China's Long March-5 rocket to resume flight in July - Xinhua

[Darwin]

I don't care about GSLV, a rocket with capabilities we had for 25 years. There is only one failure? Since when there were 2?

Both flights failed to meet the parameters.
“
Maiden flightEdit
The launch was planned to take place at around 10:00 UTC, however several issues involving an oxygen vent and chilling of the engines were detected during the preparation which caused a delay of nearly 3 hours. The final countdown was interrupted three times due to problems with the flight control computer and the tracking software.[12] The rocket finally launched at 12:43 UTC.[13] Also, according to internet user on the Chinese social media Weibo, a minor problem occurred during flight and the rocket put the YZ-2 upper stage and satellite into an orbit that was less accurate than expected. However, the trajectory was easily corrected with the YZ-2 upper stage and the payload was inserted into the desired orbit.[14]

Second flightEdit
Its second launch on 2 July 2017 experienced an anomaly shortly after launch and was switched to an alternate, gentler trajectory. However it was declared a failure 45 minutes into the flight.[15][16] The cause of the failure was confirmed by CASC and related to an anomaly which happened on one of the YF-77engines in the first stage.[17]

YF-77 was put into test-fire in 2018 after CASC redesigned the engine.[18] Long March 5 was estimated to return to flight in January 2019.[19]"

 

[Han Patriot]

Both flights failed to meet the parameters.
“
Maiden flightEdit
The launch was planned to take place at around 10:00 UTC, however several issues involving an oxygen vent and chilling of the engines were detected during the preparation which caused a delay of nearly 3 hours. The final countdown was interrupted three times due to problems with the flight control computer and the tracking software.[12] The rocket finally launched at 12:43 UTC.[13] Also, according to internet user on the Chinese social media Weibo, a minor problem occurred during flight and the rocket put the YZ-2 upper stage and satellite into an orbit that was less accurate than expected. However, the trajectory was easily corrected with the YZ-2 upper stage and the payload was inserted into the desired orbit.[14]

So your source was wikipedia and according to an internet user? . You do know that as per their test plan, the YZ-2 was supposed to be tested right? So if the lower stages delivered it to orbit, can you my genius tell me how are you supposed to test the upper stage?.

Do you even know why the second flight failed? Gosh, typical Indian. Why don't you write to reuters, CNN, and Nasaspeceflight that according to wikipedia and an anonymous internet poster in a forum said it failed?

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/11/china-long-march-5-maiden-launch/

 

[Dante80]

Some information, might come handy.

The scientist will hang for sure if failed. I doubt it will be live telecast.

Unlike India, we actually do punish people who fail. It's accountability. Indians will still boast even if their things fail, example the PSLV, Chinese will normally feel ashamed and try to improve. You can see this in Japanese and Korean culture as well.

That is not how it works, or should work. Space is objectively hard and China (as all other countries shooting for the stars in the post Cold War era) acknowledges its failures without any cult of invisibility involved. You should - kindly - study more how your space program actually works, because what you are saying has not really happened (again, post Cold War).

Both flights failed to meet the parameters.'

I am talking about Chinese failures of the initial 2 launches

The maiden flight was a complete success. Remember, parameters for success are met according to the mission objectives (which for most launch campaigns are tied to payload delivery to a specific orbit). What you are describing are minor problems before the launch (that didn't lead to a SCRUB though), and an alleged problem during flight that has been discounted (and even if it occurred as presumed by some would not even move the mission categorization to partial success instead of full) . Be careful when categorizing things like this, the nomenclature for space launch is very, very specific.

The second mission was a failure. I can get into specifics if you are interested.

But I can understand if all the design and drawings have been "procured" than tolerance for failure is low.

Actually Darwin, can you show me how this is procured? Last I heard the cryogenic Indians are using is from Russia?

For reference, some rocket engine designs from both China and India have heritage in foreign projects. I can get into specifics if you like. That is not saying much though, especially since we are not even talking about derivatives now in most modern systems fielded, but indigenous designs with a lengthy and - more easily than many assume - well documented development process.

 

[Han Patriot]

Some information, might come handy.




That is not how it works, or should work. Space is objectively hard and China (as all other countries shooting for the stars in the post Cold War era) acknowledges its failures without any cult of invisibility involved. You should - kindly - study more how your space program actually works, because what you are saying has not really happened (again, post Cold War).




The maiden flight was a complete success. Remember, parameters for success are met according to the mission objectives (which for most launch campaigns are tied to payload delivery to a specific orbit). What you are describing are minor problems before the launch (that didn't lead to a SCRUB though), and an alleged problem during flight that has been discounted (and even if it occurred as presumed by some would not even move the mission categorization to partial success instead of full) . Be careful when categorizing things like this, the nomenclature for space launch is very, very specific.

The second mission was a failure. I can get into specifics if you are interested.




For reference, some rocket engine designs from both China and India have heritage in foreign projects. I can get into specifics if you like. That is not saying much though, especially since we are not even talking about derivatives now in most modern systems fielded, but indigenous designs with a lengthy and - more easily than many assume - well documented development process.

Good analysis, the point is they have this holier than thou attitude when in fact their space program was aided by the Russians. I am not saying we are 100% indigenous, we had been doing reverse engineering for decades, learning, improving and innovating. The point is having been spoon-fed, all they can come up with is a 25 year old Chinese rocket capability and then boast about it.

The second failure was very obvious, they learned form it, improve it and hopefully succeed in testing it.

 

[Darwin]

The maiden flight was a complete success. Remember, parameters for success are met according to the mission objectives (which for most launch campaigns are tied to payload delivery to a specific orbit). What you are describing are minor problems before the launch (that didn't lead to a SCRUB though), and an alleged problem during flight that has been discounted (and even if it occurred as presumed by some would not even move the mission categorization to partial success instead of full) . Be careful when categorizing things like this, the nomenclature for space launch is very, very specific.

You are wrong. No need to suck up to the chinese here unless you yourself are of Chinese origin,. Let them face the facts.
The first flight had partial failure in correct insertion orbit and the payload's Propulsion was used to get to the required orbit.
Pl don't waste my time with manipulations. They convince no one.

 

[Dante80]

You are wrong. No need to suck up to the chinese here unless you yourself are of Chinese origin,. Let them face the facts.
The first flight had partial failure in correct insertion orbit and the payload's Propulsion was used to get to the required orbit.
Pl don't waste my time with manipulations. They convince no one.

Just sharing some information my friend, I don't really care much about nationalism or internet fan wars. Since you are an engineer, I tried to explain to you the qualifications needed in categorizing launch campaigns according to their end result. In the end though, subjective analysis always tends to color reality according to...the eye of the beholder.

Apologies for wasting your time.

 

[Han Patriot]

You are wrong. No need to suck up to the chinese here unless you yourself are of Chinese origin,. Let them face the facts.
The first flight had partial failure in correct insertion orbit and the payload's Propulsion was used to get to the required orbit.
Pl don't waste my time with manipulations. They convince no one.

Until now you can't provide me with evidence. Do you know what is an upperstage? YZ-2? The payload propulsion was not even used in that mission. They fully utilized the upper stage. Right India doesn't have this technology so I can't blame you for not knowing what it is.

Just sharing some information my friend, I don't really care much about nationalism or internet fan wars. Since you are an engineer, I tried to explain to you the qualifications needed in categorizing launch campaigns according to their end result. In the end though, subjective analysis always tends to color reality according to...the eye of the beholder.

Apologies for wasting your time.

Thanks for having a neutral analysis. We do know Darwin is pretty desperate to see Chinese launches fail...they were laughing until PSLV failed recently. =)

 

[oprih]

Nice, meanwhile muricans are busy masturbating about their imaginary space force fighting aliens in mars.