Slashdot Mirror


China To Launch Second Manned Mission

the_central_kingdom wrote to mention a Xinhuanet article discussing a second upcoming Chinese spacecraft launch in October. From the article: "Although Sun did not provide details about the new mission, space officials earlier said China has been preparing for the second manned venture into outer space since the first mission, piloted by Yang Liwei, almost two years ago. Sun Laiyan, chief of the China National Space Administration, earlier told China Daily that Shenzhou VI will carry two men into orbit for five or six days. "

155 comments

  1. Hey! by PopeAlien · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can see my wall from up here!

    1. Re:Hey! by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Funny

      I always wondered why they named the Great Wall of China after the Great Firewall of China.

    2. Re:Hey! by lbmouse · · Score: 1
  2. Queue /. alarmists... by locokamil · · Score: 1

    wondering at how quickly and why the Chinese are catching up with the US.

    Commentary on /. trends aside, is there any particular reason for America's tendency to send many, many more unmanned than manned missions into space? Surely the fact that unmanned missions are cheaper alone did not result in the creation of this policy.

    1. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 0

      wondering at how quickly and why the Chinese are catching up with the US.

      Not really. Unless something has changed, they are still using Russian technology, not home built. When they get there, then they will have 'arrived' in my book.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      They did one launch with one guy, kind of like our Mercury program. Now they've already moved on to two people which is like our Gemini program. Make the next launch will be to the moon.

    3. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Ravatar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because when unmanned missions fail, equipment dies; when manned missions fail, people die?

    4. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by ChronoZ · · Score: 0

      Some information on their spacecraft design..
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenzhou_spacecraft/

    5. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by agraupe · · Score: 3, Funny

      And in China, no one will notice if they don't come back. (laugh, I'm not serious...)

    6. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by uberdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course it's all economics. If it were cheaper to send a manned module up to put a satellite in orbit, NASA would be doing it that way. However, it is far, far cheaper to send up just the satellite, rather than the satellite plus the astronauts plus their life support equipment and supplies, plus the re-entry vehicle. Oh, and let's not forget all the safety constraints that a manned launch requires that an unmanned one doesn't.

    7. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      That, and NASA is more about research than impressing other countries nowadays.

      It might be more interested in research than impressing other countries. But what it's truly interested in is drumming up good publicity for the current administration (ex: Mars manned missions). People dying is very bad publicity that manned missions simply can't counteract. Therefore manned missions is dropped to a low, with unmanned missions emphasized.

    8. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, when are they gonna load a lifting body onto a mass driver? That's what I wanna see. :)

      With all the shuttles gone, I hope NASA takes the opportunity to rebuild from the ground up on a more assembly-line style module so that we can dominate the chokepoints of space... er I mean more effectivly conduct scientific research and observation.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    9. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by vhogemann · · Score: 1

      I guess that's because the USA already has mastered the current technology for manned missions. And now most experiments can be carried on automaticaly without direct human inferference.

      China still has a lot to learn from manned missions, surelly there's a lot of papers published from the past missions by USA, Russia and Europe... but to master this technology, they have to try it themselves.

      --
      ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
    10. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Interesting
      wondering at how quickly and why the Chinese are catching up with the US.
      I hear this all the time. China is not "catching up with the US.". To "catch" up to us, China will need to get rid of their communistic government. Their current hodgepodge of communism and sudo-capitalism just wont work in the long run.

      China's GDP as of 2004 is $7,262,000,000,000 (7.26 trillion) while the GDP of the USA as of 2004 is $11,750,000,000,000 (11.75 trillion). Growing a nations GDP by 1 trillion is a few years let alone more than 4 trillion is just impossible. China has _at least_ 1 billion people. Divide their GDP by their population and you get about $7,262 per person. The USA has about 300 million people. Divide our GDP per person and you get about $39,166.66 per person. A _huge_ difference, more than five time the amount _per person_! The whole time China is trying to grow to "catch up", the USA will be growing too. In fact, if you look at the CIA World Factbook, there is not one other single nation that even comes close to the GDP of the USA. The #2 rank is the European Union which is like 25 seperate nations. If you take the average GDP of the whole EU it is only like $466,000,000,000 (466 billion) per nation per year. The USA does more than twice that per month!

      Maybe it is time to stop all this "China is catching up" paranoia.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    11. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by bwintx · · Score: 0
      I hear this all the time. China is not "catching up with the US.". To "catch" up to us, China will need to get rid of their communistic government. Their current hodgepodge of communism and sudo-capitalism just wont work in the long run.

      Actually, most *NIX users probably think sudo-capitalism is a pretty good idea, but...

      --
      Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
    12. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by nunchux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Commentary on /. trends aside, is there any particular reason for America's tendency to send many, many more unmanned than manned missions into space? Surely the fact that unmanned missions are cheaper alone did not result in the creation of this policy.

      Unmanned missions are a necessity with the present-day American mindset. Haven't you noticed that every time one of our astronauts dies, our space program grinds to a halt for years?

      We (the USA) have lost the pioneer spirit... If we're really going to stay ahead of the Chinese (and Indians, and Russians, and whoever else) the USA as a country has to understand that tregedies will happen, and some brave souls will die in the name of progress, and they knew the risks of that happening when they signed on for the job. Because a Shenzhou crash will not slow the Chinese down for a second (really, we likely wouldn't even know it happened.)

    13. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by arhines · · Score: 1

      Maybe it is time to stop all this "China is catching up" paranoia.
      Maybe you need a reality check, but the US GDP is barely growing at all. Look at the dollar, which is worth half of what it was 2 years ago vs. the euro, for evidence of this. We are in a recession - well, maybe not a full blown one, but we are barely creeping forward. In the meantime, china is beginning to overcome the technological gap that has been the only thing keeping them making cheap plastic household goods instead of our expensive microchips and cars.

      Yes, the US has a massive GDP, but this is just residual. Do you really think that Rome circa 400BC had a "GDP" (whatever the roman equivalent would be) smaller than any other nation? Doubtful, but they sure as hell disappeared pretty quick right around that time.

      I'm sick of america's work ethic going to shit, and I hope news like this gives us a wakeup call. America cannot survive in the 21st century with a workforce with 150 million underemployed college graduates with bloody communications degrees.

    14. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by helioquake · · Score: 2, Interesting

      is there any particular reason for America's tendency to send many, many more unmanned than manned missions into space?

      You answered your own question. Because it's cheaper. Hell, much cheaper.

      The fact that, if you were to put an astronaut on board an unmanned rocket, you'd kill the bastard by exploding his guts internally plus squishing via high Gs during the launch. So to make it safe for manned mission, each rocket has to be designed with more safe proof structure for human bodies.

      None of that would be required for an unmanned rocket, which makes it cheaper to launch. Expendable missions are that cheap and cost-efficient today. In future with further development of reuseable vehicles, it could be a day when manned vehicles would be far more efficient and norm someday. (Or one can only dream...)

    15. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Cromac · · Score: 1
      wondering at how quickly and why the Chinese are catching up with the US.

      It's always easier to follow than to lead. So far they're not doing anything new just copying what has already been done.

      They may also be able to catch up faster by taking fewer precautions. If our current space program had the same level of redundancy as our Apollo missions we'd probably be spending a lot less, running many more missions and possibly losing more people.

    16. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by akhomerun · · Score: 0

      unmanned missions are the result of two things

      1. last i checked, to send something up in space still costs thousands of dollars per pound. so to send up a human with liveable quarters, food, water, oxygen, etc is about 150 pounds, or you can send up a computer to do experiments for you weighing in at about 30 pounds. subtract the salary of the astronaut, the risk of loss of human life, and it is a better deal.

      2. The U.S.A. sent their manned missions back in the 60s and 70s. The fact that China is sending manned missions may even be an indicator that they are still far behind.

      And aside from all this, the U.S.A. still sends more manned missions into space than anyone else. our space program is the largest in the world, so we send tons of unmanned missions in addition to the manned ones.

    17. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by ThreeE · · Score: 1

      Here's my favorite stat from a book I just read on China:

      "Three hundred million rural Chinese will move to cities in the next fifteen years. China must build urban infrastructure equivalent to Houston's every month in order to absorb them."

      So they've got their work cut out for them just getting a basic infrastructure in place. Once they do, their people will get sick of crappy wages and their tyrannical government and their growth will level off -- hopefully they will get rid of the tyrants too.

      Personally, as an American, I wish our neighbors to the south (Mexico) would get as ambitious as the Chinese.

    18. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      I guess that's because the USA already has mastered the current technology for manned missions.

      I'd say it has yet to master the not-blowing-people-up-when-going-to-space technology. Or the space-station technology (it could be massively improved).

      Let's not forget future tech such as living on other celestial bodies.

    19. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by lorelorn · · Score: 1
      Why should NASA, a government funded agency, be doing this? The private sector has both the means and the motivation ($$$) to achive this end, and it's something best left to them.

      NASA should be rightly concentrating on the science and exploration that the private sector has no interest in. These are best done through unmanned missions, such as Cassini/Huygens, and Deep Impact.

    20. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by incom · · Score: 1

      And by the time private industry can do worthwhile manned spaceflight China will have a moonbase and a mars mission, and the colonial future of mars will be communist and racially/culturally shallow. HUGE ventures are best served by governments.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    21. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Three hundred million rural Chinese will move to cities in the next fifteen years. China must build urban infrastructure equivalent to Houston's every month in order to absorb them."

      Unless, of course, they just put rifles in their hands and send them off to war.

    22. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Shihar · · Score: 1

      Maybe China will have a moon base first. That said, Americans always get the last laugh. There might be a Chinese flag on the moon, but I bet the good old McDonalds gold arches won't be far behind it. Honestly, the most ironic thing I have ever seen in my entire life was after the Soviet Union collapsed. They showed footage from a helocopter of a line that wrapped around 5 city blocks to get into the first McDonalds in Moscow...

    23. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by ghoul · · Score: 3, Interesting

      GDP per capita is a usefull comparison when you are trying to measure quality of life but not when you try to measure scientific progress. Granted at current levels Chines might not be able to afford SUVs in every driveway but they can afford to spend on centrally funded programs. As you said there are 4 times many Chinese thus if you want to spend 100 million on a mission every Chines just needs to afford 10 cents but every american needs to afford 40 cents. Larger population is generally an advantage given similar levels of education. Moreover while the Chinese GDP might be 7 trillion on paper everyone knows the Chinese currency is artificially lower by 20% so in real terms it is already larger than the US GDP. Things like space exploration are a kind of national luxury and they are affordable based on the whole GDP and not GDP percapita. After all their is only 1 NASA and 1 CNSA. Even not considering the exchange rates your argument about US remaining ahead falls apart as China is growing faster 9% compared to 4% . According to WB and IMF projections Chinese GDP will overtake US GDP by 2015 and by 2050 GDP per capita too will overtake US GDP. This is assuming no major wars. Given that the US is currently stuck in an expensive war which may drag down growth these points may be reached earlier. Its already becoming obvious that the US is no longer as attractive as before. Just look at the number of foreign students who stay on in the US. Earlier most foreign students would never go back to their countries as the US had the leading industry and the best opportunities but nowadays more and more Chinese and Korean students go back as opportunities at home are equal or better than in the US. So their really is no place for complacency

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    24. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Thats pretty much what the US is doing right now. No jobs for hispanics and blacks? Get them into the Army by promising college tuition and then send them off to Iraq or bases abroad. China might have to start a few wars like the US did in Iraq.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    25. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by proxima · · Score: 3, Informative

      China's GDP as of 2004 is $7,262,000,000,000 (7.26 trillion) while the GDP of the USA as of 2004 is $11,750,000,000,000 (11.75 trillion). Growing a nations GDP by 1 trillion is a few years let alone more than 4 trillion is just impossible. China has _at least_ 1 billion people. Divide their GDP by their population and you get about $7,262 per person. The USA has about 300 million people. Divide our GDP per person and you get about $39,166.66 per person. A _huge_ difference, more than five time the amount _per person_!

      A few notes:

      1.) Your figures are probably from the CIA World Factbook, which reports purchasing power parity GDP. Comparing nominal GDP makes your argument stronger, as the PPP GDP for China is substantially smaller. One source has the figure for 2004 at $1.65 trillion US. However, the PPP number is useful in that it's probably a better comparison with US output, I believe due to the rather extraordinary circumstances with the yuan dollar peg kept artificially low. Still, that said...

      2.) China's GDP growth is pretty spectacular, and has been so for the past several years (check the World Bank's World Development Indicators database). 9.5% reported growth in 2004 is probably unsustainable, but China had GDP growth of 7-9% for 1999-2003 (according to the WB). The US, by comparison, had growth of 1-4% between 1999 and 2003 (admittedly including a recession).

      3.) Your argument about per-capita GDP works against you. Few believe that the average Chinese person will be as wealthy as the average "first world" person any time soon. The point is that China, as a political and economic powerhouse, will likely become even more huge in the near future. The large population bolsters this goal, as it provides low-cost labor and a quick opportunity for growth. One only needs to raise per-capita productivity a small amount to see huge gains in overall GDP for the country as a whole.

      4.) Let's take your original figures of $7.26 trillion versus $11.75 trillion. Assuming China can keep up a 7% growth and the US has about 3% growth, China will reach the $11.75 trillion mark within 8 years. At those rates of growth, China will exceed the US within 13 years. Even if these figures are quite off, China is still likely to have a much larger economic role than it does now in the coming decades.

      --
      "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    26. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of the East Asian countries had authoritarian governments while rapidly industrializing...

      Japan in late 19th/early 20th century was nationalist emperialist fascist

      South Korea was authoritarian until late 80s

      Singapore, same

      Taiwan, same

      How have they not caught up with the US?

      China's GDP has been doubling every 10 years since 1979. One more decade will give them more PPP than the US total. Nominally, I cannot predict currency revaluations and fluctuations, so I don't know when they will nominally catch up to the US.

    27. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by proxima · · Score: 1

      PPP GDP for China is substantially smaller

      That should read, "nominal GDP for China is substantially smaller".

