794:. It's also a little bit unfair to call the Tiangong "failure" since the Tiangong-1 mission ended in 2013, and the re-entry is really not that big of deal like you thought. From what I've heard, a small space station like Tiangong which weight only 8-ton will most likely to be burned up in the atmosphere completely. For example, the old station Salyut 7 that weight 22 tons did her re-entry uncontrolled in 1991 showing little debris on the ground as the result. But it is worth knowing the speculation from those journals, so I suggest you can add some summaries backing up with links clearing those potentially bad PR. —
972:"While NASA and other space agencies say it’s very hard to compute the overall risk to any individual, it’s been estimated that the odds that you, personally, will be hit by a specific piece of debris are about 1 in several trillion. But numerically, the chance that one person anywhere in the world might be struck by a any piece of space debris comes out to a chance of 1-in-3,200, said Nick Johnson, chief scientist with NASA’s Orbital Debris during a media teleconference in 2011 when the 6-ton UARS satellite was about to make an uncontrolled reentry." -
31:
1383:
718:, no source says: 'all telemetry had failed'. According to space.com which quotes information from Chinese Xinhua.net, Tiangong-1 has already stopped data-gathering activities instead 'all telemetry had failed'. The reason why they stopped data-gathering activities is the Tiangong-1 has meet its design life of 2 years. You won't call a satellite 'failed' because it's operation is correctly over.
1610:
fuzzy earlier timeline had separate TG3 and large-station; but under that timeline, TG2 was not supposed to be a copy of TG1 (it was to be a prototype for the subsidiary modules attached to the large station's core), whereas in reality, TG2 is a copy of TG1 (the prototype of the cargo module
Tianzhou (TZ))). So no, AFAIK it isn't the same station as TG1 --
479:
but it's probably no good for the article, although, thing is, it's in there already. So someone wants it there. If it were meant to be a static number, it should be a range, but a discrete number indicates updating. Anyhow, it's a tiny thing not worth the bother. Pictures! we need
Pictures !!!! But I haven't done any of the work yet Craigboy, sorry.
280:
port. You'll find that out when we find the reference for it. One of the improvements over
Russian designs is the manned spacecraft service module, it can fly by itself, and becomes a military intelligence imaging satellite once discarded. If it separates before the de-orbit burn then it may not be the safest idea though, but it's a trafeoff.
638:
station, but substantially larger than a Soyuz spacecraft. I'd even say that the "space that astronauts can freely move about" is a bit larger than 15 cubic meters judging by the video I have seen – more like 20 cubic meter (2 meter by 2 meter by 5 meter), plus change (the bunks on the left/right, the "cones" at the end).
270:
Craigboy knows what the chinese are up to, they have purchased docking systems from the russians, we can find links for that. I think the easiest way to do that is to simply ask
Craigboy what he recalls about what he has read, so you can find it, of course if you ask, he may kindly give you some links.
778:
You seem to be under a misapprehension that its a launch and forget operation Loned, UN rules on Space require the ability to deorbit a craft to be maintained, it has to be able to control its re-entry point or its an uncontrolled re-entry. You also seem to have neglected that CNSA reported that both
478:
is PALZ doing his thing updating all that orbital trajectory data rockety sciencey kind of numbers stuff, and well
Tiangong 1's apogee dropped by a kilometer, and so the stations speed increased as it's inversely proportional to height, as shown by the increased orbits per day. Hmm fascinating stuff,
279:
I think saying Salyut 6, Salyut 7, and
Tiangong 1 all have 2 docking ports is not WP:OR. But to say they are the same kind of docking ports does indeed need a reference or it is WP:OR. The ports are similar, the Chinese did purchase some technology from the Russians, but they are not the same docking
1609:
Though the station is supposed to be "Tiangong" IIRC; the configuration of the station is the once CNSA mooted
Tiangong-4/Large-Space-Station (ie. Mir-sized) So AFAIK it isn't Tiangong-1, it is equivalent to the now projected Tiangong-3 with foreign participation that is currently being mooted. (The
877:
No you are obviously applying a racist slant, theres a world of difference between an object ordered to manoeuvre to not land on inhabited areas and an object which due to equipment failure is out of control. Applying your argument and out of control plane is not a failing, its just accomplished its
445:
suggestions welcome, and how often should it update ? like it is easy enough to add the values into a formula that updates itself, so that even without fresh data, the tally of orbits could update by itself, but I am wondering, firstly, is it a good bot task, and secondly, if so, how often should it
312:
There is a bot that Z and I have been tinkering with, and although it's nowhere near ready for it's primary task, the bot can help out editors if they want the help with orbital information. The primary task is copying spaceship launch table data from the busy wikipedia sites across to lots of other
917:
Hello. Fact: loss of telemetry (tracking and communication); implied: loss of control. The module operated well beyond its service design, not a speculation. Unable to dispose if safely may or may not be considered a "failure of disposal" but not a failure of the primary mission. I think this issue
833:
All spacecraft have an operational time. After that, anything goes. This demonstration is not considered a failure by any standard, except that the reentry has not been announced or calculated. The same happened to NASA's SkyLab after it completed it service life and fell on
Australia, and nobody
637:
had an pressurized volume of 99 cubic meters, the Apollo command module had more than 6 cubic meters, the Apollo Lunar Module had 6.7 cubic meters, the Soyuz has more than 7 cubic meters of living space – and considering that the
Shenzhou spacecraft (which docked to the station) is smaller than the
785:
Well, here is the thing I talked about. Like in your post, Indian
Express quoted the Space Engineering Office which is the one and only source for the information from Tiangong Program. And they only spoke once prior to Tiangong-2 on March 21, 2016. The original quote is "All telemetry has end and
269:
requires that the article is in context. Exactly what provides the context needed to understand a given topic varies greatly from topic to topic. To put Tiangong in context amongst similar projects doesn't look like OR to me, just so long as no unsourced statements of fact are made. I do not doubt
704:
Recently I discovered that there are some news on the Internet saying Tiangong-1 has failed. However, after research multiple sites and stories that covering this topic, there's no evidence and report from any majoy space research facility including NASA and CNSA has indicate that Tiangong-1 has
449:
The fastest update interval would be about 1 day, faster than that is possible, but not useful, the bot fetches it's two line elements from heavens-above. Chris peat tells me they get it about ever three hours, or was it four times a day from the US.gov website where it's only updated on a daily
848:
The loss of ability to control a descent is a craft experiencing a terminal failure, its now essentially a dead object in space. International laws have been tightened since Skylab and the owner is responsible for its return to Earth, but its also a pointless comparison as Skylab did perform a
512:
I was thinking it's more for the stations in orbit, that seems to be where editors like the number of orbits information and to keep up with the current things, like the scheduled dockings. On old satellite articles the information doesn't seem to be as popular, I think the orbits field wasn't
1329:
The reliable sources tend to quote odds for an individual person, not all people. If you calculated how many people live in the high-risk bands you could probably get a good idea of the answer, but it wouldn't be appropriate to add to the article because it would essentially be
378:
As of {{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|epoch}}, Tiangong 1 has a perigee of {{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|perigee_height}} kms and an apogee of {{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|apogee_height}} kms. It is making {{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|revolution_per_day}} revolutions per day and has completed a total of {{ISSIB|Tiangong
813:
Also at the press conference for the launch of Tiangong 2 yesterday an official said that 1 will make a uncontrolled re-entry sometime in the latter half of 2017 and they will monitor it to warn potential victims on the ground and other spacecraft to move out of the way.
1472:
but it is not mentioned at all in the text. Instead, it deals with a supply cargo ship (Tianzhou (spacecraft)) for a totally different space station: China's large modular space station. Those familiar with this program, please clean it up. Thank you.
618:) that quoted the engineer in charge of the design of TG-1 that TG-1's actual pressurized volume is about 40 cubic meters; the 15 cubic meters number refers to the space that astronauts can freely move about. If no-one's opposing, I'll make the change.
203:
Claiming a resemblance to Salyut would be OR. It would also be wrong. If any of the Tiangong modules resembles Salyut (or more accurately, the later DOS models that formed the backbone of Mir and the Russian segment of the ISS) it would be Tiangong 3.
313:
quieter sites (like with the ISS, there are 77 languages at least check, and most of those are too quiet for people to bother updating new launches and so forth, or even write more than a stub really), but that's not the subject right now !
1386:
Map showing the probability of re-entry of Tiangong 1 by latitude. Degrees of latitude in red are most likely (4%), degrees of latitude in green are least likely (<1%). Areas not shown on the map are outside of the possible re-entry
513:
written into the template for satellites for that purpose according to the templates docs, but is used that way on all the stations where the data is available (and where it's not, vandalism is used instead). It's also used that way on
218:
Yes, and a whale looks like a big fish which looks like a submarine which looks like a torpedo. All large airliners look almost identical. "Function creates form". Of course all spacecraft look like each other! It means nothing.
1576:
I don't remember the name "Tiangong" being mentioned in the film, just "Chinese space station". If it was, it certainly wouldn't have meant "Tiangong-1", which was originally planned to be deorbited in 2013 (the year
1391:
I'm removing the picture because in my view it is totaly contradicting the cited source. The re-entry is NOT most likly at the read area as discribed, in fact it is nearly impossible there. See the real picture at
316:
At the moment, it is a simple task for the bot to collect data from the internet, actually it's done it already once or twice for testing. So using it's data, you can say something like this which auto updates.
249:. Even when you compare the Apollo capsules with Gemini's, Soyouz, Dragon's and Orion, there are major differences. These differences are very slim when comparing the Chinese space program and the Russian's.
903:- This seems like a semantics debate (the kind of debate we love here on WP). I think we should stick with "loss of control" or "lost control" verbiage rather than failure. Seems closer to the sources.
1581:
came out). Tiangong-1 was always designed to be a technology demonstrator leading up to a full-on space station, not a multi-module station as shown in the film. The film was probably referring to
614:
Hi all. I saw that TG-1's total pressurized volume is stated as 15 cubic meters here. I've seen Chinese sources (here's the only English source that I can dig out with the same quote:
1531:
Please don't say it "crashed" into the Pacific until pieces of debris actually hit the ocean's surface. Reports actually say that the space lab "reentered" the earth's atmosphere. --
740:
hull. The third Tiangong, will be the modular space station. Tiangong-2 will not have modules. They might (but I don't believe it) have a second port for the Tianzhou docking. —
1207:
1037:
Yesterday southern coastal part of Sri Lanka experienced some light source with sound on sky, traveled and fallen to sea. it that this crash we expected in this time?
1494:
1087:
1450:
1249:
1245:
1231:
1119:
1115:
1101:
780:
1217:
245:
Function does not always create form, and that's what we call innovation. Otherwise, we would all still be driving cars which look like four-wheeled
1197:
1208:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110925013537/http://newyork.ibtimes.com/articles/217730/20110921/china-space-station-test-launch-tiangong-1.htm
955:
721:
Basic knowledge here: Tiangong-1 is an experimental space laboratory, not the station of Tiangong Program. Tiangong-2 is the space station. -
708:
The only news agency that says failure in the paragraph is space daily. However, Space Daily didn't provide any valid source in their news.
1555:
1052:
177:
1582:
1361:
1023:
615:
1611:
596:
235:
142:
135:
Another pathetic attempt to say that Chinese copy Russians/Americans etc....get a life. You can't bare the fact they are successful.
1211:
1397:
1314:
1227:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1097:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1088:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120111080248/http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/278442/20120109/expert-u-s-secret-space-plane-spying.htm
779:
communication had been terminated AND the ability to communicate had been lost. Another story on it, its now spinning apparently.
685:
238:, I actually think it is very good they are successful and such little time. The more space programs, the better. However, as
623:
521:
format may not allow numbers as large as is required to express more than is it 10,000 or 100,000 ? orbits, I don't yet know.
450:
basis. The updating wouldn't appear in the edit summary of the article, because the bot edits the template, not the article.
1091:
1393:
1307:
What are the actual odds of killing ANY human being? That is more meaningful than the odds for any person to be killed.
1292:
1162:
781:
http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/science/chinas-tiangong-1-space-station-might-falling-back-to-earth-2910732/
114:
1218:
https://web.archive.org/web/20111024195807/http://trans.wenweipo.com/gb/paper.wenweipo.com/2011/07/09/YO1107090008.htm
1001:
38:
1478:
1198:
https://web.archive.org/web/20111110071948/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/video/2011-11/07/c_131233226.htm
923:
868:
839:
619:
59:
1248:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1118:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
959:
503:
1559:
1221:
1048:
818:
I therefore request you reinstate the previous version of the article before you scrubbed potentially bad PR.
1027:
1365:
1283:
1189:
1153:
1079:
209:
1318:
1615:
1503:
1185:
1075:
600:
146:
1571:
1201:
1267:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1255:
1137:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1125:
883:
854:
823:
737:
181:
84:
1188:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1078:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
589:
894:
879:
850:
819:
1474:
1468:
The section entitled "Future development" makes no sense. It opens with a link to the "Main article"
1310:
1040:
1019:
951:
919:
898:
864:
835:
709:
689:
224:
138:
1551:
Tiangong-1 is featured in the movie Gravity, I'm pretty sure this info used to be in the article...
627:
616:
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1104&MainCatID=11&id=20111007000028
530:
I can add data to the template for almost any satellite on request. At the moment it's just for the
437:
425:
413:
401:
389:
365:
355:
345:
335:
325:
1044:
648:
643:
If someone has good sources for the total pressurized volume, than please by all means add them. --
499:
1212:
http://newyork.ibtimes.com/articles/217730/20110921/china-space-station-test-launch-tiangong-1.htm
242:
said, a lot of the Chinese space program parts and systems are very identical to the Russian ones.
1415:
My bad. I confused the population density on the left with the likelihood on the right. Sorry. --
1398:
http://blogs.esa.int/rocketscience/files/2018/01/esa_esoc_tiangong1_risk_map_jan2018-1024x375.png
674:
571:
487:
461:
291:
205:
189:
165:
103:
1252:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1122:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
973:
795:
759:
722:
1268:
1138:
815:
791:
1536:
1521:
1499:
745:
1594:
1586:
1339:
908:
498:
That sounds pretty useful - are you going to use this bot on a lot of spaceflight articles?
173:
169:
1275:
1145:
787:
1357:
977:
799:
763:
726:
220:
47:
17:
1016:
Where will it crash and when? Can it be denied that the station will crash into a city?
1493:
The space lab has re-entered the atmosphere above the South Pacific 'mostly' destroyed.
1420:
1405:
1382:
1234:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1104:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1092:
http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/278442/20120109/expert-u-s-secret-space-plane-spying.htm
644:
517:
but I think there are technical problems I need to investigate there, I think that the
266:
80:
1394:
http://blogs.esa.int/rocketscience/2018/03/26/tiangong-1-frequently-asked-questions-2/
1274:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1144:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1513:
758:
You're right, Baldusi. I'm looking forward to the launch of Tiangong-2 this October.
670:
664:
565:
481:
452:
282:
239:
185:
122:
99:
736:
Not quite right. Both Tiangong-1 and 2 are space labs prototypes developed from the
1532:
1517:
1331:
741:
256:
89:
252:
Anyhow, I agree, adding this information would be considered as Original Research.
1552:
878:
mission to take off and so anything goes with regards to coming back down again.
