Quote from: weedenbc on 09/25/2013 11:12 pmThink of it this way - I'm arguing that the KT-1 and SC-19 both have a common ancestor in the DF-21, as opposed to the DF-21 begat the KT-1 which begat the SC-19.I've always believed that KT-1 had a DF-31 based first stage, based on dimensions from images of the thing. - Ed Kyle
Think of it this way - I'm arguing that the KT-1 and SC-19 both have a common ancestor in the DF-21, as opposed to the DF-21 begat the KT-1 which begat the SC-19.
Operational Response, low cost and high load ratio are tendency of small launch vehicle and small satellite platform. In order to develop a lower cost and higher load ratio launch vehicle, a method, integration of small launch vehicle and small satellite platform, is proposed, in which the similar function systems between small launch vehicle and small satellite, such as the power system, structure system, bipropellant propulsion system and flight control system etc, are integrated. This method has the disadvantage of losing little flexibility, but the advantages, such as increasing payload and propellant, reducing launch cost, prolonging lifetime are more significant, which offers a valuable technical approach to the design of Operational Responsive Space Vehicle and is significant to the development of Operational Responsive Space. Based on this method, it is possible to develop an integrative multitask craft having standard and modular interface for various kinds of payloads. Consequently, batch production and COTS purchase are expectable.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 09/26/2013 12:21 amQuote from: weedenbc on 09/25/2013 11:12 pmThink of it this way - I'm arguing that the KT-1 and SC-19 both have a common ancestor in the DF-21, as opposed to the DF-21 begat the KT-1 which begat the SC-19.I've always believed that KT-1 had a DF-31 based first stage, based on dimensions from images of the thing. - Ed KyleThat would mean CASIC borrowed stages from their competitor CASC's rocket. Again, about a likely IMHO. But maybe.
Quote from: weedenbc on 09/26/2013 02:43 amQuote from: edkyle99 on 09/26/2013 12:21 amQuote from: weedenbc on 09/25/2013 11:12 pmThink of it this way - I'm arguing that the KT-1 and SC-19 both have a common ancestor in the DF-21, as opposed to the DF-21 begat the KT-1 which begat the SC-19.I've always believed that KT-1 had a DF-31 based first stage, based on dimensions from images of the thing. - Ed KyleThat would mean CASIC borrowed stages from their competitor CASC's rocket. Again, about a likely IMHO. But maybe.CASC's rocket? huh? I thought we all agreed DF-31 and KT-1 were both CASIC not CASC.Look forward to any PDFs you bring back from IAC!
Quote from: jcm on 09/26/2013 04:43 amQuote from: weedenbc on 09/26/2013 02:43 amQuote from: edkyle99 on 09/26/2013 12:21 amQuote from: weedenbc on 09/25/2013 11:12 pmThink of it this way - I'm arguing that the KT-1 and SC-19 both have a common ancestor in the DF-21, as opposed to the DF-21 begat the KT-1 which begat the SC-19.I've always believed that KT-1 had a DF-31 based first stage, based on dimensions from images of the thing. - Ed KyleThat would mean CASIC borrowed stages from their competitor CASC's rocket. Again, about a likely IMHO. But maybe.CASC's rocket? huh? I thought we all agreed DF-31 and KT-1 were both CASIC not CASC.Look forward to any PDFs you bring back from IAC!DF-31 was a CASC program. All Chinese strategic missiles are from CASC or more precisely, its first academy CALT, whose history dates all the way back to 1957. On the other hand, DF-21 was built by CASIC. Strictly speaking when DF-21 and 31 were first envisioned, there were no such thing as CASC and CASIC, even their common ancestor CAC did not exist; it's just the old 7th Machine Building Ministry. When they split the CAC into two entities, individual bureau and factories were assigned primarily due on geographical and historical reasons. A lot of programs found their sub-contractors ended up in both groups. Few years ago on one of the Zhuhai Airshows (IIRC the 2008 one) CASIC brought a model of KT-1 and gave its first stage diameter as 1.4m. That's way too small for a DF-31 based stage. Much more likely it's based on the DF-21.
Quote from: weedenbc on 09/25/2013 11:14 pmAlso, quote here from a Xinhua story from earlier this year about the development of a LM-11 solid-fuel quick reaction launch vehicle:http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/China/CZ-11/Description/Frame.htmStill no idea if this is what was launched today, but there are some pieces of it that fit.Right OK - if it is CZ-11, that's a different story.I am going to assume for now that Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 09/25/2013 06:28 amEarlier rumors pointing to the Harbin Institute of Technology building the satellite and CASIC building the launcher seems to be confirmed.....is correct and that it's a CASIC vehicle.It will be interesting to see what comes out in the weeks to come.1 object cataloged, 275 x 293 km x 96.7 deg orbit
Also, quote here from a Xinhua story from earlier this year about the development of a LM-11 solid-fuel quick reaction launch vehicle:http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/China/CZ-11/Description/Frame.htmStill no idea if this is what was launched today, but there are some pieces of it that fit.
