Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

china-in-space.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–76 of 76 posts

Re: China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

#71

Post by nitwit005 »

Alive-in-2025 wrote: post #32
nitwit005 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The practical part of space flight is launching satellites, and weapons. Both countries are already doing both. If we're discussing manned missions to the moon or Mars, as an American I'd prefer China spent all the money and the US didn't bother. It'd be cool to see it happen, but no one can identify practical benefits, aside from a political win.

You are missing that the money and research into figuring out how to solve many engineering and scientific challenges related to the missions had tremendous benefit to industry later. As we gain ability to do my re in space more cheaply it will get more important

If you want to do research to benefit industry, you can just do so. There's no particular reason research funding tied to human space flight should get better results.

Re: China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

#72

Post by perihelions »

SilverElfin wrote: post #24
perihelions wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Satellite constellations (links in the final paragraph of the OP article).

I hope they become better at injecting payloads into low orbit. The higher orbits Chinese companies use for internet constellations right now have huge risks of space debris, since satellites will take hundreds of years to fall out of orbit.

It's true they're using much higher LEO orbits—not sure why you were downvoted for this basic and relevant fact. While Starlink goes to 500-600 km altitudes, Qianfan seems to target 800 km[a], and Guowang has been launching to 900 km and 1,145 km [b,c]. (I'm not discussing the few Starlinks in VLEO orbits below 300 km, because I don't know what the concrete plans are with those).

Those are orbits with 100+ year dynamic lifetimes (as is regularly discussed, i.e. ref [d]). It's true that they could actively deorbit them; that's the lifespan of passive debris that fails to actively deorbit. (Ref [d] also discusses spent rocket stages in this context, and China's uniquely bad behavior there).

I assume the main motive behind this is basic business economics. China doesn't have reusable boosters; the ones that might succeed this month won't reach Falcon 9 levels of mass production, and launch cadence, for several years. They're on an expensive on-ramp. To a first-order simplification 1,100 km orbits need only 1/4th as many satellites for the same coverage as 550 km orbits.

[a] https://www.space.com/china-first-launch-internet-satellite-...

[b] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guowang

[c] https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/08/china-may-have-taken-a...

[d] https://spacenews.com/chinas-megaconstellation-launches-coul...

Re: China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

#73

Post by dingaling »

tzs wrote: post #30

In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46061943 danishSuri1994 said that if others like China and ESA did not also develop reusable rockets they would be priced out of orbit access entirely. I have a question about that, but their comment got killed faster than I could type and submit my question so I'll ask it a level up. Why would not having reusable rockets price someone like China or ESA out of orbit access? I c…

If a nation with RLVs can sustainably launch 10 anti-satellite interceptors per day but the nation without reusables can only launch 10 satellites per month, they're going to lose access to orbit.

Re: China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

#74

Post by John23832 »

pfdietz wrote: post #9

Multiple reusable rockets will drive prices down to a modest increment over the cost. Even rockets similar to Falcon 9 will have this effect, to the benefit of launch customers (and detriment of SpaceX, losing their effective monopoly.) (Not sure why this lesson in economics got a downvote?)

Don’t think hard about the fake internet points.

Re: China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

#75

Post by pfdietz »

John23832 wrote: post #74
pfdietz wrote: post #9

Multiple reusable rockets will drive prices down to a modest increment over the cost. Even rockets similar to Falcon 9 will have this effect, to the benefit of launch customers (and detriment of SpaceX, losing their effective monopoly.) (Not sure why this lesson in economics got a downvote?)

Don’t think hard about the fake internet points.

I was wondering what error I had made so I could avoid making it in the future.

Re: China Has Three Reusable Rockets Ready for Their Debut Flights

#76

Post by wombatpm »

mcculley wrote: post #68
wombatpm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress will notice when old politburo members start living on the moon base healthy for another 20 years

Will they live longer on the moon? (Maybe you are just joking, but I wonder about the idea.) When I was a kid, it was a general assumption in science fiction that living in zero-G or low-G would provide health/longevity benefits. Our experience with the ISS shows that microgravity is bad for health (muscle atrophy, bone loss, vision problems). It is not clear that low gravity would be much different.

I don’t know. I have the same background. But I would think lack of falls and pressure on your heart would be a positive. My mother-in-law went down hill quickly after 80 when she fell and broke her leg.

I would assume it was a one way trip, and the trick would be getting to orbit while you could still survive liftoff

Post reply on HN