 Main page | |
Type of site | Astronautics |
|---|---|
| Available in | English |
| Founded | 1994 |
| Created by | Mark Wade |
| URL | www |
TheEncyclopedia Astronautica is a reference web site onspace travel. The encyclopedia includes 79,433 articles with 13,741 illustrations, a comprehensive catalog ofmissiles,spacecraft,space technology,astronauts, andspaceflight from most countries that have had an active rocket research program. It provides biographies of important pioneers of spaceflight such asKonstantin Tsiolkovsky,Hermann OberthRobert Goddard. It outlines various concepts ofspace stations including the NASASpace Shuttle and the SovietBuran programme.
In addition, the encyclopedia contains many comprehensive review articles on specific space topics, among them:
Since 2019, the site is no longer updated or maintained.[6] Although it contains a great deal of information, not all of it is correct.[7]
Founded in 1994 and maintained for most of its existence by spaceenthusiast and author Mark Wade.[8][9] He has been collecting such information for most of his life. Between 1996 and 2000 the site was hosted byFriends and Partners in Space.[9]
TheAmerican Astronautical Society gave the site theOrdway Award for Sustained Excellence in Spaceflight History, which "recognizes exceptional, sustained efforts to inform and educate on spaceflight and its history through one or more media", in 2015, the award's initial year.[9] The award is named for U.S. space engineer and author Frederick I. Ordway III (1927–2014).
Telepolis journalist Marcus Hammerschmitt warmly recommended theEncyclopedia Astronautic to anyone interested in space flight, and speculated that its articles might become valued material for future researcher of cultural history.[10]
In 2006, the American space historian Stephen B. Johnson stated that Encyplopedia Astronautica "has become a popular Internet source for space history. Unfortunately, while it contains a great deal of information, not all of it is correct. Space historians have noticed a variety of factual problems, and unfortunately these problems have not been consistently repaired. Since this is not a peer-reviewed source and historical errors have not always been fixed, this cannot be considered a reliable source, despite its impressive appearance. Many other online sources have the same problem."[7]