China's Space Program News Thread

[foxmulder]

or Elon Musk himself could be telling the truth in his angry 2021 Thanksgiving email that they're burning money and they're going to go bankrupt if Starship doesn't work because they don't make enough money on Falcon 9 to be sustainable.

Ask that to LM, Boeing

and look what USSF is betting on.

 

[gelgoog]

I am sure someone in Academy of Sciences is following SpaceX closely. What SpaceX is doing with Raptor engine and Starship is the future, IMHO. This "one time use rocket" era is over.

It has its uses as an emergency launch vehicle in case of full blown peer vs peer conflict.

 

[foxmulder]

It has its uses as an emergency launch vehicle in case of full blown peer vs peer conflict.

As a "weapon" yes, as a vehicle 100% NO.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

It has its uses as an emergency launch vehicle in case of full blown peer vs peer conflict.

No it doesn't, it is liquid and cryogenic fueled. There's no way to avoid it or it's launch facilities from getting hit. Even if it doesn't get hit, here's the facts.

Space shuttle fuel tank takes 3 hours to fuel 760 ton propellant tank.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Starship has a 3600 ton tank of propellant.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Since fuel pumps are a mature technology it stands to reason that it'll likely take 12 hour to fuel Starship.

That's a long time to disrupt the launch.

You can't keep cryogenic fuels stored long either.

 

[siegecrossbow]

In case anyone has forgotten, first winter olympic mascot on Mars.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1403285573251616770

@james smith esq

 

[gelgoog]

No it doesn't, it is liquid and cryogenic fueled. There's no way to avoid it or it's launch facilities from getting hit. Even if it doesn't get hit, here's the facts.

I thought we were talking about CZ-6.
The CZ-6 can be carried with a TEL at least. So it has some rapid response capabilities.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I thought we were talking about CZ-6.
The CZ-6 can be carried with a TEL at least. So it has some rapid response capabilities.

oh, ok, CZ-6 and KZ-1 are both much better for rapid response.

 

[taxiya]

I am sure someone in Academy of Sciences is following SpaceX closely. What SpaceX is doing with Raptor engine and Starship is the future, IMHO. This "one time use rocket" era is over.

Let's focus on the intended mission of Starship, the moon landing and Mars landing.

How many launches of starship are needed to put 50t payload to LTO? How long time would the overall mission take for that 50t? Remember, the moon does not stay there for you to repeat your launch. The long mission time and multiple orbital refuling and docking and undocking will greatly increase the risk of mission failure and even risk astronaut's life. Will these multiple launches be cheaper than a single "one time rocket" launch? Being cheap is not only the fuel, but the cost of running the mission on the ground.

For this kind of mission starship is neither safe nor cheap. The "one time" rocket era won't be over until starship address these two issues. And I think non of us will live to see that day coming.

The only advantage of starship that we can foresee is being a reusable heavy LEO transporter, which if successful is better than "one time rocket". We may live to see that day coming.

What I am trying to say is that although Starship's engineering achievement deserves some prize, it is far from a "one kills all" magic.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Let's focus on the intended mission of Starship, the moon landing and Mars landing.

How many launches of starship are needed to put 50t payload to LTO? How long time would the overall mission take for that 50t? Remember, the moon does not stay there for you to repeat your launch. The long mission time and multiple orbital refuling and docking and undocking will greatly increase the risk of mission failure and even risk astronaut's life. Will these multiple launches be cheaper than a single "one time rocket" launch? Being cheap is not only the fuel, but the cost of running the mission on the ground.

For this kind of mission starship is neither safe nor cheap. The "one time" rocket era won't be over until starship address these two issues. And I think non of us will live to see that day coming.

The only advantage of starship that we can foresee is being a reusable heavy LEO transporter, which if successful is better than "one time rocket". We may live to see that day coming.

What I am trying to say is that although Starship's engineering achievement deserves some prize, it is far from a "one kills all" magic.

Starship engineering has to work first before any prize is given. Currently even FAA doesn't allow them to fly and FAA let the Boeing 737 MAX fly, so...

 

[Akame]

I have a question. Does China Have a Space Force?