Next Generation Rocket Angara: News

Russian Khrunichev Space Center switching from Proton to Angara heavy rocket production

More:

MOSCOW, August 25. /TASS/. The Khrunichev Space Center is switching over from the production of Proton-M carrier rockets to the output of Angara-A5 and Angara-A5M launchers, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said during his visit to the enterprise on Friday.
"The enterprise is by its totality both significant and strategically important, considering that this enterprise is completing, largely speaking, the production of Proton-M carrier rockets in the near-term perspective and is beginning the output of and the transition to the series of the Angara-A5 rocket and its modernized Angara-A5M version as its trials are nearing completion," Rogozin said.

By decision of Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Angara-A5 carrier rocket must be launched from the Vostochny spaceport in Russia’s Far East by 2021, he noted.
By this time, all the construction works, the delivery of technological equipment, its assembly and tests should have been completed, the vice-premier stressed.
Correspondingly, similar and no less complex works should be conducted with the rocket as well to ensure that it can take off from the Vostochny cosmodrome by the end of 2021, Rogozin said.
The Angara is a family of Russian carrier rockets of different classes, from the light to the heavy versions, that have been developed to replace Proton-M and Rokot launchers. As compared to them, the new family uses environmentally friendly fuel components.
So far, only two launches have taken place, with both of them from the Plesetsk cosmodrome in north Russia: a light Angara-1.2PP rocket blasted off in July 2014 and a heavy Angara-A5 took off in December 2014.


More:
http://tass.com/science/962034

And here about Angara 5M model



The 5M variant to fix Angara-5's ills

In 2017, Russian space officials identified another version of the Angara-5 rocket, designated Angara-5M, which was intended to address the latest obstacles on the way of the new-generation rocket family to the commercial market.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/angara5m.html

I wouldn't dance about the Khrunichev decision to retire Proton production just yet. I hope they have either cleaned out the saboteurs
working on the Proton production line or just let the staff go. I don't think it is a good idea to re-assign Proton workers to the
Angara line. We will see exactly the same crash BS all over again. The Proton was essentially never the cause of the crashes.
In the case of the most spectacular crash, hammering in a key sensor upside down (it was designed to be installed only with one orientation
and any honest worker would have known this, unless Khrunichev workers are autistic) should have resulted in more than one head rolling.
I have not heard any follow up and it looks to me like Khrunichev management is the "roof" for the saboteurs.

If military launches start failing, then emergency measures must be taken to clean out Khrunichev. The top management will need
to be suspended until they can be cleared and a zero tolerance program for the rest of the workforce implemented. If there is not enough
evidence to convict, suspects should be fired regardless. Tough sh*t. Special rules need to apply to such companies.

kvs wrote:I wouldn't dance about the Khrunichev decision to retire Proton production just yet.   I hope they have either cleaned out the saboteurs
working on the Proton production line or just let the staff go.   I don't think it is a good idea to re-assign Proton workers to the
Angara line.    We will see exactly the same crash BS all over again.   The Proton was essentially never the cause of the crashes.
In the case of the most spectacular crash, hammering in a key sensor upside down (it was designed to be installed only with one orientation
and any honest worker would have known this, unless Khrunichev workers are autistic) should have resulted in more than one head rolling.  
I have not heard any follow up and it looks to me like Khrunichev management is the "roof" for the saboteurs.

If military launches start failing, then emergency measures must be taken to clean out Khrunichev.    The top management will need
to be suspended until they can be cleared and a zero tolerance program for the rest of the workforce implemented.   If there is not enough
evidence to convict, suspects should be fired regardless.   Tough sh*t.  Special rules need to apply to such companies.

All true, but for me "By decision of Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Angara-A5 carrier rocket must be launched from the Vostochny spaceport in Russia’s Far East by 2021 means exactly what you said.

