China's Jade Rabbit Lunar Rover Officially Declared Lost

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China's Jade Rabbit Lunar Rover Officially Declared Lost

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday February 12, 2014 @11:06AM from the daisy,-daisy,-give-me-your-answer,-do dept.

An anonymous reader writes "'Jade Rabbit,' the first lunar rover successfully deployed by China, has now been officially declared 'lost.' The rover encountered problems on January 25th, just over a month into its planned three-month mission. 'The rover's mechanical problems are likely related to critical components that must be protected during the cold lunar night. When temperatures plunge, the rover's mast is designed to fold down to protect delicate instruments, which can then be kept warm by a radioactive heat source. Yutu also needs to angle a solar panel towards the point where the sun will rise to maintain power levels. A mechanical fault in these systems could leave the rover fatally exposed to the dark and bitter cold.'"

83 of 131 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ahh, heat issues... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-02-12 11:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

Someone mentioned here how spiffy it would be to send a 1kg-class lander to the Moon, while I disagreed. Now here's another reason why that's a bad idea, one that didn't occur to me at the time: the volume vs. surface ratio, and thermal management in those extreme conditions.

--
Ezekiel 23:20
1. Re:Ahh, heat issues... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-12 12:47 · Score: 1
  
  Well, they shouldn't have built it at Foxconn...
  On the bright side, it's still more successful than Slashdot Beta
2. Re:Ahh, heat issues... by ShanghaiBill · 2014-02-12 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  A Lunar "day" lasts for two weeks. To win the Google Lunar X Prize, the rover has to travel 500m. To do that in 14 days, you only need to average 0.0004m/sec. After that, you have your $20M, so who cares if your rover dies when the sun sets?
3. Re:Ahh, heat issues... by LoztInSpace · 2014-02-12 16:30 · Score: 1
  
  It was not a manufacturing problem. It ran off a cliff because the development teams used two types of abacus and fucked up the calculations.
4. Re:Ahh, heat issues... by tlhIngan · 2014-02-13 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  Well, they shouldn't have built it at Foxconn...
  You mean they shouldn't have built it in China, that is. After all, the manufacturer saw that they could make a few extra bucks by using cheaper parts in it and pocketing the difference. Why bother using the expensive components they specify? Just substitute with cheaper ones - they won't know the difference and it's a few more dollars in the pocket.
  Or perhaps they ripped off the design and produced a counterfeit part during the third shift?
*rubs hands together* by ackthpt · 2014-02-12 11:11 · Score: 1

This is going to be great!
I'll be able to open the first junkyard on the Moon at this rate =)

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
1. Re:*rubs hands together* by R3d+M3rcury · 2014-02-12 12:25 · Score: 2
  
  Nah. The money's in bringing it back.
ORLY? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-12 11:11 · Score: 5, Informative

Nice and strong signal from Yutu: http://www.moonviews.com/2014/02/yutu-rover-has-phoned-home-from-the-moon.html
Philosophical question: by ericloewe · 2014-02-12 11:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

Can the deployment be successful if the object deployed failed the majority of its mission objectives?
1. Re:Philosophical question: by bored_engineer · 2014-02-12 11:32 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. from http://dictionary.reference.co...:
  
  deploy
  verb (used without object)
  4. to come into a position ready for use: the plane can't land unless the landing gear deploys.
2. Re:Philosophical question: by DNS-and-BIND · 2014-02-12 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  Just because it landed and deployed its landing gear doesn't mean it accomplished all its design goals. Geez, imagine an Eagle that landed and expected to spend 3 months on the moon and yet ran out of battery after the first week. "Mission accomplished!"
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
3. Re:Philosophical question: by radtea · 2014-02-12 12:40 · Score: 1
  
  Philosophical answer: who cares?
  You've really posed a political question, which is what "philosophical questions" become when anyone cares about them.
  "What abstract category shall we put this concrete reality in" only matters to people who think abstractions exist independently of knowing subjects, which is say, idiots.
  Nothing "is" a "failure" or a "success". Things actively assigned to the categories failure and success by knowing subjects. The act of assignment is useful. It reduces the extreme cognitive burden we face when thinking about more than five or ten things. But when we turn around and treat those categories as more than cognitive conveniences, and therefore treat it as a matter of import which one we assign a concrete reality to, we are almost always engaged in some kind of political act.
  There are cases--mostly in scientific research--where such questions matter. In almost all other cases they are about power, not cognition.
  
