Talk:List of government space agencies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:List of space agencies)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Spaceflight (Rated List-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

too many agencies listed[edit]

Just calling something a space agency does not make it a space agency if it does nothing in outerspace, and only contracts with others to build satellites that still others launch.

China[edit]

China has planned a space station, it does not operate one.

Tiangong 1 is currently the People's Republic of China's "space station" which is why they are operating a space station; Salyut 1 from the USSR is the closest example I have to what the PRC's Tiangong 1 category fits in with. -- Sion8 (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Budget[edit]

The credibility of the budget comparison on the bottom of the page is very low without sources. Sources should be added or the section should be removed. MikkelR 20:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Erased publicity for some band[edit]

"Artistic space agencies"... erased


This list looks longer...[edit]

http://rhea.la.asu.edu/spl/data_resources/space_agencies/

Though it lacks any detailed information.

Another good source. Chadlupkes 03:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Merge duplicate articles[edit]

Space Agency and Space agency are duplicate articles, I'll try to merge them later, unless someone wants to do it first. - Rudykog 13:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Great, right after I merge them, I find that there is a category for space agencies... - Rudykog 19:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Great work!! Chadlupkes 23:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


CSA[edit]

Croatian Space Agency, mentioned on the site, is not a space agency, it's rather a some kind of astronomical society. So, it should not be on this list. It's not a government agency. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.198.142.202 (talk) 10:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Pakistan Space Program[edit]

Removed vandalism.

Israeli 1.25 billion USD budget is ridiculous[edit]

This is an overstatement by more than 1000 times. The current budget of the Israeli Space Agency is a bit of one million USD. Themanwithoutapast (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

implicit colour scheme[edit]

i suppose the colour scheme is implicitly implying that "manned space flight" implies "launch capability" which implies "operates satellites"? perhaps something like "manned space flight + launch capability + operates satellites" would make this explicit. 82.6.96.66 (talk) 10:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. Thanks for making the correction. Mike Peel (talk) 18:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

refs column[edit]

i'm not sure the purpose of the Ref(s) column? there is already a website column; if there is a specific fact that should be cited in the table, then shouldn't the citation be next to that fact, rather than in a separate column? the way it is makes it unclear what the references are referencing. 82.6.96.66 (talk) 11:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe... I was concerned that it might make the table too messy, with numbers scattered everywhere. Mike Peel (talk) 18:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Colour scheme[edit]

I don't like the colour scheme for the different capabilities. I think a sortable table with the different options as Yes/No boxes in columns would look a lot nicer. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe. But then the table would be getting rather wide... Mike Peel (talk) 20:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
The wikicode is limiting it to 100% of the page. If the country flags were removed, the founded date was only the year, the terminated column (which has very few entries) was removed, and the refs column had no "citation needed" the table could adequately accommodate three new y/n columns. This plan will sacrifice very little info. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Portuguese Spacial Company[edit]

This appears to be a link to a medical company in Portugal, should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.123.76 (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Other Agencies that should be added[edit]

ASAL - Algerian Space Agency (fr: Agence Spatiale Algérienne) - http://www.asal-dz.org/ CNT - Tunisian National Centre for Remote Sensing (fr: Centre National de Télédétection) - http://www.cnt.nat.tn/ CRTS - Moroccan Royal Centre for Space Remote Sensing (fr: Centre Royal de Télédétection Spatiale) - http://www.crts.gov.ma/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.123.76 (talk) 09:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

http://www.afrispace.org/ African Space Agency, proposed space agency of the African Union. Sidelight12 (talk) 02:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

South Africa[edit]

Hi! What about South Africa's Space Agency? --68.239.72.76 (talk) 04:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL[edit]

Theres some space agencies that need color like Nigeria. Mickman1234 (talk) 07:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I beleive that we should add more space agencies.[edit]

we need to add more space agencies, so that we will know what has satilites, operates satalites, space launch capibality, manned space launch and probly moonwalks. Mickman1234 (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Mexican Space Agency[edit]

I deleted Mexico from the list of agencies with the highest budget (stated as $914 million) because the latest information published suggests that for its first year of operation, it will be assigned between $21 million and $60 million pesos = $1.5 million USD - $4.4 million USD. References: Sep/2008: [1]; Nov/2008: [2].

The Mexican Space Agency (AEXA) does not exist. According to the official website of the Mexican Government: The Mexican Space Agency (AEXA) is in the process of being formed. It's expected that the end of the year the Mexican Senate make a final decision on this matter, so that the organisation obtains legal status. Consequently, we reiterate that it is still not possible to refer to AEXA as a legal entity as the agency as such does not yet exist. For this same reason no one has assumed any position inside AEXA and no one can claim that they are included in its budget.SEE REFERENCE
So stop adding AEXA to the list of space agencies. Limongi (talk) 14:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

It was approved on November 04, 2008... the deletion is in regards to the budget... not the agency itself... see sources for your self. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEXA

The bill creating AEXA was approved by the Mexican Senate. But it still needs a confirmation vote in the Chamber of Deputies and an eventual proclamation by President Felipe Calderón in order to be created. So it doesn't yet exist. Ref When, and if, it comes to exist, then it shall be added to the article - as this article is about current space agencies. Limongi (talk) 19:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

As of 27 February 2009 the Mexican Space Agency does not exist and has never existed, but two users: BatteryIncluded and Jesusmariajalisco keep asserting the contrary using a fan site and an incomplete article from a newspaper that reports the results of a vote in the Mexican Senate (not about its creation). While we have provided plenty of evidence, they keep ignoring it, and have gone as far as giving it an official budget, an official logo (taken from a fan site's online contest) and even a date of creation.

Unfortunately, since the initiative has never left the Congress, most of the evidence is in Spanish except for a NASA status report dated 21 Feb 2009:

  • The official Gazette of the Mexican Senate from 26 February 2009, encouraging the appropriate commissions on the lower chamber to approve the initiative and present it to the Chamber for a general vote: senado.gob.mx
  • A press conference given on 26 February 2009 where they clearly state that the initiative was sent back to the Chamber of Deputies: senado.gob.mx
  • A press article published today, 27 february 2009: "Llama Castellón a evitar que Agencia Especial Mexicana se pierda en archiveros de la Cámara de Diputados" Periodico Express
  • A status report from Steven Gonzalez, Deputy, Advanced Planning Office of NASA, dated 21 February 2009: "our own astronaut, Jose Hernandez is working on a proposal with Mexico to establish Agencia Espacial Mexicana (Mexican Space Agency)." SpaceRef
  • An article from El Universal from 4 November 2008: "El dictamen pasa a la Cámara de Diputados para que siga el procedimiento de análisis, discusión y en su caso aprobación, para posteriormente poder ser publicada por el Poder Ejecutivo si es que no hay cambios al dictamen enviado por el Senado." El Universal
  • An article about the vote in the Senate (from 4 Nov 2008): La minuta fue devuelta a la Cámara de Diputados, en virtud de que sufrió cambios con relación a como había llegado de esa colegisladora. En caso de que los diputados ratifiquen las modificaciones, el decreto será turnado al Ejecutivo para su publicación en el Diario Oficial de la Federación. Crónica

If needed, I can add dozens more. Their claims are absolutely ridiculous. - José Gnudista (talk) 10:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

If you think the newspapers are creating a hoax, take it to them. BatteryIncluded (talk) 16:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
The newspapers aren't creating a hoax, you are the one. The only newspaper you are using is El Universal which, in case you missed it in the list I published above, asserts that the initiative was sent back to the Chamber of Deputies! Exactly what part of "El dictamen pasa a la Cámara de Diputados para que siga el procedimiento de análisis, discusión y en su caso aprobación, para posteriormente poder ser publicada por el Poder Ejecutivo si es que no hay cambios al dictamen enviado por el Senado." is the one that you don't understand? El Universal. And by the way, your second "reference" (the fansite) has published, as of 27 February 2009, "A call to avoid losing the Mexican Space Agency in the files of the Chamber of Deputies" ("Llamado a evitar que AEXA se pierda en archivos de Cámara de Diputados") [3] You have no sources whatsoever. - José Gnudista (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
The entry is referenced and it comes down to your Point of View against Wikipedia's policies. Good luck. BatteryIncluded (talk) 02:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia policies request material to be referenced, in short: that an authoritative third-party supports your exact claim, not to attach two links and claim whatever you want. - José Gnudista (talk) 03:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The predecessor of the AEM, the CONEE operated sounding rockets. But there is no proof given that the AEM continues with those activities in the reference given in the List of space agencies AEM entry. Tom Paine (talk) 01:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment on the legal status of the Mexican Space Agency[edit]

The Mexican Space Agency is a proposed federal authority contained in an initiative that is getting favorable votes in the Mexican Congress but is still under discussion (it was modified and sent back to the originating chamber). Two users (BatteryIncluded and Jesusmariajalisco) insist that, if an initiative is approved in the Senate, the institution is created automatically and provide no reference at all about such theory, just a pair of links that reports on the result of a vote. References on the contrary are provided above the RFC. - José Gnudista (talk) 03:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The Agencia Espacial Mexicana article covers the status of the proposal fine. And it is prima facie absurd to argue that a legislative proposal which hasn't yet completed its course constitutes the actual creation of an agency. Even when it is, it'll require executive action. It is not unusual for legislative initiatives to be approved, but never put into effect. Put it this way - if/when the proposal is passed, we can say that for an agency like this, until it has an official website, it doesn't really exist. Rd232 talk 14:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Update on the Mexican Space Agency. The Mexican Space Agency was created on the 30th of July, 2010 when its law was published in the Diario Oficial de la Federación. Its Board of Governors was installed on the 7th of September, 2010. It is presided by Secretary of Communications and Transportation. The official acronym by the Board of Governors is AEM, and the official website is http://www.aem.gob.mx spaceale 10:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.174.49.50 (talk)

Four separate tables instead of one[edit]

Please have a look at the following proposed changes. By using four separate tables instead of one, according to the level of achievements of each space agencies, this will provide a clearer and faster picture to the readers. The previous table was overloaded and confusing while containing less information.

List of space agencies capable of conducting basic space activities
Space agency Country Founded Terminated Ref(s) Capabilities of the space agency
Name Acronym Astronauts Operates Satellites Sounding Rockets capable Recoverable Biological Sounding Rockets capable
Aeronautics & Space Research and Diffusion Center
(Spanish: Centro de Investigación y Difusión Aeronáutico-Espacial)
CIDA-E  Uruguay 5 August 1975 No No No No
Algerian Space Agency
(Arabic: الوكالة الفضائية الجزائرية‎)
(French: Agence spatiale algérienne)
ASAL  Algeria 16 January 2002 No Yes No No
Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency Forum
(Japanese: アジア太平洋地域宇宙機関会議)
APRSAF 1993  — No Yes No No
Asia Pacific Multilateral Cooperation in Space Technology and Applications
(Chinese: 亚太空间技术应用多边合作会议)
AP-MCSTA February 1992 No Yes No No
Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization
(Chinese: 亚太空间合作组织)
APSCO 28 October 2005  — No Yes No No
Austrian Space Agency
(Austrian Solar and Space Agency 1977–1987;
Also Aeronautics and Space Agency;
German: Agentur für Luft- und Raumfahrt)
ASA  Austria 12 July 1972  — [1][2] No No No No
Azerbaijan National Aerospace Agency
(Azerbaijani: Azərbaycan Milli Aerokosmik Agentliyinin)
AMAKA  Azerbaijan 21 February 1992 No No No No
Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy
(Dutch: Belgisch Instituut voor Ruimte-Aëronomie)
(French: Institut d’Aéronomie Spatiale de Belgique)
BISA
BIRA
IASB
 Belgium 25 November 1964  — [3] No No No No
Bolivarian Agency for Space Activities
(Spanish: Agencia Bolivariana para Actividades Espaciales)
ABAE  Venezuela 1 January 2008  — [4] No Yes No No
Brazilian Space Agency
(Portuguese: Agência Espacial Brasileira)
AEB  Brazil 10 February 1994  — [5] Yes Yes Yes No
British National Space Centre BNSC  United Kingdom 20 November 1985 [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Bulgarian Aerospace Agency
(Bulgarian: Институт за Космически изследвания, ИКИ)
BASA  Bulgaria 1993 [6] Yes Yes No No
Canadian Space Agency
(French: Agence spatiale canadienne)
CSA
ASC
 Canada 14 December 1989 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
China National Space Administration
(Chinese: 中华人民共和国国家航天局)
CNSA  People's Republic of China 22 April 1993  — [7] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Colombian Space Commission
(Spanish: Comisión Colombiana del Espacio)
CCE  Colombia 18 July 2006 [citation needed] No Yes No No
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation CSIRO  Australia 1926  — [8][9] No Yes No No
Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems CCSDS 1982  — No No No No
Committee on Space Research COSPAR 1958 No No No No
Czech Space Office
(Czech: Česká kosmická kancelář)
CSO
ČKK
 Czech Republic November 2003 [citation needed] No No No No
Danish National Space Center
(Danish: Danmarks Rumcenter)
DNSC
DRC
 Denmark January 1, 2005 [citation needed] Yes No No No
Danish Space Research Institute
(Danish: Dansk Rumforskningsinstitut)
DSRI
DRI
 Denmark 1 January 2005 [citation needed] No No No No
European Space Agency
(French: Agence spatiale européenne)
(German: Europäische Weltraumorganisation)
ESA
ASE
31 May 1975  — [10][11] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Ecuadorian Civilian Space Agency
(Spanish: Agencia Espacial Civil Ecuatoriana)
EXA  Ecuador 1 November 2007 [citation needed] Yes No No No
Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency
(Thai: สำนักงานพัฒนาเทคโนโลยีอวกาศและภูมิสารสนเทศ)
GISTDA
สทอภ
 Thailand 2 November 2002 [citation needed] No Yes No No
German Aerospace Center
(German: Deutsches Zentrum für Luft und Raumfahrt)
DLR  Germany 1969 [12] No Yes No No
Hungarian Space Office
(Hungarian: Magyar Űrkutatási Iroda)
HSO
MŰI
 Hungary January 1992 [citation needed] No No No No
Indian Space Research Organization
(Hindi: भारतीय अंतरिक्ष अनुसंधान संगठन)
ISRO
इसरो
 India August 15, 1969 [citation needed][4] Yes Yes Yes No
Institute for Space Applications and Remote Sensing
(Greek: Ινστιτούτο Διαστημικών Εφαρμογών και Τηλεπισκόπησης)
ISARS
ΙΔΕΤ
 Greece 1955 [citation needed] No Yes No No
Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aeroespacial INTA  Spain 1942 [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Iranian Space Agency
(Persian: سازمان فضایی ایران‎)
ISA  Iran 2004 [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Israeli Space Agency
(Hebrew: סוכנות החלל הישראלית‎‎)
(Arabic: وكالة الفضاء الإسرائيلية‎)
ISA
סל"ה
 Israel April 1983 [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Italian Space Agency
(Italian: Agenzia Spaziale Italiana)
ISA
ASI
 Italy 1988 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency
(Japanese: 宇宙航空研究開発機構)
JAXA
 Japan October 1, 2003 [13][citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
Kazakh Space Research Institute SRI  Kazakhstan 1991 No No No No
Korean Committee of Space Technology
(Korean: 조선우주공간기술위원회)
KCST  North Korea c.2009 ?  — [14] [citation needed] No No Yes No
Korea Aerospace Research Institute
(Korean: 한국항공우주연구원)
KARI  South Korea 10 October 1989 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
Malaysian National Space Agency
(Malay: Agensi Angkasa Negara)
ANGKASA  Malaysia 2002  — [15] Yes Yes No No
National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA  United States 1 October 1958  — [16] Yes Yes Yes Yes
National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences
(Arabic: الهيئة العامة للاستشعار عن بعد وعلوم الفضاء ‎)
NARRS  Egypt 1994 No Yes No No
National Center of Space Research
(French: Centre National d'Études Spatiales)
CNES  France 19 December 1961 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
National Commission for Aerospace Research & Development
(Spanish: Comisión Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo Aeroespacial)
CONIDA  Peru 11 June 1974 No No No No
National Commission for Outer Space
(Spanish: Comisión Nacional del Espacio Exterior)
CONEE  Mexico 1962 1976 No No No No
National Commission for Space Research
(Spanish: Comisión Nacional de Investigaciones Espaciales)
CNIE  Argentina 1961 1991 [17] No No Yes No
National Institute of Aeronautics and Space
(Indonesian: Lembaga Antariksa dan Penerbangan Nasional)
LAPAN  Indonesia November 27, 1964 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
National Space Activities Commission
(Spanish: Comisión Nacional de Actividades Espaciales)
CONAE  Argentina 28 May 1991  — [17] No Yes Yes No
National Remote Sensing Center  Mongolia 1987 No No No No
National Remote Sensing Center
(Arabic: المركز الوطني للإستشعار عن بعد‎)
(French: Centre national de télédétection)
CNT  Tunisia 1988 No No No No
National Space Agency of Ukraine
(Ukrainian: Національне космічне агентство України)
(Russian: Национальное космическое агентство Украины)
NSAU
НКАУ
НКАУ
 Ukraine 2 March 1992 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
National Space Organization
(Chinese: 國家太空中心)
NSPO  Republic of China (Taiwan) October 1991  — [18] No Yes Yes No
National Space Research and Development Agency NASRDA  Nigeria 1998 [citation needed] No Yes No No
Netherlands Institute for Space Research
(Dutch: Stichting Ruimteonderzoek Nederland )
SRON  Netherlands 1983 [citation needed] No No No No
Norwegian Space Centre
(Norwegian: Norsk Romsenter)
NSC
NRS
 Norway [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission
(Urdu: پاکستان خلائی و بالافضائی تحقی‎)
SUPARCO
سپارکو
 Pakistan September 16, 1961 [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Portuguese Space Company (Companhia Espacial Portuguesa)  Portugal 1989 [citation needed] No No No No
Romanian Space Agency
(Romanian: Agenţia Spaţială Română)
ASR  Romania 1991 [citation needed] No No No No
Remote Sensing Center  Egypt 1971 1994 [citation needed] No No No No
Royal Centre for Remote Sensing
(Arabic: المركز الملكي للإستشعار البعدي الفضائي‎)
(French: Centre Royal de Télédétection Spatiale)
CRTS  Morocco December 1989 No No No No
Russian Federal Space Agency
(Russian: Федеральное космическое агентство)
RSA
РКА
 Russia c.1992 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey
(Turkish: Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu)
TÜBİTAK  Turkey 1991 No Yes No No
Soviet space program
