Chinese Space Program

TwoTribes said:
Protect the payload.
Click to expand...

From what? It falls away as it's leaving the pad.

TwoTribes said:
I thought of one possibility. Perhaps it's a measure by the engineers to squeeze out every bit of payload capacity. The insulation material that was originally covering the inside of the fairing was designed to be attached on the outside and shed during launch to reduce weight. Save a few dozen kilograms? Maybe?
Click to expand...

Insulation from what? Only thing I can think of is acoustics at the pad at launch. Always thought the stuff inside, on Western fairings, was for in-flight conditions. Looks like you're right.

"CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -- In the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, sections of an Atlas V rocket payload fairing engulf NASA's Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) as they close in around it. The blocks on the interior of the fairing are components of the fairing acoustic protection (FAP) system, designed to protect the payload by dampening the sound created by the rocket during liftoff. The fairing will protect the spacecraft from the impact of aerodynamic pressure and heating during ascent."
 

Attachments

  • what-are-these-metal-looking-things-inside-the-atlas-v-v0-dWEWLiDCVFa0Fn3wgM5NIfMb4aI1Mt8h62Nu...jpg
    what-are-these-metal-looking-things-inside-the-atlas-v-v0-dWEWLiDCVFa0Fn3wgM5NIfMb4aI1Mt8h62Nu...jpg
    151.9 KB · Views: 38
I'm still dubious. The NASA photo shows acoustic protection that does its job all the way up, past Max Q to the quiet zone in LEO. The Chinese insulation tumbles away AT LIFTOFF. There is something more here.
 
Titus said:
I'm still dubious. The NASA photo shows acoustic protection that does its job all the way up, past Max Q to the quiet zone in LEO. The Chinese insulation tumbles away AT LIFTOFF. There is something more here.
Click to expand...
Could be something as simple as others would rather not have foam falling all over the launch site.
 
Oops...
Landspace did they say would disassemble it and do fatigue tests on components before reflying it, and the next flight was always supposed to use a new boosters (while they would introduce an upgraded one in H1 2027), so it shouldn't really change the company's plans

1787318426165.png
 
Last edited:
Sferrin said:
Any idea why it tipped over?
Click to expand...
When it landed, it was already sitting a bit crooked, during the fuel purge there was a fire which seems to have exacerbated the lean. Not sure if it fell over on its own or it was "helped" down, but there seems to be damage on some of the engine bells on one side.

Landspace hasn't been forthcoming with information, but seeing how they did succeed in their primary goals I can understand sweeping this under the rug so that investors don't get unnecessarily spooked. It is not a tremendous setback given the circumstances.
 
Last edited:
There was a fire, but the fall down wasn't because of it—instead, it was human error, since it was their first time handling this kind of rocket. This rocket was mainly just to test reusable technology. There are still two more of these rockets in storage, and after recovering and dismantling this one, the next launch will be no earlier than December. If nothing goes wrong, Y3 will be reused.
 
Unfortunately, it seems that typhoons have been a bit fond of visiting the launch site lately, so the launch of Chang'e 7 will likely be postponed until next year… Damn, there hasn't been an official announcement yet, but the outcome probably won't be an issue. Unless the typhoon magically decides to leave tomorrow or the day after, I don't have much hope.
 

Attachments

  • 1000023711.jpg
    1000023711.jpg
    1,021.3 KB · Views: 11
SUPER=BUG said:
Unfortunately, it seems that typhoons have been a bit fond of visiting the launch site lately, so the launch of Chang'e 7 will likely be postponed until next year… Damn, there hasn't been an official announcement yet, but the outcome probably won't be an issue. Unless the typhoon magically decides to leave tomorrow or the day after, I don't have much hope.
Click to expand...
The launch is delayed to the next opportunity in September according to international partners following a briefing.
https://world.thaipbs.or.th/detail/...ploration-launch-by-about-a-month-narit/62480
https://twitter.com/x/status/2091402314607161442
View: https://x.com/ILOA_Hawaii/status/2091402314607161442
 
The launch has been delayed to 2027 (we'll see if they can launch in Q1 as some have mentionned and some paper alluded to, or they need to wait until next summer, a launch in Q2 isn't really possible due to poor illumination for survey and poor Line of sight with earth for landing), it is quite obvious that this wasn't caused by the weather but by another, serious, issue, that probably could have been enough to miss the August-September (and potentially October) windows.

https://english.news.cn/20260823/c9f7c3ca36c94a26a6a3ffc09e7a810d/c.html

https://twitter.com/x/status/2091815071592931620
View: https://x.com/NARIT_Thailand/status/2091815071592931620
 
It is an important and ambitious mission; I can totally see people lowering their risks on that one.
 
TwoTribes said:
I suggest that before you vent your malice, you first get the full picture of what happened. It had already landed successfully; it fell over only after it had landed.
Click to expand...
Still, a peculiar operational failure, and one of a quite particular nature that is unlikely to happen with VTHL craft, but hopefully time will tell - I'm all for competing systems duking it out - Darwin and all that jazz... But as an aerospace engineer that as spent quite some years of my professional career in RLV design studies, I have come to the conclusion that VTHL RLVs, irrespective of the number of stages, are the way to go.
 
Last edited:
martinbayer said:
Still, a peculiar operational failure, and one of a quite particular nature that is unlikely to happen with VTHL craft, but hopefully time will tell - I'm all for competing systems duking it out - Darwin and all that jazz... But as an aerospace engineer that as spent quite some years of my professional career in RLV design studies, I have come to the conclusion that VTHL RLVs, irrespective of the number of stages, are the way to go.
Click to expand...
VTHL is certainly cooler. But it is less efficient. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, one of VTHLs weaknesses is cost-to-orbit so. . .yeah.
 
Not necessarily, there could have been any number of reasons, including a collision. But if I recall correctly some Chinese rockets do not “safe” themselves. That is, they do not vent excess fuel, discharge batteries, etc to remove potential energy from the used system. Leftover fuel, oxidizer, or even charged batteries can deteriorate over time into an explosive event.
 
Josh_TN said:
Not necessarily, there could have been any number of reasons, including a collision. But if I recall correctly some Chinese rockets do not “safe” themselves. That is, they do not vent excess fuel, discharge batteries, etc to remove potential energy from the used system. Leftover fuel, oxidizer, or even charged batteries can deteriorate over time into an explosive event.
Click to expand...

If true then that shows very bad work practices at their space agency.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom