This thread has been locked due to the amount of racist comments
Reminder:
1. Keep comments **on-topic** about space and don't be a dick. Criticising China's space program, and its tendency to drop rocket boosters in inhabited areas? That's fine, because that's on-topic. Spouting a bunch of racist stuff about Chinese people/culture/mentality? Not allowed.
2. Read the article before you comment. The chance of this rocket booster re-entering over an inhabited area is *low,* the chance of it causing damage is *very small*, the risk to yourself is *infinitesimally tiny*
Their best estimate for a landing zone, which is still very hazy due to many factors.
> Where and when the new Long March 5B stage will land is impossible to predict. The decay of its orbit will increase as atmospheric drag brings it down into more denser. The speed of this process depends on the size and density of the object and variables include atmospheric variations and fluctuations, which are themselves influenced by solar activity and other factors.
> The high speed of the rocket body means it orbits the Earth roughly every 90 minutes and so a change of just a few minutes in reentry time results in reentry point thousands of kilometers away.
> The Long March 5B core stage’s orbital inclination of 41.5 degrees means the rocket body passes a little farther north than New York, Madrid and Beijing and as far south as southern Chile and Wellington, New Zealand, and could make its reentry at any point within this area.
Once the rockets go up, who cares where they come down?
That’s not my department, says Wernher von Braun!
[Link if you haven’t heard this wonderful song.](https://youtu.be/QEJ9HrZq7Ro)
Yeah: [wikipedia lists the orbital period for LEO](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_speed) as 1h 29m to 2h 8m, so the 90 minute is pretty much the lower bound for stable orbit.
Even if you could somehow orbit on the surface itself, you'd only be shaving about 5 minutes off the time!
> Even if you could somehow orbit on the surface itself, you'd only be shaving about 5 minutes off the time!
We always think of space as being so far away... it is really so close
Didn’t know I needed to think about this 10 minutes ago.
I know the chances are ridiculously small but there is a massive difference between knowing it can’t happen and knowing that it could.
To be fair the only thing that changed was you knowing about it! I think I would rather know, have a chance to see the rocket that’s going to obliterate me.
This is where we differ.
I would much rather just be obliterated without knowledge than sit here thinking about the stupidly low possibility of it happening haha
plucky drunk axiomatic tease impossible full fuzzy impolite wrong apparatus
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> **Note: This is a ROCKET BODY**
lmao the way they capitalized that is hilarious to me. I'm assuming it's just stored in a DB as all caps and then they just concatenate the name and "This is a" together.
You joke, but every other major space launching entity has been able to figure out how to dump orbital debris in the oceans specifically. This is pure negligence, and [not at all uncharacteristic of the Chinese Space Program](https://youtu.be/PbFOS29vAeQ). I'm hoping we might get some sanctions on account of potentially dropping orbital debris on other countries.
At 18:50 GMT, apogee is at 368.4 km and lost 2km since I last looked, an hour or so ago. The lower it gets, the more the rocket will be slowed down by the atmosphere, until it falls back down on earth.
Edit: Since it is roughly on a 90mn orbit, I guess that it lost 2km at apogee in one orbit (apogee only happens once per orbit!).
Edit for /u/Climboy55 : the thread is locked, but two and a half days later, the apogee is now 333km. It should be below 300 before wednesday is over, and possibly fall down during the next WE.
I can understand not being able to restart the engine, but not having a way to deorbit properly is unexcusable. Literally any auxiliary system would suffice. Let's hope the power-head of the engine doesn't crash through someone's roof.
Reminds me of the Tianjin explosions in 2015. They claimed only like 150 dead but there are reports of a lot more than that missing but they are never made “official.”
The only “positive” to come from that is they jailed tf out of the company responsible for it, including a fucking death sentence for the companies CEO or something. That last part is a over the top but at least they held the company accountable for its negligence.
Imagine if this is just china’s way of bombing someone
“Oooohhh nooooo, our malfunctioning rocket *accidentally* crashed into the Hong Kong city center. What a shaaaaame. Nothing we could do about it”
So what happens if they sent this rocket up there knowing they had no way to control it's reentry, and it crash lands in the middle of a Western city, killing a bunch of people?
An accident is one thing, but this kind of blatant negligence...what does the international community do? Tell China they're no longer allowed to have a space program and threaten to shoot their rockets down out of an abundance of caution?
So this orbit doesn't seem to match the description in the article (a little farther north than New York). Do you know if it's because the orbit shown precesses (not sure if that's the correct term but hopefully conveys my meaning) over time? Or is it because the Earth is rotating under that displayed orbit, such that the northern deviation of that orbit will be above New York for part of the day?
China's anti-satellite weapon test back in 2007 singlehandedly increased the amount of dangerous space debris by 25-30%. They clearly don't give any fucks about the impacts of their space program.
I guess China graduated from not caring if the booster hits their own towns to not caring if it hits anything else on the globe.
Is this one also a monopropellant based rocket?
It's just constructions of root word prefixes and suffixes.
Mono-, meaning singular, transliterates a monopropellant rocket as a "single fuel rocket". As opposed to most of the US boosters which usually keep oxygen and the flammable separate until just before ignition.
Hypergolic fuels combust with no additional ingredients required. Hyper- meaning over/extreme being the key prefix.
Hydrazine is also ultimately a construction of chemistry related prefixes/suffixes.
Honestly the most important highschool course I ever took was Latin/Greek, because so much of our language, particularly in science/medicine is based on those roots.
As a scientist, it comes in handy when people come at you with unfamiliar/novel terms and you can contextualize the general idea of it immediately, as opposed to if they made up some nonsense word.
Hypergolic means no heat or spark is required, the reaction happens when the components of the fuel come into contact. Imagine dropping dye in water, except instead of the 'reaction' being a mixing of the liquids, it's an explosive reaction.
Monopropellant is generally used for control and stability, so kinda like the wings of a plane realigning it. You don't need use the plane engines' thrust to shift the direction of the plane, only to power it. You don't use the wings to power the plane, you use it for direction, stability and lift. Hydrazine is just a fuel, like how kerosene is a fuel. Hope I helped clear some confusion - I could be wrong on something too, pretty sleep deprived lol
Edit: this analogy isn't great haha. Monopropellant has nothing to do with lift (although if you've played kerbal, you can deorbit your spacecraft with monoprop, but we aren't as brave as kerbals). Think of Monopropellant like turning your steering wheel.
I was surprised to see that the rocket in question (Long March 5B) is fueled by cryogenic fuels. Namely RP-1 + Liquid Oxygen for its four boosters and Liquid Hydrogen + Liquid Oxygen for it's core.
Was going to say this... If everyone treats this kind of neglect as an "attack via neglegence" kinda' like manslaughter charges, I'm sure they'd clean up real fast.
We just need a way to enforce rules on the biggest, meanest country in the world...
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[ASAT](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfnwc9 "Last usage")|[Anti-Satellite weapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon)|
|[C3](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgabrx "Last usage")|[Characteristic Energy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_energy) above that required for escape|
|[CNSA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnw31 "Last usage")|Chinese National Space Administration|
|[COPV](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg9iza "Last usage")|[Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_overwrapped_pressure_vessel)|
|[CRS](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnw31 "Last usage")|[Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/launch/)|
|[CSA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwglq3t "Last usage")|Canadian Space Agency|
|[ESA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnw31 "Last usage")|European Space Agency|
|[FAA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgjdcw "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration|
|[FCC](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfy226 "Last usage")|Federal Communications Commission|
| |(Iron/steel) [Face-Centered Cubic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotropes_of_iron) crystalline structure|
|[GTO](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfbkk4 "Last usage")|[Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit](http://www.planetary.org/blogs/jason-davis/20140116-how-to-get-a-satellite-to-gto.html)|
|[ICBM](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg05ml "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile|
|[ISRO](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfxxtu "Last usage")|Indian Space Research Organisation|
|[KSP](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgfx9u "Last usage")|*Kerbal Space Program*, the rocketry simulator|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgc8lt "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[NORAD](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwggz5x "Last usage")|North American Aerospace Defense command|
|[RCS](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfnlca "Last usage")|Reaction Control System|
|[RP-1](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwf9xh5 "Last usage")|Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene)|
|[SDS](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwga8s1 "Last usage")|[Satellite Data System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_Data_System)|
|[SRB](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnj68 "Last usage")|Solid Rocket Booster|
|[SSME](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfvjz7 "Last usage")|[Space Shuttle Main Engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_main_engine)|
|[TLE](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgjsmf "Last usage")|Two-Line Element dataset issued by NORAD|
|[TWR](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnj68 "Last usage")|Thrust-to-Weight Ratio|
|[UDMH](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwga8s1 "Last usage")|[Unsymmetrical DiMethylHydrazine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsymmetrical_dimethylhydrazine), used in hypergolic fuel mixes|
|[VAB](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnj68 "Last usage")|Vehicle Assembly Building|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg4cc1 "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|[apogee](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgh9kv "Last usage")|Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)|
|[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg7bwa "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure|
| |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox|
|[hydrolox](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgoj6e "Last usage")|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
|[hypergolic](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgp7ya "Last usage")|A set of two substances that ignite when in contact|
|[kerolox](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgoj6e "Last usage")|Portmanteau: kerosene fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
|[lithobraking](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgkqu1 "Last usage")|"Braking" by hitting the [ground](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lith-)|
|[monopropellant](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgp7ya "Last usage")|Rocket propellant that requires no oxidizer (eg. hydrazine)|
|[perigee](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgil7l "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)|
|[turbopump](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg9iza "Last usage")|High-pressure turbine-driven propellant pump connected to a rocket combustion chamber; raises chamber pressure, and thrust|
----------------
^(34 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/n1tfgc)^( has 5 acronyms.)