  --
  Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
4. Re:Philosophical question: by Mal-2 · 2014-02-12 13:25 · Score: 1
  
  Relatively speaking, yes. If it had failed to land softly and had instead cratered, that'd just be an epic fail. If it had blown up on the launch pad, that would be a complete embarrassment. If it had failed to phone home at all, that would be a different type of fail. As it is, they got it there in one piece and deployed it and proved that it worked. It just didn't KEEP working, which is hopefully a solvable problem. This means it makes sense to send up bigger, more expensive missions, which might not have seemed justified had the failure been at some previous stage. It succeeded in proving they've got the basics in place. There was only so much actual science to be done with a tiny rover, so the fact that it was unable to complete the mission is less important in this particular case.
  
  --
  How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
5. Re:Philosophical question: by bored_engineer · 2014-02-12 14:03 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, I should have expounded a little more. I read the article and the discussion here intending to ask the same question that ericlowe did. I answered much too concisely after I looked up the definition, so I skipped some of the thought process.
  I didn't mean to imply that it was successful, only that the machine deployed from its lander. I suppose that I would have been more complete had I said that it had deployed properly up to "x" point, then failed at "y." (In the example that dictionary.com provided, even if the landing gear of a plane deploys properly, it doesn't necessarily follow that it will "accomplish its mission" and land safely.)
6. Re:Philosophical question: by pslytely+psycho · 2014-02-12 15:32 · Score: 2
  
  When queried on the loss of the rover the Chinese government replied "We are at a loss to explain this failure, after all it worked in Kerbal Space Program..."
  
  --
  Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
7. Re:Philosophical question: by fermion · 2014-02-12 16:00 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Doing this stuff is very hard. There are things that happen even in low earth orbit that we don't think about, that we can't relate to, because all our experience and all our common sense is tied up in this atmosphere laden gravity well.
  I have done stuff like this, and even if the top level mission objectives are not met, i.e. three month mission to explore and get data, I am sure that this mission could be listed as more than 50% successful. Things like soft landing on the moon, deploying and activating the robot, whatever the robot has done for a month, etc.
  I am sure that everyone will learn a lot from this mission. NASA has had a lot of mission that it took on with partners that probably were not even as successful as this, but there was a lot to learn from the experience.
  Again, going to space is very hard. Doing things in space is very hard, and there are a bunch of stuff that can trip you up. Not everything is going to work perfectly. NASA and the US has a great reputation because we have things like Curiosity and Voyager. But we must also remember that Hubble space telescope was almost lost, and Kepler barely completed it's primary mission and was nowhere near completing it's extended mission.
  Not saying any of this reflects poorly on anyone. Just saying space is hard.
  
  --
  "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
8. Re:Philosophical question: by khallow · 2014-02-13 01:00 · Score: 1
  
  Can the deployment be successful if the object deployed failed the majority of its mission objectives?
  Of course. It depends on the relative importance of those mission objectives and whether they were considered necessary for success or not. Out of curiosity, what makes you think it failed the majority of its mission objectives?
Not Dead Yet! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-12 11:12 · Score: 1

https://twitter.com/uhf_satcom/status/433702655290908672
China is ascending by cold+fjord · 2014-02-12 11:13 · Score: 5, Interesting

China is ascending the learning curve. Space provides a lot of tough problems. I wonder how many more visits NASA will be getting in the future, both official, and "unofficial"?
NASA's Strict Rules for Talking to and Working with China

