backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 44 comment(s) - last by iNGEN.. on Apr 5 at 5:34 PM

Image Courtesy of the Shanghai Daily
China is working on an atomic-powered rover for the nation's first unmanned mission to the moon

The Chinese space program hopes to use an atomic-powered lunar rover when the nation launches its first unmanned mission to the moon in 2012. The Shanghai Aerospace System Engineering Institute has been working on the six-wheeled, atomic-powered vehicle for four years, going as far as testing the rover in a laboratory that simulates the lunar surface.  The lunar rover was debuted in Shanghai during a China-UK Workshop on Space Science and Technology several days ago.

Researchers hope the 5-foot high, 440-pound rover is able to transmit video feeds back to Earth, along with digging and collecting soil samples, and producing accurate three dimensional images of the moon's surface.  The rover will be able to travel up to 328 feet per hour while climbing slopes and overcoming barriers.

The Chinese rover appears to be very similar to Spirit and Opportunity, NASA's unmanned rovers currently exploring Mars.  However, the Spirit and Opportunity are currently operated on rechargeable lithium ion batteries, the Chinese rover will be nuclear powered.  

"We want to make it better than the early US and Russian rovers," said Luo Jian, Shanghai Aerospace System Engineering Institute director.

Researchers are still working on fine tuning the rover's ability to handle the type of environment it will have to handle on the moon -- low gravity, temperature extremes and cosmic rays included.

China has ambitious plans for the country's space exploration program -- a deal between China and Russia to jointly study Mars was announced last week.  NASA also admitted that it is likely China will reach the moon before the U.S. returns.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Funny
By creathir on 4/2/2007 2:11:25 PM , Rating: 5
The US is not allowed to use nuclear powered spacecraft, for fear of harming the environment...

But the Chinese will probably not be repremanded for their actions. And even if they were, why would they care?

Why should we CARE?

This business of bending over everytime a liberal group finds SOMETHING wrong with our approach is really starting to grate on me...

Nuclear powered spacecraft are the way of the future... yet everytime someone mentions it... 10,000 little groups scream and hollar...

Makes me sick...

- Creathir




RE: Funny
By Mitch101 on 4/2/2007 2:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
That is funny because space is filled with Radiation so everything has already been exposed at some point.


RE: Funny
By creathir on 4/2/2007 2:18:50 PM , Rating: 2
Well, their concern is that during liftoff, it will crash and destroy ozone or some nonsense like that.

- Creathir


RE: Funny
By Anonymous Freak on 4/2/2007 3:22:45 PM , Rating: 3
No, the fear is that on launch, it will break up and radioactive debris will waft through the upper atmosphere before being spread all over the planet. The threat is very real.

Of course, the five or so pounds of Plutonium that will be used won't make much of a difference compared to the standard radiation we all experience every day. While the THREAT may be real, the REACTION is a bit much. It's not like it will cause Chernobyl-level radioactivity over a large area. At WORST, a square mile or so around the crash site will be ALMOST as bad as Chernobyl, and living a couple miles away will be the equivalent of living at high altitude.


RE: Funny
By creathir on 4/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Funny
By Ringold on 4/2/2007 5:29:41 PM , Rating: 3
America isn't banned from using the technology. It just requires a certain amount of collective strength located in the nations spine. And riot police with sturdy bats and tear gas to bash rioting hippies with. We have none of the former and not enough of the latter.


RE: Funny
By masher2 (blog) on 4/2/2007 5:31:22 PM , Rating: 2
> " it will break up and radioactive debris will waft through the upper atmosphere before being spread all over the planet..."

The radioisotopes in an RTG are typically installed in ceramic bricks, then encased in multiple layers of graphite. In case of an accident, they don't disintegrate, but rather shatter into a few large pieces and fall to earth. They're also primarily alpha emitters which means that, unless you find a piece and decide to swallow it, your risk is essentially zero. You could carry a piece around in your pocket for a few years, and not get a dangerous dose.


RE: Funny
By threepac3 on 4/2/2007 4:32:53 PM , Rating: 1
The reason they are so fearful is because an event such as this occurecd already.


RE: Funny
By Ringold on 4/2/2007 5:30:45 PM , Rating: 1
I must've missed the millions that died or the billions in damage.


RE: Funny
By defter on 4/2/2007 2:17:21 PM , Rating: 2
I recall that at least long range probes that NASA has sent are actually nuclear powered. Probably also a lot of other probes use nuclear power. How can you have a probe operate for decades without a nuclear power?


