China's Space Program Thread II

tacoburger

Junior Member
Registered Member
He can't. He's not smart enough, talented enough, nor even Chinese enough to have any company, let alone a rocket company.
What is this gate keeping? Do you need a PhD or a billion dollar company to criticize things? I call it how I see it. This is a just a random internet forum, not some paid clubhouse for 200 IQ billionaires like yourself.
Actually the whole EELV program (Atlas V, Delta IV) was supposed to make cheaper rockets. And it did. At least compared with the Titan IV and Space Shuttle launches they replaced. Both launchers use a common core architecture which was meant to scale to triple core launchers for launching large NRO spysats. In the Delta IV they went as far as making the engines as cheap as possible. For example the main engine, RS-68, uses an expendable ablative carbon-phenolic nozzle instead of using regenerative cooling. Each core only uses one engine to have as few parts as possible. In the case of the Atlas V, they bought the RD-180 from the Russians, which was much cheaper than any engine produced in the US. Including the RS-68. Despite being way more complicated in number of parts and design.

The EELV program was supposed to also lead to a resurgence of the US space launch sector clawing back market share from Arianespace and the Ariane 4 and 5. The thing is, back then, the Russians were still selling launches. A Soyuz or Proton launch was even cheaper than the EELVs due to lower cost of labor in Russia and depreciated factories and launch sites. Despite the Russians operating from launch sites further away from the Equator. So both EELV rockets ended up just launching US government payloads and having little success in the launch market.

Even with all the claimed advantages of the Falcon 9 the launch price for it was similar to Russian launches on the Soyuz or Proton. And initially reliability was low so it didn't compete with Arianespace in that either. It took a US government ban on Russian launches to basically kill that. They banned launches of US satellites, or US manufactured satellites on Russian launchers. And the US is one of the world's largest satellite manufacturers. Only non US companies continued using Russian launch service. And some did this to the very end. For example Starlink competitor OneWeb was still launching satellites on Soyuz, manufactured in Europe, until the moment the Russians stopped providing launch services to all Western countries.

For similar reasons you won't see Chinese launchers putting Western satellites into orbit. The US might claim all sorts of reasons for ITAR sanctions on China. But the truth is they just wanted to remove another competitor from the market.
And how is that all that history related to how you think a fully reusable rocket is useless? All that is ancient history. The entire point of new technology is to change the game, and force the entire world to change with them. What's next you're gonna go on and on about the ancient thousand year old history of horse riding and the unbreakable spirit of the cavalry and how this newfangled "cars" will never make sense, how will they get the oil, meanwhile grass is literally free and grows everywhere.

Believe it or not, most technology is useless in a vacuum. You can point to a car and call it the most useless piece of shit to have ever existed compared to a horse. It's useless on it's own. It's needs roads, petrol stations, supply lines to bring petrol to said petrol stations, tunnels, bridges, lots of trained mechanics for servicing, massive factories to produce enough for the general population etc etc. Same for ships, electricity, trains and aircraft. Electricity is nice as a party trick, but to use it an a country wide scale, you would need millions of kilometers of power lines wired to every house, massive power plants, mines and supply lines to feed and supply those power plants the millions of tons coal and oil that they need, produce enough devices that can use the electricity, it's never gonna catch on in anything other then a handful of richest cities.

But that's what the world did, spent trillions over decades paving roads, building tunnels, bridges, building petrol stations in the middle of nowhere, literally inventing the assembly line model of mass production to mass produce more cars. Cars needed this kinds of investment to be useful, but it also changed society and bought enough benefits that building roads though thousands of kilometers of untamed wildness and boring tunnels though mountains was suddenly possible and profitable.

Looking at something like Starship/LM-9 is a vaccum is like that. On it's own it's not too impressive. What change it inspires in other industries, the advantages it enables and the effect it will have on the space econmy is more interesting. Especially decades down the line. I really don't get this mindset of "It has to be useful before it's even flying" or "it has to be useful now, not a decade down the line once the entire world can adjust itself to it's presence and potential and start building more payloads that only make sense for a low cost superheavy, it has to be useful RIGHT NOW and flying payloads every week, otherwise it's useless and should be canceled"
 

PiSigma

"the engineer"
Need twin ion engines with giant solar wings on each side... Reminds me of something. O ya a TIE fighter! China is evil empire confirmed. At least the empire ruled the whole galaxy, didn't realize China was so powerful.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
What is this gate keeping? Do you need a PhD or a billion dollar company to criticize things? I call it how I see it. This is a just a random internet forum, not some paid clubhouse for 200 IQ billionaires like yourself.

I think you would find that there's probably a decent amount of people here who don't disagree with you, but they can also read the room.

This is indeed just a random internet forum, but we also do not want to not be subject to people continuously venting their own frustrations about things that they are unable to change and getting into arguments with others that disagree with them for the sake of it.
 

by78

General
Mr. Liu Baiqi (刘百奇), chairman of Galactic Energy, has revealed that Pallas-1's maiden flight is scheduled to take place toward the end of this year. He also said the company plans 10-12 launches for its Ceres-1 launch vehicle this year.


53549260802_3f56c696ce_h.jpg

The Chairman of Galactic Energy revealed in an interview that his company plans to build a rocket testing facility in Wenchang to inspect and maintain recovered reusable rockets and to prepare them for their next flights.

53636536676_7d01fa46df_k.jpg
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
These kinds of designs have all sorts of issues. When you land the fuel tanks are basically empty. The center of mass moves to the bottom of the vehicle where heavy items like the rocket engines are. And they added the wings there as well which means this problem will be worse. You will need to make landing gear, and it will be hard to do it for the first stage, because it is like an order of magnitude larger than the second stage.

I also see no provision for a jet engine on the design. Which means you will have to a dead stick landing just like on the Shuttle.
 
Top