Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)

T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
SlothmanAllen said:
Thanks for the reply! I noticed it mentioned China had a 600 second and 1000 second duration burn, but was that on a static test stand or actual flight time? I believe the US record is an actual flight and that record is several years out of date! Russia has the 3M22 Tsirkon which is operational, so wouldn't this have the record for longest duration scramjet flight?

I am very confused about the status of a lot of these programs and their so-called records and achievements.
Click to expand...
Both 600s test by CAS and 1000s test by CASC are ground tests.

There was a flight test in 2020 CASC. There was another flight test July 2022 by a 3rd team of CASIC/NWPU. All these flight tests are of scramjet and successful, but no details about duration of powered flight were reported.

Remember that flight duration in an actual flight test isn't much of meaning concerning scramjet. The obstacle of scramjet is to maintain stable combustion in supersonic air flow which can be well simulated in a test facility like wind tunnel. The ground test gives more valuable insight than telemetry data gathered onboard the craft.

The purpose of flight test is to verify the mode transition if it is a combined cycle engine, or ignition of the scram combustion chamber in supersonic airflow which the ground test has difficult to test.

If I must make a speculation on X-51A's flight test, I would say it is more for Budget and PR reasons as most US programs are set to be budgeted in tranches and milestones, no further funding is coming unless there is something to demonstrate. We have seen this in SLS, the railgun and EMALS etc.
 
Last edited:
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
One has to wonder why there are startups in such particular military areas like this one. The Chinese government has considerably better engines being developed, made, tested, used, by all the CAxyz institutes. Private guys can't outcompete the government, may as well work for one of the many departments in one of the many institutes/research centres for propulsion technologies.

For space launch, I can see private ventures gaining some hold of the market but never really outcompeting the gov agencies/manufacturers and contractors for the major gov space projects. Those are going to stay CASC, CAST, CASIC, and the ten other CA agencies which are at the top of the game and second to none these days, let alone be outcompeted by relatively underfunded private ventures. It's not like the Americans where they do give major public projects (NASA) to private companies. The Chinese private ventures will likely have a limited side market only for decades until they explore niches. Granted that some are exploring their own path, most aren't.

With military aerospace propulsion, it becomes even more ridiculous to have private ventures. At best you're double handling work and sucking up good minds pursuing double handling and you'd be working at a lesser pace and lesser funding with lesser equipment and resource availability than the gov teams doing similar projects. The private guys in the military exotic propulsion should really be taking top CAS/research university talent and exploring totally different concepts - the magnetic EM drive thing that was proposed by a Chinese gov team a few years ago and whatever else that isn't known and already pursued/mastered by gov counterparts.
 
A

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
ougoah said:
One has to wonder why there are startups in such particular military areas like this one. The Chinese government has considerably better engines being developed, made, tested, used, by all the CAxyz institutes. Private guys can't outcompete the government, may as well work for one of the many departments in one of the many institutes/research centres for propulsion technologies.

For space launch, I can see private ventures gaining some hold of the market but never really outcompeting the gov agencies/manufacturers and contractors for the major gov space projects. Those are going to stay CASC, CAST, CASIC, and the ten other CA agencies which are at the top of the game and second to none these days, let alone be outcompeted by relatively underfunded private ventures. It's not like the Americans where they do give major public projects (NASA) to private companies. The Chinese private ventures will likely have a limited side market only for decades until they explore niches. Granted that some are exploring their own path, most aren't.

With military aerospace propulsion, it becomes even more ridiculous to have private ventures. At best you're double handling work and sucking up good minds pursuing double handling and you'd be working at a lesser pace and lesser funding with lesser equipment and resource availability than the gov teams doing similar projects. The private guys in the military exotic propulsion should really be taking top CAS/research university talent and exploring totally different concepts - the magnetic EM drive thing that was proposed by a Chinese gov team a few years ago and whatever else that isn't known and already pursued/mastered by gov counterparts.
Click to expand...
Private companies are less conservative and therefore more innovative. A huge number of military-civil fusion startups will propel the PLA.
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
tphuang said:
friendly advise to you, don't post nonsense from this guy. He is the prime example of think tank stooges.
Click to expand...
A think tank stooge maybe but it is a report from Washington Post not him.
siegecrossbow said:
Then how come they are struggling with it?
Click to expand...
Better question: why Chinese military scientists familiar with the IC-HGV tested last year are talking with Washington Post journalist?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top