Recently in China Category

Reuters reports that China has made an extreme alititude suborbital rocket launch which may be an anti-satellite weapon.  The launch of the rocket on 15 May, elements of which reached 10,000km altititude, is thought by US government experts to be a possible test of a new anti-satellite missile.  The remnants of the test fell into the Indian Ocean.  The altitide achieved was the highest ever achieved by a non-orbiting object since 1976.

Meantime, on 15 May, the US Navy  made its third successful inteception test of its Standard Missile SM-3 Block 1B variant which is known to have both anti-ballistic missile and anti-satellite applications.  This new variant of hte missile is now expected to go into full production.  The Standard SM-3 Block 1B was launched from the U.S.S. Lake Erie striking and destroying a target missile launched from Kauai, Hawaii.

Standard Missiles were originally developed to arm cruisers and destroyers of the US Navy in a more conventional endoatmospheric anti-aircraft and anti-missile role. The latter role may soon be needed as it has emerged that Russia has delivered the latest versions of its supersonic anti-ship missile, the Yakhont to Syria's government.  With a range of 300km and in having such fast attack speeds, these impressive missiles (India's Brahmos is a licenced copy) could hold off Western naval forces from making an intervention in the current civil war in Syria.  Having said that, at such ranges, such missiles usuually have to be targeted remotely; either via satellite targeting or via maritime aircraft.

The communications satellite Chinasat 11 (aka Zhongxing 11) has been launched from the Xichang launch site in China by a Long March 3B/E (CZ-B/E) launch vehicle at 1606GMT on 1 March.  The satellite which weighed in at circa 5,400kg is designed to operate from Geostationary Earth Orbit (GEO) for 15 years.  The satellite uses the DFH 4 bus design built by the Dongfanghong Satellite Company which is an offshoot of the Chinese Academy of Space Technology (CAST).

As China flexes its financial,military and political might and continues to make border and island incursions into the disputed terrotories held by its neighbours (India, Vietnam, Japan. Philippines, Taiwan etc), fears remain that China may one day resort to full blown military action, especially if China's own prosperity or political stability ever falters.  In being viewed as a potential enemy to USA and its allies, China is thus currently banned from receiving US miltary and space technology. 

While the blanket nature of such export restrictions has been counterproductive to US space exports, critics have further pointed up the hypocrisy over this stance since it does not apparentlly prevent the US government from indirectly boosting the Chinese space programme in its own way.  This was after the US Department of Defense sheepishly admitted that it is leasing communications capacity on China's Apstar 7 satellite in order to provide US forces operating in Africa some decent communications.  The $10.6 million leasing contract officially expires in May and the US miltary want to renew it as there is little other communications capacity in the region - though their political masters are now expected to end it.  

Update:  They might be under fire for doing so, but the US Department of Defense has approved the renewal of the one year Apstar 7 capacity leasing contract with APT Satellite Holdings (which is indirectly part owned by the Chinese government) via Harris CapRock Government Solutions which provides the US armed forces with third party communications capacity.   The contract is reportedly worth $10.7 million.

China successfully conducted its first launch of 2013 at 0413 GMT on 26 April from the Jiuquan Space Launch Centre in China. The Long March 2D vehicle carried the Chinese Gaofen 1 earth observation satellite, and three cubesats into a sun-synchronous orbit. The accompanying passengers were the Turkish Turksat-3USat , the Ecuadorian NEE-01-Pegasso, and the Argentinian Cubebug-1 (aka Capitan Beto) satellites

The Gaofen 1 satellite is based upon the CAST 2000 satellite bus, with an expected lifetime of 5 years the satellite carries a 2 metre resolution panchromatic camera, an 8 metre resolution multispectral camera and a 16 metre wide field multispectral camera. The satellite had a launch mass of 1266 kg.

The Turksat-3USat  is a 3U Cubesat with a launch mass of 4 kg. The satellite which was built by the Istanbul Technical University is carrying a small camera for occasional snapshots of target areas and a UHF/VHF transponder to be used for voice communications.

The NEE-01 Pegasso satellite which is owned and built by the Ecuadorian Space Agency, is a 1U cubesat with a launch mass of 1 kg. The satellite will be mainly used for the test of real time video transmission and also testing of multi-phase solar array, a passive antenna deployment system, a thermal and radiation shield and test of a carbon nano-tubes thermal control system. This is the first satellite to be launched for Ecuador.

The Argentinian Cubebug 1 is a 2U cubesat built by Satellogic S.A. and was sponsored by the Argentinian Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation, Invap S.E., Satellogic S.A., and Radio Club Bariloche. The satellite carries a low resolution camera and had a launch mass of 2kg.

While the name Orion has been used as the name of real and fictional spacecraft before (e.g. Space 2001 - A space Odyssey's transport shuttle, and the latest manned spacecraft being developed by NASA)  the original Project Orion was actually about researching a high speed Interplanetary travel propulsion system. And one that used atomic bombs to do it  

As mankind contemplates journeys to other planets and how to get their economically, and fast enough to not run out of consumables, space propulsion scientists continue in their quest for specific impulse, that measure of momentum change per kg of propellants which could make such missions much more likely if this can be improved.  Some have considered nuclear thermal rockets which can double the specific impulse in comparison to chemical rockets - though using nuclear reactor technology in orbit remains unpopular ever since Cosmos 954 spread its nuclear entrails over Canada in 1978.  

Artist's impression of Project Orion spacecraft departing Earth. Courtesy: Adrian Mann

An even better way of improving specific impulse is to use exotic electric propulsion technologies which can offer ten-fold improvements.  However, they have one major drawback: they are very low thrust and to provide a practically usable amount they would need large power generation system.  In effect this means that they would need either massive solar arrays or a powerful nuclear reactor (yes - it is that N-word again).

There are, of course, other ways of using nuclear propulsion.  An idea originally proposed by Sanislav Ulan in 1947 was to use hundreds of atomic bombs to drive a spacecraft along. This idea was later turned into a full research project called Projct Orion. The history of the project was outlined at an evening lecture at the British Interplanetary society made by Douglas Liddle, a former engineer and aerospace history expert with experience in nuclear weaponry. 

Liddle described how the project was orignally set up in July 1958 after originally gaining traction after an unexpected observation during the Teapot series of nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s that some items could remain intact close to a nuclear detonation.  Bakerlite items had shown themselves to suffer only minor ablation - the logic being that if a nuclear bomb could be exploded near a pusher plate coated with a similar plastic or oil based material, it could be propulsed along without being destroyed.   

Cornelius Everett working with Stanislav Ulan produced a report noting that such a system could be used for space propulsion and Project Orion was formed under the auspices of Freeman Dyson at General Atomic.  The spaceships of various sizes were  designed use a magazine of nuclar devices (upto 900) which would be dropped from the rear of the spacecraft and exploded at one second intervals.   The Plutonium fuelled fission-class atomic bombs of 50kT yield would be specially designed using various explosive lensing techniques to aid the achievement of critical mass along with neutron tubes acting as initiators.  

Each bomb would have a Tungsten "bullet" designed to act as the working fluid of the device.   Scientists realised that a nuclear blast plasma itself would not offer enough mass and hence momentum to propel the craft along at fast enough speeds and that tungsten would be needed to blasted at the back plate to "pulse" the craft on its way.

To protect the crew at the front of the craft, there would have to be extensive nuclear shielding and shock absorbers various invoving double action gas and toroidal techniques.  The tungsten "bullets" would also act as shielding while not used.

The system had advantages over chemical systems.  Overall it was robust and less likely to be damaged by meteoroid strikes as propellant tankage would have been apt to do. Directional control of the craft would be made by either angling the back plate and by using chemical rocket thrusters on the craft.   In acheiving thrusts equivalent to several million Newtons and at specific impulses ranging between 2000-10000 seconds, a mission to Mars could be cut by several hundred days when compared to a Hohmann transfer chemical rocket alternative.

There were off course problems with the design.  Launching such a device containing several hundred nuclear weapons would require a very reliable and very large launch vehicle.  Apart from the shielding and shock absorption problem, the crew would also have to be protected from high and low frequency vibrations.

Experience in nuclear weapons tests in the upper atmosphere (e.g. the Project Starfish explosions) had shown that it was unwise to explode nuclear devices too close to the Earth's magnetic field and this causes large numbers of charged particles to surround the Earth causing new radiation belts.  Likewise, having bright explosions as the spaceship set off might have damaged the eyesight of observers.  Moving too far away from the Earth  would surely defeat the object of this transport system.

Nevertheless, after initial reluctance to support the idea, by 1964 even Werner Von Braun came to conclusion that such a device had merit.  But by then the Project was looking doomed.  For while NASA and the US Air Force initially supported the project, moves to take nuclear weapons out of space (the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (1963) banned nuclear devices being exploded in the upper atmosphere and the Outer Space Treaty (1967) banned nuclear weapons from being placed in orbit) meant that NASA withdrew its backing and the project was formally ended in 1965.

As a footnote, Doug Liddle reminded the audience that there was one country that has never been a signatory to the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty:  China.   As such, one day it could be China that builds such a spacecraft like Project Orion to eather travel to other planets or to move an incoming asteroid out of the way.

Bo Jiang, a Chinese national and space imaging expert who was working (with permission) as a contractor for National Institute of Aerospace (NIA) at NASA's Langley space centre, was arrested at Dulles International Airport in Washington D.C. on 16 March as he was trying to leave the country. 

Bo Jiang was formally arrested for making a false statement with respect to what he was carrying out of the country (a laptop, a hard drive and simcard were allegedly undeclared) but is actually being investigated under suspicion of stealing US state secrets.  His arrest followed brief surveillance operation by the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation). 

So what made the FBI move so fast to arrest him?  Actually it was because Bo Jiang had booked a one-way ticket to China, a somewhat obvious indication that he was unlikely to return to United States of America in the near future.  As such, given his apparent failed attempt at evasion, perhaps Bo Jiang was not such a super space spy after all.  

Then again perhaps it was all the fault of China's spymasters whose travel expenses policy might have refused a full recompense for an underused return air ticket. As NASA might yet find out with its own recently announced travel restrictions, cheapskate travel policies can sometimes back fire on the organsation that imposes them.

A contingent of the Flightglobal/Ascend space analysis, sales and news writing teams (Phil Hylands, Ryanne Woltz and Zach Rosenberg) will be at Satellite 2013 in Washington D.C. next week (18-21 March 2013).   If you would like to arrange a meeting there to get more information on our SpaceTrak or Space Review online data services,  or just want to discuss recent news in the space industry, please get in touch via ryanne.woltz@ascendworldwide.com  or phone +1 917 971 4745

Flightglobal/Ascend SpaceTrak History tab for the International Space Station. 

Stung by tough new sanctions just imposed by the United Nations over its fission-class nuclear weapons programme, and upset over the support these sanctions have had from its neighbour and recent ally China, North Korea has now threatened that it might use its nuclear weapons (presumably attached to ballistic missiles) in a first strike against its enemies, threating to turn South Korea's capital Seoul and the US capital Washington D.C. into a "sea of fire".

At the same time, the government of the North Korea (the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) has raised alarm bells in the region by formally ending the "cease fire" which ended the Korean War in 1953, and pulling out of the communications "hot line" between Pyongyang and Seoul which theoretically could prevent a misunderstanding leading to all out war.

US and Japanese Navy cruisers and destroyers equipped with the Aegis/Standard Missile-3 system which has an anti-ballistic missile capability are now expected to be put on alert in the region.

South Korean seismographic readings have indicated that North Korea has conducted its third nuclear weapons test at 0257 GMT on 12 February in the North Western region of the country.   The underground test of a fission class weapon is estimated to have had an explosive power of 6-7kT - equivalent to 6000-7000 tons of TNT.  While this is only about a third of the power relative to the bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War 2, it does respresent and increase over previous tests in 2006 and 2009 which were 1 and 4.7kT respectively. 

Western experts are more concerned over North Korea's claims that the weapon was much more compact that previous devices, indicating that it may be a forerunner of a ballistic missile-carried nucleaer warhead.  North Korea's satellite launch in December 2012 using its Taipo Dong 3 missile-based Uhna 3 launch vehicle showed it had a theoretical ability to throw small warheads over thousands of kilometers, threating most of its neighbours in the South East Asian region including South Korea, Japan and China.

Western nuclear experts are also concerned that the latest North Korean nuclear weapon test was of a device that is Uranium-based rather than one using plutonium as its fissionable material (as was used in North Korea's two previous tests). North Korea has unlimited supplies of Uranium and only a limited supply of plutonium.

Comment by David Todd:  The news is likely to be a spur to US development of more advanced longer range versions of the US Navy (and Japanese Navy) cruiser and destroyer-based Standard Missile SM-3 anti-ballistic missiles (ABM) which can.intercept balllistic missiles during their unpowered mid-course trajectories.

Current and future versions of Standard Missile SM-3 family.  A decision on proceeding with the development the SM-3 IIB missile has yet to be made. Courtesy: Raytheon

President Barack Obama has signed a law that, for most countries, takes US-made satellite technology and information off the list defining it as a munition subject to draconian International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) that control the export and import of defense-related articles and information.This long awaited move has been welcomed by US space companies who have complained for several years that their efforts at making space exports had been hobbled by ITAR. 

This security policy reversal is not the first time that the US has had to make when an over reaction proved to be counterpoductive to US interests.In fact, the United States of America has a record of both "under reacting" and then over reacting over security issues, before finally settling on a sensible middle course.

Too lax then too strict: overdoing the airport misery after 9/11

In the wake of the admittedly terrible 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, U.S. Airport security was  tightened. While many were grateful that this previously weak security system had finallly been reformed, and accepted as necessary the new tiresome security checks, what was harder to swallow was the change in behavour of US security officials. From being friendly but a tad over relaxed, overnight they turned themselves (possibly under orders) into ultrarstrict, rude and self important monsters, often showing downright unpleasantness to travellers. Of course, the result of this unapologetic and rude behaviour was to turn off foreign travellers from coming to America. And as so many travellers including those from USA's traditional allies, subsequentlly decided to stay away and soon their "tourist" dollars started to dry up.

Of course it was only a matter of time before it was realised in government that this behaviour was counterproductive to US interests andt soon US airport security guys and girls orderd to attend charm schools to rectify their newly acquired politeness deficit. Security would remain tight of course, but it would be done in a friendly and respectful way (as UK security men and women had done for years).  It is glad to report that US airports, customss and immigration, are not the unpleasant places they used to be, and this reform has at least put the welcome back into America.

We note this example as it is reminiscent of what has happened with the space industry's experience with ITAR regulation. For those new to space business, the subject of ITAR has been rumbling since the 1990s.  

Too lax and then too strict: overreaction as ITAR restrictions hit US industry

US Export restrictions have long existed to prevent potential enemies of USA benefiting from a transfer of restricted technology specifically related to military applications. There was outcry however when US space firms were discovered to have beem helping the Chinese  to fix their faulty launch vehicle guidance systems after two Chinese Long March rocket failures in fhe mid-1990s. The concern in the US Department of Defense (DoD) was that such a technology could also be used on long range ballistic missiles.  

Then came the over-reaction from the US government. Instead of restricting just the technology related to rocket guidance, in 1999 new definitions designated virtually all space technology and space technical information as "munitions" which would be subject to the strictest ITAR regulation which covered, not just the usual suspects, but all foreign countries including NATO allies.

The result was that foreign firms found it hard to obtain information on items or space hardware - ranging from full spacecraft to components - which often required long and complicated licensing procedures, Likewise, such US-built satellites and components were banned from flying on Chinese launch vehicles.  Even personel from space agencies and insurance companies were affected, finding that they had to be licenced in a cumbersome and long winded procedure by the US State Department in order to see ITAR-restricted information on US built space hardware.

Such were the difficulties encountered by firms trying to purchase US space hardware that many satellite operators turned to European firms instead to supply their hardware. Even then there were difficulties as some of these European-built satellites had subsystems which were US supplied.To allow their satellites to fly on Chinese launch vehicles, Thales Alenia Space even started offering a line of ITAR-free spacecraft. 

The net result of these draconian restrictions on space hardware and space technical inforamtion was that US lost market share in commercial space. In total, US Space manufacturers were estimated by the Aerospace Industries Assocation to have lost circa $21 billion in sales during the ten years after the new space ITAR restrictions had been applied.

ITAR foolishness: nothing can get out or in and arrest those NASA shop staff as well! 

Of course there were also some comedic moments as a result of the ITAR regime.  For example, European rocket engineers found themselves effectively disbarred from demonstrating their technology to US firms on the grounds that the US counterparts might give  accidently something away to them. In other words, not only was ITAR preventing technolgy secrets getting out, it was actually preventing them getting in!.  Meanwhile, more bizarrely, NASA's Kennedy Space Center's Visitor Center accidently found iself in technical breach of ITAR when it was dicovered that it had been selling Saturn V blueprints in its tourist shop.

Publically available Saturn V drawing probably in breech of ITAR.  Courtesy (indirectly): NASA

ITAR's counterproductive results: Obama to the rescue but it is be too little, too late

Despite all this, apart from some minor tinkering with who actually monitored the restictions (moved from the the US DoD to the US State Department) such was the fear of the militarily and economically resurgent China along with North Korea, Iran, Syria etc that US politicians  remained reluctant to relax ITAR restrictions on space technology even though they could see the economic damage that it was doing. 

Eventually, the Obama administration, saw sense (albeit slowly) and has now decided to remove most of the restrictions on satellite communications and earth observation technology at least to allied nations.   Interestingly, they have continued to prohibit space technology and information from reaching China along with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Iran, Cuba, Syria and Sudan.

Perhaps, America's space exporters will recover from this damaging and counterproductive exercise the futuilty of which, was that with ITAR restrictions in place, other nations including China, Japan and Russia, had to develop their own expertise in spacecraft with technology which now sometimes actually beats US systems in commercial competition. So this still limited relaxation might be a case of "too little, too late" anyway, no matter how polite US firms are about it.