China's First Spacewalk 148
Smivs writes "The BBC reports that China will launch its third manned space mission in late September, according to state-run news agency Xinhua.
The Shenzhou VII flight will feature
China's first-ever space walk, which will be broadcast live with cameras inside and outside the spacecraft.
For the spacewalk, two crew members will go into the spacecraft's vacuum module. One yuhangyuan (astronaut) will carry out the spacewalk; the other is there to monitor the activity and assist in case of an emergency.
Two types of spacesuits — one made in China, the other from Russia — will be carried up on the flight.
It is unclear why China has opted for two different types of spacesuit.
Spaceflight analyst Dr Morris Jones commented that China might want to test the suits against each other. Alternatively, he said, it might not be ready or willing to fly a mission exclusively with its own suits."
I know what they're up to... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You mean the ISS. Though an attack on IIS would probably be business as usual, after all doesn't it stand for It Isn't Secure ?
Re:Congrats China! Welcome to the 1960s. (Golf cla (Score:2)
Well, given that it's projected that in about 2-3 years the Americans will no longer have the ability to put someone in space to do anything (unless they rent space from the Russians), I'd say it's a pretty big deal for China to be ready to do this.
Don't underestimate how big of an achievement it actually is to do this. It's a pretty small club.
Cheers
OMG someone stop the Chinese right now (Score:1, Funny)
before they build a sphere around the earth to keep us inside.
Re:OMG someone stop the Chinese right now (Score:5, Funny)
The reference makes no sense if it's referring to Spaceballs. The bubble around Druidia (the air shield) was intended to keep the air in, not the people. The people could presumably come and go as they pleased as long as they knew the combination (which, coincidentally, is the same combination I have on my luggage).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Whatwhatwhat? (Score:2, Insightful)
What kinda link is this:
http://science.slashdot.org/ChinawilllaunchitsthirdmannedspacemissioninlateSeptember,state-runnewsagencyXinhuareports.TheShenzhouVIIflightwillfeatureChina [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The correct link is http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/-/1/hi/sci/tech/7602968.stm [bbc.co.uk]. Don't know how that happened...possibly censored by thr Chinese?
Smivs
Apache mod rewrite out of control (Score:2)
It's the way all the new Wordpress blogs are doing it. Isn't it much easier than some ugly url like http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/08/1212252 [slashdot.org]?
Either you're for the new Apache mod/rewrite enabled Wordpress URLs, or you're against progress! Sort of...
Re: (Score:2)
Yea but it is even easier to google:
china first space walk
State run media? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm..Well, while I wish the Chinese astronauts the best of luck and hope they get back safely, I doubt that the film is going to be "Live" More likely? A nice safe delay of, oh...a hour to make sure that nothing gets shown that's not supposed to be shown.
China has too much media control to trust something as unpredictable as live TV, especially in a situation where so many things could go wrong.
On that note, good luck! Maybe this'll get us off our asses and back up into space! A little competition never hurt nobody.
Re:State run media? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
True, most live events have a delay, I believe the moon mission had a 5 minute (about) delay. The difference was this delay was because of the ol' laws of physics. With China...It may be for a different reason. As an example, I believe that China's first manned mission was not shown until it had actually lifted off, then all the channels switched to the "Breaking news story!" to show it rocketing upwards. I recall something about that, but of course, I could be wrong.
Re:State run media? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, but in uncontrolled media markets, there is an incentive to keep that delay as short as possible. If you don't have it as close to live as possible, the next guy will, or some blogger. When the President comes on to give a live address, it has maybe a 5-second delay, not an hour. This is, in part, how some live shows occasionally get into trouble - remember the infamous "wardrobe malfunction" as the SuperBowl a few years back?
When Armstrong stepped onto the Moon, he was live to the entire world.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, but in uncontrolled media markets, there is an incentive to keep that delay as short as possible.
Yeah, well in space, nobody can hear the sound of an invisible hand clapping.
- RG>
Re:State run media? (Score:5, Insightful)
A little competition never hurt nobody.
Except the loser.
Re: (Score:2)
If the loser plays his cards right, he has more to gain than the winner*.
* Does not apply to picking up women.