1590:
1512:
I don't see how that could be misunderstood or misinterpreted, but I admit it's
1335:
1241:
1111:
1002:
http://www.universetoday.com/130970/see-doomed-tiangong-1-chinese-space-station/
904:
547:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1619:
1602:
1563:
1540:
1525:
1482:
1424:
1409:
1369:
1347:
1322:
1297:
1167:
1056:
1031:
981:
963:
927:
912:
887:
872:
858:
843:
827:
803:
767:
749:
730:
693:
678:
652:
604:
576:
507:
492:
469:
299:
260:
228:
213:
193:
184:
are all essentially copies of Russian technology (especially the last three).--
150:
126:
107:
93:
1469:
1240:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1181:
1110:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1071:
543:
535:
514:
1506:
as confirming the Chinese space lab's atmospheric reentry at 5:15 P.M. (PST)
546:. I can forsee editors may like it for other things when it's something like
1416:
1401:
539:
83:
be mentioned in the article? This station, just like China's space capsules
1222:
http://trans.wenweipo.com/gb/paper.wenweipo.com/2011/07/09/YO1107090008.htm
786:
data-gathering service is over", so neither "lost" nor "failed". Source:
634:
118:
1202:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/video/2011-11/07/c_131233226.htm
246:
1381:
710:
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Lessons_from_Tiangong_1_999.html
560:
1507:
633:
Yes, the 15 cubic meters seems ridiculously low – for comparison
563:
as well, as it's in orbit right now, contrary to it's infobox.
531:
518:
25:
1356:
or is it, now that it is probable for April 1st the longest
816:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-09/14/c_135687885.htm
792:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-03/21/c_135209671.htm
265:
Stating it is the same as a Salyut may well be OR, however,
98:
Why do you think Tiangon-1 looks like the Salyut stations?--
1192:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1082:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
863:
I see. NASA does mistakes. China does failures. Nice POV.
788:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2016-03/21/c_128818450.htm
948:
Can the debris kill a human, when it crahes on earth?
849:
controlled descent though they missed the target spot.
475:
684:
Can someone upload some interiors under fair-use? --
559:
Oh that reminds me, it should technically be used on
1244:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1114:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
446:update ? maybe only when the data is getting bad ?
665:http://newscontent.cctv.com/news.jsp?fileId=120456
433:{{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|orbit_number_at_epoch}} gives
361:revolutions per day and has completed a total of
319:
87:, greatly look like USSR/Russian's spaceships.
1553:http://gravitymovie.wikia.com/Tiangong_Station
1396:(which is the link in the ref). More precise:
1230:This message was posted before February 2018.
1100:This message was posted before February 2018.
421:{{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|revolution_per_day}} gives
8:
382:some of the information it can provide is :
1464:Section "Future development" needs overhaul
1308:
1070:I have just modified one external link on
1038:
1017:
949:
409:{{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|perigee_height}} gives
1180:I have just modified 3 external links on
397:{{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|apogee_height}} gives
308:New bot has a task ready for this article
1449:was invoked but never defined (see the
1435:
994:
1173:External links modified (January 2018)
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
75:Resemblance with the Salyout stations
7:
182:the Chinese automated docking system
1583:Chinese large modular space station
1441:
375:The code for that looks like this:
79:Shouldn't the resemblance with the
609:
379:1|orbit_number_at_epoch}} orbits.
24:
1184:. Please take a moment to review
1074:. Please take a moment to review
663:In case some of you are curious
29:
716:Post-mission completion failure
610:Tiangong-1's pressurized volume
964:21:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
928:13:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
913:19:04, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
888:17:44, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
873:16:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
859:14:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
844:13:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
828:16:04, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
804:13:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
331:, Tiangong 1 has a perigee of
151:14:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
127:14:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
108:13:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
94:13:10, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
1:
1168:10:29, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
918:is now clear and has no POV.
834:called it a failure. Cheers,
768:23:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
385:{{ISSIB|Tiangong 1|]}} gives
178:the Chinese docking mechanism
1378:Picture of re-entry removed.
