Slashdot Mirror
Details of Chinese Moon Rocket Emerge
MarkWhittington writes "AmericaSpace has published the results of a study of Chinese rocket development by Charles Vick, a noted expert on the Russian and Chinese space programs who works for GlobalSecurity.org, using Chinese language sources. Of note are the developing concepts for a super heavy launch vehicle designated as the CZ9 or Long March 9, capable of taking Chinese astronauts to the moon and points beyond. 'Liang outlined several new Long March versions, virtually all of them testing elements that would eventually find their way into the Long March 9 that has 4 million lb. more of liftoff thrust than the 7.5 million lb. thrust NASA Saturn V. Forty-three years ago this week a Saturn V propelled the Apollo 11 astronauts to the first manned landing on the Moon on July 20, 1969.'"
AmericaSpace
That's not the WORST name for an organization I've ever heard. But really? You're THAT unimaginative?
Everything is better with chainsaws.
You know those inscrutable aliens in sci-fi films that have indecipherable glyphs on the sides of their spaceships: They're Chinese.
It is time to build the Sea Dragon rocket with 80 million pounds of thrust. And no new launch facilities would be needed since you can only launch it from the ocean.
3...2...1...
The species must go into space and colonize the Galaxy! With rockets.
Well it would be nice if we could use horizontal take-off space planes, but in the meantime rockets will have to do. Let's not forget that steam didn't exactly replace sail overnight.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Let them go to 'and places beyond' in their fancy shmancy 12 million lb. thrust rocket. It's far more cost effective and easy, to send probes and rovers to other places in this solar system. The real question is, 'Who will be first to manipulate the higgs field in such a way that will allow for light speed or near light speed travel'?
An empire prospers when it keeps the trade routes open. It falters when it turns to lording over its own people, and a new core of empire forms on its outskirts, little fettered from it.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It's basic physics... make a heavy enough rocket and when you release the holding pin it will fall downwards, accelerating until it breaks free of the Earth's atmosphere. Then just turn it around and head to the moon.
I remember Wernher von Braun in an interview stating that the Saturn V could be used to send spacecraft to any point in the solar system. It seems that later launch vehicles developed more thrust though (Titan/Centaur) but perhaps not. So are the Chinese explicitly planing on putting colonies on the moon and Mars (or mining asteroids)?
I remember Wernher von Braun in a interview in the 70's saying that the Saturn V could be used to launch spacecraft to any point in the solar system. So are the Chinese explicitly intending to put bases on the moon and Mars or mine asteroids?
I'm pretty sure it's this attitude that is responsible for the Fermi paradox.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
http://www.amazing-planet.net/slike/RocketChair/Wan_Hu_rocket_chair.png
Life is not for the lazy.
Well, that might not be impossible http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/
Yeah, and space is just as big as the Atlantic Ocean too. Great comparison.
You're absolutely right. We must never ever compare one type of technological advancement with another because you can only ever compare two absolutely identical things before drawing any meaningful conclusion.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Obviously, a US news source is going to use the largest NASA rocket ever flown as the basis for comparison, but I think their option 'A' design looks quite like the Soviet Energiya booster.
Saturn V was a single body launch vehicle - each stage was stacked on top of each other, and fired sequentially. This was simpler to assemble, but meant that two stages had to start in flight - one of which had to start twice! The first stage was LOx/RP-1 to get high thrust low in the Earth's atmosphere, and the upper stages were LOx/LH2 to get maximum delta-V.
Energiya, on the other hand, looked more like the US shuttle stack (and indeed, was used to fly the Soviet version of the space shuttle, the main difference being its ability to fly without the shuttle as its own rocket). It had a LOx/LH2 core stage, surrounded by 4 LOx/RP-1 boosters. All of the engines were started on the ground, at liftoff. Energiya was a mode 'modern' super heavy launch vehicle, as this approach is widely considered better these days.