Re:State run media? (Score:5, Informative)
Well on the manned Moon mission for the US. If something happened and they couldn't have returned to home, they would have turned off all contact with them and Nixon had a wonderful speech to give about their deaths preprepared to give in this case even if they were still alive but stranded on the moon.
Re:State run media? (Score:5, Informative)
There were actually extensive plans made for that very contingency. The speech (draft) was written for Nixon by William Safire. In my opinion, it is one of the finest pieces of writing I've ever seen:
"Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace.
These brave men, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, know that there is no hope for their recovery. But they also know that there is hope for mankind in their sacrifice.
These two men are laying down their lives in mankind's most noble goal: the search for truth and understanding. They will be mourned by their families and friends; they will be mourned by their nation; they will be mourned by the people of the world; they will be mourned by a Mother Earth that dared send two of her sons into the unknown.
In their exploration, they stirred the people of the world to feel as one; in their sacrifice, they bind more tightly the brotherhood of man.
In ancient days, men looked at the stars and saw their heroes in the constellations. In modern times, we do much the same, but our heroes are epic men of flesh and blood.
Others will follow, and surely find their way home. Man's search will not be denied. But these men were the first, and they will remain the foremost in our hearts.
For every human being who looks up at the moon in the nights to come will know that there is some corner of another world that is forever mankind."
Re:State run media? (Score:5, Informative)
> I doubt that the film is going to be "Live"
The Shenzhou 6 launch in October 2005 was the first to be broadcast live in China, so they may yet surprise you.
After all. if something does go wrong there is little that can be done to hide it. This isn't Leonov's era - telemetry and communications will be under constant scrutiny.
Re: (Score:2)
A nice safe delay of, oh...a hour to make sure that nothing gets shown that's not supposed to be shown.
"Get that stage hand out of the shot!!"
Descision making (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
WHOOOOOSH
Re: (Score:2)
... in frustration.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you subtly implying that there'll be something wrong with the airlock on the vacuum module too?
Re: (Score:2)
This seems to be WHOOOOOSH all the way down.
Re: (Score:1)
Hey, China made my 12 inch Powerbook, which I love so much, I give it a hug each time I put it in and out of its bag, which I do a total of 4 times a day :)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They have already chosen the lucky gent with the red shirt...
Good... (Score:4, Insightful)
I realize that China isn't the moral leaders of the world, but I'm happy to see them playing catch-up when it comes to manned space-flight.
Because, given the way China tends to think, when I see them putting men in space, it makes me think they already have long term plans for trips to the moon, and perhaps even a permanent presence off-planet. And I say, it's about time.
Humans could do much worse than start making the steps to get us off this rock.
Re:Good... (Score:4, Insightful)
Catch up? I would say that Shenzhou is at least comparable with other manned space flight systems. The shuttle is on its last legs and crippled with problems. Soyuz is also due to be retired.
As essentially a larger version of Soyuz, with an orbital module that can operate indepedently. The program might not be moving fast (although now the Chinese have finished with the olympics they might redirect more resources) they do have the most technically impressive craft currently flying.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am afraid I must disagree. The Shenzhou is certianly newer, and probably better then the Soyuz. But it is far from the most impresive.
The big deal with the Space Shuttle is that it can carry seven people, a large chunk of cago, and the shuttle can be re-used (although not as well as was planned). It may be near the end of its life span, but as far as capabilities go it is still the best the world has.
For the Soyuz is claim to fame is its consistancy. The Soyuz design is the most tested manned flight syste
Re:Good... (Score:4, Insightful)
The ability to carry up cargo and passengers isn't that impressive when you look at the costs. Putting up the same quantity of people and cargo with 2 Soyuz launches and one Proton costs $180 million whilst a Shuttle launch costs over $400 million.
Reusability isn't all its cracked up to be for the Shuttle. It has made it more expensive than throw-away alternatives, and the thing has to be practically rebuilt every flight as well.
The only capability the Shuttle has which the Russian launchers do not is returning cargo, and that hasn't been used in a while.
Re: (Score:1)
I agree with you completely about the costs. No doubt about that, the Russian way is much cheaper.
But as far as "the most technically impressive craft currently flying", the Space Shuttle despite its faults, is more capable then any other spacecraft out there.
Does it get a good bang for its buck? Hell no.
