China's Space Program News Thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
broadsword
Brigadier
CZ-7 will use LOX/kerosene fuel instead of expensive and dangerous N2O4/UDMH fuels used in previous Long March 2 rocket family. It is in the class of Delta IV, Atlas V and Angara. It uses the semi-cryogenic YF-100 engines. With a mass of 579-582 tons, it is heavier than the India rocket just recently launched with about 420 tons.
danielchin
Junior Member
danielchin
Junior Member
some more
Last edited:
Quickie
Colonel
Wow...now we know how the moon surface and moon rocks really looks like. Some of the moon rocks have really weird shapes and texture, and the surface is in various shades of colour as opposed to the shades of grey we had come to know. Seriously, you can imagine all kinds of stuffs in trying to figure out what the moon rocks resemble. 
danielchin
Junior Member
According to the caption,they are images of the plasma sphere of Earth captured by the Lander's ultraviolet camera.
If you want to establish a permanent and regular shuttle service from the Earth to the Moon, the most effective way is to use a system that requires a minimum of three Space Stations.
Station One will orbit the Earth
Station Two will orbit the Moon
Station Three orbits both the Moon and Earth and can do so in either an elliptical or Figure or Eight orbit.
The reason for this is this an Apollo type mission for each journey would be really expensive and for more complex missions, including heavy or complex payloads, there are all sort of complications in relation to launch windows and general timings of orbital events.
With this model, you have one Station to receive arrivals around the Earth and able to to arrange transfer and re-entry for passengers in a more relaxed fashion. Same of course for arrivals/ascents and descents to the moon.
It also means that the passage to and from the moon is more comfortable, spacious and capable to transporting a greater range of cargoes etc.
Mining the moon is a more complicated subject as it would be expensive for many materials to extract and return to Earth for use. It would be a different matter if being used to build Space Craft and other equipment in situ as anything that does not need to be lifted into Earth Orbit is a substantial cost and fuel saving.
If there is an area worth looking at right now though, it is advanced manufacturing and material processing in both zero and low gravity environments. Earth Gravity is a unbreakable constant in any terrestrial industry and being able to exploit the effects of different gravities is actually a very exciting and tangible near term prospect.
Station One will orbit the Earth
Station Two will orbit the Moon
Station Three orbits both the Moon and Earth and can do so in either an elliptical or Figure or Eight orbit.
The reason for this is this an Apollo type mission for each journey would be really expensive and for more complex missions, including heavy or complex payloads, there are all sort of complications in relation to launch windows and general timings of orbital events.
With this model, you have one Station to receive arrivals around the Earth and able to to arrange transfer and re-entry for passengers in a more relaxed fashion. Same of course for arrivals/ascents and descents to the moon.
It also means that the passage to and from the moon is more comfortable, spacious and capable to transporting a greater range of cargoes etc.
Mining the moon is a more complicated subject as it would be expensive for many materials to extract and return to Earth for use. It would be a different matter if being used to build Space Craft and other equipment in situ as anything that does not need to be lifted into Earth Orbit is a substantial cost and fuel saving.
If there is an area worth looking at right now though, it is advanced manufacturing and material processing in both zero and low gravity environments. Earth Gravity is a unbreakable constant in any terrestrial industry and being able to exploit the effects of different gravities is actually a very exciting and tangible near term prospect.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
so let me see Viking if I get what you're thinking, personal and cargo would load up on earth on say on a dream chaser be launched to the ISS. Now they would then transfer from ISS to a second station... Well more like a fairy, that moves between orbits. This craft then transports the personal and cargo to the lunar orbit where it rendezvous with the lunar station. Where in another craft is waiting to send them to the moon
I think there is a somewhat confused view, voiced by those who seem to perceive the loss of technological and economic supremacy that china enjoyed up to the 1400s to be attributable to European risk taking in colonizing America, that suggest china should now seize the new chance and grab the moon first and thus perhaps fix the course of human development in Chinese favor for the next few hundred, or even thousands of years.
This is an entirely fallacious view. The moon is not comparable to the islands in the Caribbean which the Spanish first reached in their quest to conquer the Americas. The moon is more comparable to Greenland.
The colonization of Greenland didn't make the colonization of any other parts of America easier, just like these is no reason in physics or chemistry why colonizing the moon will make colonizing any other part of the solar system any easier.
The colonization of Caribbean islands, on the other hands, did make Spanish inroad into central and South America easier, in a way the colonization of the moon will not do for colonization of Mars.
Finally, the colonization of America was possible because the colonization first occurred where payback was rapid. Spanish colonization more than paid for itself several times over within 30 years. Within 60 years, revenue from Spanish colonial possessions in South America had already exceeded the entire rest of all revenue to the Spanish government.
The colonization of Greenland, on the other hand, paid for nothing and withered on the vine. The colony actually died out completely. It's final inhabitants starving and freezing to death in the most wretched squalor, all but totally forgotten in Europe. It wasn't until several decades after the last Greenland colonist had parishes that it occurred to Denmark to send a ship to check just how the colonists were doing. Prior to this the last ship to visit greenland was 90 year before.
This is an entirely fallacious view. The moon is not comparable to the islands in the Caribbean which the Spanish first reached in their quest to conquer the Americas. The moon is more comparable to Greenland.
The colonization of Greenland didn't make the colonization of any other parts of America easier, just like these is no reason in physics or chemistry why colonizing the moon will make colonizing any other part of the solar system any easier.
The colonization of Caribbean islands, on the other hands, did make Spanish inroad into central and South America easier, in a way the colonization of the moon will not do for colonization of Mars.
Finally, the colonization of America was possible because the colonization first occurred where payback was rapid. Spanish colonization more than paid for itself several times over within 30 years. Within 60 years, revenue from Spanish colonial possessions in South America had already exceeded the entire rest of all revenue to the Spanish government.
The colonization of Greenland, on the other hand, paid for nothing and withered on the vine. The colony actually died out completely. It's final inhabitants starving and freezing to death in the most wretched squalor, all but totally forgotten in Europe. It wasn't until several decades after the last Greenland colonist had parishes that it occurred to Denmark to send a ship to check just how the colonists were doing. Prior to this the last ship to visit greenland was 90 year before.
Last edited:
- Status