Can we please discuss why the Soviets (at the time) have pictures of the surface of Venus but NASA is jacking off to...

>We put a man on the moon
We didn't. Here is 100% evidence of falsification youtu.be/xciCJfbTvE4?t=1938

Simply put: Venus is hell. Namely, the high pressure and temperature on the surface means a shorter life for landers and rovers. This means less science value per dollar. Also, looking broadly Mars is a much more accessible destination for potential manned missions since the surface is more forgiving.

Same applies to Mercury, the main issue is that at high temperature materials loose a lot of their strength. In order to get around this you'd have to use more heat-resistant materials (such as steel, ceramics, or concrete) but this also makes the vehicle heavier and more fragile, a problem given that it has to be launched into LEO then landed on Venus.

>Liberalism
>Implying that America isn't communism under the guise of liberalism

It's like you've not heard of the Federal Reserve or John Maynard Keynes

Yes they using planned economy because classic free market is dead long ago. But all wealth is shared unequally between the small group of jews who own everything. Research and science not proper funded necause it's not profitable

>not profitable
Nothing under government control is profitable. Just look at Amtrak vs. Conrail. Both nationalized in the '70s and started sucking down money. During the '87 crisis the government miraculously sold off Conrail to private sectors. Now? Conrail is successful and pulling a profit. Amtrak? Well that is still nationalized and as we know, is still sucking down money.

If space were truly privatized and not just run into the ground by government, we would be mining everything in sight for resources.

You honestly believe we wouldn't just start hauling in iron asteroids, refining and building shit? It'd be cheap as fuck once established, seeing as there is no longer a need to get resources off Earth.

The potential is boundless, but so is competition. And why have that when everyone can just be your slaves.

This

>4th grade american history book
>has a section talking about the space race
>mentions the soviets beat us at first object in space, first man in space, and first lunar pass
>chapter ends talking about the first man on the moon
>"thus, the U.S. won the space race"

>manned missions

This is what's wrong with NASA's planetary science program. Instead of pursuing the best science cases money is funneled into Mars because to the dream that one day idea of sending astronauts. It's apparently important to look like you're working towards that despite the fact that many of these missions add nothing to a manned spaceflight attempt.

>the best science

Science is expensive, and regardless of manned flights there's more data value in Mars since Martian landers/rovers/etc last longer. The value per dollar is greater so that is NASA's aim. Also if we're talking about pure science value, Venus is #3 to Titan and Europa.

Though, even then manned missions would remain the goal since they have the maximum science value. Being able to have a staffed laboratory on another planet is a big deal.

Lemmings on Mars, really?
Can you do at least something for real, NASA
youtube.com/watch?v=Cc6as0CYVUk

>Science is expensive, and regardless of manned flights there's more data value in Mars since Martian landers/rovers/etc last longer.

No. Data does not equal science. There is demising return. If science was purely a function of data missions would never be switched off, but they are because eventually they aren't telling you anything that's worth the cost.

Secondly planetary science is not just about landers, it's mostly orbiters. Venus isn't particularly hostile to orbiters.

>if we're talking about pure science value

That depends on the scope of the opportunity and the proposals. You cannot plan an outer solar system mission and a midex budget.

>Though, even then manned missions would remain the goal since they have the maximum science value.

But at what cost? It's fine to claim that astronauts can do more but if it costs 100 times more and produces quite little where does that leave you?

...

Have the Apollo astronauts experienced any long term effects from the radiation when they went through the Van Allen belts?

this

>tfw you realize that moon natural color is brown

>Visit mum
>Discover 1980's encyclopaedias in the cupboard
>Read the section on space travel
>It's all about the Americans.
I know World Book is an American company but damn, how do you justify not even one picture of a Soviet rocket or probe?

Americans just suck at government control. Everybody here loved our equivalent of Amtrak, British Rail.

NASA rovers have found water on Mars. this alone shows that they have been invaluable to future manned mission plans.

NASA BTFO

800 fucking degrees

>NASA rovers have found water on Mars.

No they haven't. RSL came from MRO which is an orbiter.

youtube.com/watch?v=G5N2eLICRdk

Technically, ESA holds the trophy for extraterrestrial landings with Huygens and Philae.

god, why didn't they put a camera on philae

but they did, user

oh. too bad they landed in a virtual cave.

The shots from Rosetta were fantastic too

Also first soft landing on another planet, first atmospheric entry on another planet, and that was just Venera 7!

it's like you understand nothing about corporate rights, structures, or the stock market

in no way does america resemble communism...

China moon-landing photos

And the Apollo film stage. Wow, i like that dramatic light filtering. What planet is this? Krypton or Nibiru maybe?

To be fair, the moon landing was faked. Stanley Kubrick filmed and directed it. Unfortunately the production exceeded its allotted budget. Due to Kubrick's notorius perfectionism forcing them to film on location.

there is like 4 decades or camera development between those pictures.

also china's first space station was a big failure.

I'm sure you can't wait to get into the EU

Colors look different on different cameras/film.

Also Chang'e 3 landed at a higher latitude than any of the Apollo missions. Surrounded by lunar mare.

Because only Russian scenographers can survive being drunk enough to produce a realistic photography of the surface of Venus.

It always makes me angry when people refer to the space race and its winner and put all their nationalism into their one-sided argument. I don't think anyone won the space race. Both achieved miracles but were also dependent on things learned from explorations in the past, both US and Soviet.

We should be thankful to both, for the cold war led the development of many of the current technologies we value today. In many respects, I wish there would be a new cold war (regardless between what nations) because this type of competition is what truly drives technological progress. JFK didn't initiate the Apollo program because its cool, he did it out of pure pressure by the Soviets, who were by far outperforming at that time. Politicians and the public is lazy without the right incentives.

As for the space race: it boils down to whether one prefers quantity before quality or vice versa. Many of the big miracles of being "first" were achieved by the Soviets, they made countless achievements for humanity while the US was jerking off to spy satellites. In the end of course they masterfully won the "moon race" which should be considered a sub-category of the space-race, but not the finish line of the whole space quest. It is highly debatable to say whether this major achievement outperforms so many others on the Soviet side. I prefer to think of both having contributed their fair share to humanity.

Of course since then, NASA has leaped forwards and that is good. I wish NASA and SpaceX all the best. I am a true fan of them.

> usa goes to mars to eat candy bars
> russia goes to Venus to show off big penis

>space race
What race. USSR simply do science and didn't a fuck. It's USA who acts like "CHALLENGE ACCEPTED" and constantly being assholes.

Do you seriously not recognize that this dick waving on both sides was about projecting military might?

it is difficult to do much more than what the Venera probes did without really pushing things.

pressure is no problem, heck even the sulfuric acid clouds aren't much of a problem. Venus surface pressure is 92.10 bar, we have been making pressure vessels that can contain this for years, a standard scuba tank contains 207 bar. At the surface the concentration of sulfuric acid is basically nil.

The real issue is temperature, it is so hot that conventional silicon based electronics break. For this we need special electronics that use silicon carbide as a semiconductor and cooling if we want something that's not dumber than eniac. Silicon carbide should work just fine at Venusian temperatures, but it is challenging to make silicon carbide ICs. Even then you are pretty limited, you gotta use big transistors(microns!) so you don't get low operating frequencies and can't use much. Not to mention that the TRL of silicon carbide electronics is still pretty low.

So if you want something that can actually computer, you need to cool it. Cooling requires power and the only way we could get enough power to practically power it is with plutonium, which NASA doesn't have much of. Oh and to get enough cooling you need a special stirling cooling system based off of NASA's advanced stirling radisotope generator(ASRG), which is not expected to be flight ready until 2028 due to funding issues. Pic related, a plutonium powered rover, which we probably won't be able to build until >2028.

This brings us to the next issue of power. Because Venus is covered in clouds, solar cells are shit on the surface, because venus is hot RTGs generate a lot less power, because NASA doesn't have that much money we can't use better tech to generate more power from radioisotopes.

i thought they found recently the poles are way colder than they expected, 140k

Private industry will be the first to bring back Mars rocks.

well it was a race for being "first", ideologically driven by both US and USSR.

What I will agree on however, is that after the USSR fell apart, western media repeatedly shaped and continues to shape biased information about that time. There should definitely be more appreciation for the Soviet programs. I guess its part of western propaganda, much like Soviet propaganda would have downplayed any US achievements.

In my mind this type of winner-takes-it-all mentality and the overall bias is pretty disgusting, but as we all know - the winner writes history. I bet most americans have never in their life seen a decent documentary about Yuri Gagarin's flight to space despite it being such a significant event in history - yet, they have seen far more than enough about the moon landing. It is just the way things are, unfortunately.

Considering that material from Mars will be far more valuable than diamonds here on earth, I can imagine that rich people will pay horrendous amounts of money for a little rock. Who knows, perhaps this really is Musk's secret plan, if you drive down the cost for bringing back Mars rocks then your profit could be huge.

Nah man, the USSR did a bunch of dick-waving too. Take Luna 1-2, the whole purpose of the mission was pretty much just to hit the Moon. They did carry some science instruments along, but also a sphere of soviet pennants with an explosive in the middle designed to scatter said pennants on the surface of the moon. This was mainly to be the first object on the moon and had little science value.

I think Musk should mail a Martian rock to Branson(Virgin Galactic) and Bezo(Blue Origin).

didn't know about that. Thank you for the info.

>. So the costs do not justify the means.
This has never been the reason we landed on mars.

hahahaha no, because the atmosphere mixes so much that pretty much can't happen. But hey in some places it might be cold enough for lead 'snow'

The correct answer is "because most people realized there's not really a point". You are not going to Venus, in any more likely fashion you are going to Jupiter. It's fucking retarded to spend resources investigating more of something of which you're already well aware and have no propensity of colonizing or otherwise exploiting.

The pressure on the surface of Venus is so immense compared to earth, were a rover to be moving 4kph (presuming you could power it to do so), a collision would be as a mack truck moving well over 70kph.

Ok but it still debunks your claim that NASA's focus on Mars has been unhelpful to a manned mission there.

Venus has a hellish atmosphere, what's ESA's excuse for returning only one grainy UFO-tier photograph?

I believe the actual craft that landed on the comet malfunctioned. I don't recall what it was but either it didn't had a stable grip after landing or solar panels didn't deploy.

How does this math work?

NASA has made an official declaration their primary focus now is specifically and definitely toward the purpose of a manned mission to Mars in the mid 2030s. Provided relatively few setbacks, it's a very real plan.

>in the mid 2030s.
I hope the Chinese apply some serious space-race pressure so that NASA gets more funding like in the good old days.

It's still sending back data. It did bounce because the surface was nowhere near as substantive as they'd hoped and it landed partially in the shadow of a small cliff, so the solar panels are not completely exposed toward the sun. It's still a great accomplishment, something of which to be proud. This, from a USA person.

thank you for the info, I forgot what it was. It is indeed a great accomplishment

The amount of force required just to move is exponential, so the inertia is mind blowing.

so let me get this straight

they faked the mars landings, they made a fake mars rover, and they stuck it...outside? Where there are, you know, birds and wandering bands of hikers?

They set up a multi-billion dollar hoax and left it being revealed up to the whims of local fauna?

Am I missing something here?

Oh my god, yes. He should have them carved into images of his laughing face.

There are pics like that all the time. It's natural for people to top-down make images in their minds of things, like faces or animals in clouds. They're just rocks.

The point I was making is how mind-bogglingly stupid this idea is,and yeah,it's a fucking rock.

WHY would we even bother faking shit? Do these people not understand how utterly humiliating it would be if it was ever revealed? Literally one person with a shitty pen camera could bring hundreds of high end NASA people into national disgrace if they were faking this shit.

We JUST BARELY kept the Manhattan Project a secret, and that had everyone united in their resolve to beat the Axis powers to the bomb, a very serious problem. What's the compulsion here? How would you keep TENS OF THOUSANDS of people in the dark and never fuck up?

>If space were truly privatized and not just run into the ground by government, we would be mining everything in sight for resources.

>You honestly believe we wouldn't just start hauling in iron asteroids, refining and building shit? It'd be cheap as fuck once established, seeing as there is no longer a need to get resources off Earth.

>The potential is boundless, but so is competition. And why have that when everyone can just be your slaves.

I want pop/sci/ to go. Space can't just become magically accessible because of capitalism and privatization. Stop drinking the kool aid that the rich are pouring down your throat.

>Heat
Why don't we just put the electronics in a Thermos flask?

That's not Venus, it's Titan.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

moon rock is considered priceless. Mars rock would be the same.

>The real issue is temperature

Temperature is an issue, but the real issue is pressure. There's more pressure on the surface of Venus than the bottom of the Marianas Trench and micro-fractures in the material of the electronics would cause the device to fail.

you're very wrong about pressure, pressure at venus srfc is 90 atm vs ~1000 atm at challenger deep

it's 93mpa on venus surface, according to sources we can cite, which is about 13,500psi.

I just read up on the Marianas Trench and it says 15.7k psi, so I guess my information was old, my bad.

They're comparable.

I take i you've never talked to someone from /x/? The amount of stupid shit they'll believe is mindblowing.

Exactly, so what's their excuse for only returning one shit photo?

What a massive disappointment /x/ turned out to be. I remember first visiting it, expecting down to Earth conspiracy theories and research into police/government files to form plausible answers. What I got instead was reptilians and devil/angel worshipping. Just fuck my shit up.

>in no way does america resemble communism...

It's almost to the point where it resembles communism more than free-enterprise capitalism, kid.

>psi

You might be thinking of Mercury.

That's why I've been trying to move my UFO discussions to Veeky Forums to no avail. Aliens visiting earth at least once is plausible, fucking reptilians are not.

No he means Venus. An orbiter found the upper atmosphere of Venus at the poles was cold. Newspapers took it and hyped it into "the Venusian surface is habitable"

well, he cited 90 to 1000, it's 930bar to around 1000bar. is that better.

I guess if it's the kind of communism where large corporations basically run everything, buy all politicians, and make all the laws to benefit themselves..

Then yeah, I guess I could see how america is totally communistic these days.

So is there any way that Elon Musk will open up a branch in SpaceX concerned with Lunar Mining? I mean their know-how and rocket technology gets more and more sophisticated and costs are reducing. If you can eventually sell Lunar rock for more money than the cost of obtaining it, it is a viable business decision. With all the reusability of rockets and advanced in rocketry perhaps that viable soon?

Titan is a lot further away and parachutes aren't as effective there.

The Venera probes were much larger, there were several of them, and their photos weren't much better than Huygens'.

>"the Venusian surface is habitable"
conclusion, dinosaurs
"I can't see a thing on the surface of Venus. Why not? Because it's covered with a dense layer of clouds. Well, what are clouds made of? Water, of course. Therefore, Venus must have an awful lot of water on it. Therefore, the surface must be wet. Well, if the surface is wet, it's probably a swamp. If there's a swamp, there's ferns. If there's ferns, maybe there's even dinosaurs."

That means nothing good for you, user

>>micro-fractures in the material of the electronics would cause the device to fail.
the fuck is pressure supposed to cause microfractures in electronics? Solid fucking silicon does not spontaneously fracture under uniform compressive loading.

Here's a fun fact for you, the Trieste, a submarine which visited challenger deep, used regular quartz arc lamps for illumination. They were capable of withstanding the pressure without any modifications. A glass tube withstood pressure at the bottom of the ocean.

That will only prolong the inevitable. For the venus rover above, electronics have to be put in a thermos

As it turns out, wind power is actually an option on venus. You can't generate enough to keep stuff cool with out a really big turbine, but you can generate decent enough amounts for science. It is not that windy on venus, but because the atmosphere is so dense you can get reasonable amounts of power.

NASA is currently investigating pic related. You build a landsail. It uses some big high temperature gallium nitride solar cells for power and a big sail to move.

The design calls for all silicon carbide electronics. The thing is basically a glorified RC car and relies on a satellite for control.

will post more on venus later.

Mainstream science actually believed this a hundred years ago.

who the fuck will buy lunar rock?

are you joking? Rich people will pay millions for rocks from the moon or mars to have them as status symbols. I certainly would if I would have the money

I think Musk is more focused on Mars. SpaceX is already planning on sending an Red Dragon to Mars in 2018.

It's actually easier to land a Dragon v2 on Mars than the Moon, because of the atmosphere.

but I would do it out of fascination, to touch it and carry it around like the ring in Lord of the Rings. Will remind me that this little thing has been out there in the vastness of space.