China are working on a reusable shenzhou

[xenomorph555]

From a Chinese space article I looked at the Chinese are apparently working on a reusable Shenzhou. This is due to the Mir class space station were they want higher levels of efficiency and cost cuts, etc.

Note only the capsule is being made reusable and this is done by a new reusable parachute system.

EDIT: Should also note the experimental satellites they send up now and then as secondary payloads have also been testing this R-shenzhou hardware, apparently.

[Kryten]

Source?

tenchars

[Torquemadus]

It's worth noting that the Orion capsule is re-useable, but the hugely expensive SLS rocket required to launch it is not. A re-useable Shenzhou is nice, but it isn't the part of the rocket that needs to be re-useable.

Remember that the Space Shuttle orbiter was re-useable, but turned out to be more expensive to launch than the expendable rockets it was supposed to replace. This was due to the cost of maintaining the standing army of workers needed to prepare it for each launch. Also, although it was technically a heavy lifter, most of the mass it lifted to orbit was it's own dry mass, not payload.

It's been said that the Shuttle was designed "upside down" and that the first stage is the part that should have been re-useable.

If China could engineer a fully re-useable launch vehicle that costs less per launch than current expendables (as SpaceX are currently trying to do), then companies and governments all over the world would queue up to buy their launch services. ESA are currently flying a licenced version of the Soyuz launcher from French Guiana because it's cheaper to do that than launch everything on their own Ariane and Vega rockets.

[xenomorph555]

Source?

tenchars

Space China, while they are very useful and reliable with information I recommend taking this with salt. Although there's not necessarily anything unrealistic about this.

[Kryten]

Where's the article?

[xenomorph555]

It's worth noting that the Orion capsule is re-useable, but the hugely expensive SLS rocket required to launch it is not. A re-useable Shenzhou is nice, but it isn't the part of the rocket that needs to be re-useable.

Remember that the Space Shuttle orbiter was re-useable, but turned out to be more expensive to launch than the expendable rockets it was supposed to replace. This was due to the cost of maintaining the standing army of workers needed to prepare it for each launch. Also, although it was technically a heavy lifter, most of the mass it lifted to orbit was it's own dry mass, not payload.

It's been said that the Shuttle was designed "upside down" and that the first stage is the part that should have been re-useable.

If China could engineer a fully re-useable launch vehicle that costs less per launch than current expendables (as SpaceX are currently trying to do), then companies and governments all over the world would queue up to buy their launch services. ESA are currently flying a licenced version of the Soyuz launcher from French Guiana because it's cheaper to do that than launch everything on their own Ariane and Vega rockets.

Before SpaceX it is thought China had the cheapest launchers, reason is because China is a massive industrial machine capable of pumping out cheap rockets like mad and secondly due to communism. What I am trying to say is launch vehicles are not a problem price wise.

While I understand the shuttle was expensive, you should note the differences, one is a giant mega space plane and is the most complex machine ever built, the other is a small 3 man descent capsule. They don't have to prepare or upgrade it at such a massive scale.

There is many reasons for them doing what they trying to do but I believe the main reason may not necessarily be cost, but their inability to mass produce Shenzhous at a rate needed (3 a year) however you would also be delving into the cost reason with that as well.

Considering Chang'e 3 was completely automated/robotic when landing I believe the Chinese could easily create a reusable rocket, probably starting with the LM-2D's for experiments.

[xenomorph555]

Where's the article?

Here:

http://www.spacechina.com/n25/n144/n206/n133097/c797027/content.html

Kinda hard to read in translated form. In this article they are talking about the reusable parachute system

[AngelLestat]

There is many reasons for them doing what they trying to do but I believe the main reason may not necessarily be cost, but their inability to mass produce Shenzhous at a rate needed (3 a year) however you would also be delving into the cost reason with that as well.

Is not related to cost?? Why they can not do more than 3 by year in case that is what they need?

Every time that I read something related to economy in this section has no sense.

If you make something reusable you have a lot of saves, no only in materials and men hours, also in testing.

Every time you make a capsule, you need to be 100% sure that it will work. For this you need an exhaustive protocol to assemble and then testing each wire, components, chips, etc.

And you can not launch it, you need to test all this in a simulation enviroment.

On the other hand, if you recover a craft and you can reusable, then it means that you just need to do few checks, remplace the parts that you know you need to, search issues is easy, you just take a look if something is disconnected or seems different from the first time you test it.

But you know that it works! Because it was into space, all systems works, and it back. That is the most value thing.

So if they find a way to deal with re-entry and sea water, the two main issues of wear, then they can reduce costs by a lot.

[xenomorph555]

Is not related to cost?? Why they can not do more than 3 by year in case that is what they need?

Every time that I read something related to economy in this section has no sense.

If you make something reusable you have a lot of saves, no only in materials and men hours, also in testing.

Every time you make a capsule, you need to be 100% sure that it will work. For this you need an exhaustive protocol to assemble and then testing each wire, components, chips, etc.

And you can not launch it, you need to test all this in a simulation enviroment.

On the other hand, if you recover a craft and you can reusable, then it means that you just need to do few checks, remplace the parts that you know you need to, search issues is easy, you just take a look if something is disconnected or seems different from the first time you test it.

But you know that it works! Because it was into space, all systems works, and it back. That is the most value thing.

So if they find a way to deal with re-entry and sea water, the two main issues of wear, then they can reduce costs by a lot.

I didn't say the reasoning was nothing to do with cost, I said it was my belief that the main reason was not cost, as in yes cost is a big factor but my theory was that the main reason was manufacturing which is completely separate from cost. Sure you can say "Here's a few billion dollars build X" but it won't be built in a flash it will take months or possibly years.