They already have a production team and training happening for Angara production at the Omsk plant. So the former Proton workers are going to be either doing something else, laid off or they will continue to make Proton for customers or something else. Moving current workforce (all of them) over to make Angara at an existing plant with already personnel being trained, would make the workforce far too large and bloated. In most cases, I think that they will re-orientate people. I think the Russian government and intelligence agencies are fully aware of the issues, hence why we got the news about it in the first place. I think some people are going to get early retirement and or a boot out the door.

kvs wrote:I wouldn't dance about the Khrunichev decision to retire Proton production just yet.   I hope they have either cleaned out the saboteurs
working on the Proton production line or just let the staff go.   I don't think it is a good idea to re-assign Proton workers to the
Angara line.    We will see exactly the same crash BS all over again.   The Proton was essentially never the cause of the crashes.
In the case of the most spectacular crash, hammering in a key sensor upside down (it was designed to be installed only with one orientation
and any honest worker would have known this, unless Khrunichev workers are autistic) should have resulted in more than one head rolling.  
I have not heard any follow up and it looks to me like Khrunichev management is the "roof" for the saboteurs.

If military launches start failing, then emergency measures must be taken to clean out Khrunichev.    The top management will need
to be suspended until they can be cleared and a zero tolerance program for the rest of the workforce implemented.   If there is not enough
evidence to convict, suspects should be fired regardless.   Tough sh*t.  Special rules need to apply to such companies.

They can't sabotage Angara and Soyuz-2.1 because self-diagnostic system is getting in the way.

And they already tried. Remember how inaugural Angara launch was postponed? Valve was not installed properly.

Ring a bell? Same thing took out several Protons back in a day.

Diagnostics system caught problem instantly and aborted launch. Someone probably fiddled with rocket in Krunichev prior to delivery to Plasetsk. Rocket was inspected but problem could not be identified by humans. Computer OTOH is a different thing.

I just hope that military found the wise-ass who did it and fed him his own testicles.

Sabotaging rocket now requires a lot more then just busting a valve or sensor. They need to take out whole diagnostics and launch system altogether. Fat chance.

I sincerely hope that we have entered a new era of technological suppression of sabotage. But I still believe that
maggots need to be rooted out. They can bugger on off to their promised land in NATO if they hate Russia so much.
Those that get sent to a penal colony should do long terms. A combination of active house cleaning and harsh
punishment will do wonders to improve the situation.

They just need to have a much better management structure in the company and a method to know who is doing what. Something like a punch clock at a certain area of the facility or a Team Leader who is monitoring his employees and is tasked to give them the task to do their specific job. In this case, it becomes very easy to route out who could be sabotaging the rocket. If a valve was put in wrong by a Dimitri or a Illya, then either Dimitri or Illya gets investigated. If they have been tasked to do this multiple of times and multiple of times they have done it wrong, they are fired.

miketheterrible wrote:They just need to have a much better management structure in the company and a method to know who is doing what.  Something like a punch clock at a certain area of the facility or a Team Leader who is monitoring his employees and is tasked to give them the task to do their specific job.  In this case, it becomes very easy to route out who could be sabotaging the rocket.  If a valve was put in wrong by a Dimitri or a Illya, then either Dimitri or Illya gets investigated.  If they have been tasked to do this multiple of times and multiple of times they have done it wrong, they are fired.

They just need security cameras

Good Old Dimitry installed them on Vostochniy construction site and build speed and quality increased exponentially

blaming sabotage without any proof just shows how desperate the industry is , and how mentally retarded stupid some people on this forum are  . anyways making angara more and sooner will only bankrupt chrunichev sooner so go ahead ...... and not to mention there will be no commercial payloads for it to carry nore customers pilling up , since everyone is going to space-x  

Looks like the 2nd Angara A-5 vehicle (the 1st built in Omsk) has arrived in Moscow for its QA/QC shakedown as part of the Omsk manufacturing process certification:

The components of the second Angara-A5 heavy-duty launch vehicle manufactured in the Omsk branch of the Khrunichev Polet Polytechnic Production Association continue to arrive in Moscow for final assembly and testing. Today, October 6, 2017, from Omsk to Moscow went to a specialized train, which will deliver to the Khrunichev Center side block (BB-3) first stage. Together with him, a similar bench product was sent to Moscow, which will undergo dynamic tests. The purpose of the tests is to protect the factory technologies and confirm the readiness of production for serial production.

