Reusable Spacecraft Lands in China After 2 Day Flight
China’s new reusable spacecraft landed on Sunday after a two-day test flight in Earth orbit, the official Xinhua news agency announced.
“The success indicated that China has achieved key breakthroughs in researching the spacecraft’s reusable technologies. It will provide more convenient and cheaper transport for the peaceful use of space in the future,” Xinhua said.
The spacecraft landed back at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center where it was launched aboard a Long March 2F booster on Friday.
China has not released any details about the spacecraft. It is possible the vehicle is similar to the U.S. military’s uncrewed X-37 space plane, which is launched aboard a rocket and glides to a landing on a runway.
11 responses to “Reusable Spacecraft Lands in China After 2 Day Flight”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
One thing about these small shuttles that will be interesting to find out is what they’re being used for? Are they an efficiency gain? Or are they simply executing a policy? They are of course, really cool. An increase in coolness will be when A used Falcon 9 launches a used shuttle encapsulated in a used fairing. Hopefully some of the amateur trackers and photographers got some good photos and will share them with us soon.
the big deal here is did the Chinese launch with or without a fairing
Yes, which technology did they use, USAF or NASA… Is it modeled after the X-37B, X-38 or Dreamchaser.
BTW the University of North Texas just asked 15 Chinese visiting scholars to leave… It’s similar to how the Japanese were sending their engineers to U.S. universities in the 1930’s to gather IP.
Yes, which technology did they use, USAF or NASA… Is it modeled after the X-37B, X-38 or Dreamchaser.
or some other option like the Sanger spaceplane notion
the X37 borrows heavily from the shuttle because the spade work was already there AND they wanted the cross range, which is the high mark of the shuttle double delta (which comes a lot from Swedish AF designs)
the 38/DC is more a lifting body for which Steve Austin did a lot of the test flying a long time ago 🙂
the tradeoff for X range is very difficult issues controlling the lift on a rocket (that is why they are all faring launched) and a heavier wing.
The Dynasoar and Sanger spaceplane (all the way back to the Sanger bomber) has very little X range…but well a lighter wing and a more straightfoward launch issue
if it is true that they launched without a faring (which the notion of not allowing any pictures of the launch even by local residents) would seem to argue for
that would be some indication that they might be relying more on Sanger and ESA then anything else…AND would be a little scary since the rumor about the DF21 warhead is that it is a Sanger look alike ie it flies to its target
Interesting thoughts. I wonder if DF-21 hides behind the moniker of its booster and is really several programs? When DF-21 was first announced back in 2008 it was supposed to be a dual cone MARV (along Pershing II lines) that was guided in by a UCAV that had all the sensors. The weak point of that concept is a standard missile, or an F-18 can turn the system off.
In the late 80’s I started hearing rumors that the subscale Soviet BOR was a prototype intercontinental ballistic anti shipping platform that would work in conjunction with the RORSAT system. Then around 2018, I started hearing rumors that China was ‘repeating’ that concept with DF-21. Or at least the rumor mill was churning out the same grist.
yes I am pretty sure that the DF21 is really just a rocket, but the trick is the payload. IF and I emphasis IF the Chinese can develop a ocean control warhead on a suborbital rocket launched from deep inside their territory…thats an amazing game changer
My guess is, whatever it is, it’s highly experimental. Prone to some sort of failure or countermeasure that would make a real weapons architect say the concept is not worth pursuing. The reason the Chinese are doing it is to scare off a US President from sending in the flat tops during a crisis. The nature of the problem is known. You have to actively guide an RV to a moving ships that’s actively trying have you miss. Somehow you have to locate the ship, track it, and command a MARV GNC to guide to the target. All thru a reentry sheath of glowing plasma. That either means an aircraft with sensors below, or a second RV, that’s higher up and behind the munition warhead to facilitate communications between the two RV’s from behind the plasma sheith of the shooter RV. We know the way the STS communicated with the ground during reentry, but that approach goes both ways in that pumping your plasma sheath with RF to turn it into an antenna is susceptible to EW. I wonder who can deliver more power to the RV sheath, a wimpy battery on a small RV, or an SPY6? I’ll bet the SPY6 wins. Not to mention, any aircraft can be tracked and shot down. And the aircraft has to be launched hours before the attack.
Of course all this tom foolery was addressed in the Cold War. You locate the CV battle group with a RORSAT, and saturate the area with MIRV’ed nuclear warheads with enough 250 kT nuclear weapons to cover the maneuvering area of the battle group during the terminal phase of the engagement. Of course there was the difficulty of communicating the final targeting information to the RV bus to script the final release which would have had to have been done much later in cruise than when engaging fixed targets.
Even today, I’d use a submarine. They’re easier.
off toeither copehagen or the UK tomorrow and back and then will respond have to get up at 0300 🙂 off to bed now
Keep in mind a Nimitz class CVN can move through it’s own footprint in about 20 seconds. Whatever sensor system tracks it, needs to establish it’s position and velocity vector, and has to do it fast enough to detect change. Bare minimum of position only requires a position fix every 20 seconds IF the system is accurate. Then to resolve nyquist limits, it goes to every 10 seconds. So you’ll need a vector fix of position and velocity faster than a fix every 10 seconds just from the point of view of resolving the target. Then comes the problem of closing velocity and the minimum control bit of the warhead, and how to collect all this data during the terminal phase of engagement. Nuclear weapons make things easier, but hit to kill even on a big target like a CV is not easy. Maybe they do it like Space X and slow down, but if they slow down to Falcon velocities, they cam be engaged by SM and air to air missiles from any CAP that might be up.
Submarines. 🙂
from the time a DF21 warhead starts looking to impact will be under 20 seconds. and it will have some sort of widespread warhead, its not a kinetic vehicle in my view
BTW the University of North Texas just asked 15 Chinese visiting
scholars to leave… It’s similar to how the Japanese were sending their
engineers to U.S. universities in the 1930’s to gather IP.
that japanese story is pretty debunked. I am uncomfortable with what happened…unless the FBI has direct evidence against each student.