Long March-6C had successful maiden flight just now.
China's Space Program Thread II
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
You are counting your chickens much too early.
Let the eggs for the commercial space launchers prove themselves first before entertaining the idea of them doing more than some superconstellation launches.
If you are insinuating that there is state corruption or preference for state rocket developers then just come out and say it -- but all you are describing to me sounds like reasonable technological caution and backing multiple horses to me in pursuit of redundancy.
Once the commercial space launchers prove themselves, I would be surprised if they do not receive more state backing and the state would develop mechanisms to allow them to launch more sensitive and higher risk payloads, but you cannot reasonably expect them to do so this early on.
I echo some of the points raised by Tacoburger. In fact I remember reading around 2015-16, from a Chinese state space executive, that they strongly believed that SpaceX won't succeed in making reusable rockets commercial, and hence they are going the route of making normal expendable rockets cheaper through economies of scale and better system design. This was a huge miscalculation that has resulted in a lag of 7-8 years vis-a-vis US.
Now, however since the market and technology have been proven, I am optimistic.
However these things need to be thought about:
- How did China misjudge this emerging technological trend? How can it avoid similar mistakes in space and other sectors later?
- How to catch up fast with SpaceX?
- How to put more focus on disrupting things rather than simply continuing with the current gravy train.
The newer ones could very well be. The market is over saturated as it is, it's like trying to start a real estate company in China right now, or a EV company. I'm not bias towards private or SOEs. I just want results, private spaceflight could equally result in grafts, scams and stagnation too I'm well aware. It's just that from what I can see, generally speaking private spaceflight in both America and China are moving faster then their state counterparts.
You can also apply this logic and ask why is there a entire commercial launchpad already solely reserved for the LM-8, when the CZ-8 is currently launching at a rate of 1 rocket a year and when there's already a large enough demand for military payloads that the private companies can't even launch for.
The difference is that CALT and whatnot are already established and have large amount of funding and experience. Meanwhile the private companies are basically an entire nascent industry, in an industry traditionally dominated by SOEs. They need all the support that they can get at the start. Once they are more established and can survive on their own, do you start taking away support.
And I already gave an example, the Tiangong resupply contracts, unless there's a new update, most of the leading companies currently selected for a cargo spacecraft design are SOEs, even though there are a number of private companies in the bidding process. And this despite the commercial cargo resupply being a attempt to support the private space sector, vis-a-vis SpaceX. So even with programs designed to support the private space sector, it's not working as intented.
The fact that Chinese space executives in the mid 2010s thought SpaceX wouldn't succeed is hardly unique among China.
The fact that there was a "lag of 7-8 years" is not being debated.
Heck, we don't even need to think about the three questions you talked about, because that is beyond the scope of this thread.
In the same way that for the military watching threads we do not have the right to daydream about strategic procurement "disruptors" but that we have to operate within the confines of projected developments and national strategy, in the space thread our projections and discussion is similarly bound by projected developments and national space strategy.
If it becomes a matter of "dream up any wild ideas" then it just becomes anarchy, whether it is for PLA watching or PRC space watching.
In context of the above discussion with Tacoburger, simply expressing general dissatisfaction, frustration or impatience is a waste of all of our time. Instead, what can be addressed is at least his assertions that people in this thread are somehow against commercial/private space launchers, which is very much not the case in the last couple of years at least.
My point was to counter your claim that people in this thread were somehow opposed to commercial space launchers.
Because CZ-8 is from a state company and it naturally makes sense that the state would have a better handle on what they themselves are doing?
Once the commercial space launchers prove themselves and show at minimum non-inferiority if not superiority, then they will receive more capacity and if CZ-8 does not prove itself then there's nothing stopping them from giving CZ-8 slots to commercial space launch companies -- but for now I think it is admirable that the latter even have a dedicated launchpad at Hainan to begin with.
All of this strikes me as being reasonable and awaiting for the commercial space launchers to first prove themselves.
If you are asking the Chinese government to provide more support and subsidies to them to better realize their potential, and thus pave the way for them to take on state and military contracts, then that is reasonable.
However asking commercial launch companies to take on resupply contracts for Tiangong at this stage is over ambitious and technologically beyond what the state is comfortable with, until they prove themselves. The fact that the state is generally risk averse is hardly unique to the space launch industry or the space industry as a whole.
NASA did not allow SpaceX to supply cargo to the ISS with the Falcon 9 before the launcher did several successful launch missions. Would you trust an unproven rocket with delivering payloads to a multibillion space station? That is not how things are done.
Also in NASA's case they had little other option. The Shuttle was retired after Columbia disintegrated. The Ares I pushed by NASA's administrator was a failure. You had NASA sending astronauts up in the Russian Soyuz because there was no other system to launch them.
