China's Space Program News Thread

[Gloire_bb]

Who are you to assert authority over China's space program?
International space law? Oh, I never knew China got invited into international space community.
If you think China breaks so called International space law, go ahead and sue. Let's see how you do it? Otherwise, can I say you are bullshiting?

China has ratified all relevant space treaties(other than the Moon agreement, but no actual space powers did that anyway), and is an active member of all UN GA committees (incl. 4th committee and certainly Committee on Peaceful Uses of the Outer Space). China is active at promulgating prospective future space legislation and promoting rule of law in Outer Space (see, for example, joint PAROS initiative from Russia and China).
As you can see, China is certainly an active member of "International Space community". Unless you are of opinion that Washinton, DC is a world capital...

Ratification means inclusion of corresponding treaties into the Chinese legal system by the National People's Congress. (PRC constitution, art. 67; PRC Law on procedure for concluding treaties, art.7 & art.11)
As far as I know, that's quite an authority in China.

Next, nowadays China is becoming fairly active in opposing to US with its "like-minded partners" in their attempts to legislate something in their own small circle. Countering these attempts includes opinion of the international community. Much(if not most) of this very community lives within 41 degrees latitude, and thus is theoretically affected. Real risks may not be that important here(let's face it, they're extremely low). Attitude, however, is: you either care about other countries, or you do not.
Thus, as you can see reputation and messaging is important.

If Liability convention will be triggered on may, 8th - believe me, suit will happen immediately, and it is going to be quite an embarrassing experience. See Soviet debacle with Cosmos 954...which was actually settled through diplomatic(not legal) means, but still was a fairly significant blow to the international reputation of Soviet space program.

Thus, I reinstate that I am of opinion that it's an unfortunate event, especially for a civilian space station. It is a very obvious point of concern(and attack for US&aligned countries), one which hopefully will be avoided in the future.

 

[KampfAlwin]

View attachment 71710
Behold: PLASF Donnager

RIP

 

[nlalyst]

You misspelled achievement. Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) is kind of a holy grail of rocket design. The achievement here is that the LM5 core stage reached orbit and making LM5 the closest thing to SSTO launcher since the Space Shuttle. It is something to be celebrated.


That isn't applicable here since LM5 has no upper stage. You said so yourself:

Read a bit more attentively before replying. @Quickie asked me a question about the Atlas V upper stage and I gave an answer to that.

It's amusing that you now find it necessary to spin the story, after a petty attempt at political whataboutism, when the simple matter of fact is that China chose not to bother to install a de-orbit mechanism for the 21 ton core stage of its LM5B rocket. Since 1990 nothing over 10 tons has been left intentionally in orbit to re-enter without control. And now China did it twice in a row. Sorry, but this behavior was last acceptable in the early days of the Space Age when nobody quite knew exactly what they were doing.

The SLS also has a core than can reach the orbit, but it is designed so that the core automatically re-enters at perigee at a selected location.

The best explanation as to why they chose to do it this way, that I could find, has to do with the amount of fuel the Tianhe would need to expend to raise itself to the desired orbit. With more fuel on the Tianhe, it would've been entirely possible to safely deorbit the core stage and avoid international embarrassment. Yet, the management decided that it's an acceptable risk.

 

[Dante80]

when the simple matter of fact is that China chose not to bother to install a de-orbit mechanism for the 21 ton core stage of its LM5B rocket.

We don't know that. As I explained in a prior post, it is entirely possible to safely de-orbit a spent stage without RCS, by modifying the pacification process post-separation. The mass penalty is almost inconsequential, it is simply a matter of avionics battery endurance (and a couple of hours at that, max).

It is entirely possible - and in fact, probable given the circumstances - that after a similar stage last May disintegrated over villages in Côte d'Ivoire CALT may have modified the vehicle to not have this happen again. So, we may be simply witnessing now a malfunction of the de-orbit process, rather than wanton abandon.

 

[Dante80]

With regards to current tracking:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1389853726853246976

you can view the most updated track here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Current time screenshot below ( circle marks the projected landfall - take this with a grain of salt though, the window is simply too big)

 

[gelgoog]

You misspelled achievement. Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) is kind of a holy grail of rocket design. The achievement here is that the LM5 core stage reached orbit and making LM5 the closest thing to SSTO launcher since the Space Shuttle. It is something to be celebrated.

I hope you are being sarcastic. The LM5 uses parallel staging.
The 'core stage' aka first stage would be the second stage in another rocket.
Most of the thrust is done by the side boosters.

 

[Engineer]

Read a bit more attentively before replying. @Quickie asked me a question about the Atlas V upper stage and I gave an answer to that.

What Quickie said doesn't concern me. The issue here is that LM5 achieved something that Atlas V hasn't.

It's hilarious that you now find it necessary to spin the story, after a petty attempt at political whataboutism,

It is hilarious that you ran out of arguments and have to concede but you do so by yelling "whataboutism".

when the simple matter of fact is that China chose not to bother to install a de-orbit mechanism for the 21 ton core stage of its LM5B rocket.

What's the simple matter of fact here is that LM5 core module is not an upper stage, hence whatever prior practices you pull out regarding upper stages of other rocket is not applicable here.

Since 1990 nothing over 10 tons has been left intentionally in orbit to re-enter without control.

First, on your false assertion, ISS begs to differ, along with Hubble. They both weight more than 10 tons. Second, complaining about something left in orbit without control is like complaining about a chair sitting in the middle of the living room without control. It's just complaining for the sake of making noise.

And now China did it twice in a row. Sorry, but this behavior was last acceptable in the early days of the Space Age when nobody quite knew exactly what they were doing.

This practice is perfectly acceptable, which is why China did it twice in a row.

The SLS also has a core than can reach the orbit, but it is designed so that the core automatically re-enters at perigee at a selected location.

The best explanation as to why they chose to do it this way, that I could find, has to do with the amount of fuel the Tianhe would need to expend to raise itself to the desired orbit. With more fuel on the Tianhe, it would've been entirely possible to safely deorbit the core stage and avoid international embarrassment. Yet, the management decided that it's an acceptable risk. Perhaps because the B version is only to be used a small number of times (4?) needed for the space station?

LOL! I love how you spin "uncontrolled" into "automatic". Sure, the LM5 core stage will automatically reenter the atmosphere. What's important is that it will break up into dust during reentry.

 

[Engineer]

I hope you are being sarcastic. The LM5 uses parallel staging.
The 'core stage' aka first stage would be the second stage in another rocket.
Most of the thrust is done by the side boosters.

If you want to be pedantic about it, the core stage is lit first, followed by the boosters. Sure, we could call it parallel staging, but calling the core a second stage is a stretch. Which other rocket's second stage is lit before the first stage?

 

[gelgoog]

It technically is a first stage, but there's no way it could be an SSTO because it simply does not have the performance to lift its own dry mass into orbit. Let alone usable payload.

 

[Engineer]

Never said it is. I said LM5 is the closest to being SSTO since the Space Shuttle.