RE: Funny
By masher2 (blog) on 4/2/2007 2:50:27 PM , Rating: 4
A long-range probe pretty much has to be powered by a radiothermal generator (RTG). Probes nearer the sun can operate from solar power, but thats really not feasible past the orbit of Jupiter. Probes such as Cassini (Saturn) and New Horizons (Pluto) use RTGs....though environmental groups all demonstrate wildly whenever one of these is launched.


RE: Funny
By creathir on 4/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Funny
By CheesePoofs on 4/2/2007 9:28:29 PM , Rating: 2
Yep. The recent New Horizons mission to Pluto was powered my a RTG, I'm pretty sure, and there has been talk of powering one of the upcoming mars missions with nuclear power. So we certainly do use it, there are just silly people who decide to protest every time (although I remember hearing that only 20 or so showed up for the New Horizons protest).


RE: Funny
By goz314 on 4/2/2007 8:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The US is not allowed to use nuclear powered spacecraft, for fear of harming the environment...


Let the radical environmentalists whine all they want. It won't change NASA's policy with respect to RTG-based cells that provide power on probes. :)

The US doesn't have a ban on using nuclear batteries for spacecraft. Rather, I think the opposite is the case. Most recently the RTG-based New Horizons probe sent to study Pluto was launched last year. NASA's next rover mission to Mars in 2009, MSL, will use an RTG for electrical power, and the Martian sample return mission following that will likely use one too. So, I think it's safe to say that NASA has embraced the technology and has a fine track record of safety surrounding it. Don't spread FUD suggesting otherwise.

Consequently, the way I view this announcement the Chinese can play around on the moon with their "borrowed" technology all they want. That won't stop the US and other western nations from launching more rounds of follow-up missions that continually push the envelope of space exploration and lead the way for expanded scientific investigations of the solar system and beyond.


Made in China
By Mitch101 on 4/2/2007 2:14:37 PM , Rating: 1
Im Betting:

China Rover = $50.00 made by a handfull of guys who took apart a kids remote control car and added a few things over a weekend. You can crash those remote control cars and they still work.

USA Rover = $Billions redesigned and manufactured with the highest quality components cast from rare metals from a totally revolutionary design as scientists spent years developing. And built 2 of them at that crazy cost. The moment it lands it loses contact with the NASA because a 5 cent part is missed, broken, or someone uploaded the wrong program before launch.

Of course I have no data to support those claims.




RE: Made in China
By Misty Dingos on 4/2/2007 2:32:57 PM , Rating: 5
Counter Bet:

China Rover = $1,000.00 made by a handful of guys who used stolen plans and data from the USA.

USA Rover = $100,000,000.00 After years of research and cost over runs (and maybe a little political pocket lining). Built by NASA engineers, working for $75,000 a year. Wishing that they were working for a toy company making RC cars and making $150,000. One engineer in the group giggling at the other NASA engineers because he has a Chinese funded retirement plan.

Of course I don't have any information to support these claims either.


RE: Made in China
By Scorpion on 4/2/2007 3:18:22 PM , Rating: 3
I do think you are onto something...

Boy their Rover sure does look an awful lot like ours... I wonder where they got all of their ideas? Sure I understand the point of "Why mess with something that works?" But they have to admit that they are standing on the shoulder of giants. And by giants, I mean us. We've done all of the hard work, and no one should ever forget that.

quote:
"We want to make it better than the early US and Russian rovers,"

I wish he would have defined "early". The earliest Rover was done in the 70s by the russians, so I'm not real sure what's he's comparing here.


RE: Made in China
By JackPack on 4/2/2007 5:55:37 PM , Rating: 3
ROFL. Were you expecting the Chinese rover to have 3 wheels and underbody neon lights?

These are engineers, not fashion designers. They design things based on the laws of physics. Similar performance requirements are going to end up with similar design proposals.

Based on your thinking, the F-15 would have been a copy of the MiG-25. And the F-35's VTOL system was copied from the Yak-41.


RE: Made in China
By Grast on 4/2/2007 4:32:17 PM , Rating: 1
Misty,

Do not bet, NASA research is not clasified. I have a friend which works as a contractor for NASA. The plans for both rovers are easily available. It is completely reasonable the Chinese have aquired these plans. It is much easier and cheaper to copy a proven design rather then starting from scratch.

Plus when is the last time an original design or idea came out of China.

later...


RE: Made in China
By Ringold on 4/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Made in China
By JackPack on 4/2/2007 5:58:09 PM , Rating: 2
Why blame China when it's America that doesn't properly safeguard its secrets? The CIA and NSA exist for a reason. If those agencies aren't doing their job, blame them. The world isn't a utopia nor is espionage anything new.


RE: Made in China
By Eris23007 on 4/2/2007 6:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
That's a little like saying "blame the woman who gets raped when she's out late at night in a bad part of town"

While it is important to take measures to protect oneself, the blame is not with the victim of crime, but the perpetrator, whether or not the victim could have done more to prevent it.

America could do more to prevent its secrets from being stolen, but every procedure in place to prevent information from being stolen only makes it that much difficult to use the information for its intended purpose. Increased security leads to guaranteed cost increases and schedule slips.

Point the finger at the thief: CHINA.

If anyone wants to dispute my statement, that China is stealing enormous amounts of U.S. technical data, be my guest - and watch me drown you in a sea of links.


RE: Made in China
By Ringold on 4/2/2007 9:41:34 PM , Rating: 1
I usually hate to reference movies to make a historical point, but Breach, based on the real-life story of Robert Hanssen, illustrates the point well.

Don't mod down my posts, and Eris posts, just because.. well, I don't know why anyone would, we're just repeating fact. The best counter-intelligence in the world can only compensate for so much, especially when people are motivated and dedicated to their treason/espionage.

To be honest, a lot of this espionage is of an economic nature; they want to grow and use the latest technology from the best firms in the world without paying for it. But to be sure, I have no doubt there are Chinese (and Russian, plus a few other lucky tricky rising countries) informants in different parts of government right now. American born, too, not immigrants.

It's not even close far fetched that some of their technology being used in space was stolen (from us, from Russia, and from anyone else). Who knows if this rover of theirs has any (I would think the software would be the most likely item, many brilliant geeks have been tweaking rover software for many years now), but it's possible.


RE: Made in China
By iNGEN on 4/5/2007 5:34:41 PM , Rating: 2
Duh...


RE: Made in China
By 91TTZ on 4/2/2007 2:35:09 PM , Rating: 2
I think the US will get it right eventually. In fact, I predict that by 1966 we'll land our own probe on the moon, and someday, in the distant future, we'll even develop the technology to land a man on the moon.


Why Send This to The Moon?
By Operandi on 4/2/2007 2:27:35 PM , Rating: 2
Given that humans have already set foot on the Moon several times what could China possibly think they will find on the Moon that hasn't already been discovered?

The only thing that makes is that perhaps this is more of a test vehicle for a future Mars or Saturn/Jupiter Moon mission.




RE: Why Send This to The Moon?
By masher2 (blog) on 4/2/2007 2:44:39 PM , Rating: 2
Are you serious? Man has explored less than 0.00001% of the moon's surface...and zero percent of anything below the first below the first few inches. Every single new mission to the moon has added volumes to our knowledge....and still what is known is but a tiny fraction of what remains to be discovered.


By Vanilla Thunder on 4/2/2007 3:52:55 PM , Rating: 3
Man never landed on the moon. Haven't you seen the FOX special?

Vanilla


RE: Why Send This to The Moon?
By AmpedSilence on 4/2/2007 3:01:51 PM , Rating: 5
By your train of logic, humans have inhabited the Earth for thousands of years... what could possibly be left to discover on Earth?

Yet every year, something new is found, a new dinosaur or plant or yet unknown ecological system (like the thermal vents a few years back).

this is quite small minded to think that we have learned everything on just a few trips to the Moon.


RE: Why Send This to The Moon?
By Operandi on 4/3/2007 1:17:03 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sure there discoveries to be made but I can't imagine anything spectacular from what is essentially a dead rock with no atmosphere.

In comparison to Mars and the other satellites orbiting the other planets the Moon is a boring place.


By masher2 (blog) on 4/3/2007 8:33:38 AM , Rating: 2
You've been seduced by all the pop "life on mars" articles and shows. Not only are their a huge number of discoveries to be made on Luna, but many of them are highly relevant to life on Earth itself, inasmuch as our mMoon's formation, capture, and subsequent history is one of the primary factors for our current environment. Without the moon, many scientists believe life on Earth would have never developed, or at least done so in radically different manner.


Fusion Power
By TimberJon on 4/2/2007 6:33:12 PM , Rating: 2
Fusion Fusion Fusion..

Its the key man! You could create a large spacecraft that can leave the atmosphere under its own power, has dozens of little rovers in it, that can roll down ramps and roll up, plug in and recharge, and go out hunting again. Mapping the surface and drilling for ice or whatever else.

Forget nuclear. OK, easier to do on a smaller scale, because fusion isnt quite done, but Fusion uses no radioactive material, and generates no waste. It also cant really blow up. So thered be no danger to the upper atmospheres. Just junk falling down.




RE: Fusion Power
By masher2 (blog) on 4/2/2007 6:42:12 PM , Rating: 3
> "but Fusion uses no radioactive material, and generates no waste..."

I'm not sure why people believe this. The most likely form of nuclear fusion-- certainly the first one which will be commercialized-- is the D-T cycle, which uses (radioactive) tritium. And all forms of fusion are going to generate at least a small amount of nuclear waste....its an inescapable sideeffect of a neutron flux.


RE: Fusion Power
By TimberJon on 4/2/2007 7:18:14 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I meant that its not a breeder. Doesnt NEED to be fed uranium or solids. And doesnt really generate solids or mush. Yes ok there is tritium, but it burns most of it up, and its radiation doesnt penetrate our skin. Only dangerous if we inhale the dust or swallow it. After plasma testing within the core, they only needed to use a bot within the confines of the tokamak chamber for a year, before radiation levels had decreased enough to send in a suit. Mostly beryllium, tungsten and tritium in there, along with other chaff.


Uhhhmmm...
By drewsup on 4/2/2007 4:01:24 PM , Rating: 2
If its nuke powered why does it have a solar array?? Definetly a Spirit stolen design, wonder how long before one of its Chinese drivers puts it in a crater!




RE: Uhhhmmm...
By masher2 (blog) on 4/3/2007 9:13:46 AM , Rating: 2
This is the prototype, which is solar powered. The actual one they launch will (according to the Chinese, at least) utilize an RTG.


speaking of rovers and solar power + batteries
By exdeath on 4/2/2007 5:06:44 PM , Rating: 2
Why do we send these rovers on a one way suicide mission? Hasn't anyone thought to include wiper blades or fans or something to clear the dust off the panels? Or just hinged panels to dump the dust off, or even a roll of clear plastic like that used on racing helmets on mud tracks...

Hmm, at least they don't use Sony batteries...




By masher2 (blog) on 4/2/2007 5:52:32 PM , Rating: 2
> "Hasn't anyone thought to include wiper blades or fans or something to clear the dust off the panels?"

Such measures add weight to an already excruciatingly tight weight budget. Plus they may malfunction themselves...and even if they work properly, won't extend the mission indefinitely. As long as the solar panels work past the expected mission lifetime, there's really no problem. Both the current Mars rovers are still operational, despite a somewhat lowered power budget due to dust on the panels.


By osalcido on 4/2/2007 6:39:58 PM , Rating: 2
Religious fundies preach the evils of science while the rest of the world leaves us behind




By thecoolnessrune on 4/3/2007 8:49:38 PM , Rating: 2
Your very quick to blame. Most of the flak against nuclear energy comes from liberals, who consequently, don't tend to even believe in God.

Don't be so stupid please O.o


Atomic powered?
By Misty Dingos on 4/2/2007 2:11:42 PM , Rating: 2
I like the atomic powered idea. Runs long time don't have to worry about damaged or dusty arrays. But I notice that the one they are test driving must be the solar powered version.

If they want to buy the nuke option they are going to have to bring more than gold foil to the dealership. That is a spendy option but does come this spinners for the wheels. And the racing package will cost even more. I wonder if they are going to buy roadside service? I heard that it is so expensive that it is out of this world.




nuking the moon?
By geeg on 4/2/2007 4:44:34 PM , Rating: 2
They will create a new crater on the moon...




What would be funny
By rainwater on 4/2/2007 4:56:42 PM , Rating: 2
What would be funny if they landed on a Apollo site and ran over the US flag. (Of course according to Fox/SciFi channel/Art Bell its not there).




We're in trouble
By mindless1 on 4/3/2007 1:48:17 PM , Rating: 2
The next great world war will be fought off-world, battlebots on the moon. Given that the Chinese can crank things out in mass production for pocket change, they will win the war by sheer numbers alone.




"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki