People excited for successful launching of Shenzhou-6

[muyang523]

BEIJING, Oct. 12 (Xinhuanet) -- Chinese people nationwide are in great excitement as learning about the successful launch of second manned spacecraft Shenzhou-6 on Wednesday morning.

"I am very excited to see the successful liftoff of Shenzhou-6," said Tibetan woman Yuzhen, who delayed her routine pray every morning around Potala Palace for watching the live broadcasting onTV.

"Shenzhou-6's successful launching indicates that our country is becoming more and more powerful, and with a powerful motherland,we common people would then live better lives," she said.

In northwest China's Gansu Province, where the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center is located, people were in special enjoyment for Shenzhou-6, since local people contribute a lot to China's space programme, including transferring villagers, improving transport system and providing such logistics guarantee as water and electricity supply.


"Today's successful launch of Shenzhou-6 is the best return forour efforts," said Jiuquan Mayor Chen Chunming. "The astronauts' spirit is really encouraging for us to contribute more to China's space undertaking," he noted excitedly.

A series of activities, such as singing and dancing performances, would be held in Jiuquan city in the next four to five days, to celebrate the success of Shenzhou-6's launch.

After the multi-day space mission, the spacecraft will return to the main landing field in the central areas of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. Li Min, an official in charge of the craft's returning and landing at Siziwang banner, said local people were cheerful when seeing the process of Shenzhou-6's successful liftoff.

"We would make utmost efforts to assure the safely landing of our spacecraft, to satisfy people all over the country," he said.

No matter in China's remote areas or in prosperous cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, the whole nation were in the gripof excitement. From residential buildings at Xuhui District of China's economic hub Shanghai, the sound of cheers and applause could be heard as the China Central Television (CCTV) showed the launching scene.

In department stores of the city, customers were crowding in front of TV sets at the appliances sales counters to witness the historical moment

"Shenzhou-6, as a forerunner of China's research on aerospace science, may arouse more people's fantasy on the space and universe," said Gu Xiaoming, a professor on history department of Fudan University.

An Internet public-opinion poll among Shanghai citizens shows that 76 percent people were concerned about Shenzhou-6's liftoff process, 69 percent watched the live broadcasting on Shenzhou-6 from the CCTV.

After the successful launch, 44 percent Shanghai respondents were mostly concerned about the techniques and safety measures of the spacecraft, 37 percent about the landing and 19 percent about the astronauts' lives in the space

All respondents agreed that the successful launching of China's manned spacecraft Shenzhou-5 and Shenzhou-6 indicated the increasing of China's national power and that's really a pride of the Chinese people.

Every Chinese again enjoy the excitement and pride of the successful launch of Shenzhou-6, two years after the successful spaceflight of Shenzhou-5.

Millions of people witnessed the process of Shenzhou-6's liftoff through media. "Excitement", "proud", "expectation" became popular wordings when people left message in the Internet or accepted interview.

"We are really proud to see our own spacecraft in the space," said a Beijing citizen Ms. Shi, who works in a foreign company. "But we still lag behind developed countries in aerospace technology, so we need to continue our efforts to peacefully apply the space resources, in a bid to benefit the mankind," she noted.

Encouraged by Shenzhou-6's successful launch, teachers and students of Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and experts of a aerospace technology research institute in southwest China's Sichuan Province, expressed common willingness to increase their efforts to make new contribution to China's space programme.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-10/12/content_3610349.htm

[Obcession]

Sweet! I was watching the launch live on the internet. It was awesome! The two astonauts (what do they call chinese astronauts?) were reading some kind of a book...

[Dongfeng]

Sweet! I was watching the launch live on the internet. It was awesome! The two astonauts (what do they call chinese astronauts?) were reading some kind of a book...
They are called Hang-Tian-Yuan in Chinese, which can be roughly translated as "Space Traveller". I hate the nickname of "Taikonaut". It just sounds horrible.

[Dongfeng]

Jiuquan Satellite Launch Centre, just few hours before launch

http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/h_JLC_shenzhou6_051003_02.jpg

[Dongfeng]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/asia_pac_china_space_launch/img/3.jpg

[Dongfeng]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/asia_pac_china_space_launch/img/5.jpg

[Dongfeng]

http://top1.jschina.com.cn/bbs/noncgi/usr/img/051012121903__1_tv20.jpg

[MIGleader]

may the force be with them...:china:

[FreeAsia2000]

WELL DONE CHINA ! :china:

[chinawhite]

that was quick.

:china:

[bd popeye]

I'm happy to see the PRC back in space. I hope they expand their manned space program and I'm sure it will be sucessful!:)

There should be joint co-operation of all nations in space exploration.

[T-U-P]

Sweet! I was watching the launch live on the internet. It was awesome! The two astonauts (what do they call chinese astronauts?) were reading some kind of a book...
where did you find the live video? i wanna watch it. is it the whole launch?

[ahho]

They are called Hang-Tian-Yuan in Chinese, which can be roughly translated as "Space Traveller". I hate the nickname of "Taikonaut". It just sounds horrible.


well, taikonaut are what foreigner is using, but the chinese doesn't really care about the others, they are sticking to the chinese name. why would people call them taikonaut??? why wouldn't they just call them taikonren so it is in full chinese.

[Zhu Ge Liang]

I AM PROUD OF OUR MOTHERLAND...........:china:

This is to show to the rest of the world that 'though China is not welcomed in the ISS project, it will catch up soon and to prove that it can do it all by its own !!! BRAVO.........

[MIGleader]

I AM PROUD OF OUR MOTHERLAND...........:china:

This is to show to the rest of the world that 'though China is not welcomed in the ISS project, it will catch up soon and to prove that it can do it all by its own !!! BRAVO.........

it was invited by iss, but refused

[Zhu Ge Liang]

it was invited by iss, but refused

Why did China refuse ? They can learn alot from the project and save alot of years of R&D by themselves !

[Dongfeng]

You can watch the launch video here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4330680.stm

There are several versions of the story about China raking part in ISS. Some said that China expressed willingness to join ISS but was turned down by the U.S., while some others said that U.S. invited China to join but China refused. Really difficult to say.

Nevertheless, it will take China some time to catch up with the ISS. However, ISS has encountered some problems between the coordination and co-operation between different nations. The U.S. is no longer interested in ISS any more and NASA has published its new vision of Moon and Mars exploration programme. It might be easier for China to build the space station by its own.

By the way, ShenZhou-6 might have to return to earth earlier than expected (from five days down to three days) due to the bad weather in the landing site.

