Slashdot Mirror


Major Chinese Satellite Suffers Complete Failure

cyclone96 writes "China's most advanced satellite, the direct broadcast Sinosat 2, apparently suffered a major failure on orbit following launch on October 29. None of the solar arrays or antennas deployed on the spacecraft, and the Chinese are now mulling whether to destroy the spacecraft in the atmosphere. The article provides the following analysis: "The catastrophic breakdown of China's new Sinosat 2 direct broadcast satellite is the worst spacecraft failure in the history of the Chinese space program and a major setback to China's development of a new generation of larger, more powerful civilian and military satellites.""

80 comments

  1. Plastic junk by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 0, Troll

    Probably made in China.

    1. Re:Plastic junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's up there. Some of the US's worst failures barely made it off of the ground. Some had people in them, too.

    2. Re:Plastic junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was a joke. Lighten up!

    3. Re:Plastic junk by Viraptor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then they've got another 372183628 of them on the production line, ready for cheap shipping to every major US and EU reseller...

    4. Re:Plastic junk by $pearhead · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the quality of the stuff made in China have improved tremedously over the years. In the 80ies (and maybe beginning/mid 90ies), "Made in China" or "Made in Taiwan" meant inferiour quality. Nowadays I would almost say it's the opposite. Just one example: I know that many audiophiles who import amplifiers/speakers/whatnot made in China, due to the high quality and (relatively) low price.

    5. Re:Plastic junk by jimicus · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had a talk about that back when I was in school. The chap giving it was of the opinion that the reason why things are so much better today is that a lot of Taiwanese companies got a bit fed up of being the butt of everyone else's "low quality" jokes (and probably figured it would be a lot easier to sell things worldwide if they did something about quality) and promptly instigated some reforms to do something about it.

      Legend has it, a few years later a UK company placed an order for a million items (history doesn't relate what they were), with a note attached saying "We would expect your quality control to be so good that there would be no more than three faulty parts per million".

      Fast forward a couple of months, the order came off the boat and arrived in their warehouse with a note saying "Please find enclosed the three faulty items under separate wrapper, though we can't imagine why you want them."

    6. Re:Plastic junk by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Informative
      But it's up there. Some of the US's worst failures barely made it off of the ground. Some had people in them, too.
      Some didn't even make it as far as that.
      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    7. Re:Plastic junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm...when I heard it, it was RAM from the Japanese.

      Sounds like an urban legend...

    8. Re:Plastic junk by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2, Funny
      In the 80ies

      How do you pronounce that? eighty-ies? Maybe you could write 8ies, which I kinda like. Or plain old '80s.

    9. Re:Plastic junk by tttonyyy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Haha, good one!

      My dad (who worked for Rolls Royce Aerospace in Bristol) has a similar story about aerospace engines which kept blowing up after being shipped and fitted at a particular location in the far east. Eventually they sent someone out there to find out why the engines kept failing. They determined it was because some critical bolts weren't torqued up after fitting. In the end they traced it to a translation anomoly, which indicated that the installer should "check bolts for looseness" - so the installer carefully loosened the appropriate bolts.

      Urban legend, I'm sure, but a great story nonetheless. :)

      --
      biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
    10. Re:Plastic junk by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      At least they actually make things in China. The only things we make here anymore are cars, and they suck compared to their imported counterparts. (Well, we also make cars from imported designs for foreign companies here, to avoid import tariffs... but those factories are managed by Asians.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Plastic junk by jusdisgi · · Score: 1

      At least they actually make things in China. The only things we make here anymore are cars...

      And aircraft, computer chips, and lots of other high-tech stuff. But so what? Boo hoo, we don't have much commodity product manufacturing around here. Because such manufacturing is basically a solved problem these days, so everybody knows how to do it and there's relatively little profit to be had from it. We've got way more profitable activities to engage in here, things which are more befitting a highly-educated workforce sitting on some of the best infrastructure in the world. Hence, outsourcing. Manufacturing was just the first thing we sent over.

      --
      Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
    12. Re:Plastic junk by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      We've got way more profitable activities to engage in here, things which are more befitting a highly-educated workforce sitting on some of the best infrastructure in the world.

      HahaHAhaHAahhaha.

      Most of the people in the US are very poorly educated. They don't know their ass from... hey, what's that in the ground over there? They speak only one language.

      Our entire school system K-12 is specifically designed to produce factory workers. It hasn't seen any significant overhaul since that original design. Meanwhile we have sent nearly all of our factory jobs overseas.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:Plastic junk by jusdisgi · · Score: 1

      Most of the people in the US are very poorly educated.

      Sorry, this is total bullshit. You can just make things up, or you can go down to http://www.uis.unesco.org/ or any of a thousand other places to see how our education stacks up. We produce one of the best-trained workforces in the world, and your wishful superiority complex (let me guess, you're the one guy who's so gifted that the horrible public education here didn't ruin you, right?) doesn't change that a bit.

      --
      Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
    14. Re:Plastic junk by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Actually, while it didn't ruin me, it harmed me. When I was young I went to a private school for a couple years, then we ran out of money, and I had to go to public school. I had been two years ahead, but they put me in kindergarten because I was five. I spent a year sticking president's head stickers on construction paper flags and shit like that. Then when I got to first grade it was discovered I had done it all before so they bumped me up to second (I had a nasty habit of correcting my teacher's mistakes. No joke.)

      But by that time I had lost most of my enthusiasm for learning, and they had little enthusiasm for me. I was a distraction to other students because the teachers could or would not find enough for me to do. This is pretty sad either way; if they could not, then I was smarter than they were, which is okay I guess but still pretty weak. If they would not, then they didn't care about doing their jobs, which is far worse.

      I was even in GATE and they told me I couldn't participate in their astronomy-related projects because I was too young.

      Our schools produce people that, for the most part, are incapable of thinking for themselves.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Plastic junk by moogleii · · Score: 1

      Technically, I thought we design the chips. The manufacturing generally occurs out of country, mostly.

  2. Bad headlines, worse summaries by Howzer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From TFA: "A failure of such magnitude could have been caused by a major electrical or computer fault, or even a collision of the booster nose faring with the satellite during launch on its Long March 3B booster. Command errors have also been the cause of major U.S. European satcom losses in the past." (Emphasis mine)

    Upshot? Lots of people have lost lots of sats. This ain't the first, won't be the last. So let's quit with the "made in China" fnarr fnarrs before they begin, eh?

    From TFA: "...the worst spacecraft failure in the history of the Chinese space program"

    Upshot? Yeah, but you can say that about every new launch which incorporates tech that's never been flown before. And you can say that about every failure in every "all-up" development program. Cheaper, faster --- gotta be a problem here somewhere...

    From TFA: "Although it is a painful way to initiate reform, such a major loss has prompted Chinese aerospace to rise to higher standards in the past. Chinese quality control measures were tightened across the Long March booster program after fatal launch accidents at Xichang in the early 1990s. [...] The loss of such a critical spacecraft could spark similar reforms in the satellite industry"

    Upshot? A big loss, but probably a bigger opportunity.

    And that's about all you need to know.

    1. Re:Bad headlines, worse summaries by Ignignot · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but, what the hell are fnarr fnarrs?

      --
      I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
    2. Re:Bad headlines, worse summaries by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

      what the hell are fnarr fnarrs?

      Native Chinese predators that feed exclusively on panda meat.
      Don't you watch the Discovery Channel?

    3. Re:Bad headlines, worse summaries by recursiv · · Score: 1

      It's like a hurr hurr.

