CHINA STUDY SUMMARY: "On Issues of China Manned Lunar Exploration"

[luke strawwalker]

Here's a neat study I picked up recently... A paper (mostly in Chinese) on their lunar exploration plans. Some pretty cool pix in the study that I'll post here. Please note the similarity between their Lunar lander and our LSAM designs for the Altair lander that we canceled a few years back. Heck looks like they're even thinking of cloning our SLS rocket, even trying to decide between large SRB's and LRB's...
China Study Summary-On Issues of China Manned Lunar Exploration.txt


Enjoy! Later! OL JR

[luke strawwalker]

Here's the last few pics...

Later! OL JR

[MarkB.]

I don't know any Chinese but based on some other web-info (taken with a large salt lick) that is one big booster in the last couple of pictures. The proposed CZ-5 is sorta of a Chinese Proton/Saturn I-class launcher but if the size is to scale with the big one next to it, that thing is bigger than an Energiya.

Not sure if the Chinese have big solids. Their present transports seem a little delicate to be lugging heavy solids out to the pad. I don't recall seeing a Chinese rocket with big solids but they do have a solid first stage for their SLBMs that could be developed further.

[CPMcGraw]

Based on the stated dimensions, the tall one is 331' from ground to NC tip, and 29' 6" in diameter. That puts it squarely into the SatV category for physical size.

So, first stage uses 5 YF-220 engines with a combined thrust of 2M lbs? And 4 solids with another (combined) thrust of 2M lbs? Or are they each producing 2M lbs? We're either talking about 4M lbs thrust, or 10M lbs! With a design of this size, I'm thinking they're implying the latter!

Second stage uses a single YF-220 with 200T, or 400K, lbs thrust. They're keeping the design simple through commonality of engines...

One Big Honkin' Rocket!

[CPMcGraw]

The shorter one (98m) is an all-liquid design, which appears to be just under the capability of a SatV in liftoff thrust. The second stage, however, is a powerhouse of a sustainer!

First stage uses 4 YF-650's with a combined thrust of 1756T, or 3.512M lbs of thrust, and 4 liquid strap-ons (nice touch!) with a single downrated YF-650 for a combined 1280T, or 2.56M lbs, of thrust. This gives us just over 6M lbs at liftoff.

The second stage uses 2 (uprated?) YF-220's for a combined thrust of 500T, or 1M lbs. In the taller design, the YF-220 was only producing 200T each. Still, this is roughly equal to the SatV second stage.

As with the other design, the diameter is about 29' 6".

[MarkB.]

So we'd need a 3.54 OD tube for a 1/100 Future Scale. Hmm . . . . .

Isn't that the same size tube I was looking for to do an extension to an Estes Atlas? And a Centuri Little Joe II clone?

We're going to need that tube made.

[luke strawwalker]

I don't know any Chinese but based on some other web-info (taken with a large salt lick) that is one big booster in the last couple of pictures. The proposed CZ-5 is sorta of a Chinese Proton/Saturn I-class launcher but if the size is to scale with the big one next to it, that thing is bigger than an Energiya.

Not sure if the Chinese have big solids. Their present transports seem a little delicate to be lugging heavy solids out to the pad. I don't recall seeing a Chinese rocket with big solids but they do have a solid first stage for their SLBMs that could be developed further.

Yeah, I was about to say that... they're going almost all solids on their ICBMs/SLBMs, same as Russia, US, India, France, UK, etc. etc. etc.

Well, there are other ways of doing solids besides the way the we did them on shuttle/SLS... The Saturn V was going to have four solid boosters for the 'souped up' versions that I've covered earlier in some other "NASA STUDY SUMMARIES" on here... I've seen a number of proposals for 4-SRB versions of shuttle and Shuttle C and such, but NONE of them pass the smell test, because basically the crawler and everything is maxxed out with a pair of 5 segment SRB's. They're simply TOO HEAVY to use any more than that. Now, Saturn V was going to use FOUR, BUT, the EMPTY Saturn V would be stacked in the VAB, moved to the pad, and THEN a separate "portable motor facility" would be moved in by the crawler, much like the MSS, which would then stack the 4 SRB's around the Saturn V and attach them, working on opposing pairs, from segments brought up to the pad by the crawlers (or other means). The SRB's would never have to move with the Saturn V from the VAB, so they could get away with the extra weight on the pad (maybe). I'd imagine that if the Chinese were going to do a large-solid booster, (especially since the diagram seems to show four of them!) they'll probably be more likely to emulate the Saturn V with four strap-ons than the "stack 'em all in the VAB and move 'em to the pad" method like the shuttle and SLS does it.

Of course, using LRB's avoids the entire issue... stack your vehicle in one fell swoop, and then move it to the pad EMPTY of propellants! Saves a TON of weight that way!

Later! OL JR :)

[luke strawwalker]

So we'd need a 3.54 OD tube for a 1/100 Future Scale. Hmm . . . . .

Isn't that the same size tube I was looking for to do an extension to an Estes Atlas? And a Centuri Little Joe II clone?

We're going to need that tube made.

Need a 3.31 inch tube for 1/100 shuttles/SLS... and the 1.46 tubes for SRB's... :)

Later! OL JR :)