Sensibly, the Chinese appear to have looked to the most recent super heavy (100t+ payload capacity) launch vehicle that successfully flew for design cues.
Idiot
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I doubt human lift is the goal. This is a way to get more robots up. Once I had seen a video of telepresence underground heavy mining equipment i had an idea how its going to play out. Semi-autonomous robotic industry.
Given the thermal gradients, I wouldn't be surprised by a closed cycle heat engine driving them.. i'm sure it works out better than solar panels.
Will it actually happen? Im not so sure.
...eh, I feel way to pessimistic today, I need a root beer.
I have the suspicion if they did build the long 9, and this is a big "if", its going to suffer the same fate as the n1 to be used a few times and abandoned or worse turn out like buran sitting in a junk heap http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/09/28/1246200/soviet-shuttle-buran-found-in-a-junk-heap...heh, one of comander tacos. Hope your chilling dude.
because their "rockets" are half as long
I'm pretty sure it's the laws of physics and the periodic table of elements that's responsible for the paradox. It's not an "attitude" that propels you through space while obeying F=ma, it's materials and energy sources. So unless you can point me to a new periodic table with magical elements with sci-fi properties, and new kinds of Star Trek energy sources, what we have now is *it*. There won't be unreasonably strong materials, there are no fantasy Bob Lazar propulsion technologies.
The Fermi Paradox is dead simple. There is simply no way to realize any of the Space Age delusions. That's it, that's all.
Petroleum has already reached its global production peak as depletion rates shoot past the rate at which new fields can be found and brought on line; natural gas and coal are not far behind—the current bubble in shale gas will be over in five or, just possibly, ten years—and despite decades of animated handwaving, no other energy source has proven to yield anything close to the same abundance and concentration of energy at anything like the same cost. That means, as I’ve shown in detail in past posts here, that industrial civilization will be a short-lived and self-terminating phenomenon.
It's over, dude. So either grow up and face the challenges coming up, or curl into a ball and rock back and forth while crying about the dead delusions of the Space Age.
The submission and at least one of the linked articles are just silly "OMG CHINA" rabble-rousing in an attempt to justify the diversion of NASA resources from commercial providers like SpaceX towards giant white elephants like the SLS heavy-lift rocket (and the legacy contractors behind it). I've yet to see any evidence that China's supposed plans for a heavy-lift rocket are anything more than sketches from dreamy engineers, without any actual funding behind them; if anything other non-existent heavy-lift rockets like SpaceX's Falcon XX have more progress behind them.
If anything, indications so far suggest that China's space exploration plans involve the more sensible approach of assembling exploration modules in space, instead of building rarely-used mega-rockets that launch everything up at once.
See... I saw it from different angle...
Details of Cheese Moon Rocket Emerge
I knew it all along!
You might as well argue with the wall. The overwhelming mentality on Slashdot, as seen by the poster here, is that space travel is a total waste of money and that we need to invest in wars and occupations instead. If you're looking for a haven for space geeks and sci-fi fans, this isn't it.
nope, it's just that "space nutter" troll and a few fiscal-responsibility types. but if they watch the story tags fly by and jump on anything with "space" in it, they'll own every thread.
Would they even be willing to sell it?
Wasn't this the point of offshoring technology?
Have no fear. Five hundred years from now, the spaceships will be manned by cowboy types and the only time they will speak Chinese is when they swear.
Well, that might not be impossible http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/
The Brits have been pushing this kind of technology for decades (remember HOTOL?) but it seems to take a while for it to get any traction. Shame really, the potential is staggering. The demise of Concorde had more to do with its introduction coinciding with the oil embargo, it was conceived in the days of cheap fuel and its high consumption would have been less of an (economic) issue. I don't see any such issues with a hydrogen powered engine since producing hydrogen doesn't absolutely have to depend on hydrocarbons. I wonder if investors are just scared off by the Concorde experience.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
You know those inscrutable aliens in sci-fi films that have indecipherable glyphs on the sides of their spaceships: They're Chinese.
Actually, someone found a stone tablet, somewhere near Siberia. They carbon dated it, and it supposed to be like more than 5 millions year old
On that stone tablet were carvings that looks very much like some ancient Chinese characters
I had the link once, but unfortunately I lost it (hard disk crashed).
I tried to search for it, to no avail.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Maybe someone should start writing a new stuxnet variant targetting China's space program?
Yes, we will hear all the neo-cons and RWNJ on this site screaming about O killing off Constellation as well as the SLS. Yet, it is absolutely WORTHLESS.
.5B to launch. 2 companies would then win the bid to produce these. Before completion, another contest would take place to have 5 launches total from 2 companies. This allows the non-winners to do their own launch system if they believe that they have a winner (think ATK with Liberty). The companies would submit the price for 2 launches/year for 4 years. 2 companies would win. Whoever has the lowest bid, would get a 3rd launch/year. This rewards companies that push the bid low. And with 5 launches a year, it would be possible to put a lunar base, as well a mars base up their cheaply.
Instead, we should kill off the SLS TODAY and focus on getting private launchers going for human launches, as WELL as the multiple companies doing inflatable space stations.
THEN create a COTS program for TWO SHLV. It should carry around 150 tonnes to LEO, cost under 5B to produce in under 4 years, and under
Make no mistake. China IS in a cold war with the west, and they are WINNING.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I'll bet that the Chinese will set foot on the Moon and claim it for themselves, regardless of any long-standing International agreements to the contrary.
..and yes, I know this post will get modded down to "-1, Troll" and I'll get flamed for posting this. Haters gonna hate; I'm expressing my opinion, and I don't care who likes or dislikes it. I don't trust the Chinese government; I have been given no reason to.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
What this country need is a visionary genius who can lose billions of dollars failing to hype electric cars and still claim to beat the Chinese on launch costs.
Charlatans like that is what make America great.
Hah, little do any of you know that steam didn't replace sail, diesel did!
that we need to invest in wars and occupations instead.
LOL right, that's what I read on here every night.....and also love letters to George Bush. Uh......are you sure you've actually read Slashdot?
The problem I see with space travel is, going to Mars doesn't actually help us get into the rest of the galaxy. It's not actually a stepping stone......to escape the Solar System, we need new fundamental research in physics and material science. Going to Mars could actually divert from that.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
They can have it. What could they possibly do there that would make it worth the trip?
Establish a military presence that controls near earth space and possibly threatens targets on the earth's surface via large kinetic weapons (all the bang of nukes without the radiation).
OK, so our technology has peaked out.
Didn't I see you standing there when Ooog invented the wheel? And wasn't it you that said "What good is this 'wheel' thing you 'invented' that will cause the gods to hate us? Why can't you be reasonable and have your wife pack all your shit on her back like everybody else does?'
'Reasonable' people refuse to rock the boat. 'Reasonable' people embrace and defend the status quo. Status quo means 'freeze in place', nothing moves. Not even you. So, go ahead and stand in place, don't move. The unreasonable among us are moving on.
Space travel at this stage of the game is engineering. We're still developing the engineering to do it cheaper and better. Now, the next little bit is going to take some thinking, so if you wanna take a nap first, that's okay, this comment will still be here when you wake up.
You want clean air, water, land, whatever, there are exactly two and only two options to get it. Option 1 is come up with a way to destroy every piece of technology everywhere on the planet, down to and including the ability to make fire, and turn the entirety of the human species back into a hunter-gatherer tribal society. Downside of this is, the planet cannot support 7 billion people at the stage of hunter-gatherers. It'd be closer to half a million, maybe a million, spread all over the globe. High level apex predators need large areas to hunt in, they can't be supported in small areas. This means there's not a lot of them. And as the current champion apex predator, we're dangerously overextended without our technology.
Option 2 is move all havey industry like metal refining and dangerous chemical processes into orbit and beyond. Get it out of the atmosphere where its poluting byproducts can be blown away by the solar wind. Bonus is, the raw materials are readily at hand, just need a nudge to put them in orbit around Earth where they can be harvested. Again, this is an engineering problem, and like all engineering problems, you solve it by throwing engineers at it.
Go ahead, be 'reasonable'. Fight for the status quo. Fight for decreasing resources increasingly more inaccessible. Fight to keep funnelling what wealth is left into the pockets of the 1%. Just don't complain when us unreasonable blokes run you over on our way to the future.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
LOL right, that's what I read on here every night.....and also love letters to George Bush. Uh......are you sure you've actually read Slashdot?
I don't know how you have your friends/foes list set up, but I see tons and tons of comments here parroting the Republican/tea party agenda, supporting the wars, etc. I also see a fair number of opposing comments, but those mostly seem to be from non-Americans.
Going to Mars is IMO a stepping stone in that it helps get people out into space and building experience in sending people farther than an easy 3-day trip to the Moon. Also, we don't need to focus on going to the rest of the galaxy first, we need to get comfortable just leaving our own planet first, and in addition, there's plenty of stuff for us to do right here in our own solar system (and maybe even right around our own planet): energy harvesting, asteroid/moon mining, setting up systems to divert any asteroids on collision courses, tourism, etc. Besides, suppose something happened and we really did need to make an exodus from Earth (suppose the planet's atmosphere started turning unbreathable, so that in a few decades we'd be unable to live outside sealed structures); right now, we'd be screwed, but if we already have experience sending humans to other planets and building large structures in space, it wouldn't be quite so much of a stretch to contemplate building some generation ships, or at least building permanent off-world habitats for very large populations of humans.
Welcome to space race 2.0. This time around USA will be the one losing economically.
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
..via large kinetic weapons
..and the AC has it. Did everyone else forget about The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress already?
I predict the next "space race" will be to establish a permanent presence on the Moon, and the Chinese will be playing the role the Russians played back in the 1950's and 1960's.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Let's assume the Chinese build a mass driver (assuming you could actually build one) on the moon and threatened to drop heavy rocks on us. The proper response would be "If you do that, we're going to turn your country into a vast expanse of radioactive glass." Trillions of yuan wasted because they forgot we had nukes. Stupid Chinese!
People investing in aerospace who don't understand the difference between kerosene and hydrogen as fuels, deserve to lose their money. I should hope people dumping millions into a project would do a little bit of homework.
huh?
You can weep all you want but this is a problem we need to solve. I wouldn't be giving up too soon. I see in you blog you saying you lost heart when the shuttle blew up. Well, this is a risky business and people die. The astronauts know it and accept it. We waste more fuel on silly pointless wars than we consume in space travel. You seem too ready to give up. Fine. Get out of the way.
China may be going to the moon but the US will have Idiocracy.
It was mostly basic aerodynamics that killed HOTOL. The design called for something that looked essentially like a vertical rocket but with wings. You can't fly that horizontally when empty. It goes up fine, but once you've used up all the fuel and released your payload, you're left with a monstrously huge empty tank causing drag at the front, and a cluster of heavy engines at the back. In aerodynamic flight, your drag is so far ahead of the centre of mass that it's like trying to fire an arrow backwards.
HOTOL could have been flying in the mid 90s if the designers hadn't made that mistake.
I predict the next "space race" will be to establish a permanent presence on the Moon, and the Chinese will be playing the role the Russians played back in the 1950's and 1960's.
What makes you so sure they won't be playing the role of the Americans ?
Their progress is seen as 'slow' and 'copying' by most Americans, but their 5 year and 10 year and 20 year plans are being steadily executed.
Their Shenzhou spacecraft has done spaceflights that resemble American Mercury and Gemini, but it actually has all capabilities of Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and Soyuz combined (and improved).
European Linux user, living in Antwerp
Ah! I think I see where you're coming from: space travel is not something that you would ever be allowed to do, therefore it isn't interesting for the human race to endeavour.
That makes sense.. in a completely self-absorbed way...
Really. Just give the Chinese all of our Apollo info (everything we still have) and let them measure the extant rockets with a micrometer. Let them rebuild from our tech and throw in all the improvements the last thirty eight years have wrought and applaud them as they travel to the moon. There is no strategic value in the junk - the Chinese can nuke us quite handily, thank you - and we would save them trillions in development costs.
Plus, we get to watch their public become disenchanted with how great Chinese science is, just like the Americans became disenchanted with their own science. China can join the US on the metaphorical couch watching reality TV and eating fried squid chips. Win-win!
capable of taking Chinese astronauts to the moon and points beyond.
No, he is right: look how the shadows on the picture on that link are all wrong-
The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
More importantly, they are focused on the economy, the way that USA was. Sadly, they cheat at everything, which we did not, however, they are still winning.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Von Neumann probes should be possible within the known laws of physics. Physical constraints cannot be the solution to the Fermi paradox.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Then it would be mutually assured destruction. Their response would be to pound North America into dust -- non-radioactive dust, I might add, which could be re-colonized by the survivors immediately.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
No it wouldn't. They wouldn't have any reason to sacrifice their country like that.
Wrong again. Steam did replace sail, diesel came later.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
I've built quadcopters and other r/c devices. I'm even guilty of purchasing parts at hobbyking. granted some the the parts are great, but you always need to order extra because the QA over in China isn't very good. I love the thrust I get out of the NTN 26-28a motor, but man.. If you need 4 motors you need to order 6 because 50% of the motors have bearings that fail. If it wasn't for the bearings the motors would be one of the best. I'm going to replace the bearings once I get the proper tools. Also tolerance.. hmm... you can always count on one part being wrong or a hole not lining up and have to machine the part yourself. Now imagine QA like that on a Lunar Lander project. Those poor Asians on that Lunar Lander. I say they have a 50% chance of survival. Not because they are not smart.. they are very smart. But they have QA issues.
You know Ooog? I know Ooog too! Nice guy, invented the wheel. Wasn't he Chinese?
So you're inside the heads of the Chinese military leadership? You know exactly what they'd do in that situation? I think not.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
They already have nukes. If that's what they're thinking it doesn't matter what happens on the moon.
Fermi paradox aside for a second....
After that last mega-jackpot thing a few months back, the one for a bunch of money with the odds around 1 in 175,711,536, well that got me to thinking... Assuming life was as probable as wining the lottery, and assuming there are about 300 billion stars in our galaxy; with those odds there will only be life in less than 2000 systems.
The real question is ... is the chance of life forming somewhere in a system greater or less than winning the lottery, and has anyone else won this galactic lottery?
Yeah, Ooog was cool. He also helped invent dirt.
I told him we shoulda patented it. It was a great idea...
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Apparently you have no imagination, which here in the U.S. anymore doesn't surprise me one bit, all the imagination, critical thinking skills, and initiative have been bred out of or trained out of just about everyone.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
If by that you mean I'm an engineer who can actually analyze a concept without going all starry-eyed, well, that's true. Clearly you spent too much time reading science fiction and not enough studying actual science. It's fine to use your imagination, but at some point you need to leaven it with some connection with reality.
