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. "

Comments

Correct link

[Sensible Clod]

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

Might want to double-check your link next time.

Re:Correct link

[MyLongNickName]

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

Re:When's a private company going to the moon?

[gvc]

"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.

Re:When's a private company going to the moon?

[ThreeE]

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)

Re:Queue /. alarmists...

[proxima]

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.

Re:Queue /. alarmists...

[Frodo Crockett]

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.
2. 1. A reminder or prompting.
   2. A hint or suggestion.
3. 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.
4. Psychology. A stimulus, either consciously or unconsciously perceived, that elicits or signals a type of behavior.
5. Archaic. One's assigned role or function.
6. Archaic. A mood; a disposition.