This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Citation needed? I would say "currently in testing", but "tested" suggests they've made it to orbit, and AFAIK there are no non-expendable Chinese designs that have reached orbit so far. And even if you consider hop tests and engine tests to be "tested", everything seriously in the works there is basically working off the Falcon 9 playbook.
"Gravity-2 aims to operate at a similar price per kilogram as the SpaceX Falcon 9", which is about what you'd expect from a lineup that looks like someone was frantically cribbing from SpaceX. (which is mostly the right thing for them to do, to be clear; it beats the hell out of Europe's response to SpaceX)
The Hyperbola-3 hasn't had any prices announced yet but it also looks more like "cribbing from Falcon" than "innately better", except for the choice of a methalox rather than kerolox engine.
Deep Blue Aerospace is at the advanced cribbing stage, surpassing its competitors' infographics of not-Falcon-9 and not-Falcon-Heavy rockets by putting a not-Starship rocket at the end.
Pallas-1 gets us back to not-Falcon-9 and not-Falcon-Heavy territory.
The obsession with Falcon Heavy clones is IMHO a bad sign for some of these companies. Even SpaceX admits that Falcon Heavy wasn't worth the trouble in hindsight, and there was a point where if they hadn't already accepted Air Force contracts for it (or if Gwynne Shotwell hadn't talked Musk into staying on the feds' good side) they'd have probably canceled it entirely. The original rationale behind it was that they didn't think Falcon 9 would be nearly as powerful as it was, but after some engine improvements and tank stretching and propellant subcooling the F9 got pushed into the FH weight class, and FH got pushed out into a weight class where (with its small fairing) it will never have enough payloads to pay back the investment.
I don't know much about Tianlong-3. I'd give the company points for being the first Chinese startup to put a liquid-fueled rocket in orbit, but then take away a quarter of those points for being the first to launch a rocket stage unintentionally, to fly for miles out of control before impact, when a test fire stand broke.
Maybe LandSpace is the best bet here? 4 successful Zhuque-2 launches with 2 failures, VTVL and relight tests with Zhuque-3, using methalox now and working on full-flow methalox upgrades. There's no hint of Starship-scale plans in their future, but they're at least setting up to have Starship-quality institutional experience.
But I think what's impressive about the Chinese effort isn't any single rocket design, it's the sheer volume of these efforts. All but one of those companies has already reached orbit, albeit with smaller and less-ambitious designs than what they're working on now. Two of them have reached orbit with liquid-fueled stages. Even if most of them fail or come up with something mediocre, they're actually trying and achieving impressive things quicky. In the US, after SpaceX, our best efforts are probably Blue Origin (made it to orbit after only 25 years!), RocketLab (the Electron would have been impressive if they'd got reusability working, and I'm hopeful for Neutron), Stoke (still just doing hop tests, but actually trying out a potentially better-than-Falcon-9 idea), and maybe Firefly (with no impressive launch vehicle plans, but they made orbit).
Even in the "I made a PowerPoint!" dreams of (the 4th redesign of) the Long March 9, a rocket scaling to Starship is supposed to be not flying before the 2040s.
I do mostly mean LandSpace with Zhuque-2/3, and Space Epoch's Yuanxingzhe-1. Yes, I assume that these designs will be almost fully preserved in product version. They are better than Falcon-9 in that F9 is pretty old, and they're copying Starship as well. Methalox, steel body, more robust build (F9 diameter was limited by stupid American railroad/highway standard). This has the potential for rapid reusability and mass production. And you don't need to scale to Starship if you can scale to dozens of vehicles instead. I've heard that LandSpace may get facilities currently involved in metalworking for military aviation.
I am completely jaded about the Long March program and it isn't factoring into my estimates. Robin Li was wise to insist on liberalizing the space market to enable those private efforts, they will determine Chinese ceiling.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link