History is filled with intransigent people like yourself that do not believe we will ever grow beyond our current mold, that certain topics are not worth pursuing as they will never bear fruit, etc. A good example are those skeptical about the future of artificial intelligence moving away simple heuristics and mathematical models, despite that "full"-brain simulation, at least at the neuronal level, is now not a matter of if, but when:
H. Markram, "The Blue Brain project", Nature Rev. Neurosci. 7: 153-160, 2006
H. Markram, "Fixing the location and dimensions of functional neocortical columns", HFSP J. 2: 132-135, 2008
G. Khazen, et al., "Combinatorial expression rules of ion channel genes in juvenile rat (Rattus norvegicus) neocortical neurons", PLoS One 7: e34786, 2012
M. Hines, et al., "Comparison of neuronal spike exchange methods on a Blue Gene/P supercomputer" Front. Comput. Neurosci. 5: 49, 2011
R. Perin, et al., "A synaptic organizing principle for cortical neuronal groups", PNAS 108: 5419-5424, 2011
A. C. Anastassiou, et al., "Ephaptic coupling of cortical neurons", Nature Neurosci. 14: 217-223, 2011
S. Druckmann, et al, "Effective stimuli for constructing reliable neuron models", PLoS Comput. Biol. 7: e1002133, 2011
E. Hay, et al., "Models of neocortical layer 5b pyramidal cells capturing a wide range of dendritic and perisomatic active properties", PLoS Comput. Biol. 7: e1002107, 2011
S. Romand, et al., "Morphological development of thick-tufted layer V pyramidal cells in the rat somatosensory cortex", Front. Neuroanat. 5: 5, 2011
J. G. King, et al., "A copmonent-based extension framework for large-scale parallel simulations in NEURON", Front. Neuroinfo. 3: 10, 2009
T. K. Berger, et al., "Frequency-dependent disynaptic inhibition in the pyramidal network: A ubiquitous pathway in the developing rat neocortex", J. Physiol. 587: 5411-5425, 2009
A. Loebel, et al., "Multiquantal release underlies the distribution of synaptic efficacies in the neocortex", Front. Comput. Neurosci. 3: 27, 2009
H. Köndgen, et al., "The dynamical response properties of neocortical neurons to temporally modulated noisy inputs in vitro", Cerebral Cortex 18: 2086-2097, 2008
M. L. Hines, et al., "Neuron splitting in compute-bound parallel network simulations enables runtime scaling with twice as many processors", J. Comput. Neurosci. 25: 203-210, 2008
M. L. Hines, et al., "Fully implicit parallel simulation of single neurons", J. Comput. Neurosci. 25: 439-448, 2008
C. Calì, et al., "Inferring connection proximity in networks of electrically coupled cells by subthreshold frequency response analysis", J. Comput. Neurosci. 24: 330-345, 2008
M. Arsiero, et al., "The impact of input fluctuations on the frequency–current relationships of layer 5 pyramidal neurons in the rat medial prefrontal cortex", J. Neurosci. 27: 3274-3284, 2007
J.-V. Le Bé, et al., "Morphological, electrophysiological, and synaptic properties of corticocallosal pyramidal cells in the neonatal rat neocortex", Cerebral Cortex 17: 2204-2213, 2007
G. Silberberg and H. Markram, "Disynaptic inhibition between neocortical pyramidal cells mediated by Martinotti cells", Neuron 53: 735-746, 2007
M. Toledo-Rodriguez and H. Markram, "Single-cell RT-PCR, a technique to decipher the electrical, anatomical, and genetic determinants of neuronal diversity", Methods Mol. Biol. 403: 123-139, 2007
T. Berger, et al., "Transient rhythmic network activity in the somatosensory cortex evoked by distributed input in vitro", Neurosci. 140: 1401-1413, 2006
J.-V. Le Bé and H. Markram, "Spontaneous and evoked synaptic rewiring in the neonatal neocortex", PNAS 103: 13214-13219, 2006
M. Migliore, et al., "Parallel network simulations with NEURON", J. Comput. Neurosci. 21: 119-129, 2006
Y. Wang, et al., "Heterogeneity in the pyramidal network of the medial prefrontal cortex", Nature Neurosci. 9: 534-542, 2006
J. V. Le Bé, et al., "Morphological, electrophysiological, and synaptic properties of cor
Yeah, like I said: You have NO imagination, none whatsoever, and furthermore you sound like an absolute prick, likely tedious as hell to have to deal with personally, as rude as any kid from 4chan online, and you can go fuck yourself.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Says the guy who wrote this:
Maybe if you don't want people to treat you like an asshole you shouldn't act like one.