Slashdot Mirror
China Scrubs Moon Mission Plans
Jim McCoy writes "CNN is reporting that according to China's state media, plans for a manned moon mission have been shelved due to cost. They are planning on a space station though..."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
They finally found the US documents to prove THERE IS NO MOON!!!
The found that after going to the moon, they'd have to go again in an hour. The additive cost was just too much.
With your next manned space fright.
I hate to say it, but if some other country (China, India, Russia, etc.) got their act together and went and did something of note in space, it might inspire the administration and congress of the US to place a higher priority and more resources into the american space program. This is a shameful decision for both China and for the space program of the world.
CNN is reporting that China has scrapped its plans for a space station, due to cost. The Chinese government is committed, however, to launching at least three new biplanes this week.
A space station? That sure is thrifty!
There's an International Space Station... why can't we all work together?
This is obviously something just to save face. Everyone knew they would run into cost issues I believe. It can't be cheap to do stuff on the moon. Just as it can't be cheap to do things in orbit.
Give it 6 months or so and their space station will become some kind of probe, then a rocket, etc...
Der Tod ist der einzige Weg hier raus!
And I always thought the "I" in ISS stood for "international".
Right. So you're saying that humans should never explore the cosmos?
You need to get away from your keyboard a bit more, sir. The need to explore is a funamental component of what makes humans, well, humans. Part of that drive to learn involves risk, and frankly I'd give anything to have a chance to take that risk.
The evil monkey commands you to dance.
I wanted to see an international space race again... just because I might get the chance to work on the software systems. That's some really cool stuff. Perhaps China's space station and our space station can have drag races. That would be sweet! I can see it now, as the US station pulls ahead, race fans everywhere shout: WOO! "That's a big ten-four, you some b*tch monkey n*ts!" (Dr. Evil)
stuff |
Not to necessarily dispute your larger point, but while rural Chinese are impoverished, they're not starving to death. It's not Sudan or North Korea. Although North Korea is kind of their fault.
It would be the biggest waste of money since I paid my taxes in April.
At least *they* realized it in time
neather do sports and big sporting events. but it creates jobs and work. if all we did was what was needed and made sense, do you think we would have computers.
i work(ed) in IT and computers just create work.
if we didn't have computers, think of what it would be like.
more farming
less industry, no just-in-time ordering, no internet
and a bunch of bored people playing outside.
instead we have lots of paper pushers that are just spinning their wheels moving papers and numbers around to acheve... something... not sure what, but it wouldn't be there without the computer.
This makes it sound like all Chinese people are impoverished across the country. China != North Korea. Many people in the coastal region and Beijing live fine and aren't even close to starving to death.
The people in the rural areas, of course, are the ones who are impoverished. But Beijing is giving them the shaft in all ways imaginable anyway. After all, in China, if you're born in a rural area, then in most cases you aren't allowed to move into the city, thus keeping your family poor for generations.
Actually, the most pressing thing pissing me off about the Chinese government now is that they recently closed down the call center where people could make appointments to get visas to come to the US. As a result, people have to line up outside the embassy for hours before it even opens up in the hope that they'll be allowed inside that day. Given that I have a Chinese girlfriend who's going home for the Summer, I'm a bit upset about this situation. For more info...
My userid is prime!
US Military Budget is probably over 40 times Nasas. And I'm pretty sure China, bieng also a nuclear power has a huge military budget to. This is where the money should not go.
Spending in science (space exploration) is always money well spent, specially with unmanned, redundant (two identical spacecrafts or more) missions.
I think it comes down to "limited resouces demand that we ration our efforts".. sure if we had nothing better to work on it might be a fine idea to direct a significant chunk of our taxes at sending a few bodies to the Moon or Mars or anywhere else, but I think at the moment, we really need to consider the questions of our energy supply, pollution, food and water. And work directly towards solutions to these problems instead of heading up into space and along the way inventing a new "teflon".
