a lead over other nations in developing space that we would be willing to share.<br /><br />Hopefully, the Chinese and the Russians will be able to act maturely enough to put aside their differences and pool their resources. With the huge surplus of U. S. dollars China has right now, it could easily afford to have Russia build it a fleet of spacecraft, a few space stations, and a couple of lunar shuttles. Wouldn't that be wonderful? A joint Sino-Russian space program which ignores the U. S. and all of its "our way or the highway" attitudes? I believe that space exploration is too important to the future of the human race to let nationalistic pride interfere. I don't care who develops the Moon, just as long as someone does, soon, before all the technology we have developed is lost. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[captainhomer]

Well put.

 

[qso1]

CaptainHomer:<br />Why can't all the major countries just put their money together...<br /><br />Me:<br />The cost of human space exploration is the primary cost problem as far as most people are concerned. Umanned space flight generates little in the way of cost controversy.<br /><br />Your idea would therefore be applicable to mainly building manned spacecraft which would require the contributing countries to agree on a manned project. 16 countries thought building a space station would be less expensive because the costs would be spread. The costs were spread, but the U.S. paid the bulk being that it was on of the two largest contributors of hardware (The other being Russia). End result, space station far exceeded its original cost estimates. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[captainhomer]

We could learn from those mistakes.

 

[themanwithoutapast]

"Your idea would therefore be applicable to mainly building manned spacecraft which would require the contributing countries to agree on a manned project. 16 countries thought building a space station would be less expensive because the costs would be spread. The costs were spread, but the U.S. paid the bulk being that it was on of the two largest contributors of hardware (The other being Russia). End result, space station far exceeded its original cost estimates. "<br /><br />The ISS does not exceed the cost estimates for ESA, Roskosmos, JAXA or CSA - if at all it would only exceed those of NASA. However depending whether you count the Shuttle Costs as ISS costs or not, the ISS costs do not at all exceed the estimates from the early and mid 1990s.

 

[qso1]

CaptainHomer:<br />We could learn from those mistakes.<br /><br />Me:<br />This is true and we may already be in that process. The best way to reduce the cost of human spaceflight is to find an inexpensive solution to transporting humans and supporting payloads to space.<br /><br />Something private industry/enterprise is positioning themselves to do within 10 to maybe 15 years from now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

themanwithoutapast:<br />The ISS does not exceed the cost estimates for ESA, Roskosmos, JAXA or CSA -<br /><br />Me:<br />Do you have some links to those? I ask because I rarely see what the actual quoted costs for human spaceflight outside the U.S. are.<br /><br />I do count the shuttle as part of ISS as far as dedicated shuttle assembly flights. The current estimate for each shuttle mission is approx. $500 million dollars. I would say the only reason the ISS estimates of the early 1990s have not been exceeded is because the estimates vary widely.<br /><br />They range from the 1984 estimate of $8 billion as a low end estimate now...to as much as $100 billion today. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

This is the best site I have seen for ISS costs http://www.geocities.com/i_s_s_alpha/iss_alpha.htm<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Thanks for the link. Best cost breakdown on ISS I've seen yet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>