China in space.

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 19:00:48 GMT, "Ed Majden"
wrote:


"Kevin Brooks"
I am much more impressed by the Chinese effort to compete in the
commercial launch business than I am in this
reminiscent-of-the-early-sixties propoganda ploy.If they were really
interested in scientific advances, they would continue with their
launch business and join the ISS effort, instead of repeating the
feats of others forty years after the fact.

I somehow doubt that they were asked or invited to join the ISS effort.
As for progress, you must learn to crawl before you can walk. ESA in Europe
did this with their launch facilities. Indeed, they have not put a man in
space but they don't have the deep pockets that the USA has. If news
stories are correct China plans on building their own space station and
perhaps sending a man to the Moon. The USA program to do this was a
propaganda stunt at the time. Beat the Soviets at all costs. There were of
course scientific spin-offs but if science was the primary goal, why did
they only send one planetary geologist to the Moon?

The moon flights were certainly propaganda. There is nothing left to
learn from manned lunar shots. I certainly hope that the Chinese will
not waste the human lives and tremendous resources that such a mission
would entail.

Al Minyard

"Kevin Brooks"
I imagine that had they wanted in, it would have been
acceptable--Russia is part of it, so why would the PRC have been
excluded?

Many in the U.S.A. were strongly against Russian participation in ISS.
Some still hold this view today but fortunately cooler heads prevailed. The
long duration flight expertise of the Russian program is a valuable asset
along with their booster capabilities. Very much needed today with the
Shuttle grounded.

Because the geology could better be done here on earth? Hard to do the
old "taste test" (trust me, such a critter does exist in the field of
"seat of the pants" geotech engineering) in the vacuum of space .

The late and famous American planetary geologist, Eugene Shoemaker was
an ideal candidate for a geologist in space. Unfortunately a medical
problem prevented him from being an astronaught. He fought strongly to get
a qualified planetary scientist on one of the flights. Picking up samples
on the Moon could be more selective by a trained professional in the field.
They in fact trained the astronaughts that flew to the Moon in geology. But
cramming doesn't make up for years of experience in the field. I'm sure
they would admit that themselves. Eugene finally got his trip, but sadly in
a burial capsule, after his tragic car accident in Australia.

Ed

"Alan Minyard"
The moon flights were certainly propaganda. There is nothing left to
learn from manned lunar shots. I certainly hope that the Chinese will
not waste the human lives and tremendous resources that such a mission
would entail.

You don't know very much about science if you think there is nothing
more to learn about going back to the Moon. Leaving Lunar Science aside,
the far side of the Moon is an ideal place for a radio telescope as all the
man made noise created on earth would be blocked. Also an ideal place for
an optical telescope either manned or robotic. NASA is talking of a trip to
Mars. Hell, they had better get going back to the Moon safely before they
attempt going out further. They don't have the booster capability to even
do this today.
Ed

"Ed Majden" wrote in message news:A%Wjb.114508$9l5.38880@pd7tw2no...
"Kevin Brooks"
I am much more impressed by the Chinese effort to compete in the
commercial launch business than I am in this
reminiscent-of-the-early-sixties propoganda ploy.If they were really
interested in scientific advances, they would continue with their
launch business and join the ISS effort, instead of repeating the
feats of others forty years after the fact.

I somehow doubt that they were asked or invited to join the ISS effort.
As for progress, you must learn to crawl before you can walk. ESA in Europe
did this with their launch facilities. Indeed, they have not put a man in
space but they don't have the deep pockets that the USA has. If news
stories are correct China plans on building their own space station and
perhaps sending a man to the Moon. The USA program to do this was a
propaganda stunt at the time. Beat the Soviets at all costs. There were of
course scientific spin-offs but if science was the primary goal, why did
they only send one planetary geologist to the Moon?


Can't blame the Chinese for this one. They've asked repeatedly to
join the ISS but they were rejected with a prompt "No Chinese allowed"
dismissal, mainly from the US.

The Europeans are sidestepping American disapproval of any
cooperation with the Chinese by engaging them in the European-led
Gallileo project instead of ISS. It's a shame really.

http://msnbc.com/news/979759.asp?0sl=-43

"China charts
its next steps
in outer space
Beijing lays groundwork for
spacewalks, experiments
and its own space station
COMMENTARY
By James Oberg
NBC NEWS SPACE ANALYST"

(ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) wrote in message ...
In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote:
I am much more impressed by the Chinese effort to compete in the
commercial launch business than I am in this
reminiscent-of-the-early-sixties propoganda ploy.If they were really
interested in scientific advances, they would continue with their
launch business and join the ISS effort, instead of repeating the
feats of others forty years after the fact.

