China's Space Program Thread II

by78

General
Progress update on the launchpad No. 1 of the Hainan Spaceport for Commercial Launches as well as new construction activities at the neighboring Wenchang launch center.

53115418616_47ba270f37_k.jpg

The latest images of the No. 1 launchpad of the Hainan Commercial Spaceport.

53209271213_867f942929_h.jpg
53209271243_ce64c9e723_h.jpg
53209343329_20b6c0ed7c_h.jpg
 

tacoburger

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Anyone feel like most of the private rocket companies are half-assing reusability? Deep blue aerospace is the only one that is developing their first rocket to be reusable. Everyone else is just developing an expandable rocket, trying to capture as much of the market as possible and going "we will eventually develop a reusable version... later" that you know will be pushed back and delayed, that's lots of manpower and money going towards what's basically an obsolete rocket before it even launches. Unless I'm wrong, only deep blue aerospace has conducted a landing test with an actual rocket engine at this point.

Yes, you could say that developing a small lift rocket as their first rocket to gain experience and gain some small income is smart, but most are taking it too far. And if that's the case, why not have their first rocket be a liquid fuelled rocket instead of a solid fuelled one, and why are they still launching so many solid fuelled expendable rockets? I don't think the experience of building/maintaining or launching a solid fuelled rocket is gonna to be the same as a liquid fuelled rocket. Or why set up a manufacturing line for them instead of using your money and time to rush towards an actual F9-tier workhorse rocket.

Just look at Landspace, they failed their first launch of a solid rocket, gave up. And started work on the Zhuque-2, but for whatever reason the Zhuque-2 isn't even designed for reusability in mind, they will have to basically redesign the rocket from the ground up to get it reusable, which is probably why it's going to take them until the end of 2025 to even get a test flight going.

Galactic energy will be launching the Ceres-1 more than a dozen times before they will launch the Pallas-1 in the 2nd half of 2024, and the first few launches aren't even going to be reusable. Ispace wasted so much time, effort and money on 3 failed launches of the Hyperbola-1 instead of just focusing on developing the Hyperbola-2, to the point where the 3 failed launches are probably gonna sink the company. Orienspace is also planning on a solid fuelled first rocket before suddenly pivoting to an all liquid fuelled lineup.

It's crazy how Galactic energy and Ispace haven't even launched a single liquid fuelled rocket yet, and they're supposed to be trying to achieve reusability in the next 2-4 years. And they are supposed to be the best funded and leading private rocket companies in China. And even then, their initial reusable rockets are gonna to be tiny, the Pallas-1 putting up 5 tons to LEO while the Hyperbola-2 is putting up a measly 2 tons to LEO. Yeah of course their first attempts at liquid fuelled rockets are gonna to be small especially when those two companies have been developing solid fuelled rockets for the last 4 years. This are the rockets that are supposed to be competing with the Falcon 9 and Starship...

Space pioneer seems to have the smartest development plan so far, developing a medium lift liquid fuelled rocket for their first launch, instead of a tiny little solid rocket and they're immediately dumping development of the Tianlong-2 in favour of a much more powerful Tianlong-3 which they hope to rapidly make reusable. They aren't trying to sell half a dozen flights of the Tianlong-2, which shows in their development speed. If they do launch the Tianlong-3 next year, that's only a year long gap between the two models, which is wayyyyy faster than any other Chinese private rocket companies.
 

anzha

Captain
Registered Member
Paper time! I have a whole 15 minutes to breathe!

Using Tianwen-1's radio communications to study the solar wind:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Modeling vibrations, etc. on a sat's attitude control system:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Thrust vectoring and roll control with Hall Effect Thrusters:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Studying and experimenting on a rectangular combustor wrt combustion instability:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Determining the stable state for a fold-able boon:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Are spectroscopic devices good for determining biotic presence in volcanic types of rock?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!




Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Anyone feel like most of the private rocket companies are half-assing reusability? Deep blue aerospace is the only one that is developing their first rocket to be reusable. Everyone else is just developing an expandable rocket, trying to capture as much of the market as possible and going "we will eventually develop a reusable version... later" that you know will be pushed back and delayed, that's lots of manpower and money going towards what's basically an obsolete rocket before it even launches. Unless I'm wrong, only deep blue aerospace has conducted a landing test with an actual rocket engine at this point.

Yes, you could say that developing a small lift rocket as their first rocket to gain experience and gain some small income is smart, but most are taking it too far. And if that's the case, why not have their first rocket be a liquid fuelled rocket instead of a solid fuelled one, and why are they still launching so many solid fuelled expendable rockets? I don't think the experience of building/maintaining or launching a solid fuelled rocket is gonna to be the same as a liquid fuelled rocket. Or why set up a manufacturing line for them instead of using your money and time to rush towards an actual F9-tier workhorse rocket.

Just look at Landspace, they failed their first launch of a solid rocket, gave up. And started work on the Zhuque-2, but for whatever reason the Zhuque-2 isn't even designed for reusability in mind, they will have to basically redesign the rocket from the ground up to get it reusable, which is probably why it's going to take them until the end of 2025 to even get a test flight going.

Galactic energy will be launching the Ceres-1 more than a dozen times before they will launch the Pallas-1 in the 2nd half of 2024, and the first few launches aren't even going to be reusable. Ispace wasted so much time, effort and money on 3 failed launches of the Hyperbola-1 instead of just focusing on developing the Hyperbola-2, to the point where the 3 failed launches are probably gonna sink the company. Orienspace is also planning on a solid fuelled first rocket before suddenly pivoting to an all liquid fuelled lineup.

It's crazy how Galactic energy and Ispace haven't even launched a single liquid fuelled rocket yet, and they're supposed to be trying to achieve reusability in the next 2-4 years. And they are supposed to be the best funded and leading private rocket companies in China. And even then, their initial reusable rockets are gonna to be tiny, the Pallas-1 putting up 5 tons to LEO while the Hyperbola-2 is putting up a measly 2 tons to LEO. Yeah of course their first attempts at liquid fuelled rockets are gonna to be small especially when those two companies have been developing solid fuelled rockets for the last 4 years. This are the rockets that are supposed to be competing with the Falcon 9 and Starship...

Space pioneer seems to have the smartest development plan so far, developing a medium lift liquid fuelled rocket for their first launch, instead of a tiny little solid rocket and they're immediately dumping development of the Tianlong-2 in favour of a much more powerful Tianlong-3 which they hope to rapidly make reusable. They aren't trying to sell half a dozen flights of the Tianlong-2, which shows in their development speed. If they do launch the Tianlong-3 next year, that's only a year long gap between the two models, which is wayyyyy faster than any other Chinese private rocket companies.
Short and simplified answer, liquid rocket engine is much more difficult to develop than solid engine. I even suspect that many Chinese "private" companies just source their solid boosters from missile producers which PLA is happy to spread out their cost.

It is unfair to compare SpaceX (or any US space company) with Chinese "private" launchers. The two countries work in totally different manners. In US, NASA would found private companies in conceptual and engineering work using state budget. Regardless who win the final mission, the private companies retain the owership of IP and experience of the state funded work. For example, SpaceX got the first crewed Artemis mission, that money is to finance partially Starship development. Even if SpaceX don't get any further mission, they are paid for research and can keep using that knowledge in anything they want. In China, "private" launchers don't get this money nor IP because they are not providing any work to state program. They have to pay for the knowledge through doing whatever job they can get which is pretty small compared to US counterparts.
 

by78

General
China Manned Space Agency is now
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
a low-cost cargo transport system to the Chinese space station from both private and public sector companies.

The requirements are:
- Cargo capacity is ≥1.8 tons.
- Internal volume is ≥7 cubic meters.
- Must be capable of autonomous rendezvous and docking with the Chinese space station and stay in orbit for at least three months.
- Must be capable of controlled atmosphere re-entry.
- Launch prep time ≥30 days.
- Cost per trip ≤120 million RMB




52903310492_279bede2bc_k.jpg
52904267475_67ac819dfb_h.jpg


An
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the Manned Space Office. Of the 10 proposals submitted, those from the Micro-satellite Innovation Institute, the Fifth and Eighth Institutes of CASC, and Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute of AVIC have been selected for detailed design study.

53214857406_8751200227_h.jpg
 
Top