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

[DDE]

11 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

*snipped by system*

More translation issues, it seems?

Do you see a micorwave here?

 

[kerbiloid]

31 minutes ago, DDE said:

More translation issues, it seems?

Translation  from Russian to Russian?
I read the original article, it's called "микроволновка" there.

35 minutes ago, DDE said:

Do you see a micorwave here?

You wouldn't find it in our home kitchen, too, because it's on balcony.

As well, there is no water regeneration system in their kitchen. Where they had a place, there they could put the microwave, it's just a heater.

***

And btw as the toilet, the vacuum, the water regeneration, and the oven failed at once, this is the most probable place for their microoven.

Next to the electrolyzer.

So, all four switched off at once.

[Dientus]

For me it doesn't really matter who has a microwave, as long as I can heat up my hot pocket.

[050644zf]

 

[SunlitZelkova]

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

1000 experiments have been approved for launch to the CSS. Obviously, not at the same time- https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02018-3

Quote

The experiments being sent up to the new space station encompass numerous fields. Zhang is the principal investigator for HERD (High Energy Cosmic-Radiation Detection facility), which is a partnership involving Italy, Switzerland, Spain and Germany, slated for 2027. This particle detector will study dark matter and cosmic rays, and will cost some 1 billion to 2 billion yuan (US$155 million to $310 million), says Zhang.

HERD was planned for the potential Italian module for the CSS.

It is unknown whether it is an actual Italian module built in Italy or if it is built in China with Italian equipment installed. This points towards the latter I think.

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

A short article on China's private space industry- https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/china-s-billionaires-take-low-profile-route-to-exploring-space-1.1632093

Instead of suborbital space tourism or a Mars city, they are focusing on practical things, mostly building satellites. There are also private rocket companies working on reusability. I mentioned it a few weeks ago in another post, but China is building a new space port intended only for commercial launches.

This is likely to avoid clogging the existing space ports when the government needs to launch something, and also, as the existing space ports are controlled by the PLA (they are officially part of the PLARF I think), it is a rumored to be a bureaucratic nightmare to get approval for each launch.

[DDE]

9 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

they are officially part of the PLARF I think

Wouldn't it be the Strategic Support Force? RVSN got control of Russia's Space Troops for a few years, and everyone called it a disaster.

[SunlitZelkova]

6 hours ago, DDE said:

Wouldn't it be the Strategic Support Force? RVSN got control of Russia's Space Troops for a few years, and everyone called it a disaster.

Yes. I got confused with history.

For example, Taiyuan SLC is now controlled by the PLASSF SSD, however upon its creation it was controlled by the PLA Second Artillery Corps and called Base 25. Also within the "base" naming system is Base 52 in Anhui Province, a pure ballistic missile formation that operates the SRBMs that would be used against Taiwan in a war, and Base 22 in Shaanxi Province, which is China's nuclear warhead storage site.

The base naming system still prevails but the base numbers were reorganized along with the Second Artillery Corps when it became the PLARF. So Base 22 is now Base 67 and Base 52 is now Base 61.

[SunlitZelkova]

A model of a fully reusable TSTO is now on display at the visitor center of Wenchang Space Center. This is NOT based on a real spacecraft, it is a general display of what the TSTO projects in China (namely Tengyun) look like. I just want to clear that up in case Western media outlets start declaring China's secret spaceplane has been revealed.

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

As stated, this is a test vehicle to learn the ropes with reusability, not an actual launch vehicle prototype.

Deep Blue Aerospace apparently has plans for two launch vehicles, a non-reusable LV and a Falcon 9-like rocket- http://www.dbaspace.com/rocket.html

The first stage appears similar to the F9 first stage, but just as with Hyperbola's rockets, unless actual evidence appears that DBA has hacked and stolen SpaceX design documents, I don't think it can be called a copy.

They appear to plan to use oil rigs for recovery, although it is just promotional art so the plan could be different.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

I find it interesting that for stylistic purposes we paint fake windows on autonomous / remotely guided craft.

 

Any indication on how CN is doing with their reusable attempts?  BO and SX showed it could be done... but both had some spectacular failures along the way.

Edited July 28, 2021 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[sevenperforce]

52 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

As stated, this is a test vehicle to learn the ropes with reusability, not an actual launch vehicle prototype.

Deep Blue Aerospace apparently has plans for two launch vehicles, a non-reusable LV and a Falcon 9-like rocket- http://www.dbaspace.com/rocket.html

Is that a............Grasshopper static fire?

[kerbiloid]

2 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

A new spaceplane manufacturing is in progress.

1 hour ago, sevenperforce said:

Is that a............Grasshopper static fire?

