Chinese Space Program

NMaude said:
Yeah, it appears that someone fucked up when they did the pre-test calculations.

Edit: It would be nice if those two videos had English subtitles.
Click to expand...
How do you even f.ck up with such basic things so badly?? I mean the load limit, the thrust and the rocket weight, these are the first things you must carefully calculate before you go ahead and start testing rocket prototypes...

The amount of miscommunication and lack of procedure that must've happened for a project of this grand size is insane.

Why the hell doesn't CNSA have any oversight on private projects? Americans love to exaggerate the amount of Chinese state involvement in everything, but for some messed up reason there's no involvement in this case at all.

This catastrophe is not just SP's fault, it's also the fault of the entire Chinese Space Programme in general.
 
It seems like perhaps they were rushing the test and intentionally used a marginal test stand for the load? *IF* the load tolerances in the above posts were accurate, then it seems more like a conscious decision to throw caution to the wind and test to possible destruction, Elon style.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
It seems like perhaps they were rushing the test and intentionally used a marginal test stand for the load? *IF* the load tolerances in the above posts were accurate, they it seems more like a conscious decision to throw caution to the wind and test to possible destruction, Elon style.
Click to expand...

This first stage was supposed to then be used on the first Tianlong 3 launch this fall, destruction was not anticipated.

This was a "one off" First stage made during the transition from their old factory to their more recent one, it’s likely there will be a relatively lengthy delay before they can finish other, however they do have an almost completed Tianlong 2 that was supposed to launch this fall too, so it’s not impossible they still achieve an orbital launch this year.
 
@Michel Van : it´s a really bizarre design with all those elongated bolts with their heads tightened on the I-beam flanges. Might cling and clang louder than a Church pipe organ.

IMOHO, the maximum acceptable load could have simply been forgotten/confused b/w contractor communication and the launch team (something like max dynamic load Vs Max static).
 

直击天兵科技火箭坠落现场：部分山体被烧焦 公司人士：火箭升空是因为“推力太大”“没拉住” | 每经网

www.nbd.com.cn www.nbd.com.cn
“我们发动机太好了，性能太强了。”上述工作人员说。他还表示，火箭（意外）升空后，公司主动关机让火箭掉下来，“这是我们先设置好，它必须关机，都是有预案的”。
Click to expand...

"Our engines are too good, the performance are too strong." The said staff member said. He also said that after the rocket (accidentally) lifted off, the company took the initiative to shut down the engine to let the rocket fall, "This is what we set up first, it must be shut down, all pre-planned."
Click to expand...

Well, they're still boasting about the rocket's performances...

Thanksfully it seems it didn't start any generalised forest fire. The rocket falling on the hillside behind the city probably also helped reduce the damage due to the overpressure.

1719921366899.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
Well it looked like one engine failed/exploded on it’s ascent, but there easily could have been physical damage separating from the stand.
Click to expand...

Scott Manley in his video indicates it appeared to have suffered both with engine failing violently damaging other engines causing a chain-reaction of failures.
 
TheKutKu said:

直击天兵科技火箭坠落现场：部分山体被烧焦 公司人士：火箭升空是因为“推力太大”“没拉住” | 每经网

www.nbd.com.cn www.nbd.com.cn




Well, they're still boasting about the rocket's performances...

Thanksfully it seems it didn't start any generalised forest fire. The rocket falling on the hillside behind the city probably also helped reduce the damage due to the overpressure.

View attachment 733439
Click to expand...
They don't seem to have learned their lesson...
 
they found the cause: it was not Test stand
the holding clamp are still there with part of rocket attach to it
yes the rocket structure failed here !

GRib9nQb0AA_zHn
GRib9ohaYAI1bF9


Source
https://twitter.com/x/status/1808366737508950410
View: https://twitter.com/J1NFENG/status/1808366737508950410
 
i wondering is this result of sonic cut ?

for those not understand
Sonic cut is effect were vibrations of Engine result in damaging Oszillation in engine or structure of rocket.
like the Titan II engines cutting there nozzles off during testing, until issue was fixed in injectors.

I think that here was Oszillation between rocket and test stand
that damage the rocket structure at vibrating holding bolts attach to fix clamp mechanism
 
Josh_TN said:
Elon would probably just think it a successful engine test. “Well the *engines* worked…” :)
Click to expand...
Funny you should say that!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1807998347564700146
View: https://twitter.com/Cosmic_Penguin/status/1807998347564700146


LMAO a Chinese reporter visiting the Space Pioneer testing facility to ask about the June 30 “unintentional hop” - a staff there is quoted as saying “The thrust of the 1st stage was too high, the pad failed to pull back so it launched. Our engines are too good and too powerful.”
Click to expand...
 
Flyaway said:
Funny you should say that!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1807998347564700146
View: https://twitter.com/Cosmic_Penguin/status/1807998347564700146
Click to expand...
To be fair, making an equivalent to the F9 clustered engine bay/propulsion system with equivalent engines is no small feat, dozens of other organisations across the world have been trying for the past decades and they’re the first to achieve it. This is absolutely something to take pride in.
Especially from the Chinese perspective where the state owned companies are not there yet.
 
