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."
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.
Why is that ironic? Big projects are a direct result from a centralized bureaucracy with a billion people that can do the work. Their space project is nothing compared to other infrastructure projects they have.
Specialist tasks are, pretty much by default, more expensive in our current capitalist system with companies having more power than the governments. The chinese work cheaper and are faster at taking decisions. And their government does have the power to tell a company that "they will do this-and-this task for this budget, with NO option to spend more money" (whereas NASA and ESA always seem to exceed the budget).
Face it, the Chinese will rule space if Western countries don't step it up.
Or more expendable astronauts.
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?
Actually, China has been hit worse that most countries, especially the US, and it's just going to keep getting worse. The Chinese government announced that over 7% of all domestic companies went out of business over the last year, and that China is now experiencing deflation. For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, deflation is very, very bad, espeicially for a manufacturing-based economy.
That isn't an example of irony at all, unless you are following the "Alanis Morissette" theory whereby anything can be called ironic without consideration of it's actual relevence to irony.
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.
That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. When our currency tanked it was an economic nut-punch to China. When our economy tanked it was like a fricking sledgehammer.
China is in a seriously bad situation right now. Their crazy growth has been a calculated attempt to try and build up their economy before their demographics catch up to them: their "all families get 1 kid" bump makes the baby boomers look like a population contraction. They must build up a cushion before those people get too old to work.
This happening right now is about the worst thing imaginable for them. Manufacturing economies are critically reliant on other countries buying their goods, and China cannot afford an economic contraction at this point in their development.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
"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.
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/
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
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).
The Chinese government announced that over 7% of all domestic companies went out of business over the last year
Of course, those are just the failed companies due to a crackdown by Blizzard. LOL
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
China cannot afford an economic contraction at this point in their development.
Which is a perfect reason NOT to buy products made in China. Yeah, yeah, all those electronic gizmos people buy are made in China (most anyway), but you don't have to buy that spatula, plates, dog toy, sneakers or anything else made in their country.
I've done it and while at times it can get frustrating, it can be done with minimal to no effect on ones lifestyle. The only things so far I can't find that aren't made in China are gloves and sunglasses. Yes, I can go out and buy sunglasses made in Italy for $100, but I'm not that desperate.
Between their overall human rights abuses combined with their continued occupation and suppression of Tibet, now is the best time to wean yourself from the Chinese teat.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Let's say you're a Chinese manufacturer. You buy 100 yuan of raw materials, and you plan to turn them into 100 widgets and sell them in a month for 110 yuan. In the meanwhile, deflation is gripping your country, so while you're running your assembly line, the market price for widgets drops from 1.1 yuan to 0.98 yuan. So now, you have to take a loss on your manufacturing operation. Why would a company even bother in that kind of environment? Answer: they wouldn't - they shut down instead.
This is a pretty fundamental observation of economics, but if you can refute it with something besides "you're a brainwashed sheep," I'd be interested to hear your argument.
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
Well, if you compare China to US then it seems to be quite a peaceful nation (if you talk about international issues).
My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
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
if you can refute it with something besides "you're a brainwashed sheep," I'd be interested to hear your argument.
Your a brainwashed duck!
So in order to show your disapproval of the Chinese government's abuse of their people, you want to oppose and actively resist their attempt to do something to raise quality of life for those same people?
Because they planned to turn the 100 widgets into 150 yuan so after the .03 point deflation, they are still making .47 yuan per unit, and to replace the raw materials will now only cost 0.97 yuan because of the deflation.
The reason the previous poster called you a 'brainwashed sheep' is because you clearly believe that deflation and taking a loss on every every unit sold are synonymous. This is simply false. The 'same fundamental observations of economics' always seem to not notice the benefits of deflation like lower raw material costs for equal quality materials as well lower wages for an equal quality of life for their employees. In fact, if the factory continues to pay their employees the same amount, it will have the real effect of having given their employees a raise.
Every time that deflation comes up, someone does what you did. They make up a very specifically crafted scenario that would be bad in a deflation economy, and then call it a 'fundamental observation of economics. They completely ignore the fact that inflation is exactly what has cause our current financial problems. An inflation economy encourage people not to save a safety net because in an inflation economy, every dollar you save is money lost.
