China's Space Program News Thread

[Temstar]

Interesting news from November last year:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China Satellite Communications signs deal with China Academy of Space Technology and China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology for four communication satellites and launch spots with Long March 3B/G2 (launch to GTO) for 1.134 billion RMB. This works out to be about 40 million USD per satellite + launch.

Compare this with Falcon 9, which is 62 million USD per launch to GTO for new rocket and 50 million USD to GTO for reused. This is not including price for a payload which the above contract does.

Ergo: Long March 3B/G2 launch price for GTO is already cheaper than Falcon 9. Granted a foreign company may not get as good of a deal as China Satcom (which is a child company of CASC which is a state owned company).

 

[davidau]

Well, I’m not so sure about the competitive edge of kids in the States. When you get a huge shiny trophy by getting an eighth place in a spelling bee, it’s hard for kids to develop any kind of competitive edge... Back in high school, I got a nice looking “bronze” trophy for simply participating in a science fair. All I did was to draw some garbage on a little poster board. That was enough to get myself a trophy...

Those jocks who participate in competitive sports in schools usually don’t end up very successful when they grow up. It’s the “losers” and nerds who usually grow up to be Bill Gates’.

Differs from the US and the West education systems, China and its people are extremely serious about education. Hence they produce top young scientists and engineers. The space programs, for example.

Gao Kao [spelling?], or year 12 exams define the quality of students to enter what universities they would prefer. It is very competitive due to the number of students and universities ratio,

 

[silentlurker]

Ergo: Long March 3B/G2 launch price for GTO is already cheaper than Falcon 9.

Its cheaper on a per-launch basis, but more expensive on a per-kg basis. (Depending on the satellite costs for long march, of course)

 

[Temstar]

Its cheaper on a per-launch basis, but more expensive on a per-kg basis. (Depending on the satellite costs for long march, of course)

The payload capacity to GTO for both rockets are pretty similar:

LM-3B/G2: 7.1 ton to GTO
Falcon 9: 8.3 tons to GTO expended (5.5 tons if recovery)

For LEO the difference however is pretty big and I think Falcon 9 would be a lot cheaper:
LM-3B/G2: 11.5 ton to LEO
Falcon 9: 22.8 tons to LEO

The difference is because Falcon 9 is slightly bigger rocket with a higher Isp lower stages, while Long March 3B has a high energy cryogenic 3rd stage which is much better for launching to higher orbits.

 

[silentlurker]

The payload capacity to GTO for both rockets are pretty similar:

LM-3B/G2: 7.1 ton to GTO
Falcon 9: 8.3 tons to GTO expended (5.5 tons if recovery)

For LEO the difference however is pretty big and I think Falcon 9 would be a lot cheaper:
LM-3B/G2: 11.5 ton to LEO
Falcon 9: 22.8 tons to LEO

The difference is because Falcon 9 is slightly bigger rocket with a higher Isp lower stages, while Long March 3B has a high energy cryogenic 3rd stage which is much better for launching to higher orbits.

Where did you get the 7 ton number?

 

[Temstar]

Where did you get the 7 ton number?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Actually I was wrong, the manual says 5.5 tons, my mistake:

The LM-3BE is based on the LM-3B but has a lengthened first stage and boosters, which increases the GTO launch capability up to 5,500 kg.

 

[gelgoog]

Well, that's one issue with having large rockets. IIRC average GEO satellite weight today is around 4 tons. So if you use a much larger rocket to launch such a small satellite it isn't cost effective. That's why Arianespace does dual launches where they launch 2 satellites at a time whenever possible on Ariane 5. From what I understand SpaceX Falcon 9 has minimal capability for multiple launches like this. So unless the satellites themselves can put themselves into the proper orbit they'll only launch one satellite at a time. Exceptions would be missions like the ABS 3A/Eutelsat 115 West B launch where the satellites can put themselves into the proper orbit with solar electric propulsion.

 

[B.I.B.]

delete

 

[KYli]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[taxiya]

Interesting news from November last year:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China Satellite Communications signs deal with China Academy of Space Technology and China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology for four communication satellites and launch spots with Long March 3B/G2 (launch to GTO) for 1.134 billion RMB. This works out to be about 40 million USD per satellite + launch.

Compare this with Falcon 9, which is 62 million USD per launch to GTO for new rocket and 50 million USD to GTO for reused. This is not including price for a payload which the above contract does.

Ergo: Long March 3B/G2 launch price for GTO is already cheaper than Falcon 9. Granted a foreign company may not get as good of a deal as China Satcom (which is a child company of CASC which is a state owned company).

A correction. The report says
本次与五院的关联交易内容为购买中星6D、中星6E、中星9B、中星26号等4颗中星系列卫星及相关AIT技术服务，交易金额为278,380万元。本次与火箭研究院的关联交易内容为火箭研究院提供长征三号乙增强型运载火箭发射5颗中星系列卫星至指定轨道并提供相应的服务支持，交易金额为13亿元(该交易合同包含2019年《运载火箭关键部件及长周期物资备料交付协议》中已支付的1.66亿元，剔除该因素，本次与火箭研究院新增日常关联交易金额为11.34亿元)。本次日常关联交易涉及新增总金额合计为人民币391,780万元。

There are two separate contracts. The launch contract is about 5 (not 4) launches. The 5 seems to be correct because the following paragraph repeated 5 again, indicating it is not a typo by the author. The launch contract is 1.3 billion RMB, the 1.134 is final payment of the same launch package. The previously payed 166 million RMB was to reserve the production slot and key components. It should be calculated in the total cost of launch.

1.3 billion RMB means 260 million RMB or 40 million USD per launch excluding the payload. This is still better than F9 though.

Its cheaper on a per-launch basis, but more expensive on a per-kg basis. (Depending on the satellite costs for long march, of course)

Here is my calculation of cost per unit mass in GTO launch in million USD term.

F9 in its max capacity (new/reused)

Reusable mode	Payload cap (tonne)	New Rocket	Cost per tonne	Reused Rocket	Cost per tonne
Not reused	8.5	62	7.29	50	5.88
ASDS	5.5	62	11.27	50	9.09
RTLS	3.5	62	17.71	50	14.29

LM-3B/E

Payload cap (tonne)	New Rocket	Cost per tonne
5.5​	40​	7.27​

F9 is only cheaper when using an old rocket without reusing. And that "cheaper" is not cheaper at all because that price is based on the fact that some previous customers have paid a higher prices before. For a particular customer 5.88 is cheaper, but averaging out, from both SpaceX's perspective and the market (all customers) perspective F9 is more expensive than LM-3B/E.

The exchange rate is nominal rate. If we use PPP rate which the Americans prefer to use, LM-3B/E would be much cheaper than F9 in every way.

From another angle, without Vitical Landing capability F9 as a rocket is not an outstanding rocket at all in all other regards.