Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24369
    Points : 24911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 17, 2020 4:40 am


    Anyway, my point was that gliding back to the surface using the atmosphere is vastly smarter than burning fuel to fight gravity to achieve
    a vertical landing. As you noted, it reduces the payload substantially. It is just another SpaceX gimmick. Like their so-called ventilators for
    Covid-19.

    Which is what I was trying to say... using rocket fuel to land only makes sense with docking in space or landing on objects with no atmosphere like the moon or an asteroid... when the primary landing site will be earth then wings are much more efficient and reliable...

    Agreed. Either Karma doesn't work or it works very slow.

    However, we as individuals can develop a value system without citing such supra-human divine database & evaluation

    If Karma worked then life could be fair, but life isn't fair... good things happen to bad people and bad things happen to good people... life is random.

    But random is no way to live your life, we can survive if we acted like the US... always in our own personal interests and screw everyone else.

    A human on their own is weak, but a group of humans working together is immensely strong and powerful... it was not opposable thumbs and tools that make us more successful than other animals, it is the ability to communicate and work together to achieve things as a group what we could not achieve on our own.

    To work together we need trust and honesty and reliability and lots of other features... if you meet those levels then you can be accepted and part of a community... if you choose to be selfish you will usually end up fighting alone... which makes you weaker and more vulnerable.

    Being open and honest leaves you open to abuse, but that is not a good reason to not be open and honest... just be more careful who you trust...

    Right now the American people trust Musk, and he is effectively abusing that trust by making promises and claims and taking their money for stuff I don't think he will be able to deliver...

    As mentioned on this forum, I suspect the Military are supporting him so they can effectively get funding for stuff they couldn't push through themselves... it is a bit like the joke that was the JSF programme... Boeing never had any intention of trying to compete with the F-35.... they spent their time and money developing technology they could use on their drones and other products using funding for the JSF programme...

    Of course with all the problems with the F-35 did they still make the wrong choice... would Boeing have been better and fixing the problems and avoiding cost increases... well their efforts regarding the MAX failures suggests not...

    Regarding going to Mars... my understanding was that the plan was to send robots to Mars to set up a base and start producing liquid water supplies that would ultimately be modified into hydrogen and oxygen supplies so in theory when the mission with humans leaves earth there should already be a fuel supply for evac on the ground ready to use if they need it. An expedition to Mars could include using graders to level a large area of land to create an airfield for landing... hell you could use an airship filled with hydrogen that is grown organically to float up to the very top of the Martian atmosphere... with a bit of propulsion it might be able to escape into space on its own if the materials can be made light enough and strong enough...


    Last edited by GarryB on Sun May 17, 2020 4:50 am; edited 1 time in total
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1913
    Points : 1915
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun May 17, 2020 4:43 am

    Sujoy wrote:Agreed. Either Karma doesn't work or it works very slow.

    However, we as individuals can develop a value system without citing such supra-human divine database & evaluation

    I didn't invoke any supernatural influences. Karma may originally be a Hindu/Buddhist concept, but the idea of the cumulative effects of endless lying, stealing and cheating hardly requires the intervention of Shiva the Destroyer. Its a natural world process of actions having unintended consequences, and you can see it happening all around you. Empires rise, behave badly in their arrogant hubris, and then inevitably fall as the negative consequences of their misbehaviors finally catch up with them. It will happen to the USA, sooner than people think, and no amount of frenzied self-exultation, hypocritical virtue signalling and smug circle-jerking from these stupid arrogant #$%&s is going to miraculously save them.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1913
    Points : 1915
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun May 17, 2020 5:08 am

    My idea of an ideal reuseable system is the use of winged flyback boosters like Baikal but using methalox propellents so that the engines don't suffer from coking and can be returned to service with an absolute minimum of  refurbishment.  The problem with Musks vertical landing method is that the vehicle flys tail-first thru its own rocket wash resulting in damage to the engine bay and external scorching of the core.  SpaceX doesn't discuss the real costs of refurbishment but i reckon they are probably very high and probably require a complete dismantlement and inspection of the 1st stage, and replacement of all damaged thermal protection blanketing at the very least (and probably a good deal of cabling as well).

    Recovery of strap-ons is fairly easy, but the central core is much harder as it will have high altitude at burn-out and mass efficiency is paramount to maximizing the payload to orbit.  Any solution will be more expensive and gives diminishing returns.  My idea would be make this stage (and the upper stages) expendable.  Not really an issue for an A5-type modular vehicle as the core is same size as the strap-ons and reusing 4/5 of the 1st stage hardware is good enough.

    In the longer term, a vertically launched flyback winged (or lifting body) booster would be an efficient system, but it should leverage Baikal strap-ons to avoid the need to carry a large number of heavy engines. The main impediment here is development cost & operating expenses vs cost of expendable cores and upper stages. Personally i doubt that its cost effective.

    Finally, the issue that is usually ignored is that excess reliance on re-useability means that your production lines will degrade as the frequency of new-builds declines.  The Shuttle was a great example as once the 5x units were delivered the line was shutdown and the tooling disposed of.  That equals no ability to replace lost units like Challenger or Columbia.  The Angara assembly plant will kick into gear once Vostochny is ready and the last Protons are used.  How many new build F9 cores will be built each year compared to URM-1s?  You can't maintain manufacturing skills and worker knowledge on refurbishments alone...
    Sujoy
    Sujoy

    Posts : 934
    Points : 1092
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Sujoy on Sun May 17, 2020 9:21 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:I didn't invoke any supernatural influences. Karma may originally be a Hindu/Buddhist concept, but the idea of the cumulative effects of endless lying, stealing and cheating hardly requires the intervention of Shiva the Destroyer.
    I'm not saying you did or GarryB did. I was just trying to explain that Karma on an individual level does not work. If it did how come mass murders like Churchill and many like him lived and died in peace?

    Big_Gazza wrote:It will happen to the USA, sooner than people think, and no amount of frenzied self-exultation, hypocritical virtue signalling and smug circle-jerking from these stupid arrogant #$%&s is going to miraculously save them.
    Probably, in the fullness of time. But this event that you described will probably unfold a hundred years from now. Even the UK that carried out far more genocides than the US has managed so far continue to exist as a major power despite losing almost all its colonies. So the negative consequences of their despicable actions have not yet caught up with them.

    Maybe a future generation in the US and UK will eventually suffer. But my point still remains - all these mass murders that US creates Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Bush, Clinton continue to live a life of joy and peace. Neither are they behind bars nor are they awaiting execution. Had the concept of KARMA been true, this would not have happened.

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 6196
    Points : 6331
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs on Sun May 17, 2020 11:35 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:My idea of an ideal reuseable system is the use of winged flyback boosters like Baikal but using methalox propellents so that the engines don't suffer from coking and can be returned to service with an absolute minimum of  refurbishment.  The problem with Musks vertical landing method is that the vehicle flys tail-first thru its own rocket wash resulting in damage to the engine bay and external scorching of the core.  SpaceX doesn't discuss the real costs of refurbishment but i reckon they are probably very high and probably require a complete dismantlement and inspection of the 1st stage, and replacement of all damaged thermal protection blanketing at the very least (and probably a good deal of cabling as well).

    Recovery of strap-ons is fairly easy, but the central core is much harder as it will have high altitude at burn-out and mass efficiency is paramount to maximizing the payload to orbit.  Any solution will be more expensive and gives diminishing returns.  My idea would be make this stage (and the upper stages) expendable.  Not really an issue for an A5-type modular vehicle as the core is same size as the strap-ons and reusing 4/5 of the 1st stage hardware is good enough.

    In the longer term, a vertically launched flyback winged (or lifting body) booster would be an efficient system, but it should leverage Baikal strap-ons to avoid the need to carry a large number of heavy engines. The main impediment here is development cost & operating expenses vs cost of expendable cores and upper stages. Personally i doubt that its cost effective.

    Finally, the issue that is usually ignored is that excess reliance on re-useability means that your production lines will degrade as the frequency of new-builds declines.  The Shuttle was a great example as once the 5x units were delivered the line was shutdown and the tooling disposed of.  That equals no ability to replace lost units like Challenger or Columbia.  The Angara assembly plant will kick into gear once Vostochny is ready and the last Protons are used.  How many new build F9 cores will be built each year compared to URM-1s?  You can't maintain manufacturing skills and worker knowledge on refurbishments alone...

    The Angara does not have a special first stage core. It is an assembly of 3-5 (and possibly 7) identical modules. So they can all burn out at the same
    time leaving the second stage to fly through the outer atmosphere. So all the first stage modules are in principle recoverable.

    The Soyuz 5 will have the same modular assembly but the modules are much larger so will pose more of a challenge to glide back to
    the surface. But this is not a show stopper by any means.

    Vertical lending is stupid since it is not symmetric with vertical launch. The rocket's guidance system steers the launch phase to the right
    target. Steering the landing phase onto a small target area is harder since there is less distance slack to work with. Even though this
    looks like some big technological achievement, it really isn't since it is pointless. Recovery by gliding is real technological evolution.




    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1913
    Points : 1915
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza on Mon May 18, 2020 12:48 am

    kvs wrote:The Angara does not have a special first stage core.   It is an assembly of 3-5 (and possibly 7) identical modules.   So they can all burn out at the same
    time leaving the second stage to fly through the outer atmosphere.   So all the first stage modules are in principle recoverable.

    I mostly agree, but the overall lift capability is much enhanced if the fuel in the core is conserved on low throttle until the strap-ons burn-out and are jettisoned. The core then throttles up and burns to completion at high altitude. You'll put a heavier payload into orbit using staged burns than running all stages at the same rate.

    KSP (kerbal space program) is a pretty good sandbox for playing around with rocket designs Very Happy Try building an A5 analog and not igniting the core stack until you're at altitude, and compare the result with burning all stages simultaneously.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 6196
    Points : 6331
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs on Mon May 18, 2020 4:00 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    kvs wrote:The Angara does not have a special first stage core.   It is an assembly of 3-5 (and possibly 7) identical modules.   So they can all burn out at the same
    time leaving the second stage to fly through the outer atmosphere.   So all the first stage modules are in principle recoverable.

    I mostly agree, but the overall lift capability is much enhanced if the fuel in the core is conserved on low throttle until the strap-ons burn-out and are jettisoned.  The core then throttles up and burns to completion at high altitude.  You'll put a heavier payload into orbit using staged burns than running all stages at the same rate.

    KSP (kerbal space program) is a pretty good sandbox for playing around with rocket designs Very Happy Try building an A5 analog and not igniting the core stack until you're at altitude, and compare the result with burning all stages simultaneously.

    Thanks for the advice. I was going on the basis of simpler considerations. The faster the burn the less spurious fuel mass that needs to be lofted.
    So a slowly ascending rocket is much more massive than a faster one. The extreme limit is a bullet and that is what was used by H.G. Wells
    and Jules Verne for their fiction. Although I doubt any human could survive the initial acceleration no matter what scale the gun had.

    So it would on the surface appear that the non-core boosters would be wasting fuel lofting the slower mass depleting central booster in addition
    to the other stages and the payload. But it looks like there are some tricks in this problem.

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4403
    Points : 4381
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  miketheterrible on Wed May 20, 2020 4:35 pm

    I wonder how Space X flight will go?
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 6196
    Points : 6331
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs on Wed May 20, 2020 6:37 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:I wonder how Space X flight will go?

    I would not want to be an astronaut on anything Space X calls man-rated. But then Space X is not using its own tech for its
    core activities. Musk's dabbling with his own projects is a total farce./

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1913
    Points : 1915
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza on Thu May 21, 2020 12:41 pm

    I wouldn't want to be on a Dragon capsule that ever has to fire its Draco rockets.  They tested a returned unmanned capsule only to have it explode on the test stand...

    Stupid design, and cannot understand how these idiots can possibly man-rate a vehicle that has its emergency ascent escape rockets built into the manned capsule.  The entire concept is just nonsensical, but nevertheless these clowns are going to fly in it.  Suspect

    Sponsored content

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue May 26, 2020 6:17 pm