Since there is not stable economy (as in no inflation or deflation) every economy is either in a state of inflation or deflation, and dealing with the problems caused by the change. Inflation economies hurt the individual while deflation economies hurt the business. If a billion dollars is lost, it sounds worse if it is from a business (a single entity) than if it is from 100 million individuals. It isn't worse. It just sounds that way because it makes a better sound bite.
Tell that to the Tibetans. Of course, China, like an imperialist state, used some old, and even at the time, dubious claim to seize a sovereign state. So, if you redefine annexations of other territories purely an internal issue, maybe you have a point.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Try outdoor places such as Cabella's or Bass Pro Shop. No guarantees. Another option might be to try outlets. I know the one down the road from me (two actually, located a mile apart), have places which sell boots.
When you find a place which has boots you like, buy multiple pairs. I've had to resort to that when I find something I really like. I buy two shirts, two pairs of shoes, etc because I know since I like it, it won't be around for more than a few months, never to be seen again.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
tell the same to vietnam, granada, panama, iraq, afghanistan...
Sure, why not? The people get restless over not having jobs and take out their frustrations on the government. It's already happening in some places in China where the local people are fed up with the corruption of the local administrators and have both attacked government offices and demanded the people be put on trial for corruption. Which they were.
If China truly wanted raise the quality of life of its people, they'd concentrate on cleaning up that noxious cloud hanging over Beijing, building more waste treatment plants and having more strict environmental controls for manufacturers. Oh yeah, and that whole, "You'll work for twelve hours a day, with one break" needs to be worked on as well.
But don't think for a moment I'm some environmental wacko who wants unions to come to China. Hardly. I'm merely expressing my displeasure with Chinese policy by not buying their products. I do the same for a few other countries as well.
If we're going to gripe about North Korean policies towards its people, we can certainly do the same towards China.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Because they planned to turn the 100 widgets into 150 yuan so after the .03 point deflation, they are still making .47 yuan per unit, and to replace the raw materials will now only cost 0.97 yuan because of the deflation.
The instantaneous cost of the commodity isn't what's at hand here, only the price obtained for the finished good relative to the commodity when it was purchased. The raw materials only cost 0.97 now? That's fantastic, until you realize that deflation still exists. Deflation is a trap for the producer that cuts into earnings. Also, I doubt many Chinese manufacturers are making a 47% margin.
The reason the previous poster called you a 'brainwashed sheep' is because you clearly believe that deflation and taking a loss on every every unit sold are synonymous.
I never said they were synonymous. In China's current manufacturing climate, though, deflation will erase any profits from many manufacturing concerns.
The 'same fundamental observations of economics' always seem to not notice the benefits of deflation like lower raw material costs for equal quality materials as well lower wages for an equal quality of life for their employees.
Again, you're focusing on the instantaneous cost of the raw materials, which is, well, immaterial. Lower material costs are good for producers only if they are lower relative to the price of the finished goods. Why is that so hard to understand?
In fact, if the factory continues to pay their employees the same amount, it will have the real effect of having given their employees a raise.
... and increasing the manufacturer's labor costs, reinforcing my point.
Every time that deflation comes up, someone does what you did. They make up a very specifically crafted scenario that would be bad in a deflation economy, and then call it a 'fundamental observation of economics.'
... which you countered with very specifically crafted and rather unrealistic scenario. I remain unconvinced.
They completely ignore the fact that inflation is exactly what has cause our current financial problems.
You are the very first person I've ever heard attribute the current financial crisis to monetary inflation. At best, you could ascribe it to asset inflation, i.e. the housing crisis, but even that is a proximate cause. Inflation has been quite low over the past decade. A more immediate problem is the insane leveraging of financial institutions coupled with a serious lack of regulation.
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.
I agree. With the exception of China and a few other countries, I don't really care where a product is made. As your second paragraph relates, I look for the best quality at the best price.
However, unlike most people, when I buy something, I buy the best I can so it lasts as long as possible. For example, I have finally replaced my original cookware with a much more sturdy, and expensive, set but I don't have to worry for the remainder of my life that the pans will warp or go bad. Lifetime warranties are a good thing. The fact that the items happen to be made in the U.S. is just a bonus.
And yes, the whole "Buy American" thing is overdone. Those who continually harp about "Buy American" or "Buy Union" fail to mention they're the same ones who go to Wal-Mart and buy the cheapest, Chinese-made piece of crap they can find. If they were truly pro-union, they wouldn't step foot in a Wal-Mart. Besides, it's getting harder and harder to find things made in the U.S. thanks to the companies sending those jobs to China.
However, like everything else, one person does something and someone else picks it up and does the same thing. This is then passed on to someone else and so on. Eventually, you have a movement. If nothing else, the current recession/depression is a great thing because it has forced people to realize how much money they were throwing away on essentially worthless junk and how little one really needs to live a comfortable life. I mean really, do you need a flat screen tv in every room of the house?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Why, I would have said "tell the same to the Sioux, the Apache, the Comanche, the Pawnee, the Alaska natives," and so on.
It has always puzzled me how some Americans can double-think on such a grand scale when talking about Tibet: almost the entire area of the US was taken by outright theft, swindle or larceny.
At the same time, while China is the evil empire persecuting Tibetans, Israel is "just defending itself". Would be interesting to see how the US public opinion would react if China bombed Tibet the way Israel bombed Gaza, and whether it would be considered that Tibetans actually killed more Chinese of other ethnic groups last year (see Lhasa riots) than Palestinians killed Israelis.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
Actually, Alaska and most of the continental US was purchased from various nations. Having said this, pretty much all of North and South America was taken from native peoples.
There is more to science than physics!
www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
Um, you're right about Hawaii, but Alaska was purchased from the Russians.
At any rate, I wasn't defending the US, but merely pointing out that anyone who thinks that China is such a wonderful country needs to be reminded that it too, in its turn, has played the imperialist game, and with the same cheap, shoddy justifications as everyone else.
BTW, I'm not American, so anyone hear who is trying to evade the debate by saying "Just another damned Yank" can stick it up their asses, particularly those of you who I'm reasonably sure are simply Chinese feeling all nationalistic and jingoistic.
At least I'm allowed to say publicly and as frequently as I want "My government sucks" and list off all the leaders and bureaucrats and state why precisely I think they suck, without fear of any kind of incarceration.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
In the same time period, China has also conquered and displaced the natives of Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia. The parts of Southern China formerly occupied by the Miao were conquered and settled by Han Chinese a bit earlier.
Frosty piss posts are worthless, GNAA posts are worthless and hurtful, but they are the least of this site's neuroses.
And it could be argued that if my grandma had had balls, she would have been my grandpa.
South Vietnam was not an ally, it was a puppet regime. The North may have been a puppet of the Soviet Union, but that's beside the point. The North won also because the South regime, that represented the Christian urban minority, was never accepted by the Buddhist rural majority. That's what pushed the population to support the Viet Cong, and that's why all major US operations were in South Vietnam, not in the North.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
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...
That's the Big Brother mentality. Why don't China give Tibetans autonomy and fault them on human rights grounds if the Tibetan government abuses it own people. Kind of like how China likes its arrangement with the rest of the world. What the Chinese are doing to the Tibetans is in essence cultural genocide. Given China a few more decades and there won't be a Tibet left. Just a mass of people living under the rules of Han Chinese for the sake of the greater Han Chinese society without their own cultural or religious roots. We can speculate all we want on the future of Tibetan self rule but to deny Tibetan their right to self determination because we deem them to be "backward" or "regressive" is hypocrisy and highlights our own regression for basic human rights.
I am 100% confident that in the coming years most people will WISH they had gold and quite a bit of it in their basket.
Oh... you're one of those.
Counter Strike class? Is that what you guys called your IT classes in school? We called it Quake class.
Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
Not really going to answer to everything, but...
Ahem. *Points to the current Italian prime minister* Ahem.
Disclaimer: I actually am Italian, and I can confirm that your accuracy (>90% idiots) is quite amazing. It seems you have found a good statistical predictor.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
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."