
China’s orbital launch rate has risen sharply, reaching 93 rockets in a recent year and becoming the second-most productive space power. Further growth is expected from state-owned enterprises and private launch companies. Other countries have also increased launch activity, including the United States and SpaceX. The concern is that China appears to be disregarding established norms for disposing of rocket upper stages, also called rocket bodies. Early spaceflight often left these stages in varied orbits for decades. Over the last 20 years, many operators have adopted more responsible disposal because uncontrolled multi-ton metal objects in low-Earth orbit become a growing hazard over time. Russia is identified as the largest contributor to long-lived rocket bodies, while the United States has far less in comparable orbits.
"Up until a decade ago, China had never launched as many as 20 orbital rockets a year. But beginning in 2022, the Asian country launched 64 rockets and last year reached a record total of 93, marking it as the second-most productive space power in the world."
"However there is an issue with these launches, as China appears to be ignoring long-established norms about disposing of the upper stages of rockets. These are the parts of the vehicle that separate from the first stage of a rocket and push a satellite or spacecraft into orbit."
"In the early decades of spaceflight, the Soviet Union, the United States, and other spacefaring species paid little heed to these upper stages, also known as "rocket bodies." They were ejected into all manner of orbits, there to remain for decades before ultimately succumbing to the slow pull of Earth's gravity at higher altitudes."
"But in the last 20 years or so, most countries (and the private companies operating within their borders) have taken a more responsible attitude toward disposing of these upper stages. This is because, as it turns out, having large, multi-ton blocks of metal spinning uncontrollably around low-Earth orbit becomes a problem over time."
Read at Ars Technica
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]