ESA or NASA?

Originally posted by Figher Master FIN
and tell me, was it NASA or ESA who reached the moon first

That was 35 years ago and then project was done by scientists, they were given goal and funding for making it happen, there wasn't continuous budget cutting of planned projects and such...

Maybe that's the difference.
Now NASA has been long time used as like some political asset or striking weapon with policy changes and cancelling of so many projects (which also wastes resources) because not getting money for them after they have been accepted. Even current ongoing far progressed projects are constantly under pressure.
Sure moon flights were politically motivated goal, then it was about which society system was better and now similar goal was given by president who wants to clean his image from being narrow minded warmonger but there's big difference, now they're told that this is the amount of money you have to do it, leaders who make timelines and give priorities have to be politically correct and every bigger decision has to be accepted by politicians and all those steps of bureaucrasy.

Now when you compare that to ESA...
Where are politicians regarding ESA?
Where are those competing politicians boasting what goals they make it to achieve?

China sent a man into space... What has ESA done?

Originally posted by NWguy83
China sent a man into space... What has ESA done?

How about science?
Sending people up there is always expensive and political thing.
Even more because manned flights are actually very lousy way for scientific study because almost all carried equipment is for keeping those people alive...
Majority of science can be done much more cost effectively with unmanned probes and satellites.

And Chinese didn't make it themselves they bought rocket from Russian... there was no science involved in that, it was purely for political pissing contest.
ESA could easily do the same thing if politicians would want that.

if politicians would want that.

And they don't, unless someone else pays the way. Europe will be left behind while the US, Russia, China, and maybe one or two others are out exploring the galaxy.

The european space agency has for many years had a policy of not sending people into space (though strangely they do have their own astronaughts). Does anyone on this board actually doubt that if the policical will and finances were available for manned spaceflight, that the ESA and EU countries could not manage it???? This policy is currently up for review as part of the aurora project but till it is lifted of course the EU will lag behind other nations. What should be looked at is how much each of these groups contributes to our knowledge of the universe, in which case the ESA is right up there with the big boys!

Originally posted by The Block
I think the ESA have it all over NASA, when it comes to global imaging of Mars that is. Check out this pic and tell me what you think. www.universetoday.com...

[edit on 17/7/05 by The Block]

You've got be kidding. ESA is doing what NASA did in the 70's. Obviously we have better cameras now so they look a lot better. Who landed the Spirit and the Opportunity. Who went to the Moon and back. Who made the Space Shuttle, the space telescope, the Voyager, Pioneer missions or crashed a satellite into a comet?

Or what about their projects on Earth. Climate study, X-planes research, Materials R&D.

The reasons that NASA works with ESA are a) political b) economical c) because most scientist there want to explore for all, not because they need them. NASA could survive on it's own, ESA would not.

And about the bureaucracy, Europeans are the masters of them...

[edit on 7-8-2005 by iris_failsafe]

Overall Nasa has obviously accomplished more feats then the ESA.

The ESA Mars Orbiter called "Mars Express" is impressive, and has taken some great photo's, no one can dispute that. and the Ice photo is great, because if it can exist in a crater...then who knows how much of it is under the surface, or in other miscellaneous spots.

I just dont see how you can possibly think that ESA is 'better' then Nasa. I'm assuming its just patriotism and pride of ones country...because...well...just look at the current facts.

Esa has one probe orbiting Mars, while Nasa has 3 orbiting Mars and 2 on the ground, and will launch another orbiter in a week.

Which will be better then anything before it, it will have the most powerful camera ever sent to a planet. Its pictures will be unmatched, it will have 5 times the sharpness or ESA's Mars Express.

I give props to both agencies, they both have produced GREAT pics!

Nasa Rover (Spirit)


ESA Orbiter (Mars Express)

Originally posted by iris_failsafe

Originally posted by The Block
I think the ESA have it all over NASA, when it comes to global imaging of Mars that is. Check out this pic and tell me what you think. www.universetoday.com...

[edit on 17/7/05 by The Block]

You've got be kidding. ESA is doing what NASA did in the 70's. Obviously we have better cameras now so they look a lot better. Who landed the Spirit and the Opportunity. Who went to the Moon and back. Who made the Space Shuttle, the space telescope, the Voyager, Pioneer missions or crashed a satellite into a comet?

Or what about their projects on Earth. Climate study, X-planes research, Materials R&D.

The reasons that NASA works with ESA are a) political b) economical c) because most scientist there want to explore for all, not because they need them. NASA could survive on it's own, ESA would not.

And about the bureaucracy, Europeans are the masters of them...

[edit on 7-8-2005 by iris_failsafe]

Oh, say can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed.......

The Block........huh

maybe I just have a thick skull, but what are you getting at with the whole anthem thing?


oh, and muzzleflash, Its "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"...and not "Small step for man; large step for mankind"


and E_T, The China man in space thing...was a Chinese Rocket, not Russian. It was built with russian tech, but its not a russian rocket.


and ludo182, International cooperation is not neccisary.....It was less then a year ago when Burt Rutan proved that. Its just that prices go up pretty quickly when you do you business threw the big guys, but if you use several smaller companies to build components of your craft, then odds are it will be MUCH MUCH cheaper then just telling someone like Lockheed to construct the entire thing.