Home
Latest images
Register
Log inPapaDragon wrote:
Russian project to build moon orbiter estimated at over $33.5 million
http://tass.com/science/976140
Only $33.5M for a lunar orbiter mission? Seems very cheap.... NASA or ESA would spend that just on engineering design work.
+35
GarryB
dino00
Austin
southpark
Tsavo Lion
The-thing-next-door
higurashihougi
chinggis
slasher
Tingsay
Isos
AlfaT8
GunshipDemocracy
LMFS
Vann7
Hole
Nibiru
nomadski
Airman
BlackArrow
Cyberspec
ZoA
AMK
T-47
gaurav
George1
Rmf
Project Canada
KomissarBojanchev
Big_Gazza
miketheterrible
Singular_Transform
kvs
PapaDragon
sepheronx
39 posters
Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #2
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4882
Points : 4872
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
Only $33.5M for a lunar orbiter mission? Seems very cheap.... NASA or ESA would spend that just on engineering design work.
PapaDragon
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Big_Gazza wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
Russian project to build moon orbiter estimated at over $33.5 million
http://tass.com/science/976140
Only $33.5M for a lunar orbiter mission? Seems very cheap.... NASA or ESA would spend that just on engineering design work.
Speaking of ESA it looks like NASA SLS will be delayed until 2020 at least but that's understandable due to the fact that it's a massive project.
What is not understandable is that ESA segment of Orion capsule is also suffering significant delays as well but I guess that's what you get when you have more than dozen cooks in the kitchen....
kvs- Posts : 15839
Points : 15974
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
Big_Gazza wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
Russian project to build moon orbiter estimated at over $33.5 million
http://tass.com/science/976140
Only $33.5M for a lunar orbiter mission? Seems very cheap.... NASA or ESA would spend that just on engineering design work.
These TASS articles are full of technical errors. I doubt any configuration of the single stage Soyuz-5 would be able to lift 26 tons.
And what is the BS about 3 tons being the minimum. The minimum will be higher than the 17 tons of Zenit.
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4882
Points : 4872
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
kvs wrote:These TASS articles are full of technical errors. I doubt any configuration of the single stage Soyuz-5 would be able to lift 26 tons.
And what is the BS about 3 tons being the minimum. The minimum will be higher than the 17 tons of Zenit.
They seem to be confused between Soyuz 5 and Angara. 3T is the approx max for A1.2, while A5M will probably lift 26T. Situation normal for TASS...
Project Canada- Posts : 662
Points : 663
Join date : 2015-07-20
Location : Canada
Meteor satellite launched from Vostochny may be in wrong orbit, Roscosmos says
More:
http://tass.com/science/977772
This is what I have been worrying since yesterday, another failure
Its only 2 things, either Nato has a powerful space weapon that can cause havoc to Russian space launches, or their technical staff on Vostochny are infiltrated by spies or simply grossly incompetent in their jobs!.
Project Canada- Posts : 662
Points : 663
Join date : 2015-07-20
Location : Canada
Russia Loses Contact With Satellite
A weather satellite launched today from the Vostochny Cosmodrome in Russia's Far East has not reached its designated orbit, according to Roscosmos experts who are analysing the situation now.
Russia's Meteor-M № 2-1 weather satellite, which had been launched atop a Soyuz-2.1b carrier rocket from Vostochny Cosmodrome in the country's Far East on Tuesday, has failed to reach the target orbit, Russian State Space Corporation Roscosmos said in a press release.
"As a result of the work of the Soyuz-2.1b launch vehicle, the head section of the Fregat upper stage and the Meteor-M spacecraft were launched to a set interim orbit. However, during the first planned communication session with the spacecraft, connection could not be established due to its absence in the target orbit. Currently, the information is being analyzed," the press release read.
DETAILS TO FOLLOW
After a series of Failures for many consecutive years you'd think Roscosmos would put their crap together, But no, Nato still gets to sabotage their space program lol! ???? Stupid just stupid.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Project Canada wrote:
Meteor satellite launched from Vostochny may be in wrong orbit, Roscosmos says
More:
http://tass.com/science/977772
This is what I have been worrying since yesterday, another failure
Its only 2 things, either Nato has a powerful space weapon that can cause havoc to Russian space launches, or their technical staff on Vostochny are infiltrated by spies or simply grossly incompetent in their jobs!.
No NATO wonderweapons just good old fuckup
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Looks like whole thing is already at the bottom of the Atlantic
http://www.interfax.ru/world/589361
Better luck next month dipshits....
This is what happens when you operate spaceport with only skeleton crew. You might want to consider staffing it fully from now on. You have horde of clowns sitting idle on Baikonur in the name of good old days, consider relocating them finally.
Also, this is another reason why Russia should stay out of commercial launches, even Musk's PR team would not be able so smooth over this fuckup.
I assume there is much rejoice in many circles. They earned it I guess. Fair is fair.
kvs- Posts : 15839
Points : 15974
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
Project Canada wrote:
Russia Loses Contact With Satellite
A weather satellite launched today from the Vostochny Cosmodrome in Russia's Far East has not reached its designated orbit, according to Roscosmos experts who are analysing the situation now.
Russia's Meteor-M № 2-1 weather satellite, which had been launched atop a Soyuz-2.1b carrier rocket from Vostochny Cosmodrome in the country's Far East on Tuesday, has failed to reach the target orbit, Russian State Space Corporation Roscosmos said in a press release.
"As a result of the work of the Soyuz-2.1b launch vehicle, the head section of the Fregat upper stage and the Meteor-M spacecraft were launched to a set interim orbit. However, during the first planned communication session with the spacecraft, connection could not be established due to its absence in the target orbit. Currently, the information is being analyzed," the press release read.
DETAILS TO FOLLOW
After a series of Failures for many consecutive years you'd think Roscosmos would put their crap together, But no, Nato still gets to sabotage their space program lol! ???? Stupid just stupid.
Everyone is a critic and self-anointed expert. How do you stop a smart saboteur? Do they have the number 5 on their foreheads? All it takes to
screw up a launch is a "misplaced" rag. So all this judgmental BS about how Russia does not know what it is doing is retarded. The only way
that sabotage can be stopped is to remove humans from the equation. Robotize the whole process.
And it is quite possible for there to be remote EM jamming tech to sabotage launches, especially at the critical payload stage:
1) it is high enough in altitude to be subjected to a beam from NATO bases,
2) no shielding is included that would stop such an attack since weight saving is paramount
Basically a few dishes beaming a selection of frequencies at the same point that are prone to cause resonances in electronics and
spacecraft wiring would do the sabotage job rather well.
miketheterrible- Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06
or maybe its a genuine fuckup? Rockets explode (Musks rockets, Challenger Spacecraft), spacecrafts don't make their intended designation, etc. Unfortunately, it sounds more like oversight than it is of the rocket itself. Oh well. It is insured and they will end up launching a new one eventually again.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
miketheterrible wrote:or maybe its a genuine fuckup? Rockets explode (Musks rockets, Challenger Spacecraft), spacecrafts don't make their intended designation, etc. Unfortunately, it sounds more like oversight than it is of the rocket itself. Oh well. It is insured and they will end up launching a new one eventually again.
Or some moron screws the part upside down for whatever reason. Apparently he is smart enough to graduate in aerospace engineering but still not smart enough to tell the difference between up and down.
And how hard it is to install data transmitter on upper stage so you don't have to guess what the fuck went wrong?
As for insurance I think that it's only a matter of time before all payloads launched on Russian rockets become officially uninsurable. They probably are already but companies don't want to risk losing license.
At least they spared us the usual "we are trying to re-establish contact with vessel" bullshit (for the most part). With Fobos Grunt they ran with that crap for two whole days, this time they only did it for two hours.
Bitch when was the last time someone fixed a spacecraft by pressing buttons on the ground? Seriously asking...
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4882
Points : 4872
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
PapaDragon wrote:At least they spared us the usual "we are trying to re-establish contact with vessel" bullshit (for the most part). With Fobos Grunt they ran with that crap for two whole days, this time they only did it for two hours.
Bitch when was the last time someone fixed a spacecraft by pressing buttons on the ground? Seriously asking...
To be fair, Fobos Grunt was stuck in LEO for over 3 months between launch and eventual re-entry. If comms could be established and a new orbital departure sequence uploaded, the mission could have been saved, but unfortunately, the point of failure in the sequence meant the X-band receiver was not deployed.
A good example of a misbehaving satellite being saved is the Persona 2 spysat. It developed problems, but these were fixed by software patches from ground control.
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4882
Points : 4872
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
If this failure is really due to faulty sequence coding in the Fregat U/S, its is an appalling occurrence and completely indefensible. 
It would say a lot about the QA/QC at Lavochkin... 