--
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
1. Re:China is ascending by Tablizer · 2014-02-12 17:34 · Score: 1
  
  The US lunar Ranger project in the mid 60's took 7 tries before it finally was able to work. A lot of knowledge about redundancy, testing, clean-rooms, and QA was gained in the process.
  I'd love to be in there for the cheers when 7 finally clicked. Imagine failing 6 times, waiting for the news, and finally getting confirmation?
  The bazaar thing is that the 1962 Mariner II, the first interplanetary probe (to Venus) mostly worked, and it was based off of early Ranger designs. Maybe more sun helped?
  
  --
  Table-ized A.I.
2. Re:China is ascending by LaughingVulcan · 2014-02-13 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Speaking to the article quoted, any rocket which can achieve orbit can be used as a military missile with a warhead or satellite of the same payload size/specs, and almost any imaging system which can be pointed at space or a planet can be pointed at ours. So, maybe the surprise should be that individual scientists are allowed to cooperate at all internationally given there is a genuine national security interest (as opposed to "OMG! Turrerists!") And yes, NASA (and their predecessors) had a very steep learning curve. Rather amazing that China achieved the landing and roving at all on the first go-round. Definitely hard to establish a full robotic mission with a 265,000 mile round trip. Makes me conder what the successors (if any) will do.
Figures by oodaloop · 2014-02-12 11:13 · Score: 4, Funny

It was made with cheap American parts!

--
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
1. Re:Figures by mjwx · 2014-02-12 13:37 · Score: 1
  
  You must find the Jade Rabbit before the next full moon.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
2. Re:Figures by achbed · 2014-02-12 16:23 · Score: 1
  
  American components, Chinese components... All made in TAIWAN!
What a shame by msobkow · 2014-02-12 11:14 · Score: 2

Their mission had been going so well until the failure. It had been looking like it would be a good promotional piece for the Chinese, now it's just another failed space mission.
Well, not a complete failure. They did get there, and the rover was working for quite some time.
Ah well, could have been worse. Could have just failed utterly like that Mars launch a few years back. I forget who did that one.

--
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
1. Re:What a shame by ericloewe · 2014-02-12 11:22 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The Mars Climate Orbiter...
  Lockheed Martin screwed that one up. The specs called for all measurements to be SI, but a specific piece of software written by Lockheed Martin returned the value in imperial units - the error spread and ruined all calculations that depended on it.
  Since this happened while calculating how to achieve the desired orbit, the result was a resounding disaster.
2. Re:What a shame by ChunderDownunder · 2014-02-12 12:01 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  imperial units explain why the death star blew up twice.
  Yet the emperor blames contractor shoddiness on those pesky rebels.
3. Re:What a shame by wooferhound · 2014-02-12 12:40 · Score: 1
  
  Their mission had been going so well until the failure. It had been looking like it would be a good promotional piece for the Chinese, now it's just another failed space mission.
  The mission consisted of 2 parts, a lander, and a rover. The Lander has been functioning very well since touchdown, and the rover did finally phone home making the rumors of it's death exaggerated.
  
  --
  We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
4. Re:What a shame by Andrewkov · 2014-02-12 21:38 · Score: 1
  
  Their mission had been going so well until the failure
  I think that could describe a lot of missions.
Hello! by change-yutu · 2014-02-12 11:25 · Score: 5, Informative

I'm not dead yet! https://twitter.com/uhf_satcom...
Importance of keeping JPL intact by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-12 11:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

Just shows the difficulty of developing a space probe from scratch. By keeping a steady stream of probes going to Mars, the probe teams at JPL stay in practice, and good probe designs come about. Starting out with a small Mars probe in the late 90s, and steadily growing bigger was a good path.
1. Re:Importance of keeping JPL intact by hey! · 2014-02-12 12:23 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Viking is irrelevant to the point GP was making, which is that the US maintained its program capabilities with a series of modest, affordable missions rather than waiting another decade to launch a more expensive, complex mission.
  Viking was conceived and developed at the tail end of the Apollo era, and cost $934 million in 1974 dollars -- roughly 4.6 billion in present day terms. That wasn't much by the standards of the day, but Pathfinder was developed in a totally different era, an era with much more advanced technology, but much more constrained budgets. Pathfinder cost less than 1/10 of what Viking's cost ($406 million in present day dollars) and met all of its mission objectives. It was a brilliant success, not only on its own terms, but in establishing that tent-pole projects aren't the only way to do planetary exploration.
  
  --
  Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
2. Re:Importance of keeping JPL intact by joe_frisch · 2014-02-12 12:48 · Score: 1
  
  Viking was a technological triumph and should not be forgotten. Along with Apollo and Voyager it is a marvel from of the glory days of NASA.
  I wish we could have kept the funding going.
3. Re:Importance of keeping JPL intact by TechyImmigrant · 2014-02-12 14:02 · Score: 1
  
  What's a tent pole project? I thought they built space ships, not camping gear.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
4. Re:Importance of keeping JPL intact by JamieIanMacgregor · 2014-02-13 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  with all the probes we're sending out, is it any wonder the greys are coming here and stuffing a few up people's arses every now and then?
5. Re:Importance of keeping JPL intact by TechyImmigrant · 2014-02-21 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  Only when it died and needed a proper send off.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
What matters is what they do next by joe_frisch · 2014-02-12 11:31 · Score: 2

The US space program had all sorts of problems early on - a bunch of Ranger probes failed. The key was that they kept trying until it worked.
Will China keep trying until they get it right, or will they decide that space is too hard?
1. Re:What matters is what they do next by lennier1 · 2014-02-12 13:19 · Score: 1
  
  Considering how many probes were lost to various factors over the decades, coming this far on their first try actually wasn't half bad.
2. Re:What matters is what they do next by Trax3001BBS · 2014-02-12 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  The US space program had all sorts of problems early on - a bunch of Ranger probes failed. The key was that they kept trying until it worked.
  Russia was orbiting the Moon, while the U.S. was still trying to hit it with Rangers :}
3. Re:What matters is what they do next by dryeo · 2014-02-12 20:00 · Score: 1
  
  They're planning another more advanced rover then a lunar soil sample return mission in 2018. Considering this mission was mostly successful I doubt that they'll change their plans much, perhaps a bit of delay while trying to figure what failed on this mission.
  
  --
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
4. Re:What matters is what they do next by dryeo · 2014-02-12 20:09 · Score: 1
  
  Third try, the first was a hard landing in 2009 after a successful 16 month lunar oribting mission, second a repeat of the first except instead of doing a hard lunar landing, it went to L2 and then visited the asteroid 4179 Toutatis and is still going to give the Chinese experience in deep space tracking and control.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
  
  --
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
USA, USA, USA is #1!!! by BBF_BBF · 2014-02-12 11:36 · Score: 2

This is going to be great!
I'll be able to open the first junkyard on the Moon at this rate =)
The Jade Rabbit is nothing compared to the "junk" left all over the moon by the Apollo Missions. Even the Soviets left more crap on the moon than China.

In this respect it's still USA #1 with China nor any other country not even close to ever catching up.
1. Re:USA, USA, USA is #1!!! by CohibaVancouver · 2014-02-12 11:56 · Score: 1
  
  The Jade Rabbit is nothing compared to the "junk" left all over the moon by the Apollo Missions
  Yeah, but it's wicked awesome cool junk -
  
  - Moon cars
  - Hasselblad cameras
  - Descent stages
  - Plaques
  - Laser reflectors
  - Space boots
  
  Granted, the golf balls and urine bags are a bit messy.
2. Re:USA, USA, USA is #1!!! by Niac · 2014-02-12 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  Not really... They're quite frozen.
  