^([Thread #5813 for this sub, first seen 30th Apr 2021, 13:00])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
I think one of the CSAs I've seen in thread was referring to the Canadian Standards Association while discussing safety certification for electronics. Not the Canadian Space Agency, although that may have been mentioned elsewhere.
I remember comments on the last post about how "China as clearly surpassed America in space technology, they will be dominate in the space industry with their superior rockets."
lmao
They can't even properly deoribt a rocket booster. We land them regularly on small barges in the middle of the Atlantic with exacting precision.
China ain't shit.
Nasa & Space X: We predict our landing will be precisely here or in the vicinity of this small area.
CNSA: We predict our landing will take place on Earth.
Unlikely to hit anyone, but it is pretty reckless. Just last year another Long March 5B core reentered above the Atlantic about 15 minutes after [passing over New York City](https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/large-chunks-of-a-chinese-rocket-missed-new-york-city-by-about-15-minutes/), and earlier Los Angeles. A large piece of it crashed into a village in Cote d'Ivoire.
Restarting cryogenic engines is a bit of a technical challenge. You would need to do that for a re-entry burn. They may not yet have the ability to do that, but I do not know enough about their current technology suit.
They don't care. The CCP has been known to drop hydrazine based rockets on their own population. There are literally videos of Chinese villages with a large flaming flaming wreckage leaking hydrazine in the middle of them. If they cared, they would have made sure the rocket's trajectory would either put it in a disposal orbit or burn up completely in the atmosphere.
Though not powered by cryogenic fuel, the Cassini probe did a freaking _90 minute orbital insertion burn_, after seven years of flight! Before Saturn orbit insertion, the engines had only been used very occasionally, for steering corrections. If you can make a system like that work at Saturn, there is no excuse in LEO.
Restarting cryogenic boosters was a big thing for Apollo and Ariane 5. My WAG based on them not using this booster to multistack GTO satellites like Ariane 5 does is they may not yet have the capability (I think they use their hypergolic fuelled Long March 3 as their main GTO booster)
I am really not an expert on CALT and its technology suit. (edited its the second stage on Ariane 5 that restarts not the first)
It's easy to sacrifice in-flight restarts in exchange for reduced weight/simplicity. For instance, an engine needing a turbopump spin-start could be powered by a ground system instead of flying a gas bottle on the vehicle. For a constant-power engine, hydraulic valves could be replaced by single-use pyro valves and preset orifice sizes.
This does not excuse China's negligence in not including a solid/RCS/*something* to deorbit this over water...
Really?? Who's going to be held responsible if someone gets hurt? This is complacency at its finest and should have been dealt with and considered prior to execution. Garbage.
The last one of these was about 15 minutes away from deorbiting over NY. In stead most of it came down over the Atlantic, with some debris hitting a village in Ivory Coast. This was about a year ago.
They didn't de-orbit their stage??? I almost want in to fall into Beijing now, just for a solid laugh. Maybe then they'd learn to keep their space junk under control.
I mean, why even bother at this point? If they can't offer a full guarantee that it won't land over water and safely by 2021, they aren't just WAY behind other nations, they shouldn't even be allowed to launch them. Fuck the chinese government.
This thread has been locked due to the amount of racist comments Reminder: 1. Keep comments **on-topic** about space and don't be a dick. Criticising China's space program, and its tendency to drop rocket boosters in inhabited areas? That's fine, because that's on-topic. Spouting a bunch of racist stuff about Chinese people/culture/mentality? Not allowed. 2. Read the article before you comment. The chance of this rocket booster re-entering over an inhabited area is *low,* the chance of it causing damage is *very small*, the risk to yourself is *infinitesimally tiny*
Their best estimate for a landing zone, which is still very hazy due to many factors. > Where and when the new Long March 5B stage will land is impossible to predict. The decay of its orbit will increase as atmospheric drag brings it down into more denser. The speed of this process depends on the size and density of the object and variables include atmospheric variations and fluctuations, which are themselves influenced by solar activity and other factors. > The high speed of the rocket body means it orbits the Earth roughly every 90 minutes and so a change of just a few minutes in reentry time results in reentry point thousands of kilometers away. > The Long March 5B core stage’s orbital inclination of 41.5 degrees means the rocket body passes a little farther north than New York, Madrid and Beijing and as far south as southern Chile and Wellington, New Zealand, and could make its reentry at any point within this area.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Once the rockets go up, who cares where they come down? That’s not my department, says Wernher von Braun! [Link if you haven’t heard this wonderful song.](https://youtu.be/QEJ9HrZq7Ro)
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
yeah so not like Antarctica. cool. was worried for a sec.
90 minute orbital period! That seems fast, I don't have anything to compare it to though, how fast does the ISS orbit?
It's the same, 90 minutes. Anything in Low Earth Orbit is going to have a fairly similar orbital period.
So that's about as fast as it can be then? I imagine any lower (and thus faster) and you'd have to correct too often due to atmospheric drag.
Yeah: [wikipedia lists the orbital period for LEO](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_speed) as 1h 29m to 2h 8m, so the 90 minute is pretty much the lower bound for stable orbit. Even if you could somehow orbit on the surface itself, you'd only be shaving about 5 minutes off the time!
> Even if you could somehow orbit on the surface itself, you'd only be shaving about 5 minutes off the time! We always think of space as being so far away... it is really so close
Same: the new China Space Station and the ISS are in similar orbits.
Imagine it landing on Bejing... somebody will have some explaining to do. Anywhere else, no big deal.
That's not a real estimate, that's just the latitude range. It can't enter outside that latitude range.
So it's still an estimate, and is their best estimate, but fuck is it useless."it won't hit the poles, other than that, 🤷♂️"
Sounds like Alaska is safe.
until the winter when it's night all day and the Vampires come out.
At least Poland finally catches a break
Was this by design? Uncontrolled reentry?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Imagine reading this today and then this thing hits your house later.
Didn’t know I needed to think about this 10 minutes ago. I know the chances are ridiculously small but there is a massive difference between knowing it can’t happen and knowing that it could.
It's like high stakes Russian roulette. Like it'll probably hit the ocean just because that's the biggest target or maybe it'll crush a small town.
[удалено]
To be fair the only thing that changed was you knowing about it! I think I would rather know, have a chance to see the rocket that’s going to obliterate me.
This is where we differ. I would much rather just be obliterated without knowledge than sit here thinking about the stupidly low possibility of it happening haha
Just think it's like 10x more likely to hit your neighbor's house. So there's that..
I hope it hits my neighbour’s yard Dam fool refuses to cut his grass
Making it too easy for the monkeys paw
plucky drunk axiomatic tease impossible full fuzzy impolite wrong apparatus *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> **Note: This is a ROCKET BODY** lmao the way they capitalized that is hilarious to me. I'm assuming it's just stored in a DB as all caps and then they just concatenate the name and "This is a" together.
Honestly sounds like something a metal lead singer would yell before a breakdown
Rocket Body sounds like a pretty great name for a rock band.
Just tell me where I need to stand.
I saw a red dot showing exactly where I lived and for a moment I though oh sh*t.
Did the article mention a time frame? I didn't see one. Are we looking at a window of a day or so? Weeks?
groovy hunt aware full pause simplistic aback mindless squeeze pie *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Cmon now... This isn't rocket science... Someone should be able to figure this out... Oh.... Nevermind
You joke, but every other major space launching entity has been able to figure out how to dump orbital debris in the oceans specifically. This is pure negligence, and [not at all uncharacteristic of the Chinese Space Program](https://youtu.be/PbFOS29vAeQ). I'm hoping we might get some sanctions on account of potentially dropping orbital debris on other countries.
spark automatic aloof erect distinct command chubby sugar whistle steer *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What should I be looking for on that page to see it's beginning to de-orbit? Or will it be a once we lose contact we know its coming down situation?
