China Aims To Build World's Largest Rocket

hackingbear writes "Back in March, China revealed it is studying the feasibility of designing the most powerful carrier rocket in history for making a manned moon landing and exploring deep space, according to Liang Xiaohong, vice head of the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology. The rocket is envisaged to have a payload of 130 tonnes, five times larger than that of China's current largest rocket. This rocket, if built, will eclipse the 53 tonne capacity of the planned Falcon 9 Heavy from SpaceX. It will even surpass the largest rocket ever built, the 119-tonne Saturn V. China's next generation rocket Long March 5, currently scheduled to debut in 2014, has a payload capacity of 25 tonnes to LEO."

NASA and SpaceX studying super heavy lift

[Gary W. Longsine]

SpaceX and NASA are studying the possibility of a 150 ton payload class heavy lift launcher, based on SpaceX Falcon technology. NASA Studies Scaled-Up Falcon, Merlin [aviationweek.com]

Re:"manned moon landing"

[xMrFishx]

Ah yes, but this might be what the US needs in the way of a kick up the arse to improve it's space programs. We should have been on Mars ten years ago. A new space race should be healthy for the world again. I want to see an orbiting construction station or something considerably bigger than the ISS. We have the technology, but no real desire/need to do it.

Re:"manned moon landing"

[turgid]

There's no point in people being on earth either. We just are.

Re:"manned moon landing"

[Arlet]

Exactly. There's no point in sending people to Mars either.

Re:"manned moon landing"

[Arlet]

The Earth is already terraformed, so we might as well stay here.

Also, I don't buy your claims that we can easily reach Mars, and/or basically terraform it for free. And even if we could, there's not much to be gained in doing so.

Re:All the shit you buy from Wal*Mart

[Chris Mattern]

To which I say, "Great! I'd rather the US get into space, but I'll settle for damn near anybody!"

Re:Cost/weight?

[CrazyJim1]

I respectfully disagree. The Chinese know how to undercut the US in prices which was often in the form of inferior goods. They also have cheap labor and tax breaks, so companies who want to make a product will typically set up shop there. The Chinese government officials really like money. They like it so much that they don't even care about human rights. Caring about human rights is just a weakness when you're focused on greed and power.

Irrelevant

[SmallFurryCreature]

This is not about a paid moon trip but about a states ambitions to power itself from a backwater nation to a world power.

So money is not counted in a way that makes sense on a small individual scale. It is not like if the claim is made that it costs 1 billion dollar that Bill Gates could buy 6 rocket developments. And as to what it is worth. Well, what is GPS worth? The US launched it with tax payers money and the research leading up to it also was payed by the tax payer, but at what total cost and for what total benefit? Even foreign benefit?

The press likes to print big numbers because simple people think money at this level still is real. But government has one advantage business doesn't have. It gets to take back a lot of your salary right at the start and then often also a large portion whenever you spend. So even a simple salary isn't exactly the same as it is for normal business.

Suffice it to say, a lot, no it won't break China's bank and no, you can't fly on it. But the real cost to the US will be that China has a manned space program and the US won't. And that is something the Chinese might find very amusing.

Is a single big rocket the best solution?

[Required Snark]

Is is better to have one big launch vehicle (man rated), or is it more cost effective (and safer) to use multiple launches and then leave from earth orbit? Although the Saturn V worked using 60's technology, things have changed a lot since then. Maybe a different approach would be better now.

Of course, just like the first race for the moon, much of this is about national pride, so maybe the Chinese want the biggest booster just for bragging rights. Some things never change.

Re:"manned moon landing"

[ColdWetDog]

Then read here: http://www.marssociety.org/ [marssociety.org] Or read the red mars, blue mars green mars novels. Or: just think about how you would do it, lol. It is *that simple* angel'o'sphere

That simple? If you actually looked at "Red Mars" carefully, he lives in a "Star Trek" world of virtually infinite resources. Need a nuclear reactor? Just drop ship a Rickover. Need compressed gasses? Just drop ship a 737 with a bunch of compressors. It's great science fiction - it broad brushes little details like money, and especially later, the ability to create extremely complex high technology items from robotic factories. It would probably work out better if we figured out those little issues here as opposed to there. Hell, we aren't really at the level of technology that we would need to be to bolt the Ares together. Construction in outer space is slow, tricky and dangerous.

Yes we can get better. If the Chinese are trying to do it then great, we can come from behind like usual (insert tasteless joke here). But the Mars Trilogy is not yet an instructional video.

Re:Irrelevant

[hedwards]

Cracking down on the massive academic fraud and rampant plagiarism would probably go a long way towards earning a reputation for innovation. As would ending the practice of locking up academics for saying things that the government doesn't want heard.

Right now, we in the US are mostly coasting, but if the American exceptionalists and the conservatives could lighten up and allow things to sort themselves out we could still retain our leadership position on technology. Of course that would anger the creationists and the climate change skeptics.

Re:Long Dong Rocket

[Paracelcus]

The Han Chinese invented propaganda! They've re-written their history over and over since the founding of the Chinese nation by Qin (Chin) in 200 BCE (the Roman republican period/Late post Hellenistic period). Now every time something shows up on the History Channel they will always (regardless of well established facts) claim that the Chinese invented "it" and they will invariably use the "5,000 years of Chinese history" phrase (despite the fact that the Chinese written language only goes back to 1,200 BCE Max, and you can't have a history without a written language) The Greek linear B written language is older, and yet the propaganda keeps on coming! Communist governments find this kind of thing absolutely irresistible! In the 1950's the Russian/Bolshevik propaganda machine would claim to have invented absolutely everything, it was a running gag-line on TV.

Re:"manned moon landing"

[Arlet]

Overpopulation ? The Gobi desert is still mostly empty, last time I looked, as is the Australian outback, the Sahara, Antarctica, Greenland, and our oceans. All of those areas are much more hospitable than the surface of Mars. There's more room too. Don't forget Mars is a lot smaller than the Earth.

Besides, you can't fix overpopulation by going to Mars. How many people are born on Earth every minute, and how many could you realistically send to Mars ? Not enough to make a difference.

Re:Long Dong Rocket

[Joce640k]

Yeah, the USA never produced a single conman or scammer. Ever.

And they certainly wouldn't try to sell billions of worthless mortgages to the Chinese. Noooo....

Re:Irrelevant

[Jartan]

Of course that would anger the creationists and the climate change skeptics.

What a load of bull. Real climate change skeptics are an extremely small group. As a whole the "save the earth" crowd is far more luddite.

Re:SpaceX has no credibility

[Teancum]

SpaceX most clearly has credibility in terms of launching larger payloads into orbit. I guess the Dragon capsule doesn't count as something credible?

As for anything that Senator Shelby wants to fund, most especially the SLS system, I have my doubts that anything will clear the launch tower much less actually make it into space. It is going to be canceled before it gets built, much like Constellation before it, and the dozens of other NASA projects for manned spaceflight that all showed promise but never really went anywhere.

The last manned spaceflight program to actually make it to orbit was the Space Shuttle, and that was originally started under the Johnson Administration (although the heavy work on it happened during the Nixon Administration). The singular failure of NASA to put any sort of meaningful program together is a sign of what that bureaucracy is able to accomplish, and I doubt any change in the Presidency is going to make any difference on that. Neither Ronald Reagan nor Bill Clinton were able to make any significant moves in that arena... except for the ISS project if you want to give both of those Presidents at least a little bit of credit.