Slashdot Mirror


China Plans Deep Impact Mission

Comatose51 writes "China is planning its own Deep Impact mission. The goal of the mission, unlike the exploratory NASA project, is to push potential life-ending comets or asteroids away from a collision course with the earth." From the article: " The third nation to launch a man into space has lofty space ambitions that include putting two astronauts into orbit this September and eventually sending up a space station and even a manned mission to the moon."

27 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Oh, they saw that movie too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    Alternatively:
    The goal of the mission, unlike the exploratory NASA project, is to push potential life-ending comets or asteroids away from a collision course with China and divert them toward Mongolia.
    1. Re:Oh, they saw that movie too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      To save money the Chinese have decided to combine the first manned mission with the deep impact mission.

  2. China is being very ambitious by DanielMarkham · · Score: 4, Informative

    In addition to the comet mission, they are going to build their fourth space launch center , and they've also announced plans to militarize their space program.
    I wonder, when they finally land someone on the moon, will they say "We came in peace for all mankind"?

    New Star Trek Film Planned by Fans

    1. Re:China is being very ambitious by venicebeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well they are certainly talking ambitiously. But I'll believe it when I see it... From the article:

      "Actually, our country has its own Deep Impact plans, it's just we've never revealed them to the public before," the Beijing News quoted Chinese astronomer Zhao Haibin as saying.

      In other words, oh yes, we were planning to do that the whole time...but of course -

      China still had to overcome technical obstacles before it could send a comet collider into space, Xinhua news agency quoted Huang Chunping, the lead engineer behind sending China's first man into space in '03, as saying

      This is the Xinhua News Agency which according to wikipedia "reports directly to the Communist Party's Propoganda Department".

    2. Re:China is being very ambitious by Aardpig · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and they've also announced plans to militarize their space program.

      What, like the USA did years ago?

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    3. Re:China is being very ambitious by Burning1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why wouldn't they have plans?

      People are always asking themselves "what if." The US military has plans for full scale thermo-nuclear war with canada. I have plans to teleport into strange women's bedrooms. Scientists especially tend to plan things out, even if they aren't likely.

      We're all waiting on impetus and technology.

    4. Re:China is being very ambitious by Veteran · · Score: 3, Informative

      As a contractor who works at JSC, I can assure you that NASA is in charge; neither we nor our companies have any say accept for: "Yes sir". If the contractors are in charge then why did Lockheed, which had been at JSC for more than 40 years, lose the ESCG contract to Jacobs Engineering? Contractors exist because the space agency can get rid of both the companies and the individuals easily; firing a government employee is very difficult.

      Contractors in charge is a ridiculous thing to say. From the inside NASA's biggest problem is that during the space race technical people who knew how to accomplish technical tasks were picked to lead and manage the agency at all levels; now most NASA divisions have "professional managers" who couldn't personally build and fly a model rocket - let alone make critical decisions about the real thing. It is these non technical "professional managers" who are the "NASA cultural problem" you have heard so much about. Such people have been directly responsible for most of NASA's technical disasters.

  3. World killer? by Sancho · · Score: 4, Funny

    All these "deep impact" projects are starting to freak me out. Does the One World Government know something we don't?

  4. Deep impact data should help the Chinese effort by mikewas · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The Deep Impact mission was to learn about comets' structure. The comet threw up a tremendous amount of debris, much more than was expected.

    It would seem that the data gathered would be critical to any future mission to comets that intended to push a comet off course.

    --

    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." --Napoleon Bonaparte
  5. The next step of course by cxreg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is to find a comet that is actually going to impact Earth...

  6. litigation by Gherald · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ahhh, the advantages of not having a proper modern legal system

    If it was Europe trying to pull this shit, we'd have a second defendant!

  7. I for one... by Serapth · · Score: 4, Funny

    look forward to a nation finally putting a man on the moon, instead of faking it! :)

  8. Re:What about sound? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Funny

    I, for one, think they should attach a giant nose so they can smell it too.

    In a vaccum, both should be equally useful.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  9. A Chinese Moon Landing by PrntlUnit27 · · Score: 4, Funny

    What if they don't find a US flag up there?