1298:13:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
1057:05:23, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
679:11:10, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
300:01:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
261:11:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
113:Which is why Knowledge bans
982:17:42, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
653:19:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
229:09:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
214:09:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
194:04:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
1636:
1425:06:44, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
1410:06:32, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
1370:10:23, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
1348:14:17, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
1323:10:55, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
1261:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1177:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1131:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1067:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
750:11:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
731:07:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
590:pt:Ficheiro:Shenzhou-9.png
577:23:31, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
508:10:22, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
493:12:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
470:11:14, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
1620:04:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
1603:13:50, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
1585:, the culmination of the
1564:02:16, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
1541:01:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
1526:01:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
1483:03:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
694:11:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
628:15:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
174:Chinese launch entry suit
1032:09:58, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
605:11:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
592:has the SZ-9/TG-1 patch
550:in the public spotlight.
1063:External links modified
1504:U.S. Strategic Command
1388:
659:Interior of Tiangong 1
373:
1385:
341:kms and an apogee of
115:WP:original synthesis
42:of past discussions.
1445:The named reference
1242:regular verification
1112:regular verification
714:In the paragraph of
620:Galactic Penguin SST
1232:After February 2018
1102:After February 2018
166:Shenzhou spacecraft
1389:
1286:InternetArchiveBot
1237:InternetArchiveBot
1156:InternetArchiveBot
1107:InternetArchiveBot
351:kms. It is making
1500:Jonathan McDowell
1332:original research
1325:
1313:comment added by
1262:
1132:
1059:
1043:comment added by
1034:
1022:comment added by
966:
954:comment added by
141:comment added by
72:
71:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1627:
1599:
1587:Tiangong program
1575:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1448:
1440:
1344:
1296:
1287:
1260:
1259:
1238:
1166:
1157:
1130:
1129:
1108:
1004:
999:
902:
574:
570:
490:
486:
466:
459:
457:
442:
436:
430:
424:
418:
412:
406:
400:
394:
388:
370:
364:
360:
354:
350:
344:
340:
334:
330:
324:
296:
289:
287:
170:Feitian EVA suit
153:
68:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
1635:
1634:
1630:
1629:
1628:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1595:
1569:
1549:
1547:Popular Culture
1490:
1475:BatteryIncluded
1466:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1446:
1444:
1442:
1437:
1380:
1358:April fools day
1340:
1305:
1290:
1285:
1253:
1246:have permission
1236:
1190:this simple FaQ
1175:
1160:
1155:
1123:
1116:have permission
1106:
1080:this simple FaQ
1065:
1014:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1000:
996:
956:188.100.196.168
946:
920:BatteryIncluded
899:BatteryIncluded
892:
865:BatteryIncluded
836:BatteryIncluded
702:
661:
612:
587:
572:
564:
488:
480:
468:
462:
453:
451:
440:
434:
428:
422:
416:
410:
404:
398:
392:
386:
368:
362:
358:
352:
348:
342:
338:
332:
328:
322:
310:
298:
292:
283:
281:
136:
77:
64:
30:
22:
21:
20:
18:Talk:Tiangong-1
12:
11:
5:
1633:
1631:
1623:
1622:
1606:
1605:
1597:
1572:70.190.181.241
1556:70.190.181.241
1548:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1510:
1509:
1496:
1489:
