Military Review

RD-180. About rocket streams of lies

255
I don’t know if anyone noticed or not, but we had another event like “bloody gebni” with mass executions of visitors. From visiting the site was denied to several readers at once who had embarked on the path of spitting on everything they could reach. Half - under the American flag.


But not in the flag of the case, and from among the owners of the Russian tricolor there was a certain amount of fiercely plus.

It was, as the name implies, about the RD-180 engine. And about the little article of intelligent Andrei Shipilov, who, in his libel, posted by former readers in the comments, told the “truth” about this engine.

Well, let's go and dot the Latin letter. To make it clear why "the people suffered."

So, the RD-180 rocket engine - whose is it? Russian or American?

If by Shipilov, then American.

“The times in Russia were hard, I had to dump. But most importantly, Energomash had a good start. In order to get the engine with the necessary characteristics of the Americans, it was only necessary to “halve” the existing engine from the Energia rocket, to make instead of four cameras only two.

As a result, “Energomash” “developed” the necessary engine, which was named RD-180, transferred all rights and all documentation for its production to the Americans, and those, in accordance with the terms of the tender, placed the production of the engine in Russia at Energomash plants, because there there was all the necessary technological equipment. "


As is well known, the best lie is where there is a piece of truth. So is Shipilov, who is ready to do anything, just to spit in the direction of Russia.

"So all American Atlas 5s now have the first stage equipped with the Pratt & Whitney RD-180 engine, which is assembled in Russia."

Let's start with the fact that in order to comply with US legislation, the RD-180 joint manufacturer is indeed considered to be Pratt & Whitney. Shipilov deliberately omitted the word "joint", and I underlined it.

Engine manufacturer - NPO Energomash. And "Pratt & Whitney" does not stand in any way here, since 100% of the engine is assembled in Russia and from Russian materials.

The sale of the RD-180 was carried out by a joint venture between Pratt & Whitney and NPO Energomash, called JV RD-Amros (RD-AMROSS). Sale.

Purchase and installation were made by the United Launch Alliance. This is Boeing + Lockheed. And yes, ULA has the exclusive right to install RD-180 in the USA.

As for the “transfer of all rights and all documentation,” which, according to Shipilov, make the RD-180 an American engine, which is only being assembled in Russia.

We dealt with the rights: РД-180 is an export version, which was created for Atlas and can be operated only on it with the participation of the ULA alliance.

Technical documentation has indeed been transferred. But not because it was “in a hurry for USAE”. As part of the production license valid before 2030, the Americans had every right to release this engine in their country. But they could not.

And this is not the price. Although the price too. The point is in the standards (there is probably no need to explain the difference) in force in countries. Even the threads are different. The point is in the materials.

All these arguments in favor of the poor about the fact that "in the US there is everything, just to buy in poor Russia is cheaper," is overboard. A dollar bet is a good move, I don’t argue. However, why then, despite McCain’s howls and the senator’s demands, urgently send RD-180 to the landfill stories and equip the rocket "their" engines did not work?

And there is nothing. And the point.

And 21 has already passed a year since the moment of the conclusion of the contract, but they have not yet created their own LRE in the USA. Still unprofitable? Even with all the documentation?

Or maybe because, in accordance with the Soviet canons, we make rocket technology all over the country? Yes, a complete assembly is made at NPO Energomash. And the combustion chambers are supplied from Samara, special steel comes from Chelyabinsk.

Is Samara in Oklahoma? Is Chelyabinsk in Idaho? And this is also a Pratt & Whitney company? Apparently not. And this is the very stone that prevented the Americans from simply starting to make the RD-180 themselves.

Those who hate our country will, of course, begin to speak on the topic that "everyone can do there, they just don’t want to." Even as they want. But they can not. The Chinese would also be happy to sell their copies of the Sushka, and they would buy them from them. But the turbines could not be a mess.

It's all the same here.

The Americans have their own LRE, and they use them. Not often, but used. The same Delta-4. Because again, the issue price / quality.

So why RD-180 could not be recreated in American factories? Americans can't do anything with a combustion chamber. This is the main achievement of the Russian technology. In one such chamber with a diameter of just 380, millimeters burns about 600 kg of fuel per second.

This camera is a unique equipment with special protection belts from powerful heat flows. Protection is carried out not only due to external cooling of the chamber walls, but also due to the original method of “lining” the fuel film on them, which, evaporating, cools the wall.

And Shipilov says that for the production of such engines it is necessary to recreate outdated technologies. Well, well ... We work out the "lick" in full.

“RD-180 is a very good engine, but it is already very outdated, for its production it will be necessary to revive technologies that have been abandoned all over the world for a long time. Science and technology are not standing still, and in the USA there are a lot of companies that can do what is required, much better, much faster and most importantly - already much cheaper compared to Energomash.

What can I say? Applause. It turns out that the whole world has gone so far in its development that for the production of rocket engines it is even necessary to revive outdated technologies. I wonder how?

This is how I basically understand that at the 21 factory of the century it is quite possible to manufacture cars of the middle of the 20. But not the other way around. At VAZ in 1980, to assemble "Kalina" is unlikely. And then about the same situation.

What ancient technologies would have to be revived in order to adjust the release of the RD-180 in the USA - this is a mystery covered in darkness.

Well, the epic final from Shipilov:

“In short, it turned out that the RD-180 is no longer needed.

Therefore, General Dynamic held a new tender, which was won by two US companies. United Launch Services, which, starting from 2019, will begin to supply the Vulcan BE-4 engine, which will replace the RD-180. And Aerojet Rocketdyne, which will develop the next generation of fundamentally new engines, which in turn will replace the Vulcan BE-4.

Well, to make it clear what happened, I will mention only one detail - the entire contract with United Launch Services costs 46 million dollars - this is the cost of only five RD-180.

And the US Congress, in order to insure itself and create a reserve for the transitional period, allowed Energomash to release more 18 units RD-180. The latest RD-180 in history. "


Great, huh? The US Congress allowed Energomash ... Well, well.

Although what else can you expect from a hypocrite and a liar based in Cyprus?

It would be very curious, apart from unfounded arguments, to see at least one link (it does not matter in what language) where it would be told about the ownership of the Pratt & Whitney company on the RD-180 engine. And about the PERMISSION from the US Congress for Energomash.

Summary:

1. Since the United States actually screwed up with the production of liquid-propellant engines, Pratt & Whitney bought the right to use Russian RD-180s in the United States.

2. American firms have also purchased the right to manufacture RD-180 in the United States. We look at section 1 and we understand that we screwed up two times.

3. The RD-180 engine was developed by Russian engineers based on the Soviet RD-170 engine.

4. RD-180 produced exclusively in Russia, Russian hands and from Russian materials. The only material that the United States provides is the dollars for which the RD-180 is produced.

5. From points 3 and 4 it follows that this is a Russian engine. The USA in general and Pratt & Whitney in particular can go through the forest with their rights in relation to the RD-180, if only because the next generation of engines has already been developed.

6. In the United States today, titanic efforts are being made to get away from Russian dependence in middle starts.
Blue Origin introduced the new engine, BE-4, which is expected to replace the RD-180 with 2020 of the year.

The key word is presumed. If it works as it should - we'll see.

ULA announced the successful promotion of work on the creation of analogue RD-180.

No question, even 13 years of quiet work, maybe that will burn out. Production of two nodes have already mastered, well done.

Aerojet Rocketdyne conducted the first fire tests of the prechambers of its AR1 engine.

The pre-chamber is not the entire engine.

In general, of course, the Americans will create their own liquid-propellant rocket engine on methane or kerosene. The whole question is how soon.

It is doubtful that a 5 unit of RD-180 units is a panacea. And what's more, we know how in America everything is going up closer to the final. Proved by "Raptor" and "Lightning".

So let's see how it all comes true.

Returning to the beginning. Dear lovers of quotes and applause for foreign residents spitting in the direction of Russia! You were mistaken, this is somewhat not the place where you can do this. And you do not belong here, alas.

We are still able to defend what was created in our country by the minds and hands of our compatriots. And with a crash to throw out those who want to humiliate everything Soviet and Russian. Reasonable discussion and criticism is normal, quoting spikes are moveton. As well as attempts to prove to us the primordial wretchedness and secondary importance.

Take note, gentlemen. Comrades can not worry.

Sources:
http://shipilov.com/zhurnalistika/868-rd-180-neulovimyj-dzho-ili-skripach-ne-nuzhen.html
https://versia.ru/amerikancy-bezuspeshno-pytayutsya-skopirovat-rossijskoe-raketnoe-chudo
http://engine.space
Author:
255 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 24 October 2017 06: 43 New
    24
    vile little man Andrei Shipilov
    All according to the classics: "And Shipilov who joined them"
    1. maxim947
      maxim947 24 October 2017 07: 28 New
      40
      Bravo! I will constantly repeat - the rd-170 and its entire derivative line are absolute excellence in rocket engine building! And the uniqueness of the combustion chamber is absolutely precisely noticed - 263 atm. It is very cool.
      1. ammunition
        ammunition 24 October 2017 09: 49 New
        23
        Quote: maxim947
        And the uniqueness of the combustion chamber - 263 atm - was absolutely precisely noticed. It is very cool.


        Yes. It is uniqueness. And not only combustion chambers. But the combustion chamber is the main thing.
        ------------------------------
        It's a shame that in the 90 years all our secrets were given away. American engineers could not even imagine that such an engine is possible. (RD - 170).
        Yes. Technology (so far) could not recreate. But! The secret was revealed to them for free. ((
        1. Dembel77
          Dembel77 24 October 2017 14: 04 New
          24
          Now everything is clear and understandable. Thanks for the info. And to be honest, 34 years spent in the USSR would not have allowed me to doubt the talent of our rocket scientists. And the point.
        2. Anton Valerevich
          Anton Valerevich 24 October 2017 16: 11 New
          +4
          Quote: ammunition
          Technology (so far) could not recreate. But! The secret was revealed to them for free.

          If they can’t recreate, then it’s not discovered a secret, but misinformed.
        3. 73bor
          73bor 24 October 2017 20: 53 New
          +4
          The Americans can create but only their own, copy someone else's not their skate, and copy in such technologies when the same nozzles were suffered by our engineers - this is complete nonsense, a well-fed hungry man does not understand, because the documentation for the Yak-141 was also transferred to the Americans , in the end, only twenty-five years later, an airplane with dubious performance characteristics and sky-high price turned out!
        4. shahor
          shahor 24 October 2017 23: 12 New
          -1
          In fact, the United States only buys iron.

          The control system, control-electronics-put
          his own
          1. CT-55_11-9009
            CT-55_11-9009 25 October 2017 12: 37 New
            +4
            And the whole problem of the Americans is that in this case, everything
            Quote: shahor
            The control system, control-electronics-put
            his own

            this is secondary But iron is the main thing. Technical solutions that Soviet engineers made dozens of years ago are not available to American high-class engineers (this cannot be taken away from them, I admit). Something like this. To do a good face with a bad game is not always good.
            1. Bratkov Oleg
              Bratkov Oleg 16 December 2018 09: 09 New
              +1
              The main thing for the Anglo-Saxons, who have lived their entire history at the expense of parasitization on other peoples, is to prove that they are the best, the very first in everything, and therefore have the legal right to parasitize on other peoples. Therefore, no country in the world, in their view, has the right to be ahead of the Anglo-Saxons.
        5. models
          models 26 October 2017 06: 23 New
          +6
          Quote: ammunition
          But the combustion chamber is the main thing.
          Lamer Detected. The main detail of any liquid propellant rocket engine is not the chamber but the TNA.
          Quote: ammunition
          It is very disappointing that in the 90s all our secrets were given. American engineers could not even imagine that such an engine is possible.
          Poor Americans! How did they pull the RS-25 in the 1970s?

          This year, the United States launched 6 Atlases-5 against 15 native American Falcons-9 and 1 Delta-4. The entire Roskosmos launched 15 rockets, catching up with the same "American Chubais." From the fact that the "patriots" will be scribbling articles about what a wonderful and unique RD-180 these figures will not change in any way.
          1. Mista_dj
            Mista_dj 26 October 2017 16: 41 New
            +2
            Totally agree!
            I do not dispute the fact that RD-180 is the coolest thing, but this article about him is pure propaganda!
            And it is built on the same principle as Shipilov’s (obscured in the article): a bit of truth and a lot of water and cheap P-O-R rheotism.
            What is a resource turning into?
            1. erofich
              erofich 30 October 2017 11: 27 New
              0
              Truth is not a bit, but a lot. Brother 2, remember?
            2. Bratkov Oleg
              Bratkov Oleg 16 December 2018 09: 20 New
              +1
              The truth is 100 percent. The Anglo-Saxons always lived off parasites on other nations, robbing colonies, slave labor ... In the USA in 1953 a black woman was sent to prison, who did not give up her seat on the bus to the white lady ... And, to justify this innate parasitism, this Anglo-Saxon need living at the expense of others, they came up with the idea that they were the best in everything, and absolutely all the scientific and technical achievements were made precisely by the Anglo-Saxons, and the very USSR stole it from them. However, the United States flew into space only 10 years after the flight of Gagarin. They also lied to the whole world that they had visited the Moon, and all this for the sake of a sense of racial superiority, that the Anglo-Saxon race is the highest, and should rule the world. Russia's best rocket engines in the world do not fit into this scheme. And they are the best, because they are technologically advanced in production, reliable, cheap. High-tech.
              It is a pity that the leadership of the CPSU sold and betrayed the peoples of the USSR. Instead of the expected collapse of the capitalist countries, they destroyed their own country, and this, minus the Soviet Union, could not cope with such a disaster.
          2. ver_
            ver_ 28 October 2017 14: 16 New
            -1
            ... lulling is a lot of pluses at once - there is such a trait among * courtiers *, as is obsiral of everything * nihilists * -the person is imperfect - * each has its own shortcomings * - * There are only girls in jazz * ..
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 24 October 2017 21: 36 New
        +2
        Quote: maxim947
        And the uniqueness of the combustion chamber - 263 atm - was absolutely precisely noticed. It is very cool.

        And 500 atm. on the fuel pump.
      3. ver_
        ver_ 29 October 2017 08: 10 New
        0
        ..aga - I understood the service ...
    2. Orel
      Orel 24 October 2017 19: 11 New
      10
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      All according to the classics: "And Shipilov who joined them"


      The confrontation between the US and Russia is in the way. The world and the economy have become global. It was easier for the United States to buy from us while politics allowed. Recent years does not allow and what do we see? They firmly set about developing not just one, but a whole line of their own engines (Irojet AR-1 makes kerosene, Bezos-BE-4 for LNG and Mask-Raptor also for LNG) of various manned ships (Starliner, Orion and Dregon V2), plus superheavy the carrier is SLS. Engines and ships are already in the iron and are successfully tested. You can say for a long time and persistently what a good engine we have, but who will need it when the US starts using its own ???
      1. oops
        oops 25 October 2017 04: 01 New
        13
        Ek you "ruled" shunned!
        It’s better not to mention about Mask at all: until the government finances completely (and with a slide) his next “project”, he (Musk) will only publish brochures.
        Blue Origin with a methane-oxygen engine has been tinkering for more than a decade, and not from the moment when it got bogged down with politics. If in ten years the BE-4 will be ready for operation, then for it it will also be necessary to make a completely NEW ROCKET! Liquid methane is not kerosene or hydrogen !!! Plus, it will be necessary to block a completely new launch pad with a new infrastructure. Prototypes of methane-oxygen engines in Russia have existed for thirty years ...
        For SLS, no new engines were made - they will use the old engines from the Shuttles.
        Here Aerodzhet trying to tear Russian technology ... How many years have been trying ... Skoko-skoko?
        So when will the US start using its own? "Well, I couldn’t" ...
        By the way ...
        SLS and Orion are moving neither shakily nor swiftly. Well, that’s right: the lunar and, especially, the Martian manned programs are throwing an insane amount of money !!! Russian Roscosmos bouncing pokes a finger toward the Americans and draws sketches of "rocket caravans." It’s good that they don’t give him money under the lunar-Martian idiocy. Let only Americans on that Field of Fools bury their money !!!
        1. MadCat
          MadCat 25 October 2017 07: 22 New
          10
          Quote: Oops
          It’s better not to mention about Mask at all: until the government finances completely (and with a slide) his next “project”, he (Musk) will only publish brochures.

          let’s not mention Roskosmos then, but it’s somehow inconvenient, the corporation is fully financed by the state with a multi-billion dollar budget, and even with Musk it’s difficult to compete in the number of launches, losing customers.
          1. CT-55_11-9009
            CT-55_11-9009 25 October 2017 12: 58 New
            +6
            Quote: MadCat
            let’s not mention Roskosmos then, but it’s somehow inconvenient, the corporation is fully financed by the state with a multi-billion dollar budget, and even with Musk it’s difficult to compete in the number of launches, losing customers.

            And the NASA Mask finances, by the way, so that the private trader is sooooo conditional.
            1. MadCat
              MadCat 25 October 2017 14: 54 New
              +1
              Quote: CT-55_11-9009
              And the NASA Mask finances, by the way, so that the private trader is sooooo conditional.

              Mask and other clients have enough, so no argument ...
              1. CT-55_11-9009
                CT-55_11-9009 25 October 2017 15: 08 New
                0
                That's right, he also sells Tesla ...
                1. Nukesmoke
                  Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 12 New
                  +3
                  True, it seems that the Tesla production unit is greatly reduced, the sales volume is not as great as it seemed to the "genius".
                  1. Krabik
                    Krabik 25 October 2017 20: 08 New
                    +2
                    Yeah, I laughed at your joke full mouth%)

                    Here's a video for opening a gigafactory:


                    We have reduced Roscosmos and AvtoVAZ, here it is our reality ...
                2. hmiland
                  hmiland 26 October 2017 10: 38 New
                  +1
                  Well yes! On Chinese batteries! [I] [/ i] bully
              2. Nukesmoke
                Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 14 New
                +1
                Statistics on launches, profits from launches and US investments in the Mask project, please. You are not a gentleman, therefore you cannot be trusted with a word.
                1. Negro
                  Negro 25 October 2017 20: 36 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Nukesmoke
                  Launch Statistics

                  43 launches, including 18 - for US government organizations, 2 - for foreign (Turkmenistan and Taiwan), 1 - test, 22 - commercial.
                  Quote: Nukesmoke
                  profit from launches

                  Get along. But, given the number of commercial launches, it does not work at a loss.
                  Quote: Nukesmoke
                  US investment in the Mask project

                  Major programs are known. Of the total cost is comparable to the cost of the bridge to the Crimea (it seems less, but I could be wrong). At the same time, not promises to make the Angara are bought from Mask, but specific services (launches) that always competed with the offers of other market participants (Atlas from ULA, the government-military Delta, Antares). Consequently, their price for government customers is not overpriced. 18 launches of the existing Atlas, for example, would cost from $ 2 to 4 billion, depending on additional Wishlist.
          2. sir_obs
            sir_obs 29 October 2017 22: 05 New
            0
            I run a mask on my field and what?
        2. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 25 October 2017 09: 47 New
          +4
          Quote: Oops
          Russian Roscosmos bouncing pokes a finger toward the Americans and draws sketches of "rocket caravans." It’s good that they don’t give money to him under the lunar-Martian idiocy. Let only Americans on that Field of Fools bury their money !!!


          This does not mean that one does not have to move in the direction of colonization of other planets - mankind has no other options.
          You can stay outsiders.
          1. oops
            oops 25 October 2017 13: 07 New
            +4
            For long-distance manned flights, you first need to create completely new engines to reduce the flight time to a couple of weeks - no one will ever cancel radiation in space. With current technology, suicide bombers will fly to Mars.
            1. models
              models 27 October 2017 14: 17 New
              +1
              No one will cancel the desire of the Soviet man to express his valuable opinion on issues in which he is not competent. But radiation there is, firstly, quite tolerable, and secondly, screens can be supplied from it.
        3. CT-55_11-9009
          CT-55_11-9009 25 October 2017 12: 55 New
          +4
          Quote: Oops
          Ek you "ruled" shunned!

          He not only shunned the ruler, he seems to be repulsed ...
          Quote: Oops
          It’s better not to mention about Mask at all: until the government finances completely (and with a slide) his next “project”, he (Musk) will only publish brochures.

          Agree to all 100!
          Quote: Oops
          Blue Origin with a methane-oxygen engine has been tinkering for more than a decade, and not from the moment when it got bogged down with politics. If in ten years the BE-4 will be ready for operation, then for it it will also be necessary to make a completely NEW ROCKET! Liquid methane is not kerosene or hydrogen !!! Plus, it will be necessary to block a completely new launch pad with a new infrastructure. Prototypes of methane-oxygen engines in Russia have existed for thirty years ...

          And here it is not necessary. Blue Origin really messes with the engine for 10 years. BUT! BE-4 - conversion of hydrogen BE-3 to methane. They have differences, but the main similarity is that they are both cryogenic, and methane has an operating temperature of 90-110 degrees higher. And this simplifies the ground operation of fuel, and reduces the cost of maintenance of storage facilities, and facilitates the design of missiles, etc. That's just the methane's stoichiometric ratio is different (lower) and the density is lower, due to which significantly larger fuel tanks will have to be made. And he gives less impulse, and significantly. According to my calculations it was - 15-18 percent. I won’t say anything about cravings - I didn’t expect it.
          The Blue Origin rocket can also be remade for this engine. At the very least, they plan to install the BE-4 on their normally flying New Glenn. Installation is quite possible, because Now there are BE-3U, and the dimensions of BE-4 are comparable to BE-3. And they already have a launch pad, they rent one of the tables on Cape Canaveral. So these guys can do it all.
          Quote: Oops
          For SLS, no new engines were made - they will use the old engines from the Shuttles.

          I wonder if they can do it again? If so, then respect. But rather - no, maximum - heavily redesigned for modern components. But it is time and means. There are enough funds, but time is already running out.
          1. Negro
            Negro 25 October 2017 20: 17 New
            +6
            Quote: CT-55_11-9009
            Agree to all 100!

            You may not be aware. According to the results of Commercial Resupply Services, the con man and amateur Mask received 1,6 billion for 12 missions, and the serious guys from Orbital ATK, the (relatively) large and old space company - 1,9 billion for 8 missions.
            It is easy to find out what the results of this and these are.
            Quote: CT-55_11-9009
            According to my calculations it was - 15-18 percent

            Quite strange calculations, given that two completely new missiles are being made under BE-4 - New Glenn and Volcano.
            Quote: CT-55_11-9009
            and his normally flying New Glenn. Installation is quite possible, because now there are BE-3U

            New Glenn are BE-3? And even fly? Wow.
            Quote: CT-55_11-9009
            will use the old shuttle engines.
            I wonder if they can do it again?

            A simplified shuttle engine - RS-68 - flies on the Delta every 3-6 months. So it’s not particularly interesting.
          2. oops
            oops 25 October 2017 21: 04 New
            +4
            "BE-4 - conversion of hydrogen BE-3 to methane."
            Wow "alteration"! A fivefold increase in traction and a change in fuel are planned! Remaking ...
            Then you have a completely indescribable mixture of kerosene, hydrogen and methane. He’s already squandering your brains ... To make it easier for you to carry out your “impulse calculations” I’ll show how quickly offhand you can compare the specific impulse of different types of fuel: when burning in oxygen, the average molecular weight of the products of hydrogen combustion = 18 (Н2О), for methane = 27 (( СО2 + 2хН2О) / 3), for kerosene = 31 (СО2 + Н2О). The specific impulse of a rocket engine is inversely proportional to the molecular weight of the combustion products. But in general, you don’t need to calculate anything yourself - there are comparative tables of the characteristics of all engines. They are easily available online.
            A few quotes from the Blue Origin website for dessert.
            "The BE-4 engine will be used on our New Glenn family of launch vehicles. The first stage will use seven BE-4 engines and the second stage will use a single BE-4 engine."
            "We've built a new facility dedicated solely to testing the BE-4. We're testing components, including the subscale oxygen-rich preburner, staged combustion of the preburner, and main injector assembly. Powerpack testing of the turbopumps and main valves is underway, as is staged combustion testing of the subscale oxygen-rich preburner and main injector assembly. Preparations for full engine testing are underway. "
            "The New Glenn family of orbital launch vehicles Will ..."

            That is, Blue Origin and ULA have no engine or rocket yet !!!!!!!!!!!!!! The current New Shepard with the BE-3 only bounces into outer space.
        4. meGrail
          meGrail 25 October 2017 17: 22 New
          +4
          Quote: Oops
          Ek you "ruled" shunned!
          It’s better not to mention about Mask at all: until the government finances completely (and with a slide) his next “project”, he (Musk) will only publish brochures.

          Correctly! Need to forget this name!
          He doesn’t have his own engine either!
          ... and if there is, then there is no rocket ...
          ... and if there is, it does not fly ...
          ... and if it flies, it does not return ...
          ... and if he comes back, then badly!
      2. Bratkov Oleg
        Bratkov Oleg 16 December 2018 09: 23 New
        0
        The United States will certainly create both its engines and its spacecraft. Their economy has always been larger than the USSR, and especially Russia. And even though half a century after the beginning of the space era, the United States has nothing to fly into space on, still does not have, on the way they get along, they must ultimately make their own rocket for flying into space.
  3. Jeans35
    Jeans35 24 October 2017 06: 53 New
    +1
    And what's more, we are aware of how everything is getting more expensive in America, closer to the final. Proved by the Raptor and Lightning.
    Lightning is already on sale. And even Indians refuse from SUSHeks .... ((I read this news and was upset:
    https://42.tut.by/565841
    Guys, is it really true, or another blackmail of the Indians, what would they pay less ?!
    1. andrewkor
      andrewkor 24 October 2017 07: 09 New
      20
      Lightning is not for sale, but is being imposed on the USA by its vassals, so that it is absolutely not to be missed, in the sense of finance, in this project. And the squint Indians are still those “aircraft builders.” Migrant workers from the former TAPOiCh would have done better!
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 24 October 2017 08: 50 New
        23
        or another blackmail of the Indians

        I agree with andrewkor, the Indians are still passengers. They themselves can’t create anything worthwhile and outstanding (well, at least by some parameters). And everything is the same there - they don’t like the Su-57, and they don’t like the T-90, and their Su-30 falls, and generally does not dig. But in terms of knocking out discounts and other similar nishtyaks to their beloved ones, they are masters.
        By the way, the Turks do the same. We’ll either buy C-400, or we’ll buy it, then give them the technology, otherwise we won’t buy it or take our tomatoes.
        Already funny to tears sometimes becomes.
        1. CooL_SnipeR
          CooL_SnipeR 24 October 2017 11: 35 New
          +6
          Yes, they can only prank how horses cannon-loading can. From the whole show they arrange. When I looked at YouTube - my jaw almost did not dislocate from laughter lol
          1. CooL_SnipeR
            CooL_SnipeR 24 October 2017 20: 53 New
            +5

            Actually, here's the video ... such a warrior would be put down as the first counter-weapon salvo. Although the Pakistanis are no better. A little about them playfully shown in the "maximum height"
            1. garri-lin
              garri-lin 24 October 2017 21: 50 New
              +1
              There is a Japanese cartoon about a walking city armed with giant cannons of 2 - 3 meters caliber. There, the guns were also loaded for half a day. A team of 200 people. Judging by the video, the Indians are either losers or worse.
            2. meGrail
              meGrail 25 October 2017 17: 28 New
              +1
              Excuse me, but what's so funny about video? That they perform intricate dance moves? So you would know a little, I was interested and I found out, this is how they imitate some delays or other actions that will appear on a real battlefield.
              You are also at shooting, at first you perform “advance to the firing line” (I may be mistaken in the name) when you run as if to a trench under enemy fire, ducking and wagging. And it doesn’t seem strange to anyone
              1. CooL_SnipeR
                CooL_SnipeR 26 October 2017 17: 55 New
                0
                Well, yes, there’s not much funny either ... more like roosters ... I mean birds.
        2. Mista_dj
          Mista_dj 26 November 2017 13: 37 New
          +1
          I am for the friendship of peoples!
          And I am aware that India is the largest player of Russian weapons.
          But let's not forget, to really fight, only Vietnamese and Israelis can!!?
          We sell them at least SU-157, even C - 1800 400, even Mega-Nimitz - our "friends" will not break so drop! Examples, even from open sources - as much as you want!
          All that is given to them well is the production of soap about "Jimmy - Jimmy, Acha-Acha" ...
          Yes, recently “about all the cracks” flowed about leaks of military technology ...
          IMHO: unscrupulous traders came to power.
      2. rocket757
        rocket757 24 October 2017 10: 37 New
        +7
        What about that lightning? Nobody plans to fight against a really strong opponent, and once again lick Uncle Sam ..... well, you know what.
        For the Indians, and to say something sho, they are bargaining, but they themselves do nothing really advanced combat to do it.
        Sales tanks from car kits they turn out clumsy ...
        1. misti1973
          misti1973 25 October 2017 00: 58 New
          +1
          And who told you that lightning is not such a serious plane? You can set it aside, but it’s very problematic to knock it down. Missiles will fly by if it doesn’t have enough active power from a semi-active GSN. It’s full of electronic warfare there, have you been bothering with software for so long?
          1. Mefist
            Mefist 25 October 2017 01: 37 New
            +2
            It’s quite serious, but it’s worth it several times more expensive than a rocket that will hit it and it will not miss anywhere))) and in an air battle with ours, at least it’s necessary to sweat it, so our drying costs again several times cheaper and for one lightning it will take 30 drying and a dozen c2 missiles, and by the time of a likely conflict, the c400 and 500th generation will arrive. The United States and any country will not send such an expensive airplane, but a battle, with the probability of its loss being close to 5% even if 100 missiles are past, the third will also be available from an economic point of view, all shots were immediately paid off with this victory, planes like a rocket cannot be quickly made.
            1. meGrail
              meGrail 25 October 2017 17: 39 New
              +1
              Everyone would be your optimism, but "one lightning will have 2 drying times"
              the total number of Su-30M2 aircraft in the Russian Aerospace Forces has reached 20 aircraft. https://bmpd.livejournal.com/2358587.html
              USA - 102 F-35A, 48 F-35B, 25 F-35C as of 2017 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35
              1. oops
                oops 25 October 2017 22: 02 New
                +4
                In fact, in addition to the Su-30, other fighter jets fly in Russia.
                So that you do not jump very happily from the F-35 abbreviation, I’ll hammer a carnation in your chair ... Recently, the US Air Force Commission inspection found that the average F-35 repair time is 170 days !!! That is, almost half a year ... Spare parts are waiting for months! And everything is awesome expensive, expensive, expensive! .. So how many pieces of the F-35 really fly? With the F-22, a similar story: about a third (yes more!) Of planes sit on the ground and wait for service!
                Here are such prodigies ...
                1. meGrail
                  meGrail 30 October 2017 14: 23 New
                  0
                  Honestly - I spit on how much the plane can’t repair in the USA!
                  And why, as soon as you write a comment criticizing the frenzied cheers-patriotism, you immediately write to the agents of the State Department ????
                  My peaceful sky excites me more, and with regards to the comparison of the SU-30 and F-35, the author of the comment compared them. And I just chilled a little cheers-patriotic songs. And then it is too similar to "Yes, we will trample the enemy with steel wedges of our tanks in the ground, on their own territory!" slogans before the Patriotic. We all remember how this cheers-patriotism cost the people
    2. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 24 October 2017 08: 23 New
      +7
      Do not read Indian newspapers in the morning ... hereinafter
    3. venik
      venik 24 October 2017 08: 34 New
      +2
      Quote: jeans35
      Guys, is it really true, or another blackmail of the Indians, what would they pay less ?!

      ========
      Well, what do you think ??? Or is it the FIRST TIME ??? And not only in relation to Russian technology !!!!
    4. Lopatov
      Lopatov 24 October 2017 09: 03 New
      +7
      Quote: jeans35
      Guys, is it really true, or another blackmail of the Indians, what would they pay less ?!

      The Indian arms market is very, very original. A lot of money is spinning there, therefore no sentiment. Corruption, lobbying interests, companies in the media (like ours, against Iveco - Lynx). They even manage to use the fight against corruption to promote their product (as the Americans did against the Israelis to promote the M777 British-American super-expensive howitzers)
      Horror, in short.
      And all this is superimposed on a very strange attitude of the Indians themselves. For example, it’s quite normal for them to dismantle the car kit received for the “screwdriver assembly”, having removed the components and assemblies for installation on aircraft already delivered to the troops instead of the faulty ones.
      1. mervino2007
        mervino2007 24 October 2017 15: 19 New
        +1
        "To dismantle the" machine kit "received for the" screwdriver assembly?
        A possible reason for this is the late delivery of "ordered" spare parts?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 24 October 2017 15: 59 New
          +2
          Quote: mervino2007
          A possible reason for this is the late delivery of "ordered" spare parts?

          And what's the difference, what is the reason? This is, in essence, ordinary theft. Anyway, you go to the factory that produces the Opel screwdriver assembly and try to drag the engine out of there, arguing that your way to repair your engine in your company's technical center is too long to wait.
          1. shahor
            shahor 24 October 2017 23: 05 New
            0
            And do not supply purchased spare parts under the contract
            this is normal?
            1. lance
              lance 25 October 2017 06: 30 New
              +2
              and you know at least one contract under which the zip is not delivered to India? 1 full zip kit is delivered there with the product and is included in the delivery price. additional separate article and equipment, and here our Tatar is simply a dear boy.
    5. Evgeny Zhevlonenko
      Evgeny Zhevlonenko 24 October 2017 11: 33 New
      +3
      Earlier, when I heard the news about Sushki, I would be upset, but right now no, it’s not channeling, it’s become smarter, having read the essence of the claims, it’s more like bidding, they all try to beg for technology, although why should they, when even the T-90s from ready-made machine sets really cannot collect ....
    6. Abel
      Abel 24 October 2017 13: 26 New
      +6
      The Indians wanted for the same money also a factory with technologies. And when the Oblomingo bird flew in, they began to blackmail us that they would buy American planes. Well, the flag in their hands, especially if Pakistan buys Russian
    7. opoffis
      opoffis 24 October 2017 15: 12 New
      +5
      Indians refuse ALL that they want to buy for a very long time! They even SUSPENDED that the Tank Collected by Them fell apart and therefore Russia is to blame!
      IT IS NECESSARY to stop "PLAYING FRIENDS" with India, ONE IT IS NECESSARY TO PRESS ONLY AND HIDDLE HARDLY and TERMINATE ALL PAYMENTS in the form of agreements for the program "Made in India" to transfer production of Ros. products to INDIA!
      1. MadCat
        MadCat 25 October 2017 14: 51 New
        +3
        Quote: opoffis
        IT IS NECESSARY to stop "PLAYING FRIENDS" with India, ONE IT IS NECESSARY TO PRESS ONLY AND HIDDLE HARDLY and TERMINATE ALL PAYMENTS in the form of agreements for the program "Made in India" to transfer production of Ros. products to INDIA!

        India is one of the main markets, if Russia ceases to sell weapons, then the USA and Europe will sell everything they need.
        1. Nukesmoke
          Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 18 New
          +1
          What they see fit.
        2. opoffis
          opoffis 26 October 2017 16: 38 New
          +1
          Let him find what is better and CHEAPER!
          In general, Well, they Flag, you know where! We were a beggar and a little more we will live beggars than to hand out OUR WORKPLACES AND TECHNOLOGIES!
    8. Dmitry Konoplev
      Dmitry Konoplev 24 October 2017 16: 03 New
      +1
      Hindus bonuses knock out nothing more.
    9. Nukesmoke
      Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 17 New
      0
      Let's just say that the American "associates" do not have much choice. Either dermosvet, or the previous generation. And the Indians are not an indicator - they have a whole theater with the goal of bringing down prices, etc.
  4. corporal
    corporal 24 October 2017 06: 56 New
    14
    Shipilov quotes - Moveton

    Then you need to mark the articles of such authors with a special icon, well, like "the enemy of the people, do not read, do not plus." laughing wassat
    PS But seriously, why do fake news appear on VO? For bloating srach, or then to write rebuttals? All articles seem to be moderated.
    1. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 24 October 2017 08: 25 New
      +3
      To help the FSB. Special lists and all that. At the right moment, the shipovye and their lizuns will be called in.
    2. Skay
      Skay 24 October 2017 08: 48 New
      +7
      All the described action is just one of many battles on the fields of a comprehensive war launched by the West against Russia. The information war will gain momentum. There will be more and more such fakes. They will be more cynical and brazen. All according to Goebbels "The more monstrous a lie, the more willingly they will believe in it."
      We have two options, either not to notice, and then our grandchildren will not know the exploits of their ancestors, or to smash these fake guns to pieces.
      1. marder7
        marder7 24 October 2017 14: 32 New
        +7
        I am somewhat annoyed on this site that you can only plus! minus can not be put. that they are afraid that they will be screwed up to hell with dogs?
    3. mervino2007
      mervino2007 24 October 2017 15: 23 New
      +2
      "Why do fake news appear on VO?"
      - the calculation of the ability to think, and of preparedness, of readers. Outsiders are rare here.
      1. japs
        japs 24 October 2017 19: 44 New
        +6
        ... "Outsiders are rare here."
        Dear mervino, I do not agree with you, just recently I was surprised to note a bunch of new users from the "Promised Land". (some even under the "tricolor")
        “I can’t understand the reasons for such an interest ...” (C) (Almost a Hippo).
        It looks like the "Ministry of Truth" from 404 in Jewish execution.
        Frankly, this is flattering, then they are afraid and respected ...
        1. ver_
          ver_ 28 October 2017 16: 07 New
          0
          ... the flag doesn’t mean anything .. Here’s * the military review * under the striped flag ... -through the American server goes. When my TOP browser is turned on, often the flag changes on different comments. Well, don’t turn off the browser ..., Nehren’s library * Flibust * Rosgosnadzor spread rot, I’m used to reading ... I read, read and will continue to read and half-fools from the Duma aren’t a decree for me - there’s a lot of * some very strange deputies * .. . which do not impress me at all ..
          1. Negro
            Negro 28 October 2017 18: 19 New
            0
            Quote: ver_
            When my TOP browser is turned on, often the flag changes on different comments. Well, do not turn off the same browser ..., Nehren library * Flibusta

            And what for a flibust? It normally opens from Chrome, even without a frigate. And normal people use torus for SR and drugs))
  5. kas1
    kas1 24 October 2017 07: 16 New
    +2
    Simple and clear!
    1. ver_
      ver_ 28 October 2017 19: 10 New
      0
      ... no mind - count the cripple ..
  6. Mik13
    Mik13 24 October 2017 07: 25 New
    18
    Interesting news. It was necessary to publish a list of the repressed. For educational purposes.
    1. ICT
      ICT 24 October 2017 07: 57 New
      +8
      I learned to understand the technique better, and not recorded in the guard
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 24 October 2017 09: 37 New
        14
        Quote: TIT
        and not in the guard

        Right My personal opinion is that it’s wrong to “ban” visitors who have an alternative opinion, albeit not the right one. “Ban” is necessary for rudeness, obscenities, for real trolling, that is, for REAL violations of the rules of the site. It is easy to wave a saber;
        A lot of interesting people left the site, and not trolls. Need to understand. hi
      2. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 24 October 2017 10: 56 New
        13
        Quote: TIT
        I learned to understand the technique better, and not recorded in the guard


        It is easier for the poorly educated, who have not traveled abroad, to breathe in the idea that "we have all the best" and "enemies are around." The “box” cannot lie - that’s all.

        If we are forced into disinformation from both sides, then this is necessary for someone:
        to the state - that you would work for nothing (cheaper than the Chinese) and keep quiet,
        and in the West - that they would drop the “intractable Pu” and choose the “democratic oligarchs” who would be more accommodating.
        As both options do not suit you!
        1. Krabik
          Krabik 24 October 2017 13: 09 New
          +3
          And for some reason, the author has lost sight of the Merlin engines from SpaceX.

          And not only Atlases with RD-180 fly space from Cape Canaveral.
          1. oops
            oops 25 October 2017 04: 37 New
            +3
            Merlin Engines - NASA's development of fifty years ago with the replacement of some parts. Therefore, on the Falcons put as many as nine Merin instead of one RD-180. Musk has already shut up with his promises in a couple of years to create a terribly powerful new engine for a terribly heavy new rocket.
            "And not only Atlases with RD-180 fly space from Cape Canaveral." Yes. Also Falcons on their Gelding ..
            Secret Delicacies sometimes fly up from California ...
            1. Krabik
              Krabik 25 October 2017 12: 21 New
              +1
              RD-180 is also a further development of the RD-170.
              And in the Unions of assembly of small engines - this does not mean that Korolev and his engineers are crooked ...

              I don’t understand the claim to Mask at all that he should develop everything from scratch for his missiles ?!

              Here is the Union for example:
              1. oops
                oops 25 October 2017 13: 40 New
                +1
                There are NO small engine assemblies in the Unions. On the side accelerators according to ONE RD-107, and on the central section ONE RD-108. There are many nozzles because the RD-107 and RD-108 have four combustion chambers.
                1. Krabik
                  Krabik 25 October 2017 13: 48 New
                  +1
                  There are no assemblies for Angara and Proton, but the Union has it and I showed you a photo so that it is more difficult to reverse it;)
                  But you still, as in a frying pan, turned out with combustion chambers.
                  But alas - this is the assembly.

                  And from the pictures you can see that Falcon has an approximately equal number of nozzles with Proton and Angara.
                  Only its stage has no lateral accelerators and is made more monolithically.

                  In one piece, they make a step for the possible landing of the 1st step and its possible reuse.


                  Why am I writing all this ?!
                  Well, as it were, the private office of a PR specialist and a speculator bends down on Roskosmos with currency ...
                  1. oops
                    oops 25 October 2017 16: 18 New
                    +2
                    Weak to read Wikipedia, Krabik-writer?
                  2. Nukesmoke
                    Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 23 New
                    +1
                    Bend statistics + Mask support volumes from the US budget.
                    1. Krabik
                      Krabik 25 October 2017 20: 11 New
                      +1
                      Volumes of support of Roscosmos from the budget of the Russian Federation to the studio%)
                  3. Rplay
                    Rplay 29 October 2017 22: 51 New
                    0
                    What nonsense about nozzles and assemblies ???? Read about RD-107/108 first.
                    1. Krabik
                      Krabik 30 October 2017 01: 02 New
                      0
                      I read about the RD-107.

                      Due to the unstable operation of the RD-105 and the rupture of the camera, the engineers made many small cameras and called the RD-107.

                      And it was back in 1953.

                      Engineers could not make an engine with 1 controlled camera and made a bunch of small engines in the assembly and named it RD-107.

                      Or is it nonsense too ?!

                      Well, let’s give your version, why does the Union of Gagarin’s Times have such a huge pile of engines on the 1st stage ?!
              2. Cannonball
                Cannonball 28 October 2017 12: 34 New
                0
                RD-180 is not the development of RD-170, but its truncated version.
            2. Krabik
              Krabik 25 October 2017 12: 40 New
              +1
              I will give more photos of other missiles for comparison.
              Proton-M:


              Or the same Falcon:


              A huge difference between missiles hurts the eyes a bit ?!
              1. Cannonball
                Cannonball 28 October 2017 12: 35 New
                0
                And why should these rockets be similar?
            3. models
              models 27 October 2017 14: 43 New
              0
              Quote: Oops
              Merlin Engines - NASA Fifty Years Old
              Any proofs of this delirium will follow or as usual?
              Quote: Oops
              Musk has already shut up with his promises in a couple of years to create a terribly powerful new engine for a terribly heavy new rocket.
              And with the promises to put the step on the barge, he also shut up?
            4. thinking
              thinking 1 October 2018 21: 13 New
              -1
              Quote: Oops
              Merlin Engines - NASA's development of fifty years ago with the replacement of some parts. Therefore, nine Geldings are put on the Falcons instead of one RD-180.

              ***
              You are not right.
              1. Musk targets Mars.
              2. Landing on Mars of heavy vehicles by parachute is impossible, only landing on a jet thrust.
              3. For a flight to Mars, it is necessary to provide a large cargo flow into the Earth’s orbit.
              4. Clause 3 requires a significant reduction in the cost of putting goods into orbit. This is only possible with reusable systems.
              5. To return to Earth the return stages of launch vehicles, Musk chose a reactive landing method (see paragraph 2).
              6. One powerful RD-180 engine cannot provide the necessary degree of throttle thrust for reactive landing of an empty first stage.
              7. To create a reusable booster rocket with a jet thrust, Musk chose several (nine) simple and reliable (like a soldier’s boot) engines, instead of one powerful engine (see paragraphs 4, 5 and 6)
              That is why
              on the Falcons put as many as nine Merin instead of one RD-180
              1. thinking
                thinking 20 January 2019 15: 52 New
                0
                Someone, very clever, did not find reasonable arguments to show where I am mistaken.
                It turns out something like this: "I can't understand where thinking is wrong, but I don't like his comment. I'll give him a minus." laughing
                Maybe I'm right then?
    2. Alex20042004
      Alex20042004 24 October 2017 17: 45 New
      0
      Chatterbox is our main Enemy!
  7. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 24 October 2017 07: 31 New
    +9
    Americans had every right to release this engine at home. But they couldn’t.

    Today you can justify yourself endlessly and with reason. Because "they could not." And if they could then all that happened with the documentation on the RD-180 would be a complete betrayal of the interests of the country. It is from this that one must dance, and not cover up the bitter truth with excuses.
    1. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 24 October 2017 08: 31 New
      14
      It was like an interview with the designer from Energomash on TV. Unfortunately, I don’t remember my last name. The man calmly said that the transferred documents indicated assembly units, steel grades, drawings, dimensions ... but the manufacturing technology itself was not transferred. And there "there are nuances"
      Specifically, he said so. And he added that according to his forecasts, the Americans, if they can build the engine, will be in 10-15 years. If at all able.
      And the interview was in the late 90s, if the memory serves. Then, too, a wave of betrayal was on.
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 24 October 2017 10: 58 New
        +7
        Quote: Vlad.by
        And the interview was in the late 90s, if the memory serves. Then, too, the wave of betrayal was

        “The Americans thought that they would start working with us, and in four years they would take our technologies and reproduce them themselves. I immediately told them: you will spend more than a billion dollars and ten years. Four years have passed, and they say: yes, it takes six years. Years passed, they say: it takes another eight years. Seventeen years have passed, and they have not reproduced a single engine. Now they only need billions of dollars to do this for bench equipment, ”said Boris Katorgin, creator of the RD-2012 engine, back in 180, on this subject.
        Apparently this episode you had in mind.
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 24 October 2017 16: 39 New
          0
          Perhaps this was the interview, but certainly not in '12. Especially if the text "... 17 years have passed ..."
          Rather, in the 12th year he was once again shown.
    2. venik
      venik 24 October 2017 08: 52 New
      17
      Quote: Jurkovs
      And if they could then all that happened with the documentation on the RD-180 would be a complete betrayal of the interests of the country.

      ========
      Are you SURE they have received ALL "documentation" ??? For reference, a very long time ago, back in Soviet times, the laboratory where I worked received an order (from the Moscow Region) to work out the technology for processing the surface of crystals of one semiconductor material. And everything seems clear! And a couple of articles in open foreign scientific journals, where all this technology is described in detail, is available, but DOES NOT GO !!! They have been tormented for more than half a year - NOT GOING and that’s it! Until quite by chance we came across one curious effect. They began to study it - and everything went "like clockwork" !!! So, it’s enough to “remain silent” about some small detail - AND EVERYTHING is a “kirdyk” ... This is the first!
      And the second - sometimes, in order to recreate some technology (perfectly worked out in another country!) - it’s not enough just to build a plant, - you have to create an entire SECTOR, create it from scratch !!!
      1. efendia
        efendia 24 October 2017 12: 05 New
        +3
        As I read an article about our factory on which there was some kind of gear cutting German pre-war machine, we decided to change it due to a decrease in performance. Nobody took it from us, then they turned to the company that once produced this machine, they did, but they could not repeat their machine. So there are little things that do not allow you to restore the technology in full.
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 24 October 2017 16: 42 New
          +5
          If competent - no need to restore, do better.
          But it doesn’t work out. Only cheeks blow and spend money.
        2. Andrey NM
          Andrey NM 24 October 2017 18: 55 New
          +6
          ... they turned to the company that once released this machine, they undertook but could not repeat their own machine. So there are little things that do not allow you to restore the technology in full.