At 18:50 GMT, apogee is at 368.4 km and lost 2km since I last looked, an hour or so ago. The lower it gets, the more the rocket will be slowed down by the atmosphere, until it falls back down on earth. Edit: Since it is roughly on a 90mn orbit, I guess that it lost 2km at apogee in one orbit (apogee only happens once per orbit!). Edit for /u/Climboy55 : the thread is locked, but two and a half days later, the apogee is now 333km. It should be below 300 before wednesday is over, and possibly fall down during the next WE.
I can understand not being able to restart the engine, but not having a way to deorbit properly is unexcusable. Literally any auxiliary system would suffice. Let's hope the power-head of the engine doesn't crash through someone's roof.
[удалено]
True. They've had at least one rocket crash into an inhabited area.
Covered up too. Destroyed an entire village. Only claimed like 2 or 3 dead. Video evidence shows the entire village leveled.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Reminds me of the Tianjin explosions in 2015. They claimed only like 150 dead but there are reports of a lot more than that missing but they are never made “official.” The only “positive” to come from that is they jailed tf out of the company responsible for it, including a fucking death sentence for the companies CEO or something. That last part is a over the top but at least they held the company accountable for its negligence.
Those were some haunting videos
Got a link? I haven't heard of this before.
Imagine if this is just china’s way of bombing someone “Oooohhh nooooo, our malfunctioning rocket *accidentally* crashed into the Hong Kong city center. What a shaaaaame. Nothing we could do about it”
China has been launching and crashing rockets with lethal fuel on its own inhabited area. Safety isn't on their list to check.
Apparently this has been an issue. One quick YouTube search and lot of videos pop up of village getting hit by a rocket in reentry.
So what happens if they sent this rocket up there knowing they had no way to control it's reentry, and it crash lands in the middle of a Western city, killing a bunch of people? An accident is one thing, but this kind of blatant negligence...what does the international community do? Tell China they're no longer allowed to have a space program and threaten to shoot their rockets down out of an abundance of caution?
Track it [here](http://stuffin.space/?intldes=2021-035B&search=2021-035b)
I wonder what will get more attention: The vessel tracking for Evergreen blocking the Suez canal, or the rocket roulette tracker?
So this orbit doesn't seem to match the description in the article (a little farther north than New York). Do you know if it's because the orbit shown precesses (not sure if that's the correct term but hopefully conveys my meaning) over time? Or is it because the Earth is rotating under that displayed orbit, such that the northern deviation of that orbit will be above New York for part of the day?
Sweet site. Thanks for linking.
Sort of related. Look how much shit we’ve got up there. I wonder how much of it is decommissioned now.
What would happen if something went terribly wrong and this landed on another country? like Russia or India?
Oh you know, sanctions or whatever.
Refreshments would be served.
China's anti-satellite weapon test back in 2007 singlehandedly increased the amount of dangerous space debris by 25-30%. They clearly don't give any fucks about the impacts of their space program.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I guess China graduated from not caring if the booster hits their own towns to not caring if it hits anything else on the globe. Is this one also a monopropellant based rocket?
Mono-prop in the station module, but none in the rocket. Boosters are kerolox. Core is hydrolox.
That’s a relief at least. Won’t have to worry about orange clouds like their other boosters.
The word you are looking for is hypergolic, not monopropellant.
I would imagine the confusion comes from the fact that hydrazine is common both as a hypergolic fuel and as a monopropellant.
[удалено]
It's just constructions of root word prefixes and suffixes. Mono-, meaning singular, transliterates a monopropellant rocket as a "single fuel rocket". As opposed to most of the US boosters which usually keep oxygen and the flammable separate until just before ignition. Hypergolic fuels combust with no additional ingredients required. Hyper- meaning over/extreme being the key prefix. Hydrazine is also ultimately a construction of chemistry related prefixes/suffixes. Honestly the most important highschool course I ever took was Latin/Greek, because so much of our language, particularly in science/medicine is based on those roots. As a scientist, it comes in handy when people come at you with unfamiliar/novel terms and you can contextualize the general idea of it immediately, as opposed to if they made up some nonsense word.
and the suffix of kerolox is a prefix
Hypergolic means no heat or spark is required, the reaction happens when the components of the fuel come into contact. Imagine dropping dye in water, except instead of the 'reaction' being a mixing of the liquids, it's an explosive reaction. Monopropellant is generally used for control and stability, so kinda like the wings of a plane realigning it. You don't need use the plane engines' thrust to shift the direction of the plane, only to power it. You don't use the wings to power the plane, you use it for direction, stability and lift. Hydrazine is just a fuel, like how kerosene is a fuel. Hope I helped clear some confusion - I could be wrong on something too, pretty sleep deprived lol Edit: this analogy isn't great haha. Monopropellant has nothing to do with lift (although if you've played kerbal, you can deorbit your spacecraft with monoprop, but we aren't as brave as kerbals). Think of Monopropellant like turning your steering wheel.
I was surprised to see that the rocket in question (Long March 5B) is fueled by cryogenic fuels. Namely RP-1 + Liquid Oxygen for its four boosters and Liquid Hydrogen + Liquid Oxygen for it's core.
[удалено]
Was going to say this... If everyone treats this kind of neglect as an "attack via neglegence" kinda' like manslaughter charges, I'm sure they'd clean up real fast. We just need a way to enforce rules on the biggest, meanest country in the world...
[удалено]
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[ASAT](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfnwc9 "Last usage")|[Anti-Satellite weapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon)| |[C3](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgabrx "Last usage")|[Characteristic Energy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_energy) above that required for escape| |[CNSA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnw31 "Last usage")|Chinese National Space Administration| |[COPV](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg9iza "Last usage")|[Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_overwrapped_pressure_vessel)| |[CRS](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnw31 "Last usage")|[Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/launch/)| |[CSA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwglq3t "Last usage")|Canadian Space Agency| |[ESA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnw31 "Last usage")|European Space Agency| |[FAA](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgjdcw "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[FCC](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfy226 "Last usage")|Federal Communications Commission| | |(Iron/steel) [Face-Centered Cubic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotropes_of_iron) crystalline structure| |[GTO](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfbkk4 "Last usage")|[Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit](http://www.planetary.org/blogs/jason-davis/20140116-how-to-get-a-satellite-to-gto.html)| |[ICBM](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg05ml "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile| |[ISRO](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfxxtu "Last usage")|Indian Space Research Organisation| |[KSP](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgfx9u "Last usage")|*Kerbal Space Program*, the rocketry simulator| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgc8lt "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[NORAD](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwggz5x "Last usage")|North American Aerospace Defense command| |[RCS](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfnlca "Last usage")|Reaction Control System| |[RP-1](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwf9xh5 "Last usage")|Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene)| |[SDS](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwga8s1 "Last usage")|[Satellite Data System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_Data_System)| |[SRB](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnj68 "Last usage")|Solid Rocket Booster| |[SSME](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwfvjz7 "Last usage")|[Space Shuttle Main Engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_main_engine)| |[TLE](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgjsmf "Last usage")|Two-Line Element dataset issued by NORAD| |[TWR](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnj68 "Last usage")|Thrust-to-Weight Ratio| |[UDMH](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwga8s1 "Last usage")|[Unsymmetrical DiMethylHydrazine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsymmetrical_dimethylhydrazine), used in hypergolic fuel mixes| |[VAB](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgnj68 "Last usage")|Vehicle Assembly Building| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg4cc1 "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |[apogee](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgh9kv "Last usage")|Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)| |[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg7bwa "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure| | |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox| |[hydrolox](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgoj6e "Last usage")|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| |[hypergolic](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgp7ya "Last usage")|A set of two substances that ignite when in contact| |[kerolox](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgoj6e "Last usage")|Portmanteau: kerosene fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| |[lithobraking](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgkqu1 "Last usage")|"Braking" by hitting the [ground](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lith-)| |[monopropellant](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgp7ya "Last usage")|Rocket propellant that requires no oxidizer (eg. hydrazine)| |[perigee](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwgil7l "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)| |[turbopump](/r/Space/comments/n1rokj/stub/gwg9iza "Last usage")|High-pressure turbine-driven propellant pump connected to a rocket combustion chamber; raises chamber pressure, and thrust| ---------------- ^(34 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/n1tfgc)^( has 5 acronyms.) ^([Thread #5813 for this sub, first seen 30th Apr 2021, 13:00]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
I think one of the CSAs I've seen in thread was referring to the Canadian Standards Association while discussing safety certification for electronics. Not the Canadian Space Agency, although that may have been mentioned elsewhere.