Now you see, where did Musk take it from.

As always, the Chinese invented it earlier.

[DDE]

3 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

This is NOT based on a real spacecraft, it is a general display of what the TSTO projects in China (namely Tengyun) look like. I just want to clear that up in case Western media outlets start declaring China's secret spaceplane has been revealed.

Spoiler

Not gonna stop them, though.

[wumpus]

11 hours ago, DDE said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Not gonna stop them, though.

Curious that it is TSTO.  TSTO is less cool than SSTO (perhaps not in China?  That would be curious), and "cool" is the primary reason for spaceplanes (see Mike Garrison's articles on why it has winglets.  Although since we can't see the tail, they might help for horizontal  stability).

There were a number of proposals in the early 1970s to build the Shuttle this way.  Presumably too expensive (or the always present cross-range argument) even back then (when retropropulsion wasn't on the table).  And then there's the Isp of this thing.  Either the first stage is an air breather (which could have the Isp), or you could  make a slightly larger SSTO with the magic engine/fuel combination.  Again, big old fuel tanks just aren't cool.

[SunlitZelkova]

23 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I find it interesting that for stylistic purposes we paint fake windows on autonomous / remotely guided craft.

 

Any indication on how CN is doing with their reusable attempts?  BO and SX showed it could be done... but both had some spectacular failures along the way.

The first test flight of a reusable rocket in China (Long March 8) is supposed to be next year. The Long March 8 was originally an expendable rocket, but it will be modified to do RTLS.

It lands with the boosters. Both Blue Origin and SpaceX failed on their first attempts so it likely similar results could be expected. If they were to succeed on the first attempt though it would be a powerful propaganda symbol of the dwindling gap between American and Chinese technology. That is a major if though.

9 hours ago, wumpus said:

Curious that it is TSTO.  TSTO is less cool than SSTO (perhaps not in China?  That would be curious), and "cool" is the primary reason for spaceplanes (see Mike Garrison's articles on why it has winglets.  Although since we can't see the tail, they might help for horizontal  stability).

There were a number of proposals in the early 1970s to build the Shuttle this way.  Presumably too expensive (or the always present cross-range argument) even back then (when retropropulsion wasn't on the table).  And then there's the Isp of this thing.  Either the first stage is an air breather (which could have the Isp), or you could  make a slightly larger SSTO with the magic engine/fuel combination.  Again, big old fuel tanks just aren't cool.

https://china-aerospace.blog/2020/05/11/chinas-spaceplane-projects-past-present-and-future/

It just happens to exist. An SSTO is presumably not under development for the same reasons none are in the West and Russia.

Note that in this article suborbital spaceplanes for tourism- basically Chinese counterparts to SpaceShip2- are mentioned, however given the crackdown on eccentric billionaires and return of a more proletarian-ish culture despite rampant consumerism in China, it is unlikely these projects will become metal.

UNLESS, the CPC somehow intends to force these companies to lower the cost of their spaceplane tickets to airline level prices, so it isn't just billionaires flying in space- space is truly "here/there for everyone" in the People's Republic. This would be an excellent, albeit pricy, domestic propaganda move. Even if it is just a few times, just to make people think such is the situation in China (despite it obviously being unfeasible to actually make it so), it might be worth it.

[kerbiloid]

32 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

It lands with the boosters.

Then what's the sense in the boosters?

Usually they are used exactly to be jettisonned asap. If not do that, they become a ballast, and it's better just to increase the central block and add more engines to it.

(Just in case: the Proton lateral blocks aren't separated boosters, they are compartments).

***

Other rhetorical questions.

What's the sense in these grid fins, shadowed by the lateral rockets?

How could this asymmetric thing land when even the symmetric Falcon is bouncing after landing?

Why these landing legs are placed in such strange manner? Did the artist not decide if put them on the cenral or lateral block?

[Beccab]

2 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

If they were to succeed on the first attempt though it would be a powerful propaganda symbol of the dwindling gap between American and Chinese technology. That is a major if though.

I don't doubt they could just hide the first attempts making them appear as normal rocket launches and only when they can do it announce they did it at first attempt just for that reason

[DDE]

27 minutes ago, Beccab said:

I don't doubt they could just hide the first attempts making them appear as normal rocket launches and only when they can do it announce they did it at first attempt just for that reason

It helps thay they have a "controlled RUD" program that excuses the grid fins.

3 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

An SSTO is presumably not under development for the same reasons none are in the West and Russia.

Makeyev keep running around with their Corona (no, not kidding) plug-nozzle VTVL. I don't think they'll be getting any traction, of course, they aren't even in the space launcher business.

[kerbiloid]

25 minutes ago, DDE said:

Makeyev keep running around with their Corona (no, not kidding) plug-nozzle VTVL. I don't think they'll be getting any traction, of course, they aren't even in the space launcher business.

A reusable SLBM.

[DDE]

42 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

A reusable SLBM.

Sea Dragon?

[SunlitZelkova]

22 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Then what's the sense in the boosters?

Usually they are used exactly to be jettisonned asap. If not do that, they become a ballast, and it's better just to increase the central block and add more engines to it.

(Just in case: the Proton lateral blocks aren't separated boosters, they are compartments).

***

Other rhetorical questions.

What's the sense in these grid fins, shadowed by the lateral rockets?

How could this asymmetric thing land when even the symmetric Falcon is bouncing after landing?

Why these landing legs are placed in such strange manner? Did the artist not decide if put them on the cenral or lateral block?

I don't know, but whatever the reason they seem to be confident in it as a number of full scale test articles, including individual landing legs, have already been manufactured.

20 hours ago, Beccab said:

I don't doubt they could just hide the first attempts making them appear as normal rocket launches and only when they can do it announce they did it at first attempt just for that reason

The thing is, the SBIRS and STSS- and of course the Russian IR early warning sats- will detect the engines relighting for landing, so everyone will know anyways. But you never know. They may indeed go with such an option. No narrative may be better than trying to control the narrative.

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

The China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), within which contains numerous space research organizations including CALT and CAST, provided their wind tunnels to aid the Chinese Olympic team's performance in swimming and rowing.

More pictures-

Spoiler

 

[DDE]

3 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

The thing is, the SBIRS and STSS- and of course the Russian IR early warning sats- will detect the engines relighting for landing, so everyone will know anyways.

Whoa whoa whoa. I don't have clearance, and probably neither do you, so it's not "everyone". In fact, data acquired from satellites is so notoriously difficult to declassify before sharing that the major boon of the Open Skies Treaty was that the US acquired non-classified reconnaissance footage that it could (indeed, had to by treaty) promptly share with its allies.

So we can't make use of the data - whereas people who can may (or may not) know a lot more than we do anyway.

When it comes to obfuscation, it's always a question of whom exactly you're looking to fool.

[SunlitZelkova]

10 hours ago, DDE said:

Whoa whoa whoa. I don't have clearance, and probably neither do you, so it's not "everyone". In fact, data acquired from satellites is so notoriously difficult to declassify before sharing that the major boon of the Open Skies Treaty was that the US acquired non-classified reconnaissance footage that it could (indeed, had to by treaty) promptly share with its allies.

So we can't make use of the data - whereas people who can may (or may not) know a lot more than we do anyway.

When it comes to obfuscation, it's always a question of whom exactly you're looking to fool.

Yes. I shall correct my statement. "...detect the engines relighting for landing, so everyone might know anyways"

*insert now non-existent [snip] tweet regarding failed Iranian rocket test, including an image likely taken by a KH-11*

Now the current US administration is unlikely to take such action, but the US military does do public (or at least partially public) intelligence reports to the Senate and House, and even if the test is a failure, talking about China's development of reusable rockets could help scare politicians into further funding for the USSF by demonstrating China's advancing technology, or actually be deemed important to national security. So even if it isn't stated that BMD satellites detected it, it is possible a secret failed test could come to light in some form. Could. I shall not say "will".

Edited July 30, 2021 by Vanamonde

[Vanamonde]

Some comments removed. Politics may be relevant, but political discussions also invariably turn into arguments, which is why this forum has ruled the entire subject off-limits. Please avoid that. 

[SunlitZelkova]

Translation, not by me-

Quote

The Chinese startup Deep Blue Aerospace, founded in 2016, has successfully completed the first "Grasshopper" type test with its Nebula-M launcher. The craft reached an altitude of 10m. The Tonnerre-5 engine with a vacuum thrust of 50kN is reusable and produced in 3D printing.

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

i-Space is the company that plans to build the Hyperbola-3, the rocket I shared images of in an earlier post that is the spitting image of the Falcon 9.

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

I haven't seen anyone mention it, but this is the first time ever two space stations from different countries will be operating at the same time. Due to failures to launch the next stations after Salyut 1, Skylab was the sole space station for its operational (crewed) duration.

Edited August 5, 2021 by SunlitZelkova

[Beccab]

3 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

I haven't seen anyone mention it, but this is the first time ever two space stations from different countries will be operating at the same time.

I'm not completely sure since I didn't follow the CNSA back then, but didn't they already have a smaller, single launch space station before this one?