Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Launches New Heavy-Lift Long March 5 Rocket For First Time (space.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the it's-a-bird-it's-a-plane dept.

hackingbear writes from a report via Space.com: China launched its second new rocket in the year. The Long March 5 rocket, lifted off from the Wenchang launch center on Hainan Island, off China's southern coast, at 8:43 a.m. EDT (1000 GMT; 8:43 p.m. Beijing time), carrying to orbit an experimental satellite called Shijian-17, which is designed to test electric-propulsion technology. Capable of a 25 metric ton payload to low-Earth orbit (LEO), Long March 5 is among the most powerful rockets in service. Besides the scheduled launch of China's upcoming space station, the Long March 5 will also loft Chang'e-5, a robotic sample-return mission to the moon. Chang'e-5 is currently scheduled to lift off sometime next year, Chinese space officials have said.

6 of 93 comments (clear)

  1. Full launch-to-orbit vid here by ControlFreal · · Score: 3, Informative

    The full launch-to-orbit sequence has been posted on YouTube.

    --
    Support a Europe-related section on Slashdot!
  2. Long term plan by jandersen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think what is so remarkable about this is not so much China's individual achievements, but the fact that they clearly follow a long-term plan. Not to belittle American and Russian achievements, but they basically made it up as they went, and it did go much further than getting a bloke to the Moon and back again. NASA's scientists have always kept pushing for more exploration and shown great leadership, but the necessary, political will has been missing, and that is what the Chinese have. I think more or less everybody now agrees that China are definitely going to build one or more spacestations, and then go on to build a base on the Moon - and dare we hope, on to Mars? They have taken the lead, simple as that, and the rest of the world will follow. It feels good.

    1. Re:Long term plan by bgarcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... and then go on to build a base on the Moon - and dare we hope, on to Mars? They have taken the lead, simple as that, and the rest of the world will follow.

      They're slightly ahead of SpaceX in the heavy-launch department, but they're behind in reusability and cost. As long as Musk doesn't meet an early demise, I believe that SpaceX will easily win the race to Mars.

      --
      I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    2. Re:Long term plan by phayes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The U.S. didn't lack long term plans for space in the 60's but an economic wake-up call in 1973 rendered most of them financially unreachable.

      If the real-estate bubble I keep hearing about in China implodes, well we'll see if the Chinese plans are just as unreachable.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  3. Backseat to who? by sjbe · · Score: 3

    Since the US has obviously taken a backseat on space exploration it is good another nation is willing to step up.

    Care to back that assertion up with any actual data? The US has more active deep space probes than anyone. The US has more orbital launches than anyone else and that is despite temporarily lacking human rated launch vehicles. Heck, SpaceX alone has more orbital launches than every country except for China and Russia. US Astronauts logged more EVA time in 2016 than astronauts from all other countries combined. The US has the most active spaceport in the world (Cape Canaveral).

    While I'd agree that the US isn't doing as much as it could in space, the US space program isn't second to anyone at the moment by most objective measures.

  4. NASA budget by sjbe · · Score: 3, Informative

    The U.S. didn't lack long term plans for space in the 60's but an economic wake-up call in 1973 rendered most of them financially unreachable.

    The only thing that hurt the space program was a lack of political will to support it. Despite what many believe even at the height of the Apollo program during the 1960s the space program had plenty of detractors. There was never at any time a lack of available funds if we had cared to devote them to the space program. Our "fearless" leaders decided they wanted to prioritize other things but at no time was the actual ability of the US government to fund NASA in question. Funding dropped around 1973 to roughly current levels as the Apollo program was shut down. Adjusting for inflation NASA's budget today is roughly identical to the budget it had in 1973. Funding for NASA's budget as a percent of the federal budget was already being cut long before 1973 to roughly the amount.