Let us for just one moment put aside the notion of Media Spin on this article and take a look at a few elements...
"China has welcomed international cooperation in its space station."
Headlong goes the project forward as money spent on our people here on Earth is of far less importance than showing the rest of the World that we alone can build and support a space station diplomacy be Damned...
It was unclear if plans to forge ahead on its own were influenced by recent signs the United States might not want China to join the 16-nation, $95 billion International Space Station.
What signs were these? If as is stated in "16-nation" is correct, it is not only the United States' decision on who does or does not join the project...
Chinese space officials were "shocked" the United States had not done more to welcome them into the small community of space-faring nations, a leading U.S. expert said last month after a trip to China.
Again, if this is a 16-nation project, it is not just the United States who should be "welcoming" anyone, nor is the United States sole choice in who joins or not.
The United States harbors concerns that the army-run Chinese program could some day pose a threat to U.S. dominance in military satellite communications.
And finally the "truth" comes to light.
I am NOT looking to be "Flamebait" here, but just look at what this article is saying and Think about the political climate we live in right now and who has the "power" to extend or retract a hand!
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. -- Hunter S. Thompson
That's exactly the point.
Think of this parallel: Pakistan tested a nuclear weapon several years ago, knowing full well that doing so would bring them international scorn and economic sanctions. They did it for "pride." They did it to show the world that they had mastered atomic knowledge, despite the fact they have great difficulty in feeding their population. Pakistanis were tremendously proud of their achievment.
Likewise, the Chinese would become only the second country *ever* to put a human on the moon. It's an enormously difficult task (so enormous, apparently, that they scrapped the plan). It would show the world that the long period of Chinese stagnation has come to an end. They are once again going to be a world super-power. What most people forget (or never knew) is that for most of the world's recorded history, China was the greatest power on Earth.
I, for one, think it's highly rational that the Chinese wanted to do this.
last thing anyone needs is another space station.
china could do well with planetary probes. you get a lot of bang for the buck -- look at what the recent NASA mars probes accomplished.
something like a couple chinese venusian landers (rovers?) would be easily within the chinese monetary and technological budget, and would put them on the map. venusian exploration has been extremely sparse, despite how easy it is to get there compared to mars.
or how about a mercurian orbiter/lander? nobody's been there yet.
It appears that energy is a major factor that is pacing Chinese economic development. Have the Chinese established some other energy sources through R&D(say some results in some other form of hot fusion) or diplomatic arrangements(i.e. a deal with the Russians or Islamic oil exporters)?
I think they should spend their money on their own people before spending it on the moon.
Spending money on the 'people' will not lead to useful change, even if it's spent on the 'right' things (food, housing, education, etc).
They can't feed their own people without educating them.
They can't educate their people and expect to remain in power.
So they spend it in PR stunts so the uneducated can, if they want, take national pride in a nation which does not treat them well.
And they spend it in military/police funding to keep the powerful in power.
And they limit the flow of information, again, to limit education and to keep the powerful in power.
Until there is a radical change in societal structure/governmental structure, nothing is going to change, regardless of where they put their money.
IMO.
-Adam
well we already have one difficult partner... Russia... who can't put a single thing into orbit within 3 years of when it's supposed to be
there...
Pot, meet Kettle.
Uh, yeah. Like the space shuttle you mean?
Yes, that's right. Currently Russia is the only nation in a position to launch manned spacecraft. Without them we would already have abandoned the IIS and it would likely have already plummeted to the earth.
Meanwhile we can't even save Hubble, and it remains to be seen if we ever get our fleet back off the ground again.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
"The United States harbors concerns that the army-run Chinese program could some day pose a threat to U.S. dominance in military satellite communications."
I can understand the concern. A billion plus people, a huge army, an economy that is growing rapidly and will probably soon trounce the US's to become the next Superpower.
But China has never really been an expansionistic type country. It's seems throughout their history, they're usually the ones attacked, or the fighting is domestic (power struggles etc).
