Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+43
nemerson
Tingsay
Ned86
Singular_Transform
LMFS
PapaDragon
owais.usmani
TMA1
Arrow
Backman
Nomad5891
Tsavo Lion
Kiko
limb
Scorpius
magnumcromagnon
Daniel_Admassu
kvs
The-thing-next-door
flamming_python
hoom
Begome
Viktor
Isos
x_54_u43
Big_Gazza
GarryB
Sujoy
AlfaT8
OminousSpudd
Rodion_Romanovic
yavar
AMK
nero
Vann7
George1
Cyberspec
Gazputin
PhSt
calripson
miketheterrible
Hole
dino00
47 posters

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 12881
    Points : 13028
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:51 am

    Since there is no real need to rush the delivery of rocket parts to the launch facilities, the option to ship by rail to the Arctic and then transport
    by sea (even in winter with the help of ice breakers) was always there. No tunnels going north to Plesetsk and any Barents Sea port.
    But the point of liberasts like Zak bitching is to create a cacophony of "Russia fail" noise which then steers Russian public opinion and
    Russians end up helping those that want to sell them down the river. That was the cunning plan of the liberasts but it has not panned
    out. Too many Russians are not credulous enough to live up to the smear that they are bydlo. And enough BS eventually crosses
    a tipping point which drives a backlash.

    George1
    George1


    Posts : 17650
    Points : 18157
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  George1 Sun Jan 31, 2021 4:16 pm

    The emergence of a rocket and space propulsion holding in Russia is approaching
    Today, 13: 22
    63

    The emergence of a single holding is approaching, which will include enterprises of the rocket and space industry specializing in engine building. Thus, soon the leading enterprises creating rocket engines will become parts of a single structure.

    This was stated by Igor Arbuzov, general director of the Energomash research and production association, which is part of the Roscosmos state corporation, in an interview published on the corporation's official website.

    He said that there was only one step left before the emergence of a rocket and space engine building holding in Russia. This step should be the transfer of shares of the design bureau of chemical engineering named after A. M. Isaev to the trust management of NPO Energomash, which should take place within the next few months.

    Immediately after this happens, all the leading rocket-building enterprises in Russia working on the creation of engines will be united into a single structure.

    NPO Energomash will become the parent enterprise of the newly formed holding. This research and production association is considered one of the world's largest enterprises for the production of liquid-propellant engines for launch vehicles for the space industry. At the same time, despite the sanctions, it continues to supply the United States with the RD-180 and RD-181 rocket engines, and this is far from the only area of ​​activity of NPO Energomash.

    https://en.topwar.ru/179551-blizitsja-pojavlenie-v-rossii-holdinga-raketno-kosmicheskogo-dvigatelestroenija.html

    GarryB likes this post

    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1042
    Points : 1094
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  The-thing-next-door Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:29 pm

    Hopefully this will help prevent a Gloshko vs Korolev situation from ever happening again.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 12209
    Points : 12269
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:39 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:Hopefully this will help prevent a Gloshko vs Korolev situation from ever happening again.

    Yup

    They forgot that competition only works if competitors are not owned by the same entity and paid from the same budget

    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 12881
    Points : 13028
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs Mon Feb 01, 2021 1:03 am

    The-thing-next-door wrote:Hopefully this will help prevent a Gloshko vs Korolev situation from ever happening again.

    That was a failure of the Soviet leadership, starting with maggot Khruschev. It also highlights how none of these leaders were
    the Demon Lord incarnate tyrants. They all had to deal with the Soviet apparatus and it had a lot of power.

    Under sane conditions there would have been a study commissioned on the benefits of URMs and how much development
    capacity there was in the USSR to go one way or another. Instead we got some BS red director personality conflict and
    the N1 rocket was tasked to an enterprise that never built rockets before. For a national prestige project, it was an
    epic fail from the onset.