(Russian: Советская космическая программа)
СССР  Soviet Union c.1955 c. 1991 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Space Research and Remote Sensing Organization SPARRSO  Bangladesh 1980  — [19] No No No No
Space Research Centre
(Polish: Centrum Badań Kosmicznych PAN)
CBK  Poland 1977 [citation needed] No Yes No No
Space Research Institute
(Arabic: معهد بحوث الفضاء ‎)
SRI  Saudi Arabia No Yes No No
Space Technonogy Institute
(Vietnamese: Viện Công nghệ vũ trụ)
STI
CNVT
 Vietnam 20 November 2006 No Yes No No
Swedish National Space Board
(Swedish: Rymdstyrelsen)
SNSB  Sweden 1972 [citation needed] No Yes Yes No
Swiss Space Office SSO   Switzerland [citation needed] No No No No
United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs UNOOSA UNOOSA 13 December 1958  — [20]
United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space UNCOPUOS 12 December 1959  —
List of space agencies capable of conducting intermediate space activities
Space agency Country Founded Terminated Ref(s) Capabilities of the space agency
Name Acronym Launch capable Multiple Satellites Launch capable Operates Extraterrestrial Probe Recoverable Satellites capable
China National Space Administration
(Chinese: 中华人民共和国国家航天局)
CNSA  People's Republic of China 22 April 1993  — [7] Yes Yes Yes Yes
European Space Agency
(French: Agence spatiale européenne)
(German: Europäische Weltraumorganisation)
ESA
ASE
31 May 1975  — [10][11] Yes Yes Yes No
Iranian Space Agency
(Persian: سازمان فضایی ایران‎)
ISA  Iran 2004 [citation needed] Yes No No No
Israeli Space Agency
(Hebrew: סוכנות החלל הישראלית‎‎)
(Arabic: وكالة الفضاء الإسرائيلية‎)
ISA
סל"ה
 Israel April 1983 [citation needed] Yes No No No
Indian Space Research Organization
(Hindi: भारतीय अंतरिक्ष अनुसंधान संगठन)
ISRO
इसरो
 India August 15, 1969 [citation needed][5] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency
(Japanese: 宇宙航空研究開発機構)
JAXA
 Japan October 1, 2003 [13][citation needed] Yes Yes Yes No
National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA  United States 1 October 1958  — [16] Yes Yes Yes Yes
National Center of Space Research
(French: Centre National d'Études Spatiales)
CNES  France 19 December 1961 [citation needed] Yes No No No
National Space Agency of Ukraine
(Ukrainian: Національне космічне агентство України)
(Russian: Национальное космическое агентство Украины)
NSAU
НКАУ
НКАУ
 Ukraine 2 March 1992 [citation needed] Yes Yes No No
Russian Federal Space Agency
(Russian: Федеральное космическое агентство)
RSA
РКА
 Russia c.1992 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Soviet space program
(Russian: Советская космическая программа)
СССР  Soviet Union c.1955 c. 1991 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes Yes
List of space agencies capable of conducting advanced space activities
Space agency Country Founded Terminated Ref(s) Capabilities of the space agency
Name Acronym Manned Spaceflight capable Spacewalk capable Space Rendezvous and Docking capable Operates Space Station
China National Space Administration
(Chinese: 中华人民共和国国家航天局)
CNSA  People's Republic of China 22 April 1993  — [7] Yes Yes No No
National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA  United States 1 October 1958  — [16] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Russian Federal Space Agency
(Russian: Федеральное космическое агентство)
RSA
РКА
 Russia c.1992 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes Yes
Soviet space program
(Russian: Советская космическая программа)
СССР  Soviet Union c.1955 c. 1991 [citation needed] Yes Yes Yes Yes
List of space agencies capable of conducting most advanced space activities
Space agency Country Founded Terminated Ref(s) Capabilities of the space agency
Name Acronym Unmanned Moon Landing capable Circumlunar Manned Spaceflight capable Manned Moon Landing capable Operates Moon Base
National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA  United States 1 October 1958  — [16] No Yes Yes No
Soviet space program
(Russian: Советская космическая программа)
СССР  Soviet Union c.1955 c. 1991 [citation needed] Yes No No No

