If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RealClear)   China unveils its first moon rover, giving it the name of a sex toy (pic)   (realclear.com) divider line 18
    More: Amusing, rovers, lunar exploration, rabbits, Xinhua News Agency, Sina Weibo  
•       •       •

4194 clicks; posted to Geek » on 26 Nov 2013 at 12:45 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



18 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-26 11:32:00 AM
 
2013-11-26 11:55:31 AM
Good. Let's get another space race going. It's the only way the American People are going to wise up and start investing in STEM and Space Exploration once again.
 
2013-11-26 12:19:19 PM
That's nothing. North Korea has been shooting their Taepo Dong missiles into the Sea of Japan for years now.
 
2013-11-26 12:50:31 PM
If they construct it the same way they build the crap they sell me in WalMart and Home Depot, the thing will break after a couple of days, since it'll feature key stress bearing parts made out of monkey metal and plastic, bad welds, pre-stripped screws, and all the circuits modded to use fewer components, primarily by removing safety and reliability features.
 
2013-11-26 12:57:44 PM
I, for one, welcome our future Chinese heavenly bodies.

farm9.static.flickr.com picture.fm
/took some searching to find a SFW image of Evelyn Lin in the right size
 
2013-11-26 01:03:50 PM

hardinparamedic: Good. Let's get another space race going. It's the only way the American People are going to wise up and start investing in STEM and Space Exploration once again.


You seem more hopeful than I am. The American people don't care that science and exploration are why we have computers, children that live to be adults, etc. I doubt a space race would matter much. We've already given up on physics and astronomy compared to Europe, why not space exploration too? Granted, I don't think anyone is prepared to fill NASA's shoes.

Russian's? Hah, they're using the same manned spacecraft since 1962 more or less and haven't sent anything beyond low earth orbit since 1988!

China? Eh. That would be a step back, the capability just isn't there yet.

ESA? Not really, they are probably the closest in capability to NASA at the moment but they're still left behind. Mainly because ESA isn't really a full European space agency, its more like the various countries of Europe agree mission by mission on what they're going to contribute resources towards. With usually France and Germany providing the bulk of the resources.

Its unclear whether Exomars will ever rove on Mars, and it'll certainly not be more capable than Spirit & Opportunity if it does.

Canada? Japan? They like Europe favor working with others, and are looking to the United States to lead once more. Though, its also unclear how the legacy of the cooperation formed as a result of ISS will carry on after ISS. Especially with it looking very likely that ISS is going to be committed to the ocean rather than continued. Which makes absolutely no sense, you may disagree with ISS or you may not but it makes absolutely no sense to dump it into the ocean if the cost of maintaining it isn't more than the cost of building a new station.

Anyway, that brings me back to my point. Americans aren't up in arms that NASA's budget is being slashed even more. Eventually NASA is going to have to choose between SLS and ISS at the rate things are going. Not that we have a real plan of where we are going next anyway. We should have a broad and clear vision, but we don't. That would cost money, and we don't invest in the future anymore in America. We instead convince ourselves that we don't have any money to do anything, and just accept that our time has come to an end. Or so it seems.
 
2013-11-26 01:05:21 PM
Gah, 1967. Not 1962. Sorry, am out of coffee and tired.
 
2013-11-26 01:09:50 PM
Good work china. finally getting around to doing something on the moon that we are getting bored of doing on mars. Man, you guys sure are our superior.
 
2013-11-26 01:14:50 PM

bbfreak: hardinparamedic: Good. Let's get another space race going. It's the only way the American People are going to wise up and start investing in STEM and Space Exploration once again.

You seem more hopeful than I am. The American people don't care that science and exploration are why we have computers, children that live to be adults, etc. I doubt a space race would matter much. We've already given up on physics and astronomy compared to Europe, why not space exploration too? Granted, I don't think anyone is prepared to fill NASA's shoes.

Russian's? Hah, they're using the same manned spacecraft since 1962 more or less and haven't sent anything beyond low earth orbit since 1988!

China? Eh. That would be a step back, the capability just isn't there yet.

ESA? Not really, they are probably the closest in capability to NASA at the moment but they're still left behind. Mainly because ESA isn't really a full European space agency, its more like the various countries of Europe agree mission by mission on what they're going to contribute resources towards. With usually France and Germany providing the bulk of the resources.

Its unclear whether Exomars will ever rove on Mars, and it'll certainly not be more capable than Spirit & Opportunity if it does.

Canada? Japan? They like Europe favor working with others, and are looking to the United States to lead once more. Though, its also unclear how the legacy of the cooperation formed as a result of ISS will carry on after ISS. Especially with it looking very likely that ISS is going to be committed to the ocean rather than continued. Which makes absolutely no sense, you may disagree with ISS or you may not but it makes absolutely no sense to dump it into the ocean if the cost of maintaining it isn't more than the cost of building a new station.

Anyway, that brings me back to my point. Americans aren't up in arms that NASA's budget is being slashed even more. Eventually NASA is going to have to choose between SLS and ISS at the rate things are going. Not that we have a real plan of where we are going next anyway. We should have a broad and clear vision, but we don't. That would cost money, and we don't invest in the future anymore in America. We instead convince ourselves that we don't have any money to do anything, and just accept that our time has come to an end. Or so it seems.


This is solely the fault of QA that we aren't shagging hot Asian space babes on the moon.
 
2013-11-26 01:14:58 PM

bbfreak: Russian's? Hah, they're using the same manned spacecraft since 1962 more or less and haven't sent anything beyond low earth orbit since 1988!



Okay, generally true--but I have to take exception to this point. The Soyuz TMA-M in use now is "the same manned spacecraft [used] since 1962" in the same way that a Boeing 737-900EX rolling off the assembly line today is the same aircraft as a 737-100 from the 1960s. Nevermind that it has a totally new airframe, new electronics, new engines, and a reliability track record that only 50 years in service working all the bugs out of the design can achieve.

Soyuz got off to a rough start due to the Soviet system, but today it's probably the best manned spacecraft ever built. Aside from its small payload capacity, there isn't really any need to replace it.

/it's okay to admit "the other guys" did something right once in a while
 
2013-11-26 01:29:21 PM

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: bbfreak: Russian's? Hah, they're using the same manned spacecraft since 1962 more or less and haven't sent anything beyond low earth orbit since 1988!


Okay, generally true--but I have to take exception to this point. The Soyuz TMA-M in use now is "the same manned spacecraft [used] since 1962" in the same way that a Boeing 737-900EX rolling off the assembly line today is the same aircraft as a 737-100 from the 1960s. Nevermind that it has a totally new airframe, new electronics, new engines, and a reliability track record that only 50 years in service working all the bugs out of the design can achieve.

Soyuz got off to a rough start due to the Soviet system, but today it's probably the best manned spacecraft ever built. Aside from its small payload capacity, there isn't really any need to replace it.

/it's okay to admit "the other guys" did something right once in a while


Yes, Soyuz the rocket and Soyuz they spacecraft are plenty capable in their own right, and its commendable that the Russian's have such a reliable workhorse but my problem with the Soyuz isn't the Soyuz so much as what it represents. Which is the past, there is no future technology in any updated version of the Soyuz that will allow Russia to push the envelope and go beyond low earth orbit in any meaningful sort of way. Which is why the newest Soyuz replacement (which there have been many), is very similar to the American capsules. Also, it has one thing over Orion. It has a bathroom, but I'm not going to hold my breath that Rus is built anytime soon.

The Soyuz has outlasted its many replacements, and this time may not be much different.
 
2013-11-26 01:40:11 PM
This message brought to you by the Ford Probe, and the Pontiac Vibe.
 
2013-11-26 02:37:21 PM
It always annoyed me the US never bothered with sending up moon rovers. They're cheap, you could land them anywhere you felt like no matter how dangerous the surface features, and have Universities just run the things indefinitely, looking at stuff, mapping, etc.
 
2013-11-26 02:55:22 PM

mark12A: It always annoyed me the US never bothered with sending up moon rovers. They're cheap, you could land them anywhere you felt like no matter how dangerous the surface features, and have Universities just run the things indefinitely, looking at stuff, mapping, etc.


I think a photoshop of a rover in the back of a car in a ticker tape parade would illustrate the point nicely.
 
2013-11-26 03:41:52 PM
That's Communist China (according to CIA.gov.)     ever since "Captialist" U.S.A.  realized it could utilize some of that cheap commie chinese labor, it became just plain ole' China.

ain't Freedom (and the press) great!
 
2013-11-26 05:35:22 PM
jade rabbit != rabbit pearl
 
2013-11-26 06:32:02 PM

mark12A: It always annoyed me the US never bothered with sending up moon rovers. They're cheap, you could land them anywhere you felt like no matter how dangerous the surface features, and have Universities just run the things indefinitely, looking at stuff, mapping, etc.


Orbiters overall are a lot more practical and give you more for your money's worth compared to unmanned rovers and depending on the celestial body having a surface mission isn't always feasible. Mainly because unfortunately, there is no profit to make in exploration and science so its a fight just to send anything into space. Where you have to justify it with lots of science, and that usually means orbital missions because they can last for years. Mars is a special case, because not only is it a more viable target for surface missions due to it being a complex and complicated planet compared to the moon but also because the environmental factors are a bit more consistent and bearable overall.

Sure we could put a rover on the moon, but first you need to justify it. How do you do so? Mapping? Thanks to LRO and previous moon orbiters we have the best maps of the moon ever. Look at stuff? LRO has the lowest moon orbit ever, and can see the Apollo program remains easily. Ask a scientist what that'd rather have, a rover or another orbiter. They'll choose another orbiter if they have to choose.

Ask an engineer, and well you might get another answer. Mainly because rovers are a bit more challenging. Unfortunately or fortunately we gave up on doing challenging things for the sake of doing challenging things with the end of the Cold War. Oh, and its worth nothing that while the Russian's did indeed have unmanned lunar rovers, they didn't do much good science overall. By that I mean science wasn't the goal, the goal was to drive as much as possible. Which is why you can't directly compare the Lunokhod missions to NASA's Mars rover missions. One is purely scientific in its goal, the other wasn't.
 
2013-11-27 12:39:51 AM
Paging QA for threadshiat, STAT.
 
Displayed 18 of 18 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report