China Plans Space Station By 2020 293
RedEaredSlider writes "China unveiled plans for its own space station, to be completed by 2020, along with a cargo ship to ferry supplies to and from orbit. The fact that the country is proposing one is a sign of the Chinese government's ambitions in space. China is the third nation to launch its own manned rockets into space, sending its first astronaut into orbit in 2003 aboard the Shenzhou 5 rocket. Since then two other manned missions have been launched."
Space Race v2.0 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Space Race v2.0 (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd like it to have bigger ambitions.
To make a profit from humans in space
Re:Space Race v2.0 (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If fusion plants became the energy source of choice, a tritium mine may be financially solid. Of course, not many countries are currently powering their cities with large fusion plants as of yet. Still have some kinks to work out.
The High Frontier (Score:3)
Re:The High Frontier (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem with the plan outlined in The High Frontier is that it's "bootstrap" is essentially circular logic: "We need colonies in space to build the infrastructure in space to build colonies in space". He adds in "and build solar power satellites" in order to make it appear that his logic isn't circular - but any more-than-cursory examination of the economics involved shows how ludicrous that idea is. (Short version: it would be cheaper to burn the dollar bills directly for energy.)
The grandparent has it right - there's nothing to do there and little advantage to be gained by going there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the same is happening in China now?
Re: (Score:3)
A very slow race (Score:3, Interesting)
China first launched an astronaut in orbit eight years ago.
Seven years after the US launched its first astronaut in orbit, they had sent people to the moon.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think people went to the moon "just to be the first".
I seem to recall that one of the motivating factors of the space race was not falling behind the Soviets. Since rocket technology and missile technology are largely the same thing ... there was a perception that America could be losing a military advantage in not pursuing space technology.
Since the end of the Cold War, it does
You are right (Score:3)
So, yeah, you are right. We should not compare CHina to America. It is not fair to China.
waiting for our designs... (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps they are waiting for us to finalize our designs for our Back to the Moon missions so that they can finally start building their ships. I doubt they want to replicate our Apollo Era technology at this point.
Yes, but was it sustainable? (Score:4, Interesting)
True, the US sent men to the moon a few years after their first manned space flight. But, was it sustainable? Did the US followed through with a moon base and all that 2001 Space Odyssey dreams? Maybe the Chinese had studied the history of space exploration and decided not to repeat the US mistakes. Maybe they have a longer term and more sustainable plan for space exploration. You have to remember, the Chinese have more than 4000 years of advanced civilization behind them. This tends to make them more farsighted don't you think?
Re: (Score:3)
The U.S. effort to go to the Moon was followed up by Skylab, a Shuttle program, and the construction of the International Space Station (of which clearly the American involvement was quite large). Arguably that aspect of manned spaceflight was sustainable and certainly has been maintained. Dozens of follow-up spacecraft designs to succeed the Shuttle program have also been worked on by NASA... and it has been political infighting that has mostly created the current situation where NASA really doesn't have
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We can only hope that something like that will happen. To be honest, we need to start focusing on getting the technology to make using materials from other worlds feasible. With all of the focus on dwindling supplies of rare earth metals and energy sources and economic problems and population problems we should be devoting as much time and effort in to space as we can and pay any costs to get to that point. I'm generally a low taxes kind of guy, but I would definitely support a raise in taxes that was speci
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Space races bring some footprints and not much else. What I'd want to see is a killer app, some use of space that makes sense from a commercial standpoint. I know that not many agree with me, but when space becomes profitable we'll become a spacefaring race.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What I'd want to see is a killer app, some use of space that makes sense from a commercial standpoint.
Com sats, weather sats, and geolocation sats?
I wonder how the complete GPS program costs compare to the sales tax income from all GPS unit sales. The govt Might be running a profit there...
Re: (Score:2)
That is only near-earth, unmanned space flight. What is the commercial motive for a manned mission to another planetary body (even if it is as close as the moon)?
