tater

Chinese Space Program (CNSA) & Ch. commercial launch and discussion

Recommended Posts

May 8
Long March 4C • Gaofen 5
Launch time: Approx. 1830 GMT (2:30 p.m. EDT)
Launch site: Taiyuan, China
A Chinese Long March 4C rocket will launch the Gaofen 5 hyperspectral Earth-imaging satellite. Delayed from May 2. [May 4]
Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another "private" Chinese space company has a launch coming up:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long March 4C in 11 minutes. Squat for coverage, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Queqiao is set to launch in 6 minutes.. anyone got a live stream i can watch??

 

edit: so it doesn't look like there is a livestream for this launch so here's some information on the mission:

http://www.newsweek.com/race-moon-chinese-launch-lunar-communication-station-sunday-933057

Some Dutch science going on even for this mission nice...

Edited by cypher_00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

life is cheap, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, tater said:

 

Soooo... Will they? IIRC part of the reason why China isn't a part of the ISS research is because there are technologies there other nations don't want them to have.

I hope there will be as much international space collaboration as possible though. The more the better IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tater said:

 

Are we going to see Crew Dragon do a docking with it :D? Probably not, but its still cool to think about.

Are the Chinese docking ports different than the ISS ones? If Dragon were to come to the ISS, they might need to pull a docking adapter out of its trunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tater said:

 

Hmm...

standards.png

I wonder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, NSEP said:

Are we going to see Crew Dragon do a docking with it :D? Probably not, but its still cool to think about.

Are the Chinese docking ports different than the ISS ones? If Dragon were to come to the ISS, they might need to pull a docking adapter out of its trunk.

They use an APAS-89 based docking system so they might be able to dock to the shuttle ports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours old, but WTH:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/29/2018 at 1:32 AM, Wjolcz said:

Soooo... Will they? IIRC part of the reason why China isn't a part of the ISS research is because there are technologies there other nations don't want them to have.

I hope there will be as much international space collaboration as possible though. The more the better IMO.

US policy and the issue that China tend to steal a lot of technology they get their hands on , most obvious one is Russian fighter jet engines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/29/2018 at 9:16 AM, NSEP said:

That article is outdated, and APAS is not IDS.

The US section of the ISS was equipped with Russian APAS-89 ports, because the Shuttle docking systems were originally designed for the Mir/Shuttle program (and salvaged from Buran).

The Russian section of the ISS uses the old probe and drogue system that goes back to Salyut. Shenzhou uses a system that is based on APAS-89, but it might have its own quirks that makes it incompatible with the original APAS.

Today, the APAS-89 ports on the ISS are in the process of being permanently fitted with IDS adapters for CST-100 and Dragon, which rules out using APAS any more: IDA-2 was installed in 2016 and IDA-3 is going up in november (IDA-1 was destroyed in CRS-7). So unless Shenzhou converts to IDS before november, it can no longer dock at the ISS.

If it was to happen, there would have to be a long certification process to ensure that it complies with all ISS rules and systems: docking system compatibility of course, but also thruster impingement, residual pollution, structural stress, radio interference, etc...  The whole process could take several years.

Edited by Nibb31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A serious question: what country would consider sending anything to a station run by an outfit that allows this:

The lack of concern for human beings downrange taints their entire program, IMHO. It seems like any country that sent so much as an experiment would be endorsing this behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imho, they would better concentrate on reusable rockets than on orbital station.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

Imho, they would better concentrate on reusable rockets than on orbital station.

Hard to say.  A reusable rocket program might actually be more expensive, and if they can be in position to have the only orbital station after the ISS is retired they want one.  Long term you want both, but the orbital station may have more time constraints.

Some financial analyst ran the numbers and insists that the Falcon 9 reusability program doesn't save anything.  On any US government contract (other than R&D specifically for reusability), this would be considered a failure.  For any long term planning organization (like Spacex or the Chinese space program), this would be considered "learning how to land rockets for free" and a wild success.  Still, delaying reuse until the kinks are worked out of disposable rockets is probably a good idea (spacex presumably hired enough people who understood disposable rockets).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wumpus said:

Hard to say.  A reusable rocket program might actually be more expensive, and if they can be in position to have the only orbital station after the ISS is retired they want one. 

I mean to avoid dropping the gifts from sky.
That's exactly that case when reusability is not a luxury, but the way to keep roofs safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

I mean to avoid dropping the gifts from sky.
That's exactly that case when reusability is not a luxury, but the way to keep roofs safe.

If they really cared about that, why are they using hypergolics?  Ignition can't be *that* hard for the first stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wumpus said:

If they really cared about that, why are they using hypergolics?

USSR cared about that, but was happily using hypergolics in Proton and Kosmos rockets (i.e. in most of launches).

European Ariane, btw, did this, too.

Hypergolics are just more handy than cryogenics.
Also if you are anyway producing UDMH for ICBM, then why not.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.