Russian Space Program: News & Discussion #2

PapaDragon wrote:Awkward questions about federal subsidies will go away if he gets into defence budget like Boeing or Lockheed.

But now awkward questions will remain for some time. And federal subsidies are only thing keeping him in business, not just SpaceX but also Tesla and Solar City.

I find it absurd that US taxpayers are supplying the capital for the development of SpaceX technology and infrastructure, yet their "investment" gains them zero equity. Poor little taxpayer sheep, being fleeced for the benefit of private industrialists....

PapaDragon wrote:
I am glad it's this particular payload that got trashed. (Zuma spy satellite)

Elon (as his cultists like to call him) has been trying to get onto Pentagon's gravy train since he started this little adventure. Commercial launches alongside asteroid mining fantasies and single launch Mars mission fairytales are just sales pitch and distraction for the real goal: getting permanently attached to DoD budget.

Awkward questions about federal subsidies will go away if he gets into defence budget like Boeing or Lockheed.

But now awkward questions will remain for some time. And federal subsidies are only thing keeping him in business, not just SpaceX but also Tesla and Solar City.

I find it absurd that US taxpayers are supplying the capital for the development of SpaceX technology and infrastructure, yet their "investment" gains them zero equity. Poor little taxpayer sheep, being fleeced for the benefit of private industrialists... wrote:

The satellite launch service provided by SpaceX cost around 110 million $ if I recall - the Zuma spy satellite was supplied by Northrop-Grumman and cost one around one billion dollars - so who exactly is on the gravy train? All the major American aerospace companies rely heavily on government contracts - same goes for companies in other countries, including Russia.

BlackArrow wrote:

The satellite launch service provided by SpaceX cost around 110 million $ if I recall - the Zuma spy satellite was supplied by Northrop-Grumman and cost one around one billion dollars - so who exactly is on the gravy train? All the major American aerospace companies rely heavily on government contracts - same goes for companies in other countries, including Russia.

Northrop Grumman received the amount of money stipulated in the contact, no more no less

SpaceX received federal subsidies that they used to present price they charge for launch as lower than it is in reality

One company provides expensive product, other is using connections in the government and false advertising to achieve unfair advantage and defraud customer

Care to guess which is which?

PapaDragon wrote:

BlackArrow wrote:

The satellite launch service provided by SpaceX cost around 110 million $ if I recall - the Zuma spy satellite was supplied by Northrop-Grumman and cost one around one billion dollars - so who exactly is on the gravy train? All the major American aerospace companies rely heavily on government contracts - same goes for companies in other countries, including Russia.

Northrop Grumman received the amount of money stipulated in the contact, no more no less

SpaceX received federal subsidies that they used to present price they charge for launch as lower than it is in reality

One company provides expensive product, other is using connections in the government and false advertising to achieve unfair advantage and defraud customer

Care to guess which is which?

More than that, SpaceX has received federal funds (ie the taxpayers money) to develop their technology. Why don't the taxpayer have a share of the companies equity? Any private investor would.

The launch of SpaceX by American secret satellite Zuma ended in failure

tit for tat

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3041829.html

Better quality:








Lunar lander module is to be permanently docked to Deep Space Gateway station and used multiple times for lunar landings​ instead of being single use. This will reduce number of launches required for lunar landing missions fro 3 down to 2:

kvs wrote:.......................
The Angara 150 envisioned a large diameter core and upper stages.    I think this is the correct approach.  

And one that Krunichev never tried to pursue nor believed in being corrupt parasites that they are. No prizes for second place, Energia took this cake.  

kvs wrote:.....There is not much value in an 88 ton configuration when a 150 ton configuration can be developed.   Looking at these diagrams there would be a cost saving in terms of fuel and metal going with a 150 ton configuration instead of two 88 ton variants for some LEO assembly project.  

I think they learned their lesson from Energia/Buran project. They spent huge amounts of time and effort and created a masterpiece only for politicians to flush it all down the toilet.  

They are playing it safe now, canceling heavy rocket is much easier than medium one.

PapaDragon wrote:They are playing it safe now, canceling heavy rocket is much easier than medium one.

Yep, excellent point. With Soyuz-5 being a replacement for Ukropi Zenit, the vehicle will become a priority political project and will have support from multiple sectors including the military. As its future is secure, it makes eminent sense to base a SHLV on clusters of this booster. Trying to build a new design 5-6m core that can only be used on infrequent SHLVs will make it an easy target for cancellation in any future budget crunch.

Russia needs to keep their plans modest, and keep them smart. Leverage their existing tech, systems, manufacturing and personnel, and avoid all-new mega projects wherever possible. However, this is easy to say, but not to implement...

Soyuz-5 's primary launch site would be Vostochny right?? cause Wikipedia says its Baikonur and it doesn't make sense to me at all.

kvs wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:They are playing it safe now, canceling heavy rocket is much easier than medium one.

Yep, excellent point.  With Soyuz-5 being a replacement for Ukropi Zenit, the vehicle will become a priority political project and will have support from multiple sectors including the military.  As its future is secure, it makes eminent sense to base a SHLV on clusters of this booster.  Trying to build a new design 5-6m core that can only be used on infrequent SHLVs will make it an easy target for cancellation in any future budget crunch.

Russia needs to keep their plans modest, and keep them smart.  Leverage their existing tech, systems, manufacturing and personnel, and avoid all-new mega projects wherever possible.  However, this is easy to say, but not to implement...

The wrinkle in this think is that 100 ton class launchers are boutique by definition.   They will never have any volume.   This
justifies building them from modular components taken from volume production, but cannot justify compromised designs
that waste those resources.  

My point was to add an additional booster stage (seven instead of six as in the 88 ton version) and to replace the core of the
seven element first stage cluster with a custom wide diameter variant.    This core booster is the only boutique item and
its expense would not be that great since it would be the shell that gets changed while it retains the same four-nozzle
RD-171M engine.    I cannot believe that Russia is unable to afford a metal hull customization.   In fact, the 115 ton SHLV
variant has all the upper stages being custom jobs anyway.   So there really is nothing to discuss.

The benefit of clustering the first stage is that one gets a faster fuel burn which makes the whole launch process more efficient.
The most efficient is to use a gigantic cannon to fire a shell (payload) into orbit.   Of course, this is nonsensical since the
acceleration forces would damage the payload.   For the SHLV top loading with wider upper stage cores is not as efficient
as increasing the capacity of the first (clustered) stage.

The suggested approach would increase the thrust of the first stage by up to 8/6 = 1.333... or 33%.  But even a more
modest 25% increase is a big deal.    If development costs are so traumatic, then use two standard boosters for the core
instead of one custom one.   This would give a rectangular cross section instead of a circular one, but that is not an issue.

Actually i don't disagree with you, so I happily concede the point My position is that the initial 80T+ class SHLV build should use medium-lift Soyuz-5 modules exclusively (plus a suitable u/s) and get the hardware designed & built & tested, launch facilities constructed, and get 'er flying. Once up and running, the engine upgrades, hydrolox u/s and expanded core can be evolutionary upgrades once a need has been demonstrated for the additional payload capability. There is not much point developing a 110T or 160T class lifter if you have no payloads for it.

Lets start modest, and then build the system progressively over time. Modest steps but with support facilities (ie launch pad) designed from scratch to be flexible and upgradeable/reconfigurable for larger stacks.

Project Canada wrote:
Soyuz-5 's primary launch site would be Vostochny right?? cause Wikipedia says its Baikonur and it doesn't make sense to me at all.

Baikonour has a functioning Zenit pad which can be upgraded with (relatively) minimal cost & effort.  It also leverages on current manned operations, and the vast Kazakh steppes allows for more abort/recovery options compared to Vostochny.  Its a good option to introduce initial Soyuz-5 build and the 1st versions of the new Federation manned capsule.  It allows a more permissive environment to test Federation and start manned operations.