Here's where I contradict myself - I could see all of that changing however, a growing economy with a billion++ people will probably need a lot of resources...especially oil.
I wonder if this whole Iraq war is really about safeguarding the middle east from future chinese aggression. I mean, we can't have a communist nation invading a democratic nation! Or even an areas around it as it would cause the domino effect and all the countries around it would fall to communisim as well (SEE Vietnam War).Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
( This will undoubtedly get modded as a troll by some Bush-loving republican, but who cares?
Now Bush will undoubtedly follow by canceling the new moon & mars missions.
Why do I say this?
He was killing off everything he could with regard to NASA, cutting their funding to the extreme... until China announced their plans.
He immediately did a 180 and said we have to go to the moon and mars.
Why?
We haven't been there in over 25 years, it's up for grabs!
Whoever gets there 1st will end up claiming it like a poor mannered brat in a sandbox.
Why should anyone care?
Because the moon has resources that can be used to launch further missions... watch educational TV some time (Discovery, TLC, Science channel, etc.) and you might see what I'm talking about.
- Preferences: Solaris 10 (servers), Ubuntu (desktops), Solaris 11 (personal servers) -
Dude, in the words of Mohammud, 'the poor will always be with us.' If we'd waited for utopia to spring into existence here on Earth we'd never have gone to the moon, never have launched a space shuttle or never done anything else worthwhile.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
From my perspective manned space exploration does make sense. Surely, a rover on Mars is a very cool thing, and can accomplish a lot on it's own. Yet, a human can accomplish so much more on a much shorter time.
Further, isn't it just human nature to want to go?
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
Announcing plans is certainly easier than carrying them out. Cancellations (and cost overruns) have plagued every space program developed in our short "space age".
As an employee for a large aerospace corporation, I'm beginning to recognize why space is so difficult. On the parts level, parts must be "space-qualified", which limits selection to a few choice vendors who, in applying rigorous mil-spec requirements to parts testing and screening, mark-up the price 15x. The only alternative is privately "up-screen" the part according to program requirements, which is also a lengthy and time-consuming process. When dealing with space, so many new concerns must be addressed. Radiation effects, outgassing, vibration impact from launch, severe thermal excursions, redundancies, etc. Each hi-tech subcomponent has to be built twice -- one for flight and one for intense qual unit testing. Close scrutiny of reported industry design flaws must be adhered to. There's been quite a stir relating to some flawed algorithms in Actel FPGAs.
Anyway, my point is that space is difficult and costly -- as evidenced once again by this cancellation. My primary fear is that the USA lacks the monetary dedication to see such a large and bold endeavor as the moon/mars mission through to fruition. As for me, I'm just hoping the TPF and JWST survive.
Ha, ha, ha. It's very funny for many people to respond to this post and ask, "Are you talking about America?"
The reality, though, is that if you think we have it bad in America, you should really read up on what it's like elsewhere in the world.
Think of it as competition, in the same vein as Linux vs Windows.
Right now America is the undisputed 'king of the hill' or monopoly in world economics and most other areas you'd care to graph. Many other nations work just as well, but they simply don't have teh incredible wealth that the USA has.
Were you aware that the USA spends 1/3 of the money spent around the globe? The GDP of the US is over 11 trillion [US Dollars]. The GDP of the entire global economy is merely 32 Trillion.
The global economy is changing that - we see it as outsourcing, other countries see it as getting US dollars so they can increase their GDP.
If you want to change the monopoly status of the US then you agree to outsourcing, and you should seek to bring other nations to the level the US has rather than bringing the US down.
This, of course, covers nothing about the humanitarian crisis in china
It really is striking to see the level of elitism among americans. I include myself when I say that many in america get a paper cut and don't think about the mere availability of the bandaid as a striking contrast to life elswhere.
So yeah, I laugh when I see the posts asking me if I'm talking about needed gov't change in America vs China. It's really funny to me.
-Adam
Actually, we decry the military-industrial-congressional complex that seeks only to enrich itself whilst destroying stuff. I would have no problem if we spent as much money on the space program as we do on defense, and vice versa. At least we'd be building stuff and going somewhere instead of blowing stuff up and making life on earth worse.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
There are no stores in space. Every penny spent on space exploration is spent here on earth. It employees scientists, engineers, clerical types, food workers, maintenance staff, and so on.
If they did this, they would not be 'spending it on the moon'.
"...Bush and his crony Ashcroft..."
;)
Something seems backwards about this statement
--
www.nitemarecafe.com
we need to work on getting industrial capacity in orbit.
Fact of the matter is that NASA's budget is a pittance. It's hardly enough to maintain four stinking Shuttles, much less develop a follow-on vehicle. The ISS is International because the government wouldn't fund NASA to the point of being able to build it ourselves.
And unmanned missions aren't worth the trouble. If we aren't going to go there ourselves, why bother? So we learn that Mars had water once? Whoop-de-do! Doesn't matter a hill of beans what there is to be learned in space if men aren't going to go there. If the manned space program dies, then the rest of it might as well die as well - since we'll be deciding to sit back and play video games till the next asteroid smacks us.
The way people look at space these days is getting to me....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Where does this perverse notion come from that all of human endeavour must be about making a profit or being immediately productive or solving all the world's problems? It's incredibly short-sighted.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Don't let her go. I'm serious. Marry her in a small ceremony, and wait until you get your I-131. This is experience talking.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
except that it'll get crunched by a giant plant when it lands. If that wasn't the best arguement for turn out the lights...
But our country DOES take care of its people better than China. This gives us the ability to morally spend large amounts of money on space projects.
This goes back a long ways. Hunters and gatherers couldn't spend time doing things like art, science, literature, because they didn't have the resources to do it. As soon as people realized they could farm and raise stock, we had extra resources to partake in more civilized endeavours.
I'm not saying the Chinese are hunters and gatherers, but they simply don't have the resources to take adequate care of their populus and spend the massive amounts of money for manned space missions.
We do.
Now you can move the line back and forth as to what defines "adequate" living conditions for people, but if any country has enough resources to go to space without hurting it's citizens, it's the US.
If you're going to argue that no money should be spent on space exploration, then I can't really say anything to change your mind, but many good things have come from science and research that wasn't absolutely necessary for our survival.
Mar 14:7 For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.
Not to nit pick but Jesus said it about 600 years earlier.
China has a lot of problems that must be taken care of prior going to the Moon. Unfortunately, so does the United States.
Being a geek and a vivid phyiscs fan, it hurts me when I see space missions cancelled. However, I am a human being as well; I realize that there are billion dollar price tags associated with these goals. It is wise not to spend money if you cannot afford doing so, wouldn't you agree? If we *really* want to continue space exploration, maybe we should stop world-wide safaris first.
I really hope that the United States comes to the same conclusion and stops hoping to be the first on Mars. It would be nice if we spend more money on education and creation of affordable healthcare. Once we get these -- and many other things -- fixed, we shall fly. For now, I'll read science fiction and dream.
Loathe as I am to send this thread so far offtopic, I have to address this comment. Yes, the US is better than nearly every other country in the world in this and most respects, but that's no reason to get complacent. We got here by challenging our leaders, by having better education than elsewhere in the world, by innovating, and by being incredibly inhumane. I'd rather not go back to the inhumanity that litters our past, but we should do what we can to continue to improve ourselves in other categories. I don't think our current leaders are doing a good job of promoting the values that I believe are best in our country, and are starting to look a little bit like the paths some other civilizations have taken toward defeat.
Bush is not Emporer Nero, fiddling as Rome burns, nor are we living in 1984, but our government does share some traits with the bad societies of history and fiction. Our duty as citizens of the country and the world is to correct these problems, not to sit idly by and say "it could be worse."