1486:
1465:
1462:
1458:
1457:
1434:
1433:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1379:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1351:
1350:
1342:
1304:
1301:
1280:
1279:
1272:
1225:
1224:
1216:Added archive
1214:
1206:Added archive
1204:
1196:Added archive
1174:
1171:
1150:
1149:
1142:
1095:
1094:
1086:Added archive
1064:
1061:
1045:Caesarsrilanka
1013:
1010:
1006:
1005:
993:
992:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
945:
944:Death on Earth
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
811:
810:
809:
808:
807:
806:
773:
772:
771:
770:
753:
752:
701:
698:
697:
696:
660:
657:
656:
655:
640:
639:
611:
608:
586:
583:
582:
581:
580:
579:
554:
553:
552:
551:
525:
524:
523:
522:
500:Michaelmas1957
460:
309:
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
290:
274:
273:
272:
271:
253:
250:
243:
201:
200:
199:
198:
197:
196:
157:
156:
155:
154:
130:
129:
81:Salyut program
76:
73:
70:
69:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1632:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1608:
1607:
1604:
1600:
1592:
1588:
1584:
1580:
1573:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1561:
1557:
1554:
1546:
1542:
1538:
1534:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1523:
1519:
1515:
1514:breaking news
1508:
1505:
1501:
1497:
1495:
1492:
1491:
1487:
1485:
1484:
1480:
1476:
1471:
1463:
1452:
1439:
1436:
1432:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1395:
1384:
1377:
1371:
1367:
1363:
1362:121.99.108.78
1359:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1349:
1345:
1337:
1333:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1324:
1320:
1316:
1312:
1302:
1300:
1299:
1294:
1289:
1288:
1277:
1273:
1270:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1257:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1233:
1228:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1178:
1172:
1170:
1169:
1164:
1159:
1158:
1147:
1143:
1140:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1127:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1103:
1098:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1068:
1062:
1060:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1035:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1024:88.78.217.193
1021:
1011:
1003:
998:
995:
991:
983:
979:
975:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
965:
961:
957:
953:
943:
929:
925:
921:
916:
915:
914:
910:
906:
900:
896:
891:
890:
889:
885:
881:
876:
875:
874:
870:
866:
862:
861:
860:
856:
852:
847:
846:
845:
841:
837:
832:
831:
830:
829:
825:
821:
817:
805:
801:
797:
793:
789:
784:
783:
782:
777:
776:
775:
774:
769:
765:
761:
757:
756:
755:
754:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
734:
733:
732:
728:
724:
719:
717:
712:
711:
706:
699:
695:
691:
687:
683:
682:
681:
680:
676:
672:
667:
666:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
641:
636:
632:
631:
630:
629:
625:
621:
617:
607:
606:
602:
598:
593:
591:
584:
578:
575:
569:
568:
562:
558:
557:
556:
555:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
528:
527:
526:
520:
516:
511:
510:
509:
505:
501:
497:
496:
495:
494:
491:
485:
484:
477:
472:
471:
467:
465:
458:
456:
447:
443:
439:
431:
427:
419:
415:
407:
403:
395:
391:
383:
380:
376:
372:
367:
357:
347:
337:
327:
318:
314:
307:
301:
297:
295:
288:
286:
278:
277:
276:
275:
268:
264:
263:
262:
259:
258:
254:
251:
248:
244:
241:
237:
233:
232:
231:
230:
226:
222:
216:
215:
211:
207:
206:GrampaScience
195:
191:
187:
183:
179:
175:
171:
167:
163:
162:
161:
160:
159:
158:
152:
148:
144:
140:
134:
133:
132:
131:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
111:
110:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
92:
91:
86:
82:
74:
67:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1612:70.51.203.56
1578:
1550:
1511:
1467:
1443:Cite error:
1438:
1430:
1390:
1309:— Preceding
1306:
1284:
1281:
1256:source check
1235:
1229:
1226:
1179:
1176:
1154:
1151:
1126:source check
1105:
1099:
1096:
1069:
1066:
1039:— Preceding
1036:
1018:— Preceding
1015:
997:
989:
950:— Preceding
947:
812:
720:
715:
713:
707:
703:
668:
662:
613:
597:70.49.127.65
594:
588:
566:
482:
473:
463:
454:
448:
444:
432:
420:
408:
396:
384:
381:
377:
374:
320:
315:
311:
293:
284:
255:
236:42.98.40.176
234:In reply to
217:
202:
143:42.98.40.176
137:— Preceding
97:
88:
78:
65:
43:
37:
1498:Astronomer
1315:84.63.66.82
895:WatcherZero
880:WatcherZero
851:WatcherZero
820:WatcherZero
548:Fobos-Grunt
36:This is an
1470:Tiangong-2
1431:References
1387:latitudes.