"Angara-A5" is a three-stage carrier rocket of the heavy class of the family of carrier rockets of modular type "Angara" (light, medium and heavy classes), created on the basis of universal rocket modules URM-1 and URM-2. In the propulsion systems URMov used environmentally friendly components of fuel - oxygen and kerosene. Various versions of Angara launch vehicles are implemented in practice using different numbers of URM-1 universal missile modules (for the first and second stages) and URM-2 (for the upper stages).

The first stage of the Angara-A5 LV is an assembly of four side blocks (UBM) URM-1. At the second stage - the central unit - one URM-1 is used, and on the third stage - one URM-2. The final assembly of the second flight rocket "Anagara-A5" will be performed at the missile and space plant of the Khrunichev Center.

The launch of the Angara-A5 launch vehicle to the Plesetsk space center is planned for early 2018.

https://www.roscosmos.ru/24191/

Seriously there are some major questions ..

Russian military funded Angara A5 for 2.5 decades starting from 1990 ..
(The payload was around 20 tons to LEO)  .
What was teh reason for all that when Zenit and Proton upgrade could
have easily outmatched  these payloads ..

What kind of payload are they trying to launch ..

Then they came up with A5V then they came up with A5M ..


This project has really confused a lot of experts ..
Most of teh experts are flummoxed by the approach given to this vehicle  ..

gaurav wrote:Seriously there are some major questions ..

Russian military funded Angara A5 for 2.5 decades starting from 1990 ..
(The payload was around 20 tons to LEO)  .
What was teh reason for all that when Zenit and Proton upgrade could
have easily outmatched  these payloads ..

What kind of payload are they trying to launch ..

Then they came up with A5V then they came up with A5M ..


This project has really confused a lot of experts ..
Most of teh experts are flummoxed by the approach given to this vehicle  ..

We have been trough this countless times before:

Proton: toxic, obsolete and unreliable

Zenit: Ukrainian (which is far worse than all three above)


Besides you always need two launch platforms as a redundancy in case one has to be grounded like Proton is 90% of it's service time. NASA insists on this as well.


So if experts are flummoxed with this then they do not deserve to be called experts in the firs place.

Funding for the Angara originated from the need for a modern rocket system with flexibility for different payload choices. The
Zenit could only do 17 tons to LEO. Angara V5 can do 45 tons to LEO. So the discussion is yet another apples to oranges
comparison.

Really, following the "what we have is good enough" logic we should all still be riding horses and carriages.

gaurav wrote:Seriously there are some major questions ..

Russian military funded Angara A5 for 2.5 decades starting from 1990 ..
(The payload was around 20 tons to LEO)  .
What was teh reason for all that when Zenit and Proton upgrade could
have easily outmatched  these payloads ..

What kind of payload are they trying to launch ..

Then they came up with A5V then they came up with A5M ..


This project has really confused a lot of experts ..
Most of teh experts are flummoxed by the approach given to this vehicle  ..

People who don't get it are not paying attention, and don't deserve to be called "experts"...

Angara was started in 1992 as a MILITARY launch system to guarantee access to space for heavy national security payloads from Plesetsk (out of fear that Baikonour could prove unavailable should there be unfavorable political developments in newly-independent Kazakhstan, such as a Yankistani colour-revolution ).  It was not intended as a commercial launcher as such, but as funding through the 90s was zero to non-existant, developments within Russia had forced the design to evolve and become a more general purpose launcher.  Funding didn't really start in earnest until mid 2000s, and it was only then that the config was finalised.  The Russian military primarily wants A-5, so the plan was to flight test and certify the design of A-5 using prototypes hand built in Khrunichev Moscow, and then to shift all further production to brand-new serial production facility at Omsk. The Omsk facility is behind schedule as the first serial units failed QA/QC checks and further certification flights are therefore delayed while they sort out the issues (2nd flight-ready unit is now back in Moscow for QA/QC checks).

While Angara will be primary heavy-lift workhorse from 2020 onwards, Russia has not made its development a funding priority.  The reason is clear - despite their fears, Russia has solid access to Baikonur, so heavy lift needs are met by Proton.  Lack of a strategic threat means they can de-prioritise the program and save cash (ie not throwing money at a problem in an inefficient effort to accelerate the program).  

The plan was ALWAYS for Angara to be considered a developmental program until ~2020 when Proton will start to be scaled back. Both launchers will fly concurrently until adequate flight experience is achieved with Angara, and then Proton vehicle and engine manufacture will be shutdown.

The plan is still on track, though as with all real-world programs, delays are inevitable.

A-5V & A-5M are evolutionary developments of the basic A-5.  This is a NORMAL lifecycle development, and is not indicative of any "program mismanagement" as Russophobe critics love to wheel out at every fucking opportunity.  Manned A-5V is now superfluous with the Soyuz-5 based SHLV, but unmanned A-5V is still likely to born in metal as it gives a nice boost to LEO capacity (35-40T) and fills a slot between basic A-5 and the Soyuz-5 SHLV (80T+).  

A-5V was based on both a Hydrolox U/S and up-rated 1st stage engines, and it looks like the engine upgrade is going to be adopted on the upgraded A-5M.  Again, this is a sensible development, so ignore Russia-haters and their bullshit.

Regarding the much-vaunted commercial launchs that means so much to the retard Muskian fan-boi circle-jerkers that want to "colonise" Mars with a bunch of stripped down Dragon capsules (WTF...  congenital stupidity at its finest), Angara is not primarily a commercial vehicle.  Its sole current pad is in Plesetsk military base, so isn't going to launch foreign commsats anytime soon, especially as its far northerly latitude is dynamically disadvantageous.  Once the unmanned pad is built at Vostochny however, that will start to change, but until then Proton fills that spot.

Finally, I hope you have no intention to become a replacement for that banned fuktard rmf...  He was bad enough, and this forum has been better for the lack of his BS.  I'd hate for other forum members to step into his shoes and start up where he left off...

Yaah ,We have been through countless times before and I was searching for this thread for 1 hour before I found it .. he he

'
Polet company (Omsk) so far has contact for 10 Angaras. Overall there are 10 test flights planned for heavy version and 4 for light version.

http://tass.ru/kosmos/4632501

CENTER Khrunichev. PREPARATION FOR THE SERIAL PRODUCTION OF THE ROCKET-MEDIA OF THE FAMILY "ANGARA" CONTINUES

Progress on the flight certification of Omsk-manufactured URM-1 prior to 2nd A-5 launch.

https://www.roscosmos.ru/24594/

The Khrunichev Center (part of the State Corporation "ROSKOSMOS") together with the Central Scientific Research Institute of Machine Building (TsNIIMash) conducts vibration and strength tests of one of the universal URM-1 rocket modules used in the first stage of the Angara-A5 launch vehicle. These tests began in late 2017 and will last several months.

Carrying out of tests in TSNIIMash is necessary for an objective estimation of quality and reliability of a product before its statement on a batch production.

The serial production of URMs for the carrier rockets of the Angara family is created on the basis of the Omsk production site of the Khrunichev Center - in PO Polyot. The purpose of the tests is to assess the technological readiness of production in the Polet software, organized using the latest technological equipment, rigging and progressive production processes, to the serial production of Angara carrier rockets. Now the enterprise produces separate parts for the second and third flight rockets without assembly of products.

Omsk "Polet" has already manufactured and began to supply parts of the URMs to Moscow for the second flight rocket "Angara-A5". The bench sample of one of these modules (the so-called "PV" product, the abbreviation "PV" means "flight + vibration testing") is now being tested for a unique in its capabilities experimental base of strength and dynamics TSNIIMash.