In November, we have to make a pragmatic choice - is A better than B? But the rest of the time we have the freedom to be idealists - to complain, to demonstrate, to write to our leaders, and to campaign to change things. Don't tell me I can't point out the flaws in my country - that is one crucial trait that does make us better than China.
"Were you aware that the USA spends 1/3 of the money spent around the globe? The GDP of the US is over 11 trillion [US Dollars]. The GDP of the entire global economy is merely 32 Trillion."
Keep patting yourself on the back. Just because America was and is wealthy doesn't translate in to it continuing to stay that way.
The E.U.s GDP is approximately the same as the U.S. About $10 trillion if I recall. One reason for the E.U. is to create a unified economy to compete on the global stage with the U.S. and one of its goals is to displace the dollar with the Euro as the currency used to value oil.
China's GDP was around 6 trillion last I saw and growing at a furious pace as in double digit annual growth. At that rate, at the rate at which misguided western executives are pumping capital, jobs and intellectual property in to China at the expense of the U.S., and with the huge trade deficits the U.S. runs with China it will eventually pass the U.S. and not in the so distant future.
Its true the U.S. GDP is growing again but that is almost entirely due to very low interest rates and the massive fiscal stimulus the Federal government is injecting in to the economy by running more than a half trillion dollar budget deficit, borrowed money being put in to the pockets of the wealthy with tax cuts and borrowed money being poured in to massive defense spending, especially thanks to Iraq which has consumed nearly $200 billion alone in a year. This deficit spending is leading to near term prosperity at great future risk. Greenspan, Warren Buffett, the IMF and the World Bank are all raising red flags over the danger inherent in current U.S. economic policies.
The U.S. is the world's largest debtor nation with a 7 trillion dollar national debt which is exploding. The projections for the next ten years thanks to the Bush tax cuts, retirement of the baby boom etc are truly scary unless there is another dot com bubble to dramatically increase revenues or dramatic Federal spending cuts, whil in fact Federal spending is exploding under the Bush administration.
It remains to be seen if the trend continues but one reason the DOW is declining is foreign investors dumped a record $13.5 billion in U.S. stock in March. Warren Buffet is likewise betting heavily against the dollar and the U.S. economy.
On the news last night it was reported that outsourcing is running at a rate 40% higher than previous estimates and accelerating rapidly.
@de_machina
Wang told a gathering of high school students on Sunday
If I remember correctly, China was very expansionist in the dynasty before the Ming dynasty. They had built and sailed ships that were capable of going anywhere in the world. I think they had even sailed as far as east africa. Then the Ming dynasty kicked in and they burnt the boats because they thought that anything foreign wasn't worth their time.
Had they continued on that path, they might have easily have gotten to a very backward Europe and we would all be speaking Mandrin today.
There's nothing wrong with expantion as long as you aren't hurting anyone. I'm sad to see that expantion to other worlds is being treated in the same style as it would be by the Ming folks.
Blaze a trail to the New World
In "2010 Space Odyssey", China developed a Space Station in orbit around the Earth. At least everyone thought it was a Space Station until they attached huge rocket engines to it an blasted off into space.
Could it ever happen?
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Author C. Clark
...that's a moon!
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
Average male height = 1.75m
Chinese Population = 1260000000
Mean distance to moon = 384400000m
Human tower to moon = 384400000 / 1.75 = 219657142.9 People
However, for a pyramid we will need ½(n^2) + ½n (n+n-1+n-2...+n-n)
Therefore number of people needed to make a pyramid to the moon = 24124630320000000
Since 24124630320000000 is more than 1260000000, you are clearly an idiot
Guess it depends on who you believe and most economic statistics are lies or damn lies, thanks to currency fluctuations, accounting differences etc. For the EU once source I find says:
"The European Union surpasses the United States in population and exports and rivals it in GDP. Its population was 377 million on Jan. 1, 2001, and its aggregate GDP for 2002 was US$ 8.591 trillion, compared to 10.365 trillion for the US and 715.4 billion for Canada."
