New NASA Moon Rover Copies Chinese Mars Bot, Experts Claim; How Similar is VIPER to Zhurong?

[beijingwalker]

New NASA Moon Rover Copies Chinese Mars Bot, Experts Claim; How Similar is VIPER to Zhurong?​

It seems like China is not always the copycat.​

Griffin Davis , Tch Times 02 November 2022, 08:11 am

The new NASA moon rover copied the design of a Chinese Mars robot, as claimed by experts who are familiar with the two projects.

(Photo : Screenshot from Twitter post of @NASA_Johnson)
New NASA Moon Rover Copies Chinese Mars Bot, Experts Claim; How Similar is VIPER and Zhurong?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1371936842602446851

This is quite different from the usual scenario since China is commonly the one being accused of copying technologies from the U.S. and other countries.

For example, the Chinese government has many fighter jets with designs and features of some U.S. military aircraft, such as MiG-21, Boeing C-17, and other models.

Now, it is quite different with the new NASA VIPER, a lunar rover that allegedly copied China's Zhurong robot.

New NASA Moon Rover Copies Chinese Lunar Bot?​

According to the South China Morning Post's latest report, Zhurong is a Mars rover named after the Chinese God of fire.

(Photo : Photo by MATTHIEU RONDEL/AFP via Getty Images)
A picture taken on March 23, 2022 shows a replica of Zhurong rover during a presentation to the press ahead of an exhibition titled "Martian Ground" which will offer visitors to discover the universe of the planet Mars at the Cite de l'Espace in Toulouse, southern France. (Photo by Matthieu RONDEL / AFP)

This robot has been roaming on the Red Planet for more than a year now. China was able to land Zhurong on Mars last July 2021.

While Zhurong is exploring the soil of Mars, NASA is planning to send its VIPER (Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover) to Earth's natural satellite.

Although their targeted heavenly bodies are different, VIPER and Zhurong both have similarities, leading experts to speculate that NASA copied China's tech.

"This is a copy of the Chinese design," said a Chinese space expert who is closely monitoring the Zhurong and VIPER projects.

He claimed that although VIPER is a four-wheeled rover (Zhurong is a six-wheeled Mars robot), it still has a suspension similar to the Chinese Mars rover.

Other researchers familiar with the works of China and NASA found that Zhurong's design, which was allegedly copied by VIPER, has not appeared on previous space missions.

NASA VIPER's Details​

NASA Gov's official report provided the details of its ongoing VIPER project.

The international space agency said that they will use SpaceX's Falcon Heavy to launch its moon rover as early as 2023.

But the exact schedule hasn't been confirmed yet. Once VIPER lands on Earth's natural satellite, it will explore the heavenly body's South Pole.

Is The New NASA Moon Rover a Copycat of the Chinese Mars Bot?

This time, China is not the copycat.

www.techtimes.com

 

[beijingwalker]

Did Nasa imitate China’s Mars robot? Scientists say rovers share ‘inchworm’ design​

• Artemis programme’s VIPER appears to borrow from award-winning rover Zhu Rong
• The Chinese device draws inspiration from the movement of a common moth caterpillar

Published: 2:00pm, 2 Nov, 2022

China’s Zhu Rong rover has been roaming the red planet for more than a year. Photo: Xinhua

Nasa’s latest moon rover appears to borrow from the design of a Chinese robot on Mars, according to scientists familiar with the projects – a twist in a space rivalry in which China has long been accused of being the copycat.

Zhu Rong, a robotic rover named after the Chinese god of fire, has been roaming the red planet for more than a year. It features an active suspension system that simulates the movement of an inchworm, allowing it to pull its wheels free when they become stuck in rocks or sand. The unprecedented design significantly increases the rover’s mobility and chance of survival in rough terrain.

But Zhu Rong may soon have an imitator “inching” its way over extraterrestrial surfaces. The Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER), under development at Nasa’s Ames Research Centre in California, will also “inchworm – or move its wheels in a special, caterpillar-like coordinated way that helps the rover get itself unstuck”, according to Nasa’s website.

Zhu Rong’s inchworm-inspired suspension system allows it to move around the rough terrain of Mars without getting stuck in sand or rocks. Photo: Beijing Institute of Spacecraft System Engineering

In July, a VIPER prototype with this feature completed a ground test at Nasa’s Glenn Research Centre in Cleveland. The rover is expected to be deployed during a 2024 mission to find water at the moon’s south pole as part of the Nasa-led Artemis programme.

“This is a copy of the Chinese design,” said a Beijing-based space scientist who has been closely monitoring the projects.

Though the VIPER uses four wheels, the working principle of its suspension system is the same as that of the six-wheeled Zhu Rong’s “brave design [that] has not appeared in any previous space missions”, said the researcher, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

The US has long accused China of stealing space technology. The White House and Congress forbid Nasa from collaborating with Chinese organisations or individuals because of concerns over intellectual property theft.

Last year, a senior Nasa scientist with the Ames Research Centre was sentenced to a month in prison for unreported collaboration with China.

In recent years, China’s space programme has achieved several breakthroughs including quantum satellites, hypersonic weapons and landing its Chang’e 4 spacecraft on the far side of the moon. These projects have been driven in part by new technology not yet developed or used by the United States.

Nasa’s new rover an imitation of China’s Mars robot, scientists say

The US has long accused China of stealing space technology, but Artemis programme’s VIPER appears to borrow from Chinese rover Zhu Rong, which features caterpillar-inspired suspension system.

www.scmp.com

 

[Beast]

NASA's VIPER Rover Will Search the Moon for Water in 2024

NASA's VIPER rover is scheduled to land on the Moon in 2024 to look for water as part of the mission to eventually put people on Mars.

nerdist.com

Vice President Mike Pence Views VIPER Rover Test Unit

Vice President Mike Pence gets a look at an engineering test unit for VIPER – short for Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover – a lunar rover capable of seeking out water ice in the Moon’s soil.

www.nasa.gov

 

[beijingwalker]

If we just post the pics here without any info, China bashers will jump in the thread having a field party claiming that China copies America again.

 

[Beidou2020]

If it’s a proven design that works, why not copy it? They can add their own improvements.

Why try to reinvent the wheel by wasting time and money just to be different? Fastest method is the proven method.

 

[Beast]

If it’s a proven design that works, why not copy it? They can add their own improvements.

Why try to reinvent the wheel by wasting time and money just to be different? Fastest method is the proven method.

And their US important project, I dont know why, there will always be a Chinese... I heard an important designer of US ICBM projects involves a few Chinese too..

 

[serenity]

And their US important project, I dont know why, there will always be a Chinese... I heard an important designer of US ICBM projects involves a few Chinese too..

There is no US technology industry or field since 1950s that doesn't involve Chinese people. Occasionally even before 1950s, US technology industries also included Chinese people from Wong Tsu to Qian Xuesen to Li Wenhe (or Wen Ho Lee). The height of US tech fields involving Chinese people was maybe 1990s to 2015 period before the political war truly started mostly contributing to the US AI and software industry and computing industries.

Copying the "inchworm" method for the rover is fine. Of course the best methods or most suitable methods are copied. If Somalia invents the next best method to produce energy, everyone will copy that wouldn't they? All good ideas are copied and reused. That is the nature of how things are.

In the past, Chinese technical fields copy much more than they do today because they were behind the leading. Others copy various technologies from China in 5G field because it is the leading generation of telecommunication technologies. China's photonic method for quantum computing was also copied by the US after first exploring with semiconductor methods before realizing there are certain advantages with photonic method. If US find another method, China would copy that and explore that path too.

The issue people don't talk about is copying idea or general path is easy. I can do it. What I cannot do is actually create the work and products. Saying to yourself that I will "copy" the inchworm rover method is fine and easy. Actually doing it is where all the hard work is. There are all the engineering problems there although the concept itself is important as well. Both parts come together to produce actual results. In these departments, 90% of countries have no ability for either let alone both. US and China are both very capable of understanding the concepts, making use of them, applying them, mastering them, learning beyond it, and of course producing actual things from them.

 

[Dungeness]

I am sure Chinese will be cool with that, and won't bixxh about it like others do. After all, we all "share the future for mankind".

 

[Beast]

There is no US technology industry or field since 1950s that doesn't involve Chinese people. Occasionally even before 1950s, US technology industries also included Chinese people from Wong Tsu to Qian Xuesen to Li Wenhe (or Wen Ho Lee). The height of US tech fields involving Chinese people was maybe 1990s to 2015 period before the political war truly started mostly contributing to the US AI and software industry and computing industries.

Copying the "inchworm" method for the rover is fine. Of course the best methods or most suitable methods are copied. If Somalia invents the next best method to produce energy, everyone will copy that wouldn't they? All good ideas are copied and reused. That is the nature of how things are.

In the past, Chinese technical fields copy much more than they do today because they were behind the leading. Others copy various technologies from China in 5G field because it is the leading generation of telecommunication technologies. China's photonic method for quantum computing was also copied by the US after first exploring with semiconductor methods before realizing there are certain advantages with photonic method. If US find another method, China would copy that and explore that path too.

The issue people don't talk about is copying idea or general path is easy. I can do it. What I cannot do is actually create the work and products. Saying to yourself that I will "copy" the inchworm rover method is fine and easy. Actually doing it is where all the hard work is. There are all the engineering problems there although the concept itself is important as well. Both parts come together to produce actual results. In these departments, 90% of countries have no ability for either let alone both. US and China are both very capable of understanding the concepts, making use of them, applying them, mastering them, learning beyond it, and of course producing actual things from them.

The Indian BS about NASA having 50% of scientist are Indian heritage. This statements fits the Chinese better.

 

[serenity]

The Indian BS about NASA having 50% of scientist are Indian heritage. This statements fits the Chinese better.

There are far more Chinese working in US tech sectors than Indians. Same as academics and researchers. But Indians are also a huge portion of non-white experts in US industries or contributing to it directly. The smartest Indians choose to work and live in US over other western nations that are developed and have easy lives due to wealth. Same as Europeans, Chinese, Iranians, Russians at the top of their field because US industry and income is the more appealing compared to any other places.

Increasing number of Chinese return to China compared to past which is unlike for Russian or Indian experts who more often remain in US as opposed to returning to home country for development usually because those industries either do not exist in their home countries or too undeveloped as compared to the US and have much lesser potential incomes. China offers less income compared to US as well otherwise it wouldn't be so competitive (imagine if regular engineers get US level income in China then immediately China's tech industries would also slow down unless it makes many commercializable breakthroughs quickly).

So Indians do make up some high portion of US tech industries but nowhere near how online Indians often like to claim. Fucking 50% of NASA, 50% of this, 50% of that. All bullshit. Not even Chinese ethnic (including US citizens) make up 50% of US AI industry which has the highest portion of Chinese ethnic engineers and scientists working in. IIRC it was around 20%.

 

[Dungeness]

And their US important project, I dont know why, there will always be a Chinese... I heard an important designer of US ICBM projects involves a few Chinese too..

A Chinese Engineer from Peking, Mr. Wong Tsu designed the first Boeing military plane, first airmail plane and first Boeing passenger plane.

 

[gambit]

China's photonic method for quantum computing was also copied by the US after first exploring with semiconductor methods before realizing there are certain advantages with photonic method. If US find another method, China would copy that and explore that path too.

Just to clear up some potential confusion...and possibly some embarrassingly false boasting...

Photonics - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The term photonics developed as an outgrowth of the first practical semiconductor light emitters invented in the early 1960s and optical fibers developed in the 1970s.​

We know that China was no technological powerhouse in the 1960s and 1970s, correct?

According to Intel research labs into photonics, the diffraction limit of light travel creates a limit on the scaling down of the photonics components.

diffraction-limited beams

Diffraction-limited beams are beams with a minimum possible beam divergence for a given waist radius. That implies the maximum possible beam quality.

www.rp-photonics.com

What it means is that the photonics components SHOULD be confined to the micrometer scale, not nano with the current Si based technology for general and even niche computing. Practically every semicon company, even foundries, dabbled into photonics at one time or another and confirmed what Intel found.

Here is TSMC...

https://research.tsmc.com/page/off-chip-interconnect/16.html

One of the prominent challenges for widespread adoption of Si photonics (SiPh) technology is the availability of an integration platform that can simultaneously meet a wide range of power, performance, and cost criteria in different applications. As a result, there is a diversity of Si photonics integrated solutions proposed or demonstrated, but none is considered as a common solution.​

The resultant problem is data loss as components scales down below the micrometer level. Economically speaking, it is about density on a wafer to make profit, and economically speaking, photonics is simply not. TSMC, a foundry, verified that limit. Imagine an Si based circuit crunching data and a photonic data transfer link that is 1000x larger next to it. This confined photonics to niche applications, such as R/D quantum computers, and unlikely at the general computing level.

So you guys be careful at talking/boasting about this...

 

[serenity]

Just to clear up some potential confusion...and possibly some embarrassingly false boasting...

Photonics - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The term photonics developed as an outgrowth of the first practical semiconductor light emitters invented in the early 1960s and optical fibers developed in the 1970s.​

We know that China was no technological powerhouse in the 1960s and 1970s, correct?

According to Intel research labs into photonics, the diffraction limit of light travel creates a limit on the scaling down of the photonics components.

diffraction-limited beams

Diffraction-limited beams are beams with a minimum possible beam divergence for a given waist radius. That implies the maximum possible beam quality.

www.rp-photonics.com

What it means is that the photonics components SHOULD be confined to the micrometer scale, not nano with the current Si based technology for general and even niche computing. Practically every semicon company, even foundries, dabbled into photonics at one time or another and confirmed what Intel found.

Here is TSMC...

https://research.tsmc.com/page/off-chip-interconnect/16.html

One of the prominent challenges for widespread adoption of Si photonics (SiPh) technology is the availability of an integration platform that can simultaneously meet a wide range of power, performance, and cost criteria in different applications. As a result, there is a diversity of Si photonics integrated solutions proposed or demonstrated, but none is considered as a common solution.​

The resultant problem is data loss as components scales down below the micrometer level. Economically speaking, it is about density on a wafer to make profit, and economically speaking, photonics is simply not. TSMC, a foundry, verified that limit. Imagine an Si based circuit crunching data and a photonic data transfer link that is 1000x larger next to it. This confined photonics to niche applications, such as R/D quantum computers, and unlikely at the general computing level.

So you guys be careful at talking/boasting about this...

I'm not talking about photonics. I'm talking about photonic based quantum computing. You are talking about general science relating to photonics and fibre optics.

IBM and Google initial quantum computing machines were silicon based principles of operation. Chinese quantum computing machines were photonic based. US then pursued photonic based method too. Both pursued silicon based method but the more high profile Chinese machines that end up being reported in English were photonic based.

Now US has programs with machines researching for photon based or they are called linear optical methods for quantum computing. Built well after China built at least two such machines before 2020.

https://optics.org/news/12/10/14

Example of US projects also now exploring photon or light based methods.

 

[gambit]

I'm not talking about photonics. I'm talking about photonic based quantum computing. You are talking about general science relating to photonics and fibre optics.

IBM and Google initial quantum computing machines were silicon based principles of operation. Chinese quantum computing machines were photonic based. US then pursued photonic based method too. Both pursued silicon based method but the more high profile Chinese machines that end up being reported in English were photonic based.

Chinese built photonic quantum computers before the Americans explored that path. After certain successes by the Chinese, the Americans began also exploring the photonic path. Prior to starting work on photonic based quantum computers which the US till now as not built a completed one of but have projects for, US quantum computing projects were only silicon based.

Sure...You guys just be careful...Just leave it alone if you do not know what you are talking about, and I say 'you' generically.

 

[serenity]

Sure...You guys just be careful...Just leave it alone if you do not know what you are talking about, and I say 'you' generically.

You seem like a well adjusted human

"Your" group is worse but that of course is something you cannot ever realize because you have zero capacity for introspection. Now begone NAFO bot and go worry about how you can respond to the Russians recently showing your kind to be cowards and I use the term you here generically as well for you are no different to the imagined enemy you have. You can keep talking shit on the internet but it's time to trigger Article 5.