      --
      "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    28. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Leroy_Brown242 · · Score: 1

      People are cheap in China. They can kill off a few and not put a significant dent in their population. Sad, but true.

    29. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Frodo+Crockett · · Score: 3, Informative
      queue
      n.
      1. A line of waiting people or vehicles.
      2. A long braid of hair worn hanging down the back of the neck; a pigtail.
      3. Computer Science.
        1. A sequence of stored data or programs awaiting processing.
        2. A data structure from which the first item that can be retrieved is the one stored earliest.


      cue2
      n.
      1. A signal, such as a word or action, used to prompt another event in a performance, such as an actor's speech or entrance, a change in lighting, or a sound effect.
        1. A reminder or prompting.
        2. A hint or suggestion.
      2. Music.
        1. An extract from the music for another part printed, usually in smaller notes, within a performer's part as a signal to enter after a long rest.
        2. A gesture by a conductor signaling the entrance of a performer or part.
      3. Psychology. A stimulus, either consciously or unconsciously perceived, that elicits or signals a type of behavior.
      4. Archaic. One's assigned role or function.
      5. Archaic. A mood; a disposition.
      --
      "The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
    30. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by locokamil · · Score: 1

      Point taken. :)

    31. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      People dying is very bad publicity that manned missions simply can't counteract.

      I really don't understand why this is. In it's heyday space travel was exciting because men were taking great risks in the hope of gaining great rewards. When someone is killed on the project he should be lauded as a hero rather than reporting something like "7 astronauts dead" and spending months pouring out crap about changing safety procedures. By all means, make the flights as safe as possible, but don't make it the only apparent goal of the manned missions to perfect the art of keeping people alive in space.

      People die all the time. When one of them has the good fortune to know the risks and puts their life on the line then dies /for/ something, that should be celebrated.

      Maybe it's too hard to maintain that kind of interest over 40 years of incremental progress. Maybe the rewards aren't that great anymore.

      The science done on unmanned missions is all very well, but if NASA wants public support, they've going to have to come up with an ambitious mission and really dedicate themselves to it. I guess it was the space station.

      I've answered half my own points, but what's slashdot for if not posting rambling, ill informed rants?

    32. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by EiZei · · Score: 1

      The #2 rank is the European Union which is like 25 seperate nations. If you take the average GDP of the whole EU it is only like $466,000,000,000 (466 billion) per nation per year. The USA does more than twice that per month! Uhh.. maybe it has something to do with the fact that average european country is hell lot smaller than the USA?

      Anyways, I think EU at least at some point took over USA in the GPD race due to the weakening dollar.

    33. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Not quite, because the Mercury craft was only capable of carrying one. The Chinese craft has a 13% higher capacity than the Soyuz. It is currently outfitted to carry 3 people, expected to rise to 4 in redesign.

      --
      Me (Blog)
    34. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by rsynnott · · Score: 1
      "$466,000,000,000 (466 billion) per nation per year."

      I couldn't let this one go by. What a wonderful nonsense figure! What does that have to do with anything? Also, the current GDP of the EU is $13.9trillion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union

      I think your figure may be for a pre-expansion Europe.

      --
      Me (Blog)
    35. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Also, of course, America currently has no economical manned spacecraft, or indeed any manned spacecraft that they are currently happy about launching.

      --
      Me (Blog)
    36. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Control42 · · Score: 1

      That's probably one of the major problems of western society today. Science should not have to bvow to economics. It should be the other way around. Science and exploration are the major goals of humanity as a whole, that's what humans do. The rest of our society, including economics, is actually there to enable more science, period.

    37. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Berner · · Score: 1

      Newsflash, Russian rocket engines are more efficient than Western engines. The russians perfected a closed cycle engine (the RD180 is a more recent example) decades ago that still astonishes western scientist because they thought the technology was "to dangerous" to develop.

      One of the reasons that America beat the Russians to the moon was that the russians where developing this new engine while trying to get a mission sent to the moon. Since the Russians couldn't build the enormous open-cycle enginees used in the Saturn 5 they had to develop more efficient but smaller engines, they managed to do so in just 4 years but got beat to the moon during development.

      If the Chinese are using russian engines they made a good choise. If they continue making good choices then they might just meet all their goals in space. Maybe a day will come when all astronauts will have to be able to speak chinese to get past the traffic control towers stuck in orbit. ;)

    38. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by smchris · · Score: 1

      Divide their GDP by their population and you get about $7,262 per person. The USA has about 300 million people. Divide our GDP per person and you get about $39,166.66 per person.

      Interesting train of thought. Since the U.S. has about the greatest class differences outside Swaziland (I've read that the top 1% own as much as the bottom 90% in the U.S.), I wonder how much closer average income would be if someone subtracted that richest top 1% from each country. Anybody know the figures?

    39. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      Honestly, the most ironic thing I have ever seen in my entire life was after the Soviet Union collapsed. They showed footage from a helocopter of a line that wrapped around 5 city blocks to get into the first McDonalds in Moscow...

      Except the first McDonald's in Moscow was opened in January 1990, some time before the Soviet Union collapsed.

    40. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by Shihar · · Score: 1

      My mistake. It was the fall of the Berlin wall that happened first, followed by McDonalds, followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union. Once the Berlin wall fell, everyone knew it was pretty much the end, hence the confusion in my memory.

    41. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      Communism usually ends after McDonald's are opened. When customers start ordering BigMacs with plastic meat, they know the government is up to something for allowing these businesses to exist.

    42. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by uberdave · · Score: 1

      Everything revolves around economics. Ask any poor person.

    43. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1

      The numbers I gave were for 2004 from the CIA World Factbook, wich I would trust over wikipedia. The numbers from Wikipedia are only an estimate of GDP for 2005. Even if you go by the Wikipedia estimates, there is not one other _single_ nation that even comes close.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    44. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      No, however, the EU, a transnational body, exceeds it, and a fair few of the EU member states exceed it on a per capita basis. Bear in mind that there are only two single nations larger than the US, and they're both developing world.

      --
      Me (Blog)
    45. Re:Queue /. alarmists... by danheskett · · Score: 1

      The top 1/10 of 1% of Americans drastically skew the results in lots of subtle ways. This is a class that virtually no other nation has. It really should be discounted.

  3. Good News /Bad News by The_Spectry · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    The good news is that soon our astronauts can fill up on General Tso's Chicken . The bad news is they'll be hungry again in 15 minutes . Are there cats in space :leaving:

  4. The problem... by NightWulf · · Score: 2, Funny

    The problem with chinese space travel, is 30 minutes later you want to go into space again.

    1. Re:The problem... by antdude · · Score: 1

      I don't get the joke. Did I miss something? Yes, I'm Chinese. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    2. Re:The problem... by mnmn · · Score: 1

      Think Chinese food.

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    3. Re:The problem... by antdude · · Score: 1

      Nope. Still don't get it. :( Either that, I am just really tired (worked almost 60 hours this week).

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    4. Re: The problem... by gidds · · Score: 1
      It's a commonly-held belief that half an hour after eating a Chinese meal, you tend to get hungry again.

      I've no idea why it's commonly-held, coz I've never experienced it myself. Half an hour after eating a Chinese meal (which I like to do regularly), I find myself still stuffed. Maybe I'm just a pig...

