The 2nd photo of the post that you replied said "reusable rocket based on open cycle LOX/Kerosene engine". YF-100K is larger than open cycle engine of 80t something. Having 5 or 7 smaller engines in CZ-12's 3.8 metre (4 metre class) is doable.
Considerring the 10km test (see link below) by 8th was done with 3 70t methalox engines in a line configuration and CZ-10's 1st stage test was also 3 engines in a line and CZ-10 can house 7 engines, I think it is almost certain that CZ-12 reusable variant has 7 engines. 1/7* 0.65 (throttle) = 0.09 which is the demand of VTVL.
I think this report of 10km test conducted by 8th academy is how you got the understanding. The test was conducted with the 3.8m stage same as CZ-12, but with 3 70t methalox engines. However if we trust the latest presentation from 8th (why not), it will be Kerosene engines about similar thrust class, YF-102 would be the perfect candidate.
To be frank, China's naming scheme is making less and less logical sense these days, just think what warranted J-35 skipping 15 numbers from J-20.
Question to everyone, do you have the impression/understanding that there will be two reusable variants of CZ-12, if so what is your source? I am confused by the notion, so far we have seen CZ-12 being the non-reusable, CZ-12B as a model being reusable. As far as we have seen right now CASC use number without letter for the base model, so there is always an A variant before B, even if A never materialize. Example is CZ-5 being the base model, CZ-5B being the only materialized variant, but we have seen other lettered variants in development plan of CZ-5 earlier on. Worth to note CZ-5 was the E variant in paper, D was supposed to be the base, but replaced by E.
Last edited:
