Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:23 am

    The really sad thing is that the US decided to get into bed with the Chinese to get at the Soviets... if they could get into bed with communist Chinese WTF couldn't they just get on with the Soviets and the Chinese?

    They would have solved all the bugs on the N1, they just needed more time... which they simply didn't have.

    the sad thing is that people still see space as american or soviet or whatever.

    the irony is that the US is too conservative for space.

    The real reason the TV show Firefly failed is the mixed race relationship.

    The huge irony is that if you looked at the other aspects of the TV show where the people in power... the high class city folk appear English or at least European.

    The people on the recently converted planets are all pretty much either American cowboys or chinese workers... literally.

    they get by the US censors by swearing in chinese.

    ...a utopian view of the future for liberal Americans... Han Solo operating under a Euro Empire breaking the rules to make a living...

    Sorry for the rant... thank you for creating the thread... one vote from me.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Fri Sep 26, 2014 6:04 am

    GarryB wrote:The really sad thing is that the US decided to get into bed with the Chinese to get at the Soviets... if they could get into bed with communist Chinese WTF couldn't they just get on with the Soviets and the Chinese?

    They would have solved all the bugs on the N1, they just needed more time... which they simply didn't have.

    the sad thing is that people still see space as american or soviet or whatever.

    the irony is that the US is too conservative for space.

    The real reason the TV show Firefly failed is the mixed race relationship.

    The huge irony is that if you looked at the other aspects of the TV show where the people in power... the high class city folk appear English or at least European.

    The people on the recently converted planets are all pretty much either American cowboys or chinese workers... literally.

    they get by the US censors by swearing in chinese.

    ...a utopian view of the future for liberal Americans... Han Solo operating under a Euro Empire breaking the rules to make a living...

    Sorry for the rant... thank you for creating the thread... one vote from me.
    Sure they did, but that didn't have any affect on the Russian and/or Chinese space industry... - I'm amazed that China still builds their own rockets, they could probably score some deal on local production of the Soyuz-2 or FG. - Both are proven, and Chinese rockets tend to be either "hit or miss" (in this case, it would be "ka-boom! or a boring old launch).

    As mentioned earlier, the N1 really didn't have any "bugs"... - The only issue in its design was the large number of issues. Its "ka-booms!" are due to quality control (Not kidding when I say that in one case, a loose screw came out and destroyed the turbopump and therefore the whole thing went ka-boom!) within those engines, which could have been fixed...

    Space has slowly been moving "political neutral", but as we've seen, that has been changing because of the Ukrainian "crisis". - 1975!

    What do you mean "conservative"? They've been dumping billions upon billions into the SLS, CST-100 and Dragon V2, along with the Delta and the new Methane powered Atlas you name it! - Of course, most of this will end in an over-budget boondoggle, with the Dragon V2 being the exception! Read this, and this site is great so it is recommend... http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2330/1

     - On the rest, I really don't care about rants as long as a "TO55/Navyfield type" doesn't come around and troll...

    Thanks! Very Happy - This thread is like my baby... lol1

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Fri Sep 26, 2014 9:11 pm

    I've got some GOOD news!!!!!

    Leading designer for Russia's super-heavy booster to be chosen by yearend — official

    A competition for the booster rocket has not been held yet

    BAIKONUR, September 26. /ITAR-TASS/. Russia’s Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) will decide on a leading designer of a super-heavy booster rocket till the end of the year, Roscosmos head Oleg Ostapenko said on Friday.
    A competition for the booster rocket has not been held yet, he said.
    “We’ll hold a conciliatory meeting shortly to decide what [of the super-heavy booster] should look like, where the work will be done and who is to lead the way,” he said.
    Three leading Russian enterprises - the Progress design bureau, the Energia Rocket and Space Corporation, and the Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre - are now designing and developing the super-heavy booster, Ostapenko said.
     
    - Remember that I posted info on all the contenders a page or two ago, or you could look for yourself on RSW. 

    russia russia russia russia

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2526
    Points : 2659
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  kvs on Sat Sep 27, 2014 2:03 am

    This time around they should do a proper job compared to the N1. Good Russian engineering software exists that can evaluate all of the vibrational modes of any design they can propose. I hope they retained some know-how from the Energia project.

    Ultimately, research and development of nuclear propulsion should restarted.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 27, 2014 2:10 am

    kvs wrote:This time around they should do a proper job compared to the N1.   Good Russian engineering software exists that can evaluate all of the vibrational modes of any design they can propose.   I hope they retained some know-how from the Energia project.

    Ultimately, research and development of nuclear propulsion should restarted.  
    They've learned their lessons... The failure of the N1 was a direct result of Energia's reliance on Korolev, and the CCCP's insistence on speeding the project up. As you said, hopefully they can have a "repeat" of the Energia when it comes to success!

    Not only on nuclear propulsion, but on the RD-270 and other high-performance designs.... Methane anyone? (Yes, I know they are working on it...)

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:07 am

    Mike E wrote:
    kvs wrote:This time around they should do a proper job compared to the N1.   Good Russian engineering software exists that can evaluate all of the vibrational modes of any design they can propose.   I hope they retained some know-how from the Energia project.

    Ultimately, research and development of nuclear propulsion should restarted.  
    They've learned their lessons... The failure of the N1 was a direct result of Energia's reliance on Korolev, and the CCCP's insistence on speeding the project up. As you said, hopefully they can have a "repeat" of the Energia when it comes to success!

    Not only on nuclear propulsion, but on the RD-270 and other high-performance designs.... Methane anyone? (Yes, I know they are working on it...)

    If they go the nuclear route, I hope they develop a LFTR for it's one of the safest reactors and no worry of hydrogen explosions, 1/100th to 1/250th the reactive waste of uranium analogues, can be scaled up or down to a high degree, dirt cheap fuel...I know I'm preaching to the choir. Very Happy

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:14 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote:
    kvs wrote:This time around they should do a proper job compared to the N1.   Good Russian engineering software exists that can evaluate all of the vibrational modes of any design they can propose.   I hope they retained some know-how from the Energia project.

    Ultimately, research and development of nuclear propulsion should restarted.  
    They've learned their lessons... The failure of the N1 was a direct result of Energia's reliance on Korolev, and the CCCP's insistence on speeding the project up. As you said, hopefully they can have a "repeat" of the Energia when it comes to success!

    Not only on nuclear propulsion, but on the RD-270 and other high-performance designs.... Methane anyone? (Yes, I know they are working on it...)

    If they go the nuclear route, I hope they develop a LFTR for it's one of the safest reactors and no worry of hydrogen explosions, 1/100th to 1/250th the reactive waste of uranium analogues, can be scaled up or down to a high degree, dirt cheap fuel...I know I'm preaching to the choir. Very Happy
    lol1 The problem with that would be that they wouldn't generate much thrust due to lower temperatures - Good on Earth, not in space...

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:30 am

    Mike E wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote:
    kvs wrote:This time around they should do a proper job compared to the N1.   Good Russian engineering software exists that can evaluate all of the vibrational modes of any design they can propose.   I hope they retained some know-how from the Energia project.

    Ultimately, research and development of nuclear propulsion should restarted.  
    They've learned their lessons... The failure of the N1 was a direct result of Energia's reliance on Korolev, and the CCCP's insistence on speeding the project up. As you said, hopefully they can have a "repeat" of the Energia when it comes to success!

    Not only on nuclear propulsion, but on the RD-270 and other high-performance designs.... Methane anyone? (Yes, I know they are working on it...)

    If they go the nuclear route, I hope they develop a LFTR for it's one of the safest reactors and no worry of hydrogen explosions, 1/100th to 1/250th the reactive waste of uranium analogues, can be scaled up or down to a high degree, dirt cheap fuel...I know I'm preaching to the choir. Very Happy
    lol1 The problem with that would be that they wouldn't generate much thrust due to lower temperatures - Good on Earth, not in space...

    Que? Maybe a hybrid design, LFTR could be the main workhorse in the space portion but not the liftoff portion.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 27, 2014 4:01 am

    "Traditional" designs would be better, once again, due to higher temperatures. LFTR's could be used to generate power and not much more... (Higher temperatures are very desirable, more so in vacuum conditions.)

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 27, 2014 7:21 am

    Proton ready to return to flight on a cover-up mission

    For the first time since its failure on May 16, a Russian workhorse rocket will try to deliver a payload into space, this time a hush-hush satellite apparently camouflaged as a civilian payload. 

    A very strange secret mission
    The Proton-M rocket with a Briz-M upper stage is scheduled to lift off on Sept. 28, 2014, at 00:23:00 Moscow Time (4:23 p.m. EDT on Sept. 27). The launch vehicle will be carrying a classified payload known as Olymp ("Olympus") as well as Luch ("Beam"), which belongs to the Russian Ministry of Defense. The spacecraft, developed at ISS Reshetnev in Zheleznogorsk, will likely be inserted into a geostationary orbit 36,000 kilometers above the Equator, where it will provide communications for the Russian military. A Moscow-basedKommersant daily claimed that the satellite would also be used for electronic espionage for the Russian security service, FSB, however the report was widely doubted by observers.
    This web site first broke the story about the existence of the Olymp payload in 2013, even though semi-official reports about a planned launch of a military communications satellite, such as an already known Globus-1 series, had circulated earlier. Still, an apparent introduction of the new name could hint a significant upgrade of the Globus-1 spacecraft or even an entirely new design. As it turned out, a number of prominent Russian space industry contractors had previously reported in their public documents delivering components for the Olymp-K satellite. The companies involved in the project included ISS Reshetnev, Geofizika, LOMO and NPO Kvant.
    Given the fact that the new name had surfaced as Russia was gearing up to host Olympics in Sochi, one could speculate that it was assigned quite recently to a new-generation military satellite. The Soviet space history knows a few examples when the vehicle developed under a numeric code would receive a proper name shortly before reaching launch pad. During the post-Soviet period, the Russian Ministry of Defense have routinely declassified names for past and even current military satellites, while keeping most other details about their missions under wraps. In addition, most Russian military payloads would be officially identified after entering orbit as Kosmos with a number. However, in case of Olymp everything was different.
    At the beginning of 2014, to the surprise of many observers, the Russian civilian space agency, Roskosmos, suddenly announced the upcoming mission carrying a Luch satellite. The Luch, of course, are civilian data-relay satellites and all the existing spacecraft in the Luch constellation have been accounted for. As a result, an apparent decision by Roskosmos to give a new public name to the Olymp satellite could be a late and rather clumsy attempt to camouflage a military payload within a civilian constellation, which might or might not have a similar purpose to its unexpected military cousin.
    In any case, the differences between Olymp and Luch are obvious. Civilian Luch satellites were light enough to share a ride on Proton with another payload, while the spacecraft formerly known as Olymp is launched alone, betraying a much larger size! Moreover, numerous images of each Luch satellite during their development and pre-launch processing were released. Obviously, no visuals of the latest payload have been made available so far. Finally, all Luch satellites had numbers, while the latest spacecraft is carrying none.
    Possibly, the Luch cover-up campaign was a response to an accidental disclosure of the name Olymp, even though the code-name in itself provides no practical information on the purpose of its carrier.

    Preparations for launch
    This mission was previously scheduled to lift off at the end of May 2014 and, following the May 16 accident, it was initially postponed to July 8. On August 26, Roskosmos announced that specialists from GKNPTs Khrunichev had been installing thermal protection layers on the Briz-M stage at Site 92-50 in Baikonur, while the center's personnel was configuring launch pad at Site 81 for the upcoming mission. The statement also said that the Luch spacecraft was developed at ISS Reshetnev.
    On Sept. 4, Roskosmos reported that the launch vehicle, the upper stage, the payload fairing and the spacecraft had undergone autonomous checks and were all ready for integration. The assembly was completed by September 19. Two days later, a fully assembled vehicle was moved to a fueling station for loading the upper stage with propellant and pressurized gases. The launch vehicle was then rolled out to the launch pad No. 24 at Site 81 on September 23.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3355
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:35 am

    Mike E wrote:
     - Lasers have found the reflectors, if that means anything to you...

