China's Space Program Thread II

[by78]

The great province of Hubei has released an

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

for building a commercial space industry within the province. The plan lists financial incentives and aims to attract suppliers, talent, and launch providers and aims to build enough production capacity for 60 rockets and 500 satellites annually.

 

[by78]

DeepBlue's high-altitude VTVL test vehicle.

 

[by78]

Installation of the sound suppression system (water tower, pipelines, etc.) for launchpad No. 2 of the Hainan Commercial Spaceport has begun and is expected to be finished by early June.

The sound suppression system tower for launchpad no. 2 of Hainan Commercial Spaceport has reached a height of 73 meters. The design height is 90 meters. The tower is expected to be capped by the end of this month.

 

[nativechicken]

Well do results and reality matter? The reality of the situation is that China is slow, very very very slow in it's space progress. Forget reusable rockets, China can't even phase out it's hypergolic fleet, for all the sources, interviews and stats that you put out, the reality is that China is still using decades old hypergolic rockets for >50% of her launches, is the only nation to have kept such a large number of hypergolic rockets in service for so long and has been a major laggard in adopting modern cryogenic rockets, despite cryogenic rockets being a 1960s technology. China is two generations behind America and despite it's commitment to phase out hypergolic fleet, progress so far has been barely noticeable. Progress in space efforts has only been hastened after SpaceX slapped the global space agencies in the face. Not that impressive when everyone else is moving towards resauble rockets too, people move fast after they get a nasty slap to the face. While SpaceX is testing Starship, China is still busy trying to get the LM-8/LM-6 into mass production so that the nation can finally retire the older hypergolics rockets.

None of the bullshit you sprout about comments made by some high ranking project head changes this fundamental fact of the reality that we find ourselves in.

There's other noticeable things that China is moving slowly in of course. While America and the soviets were building superheavy lift rockets in the 1960s, China's own lackluster progress in that area means that they have to pull double duty in not only building a superheavy rocket, but making it reusable too. If the LM-9 had entered service in the 2010s, for example, then China can focus solely on making a clean sheet Starship clone instead of the weird design hell nightmare that has been going on with the CZ-9 and used their experience on superheavy rockets to make the progress faster.


So why the ultra-slow phase out on hypergolic rockets, something that America and the soviet achieved in a fraction of the time? Something that no other space agency, even IRSO still uses in such large numbers today? I know that you're probably going to say something of the lines of "Well hypergolics works and are cheap so that's why they didn't switch", and while that might be true, that's also masking a issue that most organizations face. Institutional culture matters. That's the difference between Blue Orgin and SpaceX, despite them both being private rocket companies founded by billonares and staffed by American rocket engineers and roughly the same age, one is launching super heavy rockets while the other hasn't even launched a single payload into orbit.

If your space agency has the mindset of "Yeah, we're fine with using 40 year old rocket designs and obsolete fuels because they just work" than no shit it's going to breed a mass culture of complacent slow old out of date dinosaurs that don't want to rock the boat. That's basically how companies and countries die, they become complacent and stop innovating. No matter what, you always want to push for the cutting edge, you don't "settle", it's always a race towards something better. I think SpaceX is successful because of this mindset, they always push for more capabilities, they don't go "ok that's good enough, let's slow R&D to a crawl to save money and resources". They could have sat on their ass for another 40 years and raked in money just off the back of Falcon 9. But they didn't.

I just smiled at your remarks.
You made many incorrect judgments without truly understanding the history of China's space industry. The one who made mistakes is you.
Firstly, I must tell you a premise: there was indeed a gap of about 20 years in the technological development of China's space industry.
That is, the 1980s and 1990s. To ensure the smooth progress of China's economic reforms, China's military industry and space industry slowed down their investment in space technology and products.
The famous story about making missiles being less profitable than selling tea eggs happened during this period. During this time, the technical talents and systems that China had accumulated for nearly 20 years were almost at a standstill and can even be said to be in a semi-disintegrated state, with a large number of industrial workers and engineers becoming unemployed and going into business. It was not until after the year 2000, due to the bombing of the embassy in 1999 and the South China Sea collision incident on April 1, 2001, that investment in China's military industry and national defense truly restarted.
I remind you that the reason why China's space technology is considered to be 40 years behind the West is partly because China's space industry started 15-20 years later than the United States and the Soviet Union (Russia), and another part is that China itself actively suppressed investment in military space technology for 20 years.
If you can read Chinese and look at the development history of China's CZ-5 subsystems, such as the YF-100, you will know that after nearly 20 years of abandoned investment in rocket power systems, development almost started from scratch.
So for me, the lag in the development of China's space industry is not due to the lack of effort by Chinese space professionals, but is determined by objective economic conditions and the overall national development plan. It is not a sin of shame or error. It is well known that without economic strength, it is impossible to develop high-end and high-tech industries. Today's prominent achievements in China's space industry are a natural result that comes with economic success. In fact, the development of Japan's space industry and the rise of the aerospace industries of the United States and the Soviet Union were also products of economic development.
Today, China's economic development achievements have attracted worldwide attention, and the natural success of space science and technology achievements is nothing that can be questioned.
Secondly, I remind you that the development of China's cryogenic rockets has mainly been since the year 2000, with the successful maiden flights of the CZ-6 and CZ-7 to the present, which is less than 10 years. China's original plan has always been to complete it in 15 years (by 2030), and it is normal for a country to take at least more than 10 years to switch from launching conventional rockets to cryogenic rockets (refer to Russia). The management, storage, and transportation facilities for cryogenic rocket launch sites and conventional rocket launch sites are completely different. Japan and Europe basically do not have conventional liquid rockets (which are essentially heavy strategic missiles) and have directly developed cryogenic rockets (which can only be used for civilian purposes and not for military use), while China and Russia have long retained conventional liquid rockets, essentially retaining the strategic strike capability of liquid fuel rockets for launching heavy missile warheads.
It is only in recent years that China's space launch missions have reached a high density, so you may feel that the development of China's new generation of cryogenic rockets is slow. In fact, China's development speed is very fast. If the United States were not for the investment during the Cold War, civilian rocket launches would all be cryogenic rockets, and now it would take more than 10 years to change from conventional to cryogenic launches. The NSF actually has the process and approval discussions for the construction of a new launch site. For example, environmental assessments should be submitted to the professional department for approval 330 days before the construction of the launch site. SpaceX's Boca Chica launch site is almost entirely illegal and non-compliant. The Starship is about to be launched, but the environmental assessment procedures have not been completed. When the environmental assessment personnel went to SpaceX to ask for a report, they were directly refused to meet. So there are a lot of private opinions. Now, the United States wants to build a new launch site in compliance, and it is impossible to get approval without going through procedures for 5-8 years. The transformation of the launch site is even more troublesome; you have to approve the demolition first, and the demolition involves environmental restoration, and the conventional fuels are highly toxic. Environmental assessments can peel off several layers of skin. Therefore, China's 15-year transition period to switch the entire main rocket launch system's fuel mode is actually very fast.
You have to deal with the fact that the launch missions cannot stop, with more than 50+ launches a year (go and see the annual space launch volume of the United States during the Cold War), and all the support of the launch site is for conventional toxic fuels. The business flow of the new launch site is still familiarizing, the launch volume is not going up, and the team is still in the process of running in and expanding. It is simply impossible to achieve the transformation within 5 years. Technically, one is to maintain and manage using the technology of the 1980s-1990s, and the other is to maintain and manage using the new technology of the 2015-2020s, which is essentially a big difference, and it is normal to have a learning and transition period.
This is the real reason that puzzles you about the slow development of China's space industry. There is an old Chinese saying, "To carve the mark on the boat to find the lost sword." That is the way you observe and evaluate.

 

[nativechicken]

Well do results and reality matter? The reality of the situation is that China is slow, very very very slow in it's space progress. Forget reusable rockets, China can't even phase out it's hypergolic fleet, for all the sources, interviews and stats that you put out, the reality is that China is still using decades old hypergolic rockets for >50% of her launches, is the only nation to have kept such a large number of hypergolic rockets in service for so long and has been a major laggard in adopting modern cryogenic rockets, despite cryogenic rockets being a 1960s technology. China is two generations behind America and despite it's commitment to phase out hypergolic fleet, progress so far has been barely noticeable. Progress in space efforts has only been hastened after SpaceX slapped the global space agencies in the face. Not that impressive when everyone else is moving towards resauble rockets too, people move fast after they get a nasty slap to the face. While SpaceX is testing Starship, China is still busy trying to get the LM-8/LM-6 into mass production so that the nation can finally retire the older hypergolics rockets.

None of the bullshit you sprout about comments made by some high ranking project head changes this fundamental fact of the reality that we find ourselves in.

There's other noticeable things that China is moving slowly in of course. While America and the soviets were building superheavy lift rockets in the 1960s, China's own lackluster progress in that area means that they have to pull double duty in not only building a superheavy rocket, but making it reusable too. If the LM-9 had entered service in the 2010s, for example, then China can focus solely on making a clean sheet Starship clone instead of the weird design hell nightmare that has been going on with the CZ-9 and used their experience on superheavy rockets to make the progress faster.


So why the ultra-slow phase out on hypergolic rockets, something that America and the soviet achieved in a fraction of the time? Something that no other space agency, even IRSO still uses in such large numbers today? I know that you're probably going to say something of the lines of "Well hypergolics works and are cheap so that's why they didn't switch", and while that might be true, that's also masking a issue that most organizations face. Institutional culture matters. That's the difference between Blue Orgin and SpaceX, despite them both being private rocket companies founded by billonares and staffed by American rocket engineers and roughly the same age, one is launching super heavy rockets while the other hasn't even launched a single payload into orbit.

If your space agency has the mindset of "Yeah, we're fine with using 40 year old rocket designs and obsolete fuels because they just work" than no shit it's going to breed a mass culture of complacent slow old out of date dinosaurs that don't want to rock the boat. That's basically how companies and countries die, they become complacent and stop innovating. No matter what, you always want to push for the cutting edge, you don't "settle", it's always a race towards something better. I think SpaceX is successful because of this mindset, they always push for more capabilities, they don't go "ok that's good enough, let's slow R&D to a crawl to save money and resources". They could have sat on their ass for another 40 years and raked in money just off the back of Falcon 9. But they didn't.

I just want to remind you of one thing, China is changing very quickly, and it is accelerating its change. For example, the Chinese automobile industry, what was its position in the world 20 years ago (2000), 10 years ago (2010)? Who would have thought that Chinese cars were strong and a threat to Western industry? But what about today? Chinese cars are something that the United States and Europe have to block with sanctions and tariffs. Elon Musk has said that without the protection of tariffs, no Western car company could survive the impact of Chinese cars.
I tell you, the space industry will be the same. You will see it in the years 2035-2045. The U.S. government and NASA have already seen it, and they are facing the competition of China's space industry, and they can only hope that one or two private companies will face it. I tell Americans, 50 years ago, the United States won the moon landing battle with the Soviet Union. It relied on the cross-industry resource integration of the U.S. government, sparing no economic cost and mobilizing the strength of the whole country, integrating 20,000 advanced suppliers and hundreds of thousands of technical practitioners to cooperate, to win this technological war and gain the respect of the world. In China, this is called a national system.
Today, the entire U.S. economy is declining, and NASA can only entrust the revival of the U.S. aerospace industry to SpaceX with only 10,000 people and Blue Origin with 6,000 people. In the field of reusable launch vehicles, China is advancing multiple technical routes such as VTVL/VTHL/HTHL + parachute recovery, while the U.S. VTHL has been abandoned by Boeing. HTHL is still far away (half of the technology that HTHL relies on is the technical foundation of large aircraft, and what is the situation of Boeing now? What about Lockheed Martin?), and only one VTVL technical solution is being developed by SpaceX. How much future do you think the U.S. space industry has?
I tell you, China's two constellations of tens of thousands of low Earth orbit satellites are state-funded, supporting a group of emerging space startups. Because according to SpaceX's experience, 30 rocket launches can perfect a reusable launch vehicle. The Chinese government uses this experience explored by Musk to cultivate a group of emerging space companies. And the U.S. NASA lets SpaceX monopolize and allows other space startups and traditional companies to face the huge risk of being unable to compete. Have you heard of a competitive tactical strategy? Tiger + pack of wolves... In the automotive field, BYD + Huawei is the tiger, and the pack of wolves is the group of new car forces and traditional car companies that have undergone technical transformation. Musk understood this, which is why he said that Western car companies need trade protection.

China's space industry is building a future pack of tigers and a pack of wolves (which will take another 10 years), while NASA in the United States is raising pigs (referring to monopolistic enterprises). This is the real reason why the United States will inevitably lose in the field of space in the years 2035-2045.

There is a saying on the Chinese internet that goes, "Children make choices, adults want it all." Do you understand what I'm saying? The real reason why the U.S. space industry has made its competitors feel unable to catch up in the past is its comprehensive investment across the entire space sector, which has led to a comprehensive lead. However, it will not be able to maintain this in the future because the one who can now say "I want it all" is no longer the United States, but China. In 10 to 20 years, you will see the results.

The U.S. government says that China is striving to challenge the United States' leadership in space by 2045. This statement is not made without basis. China's long-term space plan has always been to become a space power on par with the United States between 2035 and 2045. The only mistake China has made is overlooking the possibility that the United States can also make mistakes.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Well do results and reality matter? The reality of the situation is that China is slow, very very very slow in it's space progress. Forget reusable rockets, China can't even phase out it's hypergolic fleet, for all the sources, interviews and stats that you put out, the reality is that China is still using decades old hypergolic rockets for >50% of her launches, is the only nation to have kept such a large number of hypergolic rockets in service for so long and has been a major laggard in adopting modern cryogenic rockets, despite cryogenic rockets being a 1960s technology.

What was the Chinese space budget over the last 3 decades vs NASA's budget and Soviet Space Budget from 1960 to dissolution of USSR.

The famous story about making missiles being less profitable than selling tea eggs happened during this period.

I thought it was, "It's better to sell tea leaf eggs than to build nuclear bombs."

 

[tacoburger]

What was the Chinese space budget over the last 3 decades vs NASA's budget and Soviet Space Budget from 1960 to dissolution of USSR.

Modern Chinese efforts would have been boosted by modern electronics, computer design software and telemetry. That and decades of knowledge, and the fact that they got assistance from the soviet union and Russia. You don't see IRSO or JAXA launching hypergolic rockets en masse despite their much lower budgets. Again, this is not history here, we're not saying "oh wow it sure took China a long time to move on from hypergolic rockets but at least they're over that hump today" In 2023 China launched 67 rockets, 38 of them were by the CZ-2/3/4. So more than half the launches are still hypergolic. But it's even worse when you consider that 19 of those 67 launches are of small lift solid rocket that struggle to carry more then 1 ton into LEO. Meaning that the hypergolic fleet carried the vast majority of mass and number of sats into orbit. Probably >80% of total upmass is via the hypergolic rocket fleet in 2023.

And fine, if China wants to double down on hypergolics, go for it. If China decides that they don't give a shit about safely and wants to go full in on hypergolics, go ahead, I don't mind. Make a superheavy hypergolic, make a hypergolic full flow stage combustion engine, make a hypergolic reusable rocket, go ahead and actually advance the technology and capabilities of their rockets. Instead the CZ-2/3/4 are decades old designs and they don't seem intent on upgrading them or doing future R&D into hypergolic rockets or fuels, it's evident that they do seem comitted to eventually replacing hypergolic with modern cryogenic rockets eventually, considering that R&D on hypergolics have basically stopped.

So they are stuck in this weird limbo where the bulk of the fleet is hypergolic- they spend billions every year on making this rockets and handling their toxic fuels, but basically all the R&D budget are on modern cryogenic rocket designs- so all the R&D effort don't actually benefits the hypergolic rockets that's launching the most payloads, but despite most of the R&D budget spend on cryogenic rocket systems they can't seem to mass produce cryogenic rockets in enough numbers to actually replace the hypergolic rockets- despite a decade of effort. And of course you have the reusable rockets already muscling in- though most of the most fruitful efforts here are from private companies. Considering how slow the state agencies are in mass producing the already mature cryogenic rockets, I can't see them moving fast on reusable rockets either.

China is changing very quickly, and it is accelerating its change. For example, the Chinese automobile industry, what was its position in the world 20 years ago (2000), 10 years ago (2010)?

So again, reality check here. Why are 40 year old rockets still the workhorse of the chinese space industry in 2024? Why doesn't that seem to be changing at all in the last 10 years? Why did it take until 2015 for China to launch her first cryogenic rocket? Kinda crazy to think about that fact huh, Spacex was landing a rocket around the same time China launched her first cryogenic rocket- a technology from the 1960s.

Sure China is moving a lot faster now, or at least her private spaceflight sector is. CALT still hasn't even demonstrated that they can produce more than 1 CZ-8 rocket a year. Yes China moves fast, but that just makes the country past 20 years in rocketry even more embarrassing at just how slow they're moving.

 

[nativechicken]

So again, reality check here. Why are 40 year old rockets still the workhorse of the chinese space industry in 2024? Why doesn't that seem to be changing at all in the last 10 years? Why did it take until 2015 for China to launch her first cryogenic rocket? Kinda crazy to think about that fact huh, Spacex was landing a rocket around the same time China launched her first cryogenic rocket- a technology from the 1960s.

Sure China is moving a lot faster now, or at least her private spaceflight sector is. CALT still hasn't even demonstrated that they can produce more than 1 CZ-8 rocket a year. Yes China moves fast, but that just makes the country past 20 years in rocketry even more embarrassing at just how slow they're moving.

You should say, no matter how many times you say it, I will only acknowledge that China, after 40 years, still only knows how to use toxic conventional rockets and is incapable of adopting new rockets... (covering ears, shielding eyes, pretending not to see)...

I have already told you, I don't mind repeating it many times.
China's cryogenic rockets had their maiden flight after 2015, and the large-scale replacement of China's cryogenic rockets was always planned to be completed by 2030.
The reason is that it is impossible to write off and overthrow the enormous historical assets in a short period, and it is normal for technology to require maturation and running in, which follows the natural laws of science.

Russia has had cryogenic rocket technology for a long time, but it still launches and uses toxic conventional rockets. Do you think it's because their rocket technology is inadequate?

The real start of China's cryogenic rockets was in 2006, with a decade to build rockets (actually four series: CZ-5, CZ-6, CZ-7, and CZ-8), and then waiting for the rockets to mature also takes about a decade, which is quite normal. If you have read the literature by Ms. Yi Qing, the chief designer of the CZ-2F, you would know that most rockets require 10-15 years to truly mature after their maiden flight.

The SpaceX you admire, the Falcon 9, took about 5 years from design to maiden flight (not counting engine development), and another 5 years to mature. The development of reusable technology also took 3-4 years to mature.
You must understand that SpaceX had only one rocket model at the same time, while China's space industry had four CZ rocket models at the same time (only for space, excluding solid propellant launches, military missiles, and various satellite systems). In addition, four types of engines were developed: YF-100, YF-77, YF-115, and YF-75D. It's like you and your classmate competing in studies; you took one course and got an A+. Then your classmate, at the same time, took 10 different courses, and only got a B in the subject you took, but he got B, B+, A levels in all 10 courses.
You claim that because you got an A in one subject, you are a genius, and your classmate is a fool.

I think everyone but you knows that the person who took 10 courses with similar levels of difficulty and achieved above B in each is the true genius. Of course, such a person would be ridiculed in the United States as a "nerd."

This is the problem with your logic; you compare the strengths of SpaceX with the average aspects of China's space industry. In reality, China's space industry is lagging behind the United States by 40 years overall due to a late start, so Chinese space professionals have been frantically catching up, reducing the technical gap with the U.S. space industry from 40 years to about 10 years (China's plan is to catch up by around 2035). You may laugh all you want, mock the gap between China's space industry and SpaceX, and ignore that SpaceX's success is based on the foundation of the entire American aerospace industry. Without the foundational services of the U.S. aerospace industry, what rockets could SpaceX have developed? Everyone knows the outcome of the arrogant hare in the race between the tortoise and the hare.

Only those who laugh last laugh the sweetest. In a few years, you will see NASA's reflections.
Much of China's current work in space aims to establish a new generation of space industry systems, which are a generation more advanced than today's American space industry infrastructure. This system is designed to serve the next generation of spacecraft (including heavy-lift launch vehicles, super-large satellite systems, space service and maintenance systems, and routine access to space capabilities). Compared to the current American space industry system (built from the 1980s-1990s to the early 21st century, mainly for the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station), it is a generation ahead (currently, China's space industry support system is equivalent to the mid-to-late 1990s level of the United States and Europe).

