Joseph Riggs wrote: > > Any information on why the Chinese weren't allowed to participate in the > ISS? >
Well I can only speculate, neither China nor US made a big deal about it, obviously. The US still imposes a pretty severe export control over technology that "could contribute to China's military modernization" (see US Dept of Commerce website). It's pretty hard to have a space station partner if you can't communicate over technical issues. It's still perceived that exchange between China and US carries benefit only for China and not for the US. Indeed China has much to gain from joining the ISS program, and there's no doubt that the military will derive some positive benefit out of it too. The US doesn't see any benefit for itself. Of course an export ban only works if the other side is incapable of developing the technology themselves. In some cases, China had even deliberately refused importing the technology in order to train their own people and build the infrastructure for technical independence (mobile phone). For space station, China is so far behind that joining ISS would be far more desirable than starting from scratch. Keeping China out definitely serve the purpose of delaying China. The gamble is that isolation won't trigger an independent effort that in the long run would be even more advantageous than cooperation. OTOH, the ISS is extremely expensive compared to the typical Chinese space program budget. Perhaps the "entry fee" is beyond China's reach also (especially with the Yuan pegged to the Dollar LOL), which might mean "refused" was really a spin by the Chinese press. Of course it's way way beyond mote now. With the retirement of shuttle program, any alteration of the plan had long been out of the question. In any case, putting a station in orbit would be yet another way for the > Chinese to push their own prestige in addition to scientific benefits. The > Americans couldn't do it successfully (how many Americans alive these days > have never even HEARD of Skylab?), and the Russians couldn't afford to keep > theirs' going. Look at the wonderful Chinese and their amazing > technological prowess! > Very justifiably too. Any manned mission is very challenging and long term manned mission is an order more difficult. If I were running the China show, I would run a few symbolic manned missions to keep up the propaganda end but focus on unmanned program for practical use. Would an unmanned space station be sensible? I suppose the definition of space station is "manned", so it's really a automated space platform. If He-3 mining on the Moon is really feasible, a low maintenance space platform would a huge advantage in the inevitable rush. Most of the missions and costs are incurred to keep the "meatbags" alive and happy. Just for kicks I search for a Chinese fusion research program, since China wasn't a player in the field when I almost took a grad course on it 15 years ago (JESUS CHRIST!). Turns out the fusion world is pretty active, China had completed their tokamak just at the end of last year and is a full member of ITER. Hmm so perhaps the Helium-3 story isn't just a pie in the sky. Also last year ITER cleared a major decision point as funding was approved. Oh... don't count the Russians out. They were in bad economic shape when they abandoned Mir, but now with crude oil at $100 they are either poised to take over a big role in ISS or build a Mir-2 on their own. Or they might even partner with China. Technologically and financially China's space program has much more similarity with Russia's than with America's, Japan's, or Europe's. I am, of course, glad to hear that the Japanese are getting in on the new > space race. But I'm somewhat concerned about the ability of India to pay > for their own space program. > The mind block is that sending a 3 ton rack of instrument to the Moon is technologically not hard at all. China claimed a cost of under US$2 billion up to the current mission. Less than 1/6 of the cost of building the smallest of the artificial Palm Islands by Dubai. It should cost about the same level of investment for India, still far far cheaper than say, catching up with China's literacy rate or poverty level. -- Dr. Core
