Jump to content

Talk:Space exploration

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"Space mission" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Space mission. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 15#Space mission until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 07:51, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics

[edit]
Number of launches by year
Year Launches Success Failure Maiden
launches
First
successful
launche
2020 114 104 10 8 5
2019 102 97 5
2018 114 111 3
2017 91 84 7
2016 85 83 2
2015 87 82 5
2014 92 89 3
2013 81 77 4
2012 78 73 5
2011 84 78 6
2010 74 70 4
2009 78 73 5
2008 69 66 3
2007 68 63 5
2006 66 62 4
2005 56 52 4
2004 54 51 3
2003 63 61 2
2002 65 61 4
2001 59 57 2
2000 85 81 4
1999 78 70 8
1998 82 77 5
1997 89 83 6
1996 77 71 6
1995 80 72 8
1994 93 89 4
1993 83 79 4
1992 97 94 3
1991 91 87 4
1990 121 115 6
1989 102 100 2
1988 121 115 6
1987 114 108 6
1986 110 102 8
1985 125 120 5
1984 129 127 2
1983 129 127 2
1982 129 119 10
1981 126 120 6
1980 108 103 5
1979 110 105 5
1978 128 123 5
1977 130 123 7
1976 131 126 5
1975 132 125 7
1974 113 104 9
1973 116 109 7
1972 113 105 8
1971 133 117 16
1970 124 113 11
1969 125 106 19
1968 128 119 9
1967 139 124 15
1966 132 117 15
1965 124 109 15
1964 99 86 13
1963 69 52 17
1962 81 67 14
1961 50 34 16
1960 38 19 19
1959 23 13 10
1958 28 8 20
1957 3 2 1
  • Total number of launches: 6,018 in 64 years = 94 launches per year
  • Success: 5,559
  • Failure: 459
  • Max launches in one year: 139 launches in 1967
  • Max successful launches in one year: 127 launches in 1983, 1984
  • Max satellites on a single launch: 104 satellites on a PSLV rocket, on 15 February 2017 - mission PSLV-C37
  • 95 consecutive successful launches between these two failures: 25 Jan 1983 - Kosmos 11K65M - and - 26 Sep 1983 - Soyuz-U
  • (after 1961) Largest gap between two launches: 35 between these two launches: 2005 Nov 16 - Ariane 5ECA - and - 2005 Dec 21 - Soyuz-U-PVB
  • (before 1961) Largest gap between two launches: 70 between these two launches: 1959 Nov 26 - Atlas Able - and - 1960 Feb 4 - Thor Agena A

Source data: Jonathan's Space Home Page - The General Catalog of Space Objects (2020) - Derived catalogs - currentcat (Latest phase) Text

It does not contain missions failed before launch like this one:

  • 3 September 2016 - Amos 6

It also does not contain in-flight abort tests like this one:

Alternatively, there is a cool graphic here - https://aerospace.csis.org/data/space-environment-total-launches-by-country/ Barecode (talk) 18:31, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First outer space flights

[edit]

I have just updated this section with further details of the MW 18014 German V-2 rocket test and removed the 1949 Bumper-WAC launch. Not sure why NASA is saying that the Bumper launch was the first object in space, all the other sources say the V-2 was the first object in space. Happy to discuss his point with other Editors, however rhe evidence is pretty clear that the V-2 was the first. I also updated the photos. Ilenart626 (talk) 02:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by P199 (talk18:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Chipmunkdavis (talk). Self-nominated at 12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/African Space Agency; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - The hook teases with its talk of a space city. The reader is likely to be disappointed that the article has a red link for this. Perhaps this should be unlinked and the section expanded to give them more details of the space city.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The biggest issue is balance as there seems to be plenty of negative opinion out there. Also, I'm not understanding the reference to Jailangkung in the nominator's comment. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was the QPQ, I must have put it in the wrong box. Regarding neutrality, those are older articles of the sort of discussion that always precedes the creation of any body (is it necessary, what would it do, etc.). The opposition was the same as it always is for these projects, money better elsewhere, another white elephant sort of thing. I don't see that as due. I also haven't put any positive opinion in. In both cases, as the org was just founded, there isn't much actually behind it either way (well, a delay of opening from 2022 to 2023, but again that is reasonably routine and I haven't seen any source call it out). On the Space City, it's a newly built complex that also holds the Egyptian Space Agency. I can add more to this article, and alternatively I suppose an article could be created for it; I thought it worth a red link although I'm not 100% on how notability for that sort of infrastructure development. CMD (talk) 00:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wondered if Jailangkung was the QPQ but didn't recognise your abbreviated sig of CMD there. I've updated the review now to acknowledge this.
But I'm still not content with the other issues. I'll look at the topic more closely myself.
Andrew🐉(talk) 17:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have found a second source noting a different person with a similar concern over prioritisation from before the agency was founded, so I have added that citing both that source (in a CNN report) and Martinez 2012. I also found two sources noting a slowdown in 2020 due to budget and benefit concerns, and so added that as well. CMD (talk) 15:01, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson: status report? theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 20:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Seemingly abandoned by the previous reviewer, so I'm reviewing it. The nominator seems to have addressed the concerns adequately. BorgQueen (talk) 12:50, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Laika

[edit]

Why is Laika not even mentionned in the space exploration page ? it's the first being to have been in space right ? I don't understand why sacrificing an innocent animal is not even mentionned. 86.31.42.155 (talk) 12:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to change it. We encourage you to be bold in updating pages, because wikis like ours develop faster when everybody edits. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. You can always preview your edits before you publish them or test them out in the sandbox. If you need additional help, check out our getting started page or ask the friendly folks at the Teahouse. - DVdm (talk) 12:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, several animals need to be mentioned, including Laika (btw, the first large animal is space was Albert II (monkey), in 1949, a page I started awhile ago). And agreed that you could sign up with a user name and add them in. Some of us could do it, but for an editor to be this concerned that the animals need more coverage, frankly, we need you to edit! and more fully address legitmate and historically accurate concerns. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]