From 8d54598eb61a35e55846ffb045b7811d1f76d74d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Teleo Agents Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 13:07:22 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] auto-fix: strip 2 broken wiki links Pipeline auto-fixer: removed [[ ]] brackets from links that don't resolve to existing claims in the knowledge base. --- inbox/archive/2026-02-11-china-long-march-10-sea-landing.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/inbox/archive/2026-02-11-china-long-march-10-sea-landing.md b/inbox/archive/2026-02-11-china-long-march-10-sea-landing.md index 7386e143..a3963ebb 100644 --- a/inbox/archive/2026-02-11-china-long-march-10-sea-landing.md +++ b/inbox/archive/2026-02-11-china-long-march-10-sea-landing.md @@ -34,12 +34,12 @@ China is also building a 25,000-ton, 472-foot rocket-catching ship "Ling Hang Zh **Why this matters:** The KB claim that China is "closing the reusability gap in 5-8 years" is already outdated. China demonstrated controlled first-stage sea landing in Feb 2026 and is launching a reusable variant in April 2026. The gap closed in ~2 years, not 5-8. **What surprised me:** The tethered wire / cable-net recovery approach. This is a genuinely different engineering solution — not copying SpaceX. China is innovating on the recovery method, not just catching up. **What I expected but didn't find:** Detailed cost projections for reusable Chinese launch. Also missing: how many reflights they're targeting per booster. -**KB connections:** [[China is the only credible peer competitor in space with comprehensive capabilities and state-directed acceleration closing the reusability gap in 5-8 years]] +**KB connections:** China is the only credible peer competitor in space with comprehensive capabilities and state-directed acceleration closing the reusability gap in 5-8 years **Extraction hints:** The "5-8 years" timeframe in the KB claim needs revision — evidence now shows 1-2 years. The cable-net recovery approach as evidence of independent innovation, not just technology copying. State-directed acceleration as a different competitive model than market-driven (SpaceX) or patient-capital (Blue Origin). **Context:** China's space program operates under state direction with strategic competition motivation. The speed of their reusability development suggests the 5-8 year estimate was significantly wrong — possibly because it underweighted state-directed industrial policy. ## Curator Notes (structured handoff for extractor) -PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[China is the only credible peer competitor in space with comprehensive capabilities and state-directed acceleration closing the reusability gap in 5-8 years]] +PRIMARY CONNECTION: China is the only credible peer competitor in space with comprehensive capabilities and state-directed acceleration closing the reusability gap in 5-8 years WHY ARCHIVED: Directly challenges the "5-8 year" timeline — China achieved first stage recovery in early 2026, with reusable variant launching April 2026 EXTRACTION HINT: The claim needs timeline revision. Also extract the cable-net recovery approach as evidence of independent innovation trajectory.