Other

That’s no moon, it’s a (Chinese) space station

Wang Wenbao

An oft-cited rationale for having NASA focus on returning astronauts to the Moon is that China is ramping up its efforts to do so and could beat us back there, with a concomitant loss of prestige for the US. There’s just one problem with this: the Chinese don’t appear to be a in particular hurry to go there, based on comments Wednesday by one senior Chinese official.

Wang Wenbao, director of the China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO)—a position described as roughly equivalent to NASA associate administrator for space operations Bill Gerstenmaier—talked about China’s human spaceflight plans in a talk at the National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs on Wednesday. He outlined a series of missions to demonstrate docking and rendezvous technologies, first unmanned and then manned, as well as rudimentary human-tended space labs. The long-term goal, he said, was a modular space station, whose elements would be launched from a new spaceport on Hainan by its Long March 5 rocket under development. That facility, to be assembled between 2016 and 2022, would be able to support three people for long-duration stays (of unspecified periods), supported by Shenzhou spacecraft.

What was notable, though, was what he did not say. Not once during his presentation did he make any discussion of human mission to the Moon; his long-term plans stopped with the completion of their three-person space station in the early 2020s. That doesn’t mean that they’re not interested in doing so at some later date, but the fact that a leading official did not mention it at all in a major speech suggests that they’re in no rush go there, contrary to some claims in the US.

24 comments to That’s no moon, it’s a (Chinese) space station

  • Which still won’t stop the tinfoil hat brigade. While I’ve always been a huge fan of focusing our efforts on the Moon, I’d actually like to see them done in a way that actually enables us doing more than just a repeat of Apollo, done just so we can beat the boogieman de jour. All of this rhetoric about us being reduced to mediocrity and becoming a second-rate space power ignores the fact that nobody else is really being that ambitious in space. We don’t have to be “reduced” at all to become a mediocrity when it comes to space–we already are. But so is everyone else. Building a big rocket that will rarely fly isn’t going to change that in the way that developing propellant depots and other advanced technologies would.

    But what would I know. I’m not a Congressperson from UT,TX, or AL, or a journalist/blogger from Texas…

    ~Jon

  • amightywind

    A warm welcome to the 1960’s for our Chicom friends! The Chinese program is a huge bore.

  • Gee, I thought the Chinese were going to the Moon to burn our U.S. flags even though there’s no atmosphere, according to the cuckoos.

  • sc220

    I knew that the Chinese wouldn’t be as foolhardy as that. I’m just surprised that they didn’t continue the charade in an effort to egg us on. But I’m sure we’ll try to find another boogie man to justify some half-cocked enterprise. Perhaps this would be a good job for Sarah Palin and her band of Tea Partiers!

  • amightywind

    sc220 wrote:

    “Perhaps this would be a good job for Sarah Palin and her band of Tea Partiers!”

    It is a shame Obama and his wild eyed supporters have politicized NASA. It was one of only a few places left were leftists and conservatives could agree. But it is what it is. Obama is the most polarizing president in US history.

  • Robert G. Oler

    amightywind wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 11:22 am

    lol

    Robert G. Oler

  • John Cunningham

    This isn’t a “bold” plan, it’s a compromise sop to get people off the Administration’s back. How can spending billions on a heavy lift vehicle that won’t be decided on until 2015 be bold, or result in anything useful?? And the announcement of new funding of $6B of 5 years is still less than if the Admin had not cut the budget in the first place, not to mention from what I’ve read most of the funding will go to Earth observation and Global Warming research — focusing inwards rather than outwards.

    Providing $3 billion to Kennedy Space Center? Why? To keep people employed after you’ve gutted their jobs? What’s the point?

    This line sounds good, “Jumpstarts a new commercial space transportation industry” — I’m all for that. BUT…how much funding, how much control does the government exercise and will it take steps on the regulatory and infrastructure side to enable commercial space flight??

    Meh. Not a plan, a prevarication designed to get people of his back with a few bucks, lofty talk and real decisions kicked 5-6 years down the road.

  • Vladislaw

    “Obama is the most polarizing president in US history.”

    So he is so polarizing that several states have left the union and declared war on the other states? Gosh, I must have missed it.

  • Robert G. Oler

    I’ve never thought that the Chinese were going to the Moon. This speech does NOT mean that they are not, but I would be very surprised if they are.

    I suspect that they have their eyes on things a lot closer to home…like GEO …

    Robert G. Oler

  • Ben Russell-Gough

    If the Chinese are planning to send humans to the Moon, I suspect that their space station would be the first step. Before the Apollo paradigm, one common idea for a lunar spacecraft was an orbiter built in LEO with component commonality with an LEO space station. You basically get a Tiangong module, attach a propulsion module and send it off. I simplify greatly here, but that is the essence of the idea.

    That said, I agree that the Chinese aren’t interested in a race. They’ll go where they want to go when they want to and no sooner. FWIW, I suspect that they are much more interested in sorting out the possibilities of crewed and uncrewed military space right now (especially space-to-space ASAT, based on the Shenzhou-7 subsat experiment).

  • common sense

    I cannot believe all this nonsense. Look, whether China goes to the Moon or not, at least they choose the right path. They will first learn in LEO how to survive. If they get enough experience and find it absolutely necessary to go mine He3 then they will have learned how to establish a smoewhat permanent presence in space. They clearly are not in for space stunts. It’s funny that we may have to learn from China how to conduct a space program. Then again I hope they don’t cut the finances to ours otherwise we won’t even be able to follow them there or anywhere. Whether it takes them 10 years or 10 centuries… The Chinese are very patient, unlike us.

    As far as military space is concerned they do not need any crewed vehicle and neither do we. What is the benefit of a miltary capsule?

    Oh well…

  • Wodun

    Send mapping satellites to the moon.

    Build a space station.

    Send robotic precursor missions to the moon.

    Sounds a lot like our plans for going to the moon, mars, or anywhere else.

    Why is it people on this forum use those same types of activities to support Obama’s plan and claim we will go to the moon, mars, or everywhere and then totally dismiss where another country could go using a similar strategy?

    People say we don’t need an objective and a time-line but that we will still get to the moon and mars. Why do the Chinese need an objective and time-line?

    The Chinese might not be in any hurry to get to the moon but in our current situation we wont be going anywhere in a hurry either.

    A lot of the comments on this forum are dismissive of China and totally underestimate their capabilities in the long term. Incredibly foolish.

  • Robert G. Oler

    Ben Russell-Gough wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
    . FWIW, I suspect that they are much more interested in sorting out the possibilities of crewed and uncrewed military space right now (especially space-to-space ASAT, based on the Shenzhou-7 subsat experiment)…

    I agree with you on the military ops.

    If I was the Reds I would have as a goal parking a GEO crewed station over the US with 1 meter resolution in its optics. That would/should excite everyone.

    as for the -7/subsat experiment…it really was just about nothing. It was far far less then what Gemini IV did with its Titan 2nd stage.

    Robert G. Oler

  • amightywind

    Robert G. Oler wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 2:07 pm:

    “If I was the Reds I would have as a goal parking a GEO crewed station over the US with 1 meter resolution in its optics. That would/should excite everyone”

    Not a red? Could have fooled me. I would be excited too if the Chicoms were so dumb. I can’t think of a worse place than GEO to put a space station. 1 m resolution from 22000+ miles range would be require an 4 meter reflector at least, not to mention the poor seeing due to the high incidence angle. You aren’t thinking clearly.

  • Robert G. Oler

    amightywind wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 2:22 pm

    nope

    bet you money that “our” next or two steps away effort is optical and IR 1 meter capabilities in near GEO (probably with large inclines to drift back and forth).

    the ability to see anything at anytime more then compensates for the lack of sun synchronous clarity. It is a game changer.

    Robert G. Oler

  • Vladislaw

    I believe GEO will be the goal also, here is an interesting white paper of LEO versus GEO.

    It is the GEO-Africa plan.

    http://www.earthobservations.org/documents/geo_africa/GEO-Africa-WhitePaper-Draft1-17Feb2010_1.PDF

  • amightywind

    Robert G. Oler wrote:

    bet you money that “our” next or two steps away effort is optical and IR 1 meter capabilities in near GEO (probably with large inclines to drift back and forth).

    “the ability to see anything at anytime more then compensates for the lack of sun synchronous clarity. It is a game changer.”

    The Air Force has been flying IR detectors at that altitude for decades (DSP). That is a far cry from 1 m resolution manned platform. “Game changer” seems to be the new tag line for programs without deliverables or deadlines. Sorry to inform you that higher GEO inclinations lead to a figure 8 ground track that would hurt visibility as often as it would help. A slightly eccentric synchronous orbit with 0 inclination would get the effect you are talking about. My guess is such orbits would be unpopular with other operators in GEO.

    Vladislaw wrote:

    “I believe GEO will be the goal also, here is an interesting white paper of LEO versus GEO.”

    Oler’s absurd suggestion was a Chinese manned imaging platform, like Salyut 4, in GEO. We are not talking about traditional weather satellite. Post nothing if you cannot keep up.

  • Robert G. Oler

    amightywind wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    not so much

    The Military has been flying IR detectors but they are missile warning. The game change technology is 1 meter resolution at any time …as for

    “. A slightly eccentric synchronous orbit with 0 inclination would get the effect you are talking about”

    nope. It wont be 0 inclination it would be about 10 or so degrees and that can be worked out with the day night cycle when one has to move to different wavelengths with varying accuracies….and the orbit would be either lower or higher then the actual Clarke belt…tethers would be very helpful here.

    it wont even be crewed all the time…man tended.

    there is a reason the Webb telescope is being built!

    Robert G. Oler

  • Vladislaw

    amightywind wrote:

    “Oler’s absurd suggestion was a Chinese manned imaging platform, like Salyut 4, in GEO. We are not talking about traditional weather satellite. Post nothing if you cannot keep up.”

    My apologies, the link was not about the manned part but about the imaging aspect. I should have been more clear.

    China wants firsts just as anything nation does as a national prestige and pride issue. So what can China do first?

    Goto LEO? no.
    Goto the Moon? no.
    Build a space station? no.
    no no no no no

    So many firsts have already been taken. When kennedy chose the moon it was for a reason, what can America do that:

    A. the Soviet Union isn’t planning to do.
    B. the Soviet Union is planning to do that we can beat them at.

    For me It leaves basically a few options for the Chinese to do first, something at mars, something at an asteroid or something in GEO.

    As GEO is the cheapest option for a manned first. I believe that will be their target for a first.

  • amightywind

    Oler wrote:

    “and the orbit would be either lower or higher then the actual Clarke belt…tethers would be very helpful here”

    Like I said. Non 0 eccentricy, 24 hour orbit. Tethers? Let’s talk again when you are sober.

  • The Chinese, if they were smart & pragmatic, WOULD DO a Lunar mission! Why should they copy us and chain themselves to LEO with yet another dull & boring space station? Enough of this stupid going around in circles!! Go someplace! Only the staunchest of the Mars & Asteroid fanatics would say “so what”. Once the full implications of this Chinese feat sink through, America will feel the sting of being incapacitated & left at the starting gate! Imagine, if their spacemen visit one of the Apollo landing sites! Our relics of past glory will be televised by the Commies. Even if it was through the lens of a long-distance moving, robotic rover, sent over from a landing module. And consider the sight of the Red Flag planted firmly on Luna firma….maybe tied in with a taikonaut with the Earth in the deep black sky!! What will the Mars & Asteroid zealots have to say for themselves then?? On what angles will they choose to trivialize it?? Uglier still, will be how they will justify their support for getting President Obama to destroy our would’ve-been Lunar program, ten or twelve years previously (by that time). Charles Bolden is a total jackass, to go in front of Congress and tell them that a Chinese Lunar Landing would not matter. People, let’s rescue Constellation right now! Like that song says: “I swear it’s not too late.”

  • Queysther

    @Castro: Guess that makes me a jackass too then. A Chinese moon landing will not matter. And if they do actually do this (doubtful), they won’t be stupid enough to visit an Apollo site and film the US flag there, because that would be self-defeating: It would only serve to illustrate to the whole world someone else got there first…In fact, if I were the Chinese and had to go to the moon for political reasons, I’d chose to land on the far side or at the poles. That way, I can make a reasonable claim to a First…

  • […] That’s no moon, it’s a (Chinese) space station – Space Politics […]

  • @ Queysther: Ah yes….that exhilarating, euphoric feeling of when you are the very first at anything!! “Flags & Footprints” here; THEN “Flags & Footprints there. Yeah, let’s conduct deep space exploration this way, all the time! Rule #1: (The Prime Directive) We NEVER re-visit a planetoid or planet twice, especially NEVER go a world that had men landed upon it by another national power. Regardless of whether 40, 50, or 60 years has passed after the acheivement. Regardless of whether the said destination is even a mere three days flight from Earth. We NEVER revisit somebody else’s Flags & Footprints shrine—or marsh. Everything beyong LEO is to be soley a World Records highest-altitude-reached stunt! That way, NASA doesn’t ever have to bother with intricate-detail landing craft, ever again. Then we don’t ever have to bother with anything as complicated as base modules & resource utilization….ever. Gee, what a amazingly bold course, Mr. Obama has set us on!

Leave a Reply to Robert G. Oler Cancel reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>