Re: (Score:2)
How much did the GPS program cost? I haven't been able to find any figures. The European GPS system will cost roughly 7.5 billion EUR, so about 11 billion USD. Yikes, those are big numbers! I think it's reasonable to assume GPS was a lot more expensive, so far: they had to do way more R+D, the technology used was more expensive in the past, they launched more than twice as many satellites, etc. If we're using the expenses for Galileo as a lower bound, you'd end up with about 35 USD per US resident. Seems un
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not likely. The rivalry between the U.S. and China is nothing compared to the rivalry between the U.S. and Soviet Union at the time of the first space race. And the original space race was only prompted by the U.S. realization that the USSR was WAY ahead of us in astronautics. Launching men into space and even a space station just shows that China is on par with the U.S. and Russia, not that it's way ahead. This is likely just another move by China to assert its position as a serious peer, not a move to sho
Re: (Score:3)
the original space race was only prompted by the U.S. realization that the USSR was WAY ahead of us in astronautics
That was the perception at the time, but it was probably not correct. There was the missile gap [wikipedia.org] that turned out to be just a political ploy. Also, the US had plans to launch a satellite at least a year before the Soviets launched the first Sputnik, but president Eisenhower didn't approve it [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
the original space race was only prompted by the U.S. realization that the USSR was WAY ahead of us in astronautics
Also, the US had plans to launch a satellite at least a year before the Soviets launched the first Sputnik, but president Eisenhower didn't approve it [wikipedia.org].
People remember what you did a lot better than what you could have done. Based on the link you provided, I get the impression the Eisenhower administration didn't want to escalate the cold war by launching what could be interpreted as a military missile.
Re: (Score:2)
If only "could have," "might have," and "should have" counted instead of "did."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Hopefully the emergence of the Chinese and others (India?) will fuel a new space race, with bigger ambitions than last time around. Mars maybe?
God, I hope not. I hope we stay on the sidelines and watch the Chinese flush billions of dollars down the toilet to do what we've already done.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's *exactly* what we need - another expensive and pointless race to prove who has the biggest penile substitute.
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of looking at it as a challenge to be there first, start bidding on components to build their space station. A good way to bring money back into our Western pockets, no? That's assuming they need our technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Captain Henny Youngman says (Score:3)
I bet the orbit will take an hour - so they'll be back around as soon as you are hungry again.
The size is irrelevant (Score:3)
Not sure why every news source is banging on about the station being low mass; once the principle of on-orbit assembly is mastered the only real limits to mass are how many modules you choose to launch, and how much fuel you need for a reboost. Getting from 60-tonne station to 400-tonne station is a far smaller step than getting from nothing to a multi-modular station.
The fact China isn't going to build a very large station may indicate firm intentions to go to the Moon. If they are just using this to practice techniques for longer range exploration, there isn't much point making it huge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Planning is not doing.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because China is planning to planning to build something does not mean they will. Remember we we planned to build that super mega particle smasher in Texas? I don't recall that plan working out.
Remember when the US planned to have colonies on the moon by now?
Remember when I planned to marry a super model when I was a teenager? I am sure you can guess how that worked out.
That aside, I hope they do it. It seems the world will only move forward with competition from an "evil" empire.
Re: (Score:3)
This is very true, but doesn't actually apply here. This space station is part of Project 921, which China has been working on since 1992.
The schedule has slipped by a year or two, but what they are doing now is pretty what they planned to be doing in the early 90s.
The US on the other hand has gotten into the habit of switching programs every 18 months or so. This is unlikely to change with a 'new space race' because the Chinese threat to US space dominance is boiling-frog slow, and the US public are decide
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The US on the other hand has gotten into the habit of switching programs every 18 months or so. This is unlikely to change with a 'new space race' because the Chinese threat to US space dominance is boiling-frog slow, and the US public are decidedly lukewarm regarding such things these days - see the total non-response to Obama's "Sputnik Moment" comment.
No problem, we'll buy our lead and melamine laced Chinese made space station from Walmart.
Re:Planning is not doing.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because China is planning to planning to build something does not mean they will
Sure, but China's track record on executing on promised mega-projects is pretty good.
Men in orbit? Check.
High-speed Rail? Check.
Three-gorges dam? Check.
Hangzhou Bay Bridge? Check.
We could go on and on...
Meanwhile, all the USA seems able to produce any more is Obama's birth certificate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Does this mean we should resurrect the old arguments comparing the cost of Apollo to the amount of money spent on makeup in the same period?
