I have to start this by saying I wish I had more than one source for this, the weekly Teslarati email I get contains some information on the Chinese developing a copy of SpaceX's Starship for Low Earth Orbit flights. They quote China's Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT) but don't include any references I can link to. They do include, though, a graphic showing the vehicle and a flight outline.
If you're familiar with Starship from their test flights last year, the flight
profile will look very familiar. This graphic apparently originated at a
February '22 meeting in which it was presented as a fully-reusable human-rated
rocket that would replace the country's existing crew launch vehicles - at
least for LEO. Fueled, like SpaceX's next-generation rocket, by methane
and oxygen (methalox), it's hard to look at the vehicle's upper stage and not
think of it as a Starship copy.
We've known since 2019 that the Chinese have been experimenting with grid fins similar to the ones SpaceX uses on both Falcon 9 and the Superheavy booster. There are many reports of other aerospace agencies attempting to build off the Falcon 9 concepts and achieve reusability. While there are many claims that others are copying SpaceX, this Starship concept looks to remove all doubt.
Note the similarity in the flight path, especially the right half of that
graphic. The Second Stage clone would use the same profile SpaceX has
developed, with two flaps on each side of the second stage at the front and back of
the lander. The lander will descend while decelerating in a horizontal
position, and then flip to vertical at the very end of descent to perform a
propulsive landing.
The system seems to be smaller than Starship and that seems like it has to
help them. I think some of the difficulties SpaceX has with the system
is partly from how big it is.
Three main differences between Starship follow. First, China wants the rocket to be able to launch about 20 tons to LEO, while Starship is aiming for 100-150+ tons to the same orbit. Second, the booster appears to be a visually identical copy not of SpaceX's Super Heavy - but of Blue Origin's New Glenn first stage. Finally, instead of an ultra-high-performance engine like SpaceX's Raptor, China's next-gen crew launch vehicle would use a simpler gas generator engine cycle - less efficient but much easier to design, build, and make reliable.
The author of the email piece, Eric Ralph, had a positive take on the Chinese
copying SpaceX. I have to admit I'd never thought of it this way. He talks about how ULA, Arianespace and Roscosmos have just puttered around paying lip service to reuse but doing essentially nothing to develop it, and while China has been slow, they seem to be actually doing something.
[...]The half-hearted stumbling about of formerly great launch providers makes China's strategy of observing what has worked and copying successful designs (or at least copying a company with a strong record of success) look like a stroke of brilliance. While the speed of the country's efforts to develop reusable rockets has left plenty to be desired, at least its space agencies, design bureaus, and startups are actually trying to seriously respond to and learn from SpaceX's successes.
I've long thought that the way SpaceX developed the technology was
brilliant. I could see from the way ULA CEO Tory Bruno talked that he thought it would
cost way too much money to develop and he just saw the costs entirely
differently. SpaceX seemed to think that they sent up a Falcon 9 for
hire and when the booster separated, it had just been thrown out. It's
now "free" as if they picked it out of a trash pile to experiment on. They can tell the
engines to turn on for a very minimal amount of extra cost, and guide it
to where it could land. As long as the primary mission of launching a
customer's satellite was accomplished, and every launch coverage has stressed
that was their crucial part, everything after MECO was teaching them more than if they dropped the booster in the ocean.
True, the recovery drones were an expense and I'm sure there were others, but
those costs get amortized out over many recoveries - well over 100 at this time.
Chinese Long March 2 grid fins in 2019. CASC Photo.
Looks like the booster is more New Glenn in it's shape than Booster. But it's the ChiComs. Which means I won't trust the truth until after verification by outside trustworthy sources.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much SpaceX data the Chinese already have?
ReplyDeleteAll of it?
DeleteThe Chinese motto since forever...."Why invent it if you can steal it".
ReplyDelete"Why invent it if you can steal it?": Well, the primary reason is that it has to be demoralizing to work for an aerospace firm where you are given no creative freedom in the solution of your problem, and are told to "shut up and copy (somebody else)". You won't retain anyone who has any hope of creating something new, and will end up with a bunch of time-servers.
ReplyDeleteNow, that may not be a primary consideration for China. But it's something to keep in mind: Tell someone to shut up and color inside someone else's lines, and creative genius vanishes like snow in Death Valley.
OTOH, reuse obviously works and works fantastically well, (and everyone who understood the problem of space launch in any terms greater than meeting a narrow contract long understood the necessity of it). All serious future space efforts should be attempting it.
MadRocketSci
One rather tragic thing about Chinese history is that their great age of invention and discovery happened in what is supposed to be regarded (officially) as their "bad-old-days" of disunity, before a central bureaucratic empire crushed all opposition.
ReplyDelete