      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
    4. Re:Bad headlines, worse summaries by Maxwell · · Score: 1
      FTA
      It is not uncommon for spacecraft to have individual hinges and latches on single solar arrays or antennas hang up. Such a mechanism failure is, for example, suspected in the apparent loss of the NASA Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft (AW&ST Nov. 27, p. 53). But to have all major solar array and antenna deployments halted by a broader failure is almost unheard of in modern satellite operations.


      Emphasis mine. It's all in the scale. The thing is space junk. No functions. Dead. Three years to replace.

      JON

    5. Re:Bad headlines, worse summaries by mhollis · · Score: 1

      That got me wondering about their metrics (how they measure this).

      From TFA: "...the worst spacecraft failure in the history of the Chinese space program" Is this the worst in dollar (Yuan) amounts lost by shareholders? It this the worst in terms of totality and completeness of loss of function (there are functions left on the spacecraft, as the Chinese believe they can force it to re-enter the atmosphere and prevent it from becoming "really expensive space junk") or is this the worst in terms of the amount of information known to the public -- in other words a PR disaster?

      One would imagine that the Chinese government is still getting used to the fact that they do not operate in total secrecy as they did from the time of their revolution and complete takeover of the mainland until a few years after Mao's death, especially with respect to their space projects. They have, to use a fundamentally Chinese expression, "lost face," and in a big way here. I would expect internal purges after a discovery period to find out who caused what to happen, assuming they can sift through their data and discover precisely what did happen.

      --
      Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
  3. wikipedia by arun_s · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Slightly offtopic: I was searching for 'Sinosat' in Wikipedia, and came across this page. The outcome is already updated as 'Failure', with a reason given.
    As a comparison, the article linked here at /. is dated 3rd December, and the wiki change was in the 2nd. I'm seriously impressed.

    --
    I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
  4. Re:BWHAHA by El+Lobo · · Score: 0, Redundant

    You mean like Discovery? Or Challenger?

    --
    It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
  5. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thousands of Iraqi women and children are still unavailable for comment. People in glasshouses...you know the rest.

  6. Walmart's on the phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mr. Wong, you know you're our favorite supplier, but I think we may have to reconsider our agreement if you insist on breaking the satellites before they get to the stores.

    1. Re:Walmart's on the phone by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      Mr. Wong, you know you're our favorite supplier

      You still use him? He and his brother were our best suppliers, but we had problems with one item. They kept sending us blackboards, but we explained we need the kind you can write on with markers. After several rounds of this they finally explained that two Wongs don't make a white. So we had to change.

  7. worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd have thought that the worst spacecraft failure would be one that directly resulted in loss of life, like that rocket that veered off course and flew into a town a few years ago. I realize that the loss of a satellite might indirectly result in lost lives (or the lost opportunity to save lives), but I don't see how that can be compared with the direct death of many by a malfunctioning rocket.

    1. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by ThosLives · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I know this is not on-topic, but I just had an interesting question come to mind, and I realize it is one to which I don't have a satisfactory answer because of all the possible scenarios: Is the loss of life bad?

      There are so many nuances to that question I don't even know where to begin, other to know that it is an important and probably overlooked philosophical question. I know the first response of most people is "Of course the loss of life is bad!" but then you have to ask - "What life?" Because there is no such thing, for instance, of non-life-based food. Is loss of plant life not bad, but loss of animal life bad? What about non-sentient animals versus sentient animals? Domestic versus feral?

      All those thoughts lead me to believe the first response to the question "Is the loss of life bad?" is "Sometimes yes, sometimes no." But I don't really have a firm way to evaluate when it is appropriate to classify it one way or the other, and I would estimate that most people cannot honestly make that distinction either - not because they are inept or unfeeling, but because people don't know enough information to correctly analyze the problem; that was even indicated by the AC's observation that

      ...the loss of a satellite might indirectly result in lost lives (or the lost opportunity to save lives), but I don't see how that can be compared with the direct death of many by a malfunctioning rocket.

      That's actually fairly insightful, because it shows that there is no readily accepted way to evaluate the current loss of [human] life against potential future loss or gain of life. (I would posit that there are some ways to make this evaluation, but not everyone accepts those ways of thinking, hence my caveat of 'readily accepted'.)

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    2. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd have thought that the worst spacecraft failure would be one that directly resulted in loss of life, like that rocket that veered off course

      I don't know, this is China we're talking about. Loss of life can be a result of just having your blog veer off course.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem here is the use of the word "worst". Worse and better are adjectives. You need a subject for them to be adjectives of. Perhaps it was the worst loss of financial investment. Perhaps it was the worst setback in terms of infrastructure to improve standards of living. It seems it wasn't the worst in terms of direct loss of life.

      There is no meaningful "worst" in overall terms because there are so many independent apples and oranges metrics of which it could be the "worst".

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    4. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.

      Why? Can he fetch an 8 iron?

    5. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by cyclone96 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd have thought that the worst spacecraft failure would be one that directly resulted in loss of life, like that rocket that veered off course and flew into a town a few years ago.

      A few other folks have pointed out that the Long March failure was (obviously) a lot worse. I think the author of the piece was making a distinction between a launch vehicle failure (what you have when a rocket flies into a village) and a spacecraft failure (the satellite is put into orbit by the launcher, but it doesn't work). This piece was in Aviation Week and Space Technology, which is considered the leading publication in the aerospace industry. The normal readership of AvWeek would make that same distinction.

      --
      Worst...sig...ever!
    6. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why? Can he fetch an 8 iron?

      Nah. Because he gets really mad when he spends all morning using his nose to find one stray molecule of quail scent under a bush in 200 acres of fields and brush, and then stands there for ten minutes on point to show me where it is, and exhibits saint-like patience while I kick around in the cover to get the bird up into the air where it's safe to use a shotgun... and then... miss. You've never seen such a look of reproach. Plus, quail is some very tasty meat, and we usually share (although I think it's the butter in which it's sauteed that really gets the dog going).

      However, I have no doubt that any good retieving dog would be happy to go fetch that 8-iron you threw in the woods out of disgust. We could probably get that process worked out in one afternoon. You bring a bag of liver treats, and we'll have it on his resume in an hour. The real solution, though, is to give up that silly game of golf, and try your hand at shooting trap and skeet. You'd like it: it's expensive, frustrating, and you have to keep buying fancy equipment, since only your other, less-expensive equipment could possibly explain any competitive failures. It's like golf, only you can easily kill yourself or someone else if you're not careful.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    7. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Elbowgeek · · Score: 0, Troll

      Erm, perhaps you, Mel Gibson and Michael Richards could also get together over coffee and debate when spewing racial hatred is acceptable or not.

      Also to consider: Loss of life is bad when it involves innocent people. Hello. This is not up for debate. Then again, what if we decided that the loss of *your* life was acceptable? I think you'd stop even thinking of arguing this silliness.

      Oy.

      --
      Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
    8. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eh, I'm in a good mood today, so:

      I didn't say anything about an event (loss of life, in this case) as being acceptable - I asked if it was bad. Those are distinct concepts actually. In some cases, what is acceptable for one audience is not acceptable to another audience, and I also think that 'good' or 'bad' is independent of acceptance (though I hope that people accept the good and reject the bad). (Note that if you claim that one group's acceptance is more acceptable than another, you have to have some reason for claiming that, and that connotes an evaluation of 'good' or 'bad'; without those concepts, everything is just opinion.)

      Next: define 'innocent'. I can't make any kind of response to your statement "Loss of life is bad when it involves innocent people" without knowing what you mean by 'innocent'. I know what I mean by innocent, but this is a word which has so many connotations that it's not possible to discuss without a firm understanding of what is meant by that. I'm not trying to be flippant here either - do you mean "has never committed a crime ever" or "has never been caught for committing a crime" or "was not directly involved in some other business which happened to occupy their current location (by intent? by accident?) and resulted in personal [physical] damage". Those are all distinct meanings and it bears being clear on which one is meant, because our, ahem, acceptance of situations depends on that meaning.