      --

      Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.

    5. Re: The problem... by antdude · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I never heard or witnessed this before. I have seen and experienced the sleepiness part before though. ;)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  5. I'm tellin' ya... by Sensible+Clod · · Score: 1

    watch out for these Chinese dudes. Everybody was glued to the screen back when Russ^H^H^H^H the USSR was doing the space race thing, but people aren't paying as much attention to Red^H^H^H China, but here goes one, then another, then two, then three, then space station, then moon...they'll be on Mars before long.

    --

    The difference between spam and poop is that you don't have to dig through septic tanks looking for real food. -- Me
    1. Re:I'm tellin' ya... by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Funny

      Everybody was glued to the screen back when Russ^H^H^H^H the USSR was doing the space race thing, but people aren't paying as much attention to Red^H^H^H China,

      One of these days, they'll invent software that can interpret the backspace button properly. Who knows what will happen then, perhaps slashdot posts won't have as many errors. Who knows! The possibilities are endless!

    2. Re:I'm tellin' ya... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One of these days, they'll invent software that can interpret the backspace button properly. Who knows what will happen then, perhaps slashdot posts won't have as many errors. Who knows! The possibilities are endless!
      But in China:
      One of these days, they'rr invent softwale that can intelplet the backspace button plopelry. Who knows what wirr happen then, pelhaps srashdot posts won't have as many ellols. Who knows! The possibirities are endress!
  6. Technology Transfer by putko · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't know how good this source is, but:

    Here is something from Global Security about the origin of the tech.

    Supposedly the tech is not just a copy of Russian stuff, and the Chinese are talking about what they are doing because they want to make money off of space services. You have to talk about it to sell it.

    --
    http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_s tone_your_children/dt21_18a.html
  7. Reminds me of early NASA by Vandil+X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When you look at the history of NASA's space adventures, it's pretty clear that we sort of peaked with the the 1960s and early 1970s. Then they sort of went soft.

    China's missions remind me of NASA's early days, when John Glenn and others made simple manned orbits. Sure, there was some scientific value to them, but the primary reason was: look what our country can do.

    I not only hope China will continue to plan and conduct these manned missions -- but also I hope all of their missions are a tremendous success.

    This and only this will spur NASA out of safety/budget land and go back to the cock&balls manned flights of yester-century.

    Just my 2 cents.

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
    1. Re:Reminds me of early NASA by timeOday · · Score: 1
      China's missions remind me of NASA's early days, when John Glenn and others made simple manned orbits. Sure, there was some scientific value to them, but the primary reason was: look what our country can do.
      What else is there? Science? Sort of. You can use the scientific method to study anything there is, including space of course.

      It's interesting to speculate how far behind the Chinese really are, or aren't. It was only 8 years between America's first man in space and the apex of manned space exploration, landing on the moon. And that was without having a blazed trail to follow.

    2. Re:Reminds me of early NASA by slashdotnickname · · Score: 1

      While China's current space program might seem similar to early NASA or Soviet programs, there is one big difference... the earlier space programs didn't have existing space technology to draw on, everything had to be invented from scratch (so far as space technology goes) and the dangers in such a young field were higher.

      there was some scientific value to them, but the primary reason was: look what our country can do

      You clearly haven't put much thought into that statement. Space travel technology is extemely costly to develop, and (at the time) there was no massive economic benefit from it so the costs were prohibitive to private business and could only be funded by governments. The technological landscape as changed since then (i.e. telecommunications) so now there's commercial benifits for private companies to invest into space as well. There was always a scientific interest in space travel, but, realistically, without the "look what our country can do" or "$$$" reasons space travel would of never taken off.

    3. Re:Reminds me of early NASA by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      This and only this will spur NASA out of safety/budget land and go back to the cock&balls manned flights of yester-century.

      Hell, the Bush administration would simply outsource our space program to India to reduce that huge budget deficit they built up.

    4. Re:Reminds me of early NASA by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      No, the apex of manned space travel was the long-term manned space station (so far). Don't be silly.

      --
      Me (Blog)
    5. Re:Reminds me of early NASA by timeOday · · Score: 1
      No, the apex of manned space travel was the long-term manned space station (so far). Don't be silly.
      I don't see why. But even if so, I really don't see what the ISS has over MIR.
    6. Re:Reminds me of early NASA by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have anything over Mir, for the moment. Mir was a long term manned space station (the first, really), and I would consider it humanity's most interesting and significant manned space venture so far. The IIS, however, has the potential to surpass it; they're already developing super-clear glass that can't be made on Earth as a commercial product, for use in instruments.

      --
      Me (Blog)
  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Correct link by Sensible+Clod · · Score: 5, Informative

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

    Might want to double-check your link next time.

    --

    The difference between spam and poop is that you don't have to dig through septic tanks looking for real food. -- Me
    1. Re:Correct link by MyLongNickName · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thanks for the info. I hadn't realized that the Chinese built their (mostly) own ship. They are further along that I knew.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  10. He Was Destined by Comatose51 · · Score: 3, Funny
    Sun Laiyan, chief of the China National Space Administration...

    He was destined to go into the space exploration field.

    PS - Yes, yes, I know Sun in Chinese means "grandson". Cheap joke, I know.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
    1. Re:He Was Destined by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      And it's also pronounced "soon", IIRC

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    2. Re:He Was Destined by sci50514 · · Score: 0

      FYI, "Sun" in Chinese has mulitple meanings. One of it means Grandson while the other is for the family name. When you use "Sun" in the name, it does not mean it is grandson or something like that.

      "Sun" is the Han Yu Pin Yin version. The dialect version is spelt as "Soon".

    3. Re:He Was Destined by hugesmile · · Score: 2, Funny
      Sun [pronounced "soon"] Laiyan, chief of the China National Space Administration...
      He was destined to go into the space exploration field.

      Try pronouncing his whole name - Soon Layin'?
      "Hey baby, I'm an astronaut. Wanna go back to my place?"

      Joke attempt #2: Why would someone named "Sun" be destined for space exploration? Wouldn't the Sun be a little hot to visit? Oh yeah, of course, you go at night.

      PS Two cheap jokes are better than one (unless neither is funny).

  11. Re:Astronaut blog? by aussie_a · · Score: 1

    Will their re-entry vehicle be shot down?

    Wait. They've got a re-entry vehicle? Why bother?

  12. mod parent funny by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

    This isn't redundant. It's a joke. And appropriate given these sudden dearth of Chinese space missions while most of their people languish.

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    1. Re:mod parent funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "dearth" ?

      I don't think that word means what you think it means...

    2. Re:mod parent funny by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      They could argue it stimulates their economy, putting more poor people to work, invents Chinese Tang to collect patent royalties from other nations, etc. etc.

    3. Re:mod parent funny by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      The innovation angle plays a lot better if you're the first to do it.

      As far as putting more people to work, if they were really trying to stimulate the economy that way there are plenty of better methods like that damn they're building on the Huang tse river, I thing.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  13. Re:Astronaut blog? by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Honestly, Chinese censorship doesn't work that way.
    Imagine what would happen if an American astronaut made an obscene comment about Bush, how it would be treated.

    Chances are he'd be let go and censored.

    The thing you have to remember is that while China theoretically has a legal system, things like status and respect, the position of your family, whether you're native to the local area, etc. carry far more weight there than they do in the US. This is especially true regarding the power of your family. You can be arrested simply for looking grungy and hanging around a train station (as one of my Chinese friends was.) Similarly, you can get away with murder if you have the right connections. You'll still be tried and sentanced to death, but they give you, say, a year so that you can work your connections and quietly be declared not guilty.

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  14. One Question by richdun · · Score: 2, Funny

    How good are Chinese hydrogen fuel sensors? Just wondering...

    "Made in China" is on everything else in this country, so just checking.

    1. Re:One Question by mikejz84 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The rocket does not run on hydrogen, but on 100% clean burning political dissidents.

    2. Re:One Question by mnmn · · Score: 1

      Hey their rockets may well work reliably.

      Think of when India will send people up to compete with China, and Pakistan will send their own to compete with India. We'll run out of elbowroom on the moon.

      And with that, we'll see the first spacesuits that can fit long beards. You can bet they'll all land on American soil and claim to be refugees!

      and spend their remaining days driving yellow cabs downtown NYC.

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    3. Re:One Question by turgid · · Score: 1

      Maybe the US could donate its stockpile from Gitmo? It must be expensive keeping people locked up for years.

  15. When's a private company going to the moon? by Mr.+Maestro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I mean, the lunar missions all used what, 1960's technology? And now that the X-Prize MIGHT result in commercial orbitals, how much harder is it to go the moon once you are up there?
    Seriously, I'm asking how much harder. I'm no rocket scientist.
    Seems some rogue millionaire could have someone construct his a ship with all that extra cash using at least 1980's technology.

    1. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by gvc · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Seriously, I'm asking how much harder."

      A lot harder. You can reach orbit at about 25,000 km/hr. Escape velocity, which is necessary to reach the moon, is 40,000 km/hr.

      Because energy is proportional to the square of velocity, that's about 2.5 times as much energy.

      But it gets worse - since liftoff weight is dominated by fuel and propulsion, that's 2.5 times as much weight. etc.

      Then, when you re-enter the earth's atmosphere, you have 2.5 times as much energy to burn. Simple ballistic re-entry techniques won't work for this; you need aerodynamic negative lift to sweep a big arc while you're re-entering.

      Of course all these problems were addressed in 1969, but it was a massive undertaking. Much more massive than just sticking a tin can with an asbestos heat shield on top of an ICBM booster.

    2. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by jericho4.0 · · Score: 1
      Once you've got your life support systems tested, your astronauts trained and into LEO, etc, it's not a big leap to the moon. Assuming you've already got a lander...

      The X-Prize was further from LEO than LEO is from the moon, for instance.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    3. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you think NASA designed and built the Lunar Module, etc.

      "This home page is dedicated to the men and women
      that designed, built and tested the Lunar Module at
      Grumman Aerospace Corporation
      Bethpage, New York"

      http://users.specdata.com/home/pullo/

      It's a shame that NASA and the government are routinely given credit for the design and construction of these vehicles, then the truth is, they took taxpayer money and managed the projects.

      Sure, NASA did a great job at managing and paying for technology, but in the end, most of the great feats that America accomplished in space exploration were done by companies, composed of employees that were not employed by the government.

    4. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by ThreeE · · Score: 1, Informative

      I think your calculations are a bit off. LEO is about 83% of the energy needed to get to the moon. Here's a link to some data (particulary good graphical presentation) -- you want to look at page 6 and beyond:

      http://www.mines.edu/research/srr/Reference%20Libr ary/LDEM_Draft4-updated.pdf

      This is why establishing a firm foothold in LEO (ISS) is pretty important.

      (Cue demachina rant)

    5. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what. Even the military is armed by companies, and even outsources many personel positions to contractors.

    6. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by demachina · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "This is why establishing a firm foothold in LEO (ISS) is pretty important."

      You deserve a rant since you keep saying that somehow the ISS is important in going to the Moon or Mars. It simply isn't. Its not going to be used to assemble spacecraft in space, nor is it going to be used to refuel them. I REALLY doubt any mission to the Moon or Mars would ever waste the energy to rendevous with it.

      Get over it the ISS was a waste of $100 billion dollars and you aren't going to be able to dream your way out of it. If all that time and money had gone in to affordable launch vehicles (and I would be way happy with just building updated Saturn V's) we would be on the Moon again already. Saturn V's were pricey in their day but versus the $1.3 billion total average cost of a Shuttle launch they are almost cheap.

      --
      @de_machina
    7. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by Black+Tezcatlipoca · · Score: 1

      And now that the X-Prize MIGHT result in commercial orbitals, how much harder is it to go the moon once you are up there?

      Not much harder. Once you're outside of the atmosphere you dont need to worry about using massively high thrust chemical rockets to get you up quickly, or dumping ludicrous amounts of energy on reentry.

      You could pretty much just strap a low weight inflatible habitat like the ones Rob Bigelow is building to an apollo era LEM and a cheap pressure fed rocket.

    8. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by Black.Shuck · · Score: 0

      I do not think Escape Velocity is required to reach the Moon. Isn't EV the speed needed at sea-level to propel an object to infinity without any further propulsion? (Discounting the effects of wind-resistance.)

      The influence of gravity gets weaker the further from the surface you are. EV at 5,000 meters is less than EV at sea-level. In theory you could fly to the Moon at 1 kmph, assuming you had enough fuel, monstrous engines, and a craft big enough to carry it all.

    9. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by gvc · · Score: 1

      (a) You need within epsilon of escape velocity. In fact, both lunar-height orbit and escape velocity are both a bit over 40,000 km/h. I believe that the Apollo missions achieved somewhat higher than escape velocity.

      (b) "Escape velocity" is a measure of the energy you need to get that far from earth. Even if you go "straight up" you need the same energy.

    10. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by Mr.+Maestro · · Score: 1

      Of course all these problems were addressed in 1969, but it was a massive undertaking. Much more massive than just sticking a tin can with an asbestos heat shield on top of an ICBM booster.
      That is my point. Wasn't all the math and legwork figured out all ready? And wasn't it all constructed with 1960's technology? Now all they need is someone with DEEP pockets.

    11. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by gvc · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Somewhere in my basement I have a 1960 Scientific American that spells it all out. The article has remarkably realistic renderings of an Apollo capsule and also a Shuttle.

      As I recall, the same article also details the energy requirements to get to Mars. The trick there is that if you land on Mars, you need Mars-escape-energy to get home.

    12. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by Black.Shuck · · Score: 1

      Well, I went and looked it up. It seems that EV really does refer to speed rather than the energy required to attain that speed. I can see where you're coming from in (b), but I don't think it's quite right.

      For example, take The da Vinchi Project. They will (eventually, possibly :p) use a helium balloon to lift their rocket to a high-altitude before firing its engines. I do not know how much energy is required to fill a helium balloon, but I'm sure that if the rocket was capable of reaching EV, the total energy expended by both balloon and rocket stages would be significantly less than if the rocket launched from the ground.

    13. Re:When's a private company going to the moon? by gvc · · Score: 1

      When you inflate a balloon you supply energy which is used to displace air in the atmosphere. There's no free lunch.

      My point about EV was that, whatever mechanism you use, you'll need at least that much energy.

      Suppose you rode your helium balloon to the moon and then cut your basket loose. By the time you fell to earth you'd have reached escape velocity. If you really could get to the moon with less energy you'd have invented a perpetual motion machine.

  16. p.s. by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I know your comment was a joke. But still, I think that there's a serious misunderstanding in the West of China's political situation.

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  17. Good luck to them by Bananatree3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have a feeling we are coming up to the next great Space Race sometime later this decade/ next Space Race. It seems to me that every country should have the right to be able to end people into space. With Japan starting to launch its own rockets, and India not too far behind, I wonder if Asia will have its own Space Race. It seems to me that the US will probably just sit there with the Shuttle and ISS until someone (maybe China) decides to go further out into interplanetary space, and then we might see some serious action on behalf of the US to ramp up its space initiative.

    1. Re:Good luck to them by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      I too wish that this will spark the next wave of space exploration and discovery.

      However, even if the NASA gets the space exploration budgets in place, by that time there will be a shortage of brain power to compete with all the PhD's that have since stayed home for education in China and India. By then, can we even compete? I hope the brain drain in our higher ed gets reversed before some drastic situation like this happens.

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    2. Re:Good luck to them by Shihar · · Score: 1

      Sure, NASA will sit there scratching their balls, but my money isn't on NASA. It isn't on China, India, or Japan either. I'll place my bets on good old fashion 100% American corporate greed. Eh, if we are stuck with this capitalist system, might as well use it. Honestly though, I think the corporations are going to be the ones to win this race. I bet while NASA and Russia are still dicking around with the ISS, China is trying to figure out how you can combine a ICBM and a tin can to make a rocket to the moon, and India is trying to justify to its people why they should spend money on space when there are still millions of people that don't have power, someone is going to send up a hotel and start cashing in.

    3. Re:Good luck to them by HungWeiWeiHai · · Score: 0

      Well, the heat shields better work again, because in space, not one can hear you scream (unless the microphone is on and working...)

      I wonder if they have "essence of dim sum" and "powder of mu shu pork" for meals (which would have to be "high protein, low residue...)

    4. Re:Good luck to them by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that every country should have the right to be able to end people into space

      Avoid human rights jurisdictions, eh? Guantonimo was not far away enough.

      Best Fruedian Typo I've seen in a while. Our S's are $5 each, BTW.

    5. Re:Good luck to them by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      However, even if the NASA gets the space exploration budgets in place, by that time there will be a shortage of brain power to compete with all the PhD's that have since stayed home for education in China and India. By then, can we even compete? I hope the brain drain in our higher ed gets reversed before...

      Yes, but we'll have way more lawyers instead. I'm sure we'll find a way to sue them back down the Earth.

    6. Re:Good luck to them by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Yes, obviously. Read "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" ;)

      --
      Me (Blog)
    7. Re:Good luck to them by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      every country should have the right to be able to end people into space.

      Paging Dr. Freud! Please pick up the white courtesy phone.

    8. Re:Good luck to them by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      every country should have the right to be able to end people into space

      "Should"? "Right"? Are you sure you're not confused? More importantly, don't confuse the /. readership with statements that try to blur the distinction between "right" and "privilege".

  18. 'outer' space by EreIamJH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article says that they'll 'venture into outer space'. Isn't it just 'space', not 'outer space'??

    1. Re:'outer' space by matt21811 · · Score: 1

      The ever useful Wikipedia says you are correct:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space
      It should just be space. Outer space is redundant.

    2. Re:'outer' space by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      The ever useful Wikipedia says you are correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space It should just be space. Outer space is redundant.

      If you use Wikipedia, then don't mislead people about what it says (despite its ever-changing nature):

      "The term outer space is used to distinguish it from airspace and terrestrial locations."

  19. It would be nice if China had some kind of realiza by Christ0ph · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be nice if China had some kind of realization when their astronauts are up in space, flying around the Earth, looking down on a fragile ball, without any borders visible on the 'map' - that we are all one people, one race, one world.. a very fragile and exceedingly precious world.. here in our tiny, five mile thick zone of comfort, balanced between a world that is very very cold (space) and one that is very very hot.. (magma)

    But instead, the Chinese that I have spoken to don't see this as some kind of triumph for mankind and instead, see it as 'catching up with America' - a continuation of what has become a national obsession.. Of course, they are catching up with America in 1963.. (which was catching up to the then-USSR a year earlier) but...

    Ultimately, I think its a good thing.. The space cooperation between the US and the USSR was clearly, in retrospect a BIG thing in improving the relations between our two countries.. It may have saved us from a nuclear war during those years..

    Now I'm praying that we don't end up in one in the 21st century.. Seems like both China and the US are currently ruled by the same kinds of idiots.. the kind that doesnt mind seeing millions of people die if its good for profits..

    But.. any scientist could tell them.. IT WONT BE..

    As Einstein said "We can't tell you what weapons World War III will be fought with, but we can tell you that World War IV, IF THERE IS ONE will be fought with sticks an arrows..

    If we live to see it.. if the human race survives..

    Just say NO..

  20. Man, 10 years down the road there will be another by melted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Man, 10-15 years down the road there will be another cold war and another arms/space/tech race. And for the layman, that's great news. More jobs here in the US, more investment into tech with all the trickle-down effects, more investment into education, too.

  21. and current NASA by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And where the hell is NASA? The Chinese are putting men in space and we cower in our launch craft waiting for the safty teams to tell us it is only "damn dangerous". I will put my life where my mouth is - put me in space, and damn the hazards - let the cowards fly for NorthWest - I want to be on space!!!!

    Sera

    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    1. Re:and current NASA by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm devising a home-made method of getting into space. Now would you please hop into my cannon and I can shoot you into space, hazards be damned.

    2. Re:and current NASA by incom · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling that the military space program is getting all the NASA funds/govt. attention. Which imho isn't the smartest, sure they can blow away foreign sattelites, spy from space with multiple optical frequencies and high granularity, and probably a bunch of land targetting weapons aswell, but all of this is classified military stuff. So getting beaten in the public arena by the chinese will harm the american self-image, a space arms race is already in progress, lack of technology that is transferable to civillian society, humanity is missing out on scientific benefits, and we're not working towards making humanity not have all it's eggs in one basket(on earth).

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    3. Re:and current NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want to be "on space"?
      You sound like you're "on" something, all right, but it isn't space.

  22. Speaking of appropriate names. by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

    If you think that's an appropriate name, there was a space tourist named Shuttleworth...

  23. Safety restaints... China... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You misspelled expendable. Like they'd give two shits about an individuals safety.

    1. Re:Safety restaints... China... by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      This is an interesting attitude. Does it really ring true with modern China?

      --
      Me (Blog)
  24. Why are they going? by matt21811 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Chinese seem to be copying the old US space program fairly closely.
    Why? National pride? To make money? Because its there?

    The real reason the Chinese want to go into space is the same reason the US went there. It's the military application. If any country in the world wants to go toe to toe against the US in anything except a world destroying nuclear match up then they have to take the GPS and satellite spying monopoly from the USA.

    It works even better if they find out a way take out US satellites without affecting their own. Blowing them up might cause large debris fields that are a danger to their own satellites. Maned missions could be sent up do attach de-orbiting rockets or more simply, spray paint the lenses and break off the antennae.

    A US military without satellites has limited recognisance, communications, and command and control abilities. Some soldiers won't even know where they are.

    I think the frightening thing for the US is that they won the cold war by simply outspending the USSR. With China's incredible growth it not many years before the opposite situation could occur.

    1. Re:Why are they going? by bani · · Score: 1

      The chinese economy is strongly linked to the US, the US is china's #1 export partner. Military attacks on your primary source of income doesn't seem terribly smart to me.

      Taking out the entire GPS constellation would appear no small task either. It's also a lot of expensive effort on an inexpensive target. Compared to other space projects, GPS is dead cheap. Take out a couple GPS satellites, they're replaced almost instantly and very cheaply. So in the end you've accomplished little.

      I think the frightening thing for the US is that they won the cold war by simply outspending the USSR. With China's incredible growth it not many years before the opposite situation could occur.

      Could you remind me what "war" the US is currently having with China?

    2. Re:Why are they going? by vidarh · · Score: 1

      That it's not economically advantageous doesn't mean it isn't worth being prepared for it. Presenting a credible threat means noone in the pentagon will suddenly get the bright idea of trying to pull another Iraq on them. Keep in mind that China won't be planning just for today, but need to take into account what might happen if the US government keeps getting more aggressive over the next decades.

    3. Re:Why are they going? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      If any country in the world wants to go toe to toe against the US in anything except a world destroying nuclear match up then they have to take the GPS and satellite spying monopoly from the USA.

      What on earth is wrong with you people? Why is it anything any other country does is believed to be an attack specifically on the US? Do you think we all wake up each morning and consider how best to annoy/attack America that day?

    4. Re:Why are they going? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      France was Germany's largest trading partner pre-WWII. Large scale war isn't a particularly rational act that's why it's so hard to predict.

  25. Re:It would be nice if China had some kind of real by blacklite001 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course, Einstein didn't use caps, and he spelled properly, and he didn't even say that bit in caps if you want to be really picky, but you know.

    "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

  26. Proper usage of "Outer" Space by Nick+Driver · · Score: 1

    Just my not-so-humble opinion, but I've always considered the term "outer space" to be more appropriately applied to space which is beyond our own solar system. That would really make it genuinely deserving of the adjective "outer". Anyone else concur?

  27. Re:Man, 10 years down the road there will be anoth by aussie_a · · Score: 1

    more investment into education, too

    You misspelt propaganda.

  28. Re:It would be nice if China had some kind of real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Americans are the ones agressively pursuing war. If you ACTUALLY have a look at America's history, you'll notice they STARTED and PROVOKED nearly 200 wars. Honestly, take a history lesson --- in all four corners of the globe, there has been millions of innocent children, women, men and babies massacred in the name of "freedom" and "democracy".

    Lest we no through stones meanwhile occupying in the largest glass mansion on the face of the planet.

  29. goodness, NO! by tloh · · Score: 1

    Why, the offending individual would simply be modded to oblivion.

    silly child, sheesh!

    Disclaimer: I am Chinese but not Communist; I believe in religious freedom and political relief for Tibet but not Taiwan Independance; I seek out new thoughts and ideas and will boldly post where none has before, but I'll shoot a phasor up your ass if you are a trolling bastard.

    now then......would you care for some green tea?

    --
    Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
    1. Re:goodness, NO! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I believe in religious freedom and political relief for Tibet but not Taiwan Independance

      Taiwan will not go without one hell of a fight.

    2. Re:goodness, NO! by tloh · · Score: 1

      I do hope people reading this realize the whole post was just a lame joke. Lets hope there wont be any fighting at all - from either side.

      But just for the sake of arguement, I'd like to play devil's advocate. Is it really so bad for Taiwan to reconcile without a fight? The way I see it, Mainland China is ripe for conquest from within. more than 20 years of experience with the market economy has been adicctive for most of the country. Though a bit slow, the government *is* moving to liberalize many aspect of running the country. From an ordinary citizen's perspective, it is my experience that in recent times, having Taiwan connections brings a lot of clout in many social/business situations.

      Having continued the republican legacy of the previous nationalist regime, it is only natural that the Taiwan political establishment would be able to show her big brother how "things ought to be done" in a truly free society. In so many ways, the mainland is treading a path that Taipei has already traveled. As the island pseudo-nation is further along the same road to the destination of a better society, it makes no sense to taunt or in any way antagonize a fellow traveler who may soon be shoulder to shoulder with you.

      I think the most ideal scinario would be for Taiwan to try walking a line as close as possible to a good relationship and use that proximity and influence to steadily and persistantly nudge the big lumbering juggernaut in the right direction. I believe when the smoke clears, everyone will come out a winner. ...with the possible exception of maybe Japan and probably the US as well as other nation-states that have taken an adversarial role against China (both of them) in one capacity or another over Taiwan.

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
  30. Re:goodness, NO! Do you believe in the right of by HungWeiWeiHai · · Score: 0

    da fei jie? What kind of boosters do you use? How many xdynes of energy output? (laugh...)

  31. Hooray for competition! by Leroy_Brown242 · · Score: 1

    I'm all for more people getting into the space race.

    Fuck NASA, lets get everyone involved!

  32. Not all Hydrogen in a Long March. by reality-bytes · · Score: 1

    The rocket motors on the Long March derived rockets use Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) and Nitrogen Tetroxide as the oxidiser source. (probably due to it being related to the Dongfeng ICBM)

    The smaller upper stages do use LOX/LH2 like the Shuttle system.

    I am told the main reason for the ECO system on the Shuttle is that if the fuel runs out, the roket's turbopumps are liable to over-rev and disintegrate (bye-bye engine).

    Assuming the long March motors use turbopumps to inject the oxidant, then they'd suffer the same problem. However, this problem need not be seen as 'critical' in a vehicle which is largely expended in launch and also includes a method for extracting the crew at any stage of launch, a launch-escape tower (actually a Solid rocket on the capsule).

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  33. A dumb question on my part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... but what the hell is a "space official"?

    All I'm coming up with is "Commando Cody, Sky Marshall of the Universe".

    1. Re:A dumb question on my part... by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      what the hell is a "space official"?

      Probably Dr. I. Q. Hi, Secretary of the Stratosphere, who commissioned space hero D. Dodgers to claim the Planet X for Earth, and secure the supply of illudium phosdex (the shaving cream molecule), some time in the 24 1/2th Century.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  34. SciFi Books in This Topic? by mattwilson247 · · Score: 1

    Are there any scifi books out there that visit this topic of Chinese space ventures? Imagine something like China becomes the largest world power and controls every aspect of life and has the majority of our solar system explored and colonized! That would be interesting. ANy books like this?

    1. Re:SciFi Books in This Topic? by dahlek · · Score: 1
      Sure, 2010 by Clarke.

      dahlek

    2. Re:SciFi Books in This Topic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, the ChungKuo series of books

  35. Re:Man, 10 years down the road there will be anoth by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
    there will be another cold war and another arms/space/tech race. And for the layman, that's great news. More jobs here in the US, more investment into tech with all the trickle-down effects

    So, which branch of the military industrial complex are you astroturfing for? ;-)

    America cannot function without an enemy it seems. I often wonder if it's part of someones grand plan, or just a quirk of fate.

  36. Re:Astronaut blog? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
    You can be arrested simply for looking grungy and hanging around a train station (as one of my Chinese friends was.) Similarly, you can get away with murder if you have the right connections.

    It's no different anywhere else my friend, trust me on that . People of all races / backgrounds are just as corrupt as each other. At least China is open about its censorship. Monsanto (sp) milk anyone? The government controls the media where you are, while the corporations do it here. The end result is the same.

  37. Re:It would be nice if China had some kind of real by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
    It would be nice if China had some kind of realization when their astronauts are up in space, flying around the Earth, looking down on a fragile ball, without any borders visible on the 'map' - that we are all one people, one race, one world.

    I think the leaders of all countries would do well to get that. However, that's not why the USA or USSR went up. They went up to prove that they could drop nukes on each other on any target. So, please drop the romantic thoughts about space exploration. They do not come in peace. ;-)

  38. Pig Sperm by eander315 · · Score: 1

    I found an interesting BBC story on the upcoming launch. Apparently they will be testing pig sperm. The article also says that the astronauts will orbit the earth 5-6 times, not 5-6 days, which leaves me wondering which article is correct.

  39. Re:Man, 10 years down the road there will be anoth by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

    More jobs here in the US, more investment into tech with all the trickle-down effects, more investment into education, too.

    Well, assuming that we can avoid nuclear annihilation this time, too.

    N = R* x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x L

  40. Re:Astronaut blog? by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

    People of all races / backgrounds are just as corrupt as each other.

    What do you base this on? Is this a belief, or can you cite studies? How have you measured corruption? How? If your interpretation is subjective, how much have you traveled?

    I'm suspicious of the notion that all societies are equally corrupt, since it suggests that nothing at all can be done about the problem, which breeds apathy. If societies are not equally corrupt, then there are reasons for this which can be studied and used to help make some small inroads against the problem.

    All cultures have some evil people, but they aren't identical in how they are corrupt. The US may have 'campaign donations' but it's a lot harder to bribe the local cops. Corruption in the US is organized and better tucked away and doesn't cripple small businesses the same way it does in some third world nations.

    Right now I'm living in Makati, Philippines. Things are reasonably uncorrupt in this city but if you go into the provinces most of the cops are out for bribes.

    The government controls the media where you are

    I never said otherwise. My point was that censorship in China wasn't a matter of people being executed, which a previous poster implied.

    The end result is the same.

    Similar, yes. The same? No. On the up side, Americans can go out on the net and find information from contrary sources if they like. These are more likely to be blocked in China, though the censorship didn't seem to be that bad, when you got down to it.

    In America, there was more freedom, but also the problem that because people were less likely to realize what was going on, they were more likely to trust the media.

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  41. Re:It would be nice if China had some kind of real by ghoul · · Score: 1

    The Chinese are already unaware of boundaries on the map. They proclaimed ignorance of such boundaries when they went into Tibet, East Turkestan, East Kashmir. Soon they will say--" We saw no boundary from space between us and Taiwan so we will just come in. Move along anow !!"

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  42. Re:Ha ha stupid Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Idiot. Red China has MAYBE $475 billion of T-notes. Less than 10% of the outstanding debt.

    We could inflate our way out of their ENTIRE payoff in 24 months, without endangering our own economy.

  43. GDP figures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The facts above are incorrect.

    The "real" GDP of China is about 1.75 trillion. The price power parity adjustment GDP is 7 trillion. That adjustment is used to take into account that you can buy 6 bananas for a dollar in China, instead of just 2 bananas in the US. It accounts for any ability to buy stuff, and hence it accounts for the real value of their currency.

    The "Real" GDP would apply more as free trade becomes more important, as the "Real" GDP will account for if everyone in america begin to spend all their money in China or vice versa.

  44. Re:Astronaut blog? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
    If your interpretation is subjective, how much have you traveled?

    It's entirely subjective, based on human nature. I have traveled somewhat, including China many years ago. Most of my travels have been in Europe (home), and North America. I would not say all cultures are equally corrupt, but it is present in almost all. Genetically, we may look different, but we have the same drives and goals that can lead to corruption. It would not surprise me if there were some societies that did not have corruption, but I'd bet that they would be small communities where corruption would be too obvious.

    Corruption does not require evil people. Evil is a word banded about far to often these days, it helps detract from the idea that your enemy/opponent has a valid argument/beef with you. Saves actually arguing the point!

    Corruption is merely a group of people who look out for each other, usually to the detriment of others. This basically how business works in many places, with people in private members clubs, 'secret societies' etc putting contracts each others way. From what I understand here in Scotland, just about any council work will be awarded to someone with some link to the person running the project, and of course it comes in at a higher quotation than the same work in the private sector. Not close enough to prove anything, but not fair either.

    It's evolutionary. Those who looked after their own got rewarded with long life, prosperity and most importantly, many offspring. Corruption works!

    Corruption in the US is organized and better tucked away and doesn't cripple small businesses the same way it does in some third world nations.

    I'd say their situation is in fact worse. In the US, corruption IS business & politics at the highest level. They are at war right now at the request of these corportations. The US requires a constant enemy to prosper, it's industry and economy are heavilly tied to the arms industry. The people at the top ALL have connections like this. If it's such a free country, why don't the reporters pick up on this? Because they work for the same people.

    Thousands of innocent people are dead because of this. Over oil mostly, but the regeneration and continued fear is also creating vast profits for companies like Harliburton and The Carlyle Group (sp?). Small businesses don't mean squat when you have that level of corruption in the world. Not when real people are being crippled!

    In America, there was more freedom, but also the problem that because people were less likely to realize what was going on, they were more likely to trust the media.

    No kidding! The ultimate problem there is that the propaganda starts at a very early age, daily pledges, marches etc., bog standard propaganda. They are educated that the USA is the worlds ultimate country, with the perfect system, run by the perfect people. Some sort of master race, if you will ;-) They have no critical thought, and just take everything at face value. Some of the studies are mind blowing, the levels of disinformation are incredible. Most Americans believe that 'the terrorists' are a highly organized and coherent group who 'hate freedom'. Of course, anyone with even the most basic knowledge of Middle Eastern history would know that they have plenty of completly valid reasons to hate the USA, in fact I would take their side on many issues in the region. These folk don't know how to play the western power game though; some think that terrorist acts help their cause. If they just played the media and explained to the US population the things that their nation has done, then they would be far more successful in their cause.

  45. Re:Man, 10 years down the road there will be anoth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's already another cold war going on, between Pakistan and India... with a participation from China.

    Or there's the Taiwan - China cold war
    Or the North / South Korea cold war with Japan participating