Japan’s Epsilon rocket ordered to self-destruct after failed launch

[etylo]

That seems fishy to me honestly, repeatedly lightning strike?

Thats what reported, if you read in chinese reports and they look to me credible.

https://www.baike.com/wiki/7%C2%B723%E7%94%AC%E6%B8%A9%E7%BA%BF%E7%89%B9%E5%88%AB%E9%87%8D%E5%A4%A7%E9%93%81%E8%B7%AF%E4%BA%A4%E9%80%9A%E4%BA%8B%E6%95%85/3734854?view_id=25zikk6h0g3c3k

 

[Nan Yang]

well a majority of Chinese SLV's are solid chemical rockets so no real surprise.
If I'm right all Chinese manned missions have been powered by solid rockets so far.

I'm not saying this is wrong or right. Just saying solid fuelled rockets are less complex and therefore more reliable. The only down side is environmental pollution.

All Chinese big rockets are all liquid fuel including the rocket for manned mission.

India's rocket however are almost all solid fuel.

 

[beijingwalker]

All HSR/Shinkansen incidents in Japan are related to earthquake, and none of them have resulted in any casualties.

Wenzhou line was considered a HSR at the time, and it was one of the biggest HSR accident in the 2010s.

2011 was over a decade ago, afte that Japan's bullet trains suffered several derailments, and you have to keep in mind the scale of HSR systems in different countries, same as rocket launching, if you launch 100 rockets, the chance of some failure will certainly multiply than if you just launch one.

 

[REhorror]

2011 was over a decade ago, afte that Japan's bullet trains suffered several derailments, and you have to keep in mind the scale of HSR systems in different countries, same as rocket launching, if you launch 100 rockets, the chance of some failure will certainly multiply than if you just launch one.

No, they don't.
Japan Shinkansen never had any major accident, and the last train-related accident that Japan was in 2004. This year they have some earthquakes, but the train was stopped in place with no casulaties or injuries.

Maybe you are thinking of Taiwan, which did have an accident with high casualties using Japanese trains recently.

 

[etylo]

well a majority of Chinese SLV's are solid chemical rockets so no real surprise.
If I'm right all Chinese manned missions have been powered by solid rockets so far.

I'm not saying this is wrong or right. Just saying solid fuelled rockets are less complex and therefore more reliable. The only down side is environmental pollution.

Oh yeah, the good Americans just dont care about their own astronauts safety when launching rockets, but opted for the lofty goal of saving the humanity from enviromental pollution, how self serving and hypocritical. If you Americans are so concerned with pollutions, why dont you start drastically reduce your per captia carbon emissions in US.

 

[beijingwalker]

No, they don't.
Japan Shinkansen never had any major accident, and the last train-related accident that Japan was in 2004. This year they have some earthquakes, but the train was stopped in place with no casulaties or injuries.

Maybe you are thinking of Taiwan, which did have an accident with high casualties using Japanese trains recently.

Japan doesn't have much HSR to start with, in HSR, China is in her own league, several times larger than the rest of world combined.

 

[beijingwalker]

Japan's HSR is like a Chinese province in scale, one can argue that HSR in 99% of the Chinese provinces have a prefect safety record, never had any accidents ever.

 

[dbc]

Oh yeah, the good Americans just dont care about their own astronauts safety when launching rockets, but opted for the lofty goal of saving the humanity from enviromental pollution, how self serving and hypocritical. If you Americans are so concerned with pollutions, why dont you start drastically reduce your per captia carbon emissions in US.

couple of issues with solid motors, you can't throttle the engine. The fuel is extremely toxic and hazardous to those who handle it and then of course pollution. Finally, you can't really produce Geptil on Mars

The US has mastered all known fuel mixtures so we can achieve the same reliability as solid fuels with kerosene or methane or hydrogen and we don't have to depend on toxic chemicals to go into space.

 

[etylo]

well a majority of Chinese SLV's are solid chemical rockets so no real surprise.
If I'm right all Chinese manned missions have been powered by solid rockets so far.

I'm not saying this is wrong or right. Just saying solid fuelled rockets are less complex and therefore more reliable. The only down side is environmental pollution.

Apparently you are wrong then, all chinese rockets use liquids as fuel except one new model, dont talk of nonsense when you have no idea of chinese space tech.

China's new powerful solid rocket engine conducts test run

China successfully conducted a test run of its new huge solid rocket booster engine in Xi'an, northwest China's Shaanxi Province, on Wednesday.

news.cgtn.com

 

[dbc]

All Chinese big rockets are all liquid fuel including the rocket for manned mission.

India's rocket however are almost all solid fuel.

The operational Long March 5 through 8 LOX/Kerosene SLV have never been used for manned space flights. So far all Chinese manned missions have been solid motor but this is likely to change soon.

I don't think India has a manned SLV and I don't know much about their space program so can't comment about their SLVs.

Apparently you are wrong then, all chinese rockets use liquids as fuel except one new model,

China's new powerful solid rocket engine conducts test run

China successfully conducted a test run of its new huge solid rocket booster engine in Xi'an, northwest China's Shaanxi Province, on Wednesday.

news.cgtn.com

I'm talking about manned mission. I am aware LM5 through 8 are LOX / Kerosene

 

[Nan Yang]

The operational Long March 5 through 8 LOX/Kerosene SLV have never been used for manned space flights. So far all Chinese manned missions have been solid motor but this is likely to change soon.

I don't think India has a manned SLV and I don't know much about their space program so can't comment about their SLVs.


I'm talking about manned mission. I am aware LM5 through 8 are LOX / Kerosene

LM-2F manned rated SLV is all liquid fuel.

All space station modules are launched by LM-5B which is also all liquid fuel.

 

[DF41]

I failed to see why my posting expressing my delight and happiness at failure of Japanese launch deserved - tive rating from dbc?

Or that dbc can award that as he pleased and want regardless of anything else

Why should I feel anything but SCHADENFREUDE at failures of Japan

Considering what Japan done to Chinese and other people of the world and never apologised for that.

Japanese at that time cheering and banzaiing away at what they done

The time will come very very soon that Yasakuni Shrine be razed to the ground when Japan go to war with China.
And a public toilet build in place.

AND THE JAPANESE EMPORER BE MADE CUSTODIAN OF THE TOILET COLLECTING 100YEN FROM EACH VISITOR

 

[dbc]

LM-2F manned rated SLV is all liquid fuel.

nope the main engine stage 1 and 2 are UDMH/N2O4 solid fuelled
the four strap on boosters are liquid fuelled.

 

[Nan Yang]

nope the main engine stage 1 and 2 are UDMH/N2O4 solid fuelled
the four strap on boosters are liquid fuelled.

UDMH/N204 is liquid fuel.

 

[REhorror]

Japan doesn't have much HSR to start with, in HSR, China is in her own league, several times larger than the rest of world combined.

Japan has like the 3rd most HSR per country per your charts, I don't see why it doesn't have much. Hell, my country has no HSR rail at all.
It's just that China has much more.