I would hope that Lavochkin has procedures in place to check & confirm sequence coding? Generate the code specific for the mission, then test in a certified simulator environment, then ensure that the CRC checksums of the approved code file(s) are included in flight preparation procedures and checked prior to launch. If done properly there should be zero chance of error.
Unless the code preparation is secure and water-tight, it will always be an Achilles heel as software is always ephemeral and can't be seen... If it is incorrect due to either incompetence, lack of testing, or deliberate sabotage (*) its difficult to detect without confirming its checksum version.
(*) sabotage can't be fully dismissed, as Russian space industry workers aren't well paid, and if nefarious 5th columnists with bags of money want to disrupt the industry, they will undoubtedly find willing pairs of hands if the coin is right.
Fingers crossed for Kanopus-V 3 & 4 launches next month.... providing they don't delay to investigate Fregat failure
It would say a lot about the QA/QC at Lavochkin... I would hope that Lavochkin has procedures in place to check & confirm sequence coding? Generate the code specific for the mission, then test in a certified simulator environment, then ensure that the CRC checksums of the approved code file(s) are included in flight preparation procedures and checked prior to launch. If done properly there should be zero chance of error.
Unless the code preparation is secure and water-tight, it will always be an Achilles heel as software is always ephemeral and can't be seen... If it is incorrect due to either incompetence, lack of testing, or deliberate sabotage (*) its difficult to detect without confirming its checksum version.
(*) sabotage can't be fully dismissed, as Russian space industry workers aren't well paid, and if nefarious 5th columnists with bags of money want to disrupt the industry, they will undoubtedly find willing pairs of hands if the coin is right.
Fingers crossed for Kanopus-V 3 & 4 launches next month.... providing they don't delay to investigate Fregat failure
miketheterrible- Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06
- Post n°339
Re: Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #2
miketheterrible Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:19 am
a lot of assumptions floating around but lets see what we can gather for facts
- Proclaims from above that these people are low paid. Does anyone have official numbers of how much these workers get paid?
- What exactly failed? It failed to reach its intended target, failure was the upper stage. This isn't first time this has happened. Not just Russia either.
- Was this satellite of strategic value? No it wasn't. It was a meteorological satellite. Not first for Russia either. So sabotage makes little sense
- Soyuz is now getting more work because lack of Proton launches due to its failure. Possibly QC issue then.
- Insurance always exist for this stuff. Insurance companies would actually strive for these contracts cause they earn a lot. Of all failures vs success, especially on Soyuz, most of them are probably pushing each other for it. Proton may have been a different case.
I think you guys are getting worked up over nothing.
- Proclaims from above that these people are low paid. Does anyone have official numbers of how much these workers get paid?
- What exactly failed? It failed to reach its intended target, failure was the upper stage. This isn't first time this has happened. Not just Russia either.
- Was this satellite of strategic value? No it wasn't. It was a meteorological satellite. Not first for Russia either. So sabotage makes little sense
- Soyuz is now getting more work because lack of Proton launches due to its failure. Possibly QC issue then.
- Insurance always exist for this stuff. Insurance companies would actually strive for these contracts cause they earn a lot. Of all failures vs success, especially on Soyuz, most of them are probably pushing each other for it. Proton may have been a different case.
I think you guys are getting worked up over nothing.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
miketheterrible wrote:a lot of assumptions floating around but lets see what we can gather for facts
- Proclaims from above that these people are low paid. Does anyone have official numbers of how much these workers get paid?
.........
If failure was due to human error by employees who are not sufficiently paid and they can't identify specific guilty party then best course of action is to lower the income of all employees involved until financial loses are recuperated.
If this situation repeats then these incompetent employees should be let go and replaced with more competent ones who would be motivated to accept the job by offer of much larger income than their predecessors.
Incompetence cannot be tolerated.
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4882
Points : 4872
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
Looks like the cause was human error, with Fregat not properly configured for a launch from Vostochny. Un-fucking-believable.....
A navigational error doomed Vostochny launch
By November 29, specialists at NPO Lavochkin, which builds Fregat, had already narrowed down the most likely culprit in the failure of the Soyuz launch from Vostochny spaceport, industry sources close to investigation told RussianSpaceWeb.com
Although the information is still preliminary, it is increasingly clear that all the hardware aboard the Fregat upper stage performed as planned. But, almost unbelievably, the flight control system on the Fregat did not have the correct settings for the mission originating from the new launch site in Vostochny, as apposed to routine launches from Baikonur and Plesetsk. As a result, as soon as Fregat and its cargo separated from the third stage of the launch vehicle, its flight control system began commanding a change of orientation of the stack to compensate for what the computer had perceived as a deviation from the correct attitude, which was considerable. As a result, when the Fregat began its first preprogrammed main engine firing, the vehicle was apparently still changing its attitude, which led to a maneuvering in a wrong direction.
At the time, ground control was still receiving telemetry from the mission, but the space tug left the communications range around 7o0 seconds after the liftoff and before the completion of the first maneuver. Apparently, it was not immediately possible to predict the exact trajectory of the stage resulting from the wrong attitude, but it likely led to a suicidal plunge of the stack into the Earth's atmosphere. The available telemetry also allows to establish the exact culprit in the failure, sources said.
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/meteor-m2-1.html#culprit
A navigational error doomed Vostochny launch
By November 29, specialists at NPO Lavochkin, which builds Fregat, had already narrowed down the most likely culprit in the failure of the Soyuz launch from Vostochny spaceport, industry sources close to investigation told RussianSpaceWeb.com
Although the information is still preliminary, it is increasingly clear that all the hardware aboard the Fregat upper stage performed as planned. But, almost unbelievably, the flight control system on the Fregat did not have the correct settings for the mission originating from the new launch site in Vostochny, as apposed to routine launches from Baikonur and Plesetsk. As a result, as soon as Fregat and its cargo separated from the third stage of the launch vehicle, its flight control system began commanding a change of orientation of the stack to compensate for what the computer had perceived as a deviation from the correct attitude, which was considerable. As a result, when the Fregat began its first preprogrammed main engine firing, the vehicle was apparently still changing its attitude, which led to a maneuvering in a wrong direction.
At the time, ground control was still receiving telemetry from the mission, but the space tug left the communications range around 7o0 seconds after the liftoff and before the completion of the first maneuver. Apparently, it was not immediately possible to predict the exact trajectory of the stage resulting from the wrong attitude, but it likely led to a suicidal plunge of the stack into the Earth's atmosphere. The available telemetry also allows to establish the exact culprit in the failure, sources said.
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/meteor-m2-1.html#culprit
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Big_Gazza wrote:Looks like the cause was human error, with Fregat not properly configured for a launch from Vostochny. Un-fucking-believable.....
A navigational error doomed Vostochny launch........... But, almost unbelievably, the flight control system on the Fregat did not have the correct settings for the mission originating from the new launch site in Vostochny, as apposed to routine launches from Baikonur and Plesetsk. .................
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/meteor-m2-1.html#culprit
Find that degenerate moron responsible, fire his dumb retarded ass and send him a bill for this fuckup.
His entire personal property and internal organs could at least cover the fuel costs.
And move entire launch roster from that shithole Baikonur to Vostochnii ASAP!!!
Forget that that Kazakh shithole ever existed, it's been causing nothing but problems for years...
Project Canada- Posts : 662
Points : 663
Join date : 2015-07-20
Location : Canada
I highly doubt this is about gross negligence, You dont make mistakes on almost a regular basis. This is a sabotage, NATO 5th columnists have infiltrated Roscosmos and the FSB needs to wipe the slate clean asap.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Project Canada wrote:I highly doubt this is about gross negligence, You dont make mistakes on almost a regular basis. This is a sabotage, NATO 5th columnists have infiltrated Roscosmos and the FSB needs to wipe the slate clean asap.
It's exactly gross negligence.
NATO doesn't need 5th columnist in Roscosmos, it's cheaper to just wait for Roskosmos to inevitably do their job for them by fucking up.
Besides, why would they even bother with some two bit weather satellite?
kvs- Posts : 15839
Points : 15974
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
PapaDragon wrote:Project Canada wrote:I highly doubt this is about gross negligence, You dont make mistakes on almost a regular basis. This is a sabotage, NATO 5th columnists have infiltrated Roscosmos and the FSB needs to wipe the slate clean asap.
It's exactly gross negligence.
NATO doesn't need 5th columnist in Roscosmos, it's cheaper to just wait for Roskosmos to inevitably do their job for them by fucking up.
Besides, why would they even bother with some two bit weather satellite?
Do you really think that the workers involved have such contempt for their jobs that they would miss this critical technical aspect?
You clearly do not know anything about working in an engineering/science environment. There would have been a specific task created
to adjust the launch origin parameters and people assigned to changing the software since it is, like, as important as having functional
rocket engines. They test rocket engines but don't account for launch geometry? Take a hike.
