Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
China Space Science

China Launching First Space Station Module In September 102

Posted by Unknown Lamer from the communist-space-zombies-attack dept.
arisvega writes "The Chinese Space Station's first module has been moved to its final testing location, and will soon be launched into orbit. Two manned missions are scheduled to follow after an unmanned mission checks out. The best part? A movie about China in space is already premiering."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Launching First Space Station Module In September More

China Launching First Space Station Module In September

Comments Filter:

  • Soon the Chinese will be dropping bombs on us from space like kids dropping rocks onto cars from freeway overpasses!

  • Competition is good. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 ) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @04:49PM (#36741276) Homepage
    It is an unfortunate fact that in the current climate it is very hard to get people in the US interested in space when there's no big looming Soviet threat. This will be good for space in that it will help push people in the US to be more competitive, both because of our general competitive culture and because of the general, residual anti-communist attitudes (and yes, I know that the Chinese aren't really community at this point, but most Americans don't understand that.) So this will help encourage the US to be a bit more serious about space stuff. This is also good because competition is in general better. China might succeed at some things that the US and the various countries involved in the ISS have not done as well. Having different groups trying to tackle the same problems will often lead to different methods and technologies being applied, which in the long run benefits everyone. And of course, a space race is a much better form of competition than a lot of the alternatives like warfare.
    • I'm not so sure it is good. The space race of the 1960's is not going to return - what may return is the arms race of the 1970's-1980's, into which the space race against the USSR inevitably devolved.

      We have already done the feel-good, man-on-the-moon part of aerospace that is within the realm of the feasible. (Whereas actually reaching other solar systems is not). Thus we will will not return us to the starry-eyed 1960's. So, what's left? A resumption of the cold war - spending billions on missile d

      • The space race of the 1960's is not going to return

        I would not be so sure. Chinese progress in space could get quite a few US politicians to reverse their course. It has happened before.

        The "patron saint" of the Apollo program actually started off wanting to kill the program. JFK was against Apollo as a senator and at the beginning of his administration. VP Johnson got him to delay his decision to dismantle Apollo. Then the Russians sent up Yuri Gagarin and Kennedy completely reversed his opinion on Apollo and became its champion.
        http://en.wikipedia.org [wikipedia.org]

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by TopSpin ( 753 )

          I would not be so sure.

          I am sure. China just clarified [thehindu.com] our budget priorities for us yesterday. Last week China helped [reuters.com] with our diplomatic prerogatives.

          In the next few days we may have a budget deal. Where do you think Treasury will be looking for the next few hundred billion of financing? Or rather, how many hours will it take for Geithner to arrive in Beijing (for the third time) after the limit gets bumped?

          We're not going to be engaging anyone in any aerospace competitions. Not merely because we can't afford it, but al

          • We're not going to be engaging anyone in any aerospace competitions. Not merely because we can't afford it, ...

            The last 50 or so years of US history clearly demonstrates that is no impediment to the US government.

            ... but also because they would rather we not.

            You are using an erroneous and simplistic model of the US dollar trade. Given China's exports based economic strategy and their desire to manipulate their currency to maintain an export advantage they have to acquire US dollars from exporters. They can't use these dollars in any normal market because that will send their currency in the "wrong direction". Buying US bonds gets rid of these dollars without a

          • China just clarified [thehindu.com] our budget priorities for us yesterday. Last week China helped [reuters.com] with our diplomatic prerogatives.

            The Chinese government whines about stuff like this all the time; they're notoriously thin-skinned when it comes to perceived international slights. Most of the time it doesn't have much of an effect; they were furious when Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize but in the end only about 19 or so countries were convinced to boycott the award ceremony (and i

      • much like the F14 fleet that never saw any real action before being retired

        Now that's just BS. I distinctly remember an engagement where the communications ship SS Layton had become disabled and was drifting into hostile waters when it received aerial support from a squad of F-14s from the USS Enterprise. If I recall correctly, those F-14s saved the day.

      • > I'm not so sure it is good. The space race of the 1960's is not going to return China announced it was going to live on the Moon by 202(?), not a week later the U.S announced it also was going back to the Moon. Oh no the race is there, just different nations. Doing so is another matter for the U.S., this grandiose decision was made when money was there for the asking. It requires funding I don't believe the U.S. can afford at this time or in the near future.

      • My second post in this thread with the same links:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Republic_of_China_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Delivery_Systems_Estimates [wikipedia.org]

        The Chinese already have ICBMs, and have had them for a very long time. They also already have anti-satellite weapons:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test [wikipedia.org]

        Manned space flight is not a pre-requisite for these things. If there's going to be an arm race, it will happen with or without a space programme.

    • While I agree with your point, I'm not sure whether the general public being interested in space is really the issue; there are always areas of the public that are deeply interested in the space program, from kids to scientists, but if TV rating are governing these projects, we're all doomed!
      At the end of the day, all the cool and interesting things about space, are, at best 'the fat', and at worst just a guise for what really drives the space program...

      The aspect of issue that I think merits most cons

    • So this will help encourage the US to be a bit more serious about space stuff.

      No it won't!!!!!!!

      Here's a reality check. The US space race was a complete farce; top to bottom.

      The US could have beaten Sputnik into orbit but wanted to allow the Russians to establish an international precedence on space overflights. Their plan worked perfectly except for the unexpected public backlash. This is important because the US was already developing manned spy satellites so as to observe the Russian's nuclear deployments and development. Basically what kicked off the space race was the nuclear ar

  • oh noes! (Score:5, Funny)

    by waddgodd ( 34934 ) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @04:51PM (#36741322) Homepage Journal

    We'd better hurry up and launch then, don't want China to steal our Alpha Centauri victory

  • It was called Serenity.

    Stay Shiny!

  • Who says the U.S. can't afford a space program? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PinchDuck ( 199974 ) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @04:59PM (#36741440)

    All the stuff we buy from China proves we have more than enough money to finance one. Theirs.

    • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

      by dmbasso ( 1052166 )

      Slashdot should give one extra non-expiring mod point, that when used would only be recredited after a long time, like one month.

      If I had that mod point now, sir, it would be yours. :)

    • All the stuff we buy from China proves we have more than enough money to finance one. Theirs.

      Two points.

      1. The U.S. chooses to finance wars instead of space.
      2. The space shuttle, while "cool" and inspiring to the public, demonstrated that government involvement in space exploration has moved beyond helping -- especially in terms of corralling financial resources -- and into hindering. The political compromises in the space shuttle design ended up with a $1.5b/launch cost and a crew cabin mounted laterally to the fuel instead of on top of it, directly causing two fatal catastrophes. It's not just a soundbite -- it's time for the private sector to take over.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by gatkinso ( 15975 )

      In all fairness, a lot of the money is coming from Europe.

    • That's a weird statement, as it's not money that finances space programs, it's productive output - production capacity.

      Sure, capital is required, but capital is used only to get the necessary tools, instruments, materials and people, but if there is nowhere to get these components from, then there will be no program.

      USA borrows half of what it spends from US bond sales (and today, those are mostly bought up by the Fed), but China is one of the countries who finance USA by buying counterfeit US dollar for Ch

  • The shipping cost would be crazy.

  • The only reason for manned spaceflight, at this point, is to study manned spaceflight- or to study black holes, black-holes of money.

    Like the aircraft carriers and stealth fighters , this is just flag waving "me too'-ism.

    Apparently the Chinese have so much dough from selling us crap at Walmart that they need to watch some of it burn by launching toiletries into orbit.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tloh ( 451585 )

      ...... Like the aircraft carriers and stealth fighters , this is just flag waving "me too'-ism.......

      Carriers are *NOT* trivial money black holes. One of the main reasons America can pursue its current foreign policy on the world stage today is because of the capability of carrier task forces to project power globally. The United States currently have 11 nuclear powered carriers in service. The current plans are for new units of the next generation Gerald R. Ford class carriers to replace current ones (starting with USS Enterprise) on a one-for-one basis as they become operational. Contrast that with r

      • One of the main reasons America can frantically pursue its current policy of destroying its own wealth is because of the capability of carrier task forces to project power globally.

        FTFY

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tloh ( 451585 )

          I don't necessarily disagree with you just yet, but would you please justify your "correction"? How does projection of naval power have anything to do with a perceived "policy of destroying it's own wealth"? There is, in fact, much to argue the opposite. Any student of economics or military history would be familiar with the work of Alfred Thayer Mahan. The ideas outlined in his seminal work "The Influence of Sea Power upon History" is as influential today as it was when it was written more than 120 yea

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gatkinso ( 15975 )

        Just don't try to use them against an adversary with decent subs.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tloh ( 451585 )

          That is a nice start, but won't you please finish expressing your thought? Which adversary has decent subs and what makes them decent? I'm genuinely curious.

          • as my two cowardly siblings post, any half-way modern diesel-electric sub with a couple of moderatly capable torpedos can put a serious dent in your day. A diesel-electric might not have the range, or submersion capabilities of a nuclear sub, but given the lack of always-on coolant pumps (which is a must for nuclear reactors), a good DE sub can pretty much become undetectable once submerged and running silent.

            my siblings links to a chinese sub which reportedly could stay submerged for up to a week, even tho

    • Apparently the Chinese have so much dough from selling us crap at Walmart that they need to watch some of it burn by launching toiletries into orbit.

      As a Chinese, I'd say it's mostly a result of Chinese government plundering from the citizens rather than selling you cheap crap.

      • Ah! yes I had not considered that. Good point, I worked with a Chinese gentleman whose brother, still in China, had starved to death. Seems like he and his family would have preferred food over an orbiting monument.

  • Why does the icon for the China articles look more like a zipper than a wall?

    For that matter, why do all the icons look like cartoony crap?

  • I should be glad that my 'scoop' got posted, but I still cannot enjoy it; with the exception of few posts (yeay! ./ moderation works!) there is so much trolling, bitterness and even anger - seriously, is everything a competition to you people?

    Am I wrong in reading at '-1' ?

    These are new exciting times; and you are worried that China will be pissing on you from orbit? Or that superpower leaders are stupid enough to go to war?

    If you are afraid that China will colonize low Earth orbit and "force" you to confor

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sconeu ( 64226 )

      These are new exciting times; and you are worried that China will be pissing on you from orbit?

      No, we are pissed off that we don't seem to have the testicular fortitude to actually fund a decent space program.

      Or have you missed the news this week about the last Shuttle flight, with nothing to replace it. Now granted the Shuttle turned out to be a clusterf**k, but there is no clear direction on what to do next.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by IrquiM ( 471313 )
        I see the direction prettly clearly - it just takes some time to get the companies up to speed (private companies is the direction forward for NASA)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tloh ( 451585 )

        No, we are pissed off that we don't seem to have the testicular fortitude to actually fund a decent space program.

        Or have you missed the news this week about the last Shuttle flight, with nothing to replace it. Now granted the Shuttle turned out to be a clusterf**k, but there is no clear direction on what to do next.

        And of course the Chinese are to be blamed for that.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by sconeu ( 64226 )

          Way to complete not read the thread.

          I said I wasn't pissed at the Chinese, I was pissed at the US.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by tloh ( 451585 )

            Dude, the post you're responding to was about disappointment over trolling on a post about the Chinese in space. How is it logical that it is actually about being pissed at the US? Funny logic you subscribe to, but if that's your intent, the whole damn discussion ought to be modded "offtopic". I'm in agreement with the original poster, a little perspective and open-mindedness goes a long way in "learning a thing or two".

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tloh ( 451585 )

      Welcome to slashdot my friend.

      The average /.er is usually above average in technology literacy. However, a large overwhelming majority is hopelessly retarded in the area of cultural awareness and social maturity. I'm as curious as the next guy about what other nations are up to scientifically and technologically. But any time anything related to China comes up, I cringe at the embarrassing displays of stupidity and ignorance that this majority is capable of unleashing. Unfortunately, it comes with the t

  • It will be Bruce Lee's grandson, in orbit with feet and nunchuks flying as he fights the evil criminals in zero gravity. Pufff. This is going to be awesome!

  • Looking at slashdot headlines in my rss reader, at first I mixed up several different headlines and read this one as "Google Launching First Space Station Module In September."

    ... and it didn't really seem particularly surprising...

Slashdot Top Deals

2 pints = 1 Cavort

Close