[MIGleader]

the ultimate asian peace program: a joint space station built by russia, china, japan, pakistan, india, thailand, and taiwan. such a massive program would push the technologies and econmies of asia and do much to promote peace between friends and rivals.

[adeptitus]

Space exploration is one of those programs that's very costly and have llittle actual economic benefit in the short-term. It's hard to justify spending so much money and say "well we might realize gains in 50 or 100 years".

When NASA first propose the space shuttle program, the claimed that per launch cost could be reduced to $100 million USD (adjusted for inflation). Current average launch expenditure for NASA space shuttle is $1.3 billion. The total cost of the NASA shuttle program, to its planned retirement in 2010, is estimated at $174 billion USD total. In comparison, the Russian government's entire space program budget from 2005 to 2015 is 425 billion rubles ($15 billion USD).

Western nations have taken the path of joint-projects to share the cost burden. China's space program is mostly solo, but they use proven technologies from domestic rockets and Russian space program to minimize cost and risk. The PRC government today is not wealthy enough to blow $174 billion like US does with just the NASA shuttle program.

The unfinished Russian Buran 2.01 :(
http://www.buran.ru/htm/2-01.htm

[T-U-P]

question about the booster, what are those pieces that keep falling down when blasting off? they fell down in every single one of the launches.

[TJJH]

I do believe that they are the pieces of the discarded rockets.

[Dongfeng]

question about the booster, what are those pieces that keep falling down when blasting off? they fell down in every single one of the launches.
The same stuff that hit space shuttle Columbia, which later resulted in the lost of the space shuttle.

It is used to keep the temperture of the fuel tank of the rocket in cold weather.

[Dongfeng]

the latest report has confirmed that ShenZhou-6 has landed safely. The mission has been a complete success :china:

[Zhu Ge Liang]

the latest report has confirmed that ShenZhou-6 has landed safely. The mission has been a complete success :china:


THANKS GOD....... :china:

[Obcession]

:china:

[T-U-P]

the latest report has confirmed that ShenZhou-6 has landed safely. The mission has been a complete success :china:
lol, you got the news 1 hr before me, and im watching it live on cctv.com

well this time it took then a long time to find the capsule.

[Dongfeng]

I was watching live TV on CCTV too.

I think the delay is mainly because the landing was carried out at night time and the vehicles were not able to travel so fast.

The two astronauts seemed to be in very good mood and health condition.

http://www.sinodefence.com/news/2005/news05-10-17.asp

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/TECH/space/10/16/china.space.ap/story.exit.capsule.cctv.jpg

[JZXT]

A source of national pride and united the people.


THANKS GOD.......

It is good engineering and careful check.. check and check again.

Personally, there is no such thing. It is for weak mind people that need sense of direction and purpose.

[PiSigma]

and the best part of it all is that they got back safely, it's pointless to go up and spend billions of dollars and crash land or burn up.

in the end it's about about good engineering, it truly is great being an engineer.

[T-U-P]

and the best part of it all is that they got back safely, it's pointless to go up and spend billions of dollars and crash land or burn up.
in fact, it landed in the perfect position, which is the upright position (although that would make the astronauts harder to get out because the door is on the top).

[Longaxe]

Lol I don’t see how it can land upside down, without killing the astronauts. Considering the way the parachute deploys, and the fact that the retrorockets are on the bottom.:coffee:

[Fairthought]

Congratulations to China for a hugely successful space mission.

Though the Chinese manned spaced program is proceeding more slowly than the primodial programs of the US and the USSR back in 1960's, it is accomplishing much more with each flight. Back then, the crash space program of the US and USSR led to several catastrophic launchpad failures and only proved the need to take things slow and in stages.

China has found its stride, and each successive launch will show a significant advance on the previous.

China's first manned spaceship (the ShenZhou 5, Oct 15th, 2003, flown for 21hours 23 min for 21 orbits) has room for three passengers. The Soviets's first manned spaceship (the Vostok, flown april 12, 1961 for 1 hour 48 min single orbital flight) only had room for one. The American's first manned spaceship (the Mercury, flown May 5, 1961 for a 15 min suborbital flight) only had room for one.

Furthermore, the Mercury was a phonebooth of a space capsule, shoehorned to fit on top of America's first ICBM, the Atlas I. This was part of America's 'Get a Man into Space Soonest' program that sought to save time be eliminating the need o develop a new carrier rocket. The Mercury was one-third the size of the Vostok. The Vostok was slightly over half the size of ShenZhou. The Mercury could only support a 24 hour flight. The Votok a ten day flight. The ShenZhou a twenty day flight.

The Shenzhou performs orbital maneuvers, which neither the Soviet Vostok nor the American Mercury could do.

I know there will be complaints about comparing China's current space program with the 1961 space programs of US and USSR. But this is China's first manned space flights, as 1961 represented the first manned space flights of America and the Soviet Union. What else can it be compared to?



Compared to ShenZhou5, the ShenZhou 6 mission had two passengers. They performed orbital maneuvers, ventured into the service module, and conducted experiments. They spent 115 hours and 32 min in flight.

ShenZhou 7 is expected to fly in 2007. The Chinese will attempt orbital docking and tethered spacewalk maneuvers. This will represent the extant of the abilities of America's Gemini space program (the precursor to the Apollo lunar program) as well as the Soviet's Soyuz space program (precursor to the Salyut space station program).

What this means is, after ShenZhou 7, the Chinese will be ready to either build a space station or send men to the moon. ...Or both.

Militarily, it also means China can construct weapon platforms in space. This could be for ASAT or missile defense projects.

[Zhu Ge Liang]

Hope that someday Chinese astronauts will reach and land on Mars much faster than the Americans ! And then we can name few provinces there in Chinese characters ! :)

[T-U-P]

Lol I don’t see how it can land upside down, without killing the astronauts. Considering the way the parachute deploys, and the fact that the retrorockets are on the bottom.:coffee:
well just so that you know, the ShenZhou 5 capsule landed on its side. of course it's not possible to land upside down if everything worked, but there is still a possibility to land on its side.

and i doubt landing upside down would kill the astronauts.

[seawolf]

in 1969, the US and soviet has already sent men into orbit. this technology is 35 years old. this is very very old tech. hey, you can only blame your CCP for this, your CCP is the one that closed china to the rest of the world for such a long time.
china used money to buy the rocket tech from france, and hired some europeans to put the parts together. the europeans are very desperate for money, they would even sell their own grandmothers.

[Obcession]

Seawolf, shut the **** up.
China is the third country to send a man up into space, so according to your theory, Japan, EU and Italy's space programs are behind the US and Russia in more than 35 years old.
Provide some ******* proof and state some facts or leave, instead of ruining the forum with your personal (arrogant and ignorant) opinions.

[DumLoco]

in 1969, the US and soviet has already sent men into orbit. this technology is 35 years old. this is very very old tech. hey, you can only blame your CCP for this, your CCP is the one that closed china to the rest of the world for such a long time.
china used money to buy the rocket tech from france, and hired some europeans to put the parts together. the europeans are very desperate for money, they would even sell their own grandmothers.

What a pathetic opinion...
The manned misions are a great achievement for China, since no other nation after US and Russia has dare to concieve a serious and ambitious space program. Their technology is not 35 years old, they just must to start from this... They can't launch from one day to another a guy to the moon, so they are making all the required steps at a very impressive speed. And by the way, the technology of the Shenzhou missions is offcourse far better than the ones of the sixties US/Soviet missions.

:china:

[sumdud]

Just watch her lit the engine and lift, as if she has no weight!:china:

Man, really, Chinese rockets just fire and life. The Shuttle needs 3 seconds at least. That's some nice fuel China have.

[H5N1]

Oh yeah... the very thing that cross my mind too.. and also I notice that the booster produce very little respectable smoke. The flames were also very clear and distinct. Unlike the US shuttle launches.

But I believe the shuttle launch has a much heavier payload... so you can't compare that to the Shenzhou-6.

But the rocket boosters seems more advance than the ones used by the US.

[Fairthought]

It isn't just the the size of the payload. The ShenZhou uses liquid fuel propellant (specifically nitrogen tetraoxide as oxidizer and UDMH as fuel), which produces a much clearer plume. The Shuttle uses solid fuel propellant, which creates a much larger, opaque plume. Also the Shuttle plume is not smoke, per se, it is water vapor.

The US used to believe the solid fuel rockets were technologically a generation ahead of liquid fuel rockets because it has a stronger specific impulse (~15% more) than a liquid fuel rocket of the same dimensions.

For decades the US sneered at Russian rocket technology as being a whole generation behind America's because the Russian kept the liquid fuel. After the cold war it was revealed the Russian liquid fuel rockets had a major advantage over solid fuel: its a controllable burn. The russian's actually created rocket engines with throttle control to give their rockets a more efficient launch, thus a higher specific impulse. Liquid rockets also offer much higher safety for passengers, as the trajectory can be altered allowing multiple escape points throughout liftoff. The danger of a solid fuel rocket is there is no control. Once it burns, you're in for the pre-programmed ride and that's that.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, American generals were shocked to be told by US scientists that the Russian rockets were more advanced than their own. This went against everything the've been told for 30 years. Lockheed made a deal with a Russian company to buy the technology for throttle control liquid engines (the RD-180), which is now in service as their newest launcher, the Atlas V. I saw the first Atlas V while it was still in the Final Assembly Building. It was ironic hearing the factory guide extolling the Atlas V as Lockheed's greatest creation as we visitors could plainly see the rocket nozzle's were stencilled in Cyrillic script.

You see, part of the contract that Lockheed signed to obtain the Soviet technology was the agreement to purchase 100 RD-180 engines from russian factories. After that, Lockheed obtains the license to produce the engines on their own.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese obtained the same engine technology from the Russians. At the time, russia was desparate for cash, and China has benefited alot from Russia's Soyuz heritage.

Here is how Astronautix.com (http://www.astronautix.com/props/solid.htm) summarizes the difference between Solid and Liquid fuels:

The disadvantages of solid propellants in space applications include:


Slightly higher empty mass for the rocket stage

Slightly lower performance than storable liquid propellants

Transportability issues: Solid propellants are cast into the motor in the factory, unlike liquid fuel rockets which can be fuelled at the launch pad. This means they have to either be: 1) limited in size to be transportable (as for the Delta and Ariane strap-on motors); 2) cast in segments, with the segments assembled at the launch base (as for Titan and the Space Shuttle); or 3) cast in a factory near the launch site (actually done for large test motors intended for Saturn V upgrades).

Once ignited, they cannot be easily shut down or throttled. Thereafter they have to be pre-cast or milled out for a specific mission.

Often catastrophic results in the event of a failure
Advantages of solid rocket motors, many of which make them ideal for military applications:


High density and low volume

Nearly indefinite storage life

Instant ignition without fuelling operations

High reliability

[Sea Dog]

Oh yeah... the very thing that cross my mind too.. and also I notice that the booster produce very little respectable smoke. The flames were also very clear and distinct. Unlike the US shuttle launches.

But I believe the shuttle launch has a much heavier payload... so you can't compare that to the Shenzhou-6.

But the rocket boosters seems more advance than the ones used by the US.

Oh come on. You're not seriously comparing a Shenzou launch to the STS system are you? They are two totally different animals. The STS system relies on two solid rocket boosters and three main engines. And yes it is much heavier than a smaller rocket. You would be better off (if you want to compare US and PRC) comparing a Shenzou-6 launch to a Delta rocket or something. Deltas are very clean and powerful launchers that are extremely accurate.

Oh, but congratulations to China nonetheless. :)

[sstsubs]

congraulating china? hey, the russians in 1954 already sent a satellite into space, china is how many decades behind? hey, it is your own government's fault for closing china to the outside world. And it is your 1 billion chinese's fault for allowing them to do so. And even today, china is still closing all the informations and democratic ideas from the outside world. And once again you 1 billion is allowing them to do so.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,1578189,00.html
yep, nothing ever changes in china.

[MIGleader]

congraulating china? hey, the russians in 1954 already sent a satellite into space, china is how many decades behind? hey, it is your own government's fault for closing china to the outside world. And it is your 1 billion chinese's fault for allowing them to do so. And even today, china is still closing all the informations and democratic ideas from the outside world. And once again you 1 billion is allowing them to do so.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,1578189,00.html
yep, nothing ever changes in china.

its strange how sometines you can criticize russian equipment, and other times you can praise it. :roll:

[trkl]

It isn't just the the size of the payload. The ShenZhou uses liquid fuel propellant (specifically nitrogen tetraoxide as oxidizer and UDMH as fuel), which produces a much clearer plume. The Shuttle uses solid fuel propellant, which creates a much larger, opaque plume. Also the Shuttle plume is not smoke, per se, it is water vapor.

The US used to believe the solid fuel rockets were technologically a generation ahead of liquid fuel rockets because it has a stronger specific impulse (~15% more) than a liquid fuel rocket of the same dimensions.

