Russia Today: US losing pace in military space race against China

[Stranagor]

US losing pace in military space race against China

A senior US general in the recently created Space Force has warned Beijing could outgun Washington by 2030. Why is Joe Biden allowing this to happen?

www.rt.com

 

[Song Hong]

There are signs of regression in US engineering capabilities except while IT seems to be holding for now. A few big programs are disastrous such as Zumwalt, Boeing 737Max. Others are achieve at a very high cost or delay including B1B, F22, F35, LCS, Ford aircraft carrier, EM propulsion/guns. In some key technologies, foreigners are leading for example IC. In the realm of biotech, while US is still leading, China is catching up at a breathtaking speed.

My experience of working with US MNC is they are lorded by a bunch of moronic, insecure, psychopathy MBAs, in lock step against engineers. Sworn aim of these MBAs are to prevent the rise of good engineers, ridiculing engineers. They promote either the MBAs or engineers from weak domain, such as project management, sales and operation.

 

[casual]

author is talking out of his ***. all space force projects are confidential so it is not possible to judge their progress.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

There are signs of regression in US engineering capabilities except while IT seems to be holding for now.

My experience of working with US MNC

Hmm...SpaceX has popped up out of nowhere and seems to be making other Space programs looks like beginners when it comes to rocket power, reusability, and manned capabilities.

How do you explain a private company with a few thousand people and a budget less than state sponsored programs having the most powerful rocket and the largest flight proven reusable manned spacecraft? They have launched 18 people into space in just 18 months. State sponsored programs took years.

The inside of his spacecraft looks like something out of Star Trek with touch screens.
Meanwhile NASA's space shuttle looked like a 1980's toggle switch infested airplane and both the Soyuz and Shenzou use trigger sticks to press buttons.

We've been seeing futuristic stuff like this in movies/tv for decades...why is SpaceX the only one doing anything about it.

 

[somsak]

Hmm...SpaceX has popped up out of nowhere and seems to be making other Space programs looks like beginners when it comes to rocket power, reusability, and manned capabilities.

How do you explain a private company with a few thousand people and a budget less than state sponsored programs having the most powerful rocket and the largest flight proven reusable manned spacecraft? They have launched 18 people into space in just 18 months. State sponsored programs took years.

The inside of his spacecraft looks like something out of Star Trek with touch screens.
Meanwhile NASA's space shuttle looked like a 1980's toggle switch infested airplane and both the Soyuz and Shenzou use trigger sticks to press buttons.

We've been seeing futuristic stuff like this in movies/tv for decades...why is SpaceX the only one doing anything about it.

The most powerful rocket? Which one?

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

The most powerful rocket? Which one?

Falcon Heavy 2018

Elon Musk embarrasses US, Russian, and Chinese space agencies by launching the most powerful rocket

Falcon Heavy successfully launches!!! Elon Musk to buy Volcanic Island lair.:-) WOW!!!! Video Details to follow. Double landing Yes, he sent his Tesla as the payload. Building large stations like this are now almost within our grasp. Volcanic Island lair in "You Only Live Twice"...

defence.pk

SpaceX: Falcon Heavy
Payload to LEO 63,800 kg (140,700 lb)
Payload to GTO 26,700 kg (58,900 lb)

US: Delta IV
Patload to LEO 28,790 kg (63,470 lb)
Payload to GTO 14,220 kg (31,350 lb)

Russia: Angara 5
Payload to LEO 24,500 kg (54,000 lb)
Payload to GTO 7,500 kg (16,500 lb)

China: Long March 5 (cz5)
Payload to LEO 23,000 kg (51,000 lb)
Payload to GTO 13,000 kg (29,000 lb)

The most powerful rocket? Which one?

The embarrassment will be worse if the Starship launches next year as it is far more powerful than the Falcon Heavy.

Starship v1 with full reusability:

Patload to LEO 100,000 kg (220,000 lb)
Payload to GTO 21,000 kg (31,350 lb)

 

[SaadH]

Hmm...SpaceX has popped up out of nowhere and seems to be making other Space programs looks like beginners when it comes to rocket power, reusability, and manned capabilities.

How do you explain a private company with a few thousand people and a budget less than state sponsored programs having the most powerful rocket and the largest flight proven reusable manned spacecraft? They have launched 18 people into space in just 18 months. State sponsored programs took years.

The inside of his spacecraft looks like something out of Star Trek with touch screens.
Meanwhile NASA's space shuttle looked like a 1980's toggle switch infested airplane and both the Soyuz and Shenzou use trigger sticks to press buttons.

We've been seeing futuristic stuff like this in movies/tv for decades...why is SpaceX the only one doing anything about it.

Reusability is another one of Musk's fraud in a long list of frauds, starting with Zip2.com. In short, what resuability makes up in saving the rocket, it sacrifices almost equal amount in payload and more in reliability. Per launch cost is still 90% of the legacy players and at much less a reliability rate.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Reusability is another one of Musk's fraud in a long list of frauds, starting with Zip2.com. In short, what resuability makes up in saving the rocket, it sacrifices almost equal amount in payload and more in reliability. Per launch cost is still 90% of the legacy players and at much less a reliability rate.

How is saving 9 complex/expensive engines from being burnt up on re-entry a bad thing? In the Falcon Heavy's case it is 27.

Even the Space Shuttle reused all its engines.

Not all satellites are heavy military ones.

Also there is no requirement that the rocket has to be reused. Many US military missions have not had a landing due to the extra weight requirements.

In fact there is a Falcon Heavy military GEO launch next year where they are going to completely lose the middle 1st stage booster with the usual upper second stage AND they are going to see if they can actually recover the other two 1st stage boosters on barges. An attempted double barge landing.

 

[kankan326]

How is saving 9 complex/expensive engines from being burnt up on re-entry a bad thing? In the Falcon Heavy's case it is 27.

Even the Space Shuttle reused all its engines.

Also there is no requirenent that the rocket has to be reused. Many US military missions have not had a landing due to the extra weight requirement.

I'm not an expert in rockets. But my instinct tells me reusing launched rockets can not save much money. After launch, the engines and all rocket structures were burnt by high temperature. Can they be used again? Even if they can, why not just install parachutes for recycling? Which will save a lot of fuel than relanding. Is the fuel cost for relanding less than the engines cost?

Space shuttle is not more economical than spacecraft

 

[somsak]

Falcon Heavy

Elon Musk embarrasses US, Russian, and Chinese space agencies by launching the most powerful rocket

Falcon Heavy successfully launches!!! Elon Musk to buy Volcanic Island lair.:-) WOW!!!! Video Details to follow. Double landing Yes, he sent his Tesla as the payload. Building large stations like this are now almost within our grasp. Volcanic Island lair in "You Only Live Twice"...

defence.pk

SpaceX: Falcon Heavy
Payload to LEO 63,800 kg (140,700 lb)
Payload to GTO 26,700 kg (58,900 lb)

US: Delta IV
Patload to LEO 28,790 kg (63,470 lb)
Payload to GTO 14,220 kg (31,350 lb)

Russia: Angara 5
Payload to LEO 24,500 kg (54,000 lb)
Payload to GTO 7,500 kg (16,500 lb)

China: Long March 5 (cz5)
Payload to LEO 23,000 kg (51,000 lb)
Payload to GTO 13,000 kg (29,000 lb)


The embarrassment will be worse if the Starship launches next year as it is far more powerful than the Falcon Heavy.

Starship v1 with full reusability:

Patload to LEO 100,000 kg (220,000 lb)
Payload to GTO 21,000 kg (31,350 lb)

Heavy-lift launch vehicle - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Good specification!. But according to this Wikipedia, Falcon heavy is not yet heavy-lift launch vehicle?

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

I'm not an expert in rockets. But my instinct tells me reusing launched rockets can not save much money. After launch, the engines and all rocket structures were burnt by high temperature. Can they be used again? Even if they can, why not just install parachutes for recycling? Which will save a lot of fuel than relanding. Is the fuel cost for relanding less than the engines cost?

Space shuttle is not more economical than spacecraft

They have landed their rockets 96 times.
During some relaunches you can even see the soot still on the rockets. The only issue is inspecting the landing legs because they can get damaged even during what looks like soft landings.

The rocket is too big to have landing randomly in some area by parachute.

You aren't going to lift the booster out by helicopter. Even the Space Shuttle had to send them into the ocean.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Heavy-lift launch vehicle - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Good specification!. But according to this Wikipedia, Falcon heavy is not yet heavy-lift launch vehicle?

The Long March 9 had to wait 4 years to make that "proven" list since none of its payloads until then crossed 20 tons.

Space shuttle is not more economical than spacecraft

Well throwing away an Airbus or Boeing Aircraft after every flight isn't economical either. Those are pretty large aircraft. The Space shuttle could carry 8 people and equipment.

 

[aziqbal]

US losing pace in military space race against China

A senior US general in the recently created Space Force has warned Beijing could outgun Washington by 2030. Why is Joe Biden allowing this to happen?

www.rt.com

Russia who has a one old prehistoric Carrier and could not stop a Royal Navy Type 45 DDG from entering its waters

China couldn't do anything to Royal Navy assets in South China Sea who operates 2 Casino Carriers

both Russia and China struggling to contain Royal Navy are dreaming of taking on 11 x CVN + 10 x LHA + 300 top class warships

keep dreaming

 

[kankan326]

They have landed their rockets 96 times.
During some relaunches you can even see the soot still on the rockets. The only issue is inspecting the landing legs because they can get damaged even during what looks like soft landings.

The rocket is too big to have landing randomly in some area by parachute.

You aren't going to lift the booster out by helicopter. Even the Space Shuttle had to send them into the ocean.

You didn't answer some crucial questions:

1,The rocket landing needs fuel. What's the cost for the extra fuel? By the way, I believe it will need much less fuel to land in a certain area if it is parachute landing.
2, The launched rocket' engines and shell are subjected to several thousand ℃ high temperature. What materials can resist such high temperature without any properties change and shape change so the rocket can be reused without any potential risk? Aren't the materials much expensive than normal rockets'?

 

[xuxu1457]

The only enemy of the United States is itself, so China will not have an arms race with the United States.
The arms race is the stupidest thing. China's military spending is less than one third of that of the United States, even though its GDP is 70% of that of the United States.