This is a clear case of sabotage since the correct launch software was replaced with an old version. It would only seem like a likely
"mistake" for the average media consumer sap.
The negligence would be not having 24/7 video surveillance of all the terminals with access to onboard computers. This would have
caught the perp 100% and, in fact, would likely prevented this sabotage ploy in the first place.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
kvs wrote:PapaDragon wrote:Project Canada wrote:I highly doubt this is about gross negligence, You dont make mistakes on almost a regular basis. This is a sabotage, NATO 5th columnists have infiltrated Roscosmos and the FSB needs to wipe the slate clean asap.
It's exactly gross negligence.
NATO doesn't need 5th columnist in Roscosmos, it's cheaper to just wait for Roskosmos to inevitably do their job for them by fucking up.
Besides, why would they even bother with some two bit weather satellite?
Do you really think that the workers involved have such contempt for their jobs that they would miss this critical technical aspect?
You clearly do not know anything about working in an engineering/science environment. There would have been a specific task created
to adjust the launch origin parameters and people assigned to changing the software since it is, like, as important as having functional
rocket engines. They test rocket engines but don't account for launch geometry? Take a hike.
This is a clear case of sabotage since the correct launch software was replaced with an old version. It would only seem like a likely
"mistake" for the average media consumer sap.
The negligence would be not having 24/7 video surveillance of all the terminals with access to onboard computers. This would have
caught the perp 100% and, in fact, would likely prevented this sabotage ploy in the first place.
Since you are are from Canada I will assume that you are unfamiliar with finer points of East European work discipline so I need to inform you that this is precisely the type of fuckup one would expect to find in these parts.
Roskosmos is comprised of both dedicated employees and dipshits who have not yet been fired due to combination of factors. Latter type needs to be excised because those are the ones who have such contempt for their jobs and are phoning it in until they retire.
Personally I am not surprised at all at the cause of the crash, it fits perfectly with the well known pattern. Solution is to get rid of incompetent dipshits. Simple.
Anyone who thinks that this is some sabotage is just butthurt fanboy. There are more important things to sabotage than this crap.
AMK- Posts : 6
Points : 6
Join date : 2016-01-23
Location : Bulgaria
PapaDragon wrote:
Anyone who thinks that this is some sabotage is just butthurt fanboy. There are more important things to sabotage than this crap.
I mostly share your opinion on this. But on the other hand, yeah, there are much more important things to sabotage out there, but what if there are preconditions which make sabotaging Roscosmos particularly easy? So why not, what is stopping "them"? Just thinking out loud here...
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
AMK wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
Anyone who thinks that this is some sabotage is just butthurt fanboy. There are more important things to sabotage than this crap.
I mostly share your opinion on this. But on the other hand, yeah, there are much more important things to sabotage out there, but what if there are preconditions which make sabotaging Roscosmos particularly easy? So why not, what is stopping "them"? Just thinking out loud here...
Blaming these crashes on some phantom American sabotage is space equivalent of blaming Russian hackers for Hilary Clinton's election defeat.
It's retarded.
kvs- Posts : 15839
Points : 15974
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
PapaDragon wrote:AMK wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
Anyone who thinks that this is some sabotage is just butthurt fanboy. There are more important things to sabotage than this crap.
I mostly share your opinion on this. But on the other hand, yeah, there are much more important things to sabotage out there, but what if there are preconditions which make sabotaging Roscosmos particularly easy? So why not, what is stopping "them"? Just thinking out loud here...
Blaming these crashes on some phantom American sabotage is space equivalent of blaming Russian hackers for Hilary Clinton's election defeat.
It's retarded.
Proof by assertion. Got ya. We should all bow in your presence to your infinite knowledge.
Bugger off.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13463
Points : 13503
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
kvs wrote:PapaDragon wrote:AMK wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
Anyone who thinks that this is some sabotage is just butthurt fanboy. There are more important things to sabotage than this crap.
I mostly share your opinion on this. But on the other hand, yeah, there are much more important things to sabotage out there, but what if there are preconditions which make sabotaging Roscosmos particularly easy? So why not, what is stopping "them"? Just thinking out loud here...
Blaming these crashes on some phantom American sabotage is space equivalent of blaming Russian hackers for Hilary Clinton's election defeat.
It's retarded.
Proof by assertion. Got ya. We should all bow in your presence to your infinite knowledge.
Bugger off.
Fine, then how about you prove your conspiracy fantasies?
Oh that's right, you can't because you ain't got shit. So sad....