Eh? You mentioned "scientific advances" and "ISS" in the same sentence.
I'm not entirely sure I see any relationship between scientific advances
and Fredovitch.

Check for myopia, then. ISS is already providing scientific data; see
spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/ for info on current and past research
conducted on the station. It is a whale of a lot more likely to
provide scientific advances than the PRC's spam-in-a-can propoganda
ploy.


OTOH, China is launching Double Star as a joint mission with ESA
in the fairly near future as an add-on/follow-on to Cluster II, and
that is a mission which should provide significant scientific gain.

Wonderful. Maybe had they invested some of the resources dedicated to
this little pointless jaunt into this and similar programs, they might
be getting better results.


OTOH#2, Long March looks to be shaping up to being one of the more
useful launchers, possibly trailing only Vostok and Proton.

You must have missed the "I am much more impressed by the Chinese
effort to compete in the commercial launch business..." bit I
mentioned earlier. And BTW, Vostok is not a launcher.

Brooks

Andreas Parsch wrote in message ...
robert arndt wrote:

Andreas,

[...]
So, don't assume that any future German manned launch would be an ESA
peace mission. If Sanger is ever built the very first payload might
very well be a spy sat or other military package.


There is no "German" space program, it's all European (i.e. ESA). And
remember that Germany has been bashed recently for its _lack_ of
military enthusiasm.

Wrong again Andreas. Any transatmospheric bomber concept (which have
been studied by DASA before it was EADS) would be Luftwaffe piloted.
Second, in case you're not up on the news, Germany has close to 11,000
troops deployed with a pledge of another 2,200 for ISAF and 5,000
ultimately for the newly created NATO NRF (initial contribution of
1,100 with build-up to 5,000 by 2006). These figures do not count any
German/NATO/UN contribution of troops to Iraq in the event an
agreement is reached. You are full of it with the "lack" nonsense
since even the Heer complained about rearmament AGAIN in 2003. The
first time was in 1999 over the Balkans. And FYI, German IDZ
supersoldiers are operating in the Balkans since July 2002. I guess
you don't bother reading the military journals back home or Germany
doesn't want that attention in its press. I guess you are unfamiliar
with the "German Army 2020" Program your govt. "forgot" to announce-
but thanks to a leak to the Pentegon, we've got it. It states that the
Germany Army will be completely restructured for ultra-rapid, global
warfare and that the Heer will be dividing into supersoldier "Jaeger"
groups that will fight in real time with the aid of ACRs, entire
families of wheeled AFVs, UCAVs, and ultra-sophisticated electronic
gear.

Even if not built
and a German rocket is launched instead, German nationalism will
guarantee a different name.
Raumfahrer? Never. Raumjaeger or Jaegernaut, probably.


"German nationalism"?? Where (or when!) the **** are you living?!?
It's not 1945 anymore! For the record, I'm a German with a more than
average interest in space flight, and I have _never_ seen terms like
"Raumjäger" or "Jägernaut" (ridiculous!! - whoever thought of this
can't possibly be a native speaker of German!) in a German publication
(since the late '70s at least).

Andreas

Thanks again Andreas for omitting the origins of both those terms in
my previous post. And yes, I clearly stated that the publication that
came up with the term "Jaegernaut" was foreign. Certainly, the Germans
will call their own manned space personnel what they want. But on that
day is won't be a variation of astronaut or cosmonaut (as in previous
passenger missions).

Rob

"Gordon" wrote in message
...
I think this flight was a
monumental achievement for the PRC, but the postflight interview with the
Taikonaut seemed a blast from the past, with party slogans and embedded
phrases
that show their program is under the Communist banner, intended to spread
their
message into the reaches of space. That is sad, and I think it detracts
from
the accomplishment of the Chinese people.

That's a rather cynical view. Why should a Chinese Communist not be proud
of his country and wish to say so? He's also aware that his future
participation is probably dependent on pleasing those in government who hold
the purse strings. Funny how when an actress with fake tears cries "God
bless America" we assume she's being heartfelt, but when someone from an
opposing political idea issues a similar sentiment we automatically assume
they're being coached.

Si

robert arndt wrote:

There is no "German" space program, it's all European (i.e. ESA). And
remember that Germany has been bashed recently for its _lack_ of
military enthusiasm.

Wrong again Andreas. Any transatmospheric bomber concept (which have
been studied by DASA before it was EADS) would be Luftwaffe piloted.

We talked about _space launch vehciles_ and not _bombers_. DASA can
study as much as it wants, but there never was - nor will there be in
the foreseeable future - a German military requirement for a
transatmospheric bomber.

Second, in case you're not up on the news, Germany has close to 11,000
troops deployed with a pledge of another 2,200 for ISAF and 5,000
ultimately for the newly created NATO NRF (initial contribution of
1,100 with build-up to 5,000 by 2006).

Yes, I know. And so what? This has nothing to do with a space program.

These figures do not count any
German/NATO/UN contribution of troops to Iraq in the event an
agreement is reached.

The current German goverment has repeatedly and firmly stated that
there will be no German troops in Iraq. The support for this in the
general public is 70%, so even the opposition doesn't dare to suggest
otherwise.

You are full of it with the "lack" nonsense
since even the Heer complained about rearmament AGAIN in 2003. The
first time was in 1999 over the Balkans. And FYI, German IDZ
supersoldiers are operating in the Balkans since July 2002.

Again, this has _nothing_ to do with space program. And by the way,
they're not "supersoldiers" ... the usual term would be "Special
Operation Forces".

I guess
you don't bother reading the military journals back home or Germany
doesn't want that attention in its press. I guess you are unfamiliar
with the "German Army 2020" Program your govt. "forgot" to announce-
but thanks to a leak to the Pentegon, we've got it. It states that the
Germany Army will be completely restructured for ultra-rapid, global
warfare and that the Heer will be dividing into supersoldier "Jaeger"
groups that will fight in real time with the aid of ACRs, entire
families of wheeled AFVs, UCAVs, and ultra-sophisticated electronic
gear.

This concept is well known here. It's no secret that the German
military wants to transform into a "special force" with fewer soldiers
and more advanced equipment. No "leak" of any sort was needed for the
Pentagon to know this too.


Even if not built
and a German rocket is launched instead, German nationalism will
guarantee a different name.
Raumfahrer? Never. Raumjaeger or Jaegernaut, probably.


"German nationalism"?? Where (or when!) the **** are you living?!?
It's not 1945 anymore! For the record, I'm a German with a more than
average interest in space flight, and I have _never_ seen terms like
"Raumjäger" or "Jägernaut" (ridiculous!! - whoever thought of this
can't possibly be a native speaker of German!) in a German
publication
(since the late '70s at least).


Thanks again Andreas for omitting the origins of both those terms in
my previous post. And yes, I clearly stated that the publication that
came up with the term "Jaegernaut" was foreign.

You did, and what _I_ said was that whoever published it didn't bother
to ask someone who speaks German as their first language.

And BTW, your digression was noted ;-)

Certainly, the Germans
will call their own manned space personnel what they want.

Germany _has_ (civilian) space personnel, and they're called
"Astronauten". And there is no German manned military space program in
sight - I really wish to know where you got to think otherwise!

But on that
day is won't be a variation of astronaut or cosmonaut (as in previous
passenger missions).

Whatever you say ... I guess being a native German is simply not enough
for me to have any competence :-/.


Andreas

"tscottme" wrote in message
...
John C. Baker wrote in message
...


While manned space flight is an impressive technical
accomplishment, and space exploration is important
to mankind's understanding of himself, I have one
thing to say to Beijing: "Welcome to 1961."

Standby for garish polyester clothing and bitter, ugly
women without bras.

How will they tell the difference?

Homer

(My email address has an "anti spam" name)

"Ed Majden" wrote in message news:Q1%jb.115923$6C4.19242@pd7tw1no...
"Kevin Brooks"
I imagine that had they wanted in, it would have been
acceptable--Russia is part of it, so why would the PRC have been
excluded?

Many in the U.S.A. were strongly against Russian participation in ISS.
Some still hold this view today but fortunately cooler heads prevailed. The
long duration flight expertise of the Russian program is a valuable asset
along with their booster capabilities. Very much needed today with the
Shuttle grounded.

I have yet to see anything that indicates that had China wanted in it
would have not been allowed; heck, it made it into the WTO!


Because the geology could better be done here on earth? Hard to do the
old "taste test" (trust me, such a critter does exist in the field of
"seat of the pants" geotech engineering) in the vacuum of space .

The late and famous American planetary geologist, Eugene Shoemaker was
an ideal candidate for a geologist in space. Unfortunately a medical
problem prevented him from being an astronaught. He fought strongly to get
a qualified planetary scientist on one of the flights. Picking up samples
on the Moon could be more selective by a trained professional in the field.
They in fact trained the astronaughts that flew to the Moon in geology. But
cramming doesn't make up for years of experience in the field. I'm sure
they would admit that themselves. Eugene finally got his trip, but sadly in
a burial capsule, after his tragic car accident in Australia.

Nice, and about as useful as the "teacher in space" crap. Picking up
rocks is hardly something that the astronauts were unqualified for,
and there was no outstanding need for a planetary geologist to
accompany each flight--one was plenty.

Brooks

Ed