Before 2030-2035, I will quietly watch your various "humiliations" and "mockeries" of China's space industry, and then one day, you will find that the world has suddenly changed. Overnight, everyone will discover the greatness of China's space industry and delve into the history of its growth, exploring everything about it, wanting to know how it moved from the periphery of the world to the central stage, becoming the dream pursued by countless people. At that time, you will realize that the space development history you despised is so glorious and inspiring.

It takes ten years of hard work to shine for three minutes on stage. What you see is the apparent backwardness of Chinese rockets, while I see how the foundation of China's space industry is being built. It won't be long (within a few years) before you see NASA discussing the negative impact of SpaceX on American space and studying where Artemis went wrong. You will see an increasing number of questions about why SpaceX's Starship, with such strong payload capacity, doesn't do this or that. It is at that time that China's moment in space will arrive.

 

[gelgoog]

In 2023 China launched 67 rockets, 38 of them were by the CZ-2/3/4. So more than half the launches are still hypergolic. But it's even worse when you consider that 19 of those 67 launches are of small lift solid rocket that struggle to carry more then 1 ton into LEO. Meaning that the hypergolic fleet carried the vast majority of mass and number of sats into orbit. Probably >80% of total upmass is via the hypergolic rocket fleet in 2023.

Now that is some bullshit extrapolation on your part. The number of launches has little correlation with the upmass. The CZ-5 put up the Chinese space station. How much mass do you think that has? The CZ-7 sends the Tiangong regularly into space. How much mass do you think that has?

Even in 2023, a year CZ-5 did not launch space station modules, it launched the Yaogan 41 recon satellite with an extended nosecone. If the satellite was small and light they wouldn't use the extended nosecone with it. Nor would they use the CZ-5. It is probably as large as a US Keyhole satellite. If you want to know how large that is, check the size and mass of the Hubble Space Telescope.

R&D on hypergolics have basically stopped.

Ever heard of RS-28 Sarmat? That is hypergolic. There are also claims that China is making a replacement for the silo based DF-5.

despite most of the R&D budget spend on cryogenic rocket systems they can't seem to mass produce cryogenic rockets in enough numbers to actually replace the hypergolic rockets- despite a decade of effort.

There just aren't enough launch sites even if you produced the rockets for them.

The supposedly low launch cadence of each site is probably because of policy. In China it could be that like with US MIC launches they try to make sure that urgent satellites are launched in as short a timeframe as possible. This could mean that you have rockets waiting for urgent satellite payloads to be available. This leads to much longer average launch site preparation time. Because of one such urgent satellite the rest of the satellites could be getting their launch dates pushed back.

So again, reality check here. Why are 40 year old rockets still the workhorse of the chinese space industry in 2024? Why doesn't that seem to be changing at all in the last 10 years? Why did it take until 2015 for China to launch her first cryogenic rocket? Kinda crazy to think about that fact huh, Spacex was landing a rocket around the same time China launched her first cryogenic rocket- a technology from the 1960s.

Cryogenic rockets are even older than hypergolics. One good example is the R-7 aka Soyuz.
It has nothing to do with age and everything to do with convenience and toxicity.

 

[doggydogdo]

So again, reality check here. Why are 40 year old rockets still the workhorse of the chinese space industry in 2024? Why doesn't that seem to be changing at all in the last 10 years? Why did it take until 2015 for China to launch her first cryogenic rocket? Kinda crazy to think about that fact huh, Spacex was landing a rocket around the same time China launched her first cryogenic rocket- a technology from the 1960s.

Sure China is moving a lot faster now, or at least her private spaceflight sector is. CALT still hasn't even demonstrated that they can produce more than 1 CZ-8 rocket a year. Yes China moves fast, but that just makes the country past 20 years in rocketry even more embarrassing at just how slow they're moving.

China's first cryogenic rocket launched in in 90s, what are you on about??

anyways why would China focus on new revolutionary rockets when the ones they have works fine and they are achieving objectives using them.