China's Space Program News Thread

[Orthan]

Another improvement China has done to Feitian suit is adding helmet mounted flashlight to their suit.

Russian Orlan suit doesn't have helmet mounted flashlight and have to borrow EMU suit's flashlight to put on their helmet.

How does the feitian suit compare to the latest russian spacesuit, orlan-MKS ?

 

[taxiya]

On this part specifically -- do you think it's likely that they will pursue any iteration of the CZ-9(11) variant if they pursue CZ-9(21) anyway?

Specifically, CZ-9(21) will be using new engines (YF-135 in first stage, and a new 120t engine), while CZ-9(11) would've used YF-130 and YF-90.

Looking at CZ-9(21), in all respects it looks like it should be superior to CZ-9(11) including with the potential for reusability, so I wonder whether it would make sense for them to pursue CZ-9(11) with necessary time, money and expertise to complete development and build a production line for YF-130 and YF-90, if they will end up being abandoned for CZ-9(21) and YF-135 and the new 120t engine a few years afterwards anyway?

It is hard to tell. The only reason that I can think of "pursuing CZ-9(11)" is to meet the date of 2030 moon landing.

But there are two questions about 2030. Did CNSA give a big margin of 2030? That is did they take into consideration of change of configuration like 11 to 21? If they did, then version 21 may not push over the 2030 milestone, then there is no need for version 11.

The other question is that 2030 is just "around" not a date set in stone. I think this could be the case because CNSA has in most cases stated "around". So 2033 still fit the statement. Version 21 could be on time, meaning no need for version 11.

In any case, CZ-9(21) is to replace the full sized CZ-9(11) with four boosters. The only purpose of them is moon base building and Mars landing.

Based on the thought (about 2030) above I think I agree with your assessment that there is no need to pursue CZ-9(11).

 

[taxiya]

To be honest, whether CZ-9 pursues a starship-esque second stage or not into the more distant future, is less significant than whether the first stage of the rocket is compatible with VTVL reusability -- that's where the greatest value and cost savings lie.

The redesign of CZ-9(21) looks quite meaningful in that regard, because now the first stage looks very much compatible with a VTVL architecture if they wanted to pursue it.

Whether a reusable starship esque second stage is developed for CZ-9(21) into the future is another question, but getting the first stage right IMO is of far greater consequence.

yes indeed. The first stage of CZ-9(21) is certainly aiming at that direction. I think the best comparison is that CZ-9(21) vs. Super-Heavy (the starship first stage).

But one thing is clear, starship is an architecture that the starship (2nd stage) is an integral part. When I made my post I was replying the notion about whether CNSA has demonstrated its interest in the architecture, the answer is not yet.

 

[taxiya]

I think the reason they initially design CZ-9 with boosters was so they could adjust the payload from 50 ton to 100 ton and 140 ton to LEO depending on the number of booster. Since the appearance of triple cored CZ-5DY (70 ton LEO) the scalability option is unnecessary so they change it to single cored full power version (150 ton LEO).

That was exactly what Long Lehao said.

 

[KampfAlwin]

Damn! So cool!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1408957385083789315

 

[KampfAlwin]

Much clearer video of Zhurong‘s lander landing.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1408958199764455427

 

[Xizor]

Also, does how does the Chinese robotic arm compare to the Canadarm v2? It seem to be using the same mechanism for its grapple fixtures ( any close up of that?).

Can we also expect to have an analog to Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM)?

 

[Temstar]

Compile list of footages from Zhurong, including a bit where it's turning on the spot after getting the selfie taken with the lander.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Damn! So cool!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1408957385083789315

It has travelled 236 meters since the missions started. I think it would beat Yutu2 in terms of raw distance travelled before August.

 

[Blitzo]

It is hard to tell. The only reason that I can think of "pursuing CZ-9(11)" is to meet the date of 2030 moon landing.

But there are two questions about 2030. Did CNSA give a big margin of 2030? That is did they take into consideration of change of configuration like 11 to 21? If they did, then version 21 may not push over the 2030 milestone, then there is no need for version 11.

The other question is that 2030 is just "around" not a date set in stone. I think this could be the case because CNSA has in most cases stated "around". So 2033 still fit the statement. Version 21 could be on time, meaning no need for version 11.

In any case, CZ-9(21) is to replace the full sized CZ-9(11) with four boosters. The only purpose of them is moon base building and Mars landing.

Based on the thought (about 2030) above I think I agree with your assessment that there is no need to pursue CZ-9(11).

2030 for initial manned moon landing, or 2035 for the ILRS?

Because the aim to achieve a manned moon landing before 2030 (per the slide), AIUI, was described to be achievable using two CZ-5DY launches (a triple, and a single), so it wouldn't need either any variant of CZ-9 to begin with

The ILRS, as I understand it, consists of multiple phases between 2025 to 2035+, and the earliest in which an ideal "super heavy" is projected to be needed will be in the early 2030s to launch bigger payloads to the moon, and a manned launch to the ILRS will only occur sometime after the mid 2030s.

What I wonder is whether the initial launches to the ILRS can be done with CZ-5DY, depending on how heavy the payloads are, meaning the "requirement" for the super heavy capability of CZ-9 might not truly emerge until the early 2030s, which could allow CZ-9(21) to be pursued with complete abandonment of CZ-9(11) without compromising their projected launch plants.