China has none of those issues. CZ-5 is a highly successful launcher which put the Chinese space station up. CZ-7 also operates fine launching the resupply capsules. And CZ-2F, the manned launcher, has the issue that it is hypergolic and uses toxic fuel. But at least it works.
The technology in CZ-5 can also be retrofitted to make a reusable launcher i.e. CZ-10. It uses the same YF-100 engine and the same factories and tooling. So, no, the past two decades of Chinese space launchers were not a waste of time at all.
Also in NASA's case they had little other option. The Shuttle was retired after Columbia disintegrated. The Ares I pushed by NASA's administrator was a failure. You had NASA sending astronauts up in the Russian Soyuz because there was no other system to launch them.
China has none of those issues. CZ-5 is a highly successful launcher which put the Chinese space station up. CZ-7 also operates fine launching the resupply capsules. And CZ-2F, the manned launcher, has the issue that it is hypergolic and uses toxic fuel. But at least it works.
The technology in CZ-5 can also be retrofitted to make a reusable launcher i.e. CZ-10. It uses the same YF-100 engine and the same factories and tooling. So, no, the past two decades of Chinese space launchers were not a waste of time at all.
Last edited:
Bit of a catch-22 here isn't it? How are the commercial companies going to prove themselves when they are not given the resources to do so? And they won't be given more resources if they don't prove themselves. Can't grow if you're being cut off before you can even walk.
For example, a better solution then outright giving an entire commercial launchpad to just LM-8 launches from the get go, especially when the CZ-8 doesn't even has the production numbers to fully use the launchpad, is to give full use for the 2 commerical launchpads to private companies for exclusive use for a limited period, say 2-3 years, to allow them to weed out the competition and test and refine out their rockets. Then after the 2-3 years has passed, open up the 2 launchpads for the CZ rockets too, allow the 2 to directly compete for the launchpads and missions.
Commercial space companies like AZSPACE already have actual cargo spacecraft prototypes that they have literally launched into space though. Can you say the same for Chengdu aerospace?- which was one of the companies selected. Great aircraft and engines, but they don't really have experince in cargo spacecraft manufacturing...
And if you want to use NASA as an example, SpaceX is still a extremely new company compared to a company like Boeing... and guess who has launched more human spaceflight missions while we're currently waiting to see if Starliner kills it's crew tomorrow. NASA took a major risk for SpaceX instead of just going back to ULA/Boeing and it paid off.
Doesn't seem like a catch 22 to me -- the Chinese government has provided room for the commercial space launch companies to grow and prove themselves.
If they wanted to actually cut them off they would have done so -- the opportunities are literally endless.
Again, they know the number of the state launch companies, so it makes sense to give them preference for now. If the state companies fail or if the commercial companies prove themselves to be superior, then they can reevaluate.
If you are wanting the Chinese government to treat state launch companies and commercial companies to be "equal" at this stage then you're being unrealistic. If anything it is frankly progressive and forward thinking of them to even give commercial companies a pad a Hainan to begin with.
I'm not opposed to commercial space companies being involved eventually, but if you're asking me whether Chengdu/CAC should be treated with skepticism for being selected for thee cargo spacecraft contract, no lol. CAC have proven themselves to be a dynamic, competent aerospace institute and corporation with the program management track record to back it up. Their entry into this domain should be prospect for interest and optimism rather than suspicion.
Ultimately, the established state players have a greater reservoir of maturity and trust.
It is up to the commercial space companies to demonstrate that they are also deserving of it. SpaceX proved themselves, and are now treated with trust and maturity. You cannot expect that level of trust to Chinese commercial space companies until they've done so yet -- and right now they are giving the opportunity to show what they have.
Overall, you seem to be dissatisfied with the extent of state support for the commercial launch providers, whereas I think the current amount of state support for them is quite reasonable.
Now, if you are asking me if I think more state support can be given to them, then of course the answer is yes (among other projects that the PRC space industry should have looked more into in the recent past if they did not approach things with the same kind of caution that they always do), however there is a difference between believing that "more support would have benefits" versus "current level of support is the state seeking to cut them off" -- the latter of which seems to be your argument.
I don't think this conversations makes sense. China already supports the private space rocket industry.
The main bottleneck is not the state right now, it's actually R&D of the rockets the private industry is developing right now. What the state it waiting for, and what we here in this thread are waiting for, is to see if that R&D succeeds.
I would be far more likely to consider tacoburger's arguments on this aspect if we see an actual successful private space launcher that later on doesn't receive support from the state. For now the state is correctly taking a wait-and-see approach.
The main bottleneck is not the state right now, it's actually R&D of the rockets the private industry is developing right now. What the state it waiting for, and what we here in this thread are waiting for, is to see if that R&D succeeds.
I would be far more likely to consider tacoburger's arguments on this aspect if we see an actual successful private space launcher that later on doesn't receive support from the state. For now the state is correctly taking a wait-and-see approach.