But the gap is not as bad as it first seems. While the Russians can build thier spacecraft on the cheap, could the USA? The cost/kg of non-manned craft currently in operation clearly favours the Russians as
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't see why the shuttle is 'technically impressive'. What abilities does it possess that a combination of capsule and cargo rocket doesn't?
Reusability? If the Chinese so desired, the descent module of a Shenzhou could probably be reused. It would probably be about as economical as reusing a shuttle orbiter.
Electronics? The Chinese electronics industry is not to be sniffed at. Its growing faster than their traditional heavy industry is at the moment, and I doubt it is significantly behind the US cut
Re: (Score:1)
"What abilities does it possess that a combination of capsule and cargo rocket doesn't?"
The ability to do it with one spacecraft. Neither the capsule or cargo is as technically capable on thier own, as the Space Shuttle. Of course having two launchers is simpler, easier and cheaper. Thats not the point. I am not comparing space programs, I am comparing individual spacecraft.
"the descent module of a Shenzhou could probably be reused"
The descent module of the apollo craft could be re-used. Thats a strawman ar
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Except for the Shuttle, of course. Which has flown more flights (123 as opposed to 99), with a higher success rate (two major failures as opposed to four).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Given that the Progress resupply ships are essentially unmanned Soyuz capsules, I think you have to count a lot more than merely the 99 manned flights. The launch system is essentially the same in either case, even if there are detail differences in the orbital vehicles. (I can't readily find total number of Progress launches, but it was 43 - all successful - to Salyuts 6 and 7; plus many since then to Mir and 30 to ISS.)
Re: (Score:2)
Whyever should we care about Progress in a discussion of manned spaceflight? Which is what this is, in case you missed the GP.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not even remotely, the current mark of the design only has thirteen flights. Soyuz, overall, only has 90 odd flights *total* as compared to the Shuttle which is up around 120.
A reputation totally undeserved and based on many people being utterly ignorant of the history of Soyuz - which includes a long series of dangerous near misses, total mission failures, a
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The first step would be to build a space station in Earth orbit. Okay, let's pretend that's done. Then we need to build a spaceship at the space station. This spaceship would be used to fly from
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's much easier laucnhing stuff deep into space if it's built and launched in low gravity. You can build it larger, you waste less fuel for launch and a bunch of other useful stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
A permanent moonbase has one significant advantage: low gravity.
It's much easier laucnhing stuff deep into space if it's built and launched in low gravity
Launch what?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how do the spaceships get to the moon in the first place? If you are suggesting manufacturing there, then I think you have very little grasp of the complexity.
Re: (Score:2)
Well... this is where Kim Stanley-Robinson's ideas of a space elevator come into play.
Slow effecient transport to the moon, faster inter-planetary transport from the moon to say... Mars.
The same people that say the space program is a waste of time, money and effort are the same people who complain that technology doesn't move fast enough. A lot of fallout from space technologies end up helping the world - water recycling is a BIG one. If you spent more than 5 minutes glossing over space flight you'd realise
Re: (Score:2)
So... the moon has an advantage because of lower gravity. Then you propose a space-elevator (a fantasy at this point). So, then the Earth loses its disadvantage because you can now get stuff off cheaply. If you can do that, you would be better off transporting stuff up to a space station, building there and forget about the moon base.
The same people that say the space program is a waste of time, money and effort are the same people who complain that technology doesn't move fast enough. A lot of fallout from
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And how do you think humans are going to cope with low gravity. In space astronauts need to exercise around 2 hours a day to prevent the muscles from deteriorating. Never mind the practicality of the rest of the things you need to adjust to the low-grav environment.
Re: (Score:2)
typo... (Score:3, Funny)
=>the US would benefit more with exploring the Universe than exploding Iraq
Here, I done it for you.
Re: (Score:1)
Moderation results : (Score:2)
Moderation +1
30% Funny
40% Flamebait
30% Insightful
Just so you know...
Re:Good... (Score:5, Insightful)
A permanent moonbase is like the war in Iraq: Sure, some profit off it but essentially you are throwing money away.
Yeah, just like the war in Iraq, except without the part about, you know, killing people.
The US is still a very rich country (not, granted, as rich relative to the rest of the world as we were in the 1960s, but still) and we can afford to do things that don't show an immediate profit. Speaking as someone who has seen war up close and personal -- and whose father was one of the people who made the moon landings happen -- I'd much rather have us spending money on space exploration than on wars of aggression.
Smart testing (Score:5, Interesting)
China is fast tracking their progress in space, and they're doing pretty good risk management to get it done. They used Russian experience when designing their capsule system (their spacecraft has a number of big similarities to the Soyuz capsule, very very big similarities, and now they're taking up a backup suit in case a design flaw appears during the test that would affect a rescuer. It's a fine idea and doesn't indicate some big uncertainty about their own design, it shows a clear headed decision to trade a possible nationalistic PR win for a measured, risk aware backup plan that puts the lives of their Taikonauts ahead of the usual spin goals.
I'm not a huge fan of PRC in general, but their space program has been well executed so far. They're making good use of available data while still innovating on their terms instead of having to build everything from scratch.
Re: (Score:2)
They look the same, but in the same way that Buran and the US shuttle looked the same. Aerodynamic principles mean there are only certain ways to do things. Looking the same doesn't mean it is old Russian technology with a Chinese flag stamed on it.
Shenzhou is home-grown Chinese technology. Had they simply wanted to smack a Soyuz on top of a Long March rocket they could've done that, and saved themselves the last 6 flights. The amount of testing alone should convince you that the systems of that spacecraft
Re:Smart testing (Score:5, Informative)
One major difference? You joke surely;
1. The engines were on the stack, not the orbiter. The stack could (and did) fly without the orbiter at all
2. There were four boosters instead of two.
3. The boosters were liquid, not solid fueled
Even the link you provided as alleged evidence that it was just stolen technology acknowledges these very major differences.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought plans for the US orbiter were public? Can't steal that, copy maybe but not steal.
Re:Smart testing (Score:4, Insightful)
From the sound of it, this "vacuum module" is there so they can evacuate it slowly and check for leaks, and if a problem happens, re-pressurize it quickly. That's safer for lots of reasons. Firstly, you don't need to get the guinea pig back IN the ship before you can begin to re-pressurize them. Secondly no risk of a hose splitting and causing them to rocket away from the ship. (and break a tether)
The use of two suits is a good plan also. I'd expect them to have two people in the vacuum module, one in the russian suit and one in their new suit. If there's an emergency with the new suit, having someone in the module to help could make all the difference.
Does make me wonder though how much ground testing they've done. One would assume they've done a lot of vacuum testing on the ground already, but they sure are going about this slowly despite that. They should already know if their suit is OK before flying it up into space. The lack of gravity seems unlikely to change the behavior of the suit.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't using a space suit in an evacuated crew compartment for an extended period a problem in itself? Obviously you have airlocks, but you don't hang around in those often doing tests.
I seem to recall some repairs had to be done in an evacuated module of Mir at one point, and it was tough (for some reasons relating to heat IIRC)
Re: (Score:2)
Fast tracking? As compared to who? Two flights, with a third in the offing, in five years isn't 'fast' by any reasonable usage of the word.
Nine comments... (Score:5, Insightful)
All nine of you are totally busted for pretending you read the article, since the link doesn't work.
Re: (Score:2)
Blame the editor.
And here is a story on El Reg: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/07/china_to_launch_manned_space_mission_by_end_of_month/ [theregister.co.uk]
Re: (Score:1)
and this is from Xinhua:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/06/content_9815338.htm [xinhuanet.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Please hand in your geek card immediately.
An astronaut by any other name... (Score:4, Interesting)
Why does the media use foreign names for astronauts from other countries? We've got cosmonaut and now "yuhangyuan"? That's ridiculous. Is "astronaut" somehow reserved for only US spacefarers? I think this whole thing is a leftover from the cold war, where it was somehow insulting to use the same terminology for Soviet and US astronauts, probably because of the fierce competition.
On another note, if the astronauts don't leave the confines of their ship, and merely evacuate all the air, is that really a "space walk"?
Re: (Score:1)
Why do we call Rome by that name. The locals call it Roma - you'd think they would know they proper name of the place they live.
Why do we call Spain by that name. The locals call it España. You'd think they would know the proper name.
Things can have multiple names. Its the spice of life.