Earlier rumors pointing to the Harbin Institute of Technology building the satellite and CASIC building the launcher seems to be confirmed.....
小运载器末修级及过渡段, 二三级以及三级与上面级航天器之间的级间分离, 整流罩分离, 二级与三级固体发动机点火等共用电源, 实现了运载器和卫星的统一供电, 主动段为运载器末修级提供电能, 在轨运行期间为卫星提供能源和供配电管理
Ahh, this is news to me. Can you recommend a good source on this?I had gotten the impression that in the split CASIC had ended up with all the solid missiles including DF-31. My bad.
Quote from: jcm on 09/26/2013 02:29 pmAhh, this is news to me. Can you recommend a good source on this?I had gotten the impression that in the split CASIC had ended up with all the solid missiles including DF-31. My bad.I'm afraid there's no good source on the internet, either in English or Chinese. But if you read Chinese, I can offer you a reading list. Simply put, the organizational evolution of the 7th Machine Building Ministry was a complete mess. There's endless restructuring and consolidation through its first 30 years. It experienced a massive relocation of infrastructure in the late 60s and early 70s due to the sino-soviet war paranoid, some moved back in the 80s while others not, creating further confusion. I'll try my best to summarize it in a few lines.R&D institutesFirst Academy (now CALT of CASC): large missile and rocket, remains at Beijing all the time. It has its own production facility. CZ rockets are built largely in house but solid missiles are often subcontracted.Second Academy (now CCMETA of CASIC but still commonly known as the 2nd Academy) G2A missiles, project 640 (ABM program), JL-1, DF-21. Moved from Beijing to Shanghai in the late 60s, its HQ moved back to Beijing in early 80s.Third Academy (now 3rd Academy of CASIC) cruise missiles. Beijing.Forth Academy - solid rockets motors. This one is interesting. It was first founded in Sichuan as the 4th Academy, then moved to Inner Mongolia in the late 60s, then moved backed to Beijing in 1970 but part of it remained in inner Mongolia, the Beijing division moved to Shanxi in 1975, became the 063 base. The Shanxi division later became the 4th Academy of CASC, while the Inner Mongolia division became the 6th Academy of CASIC. Loosely speaking, the former specialize in large solid motor while the latter dealt with small motor and kick stages.Fifth Academy (now CAST, or 5th Academy of CASC) Spacecrafts. Sixth Academy (AALPT, or 6th Academy of CASC) liquid propulsion. Most facilities in Shanxi but some remain in Beijing.7th Academy (now 7th Academy of CASIC) Ground infrastructure.8th Academy (now SAST of CASC, more commonly known as the Shanghai bureau or Shanghai clique ) literally everything except engine. Also has its own production capacity.Industry parks061 base, Guizhou, later became Jiangnan Aerospace Industry Co. of CASIC (something like that, can't bother checking its official English name) main products include refrigerator, automobile and DF-21.062 and 064 base, both in Sichuan, now Sichua xxxxx Co. under CASC. Subsystems for rocket and missiles, cruise missiles.063 base, Shanxi, solid rockets, I think it's now part of Xi'an Aerospace Co. of CASC.066 base, Hubei, now Sanjiang xxx Co. of CASIC. Its main business seems to be real estate, amusement parks, medicine and heavy trucks.... but it also built a lot of SRBMs include DF-11 and different types of TELs. 067 base, Guizhou. Liquid rocket engines and GN&C. Part of 6th Academy of CASC.068 base, Hunan, now Hunan xxx Co, part of CASIC. This is a marginal one, not building very important stuff.
This is very helpful, thank you. But what is confusing me is the China Hexi Company in Shanxi which is described in some sources asthe 4th or 6th Academy of CASIC (not CASC). Are these sources just wrong? You are saying I think that China Hexi is part of CASC, while the former subdivision at Hohhot is CASIC 6th. And it's the Shanxi plant that makes the big solids (both DF-21 and DF-31?)Edit: From the document Brian pointed to, CASIC 4th does indeed make DF-21, and CASC 4th is alleged to make DF-31. OK. Are they both in Shanxi? I think that explains part of my confusion.
I suppose that this would be our candidate launch pad.https://maps.google.com/maps?q=40.958+N,+100.291+E&hl=en&ll=40.972446,100.363401&spn=0.004261,0.009645&om=1&t=k&z=17 - Ed Kyle
Quote from: edkyle99 on 09/27/2013 04:29 pmI suppose that this would be our candidate launch pad.https://maps.google.com/maps?q=40.958+N,+100.291+E&hl=en&ll=40.972446,100.363401&spn=0.004261,0.009645&om=1&t=k&z=17 - Ed KyleVery probably; and it is a recent development -- it is absent in my Google maps-based map of Jiuquan area made in February 2010.