1360:joke ever?
1293:Report bug
1182:Tiangong-1
1163:Report bug
1072:Tiangong-1
990:References
686:65.94.79.6
585:Portuguese
544:Genesis II
536:Tiangong 1
515:Vanguard 1
221:Old_Wombat
1451:help page
1276:this tool
1269:this tool
1146:this tool
1139:this tool
645:Tony Mach
540:Genesis I
164:Well the
66:Archive 2
60:Archive 1
1533:Uncle Ed
1518:Uncle Ed
1311:unsigned
1282:Cheers.—
1152:Cheers.—
1053:contribs
1041:unsigned
1020:unsigned
952:unsigned
738:Tianzhou
705:failed.
700:Failure?
671:Craigboy
635:Salyut 1
567:Penyulap
483:Penyulap
455:Penyulap
285:Penyulap
247:calashes
240:Craigboy
186:Craigboy
139:unsigned
100:Craigboy
85:Shenzhou
1579:Gravity
1488:Reentry
1186:my edit
1076:my edit
742:Baldusi
371:orbits.
267:wp:lede
257:Xionbox
90:Xionbox
39:archive
1591:Ahecht
1502:cites
1447:esafaq
1336:Ahecht
905:NickCT
321:As of
180:, and
1012:Crash
974:Loned
796:Loned
760:Loned
723:Loned
561:OPSEK
474:Well
438:ISSIB
426:ISSIB
414:ISSIB
402:ISSIB
390:ISSIB
366:ISSIB
356:ISSIB
346:ISSIB
336:ISSIB
326:ISSIB
16:<
1616:talk
1598:PAGE
1596:TALK
1589:. --
1560:talk
1537:talk
1522:talk
1516:. --
1479:talk
1421:talk
1417:Fano
1406:talk
1402:Fano
1366:talk
1343:PAGE
1341:TALK
1334:. --
1319:talk
1303:Odds
1049:talk
1028:talk
978:talk
960:talk
924:talk
909:talk
897:and
884:talk
869:talk
855:talk
840:talk
824:talk
800:talk
790:and
764:talk
746:talk
727:talk
690:talk
675:talk
649:talk
624:talk
601:talk
542:and
504:talk
476:here
464:talk
294:talk
225:talk
210:talk
190:talk
147:talk
123:talk
117:...
104:talk
1250:RfC
1220:to
1210:to
1200:to
1120:RfC
1090:to
595:--
532:ISS
519:TLE
119:Wnt
1618:)
1601:)
1562:)
1539:)
1524:)
1481:)
1453:).
1423:)
1408:)
1400:--
1368:)
1346:)
1321:)
1263:.
1258:}}
1254:{{
1133:.
1128:}}
1124:{{
1055:)
1051:•
1030:)
980:)
962:)
926:)
911:)
886:)
871:)
857:)
842:)
826:)
802:)
766:)
748:)
729:)
692:)
677:)
669:--
651:)
626:)
603:)
538:,
534:,
506:)
441:}}
435:{{
429:}}
423:{{
417:}}
411:{{
405:}}
399:{{
393:}}
387:{{
369:}}
363:{{
359:}}
353:{{
349:}}
343:{{
339:}}
333:{{
329:}}
323:{{
227:)
212:)
192:)
176:,
172:,
168:,
149:)
125:)
106:)
1614:(
1593:(
1574::
1570:@
1558:(
1535:(
1520:(
1477:(
1419:(
1404:(
1364:(
1338:(
1317:(
1295:)
1291:(
1278:.
1271:.
1165:)
1161:(
1148:.
1141:.
1047:(
1026:(
976:(
958:(
922:(
907:(
901::
893:@
882:(
867:(
853:(
838:(
822:(
798:(
762:(
744:(
725:(
688:(
673:(
647:(
622:(
599:(
573:☏
502:(
489:☏
223:(
208:(
188:(
145:(
121:(
102:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.