They are not neccessarily "making up" new names for the heck of it. Its a bit of courtesy to call their yuhangyuan as they call themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:An astronaut by any other name... (Score:5, Informative)
As NASA has defined it, only US space-going individuals may claim the title "astronaut." Further, they cannot be civilians, at least according to an article in the latest Wired.
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/16-09/ff_starcity?currentPage=6 [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, NASA can go fork themselves as far as that goes, but I'll allow as how being a passenger is a little different from being crew. We don't call the folks in the back of commercial airplanes "aeronauts", do we? (Okay, we don't call the pilots that either these days.)
Comes to that, though, they shouldn't call their payload specialists astronauts either. (Personally I don't really think the term should be applied to anyone who isn't exploring space (or testing new space vehicles) -- which means it shou
Re: (Score:1)
As NASA has defined it, only US space-going individuals may claim the title "astronaut."
Well if that's the case, then I guess Canada must have a serious foreign policy spat on the horizon: http://www.google.com/search?q=canadian+astronaut [google.com]
And the ESA
http://www.google.com/search?q=esa+astronaut [google.com]
In fact, the NASA mission summary for STS-124 refers to "Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Akihiko Hoshide": http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/sts124/main/index.html [nasa.gov]
- RG>
Re: (Score:1)
You're right! We should all use the same word. The first person in space [wikipedia.org] was Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin. Of course you will agree that since we all want to use the same word, and that cosmonauts were first, we should call all spacefarers by the original name: cosmonauts. Right?
Re: (Score:1)
Or you call it Taikonaut
http://www.taikonaut.com/index_en.html [taikonaut.com]
Re: (Score:2)
On another note, if the astronauts don't leave the confines of their ship, and merely evacuate all the air, is that really a "space walk"?
No, it's called a chinese fire drill...
Re: (Score:1)
I do agree with you about the space walk comment, really, if that is what it is, then its more of a vacuum test.
Scary space walk (Score:5, Funny)
If I were the yuhangyuan on the tether, I'd be yelling "You Hang You On!" like crazy!
Joy luck, gentlemen.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Scary space walk FIRE (Score:2)
Differing space suits (Score:5, Funny)
Because the first type of suit doesn't come in child sizes
Re: (Score:2)
The parents, obviously. Now they know where their starchild [tvacres.com] went.
Bizarre (Score:1, Insightful)
Made in Russia (Score:1)
Wait... a Chinese guy will be wearing a "Made in Russia" suit?
Man, it's the first time someone will be a live embodiment of an inverted "Soviet Russia" joke.
You-hang-on (Score:1)
Open Source Space? (Score:2)
When China starts exploring space and developing new technology for it (not just retracing the USA's pioneering steps), will China publish as much of its results for free consumption by the rest of the world as the USA has? Did Russia ever publish as much as the USA has?
Or will the capitalists just freely subsidize the (ex/) Communists' space industries without getting as much back?
Coincide with "Founders Day" Oct 1 (Score:3, Informative)
Names of spacecraft. (Score:1)
We used to call ships that sailed on water "Sailing Ships" and then when we moved to space we now call them "space ships"
The Chinese term for sailing vessel is "Junk" so does that mean they are going to contribute to the whole "Space Junk" problem, by sending out more pieces of Space Junk?
Spacewalk postponed (Score:4, Informative)
I heard they had to postpone the spacewalk until they found new astronauts... Turns out the ones they already had qualified were under-aged. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I don't get it. I was going for funny. (*shrugs*)
A different meaning there (Score:1)
China does not supply spacesuits, so only REALLY bad people go into space.
Humor (Score:1)
Oh, come one... no one sees the humor in this???
"yuhangyuan (astronaut)"
No doubt pronounced 'You-hang-on'... Funny, but redundant, if you ask me.
Re: (Score:1)
While... (Score:1, Offtopic)
While...
Re: (Score:1)
Since China is such a media-controlling country (apart from other kinds of control), they most likely would film their so-called spacewalk in Bird's Nest Stadium or somewhere similar.
I bet their special effects will be better then the ones used to simulate the moon landing.
Re: (Score:1)
The Chinese Communist teach school kids that one of Mao's heroes was a guy who sacrificed his life to save a goat from being run over by a train.