  --
  http://gabrielcain.com/
3. Re:USA, USA, USA is #1!!! by CohibaVancouver · 2014-02-12 14:13 · Score: 1
  
  and a few LM ascent stages
  Wonder how beat up those are...
Mods, ? by BancBoy · 2014-02-12 11:43 · Score: 1

+1 Angry, With Valid Point

--
[UID-HeinzIntel]
Re:Maybe commited suicide due to harsh conditions by DoubleJ1024 · 2014-02-12 11:48 · Score: 1

That's Japan you insensitive CLOD.
Re:Apologize now! by o_ferguson · 2014-02-12 11:57 · Score: 1

1,000 “outbroken” - 1,000 apologies for my retarded kinsmen. "Please to be restful. It is only a few crazies who have from the crazy place outbroken." --William S. Burroughs.

--
- In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
Quality In, Quality Out by tech.kyle · 2014-02-12 11:58 · Score: 2

That's going to be an interesting PayPal claim.

--
If we colonize Mars, it won't be the World Wide Web anymore. UWW?
1. Re:Quality In, Quality Out by TheGratefulNet · 2014-02-12 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  "look, I sent it there. its not my problem that no one was there to sign for it."
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:radioactive by ChunderDownunder · 2014-02-12 12:08 · Score: 1

It was faked, why should the Chinese care about a little 'space-junk' littering the Gobi Desert?
Of course, I don't think the Mongolians would appreciate you calling them 'aliens', you insensitive clod! :-)
Getting there is only part of the battle... by trims · 2014-02-12 12:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

As I pointed out on the story on Israel doing a moon mission last week, the technology and knowledge required to put an (unmanned) 100kg object on the moon (or Mars, or other celestial rock) is very well understood these days, so much so that well-financed private corporations (see the various X-prise competitors) can do it, given $100m or less. All the engineering issues are both well-known, and well-documented as to solutions. This is all out in the open press, so anyone with the capital merely has to hire enough competent engineers, and have enough money to build the resulting design. Rocket science is no longer rocket science.
What remains extraordinarily difficult is for someone to build a long-functioning probe. The knowledge of the practical problems (and their workaround/solutions) has NOT been disseminated, and thus, pretty much everyone has to learn from scratch. Extraterrestrial probe building is still very much a Deep Magic field, with only a select few organizations (mostly NASA, but ESA too) having the experience to do it well. And they're not sharing.
I fully expect the Chinese to get a working lander robot sometime soon. Just like I fully expect that their next one will not work to its design specs, either. In many ways, it's like building a new car from scratch - the first couple of prototypes crash badly, and you have to learn all the tricks by yourself, because nobody else shares their hard-won info with you. Tesla does well because they were able to hire experienced people from Ford, etc. who brought that knowledge with them. The Chinese Space Agency (CNSA) wasn't able to do that, for obvious reasons, so they're going to have to do the whole learning curve themselves. Good news is that they'll do it MUCH faster than anyone else did, if for no other reason that the tech and general science knowledge is more available and understood.
-Erik

--
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
1. Re:Getting there is only part of the battle... by khallow · 2014-02-13 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  The knowledge of the practical problems (and their workaround/solutions) has NOT been disseminated, and thus, pretty much everyone has to learn from scratch. Extraterrestrial probe building is still very much a Deep Magic field, with only a select few organizations (mostly NASA, but ESA too) having the experience to do it well. And they're not sharing.
  NASA at least has been sharing. But that's the sort of knowledge that either gets buried in a forty year old NASA journal or never put to paper in the first place because nobody thought it was important enough to do so.
Re:How do I disable beta by lennier1 · 2014-02-12 13:18 · Score: 1

There should be a link in the page footer.
The saying is true. by GoodNewsJimDotCom · 2014-02-12 13:19 · Score: 5, Funny

It is better to have roved and lost than to have never roved at all.

--
God spoke to me
1. Re:The saying is true. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-12 14:29 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  It is better to have roved and lost than to have never roved at all.
  Ah, the moral problem you present: rate you up +1 for being clever or -1 for being racist....
The difference between innovation & imitation by sethstorm · 2014-02-12 13:19 · Score: 1

With the US, they would have considered more possibilities of how to handle disasters.
With China, it's mostly about the events that generate PR (and thus face-saving) value. The lunar rover's construction is considered an afterthought except for getting it to the desired event.

--
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Are you kidding? by cyfer2000 · 2014-02-12 13:50 · Score: 5, Informative

I don't know what koolaid you guys have been drinking, but Chinese news says the rabbit has waked up.

--
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Moon dust is being blamed by Trax3001BBS · 2014-02-12 14:21 · Score: 2

I guess it's some really tenacious stuff, and very abrasive.
On board the LEM the astronauts took out rocks to look at them, the dust was so fine it got under their finger nails and took several weeks to grow out.
- Harrison H. Schmitt (Apollo 17)
And confirmed by UHF-Satcom by cyfer2000 · 2014-02-12 14:25 · Score: 2

pic

--
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Re:Apologize now! by ShieldW0lf · 2014-02-12 14:39 · Score: 1

I think Slashdot and all you foreigners should apologize for blatant Anti-Chinese bias! You try to make a bad image for China....not your country, not your business, but you must meddle in our affairs. I think you act out of jealousy because of China's advanced technology.
We rely on you to manufacture just about everything we use. It scares us, and it makes us insecure about ourselves. The lesser among us need to either deny the truth of our dependence upon you, or make you seem like primitive beasts of burden, or both.

--
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Dear China by argStyopa · 2014-02-12 15:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm as patriotic as the next guy - "go team USA" and all that - but I'm sad to hear that your rover is lost.
Space is not a zero-sum game. My country has decided that we're more interested in spending the dollars (that we constantly borrow from you) on social welfare programs, caring for old people, and floating eleven carrier groups in a world that doesn't have a single other navy that could fight ONE of them.
I'm looking forward to your next space accomplishment, as I truly believe such things help ALL people, ultimately.

--
-Styopa
1. Re:Dear China by rinka · 2014-02-13 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Really wish I could mod this up.
  Completely with you argStyopa
2. Re:Dear China by cavebison · 2014-02-13 14:46 · Score: 1
  
  I'm as patriotic as the next guy - "go team USA" and all that - but I'm sad to hear that your rover is lost.
  I wonder why Americans often feel the need to qualify their support for another country by making sure it's known how "patriotic" they are. It sounds very, very weird from the outside (in this case Oz).
Re:Figures... by NormAtHome · 2014-02-12 15:22 · Score: 1

Anonymous coward complex, you have it.
But I also read... by theendlessnow · 2014-02-12 15:41 · Score: 1

I read that around the same time, Al-Qaeda had discovered a new vehicle to move their weapons of mass destruction. Code red, Kano!
Re:They should have stolen some more recent plans. by ColdWetDog · 2014-02-12 15:52 · Score: 2

Stop whining and get your concepts straight. The US still leads pretty much everybody in advanced technology. China is playing catchup. They're playing a good game - not terribly surprising as their economy is pretty much the same size as ours and they have a more than a few smart, hardworking people. Yes, they steal our intellectual property. We steal theirs (and everybody else's). Get used to it.
However, they are world leaders in literally bulldozing the opposition. The major reason we can't build a high speed train between anywhere where you would want to build a high speed train is that there are things in the way. Buildings, roads and other annoyances. In China a few bribes and some physical / emotional threats to the less enthusiastic folks and you're there. In the US, where we still follow the rule of law most of the time, not so much.
The world is a complicated place. Certainly the shine on America is wearing off - it always was a thin layer of chrome. Happens to every society and civilization. China may be ascendant but it is not clear just how high they will go. China has a long, very long history of ups and downs.
Stay tuned.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Oh well by kilodelta · 2014-02-12 16:03 · Score: 1

They can get the rover to the Moon but they can't get it to work. Meanwhile the United States has successfully put four rovers down on Mars without much issue. Sojourner, Opportunity, Spirit, and Curiosity. All of them deployed successfully and in the cases of Opportunity and Spirit both performed WELL beyond expectations.

And Curiosity is doing a bang up job too. I guess it sucks that the Chinese spies couldn't infiltrate the groups that developed those rovers.
1. Re:Oh well by matfud · 2014-02-13 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  All the Pioneer and Ranger missions?
  Luna, Cosmos, Zond?
  Yep lots of failures.
2. Re:Oh well by matfud · 2014-02-13 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  Really it is fucking amazing that it got there.
  Curiosity! Well that is beyond anyone’s expectations. The little thing just keeps going.
3. Re:Oh well by matfud · 2014-02-13 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  Opportunity. I must get that right.
Re:Best I've Ever Owned by achbed · 2014-02-12 16:28 · Score: 1

The Jade Rabbit is the best vibrator I've ever owned. Do yourself a favor and get one (or two!). They go great on the clit, in the pussy, in the ass, tickling the dick or nipples, and (my personal favorite) pressed up tight against your taint, just under the scrotum.
But they really don't work well when it's 100K. Of course, if you were to touch your taint with an object at that temperature, I think you might get a variant of the tongue-on-flagpole effect, much to your displeasure.
Re:They should have stolen some more recent plans. by Guy+Smiley · 2014-02-12 19:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

The US leads everybody in their belief in astrology, and their disbelief in evolution as scientific fact.
The government is dominated by individuals that care more about enhancing their personal fortunes or agendas than about the long-term success of the country.
I don't think this bodes well for the future.
It's alive again ... by Vlijmen+Fileer · 2014-02-12 19:23 · Score: 1

http://www.ecns.cn/z/2013/Laun...
News of its death sadly premature :p.
1. Re:It's alive again ... by rinka · 2014-02-13 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, Indian papers are full of how the rover survived the lunar night.
  I wish them the best of luck and hope that the mechanical faults are minor.
What has been accomplished so far? by m.alessandrini · 2014-02-12 19:46 · Score: 1

Did everyone see some photos or videos of what the rover did in the first month, apart from the one photo of the rover when it first landed? From the beginning it seems impossible to find any bit of information about this mission. Was this a kind of secret mission, or what? I mean, not every day someone is walking around on the moon.
Its alive! by Camael · 2014-02-12 19:49 · Score: 1

And now it's apparently alive again .
1. Re:Its alive! by dwater · 2014-02-12 22:32 · Score: 1
  
  I hope they manage to recover it. I'm glad it managed to survive the night without any further damage...
  
  --
  Max.
Re:They should have stolen some more recent plans. by ColdWetDog · 2014-02-13 00:33 · Score: 2

Man, if you think that Americans believe in weird stuff, you should spend some time looking around modern Chinese culture. Rhino Horns? Vaguely phallic quasi edible marine life? Lucky numbers?
We're just posers.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:Are you bitter? by radiumsoup · 2014-02-13 02:16 · Score: 1

same way people salivate to submit the "Beta sucks" posts.
Re:It's not lost... by ctheme · 2014-02-13 06:43 · Score: 1

I'm sure Godot will show up and bail the Jade Rabbit out sooner or later.
Re:The difference between innovation & imitati by matfud · 2014-02-13 09:07 · Score: 1

Do you know how many times the US and Russia failed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
Re:Apologize now! by ShieldW0lf · 2014-02-14 07:52 · Score: 1

But not anything we actually need. We let them make toys. Meanwhile, we feed them.
Is the weather nice in the dream world you live in?

--
-1 Uncomfortable Truth