For decades the US sneered at Russian rocket technology as being a whole generation behind America's because the Russian kept the liquid fuel. After the cold war it was revealed the Russian liquid fuel rockets had a major advantage over solid fuel: its a controllable burn. The russian's actually created rocket engines with throttle control to give their rockets a more efficient launch, thus a higher specific impulse. Liquid rockets also offer much higher safety for passengers, as the trajectory can be altered allowing multiple escape points throughout liftoff. The danger of a solid fuel rocket is there is no control. Once it burns, you're in for the pre-programmed ride and that's that.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, American generals were shocked to be told by US scientists that the Russian rockets were more advanced than their own. This went against everything the've been told for 30 years. Lockheed made a deal with a Russian company to buy the technology for throttle control liquid engines (the RD-180), which is now in service as their newest launcher, the Atlas V. I saw the first Atlas V while it was still in the Final Assembly Building. It was ironic hearing the factory guide extolling the Atlas V as Lockheed's greatest creation as we visitors could plainly see the rocket nozzle's were stencilled in Cyrillic script.


Solid rockets have a lower ISP than liquid rockets, not a higher Isp. The US prefered solid rockets for ICBMs because they are easy to store and can be launched quickly, while most liquid rockeds have to store their fuel seperately and have to be fueled up right before launch. The US orbital launch vehicles have always used liquid fuels, or used rockets with a some solid stages and some liquid stages.

The shuttle uses solid rocket boosters, but its main engines run on liquid O2 and liquid H2. Oviously when you burn H2 and O2 you get H2O, aka water/steam. The US used to use fuels like NO4 and UMDH, they are good rocket fuels, but now the only liquid fuels used are H2/O2 or O2/kerosene due to environmental reasons (NO4 and UMDH are very toxic).

The Russian liquid rocket engines are very good, and in some cases superior to US designs. However, the US has been making throtleable liquid engines for many decades so it is not correct to say that the US uses only solid designs.

[MIGleader]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/world/china/piloted.htm
enjoy

[MIGleader]

recession for four years?--what are you talking about? The US economy is on solid footing and has been for a couple of years now.

yes the economy is earning money, but the money it owes to others is growing even faster.

[Skycom Type 2]

Since we are on the topic of space travel, and there seems to be a large number of knowledgeable people on this forum, what do you guys make of this idea?

http://www.skyramp.org/

basic summery: build a giant track into a mountain at 45 degree angle, mount rockets on a sled, put a spaceship on rocket sled, boost up the mountain, launch the spaceship off the mountain at an attitude of some 20,000+ feet where the air is half as dense as sea level, with a velocity of mach 1+

personal opinion: while I am not quite sure about the cost reduction benefits being as high as they said (90%) because your still using fuel to move a mass a certain distance, and to obtain a certain velocity. I can’t fault the fact that it would be safer and easier to use than vertical launch systems, like if the rockets on the sled go bust after launching you can just turn them off and the entire rig will stop by itself due to gravity. Easier because by the time the spaceship launch’s its going mach 1+, so you don’t have to worry about those winds blowing back it down to earth:) .

China benefits: the ego boost of being able to put more stuff in space than the U.S did in 30 years, as well as the small advantage of dominating the space theatre if the cost’s pan out. If they don’t well at least the rockets are less likely to blow up because of a minor computing error:) .

Speculation: Also since the U.S aerospace giants (Lockheed Martin, etc…) have a lot of clout, the U.S might not be able to switch to a sky ramp even if the people at N.A.S.A wanted to. While china is a centralized government, so they could just order one to be built.

Random thoughts: this is my first post I hope I don’t get a warning for this:(

[ahho]

Since we are on the topic of space travel, and there seems to be a large number of knowledgeable people on this forum, what do you guys make of this idea?

http://www.skyramp.org/

basic summery: build a giant track into a mountain at 45 degree angle, mount rockets on a sled, put a spaceship on rocket sled, boost up the mountain, launch the spaceship off the mountain at an attitude of some 20,000+ feet where the air is half as dense as sea level, with a velocity of mach 1+

personal opinion: while I am not quite sure about the cost reduction benefits being as high as they said (90%) because your still using fuel to move a mass a certain distance, and to obtain a certain velocity. I can’t fault the fact that it would be safer and easier to use than vertical launch systems, like if the rockets on the sled go bust after launching you can just turn them off and the entire rig will stop by itself due to gravity. Easier because by the time the spaceship launch’s its going mach 1+, so you don’t have to worry about those winds blowing back it down to earth:) .

China benefits: the ego boost of being able to put more stuff in space than the U.S did in 30 years, as well as the small advantage of dominating the space theatre if the cost’s pan out. If they don’t well at least the rockets are less likely to blow up because of a minor computing error:) .

Speculation: Also since the U.S aerospace giants (Lockheed Martin, etc…) have a lot of clout, the U.S might not be able to switch to a sky ramp even if the people at N.A.S.A wanted to. While china is a centralized government, so they could just order one to be built.

Random thoughts: this is my first post I hope I don’t get a warning for this:(


i think this is a pretty good opinion, why would you get a warning

[chinawhite]

@Skycom Type 2.

Actually i have read about that but my version is different.

Use of magets or super conductors to propel the space ship into space. Like a cannon.

I think one has been tested or in testing in africa somewhere.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not impressed with these giant rockets giving off posinious gases which causes global warming.

If man wants to chuck things ino space thing a cheap alternative to these rockets. Which still rely on the same technology as the germans used in their V-2s

Regards,

Chinawhite

[ahho]

how does v-2 work????

[chinawhite]

It works by having a chemical reaction in its chamber which is then forced out of a nozzel.

It works on newtons third law
"To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"

hope that helps:( .

Regards,

Chinawhite

[Gollevainen]

Random thoughts: this is my first post I hope I don’t get a warning for this

well nobody in here gets warnings whitout reasons, So you have nothing to fear, welcome to our forum and enjoy...

[MIGleader]

how does v-2 work????

really crappy. it used a very primitive form of radio/gyro/gear guidance. thats why the germans were never able to use it on military targets. it could only kill random civilians.

[Fairthought]

Solid rockets have a lower ISP than liquid rockets, not a higher Isp. The US prefered solid rockets for ICBMs because they are easy to store and can be launched quickly, while most liquid rockeds have to store their fuel seperately and have to be fueled up right before launch. The US orbital launch vehicles have always used liquid fuels, or used rockets with a some solid stages and some liquid stages.

The shuttle uses solid rocket boosters, but its main engines run on liquid O2 and liquid H2. Oviously when you burn H2 and O2 you get H2O, aka water/steam. The US used to use fuels like NO4 and UMDH, they are good rocket fuels, but now the only liquid fuels used are H2/O2 or O2/kerosene due to environmental reasons (NO4 and UMDH are very toxic).

The Russian liquid rocket engines are very good, and in some cases superior to US designs. However, the US has been making throtleable liquid engines for many decades so it is not correct to say that the US uses only solid designs.

I didn't say the US used Solid fuel propellants exclusively. The US prefers solid fuel rockets for a variety of applications. Military ICBM's and Rocket Boosters are the two biggest applications that favor solid rockets. The US space Shuttle relies overwhelmingly on the SRB (solid rocket boosters) for early liftoff from its launchpad.

Solid rockets are not as efficient as liquid rockets, and I was wrong to compare specific impulses. One reason the US had an endemic aversion to liquid fuelled rockets was due to the much lower reliability of liquid fuel engine ignitions compared to solid fuelled counterparts. That is also why the US preferred strapon boosters to be solid fuelled. If all initial stage engines are not firing simultaneously, the rocket will tear itself apart on the launchpad.

However, over the last 50 years, significant advances had been made in improving the reliability of liquid fuelled engine ignition.


It is no true that the US has been making throttleable liquid engines for 'many decades'. Not in regards to carrier rockets. Of course you can fish up designs for cruise missiles, but that has no manned space program application.
There is no reason for Lockheed martin to spend many millions (billions) of dollars on Soviet era throttle control technology if the US already had it for 'many decades'.

There is a difference between researching a technology for decades and actually having it for use in carrier rockets.

[trkl]

It is no true that the US has been making throttleable liquid engines for 'many decades'.

The XLR-99 engine used on the X-15 in the late 50's is said to be the "first large, man-rated, throttleable, restartable liquid propellant rocket engine". So the US has had this tech since the 50's.

[Fairthought]

That is incorrect.

The US Experimented with throttleable engine designs going back decades. The X-series were all experimental. That's what the X stands for.


The X-15 has nothing to do with carrier rockets into space anyway. It was a research program that probed the limits of aircraft speed and altitude given the technology of the day. It provided the US with invaluable flight data that was later incorporated into the SR-71 Blackbird.

The X-15, which is an airplane, did have a liquid throttleable re-startable rocket engine. It was dropped from the underbelly of a B-52 at high altitude in order to give the engine plenty of time to start. This is because the liquid throttleable engine still had ignition reliablility problems.This is not something that a carrier rocket could afford to have. As I said before, all the engines in the first stage of a carrier rocket needs to fire simultaneously, or the rocket will tear itself apart. The US did not solve this problem, the liquid rocket engine was discarded and the technology for liquid throttleable engines for use in carrier rockets was never developed. That is, not until the 1990's when the a US corporation bought the technology from Russians.


Which brings us to the discussion of the defining the limit of space.

According to the Federation Aeronautique Internationale, space is arbitrarily defined as the altitude above 100 km over the earth. By this arbitrary definition, the X-15 barely managed to make it into 'space' twice.

However, that altitude is far, far below the minimum altitude needed to maintain low earth orbit. It is of no significance whatsoever to a manned space program unless you severely limit yourself to sub-orbital flights only (which is absurd).

[trkl]

This is because the liquid throttleable engine still had ignition reliablility problems.This is not something that a carrier rocket could afford to have. As I said before, all the engines in the first stage of a carrier rocket needs to fire simultaneously, or the rocket will tear itself apart. The US did not solve this problem, the liquid rocket engine was discarded and the technology for liquid throttleable engines for use in carrier rockets was never developed. That is, not until the 1990's when the a US corporation bought the technology from Russians.


Liquid engines were not discarded, and every large orbital launch vehicle that the US has ever built uses liquid propellants. Many of those liquid engines have been throtleable. For example, ever notice the "go with throttle up" command in the space shuttle launch sequence?

I know that X-15 was a long way from being an orbital launch vehicle. However, it still had a large, throttleable, restartable, liquid engine that was reliable enough to be man-rated. There is really no reason why the engine of the X-15 could not be used in a launch vehicle.

[walter]

from space.com:

BEIJING (AP) – China's next space flight will carry three astronauts into orbit to perform a spacewalk and prepare for an eventual space station, newspapers reported Thursday.

The government has said the next mission could be launched as early as 2007.

News reports Thursday said the 14 candidates for the next mission include Yang Liwei, Fei Junlong and Nie Haisheng – the three men who flew aboard China's first two manned space missions, Shenzhou 5 and Shenzhou 6.

A report in the Beijing Morning Post said that after Shenzhou 7, China would send two unmanned vehicles into space with equipment to set up a space station.

It is expected to take 6 1/2 years to develop rockets powerful enough to launch the necessary equipment, the paper said, citing Liu Zhusheng, chief designer of China's Long March rocket.

[swimmerXC]

putting all your eggs in one basket... not a good idea :(

[MIGleader]

from space.com:

so that means the rokets for the mission were already under development since 2000?

china better not send all of its former astronauts in one ship. if theres an accident, china would lose all the people with experience

[swimmerXC]

China eyes 2017 moon landing

Friday, November 4, 2005; Posted: 10:12 a.m. EST (15:12 GMT)

BEIJING, China (Reuters) -- China, which launched its first manned space mission just two years ago, plans to put a man on the moon around 2017 and investigate what may be the perfect source of fuel, a newspaper reported on Friday.

Two Chinese astronauts orbited Earth for five days last month in the Shenzhou VI and China was now developing new craft up to the Shenzhou X, eyeing a permanent space station and an eventual moon mission, state media said this week.

"China will make a manned moon landing at a proper time, around 2017," leading scientist Ouyang Ziyuan was quoted by the Southern Metropolis News as saying.

The project also includes setting up a moon-based astronomical telescope, measuring the thickness of the moon's soil and the amount of helium-3 on the moon -- an element some researchers say is a perfect, non-polluting fuel source.

Some scientists believe there is enough helium-3 on the moon to power the world for thousands of years.

"We will provide the most reliable report on helium-3 to mankind," Ouyang said.

The United States unveiled a $104 billion plan in September to return Americans to the moon by 2018. Its Apollo program carried the first humans to the moon in 1969.

China's first lunar orbiter could blast off as early as 2007, coinciding with its third manned space trip in which possibly three men would orbit Earth in Shenzhou VII and conduct a space walk. (Full story)

China was designing a rocket that could carry a payload of 25 tons, up from a present limit of eight tons, the Beijing News reported this week, though it would unlikely be ready for another six-and-a-half years.

Copyright 2005 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Source (http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/11/04/china.moon.reut/index.html)

forget NASA... im going to china in 2009 anybody want a signature before i walk on the moon? ;)
:china: :china: :china:

[PiSigma]

don't really think they will send all three astronauts with experience up at once, maybe just 1 with 2 news ones or send 3 new ones up. it might be wise to send someone experienced up there if the next mission requires something difficult to be done like space walk or putting two parts of the shenzhou together (space station). the news report only says the 3 guys that have already gone up will be considered, but the chances of picking them again is very low, no one want to sacrifice a national hero for something that a "no ones knows" can do.

[Obcession]

He's vince, ban him!
Hm, if it's old, then why has only 3 countries done it?
Actually, there is a resource on the moon you can bring back. It's called Helium 3. It is a very good material for generating nuclear power.

[Gollevainen]

funny to see that russians have quite bright views of chinese spaceprogram...what do you guys think? Is this too blue-eyed idealism or does it have any base on it?...i'm not very knowlidgble of chisese space program...

From Pravda....
China set to conquer space, build orbital station and lunar base
11/25/2005 12:06
China is becoming the only world nation which is capable of competing with the United States in the field of the most important global issues

On October 17th, 2005, a return capsule of the Chinese spacecraft Shenzhou-VI successfully landed in Inner Mongolia. Two taikonauts (taikun - Great Emptiness) returned to Earth on board the spacecraft. The Chinese manned space mission duration was 115 hours and 30 minutes. Estimated cost of the Shenzhou program is $111 million.

The success of the second Chinese manned space mission created far-reaching geopolitical consequences that are a lot greater than a sheer technological achievement. "The ultimate goal of the Chinese manned space program is to build a permanent space laboratory and engineering system," said Tan Sianming, press secretary of the manned space program of China, shortly after the landing. The plan for 2007 features a spacewalk. A docking in orbit is slated for 2009-2012.

Today's China is becoming the only world nation which is capable of competing with the United States in the field of the most important issues in terms of technology and politics. China has an impressive economic foundation to rest upon. According to September report by Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), within the next five years China's economic growth rate will be higher than that in most Western countries.

Still, China has a lot of complex issues to resolve with regard to modernization of its technological and scientific capabilities. According to Chinese experts, power consumption required to produce $10 thousand worth of China's GDP equaled 11.8 million tons of comparison fuel in 2002. The amount is three times greater than that in the United States, it is five times greater than figures for Germany, and six times greater than figures for Japan. Excessive power consumption in China is at least 230 million tons of comparison fuel.

If China's economy develops as predicted by the OECD analysts, China will be able to commence the lunar exploration program at the end of a second decade of the 21st century.

Russian experts were asked to comment on two issues:

- The progress made by the Chinese manned space program;
- China's capability to build a space station and a lunar base in the foreseeable future

Lev Zeleny, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, director of the Institute of Space Studies:

"I know that the Chinese have a comprehensive multistage program for the exploration of the Moon. It looks like the program will be a success. A new generation of the Chinese is calling the tune out there. They are not like the Chinese we got used to in the past. It is largely the people who worked in the West for several years, they learned everything they could during their foreign experience. When they came back to China, the authorities created excellent working conditions for them. There are still some specialists who belong to the older generation but all of them play second fiddle to the young blood."

Leonid Gorshkov, doctor of technical sciences, professor, senior researcher at the Russian Space Corporation Energia

"I am really impressed by a cautious approach of the Chinese. They launch a spacecraft with animals once a year. Then they carry out the first manned mission. They launch the second manned mission after a considerable break. They are obviously very cautious. That is the way they have chosen.

"They unveiled their objectives and said that the job would be done in a very short period. However, it is quite difficult to make accurate predictions at the moment. All and all, the Shenzhou missions are a big success of the Chinese. I believe China will become a strong player in terms of international space exploration," the expert said.

Ivan Moiseev, scientific leader of the Institute of Space Politics:

"Unlike the USA and the USSR in the past, nowadays China is moving slowly yet surely while building up its space program. In terms of science and technology an emergency situation would be a very unpleasant thing to deal with for them. It would equally have a very negative impact on the social and political aspect of the program. Considering the above, I believe that a lunar space station will be completed in some fifty years or so. However, I view the launch of the second manned mission as a positive event," said he.

[MIGleader]

well, the russians probably see plenty of potential in the chinese space program, and probably plan to have joint space operations in the future. they're just giving some compliments to the chinese. the russian space base is probably the only one right now that can hope to compete with NASA.

[walter]

well, the russians probably see plenty of potential in the chinese space program, and probably plan to have joint space operations in the future. they're just giving some compliments to the chinese. the russian space base is probably the only one right now that can hope to compete with NASA.

what russian space base? do you mean the industrial/technology base supporting their space program?


as to the article and the opinions of the russians, I would agree with all but one point--I think the Chinese will have a lunar base sooner than in 50 years, maybe 25 or 30. But as was said, it is very difficult to make those kinds of predictions. The best you can do is set a lower limit on it--maybe at the very soonest a lunar base could happen for the Chinese in 20 years.

[PiSigma]

i don't think china can get a moon base in 15 years, remember that NASA plans to have a moon base in 15 yrs from now. and considering the funding, experience, manpower that NASA gets compared to the chinese space agency, it's much much bigger. also nasa have experience in spacewalks.. and lots of it... also experience in building space station. although building on the moon will be different from building ISS.. but the fundamentals are there. and china still need to develop new rockets for carrying all that load onto the moon... all of this need time to design, test, and perfect. so i'm thinking maybe a minimum of another 30 years are needed for a moon base. maybe in 20 yrs they can send men to the moon and back like the apollo missions but not a base. base = constant delivery of food, water, fuel, spares. just that is going to cost them.

[adeptitus]

i don't think china can get a moon base in 15 years, remember that NASA plans to have a moon base in 15 yrs from now. and considering the funding, experience, manpower that NASA gets compared to the chinese space agency, it's much much bigger. also nasa have experience in spacewalks.. and lots of it... also experience in building space station. although building on the moon will be different from building ISS.. but the fundamentals are there. and china still need to develop new rockets for carrying all that load onto the moon... all of this need time to design, test, and perfect. so i'm thinking maybe a minimum of another 30 years are needed for a moon base. maybe in 20 yrs they can send men to the moon and back like the apollo missions but not a base. base = constant delivery of food, water, fuel, spares. just that is going to cost them.

I'd agree that NASA has more funding and experience, but if the PRC is willing to allocate the resources, a Moon base in 15 years is not impossible. A lot of things have already been done so it's not new territory. i.e. the Russians had their Salyut since 1971 and has tons of experience in operating space stations. Assuming if they're willing to share it, and the PRC is willing to pay for it, the PRC wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel.

However, I think the PRC government might NOT push for a Moon station with 15 year schedule because of their risk-avoidance approach. For an example, before sending a man to space they did 4 unmanned launches (Shenzhou 1-4) just to make sure that Yang Liwei is going to return safetly.

[akinkhoo]

china space program has close to no budget compare to the USA and RUSSIA. it is virtually there just for show and never any commitment.

from past history, space program are only useful if maintainable. NASA when 40 years backward after the failure of maintaining the space shuttle. the russian energia (the only superbooster available) is also dysfunctional. so having the rocket tech is useless if you cannot maintain and use it.

same goes for space station; the ISS is in worst state than MIR was, without the large resupply from space shuttle. parts are abandon as there is no shuttle to carry them up and russian rockets can't fit them. the russian are going back to space tourist then sending scientist. so there is almost no development on ISS, looking more like a ultraexpensive clubhouse by the days. :nana:

as for NASA's new spacecraft: CEV is very similiar to the apollo but uses solar panel like the soyuz/shenzhou. so basically, everyone is back to using spacecraft based on1960s concept! :roll:

basically the space race is over and it has been in decline. china will drag the manned development as long as possible as the competition is going nowhere with it for the last 40 years. :coffee: space age spy technology is most useful for china than manned goals.

[walter]

@ akinkhoo,

I have to disagree with you on almost every point you made.

1. I think China has made great achievments with its budget, and I see no reason to assume the chinese space program is just for show and 'no committment'. In my eyes, deciding to send humans into space in the early 90's and having achieved two successful manned flights by 2005 with many more (and more complex) planned is nothing but pure committment. Maybe it is mainly being done for national pride--I see nothing wrong with that. The benefits it brings China in high tech areas must be worth quite a bit, as well.

2. Having rocket tech is useless if you can't maintain it--sure is.

3. ISS is not in worse state than MIR was. MIR suffered an on board fire and a collision with a resupply vehicle. The ISS has minor maintenance problems--so no comparison if you ask me. The ISS's main problem is obviously continuing construction as about 20 more shuttle flights are necessary, and it seems not all of those will happen.

4. As for the CEV being 60s tech, well not quite. The CEV capsule concept is based on the same physics as the 60's Apollo capsule, and its mission (manned moon and mars missions) does not require any type of lifting body design, whereas the space shuttle was designed to carry large objects to and from orbit and be reusable. The space shuttle accomplished these design parameters but failed miserably in cost and reliablitiy/safety--the two mutually negatively influencing each other. It is time to move beyond a manned vehicle for delivering payloads into LEO. That is a mission easily done with conventional launchers.

[AssassinsMace]

china space program has close to no budget compare to the USA and RUSSIA. it is virtually there just for show and never any commitment.

from past history, space program are only useful if maintainable. NASA when 40 years backward after the failure of maintaining the space shuttle. the russian energia (the only superbooster available) is also dysfunctional. so having the rocket tech is useless if you cannot maintain and use it.

same goes for space station; the ISS is in worst state than MIR was, without the large resupply from space shuttle. parts are abandon as there is no shuttle to carry them up and russian rockets can't fit them. the russian are going back to space tourist then sending scientist. so there is almost no development on ISS, looking more like a ultraexpensive clubhouse by the days. :nana:

as for NASA's new spacecraft: CEV is very similiar to the apollo but uses solar panel like the soyuz/shenzhou. so basically, everyone is back to using spacecraft based on1960s concept! :roll:

basically the space race is over and it has been in decline. china will drag the manned development as long as possible as the competition is going nowhere with it for the last 40 years. :coffee: space age spy technology is most useful for china than manned goals.

Actually I just some think tank guy being interviewed on TV say that China now spends more than Russia on its space program.

[akinkhoo]

I think China has made great achievments with its budget, and I see no reason to assume the chinese space program is just for show and 'no committment'. In my eyes, deciding to send humans into space in the early 90's and having achieved two successful manned flights by 2005 with many more (and more complex) planned is nothing but pure committment.
they have been working on it since 1970s. yes the CNSA is committed, just like NASA. but it is the funding that decides how much is done. my language was directed at CCP for underfunding this program and they funded it minimally just to show they have a manned program. can anyone dig out the budget of the chinese manned space program; that is it around 2 billion?

the achievments are great, but i don't feel CCP should be credited for something they are not willing to pay for.. :p

3. ISS is not in worse state than MIR was. MIR suffered an on board fire and a collision with a resupply vehicle. The ISS has minor maintenance problems--so no comparison if you ask me.
yes you are right, but the ISS is less capable then the MIR is with only 1 lab compare to 3 functioning and working ones. i was thinking capability and did not write properly, sorry. but my point was there is no major improvement in capability from doing the latest space station program.

the japanese and european lab are ready but how they are going up will be an interesting problem to watch. anyone guesses...

4. As for the CEV being 60s tech, well not quite. The CEV capsule concept is based on the same physics as the 60's Apollo capsule, and its mission (manned moon and mars missions) does not require any type of lifting body design, whereas the space shuttle was designed to carry large objects to and from orbit and be reusable.
well it is 60s tech, because the required technology were already prefected back then. rendevous, docking, descent and accent, all pretty much the same technique were used. i was hoping they would go with the space tug system (STS) which would allow a more reusable and sutainable system. in the end the CEV prove to be as unreusable as the apollo!

i fear the apollo-like mission profile, show they don't have much intend to stay, it is only the duration that has be lengthen, the reusablity will make the cost too high to maintain a base. maybe they are aiming for mars; if so moonbase will be unlikely.

It is time to move beyond a manned vehicle for delivering payloads into LEO. That is a mission easily done with conventional launchers.
yes, but there was already such capability in the 60s, so it was a step backward which show it was a wrong move. the spaceshuttle did little because it took away NASA's superlift capability away. in fact the new lifter for the moon mission has lesser power than the saturnV and requires 2 launches. a mission profile the russian had developed in the 60s for their moon race bid! talk about irony for the russian.

just my thought. i am just looking from a very long term view... as space program tend to die down very quickly as seen with the ISS...

Actually I just some think tank guy being interviewed on TV say that China now spends more than Russia on its space program.
the Russian has to singlehandedly fund the entire ISS operations since the shuttle grounding as the US has a law against paying russia for tech services. putin reallocate additional money for the space program saying they would keep the ISS afloat even if they have to do it themselve. only recently did the law change to allow space services and allow NASA to pay russia for ferrying their crew again. but many flights with US equipment and astronaut had been done for free.

don't you hate doing business with your formal enemy? very political... :D

[patriot]

I saw on "News Hours With Jim Lehrer" that most Chinese wasn't excited at the launch of the shuttle. They said that the space program was designed to shift the attention of the Chinese people from the country's oppressive political problems. It was a commie trick. This obviously wasn't true after reading this post. But any of you living in China want to give me some real answers.

[Roger604]

I saw on "News Hours With Jim Lehrer" that most Chinese wasn't excited at the launch of the shuttle. They said that the space program was designed to shift the attention of the Chinese people from the country's oppressive political problems. It was a commie trick. This obviously wasn't true after reading this post. But any of you living in China want to give me some real answers.

Yeah you know, all the people in the world are on their knees begging for Hollywood to tell them what to think and how to dress and who is "cool". If only those darned tyrants ruling over these people could be overthrown, the world would be happy slaves to American cultural imperialism. ;)

I've spoken to lots of mainland Chinese, and they are very excited. People are optimistic about the future of the country. Of course, these are city people so it might be different in the countryside.

[Obcession]

Well, an American (not being stereotypical or anything)'s words on what the Chinese peoples think obviously is not very valid when compared to a Chinese who's living in mainland China's opinion. Many of my relatives in China watched the launch live (I did too!). So it is a big deal, and a great source of nationalism. I can't imagine any Chinese not being excited about the launch (except those who have something against the CCP, or those that haven't been to China in many years).

[T-U-P]

I saw on "News Hours With Jim Lehrer" that most Chinese wasn't excited at the launch of the shuttle. They said that the space program was designed to shift the attention of the Chinese people from the country's oppressive political problems.
that is the biggest lie i've heard in recent years (even bigger than saddam having WMD). it's so big that it's kinda funny because there're 1.3 billion people in the world cheering for the launch and here they say no one cared... (i only exaggrate slightly). everyone in china at the time was excited, if you were there (my relatives and my old friends were), then you'll know how the people felt. go ask anyone and they'll tell you that they're glad china has made such progress. i remember reading somewhere (the week during the mission) where a reporter was surprised when he asked a peasant, who was living in poverty, whether if he's happy for the launch, and the peasant said he is very happy and is proud for his country. i cannot give you anymore info than this because i wasn't in china when it happened (although it was possible since BC teachers were on strike at the time...), so i can't speak for everyone.

[Dongfeng]

It is true that a lot of chinese people were very excited about the success of the space programme, it is also true that many others feel that it is irrelevant to their day-to-day life, all depending on your situation.

If you are a migrant worker working in a city construction site earning less than $4/day, of course a space programme seems to be so far away.

It is wrong to say ALL Chinese are or aren't happy about the space programme. That's the problem with some Western reports. There are 1.3 billion people there and naturally the opinions could be different from person to person.

Generally speaking, those young and educated (including many students), who do not worry too much about life, feel very excited about the ShenZhou success. Those who are struggling to make a living, cannot care less.

Is CCP using space programme to raise the national pride and even divert the attention from real social and economic problems? Maybe that is one of reasons for the space prgramme, and there is nothing wrong with that, because every government uses this trick more or less. Why do you think G W Bush suddently wanted to send human to the moon and mars?

[walter]

Is CCP using space programme to raise the national pride and even divert the attention from real social and economic problems? Maybe that is one of reasons for the space prgramme, and there is nothing wrong with that, because every government uses this trick more or less. Why do you think G W Bush suddently wanted to send human to the moon and mars?

Man, I hope GW wasn't thinking he'd be able to excite the American public with the moon or mars, b/c the American public doesn't seem to care at all, no matter if they are minimum wage or quite well off. Manned space programs invoke nothing but apathy in the US--quite sad. Bush senior also proposed a manned mars mission in his day, same reaction from the US public, a big "who cares, so what; wouldn't that be expensive?" and nothing ever came of it. I am somewhat bitter.:(

[Dongfeng]

I don't know about others, but personally I am full of respect to any space programme, no matter it is from China, US, Russia, Europe, or any other countries. A space programme brings huge benefit to our society. Most importantly, it inspires younger generation to pursue science and technology when they grow up.

I suspect those who say Chinese space programme is only to divert attention from real problem must be very skeptical about the US space programme too.

[adeptitus]

I saw on "News Hours With Jim Lehrer" that most Chinese wasn't excited at the launch of the shuttle. They said that the space program was designed to shift the attention of the Chinese people from the country's oppressive political problems. It was a commie trick. This obviously wasn't true after reading this post. But any of you living in China want to give me some real answers.

Look at it this way, even if it was a "diversionary project", it only works for couple of days when people are watching the spacecraft on TV.

Like it or not, almost all land on this planet has been "discovered" and claimed. Out in space, there are countless planets with resources to be had. We don't have the technology to reach and obtain this resources right now, but if you don't start with the first step, you'd never get there.

[subfleet]

This troll isent going to be enjoing replyes to his own BS...

Vince for god sake, get a life!!:nono: :mad: :nono:

[coolieno99]

China's 120 ton LOX/kerosene rocket engine for New Generation Launch Vehicles was successfully tested on Oct. 30, 2005.

China's 50 ton LOX/LH rocket engine for New Generation Launch Vehicles was successfully tested on Jan. 15, 2006.

http://english.people.com.cn/200601/16/eng20060116_235854.html

[Croq]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a space station essential if you are going to the moon, even only for a walk in the future? The Saturn rockets are a thing of the past and a space station is absolutley quintessential if you are to place a base on the moon.

The closure of NASA's manned space flight program for 3 years (?) doomed ISS. But, if you add tanks and a couple of hundred tonnes of rocket fuel to ISS it could be the first refueling station in space.

[PiSigma]

it does make sense to have a spacestation as a jump point for the moon, then have moon as a base to mars... but having a moon base and also a space station means two bases to maintain. twice the amount of supplies need to be delivered, and shipping and handling costs are pretty expensive for these guys.

Also for the rocket or space shuttle to get to the space station they need fuel, then move onto moon, they will need more fuel. but if they go directly to the moon, they can use some of the velocity they picked up escaping earth and might save fuel and time.

i know you are probably thinking having shuttle service only from moon to ISS or something. but the problem is that ISS or any other space station can't support the moon's supplies since the ISS can't hold much supplies itself. and if going to be used for such a role will need huge investments and upgrades that no country building the ISS is willing to support right now.