      Next: Regarding the loss of my life: be more specific. If the infamous 'we' decides loss of my life is acceptable when I'm 93 and it hurts when I breathe, I probably don't care. If I'm running around murdering people, I'd say that loss of my life is acceptable. If I'm trying to save people from a burning building, loss of my life is acceptable. Heck, even if I get hit by a car, I can accept the loss of my life. I would even accept the loss of my life as a result of crime. Now, if you're asking if I condone actions that result in any of those situations surrounding loss of my life, that's a different question.

      Think about this - is a flood "bad"? I will agree that a flood can be destructive (in the short term), but is it bad? Is it good? Or is it simply a result of physics?

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    9. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Elbowgeek · · Score: 1
      I didn't say anything about an event (loss of life, in this case) as being acceptable - I asked if it was bad.
      Yes, it's all bad...
      --
      Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
    10. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is China we're talking about. The population is split into three castes: the minute ruling elite, the tiny "middle-classes", and the vast hordes of slaves/breeders. The important point to remember is that the ruling elite do not care at all about either of the other two castes; their lives have ZERO value. So, from a Chinese point of view, this is much worse as it strikes at the international prestige of China, which damages the ruling elite themselves and is therefore infinitely more important than blowing up a town.

      China put down, with leathal force, more than 80,000 armed uprisings within its borders last year, according to Chinese security figures. Slavery, public executions and show trials are still a daily fact of life all over the country and that's why so many of our bigest companies are flocking to do business there just as they did when Hitler was on the go (Nazi Germany being the only country to see a rise in American investment in the 30's): that sort of treatment of the workforce always means big profits.

    11. Re:worst spacecraft failure involved loss of life by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      It's like golf, only you can easily kill yourself or someone else if you're not careful.

      Sign me up! I've found it's really hard to actually take anybody out with hitting a stupid little ball at them. Plus even when you get a good one off, etiquette requires that you actually warn them that it's on its way. I'll bet nobody tells them quails nuthin.

  8. In Soviet China... by Rastignac · · Score: 0

    ...Satellites fail.
    At least, they won't use this one to send us more and more spams.

    --
    -- Rastignac was here.
  9. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Typical /. leftist moral equivalence still an ineffective rhetorical tool. News at 11.

  10. Sad... by AB3A · · Score: 1

    This is a genuine attempt by a people to better themselves. It appears to have failed. That's sad. I hope that the agencies in China will do their best to learn from this experience (as all other countries have done) and rebuild.

    A little more competition in the race for space is a good thing in my opinion.

    --
    Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
  11. WTF !! by minus_273 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The author of the article is an idiot and one who has never heard of the long march. That is a video everyone should see. That is seriously worse that a satellite loss. The long march launches in the 90s were basically ballistic missiles launched at villages. The death toll from one is about 500.

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
    1. Re:WTF !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It look to me like that was a rocket failure, not a satellite failure.

    2. Re:WTF !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This video has already been proved a hoax.

  12. How To Destroy? by omegashenron · · Score: 1

    If none of the antannae deployed then how can they destroy it?

    On the other hand, it could make great target...

    --
    Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
    1. Re:How To Destroy? by cyclone96 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If none of the antannae deployed then how can they destroy it?

      The antennas that didn't deploy are part of the payload (direct broadcast television). Most satellites use a different, low bandwidth omnidirectional antenna for commanding and engineering data. So the satellite is basically alive, but without the payload antennas deployed (or the solar arrays, which doesn't leave enough power to run the payload) it's not usable for anything (except maybe for some engineering tests since it's now essentially disposable).

      --
      Worst...sig...ever!
  13. Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's the same group that will spend money for a bottle of "magic pebbles" to put on top of an amplifier to improve sound quality. Green CD markers, specially "treated" digital clocks, megabuck speaker cables, wooden volume control knobs, and other assorted audiophool insanity have pretty much destroyed any credibility that "audiophiles" ever had as far as judging the objective worth of a product.

    If the audiophool market is purchasing Chinese products, it is out of last resort. The Chinese are among the last countries still manufacturing some types of vacuum tubes used in high-end sound gear.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  14. Re:Worst failure in the history... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Recently I have had the worst failure in the history of my personal space program... I was startled by a black bear while hiking and I threw my cell phone at it (generally black bears are not all that brave) and the cell phone broke! I am currently reviewing all policies & procedures that led up to this moment as well as interviewing various people involved in the selection and purchase of the cell phone. I am also thinking that perhaps the bear itself quickly entered some sort of "self destruct" command in the moments that it was near the phone. Another possibility is that some sort of debris collision or a micrometeor collision, but that is highly unlikely. I am at a complete loss to understand why my cell phone broke when I threw it at the bear, it hit some rocks and stopped working.
    End of sarcasm here: Launching things into space is risky... expect things to break sometime!

    TDz.

  15. Re:BWHAHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Discovery Discovery? You must mean Columbia.
  16. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, ad hominem attacks are not a good way to disprove an argument.

    Let's face it, most Slashdotters are Japanophilic technogeeks who will spend thousands of dollars on the latest PDA because it has a couple of extra buttons that the previous model didn't. They'll also spend $3000 on the latest PowerMac so that they can install Linux on it and spend their weekends hacking the kernel source. Why should I think you know anything about China?

  17. I guess that's what happens... by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ... when you steal technology. That being said, our own record on satellite launch is surprisingly poor, considering the relative maturity of our technology

  18. Worst ever? No way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    "the worst spacecraft failure in the history of the Chinese space program"

    In my humble opinion, this description is a load of garbage. The loss of control of a satellite in orbit is minor compared to the of a Long March launch vehicle to the point that it exploded moments after launch and flaming debris crashed into the ground killing (officially) 6 people in 1998. The real number of deaths was probably much higher (some estimates place it at about 200). Given the cover-up of that event, I suppose the present example might still be the most serious recent failure the Chinese government has allowed their news media to talk about in any detail. Given the actual record to date, this event seems more like business as usual, but this time effecting a Chinese satellite, rather than a customer from somewhere else that the Chinese space agency could try to blame as the source of the problem (see the linked article for previous examples).

  19. Enforces the "made in China" stereotype by Yahma · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    "Made in China" has always been analogous to crappy quality and cheap parts. Looks like this satellite is no different!

  20. Thank you for the digestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But many people like to do their own thinking

    1. Re:Thank you for the digestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>But many people like to do their own thinking

      On Slashdot?

      You haven't been here long, have you.

  21. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wasn't saying ANYTHING about China or the quality of their products, you asshat.

    I was critiquing the ability of the audiophool crowd to distinguish worthwhile products from technobabble, marketing scams, and flat-out bullshit. And how an endorsement by said group says absolutely NOTHING about the technical merits of a product. Here are only a few examples of the utter BULLSHIT that the audiophools buy into:

    A wooden volume control KNOB for $500 (need 2 for stereo, BTW) that promises buyers that "The sound becomes much more open and free flowing with a nice improvement in resolution. Dynamics are better and overall naturalness is improved.":

    http://www.referenceaudiomods.com/Merchant2/mercha nt.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=NOB_C37_C

    Special "secret mojo" paint to apply to the D/A chip inside your CD player to create the mystical "tube sound":

    http://www.altmann.haan.de/tubeolator/

    A $1500 POWER CABLE that is described like a glass of fine wine. "The Clairvoyant's signature is engaging, energetic, and bristling with light and microdynamic life"; "lifelike timing and pace" coupled with "clarity, definition, lithe touch, and articulation throughout the lower registers."

    http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/audiomagic_clai rvoyant.htm

    The previously mentioned bottle of magic pebbles to increase listening pleasure:

    http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  22. In Other News, US Space Laser Test Successful by mkcmkc · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    nyuk nyuk nyuk

    --
    "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
    1. Re:In Other News, US Space Laser Test Successful by mkcmkc · · Score: 1

      He who moderates first, doesn't get the joke. :-)

      --
      "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
  23. Re:Worst ever? No way... - ACTUALLY... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There were 2 Long March disasters, the first killing 6 (officially), and a year later the second killing an estimated 4 to 5 hundred.

    Of course, these estimates mean nothing considering the Chinese Govt had 6 hours to do damage control and are consistent liars in such matters.

    The difference between their lies and our lies is that when we challenge our lies, we don't often get imprisoned and have our organs harvested.

    But the point is absolutely correct - this article is full of sensationalist bullshit and shoddy research. Bravo shamedot.

  24. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by inviolet · · Score: 1

    You win the thread.

    Damnit, where are my mod points when I need them?!

    --
    FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
  25. forced early retirement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wouldn't that mean a forced early end of life?

  26. Re:BWHAHA-BOOM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see someone try to argue that moderation works now. My timestamp is earlier than the one saying challenger and discovery.

  27. I know what happened by ILuvRamen · · Score: 0

    I bet the US shined a big laser at it and broke it (if you don't get that joke, you don't read slashdot enough.) But really, I think we all know that most stuff with "made in china" stamped on it is low quality junk that breaks often so that's probably why it failed.

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    1. Re:I know what happened by brownaroo · · Score: 1

      I don't think its a joke - I reckoned they did

    2. Re:I know what happened by ILuvRamen · · Score: 0

      well then that's extra funny hahahahahaha! Take that, bitches!

      --
      Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  28. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    News at 11.

    I normally go to bed at 10, but I stayed up just to see that. Turned out there was nothing at all about it, and now I've been sleepy all day.

  29. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by Cervantes · · Score: 1

    You win teh intarwebs. Great retort and solid comment with backup. Also, further proof that some (most?) audiophiles are just nutcases who think they hear a difference when it's not actually audible.

    Please provide an address where we can send you your new "teh intarwebs". Shipping and Handling extra.

    --
    If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  30. Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The battery compartment was labeled: Made by Sony

  31. In Soviet China by mqduck · · Score: 1

    In soviet China .*

    --
    Property is theft.
  32. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    A wooden volume control KNOB for $500 (need 2 for stereo, BTW) that promises buyers that "The sound becomes much more open and free flowing with a nice improvement in resolution. Dynamics are better and overall naturalness is improved." First of all, the knobs have a bronze insert for additional radial strength and improved harmonic quality.

    Secondly, you ignore the multiple layers of C37 lacquer, which would otherwise result in over-dampening of the highest frequencies.

    Finally, the knobs are only $485, a steal considering the labor that have gone into their design and testing.
  33. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The existence of idiotic products targeting a group does not automatically make all of the people in that group idiots. For example my wooden slashdot reading knob, which, for just $500 will dramatically increase the clarity of your slashdot reading, does not automatically make all slashdot readers idiots.

    Sales of such a product would prove that those few individuals are idiots. But nothing more.

  34. Bad taglinr, better summary by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.

    Err... no. It was actually an Atheist leader who reckoned that Euthanasia “might not be bad”.

    Maybe next month? You might get one of the people from a Persian or Babylonian religion, who advocate human sacrifices for Christmas.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  35. Re:Audiophile tastes aren't exactly a good metric. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But then, so much of the global economy is driven by the feeding of mindless aesthetes, like those needing to buy a new cellphone every time a cuter one pops up, maybe with Kitty whiskers.

    It's all recycling of lucre from the stupid back to the less stupid and back, and the latter will then buy yachts, jetskis, and giant scrape houses, not quite as stupid but still, creating more or less stupid jobs in other stupid sectors. This is the only meaning of existence.