ArsTechnica: China reveals a new [Long March 9] heavy lift rocket that is a clone of SpaceX’s Starship

[Guynextdoor]

Chinese STEM "innovation" at work again!!

Wrong bro. Elon musk cloned the Chinese rocket, not the other way round

 

[Guynextdoor]

Most of the technology that is required is pretty much known and has been utilized for so long already.

What is not known is the engineering when used in combination, and would involved things like reliability and cost.

After all, I think all the space faring nation or nations, of US, Russia, China and possibly European (Japan, India??) would be able to do it if they really wanted to, but either is considered not much use for themselves or too risky. Because the investment is huge with high engineering risk that might prove to be unworthy like the US Space Shutter program.

Therefore the choices are pretty much variation of those known and tried technology in order to achieve the objective of reducing launch cost per payload to orbit.

Combination using heatshield for reentry, rocket engine for deceleration (don't think parachute would be possible for something big), and using thrust vectoring + some sort of aerodynamic surface like fin or grid fin for altitude control is obvious and almost a given because these are technologies that has been in used and familiar.

That would left the landing mechanism that might vary because it is not so familiar.

China decided to explore the net capture technology that seem more complicated then the leg landing and the so called chopstick method. But it is probably selected because of certain advantage like the payload ratio mentioned.

Both China and SpaceX choice is still under development, SpaceX had one single success test. Only time would tell, which one is viable or better.

Most of the technology that is required is pretty much known and has been utilized for so long already by the west

The issue is not that you are using established technology mostly developed and perfected by the west, it's that you are claiming you are 'ahead' of them and have innovated some of this yourself.

 

[Nuffle]

Most of the technology that is required is pretty much known and has been utilized for so long already.

What is not known is the engineering when used in combination, and would involved things like reliability and cost.

After all, I think all the space faring nation or nations, of US, Russia, China and possibly European (Japan, India??) would be able to do it if they really wanted to, but either is considered not much use for themselves or too risky. Because the investment is huge with high engineering risk that might prove to be unworthy like the US Space Shutter program.

Therefore the choices are pretty much variation of those known and tried technology in order to achieve the objective of reducing launch cost per payload to orbit.

Combination using heatshield for reentry, rocket engine for deceleration (don't think parachute would be possible for something big), and using thrust vectoring + some sort of aerodynamic surface like fin or grid fin for altitude control is obvious and almost a given because these are technologies that has been in used and familiar.

That would left the landing mechanism that might vary because it is not so familiar.

China decided to explore the net capture technology that seem more complicated then the leg landing and the so called chopstick method. But it is probably selected because of certain advantage like the payload ratio mentioned.

Both China and SpaceX choice is still under development, SpaceX had one single success test. Only time would tell, which one is viable or better.

This is the problem with Old Space: this slow progress ends up compromising the entire development process due to large budgets. Just look at how Blue Origin is far behind SpaceX (spending much more, including personal financial support from Jeff Bezos, who sold billions of Amazon shares to invest in BO) because it develops its rockets based on the Old Space concept. SpaceX, on the other hand, has really opened a giant gap between Old Space and New Space, creating a family of rockets in less than a decade and a half.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Most of the technology that is required is pretty much known and has been utilized for so long already by the west

The issue is not that you are using established technology mostly developed and perfected by the west, it's that you are claiming you are 'ahead' of them and have innovated some of this yourself.

The thing I'm also trying to point out is they are spending time and energy on this "established technology" as if it is the "end-all and be-all correct solution".

For instance they are now spending R&D money to replicate the Falcon 9 landing tech which SpaceX is already trying to shelve in favor of the Starship approach.

Wouldn't it have been better say 6 years ago to see what the weakness is to the Falcon 9 approach and design something better...instead of just replicating.

I remember a thread saying China finally after 10 years of research figured out how to make the metal alloy fan blades of jet engines...meanwhile in that time engine designers switched to ceramics. They ended up 10 years behind again.

A good example is EVs. Instead of wasting time trying to replicate building super efficient gasoline engines (as if gasoline powered cars are the "end-all be-all correct solution") they invested in electric engines and surprise surprise ended up with a tech way ahead of the competition.

Why are they wasting time on replicating ASML's lithography in building chips? As if ASML has the "end-all be-all correct solution" for making chips? Are they Gods or something? Yeah right! I'm sure there are much better strategies..spend some time looking for it..geez.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

This is the problem with Old Space: this slow progress ends up compromising the entire development process due to large budgets. Just look at how Blue Origin is far behind SpaceX (spending much more, including personal financial support from Jeff Bezos, who sold billions of Amazon shares to invest in BO) because it develops its rockets based on the Old Space concept. SpaceX, on the other hand, has really opened a giant gap between Old Space and New Space, creating a family of rockets in less than a decade and a half.

Not only that..but Blue origin has one physical rocket that they have been working on for ages. SpaceX builds a new one in like 2 weeks.

They had that catch a few weeks ago and ALREADY they have another rocket testing on the pad.

 

[JsCh]

Most of the technology that is required is pretty much known and has been utilized for so long already by the west

The issue is not that you are using established technology mostly developed and perfected by the west, it's that you are claiming you are 'ahead' of them and have innovated some of this yourself.

Where did I claim that China is ahead. Not me, and I don't think anyone in China space industry say that.

I think it is the west that try constantly to try to put China down. If Tonya harding tactics doesn't work, all is left is smearing.

Anyway, I am not into this petty dick measuring contest.

FYI, rocket is invented by China.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

China decided to explore the net capture technology that seem more complicated then the leg landing and the so called chopstick method. But it is probably selected because of certain advantage like the payload ratio mentioned.

If this is the multiple crossing wires constricting around the landing rocket I think this is actually a pretty good method as this was my initial thought on how to best grab a rocket.

However you are going to run into the same issues of momentum that SpaceX had where you have this heavy weight moving fast and then trying to come to a complete sudden stop without denting the rocket. They would swing the chopstick arms and they would bend and snap back with momentum as it was stopped. This gave it sort of a "rubbery arm" effect. Of course with wires a little wraparound may not be bad.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[JsCh]

From the interviewee in the tweet video,

Methodology is hard type recovery (meanning not much cushioning)
Required 1st stage to have ability to hover
Completed technical feasibility review.
R&D work has already started.
Expect 1st stage recovery to be realized around 2030.

Also another Video link from CCTV news ->

Sina Visitor System

Long March 9 recovery plan

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies