Another Taikonaut Launch This Week

JPThorne writes "BBC Online is reporting that China will launch a manned space mission sometime between Wednesday and Sunday of this week. Two as yet unnamed Chinese Astronauts will undertake the mission." From the article: "The launch comes almost exactly two years after China's first manned space flight, which made astronaut Yang Liwei a national hero. Unlike the last mission, Xinhua said a live broadcast of the launch would be provided to foreign media. Analysts say the fact the authorities are being more open about this launch may indicate that they are more confident of its success. "

Comments

So I guess...

[lucabrasi999]

I guess this means that since China can now afford to send (two) ships into space, it doesn't need any more Foreign Aid from the EU, Japan or the US.

Re:So I guess...

[bbc]

"I guess this means that since China can now afford to send (two) ships into space, it doesn't need any more Foreign Aid from the EU, Japan or the US."

I guess that much was already clear when China started sending money to the US.

Re:Wanna bet China reaches the moon before we go b

[DigiShaman]

Having been back from China, I can tell you that the government is just a paper tiger when it comes to "mankind" missions. This is just a PR move to jumpstart the publics love of the government. Fact is, the people there (at least in Shanghai) see everything as a "government issue" regardless if it's good or bad. I bet that China will land man on the moon a few times and never go back. Basically, it's pure politics and not science. ...been there, done that.

Re:Wanna bet China reaches the moon before we go b

[Anonymous Coward]

the ISS has components from many different countries.. ever heard of the russians?

the robotic arm on the shuttle is Canadian

Biased Reporting - "Backward", Anti-Chinese

[justanyone]

From the Article:

Shenzhou VI, like Shenzhou V, is based on Russia's Soyuz spacecraft, a model developed in the late 1960s.

TFA (The F-ing Article) reads as if they are working with 1960-s era technology. I would suggest that this is biased reporting based on a premise that the Chinese technology is from the 1960's and they're using it now because that's the best they can do.

Instead, I would suggest that they are probably using a derivative of the Soyuz technology updated with modern materials and techniques. The U.S. is using Delta launch vehicles which had their roots in the 1960's as well, but we don't advertise that a rocket was a "Delta-IV, a model developed in the early 1960's" because most of the innards have been updated and redesigned with techniques and materials that are the latest in rocket design.

The Chinese program may not use as advanced a technology as the U.S. Delta and E.U.'s Ariane programs, but that doesn't mean the rocket was designed in the 1960's and they're stuck still using that level of ability.

Space reporting should not be politically biased.

Re:Biased Reporting - "Backward", Anti-Chinese

[justanyone]

Complete, relevent section of article reads:

Technical improvements:

Shenzhou VI, like Shenzhou V, is based on Russia's Soyuz spacecraft, a model developed in the late 1960s.
Liu Yu, commander in chief of the rocket system, said the rocket for Shenzhou VI was an improvement on the one used two years ago. "We have confidence in the quality of this rocket. We have the conditions and capability to fulfil this mission," Mr Liu told Xinhua.

Mr Yang's flight in 2003 made China only the third nation to put a human into space, after Russia and the United States. China has had a rocketry program since the 1950s, and Beijing fired its first satellite into orbit in 1970. China's space programme, which is closely linked to the military, is a matter of enormous national pride for the government. Chinese officials say they want to land an unmanned probe on the moon by 2010, and also build a space station.


I stand by my previous assessment. I acknowledge that some articles mention that Delta rockets are derived from 1950's American THOR IRBM military rockets (see: Delta_rocket on Wikipedia). However, most mention that this has been significantly improved in the intervening decades. This article has a subtle bias that I want to highlight; the idea that the Chinese (and even Russian) Soyuz-derived rockets are somehow outdated, backward, stone-age 1960's-era technology compared to U.S. and E.U. models (like, laughably, the Space Shuttle, designed in the very early 1970's for quasi-military missions).

Admittedly, some of the Chinese technology might seem backward. In the 1980's, they lauched a probe that had to re-enter Earth's atmosphere and needed a heat shield. They researched a bunch of different high tech materials, testing ablating rates, weight, cost, heat transfer, etc., and finally settled on Oak. Yes, a wooden heat shield. It apparently ablated at a known and reliable rate, was a good heat insulator, and had many other benefits, the very least of which was cost. I recognize engineering genius in this decision, but the reporting on it laughed and laughed about the low-tech, backwards-assed Chinese program. I disrespect reporting that presumes that high tech requires high cost; I also disrespect reporting that pretends that basic designs originating in the 1960's but refined constantly since then are somehow less than state of the art.

In programming, it's "On the shoulders of giants we climb"; this is true of many engineering disciplines and I want to highlight the sometimes subtle bias in science reporting presuming all-new == much-better.

Re:space pirates

[Mingco]

Considering NASA's safety records (http://www.airsafe.com/events/space/astrofat.htm) , maybe they should copy someone else's software. Then again, 26 people to the Chinese is like 1/100th of an American.

-Ming

Re:Wanna bet China reaches the moon before we go b

[Rei]

just a PR move to jumpstart the publics love of the government ... land man on the moon a few times and never go back ... pure politics and not science.

Amazing how even governments with philosophies as different as the US and China play the space card the same. Manned spaceflight is about giving the public something to cheer for - a human face on a program that is most efficiently done with robots loaded with tools that the average person doesn't understand.

Re:I swear

[shotfeel]

Astronaut
Cosmonaut
Taikonaut

Not knowing either Russion or Chinese, I have to ask why the need to change the first part of the term, but keep the last part of the term the same? Or is that actually what the Russians and Chinese call their astronauts?

OK, wikipedia gives some info. Still seems strange to me. At least the "Cosmonaut" is an anglicization of the Russian word ????????? (kosmonavt), makes sense.

Re:57-60% change chinese on moon by 2020

[Red Flayer]

"If the Chinese go to the moon, I don't think it will be just a publicity stunt-I expect they'll develop a real economic presence there. Stuff like a Lunar space elevator could be a highly profitable enterprise"

Please, explain the profitability. Where are they going to get the revenue that pays off the capital expenditure? A space elevator could perhaps be more cost-effective than an surface-launch based space program, but it's not even close to profitable.

If you believe that other governments (such as the US) would base their space program on leasing time on a Chinese space elevator, think again... there is no way that the US would give China the direct power to handicap our space program.

Joint ventures? Quite possible, but still not likely to be profitable for China. No space venture is directly profitable -- the profits derived are in national pride and perhaps technological development.

I can easily see China having a physical presence up there -- more satellites, etc. Or perhaps even (gasp!) a military presence. But an economic presence? There is no economy up there, nor is there likely to be, until there are profitable enterprises in space. Even the farfetched ideas circulating now are still dependent upon an earth-based economy. We've a long way to go, baby, and 15 years is a blink of an eye.

Taikonaut to confirm GreatWall is visible in Space

[digitaldc]

'Chinese officials say they want to land an unmanned probe on the moon by 2010, and also build a space station.'

this reminded me of the quote:
"That's no moon, its a space station."

Many insights to the moon could be gained from a new and sophistacated moon probe, I am not as sure about the benefits of the space station other than for scientific experiments and spacedocking practice.
The question now is: Should the US, Russia, EU, Japan and China all be obligated to share individual research and information acquired from each mission in the hopes to further the overall objective of creating reliable space travel?
Also, once some country lands on the moon, can they just claim it as territory and start building on it in any fashion?

ISS docking prospects

[matt me]

As stated, the Shenzou capsule is based on the Russian Soyuz (the most robust and reliable craft ever) - this means, interestingly that China have the technological potential to dock with the ISS. But would the US would ever allow them? Politically, no, but it is an INTERNATIONAL space station, and arguably given Russian have been keeping it alive for the past two years, they should. be presured into it. Maybe after the US have pulled out, China could go up there.