Shenzhou 10 (SZ-10), Long March 2F/G (CZ-2F/G) - Jiuquan - June 2013

[beidou]

The Chinese official media was reporting that SZ-10 had been ready to be launched at any time (possibly late this year) from Liang Xiaohong (the Party secretary of CALT).

http://scitech.people.com.cn/GB/18212232.html

[lucspace]

In the English language CCTV broadcast on Shenzhou-9 launch day, SZ-10 was mentioned 'to be launched early next year'.

[Phillip Clark]

During the docking coverage on June 18 one of the commentators said that Tiangong 1 could host missions lasting up to ~20 days.   So this would seem to put a ceiling on the Shenzhou 10 duration.

[tonyq]

There seems to some mixed reporting on SZ-10 at the moment, with several commentators suggesting that the flight has moved back into 2012, while other still refer to the mission flying in 2013.

I'd imagine that once SZ-9 returns and the analysis of the flight is complete, the Chinese authorities will announce a projected time frame for SZ-10, rather like the 'June to August' window that was announced for SZ-9, back in February.

What will be interesting, is how the SZ-10 flight might be distinguished from SZ-9. They could push the duration out towards 20 days, or presumably longer if it flew with just a crew of two, although this would seem unlikely, but what else are they likely to do, on this mission?

[apace]

What will be interesting, is how the SZ-10 flight might be distinguished from SZ-9. They could push the duration out towards 20 days, or presumably longer if it flew with just a crew of two, although this would seem unlikely, but what else are they likely to do, on this mission?

If they achieve all goals with SZ-9, yes the question will be what they want to do with SZ-10 and the limited resources they have on TG-1. But as they told, they do research on TG-1 also, so SZ-10 will be less an engineering cruise and more a research one.

[Dalhousie]

More EVA work perhaps?

[hektor]

Indeed they could install hardware on the exterior shell of Tiangong for instance.

One thing they could do since it could be the final Shenzhou to Tiangong-1 is to leave their orbital module attached ?

[Zero-G]

I don't think that a second manned docking mission to TG-1 would be of much longer duration than SZ-9:
QI Faren, the former chief designer of the Shenzhou spacecraft, has said in media interviews that the consumables on board of TG-1 could support 60 "man-days" of manned occupation (i.e. 2 people for 30 days, or 3 people for 20 days). So, if the crew of SZ-9 stays on board of TG-1 for 10 days as planned, they would use up about half of the consumables of the station, leaving only 30 man-days of potential manned occupation (15 days for 2, or 10 days for 3 people).
As much as we know, any substantial resupply of the station's consumables is not planned.

Media reports of QI Faren's statements can be found here: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-03/01/c_131440672.htm
and here: http://www.shxb.net/html/20120306/20120306_305688.shtml

[tonyq]

consumables on board of TG-1 could support 60 "man-days" of manned occupation (i.e. 2 people for 30 days, or 3 people for 20 days). So, if the crew of SZ-9 stays on board of TG-1 for 10 days as planned, they would use up about half of the consumables of the station, leaving only 30 man-days of potential manned occupation (15 days for 2, or 10 days for 3 people).

Are you certain that his 60 'man days' is cumulative? Is that not the maximum for each visit, after which the systems for regenerating oxygen, water etc, would need time to recover? Presumably food consumables are brought with each Shenzhou.

Also, is there any capability to conduct EVA from the new Shenzhou design, which is ofcourse, not identical to SZ-7?

[apace]

consumables on board of TG-1 could support 60 "man-days" of manned occupation (i.e. 2 people for 30 days, or 3 people for 20 days). So, if the crew of SZ-9 stays on board of TG-1 for 10 days as planned, they would use up about half of the consumables of the station, leaving only 30 man-days of potential manned occupation (15 days for 2, or 10 days for 3 people).

Are you certain that his 60 'man days' is cumulative? Is that not the maximum for each visit, after which the systems for regenerating oxygen, water etc, would need time to recover? Presumably food consumables are brought with each Shenzhou.

Also, is there any capability to conduct EVA from the new Shenzhou design, which is ofcourse, not identical to SZ-7?

TG-1 has NO regenerating life supply system.

[tonyq]

TG-1 has NO regenerating life supply system.

OK - so the 60 days is cumulative; therefore SZ-10 is effectively capped at around 30 odd man days; 2 people x 15 days, or 3 people x 10 days.

Seems unlikely that it is going to represent a great leap foward from SZ-9, but could well be a more of a consolidation of what has been achieved, with a bit more focus on research. This suggests that the SZ-9 back-up crew should be well placed to fly the mission, especially as the lead time seems to be only 6-8 months.   

[lucspace]

I was wondering about EVA capability at TG-1.
It is certainly not possible from SZ-9; there are no handrails on its exterior; those are also missing from TG-1 itself.

Also, the SZ-9 OM seems to be filled with additional equipment compared to SZ-7. There seems no be no room to store EVA suits, let alone donning it.
Also, having the OM combine functions of toilet, kitchen, bedroom and airlock, may be a bit too much.

[Phillip Clark]

I feel that expecting an EVA or a flight longer than ~20 days is expecting too much for the Tiangong 1 mission.

Maybe EVAs via the Shenzhou orbital module and flights of 1-2 months on Tiangong 2, using the back-up TG 1 vehicle that we know exists, suitably modified after the TG 1 experiences.

Sorry, off topic for Shenzhou 10!

[Dalhousie]

Also, the SZ-9 OM seems to be filled with additional equipment compared to SZ-7. There seems no be no room to store EVA suits, let alone donning it.
Also, having the OM combine functions of toilet, kitchen, bedroom and airlock, may be a bit too much.

It's been done of course, and even from the smaller Soyuz orbital module, which serves the same function

[Dalhousie]

TG-1 has NO regenerating life supply system.

Are you sure? Several reports have said it has.

[apace]

TG-1 has NO regenerating life supply system.

Are you sure? Several reports have said it has.

Which reports? In the talks around the special coverage on CCTV they discussed this topic and told that they have no regenerating life supply system on TG-1, so the limited 60 man days. But they are working on such system and pointed to the two existing systems in the ISS (US and RUS) but not disclosed, which system they want to use for future missions.

[Dalhousie]

Which reports? In the talks around the special coverage on CCTV they discussed this topic and told that they have no regenerating life supply system on TG-1, so the limited 60 man days. But they are working on such system and pointed to the two existing systems in the ISS (US and RUS) but not disclosed, which system they want to use for future missions.

Several places.

On this website: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/06/chinas-shenzhou-9-successfully-docks-with-tiangong-1/

"The module also has waste recycling equipment".

Also: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/714591.shtml

"Astronauts of Shenzhou-9 will test the recycling system inside Tiangong-1... All vapors from breathing and sweating will be automatically collected and recycled. A device will turn the water into oxygen, while another device will turn the astronauts' urine into water... The urine-turned-water will be sent back to earth for testing before future astronauts drink it..."

And here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/9329133/Chinas-first-female-astronaut-prepares-for-launch.html

"The team will test whether the module is functional, and whether it can efficiently recycle its oxygen and water."

Does not make them right of course.

[Geron]

This article states the Chinese could have an astronaut on the moon by 2016?

[Geron]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/9793/spacex-and-elon-musk-in-space-race-with-china

See article: "possible manned lunar landing in 2016"

Think it is a typo?

[Dalhousie]

More likely invention by some journalist who still thinks everything is a "race"