    GarryB likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 33227
    Points : 33741
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  GarryB Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:01 am

    The interesting thing is though that in the west it was claimed that having all those smaller rocket nozzles was less reliable because it multiplied the chances of nozzle failure... any of which would lead to ruin...

    But that new rocket motor they have developed has several rocket nozzles and if one nozzle fails the other nozzles can boost thrust to compensate for the loss of any nozzles.

    Not something the Saturn V could hope to do with its enormous nozzles.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 6741
    Points : 6819
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  flamming_python Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:17 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    The-thing-next-door wrote:Hopefully this will help prevent a Gloshko vs Korolev situation from ever happening again.

    Yup

    They forgot that competition only works if competitors are not owned by the same entity and paid from the same budget


    Worked fine for competition between MiG, Sukhoi, Tupolev, Myashchishev and so on

    GarryB and magnumcromagnon like this post

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 12209
    Points : 12269
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  PapaDragon Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:11 am

    flamming_python wrote:...Worked fine for competition between MiG, Sukhoi, Tupolev, Myashchishev and so on

    MiG and Sukhoi were constantly lagging behind the West, they only reached parity once MiG was ditched and reources were focused on Sukhoi

    Tupolev only got good once Myashchishev was ditched

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3430
    Points : 3428
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Tue Feb 02, 2021 11:42 pm

    Not Russian space-related, but still relevent.  This is what happens when a space program is hijacked by an egotistical naricisst and his self-promotional nonsense is acclaimed and amplified by a corrupt and fecklessly ignorant MSM echo chamber.    Laughing    Muricans can shove their endless spiteful criticsms of all things in the Russian aerospace sphere. It clear that these fucking idiots do not have a monopoly on innovation or the ability to engineer a reliable launch system.  Self-exultation and snarky dismissals of the achievements and abilities of others is not a magical receipe for success!!

    No apolgies for gloating. I'm loving seeing that dickwad with shit on his face...

    https://www.russiadefence.net/t3448p225-us-launch-vehicles-and-spacecraft-discussion-news#311636

    GarryB likes this post

    avatar
    limb


    Posts : 650
    Points : 668
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  limb Wed Feb 03, 2021 3:36 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:Article by Anatoly Zak.  Interesting stuff even if he is another one of these Euro-Atlantacist sovok jew russophobic Putin-haters...

    Roskosmos is promoting a reusable rocket.

    source

    Start preliminary design

    In 2020, after nearly two decades of research, the Russian space industry embarked on the development of a next-generation mid-range rocket designed to replace the Soyuz family of launch vehicles. Unlike a number of previous Soyuz design projects relying on traditional kerosene-fueled engines, the latter is to switch to newly developed engines fueled by cryogenic-temperature liquid methane from available and cheap natural gas.

    Russia's efforts reflect technological trends around the world. Methane is now considered the best fuel for reusable rockets due to its "clean" combustion process, which leaves little soot in the main engine.

    In June 2020, Roskosmos approved the Terms of Reference for the outline design of the Amur-LNG rocket , previously known as Soyuz-5 or Soyuz-LNG. (LNG - Russian abbreviation - Liquefied Natural Gas ).

    On October 5, 2020, Roscosmos signed a contract with RCC Progress, the manufacturer of the Soyuz-2 launch vehicle, to develop a preliminary design of the Amura-LNG launch vehicle in the amount of 407 million rubles (about $ 5.4 million).

    The two-stage medium-class launch vehicle was promised to be launched for the first time in 2026 from the modernized Soyuz complex at the Vostochny cosmodrome. According to the head of Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin, financing of the construction of a filling and launching complex for the Amur rocket will be implemented in the third phase of the Vostochny construction after the completion of the second phase in 2023, which provides for the construction of a launch complex for the Angara missile family at the cosmodrome.

