Chinese engineers reveal nuclear-powered lunar rover

While the US is already thinking ahead to manned missions on Mars, China's space program is still in its infancy, with the country taking the very first steps to sending vehicles and eventually people to the Moon. After launching a lunar orbiter later this year, scientists will begin the process of choosing among several competing rover designs for exploring the Moon's geology and terrain, and now the first of these candidates has been unveiled for public consumption. Very similar to the famous Mars rovers Spirit and Opportunity, the six-wheeled bot created by a team at Shanghai Aerospace System Engineering Institute is capable of cruising around the Moon at a reported 100 meters per hour, all the while snapping photos and collecting bits of moon rock for analysis and possible sale on eBay. Perhaps the most interesting part of this design is its dual-mode power system, which consists of the standard solar cell array as well as a nuclear power source, allowing the rover to operate continuously and in areas that go long periods without sunlight. No word yet on when exactly the Chinese will pick the winning rover, but expect whichever model emerges victorious to head skyward sometime in 2012.

[Via BBC, photo courtesy of Shanghai Daily]

[NHAnimator @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:00PM]

Something about this photo just screams 'failure' with a capital F.

"Well, it worked okay in my office when I dumped all that sand on the floor!"

[7of7 @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:01PM]

At least we know how China will deal with the population problems. It probably won't be very good for them (or Korea and Japan) when this thing explodes and scatters radiation all over Asia.

[akintz @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:03PM]

The Chinese are going to beat us to the moon!

It's too bad we've shifted our focus away from that. I mean, it'll be cool to have a person on Mars and all... but shouldn't we kind of practice that sort of stuff on the moon first? Obviously different environments... but when was the last time a person was on the moon? And we want one on Mars?

[akintz @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:03PM]

The Chinese are going to beat us to the moon!

It's too bad we've shifted our focus away from that. I mean, it'll be cool to have a person on Mars and all... but shouldn't we kind of practice that sort of stuff on the moon first? Obviously different environments... but when was the last time a person was on the moon? And we want one on Mars?

[kingofwale @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:03PM]

tint paper and cheap plastic? Well, at least we can sleep better knowing they didn't further the stereotype that Chinese can't build quality products. ;)

[akintz @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:04PM]

The Chinese are going to beat us to the moon!

It's too bad we've shifted our focus away from that. I mean, it'll be cool to have a person on Mars and all... but shouldn't we kind of practice that sort of stuff on the moon first? Obviously different environments... but when was the last time a person was on the moon? And we want one on Mars?

[akintz @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:04PM]

The Chinese are going to beat us to the moon!

It's too bad we've shifted our focus away from that. I mean, it'll be cool to have a person on Mars and all... but shouldn't we kind of practice that sort of stuff on the moon first? Obviously different environments... but when was the last time a person was on the moon? And we want one on Mars?

[Plaid @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:08PM]

I don't get it. If you've got a radioisotope thermal generator on-board, you bloody well don't need the solar cells. Unless it's a teeny tiny RTG, but then it's hardly better than going without...

[cjameshuff @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:28PM]

A RTG capable of continuously running the robot might be too heavy. A lighter one could charge a bank of batteries/supercapacitors and allow periods of activity in darkness, with rest periods required to recharge. Solar cells could allow continuous activity or a significant drop in recharge time, with the RTG primarily being there to allow operations in shadow.

[Dustin Frazier @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:23PM]

The wheels are the rover's defense system as they can hypnotize any rampaging Martians. Good luck to you rover, we all hope you find Veeger.

[Rolf Shervey @ Apr 3rd 2007 3:01PM]

cjameshuff- thanks for your correct insights.

7of7 is obviously unaware that RTGs are common for space vehicle power sources, and that risks of leaks associated with failure of the launch vehicle are negligible.

Likewise, Plaid doesn't really understand the physical limits placed on vehicles. Again, solar+nuclear decay dual-source power is quite a popular and attractive option, balancing high efficiency (SOLAR= in power vs. weight + sustainability, with great reliability (nuclear decay).

Why are there the comments about China copying this and other design attributes and what is wrong with that? First let me say, I am China's biggest critic when it comes to their (lack of) stand against piracy and their blatant copying of many specific patented items and IP in general- but in this case, there really isn't any better "original" way to do this. If they didn't build a vehicle in the same basic way as the now tried and proven design, they would be guilty of being stupid- something they are not.

[Carmine @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:38PM]

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a "Keeping it Real Fake: Mars Edition."

[danny @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:54PM]

Aww, I was gonna say

' let the racial, arrogant comment begin ! '

but you guys are too quick.

[Xee @ Apr 3rd 2007 1:57PM]

"collecting bits of moon rock for analysis and possible sale on eBay."

Nice way to trivialize the efforts of other nations to get into space, Mr. Blass.

[blueeyesm @ Apr 3rd 2007 2:32PM]

First of all.. its not tint paper,.. its kapton tape, used in the aerospace industry. You'd be surprised at how often its used.

I'm all for the Chinese doing this - they have been assembling aerospace parts for many years, esp. for NASA - I suspect they will show NASA how to do it within budget!

[Ayle @ Apr 3rd 2007 2:46PM]

At last an intelligent comment!

[HuangBaoLin @ Apr 3rd 2007 2:47PM]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Dammit China, please do something original for a change. However, I guarrantee this unit pictured is mearly a prop. They don't have anything decent even close to ready. I wouldn't send anything into space with weak ass suspension arms, hinges and linkages like the ones in the above pictured rover.

You know...it's not so tough getting something into space when you can exploit well over half your countries population so to accumulate the unlimited funds necessary to pointlessly chase Endeavors through trial and error, just to accomplish a pathetic "Me Too...".

China, why can't you use your funds and other wealth to push your third world country upto a first world position. Having nuclear weapons and doing space exploration doesn't get you there any sooner. Same to you India.

[Elliot @ Apr 3rd 2007 2:50PM]

Interesting...My dad worked on this for Boeing thirty-five years ago. I know one thing they were concerned about was the affect of radiation on delicate electronics. I wonder if that's still an issue.

In any case, I guess this means the chinese space program is about where we were in 1972. Too bad we took that twenty year vacation.

[blueeyesm @ Apr 3rd 2007 3:27PM]

Elliot:

Yes, it still is, even to this day. The electronics are subjected to a hardening process as well as vibration tests, extreme temperature tests at peak power, etc.

[Ordeith @ Apr 3rd 2007 3:13PM]

akintz,

the plan is to use the moon as a staging area for Mars.

[macona @ Apr 3rd 2007 3:31PM]

Its nice to see some people are thinking about space after we in the US fell flat on our faces.

In a rover that can do 100KPH, I sure would want dual power sources. In an hour you are probably out of walking distance before your air runs out if something happens to one power source or another.

The complete operating manuals for the original USA moon rover are online and it is a pretty interesting read. redundancy everywhere.

Nuclear fuel is not that big of a deal, even if the rocket exploded the RTGs are made very robustly out of probably stainless or inconel. Even if it was breached it is not enough to cause a problem.

Nuclear energy is the best hope for the future. America has not built a reactor in 30 years and there are a lot of new technologies out there and we are being left behind. Its time to stop pandering to the environmentalists and those who FEEL rather than think and do what needs to be done.

[blueeyesm @ Apr 4th 2007 12:55AM]

100kph is 60mph.

as stated above, its max. velocity 100 meters per hour.

[macona @ Apr 4th 2007 1:18AM]

OOPS! (I was thinking that was a little fast)

Oh well you will still need the RTG if you want to use the rover when its in the dark phase for the area it is in.

[christoffer.arstrand @ Apr 3rd 2007 4:17PM]

"In a rover that can do 100KPH, I sure would want dual power sources. In an hour you are probably out of walking distance before your air runs out if something happens to one power source or another"

1. The article makes no mention of someone sitting on the rover.
2. 100KPH is exactly one thousand times faster than this rover. ;-)

[Andir3.0 @ Apr 3rd 2007 6:39PM]

IMHO we should be focusing on the moon before Mars or any other planet. Some would even say we should focus on Earth first, but you can't win them all...

[rainygrass @ Apr 3rd 2007 9:24PM]

what i see is just pure science project...and new york times once mentioned China will begin their moon plan from 2015...very long way to go...America can do much more than this in next 10 years...
dosen't mean Chinese should do that because US did it already...

[熊佳斌 @ Apr 3rd 2007 10:57PM]

we are on the way, donot be afraid!

[J @ Apr 4th 2007 10:26AM]

maybe someone should tell them the dark side of the moon isn't really dark...