222.214.45.162talk公历二〇〇九年三月卅一日 (星期二)农历三月初五 十三时卅九 (标准北京中央时间)

Soviet Space Agency[edit]

There seems to be a question as to whether the Mexican Space Agency should be listed or not, which hinges on the fact that while it is in the process of being set up, it does not currently exist. Why therefore is the Soviet Space Agency listed? The Soviet Space Agency does not exist anymore. It is important to have the agency listed as a historical agency, but if this page is only about current agencies, then the Soviet Space agency should not be listed. 68.148.123.76 (talk) 07:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

The budget numbers for European countries include both their ESA budget contribution and their own budget[edit]

For instance Germany contributes about 50% of its total budget to ESA and uses the rest for its own programs. A comment should be added to that effect.Themanwithoutapast (talk) 19:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I know. The ESA portion should not be included in the country. Otherwise, this screws up the total. I have posted a few reliable resources in the section. Can someone verify? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.20.251 (talk) 02:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


ASI´s Budget[edit]

According to ASI´s page in wikipedia the budget of the italian space agency is $978 million, so it should be below India and China.--88.26.57.82 (talk) 01:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

If African space history can be dated back to 1686, how come no African country budget was reflected in the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.78.134.117 (talk) 12:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

private space companies?[edit]

Maybe we should compile a similar list with capabilities of private space companies? Alinor (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

List of private spaceflight companies Alinor (talk) 19:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

PLEASE[edit]

There needs to be more info on space agencies :) Mickman1234 (talk) 06:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

"operates moon base"[edit]

they listed as nasa currently operating a moon base, break out the tin foil hats. I corrected it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.61.204.112 (talk) 09:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Someone excessively optimistic seems to have added "operates moon base", with even a wrong entry, as stated above. Do we really need a column that is filled with only "no"'s ? Also changed title of this discussion section. -- 89.247.67.47 (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

okay up date is needed[edit]

China has an astronaut and has launched a rocket and it's astronaut into space, so the info. needs to be up dated. Arizona86002 (talk) 15:44, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Astronauts[edit]

The classification of "Capabilities of the space agency - Astronauts" appears highly inconsistent. Some countries are listed "yes" whose nationals have only been trained and flown on other agencies programmes. In some cases even selected by other programmes but not yet flown and so that nation doesn't even have any actual astronauts yet.

For example Denmark and India. As far as I can make out no Dane has yet gone into space, but one was recently selected as a candidate by ESA's EAC. He isn't yet an astronaut and there is no certainty he will go into space. Similarly India's only astronauts so far have been a Russian-trained fighter pilot and a dual-national in Nasa's astronaut programme. These are just examples of what I mean, it applies for a number of other agencies listed as "yes".

But on the flip-side there have been a number of British-American astronauts who joined Nasa's programme, A British astronaut candidate recently selected by ESA just like the Dane and even a private citizen trained and launched by the Soviets. And yet it isn't listed. Again this is an example, if the requirement is simply for that nation to have or perhaps sometime in the future have an astronaut many more agencies should be included which aren't.

Also, while I can see that the ESA members that had their own astronaut corps are listed while those that didn't aren't, the ones that did don't now because those functions were transferred to the EAC so they don't have such "capability". And as I've already said this is inconsistent because other agencies are listed which never trained any of their own astronauts anyway. So either all ESA member agencies who have had astronauts should be listed or none of them.

As the category is "capabilities of a space agency", It doesn't really make any sense to include agencies that cannot currently at least train their own astronauts. Any agency can pay for their nationals to be trained by another country's agency, or have had their nationals (or more usually joint-nationals) fly as an astronaut in another space programme. To have astronaut capability should really only apply to agencies that can at least fully train them, if not actually launch them, as that is the only real distinction that implies any real capability. ChiZeroOne (talk) 03:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. About ESA - same for launch capability - see below. Alinor (talk) 08:49, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Launch capable agencies (Iran, ESA)[edit]

  • Iran is missing, but it is properly listed here.
  • ESA is listed, France is listed, UK is not listed. I understand this as: France has separate capability/launcher program from the ESA launchers. UK has no such separate program. If France has no separate program, but the meaning of listing it there is, because the ESA program has much of its design/manufacturing done in France - I think this should be explicitly mentioned, but also this borders on OR/POV, as somebody has to distinguish "much of" from "small part of" (for example Spain, Germany, other ESA states) - so it would be good if some sources are provided in addition to an explanatory footnote. Alinor (talk) 08:49, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

GASA[edit]

When's the Global Aeronautics and Space Adminstration going to happen? What happens if the Klingons and/or Daleks decide to attack TOMORROW??? We're totally unprepared! But seriously, if Humankind ever did attempt to reach out into the depths of the Solar System and beyond, it surely has to be a global effort. I reckon that Humankind has the wherewithall to launch a probe to Alpha Centuri right now, if it had a mind to do so. Such a probe would HAVE to be launched in the name of all Humanity, wouldn't it...? I don't know what I'm blathering about...an appeal for unity between all nations in scientific endevour, I guess... 82.5.68.95 (talk) 05:29, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

True. But this is the article's talk page, not a forum for discussions.--115.69.252.126 (talk) 09:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

European flag[edit]

it seems that some people don't understand the European flag, they think that to use it all of Europe should be represented? EU uses it, but the EU only has 27 member states. all people in Europe can use it, if they want to.

citation from link,

This is the European flag. It is the symbol not only of the European Union but also of Europe's unity and identity in a wider sense. The circle of gold stars represents solidarity and harmony between the peoples of Europe. http://europa.eu/abc/symbols/emblem/index_en.htm


In the Ryder Cup between Europe and USA, Europe uses the flag, but there Isn't any players from Finland - ukraine - Greece - Russia - Turkey - Serbia - Belgium, but that don't mean anything, Russia could use if they want to, all organisations located in Europe can adopt it. Here the Georgian president uses it side by side with the Georgian flag.

http://www.google.dk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,3596219_1,00.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3837722,00.html&usg=__ctQgZ7NP5SZjK8UCyc11qQSg7VI=&h=143&w=194&sz=8&hl=da&start=9&zoom=0&tbnid=JFnd5a1gxAqR1M:&tbnh=76&tbnw=103&ei=7VhiTdLMJpKBswado5C6CA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Deuropean%2Bflag%2Bsaakashvili%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dda%26sa%3DX%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1

The flag is also used by the Council of Europe http://www.coe.int/aboutCoe/index.asp?page=symboles&l=en it has 47 members http://www.coe.int/aboutCoe/index.asp?page=47pays1europe&l=en from Iceland in the west to Russia and Turkey in the east.

I don't think its very hard to understand, that this flag can be used to represent anything European, EU - Council of Europe - ESA - Ryder Cup, it just means anything European. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.196.3.46 (talk) 13:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Guys, first you all need to calm down. Please listen to me carefully. The problem arises from the fact that someone decided to put "Europe" in the country list. Europe is neither a country nor a unified political supranational entity. Therefore it has no flag. The Council of Europe has a flag, the European Union has a flag, but Europe doesn't. Europe doesn't have a space agency either. There are several European agencies engaged in space activities (eg. EUSC, ESO, EUMETSAT) and ESA is only one of them. ESA does not represent the entirety of the European states; it only represents its 18 current member states. In the column "Country" those are the ones that should be mentioned. I propose that the first column should read "ESA member states" (because those ARE countries - ESA is not a country) and the second column should remain as it is (European Space Agency). I rest my case. CostaDax (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


I agree with 80.196.3.46, that ESA must be shown with the european flag, the flag is europes flag and ESA is a european space agency so there is nothing to talk about, the flag belongs to all the member states. The flag stays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.196.3.171 (talk) 12:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Europe is not a country. As per wiki rules for list of states, only sovereign nations are included in these lists and when a non-sovereign entity is included that entity must be noted out as such. In case of Europe, putting the flag of EU is going to give the impression that EU is a nation state which is not true. Furthermore not all countries in Europe contribute to ESA. Both the article and the budget list are for nation states which are sovereign. Any entity public or private or corporate conglomeration which is to be included must be clearly separate and distinguishable by any reader on wikipedia. There are many space agencies in the world, private and public. This article only deals with those agencies which are sovereign. The inclusion of ESA is there only because it is important and all its members are sovereign. But the article must distinguish between the fact that ESA is a collection of nations working on some projects while the rest of agencies are independent national agencies. It would be proper to use ESA logo with it since not all European nations are contributing in ESA. If EU flag is to be used then a collapsible list of countries involved should be available for view in the same list. --119.156.17.164 (talk) 08:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Spam removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.77.83 (talk) 11:53, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

There are two "Not the esa flags":
Not the esa logo.png 24px wide, File:Not the esa logo.png
Inspired be the original one, I created the next one to be 22px wide (as all the flag icons are) – unfortunately it is not as beautiful as the first one:
Not the esa flag.png File:Not the esa flag.png
Plus I created a round logo surrogate:
Not the esa logo 2.png
It can be used like that:
Agency Flights Individuals ISS Crew Notes
NASA logo.svg NASA 232 133 36 26 women, 55 double, 19 triple and two quadruple flight
Roscosmos logo ru.svg Roskosmos 57 38 31 eight double, four triple and one quadruple flight
Not the esa logo 2.png ESA 18 12 5 one woman, four double flights and one triple flight
Tony Mach (talk) 12:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

International Space Station Cost and annual Budget[edit]

Would anyone be interested in helping out with the ISS budget, across the english-speaking world, there are no proper totals I can find, even though this information is sure to exist somewhere. Every major media outlet makes poor guesses as to the cost..

Is there any hope for something like this ?

Total annual ISS budget

Country Agency Budget
(USD)
 USA NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) $10,123 million[21]
 ESA ESA (European Space Agency) $3,445 million (2011)[22]
 RUS ROSCOSMOS (Russian Federal Space Agency) $1,800 million (2011)[23]
 JPN JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) $2,000 million[24]
 CAN CSA (Canadian Space Agency) $234 million[25]
  ISS partners All space agencies annual budgets approx $1.77  [citation needed]

there is basically nothing I can find that says what the total cost of the ISS is... Please discuss this idea here Talk:International_Space_Station#Costs rather than on this page.

Penyulap talk 00:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Retitiling or amendment needed[edit]

Article includes "List of space agencies with manned spaceflight capability", "List of achievements of space agencies with lunar landing capability". NASA now lacks manned launch capability; it will lose flight capability when Atlantis re-enters. NASA lost lunar landing capability in late 1972. Either NASA should be removed from those lists, or the headings should be altered. 94.30.84.71 (talk) 19:27, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Agree, NASA needs to be re-classified. Ctetc2007 (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Clarification of Classifications[edit]

What exactly does "manned space flight" mean? Does it mean "manned space launch" capable, or just that it has a something that is manned and going through space? NASA is in a very strange case for at least the next 10 years. It has astronauts, it operates a space station, but it has no manned space launch capability. Where does that put it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.206 (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I think a clarification on wheter the list must contain current or historical information is needed. That is, should the Soviet Space Programme be listed? Should the capabilities of NASA include or not "Manned Lunar Exploration"? Tom Paine (talk) 18:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Poland's "space agency"[edit]

Poland does not have a space agency. Read this recent article from the Warsaw Business Review (pgs 10-11). They plan to create one, but the plans have not been made official yet. CBK is definitely their most active space organization, but to list it as an "agency" is misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.79.208.68 (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Italy launch capability[edit]

Hey guys!

I think you should include also Italy among countries that possess a launch capability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_rocket

Since France is included on the basis that the Ariane program has much of its design/manufacturing done in France, you should include also Italy on the same basis since much of the design/manufacturing of the Vega rocket is done in Italy, that is also (1) the leading contributor (more than 65%). (2) the italian space agency partecipate jointly with ESA in the development and fielding of that rocket. That is, it is not an ESA project financed by Italy, it is a project lead by the italian space agency in which ESA (of which the italian space agency is a member) partecipates.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.53.70.50 (talk) 23:35, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Italy has no launch facilities. The Vega was launched from esa facilities in Guyana and was developed along with the esa. This seems far enough away from a domestic development and launch program.--RadioFan (talk) 13:06, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

World maps: USA and human space flight[edit]

As someone already wrote on the discussion page: The map File:Human spaceflight.svg needs to be recolored since the USA doesn't have an active human space flight program at the moment. They're now at the same level as the European states. --StYxXx (talk) 09:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

True, but no one seems to care about that and the colour in the tables (telling that U.S. is able to send a man, while temporarily they are not). The fact is, NASA currently lacks possibility to send a human into space. Certainly this is temporal, however this is the fact. Otherwise you can put e.g. ESA as an agency able to send humans, as they can contract Russians or rush and put some capsule on Ariane 5, which is human rated in terms of safety... aegis maelstrom δ 19:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Iranian Space Budget given is not yearly but for 5 years combined[edit]

As per the article cited for Iranian space Budget, $500 million budget is for 5 years which means, the yearly budget is $100 million. The Space Budgets of other nations (i just checked the ones above Iran) given in the list is for yearly.

This is the relevant comment from the website cited for Iranian space budget "Iran launched its first satellite in 2005 aboard a Russian rocket, and began developing Omid in 2006, a year after the Iranian government announced it would spend $500 million on a domestic space program between 2005 and 2010." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.245.27 (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

"Yes" to NASA or "No" to the Soviet Union.[edit]

December 11 2012 Uçan ispanyol downgraded NASA's "manned spaceflight capability to "No"-"No" [6], probably because of the space shuttle's retirement. But where is the logic; even today the long-gone Soviet Union seems to be capable of doing anything in space. Either the Soviet column should be full of "No"s, or the headline should be something like "…achievements…" or "…Accomplished tasks…" --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 17:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Since no one has replied, I must assume that you all concur ;-) --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 00:50, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I concur. And this article is all over the place in how it indicates capabilities. Yes / no columns, color legends, separate tables? Not sure what to do about this. Connor Behan (talk) 00:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Your argumentation is fallacious. Evidently, you have no choice but to represent the Soviet space program as it was at the moment where it last had any meaning. The program, while terminated having been replaced by another one, did in the end still possess launch capacity at the time it was disbanded. NASA, however, at this moment does not. I propose, to reflect that additional dimension of information, that NASA's launch capacity be marked with "used to", or something similar, with a yellow background, like is often done in other lists comparing capabilities on Wikipedia. Gyzome (talk) 01:58, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The "APSCO" link is just prety much SPAM![edit]

The external link for the Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization just takes the user to an on-hold website and not thing else can someone fix this to the correct website if one currently exists? -- Sion8 (talk) 16:34, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done The external link is corrected. It now links to APSCO website. Thanks ! - Ninney (talk) 16:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Cool thank you! -- Sion8 (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)