China's Space Program News Thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
escobar
Brigadier
YF100: 120-ton liquid oxygen-kerosene engine project has been accepted by the National Defense Science and Industry Council; breaking more than 70 key technologies and master the high pressure staged combustion cycle engine design technology; Also led to the development of nearly 50 kinds of new materials, and promoting the development of related technologies :
Long March V launch vehicle booster separation test is successfully completed:
The tower used for the Long March V rocket vibration testing construction completed at tianjin:
Long March V launch vehicle booster separation test is successfully completed:
The tower used for the Long March V rocket vibration testing construction completed at tianjin:
Last edited:
vesicles
Colonel
Re:
Agreed completely! Without the govnt-funded programs, there would not be the fundamental research that is the foundation of everything. Without it, no one will have enough fundamental knowledge to do anything. However, most of the people performing basic research tend to get tunnel vision and focus too much on the stuff at hands and forget that the ultimate goal is to benefit mankind. So this is where private companies come in. The profit-driven nature of the private companies will ensure that they will take the knowledge and attempt to apply them to the real world as much as possible. Hence, the phrase "from bench to bedside" in the medical world.
I know this from personal experience. I myself do basic research and know personally that we tend to get too boggled down with what is going on in the lab and what happens "theoretically". Once we understand a mechanism, we tend to move on to the next "exciting thing" since our mentality is more of curiosity of the natural world. Seldomly, we worry about how to apply what we know to the real world. My postdoc mentor, however, took his discovery, invented a new drug and started a company. I currently sit on their advisory board and know from first-hand experience that their primary goal shifts from making a discovery to applying existing technologies. They get exited about something that they are sure will work. Both my former mentor and I, however, get bored every time they talk about these existing technology since it is, to us, not very exciting. The interesting thing is that, even though my former mentor founded the company and is the Chief Science Officer (don;t ask me how they came up with the title. Guess everyone wants to be a C..O), he still thinks like a basic scientist and wants to pursue things "exciting" and curious. However, his colleagues in the company, who mostly have background in the private sector, do not share the same enthusiasm on these "unpredictable" things. Guess part of the reason that my mentor wants to bring me on-board is to give him support. Indeed, we always have big arguments about the direction of the company since we want to pursue some crazy, and to us, exciting ideas, but CEO/CFO/C..O's of the company think that investing in these ideas will sink the company and would not let us do it. So we end up having to try these ideas in our own labs.
The funny thing is every time at the meetings, we would start out talking about things about the company, then about tweaking the new drugs, then somehow go into discussing some crazy ideas, then the shout "focus!!" from the CEO. The meetings will always end with us promoting insane projects and the C..O's shutting us up... Our argument is that one of these projects might give us "the next big thing" that is going to let us win the Nobel Price and make the company billions of $$$. But the CEO will say "that's IF we can survive that long..." This is the fundamental difference between a company and a govn't funded lab.
Agreed completely! Without the govnt-funded programs, there would not be the fundamental research that is the foundation of everything. Without it, no one will have enough fundamental knowledge to do anything. However, most of the people performing basic research tend to get tunnel vision and focus too much on the stuff at hands and forget that the ultimate goal is to benefit mankind. So this is where private companies come in. The profit-driven nature of the private companies will ensure that they will take the knowledge and attempt to apply them to the real world as much as possible. Hence, the phrase "from bench to bedside" in the medical world.
I know this from personal experience. I myself do basic research and know personally that we tend to get too boggled down with what is going on in the lab and what happens "theoretically". Once we understand a mechanism, we tend to move on to the next "exciting thing" since our mentality is more of curiosity of the natural world. Seldomly, we worry about how to apply what we know to the real world. My postdoc mentor, however, took his discovery, invented a new drug and started a company. I currently sit on their advisory board and know from first-hand experience that their primary goal shifts from making a discovery to applying existing technologies. They get exited about something that they are sure will work. Both my former mentor and I, however, get bored every time they talk about these existing technology since it is, to us, not very exciting. The interesting thing is that, even though my former mentor founded the company and is the Chief Science Officer (don;t ask me how they came up with the title. Guess everyone wants to be a C..O), he still thinks like a basic scientist and wants to pursue things "exciting" and curious. However, his colleagues in the company, who mostly have background in the private sector, do not share the same enthusiasm on these "unpredictable" things. Guess part of the reason that my mentor wants to bring me on-board is to give him support. Indeed, we always have big arguments about the direction of the company since we want to pursue some crazy, and to us, exciting ideas, but CEO/CFO/C..O's of the company think that investing in these ideas will sink the company and would not let us do it. So we end up having to try these ideas in our own labs.