OK, if you want it, here it is: according to Wikipedia, the total cos of building, launching and operating the International Space Station for 30 years is US$160 billion, and the total turnover of the worldwide cosmetics industry was US$170 billion in 2006.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point of the last statement is that people are more concerned with stupid shit, following their tea party masters, and FUD then any real progress. People completely emotionally tied up into some idealogical belief and refusing to look at and actually facts or think reasonably about anything thats counter to the tight held ignorant crap.
remember kids: If some counters you with actual facts and demands accountability in what you say, they are a no good liberal.
The polarization in this country will
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyways, as I understood it, the same questions existed regarding Mccain's citizenship s
Re: (Score:3)
But China is not held back by politicians that only want to do good for THEIR voters or the people that they get bribed from. They have less red tape to go through when doing stuff - they just use the debt we own to improve their country and they do it well. They're basically the US right after the Depression, they get access to unlimited funds to build stuff which in turn generates jobs and a flourishing economy because the value of their country goes up.
Wow, that's an ambitious schedule (Score:2)
I wonder if they'll also be just as fast in discovering that manned space stations are generally a waste of time and money?
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not. If the China government says they want it, it is completely achievable. Now, you add elected officials, scientifically illiterate people making key the decisions, stupid libertarian think the private sector can do it, and people who seem to be general angry at all progress, and then no, 9 years is not possible.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Skylab 1973. 4 years after the moon landing.
I really dont think its a tougher task. Its just throwing junk into LEO and calling it a day. A flight to the moon is a whole different ballgame.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese GDP (Score:5, Interesting)
Look for a video called "China's Ghost Towns" to see how China is inflating their GDP by building cities that no one can afford to live in. It's freaky to see all these empty supermalls and highrise apartment buildings. When China's bubble explodes it's going to be a whole new disaster for the world economy.
Re: (Score:2)
Bubble? do you know how China manages their money?
Only in America can someone look at a country that is actually thinking forward and say it's a bubble.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The US has a lot of work to do its own economy, so this isn't meant to downplay anything about that. It's also not meant as anything negative about China--bubbles happen everywhere.
Having said that...
The idea of a China bubble isn't too far-fetched, and is on the radar of a lot of economists. It's not just about China either, but all of the emerging-economy nations that have seen recent rapid growth.
E.g., http://www.economist.com/node/18560195
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Chinese GDP (Score:4, Insightful)
Hell, I'm about to review 3 test reports from Beijing this evening. I go over several every week. Some of the engineers over there are better than others, but on average they are overly optimistic compared to test reports form our American engineers. Are they capabke of learning and improving? Certainly. I see it first hand. But when the short comings get pointed out in a conference call, we have to tread very carefully because they get so butt hurt by criticism in front of their peers we are afraid someone is going to start crying or do something drastic. The director we have over there lived in the States for 20 years. He is very helpful in bridging the gap between the two different cultures...
Anyway, I'm just trying to say that I'm extremely open of other cultures and ways of life. If anything I'm strongly anti-racist. But that doesn't mean I cannot recognize cultural differences that can dramatically impact performance when it comes to building and testing complex systems. China faces some serious challenges, political and cultural. It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next 20 years or so, but I still expect them to rise above all other nations to become the next true global hegemony.
Re: (Score:3)
Dumb Idea, Potential Opportunity (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
" Nations that have already seen that it is a financial black hole that produces practically nothing of value need not accompany them."
no, short sighted politician, and ignorant SOB don't see any value.
The Manned space program has paid for it's self many times over. It's a fantastic practical RnD resource. They have a unique need, private industry fills it, and then take what they learned to make other products they sell. They get taxed and the money goes around.
god damn it, how stupid are people not to be
Re: (Score:2)
The question is not if the manned space program has had benefits in other areas. That's quite obvious.
The question is: could you have spend the same money on something else, and get an even better return on your investment ?
For instance, we could have spend more on robotic missions, getting better robot technology as a result.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously you can't predict the exact ROI for a certain research program, but you'll still have to make a choice what you're going to do with a certain budget.
The ISS costs about 100x as much as the Spirit/Opportunity rovers on Mars, but I don't think it returned 100x as much in scientific or engineering value. In fact, I've heard more interesting stuff come out of the Mars rovers than from the entire operation of the ISS.
Re: (Score:2)
"Documented fact," eh? That should make it easier for you to prove it and not just insult people with empty platitudes. Show us credible numbers and lists of technologies that have, for example, paid for the cost of the ISS "many times over." They do not exist. It is a false claim. It i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
financial black hole that produces practically nothing of value
A manned station can be useful.
On the other hand, what if you do the ISS thing and take plans for a very useful manned station, and cut cut cut cut budgets until the only thing left is the hotel load? That's how you end up with a "financial black hole that produces practically nothing of value".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm pretty sure all these products would have been invented/produced even without a manned space program, and on a lower budget.
Re: (Score:2)
Great... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Space travel - yet another thing we'll be outsourcing to China...
China has already admitted that they can't do it as cheaply as SpaceX. Now, it's possible that SpaceX is producing unrealistic cost estimates, but for the time being it looks as if private industry could at the very least compete with the Chinese space program, if not surpass them in cost-effectiveness. If that changes, yeah, we might have to outsource to them, but there's no reason to be such a pessimist yet.
well... (Score:2, Insightful)
at lease someon is going. Good luck China.
BTW, Manned Space Programs are what countries get for have appropriate eye on science and the longevity of a country.
It's also what you loose when all focus is on money spent now and constantly cutting.
But hey, let keep lowering taxes and butcher all our assets. It's the libertarian way...to 3rd world status.
have had plans for a while (Score:2)
So What? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They DO realize... (Score:2)
They DO realize that really, to build a space station, it has to be in SPACE - you know, where people can see it?
Not, for example, in a pool.
I'm just sayin'.
Re: (Score:2)
With the what's been in the news in the past few years about Chinese manufactoring I would personally like to see some kind of oversight comittee on this project if they're going to be allowed to put a thousand pounds of "Grade A Chinese Steel" a few hundred miles above my head.
Orbital Mechanics [wikipedia.org]. Newton's got you covered. Now, calm down.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
China is under no obligation to recognize any "oversight committee." Unless you want to go to war with them, I'm pretty sure they, as a sovereign country, can send whatever they damn well please into space.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But it's going to cost them a lot more to get it into orbit, y'know, with all the lead in everything...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but inside there is a lot of plastic, bad/cheap soldering jobs, cheap components that break easily, duct tape, and a lot of empty unused space.
Well in that case, it is *definitely* a knock-off of the ISS.
Re:Knock-offs (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope my Chinese made sarcasm detector is just off today, because I'm not sure if that was a joke or not. The crap they sell you is cheap, because frankly you keep buying it and they don't care what you do with it; they aren't investing in you. A space station on the other hand, is something they are interested in investing in, an investment in themselves (or at least an investment in sabre rattling).
Unless Beijing wants to start spewing propaganda that they invented space travel, have had it since the beginning of time, but graciously let the west ungratefully steal it from them, I can think of better places to use my stereotyping.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A space station on the other hand, is something they are interested in investing in, an investment in themselves (or at least an investment in sabre rattling).
I hope they do a better job with their space station than they did with their high speed rail system. [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That will be 17 years from their first manned space launch. That's more time that it took the Soviets, and they had to do it from SCRATCH.
Re: (Score:3)
'Low' Mileage, Great Location...
Isn't "Great Location" one of the problems with the ISS? The orbit was a compromise between what the shuttle was capable of, what the soyuz was capable of, and an orbit not already full of junk? The end result being a fairly crappy orbit for everyone involved?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they are pretty good at ping-pong, you know ...
Re: (Score:3)
US spacefarers are astronauts. Russian spacefarers are cosmonauts. Chinese spacefarers are taikonauts.
You do of course realize the stupidity in inventing a new English word for people doing the exact same profession but in a different country? We don't have 100 different terms for scientist either, that's the whole damn point of having your own language. Astronaut is more then acceptable general term for spacefarers from all nations when speaking in English. Not to mention official texts from China when written in English use the term astronaut [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)