Is this the first time ever a (cryogenic or not) liquid-fueled rocket non-explosively lifts off from a different location than intended? Even the Viking 8 static fire lifted off from its launching pad (source: The viking rocket: A memoir on NTRS).

Henan suddenly having a de-facto launch pad of a 800 tons-thrust rocket is definitely something.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808494899983188141
View: https://x.com/Harry__Stranger/status/1808494899983188141


Almost half a square km of burnt forest.
 
Last edited:
TheKutKu said:
To be fair, making an equivalent to the F9 clustered engine bay/propulsion system with equivalent engines is no small feat, dozens of other organisations across the world have been trying for the past decades and they’re the first to achieve it. This is absolutely something to take pride in.
Especially from the Chinese perspective where the state owned companies are not there yet.
Click to expand...

Actually, I was not aware of any other projects of this scale outside Long March 10A and LandSpace (though that is methox). Who else is going in this direction?
 
TheKutKu said:
Is this the first time ever a (cryogenic or not) liquid-fueled rocket non-explosively lifts off from a different location than intended? Even the Viking 8 static fire lifted off from its launching pad (source: The viking rocket: A memoir on NTRS).

Henan suddenly having a de-facto launch pad of a 800 tons-thrust rocket is definitely something.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808494899983188141
View: https://x.com/Harry__Stranger/status/1808494899983188141


Almost half a square km of burnt forest.
Click to expand...

It is almost certainly the first time a private company has had this kind of problem, and likely the first time such a result happened in the last half century. That said, explosions happen in commercial space. The most successful rocket company prides itself on rapidly producing things that often blow up.

Also not for nothing, the actual PRC rocket program regularly drops hypergolic first stages on its own country. So this hardly seems like a deal breaker.
 
Josh_TN said:
Actually, I was not aware of any other projects of this scale outside Long March 10A and LandSpace (though that is methox). Who else is going in this direction?
Click to expand...

Quick list of Chinese "Falcon-like" next generation medium and heavy launchers:

Government projects: these are serious, sanctioned projects by the CASC, the traditional missile/launcher-making SOE with over 50 years of experience, which launches 50 rockets a year, including manned launches, these are as certain as Vulcan, H3 or Ariane 6 were certain, if not more.

-CZ-10A, build by CALT/"1st Academy of CASC" the chinese reusable crew launcher. CZ-10A is the Single-core version which will carry the upcoming capsule Mengzhou, Shenzhou's successor, to the Tiangong space station by the end of the decade, It uses an original recovery method using strings, kinda similar to Starship's arms. A static fire of a 3-engines version happened earlier in June
Diameter: 5m
Payload: >14t to LEO in reusable mode.
First Stage Engines: 7xYF100K/N engines, an improved, reusable version of the kerolox engines that power the CZ-5 to CZ-8, (831 tf)
Planned first launch: 2026
Launch Site: Dedicated Wenchang Pad

-CZ-10, built by CALT, It is the Tricore ("Falcon Heavy") version of CZ-10A, with an additional Hydrogen-Oxygen third stage, so far it is exclusively dedicated to the crewed lunar program, and therefore needs all its performances, so only an expendable version seem to exist.
Diameter: 5m
Payload 70t to LEO, 27t to Trans-Lunar Injection.
First Stage Engines: 3x7xYF100K, 2674 tf, Staged Combustion Kerolox
Planned first launch: 2027
Launch Site: Dedicated Wenchang Pad

-CZ-12 (previously known as "XLV" or "XLV-20"), Built by SAST/"8th Academy of CASC", A medium, expendable launcher of roughly F9 1.0 dimensions dedicated to the commercial market. Largely thought to be repurposed from the R&D of SAST's attempt at a CZ-10 competitor. Tank could be seen a couple years ago, and a test of its engine bay happened in April
Diameter: 3.8m
Payload: 10t to LEO, 6t to SSO
First Stage Engines: 4xYF100K, 510 tf, Staged Combustion Kerolox
Planned first launch: Late August 2024
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, compatibility with Inland launch centers.

-"Reusable 4m Launcher" (previously known as "XLV-22"), Built by SAST. A Medium, reusable launcher, probably of current F9 dimensions, particularity is that it uses engines developped by the private company Jiuzhou Yunjian. A "grasshopper" version did a Reusability test earlier this month.
Diameter: 4m
Payload: At least 6.5t SSO reusable
First Stage Engines: 9xLongyun-70, ~670 tf, Gas Generator Methalox.
Planned first launch: 2025
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, compatibility with Inland launch centers.

Beside the last two, SAST has expressed interest in developping "tricore" versions of each, these are not sanctionned.

Projects by companies that already launched a rocket to orbit.

-Zhuque 3, built by Landspace, which sent the first Methalox-powered launcher to orbit last year. A Medium-heavy reusable launcher using a stainless steel structure. A "grasshopper" version did a low altitude test earlier this year, and a high altitude one happened in september. Since then they shared progress on their engines and structure.
Diameter: 4..5m
Payload: 18.3t to LEO Downrange-Reusable, 21.3t to LEO Expendable. 12.5t to LEO RTLS-Reusable.
First Stage Engines: 9xTianque-12B, ~900 tf, Gas Generator Methalox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: Mid 2025
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, Landspace's own pad at Jiuquan.

-Tianlong 3, built by Space Pioneer. Medium reusable launcher. A Tricore version "TL-3H" is planned (68t to LEO)
Diameter: 3.8m
Payload: 17t to LEO, 14t to SSO.
First Stage Engines: 9xTianhuo-12 , ~820 tf, Gas Generator Kerolox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: Used to be September 2024.
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, Space Pioneer's own pad at Jiuquan.

-Pallas 1, built by Galactic Energy, by far the most succesful chinese private LSP which regularly launches its Electron-Sized Ceres 1. Medium Reusable launcher. Have been working on a pathfinder since early 2023 Recently did a Gimbal-integrated hot fire test of their engine. A tricore version is planned (14t to LEO).
Diameter: 3.35m (engine bay is ~3.8m)
Payload: 8t to LEO
First Stage Engines: 7xWELKIN/Cangqiong-1 , ~350 tf, Gas Generator Kerolox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: November 2024.
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, possibly Taiyuan.

-Kinetica 2, built by CAS Space, a Majority-public-owned company owned by the Chinese Academy of Science. CAS already succesfuly launched the solid rocket "Kinetica 1" three time (probably shared development with CALT's Jielong 3) . Tricore Medium Reusable Launcher. Recently did a cold test of a single-engine stage prototype and are building a "grasshopper". They also plan a four boosters version "Kinetica-2H" and a "mini-starship" "Kinetica-3"
Diameter: 3.35m
Payload: 12t to LEO
First Stage Engines: 3x3xYF-102, 766 tf, Gas Generator Kerolox, developped by the state-owned AALPT and already used on Tianlong-2
Planned first launch: August 2025.
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, Jiuquan

-Hyperbola 3 (also known as "SQX-3"), built by I-Space, which launched the Hyperbola-1 solid rocket three times to orbit (and has another launch planned tomorrow), Reusable Medium launcher, currently doing testing on a "grasshopper" using the same engine. Engine has been repeatedly test fired.
Diameter: 3.35m
Payload: 13.4t to LEO (expendable), 8.5t (reusable)
First Stage Engines: 9xJD-2 , 900 tf, Gas Generator Methalox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: 2025.
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2

-Gravity 2 (YL-2), built by Orienspace, which succesfully launched the Gravity-1 all solid medium launchers in January. Reusable Medium-Heavy Launcher. Engine is currently being prepared for first hot fire. Tricore and Solid-boosted version are planned with 38 and 29t of payload to LEO respectively.
Diameter: 4.2m
Payload: 21.5/15/5.9 to LEO/SSO/GTO (expendable), 17.4/11.9/3.9 (reusable)
First Stage Engines: 9xYuanLi-85 , 990 tf, Gas Generator Methalox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: 2025.
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2, possibly sea barge.

-Kuaizhou 6, built by ExPace, a state-owned company, held by the missile giant CASIC. ExPace regularly launches the Kuaizhou-1 small launcher. Reusable Medium-Heavy launcher. Recently tested a "grasshopper" using their engine. Recently announced.
Diameter: 4.2m
Payload: ?
First Stage Engines: 9xMingFeng-2 , 630 tf, Gas Generator Methalox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: ?.
Launch Site: ?

Notable launcher projects by companies that haven't gotten to orbit.

Nebula-1, built by DeepBlue Aerospace, they have been testing "grasshoppers" since 2021 but have yet to build an orbital launcher. Light-Medium Reusable launcher, Currently doing static fire testing on a large "grasshopper" variant of their first stage (with 3 engines instead of 9). Honestly have some of the best shot at being the first chinese organization to launch a reusable rocket. I include because they regularly get substantial funding rounds.
Diameter: 3.35m
Payload: 2t to LEO Reusable in initial version, 6t in later versions.
First Stage Engines: 9xThunder-R1 , 200 tf, Gas Generator Kerolox, developped in-house
Planned first launch: End of 2024.
Launch Site: Wenchang Commercial Pad 2

XZY-1, built by Space Epoch. Medium Reusable Launcher The company has done some static fire of a prototype stage using purchased engines. Stainless steel structure. I include them because they also got a few round of funding. They aim for some electron like-splashdown recovery, but with a propulsive splashdown (like the early F9 and Starship tests).
Diameter: 4m
Payload: 6.5t to 1100 km polar orbit
First Stage Engines: 9xLongyun-70, ~670 tf, Gas Generator Methalox.
Planned first launch: 2025. With a Suborbital splashdown test planned for "the end of 2024"
Launch Site: ?

There are a lot more dubious Space Launch Provider startups...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom