Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

nikkibeast666 t1_jdiv4tp wrote

Just looking at the image I thought this was going to be an article on Big Foot.

31

svenge t1_jdjr7tv wrote

I find Bigfoot stories to be more credible than anything involving Europe independently creating their own crew-rated launch vehicles, spacecraft and/or stations.

7

ErikTheAngry t1_jdj2whv wrote

Excellent news.

Innovation improves with more minds working on problems. Concurrently solving the same problems is perhaps not the most efficient approach, but it should lead to the greatest volume of innovation.

Not to mention that means another space station, which means more zero-g science.

12

r2k-in-the-vortex t1_jdjmft5 wrote

I would like to point out that ESA does not have a manned launch capability. This advice is simply stupid, just because of that one fact alone.

What ESA needs is to develop Prometheus into a viable engine and build a reusable launcher from that, then go from there.

First comes the engine, then comes the rocket, then comes the space program, it doesn't work the other way around.

11

AmeriToast t1_jdkx2xd wrote

Any kind of EU backed space stations would end up government hell with many countries not seeing this as a benefit to their country and not supporting it and others fighting over who gets to build which part. Good luck getting this sorted out anytime soon.

−2

r2k-in-the-vortex t1_jdla9dh wrote

ESA is supporting its share in ISS just fine. Financing common projects over EU is in general a solved problem, that's really not a roadblocker.

But with rise of spacex Ariane model is over and done with, not that it was ever man rated anyway. You can't build a manned spaceflight program entirely of your own, if you don't have a suitable launcher.

At this point, ISS successor, in cooperation with US and others (minus Russia) is sensible. But an entirely EU station simply isn't viable.

5

Kaz_55 t1_jdlqtvi wrote

>But with rise of spacex Ariane model is over and done with, not that it was ever man rated anyway.

It is, actually

>Ariane 5 was originally intended to launch the Hermes spacecraft, and thus it is rated for human space launches.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5

Not that I would expect a SpaceX fan to know that.

I'd also like to remind you that SpaceX was pretty vocal about those Mars colonies and how they would be funded via their satellite internet, none of which has worked out so far, let alone it being profitable. "Reuse" is nice to have, but it is not mandatory.

1

r2k-in-the-vortex t1_jdlrzy8 wrote

Falcon did 61 launches last year. No matter what you are fan of, you got to respect that tonnage and revenue. Starship is going to go a giant leap beyond that within few years. The only limit is finding enough payloads.

Yes, reuse is absolutely mandatory if you plan to play on the level field with that. Reuse, or learn to build new orbital rocket each week in perpetuity on the cheap, good luck with that.

2

Kaz_55 t1_jdlu0b6 wrote

>Yes, reuse is absolutely mandatory if you plan to play on the level field with that. Reuse, or learn to build new orbital rocket each week in perpetuity on the cheap, good luck with that.

No it's not. Reuse itself puts a tight limit on your launch capacity, and SpaceX regularely expends boosters. Reuse is entirely optional, and speculating about a "a level playing field" without even knowing how reusability impacts SpaceX financially is pretty misleading.

1

lughnasadh OP t1_jdimnf3 wrote

Submission Statement

"Europe should design and implement a European Space Mission to establish an independent European presence in Earth orbit, lunar orbit, on the Moon, and beyond, including a European Commercial LEO Station, Cargo and Crew Capabilities for the Gateway and the Moon, and sustained presence on the lunar surface."

It's worth noting although this comes from ESA's own self-appointed advisory group, we don't know how much of its recommendations will be followed. However, ESA Director General Josef Aschbacher has been talking lately about the need for big changes at ESA.

The full report is a 21 page PDF, available here.

10

Croakerboo t1_jdje5q5 wrote

I imagine budgets will be a massive factor. Space is not cheap and Europe has A LOT going on right now.

10

Kaindlbf t1_jdk3w9y wrote

how about they develop cheap reusable rockets first before blowing wads of cash on a station

5

FuturologyBot t1_jdirg7p wrote

The following submission statement was provided by /u/lughnasadh:

Submission Statement

"Europe should design and implement a European Space Mission to establish an independent European presence in Earth orbit, lunar orbit, on the Moon, and beyond, including a European Commercial LEO Station, Cargo and Crew Capabilities for the Gateway and the Moon, and sustained presence on the lunar surface."

It's worth noting although this comes from ESA's own self-appointed advisory group, we don't know how much of its recommendations will be followed. However, ESA Director General Josef Aschbacher has been talking lately about the need for big changes at ESA.

The full report is a 21 page PDF, available here.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/120ro0k/an_esa_advisory_committee_has_recommended_europe/jdimnf3/

1

tickleMyBigPoop t1_jdj3re7 wrote

Lol you guys thought the US government blows money on bloated projects.

At least we solved our space bloat with fix cost contracts aka spaceX….the ESA needing to making sure every country is happy will bleed money to make sure certain jobs stay in certain countries.

If europe wants to be competitive they have to switch to fix cost contracts with no strings.

Simply x money to perform y tasks.

1

Loyvb t1_jdj6asi wrote

Yeah, as a European, I'd love for us to stand on our own feet more. I want this to succeed.

But it'll cost us, and agreeing in these kind of things is hard.

2

gubodif t1_jdjdfaw wrote

I’m thinking this will flounder on the shoals of finance.

2

Loyvb t1_jdj6asf wrote

Yeah, as a European, I'd love for us to stand on our own feet more. I want this to succeed.

But it'll cost us, and agreeing in these kind of things is hard.

1

Ottomic87 t1_jdlpz43 wrote

ESA recommending having an ESA station, moonbase and Mars casino with blackjack and hookers feels a bit like that Obama giving Obama a medal meme.

Would it be cool? Sure. Would be that smart? Hardly. Are we doing to? No, we aren't going to.

1

Warm_Trick_3956 t1_jdmx0en wrote

The article mentions a gateway. What do you guys think this “gateway” is? Is this a long enough answer to allow me to post in this forum yet?

1

LearnToStrafe t1_je2twsx wrote

They realize that they need to get to said space station on their own right?

1

czk_21 t1_jdjjnx7 wrote

sure why not? show those mericans(and chinese) who shall rule the moon!

0

Outrageous-Yak-3318 t1_jdje6e7 wrote

We need someone to take the lead on space exploration and the US is only interested in profit. Glad to see EU moving in that direction.

−5

AmeriToast t1_jdkwlun wrote

Lol at the Esa taking the lead. This is nothing more than a pipe dream. Europe does not have the ability to do any of this. They fight over the smallest things when it comes to any space project. Their only hope would be to partner with an American company to make one for them.

1

zoinkability t1_jdjxd3v wrote

LOL, if NASA was interested in profit the SLS would have been shitcanned a long long time ago

−1

IFurious_Troll t1_jdk87td wrote

What a fuckin joke. The EU is so far behind China and the US in space exploration, lmao. You guys really should just stay out the way and shut up.

−5