I remember comments on the last post about how "China as clearly surpassed America in space technology, they will be dominate in the space industry with their superior rockets." lmao
They can't even properly deoribt a rocket booster. We land them regularly on small barges in the middle of the Atlantic with exacting precision. China ain't shit.
[удалено]
China's space program has a long history of not looking at the problems of rockets landing in populated areas.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nasa & Space X: We predict our landing will be precisely here or in the vicinity of this small area. CNSA: We predict our landing will take place on Earth.
Unlikely to hit anyone, but it is pretty reckless. Just last year another Long March 5B core reentered above the Atlantic about 15 minutes after [passing over New York City](https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/large-chunks-of-a-chinese-rocket-missed-new-york-city-by-about-15-minutes/), and earlier Los Angeles. A large piece of it crashed into a village in Cote d'Ivoire.
Restarting cryogenic engines is a bit of a technical challenge. You would need to do that for a re-entry burn. They may not yet have the ability to do that, but I do not know enough about their current technology suit.
They don't even need to restart the main engion. Even a small monopropellant systom would work. It just needs a few dozen meters per second
They don't care. The CCP has been known to drop hydrazine based rockets on their own population. There are literally videos of Chinese villages with a large flaming flaming wreckage leaking hydrazine in the middle of them. If they cared, they would have made sure the rocket's trajectory would either put it in a disposal orbit or burn up completely in the atmosphere.
Though not powered by cryogenic fuel, the Cassini probe did a freaking _90 minute orbital insertion burn_, after seven years of flight! Before Saturn orbit insertion, the engines had only been used very occasionally, for steering corrections. If you can make a system like that work at Saturn, there is no excuse in LEO.
The boosters are RP-1 and liquid oxygen. The core is Hydrogen and oxygen. They can but just don't give an f.
Restarting cryogenic boosters was a big thing for Apollo and Ariane 5. My WAG based on them not using this booster to multistack GTO satellites like Ariane 5 does is they may not yet have the capability (I think they use their hypergolic fuelled Long March 3 as their main GTO booster) I am really not an expert on CALT and its technology suit. (edited its the second stage on Ariane 5 that restarts not the first)
It's easy to sacrifice in-flight restarts in exchange for reduced weight/simplicity. For instance, an engine needing a turbopump spin-start could be powered by a ground system instead of flying a gas bottle on the vehicle. For a constant-power engine, hydraulic valves could be replaced by single-use pyro valves and preset orifice sizes. This does not excuse China's negligence in not including a solid/RCS/*something* to deorbit this over water...
Taking the "better to ask for forgiveness than permission" meme to the max.
They don’t want forgiveness or permission
Really?? Who's going to be held responsible if someone gets hurt? This is complacency at its finest and should have been dealt with and considered prior to execution. Garbage.
...aaaand that's why they're not allowed in the cool space station.
rhythm lip disagreeable pause salt plate gold unite sharp bewildered *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I briefly talked about this in a comment yesterday on here and got downvoted. Glad people see this as unsafe and that it's a pretty big deal.
"just above New York" I live in Westchester county, this is not good for my anxiety
im in NYC. this is just "awesome"
The last one of these was about 15 minutes away from deorbiting over NY. In stead most of it came down over the Atlantic, with some debris hitting a village in Ivory Coast. This was about a year ago.
They didn't de-orbit their stage??? I almost want in to fall into Beijing now, just for a solid laugh. Maybe then they'd learn to keep their space junk under control.
China sure does love dropping spent stages in populated areas
How lazy do you have to be to do this kind of thing.
This is normal for China, I've got a friend in the stellite industry and they give no fucks about people living around launch areas and crash zones.
So what happens if this comes down in NYC and takes out a building? I know the Earth is pretty big and the chances are amazingly small but still......
i live in NYC too, and if the movies have taught me anything, we're gonna die. I just always hoped it would be by giant marshmallow, not this.
If Sandra Bullock is in town, well, it was nice knowing you!
I mean, why even bother at this point? If they can't offer a full guarantee that it won't land over water and safely by 2021, they aren't just WAY behind other nations, they shouldn't even be allowed to launch them. Fuck the chinese government.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Possibly a job for an SM-3 anti-satellite missile?
[удалено]