Page 30 - test

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

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

 Page163.A dedicated monitoring and  Monitoring teams (customer representatives)
inspection team was established since the very will attended these review. What are their
beginning of the program. The team has the approvals rights and can they report on their
Manufacturing manufacture monitoring experience in former conclusion to the insurance brokers, to get their
DFH-4 program. Several managers and
Monitoring technical experts from DFH-4 program are feedback.,
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
phases TVAC, it means several mounting of oriented.
appendices (Solar Array, antennas).
Sequential  Page 121. It appears that there is an Antenna  Why not, but there is no health check done after.
Launch flow and Solar Array deployment done on the
launch pad, before fuelling.
spacecraft
operations
Table 7-d Chinasat 16 technical assessment

8.1 CHINASAT 16 DFH-4S TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Based on the above analysis, one can conclude:
 The Chinasat 16 spacecraft is considered as a very challenging program, mainly with the introduction of the
electric propulsion for station keeping and the antenna development and the Ka band repeater.
 The technologies proposed can be qualified as “modern” and up to date but their qualification needs to be
demonstrated and will take time. One example it is said that the HP have been qualified in 97 is questionable as
the corresponding technology as certainly evolved since that date/ On the basis of the proposed documentation
severe doubt on the ability of their IPS to verify the 15 years life time
 Few critical units are subcontracted.
 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 Li Ion batteries without significant in-orbit experience is questionable..
 The solar array heritage including SADM should be explicated.
 The fact that the project schedule is completely erroneous (copy-paste) does not add confidence of the package
content.
 It is not clear how they incorporate lessons learned from previous program into this spacecraft development.
In summary the construction of this spacecraft challenging and cannot be assessed with the information provided to date.
Therefore the in-orbit risk assessment is difficult to establish.

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.