What's new

US Tries to Stifle Chinese Space Advances

Aramsogo..:lol:how'll US even give special stuff to Canada, they've this bad experience losing war to Canada if you may give a read at the history lol. They invaded Canada and they got the whoop a** treatment they'll remember forever.
 
.
China was Nipple Feeded by the Soviets with the R2 Rocket on whose Reverse Engineering Base, They got their Missile and Space Program.

Similarly, America transferred Space Technology to Japan.

But India never had that Privilege. No one ever transferred Missile/Space Technology to India.
Even the Americans put sanctions on that Russian Company which ought to transfer Cyrogenic Tech to us and it was Blocked.

China was transferred Cyrogenic Tech by Americans in 1984.

America ripped of the Germans V2 Rockets with Operation Paperclip. Same with the Soviets.

Even Saturn V was designed by that German who made the V2 under the Nazis.

Except the Germans, all are Rip-offs.
 
. .
.
China was Nipple Feeded by the Soviets with the R2 Rocket on whose Reverse Engineering Base, They got their Missile and Space Program.

A strange way for you to say something simple. The R2 was a copy of the V2 and that was in 1960. There was no more help due to the Sino soviet split.

Similarly, America transferred Space Technology to Japan.

They didn't simply transfer technolgy to Japan. They also funded and sent their own scientists their to help and is still helping them to this day.

But India never had that Privilege. No one ever transferred Missile/Space Technology to India.
Even the Americans put sanctions on that Russian Company which ought to transfer Cyrogenic Tech to us and it was Blocked.

You guys used it directly imported.

China was transferred Cyrogenic Tech by Americans in 1984.

Strange as the first Chinese cryogenic rocket was designed in 1980. Any sources?

America ripped of the Germans V2 Rockets with Operation Paperclip. Same with the Soviets.

That does not take from their achievements throughout the decades.

Even Saturn V was designed by that German who made the V2 under the Nazis.

Only shows that America is not picky in who is helping them

Except the Germans, all are Rip-offs.

A trident is not the same as a V2 in any technical point except that they are both ballistic.
 
.
Just as I should not underestimate India you should not underestimate China.
I did not.
I think you should address me instead of you people.
Actually it goes for all those who keep harping about external similar, internal different. Malarkey.
China may have learned from the Soviet or maybe not. You are simply making guesses here. Independent propulsion is as a large a difference between a rocket launcher and a grenade. As for the rest it is completely irrelevant to the topic.
If you understood the evolution of China's space program you would have understood why I used that example.
Read this:
Soyuz Orbital Module

Shenzhou Orbital Module

The difference between the two orbital modules and the probable reasons why an independent propulsion system was added to the Shenzhou model. Bottom line, similar design, similar functions but slight improvements. Again not on a monumental scale, meaning no big deal.

Thats the point. There is no suggestion of a similar genealogy between the Soyuz and the Shenzhou besides the un-unique shape. What else do you expect a capsule to look like, a cube? As for components Soviet was not involved. Your hypothetical insinuations are worthless.
As you have said you are not an expert. How is China not independent in the space sector? What does it have to import? The last foreign component used in a Chinese ballistic missile was the R2 assembled in the 1960.
Completely irrelevant. There is no connection to the Chinese space program from this. Do you have anything else besides insinuations?
A cube could do just fine, given the sparse atmosphere at that altitude and lack of any drag! The "eerie" similarity between the two spacecraft designs does suggest, either collaboration or contribution, one way or the other, by Russian scientists.

Whoever said that components have to be produced inhouse to be considered indigenous? So what if China manufactures all the components in house. Nothing new here. But the design, the minds behind the design came from Russia. Thats for sure - there are reports of Russian scientists defecting to different countries, China included, for better pay during the upheavel of the 90's. Some among those who did not defect could be bought for the right price. So could sensitive technologies. Everybody whetted their appetites in the free for all till Putin put a stop to it!

Hence there is a strong correlation between the events of the tumultuous Russia of the 90's and sudden spurt in Russian based technological prowess of certain countries during that time.
Facts are facts. Ignore them if you must.
Exactly.
 
.
Soyuz

soyuz-tma-7__1.jpg


Shenzhou

_40902138_shenzhou_vi2_inf416.gif


They do not even share external similarities.
 
.
Soyuz

soyuz-tma-7__1.jpg


Shenzhou

_40902138_shenzhou_vi2_inf416.gif


They do not even share external similarities.

This is called evolution of the design. Like LCA is "evolved/copied" from Viggen/Mirage/Rafale, likewise, Shenzhou is evolved from Soyuz. Its so clear in the pictures you posted.

Both contain
1 Orbital module
2 Re-entry module &
3 Service module

in exactly the same order and design, except that China probably intends to utilize the orbital module as a building block for a probable future space station (and hence the independent propulsion system). None of the other countries spacecrafts have this particular kind of design. Russian input is clearly visible.
 
. .
This is called evolution of the design. Like LCA is "evolved/copied" from Viggen/Mirage/Rafale, likewise, Shenzhou is evolved from Soyuz. Its so clear in the pictures you posted.

Both contain
1 Orbital module
2 Re-entry module &
3 Service module

in exactly the same order and design, except that China probably intends to utilize the orbital module as a building block for a probable future space station (and hence the independent propulsion system). None of the other countries spacecrafts have this particular kind of design. Russian input is clearly visible.

Another important similarity you fail to mention is both are spaceships!
 
. .
china is decades ahead of india in most things. india is extremely reliant on foreign tech for even the basic things. if india is ahead of china in tech then america would focus its attention on india instead of china. but china gets all the american attention. only thing similar about china and india is population size, but thats where the similarities stop.
 
.
Can anyone post the sequence of events for Shenzhou's reentry? I couldnt find - my google mojo doesnt work well when drunk ;)

---------- Post added at 08:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:58 PM ----------

china is decades ahead of india in most things. india is extremely reliant on foreign tech for even the basic things. if india is ahead of china in tech then america would focus its attention on india instead of china. but china gets all the american attention. only thing similar about china and india is population size, but thats where the similarities stop.

Here comes another one!! Welcome to inane comment club!
 
.
This is called evolution of the design. Like LCA is "evolved/copied" from Viggen/Mirage/Rafale, likewise, Shenzhou is evolved from Soyuz. Its so clear in the pictures you posted.

Its hard to argue with someone who refuses to think anything Chinese can be unique. You only see similarities. I suppose If I gave you the J 20 you would say its a copy of the Mig 1.44.

Both contain
1 Orbital module
2 Re-entry module &
3 Service module

Rather important things wouldn't you say? Should we get rid of one or add a few unnecessary ones just to be unique?

in exactly the same order and design, except that China probably intends to utilize the orbital module as a building block for a probable future space station (and hence the independent propulsion system). None of the other countries spacecrafts have this particular kind of design.

there are only 3 sections and they have a reason for being assembled that way. Should we mix and match them for the sake of being unique?

Highlighted. Thats rather different then.
 
.
Its hard to argue with someone who refuses to think anything Chinese can be unique. You only see similarities. I suppose If I gave you the J 20 you would say its a copy of the Mig 1.44.
I will give credit where its due. Uniqueness comes from evolving a design independently. That isnt the case here. There was no learning curve, no stepwise improvements. So up till now, I dont find anything unique in China's inventory. But I am sure, given the achievements in the last decade, we will see improvements in the spacecraft, launch vehicles, and other technologies which would be unique to China.
Rather important things wouldn't you say? Should we get rid of one or add a few unnecessary ones just to be unique?

there are only 3 sections and they have a reason for being assembled that way. Should we mix and match them to make it for the sake of being unique?
True. It was the Russians who originally thought of that. There.
In contrast, American Apollo program's spacecraft, evolved from Mercury and Gemini programs, had the Command Module (Orbital and Re-entry rolled into one) and the Service module - apart from a lunar landing module.

The difference in American and Russian designs. Thats uniqueness.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom