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

[kerbiloid]

21 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

This?

Any known R-C lunar railroads?

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

4 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Any known R-C lunar railroads?

Mare Gobi?

image3-min.png (1512×1080) (thesmartlocal.com)

(Okay, technically not lunar)

 

[SunlitZelkova]

11 hours ago, terry55 said:

I've read that Russia is going to build a station on the surface of the Moon with China. What do you think about that point? Do you think that really possible at all?

It is impossible to tell what will happen in the future. A war may start two years from now over Taiwan, that completely wrecks the economies of China and the US and kills all funding for deep space exploration (along with spaceflight being literally killed during the cyber and ASAT combat).

But in terms of how it looks right now, it is hard to tell. Judging from the video released at GLEX, it is a primarily robotic research station with a capacity for short surface stays in the long run. China was planning to do this anyways- a robotic research station on the lunar south pole has been known as the end goal of their robotic lunar program for awhile.

Russia (that is, Rogozin) proposed creating a legal framework for the project (maybe a Russia-China counter to the Artemis Accords), so we will have to see what becomes of that.

The actual project itself looks iffy. It's not like the ISS where without the Russian section the whole thing doesn't work- China can do this on its own and is developing its own set of spacecraft (unlike the ISS where the US lacked a long duration capsule and required Soyuz). So while this likely will happen in some form- China is going to build the lunar station anyways- whether Russia stays will be a matter of politics.

Hopefully it succeeds though.

7 hours ago, terry55 said:

China has the resources and technology to do this on its own. Russia has a great deal of experience in manned space operations. Both have political reasons to pursue projects such as this. So it can be a good collaboration. However introducing another sovereign government into the program brings complexities and Earth bound politics into the mix.
 

The thing is, there isn't too much too lose for either side with this project. Russia and China have not declared themselves as allies- communist party affiliated papers regularly state China will not form some kind of Warsaw Pact-like alliance, in order to solve its problems on its own. But ever since China ceded disputed territory to Russia, IIRC, there hasn't been much tension between them.

The only dicey thing is risking loss of intellectual property. But China is getting to a point where it probably doesn't need to conduct such actions in the field of space/rocketry, vs. collaborating in the early 2000s would likely have lead to theft.

So the politics, from what I know as of this post, don't appear too stormy for the road ahead.

However as for the external factors (rising tensions with the West) and whether that will result in some kind of catastrophe that could destroy deep space exploration plans, it is hard to tell.

We will just have to wait and see.

[kerbiloid]

Who'd be the station boss? He can be only one.

[SunlitZelkova]

That is the biggest threat to the project. If for whatever reason China tries to take more or characterize it (in propaganda, announcements, actual operations whatever) as a "Chinese-lead" project, Russia will leave, just as it decided not to participate in Artemis for the same reason (or at least partially for that reason).

As for who it is/will be- no one knows. So far it is the "International Lunar Research Station"- not Russia-China, not China-Russia. Because the treaty that will govern its operations hasn't been written yet, whether there will be some kind of hierarchy or not is yet to be determined.

[kerbiloid]

The Vostochny  site is placed to let the rockets not pass over the Chinese territory.

[RCgothic]

Mark Watney had better not get stuck on Mars.

 

 

[DDE]

13 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Who'd be the station boss? He can be only one.

Well, Federal Law 5663-I "On space activities" Article 20 Section 3 states any Russian vehicle can only be captained by a Russian citizen. I'm sure the Chinese have a similar position.

[kerbiloid]

Both on top.

***

Though we have a perfect example of successful international cooperation running right now.

The ISS. The two national segments. 

No problems, successful relations, open-hearted co-operation.

Absolutely no intentions to divorce.

If this is going between Russians and Americans, why wouldn't between the Russians and Chinese.

Probably, an R-C Antarctic station would be a good start. Waiting for it.

Edited June 23, 2021 by kerbiloid

[YNM]

14 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Who'd be the station boss? He can be only one.

But you can have different person in charge of different things. That's how it currently works for the ISS...

On 6/22/2021 at 9:20 PM, terry55 said:

However introducing another sovereign government into the program brings complexities and Earth bound politics into the mix.

I honestly still don't know what position would members in a russia-china co-op be like. We'll have to see what they could come up with, but there's a chance one side will wing it alone.

[DDE]

With three people and a permanent listed address, there are semi-serious quips (fuelled by press conferences a decade ago) that the station now has a proper Communist Party cell.

So, I guess, meming is in order.

Spoiler

 

 

[SunlitZelkova]

8 hours ago, RCgothic said:

Mark Watney had better not get stuck on Mars.

 

 

This is disturbing.

Although I suppose there wasn't any cooperation in space during the 2000s when relations were decent anyways, so it doesn't necessarily signal a severe decline in relations.

Some think Nelson does not actually think that.

He contradicts himself in that sentence.

1 hour ago, DDE said:

With three people and a permanent listed address, there are semi-serious quips (fuelled by press conferences a decade ago) that the station now has a proper Communist Party cell.

So, I guess, meming is in order.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

They are considering creating one on Tianhe.

Unless by "station", you meant Tianhe, not the ILRS, in which case, never mind.

They have yet to submit the paperwork though.

7 hours ago, DDE said:

Well, Federal Law 5663-I "On space activities" Article 20 Section 3 states any Russian vehicle can only be captained by a Russian citizen. I'm sure the Chinese have a similar position.

Would a habitat count as a vehicle?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

The full footage will be released eventually-

Weirdly, if you open this tweet on Twitter, it says the images of the space telescope "may contain sensitive content".

The space telescope is a free flying component of Tianhe/CSS, although just how far it is supposed to go is unknown.

Xi Jinping talked to the taikonauts, and they have unpacked cargo from Tianzhou-12-

In case you are interested, video of their conversation-

Spoiler

 

More images from cargo unpacking-

Spoiler

An EVA is planned to take place in the next 10 days.

[kerbiloid]

_{(misunderstood, thought about the lunar base)}

  

3 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Weirdly, if you open this tweet on Twitter, it says the images of the space telescope "may contain sensitive content".

It contains. The sensitive elements of the camera.

Edited June 24, 2021 by kerbiloid

[DDE]

5 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Weirdly, if you open this tweet on Twitter, it says the images of the space telescope "may contain sensitive content".

Twitter's often mocked in that regard. At the very least it seems to tag any material that has to do with controversy-inducing countries. I think nearly everything regarding Syria and Iraq gets caught regardless of the actual content.

5 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Would a habitat count as a vehicle?

The term used is literally "object", specifically "piloted object".

Interestingly, under the typology of ГОСТ Р 53802-2010 "Space systems and stations. Terms and definitions", item 106, a space station is merely a multimission vehicle (space apparatus, item 102) used to carry out scientific and applied objectives, with no reference to crew (e.g. item 122 "habitable space vehicle" or item 123 "visitable space vehicle"). Also oddly enough, they already have a definition of a space base (as an orbital shipyard), an interorbital tug (not in the sense of Briz or Fregat) and a propellant depot, but not of anything having to do with other stellar bodies.

Also, it turns out "stage-and-a-half" is approved Russian terminology.

Edited June 24, 2021 by DDE

[kerbiloid]

8 minutes ago, DDE said:

The term used is literally "object", specifically "piloted object".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objects_in_Space

8 minutes ago, DDE said:

Also, it turns out "stage-and-a-half" is approved Russian terminology.

It was in the 1980s "Энциклопедия 'Космонавтика'" / "Encyclopaedia 'Cosmonautics'", about Atlas.

So, approved by Glushko (the chief editor).

Edited June 24, 2021 by kerbiloid

[050644zf]

 

 

Edited June 24, 2021 by 050644zf

[YNM]

 

20 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

The space telescope is a free flying component of Tianhe/CSS, although just how far it is supposed to go is unknown.

I thought it was more like Hubble...

[SunlitZelkova]

16 hours ago, DDE said:

Twitter's often mocked in that regard. At the very least it seems to tag any material that has to do with controversy-inducing countries. I think nearly everything regarding Syria and Iraq gets caught regardless of the actual content.

The term used is literally "object", specifically "piloted object".

Interestingly, under the typology of ГОСТ Р 53802-2010 "Space systems and stations. Terms and definitions", item 106, a space station is merely a multimission vehicle (space apparatus, item 102) used to carry out scientific and applied objectives, with no reference to crew (e.g. item 122 "habitable space vehicle" or item 123 "visitable space vehicle"). Also oddly enough, they already have a definition of a space base (as an orbital shipyard), an interorbital tug (not in the sense of Briz or Fregat) and a propellant depot, but not of anything having to do with other stellar bodies.

Also, it turns out "stage-and-a-half" is approved Russian terminology.

Interesting. I wonder if the space base dates from or is related to MKBS or some of the Mir-2 designs, so perhaps it became law in case something like that is built?

This could create issues if the cosmonauts and taikonauts are to live in the same habitat (and habitats are added to the law). Neither side would want to permanently give up the opportunity of having one of their own command the base.

1 hour ago, YNM said:

 

I thought it was more like Hubble...

It is, it is just intended to be capable of docking to the station to allow for servicing, instead of having to build a spaceplane.

There is a sort of "Sino-JWST" in the works as well, that would feature in-orbit assembly. Currently just a research project, no funding or plan to cut metal.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Lot's of great info has been revealed about China's deep space exploration vehicles, courtesy of a lecture by Long Lehao, a rocket designer, given at Hong Kong Polytechnic University recently.

Three variants- Long March 9A (CZ-9A), Long March 9B (CZ-9B), and CZ-9. B will not have boosters, possibly to allow for first stage recovery.

The "921 rocket"- intended to launch the Next Generation Crewed Spacecraft and crewed lunar lander in a two launch LOR architecture, now has an official name- Long March 5DY (CZ-5DY). China may attempt a crewed lunar landing before 2030.

In addition, it appears the Next Generation Crewed Spacecraft will have a built in launch escape system, similar to Crew Dragon, instead of an escape tower. However, for LEO missions it will have an escape tower- which implies there will be two different versions of the Next Generation Crewed Spacecraft, perhaps a variant with maximum crew (7 taikonauts/astronauts/cosmonauts) for space station transport, and a BLEO version with less crew.

Elon actually replied to this tweet-

Let the second Moon Race begin, with a GAO dispute over the lunar lander and a quiet presentation at a Hong Kong university, instead of an inspiring speech by JFK!

China will also be attempting to land its first recoverable booster next year, of the Long March 8R rocket.

The Chinese MSR mission has now been officially referred to as Tianwen-2, indicating there will be no further Mars missions from China until 2028.

A two launch architecture- with Long March 5 and Long March 3 launches- is still on the table.

Several deep space projects are mentioned in the image-

1. China will launch a sample return mission to asteroid 2016 HO3 in 2024, on a Long March 3B rocket.

2. Hard to tell, but there is something about launching a Jupiter spacecraft before 2034 on a Long March 5.

3. China will be launching a spacecraft that will fly out to 100 AU as part of the celebrations for the 100th anniversary of the People's Republic. Launch is apparently in 2049.

This lecture also discussed space based solar power and multiple spaceplane projects. Full video, in Chinese, here-

There has also been some poorly reported news about the Chinese space program too. China is not aiming for a crewed landing on Mars in 2033.

I wouldn't be surprised if this suddenly creates a call for a crewed Mars program to begin in the US, at least by nationalists. The likes of CNBC and ABC news are already hyping up a new space race.

It would be truly comical if this kick-starts a NASA crewed Mars program, all because of a mistranslation and a desire to get ad revenue through shocking headlines.

[YNM]

8 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

It is, it is just intended to be capable of docking to the station to allow for servicing, instead of having to build a spaceplane.

Ah right, I didn't know that. That's interesting... so the telescope is actively manoeuverable and it can rendezvous with the station... cough derrived tech cough

Spoiler

8 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

It would be truly comical if this kick-starts a NASA crewed Mars program

Eh, if NASA's HLS contract is any indication we might actually see " *that* " on Mars being supported by the gov't. Let us begin the process of killing 'old' space and nominate in the 'new' space.

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by YNM

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

10 hours ago, YNM said:

the telescope is actively manoeuverable and it can rendezvous with the station

Um... Even if they only put 300m between the two - won't there be quite a bit of drifting?  

[SunlitZelkova]

7 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Um... Even if they only put 300m between the two - won't there be quite a bit of drifting?  

Yes. There will be a maximum limit to how far it can go before being unable to return, but it isn't intended to stay at a fixed distance away from the station.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

This lecture also discussed space based solar power and multiple spaceplane projects.

Here is some info on those.

For SBSP, it is very hard to tell, but the plan looks a little like this. All likely aspirational as the tweet indicates-

2022- Launch of a small scale demonstrator capable of supplying 50 kilowatts.

2030- Launch of a larger experimental array capable of supplying 660 megawatts.

2060- Launch of full scale satellite, capable of supplying 10000 gigawatts.

Translation, not by me-

Quote

2025: Single stage engineering implementation - rocket powered, vertical take off, horizontal landing, controllable (something), partly reusable

2030: Two stage engineering implementation - rocket powered, vertical take off, horizontal landing, controllable (something), fully reusable

2035: Complete reusable - combined cycle engine, horizontal take off and landing, single stage to orbit, fully reusable

Whether these projects will actually come to fruition is unknown, not only because of their apparent ambition, but because news about spaceplane development in China is pretty hard to find.

[kerbiloid]

7 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

2022- Launch of a small scale demonstrator capable of supplying 50 kilowatts.

2030- Launch of a larger experimental array capable of supplying 660 megawatts.

Absolutely realistic. 13 200 times greater area in 8 years.

240 kW is the peak total of all ISS panels.

40 kW is Mir.

Why not just make 3 000 times bigger solar panels than the ISS has.

7 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

2060- Launch of full scale satellite, capable of supplying 10000 gigawatts.

And somebody call the 2050 fusion plans too blurry.

These people have a sharp and clear vision of the future.

[SunlitZelkova]

32 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Absolutely realistic. 13 200 times greater area in 8 years.

240 kW is the peak total of all ISS panels.

40 kW is Mir.

Why not just make 3 000 times bigger solar panels than the ISS has.

And somebody call the 2050 fusion plans too blurry.

These people have a sharp and clear vision of the future.

It is likely just made up dates in an attempt to wow the Hong Kongers. The China Academy of Space Technology hasn't even made much progress in the way of the technology required anyways.

The thing about the plan is it does involve creating huge satellites. If I am interpreting the image of the slide correctly (it is a little blurry and hard to tell) the 10000 gigawatt satellite will be 20 km by 1 km, and will require 143 Long March 9 launches to complete. It isn't one solar panel of course though.

660 megawatt satellite is 300 meters by 600 meters and requires 17 Long March 9 launches.

With the will and money, it's not too dumb of an idea, NASA and the DOE studied such a plan in the 70s- http://spaceflighthistory.blogspot.com/2016/12/energy-from-space-department-of.html

On an off-hand note, this is the sort of project rapid-reuse Starship is great for. In fact, the cargo spacecraft proposed by Boeing for the NASA-DOE study basically has the same configuration as Starship, but with plane-like return instead of propulsive landing (right down to a chomper-like payload bay).

[kerbiloid]

41 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

It isn't one solar panel of course though.

The ISS panels as well. They are segments.

41 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

will require 143 Long March 9 launches to complete

Reminds me of hundreds launches for the Horizon base.

42 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

NASA and the DOE studied such a plan in the 70s

And were dropped.

Solar power plans from 70s perfectly match the 80s Mir-like space station.

[SunlitZelkova]

14 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The ISS panels as well. They are segments.

Reminds me of hundreds launches for the Horizon base.

And were dropped.

Solar power plans from 70s perfectly match the 80s Mir-like space station.

Project Horizon was never intended to be a realistic plan. It was mainly created so that come around 1959 when the government was starting to get serious about space, the Army could say they had experience in space and keep their spaceflight program under the ABMA. The Eisenhower administration saw through their games and military lost all of its space projects, apart from the Air Force which had actual reasons to build things like reconnaissance satellites.

The 70s SBSP project was created in the 70s but it was never intended to be built in the 20th century. Construction wasn't expected to begin until the year 2000. And it wasn't even a program anyways- just a study. It was not closed due to infeasibility, but due to pro-oil voices in the Reagan administration attempting to kill government research on most alternative energy sources.