    I explained you already ,several times but you seem to totally ignore it.. one more time.
    you   dont  need astronauts in the moon to deposit  reflectors there.
    Russia have reflectors in the moon since 1971..they even have 3 land rovers there and other equipment and they never sent humans there. never claimed it.Russia even have soil samples of the moon and NEVER have sent men to the moon. You simply send ROVERS to the moon with reflectors and thats it. No need for humans to do it ,when a rover can do the same...

    Any proof of Apolo missions on the moon can be all unmanned. without humans.. you send reflectors and a rover
    and thats it.. you can claim you were there.. but can you see a human walking in the moon playing golf? no you cant. The only "Evidence" that Amstrong was in the moon was his word and NASA manipulated photos and nothing else. hopefully we can also finally put to end the Lazer-Reflectors argument.   About Russia not saying anything of the fake.. simply they were fooled first and/or they had a monetary agreement so they say nothing.  Is not the first time Russia keep silence of as scandal..  The Kursk disaster for example ,that was torpedo by an american submarine ,that happened unintentionally and that Putin covered it.. because of Many Billions $$ they received in change for the accident. Since Putin is very practical decided that it was better to keep silence since 1) the money 2) americans apologized for the incident. 3)To avoid major rage in Russia asking for a retaliation or declaration of war to US.  So in order to avoid a major war for an unintended accident Putin keep silence.. Same with the 9/11... Putin official version is that it was Alqaeda who did it.. but Russia Today Kremling funded media says the opposite.  I can go on and on.. Russia have also secrets that will not like US to reveal , like that GAGARIN was not who did the first flight..others Russians did it and got wounded and he took credit. etc..  The important thing.. is .. that Russia Did had a real space program..and never faked their achievements ,contrary to American Holywood.. and the way Russia beat americans in the moon ,mars ,venus ,Jupiter being first to visit it with a Probe was of sending waves after waves of space rockets non stop after they get it right.  

    But  you can ignore.. what i told you about the Reflectors  you can ignore the Camera film problems with radiation and extreme cold and heat of space.. you can even ignore how Amstrong nearly DIE while testing the moon lander and that they never got it working.. you can ignore tons of evidence of manipulatled photos.. and believe by faith is you like. but so far evidence says different.

    Big_Gazza
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 510
    Points : 534
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Sep 27, 2014 5:42 pm

    Mike E wrote:In any case, the differences between Olymp and Luch are obvious. Civilian Luch satellites were light enough to share a ride on Proton with another payload, while the spacecraft formerly known as Olymp is launched alone, betraying a much larger size!

    This isn't quite correct.  The original Luch satellites (aka Altair) and the 2nd gen Luch-2 used dedicated Proton launches, but the subsequent Luch-5x series were only half the mass and could therefore share a ride.

    Re this upcoming launch, is this not the same satellite that was originally called Luch-4 and would have had a mass of 3 ton and therefore need to revert to dedicated proton launches? IIRC Luch-4 was cancelled but reconfigured as a testbed for new technologies.  

    Anatoly Zak is fully aware of this past history, yet he deliberately launches into conjecture about military involvement, but it seems reasonable to expect that a new experimental data relay satellite would be kept under tight wraps with little to no public scrutiny?

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 27, 2014 9:24 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Mike E wrote:In any case, the differences between Olymp and Luch are obvious. Civilian Luch satellites were light enough to share a ride on Proton with another payload, while the spacecraft formerly known as Olymp is launched alone, betraying a much larger size!

    This isn't quite correct.  The original Luch satellites (aka Altair) and the 2nd gen Luch-2 used dedicated Proton launches, but the subsequent Luch-5x series were only half the mass and could therefore share a ride.

    Re this upcoming launch, is this not the same satellite that was originally called Luch-4 and would have had a mass of 3 ton and therefore need to revert to dedicated proton launches? IIRC Luch-4 was cancelled but reconfigured as a testbed for new technologies.  

    Anatoly Zak is fully aware of this past history, yet he deliberately launches into conjecture about military involvement, but it seems reasonable to expect that a new experimental data relay satellite would be kept under tight wraps with little to no public scrutiny?
    In all honesty, I don't know what to think about this... Zak is claiming that it is actually an electronic commutation satellite used for spying etc. "Luch" is a name just to confuse reporters, and so far it has done very well!

    "But it seems reasonable to expect that a new experimental data relay satellite would be kept under tight wraps with little to no public scrutiny?" - Are you suggesting that this could just be secretive public satellite?

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3355
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Vann7 on Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:23 am



    No idea why the Proton-M was made with the Angara being so close to release... and already having
    different versions of Soyus.. anyway good video..





    Big_Gazza
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 510
    Points : 534
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Sep 28, 2014 3:29 pm

    Mike E wrote:"But it seems reasonable to expect that a new experimental data relay satellite would be kept under tight wraps with little to no public scrutiny?" - Are you suggesting that this could just be secretive public satellite?

    I'm simply suggesting that a new large-mass data relay geosat using new technolgies would be a sensitive mission, regardless of who the ultimate user would be, especially if the hardware is mostly of domestic Russian manufacture rather than reliant on western components as the Luch 5x series were. Such a commsat would be a very significant mission for Russian national security, even if it were in fact destined for civilian service.

    I'm also wondering if much of Russia's "bad luck" with launching federal payloads may not be accidental, and that security has been beefed up in preperation for an important national mission. It onvious taht there is a significant 5th column working inside Russia, and I don't discount the fact that there could well be saboteur cell(s) working within Russian aerospace industries. Pay scales are still quite low, and its an unfortunate human trait that people can be tempted to betray their colleagues, friends and nation in order to have their palms laced with dirty silver...

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2526
    Points : 2659
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  kvs on Sun Sep 28, 2014 3:51 pm

    Vann7 wrote:

    No idea why the Proton-M was made with the Angara being so close to release... and already having
    different versions of Soyus..  anyway good video..


    The Proton-M was released in 2001. It is not recent. Angara is only going to have its first full scale launch test in December of this year or
    early next year.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sun Sep 28, 2014 6:31 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Mike E wrote:"But it seems reasonable to expect that a new experimental data relay satellite would be kept under tight wraps with little to no public scrutiny?" - Are you suggesting that this could just be secretive public satellite?

    I'm simply suggesting that a new large-mass data relay geosat using new technolgies would be a sensitive mission, regardless of who the ultimate user would be, especially if the hardware is mostly of domestic Russian manufacture rather than reliant on western components as the Luch 5x series were.  Such a commsat would be a very significant mission for Russian national security, even if it were in fact destined for civilian service.

    I'm also wondering if much of Russia's "bad luck" with launching federal payloads may not be accidental, and that security has been beefed up in preperation for an important national mission.  It onvious taht there is a significant 5th column working inside Russia, and I don't discount the fact that there could well be saboteur cell(s) working within Russian aerospace industries.  Pay scales are still quite low, and its an unfortunate human trait that people can be tempted to betray their colleagues, friends and nation in order to have their palms laced with dirty silver...
    Got it.... So far I haven't heard if this will replace or only complement the Luch series, but hopefully we will find out sooner rather than later.

    By the standards of other countries, Russia rocket industry is extremely reliable when it comes to launches. Sabotage in something as monitored as a rocket would be found before, if not after the failure. Most of the time the problem is something very simple, like a bug in the hardware that controls the engine flow rate etc.

    Big_Gazza
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 510
    Points : 534
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Mon Sep 29, 2014 8:44 am

    Mike E wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Mike E wrote:"But it seems reasonable to expect that a new experimental data relay satellite would be kept under tight wraps with little to no public scrutiny?" - Are you suggesting that this could just be secretive public satellite?

    I'm simply suggesting that a new large-mass data relay geosat using new technolgies would be a sensitive mission, regardless of who the ultimate user would be, especially if the hardware is mostly of domestic Russian manufacture rather than reliant on western components as the Luch 5x series were.  Such a commsat would be a very significant mission for Russian national security, even if it were in fact destined for civilian service.

    I'm also wondering if much of Russia's "bad luck" with launching federal payloads may not be accidental, and that security has been beefed up in preperation for an important national mission.  It onvious taht there is a significant 5th column working inside Russia, and I don't discount the fact that there could well be saboteur cell(s) working within Russian aerospace industries.  Pay scales are still quite low, and its an unfortunate human trait that people can be tempted to betray their colleagues, friends and nation in order to have their palms laced with dirty silver...
    Got it.... So far I haven't heard if this will replace or only complement the Luch series, but hopefully we will find out sooner rather than later.

    By the standards of other countries, Russia rocket industry is extremely reliable when it comes to launches. Sabotage in something as monitored as a rocket would be found before, if not after the failure. Most of the time the problem is something very simple, like a bug in the hardware that controls the engine flow rate etc.

    I wish I could be as confident... There have been a number of failed proton launches that were put down to hardware failures for which a suspicious person could easily come up with sinister causes:

    Proton fail 05-12-2010 (Glonass x3) - vehicle was lost due to excessive fuel loaded to upper stage, which resulted in too much weight and an inability to reach orbit. What was the history behind this fault fuel load calculation? Could the launch-pad technicians have been given a deliberately incorrect fuel load instruction?

    Proton fail 17-08-2011 (Express AM4) - Briz-M upper stage software bug. Deliberate hack?

    Proton fail 06-06-2012 (Telkom-3/Express MD2) - Briz-M upper stage shut down 4 minutes earlier than planned on its fourth burn. Apparently caused by a piping failure.

    Proton partial-fail 08-12-2012 (Yamal-402) - Briz-M upper stage shut down 4 minutes earlier than planned on its fourth burn. Apparently caused by excessive temperature of the propellant line due to excessive engine start frequency and solar heating. (Sounds like a bona fide design issue).

    Proton fail 02-07-2013 (Glonass x3) - vehicle lost control immediately on launch. Fault was traced to yaw sensors installed upside down. Human error blamed during rocket assembly, but how can we be sure that these were not tampered with while the launcher was in storage?

    Proton fail 15-5-2014 (Express AM4R) - Proton third stage vernier (steering) engine failure at T+542 seconds due to turbo-pump pipe leak (or bearing failure?).

    Many of these failures seem to due to sloppy manufacturing, testing and QA procedures. Its interesting to note that the Bulava SLBM is experiencing similar problems, ie multiple failures unrelated to design issues but due to supply chain issues. The causes of these failures should be correctable, but in the meantime, the failure rate of 1 per year over the last half decade is causing damage to proton commercial success which was once very impressive. I REALLY hate to see Elon "SpaceX is exceptional" Musk profiting from Protons current rut....

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:26 am

    No plans for Sea Launch project sale to Israel

    We have received no proposals on the Sea Launch purchase, Sea Launch CEO Sergey Gugkayev says

    MOSCOW, September 29. /ITAR-TASS/. The head of Sea Launch, an international spacecraft launch service, denied reports on Monday of plans to sell the project to an Israeli company.
    “The reports that an Israeli company is planning to buy the Sea Launch project are not true. We have received no proposals on the Sea Launch purchase,” the company’s CEO Sergey Gugkayev told ITAR-TASS.
    Gugkayev confirmed however that Sea Launch, which launches Russian-Ukrainian Zenith-3SL rockets from a mobile platform in the Pacific Ocean, is in talks with an Israeli firm on “cooperation in the sphere of launching spacecraft”. “But this is not the only company manufacturing satellites with which we are holding negotiations on possible joint work,” the Sea Launch consortium CEO said, commenting on the reports.

    A director of information policy department at Russia’s United Rocket and Space Corporation, Igor Burenkov, said “various options for developing the Sea Launch project are being considered, in particular, in the interests of Russia.”
    A source in the Russian Defense Ministry told ITAR-TASS that Sea Launch is currently holding negotiations with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), a major Israeli aerospace and aviation manufacturer.
    Earlier media reports said, citing unnamed sources, that a leading Israeli company in the space sector is expected to hold talks in the coming days aimed at discussing the possible sale of the Sea Launch consortium.
    The reports said that Russia's space agency, Roscosmos, and the United Rocket and Space Corporation have refused to buy the consortium, and efforts have been made to search for a foreign customer.
    The International Sea Launch consortium headquartered in Nyon, Switzerland, was founded in 1995. It was re-organized in 2010. Its majority shareholder — Energia Overseas Limited (EOL), a lower-tier subsidiary of the Russian Energia Corporation — owns 95% of shares. Three percent of shares belong to American airline Boeing and two percent to Norwegian Aker Solutions.

     - If this had happened, I'm sure more than a couple forum members would have died...

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:20 am

    Never going to happen... what rockets would Israel launch?

    The rig was designed for the Ukrainian-Russian Rocket and i suspect the Russians can build the components the Ukrainians were providing... I doubt Israel could do the same.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:28 pm

    Failure investigation ends


    On Sept. 29, 2014, a day after the Proton successfully returned to flight, the International Launch Services, ILS, which markets Proton rockets to customers outside Russia, announced that the Failure Review Oversight Board, FROB, has concluded its work after a detailed review of the findings by the Russian State Inter-agency Commission, IAC, and GKNPTs Khrunichev into the probable cause of the Proton's failure to deliver Ekspress-AM4R. 
     
    The members of the FROB reviewed the initial assessment provided by the IAC along with the additional testing and investigations that the IAC directed to be performed by Khrunichev and their subsidiaries. Based on the data presented, it was agreed by the FROB that the probable cause of the failure was the loss of structural integrity of a bolted interface that attaches the Stage III steering engine turbopump to the main engine structural frame. The loss of integrity led to an excessive steering engine turbo pump vibration environment that damaged a fuel inlet line to the oxidizer gas generator, resulting in a fuel leak. The loss of fuel led to the premature shutdown of the turbopump and loss of stage control authority and ultimately loss of mission approximately 545 seconds into the flight.
    Additionally, the FROB concurs that the identified corrective action plan will adequately address the identified probable cause and contributors to the failure, ILS said.
    According to ILS, all of the required corrective actions were incorporated into the Proton's return-to-flight mission. 

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:26 am

    Russian scientists develop unique rover descent system for ExoMars project

    Two access ramps will allow the rover to roll off the landing platform

    MOSCOW, October 3. /TASS/. Russian scientists have created a unique descent system for a Mars rover, Space Research Institute Director Lev Zelyony said on Friday.
    “Our European colleagues want to achieve maximum security for the rover so that it could roll onto Mars’ surface in any direction, if need be,” he said.
    “We have developed such a system. It has been decided to make two access ramps which will allow the rover to roll off the landing platform,” Zelyony said.
    Russian scientists will focus on Moon and Mars exploration and repeat the Phobos-Grunt mission in the next decade, Zelyony said earlier.
    The Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) in partnership with the European Space Agency will be carrying out two stages of the ExoMars mission in 2016 and 2018.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Oct 04, 2014 9:02 am

    - On the Mars spacecraft topic... - Inflatables are a possibility, with better protection against radiation and space trash 'floatin round'. Read this; http://www.russianspaceweb.com/inflatable.html




    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 04, 2014 12:35 pm

    I remember reading a while back about a similar idea where a very light inflatable material was to be used for the shell, with the structure being formed by water ice. the design has a large rear array of solar panels that blocked off the suns light so the space craft was going to be cold anyway... it was intended to be used as a freighter/freezer to be put in orbit around Mars.

    When manned ships arrived they could dock onto the vessel and it would be stocked with food and equipment and of course contain water that can be used for drinking and air and rocket fuel.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Oct 04, 2014 8:21 pm

    GarryB wrote:I remember reading a while back about a similar idea where a very light inflatable material was to be used for the shell, with the structure being formed by water ice. the design has a large rear array of solar panels that blocked off the suns light so the space craft was going to be cold anyway... it was intended to be used as a freighter/freezer to be put in orbit around Mars.

    When manned ships arrived they could dock onto the vessel and it would be stocked with food and equipment and of course contain water that can be used for drinking and air and rocket fuel.
    Do you think that you could find it? - No "pressure", but I'd love to see it! Using ice seems like an unusual decision, as the idea is to keep it as inflated and "flexible" as possible. The skin itself is relatively lightweight and wouldn't weigh as much as ice, or so I think... I think that flexible solar cells could be incorporated into the skin easily, and that would keep it simple rather than adding hard points on the craft.

    Inflatables could also incorporate the stored hydrogen "around the body" idea to reduce the effects of radiation.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Launch Vehicles and their Spacecraft: Thoughts & News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 9:04 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:04 pm