Future operations would be shared with Vostochny once the SHLV pad(s) are ready (which will be designed to be compatible with Soyuz-5 LEO manned stack).

Some nice geopolitical advantages are that:

(1) it prevents the Zenit pad from being able to continue launching Zenit, thereby restricting the demand for this Ukropistani launcher.  Don't feed the Banderite-controlled Ukropi MIC.
(2) it keeps the Kazakhs sweet and gives them more reasons to maintain a working relationship with Russia. Demonstrate that Russia is prepared to continue using Baikonour, but that if the Kazahks play hardball and try to fuck Russia over, Moscow can ultimately pull the plug and watch the vast Cosmodrome return to the desert (its not like anyone else will offer to use and maintain the facilities).

There is one thing about Russian launch vehicle inventory that I forgot to mention:

Reason why the have duplicate rocket systems in light and medium segment is because Russian Military insists on always having more than one type of rocket available in segments that they use (light and medium in this case) and they had them due to various leftover platforms from Soviet era.

But with those systems being retired they wanted new ones developed.  

So that is why they have Soyuz 2.1 and Angara 1.2 in light class and Proton and Angara 5 in medium class.  

Of course now that Proton is to be retired as well they want additional vehicle to supplement Angara 5 so that was decisive impetus for Soyuz 5 project.

Soon it's going to be Soyuz 2.1 and Angara 1.2 for light and Soyuz 5 and Angara 5 for medium class. Basically Angara will be playing substitute for both classes.

KANOPUS-B No. 3 AND No. 4 launched successfully from Vostochny

https://www.roscosmos.ru/24634/

ROSKOSMOS. SPACE APPLIANCES " ARE REDUCED FOR DESIGN ORBITS
02/01/2018 06:51
On February 1, 2018, one hour after the start of the Soyuz-2.1a launch vehicle, the Fregat upper stage brought the main payload - the space probes of the Earth's remote sensing "Canopus-B" No. 3 and No. 4 to the calculated orbits. Separation of space vehicles passed regularly at 6:06 Moscow time and 6:12 Moscow time on the solar-synchronous circum-circular orbits.

After the separation of the spacecraft "Kanopus-V" No. 3 and 4 from the upper stage, the specialists of the Main Operational Control Group at the Mission Control Center (MCC) began to control their flight. In the near future, the satellites will begin to work as part of the space complex "Kanopus-V" in conjunction with the already launched into the orbit of the spacecraft "Canopus-B" No. 1 and spacecraft "Canopus-V-IC".

Meanwhile, the "Fregat" upper stage continues to fulfill the flight task of the launch campaign. He will deliver to the target orbits nine American and German small spacecraft S-Net, Lemur and D-Star One, launched as a passing payload under the contracts of OAO Glavkosmos. Separation of small space vehicles is scheduled from 07:33 Moscow time to 07:50 Moscow time.

Russian expert proposes nationwide voluntary ‘space fund’ for moon exploration

A former senior executive of Russia’s United Rocket and Space Corporation has proposed to introduce a voluntary payment that would allow a fully independent national moon program as well as a new orbital research station.
The author of the proposal, Valentin Uvarov, is now an independent expert in the sphere of space research, but in 2014-2016 was head of the Directorate of Manned Space Complexes at the United Rocket and Space Corporation. In 2016-2017, Uvarov headed the Department of Commercial Projects in Manned Space Research at the same corporation.

Read more
roscosmos.ruRussian moon base to be built by 2050 – Energia
In his open letter, published by the Izvestia daily, Uvarov wrote that according to his calculations the implementation of both the moon program and the new orbiting research station would cost the Russian budget about $38 billion or 2.13 trillion rubles. He then proposes to split to overall sum into 100 million parts (a very rough estimation of economically active people in the Russian Federation) and then introduce a schedule of equal monthly payments over the 15-year period. The result is a relatively modest 120 rubles per person per month or about $2.15.

The expert argues that while small, the new “space fund” could provoke a negative reaction from citizens if it were imposed upon them. However, he theorizes that if the contribution into the national space program is made on a strictly voluntary basis the project could boost national morale and unity.

According to Uvarov’s preliminary proposal, the Russian authorities must set up a separate foundation for collecting donations for the national space program. All money transfers within the fund must be completely transparent and the overall sum collected must be published on the internet in real time.

https://www.rt.com/politics/417908-russian-expert-proposes-nationwide-voluntary/


That is a good idea... for Russian citizens to invest on their nation space program.. But an ever better idea
will be to sack their monkey President from power and replace him for someone who truly have ambitions to take
Russia into outmatch US and anyone else in everything in space. A president that do not waste Russia budget in
Good for nothing sports and olympics or gloryfying the soviet past victories or financing grandmas in other countries ,veterans from world war 2.  According to him a new Moon landing project and orbital station will cost $38 billions to Russia budget.. this is way cheaper than the 51$ that Putin the "Genius" spent in Sochi olympics..  If Russians had
a true leader with ambitions ,that knew how important is for Russia to compete with the most developed countries,
then Already Russia will have surpassed Not only United States achievements and missions in space ,but also Soviets era too. that were trying hard to get a Rocket for humans to land in the moon , and even build a space shuttle who flew.  If people think about it.. Russia lame performance in space is consequence of Putin's idiocy of reducing by 50%
their space program and his addiction to sports.  With the $51 billions than Putin wasted in Sochi.. and the $11 billions in FIFA 2018.. and the super train to China that Putin Agree to build costing $250billions..  we have how much money throw a way by the President in completely less important things ?   Thats about $312 billions !!!!! that could have been used.. for not only a moon manned landing but also a mars manned landing with Russia own space station ,and a base on the moon.. but also a brand new space shuttle , for civilian and military purposes. With that amount money Putin could have created a modern space industrial revolution in Russia.  But the Simian President prefer to promote
meaningless and in activities to celebrate Russia Past glory.  about how heroic they were.  

There are many ways to promote National Unity ,patriotism and boost the morale of your citizens.
and Sports is the LAMEST way to do it. because Sports in reality a competition in a meaningless physical activity
that in no way will help make their country better other than entertain for a few hours people while watching TV.
The best way to promote nation unity is transforming Russia Economy into modern one ,leading the world into the
future and creating with closest BRICS allies an alternative Business world to the west one ,that is as good if not better.

Is indeed Sad ,that citizens in Russia now have to collect money among civilians , in order to promote a really
ambitious space program and not have to deal with a President out of touch with reality , and his Inaction
in moving faster in their Space program. Is kind of amazing ,that ~50 years laters ,Russia is so behind of the
ambitious program soviets had in space. Soviets were landing in Venus and mars and moon with probes and Rovers..
and build a space shuttle that flew and if that wasn't impressive enough ,they were testing /developing a rocket to the moon for man landing.. So what is Putin doing today?   Busy , fighting Americans with words while being slapped in the face , and complaining that the World is not fair for Russia.    Instead of doing something and compete.

When will Russia restore the legenda system?

Soyuz 2.1 .... more of the same Taxi light rocket to the ISS..

Looks how Americans use their business leadership as a weapon to influence
the social masses.. every launch of SPACEX is turned into a major event.. as if they
were heading to land again in the moon with Astronauts..



Hope Putin have fun with FIFA.. celebrating "sports unity" of nations while
Americans is stealing the show in space.


Someone have to explain Putin what leadership is , and that being second best is not enough.
Why is Putin allowing Americans to do outmatch them in space ? Now SpaceX have the
world most powerful rocket. Good job MR Putin.  

Many comments of people saying.. oh poor Russia , no longer NASA Will
need your rockets..

at the rate Russia is doing in Space ,probably will end as the third or 4th best in space..
since China have a much more ambitious space program than Russia. they landing in the moon
already .. So SpaceX ,NASA,China and in the last place Russia . Amazing  .  