The funny thing is every time at the meetings, we would start out talking about things about the company, then about tweaking the new drugs, then somehow go into discussing some crazy ideas, then the shout "focus!!" from the CEO. The meetings will always end with us promoting insane projects and the C..O's shutting us up... Our argument is that one of these projects might give us "the next big thing" that is going to let us win the Nobel Price and make the company billions of $$$. But the CEO will say "that's IF we can survive that long..." This is the fundamental difference between a company and a govn't funded lab.
Last edited:
Re:
If you are not arguing about efficiency then surely you will agree that the increased efficiency of a private space company as compared to a governmental space program will drastically lower costs
Government run space programs do not go out and recruit the best qualified people nor do the best practices to achieve the goals. In this case its achieving a mission to Mars and a safe return. As I mentioned before private space has more flexibility to conduct its programs. Private space can hire laid off engineers, space workers and others with the experience needed to jump start a program. Government programs do not have that kind of flexibility
Understand this: Private space companies can hire those people who pioneered those first missions. Government space programs with their red tape cannot.
That experience is a major factor in a program being successful or being a failure. The advantage goes to the flexibility of private space companies
---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:20 PM ----------
Check this reference and revise your thinking on what private can do and what government can do.
"...The Mars Analog Research Station Program (MARS) is an international effort spearheaded by The Mars Society to establish a network of prototype research centers where scientists and engineers can live and work as if they were on Mars, to develop the protocols and procedures that will be required for human operations on Mars, and to test equipment that may be carried and used by human missions to the Red Planet..."
Can you show me the comparable government program from any country that is conducting this basic research for a Mars mission? The Mars society is out front in developing the protocols and procedures for a mission to Mars.
Again where is the Chinese, Russian, European, Japanese, or American government program that is doing the same? Any?
Some people are not waiting for governmental permission to travel in space. And that spirit is what is needed to conduct missions to Mars
The Mars Society
International grassroots non-profit Humans to Mars organization.
---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------
News: "Following the success of the Falcon9/Dragon resupply test to the ISS comes the following announcement: 'Intelsat, the world's leading provider of satellite services, and Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), the world's fastest growing space launch company, announced the first commercial contract for the Falcon Heavy rocket. "SpaceX is very proud to have the confidence of Intelsat, a leader in the satellite communication services industry," said Elon Musk, SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer. "The Falcon Heavy has more than twice the power of the next largest rocket in the world. With this new vehicle, SpaceX launch systems now cover the entire spectrum of the launch needs for commercial, civil and national security customers."' As of yet, the Falcon Heavy hasn't flown, but all the parts have been tested. Essentially an upgunned Falcon 9 with additional boosters, the Heavy has lift capability second only to the Saturn 5. On top of the four Falcon Heavy launches planned for the U.S. Air Force this year, the Intelsat contract represents the true dawn of the commercial space age."
So things are moving fast
If you are not arguing about efficiency then surely you will agree that the increased efficiency of a private space company as compared to a governmental space program will drastically lower costs
Government run space programs do not go out and recruit the best qualified people nor do the best practices to achieve the goals. In this case its achieving a mission to Mars and a safe return. As I mentioned before private space has more flexibility to conduct its programs. Private space can hire laid off engineers, space workers and others with the experience needed to jump start a program. Government programs do not have that kind of flexibility
Understand this: Private space companies can hire those people who pioneered those first missions. Government space programs with their red tape cannot.
That experience is a major factor in a program being successful or being a failure. The advantage goes to the flexibility of private space companies
---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:20 PM ----------
Check this reference and revise your thinking on what private can do and what government can do.
"...The Mars Analog Research Station Program (MARS) is an international effort spearheaded by The Mars Society to establish a network of prototype research centers where scientists and engineers can live and work as if they were on Mars, to develop the protocols and procedures that will be required for human operations on Mars, and to test equipment that may be carried and used by human missions to the Red Planet..."
Can you show me the comparable government program from any country that is conducting this basic research for a Mars mission? The Mars society is out front in developing the protocols and procedures for a mission to Mars.
Again where is the Chinese, Russian, European, Japanese, or American government program that is doing the same? Any?
Some people are not waiting for governmental permission to travel in space. And that spirit is what is needed to conduct missions to Mars
The Mars Society
International grassroots non-profit Humans to Mars organization.
---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------
News: "Following the success of the Falcon9/Dragon resupply test to the ISS comes the following announcement: 'Intelsat, the world's leading provider of satellite services, and Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), the world's fastest growing space launch company, announced the first commercial contract for the Falcon Heavy rocket. "SpaceX is very proud to have the confidence of Intelsat, a leader in the satellite communication services industry," said Elon Musk, SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer. "The Falcon Heavy has more than twice the power of the next largest rocket in the world. With this new vehicle, SpaceX launch systems now cover the entire spectrum of the launch needs for commercial, civil and national security customers."' As of yet, the Falcon Heavy hasn't flown, but all the parts have been tested. Essentially an upgunned Falcon 9 with additional boosters, the Heavy has lift capability second only to the Saturn 5. On top of the four Falcon Heavy launches planned for the U.S. Air Force this year, the Intelsat contract represents the true dawn of the commercial space age."
