Author Topic: Chinese Research into Reusability  (Read 5758 times)

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3473
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 2020
  • Likes Given: 2343
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #20 on: 03/20/2017 06:22 AM »
I think this quote is more telling:

Quote
Deng Xinyu, a researcher on the Chinese rocket recovery programme, said that vertical landing involved many challenges and was extremely difficult to achieve.

Is the real reason they rejected it because they don't think they can do it?

Or not worth doing at this stage.  Remember the economic viability of reusability has yet to be demonstrated.

That's kind of like saying "the ability of an aircraft carrrier to win a war has yet to be demonstrated, so we're going to keep sinking all our money into battleships" in 1940.

What you are proposing is like saying we should stop all investment in battleships in 1902 because there is some interesting work happening in heavier than air flight in a few places.

Note that there is nothing that says that China is not interested in further work this field.They have merely decided that one approach is not viable.

In 1902, it would be 40 years before aircraft carriers were demonstrated to win wars.  In 1940, that would be demonstrated within 5 years.

So, you think it's 1902 with respect to reusable rockets and I think it's 1940.  In other words, if reusable rockets demonstrate economic viability within 5 years, I'm right.  If they demonstrate economic viability only after 40 more years, you're right.

Place your bets now.  SpaceX, Blue Origin, ULA, Arianespace, Russia, and China have placed theirs.

Still a bad analogy.

You haven't provided any evidence or reasoning to support it being a bad analogy.

Barring the STS, nobody has demonstrated technical reusability of an orbital launch system.  Nobody has yet demonstrated economic viability of such systems.

Just like in 1940 nobody had demonstrated winning a war with aircraft carriers.

It will take several years for this to happen, at best.

Even if it takes 5 years from today for SpaceX and/or Blue Origin to do it, if it's going to happen, it's a mistake for China and other launch providers not to be going full speed on reusability at least to the SpaceX level right now.  It takes time to design, build, and test a new launch vehicle and to iron out all the bugs.

China and the rest are already way behind.  The fact that they still aren't embracing it means it will just take them longer to catch up.

Maybe longer.  In 1970 many of us thought we were on the verge of reusable rockets too.

In 1940 nobody questioned the importance, indeed centrality, of heavier than air maritime aviation.

That is not remotely true.  It was fiercely debated within all the world's major navies.  Both the U.S. and Japan had aircraft carriers, but also battleships.  Many still viewed battleships and cruisers as more important.  Huge sums were wasted right up until the war started building battleships and cruisers.  Partway through the war, as it became apparent that aircraft carriers were so much more effective, many ships of other types that were under construction were converted to aircraft carriers, or just scrapped to start from scratch with carriers.

In 1902 nobody knew it it was possible (barring man-carrying kites). 

But you are missing the points here, not just making a poor historical analogy.  The points are that 1) the Chinese may be quite justified in giving up one particular approach (not that they can't achieve it)

That's exactly what the traditionalists said about battleships in the 1930s.

and 2) the case for reusability, is not yet as clearcut as wishful thinking would have it.

Again, we'll see.  If it takes more than 40 years, you're right, it's 1902.  If it takes five or fewer, you're wrong.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4942
  • Liked: 859
  • Likes Given: 308
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #21 on: 03/20/2017 02:15 PM »
The Chinese are doing reusability to lower their domestic launch costs. They not competiting inter nationally, so any saving is a success.
Definitely competing on international market. Small wins so far, but they do.

And again, a significant driver for their investments such as Wenchang launch complex and stated reason for reusability research, which has been going on for a couple years now, is to improve the public image.

Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Dalhousie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 294
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #22 on: 03/20/2017 10:48 PM »


Again, we'll see.  If it takes more than 40 years, you're right, it's 1902.  If it takes five or fewer, you're wrong.

In either case you are still wrong.  The value of maritime aviation was demonstrated by 1916.  I would hope that reusability in some form will have been demonstrated by 14 years from now.  Assuming  that progress rates will be comparable.  Which is unlikely. 

But you are still missing the point.  It's not the time scale, it's the readiness of the technology. To date nobody has reused a first stage, unless you want to count the SRBs. 
"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3473
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 2020
  • Likes Given: 2343
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #23 on: 03/21/2017 06:21 AM »


Again, we'll see.  If it takes more than 40 years, you're right, it's 1902.  If it takes five or fewer, you're wrong.

In either case you are still wrong.  The value of maritime aviation was demonstrated by 1916.  I would hope that reusability in some form will have been demonstrated by 14 years from now.  Assuming  that progress rates will be comparable.  Which is unlikely. 

But you are still missing the point.  It's not the time scale, it's the readiness of the technology. To date nobody has reused a first stage, unless you want to count the SRBs.

You're still not getting it.  I specifically said "demonstrated to win wars" because that's the equivalent of your "demonstrated economic reuse".  Lots related to reuse has been demonstrated already.  Asking that economic reuse be demonstrated by a competitor is like asking that aircraft carriers demonstrate they can win a war by winning a war.  By the time that happens, it's too late.

Anyway, I'm sure you won't get that either, but I'm confident other readers of this thread will understand, so I'm done with the conversation now.

Offline Dalhousie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 294
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #24 on: 03/30/2017 07:55 AM »


Again, we'll see.  If it takes more than 40 years, you're right, it's 1902.  If it takes five or fewer, you're wrong.

In either case you are still wrong.  The value of maritime aviation was demonstrated by 1916.  I would hope that reusability in some form will have been demonstrated by 14 years from now.  Assuming  that progress rates will be comparable.  Which is unlikely. 

But you are still missing the point.  It's not the time scale, it's the readiness of the technology. To date nobody has reused a first stage, unless you want to count the SRBs.

You're still not getting it.  I specifically said "demonstrated to win wars" because that's the equivalent of your "demonstrated economic reuse".  Lots related to reuse has been demonstrated already.  Asking that economic reuse be demonstrated by a competitor is like asking that aircraft carriers demonstrate they can win a war by winning a war.  By the time that happens, it's too late.

Anyway, I'm sure you won't get that either, but I'm confident other readers of this thread will understand, so I'm done with the conversation now.

I get what you are saying and still think you are wrong both analogically and factually.  The failure to understand is your part.
"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2183
  • Likes Given: 736
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #25 on: 06/10/2017 03:11 PM »
Quote
Reusable craft are in CASIC's plans
Beijing (XNA) Jun 08, 2017

China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp, one of the nation's major space contractors, said on Tuesday it is developing reusable spacecraft capable of taking off and landing at airports.

Liu Shiquan, deputy general manager of CASIC, told the 2017 Global Space Exploration Conference, which opened on Tuesday in Beijing, that the cutting-edge spacecraft's key technologies and major parts - such as its engine - have passed ground tests and the program is proceeding smoothly.
[...]

http://www.spacedaily.com/m/reports/Reusable_craft_are_in_CASICs_plans_999.html
« Last Edit: 06/10/2017 03:11 PM by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4304
  • Liked: 2577
  • Likes Given: 3603
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #26 on: 06/12/2017 12:42 AM »
...  I would hope that reusability in some form will have been demonstrated by 14 years from now.  Assuming  that progress rates will be comparable.  Which is unlikely. 

But you are still missing the point.  It's not the time scale, it's the readiness of the technology. To date nobody has reused a first stage, unless you want to count the SRBs.

10 days later... someone did.  Refurbishing the booster cost much less than half that of a new one.

Next week another reused first stage launches; two more are being test fired for FH with others in the queue before year's end.  I'd say the technology is ready.  Do you really think the Chinese believe otherwise?

Your move...where do the goal posts go next?

Repeating this quote... a head shaker for sure.
Quote
I would hope that reusability in some form will have been demonstrated by 14 years from now
« Last Edit: 06/12/2017 12:46 AM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline eeergo

  • Phystronaut
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4615
  • Milan, Italy; Spain; Virginia
  • Liked: 376
  • Likes Given: 313
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #27 on: 07/17/2017 11:09 AM »
« Last Edit: 07/17/2017 11:09 AM by eeergo »
-DaviD-

Online SmallKing

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 115
  • Zhejiang, China
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #28 on: 07/17/2017 12:09 PM »
From ChinaSpaceFlight  :o :


https://twitter.com/cnspaceflight/status/886839417096216576
There are two plans so far, parafoil and multi-parachute, both for laning a strap-on booster
Launch Land Relaunch

Offline eeergo

  • Phystronaut
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4615
  • Milan, Italy; Spain; Virginia
  • Liked: 376
  • Likes Given: 313
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #29 on: 07/17/2017 02:13 PM »
From ChinaSpaceFlight  :o :


https://twitter.com/cnspaceflight/status/886839417096216576
There are two plans so far, parafoil and multi-parachute, both for laning a strap-on booster

Thank you for the paper! Google-translating I get that the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology's Institute of Aerospace Systems Engineering and the Beijing Institute of Space Electrical and Mechanical have performed crane tests, air drop tests, real size (?) airbag prototype development and landing impact testing, and they have achieved an accuracy of several hundred meters in landing.

How advanced are they into implementing it into a vehicle? Is this a "general" (vehicle-agnostic) development for now, or is it more geared toward the CZ-5/7 boosters? I assume the hypergolic old-generation boosters are not considered for recovery?
-DaviD-

Online SmallKing

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 115
  • Zhejiang, China
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #30 on: 07/17/2017 10:40 PM »
From ChinaSpaceFlight  :o :


https://twitter.com/cnspaceflight/status/886839417096216576
There are two plans so far, parafoil and multi-parachute, both for laning a strap-on booster

Thank you for the paper! Google-translating I get that the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology's Institute of Aerospace Systems Engineering and the Beijing Institute of Space Electrical and Mechanical have performed crane tests, air drop tests, real size (?) airbag prototype development and landing impact testing, and they have achieved an accuracy of several hundred meters in landing.

How advanced are they into implementing it into a vehicle? Is this a "general" (vehicle-agnostic) development for now, or is it more geared toward the CZ-5/7 boosters? I assume the hypergolic old-generation boosters are not considered for recovery?
Seems like subscale, if it goes well, I reckon it will be used in old Changzheng series firstly for some test of controlled crash
Launch Land Relaunch

Offline zhangmdev

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Chinese Research into Reusability
« Reply #31 on: 07/18/2017 03:40 AM »
That paper left out a few important parameters like drop test article weight, size, drop altitude, separate/touchdown velocity, parachute/parafoil size and weight. I think those are just proof-of-concept tests. Don't expect to controlled-crash recover old CZ boosters any time soon.

Tags: