China's Space Program Thread II
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
I think that entirely depends on how much of the G60's constellation will be launched by LM-6A, to my knowledge it is hardly going to be exclusive to that platform but highly dispersed among a variety of launch platforms.
I don't think it is standard modus operandi for the LM-6A upper stage to produce this amount of debris. Shit happens, but I don't expect this to keep happening.
Therefore how much of the constellation will be launched on LM-6A should have limited to zero relevance in my honest opinion.
Therefore how much of the constellation will be launched on LM-6A should have limited to zero relevance in my honest opinion.
Popular write-ups in the West of China's Space Program:
Papers:
About the Moon:
Deep learning driven interpretation of Chang'E-4 Lunar Penetrating Radar
(note, a collaboration between US and Chinese scientists)
Analysis of a large buried impact crater and vertical mineral composition at the Chang'E-4 landing site by multi-source remote sensing data
Chang'E-5 In Situ Spectra Revealing Meter-scale Surface Temperature Distribution Characteristic of the Moon
Expansion ignition limit of hydrocarbon fuels based on the controllable free radical relay combustion under extreme conditions
A compact matchbox-sized dust detector for lunar surface applications
Mars:
Aerodynamic performance optimization of a UAV's airfoil at low-Reynolds number and transonic flow under the Martian carbon dioxide atmosphere
Space Technology:
Exploring efficiency in next generation high temperature superconducting-enhanced applied field magnetoplasmadynamic thrusters: A combined numerical and experimental study
Model-based hybrid control of combined active–passive vertical zero-gravity system
Vision-aided Inertial Navigation for Planetary Landing without Feature Extraction and Matching
Nonlinear modeling and validation of spacecraft dynamics for space-based gravitational wave detector
Endoatmospheric powered descent guidance
Space Biology:
Specific rhizobacterial assembly enhances the physiological adaptation of soil-cultivated wheat to simulated microgravity
Papers:
About the Moon:
Deep learning driven interpretation of Chang'E-4 Lunar Penetrating Radar
(note, a collaboration between US and Chinese scientists)
Analysis of a large buried impact crater and vertical mineral composition at the Chang'E-4 landing site by multi-source remote sensing data
Chang'E-5 In Situ Spectra Revealing Meter-scale Surface Temperature Distribution Characteristic of the Moon
Expansion ignition limit of hydrocarbon fuels based on the controllable free radical relay combustion under extreme conditions
A compact matchbox-sized dust detector for lunar surface applications
Mars:
Aerodynamic performance optimization of a UAV's airfoil at low-Reynolds number and transonic flow under the Martian carbon dioxide atmosphere
Space Technology:
Exploring efficiency in next generation high temperature superconducting-enhanced applied field magnetoplasmadynamic thrusters: A combined numerical and experimental study
Model-based hybrid control of combined active–passive vertical zero-gravity system
Vision-aided Inertial Navigation for Planetary Landing without Feature Extraction and Matching
Nonlinear modeling and validation of spacecraft dynamics for space-based gravitational wave detector
Endoatmospheric powered descent guidance
Space Biology:
Specific rhizobacterial assembly enhances the physiological adaptation of soil-cultivated wheat to simulated microgravity
That's a very nice sentiment, but 4 out of the 7 launches of the 6A have been recorded leaving debris. That's not an anomaly.
Only if they are really debris as in upper stage breakingup.
This sentence doesn't make sense. First of all, you are saying this is not an anomaly that means you believe this kind of "debris" is within the designer's expectation. Then you quote what US military says as happening 4 out of 7 (57%). A probability of failure this high is certainly an anomaly (the fancy American term for failure).
Since these "debris" are along the same orbit as the G60 constellation, China would be the most likely to suffer far ahead of anyone else. You (essentially the US) are saying that Chinese are suicidal.
Usually in space launches, the failure rate is something less than 6%. Launchers will accept that risk and bet on the 94% chance of success. With a failure rate as high as 57%, you (the US) are saying CASC is still launching CZ-6A and willing to kill own satellites, that is madness.
There are only two alternatives that people can take, either you believe China is crazy by continiously launching a dangerous rocket with no intention of fixing it, or the whole debris thing is just another smear campaign as the "uncontrolled reentry".
Last edited:
by78
General
A brief summary of the Jilin remote sensing constellation and Changguang, its parent company/operator.
The constellation now has 138 satellites in operation and can revisit any spot 35 to 37 times per day. Changguan has also put into operation phase I of its satellite production base, which occupies 97,300 sqm and has an annual production capacity of 100 satellites.
The chief of Changguan Satellite Technology revealed in an that a new generation of optical and radar satellites are under active development. The company plans to rapidly expand its Jilin-1 constellation to 300 satellites by the end of 2026.
This is a great news. It was reported earlier that Jilin's final phase (by 2025) would have 138 sats in orbits providing revisit of every 10 minutes. Even considerring that the 300 consists many different types of sats it is still significantly more than the number needed for 10 minutes revisit, meaning that the time gap could be likely halved by 2026. Together with in-situ target identification and intra-sat communication, nothing can get out of site.
You might want to police that tone. This is definitely not the thread or forum for it.