Slashdot Mirror


China's First Spacewalk

Smivs writes "The BBC reports that China will launch its third manned space mission in late September, according to state-run news agency Xinhua. The Shenzhou VII flight will feature China's first-ever space walk, which will be broadcast live with cameras inside and outside the spacecraft. For the spacewalk, two crew members will go into the spacecraft's vacuum module. One yuhangyuan (astronaut) will carry out the spacewalk; the other is there to monitor the activity and assist in case of an emergency. Two types of spacesuits — one made in China, the other from Russia — will be carried up on the flight. It is unclear why China has opted for two different types of spacesuit. Spaceflight analyst Dr Morris Jones commented that China might want to test the suits against each other. Alternatively, he said, it might not be ready or willing to fly a mission exclusively with its own suits."

148 comments

  1. I know what they're up to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...and I can't stand by to let it happen! To arms, people, they're going to censor the IIS's wifi!

    1. Re:I know what they're up to... by Evil+Pete · · Score: 2, Informative

      You mean the ISS. Though an attack on IIS would probably be business as usual, after all doesn't it stand for It Isn't Secure ?

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
  2. OMG someone stop the Chinese right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    before they build a sphere around the earth to keep us inside.

    1. Re:OMG someone stop the Chinese right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      modded at -1? Go watch Spaceballs you idiot!

    2. Re:OMG someone stop the Chinese right now by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

      The reference makes no sense if it's referring to Spaceballs. The bubble around Druidia (the air shield) was intended to keep the air in, not the people. The people could presumably come and go as they pleased as long as they knew the combination (which, coincidentally, is the same combination I have on my luggage).

    3. Re:OMG someone stop the Chinese right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wall of China = bubble. One of the astronaut will be wearing a made in Russia suit.

      Hence, "In Soviet China bubble keeps you IN."

    4. Re:OMG someone stop the Chinese right now by GigG · · Score: 1

      Or it could be a reference to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere but that doesn't really fit either.

      --
      Is buying a Harley Davidson as your first motorcycle since you were 16 at age 49 a midlife crisis issue?
    5. Re:OMG someone stop the Chinese right now by bpkiwi · · Score: 1

      I thought it was a reference Quarantine (Greg Egan).

  3. Whatwhatwhat? by Mastadex · · Score: 2, Insightful
    --
    A morning without coffee is like something without something else.
    1. Re:Whatwhatwhat? by Smivs · · Score: 2, Informative

      The correct link is http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/-/1/hi/sci/tech/7602968.stm. Don't know how that happened...possibly censored by thr Chinese?
      Smivs

  4. State run media? by Tom90deg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmm..Well, while I wish the Chinese astronauts the best of luck and hope they get back safely, I doubt that the film is going to be "Live" More likely? A nice safe delay of, oh...a hour to make sure that nothing gets shown that's not supposed to be shown.

    China has too much media control to trust something as unpredictable as live TV, especially in a situation where so many things could go wrong.

    On that note, good luck! Maybe this'll get us off our asses and back up into space! A little competition never hurt nobody.

    1. Re:State run media? by damburger · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why not? Most live events have a delay, because sometimes bad shit happens. I don't think the Chinese state not making its own impromptu snuff film has anything to do with their censorship practices.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    2. Re:State run media? by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A little competition never hurt nobody.

      Except the loser.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    3. Re:State run media? by Tom90deg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      True, most live events have a delay, I believe the moon mission had a 5 minute (about) delay. The difference was this delay was because of the ol' laws of physics. With China...It may be for a different reason. As an example, I believe that China's first manned mission was not shown until it had actually lifted off, then all the channels switched to the "Breaking news story!" to show it rocketing upwards. I recall something about that, but of course, I could be wrong.

    4. Re:State run media? by necro81 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most live events have a delay

      Yes, but in uncontrolled media markets, there is an incentive to keep that delay as short as possible. If you don't have it as close to live as possible, the next guy will, or some blogger. When the President comes on to give a live address, it has maybe a 5-second delay, not an hour. This is, in part, how some live shows occasionally get into trouble - remember the infamous "wardrobe malfunction" as the SuperBowl a few years back?

      When Armstrong stepped onto the Moon, he was live to the entire world.

    5. Re:State run media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I read that it will not be shown live on television. Instead a CG version will be shown like they did for the Olympics - the article did not mention whether it will include fireworks as well though.

    6. Re:State run media? by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well on the manned Moon mission for the US. If something happened and they couldn't have returned to home, they would have turned off all contact with them and Nixon had a wonderful speech to give about their deaths preprepared to give in this case even if they were still alive but stranded on the moon.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:State run media? by Lincolnshire+Poacher · · Score: 4, Informative

      > I doubt that the film is going to be "Live"

      The Shenzhou 6 launch in October 2005 was the first to be broadcast live in China, so they may yet surprise you.

      After all. if something does go wrong there is little that can be done to hide it. This isn't Leonov's era - telemetry and communications will be under constant scrutiny.

    8. Re:State run media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little competition never hurt nobody.

      Except the loser.

      Make that plural: losers, as we are legion.

    9. Re:State run media? by MagikSlinger · · Score: 1

      A nice safe delay of, oh...a hour to make sure that nothing gets shown that's not supposed to be shown.

      "Get that stage hand out of the shot!!"

      --
      The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
    10. Re:State run media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Nixon had a wonderful speech to give about their deaths preprepared

      Nixon, eh?

      Let me guess - did it go something like ``Those assholes got themselves killed doing crazy, dangerous shit. Did you hear that, you lazy, greasy hippies?''

      I love the man - so much venom condensed into one tiny knot in the Universe.

    11. Re:State run media? by steelfood · · Score: 1

      If the loser plays his cards right, he has more to gain than the winner*.

      * Does not apply to picking up women.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    12. Re:State run media? by cmr-denver · · Score: 5, Informative

      There were actually extensive plans made for that very contingency. The speech (draft) was written for Nixon by William Safire. In my opinion, it is one of the finest pieces of writing I've ever seen:

      "Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace.

      These brave men, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, know that there is no hope for their recovery. But they also know that there is hope for mankind in their sacrifice.

      These two men are laying down their lives in mankind's most noble goal: the search for truth and understanding. They will be mourned by their families and friends; they will be mourned by their nation; they will be mourned by the people of the world; they will be mourned by a Mother Earth that dared send two of her sons into the unknown.

      In their exploration, they stirred the people of the world to feel as one; in their sacrifice, they bind more tightly the brotherhood of man.

      In ancient days, men looked at the stars and saw their heroes in the constellations. In modern times, we do much the same, but our heroes are epic men of flesh and blood.

      Others will follow, and surely find their way home. Man's search will not be denied. But these men were the first, and they will remain the foremost in our hearts.

      For every human being who looks up at the moon in the nights to come will know that there is some corner of another world that is forever mankind."

    13. Re:State run media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor loser

    14. Re:State run media? by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      Yes, but in uncontrolled media markets, there is an incentive to keep that delay as short as possible.

      Yeah, well in space, nobody can hear the sound of an invisible hand clapping.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    15. Re:State run media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a poor loser you insensitive clod!

    16. Re:State run media? by weirdcrashingnoises · · Score: 1

      I am a clod you insensitive pants!

      --
      sigs... don't talk to me about sigs....
    17. Re:State run media? by EdibleEchidna · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there will be a delay in case there's a "wardrobe malfunction" with a space suit.

    18. Re:State run media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little competition never hurt nobody.

      Except the loser.

      Wrong. Even if you lose, competition makes you perform better than you otherwise would have. There are lots of research studies about this. See for example this study.

    19. Re:State run media? by NotmyNick · · Score: 1

      I believe the moon mission had a 5 minute (about) delay. The difference was this delay was because of the ol' laws of physics.

      Nope. Just about 1 1/4 secs. The most part of the 10-12 sec delay had to do with the doppler shift and color conversion process. AW&ST, p18-20, 26 May 1969. PDF I suppose, technically, that is the laws of physics governing that, though.

      --
      Notmysig
  5. Descision making by Hrshgn · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm just asking myself how they decided which of the two astronauts will have the honor to try the Chinese spacesuit?

    1. Re:Descision making by cashman73 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure that would such an "honor". Judging by the quality of 90% of their other products, I think I'd take the "Made in Russia" suit, myself,... ;-)

    2. Re:Descision making by Hanyin · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure that would such an "honor". Judging by the quality of 90% of their other products, I think I'd take the "Made in Russia" suit, myself,... ;-)

      I mean yeah, that was really terrible when Bird's Nest Stadium collapsed on everyone. My point is that they're more than capable of making high quality products, the government knows what's being produced there so they obviously know how much control is needed in a case such as this. The problem is that no matter how bad the cheap products turn out westerners still buy them, which if you were a factory owner, would be a great motivation to increase your margins.

    3. Re:Descision making by phantomcircuit · · Score: 2, Funny

      WHOOOOOSH

    4. Re:Descision making by GottliebPins · · Score: 1

      I'm sure their space suits have been thoroughly tested by hundreds of political pr... um, volunteers.

    5. Re:Descision making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Bird's Nest was designed by Western architechts. And don't worry, there's still plenty of time for it to collapse.

    6. Re:Descision making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHOOOOOSH

      ...might well describe the failure mode of a cheaply produced spacesuit.

    7. Re:Descision making by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 1

      WHOOOOOSH

      ...might well describe the failure mode of a cheaply produced spacesuit.

      This seems to be WHOOOOOSH all the way down.

    8. Re:Descision making by PlatyPaul · · Score: 1

      In space, no-one can hear you scream...

      ... in frustration.

      --
      Misery loves company. Online misery loves unsuspecting random strangers.
    9. Re:Descision making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      misFortune Cookie

    10. Re:Descision making by master_p · · Score: 1

      They have already chosen the lucky gent with the red shirt...

    11. Re:Descision making by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Are you subtly implying that there'll be something wrong with the airlock on the vacuum module too?

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    12. Re:Descision making by dafing · · Score: 1
      cant believe you didnt get the joke :) If you read things aloud, it makes it easier to understand at times, getting the emphasis on certain words right etc. Such as "honour" above.

      Hey, China made my 12 inch Powerbook, which I love so much, I give it a hug each time I put it in and out of its bag, which I do a total of 4 times a day :)

      --
      --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  6. Good... by interactive_civilian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I realize that China isn't the moral leaders of the world, but I'm happy to see them playing catch-up when it comes to manned space-flight.

    Because, given the way China tends to think, when I see them putting men in space, it makes me think they already have long term plans for trips to the moon, and perhaps even a permanent presence off-planet. And I say, it's about time.

    Humans could do much worse than start making the steps to get us off this rock.

    --
    "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
    1. Re:Good... by Daimanta · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "Humans could do much worse than start making the steps to get us off this rock."

      I just love rethoric like this. If you call Earth "this rock" you must be really happy that we are walking on "that pebble". This rock provides us with live, that pebble is a bunch of sand and stone and beyond some research, there is pretty much nothing that is of interest to us.

      A permanent moonbase is like the war in Iraq: Sure, some profit off it but essentially you are throwing money away.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    2. Re:Good... by damburger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Catch up? I would say that Shenzhou is at least comparable with other manned space flight systems. The shuttle is on its last legs and crippled with problems. Soyuz is also due to be retired.

      As essentially a larger version of Soyuz, with an orbital module that can operate indepedently. The program might not be moving fast (although now the Chinese have finished with the olympics they might redirect more resources) they do have the most technically impressive craft currently flying.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    3. Re:Good... by Swizec · · Score: 2, Informative

      A permanent moonbase has one significant advantage: low gravity.

      It's much easier laucnhing stuff deep into space if it's built and launched in low gravity. You can build it larger, you waste less fuel for launch and a bunch of other useful stuff.

    4. Re:Good... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      The thing is, the US would benefit more with exploring the Universe than exploring Iraq.

    5. Re:Good... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      A permanent moonbase has one significant advantage: low gravity.

      It's much easier laucnhing stuff deep into space if it's built and launched in low gravity

      Launch what?

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    6. Re:Good... by Swizec · · Score: 1

      Space ships of course.

    7. Re:Good... by jimdread · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because, given the way China tends to think, when I see them putting men in space, it makes me think they already have long term plans for trips to the moon, and perhaps even a permanent presence off-planet. And I say, it's about time. Humans could do much worse than start making the steps to get us off this rock.

      The first step would be to build a space station in Earth orbit. Okay, let's pretend that's done. Then we need to build a spaceship at the space station. This spaceship would be used to fly from the station out into space or the moon. It would never go to Earth, so it doesn't need to be streamlined. Then we can fly the fuel for it to the space station, where it can refuel. The advantage would be that we wouldn't need to launch the spaceship from Earth's surface every time. It can fly from earth orbit where the station is.

      The spaceship would have to go find some fuel sources in space, and resources to build more ships and more space stations. Otherwise these materials would have to be flown up from Earth at great expense. They'd also have to build some space-greenhouses for growing plants for people to eat. And probably space-barns full of space-cows and space-chickens. And space-burger-joints selling squished-up space-cow burgers inna tube.

      As for getting us off this planet, it might be possible. If we get some good advances in space travel, the cost of launching something into orbit might get down to $100/kg. That would be a cost of say $10,000 per person, so it's not completely unreasonable. We could launch the whole USA population into space for three trillion dollars! But they'd want somewhere to live, and stuff to eat. That's why we'd need the space stations, space barns, and space burger joints.

      Then once we have people living in space for long enough, somebody can invent a hyperspace drive, or else we can build generation ships to fly to the next star over.

    8. Re:Good... by inhuman_4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am afraid I must disagree. The Shenzhou is certianly newer, and probably better then the Soyuz. But it is far from the most impresive.

      The big deal with the Space Shuttle is that it can carry seven people, a large chunk of cago, and the shuttle can be re-used (although not as well as was planned). It may be near the end of its life span, but as far as capabilities go it is still the best the world has.

      For the Soyuz is claim to fame is its consistancy. The Soyuz design is the most tested manned flight system out there. So while yes it may be old and crappy, its got a solid reputation. Not to mention that it is cheap, and fast to launch.

      Give the Shenzhou another decade and it could replace the Soyuz as the cheap way to get to space, but the Shuttle is still the king in terms of capabilities.

    9. Re:Good... by damburger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The ability to carry up cargo and passengers isn't that impressive when you look at the costs. Putting up the same quantity of people and cargo with 2 Soyuz launches and one Proton costs $180 million whilst a Shuttle launch costs over $400 million.

      Reusability isn't all its cracked up to be for the Shuttle. It has made it more expensive than throw-away alternatives, and the thing has to be practically rebuilt every flight as well.

      The only capability the Shuttle has which the Russian launchers do not is returning cargo, and that hasn't been used in a while.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    10. Re:Good... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      And how do the spaceships get to the moon in the first place? If you are suggesting manufacturing there, then I think you have very little grasp of the complexity.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    11. Re:Good... by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

      Well... this is where Kim Stanley-Robinson's ideas of a space elevator come into play.

      Slow effecient transport to the moon, faster inter-planetary transport from the moon to say... Mars.

      The same people that say the space program is a waste of time, money and effort are the same people who complain that technology doesn't move fast enough. A lot of fallout from space technologies end up helping the world - water recycling is a BIG one. If you spent more than 5 minutes glossing over space flight you'd realise this.

    12. Re:Good... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      So... the moon has an advantage because of lower gravity. Then you propose a space-elevator (a fantasy at this point). So, then the Earth loses its disadvantage because you can now get stuff off cheaply. If you can do that, you would be better off transporting stuff up to a space station, building there and forget about the moon base.

      The same people that say the space program is a waste of time, money and effort are the same people who complain that technology doesn't move fast enough. A lot of fallout from space technologies end up helping the world - water recycling is a BIG one. If you spent more than 5 minutes glossing over space flight you'd realise this.

      And what in the hell did this have anything to do with what I posted? You blabbered about the big advantage of a moon base, and I asked you what it was. You still haven't made a case for one.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    13. Re:Good... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A permanent moonbase is like the war in Iraq: Sure, some profit off it but essentially you are throwing money away.

      Yeah, just like the war in Iraq, except without the part about, you know, killing people.

      The US is still a very rich country (not, granted, as rich relative to the rest of the world as we were in the 1960s, but still) and we can afford to do things that don't show an immediate profit. Speaking as someone who has seen war up close and personal -- and whose father was one of the people who made the moon landings happen -- I'd much rather have us spending money on space exploration than on wars of aggression.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    14. Re:Good... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Which is why it needs to be done in baby steps:
      1. Manned moon base - supported by Earth with regular cargo shipments
      2. Self sustaining manned moon base - they can grow their own food, repair their own facilities and do not need support from Earth
      3. Basic mining and refining of ore with support from Earth - the initial tools to do the job are brought up from Earth
      4. Self sustaining basic mining - refined ore is used to produce replacement parts and new tools
      5. Advanced mining - could be self sustaining, might not be
      6. Basic large structure construction - possibly expanding the moonbase or building new vehicles for achieving lunar orbit
      7. Advanced large structure construction - building lunar orbit to earth transfer vehicles in lunar orbit

      Once you have completed that last stage, you have the basic plans for going anywhere in the solar system at a fraction of the price of new build from Earth. Yes, its a fantastic idea now if you simply say 'use the moon to build space ships', but not if you break it down into logical steps.

      Of course, the idea that anyone is actually going to finance this is fantasy in and of itself...

    15. Re:Good... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Soyuz design is the most tested manned flight system out there.

      Except for the Shuttle, of course. Which has flown more flights (123 as opposed to 99), with a higher success rate (two major failures as opposed to four).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    16. Re:Good... by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      And how do you think humans are going to cope with low gravity. In space astronauts need to exercise around 2 hours a day to prevent the muscles from deteriorating. Never mind the practicality of the rest of the things you need to adjust to the low-grav environment.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    17. Re:Good... by AJWM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given that the Progress resupply ships are essentially unmanned Soyuz capsules, I think you have to count a lot more than merely the 99 manned flights. The launch system is essentially the same in either case, even if there are detail differences in the orbital vehicles. (I can't readily find total number of Progress launches, but it was 43 - all successful - to Salyuts 6 and 7; plus many since then to Mir and 30 to ISS.)

      --
      -- Alastair
    18. Re:Good... by inhuman_4 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you completely about the costs. No doubt about that, the Russian way is much cheaper.

      But as far as "the most technically impressive craft currently flying", the Space Shuttle despite its faults, is more capable then any other spacecraft out there.

      Does it get a good bang for its buck? Hell no.

      But the gap is not as bad as it first seems. While the Russians can build thier spacecraft on the cheap, could the USA? The cost/kg of non-manned craft currently in operation clearly favours the Russians as well. If the USA had gone the Russian path it would have been more costly too. Although the gap would not be so great as it is with the Shuttle.

    19. Re:Good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever thinks they are "the moral leaders of the world" are just a bunch of hypocrites.

    20. Re:Good... by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Soyuz design is the most tested manned flight system out there.

      Not even remotely, the current mark of the design only has thirteen flights. Soyuz, overall, only has 90 odd flights *total* as compared to the Shuttle which is up around 120.
       
       

      So while yes it may be old and crappy, its got a solid reputation.

      A reputation totally undeserved and based on many people being utterly ignorant of the history of Soyuz - which includes a long series of dangerous near misses, total mission failures, and landing issues. Three of the last five landings have had serious failures!
       
       

      Not to mention that it is cheap, and fast to launch.

      Yeah, it's cheap. So is a Yugo or a Vespa scooter. You get what you pay for.

    21. Re:Good... by damburger · · Score: 1

      I just don't see why the shuttle is 'technically impressive'. What abilities does it possess that a combination of capsule and cargo rocket doesn't?

      Reusability? If the Chinese so desired, the descent module of a Shenzhou could probably be reused. It would probably be about as economical as reusing a shuttle orbiter.

      Electronics? The Chinese electronics industry is not to be sniffed at. Its growing faster than their traditional heavy industry is at the moment, and I doubt it is significantly behind the US cutting edge in any way. The shuttle, on the other hand, is using mostly 70s (with some 80s) technology on board because its well established.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    22. Re:Good... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Given that the Progress resupply ships are essentially unmanned Soyuz capsules, I think you have to count a lot more than merely the 99 manned flights.

      Whyever should we care about Progress in a discussion of manned spaceflight? Which is what this is, in case you missed the GP.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    23. Re:Good... by inhuman_4 · · Score: 1

      "What abilities does it possess that a combination of capsule and cargo rocket doesn't?"

      The ability to do it with one spacecraft. Neither the capsule or cargo is as technically capable on thier own, as the Space Shuttle. Of course having two launchers is simpler, easier and cheaper. Thats not the point. I am not comparing space programs, I am comparing individual spacecraft.