Vann, You always complain about something. You always blame Putin about the Russian Space Program. Why don't you blame soviet-era leaders? In the late 1960s, the Soviet Union were able to compete with America in space race. The Soviet Union planned to send the first human to the Moon in 1968 but N1 Rocket Project became disaster after Sergei Korolev's death. Several N1's exploded at Launch Pad and destroyed everything close to it.

Also SpaceX is a private company, not a State-owned company like NASA or Roscosmos. Even NASA doesn't have such rockets like Falcon 9, Which is Reusable rocket.

Falcon Heavy isn't world most powerful rocket. N1 Rocket produced 45,400 kN Thrust at First Stage.

Musk has built a 50T to LEO class lifter, but there are no payloads for it....  F9H is an impressive vehicle, but I fear its a rocket to nowhere.  US manned lunar or deep space missions (if they ever fly) won't be using F9H.  The ISS has a decade left it it, and the US isn't planning any more heavy station modules.  No-one is going to use it launch geostationary commsats as smaller launcher will do, and attempting to launch more than 2 birds with a F9H would present significant multi-payload integration issues.

Sending a Tesla roadster and a mannikin in a "spacesuit" to the general vicinity of Mars?  Its a fun stunt, and a novel PR exercise, but ultimately pointless.

BTW Vann, if Russia did have a 100T class launcher currently available, what would they use it for?  The Russian Soyuz-V based SHLV may not fly for another 9-10 years, but the lunar Federation crewed vehicle won't be ready until then, so the timescale isn't an issue in my book.  Russia has a lot more important priorities... you know the sort of strategic achievements that drive the US Ruling Class cunts wild with impotent rage as their full-spectrum dominance fades away day by day.

if Russia did have a 100T class launcher currently available, what would they use it for?

Launching 5 Glonass satellites at once plus launching bundles of legendas.

lol

KomissarBojanchev wrote:

if Russia did have a 100T class launcher currently available, what would they use it for?

Launching 5 Glonass satellites at once plus launching bundles of legendas.

Launching 5 standard size satellites still doesn't justify price-tag of superheavy rocket. Cheaper to just use couple of medium rockets.

Only way for superheavy to make sense is launching massive payloads and those are still not not around.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:

if Russia did have a 100T class launcher currently available, what would they use it for?

Launching 5 Glonass satellites at once plus launching bundles of legendas.

When would Russia need to launch 5x Glonass simultaneously?  

Ever hear the phrase "putting too many eggs in one basket"?  Remember what happened in 2013 with a Proton failure which resulted in the loss of 3x Uragan-M?

It makes no sense to spend billions so that you can attempt with 1 rocket what you routinely do with 2-3.

You don't need a SHLV unless you are launching unusually massive space station modules, heavy lunar manned craft, or manned mars missions.  Russia won't be doing these until the late 2020s or early 2030s, and truth be told, neither will Uncle Scam.  Musk isn't going to be funding any worthwhile missions to Mars, despite the endless fan-boi hoop-la and self-promotional vanity projects.  Red Dragon?  Don't make me laugh...  NASA won't be granted the funds for similar ventures anytime soon, and they are more interested in space science in any case (which is the real pay-off. and is where NASA truly excels like no-one else can).

In short, a SHLV is a necessary tool, but lets not kid ourselves that it will fly regularly or be a "game-changer"  (How the Muskians love that phrase...).  Russia needs to focus on what matters.  Complete the Angara manufacturing complex and build a Vostochny launch facility so that they can entertain commercial launches and finally retire Proton (can't do that from a military Cosmodrome in the far North), get Soyuz-5 and Federation flying from Baikonour, then Vostochny.  A few space science missions such as the lunar robots being prepped for 2019-22 launches are also a priority.  In my (practical) mind, the successful launch of Luna 25/26/27 is far more important than debut of a heavy launcher with a PR payload with zero science returns.