So things are moving fast
Re:
You need to post some evidence that supports your opinion. Can you do it?
Meanwhile as posted earlier Space X picked up a contract to launch commercial payloads for Intelsat. Sounds like a money maker to me.
The contract comes at a time when the Falcon Heavy Rocket is still awaiting a new launch pad which is currently being built at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.
Read more at
Launching from Vandenberg means that polar orbits will be achievable for payloads
And jobs will flow to the United States.
Speaking of the agreement Intelsat CTO Thierry Guillemin said:
“Timely access to space is an essential element of our commercial supply chain. As a global leader in the satellite sector, our support of successful new entrants to the commercial launch industry reduces risk in our business model. Intelsat has exacting technical standards and requirements for proven flight heritage for our satellite launches.”
You need to post some evidence that supports your opinion. Can you do it?
Meanwhile as posted earlier Space X picked up a contract to launch commercial payloads for Intelsat. Sounds like a money maker to me.
The contract comes at a time when the Falcon Heavy Rocket is still awaiting a new launch pad which is currently being built at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.
Read more at
Launching from Vandenberg means that polar orbits will be achievable for payloads
And jobs will flow to the United States.
Speaking of the agreement Intelsat CTO Thierry Guillemin said:
“Timely access to space is an essential element of our commercial supply chain. As a global leader in the satellite sector, our support of successful new entrants to the commercial launch industry reduces risk in our business model. Intelsat has exacting technical standards and requirements for proven flight heritage for our satellite launches.”
vesicles
Colonel
Re:
You are the one who needs "to revise your thinking". One or two private companies may be leading the way in doing some awesome projects. However, the key here is "awesome" projects, like Mars expedition which likely generate a lot of buzz and attract funding from sources other than govn't agencies. For instance, some billionaires might be fascinated with the idea of travel to Mars and would like to dedicate whatever he has to that cause. I challenge you to find a company that makes products that are meaningless and boring, and that nobody cares and wants to have anything to do with.
We hear about Mars landing on the news. All these fascinating projects start out as boring math equations and some nasty chemicals in the lab that no one cares about. How many of those projects do you hear about on the news? None! How many billionaires will fund something like that? None! Schools send little kids to visit NASA all the time. Do they send kids to visit an organic chemistry lab that studies highly strained small-ring aromatic compounds to better understand the effect of structural distortion on bonding and orbital overlaps in molecules? Did I put you to sleep with the above sentence? These are the things nobody cares about, but are the foundation for the exiting stuff you have in your mind. Without these boring things, you will NEVER get to the exciting and awesome things, like traveling to Mars. Yet, who will invest in these boring things? Will you? I know I wouldn't. If you ask me if I will invest in the projects that I myself am doing now, my answer is a big NO! Why? who knows if my stuff is going to work or not. If it works, I will cure cancer! If it doesn't work, I'll move on to another project. I can afford to do that because NIH funds my projects. Can individual afford to pour in ~$2000/day for 5-10 years into something he/she doesn't even know it would work? Any sane people would say no. But will people invest 10-15 year later WHEN I finally crack the code and develop a theory that finally solves cancer? You betcha! All the big pharmaceutical companies will swarm in like bees and invest hundreds of millions to develop new drugs using my theory. I know I may sound like I'm day-dreaming, but I at least get a chance with all the govn't funding I have now. Will I ever get a chance if I work in a company? My project will be killed instantly since it's a black hole that nobody wants to fill with their hard-earned money.
As I mentioned in my previous post, my former postdoc mentor developed a new drug that is going onto the market shortly. A number of mega pharmaceutical companies, like P&G, are trying to acquire his company. If you look at him now, you will use him as an example of how efficient a private company works in putting out new products. In fact, all the drugs in the world have been developed by companies. However, he spent almost 20 years working on his controversial theory in the lab. This theory has absolutely nothing to do with drugs. It's about how human stomach protects itself against acid erosion. Exciting stuff, huh? his theory was not only not accepted by his peer, but was actually ridiculed. You think any company would invest in him 20 years ago when he was being laughed off the stage at conferences? He was able to continue his research because NIH keeps funding him since his hypothesis is scientifically sound. This is the importance of govn't-funded programs. The non-profit nature of these programs allows many crazy and meaningless ideas to mature into exciting stuff like a new drug or a crucial technology that makes space traveling possible.
---------- Post added at 07:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:44 PM ----------
Another example from my own personal experience. The protein I work with is a key protein in cancer. ~20% of ALL human tumors are found to have mutations in this protein. Thus, all the big drug companies had invested huge amount of resources in an attempt to find an inhibitor to this protein. After almost 10 years and billions of $$$, no one could do it. So this protein has been deemed "undruggable". And all the big companies dropped projects on this protein about 10-15 years ago. No one was even allowed to whisper this protein as it would be seen as an attempt to waste company's money. Yet, scientists in university labs still work on this protein with NIH funding. With the advancement in another field that sounds like having nothing to do with cancer biology, university labs, including mine, supported by govn't funding are proposing new hypotheses on how this protein may function. Seeing all these new activity, many companies also join in and are reviving their old programs on this protein. Within the past 5 years, 8 new drugs have been developed and put into clinical trials, based on the hypotheses proposed by university labs, which are, again, supported by govn't funding. All this would have been impossible without govn't-funded projects since all companies had changed their direction and deemed this protein "undruggable".
You are the one who needs "to revise your thinking". One or two private companies may be leading the way in doing some awesome projects. However, the key here is "awesome" projects, like Mars expedition which likely generate a lot of buzz and attract funding from sources other than govn't agencies. For instance, some billionaires might be fascinated with the idea of travel to Mars and would like to dedicate whatever he has to that cause. I challenge you to find a company that makes products that are meaningless and boring, and that nobody cares and wants to have anything to do with.
We hear about Mars landing on the news. All these fascinating projects start out as boring math equations and some nasty chemicals in the lab that no one cares about. How many of those projects do you hear about on the news? None! How many billionaires will fund something like that? None! Schools send little kids to visit NASA all the time. Do they send kids to visit an organic chemistry lab that studies highly strained small-ring aromatic compounds to better understand the effect of structural distortion on bonding and orbital overlaps in molecules? Did I put you to sleep with the above sentence? These are the things nobody cares about, but are the foundation for the exiting stuff you have in your mind. Without these boring things, you will NEVER get to the exciting and awesome things, like traveling to Mars. Yet, who will invest in these boring things? Will you? I know I wouldn't. If you ask me if I will invest in the projects that I myself am doing now, my answer is a big NO! Why? who knows if my stuff is going to work or not. If it works, I will cure cancer! If it doesn't work, I'll move on to another project. I can afford to do that because NIH funds my projects. Can individual afford to pour in ~$2000/day for 5-10 years into something he/she doesn't even know it would work? Any sane people would say no. But will people invest 10-15 year later WHEN I finally crack the code and develop a theory that finally solves cancer? You betcha! All the big pharmaceutical companies will swarm in like bees and invest hundreds of millions to develop new drugs using my theory. I know I may sound like I'm day-dreaming, but I at least get a chance with all the govn't funding I have now. Will I ever get a chance if I work in a company? My project will be killed instantly since it's a black hole that nobody wants to fill with their hard-earned money.
As I mentioned in my previous post, my former postdoc mentor developed a new drug that is going onto the market shortly. A number of mega pharmaceutical companies, like P&G, are trying to acquire his company. If you look at him now, you will use him as an example of how efficient a private company works in putting out new products. In fact, all the drugs in the world have been developed by companies. However, he spent almost 20 years working on his controversial theory in the lab. This theory has absolutely nothing to do with drugs. It's about how human stomach protects itself against acid erosion. Exciting stuff, huh? his theory was not only not accepted by his peer, but was actually ridiculed. You think any company would invest in him 20 years ago when he was being laughed off the stage at conferences? He was able to continue his research because NIH keeps funding him since his hypothesis is scientifically sound. This is the importance of govn't-funded programs. The non-profit nature of these programs allows many crazy and meaningless ideas to mature into exciting stuff like a new drug or a crucial technology that makes space traveling possible.
---------- Post added at 07:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:44 PM ----------
Another example from my own personal experience. The protein I work with is a key protein in cancer. ~20% of ALL human tumors are found to have mutations in this protein. Thus, all the big drug companies had invested huge amount of resources in an attempt to find an inhibitor to this protein. After almost 10 years and billions of $$$, no one could do it. So this protein has been deemed "undruggable". And all the big companies dropped projects on this protein about 10-15 years ago. No one was even allowed to whisper this protein as it would be seen as an attempt to waste company's money. Yet, scientists in university labs still work on this protein with NIH funding. With the advancement in another field that sounds like having nothing to do with cancer biology, university labs, including mine, supported by govn't funding are proposing new hypotheses on how this protein may function. Seeing all these new activity, many companies also join in and are reviving their old programs on this protein. Within the past 5 years, 8 new drugs have been developed and put into clinical trials, based on the hypotheses proposed by university labs, which are, again, supported by govn't funding. All this would have been impossible without govn't-funded projects since all companies had changed their direction and deemed this protein "undruggable".
Last edited:
- Status