Just to clarify, is the 140t to LEO for the LM-9 a misnomer? I remember people saying it is in the same class as SLS.
China's Space Program News Thread
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
- Status
Either just figure of speech like calling the 13,000 ton type 055, "10,000 ton class destroyer" or this is referring to early configuration with smaller payload like SLS Block I (95t), with the full 140t version will be ready in 2030.
escobar
Brigadier
Seems the 921 rocket is gone.
Unlikely, the latest info is 921 rocket will be for crew with LM 9 for cargo, kinda like Ares I and Ares V in Constellation program.
This is one of the reason I criticize the "new age" reporters being unprofessional. Here is why, the red bold texts are quotation of Li Hong's words. The rests are the reporter's own words.
Firstly, the reporter mixed her own understanding of what the interviewee said with the quotation in the same paragraph. This does not make it clear of what was the question, what was the answer, what was the interpretation. A professional interview should separate these in different paragraph with the heading like "Reporter:", "Interviewee:".
Secondly, her interpretation (in black bold texts) asserted 100t LEO, qualified the figure with "is 4 times of CZ-5". This firmly put CZ-9 at 100t LEO. However, the Li Hong's original words was "greater than 4 times of CZ-5's LEO capability". Greater than 4 is totally different from 4. Yet, she did not verify her interpretation with the interviewee, but rather assumed being right. The worst is that she did not put her report in the format that I proposed above. It is not like the reporter (knowing nothing) ask for an answer, but rather the reporter makes her mind then get some professional person to back her up with twisted interpretation.
There are three proposed configurations of CZ-9 by Long Lehao. The following slide was from a presentation by Long Lehao in 2017.
The left most is the 140t version (CZ-9) with four boosters. The middle one (CZ-9A) is 100t with two boosters. the right one (CZ-9B) is 50t without boosters but 5 engines in the core instead of 4.
In the presentation, Long Lehao said "CZ-9 (140t) is our plan, the initial test may be conducted by CZ-9B, CZ-9A and B may not be ever typified, depends on if there is a need for them".
So my understanding is that, strictly speaking CZ-9 is 140t, the other two are possibilities that may never be built. Anything other than 140t (now it is 150t) are misunderstanding or misquotation.
As of comparing to NASA's program, CZ-9 is comparable to Ares V (150t 240x240km LEO). SLS block II cargo at 130t is the down-sized Ares V.
I think Li Hong meant the initial flight test of CZ-9 program may happen in 5 years instead of the maiden flight of CZ-9. The initial test planned (according to Long Lehao) was probably the configuration of CZ-9B (without boosters). But this variant together with the two boosters variant may never be typified. So they are test articles during R&D rather than a planned product for application. Also CZ-9 strictly speaking is only meant to be the four booster variant. This goes the same as CZ-5 being the 2.5 staged version while the 1.5 staged is CZ-5B. Although they are in the same CZ-5 family but CZ-5 is also the designation of a specific rocket.
I see, thanks for the information. I suppose we'll see in... hopefully 5? years time for a first launch as the person stated.
Somebody posted an audio recording of the interview
passcode: auss
The recording is transcribed word for word to the following texts in the report. The blue texts are the reporter. The red are Li Hong.
Li Hong did not say anything about CZ-9's flight, partial test or maiden. The "CZ-9 flight in 5 years" is the reporter's own words without any reference to the interviewee.
The recording apparently is recorded over telephone, not a face to face interview. Since the original report in text ended at exactly the red texts, I believe the recording is complete in case of CZ-9.
Regardless, the report is so bad in quality and only added confusion.
passcode: auss
The recording is transcribed word for word to the following texts in the report. The blue texts are the reporter. The red are Li Hong.
Li Hong did not say anything about CZ-9's flight, partial test or maiden. The "CZ-9 flight in 5 years" is the reporter's own words without any reference to the interviewee.
The recording apparently is recorded over telephone, not a face to face interview. Since the original report in text ended at exactly the red texts, I believe the recording is complete in case of CZ-9.
Regardless, the report is so bad in quality and only added confusion.
- Status