And that was in 2002 so it probably it must easily be over $10 trillion now considering the extent to which the Dollar has cratered relative to the EU since then. You need to allow for the fact the Euro is something like 20% higher than it was versus the dollar before Bush came to town and if you are estimating GDP in dollars that does factor in.
Another more recent estimate:
"According to figures from Eurostat, the Statistical Office of the European Communities, the EU's combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will grow to 12.1 trillion dollars, slightly higher than the 12.04 trillion dollar GDP of the United States, which will thus lose its position as the world's leading economic power."
Your number for China appear to be more accurate than mine. 6 trillion was thrown out in an article I read a month or two ago. It appears certain China's GDP is around 11 trillion Yuan and it has been growing at just under 10%. The tricky part is how you value the Yuan. One rate I find is about 12 cents for a Yuan which yields maybe a $1.3 trillion GDP. The problem is everyone knows the Yuan is being pegged at an artificially low exchange rate which makes Chinese goods artificially cheap on foreign markets which is why they sell so well and a source of muttered fair trade complaints. To accurately value their GDP the Yuan should be floating and set by market forces, though if it did that it would dramatically alter their financial position relative to the West across the board.
@de_machina
The Moon is about 356,614Km from the Earth at closest approach. China is home to about 1.3B people. A column of Chinese people, stacked in "human triangles" sitting on one another's shoulders (1m high), would reach the moon, leaving over 230M people. Half to clamber up (then down) to the Lunar surface, at a rate of about 1Km:h, reaching the surface in about 20 years, splitting their population evenly between the planets in under 4 years. And they only have to scale up their acrobat budgets, not that risky American rocket science.
--
make install -not war
"And unmanned missions aren't worth the trouble. If we aren't going to go there ourselves, why bother? So we learn that Mars had water once? Whoop-de-do! Doesn't matter a hill of beans what there is to be learned in space if men aren't going to go there."
Lets take a look at manned missions versus unmanned missions, shall we?
Manned orbital missions: Scored a social, political, and engineering success, but scientific discoveries amounted to humans can handle low gravity okay.
Manned Moon missions: Scored a social, political, and engineering success, but the scientific discoveries amounted to moon rock == earth rock. If it had been possible, we'd probably have sent a robot first.
Next, look at the stuff that "doesn't matter a hill of beans".
Hubble Telescope: Despite being remote-controlled, it has discovered many new (and beautiful) things and it has also helped us find proof that our science is correct (black holes, general relativity, etc).
Voyager probes: Sent back images that helped further our understanding of the jovian moons (like Europa), Saturn's rings, etc. Also helped prove to ourselves that we can achieve major feats of engineering and course-planning. I think we also might have put some earth-stuff in the 2nd voyager just in case aliens find it. If so, it might not advance our science, but it could easily advance theirs, which is still a helluva achievement.
Martian probes: Has (and are still) helping us learn about what Mars has to offer (hopefully resources that will support colonization, which would justify a manned mission). The history books carried in the backpacks of students living on Mars wont think those "unmanned missions [weren't] worth the trouble".
It looks to me as if our manned missions didn't do a whole lot more than prove "it can be done". Compare that to the scientific & cosmological discoveries of our unmanned probes. Unmanned missions also help us figure out what manned missions are worth the effort.
If it turns out that we can't live on mars, a manned mission will create little more than boot-patterns in the dirt, which will be blown away by the next martian wind.
"If the manned space program dies, then the rest of it might as well die as well - since we'll be deciding to sit back and play video games till the next asteroid smacks us."
Survival shouldn't require abandoning Earth. Even if we can live elsewhere, it's not like we can allow asteroids to hit the motherland anyway.
There's nothing wrong with being content with simpler goals like preserving the Earth.
Some people think it's too humble a goal for humanity,
but often the humble route is a sign of maturity.