Quickie
Colonel
It's like YF-23 vs. YF-22, or YF-16 vs. YF-18, they have more options.
All depends on how one want to spin it.
More like they have found out which solution is the best way to go. For example, why there is now also a CZ-9 version 22.
China's Space Program News Thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
More like they have found out which solution is the best way to go. For example, why there is now also a CZ-9 version 22.
by78
General
The Zhurong Mars rover has travelled 1400 meters as of December 21, 2021.
The Mars rover has travelled more than 1900 meters on the surface. Meanwhile, the Mars orbiter continues to survey the planet and will soon complete a global survey of Mars.
The last column listed only the 770km SSO orbit capacity (with and without reusable stages), which makes me somehow believe that this rocket might be optimized for commercial SSO orbit launches.
The development of a two-stage fully reusable LOX/Methane rocket is to be completed by 2035:
Ok, now I understand your question is only referring to this specific rocket.
Does it mean that the new LOX/Methane rocket will mostly be used for SSO launches?
Yes, this particular rocket is meant for SSO missions.
If so, why is methane rocket best for SSO launches?
No, methane engine is not specially good or bad for any specific orbit types. For example version 22 CZ-9's first stage also uses methane engines. CZ-9 is meant for heavy LEO or inter-planetary missions.
We have to wait before we know what CZ-9 is going to be. The presentation mentioned CZ-9B for TW-3 mission 2028. CZ-9B is a variant of version 11. That means version 11 is still under development ahead of version 21 and 22. If they have decided to go for version 22 only, CZ-9B should not be an option for TW-3. The situation is very fluid.
Also remember the 200t methane engine on version 22 is as new as YF-135 on version 21. While YF-130 is way ahead of them in development. I suspect that we will see both version 11 and 21/22 CZ-9.
escobar
Brigadier
that mean different launch pad. Insane. I dont see a need to have both version
It's like YF-23 vs. YF-22, or YF-16 vs. YF-18, they have more options.
All depends on how one want to spin it.
Exactly, this is not fueled by uncertainty imo. When you have both the luxury and the common sense to go hardware & design rich on low TRL projects, then it is absolutely certain the results are guaranteed even if a specific branch of the design tree falters.
In other words, I think they are doing well to front-load development cost, and then use what sticks best to optimize (if needed). Brings the concept of assured access into reality, faster.
- Status