Details of Chinese Spacecraft's Asteroid Encounter 89
the_newsbeagle writes "Chinese aerospace engineers have revealed, for the first time, details about their Chang'e-2 spacecraft's encounter with the asteroid Toutatis last month. They have plenty to boast: The asteroid flyby wasn't part of the original flight plan, but engineers adapted the mission and navigated the satellite through deep space (PDF). Exactly how close Chang'e-2 came to Toutatis is still unclear. The article states that the first reports 'placed the flyby range at 3.2 km, which was astonishingly—even recklessly—tight. Passing within a few kilometers of an asteroid only 2 to 3 km in diameter at a speed of 10,730 meters per second could be described as either superb shooting or a near disaster.' If the Chinese spacecraft did pass that near, it could provide a "scientific bonanza" with data about the asteroid's mass and composition."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Its speculative though. They don't know it got to 3.2 km range. And if your vehicle is disposable and the mission is a bonus, why not take risks?
It needs more time to transmit the data (Score:2)
Please remember, the data speed between the Chinese satellite and the ground stations is 20kbps or less.
I think the Chinese needs more time to download more data before they themselves can digest what exactly transpired during the flyby.
Re:Figures. (Score:4, Insightful)
I read it as the American author feeling threatened by the Chinese space programme that is apparently now rivalling or even surpassing NASA. Yes, surpassing. When they get their space station up it will be bigger than the largest US one, putting Skylab in third place behind the Russians.
It's stupid. We should be congratulating them and thanking them for advancing science and mankind's exploration of space. Maybe work with them on the ISS, or getting back to the moon. Don't feel inadequate, just accept that you are not funding NASA enough to be the leaders at everything and that it really doesn't matter.
Cautiously optomistic? (Score:2)
Re:Figures. (Score:4, Interesting)
Then they conducted a reckless ASAT test at relatively high LEO altitudes and nearly doubled the number of trackable debris at that altitude [see Johnson Space Center's Orbital Debris Quarterly Newsletter for the chart]. At that altitude, the pieces of their defunct weather satellite will remain a hazard for many decades. That got them uninvited.
China needs to decide whether the PLA is running the show or not, and decide whether they want to be a responsible space-faring nation... or not.
Re: (Score:2)
How childish of the US to take that attitude. On the one hand it routinely and openly spies on China with satellites, participating fully in the international dick-measuring contest. If you hadn't noticed other countries have been protesting your anti-satellite weapons as well. When China gets fed up and decides it needs to demonstrate to the US that it cannot act with impunity the US gets in a huff and blocks co-operating with the ISS, even though the other partners want China in.
The US needs to realize th
Re: (Score:2)
And they are complete and helpless victims of "open spying by satellites", with no spy satellites of their own [globalsecurity.org].
When China finally reaches the modern era and actually lets its people have free access to information, such ignorant post
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Figures. (Score:4, Funny)
It was a payload destined for the NYTimes, but somehow, it was re-routed.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not belittling the Chinese accomplishment, I think it's very cool they were able to adjust their mission to get these photos.
Re:Figures. (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you seen some of the missions NASA has undertaken?
Yes, and even when they fail or kill people, they aren't usually described as "reckless" or "disaster" (even if near). If someone died, it was a tragedy, but not a disaster. At least in mainstream media. But this, a well-executed fly-by, is a reckless near-disaster. It wasn't the mission that was the complaint, but the coverage of it. It was described in a negative manner. Why?
Re: (Score:3)
Do you have to work hard to avoid everything that conflicts with your bizarre word view?
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/01/28/challenger.anniversary.teacher/index.html [cnn.com] - "The Challenger disaster's teachable moment"
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/01/us/columbia-anniversary/index.html [cnn.com] - "NASA, Texas towns mark Columbia disaster"
But yes given Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia it takes a lot for something to reach "disaster" level for NASA.
Re: (Score:3)
Why?
Maybe this ieee Spectrum author has a subtle personal bias and he injected a single provocative word, who knows? At least the story wasn't written for a government owned media outlet, passed through government censors working under the guidance of national political bias. Try People's Daily sometimes.
Re:Figures. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Fox News isn't a government sanctioned or government supported news outlet. You should at the very least compare NPR with CCTV to get anywhere close to a valid comparison. By the way, did you watch Chinese language CCTV or CCTV-9 International? Big difference there if you didn't know.
Re: (Score:2)
By the way, did you watch Chinese language CCTV or CCTV-9 International? Big difference there if you didn't know.
Yes, I know. I watched a variety of the available TV t
Re: (Score:2)
By constructing this equivalency, you are essentially saying that the US would experience no change whatsoever, either for better or for worse, if it were to nationalize and place under a propaganda department every existing media outlet, make private publishing illegal, and punish bloggers and celebrity commentators for publishing views different from the government narrative.
Most Slashdotters typically have a history of voicing disgust at the encroachment of government censorship within the US. However, i
Re: (Score:2)
make private publishing illegal, and punish bloggers and celebrity commentators for publishing views different from the government narrative.
Celebrity commentators are punished for views different from the government narrative. Granted the punishment is much less, but the Dixie Chicks had financial penalties for their anti-government comments. That they were imposed by "private" companies in support of the government than a fine by the government directly makes it all ok, right?
However, if you truly believe your above equivalency, then there should be no disgust towards the US government at all in your comment history. Am I correct?
I don't understand how you would make that leap. I'm guessing that you've seen me be critical of the US and are trying to trick me into answering a "when did you stop
Re: (Score:2)
Explain Michael Moore's fortune in embarrassing government and politicians, and his continued freedom to do so
I'm saying your drawing of an equivalency is irrational given the difference in degree that you have admitted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What country are you from, AK Marc? And in what capacity and how long did you stay in China? From this utter ignorance of the differences between US and China, I have a feeling you took the tourist route.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"In the communist system man is a wolf for man. In the capitalist system it's the opposite"
Re: (Score:2)
It's a dog eat dog world.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh really? I am from China. I can tell you with 100% certainty that nobody believes the 7pm news from CCTV-1. Chinese netizens tend to make fun of them. It is totally biased. It shies away from serious issues such as train crashes. It is a mouth piece for the communist party. You have absolutely no idea what you are on about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that most of these funny posts about CCTV get taken down by the Internet police in China, CCTV is sponsored by the central government. One of my friend's parent's company got visited by the police, because one of his employee made fun of CCTV, they figured out that IP address came from that company. Fox News is not sponsored by any branch of your government, you can bad mouth it as much as you want, and you won't get visited by the police.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People have been visited by the police for bad mouthing Fox.
Really, who? Fox is a regular dumping ground for the Left. The Daily Show trashes them all the time. You have a rather skewed view of the freedoms Americans enjoy. It's not perfect, but comparisons to the state run media in China are a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When speaking of bias, substance trumps technicality. Lies of omission and lies of fabrication are technically all lies, but are substantially different.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Because they are jealous - that the Chinese could afford to remission a probe to do something "trivial" as photograph an asteroid. Of course when NASA decides to remission probes to deliberately crash into the Moon then that is "discovery". To me, deliberately crashing anything man-made into an extra-terrestrial object runs the risk of contaminating samples for future experiments.
Re: (Score:2)
"To me, deliberately crashing anything man-made into an extra-terrestrial object runs the risk of contaminating samples for future experiments"
Does that mean it's OK to destroy a satellite in orbit and creating a debris field scattered across a wide chunk of LEO? That's exactly what China did when they shot down one of their own satellites during a test. China can conduct all the space missions it wants but they still have about 30 years of catchup before you can start comparing their achievements with NA
Re: (Score:2)
It was described in a negative manner. Why?
'Cause we doan like them Chiners much?
Its because we can't believe that anybody else is pulling the same kinds of asinine stunts we used to pull all the time...
Re:Figures. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
However, if you want to see reckless then watch Armstrong navigate onto the moon in a tinfoil box.
Yeah but that was cool.
Re: (Score:2)
However since then there has been a growing stream of "cool" coming from space exploration - mostly cool engineering, discoveries, and Hubble style pictures, where the heroes are off camera.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Wasn't that the Japanese?
Re:They flew close but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
No, but there has been some concern as the point of your post has yet to be discovered.
Re: (Score:2)
AC's a Planet of the Apes fan.
WHOOOSH! (Score:4, Funny)
that was either a Chinese satellite on a close flyby, or the joke.
Re: (Score:1)
China! China! ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Passing within a few kilometers of an asteroid only 2 to 3 km in diameter at a speed of 10,730 meters per second could be described as either superb shooting or a near disaster.
I'm not often a "Yay, China!" kind of guy, but I do admit that's pretty cool; ballsy even. I'm happy for the engineers who stuck their necks out to try it. Pretty neat!
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if they were actually able to take pictures or something. I mean, there is no way that the thing was ever designed for such tracking rates...
Re: (Score:2)
... there is no way that the thing was ever designed for such tracking rates
If you're playing with something like space, you need to design in the exponential. Eleven klicks per sec. is pretty slow compared to a lot of stuff that's flying around out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Tracking rate. At 1000 degree/s tracking rate if you want to keep the target stable in focus at closest appoach. I doubt that thing has gyros to give it that much rotational momentum...
Re: (Score:2)
... there is no way that the thing was ever designed for such tracking rates
If you're playing with something like space, you need to design in the exponential. Eleven klicks per sec. is pretty slow compared to a lot of stuff that's flying around out there.
At 1000 degree/s tracking rate if you want to keep the target stable in focus at closest appoach. I doubt that thing has gyros to give it that much rotational momentum...
We've sent out stuff that are damned near blasting past planets, yet they manage to handle the flyby easily even at the velocity at which they're moving.
Cosmic particles go quite a bit faster than that mere "stuff."
Re: (Score:2)
Problem with china is, you stick your neck out and fail, your head is promptly removed.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem with china is, you stick your neck out and fail, your head is promptly removed.
That's Japan. "It was a good death." -- The Last Samurai.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with China?
There's nothing wrong with China. The Chinese, on the other hand ... Ca. four billion people who treat each other like shit, all of who treat everyone who's not Chinese like shit. Bravo. What a stupid culture, Yeah, great, your civilizatiion's four thousand years old. Big deal. What've you done with that other than bury pottery armies and oppress your own people (and other people)?
Re: (Score:2)
all of who treat everyone who's not [LOCAL] like shit : China Y / USA Y
What a stupid culture : China Y / USA Y
great, your civilizatiion's four thousand years old : China Y / USA N
bury pottery armies : China Y / USA N
oppress your own people (and other people)? : China Y / USA N
|/flamebait
Ahem... Seems they beat you on Culture and artifacts.
Re: (Score:2)
oppress your own people (and other people)? : China Y / USA N
You got that one wrong. China Y / USA Y.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, great, your civilization's four thousand years old. Big deal. What've you done with that other than bury pottery armies and oppress your own people (and other people)?
Okay, they've done some fantastic things with food, including pasta/noodles, admitted. And rocketry, and gunpowder, and weaponry (lots of weaponry), ... Still, ...
The Korean War pretty much sucked in every way. Ditto The Cultural Revolution, the Red Guard, and everything related to Mao. Ditto VietNam, Tibet, ... Tsianenman Square ...
Tell me when to stop. :-P
Re: (Score:2)
Don't stop, keep going. Oh wait...there's not much more after that is there.
Hmm ...
Would you mind listing all the shitty things the United States has done over the same time frame?
Note I'm not a Murrican, and yeah I know about all the shitty things they've done, and are doing. I often wonder how they manage to sleep at night.
I was just ranting. They've both done some marvelous, and some marvelously ugly, stuff.
Man ... That's playing chicken ... (Score:2)
I'd love to have a video of THAT flyby.
10+ kilometers/second (36000k/h) with those kinds of tolerances must look like being on a bullet aimed at a bull's eye right up until the end.
Re: (Score:2)
... I do admit that's pretty cool; ballsy even.
For the girls/females/women out there, ovaries are ballsy-ish, yes? I didn't intend that epithet to exclude you, just so's you know. Had to say that (for whatever reason, I'm not entirely sure). Carry on; kthxbye. Tooduls!!!111 :-)
unimpressed; amateur effort (Score:1)
We (the U.S.) actually landed on one, and a staunch documentary about it starred Bruce W.
Changed Orbit (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And when launching the probe, they changed the orbit of the Earth ! Why is it that no one showed us the calculations proving it is safe ?!
Re: (Score:3)
A satellite can change the orbit of an asteroid; one play to deflect them is a 'gravity tractor' that uses ion engines to station keep some distance from the asteroid, and its gravitational pull alters its orbit.
However, that technique (which is what I presume you were thinking of) depends on the probe spending months near the asteroid. This flyby was on a timescale of ~1s. Chang'e 2 has a mass of ~2500kg, so we are talking an effect that is likely to be tiny compared to other influences such as solar light
Photos (Score:3)
For once, the phrase "photos or it didn't happen" seems about right, if only to encourage the Chinese to publish their data sooner rather than later. Excellent achievement though!
Re: (Score:2)
Uh. Didn't actually read the article did you? Or maybe you were using lynx and didn't note the [image] on top?
Re: (Score:2)
Ha! Guilty as charged :)
Re: (Score:3)
Science done right (Score:3)
Re:Science done right (Score:5, Insightful)
Holy (bleep), did you see the landing sequence of Curiosity? -- that's dancing near the fire! The reason it worked is because of all of those "bureaucratic tests", and there is now a laboratory on Mars which no other nation or agency could have put there. Kudos to the Chinese for the Chang'e-2 mission, but NASA is still so far ahead of anyone else in robot exploration of the solar system, measured by current, operating, successful missions (Cassini, Messenger, Curiosity, New Horizons, etc, etc), that there is really no comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
When Curiosity was in the planning stages, 2gb for a comp was a major improvement. At some point they had to freeze the specs. If they had tried to keep up with Moore's Law, I doubt we'd have a functioning vehicle.
As far as bureaucracy goes, I hate it as much as the next person, maybe more. I wish humanity could come up with something better to ensure the success of complex projects.
Chang'e 2's moon photo (Score:2)
in high resolution glory:
http://159.226.88.59:7779/CE1OutENGWeb/ [159.226.88.59]
It is hosted on some weird IP address... I know... You need to register to download too. NASA tend to release everything on their website, and you don't tend to need to register.
One word (Score:2)