The final assembly of the second flight rocket "Anagara-A5" will be performed at the missile and space plant of the Khrunichev Center in Moscow. Sending of the carrier rocket "Angara-A5" to the cosmodrome Plesetsk is planned in 2018.

Reusable version of Angara URM-1 core may be under development? I'm not familiar with this site - is it reliable or a BS tabloid?

https://iz.ru/688507/dmitrii-strugovetc-evgenii-deviatiarov/rossiiskuiu-raketu-angara-snabdiat-kryliami

Russian missile "Angara" will be supplied with wings

The carrier of a light class will be reusable, having received an opportunity of landing at the aerodrome.

In Russia, the project to create a reusable version of the Angara missile was revived. The light-class carrier is planned to be equipped with folding wings. After launching and putting the cargo into orbit, the rocket will be able to open its wings and, like an airplane, make a soft landing at the airfield. The project is being implemented by the developer of the Angara Khrunichev Center together with Roskosmos and Myasishchev Design Bureau. This year the technical appearance of the missile should be presented to the board of the Military-Industrial Commission. This is the third attempt to supply the Angara with wings: the previous two did not lead to success.

As Izvestia was told at the Khrunichev Center, this enterprise, in pursuance of the instructions of the President and the Government of the Russian Federation, began developing a reusable stage for the Angara-1.2 light-weight rocket.

- On this subject, the development work is conducted, - the general director of the Khrunichev Center Aleksey Varochko told Izvestia. - We are doing it with Roskosmos and OKB Myasischev.

The main option under consideration is the conversion of the Angara missile into a reusable one - the equipment of a light version of the carrier with folding wings. Other options for returning the first stage are also being studied: with the help of their own engines, like the American Falcon 9 rocket or parachute landing.

In "Roskosmos" and OKB Myasishchev confirmed information about the work. The aviation bureau emphasized that the first results could be announced as early as in the spring of 2018. By this time, the technical appearance of the reusable "Angara" will be chosen. It will be represented by the board of the Military Industrial Commission, which will have to decide on the financing of the project.

Big_Gazza wrote:Reusable version of Angara URM-1 core may be under development?  I'm not familiar with this site - is it reliable or a BS tabloid?

https://iz.ru/688507/dmitrii-strugovetc-evgenii-deviatiarov/rossiiskuiu-raketu-angara-snabdiat-kryliami

Russian missile "Angara" will be supplied with wings

The carrier of a light class will be reusable, having received an opportunity of landing at the aerodrome.

In Russia, the project to create a reusable version of the Angara missile was revived............

Funny how getting boot up the ass and being kicked to the curb stimulates creativity and initiative.

Back when Angara was initially approved Khrunichev was more than happy to take the cash, stall the whole thing and push for indefinite use of obsolete Proton junk.

But now when Energia took their lunch money they suddenly get creative on their own accord.

Had they had more than handful of brain cells they would have started work on superheavy Angara 7 with enlarged central core on their own initiative as Energia did with Soyuz-5.

Who knows, if they manage to crack this thing there might be some use for them after all other than being water-boys for winning team. Still, given their track record I will believe it when/if I see it.

PapaDragon wrote:Funny how getting boot up the ass and being kicked to the curb stimulates creativity and initiative.

Back when Angara was initially approved Khrunichev was more than happy to take the cash, stall the whole thing and push for indefinite use of obsolete Proton junk.

But now when Energia took their lunch money they suddenly get creative on their own accord.

Had they had more than handful of brain cells they would have started work on superheavy Angara 7 with enlarged central core on their own initiative as Energia did with Soyuz-5.

Who knows, if they manage to crack this thing there might be some use for them after all other than being water-boys for winning team. Still, given their track record I will believe it when/if I see it.  

To be fair, they did promote the Baikal reuseable fly-back stage, but the State wasn't going to fund its development.

Hopefully they develop this concept further and make it an evolutionary improvement to Angara system.  I really dislike the SpaceX reuseability concept of flying a booster through its own exhaust plume.  The Muskians don't admit it, but I don't see how the propulsion sections of the recovered cores cannot require extensive testing and refurb after every flight. I'd like to know what kind of temperatures the engine bay experiences when its flying tail-first through its own rocket wash, but I don't expect SpaceX will ever tell...

Given the advancement of drone technology and unpiloted flight systems, a flyback booster with deployable wings and a small air-breathing engine looks to be better technique.  I'd design the propulsion section to be de-coupled from the vehicle so that on recovery, the engine compartment is unbolted and removed and sent to the testing/refurb line.  The vehicle itself gets a visual inspection, tank/piping flush and instrument/avionics function check, then a new propulsion package gets bolted on and the assembly is returned to the operational pool.

Big_Gazza wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:Funny how getting boot up the ass and being kicked to the curb stimulates creativity and initiative.

Back when Angara was initially approved Khrunichev was more than happy to take the cash, stall the whole thing and push for indefinite use of obsolete Proton junk.

But now when Energia took their lunch money they suddenly get creative on their own accord.

Had they had more than handful of brain cells they would have started work on superheavy Angara 7 with enlarged central core on their own initiative as Energia did with Soyuz-5.

Who knows, if they manage to crack this thing there might be some use for them after all other than being water-boys for winning team. Still, given their track record I will believe it when/if I see it.  

To be fair, they did promote the Baikal reuseable fly-back stage, but the State wasn't going to fund its development.

Hopefully they develop this concept further and make it an evolutionary improvement to Angara system.  I really dislike the SpaceX reuseability concept of flying a booster through its own exhaust plume.  The Muskians don't admit it, but I don't see how the propulsion sections of the recovered cores cannot require extensive testing and refurb after every flight. I'd like to know what kind of temperatures the engine bay experiences when its flying tail-first through its own rocket wash, but I don't expect SpaceX will ever tell...

Given the advancement of drone technology and unpiloted flight systems, a flyback booster with deployable wings and a small air-breathing engine looks to be better technique.  I'd design the propulsion section to be de-coupled from the vehicle so that on recovery, the engine compartment is unbolted and removed and sent to the testing/refurb line.  The vehicle itself gets a visual inspection, tank/piping flush and instrument/avionics function check, then a new propulsion package gets bolted on and the assembly is returned to the operational pool.

All of these methods of reusability are dubious if the cost of checking for structural damage on the used rocket  engine costs more than making a new rocket. At this point unless overhauling a rocket engine becomes as easy and cheap as overhauling a turbojet  then reusable rockets will always be vaporware. What seems more feasible is just to make the production of new rockets as  cheap and fast as possible through 3d printing, absolute standardization and 10s billions of dollars in funding of ultralight ultrastrong materials for building the rocket.

However if rockets will be single us forever then there will be a massive saturation of space junk in a few decades from discarded stages but hopefully technology will increase exponentially and that junk will be easily cleaned up.

Big_Gazza wrote:
To be fair, they did promote the Baikal reuseable fly-back stage, but the State wasn't going to fund its development.

[]
Given the advancement of drone technology and unpiloted flight systems, a flyback booster with deployable wings and a small air-breathing engine looks to be better technique.  I'd design the propulsion section to be de-coupled from the vehicle so that on recovery, the engine compartment is unbolted and removed and sent to the testing/refurb line.  The vehicle itself gets a visual inspection, tank/piping flush and instrument/avionics function check, then a new propulsion package gets bolted on and the assembly is returned to the operational pool.

in Izvestia article below you can find nice info-graphics for Baikal  booster

https://iz.ru/695624/2018-01-15/proekt-baikal-angara

The construction of the second phase facilities for the "Angara" in the East will begin in June 2018


TASS, May 24. The construction of the second phase of ground-based space infrastructure facilities at the Vostochny Cosmodrome (Amurskaya Oblast) is scheduled to begin in June this year to launch Angara launch vehicles, Roskosmos reported.

"Roskosmos State Corporation in mid-May received a positive conclusion from the Glavgosexpertiza of Russia on the construction of a launch complex for Angara launch vehicles at the Vostochny Space Center." The works on the creation of the second stage of the cosmodrome will begin in June 2018, "the press service said.

The Roskosmos was reminded that the government of the Russian Federation determined the general contractor for the construction of the second stage of the spaceport of the Eastern company of the PCO "Kazan". "The construction of the launch complex for the Angara missiles will allow the first launch of this type of space rocket in the first year of 2021. The total volume of investments is about 40 billion rubles," Roskosmos said.

The state corporation was informed that the launching complex will be built at the first stage of the second stage of the cosmodrome. "Construction of the assembly and testing complex for the Angara launch vehicles will begin in 2023, which will be completed in 2025. A temporary solution for storage and preparation for the launches of Angara missiles and space vehicles on them at the Vostochny Cosmodrome is the technical complex Soyuz- 2, "Roskosmos added.

Earlier, Dmitry Rogozin, who then held the post of vice-premier of the Russian Federation, commissioned the construction of a second launch pad for the Angara missile in May.

http://tass.ru/kosmos/5229522

Big_Gazza wrote:The construction of the second phase facilities for the "Angara" in the East will begin in June 2018
................
The state corporation was informed that the launching complex will be built at the first stage of the second stage of the cosmodrome. "Construction of the assembly and testing complex for the Angara launch vehicles will begin in 2023, which will be completed in 2025. A temporary solution for storage and preparation for the launches of Angara missiles and space vehicles on them at the Vostochny Cosmodrome is the technical complex Soyuz- 2, "Roskosmos added.
.................
http://tass.ru/kosmos/5229522

Interesting.

Back when Krunichev was kicked to the curb and Energia took their contract it was planned for Angara to share facilities with Soyuz on Vostochnii on permanent basis but now it seems that Angara will be getting it's own separate assembly building after all.

PapaDragon wrote:

Back when Krunichev was kicked to the curb and Energia took their contract it was planned for Angara to share facilities with Soyuz on Vostochnii on permanent basis but now it seems that Angara will be getting it's own separate assembly building after all.

you know positive vibes form Rogozin

Center Khrunichev found a way to reduce the complexity of production "Angara"

MOSCOW, May 21 - RIA Novosti. The Khrunichev Space Center has found opportunities to reduce the complexity of production of the Angara missiles by three times, and the Proton rockets by a third, according to the company's annual financial statements published on the Center's website .

The Angara rockets were launched twice. July 9, 2014, the light version of the Angara-1.2PP rocket was launched. The first flight of a heavy "Angara" took place on December 23, 2014. The next launch is planned for 2018.
"Carrying out measures to reduce the cost of production of the family of Angara carrier rockets and Proton-M rocket vehicles, including a set of measures (technological and design) that reduce the labor intensity of Proton rocket vehicles by 30 percent, and for carrier rockets "Angara" three times, "the document says.

In the feasibility study for the current Federal Space Program for 2016-2025, available at RIA Novosti, it is indicated that the prime cost of manufacturing the Angara-A5 heavy -duty missile is set at 3.5 billion rubles (in 2015 prices). The cost of the light version of "Angara-A1.2" is set at 1.3 billion rubles. The cost price for the production of the Proton-M rocket in prices for 2017 is set at 1.4 billion rubles by the same document.
Launch vehicles of the Angara type are environmentally friendly, since their engines operate on kerosene and oxygen without using an extremely toxic heptyl. The whole family, designed according to the modular type, includes missiles of four classes (from light to heavy - Angara-A1.2, Angara-A5, Angara-A5M and Angara-A5B) with a carrying capacity of 3.8 tons up to 37 tons for launches from the Plesetsk cosmodrome, and in the future - from the East.

РИА Новости https://ria.ru/space/20180521/1521007119.html