Page 23 - test

Ref : CM-DFH4-2014-1
BEAZLEY Issue : 1

DFH 4 Series Spacecraft Date : 28 Sept 2014
Page 21 of 38

CHINASAT 9 Observation Comment /Assessment Cri
 Since there is no detailled schedule, the page  There is some doubts on the delivery date, but maybe
108 is considered as the master schedule. is not a concern for insurance brokers.

With a Kick Off Jan 2014 and a coupling
Project expected in April 2016 (25 months after the
Schedule KO), and a a launch scheduled for March 2017
some slippages are expected.
 The 8 months for the single line flow seems  There is some doubts on the delivery date, but maybe
reduced to a minimum difficult to accomplish is not a concern for insurance brokers.
on this kind of spacecraft.
 Page 109.A dedicated monitoring and  Monitoring teams (customer representatives) will
inspection team was established since the very attend these reviews. What are their approvals rights
beginning of the program. The team has the and can they report on their conclusion to the
Manufacturing manufacture monitoring experience in former insurance brokers, to get their feedback.,
DFH-4 program. Several managers and
Monitoring technical experts from DFH-4 program are
teams involved in related activities. Some of them
will be resident in the field office of CAST
since system AIT. The team will attend system,
subsystem and critical unit monitoring and
inspection.
System test  Page 137.Environmental tests done before  Why not, but this is not a program schedule oriented.
phases TVAC, it means several mounting of
appendices (Solar Array, antennas).
Sequential
Launch flow  Page 121. It appears that there is an Antenna  Why not, but there is no health check done after.
spacecraft and Solar Array deployment done on the
launch pad, before fuelling.
operations
Table 7 Chinasat 9 technical assessment

7.1 CHINASAT 9 DFH 4 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Based on the above analysis, one can conclude:
 Provided that the lessons learned from previous experience (either good or bad) are taken into consideration the
spacecraft design looks sound.
 The Chinasat 9A spacecraft is not too complex and the payload is relatively simple.
 The technologies proposed can be qualified as “modern” and up to date.
 Few critical units are subcontracted. What s the visibility that they will have
 Most of the units are designed, manufactured and tested by CAST.
 The categorization of the units and their qualification status is questionable.
 The usage of NiH2 batteries seems based on previous experience in orbit. Its qualification (including life test)
as to be detailed
 Qualification status of the antenna technology.
 The solar array heritage including SADM should be developed
 The schedule and the launch date are questionable due in particular to the short duration of the single line flow.
 The in orbit performances of Venesat are considered as a plus for the Laosat spacecraft.

This document is proprietary of BEAZLEY© and must be treated on a confidential basis. It may be used solely by BEAZLEY, use or reproduction, of the document and the
Contained therein, for any other purposes without BEAZLEY written consent is prohibited.