There have already been calls in this country to ban kitchen knives with a point, I shit you not. Some chefs have said that you can use knives without points for most things anyway, and that pointless knives are the norm in China and they do OK.
Others point out that gang violence in China simply involves fatal hackings instead of fatal stabbings.
He might hit it eventually, but not at a lower cost that state programmes. The idea that private enterprise is better at space is a masturbatory fantasy of libertarians, and nothing more. Learn to embrace reality please.
Which is why you shouldn't look at things 'basically'. You miss out on a whole lot.
Comparing the Voskhod missions to Shenzhou is totally absurd. Even the slightest bit of research would reveal this, but you prefer a more 'basic' view of things I see.
Although what the craft is doing, in the most basic sense of course, is similar to what was done before, Shenzhou is probably the most modern manned spacecraft flying right now.
The Chinese have done two manned flights, Shenzhou 5 and Shenzhou 6. They also, if you hadn't figured this out from the names, sent up 4 unmanned versions of the craft before they put anybody in it.
Shenzhou 7 is due for launch in 8 days. Go on youtube and you can see video of the rocket itself ready to go out to the launch pad. If you think this is hot air you are a total nonce.
Considering that private enterprise is currently struggling with LEO, that is a laughable assertion. You will lose your money because you are a fool and thus easily parted from it.
They want their own space station in order to technologically advance their country, and because we told them to piss off when they offered to contribute to the ISS (Which kind of throws the 'international' bit out the window). None of the reasons you suggest have anything to do with it.
Shenzhou is NOT a 'modernized Soyuz' - it has a similar appearance to Soyuz simply because of the practicalities of building a spacecraft, but don't try and imply the Chinese do not have an indigenous spaceflight capability.
What the US has done in Iraq is orders of magnitude worse than what China has done in Tibet. Over a million more people have died during the occupation than would've died in a comparable period under Saddam.
And environmental concerns? Per capita western countries pollute a lot more than the Chinese do.
They don't. They wanted to, and given that the shuttle replacement is falling behind schedule and relations with Russia are putting access to Soyuz in jeopardy, having an alternative means of getting there would be great. Pity the west had to be petty about it.
One feature of the Shenzhou capsule is that the orbit module (which detaches from the reentry module before reentry) can stay in function as a separate spacecraft.
Thus part of Shenzhou 7 will stay in space to form part of the station, and part of it will return the men home.
Which is why microfinance is great for this sort of thing. Rather than giving out loans to gimps in the first world who want to live beyond their means and can't keep up the payments, lend out small packets of money to developing world individuals and communities, who given the opportunity to thrive will work their arses off and pay you back.
Aside from the idiocy of the conspiracy theorists in general, they seemed to have missed the point that if the beam is at 450GeV, then the collision will be 900GeV and that doesn't exceed the energy of the most powerful currently active accelerator (the Tevatron). Even if the 14TeV collisions ultimately envisioned were going to create a micro black hole and end the Earth, it wouldn't happen tomorrow anyway.
We have for sure left viable life forms on the Moon, and have now shown reasonably complex animal life can be survive vaccuum.
Before we continue to jizz terrestrial organisms over everything in sight like a fustrated teenager, perhaps we ought to consider the implications. If there is life elsewhere in the solar system, it is likely microbial life living underneath the surface of somewhere like Mars or Europe where there might be liquid water.
Given that these extraterrestrial ecosystems are physically smaller and almost certainly have less energy to drive them, the organisms found there will probably be less primitive. If they encountered any of the microscopic monsters that 4 billion years of Earth evolution has produced they probably won't survive.
Turning a state-owned enterprise into a private company whose only responsibility is to its shareholders is the reason why the UK lags behind mainland Europe in broadband. That France should kick our arses at this, with an equivalent sized population and economy but more area to cover, is shameful.
Its the quasi-religious belief that share price equals quality that has left us in this mess.
Having bought into the free market orthodoxy of Thatcher, New Labour instinctively hand over everything to private contractors who milk the taxpayer and do a shabby job. At the risk of being branded a dirty commie, renationalising BT might be a requirement for getting this job done properly and for reasonable price.
If I were to actually use 7.6 megabits/second constantly I would get an unpleasant email from my ISP. The maximum bandwidth your connection can handle has little bearing on how much data the UKs creaking network of copper cables and fibre optics can actually shift.
Only a tiny fraction of people use the Internet to its full potential. We are not a small % of antisocial bastards; whenever I have shown someone what is out there they have taken it. People only self-regulate their usage through ignorance. BBC iplayer highlighted this problem by bringing content delivery to a wider audience, and the ISPs bitched about it so badly. They had sold people connections on the basis they would hardly use them, and became pissy when people started using the product they had paid for.
Getting every end user to have a maximum bandwidth in the gigabit range would presumably mean that sustained usage in the megabit range would no longer be a problem. If the studies they did simply increased the maximum bandwidth of peoples connections without increasing network capacity to match, though, then the people who wrote it were morons and the article is meaningless.
Isn't using a space suit in an evacuated crew compartment for an extended period a problem in itself? Obviously you have airlocks, but you don't hang around in those often doing tests.
I seem to recall some repairs had to be done in an evacuated module of Mir at one point, and it was tough (for some reasons relating to heat IIRC)
I just don't see why the shuttle is 'technically impressive'. What abilities does it possess that a combination of capsule and cargo rocket doesn't?
Reusability? If the Chinese so desired, the descent module of a Shenzhou could probably be reused. It would probably be about as economical as reusing a shuttle orbiter.
Electronics? The Chinese electronics industry is not to be sniffed at. Its growing faster than their traditional heavy industry is at the moment, and I doubt it is significantly behind the US cutting edge in any way. The shuttle, on the other hand, is using mostly 70s (with some 80s) technology on board because its well established.
The ability to carry up cargo and passengers isn't that impressive when you look at the costs. Putting up the same quantity of people and cargo with 2 Soyuz launches and one Proton costs $180 million whilst a Shuttle launch costs over $400 million.
Reusability isn't all its cracked up to be for the Shuttle. It has made it more expensive than throw-away alternatives, and the thing has to be practically rebuilt every flight as well.
The only capability the Shuttle has which the Russian launchers do not is returning cargo, and that hasn't been used in a while.
1. The engines were on the stack, not the orbiter. The stack could (and did) fly without the orbiter at all
2. There were four boosters instead of two.
3. The boosters were liquid, not solid fueled
Even the link you provided as alleged evidence that it was just stolen technology acknowledges these very major differences.
They look the same, but in the same way that Buran and the US shuttle looked the same. Aerodynamic principles mean there are only certain ways to do things. Looking the same doesn't mean it is old Russian technology with a Chinese flag stamed on it.
Shenzhou is home-grown Chinese technology. Had they simply wanted to smack a Soyuz on top of a Long March rocket they could've done that, and saved themselves the last 6 flights. The amount of testing alone should convince you that the systems of that spacecraft are previously untried.
Slashdot Mirror
Both those are available from the UK using uk.youtube.com, and both involve guns not knives. So, what the fuck?
There have already been calls in this country to ban kitchen knives with a point, I shit you not. Some chefs have said that you can use knives without points for most things anyway, and that pointless knives are the norm in China and they do OK.
Others point out that gang violence in China simply involves fatal hackings instead of fatal stabbings.
Mod parent up. True English has uses 'vet' in common speech all the time.
Because any self respecting nerd would use the Internet more than 10 days out of a month
Then you are even more dense, seeing as the first Soviet spacewalk was from a Voskhod...
He might hit it eventually, but not at a lower cost that state programmes. The idea that private enterprise is better at space is a masturbatory fantasy of libertarians, and nothing more. Learn to embrace reality please.
Which is why you shouldn't look at things 'basically'. You miss out on a whole lot.
Comparing the Voskhod missions to Shenzhou is totally absurd. Even the slightest bit of research would reveal this, but you prefer a more 'basic' view of things I see.
Although what the craft is doing, in the most basic sense of course, is similar to what was done before, Shenzhou is probably the most modern manned spacecraft flying right now.
The Chinese have done two manned flights, Shenzhou 5 and Shenzhou 6. They also, if you hadn't figured this out from the names, sent up 4 unmanned versions of the craft before they put anybody in it.
Shenzhou 7 is due for launch in 8 days. Go on youtube and you can see video of the rocket itself ready to go out to the launch pad. If you think this is hot air you are a total nonce.
Considering that private enterprise is currently struggling with LEO, that is a laughable assertion. You will lose your money because you are a fool and thus easily parted from it.
They want their own space station in order to technologically advance their country, and because we told them to piss off when they offered to contribute to the ISS (Which kind of throws the 'international' bit out the window). None of the reasons you suggest have anything to do with it.
Shenzhou is NOT a 'modernized Soyuz' - it has a similar appearance to Soyuz simply because of the practicalities of building a spacecraft, but don't try and imply the Chinese do not have an indigenous spaceflight capability.
What the US has done in Iraq is orders of magnitude worse than what China has done in Tibet. Over a million more people have died during the occupation than would've died in a comparable period under Saddam.
And environmental concerns? Per capita western countries pollute a lot more than the Chinese do.
They don't. They wanted to, and given that the shuttle replacement is falling behind schedule and relations with Russia are putting access to Soyuz in jeopardy, having an alternative means of getting there would be great. Pity the west had to be petty about it.
One feature of the Shenzhou capsule is that the orbit module (which detaches from the reentry module before reentry) can stay in function as a separate spacecraft.
Thus part of Shenzhou 7 will stay in space to form part of the station, and part of it will return the men home.
Which is why microfinance is great for this sort of thing. Rather than giving out loans to gimps in the first world who want to live beyond their means and can't keep up the payments, lend out small packets of money to developing world individuals and communities, who given the opportunity to thrive will work their arses off and pay you back.
Aside from the idiocy of the conspiracy theorists in general, they seemed to have missed the point that if the beam is at 450GeV, then the collision will be 900GeV and that doesn't exceed the energy of the most powerful currently active accelerator (the Tevatron). Even if the 14TeV collisions ultimately envisioned were going to create a micro black hole and end the Earth, it wouldn't happen tomorrow anyway.
We have for sure left viable life forms on the Moon, and have now shown reasonably complex animal life can be survive vaccuum.
Before we continue to jizz terrestrial organisms over everything in sight like a fustrated teenager, perhaps we ought to consider the implications. If there is life elsewhere in the solar system, it is likely microbial life living underneath the surface of somewhere like Mars or Europe where there might be liquid water.
Given that these extraterrestrial ecosystems are physically smaller and almost certainly have less energy to drive them, the organisms found there will probably be less primitive. If they encountered any of the microscopic monsters that 4 billion years of Earth evolution has produced they probably won't survive.
Turning a state-owned enterprise into a private company whose only responsibility is to its shareholders is the reason why the UK lags behind mainland Europe in broadband. That France should kick our arses at this, with an equivalent sized population and economy but more area to cover, is shameful.
Its the quasi-religious belief that share price equals quality that has left us in this mess.
Madness? THIS. IS. NEW. LABOUR!!!!!
Having bought into the free market orthodoxy of Thatcher, New Labour instinctively hand over everything to private contractors who milk the taxpayer and do a shabby job. At the risk of being branded a dirty commie, renationalising BT might be a requirement for getting this job done properly and for reasonable price.
If I were to actually use 7.6 megabits/second constantly I would get an unpleasant email from my ISP. The maximum bandwidth your connection can handle has little bearing on how much data the UKs creaking network of copper cables and fibre optics can actually shift.
Only a tiny fraction of people use the Internet to its full potential. We are not a small % of antisocial bastards; whenever I have shown someone what is out there they have taken it. People only self-regulate their usage through ignorance. BBC iplayer highlighted this problem by bringing content delivery to a wider audience, and the ISPs bitched about it so badly. They had sold people connections on the basis they would hardly use them, and became pissy when people started using the product they had paid for.
Getting every end user to have a maximum bandwidth in the gigabit range would presumably mean that sustained usage in the megabit range would no longer be a problem. If the studies they did simply increased the maximum bandwidth of peoples connections without increasing network capacity to match, though, then the people who wrote it were morons and the article is meaningless.
Isn't using a space suit in an evacuated crew compartment for an extended period a problem in itself? Obviously you have airlocks, but you don't hang around in those often doing tests.
I seem to recall some repairs had to be done in an evacuated module of Mir at one point, and it was tough (for some reasons relating to heat IIRC)
I just don't see why the shuttle is 'technically impressive'. What abilities does it possess that a combination of capsule and cargo rocket doesn't?
Reusability? If the Chinese so desired, the descent module of a Shenzhou could probably be reused. It would probably be about as economical as reusing a shuttle orbiter.
Electronics? The Chinese electronics industry is not to be sniffed at. Its growing faster than their traditional heavy industry is at the moment, and I doubt it is significantly behind the US cutting edge in any way. The shuttle, on the other hand, is using mostly 70s (with some 80s) technology on board because its well established.
The ability to carry up cargo and passengers isn't that impressive when you look at the costs. Putting up the same quantity of people and cargo with 2 Soyuz launches and one Proton costs $180 million whilst a Shuttle launch costs over $400 million.
Reusability isn't all its cracked up to be for the Shuttle. It has made it more expensive than throw-away alternatives, and the thing has to be practically rebuilt every flight as well.
The only capability the Shuttle has which the Russian launchers do not is returning cargo, and that hasn't been used in a while.
One major difference? You joke surely;
1. The engines were on the stack, not the orbiter. The stack could (and did) fly without the orbiter at all
2. There were four boosters instead of two.
3. The boosters were liquid, not solid fueled
Even the link you provided as alleged evidence that it was just stolen technology acknowledges these very major differences.
They look the same, but in the same way that Buran and the US shuttle looked the same. Aerodynamic principles mean there are only certain ways to do things. Looking the same doesn't mean it is old Russian technology with a Chinese flag stamed on it.
Shenzhou is home-grown Chinese technology. Had they simply wanted to smack a Soyuz on top of a Long March rocket they could've done that, and saved themselves the last 6 flights. The amount of testing alone should convince you that the systems of that spacecraft are previously untried.