    Due to the presence of Soyuz-2 launch sites at several cosmodromes, including Baikonur and Plesetsk, as well as the very low load on the Soyuz-2 launch pad on Vostochny, Roskosmos could probably decommission the existing complex for its conversion into the "Amur" launch pad without much influence on the launch program of the "Soyuz-2" rocket. In addition, the construction of the "Amur" site could de facto replace the much more expensive plan to build a launch pad for a super-heavy rocket, the development of which practically stopped in 2020.  [calling bullshit on this.  Zak is a wanker who so loves to inject his fake prophecies of Doom]

    On January 9, 2021, Rogozin announced several more details about the Amur-LNG rocket. According to his Facebook post, the rocket will have a fully automated pre-launch system, make extensive use of lightweight composite materials to replace metals, and use a reusable first stage capable of up to 100 flights. Because methane fuel will be pumped into the tanks under the same cryogenic conditions as liquid oxygen (which serves as an oxidizer), the fuel and oxidizer tanks can be combined into a single structure separated by a thin bulkhead, further simplifying the design and saving weight.

    In the next post, Rogozin also confirmed that the Russian super-heavy project will now be based on the Amur-LNG family, rather than on the kerosene Soyuz-5.   [sounds suspect to me      Why build a SHLV from modules that have a 9-12.5T to LEO capacity rather than Soyuz 5 with its 17T?]

    The Amur-LNG was supposed to use either the standard 81KS payload fairing inherited from the Soyuz-2 family, or the newly developed wider fairing with a diameter of 5 meters for especially large payloads. Russian experts have also begun to explore the possibility of soft landing and reuse of fairings from Amur missiles, an industry source told RussianSpaceWeb.com .

    Soft landing equipment

    According to industry sources, in early 2021, the Amur-LNG concept design was undergoing rapid evolution on the drawing board before its architecture was approved for a more detailed design.

    One of the key features that remained unchanged at the time was the first stage landing legs. Although publicly released images of Amur LNG showed the launch vehicle landing on what appeared to be a replica of SpaceX's Falcon landing legs, in fact, Russian experts were evaluating three different landing leg designs. Only one of them bore some resemblance to the system used by SpaceX, but was less likely, according to an industry source, to have been adopted for full-scale development. Another proposal reportedly included a classic look with support legs, but wider and shorter than on Falcon rockets, and a third configuration had a fixed structure integrated with the engine compartment structure.

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 U7ajga10
    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 00111310

    Possible payloads

    With a payload of up to nine tonnes for low-earth orbit, LEO Amur-LNG will be well positioned to fulfill all federal, commercial and military missions previously performed by Soyuz-2 missiles, whose payload is limited to eight tonnes. Roscosmos argued that the Amur-LNG project is focused on commercial exploitation and should correspond to a mission price of no more than $ 22 million. It was assumed that the rocket will serve both light and medium market segments. Depending on the task, due to additional fuel, the Amur variants could have a consumable and reusable option, as well as between the return of the first stage to the launch pad or landing at a distance from the Vostochny.

    In early 2021, Russian specialists also began to study possible manned spacecraft that could take advantage of the Amur-LNG rocket. One of the candidates was the reusable manned spacecraft MTKS Argo, proposed by S7 for commercial missions, and the manned spacecraft PTK-M Orlyonok, conceptualized by RSC Energia in 2020, as the first step in Russia's lunar exploration program.

    Methane engine

    The main technical task of the Amur-LNG project was the development of a new generation methane engine, designated RD-0169. According to the formal assignment for the Amur-LNG propulsion system, the serial version of the engine must be able to operate at least 10 times or make from 25 to 50 starts. In the course of preliminary design from 2016 to 2019, the KBKhA design bureau in Voronezh has already conducted research on the processes of mixing and ignition of fuel in methane engines, and even some engine components have been brought to autonomous tests.

    In May 2020, Roscosmos signed a contract with KBKhA worth 6.3 billion rubles ($ 83.66 million) for the full-scale development of the RD-0169 engine until the end of 2025. However, due to the complexity of the RD-0169 project, it was decided to develop an experimental engine demonstrator called RD-0177.

    The contract for the development of RD-0177 worth 765.78 million rubles ($ 10.1 million) was awarded to the same company on September 29, 2019. This stage of work should be completed by November 15, 2021.