  10. The math doesn't look good... by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    An estimate of the orbital delta-v for Tempel /Deep Impact suggests a velocity change of only 1 cm/hour (I can't vouch for the math). Assuming we would need to nudge a threatening body by 1/2 the diameter of the Earth (from direct hit to grazing pass-by), we would need to know to hit a Tempel 1-sized body in advance by over 73,000 years. This type of mission would work 10 years in advance for much smaller bodies (say less than 350 m in diameter). Even these estimates assume a perfect strike by the deflecting deep impactor -- a margin of error or the need to push the object several Earth-diameters further reduces the potential for this method.

    Kinetic energy is not the way to go. Deep Impact delivered only about 4.5 kt of TNT. In contrast, a good sized thermonuclear weapon could deliver thousands of times that energy (even taking into account the relatively poor conversion of 100 megatons yield into delta-V).

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:The math doesn't look good... by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here's neat link mentioning megatons of yield needed to deflect 1km asteroid by cm/s. here Repeated applications of the more usual 1-5 MT warheads seems more reasonable than the need to invent a 100MT monster. But if the dimensions of the asteroid are of the order of dozens of cubic km then we're probably screwed! 8D

      Just to wax philosophical for a moment, I hear people talk about founding space stations so we "don't have all our eggs in one basket", but if the entire earth gets wiped out does it really matter if we have a couple dozen people in a space station or moon base? nah, who gives a crap at that point, certainly you or I won't....

  11. Astronauts? by gumpish · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the blurb: From the article: "The third nation to launch a man into space has lofty space ambitions that include putting two astronauts into orbit this September and eventually sending up a space station and even a manned mission to the moon."

    I'm pretty sure you mean taikonaut (unless the Chinese are really sending Americans into space...)

    1. Re:Astronauts? by Rangsk · · Score: 3, Informative

      According to this Wikipedia article:
      Taikonaut is sometimes used in English for astronauts from China by Western news media. The term was coined in May 1998 by Chiew Lee Yih from Malaysia, who used it first in newsgroups. Almost simultaneously, Chen Lan coined it for use in the Western media based on the term tàikng (), Chinese for space. In Chinese itself, however, a single term yháng yuán (, "universe navigator") has long been used for astronauts and cosmonauts. The closest term using taikong is a colloquialism tàikng rén (, "space human") which refers to people who have actually been in space. Official English text issued by the Chinese government uses astronaut.

      So I suppose astronaut would be as good a term as any.

      --
      "Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose." --Douglas Adams
  12. You see... by Surazal · · Score: 5, Funny

    China's not happy since they are the fireworks experts. They don't want to be outdone.

    I kid. ;^)

    --
    --- Journals are boring; Go to my web page instead
  13. Which method? by davmoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder which way China will go with their visions for space.

    Will they follow through and actually do what they claim.

    Or will they take the US route (which we'll call "Fred") where we talk grand plans and visions...then we cut funding for other projects that are already successfully producing major scientific discovery, and finally we then cut funding even more and adapt 40 year old technology that never lived up to its original expectations in the first place. And then when it fails we propose gigantic new visions we don't intend to follow through on, so that everyone forgets about the failure of the earlier project.

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
  14. Re:stupid reporters by Snarfangel · · Score: 3, Funny

    It was NOT named for the movie, in fact the project was named before the movie was made.

    The next thing you'll claim is that Armageddon isn't a made-up name at all, but based on some old book.

    --
    This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
  15. Re:What Goes Around by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "With 2B people to feed, China has much more pressing issues that saving the Earth from comets."

    That's the problem, iddn't it? They can't afford to be hit by a comet, either. Well roundedness/diversity can be a good thing. Consider the USA's space program. Suppose it never happened, would the USA be the same for it? Maybe they want to cover their butts and spark a little technological innovation to boot.

    "This project is a cover for military operations in space. Maybe they're researching how to divert a planetoid into the Earth, potentially more powerful than any nuclear weapon."

    Err maybe. The way I see it, though, this sort of weapon has the same drawbacks as a nuclear weapon. It's not like they're going to use it against their enemies without it being traced back to them. If they managed to drop a comet on somebody, from a consequences point of view they'd be in just as much shit as they would be if they had fired a nuclear weapon. Worse, it'd take a hell of a lot longer to get the ball rolling, not to mention the dangerous consequences of a small mistake. What would stop the USA or any other government from responding with nuclear weapons if China pulled a stunt like that? Truth be told, I have trouble imagining that the impact of a comet wouldn't rock their boat, anyway. If it hit the water, for example, well just think about that. If a big enough comet hit to kick a lot of dust into the air, well they wouldn't be fond of that, either. Maybe I'm just incredibly naieve about how useful of weapon a comet diversion would be, but IMHO this theory just seems too far-fetched.

    An alternative explanation is that China's vasteness makes the concept of a comet or asteroidal impact a bit scary. (At least on a statistical level.) Perhaps they're worried about their own territory. They might even be trying to improve their global image. "We're trying to save the planet here!"

    Anyway, I can speculate all day about it. I'm not trying to say you're wrong. I'm just not sure I suspect you're right.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  16. Wrong. by lheal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're not wrong about China having an ulterior military motive for their space work. A nation (even an Axis of Evil Rogue Nation) has a right to defend its interests against a perceived threat. Of course China has military uses planned for their extraterrestrial technology.

    But you're completely wrong in thinking that we could say or do anything to stop China from doing anything they really want to do. Had we shown "leadership" and pushed for a ban on military uses of space, they wouldn't have listened anyway.

    We will have weapons in space because we have weapons wherever we go. We are a violent, overconsumptive, power-hungry race.

    Get past it. You'll sleep better.

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
  17. Instead of "Made in China" by vchoy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just imagine:

    One big label on earth:

    "Saved By China"

  18. Re:What Goes Around by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful
    With 2B people to feed, China has much more pressing issues that saving the Earth from comets. And messing with cometary orbits is too risky for even space programs with decades of cautious experience.

    You illustrate the point of the program precisely, to educate people with reactionary views like your own. China does not want to be seen as a technically and military inferior country that can be pushed around by the worlds last superpower. The population of China is generally estimated to be 1.3B, not 2B.

    They are spending the money on this project for exactly the same reason that JFK launched the moon shot - political prestige translates directly into power. The idea of going to the moon was to spend the USSR into the ground. JFK started the program in 1962, a quarter century later the USSR was kaput.

    For example at the moment there is a sizable faction of the Republican party that spends its time talking about the need to start a trade war with China. Some of them even want to go further and instigate a new cold war. In that type of political environment it makes good sense to invest a few billion dollars pointing out that the economy of China is not stagnant and declining and that it has more than enough capacity to support a military sector that is more than sufficient for national defense.

    According to the CIA world fact book China's economy is worth 7.2 trillion and is growing at 9.1%, the Us economy is worth 11.8 trillion and is growing at 4.4%. At that rate China overtakes the US in 10 years time. That is not even taking acount of the fact that the US economy is mature and the typical growth rates of mature economies are much less than 4%. Plus the US has a massive balance of payments deficit that is only being financed by China buying US bonds.

    So even if the US was to try a cold war strategy at this stage as the neanderthal wing of the GOP would like it is simply too damned late. China has more economic leverage over the US than the US could hope to gain over China.

    The US is currently facing the same problem that hit the British Empire. In the 1920s a bunch of politicians got into power who were really into the whole imperialism thing, they swaggered about holding 'empire days' and such. All the time completely oblivious to the fact that the empire was slipping away and their behaviour was one of the main reasons that it was happening.

    China and India are becoming world powers. The US is not going to be the worlds only super power in the future. That is a good thing if people would only realize it. The US is not going to be able to pursue a unilateral foreign policy, but why on earth does the Bush administration want to?

    --
    Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
    Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  19. That's impossible! by you-nix-boy · · Score: 4, Funny

    After all, nudging a comet with enough accuracy to hit a point on the earth would take unheard of mathematical precision, requiring millions of skilled... oh, wait, never mind...

    --
    --- Pork is not a verb.
  20. Re:What Goes Around by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Informative
    One other factoid, population below the poverty line. China 10%, USA 12%.

    That is from the CIA world fact book, admitedly the poverty line definition is probably different. But China does not suffer from mass starvation as many in the US seem to think.

    India is not nearly as well off. 25% below the poverty line and only 3 Trillion in GDP. That could change rapidly however since the economy has been very much damaged by the autarky policies of previous governments that are being unwound.

    --
    Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
    Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/