Slashdot Mirror
China's New Military Space Stations Coming Soon
WindBourne writes "China will be launching 2 new space stations this next year. One is for their civil program (as run by the military), while the second is openly for the military. It appears that there will be multiples of the military version to be launched in 2010, and that they are developing the same US Air Force Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL) that was canceled in 1969. In addition, it appears that China is accelerating their timelines on a number of the earlier space announcements."
Whats ironic is that China seems to have much more ambition, or is that much less red tape, then NASA does in the USA to get space projects happening
God save our souls. Those things are coming down, sooner rather than later.
China's military is tightly interwoven into the country's economy. Apparently you won't find a company that doesn't have a general behind it somewhere. So military or civilian, it's all the same in the end.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
To what degree is this a novel phenomenon? TFA didn't mention any weapons systems, or anything besides probable surveillance gear and being under the administrative control of the military. That seems pretty much identical to everybody else's use of military satellites. It is interesting that they'd see some value in building two manned stations; but the purpose seems to be pretty similar to what satellites have been used for for decades now.
isn't all their tape red?
I for one welcome our new Chinese overlords.
Or MSG.
Our trade-deficit has largely funded them (and killed our industrial base as a side-effect). If they turn into a large menace, we largely have ourselves to thank/blame. Blowback Theory is live and well. The belief that doing business with a country creates a democracy has proven to be horsewash. It seems the US creates most of its own monsters.
Table-ized A.I.
This reminds me of a cheap 80's movie called Defcon 4. Manned military platform loaded with nukes. Next thing you know, a comet will pass and turn everyone to dust...
I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class, especially since I rule.
That's some pretty bold speculation on China's intentions. Got a source?
I'm standing firm in my belief that the best thing George Bush did during his 8 years (and maybe the only good thing) (and intentionally or otherwise) was watching the Olympics in China rather than holding out. Their military is huge and their economic grip on the US is tight, so remaining on good terms with them is really the best option to get them to do what you want.
Whale
"minus some of the things that we (supposedly) have that makes us better than them"
The big difference between the west and other areas is that the west has a large middle class. Having a large middle class encourages upward mobility both from poor to middle class and middle class to rich.
China is a contender for sure, but so are India, Brazil, Russia, etc.
"china is the worlds largest military threat"
I'm not sure the world agrees. The Chinese are actually good people. Their leaders have made some bad decisions but whose hasn't.
I realize the consequences would be bad.. but I just can't imagine what might happen if the US decided to default on all money owed to China.
WTO step in? China nationalizing anything with a hint of US owned assets? Global Anarchy?
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
NOTHING will kick NASA (and Roscosmos) in the ass like some actual competition.
We beat the Soviets to the moon... now, can we get back there before the Chinese?
and this time they are not going to have a bunch of expat Germans with paper-clips on their files to bail them out. I think what is more worrying is that Iran & North Korea may well have manned space flight programs up and running before the USA does. What needs to happen is more Funding for NASA and they need someone with a lot of Political Savy running it (Like James Web in the 60's)
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Of possible interest, the Soviet Union had a number of military space stations. The Almaz project culminated in a Salyut analogue that actually had a 20mm cannon that was test fired in orbit.
In the 1980s, they built the Polyus Space Battlestation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyus_(spacecraft)) which was to be equipped with nuclear mines, a boron field generator, frickin' laser beams, cannons, etc. As part of a last gasp effort to regain relevancy by showing command of the sky, a test battlestation was launched on one of the two Energia boosters that flew. A funny thing happened on the way to orbit, though...
Because of CG issues, the battlestation (about as big as a US space shuttle) was mounted upside down on the booster. Once it separated from the Energia, it was designed to fire a thruster that would turn it 180 degrees, stop rotation, then the final stage would boost this Cyrillic emblazoned death star into orbit.
The Energia booster completed it's cycle, the explosive bolts detonated, and the Polyus slowly pulled away. A thruster at the bottom fired, and the ponderous bulk began to rotate. With steady precision, it rotated 90 degrees, 135 degrees, then finally 180 degrees.... ....and kept rotating. As it completed a _complete_ rotation, the rocket fired again and smartly placed it back in the exact same angle it had been when it started.
The rocket fired as scheduled, but unfortunately for this military menace, the effect was the opposite intended. With typical maniacal mechanical thoroughness, the rocket ran, slowing the station and neatly dropping it into the Indian ocean.
I've heard rumors (for what that's worth) that one of the US Nuclear subs equipped for deep sea salvage just happened to be in the area at the time. If true, that's the goddamndest thing...
Nonetheless, it's interesting to speculate about what might have happened in the end-stages of the Cold War if the Soviets had gained control of the high ground in this fashion.
An aside, a great site for learning more about the military efforts in space during the 60s and 70s is Cold Orbits: http://www.deepcold.com/
Space race will accelerate space commercialization and hence will speed up the recovery of the economy.
Instead of building cars GM can build space vehicles.
I don't ever see stories on /. talking about NASA that make a point of mentioning their obvious military ties when they undertake civilian space programs.
So far, the single dissenter against efforts to prevent militarisation of space at the UN has been the US, not China.
What this "acceleration of timelines" indicates is that the Chinese are taking the US stance very seriously.
'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
Some are, some are Fenqings. Fenqing is Chinese for angry youth - they are fiercely nationalistic, very keen on invading Taiwan a year back for example. Right now, given the recent naval clash, they will be keen on on standing up to the US. Imagine a cross between freepers and the Freikorps and you've got it.
If these people ended up in control of Chinese foreign policy, China in the 2000's could plausibly go on the rampage a bit like Japan in the 1930s.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
I'm actually much more intrigued by the statement at the end of the article in Space.com about the nuclear powered rover they intend to land on the moon.
Interesting (if true) that they didn't just put on solar panels (will the rover be used during the lunar night?).
If they are willing to use nuclear power (probably just RTGs) for such a relatively modest application (except for an experiment or two the Apollo astronauts left on the moon I don't think any nuclear power was ever used there) will they be using nukes for more applications in their space program?
Nuclear power (first as RTGs, then as full fledged reactors) will REALLY give their spacecraft an order of magnitude more capability than solar powered ones. The Russian radar satellites used to locate American carrier groups used nukes (and one crashed in Canada!). If the Chinese are willing to take the risk (our collective risk?) for using nukes in space what kind of benefits will they obtain?
Certainly, for some military applications a small, compact nuclear power plant might be a better power source than large vulnerable solar cells. (though the reactor would likely need radiator fins).
Let China put up a dozen "military" stations. The Manned Orbiting Laboratory (http://www.astronautix.com/craft/mol.htm ) was canceled for good reasons. Primarily that all the functions could be automated and/or ground controlled, without the extra mass, complexity and vulnerability of a manned station. It will provide them with many individual opportunities to practice maintaining manned stations, docking, crew and supply transfers, etc. We already have the experience and know which works best. But let them make their own mistakes. They many even pull off their entire program through lunar landing in their own fashion, but their particular path isn't the most efficient or effective. Perhaps the hard way will be the best way to learn. OTOH, they may develop technology and techniques we didn't because we didn't need to.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Interesting (if true) that they didn't just put on solar panels (will the rover be used during the lunar night?).
Very slightly off topic, you'd be amazed how many people confuse "same face always facing the earth" with "same face always facing the sun". Then for a good time explain Mercury's spin-orbit resonance and they get all confused.
During the night, a good way to keep warm is a nice toasty nuclear reactor or RTG.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
The sun only rises once a month on the moon. A solar powered lander would be unable to maintain its minimum standby temperature during the long night.
Impeach Bush/Cheney!
No War for Oil!
Social Justice!
Hands off. . . uh, hey - that's MY bong load, dude!
The Manned Orbiting Laboratory (http://www.astronautix.com/craft/mol.htm ) was canceled for good reasons. Primarily that all the functions could be automated and/or ground controlled, without the extra mass, complexity and vulnerability of a manned station.
And what happens when a) you get hacked or b) someone from the manned station next door comes over for a visit and unplugs a few things.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
And hey, if they want to waste the money, let 'em. Given China's unwillingness to behave responsibly internationally (e.g. with Sudan and Darfur), and their unproductive attitude towards international cooperation, I frankly hope that blowing through all that cash will cramp their style. Because it means less hassle for everyone outside China in the long run.
My theory is that the US will sell Alaska to China. That is the only way I see the US getting out of this debt mess. It's not that far from China, it gets them a foothold on the continent, and will all the oil and reserves there is has to be worth a lot to China.
The US gets rid of all its debt and Sarah Palin--it's a win-win!.
China and Russia have a long history of doing stupid shit that causes problems for other people. I think it comes with having bad, undemocratic governments, and they think they can steamroll over the interests of everyone on Earth, and not just their own people.
To wit the Russian RORSAT crash in Canada that spread radioactive debris over the Canadian Arctic, and China's incredibly irresponsible ASAT test, which left behind loads of long lived orbital debris.
Would the empty vacuum of space really be a good way to dissipate heat? I thought everything in space was cold on the dark side and hot on the sun side. Without a medium to transfer heat into it wouldn't be a good thermal conductor... or am I totally incorrect in this?
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
In a few years you will see China overtake the 'West' in the utilization of 'space' and the West will never be able to regain their prominence in that area. This is because the West does not have the one thing that is needed in order to maintain long tern projects of this magnitude. The West does not have continuous governments.
In China with one party rule they have the ability to put forward really long term plans. This is not so in the West where governments only have a life of about four years. No sooner does a Western government come to power than they start to campaign for the next election instead of moving their societies forward and usually in the process discontinue the grand plans of the previous governments so that they don't get credit for their success should their be any.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
You could probably swap China for America or Russia in your comment, and it nearly as accurate. And I'm former NASA, so I'm not one to want to mix military and civilian space.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Surely you're not suggesting that manned spaceflight is a... a... waste of money?
it's a (chinese) spacestation.
Yes, they'll learn (or find new ways). While we are doing what, exactly ?
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Well, I guess that explains why that's how they'll say damn in the future.
The OP has serious comprehension problems. China has two space station programs, one for now and one for about ten years in the future. Not multiple space stations in 2010. There will be multiple missions to one space station over a few years.
China in the 2000's could plausibly go on the rampage a bit like Japan in the 1930s.
They are running out of time to meet that deadline...
I don't think the negotiating position of the US is all that bad - the US is a lot more powerful militarily, and while the Chinese economy has been growing fast - it's still only about a third of the US'. If the US maintains good relations and coordinates with their allies - like the Europeans and e.g. Japan, South-Korea, Taiwan in Asia - China is completely outclassed, and will be at least for many decades. Most of the powerful and productive nations in the world are democracies and - despite the rivalries - we share a lot of our values. That should be a good basis to deal with a developing nation like China with an outdated system of government.
So really - caving-in to the Chinese is counter-productive, the US can and should negotiate from a position of strength. Bush should have gotten something in return for visiting during the Olympics. Maybe he did - not all diplomatic activities are out in the open, but it was certainly worth something for the Chinese. If we don't make any demands we are are not going to get anything.
or am I totally incorrect in this?
Yes, you are. Heat can dissipate through radiative transfer.
"You can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them." [Condoleezza Rice]
Military manned spaceflight has been seen for decades as a colossal waste of money. Up until now, only the Soviets were dumb enough to try (and fail spectacularly).
I'd rate human spaceflight for civilian purposes ("research", "national leadership" -- basically for the hell of it), as only something worthwhile only when the value added by having humans around far exceeds the money saved by using robots -- which isn't often.
The military is usually interested in results. That's why the US rejected manned military space decades ago.
Remember, the US did not make the deals with China last year, in 2000, in 1990, but has made the deal to trade with them since 1970's. Because the US wanted them to help defeat the Soviet Union. You get what you want, should you pay as promise.
Like all other countries, we deal with others not because we are nice nor naive, but because we have something to ask for.
Finally, for most people who care about their every day life much more than ideology, the value of democracy is questionable. Buddy, look around the world. Are many (most?) ''democracies'' -- India, Mexico, Brazil, Thailand, Pakistan, The Philippines -- better than China in dealing with any matters that count: equality, education, health care/education, standard of living, environment, crime, corruption? The answers are no. Many are worse in many areas. Maybe the USA is an exception. Or is USA really better too?
Democracy is an ideal, just like communism. For the last 30 years, people in China have mostly decided to pursue better living as the ultimate goal, and not ideology.
Rain on your wedding day is ironic...if had some sort of power over the rain or were in Death Valley.
Good advice you just didnt take...I mean yeah if you were Confucious
You have embrace other peoples inaccuracies and make them work. Its how I havent gone Crazy.
Maybe.
Perhaps the Chinese have some master plan for military space domination, but I can't see how manned military space stations could possibly fit into it. Anything that you would want to do in space from a military standpoint could more easily and cheaply be done by autonomous or ground-controlled spacecraft.
Can anyone tell me what the strategic advantage of a manned space station is? Is there anything that outweighs the obvious disadvantages of all that extra technology (and accompanying risk) for keeping the carbon-based water bags alive?
They're just getting ready to evacuate the "Earth that Was".
The Chinese are actually good people. Their leaders have made some bad decisions but whose hasn't.
The Chinese people don't have their finger on the button, their leaders do, making their leaders (and therefore all of China) a very large potential military threat to the rest of the world.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Plenty of jobs for all those united technologies layoffs.
Yep. Heat can transfer via:
;)
1) Conduction
2) Convection
3) Radiation
The first two wouldn't work in space, but the 3rd's a charm. After all, if it didn't, the Sun wouldn't be able to warm the Earth, would it? We'd all be dead- or never have evolved in the first place.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
The Chicoms are putting a rover on the moon?
Damn! Patrick McGooghan will never get off the moon now.
solar power in space is a much better alternative that nuclear power.
It's much more efficient, cheaper and if the launch fails (which it does on occasion, columbia any1?) then we won't risk blowing a nuke
would be ironic if it we nuked ourselves dontcha think?
Slashdot - I went there to fix their grammar that they're so bad at.
I, for one, don't.
The original idea we had with the Air Force station was that we'd require people up there to twiddle the knobs and operate the cameras. This fits with the old pulp image of space where computers weren't quite on the drawing board but a manned spy satellite is about as useless as a manned telephone exchange with human operators plugging in connections.
What we're finding is there's less and less justification for human beings to be in space. That's practical justifications. I still want our giant Babylon 5 space stations at L4 and L5, but the only justification there is the total awesome factor. Back when they were talking about the orbital power sats in the 70's, the idea was that the first significant orbital presence would be from the construction workers. Well, telepresence could probably handle most of the complicated tasks.
I can't imagine what the practical military applications would be for a dedicated military space station. Scifi had assumed there would be a market for satellite maintenance and repair but the economics have shown that it's cheaper to launch a replacement than repair the old one. Given we've got that same system going for desktop computers on the ground, I doubt that will ever change for satellites. Even for expensive equipment like the Hubble, the economics of on-orbit repair seem to be skewed in favor of cheaper, disposable satellites.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
They also created Taliban and Osama! Oh, wait...
And what happens when a) you get hacked or b) someone from the manned station next door comes over for a visit and unplugs a few things.
a) Explode the space station.
b) Explode the space station.
And you didn't ask this, but the answer to what happens when c) you get bored of your stupid unmanned space station
is
c) Explode the space station.
The enemies of Democracy are
Joss Whedon was on to something when he gave the Firefly characters chinese phrases throughout the show...
Correction: "Guatemala" was not the name I was thinking of...rather it was Guam that I was thinking of.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
The Chinese have a very poor history in terms of technical success with nuclear technologies. They have yet to build a working nuclear submarine that doesn't kill the crew. If indeed they are doing this (remember that they don't feel compelled to tell the truth, and that they wildly exaggerate) then they are probably using a purchased Russian device.
We wouldn't be defaulting. We would just be calling it even based on all technological and industrial research and development they've stolen from us over the years.
And I don't have a source. I am the source.
We wouldn't be defaulting. We would just be calling it even for all the technological and industrial research and development they've stolen over the years.
And I don't have a source. I am the source.
ISI created the Taliban for their own cynical political reasons. American was only a small part of the problem.
"remaining on good terms with them is really the best option to get them to do what you want."
Good. You have them right where they want you.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
Finally a chance for a decent space war. We've been waiting for that since the friggin' '60s.
-Styopa
well, in terms of doing one big thing right, I agree, dictatorship is much more efficient. Why the West doesn't continue space plan? Maybe precisely not enough people support it. So it cannot be on the priority of every government.
The President must be informed immediately that drastic action must be taken to prepare our own Military Space Designs.
Mr. President, we CANNOT ALLOW A SPACE STATION GAP!!!
"Don't be a martyr -- BE THE ONE WHO GOT AWAY!"
Two things : Everybody who has a button can have their finger on it, it doesn't make them any closer to pushing it, mostly when they have no reason, furthermore when it would be suicide. Secondly, the Chinese people do have their finger on the button to make their regime go off. Surely it would be no easy button to push, but more and more people are as we speak joining to push it, and it seems that 2009 is the year we'll see how far these guys can push it.
You just got troll'd!
The problem for the U.S. with using nuclear power in space is that the environmental groups go crazy when any amount of nuclear material is launched.
Yeah, like in the Tibet, or Tiananmen.
C'mon.
Breaking news: it's still a dictatorship
If you think that there are countries where the average people by and large are NOT good people, you've been exposed to too much propaganda.
This space available.
imagine a Beowulf cluster of .... ah fuxk it.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
when following in others footsteps, literally. At this time, China is out and out stealing, as well as buying tech from elsewhere.
lol, this never gets old.
Moderation: +1 pwnage
Depends on where you're at in space. If you're outside of Jupiter's orbit, nukes are the way to go unless you have a few hundred square kilometers of mirrors to concentrate what little sunlight you get. And on Luna, too, nukes make sense. 2 weeks of every month it's dark and cold.
They don't launch plutonium reactors or anything like that, they use radioactive isotope generators that act more like tea kettles and stop producing heat in what, 10, 15 years? They don't blow up.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
replace Chinese with U.S. and you get what 60%+ of Earth population thinks right now: "man, I hope americants dont go batshit insane and start nuking things once they realize they are no longer rulers of the world"
We believe that we are ordained by god to serve no other function than to move money around.
No, that is just the people who have all of the money that believe that, because they think "work" is beneath them. The rest of us, stuck here in reality where you have to have a real job to survive, know better.
Unfortunately, because they do have all of the money - and thus the power to create jobs - the rest of us who need jobs to live are simply screwed.
The rest of us will waste away together, and the last thing we'll hear is hymns of praise to "free trade" being sung by that aforementioned teeny, tiny subset of people.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
China has saved ~50% GDP for many years, USA has saved very little. This space race is unlikely to swing America's way; don't look over your shoulder, it's the sky that's watching...
Can't say it better than Key Trends in Globalisation does http://tinyurl.com/dkmdht
Therefore adding domestic and international savings together gives a lower bound for the real value of China's savings, using official exchange rates, of $1,110 billion and a probable upper bound, using PPP figures, equivalent to $1,938 billion. This equates to savings rates for China of 56 per cent, if official exchange rates are used, and 50 per cent if a PPP exchange rate is used.
If even the lower figure is taken, that is 50 per cent of GDP, a necessary corollary is that China's total savings in absolute terms will be as large as those of the US when its economy is only half the size of that of the US. If the higher percentage is used then China's total savings will exceed those of the US before it is half the size of the US economy.
It may, therefore, already be the case that China's total savings have reached in absolute terms those of the US. More probably its savings are still somewhat lower than those of the US in absolute terms but they are already approaching it.
While China's GDP will not overtake that of the US in absolute terms for some time, China has therefore either already overtaken the US as the world's greatest source of finance for investment or will do so in a relatively short time frame.
Superpowers, ready? On your marks, get set...
I would argue that North Korea is the world's largest military threat. They have what, the fourth largest standing army in the world, and a crazy, unpredictable dictator giving commands. The only somewhat ally North Korea has is China, and describing that relationship as an alliance is a bit of a stretch.
China isn't looking to start a war. Its interested in stability. North Korea, on the other hand, may very well be looking for the right excuse to internally justify war.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
Actually, both taliban and OBM/Al Qaeda WERE created by the USSR invasion of Afghanistan. Even now, Russia has their hands full with internal terrorists issues due to this.
Brazil will always have a bright future. And it always stays in the future.
I've lived in China and I can say that is not the case, BUT that said it helps if you have friends in the government but not every company has them, and certainly not generals... as there would have to be a hell of a lot of them.
China owes its existance to usa in ww2 , saved from japan.
Sure the Japanese are all hello kitty now, but they were death kitty before.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.