      "the descent module of a Shenzhou could probably be reused"

      The descent module of the apollo craft could be re-used. Thats a strawman argument. There is a huge difference between the whole craft, and a decent module.

      "Electronics?"

      The Chinese electronics are most likely far better then the stuff on the Shuttle. But as long as the stuff works, its age is of no consequence.

      At least until they run out of 486s on ebay, then the Shuttle is down for the count.

       

    24. Re:Good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can any other space vehicle, go into space, pluck off a satellite from orbit, and bring it back to earth?

      Completely useless ability, yet the argument is "technically impressive" not "most bang for the buck".

    25. Re:Good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a fair attempt to equalize the cost-comparison, but it doesn't quite bring them head-to-head, because multiple launches and LEO-rendezvous seriously complicate the mission, and the capability still isn't equal. This requires three launches, associated delays, compound risk, rendezvous operations (which typically take several days), and that only gets the same mass of deliverable cargo and one less astronaut in orbit.

      The shuttle brings with it that 7th person, plus a 150,000 pound work platform, and the re-entry capability.

      But your point in general stands because we seldom need all that capability, especially with a viable space station in orbit, which is why Constellation is returning to simple capsule designs. The ISS negates most of the benefits of launching a SpaceLab module in the shuttle bay, for example.

      Anyway, it's not simply the re-usability that drives the cost up. It's the melding of all those features together in a single application: re-usable, cargo-and-crew together, down-mass, runway landing, huge cross-range capability, etc.

      I also have to nitpick the GP's claim that the Soyuz is the most tested system out there. For the Soyuz rocket, this is true. It has over 1700 launches, mostly for cargo, and a slightly lower success rate than the shuttle. The combined Soyuz rocket and spacecraft, however, has been launched slightly fewer times than the shuttle, has approximately the same success rate, and has undergone several major upgrade programs. The latest version, the Soyuz TMA, has had three moderately alarming re-entry anomalies in just 11 flights, indicating that these upgrades affect its status as "mature."

      What Soyuz amounts to is an excellent example of a system that has been kept appropriately simple in relation to its usage. This supports its excellent track record and low cost, but at the same time has somewhat limited the Russians activities in space.

  7. Smart testing by Chairboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    China is fast tracking their progress in space, and they're doing pretty good risk management to get it done. They used Russian experience when designing their capsule system (their spacecraft has a number of big similarities to the Soyuz capsule, very very big similarities, and now they're taking up a backup suit in case a design flaw appears during the test that would affect a rescuer. It's a fine idea and doesn't indicate some big uncertainty about their own design, it shows a clear headed decision to trade a possible nationalistic PR win for a measured, risk aware backup plan that puts the lives of their Taikonauts ahead of the usual spin goals.

    I'm not a huge fan of PRC in general, but their space program has been well executed so far. They're making good use of available data while still innovating on their terms instead of having to build everything from scratch.

    1. Re:Smart testing by damburger · · Score: 1

      They look the same, but in the same way that Buran and the US shuttle looked the same. Aerodynamic principles mean there are only certain ways to do things. Looking the same doesn't mean it is old Russian technology with a Chinese flag stamed on it.

      Shenzhou is home-grown Chinese technology. Had they simply wanted to smack a Soyuz on top of a Long March rocket they could've done that, and saved themselves the last 6 flights. The amount of testing alone should convince you that the systems of that spacecraft are previously untried.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    2. Re:Smart testing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buran was a copy of the shuttle. They stole the plans. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/spacecraft/q0153.shtml

      As an aerodynamics engineer, I appreciate your argument. It has been true previously - like for the F-15 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-15_Eagle and MiG-31 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-31 aircraft.

      In the Buran case, it was a copy with 1 major difference. The Russians made the landing gear automatic too. The Space Shuttle has been able to land via computer control for years, but lowering the landing gear has always been manual for some reason. I worked on the shuttle nose wheel steering software back in the early 1990s.

    3. Re:Smart testing by damburger · · Score: 4, Informative

      One major difference? You joke surely;

      1. The engines were on the stack, not the orbiter. The stack could (and did) fly without the orbiter at all
      2. There were four boosters instead of two.
      3. The boosters were liquid, not solid fueled

      Even the link you provided as alleged evidence that it was just stolen technology acknowledges these very major differences.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    4. Re:Smart testing by v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From the sound of it, this "vacuum module" is there so they can evacuate it slowly and check for leaks, and if a problem happens, re-pressurize it quickly. That's safer for lots of reasons. Firstly, you don't need to get the guinea pig back IN the ship before you can begin to re-pressurize them. Secondly no risk of a hose splitting and causing them to rocket away from the ship. (and break a tether)

      The use of two suits is a good plan also. I'd expect them to have two people in the vacuum module, one in the russian suit and one in their new suit. If there's an emergency with the new suit, having someone in the module to help could make all the difference.

      Does make me wonder though how much ground testing they've done. One would assume they've done a lot of vacuum testing on the ground already, but they sure are going about this slowly despite that. They should already know if their suit is OK before flying it up into space. The lack of gravity seems unlikely to change the behavior of the suit.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:Smart testing by v1 · · Score: 1

      I thought plans for the US orbiter were public? Can't steal that, copy maybe but not steal.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    6. Re:Smart testing by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      China is fast tracking their progress in space

      Fast tracking? As compared to who? Two flights, with a third in the offing, in five years isn't 'fast' by any reasonable usage of the word.

    7. Re:Smart testing by damburger · · Score: 1

      Isn't using a space suit in an evacuated crew compartment for an extended period a problem in itself? Obviously you have airlocks, but you don't hang around in those often doing tests.

      I seem to recall some repairs had to be done in an evacuated module of Mir at one point, and it was tough (for some reasons relating to heat IIRC)

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  8. Re:China has its first spacewalk! by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    And they both resulted in failure. Of course, you don't have the luxury of editing the story afterwards to reflect your "success".

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  9. Nine comments... by tgd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All nine of you are totally busted for pretending you read the article, since the link doesn't work.

    1. Re:Nine comments... by gzipped_tar · · Score: 1
      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    2. Re:Nine comments... by gzipped_tar · · Score: 1
      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    3. Re:Nine comments... by Tom90deg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      But, I thought it went against everything /. STANDS for to actually RTFA. Don't you believe in Slashdot anymore?

    4. Re:Nine comments... by fireforadrymouth · · Score: 1

      I've heard of these do-hickeys that navigate the tubes for you. Crawling tube spiders or something

      Please hand in your geek card immediately.

  10. An astronaut by any other name... by Dan+East · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why does the media use foreign names for astronauts from other countries? We've got cosmonaut and now "yuhangyuan"? That's ridiculous. Is "astronaut" somehow reserved for only US spacefarers? I think this whole thing is a leftover from the cold war, where it was somehow insulting to use the same terminology for Soviet and US astronauts, probably because of the fierce competition.

    On another note, if the astronauts don't leave the confines of their ship, and merely evacuate all the air, is that really a "space walk"?

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is "astronaut" somehow reserved for only US spacefarers?

      Yes. It's in the definition of the word astronaut.

    2. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was more retarded in the article. Obviously in Chinese they would be called yuhangyuan but when you translate the article to English why pick one word and put it in quotes and then translate it for us. Why not explain what all the other words mean.

    3. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by arkarumba · · Score: 1

      Why do we call Rome by that name. The locals call it Roma - you'd think they would know they proper name of the place they live.

      Why do we call Spain by that name. The locals call it España. You'd think they would know the proper name.

      Things can have multiple names. Its the spice of life.

      They are not neccessarily "making up" new names for the heck of it. Its a bit of courtesy to call their yuhangyuan as they call themselves.

    4. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On that note, why is the sports section so full of guys named "Jose'?" This is Amerkin news, they should call them all Joseph and be done with it. Yee-haw!

    5. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by necro81 · · Score: 1

      When China first got into space flight, their pilots were referred to as taikonauts ("taiko" meaning "space" in Chinese I presume) by Western media. What happened to that?

    6. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by hashax · · Score: 1

      Well, the first 'space-man' was a cosmonaut, so by the 'i-was-there-first' rule all spacemen should now be called Cosmonauts. As an aside, both names are derived from Greek, somewhat embarassing given they were coined to assume national identities. On a further note, in all Chinese documentation written in English, 'astronaut' is used, while cosmonaut is used in chinese documentation written in Russian. Taikonaut was invented by the US media to distinguish Chinese astronauts. And on another topic, French space-men - Spationaute and for Indian spacemen, I propose: Apu-naut. Apu: Tonight Iâ(TM)m going to party like itâ(TM)s on sale for $19.99!

    7. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by barzok · · Score: 4, Informative

      As NASA has defined it, only US space-going individuals may claim the title "astronaut." Further, they cannot be civilians, at least according to an article in the latest Wired.

      Aside from surviving the trip, Garriott has one more wish--to earn the title of astronaut. As a gamer, he cares deeply about the difference between character classes--whether a ninja, merchant, or citizen spaceman. But the moniker he has dreamed of all his life is not coming easily. NASA has strict rules about how it titles its explorers, and Garriott cannot qualify, no matter what he does, because he's a private citizen. Instead of an astronaut, they'll call him a space flight participant.

      http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/16-09/ff_starcity?currentPage=6

    8. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by jimdread · · Score: 1

      Why does the media use foreign names for astronauts from other countries? We've got cosmonaut and now "yuhangyuan"? That's ridiculous. Is "astronaut" somehow reserved for only US spacefarers?

      You're right! We should all use the same word. The first person in space was Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin. Of course you will agree that since we all want to use the same word, and that cosmonauts were first, we should call all spacefarers by the original name: cosmonauts. Right?

    9. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... so you've provided evidence for why we _would_ just call a cosmonaut an astronaut, since we're speaking english. The same reason we call Roma, Rome. Also the same reason we spell China as we do and not use native chinese characters.

      I have to say I agree with the GP. However, the media seem to love using (and no doubt tremendously bastardizing) the name of 'astronauts' from their home country. It's mostly likely a bit of tradition now (with the common use of cosmonaut, astronaut and now taikonaut/ yuhangyuanaut).

    10. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by Sinbios · · Score: 1

      I think the point was because when we write about Rome, we don't write "Roma" (Rome), and therefore we shouldn't write "yuhangyuan" (astronaut) when we're writing about astronauts.

      --
      Anyone can "stand up for what they believe", but it takes a very brave individual to change what they believe. - Loundry
    11. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in France, they called US astronauts "spacionauts" for a while. Not sure if they still do that.

      AC

    12. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by AJWM · · Score: 1

      Well, NASA can go fork themselves as far as that goes, but I'll allow as how being a passenger is a little different from being crew. We don't call the folks in the back of commercial airplanes "aeronauts", do we? (Okay, we don't call the pilots that either these days.)

      Comes to that, though, they shouldn't call their payload specialists astronauts either. (Personally I don't really think the term should be applied to anyone who isn't exploring space (or testing new space vehicles) -- which means it shouldn't have been applied to Shuttle crews since the early 1980s.)

      --
      -- Alastair
    13. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by pythonist · · Score: 1

      Or you call it Taikonaut

      http://www.taikonaut.com/index_en.html

    14. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by FooGoo · · Score: 1

      On another note, if the astronauts don't leave the confines of their ship, and merely evacuate all the air, is that really a "space walk"?

      No, it's called a chinese fire drill...

      --
      People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
    15. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      As NASA has defined it, only US space-going individuals may claim the title "astronaut."

      Well if that's the case, then I guess Canada must have a serious foreign policy spat on the horizon: http://www.google.com/search?q=canadian+astronaut

      And the ESA

      http://www.google.com/search?q=esa+astronaut

      In fact, the NASA mission summary for STS-124 refers to "Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Akihiko Hoshide": http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/sts124/main/index.html

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    16. Re:An astronaut by any other name... by dafing · · Score: 1
      I cant believe how insensitive you are to the rest of the world.

      I do agree with you about the space walk comment, really, if that is what it is, then its more of a vacuum test.

      --
      --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  11. Scary space walk by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I were the yuhangyuan on the tether, I'd be yelling "You Hang You On!" like crazy!

    Joy luck, gentlemen.

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    1. Re:Scary space walk by Nerdfest · · Score: 2, Funny

      I keep thinking "Space Wok, with yuhangyuan!". Must be too close to lunch.

  12. I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if at the last second they will replace the astronaut with a better looking one, while still flying the uglier one in a storage compartment to do all the work.

  13. Differing space suits by halcyon1234 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is unclear why China has opted for two different types of spacesuit.

    Because the first type of suit doesn't come in child sizes

    1. Re:Differing space suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i don't get it... b/c chinese ppl are small? or is it a joke because of the gymnasts?
      the 1st one is the chinese suit, right? it doesn't come in child? then why even make the chinese suit? and who is the child being sent up?

    2. Re:Differing space suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who modded this Informative?!?!!?

    3. Re:Differing space suits by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1

      Who modded this Informative?!?!!?

      The parents, obviously. Now they know where their starchild went.

    4. Re:Differing space suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it did, but when they asked for size 16, they got size 14 instead.

  14. Bizarre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    America was one of the great nations in the space race. But we are about to be grounded. Again. This time, for 5 years. Why? Because Bush would not allow either NASA OR the airforce to complete the X-33. It sat in a hanger for 6 years and only last year was dismantled. The air force kept asking and cheney said no. Sad that Sick politics is what has grounded America. Even now, We could be up there in 2 years, by having congress and NASA authorize COTS-D as well as have NASA consider alternatives such as Direct. Nuts, simply moving orion or dragon to an eelv would keep us going, and that is doable within 2 years. But politicians and NASA are afraid that it might kill ares I. Personally, I would rather see the I killed and worked started on the IV and V. As long as have multiple launchers (EELVs, Falcon, Tarus), as welled a rated capsule, then we would be ok.

    Bush and his admin will go down in history as the worst American presidency.

  15. The reason for two types of suits by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 0, Troll

    They are testing the Chinese suit. And, testing with humans is easy if you don't care if the test subject dies.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  16. Actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia sold them some things. But it appears that China has a great deal more tech than Russia sold them. In fact, they are showing up with loads of Russian AND American know-how on their crafts.

  17. Spacewalk... in Bird's Nest Stadium? by ilovesymbian · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Since China is such a media-controlling country (apart from other kinds of control), they most likely would film their so-called spacewalk in Bird's Nest Stadium or somewhere similar.

    In latest news, NASA returned the sets they borrowed from China in 1969 for their moon walk.

    1. Re:Spacewalk... in Bird's Nest Stadium? by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 1

      Since China is such a media-controlling country (apart from other kinds of control), they most likely would film their so-called spacewalk in Bird's Nest Stadium or somewhere similar.

      I bet their special effects will be better then the ones used to simulate the moon landing.

  18. Made in Russia by Mr_Icon · · Score: 0

    Wait... a Chinese guy will be wearing a "Made in Russia" suit?

    Man, it's the first time someone will be a live embodiment of an inverted "Soviet Russia" joke.

    --
    If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
  19. You-hang-on by alexschmidt · · Score: 1

    When I try to pronounce 'yuhangyuan' it sounds like "You Hang On". I've got a bad feeling about this....

  20. Open Source Space? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    When China starts exploring space and developing new technology for it (not just retracing the USA's pioneering steps), will China publish as much of its results for free consumption by the rest of the world as the USA has? Did Russia ever publish as much as the USA has?

    Or will the capitalists just freely subsidize the (ex/) Communists' space industries without getting as much back?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Open Source Space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open Source journalism for sure:

      BBC: The Shenzhou spacecraft closely resembles the Russian Soyuz capsules, but is substantially larger. Unlike the Soyuz, it has an orbital module that is equipped with its own propulsion, allowing autonomous flight.

      Remarkably similar to this:

      WIKIPEDIA: The Shenzhou spacecraft closely resembles Soyuz, although it is substantially larger, and unlike the Soyuz, it features a powered orbital module capable of autonomous flight.

      As far as I can, the Wikipedia article came first.

  21. Welcome to 50 years ago! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spacewalks are old news these days.

  22. While... by WED+Fan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I wonder if at the last second they will replace the astronaut with a better looking one, while still flying the uglier one in a storage compartment to do all the work.

    While...

    • Adding extra flame to the take off
    • Adding extra stars to the sky
    • Claiming the YouHangOnForDearLife (astronaut) is really 2 years older than he really is
    • Claiming the people of Tibet are truly free, autonomous, and much more happy, and the Dalai Lama is perfectly safe to return to his homeland
    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
  23. Congrats China! Welcome to the 1960s. (Golf clap) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Been there, done that. If you manage to put a permanently-manned base on the moon or Mars, then I'll be impressed.

  24. who cares... by nimbius · · Score: 1

    let the politicians do the naming and drum-beating. scientists have more important things to do, like making sure they dont turn their first spacewalker into a floating corpse-cicle.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  25. typo... by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 2, Funny

    =>the US would benefit more with exploring the Universe than exploding Iraq

    Here, I done it for you.

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
    1. Re:typo... by michaelmuffin · · Score: 1

      flamebait? is there some conspiracy theorist moderator out there who thinks that the US and its allies dropping bombs (which explode!) on iraq is some kind of hoax?

  26. Coincide with "Founders Day" Oct 1 by peter303 · · Score: 2, Informative

    59th Anniversary of the founding of The Peoples Republic of China Oct 1, 1949. (If weather holds and no saftey glitches.) Originally they were considering tying this into the Olympics, but decided to spread 2008 events out.

  27. Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're dealing with human lives. And while China may not have the best rights records, they do realize that on a live broadcast of a spacewalk, if they lose their astronaut it isn't going to go well for them. Given they have the option of sending up extra suits that are well tested, why wouldn't they? (fuel/cost being the answer.)

    Fuel/cost concerns versus the visibility of the disaster should make the final solution obvious.

    1. Re:Safety by Perf · · Score: 1

      The Chinese Communist teach school kids that one of Mao's heroes was a guy who sacrificed his life to save a goat from being run over by a train.

  28. Apache mod rewrite out of control by burnitdown · · Score: 1

    It's the way all the new Wordpress blogs are doing it. Isn't it much easier than some ugly url like http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/08/1212252?

    Either you're for the new Apache mod/rewrite enabled Wordpress URLs, or you're against progress! Sort of...

    1. Re:Apache mod rewrite out of control by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Yea but it is even easier to google:

      china first space walk

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  29. Names of spacecraft. by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

    We used to call ships that sailed on water "Sailing Ships" and then when we moved to space we now call them "space ships"

    The Chinese term for sailing vessel is "Junk" so does that mean they are going to contribute to the whole "Space Junk" problem, by sending out more pieces of Space Junk?

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
  30. Spacewalk postponed by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 3, Informative

    I heard they had to postpone the spacewalk until they found new astronauts... Turns out the ones they already had qualified were under-aged. :-)

    --
    "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
    1. Re:Spacewalk postponed by consonant · · Score: 1

      Man..that *was* funny. Funnier still though, is the "Informative" mod! Bwahahahaha! Oh wait, for karma, perhaps..?

    2. Re:Spacewalk postponed by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I don't get it. I was going for funny. (*shrugs*)

      --
      "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
  31. Re:Scary space walk FIRE by mkiwi · · Score: 1

    Since the link is messed up, can we just assume that they're doing a Chinese Fire Drill in space? That would be funnier.

  32. A different meaning there by No2Gates · · Score: 1

    China does not supply spacesuits, so only REALLY bad people go into space.

    --
    Every time you call tech support, a little kitten dies.
  33. Humor by CDMan · · Score: 1

    Oh, come one... no one sees the humor in this???

    "yuhangyuan (astronaut)"

    No doubt pronounced 'You-hang-on'... Funny, but redundant, if you ask me.

    --
    -jg
  34. In Soviet China... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Space Walks You!

  35. If one suit fails hopefully the other doesn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A pilot and copilot of a passenger aircraft both eat different meals in case one of them gets sick or whatever and is unable to do their job, at least there will still be the other person who is ok and can continue on. Probably ONE of the reasons why they use two different space suits, in case one fails

  36. Name? by professorfalcon · · Score: 1

    What are Chinese astronauts called? Chinonauts?

  37. Space fever! by michaelleung · · Score: 1

    For a moment I thought it was China's first moonwalk, you know, moonwalk? Get it? Oh, hell.

  38. Moderation results : by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1

    Moderation +1
        30% Funny
        40% Flamebait
        30% Insightful

    Just so you know...

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
  39. Re:Congrats China! Welcome to the 1960s. (Golf cla by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    Been there, done that. If you manage to put a permanently-manned base on the moon or Mars, then I'll be impressed.

    Well, given that it's projected that in about 2-3 years the Americans will no longer have the ability to put someone in space to do anything (unless they rent space from the Russians), I'd say it's a pretty big deal for China to be ready to do this.

    Don't underestimate how big of an achievement it actually is to do this. It's a pretty small club.

    Cheers

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.