a snapshot of current China rocket technology

[gagaga]

 

[ImperatorDragon]

China is still far behind.

 

[no_name]

First pic 4th, 5th column shows vacuum thrust/impulse.
Fuel is either Kerosene/oxygen or oxygen/hydrogen.

 

[American Pakistani]

Wish you success.

 

[ao333]

So... US>Russia>EU>China

As expected

 

[Project 627]

So... US>Russia>EU>China

As expected

No its Russia>US>China>EU

As you can see RD-180 & RD-170 is ahead everybody when it comes to trust.

 

[oct605032048]

One reason why China don't have big rocket is that all rockets need to be transported by train to the launching site. The diameter of the tunnels along the railway determines the upper limitation of the rocket diameter.

With new launch site in Hainan under construction and ocean transport of rocket, we could get rid of this limitation.

 

[cloneman]

I think it's due to budget reason that the LM-5 and more heavier rocket developed so slow.You always have two choices,
1.Put into too much resources on those space projects which generally won't have too much outputs and got bankruptacy like the USSR.
2.Input certain amount of resources which is getting according to your GDP and social development and have a sustantial space project.
I think China is using the stategy Two and will always use it.She won't try to develop those looking good but meaningless space toys.Also the Chinese moon landing and deep space adventure will not likely to be a mission like" we rush there,we arrived and we back".

 

[gagaga]

I just remember some Chinese member here talk about China is going to send men to moon, and some even talk about China rocket technology surpass Russia. I post this, my little research, dedicate to these people, hope them respect the fact that even Japan got better tech than the Chinese, and this fact not gonna change in the near future. you see the LOX/LH2 engine YF-77, which will have its first flight in 2014, its thrust is weaker than the LE-7A. also, China don't have any plans on develop a solid-fuel rocket booster, which contribute much to the payload of a mid-heavy lift launch vehicle.

speaking of manned moon landing, take Saturn V and Soviet Union N-1 as references, China need a launch vehicle with payload at least 100 tons to the LEO, and the Long March 5, that China is going to have in 2014, its maximum payload to the LEO is 25 tons. So, very obvious, no matter how much you want it happens, it wont happen any time soon. China start the development on LM-5 in 2006, and right now China dont have any other rocket development project.

actually, the overall payload of LM-5 do catch up the mainstream, it will surpass Japan's H2B and catch up France, it just China made it by the tech that the mainstream dont use anymore, like Kerosene/Liquid oxygen fuel, and strap-on 10 engines in the first stage, take Ariane 5 as an example, it has two solid-fuel rocket boosters, one engines on each, and one Vulcain 2 engine on the core first stage, which is 3 engines on the first stage, while China LM-5 has 4 liquid fuel boosters, two YF-100 on each, and two YF-77 on the core first stage, which is 10 engines on the first stage.

I remember a guy from China space related industry call China the number 1 in the second world of the globe space community, compared to the first world, i think what he say is quite true, but just dont know why many people dont believe that.

 

[gagaga]

One reason why China don't have big rocket is that all rockets need to be transported by train to the launching site. The diameter of the tunnels along the railway determines the upper limitation of the rocket diameter.

With new launch site in Hainan under construction and ocean transport of rocket, we could get rid of this limitation.

good, the overall payload of Long March 5 catch up the mainstream, now what if China focus on improve its engine tech.

 

[gagaga]

I think it's due to budget reason that the LM-5 and more heavier rocket developed so slow.You always have two choices,
1.Put into too much resources on those space projects which generally won't have too much outputs and got bankruptacy like the USSR.
2.Input certain amount of resources which is getting according to your GDP and social development and have a sustantial space project.
I think China is using the stategy Two and will always use it.She won't try to develop those looking good but meaningless space toys.Also the Chinese moon landing and deep space adventure will not likely to be a mission like" we rush there,we arrived and we back".

about your conclusion, you know other than the apollo project, all US unmanned deep space exploration means a lot to the mankind knowledge about space? who are you referring to about being "we rush there,we arrived and we back" ???

speaking of China moon landing and deep space exploration, yes, as you said, it doesnt have much or say it dont have any economic return, so yeah, it wont happen, so there is no "Chinese moon landing". China start deep space exploration soon this year with Yinghuo-1 though, but it fits being "we rush there, we arrived and we back" more than the US mars landing probes.

 

[Akasa]

So... US>Russia>EU>China

As expected

Yes, I was completely envious at the EU's man in space, their new space station, and their spacewalk.

 

[applesauce]

speaking of manned moon landing, take Saturn V and Soviet Union N-1 as references, China need a launch vehicle with payload at least 100 tons to the LEO,

not true, the thrust required for a moon missile is dependent on what method you wish to use to get there. if all you had was smaller rockets then you can launch part into earth orbit and build up a moon ship in orbit. of course a direct ascent would need the most powerful rockets