With the development of science and technology, the comprehensive strength of many countries has improved very rapidly. Especially in the aerospace field, everyone is scrambling to be the first. Because many countries have realized that future space research will play a vital role in the development of the country and even the sustainable survival of mankind. Since ancient times, the weak will choose to emulate the strong, so many countries regard the United States as an example for them to learn from and as a goal to pursue. After all, the United States is the first country in the world to build the space station , and also the first country to launch the space shuttle into space. aerospace Strength symbolizes the comprehensive level of a country. If the country does not have strength, it is impossible to make any achievements in the aerospace field.
But in recent years, many countries have regarded China as an example to learn from, because China's development speed in the aerospace field seems to have caught up with the United States. But is this really the case? In this regard, Chinese experts said that the truth may be far crueler than we imagined. Because in this technology, the United States is at least 15 years or more ahead of us. That is aerospace engine technology. Some countries such as the United States and Russia are at least 20 years ahead of our country. Take the United States' "Falcon Heavy" rocket as an example. This is a civilian launch vehicle, but it is currently one of the most advanced rockets in the world. Its thrust is several times that of my country's Long March 5 .
Many people wonder why we can build world-class fifth-generation aircraft, intercontinental missiles, and hypersonic weapons, but we are stumped by aerospace engines? Judging from the current level of strength, how big is the technological gap between my country's aviation and technology and that of the United States? According to experts, the United States' heavy-lift Falcon rocket 's low-Earth orbit payload is 65 tons, while my country's Long March 5 low-Earth orbit payload is 26 tons. This alone is more than twice the gap. In addition to the payload, the U.S. uses environmentally friendly materials that can be recycled multiple times. This also makes the launch cost of the US launch vehicle very low. Their single launch cost is only about 100 million US dollars, while our country requires a minimum of 300 million US dollars. The gap is obvious.
Perhaps if we want to catch up with the gap, we must at least wait until our country's Long March 9 enters service. So how long will it take for us to build a launch vehicle that is as powerful as the Falcon Heavy? Experts say it will take at least 15 years. Does that mean that the gap between us and the United States' aerospace level is only 15 years? In this regard, our country's aerospace academician said that it would be great if this was really the case. But this is obviously impossible, unless the United States has not made any progress in its aerospace capabilities in these 15 years. He said that the gap in aerospace capabilities between my country and the United States is conservatively estimated to be at least 30 years. Therefore, in the field of aerospace, our country still has a long way to go.
