China's Space Program News Thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
is there anything revolutionary about it or is it just a bigger version of Hubble? I think that it is useless to compete in optical/IR space observatories. The gap is large and there's not much value added for another me-too observatory. Instead for better prestige and even practicality it is better to do something that they haven't done, like X-ray pulsar navigation.
by then China could have the first solar system or interstellar navigation system...
by78
General
Wrong thread?
I am thinking of the progress of CZ-9(21) and the (latest acceptable) time of moon base building being the determine considerations rather than CZ-9(11) itself.
In a way, I am looking at it as similar to steam and EM catapult. Both were developed in parallel, both reached completeness. Whoever was ready first before the critical time point was chosen. Steam cat and CZ-9(11) are not the favoured ones but may reach maturity and even be used if the favoured one can't meet the absolute deadline. The question is what is if there is a absolute deadline and what will it be.
In case of CZ-9(11) being cancelled due to CZ-9(21) being fast, YF-130 and YF-90 will continue to finish their work as fully ready engines even if they have no rocket to be used. Cancelling them any time from today is too late and waste of all the works done. Actually, these engines are in the second stage (Engineering design) after Conceptual and Key tech phase. YF-135 is in the first stage. So continue working on YF-130 and YF-90 is doing the 2nd stage work for YF-135 which will significantly speed up YF-135.
CZ-9(21) is certainly the final shape of CZ-9. CZ-9(11) was the final shape at the beginning of China's moon program before 2010, but seems to be obsolete after China's space ambition has massively expanded to include many deep space missions, long term operation of permanent moon base and near earth super-structures. Reusable is the only choice.
China spent way too much money on the Super Heavy to dump it I think. Even if it only flies once every other year I think it will be used.
The fact they are already testing actual hardware for it makes this even more inevitable. Unless some kind of N-1 scale disaster happens it won't be cancelled.
I prefer the triple booster Long March 5 replacement 921 rocket with partial reusability to this design since I think Super Heavy rockets are uneconomic in general. The fact is neither Korolev nor Von Braun initially planned to make a Moon mission with Super Heavy rockets. They only did it to save time and reduce risk with going with their initially preferred multiple launch solution. At the time it was a PITA for both the Soviets and the US to get staging and docking to work properly. So launching everything in one go was the preferred solution to get to the Moon quickly.
The fact they are already testing actual hardware for it makes this even more inevitable. Unless some kind of N-1 scale disaster happens it won't be cancelled.
I prefer the triple booster Long March 5 replacement 921 rocket with partial reusability to this design since I think Super Heavy rockets are uneconomic in general. The fact is neither Korolev nor Von Braun initially planned to make a Moon mission with Super Heavy rockets. They only did it to save time and reduce risk with going with their initially preferred multiple launch solution. At the time it was a PITA for both the Soviets and the US to get staging and docking to work properly. So launching everything in one go was the preferred solution to get to the Moon quickly.
- Status