    Although the RD-0169 engine has a thrust of 85 tons, the two-ton prototype engine will have experimental versions of the gas generator and combustion chambers designed to test key processes in these components, such as ignition and shutdown. These are the most important and difficult to predict stages in the operation of a rocket engine, when new systems that have not yet been calibrated tend to fall prey to high frequency vibrations.

    On June 3, 2020 Roskosmos announced that NPO Energomash had completed firing tests of a generator model for RD-0177, having tested various nozzle designs. According to the company, these tests were to be followed by the development of the combustion chamber.

    In August 2020, the head of the Russian propulsion development group, which includes Energomash and KBKhA, said that the gas generator and mixing head for RD-0177 had been tested, and the industry was switching to engine production. However, by that time, the appearance of the first working version of RD-0177 was expected not earlier than 2022 or 2023.

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Rd-01610
    Demonstration engine RD-0162-D2A with a thrust of 40 tons, which made 10 test launches in December 2016.

    The role of RD-0169 in the Amur-SAU project

    Although the nominal thrust of the RD-0169 engine was originally designed for 85 tons, the design of the engine provides for the possibility of increasing thrust well above this level. At the beginning of 2021, a throttling factor of 1.33 was specified for RD-0169. This means that the most powerful version of the engine, with a thrust of 95 tons, is suitable for the first stage of Amur-LNG.

    An early design of the reusable first stage, conceptually developed in 2020, involves a group of five engines operating during launch and flight. The central motor has the ability to restart to provide the first stage braking maneuver after separation. Then the same engine was started a third time to ensure a soft landing on the landing pad. The developers also proposed a four-engine, single-use first stage option, providing a higher payload for the entire rocket due to the lack of fuel reserves for landing.

    The deep throttling mode on individual engines will allow the first stage to successfully launch into orbit, even if one of the engines fails, by commanding the rest of the engines to increase thrust.

    According to the initial plans, the second stage of the Amur-LNG rocket was also supposed to use a vacuum version of the RD-0169 engine with thrust from 85 to 110 tons with a modified nozzle. However, in early 2021, engineers were considering converting the second stage to kerosene fuel due to the thrust limitation provided by RD-0169, an industry source told RussianSpaceWeb.com . This decision was probably prompted by plans to use the second stage not only for entering the initial orbit, but also for subsequent maneuvers in orbit.

    I guess you and KVS are wrong about reusable burn landing rockets being inefficient if Russia is trying to do the same as musk? Also doesn't this article prove you wrong that rocket wash and general use damages the engines, since Russian engineers have determined that methane fuel doesn't cause much wear?
    avatar
    limb


    Posts : 650
    Points : 668
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  limb Wed Feb 03, 2021 3:40 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:...Worked fine for competition between MiG, Sukhoi, Tupolev, Myashchishev and so on

    MiG and Sukhoi were constantly lagging behind the West, they only reached parity once MiG was ditched and reources were focused on Sukhoi

    Tupolev only got good once Myashchishev was ditched


    Oh yeah, it totally wasn't because of industrial sabotage and general economic destitution caused by prowestern capitalists for more than a decade... Rolling Eyes

    MiG totally had parity and superiority with most NATO aerospace companies. Also myasischev was a small specialized design bureau since the early 60s with few resources, so IDK why you're blaming them for resource sucking. Interesting that you ignore Yakovlev, antonov and ilyushin, when they designed lots of useful aircfraft superior to western analogues throughout the cold war.

    GarryB and Scorpius like this post

    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 12881
    Points : 13028
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs Wed Feb 03, 2021 6:04 am

    You are taking Zak's claims as Gospel. Where has there been any official announcement that vertical landing is being adopted?

    So park your smugness in the garage.

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3430
    Points : 3428
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:56 am

    limb wrote:I guess you and KVS are wrong about reusable burn landing rockets being inefficient if Russia is trying to do the same as musk? Also doesn't this article prove you wrong that rocket wash and general use damages the engines, since Russian engineers have determined that methane fuel doesn't cause much wear?

    No, cuz flying through your own superheated rocket wash WILL cause damage and require refurbishment (flame retarddent materials need to be replaced, while hoses and tubing and cables need to be removed and tested before either reuse or replacement.  The idea of simply refuelling and relaunching (like a jet passenger plane) just isn't applicable for rocketry.  Its going to be easier (and cheaper) to refurb an engine that hasn't been scorched, and that points towards fly-back boosters rather than inverted blowtorches.

    Does that mean that Russia shouldn't develop the tech? Of course not, even if the reason is mainly to not be left behind a technological curve.  China is probably interested in the concept as they have the issue with dropping spent stages on inhabited land when launching from their interior. I can think of plenty of reasons to emulate Falcon 9 tech but none of them involve worshipping at the Holy Shrine of Musk. One good example is rocket-powered landing of manned capsules or heavy cargo-return vehicles. Chutes don't cut it as landing can't be controlled, and descent rockets built into a heat shield won't suffer they same level of heat damage as a Falcon 9 tail.

    BTW the use of methane fuel has been considered for DECADES but has only recently gained traction due to the desire to reuse engines.  Methane doesn't leave coke residues within the turbopumps and internal flow paths so avoids much of the cleaning/refurb needed to return an engine to a flight-worthy condition.  Without actual reuse the advantages of methane aren't gained and spacefairing nations were not about to introduce a whole new family of rockets just to trial a new propellent combo.

    kvs likes this post

    avatar
    owais.usmani


    Posts : 1212
    Points : 1210
    Join date : 2019-03-27
    Age : 36

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  owais.usmani Wed Feb 03, 2021 8:25 am

    The Open Space Telegram channel published fantastic photos of what they say is an engine test at the Energomash facility in Khimki near Moscow. Cool

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Etpogp10
    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Etpogq11
    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Etpogq10

    Source: https://t.me/ruspacelive/2593

    dino00 likes this post

    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1042
    Points : 1094
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  The-thing-next-door Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:40 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:

    No, cuz flying through your own superheated rocket wash WILL cause damage and require refurbishment (flame retarddent materials need to be replaced, while hoses and tubing and cables need to be removed and tested before either reuse or replacement.  The idea of simply refuelling and relaunching (like a jet passenger plane) just isn't applicable for rocketry.  Its going to be easier (and cheaper) to refurb an engine that hasn't been scorched, and that points towards fly-back boosters rather than inverted blowtorches.

    You are also significantly shortening the engines lifespan by burning it on decent.

    Reusable engines will also be inferior to thier disposable counterparts, unless ofcourse vastly superior materials are used, materials that are probably out side of what pindo material science can provide.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 33227
    Points : 33741
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  GarryB Thu Feb 04, 2021 6:08 am

    MiG and Sukhoi were constantly lagging behind the West, they only reached parity once MiG was ditched and reources were focused on Sukhoi

    Tupolev only got good once Myashchishev was ditched

    I would say the opposite, the MiG-29 and Su-27 were rather superior than any western aircraft designed and flown at the time, their avionics were a bit patchy, but even then it had faults but also serious advancements.

    I remember in the Mid-1980s the west was talking about new generation air to air missiles... called ASRAAM for the Sidewinder replacement and AMRAAM for the Sparrow and Sky Flash replacement... the British were going to make the ASRAAM and the Americans the AMRAAM... funding and priorities were not high for either because western fighter pilots were Tom Cruise Top Guns and eastern pilots were robots.

    Of course come the 1990s and they got their hands on MiG-29s and suddenly realised that the R-73 is vastly superior to the Sidewinder and was so dangerous getting close to Soviet or Russian fighters with such missiles would be suicide, so they poured funding into AMRAAM which replaced their older BVR SARH missiles, but they screwed the Brits AGAIN... how many times is that now... Blue Streak, Machine gun calibres, assault rifles, the list is probably very long.

    The point is that up until AMRAAM entered service the western much vaunted air power was actually in trouble... sensor fusion with helmet mounted sights and IRST and radar all working together was the MiG-29 and Su-27 before any HATO fighter had that...

    Export sales funded Sukhoi development, but MiG didn't sleep and kept up with state of the art.

    You are taking Zak's claims as Gospel. Where has there been any official announcement that vertical landing is being adopted?

    The only reusable rockets I have seen them promote use wings to glide back to earth and undercarriage for conventional landing on a runway in the form of fly back boosters that glide and land via autopilot.

    kvs likes this post

    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 12881
    Points : 13028
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs Thu Feb 04, 2021 6:53 am

    People need to try harder when pimping wonder "tech". If someone is going to waste resources lofting rocket fuel to 60 km,
    assuming a reusable first stage, then may as well use the fuel to propel jet engines on the way down. By contrast a
    glider does not need to waste payload to loft fuel for the return trip. The US Space Shuttle was a glider and I don't
    recall people bitching about it being inferior and should be replaced by some vertical lander.

    All this vertical landing BS showed up thanks to Elon Musk the shyster. Now you know why snake oil was so popular back
    in the day. A shyster can sell the fantasy delusion and basically create a cult following.

    avatar
    limb


    Posts : 650
    Points : 668
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  limb Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:39 am

    kvs wrote:People need to try harder when pimping wonder "tech".   If someone is going to waste resources lofting rocket fuel to 60 km,
    assuming a reusable first stage, then may as well use the fuel to propel jet engines on the way down.    By contrast a
    glider does not need to waste payload to loft fuel for the return trip.    The US Space Shuttle was a glider and I don't
    recall people bitching about it being inferior and should be replaced by some vertical lander.

    All this vertical landing BS showed up thanks to Elon Musk the shyster.   Now you know why snake oil was so popular back
    in the day.   A shyster can sell the fantasy delusion and basically create a cult following.


    Nodoby bitches about the space shuttle? have you not seen the space tech channels like Scott Manley shitting on it for years for being an example of "government innefficiency" and touting "the free market", tech startups and ofc elon chungus as the solution against inferior state controlled NASA products.


    Last edited by limb on Thu Feb 04, 2021 10:53 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Nomad5891


    Posts : 62
    Points : 64
    Join date : 2021-02-04

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Nomad5891 Thu Feb 04, 2021 10:48 am

    I see for some time there is some sort of devision between memebrs on if Roscosmos and Russia in general is doing well or bad over the past few years, even decades.

    I for one prefer to rely on facts and sadly what I see is the following:
    Total launches per country 2015
    Russia 27
    USA 20
    China 19

    Total launches per country 2016
    China 22
    USA 22
    Russia 19

    Total launches per country 2017
    USA 30
    Russia 20
    China 18

    Total launches per country 2018
    China 39
    USA 34
    Russia 20

    Total launches per country 2019
    China 34
    USA 27
    Russia 25

    Total launches per country 2020
    USA 44
    China 39
    Russia 17

    For 2021, we already have 6 Launches for USA, 3 for China and just 1 from Russia.

    I think it is pretty obvious that in a little more than 5 years Russia has gone from being a leader in rocket launces to the 3rd place. And mind you, 3rd place by not some marginal difference - China, that is in second place, has launched more than the double ammount of rockets for 2020.

    So in my view it is clear something is going wrong in Roscosmos. What we see are the results of years, maybe decades of bad management, badly put goals, wasted budgets and oportunities.
    The interesting thing to see if somehow this trend can be stopped and even inversed by the russians?
    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 12881
    Points : 13028
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  kvs Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:49 pm

    limb wrote:
    kvs wrote:People need to try harder when pimping wonder "tech".   If someone is going to waste resources lofting rocket fuel to 60 km,
    assuming a reusable first stage, then may as well use the fuel to propel jet engines on the way down.    By contrast a
    glider does not need to waste payload to loft fuel for the return trip.    The US Space Shuttle was a glider and I don't
    recall people bitching about it being inferior and should be replaced by some vertical lander.

    All this vertical landing BS showed up thanks to Elon Musk the shyster.   Now you know why snake oil was so popular back
    in the day.   A shyster can sell the fantasy delusion and basically create a cult following.


    Nodoby bitches about the space shuttle? have you not seen the space tech channels like Scott Manley shitting on it for years for being an example of "government innefficiency" and touting "the free market", tech startups and ofc elon chungus as the solution against inferior state controlled NASA products.

    You are making a non sequitur observation and for now I will pretend you are not a troll.
    I am clearly talking about the functionality of the Space Shuttle and not its price tag. Show
    me any example of bitching about the Space Shuttle where its functionality is attacked and
    people pimp vertical landing as a superior alternative.

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3430
    Points : 3428
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:07 pm

    limb wrote:Nodoby bitches about the space shuttle? have you not seen the space tech channels like Scott Manley shitting on it for years for being an example of "government innefficiency" and touting "the free market", tech startups and ofc elon chungus as the solution against inferior state controlled NASA products.

    Those complaints about the shuttle were made by those with an ideological axe to grind, namely those who wanted total privatisation of all space activities so that elite-capital can sponge off the taxpayer for space activities they same way they do in the privately-owned MIC.

    The shuttle program wasn't so much "inefficient" as the bulk of the costs were unavoidable management, engineering and labour required for the efforts to recover orbiters and perform the necessary strip down, inspections and refurbishment that are needed for manned flight. In reality, private industry wouldn't be able to do it any better or cheaper, regardless of the endless BS propaganda for the Prophets of Privatisation.

    The shuttle operation was a well managed affair with plenty of resources lavished on it, and the fact that they managed to keep their losses over 30 years of operation to just 2 orbiters is proof of their effectiveness. Does anyone think that Musk (for instance) will be able to operate a fleet of his stupid flying silos without a much greater tally of lost vehicles and dead crewmen?

    magnumcromagnon and kvs like this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3430
    Points : 3428
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:57 pm

    Nomad5891 wrote:

    .....

    I think it is pretty obvious that in a little more than 5 years Russia has gone from being a leader in rocket launces to the 3rd place. And mind you, 3rd place by not some marginal difference - China, that is in second place, has launched more than the double ammount of rockets for 2020.

    So in my view it is clear something is going wrong in Roscosmos. What we see are the results of years, maybe decades of bad management, badly put goals, wasted budgets and oportunities.
    The interesting thing to see if somehow this trend can be stopped and even inversed by the russians?

    The reduction of Russian launch cadence is entirely due to their loss of commercial contracts as Russian federal missions haven't changed significantly (don't have time to run the numbers). Loss of commercial flights has two main reasons:

    (a) Proton & Briz-M unreliability - approx 10% failure rate for over a decade tends to cause payload owners to look for better alternatives (thankfully this now seems to have bene resolved).
    (b) Geopolitics - pressure on Western satellite operators to not use Russian launch services, but to throw contracts at (subsidised) privatised launch providers like SpaceX to support the privitisation ideology.

    The bottom line here is that it is pointless for Russia to try to recover its share of the commercial market due to the geopolitical situation.  The US and its Eurotrash satraps want to diminish Russias space footprint, and even if Russia were to reduce launch costs and increase reliability (which they are suceeding at), the US can short-circuit that effort by simply sanctioning them and preventing any satellite with US-made components from being launched on Russian rockets.  The US used that approach to kill the Chinese commercial launch industry in its cradle in the 90s when Chinese launchers were gaining market share due to their low costs.  The US will do the same to Russia as well if push comes to shove.

    Regarding the allegations of "bad management, badly put goals, wasted budgets and oportunities" how exactly are Roskosmos underperforming in comparison to say, the ESA? The Eurotrash have a much higher budget than Roskosmos, yet they can't launch humans into space, only have one cosmodrome (Kourou), aren't working on their own advanced transport (no Euro equivalent of Orel), aren't planning their own SHLV, etc etc.  Compared to how much money ESA burns, I think Roskosmos isn't doing badly.  

    They are building an entire new cosmodrome and all of the assorted infrastructure to support the new enterprise (its a HUGE project), including an Angara pad (and then Amur if reports are tue).
    They are building an entirely new rocket-manufacturing facility in Omsk for Angara with all-new workforce, manufacturing techologies and QAQC/management structures.  
    They are operating human and cargo transport systems to LEO for support of ISS.
    They are working on building modernised Zenit as Soyuz-5 to recover the capability of a single core launch with 17T to LEO (while guaranteeing that Ukropi Zenot is dead and buried and never to rise from its grave - fuck those bastards  Very Happy ).
    They are working on development of multiple engines over a wide propellent range (kerolox, hydrolox, methalox).  
    They are working on a nuclear-powered deep-space transport system.  Shocked  Very Happy
    They are working on a series of robotic lunar probes for launches starting this year (Luna 25 in October)

    Thats a LOT of parallel developments, on a budget smaller than ESA and in an enviroment replete with strenuous efforts by the West to sanction Russian into the ground and implode her economy.

    Sure they don't have much activity in space science or planetary exploration, and thats a loss that I feel quite keenly (how I long for a return to Venus with long-lived surface stations...) but they are concentrating their resources on firstly saving their industry and national capabilities, reversing the 90s & 00s brain-drain, building modern infrastructure and new technology launch systems.  Once these investments bear fruit then their attention will turn to science and applications. You don't think they are building all of this just to create a few jobs do you?


    Last edited by Big_Gazza on Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:18 am; edited 1 time in total

    kvs and Backman like this post

    Backman
    Backman


    Posts : 1084
    Points : 1090
    Join date : 2020-11-11

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Backman Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:08 am

    Does the 3rd place in launches include the Soyuz rocket in French Guinea ? It probably should. That's a Soyuz system and Roscosmos probably makes some money servicing it
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3430
    Points : 3428
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:25 am

    Backman wrote:Does the 3rd place in launches include the Soyuz rocket in French Guinea ? It probably should. That's a Soyuz system and Roscosmos probably makes some money servicing it

    Russian launches in 2020:

    Baiknour - 7
    Plesetsk - 7
    Vostochny -1
    Kourou (ESA) - 2

    total: 17

    IMHO the ESA Soyuz launches should be included in Russian tally as Chinese and US numbers are bolstered by private microlight launchers, eg Rocketlab for US even though they launch from New Zealand. Its a Russian built rocket launched by Russian specialists on foreign soil. It relies on Russian capabilities, so should count towards the yearly tally.

    2020 launches only had 3 commerical contracts (all for OneWeb), and a bunch of microsats launch-sharing with Gonets 27-29 in September out of Plesetsk.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 12209
    Points : 12269
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  PapaDragon Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:36 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Backman wrote:Does the 3rd place in launches include the Soyuz rocket in French Guinea ? It probably should. That's a Soyuz system and Roscosmos probably makes some money servicing it

    Russian launches in 2020:

    Baiknour - 7
    Plesetsk - 7
    Vostochny -1
    Kourou (ESA) - 2

    total: 17

    IMHO the ESA Soyuz launches should be included in Russian tally as Chinese and US numbers are bolstered by private microlight launchers, eg Rocketlab for US even though they launch from New Zealand. Its a Russian built rocket launched by Russian specialists on foreign soil. It relies on Russian capabilities, so should count towards the yearly tally.

    2020 launches only had 3 commerical contracts (all for OneWeb), and a bunch of microsats launch-sharing with Gonets 27-29 in September out of Plesetsk.

    As long as nothing goes boom numbers are trivial

    What matters is getting stuff in orbit

    Big_Gazza likes this post


    Sponsored content


    Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed May 25, 2022 11:48 pm