          It happens even more interesting. We had a borer in our workshop who worked on one crucial part, but he had a drawback - he drank, came to work with the “exhaust”. Suspended from work, put another kind of sensible employee. Marriage went. Changed a few people ... They returned the man back, I had to put up with the "lack". Technology...
          1. Vlad.by
            Vlad.by 25 October 2017 14: 03 New
            +1
            Maybe not technology. I have a friend, a doctor. So she’s just not allowed to go to the ward room with computers - as she goes, concrete glitches begin. Just some kind of mysticism. And more than once, and not two. It is checked repeatedly.
            The technique also adapts to the person. Or rejects completely laughing
    3. Nukesmoke
      Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 28 New
      0
      This is a difficult game. Could? Very unsure. Not because the Americans are stupid, but since they have their own system for producing rocket engines that developed along their own paths, then to master something third-party, you must really try and invest.
      As an example, during the years of the US Navy, the country where engine building was one of the best in the world, wanted to build British-made Merlins. When, with the complete transfer of technology, it continued to fail, it was necessary to call on British personnel who produced and trained local personnel.
  8. inkass_98
    inkass_98 24 October 2017 07: 32 New
    27
    Well, what's the point of banning those who express their point of view?
    This discussion somehow slipped away from me, but there is no desire to stir this pile. Therefore, I express an opinion that has already been repeatedly raised by many readers of VO: there was no need to cancel the minus. Everything was clear and understandable, inadequate personalities quickly drove into the "skull".
    The use of an administrative resource as a punitive measure is a sign of uncertainty; this is the wrong approach to the discussion. Something like this.
    1. ICT
      ICT 24 October 2017 08: 09 New
      +6
      I fully support
      except driven into skulls
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 24 October 2017 10: 06 New
        +5
        They were not driven deliberately, but in the course of discussion. If a person fundamentally craps, then the attitude towards him is appropriate, and the more crap, the more he goes into minus. Everything was fair.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 24 October 2017 14: 00 New
        +5
        I am aware that I have one warning altogether out of the blue, some troll drew up a complaint, and the administration immediately responded joyfully. And they banned me for criticizing the same Skomorokhov, it was the case.
        Therefore, I comment less and less, although I come back regularly.
        1. Captain Nemo
          Captain Nemo 25 October 2017 01: 16 New
          +1
          The same garbage. The warning flew for nothing. To the questions of the administration - did not receive the answer
    3. andranick
      andranick 24 October 2017 16: 53 New
      +9
      inkass_98
      Using an administrative resource as a punishment measure is a sign of uncertainty, this is the wrong approach to the discussion
      I completely agree. AT dispute truth is born and it is clear who is worth what. Frank trolls and other provocateurs, coupled with balabolov fly, went into the "skull". Of course, the administrative resource must be used against those that violate the requirements of the law and site rules.

      The site has left (or commented much less frequently) many well-reasoned and knowledgeable people. Perhaps the reason for this was the choir's "idle" or "all gone" style that became a style, in the stream of which any meaning is lost. Indeed, before commenting, often even an attempt to delve into is not made, not to look for materials on the topic! I read the title of the article, decided on the mood - and rather post (the highest chic - get into the top ten posts!)
      Therefore, I read comments less and less, comment more rarely.

      Z.Y. But the quality of the material on the site has deteriorated greatly. I think most of the ridiculous mistakes could be eliminated by banal proofreading. Here is a field for making an effort.
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 24 October 2017 17: 26 New
        +8
        I agree. The people are slowly scattering, articles are becoming increasingly politicized, and there are more and more hats instead of discussion.
        Still, the original version of the site was preferable.
    4. ver_
      ver_ 29 October 2017 08: 36 New
      0
      ... the flock must be sent, for that and the shepherds in the flock ..
  9. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 24 October 2017 07: 39 New
    19
    I have not seen the original article, but I can easily understand the indignation of the author of this.

    I’d like to add the following to the text above: "outdated"The RD-180 is actually an engine that is practically in its class that cannot be surpassed for physical reasons. No one can, and even more so an amer. The efficiency indicators given by a rocket engine depend on the pressure level in the combustion chamber. At the same time, it reads that the practical limit pressure of 250-300 atmospheres, into which plug the RD-180 gets. Why practical? And maybe to increase it further? Because the graph of the dependence of the specific impulse on the pressure in the combustion chamber in the region of the indicated pressures becomes almost horizontal. , and the specific impulse will increase by units. At the same time, it is even intuitively clear that pressure increase is an increase in the mass of the engine. At the same time, the walls can’t just be made thicker - the cooling parameters will go awry; one curtain cooling is not enough. In addition, the mass increase is deterioration of the thrust-to-weight ratio of the engine, for the same thrust more weight of the structure.This indicator is important.

    Have what? If the United States spends 100500 billion greens, they will probably be able to create some kind of analogue of the RD-180. Maybe even + 1-3 units of specific impulse. But they will never be able to make the best engine in terms of the totality of parameters, regardless of any money or brainstorming.

    BE-4 is a thing in itself; let's see what will be the output - especially in terms of price and reliability.
    1. ICT
      ICT 24 October 2017 08: 04 New
      +3
      Quote: Gormengast
      RD-180 is actually an engine that is practically in its class,

      RD-180 is an export option


      I read like that article by the link provided by the visitor IN (FOR LONG BEFORE THE FIRST ARTICLE)
      the article is very detailed and with descriptions of many questions on the modernization of the original engine

      in the Kratz there everything turned out that way, our camera is full of nothing, but the whole kit is made on American grandmothers and protected by their patents,
      those. we either sell it to them or plop ourselves at a whistle
      1. Gormenghast
        Gormenghast 24 October 2017 08: 20 New
        +6
        This is easily refuted by the presence (and production!) Of the RD-170/171. This engine is purely Soviet, the mattresses had nothing to do with it - how does it give out the same characteristics as the supposedly advanced American one? And why change something if the source is excellent? belay

        Type: bearded commies with a sledgehammer hollowed out some kind of dense RD-170, but then enlightened Americans came and ... did the same! laughing Brad.
      2. user1212
        user1212 24 October 2017 11: 12 New
        +2
        Quote: TIT
        in the Kratz there everything turned out that way, our camera is full of nothing, but the whole kit is made on American grandmothers and protected by their patents,

        The body kit is a loose concept. A plastic tag in English is also a kit. Actually a bit wrong. Americans put their control and telemetry electronics.
    2. rocket757
      rocket757 24 October 2017 10: 47 New
      +3
      And I "like" how the Yankees advertise / extol their own STEP in the way of creating advanced (as they heat) rocket engines !!!
      I know what they emphasize ... e in achieving their goals, and even more in "washing out" their failures.
      In short, the code of the price of their new products will fly away to space distances ... and the result from such heights will be far !!!
    3. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 24 October 2017 15: 29 New
      +2
      Quote: Gormengast
      I would like to add to the above text: the "obsolete" RD-180 is actually an engine that is practically in its class cannot be surpassed for physical reasons.


      Well, we have a guy (I would like to say a genius, I'm afraid to jinx it), who suggested changing the parameters of the flowing jet by introducing a nozzle into the nozzle, which increases the efficiency of the nozzle itself. At the prototype level, the idea works. Curious to see the results when scaling.
      The idea is quite interesting - it's a pity there is no funding.
      If successful, it is an increase in the efficiency of rocket engines.
      1. oops
        oops 26 October 2017 04: 31 New
        0
        If you mean a retractable nozzle, then it has long been used in military missiles.
  10. Orionvit
    Orionvit 24 October 2017 08: 00 New
    +6
    If you count how many technologies (and with your minds), went west in the period of the 90s, but they still didn’t do much that was done in the USSR. Vague doubts torment me that the technological "superiority" of the West is, frankly, blown. There are some among us (those who judge the level of progress, judged by iPhones) who say that all this is nonsense, the United States is a great technological power, and Russian engines are bought because they are cheaper. Like the laws of the market, why produce at exorbitant prices, if you can buy cheaper? But only time shows, the West is blown away, in terms of technology.
    1. aiden
      aiden 25 October 2017 00: 40 New
      +1
      It is absolutely true that if our industries had such funding, then they would have teleported into space a long time ago.
    2. Nukesmoke
      Nukesmoke 25 October 2017 19: 33 New
      0
      Here is an interesting question. The Americans, in theory, should have beckoned our specialists, but they should have done new engines according to the local standard. However, either the Americans decided to save, or to cheat, or to rely on themselves. As a result, because of the "cheap" taxiways, they seriously damaged engine building.
  11. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 24 October 2017 08: 19 New
    23
    sad
    In response to Shipilov’s illiterate note, a thunderstorm IN Skomorokhov broke out in an equally illiterate article.
    1. Whose RD-180. I do not know (too lazy to look for) the details of the contract with Energoash with PV, but the following is known:
    a) no Russian missiles exist and are not being designed for this - the best of the kerosene - engine. Shipilov is right about this.
    b) RD-180 is superior to RD-170 in terms of thrust to the nozzle and UI, and fundamentally superior to RD-171 in accident statistics - the RD-180 simply does not have them. The merit is PV or Lockheed I do not know, but judging by the rest of the engines, not Energomash.
    2. The Americans could not. Of course they couldn’t, because the RD-180 was not made in the garage, but remained an inheritance from Energy. It would be madness to repeat all this in the USA, especially since the Americans had exactly the same inheritance from the Shuttle - RS-68. No one in their right mind would develop such a thing from scratch, but since he was already with Rocketdayne, why not.
    3. Americans can’t. The Americans, in addition to the Atlas, have two of their heavy missiles. Two more heavy and three superheavy ones are in development. In recent years, Americans have made heavy rockets as scalded, it is already some kind of national sport.
    Including three new rocket engines are being made. Two of them are already on fire tests.
    Previously, Americans were not very worried about rocket engines, since in the 70s they went into solid propellant rocket engines and hydrogen. But now, with the advent of commercial space exploration, rocket engines have become relevant again. I repeat, liquid propellant rocket engines have become relevant for merchants, and NASA with DOD is quite satisfied with hydrogen / solid propellant rocket propulsion.
    3.1 Americans cannot. The Americans made two EELVs, not one. Both took off. Disappear tomorrow by the pike, everything RD-180 - YULA will notice, but America - no. Responsible launches will go to Delta, checkpoints - to Falcon. Even for the money will be about one to one.
    4. McCain is angry. McCain is a politician of the patriotic genre. It’s just for him to give taxpayers' money (and what money - from the budget of DOD!) To Russians. And it can be understood, I think. Import substitution, that’s all.
    1. nmaxxen
      nmaxxen 24 October 2017 12: 24 New
      +7
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      NASA with DoD is quite comfortable with hydrogen / solid propellant rocket propulsion.

      they are happy because they are vulgar bureaucrats, sawmills of the budget.
      Hydrogen was considered promising in the 60s of the last century. Since its supporters believed that the complexity and cost of structures and infrastructure associated with its use, designers and operators can minimize.
      Later in practice it turned out that this does not work, but since you can’t quickly turn off the bureaucratic and PR-media rails, we decided to turn out in two ways:
      1. To create, to the absurdity, the dear freak Delta Heavy, but to justify its existence by terribly secret military applications - do not care, the illiterate authorities at the top will be satisfied with these mantras.
      2. Attach solid propellant crutches to the hydrogen imperfection.
      Call them accelerators, to mask the impossibility of creating (at reasonable prices and timing) a fully hydrogen launch vehicle (even the shuttle was originally thought to be completely hydrogen)
      Thus, create an illusion among the authorities and the illiterate public that this is only
      a slight refinement. - of the type that can be handled without a fundamental alteration of the hydrogen carrier structure.
      As a result, we get a miserable, flawed, expensive shuttle that still had to be thrown into the trash despite monstrous image losses,
      and other freaks like the SLS projected from the components of the same shuttle.
      The hydrogen-rttt pair is the worst thing to do in the pH - they do not compensate for each other's shortcomings, but only increase the high cost and / or unreliability. The launch vehicle remains large and complex in terms of infrastructure and operation (due to hydrogen) and expensive (due to both).
      Even in such a fashionable ecology - all the purity of hydrogen is more than blocked by an absolutely monstrous exhaust from solid propellant rocket engines.
      1. models
        models 26 October 2017 10: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: nmaxxen
        they are happy because they are vulgar bureaucrats, sawmills of the budget.

        They are corrected. Won X-37 launched on Falcon where neither hydrogen nor solid propellant.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        1. Create an absurd dear freak Delta Heavy,
        They created Delta-4, which before the union of the Boeing and Lockheed missile units cost the same 70 million as Atlas-5. The price went after monopolization and at the same time with the Atlas.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        but justify its existence terribly secretly by military applications

        These applications are so terribly secret that even pedivicia knows about them. KH-11.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        The hydrogen-rttt pair is the worst thing to do in the pH - they do not compensate for each other's shortcomings
        Have Americans, Europeans, Indians, and Japanese forgotten to consult the best cushioned rocket engineers in Russia and are they using it?
        Quote: nmaxxen
        Later in practice it turned out that this does not work
        In practice, it turned out that it turns out even with the daughter of Amazon. It doesn’t work for Mask, who by the standards of the industry is a rogue, and for the USSR and the Russian Federation.
        1. Negro
          Negro 26 October 2017 19: 31 New
          0
          Quote: modeller
          Delta-4, which before the union of the Boeing and Lockheed missile units cost the same 70 million

          I do not remember such a figure. Where is she from?
          Quote: modeller
          It doesn’t work out for Mask, who by the standards of the industry

          Musk businessman, he works in a different logic. There is no need to make a perfect rocket if imperfect of the same performance is half the price, albeit heavier.
          1. models
            models 27 October 2017 05: 36 New
            0
            Quote: Negro
            I do not remember such a figure. Where is she from?
            Boeing was awarded a contract for 19 out of the 28 launches; Lockheed Martin was awarded a contract for the other 9. Boeing received $ 1.38 billion, and Lockheed Martin received $ 650 million for the launches. Anglova.
            Quote: Negro
            Musk businessman
            Bezos did the same, but hydrogen did.
            1. Negro
              Negro 27 October 2017 19: 26 New
              0
              Quote: modeller
              Boeing was awarded

              If you look at the information on the link in the wiki
              https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/eelv
              -program.htm
              then make sure everything is very muddy. The amount you describe is the payment of only one of the development steps. Specifically, the Delta is generally made according to the cost + scheme, it completely belongs to the military.
              Quote: modeller
              Bezos did the same, but hydrogen did.

              Bezos in this case is not a businessman, but rather an athlete.
              1. models
                models 28 October 2017 06: 39 New
                0
                Quote: Negro
                then make sure everything is very muddy
                Everything is clear there. It is necessary to read the article completely.
                Quote: Negro
                The amount you describe is the payment of only one of the development steps.
                2.03 billion is exactly for the launch of 28 EELV. About the amount of development was higher.
                Quote: Negro
                Specifically, the Delta is generally made according to the scheme of cost +
                From Saturn-Apollo to the Falcons, everything according to this scheme was done.
                Quote: Negro
                Bezos in this case is not a businessman, but rather an athlete.

                Nevertheless, he was able to make such an expensive hydrogen-oxygen engine with infrastructure.
                1. Negro
                  Negro 28 October 2017 10: 13 New
                  0
                  Quote: modeller
                  2.03 billion - this is exactly at the launch of 28 EELV

                  Not a. Never EELV, and especially Delta, did not leave for such money. It seems to me that this is not a launch fee, but a "readiness for launch" payment. However, you need to delve into the details
                  The commercial price of the Atlas, now, taking into account the SpaceX factor -
                  https://www.rocketbuilder.com/
                  starts from 109M and up to 179, if you wind all the options. State launches are always 1,5 times more expensive. That is, according to your version, the commercial Delta costs 50 million. This is crazy.
                  Quote: modeller
                  Nevertheless, he was able to make such an expensive hydrogen-oxygen engine with infrastructure.

                  Yes, because he does not expect to recapture the money. Mask's trick is that he received hydrogen performance on relatively simple and cheap kerosene technologies. Plus the same engine of the second and first stages.
                  And Musk began not with 80 billion, but with 100 million.
                  1. models
                    models 28 October 2017 13: 42 New
                    0
                    Quote: Negro
                    Not a. Never EELV, and especially Delta, did not leave for such money.
                    The article says that they left. Did you directly raise the budgets of the Pentagon and NASA for those years to state the opposite?
                    Quote: Negro
                    It seems to me that this is not a launch fee, but a "readiness for launch" payment.
                    Then why is the payment proportional to the number of starts?
                    Quote: Negro
                    The commercial price of the Atlas, now, taking into account the SpaceX factor
                    And in 2004, Delta-4M went for $ 133 M http://www.astronautix.com/d/delta4m.html
                    Instead of the SpaceX factor, there was a competition between Boeing and Lockheed.
                    Quote: Negro
                    That is, according to your version, the commercial Delta costs 50 million. This is crazy.
                    I remember the times when Proton-M flew for 25 lyamas.
                    Quote: Negro
                    Mask's trick is that he received hydrogen performance on relatively simple and cheap kerosene technologies.
                    I kind of know. But hydrogen, and he developed - the original Raptor. They refused because methane is easier to do on Mars.
                    1. Negro
                      Negro 28 October 2017 14: 03 New
                      0
                      Quote: modeller
                      The article says that they left

                      In the article, the figure of 2 yards applied to the 98th year. The first start of the Delta is the end of 1. And after the assessment you quoted, there are many others:
                      By mid-2004 program costs had increased over the approved 2002 program baseline estimate of $ 18.8 billion, resulting from the failure of the commercial market to materialize, additional access to space and mission assurance initiatives, and several other factors such as incorrect inflation assumptions and satellite weight growth

                      Since the figure is not decrypted, I used the word "muddy"
                      Quote: modeller
                      Then why is the payment proportional to the number of starts?

                      And why not?
                      Quote: modeller
                      And in 2004, Delta-4M left for $ 133 M

                      Yes, that seems to be true. Unlike 70M
                      Quote: modeller
                      I remember the times when Proton-M flew for 25 lyamas.

                      And I don’t remember, except for the statements of Roscosmos. Which proton launch cost so much?
                      Quote: modeller
                      They refused because methane is easier to do on Mars.

                      They refused, because hydrogen is "payin in the ass." The mask does not make sense to go to these technologies when it can remove the same loads on methane, albeit with less weight perfection.
                      1. models
                        models 28 October 2017 15: 26 New
                        0
                        Quote: Negro
                        In the article, the figure of 2 yards applied to the 98th year.
                        Launch contracts are concluded. Wholesale and several years in advance.
                        Quote: Negro
                        Yes, that seems to be true. Unlike 70M
                        The Japanese Delta (H-IIA) somehow takes off for 80 million, although there is a small series (maximum 4 per year) with all that it implies. With horseradish would the American Delta with more seriality and similar salaries fly more expensive? In addition to that, during the monopoly, ULA got everything from the manager to the installation technician.
                        Quote: Negro
                        And I don’t remember, except for the statements of Roscosmos. Which proton launch cost so much?
                        In the middle of 00x. And what are the claims of Roscosmos as a source of information about the price of Proton? About the fact that now 66 we also know from the ILS statement.
                        Quote: Negro
                        They refused, because hydrogen is "payin in the ass."
                        I do not remember such statements from either Mask or Shotwell. But about Mars it was.
                      2. Negro
                        Negro 28 October 2017 17: 07 New
                        0
                        Quote: modeller
                        Launch contracts are concluded.

                        To a non-existent rocket? No, they are not so concluded.
                        Have you read a piece about 18 billion? Have you given the real price of a minimum Delta of 133 million? What do you rest against?
                        Quote: modeller
                        Japanese Delta (H-IIA) somehow takes off for 80 million

                        98,5 were taken from Canadians. And there is an opinion that they tried very hard to get along.
                        Quote: modeller
                        In the middle of 00x. And what are the claims of Roscosmos as a source of information about the price of Proton?

                        The fact that peculiar people work there as bosses.
                        Again. Which proton launch cost so much?
                        Quote: modeller
                        About the fact that now 66 we also know from the ILS statement.

                        But this is a commercial offer (though, it seems like no one is already coming).
                        Quote: modeller
                        I do not remember such statements

                        About the ass - this is just Mask to the question of hydrogen. But look for laziness.
    2. SPACE
      SPACE 24 October 2017 21: 10 New
      +2
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      no Russian missiles exist and are not being designed for this - the best of the kerosene - engine. Shipilov is right about this.

      Of course, because the RD-180 is not peculiar to the Russian rocket engine manufacturing, in fact it is the only asymmetric liquid propellant rocket engine, all engines used on carriers are either single-chamber type RD-190, or four-chamber type RD-170, such arrangements with symmetrical nozzle arrangement are in every way more rational.
      1. Negro
        Negro 25 October 2017 00: 31 New
        +1
        Quote: SPACE
        such arrangements with symmetrical nozzle arrangement are in all respects more rational.

        That is, the only reason for the abandonment of the RD-180 on Russian missiles is the irrationality of the engine design? OK.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        they are happy because they are vulgar bureaucrats, sawmills of the budget.

        Because in terms of engineering - an absolutely reasonable scheme.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        Create absurdity dear freak Delta Heavy

        You are talking about the most powerful flying rocket. About the rocket, which, having the same weight as the Proton (733 tons against 705), displays 2 times more on the GPO (14,2 tons against 7,1). Heavy is an absolute technical masterpiece in its field.
        As for the economy, the heavy is quite comparable with Arian-5, given that Arian launches a heavy + light satellite at a time, and Heavy is capable of launching 2 heavy ones. That is, it could have been possible if it had not been for the position of the American military, who do not want to bother with this business of yours. This is the 600th Mercedes among missiles. But not the golden Rolls Royce, far from it. It costs so much because it costs so much.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        Call them accelerators to mask the inability to create (at reasonable prices and times) a fully hydrogen pH

        The EELV project initially envisioned a wide range of LV settings for loading. American hangar, you know. The use of accelerators in those years was the only reasonable solution. The URM scheme is more complex.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        miserable, flawed, expensive shuttle,

        The shuttle did everything that was required of him. He fully complied with the technical requirements.
        Quote: SPACE
        and other freaks like SLS

        SLS is, above all, a political project. Nevertheless, there is nothing even remotely resembling the capabilities of SLS, and until the appearance of BFR, Mask is not expected.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        The hydrogen-rttt pair is the worst thing to do in the pH

        Japanese, European, and American heavy launchers work according to this scheme. The operators are quite happy with them, and they are not in a hurry to refuse this scheme. The volcano will use boosters + rocket engines, NGL - boosters + solid propellant rocket engines, Arian-6 and SLS - boosters + hydrogen. The booster-free scheme so far is supposed to use Musk and Bezos.
        The scheme is attractive in that low-pulse solid propellant rocket propel the rocket out of the atmosphere, and high-pulse hydrogen engines form an orbit. Technically, it is very elegant. In economics, yes, there are questions. More precisely, they appeared thanks to SpaceX.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        and / or insecurity

        With regard to Ariana, this sounds especially original.
        Quote: nmaxxen
        absolutely monstrous exhaust from the solid propellant rocket engine

        It's about a mixture of nitrate with aluminum.
      2. Cannonball
        Cannonball 28 October 2017 12: 38 New
        0
        RD-180 - two-chamber. Where is the asymmetry?
        1. Negro
          Negro 28 October 2017 13: 04 New
          0
          Quote: Cannonball
          Where is the asymmetry?

          It is longer than wider. Another thing is that few people see the problem.
          1. Cannonball
            Cannonball 28 October 2017 14: 05 New
            0
            This does not deny its symmetry.
    3. models
      models 26 October 2017 10: 29 New
      0
      RS-68 is not an inheritance from the Shuttle, but the result of the same EELV program in which the RD-180 was banged. The inheritance from the Shuttle is RS-25 and SRB.
      1. Negro
        Negro 26 October 2017 19: 33 New
        0
        Quote: modeller
        RS-68 is not an inheritance from the Shuttle, but the result of the same EELV program in which the RD-180 was banged.

        Inheritance in the same sense that RD-180 is an inheritance of Energy.
        1. models
          models 27 October 2017 14: 20 New
          0
          Then the legacy of the lunar program, for RS-25 was a closed cycle (as in the "unique" RD-180), and RS-68 was open.
  12. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 24 October 2017 08: 23 New
    +6
    Everything seems to be correct, emotionally, with Roman, all the accents are verified, but for some reason his articles remind me of the speech of agent Klaus from 17 of the spring moments.
  13. True
    True 24 October 2017 08: 31 New
    +5
    Wow, so they have patents? So this is an American engine assembled in Russia. You do not call Apple a Chinese brand. Well, just scream. C400- Soviet, Croatian robots, missiles, those that do not fall, American. Nothing of their own, only majors and thieves.
    P.S. you can ban, the resource turns into a reserve of cheers-patriots.
    1. venik
      venik 24 October 2017 10: 38 New
      +3
      Quote: True
      Wow, so they have patents?

      =========
      My friend, and you, in fact, know WHAT IS "Patent" ?? This is a purely COMMERCIAL concept !!!
      1. Black5Raven
        Black5Raven 24 October 2017 23: 17 New
        0
        Quote: venik
        My friend, and you, in fact, know WHAT IS "Patent" ??

        Patent (from lat. Patens - open, clear, obvious from the full name) - a title document certifying the exclusive right, authorship and priority of an invention, utility model or industrial design.

        Enlighten yes
    2. SPACE
      SPACE 24 October 2017 21: 24 New
      +1
      Quote: True
      Wow, so they have patents? So this is an American engine assembled in Russia. You do not call Apple a Chinese brand. Well, just scream. C400- Soviet, Croatian robots, missiles, those that do not fall, American. Nothing of their own, only majors and thieves.

      This engine, which has no analogues in the world, was created and is made and it belongs to Russia. tongue . But your Americans can’t fly into space on their own, they can’t efficiently enrich uranium, they don’t have icebreakers at all, Abrams without a loading machine sucks, the F-35 is just an unarmed iron ... lol
      1. True
        True 25 October 2017 00: 49 New
        +1
        Quote: SPACE
        And here are your Americans

        What are they mine?
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. free
    free 24 October 2017 09: 17 New
    +7
    NOTDear lovers of quotes and applause to foreign residents who spit towards Russia! You’ve made a mistake, this is somewhat not the platform where you can do this. And you do not belong here and not at all alas.
    Cons would have to be returned.
  16. Gransasso
    Gransasso 24 October 2017 09: 37 New
    +3
    "... RD-180 is made exclusively in Russia, by Russian hands and from Russian materials. The only material that the United States provides is dollars ..."


    The author ... cries of the soul is good .... but the question is: whose electronics is on this engine? ... Amersky Ali Russian .. who developed it and physically produces / installs it?
    1. papas-57
      papas-57 24 October 2017 21: 24 New
      +2
      `` but the question is: whose electronics is on this engine. '' Are you sure that it’s not Chinese. I do not rule it out.
  17. zak167
    zak167 24 October 2017 09: 42 New
    +1
    This Shipilov is another liberal. Which only can bleat on Russia.
  18. Akim
    Akim 24 October 2017 09: 57 New
    19
    Quote: TIT
    in the Kratz there everything turned out that way, our camera is full of nothing, but the whole kit is made on American grandmothers and protected by their patents,

    Well, this is precisely the example of consciously distorting a part of information for the manipulation of consciousness by an inexperienced reader, who is ready to take a word and who is too lazy to do a little searching and reading information. In fact, Mr. Shipilov simply substitutes concepts - such as once the US patent, then the rights to these developments belong to the States. However, it is not difficult to google or find all these patent numbers on the website of the US Patent Office. And here a very interesting thing will be revealed - in all patents the right holder specifies none other than Energomash! Moreover, if you track the history of the patent and its ownership (the patent office website allows it), it turns out that the patents have only one (the first and only) right holder - Energomash and the rights to the patents have not been transferred to anyone. In addition, all of these US patents are preceded by Russian patents registered earlier in time. The conclusion is simple - Energomash simply registered all his developments with the American Patent Bureau, so that unscrupulous "partners" would not snitch them away .. they did not trust the campaign too much. But from this registration of the development did not become American property, because patents clearly indicate the copyright holder.
    http://lpre.de/energomash/RD-180/index.htm по этой ссылке подробнее по теме, а в конце статьи есть раздел "Использованные источники информации" со ссылками на патенты - только кликай и просвещайся.
  19. Akuzenka
    Akuzenka 24 October 2017 10: 04 New
    +2
    Bravo, author! I have long been waiting for something like that. Already going to leave with "VO" because of the reasons voiced by the author.
    1. True
      True 24 October 2017 11: 38 New
      +9
      Quote: AKuzenka
      Already going to leave with "VO" because of the reasons voiced by the author.

      Not on Kiselyov’s Twitter for an hour? There is only good news and victories, victories ...
  20. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  21. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Just a man
        Just a man 24 October 2017 10: 51 New
        +3
        Has it exploded? The reaction went quickly.
        1. aiw
          aiw 24 October 2017 11: 15 New
          +1
          This is your main argument, are you not capable of more? Ai-ai ...
          1. True
            True 24 October 2017 11: 46 New
            +3
            Quote: aiw
            This is your main argument, are you not capable of more? Ay-ay.

            Capable of. Scha will begin to be rude. Or ask how many factories you personally opened and why so few. Local patriots, they are. Like in a joke: I, and I will all of you now ...
            1. Just a man
              Just a man 24 October 2017 11: 57 New
              +2
              Are you sick? Why are you so miserable then, not smart sarcasm, not fresh thoughts.
              1. True
                True 24 October 2017 12: 53 New
                +3
                So many comments, and all some kind of antics. You do not argue your position in any way, but simply say to all those who disagree that you’re like that. Reread, I would be ashamed.
                1. Just a man
                  Just a man 24 October 2017 13: 10 New
                  +5
                  And that little hands tremble? Reread your comments, more like cock cock with a lot of insults against opponents. Conscientious you are our handshake. And teach your wife to cook soup better or whatever your brother’s spouse N2 is accepted.
                  1. True
                    True 24 October 2017 23: 50 New
                    +1
                    Yes you are sick. I won’t help you.
  22. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 24 October 2017 10: 44 New
    +3
    Is Samara in Oklahoma? Is Chelyabinsk in Idaho? And this is also a Pratt & Whitney company? Apparently not. And this is the very stone that prevented the Americans from simply starting to make the RD-180 themselves.
    Those who hate our country will, of course, begin to speak on the topic that "everyone can do there, they just don’t want to." Even as they want. But they can not. The Chinese would also be happy to sell their copies of the Sushka, and they would buy them from them. But the turbines could not be a mess.


    RD-180 is really not expensive.
    The development of a new engine, which means costs associated with this, should lie at the cost of the entire series, say for 10 years. This means that an American engine with similar characteristics will cost 40-50% more for the US budget.
    It is not rational to repeat the RD-180, due to different nomenclatures of materials and their characteristics - it is easier to develop a new engine according to the local documentation (what has already been done and the engine is in the process of fire tests).
    "... The Americans thought that they would start working with us, and in four years they would take our technology and reproduce it themselves. I immediately told them: you will spend more than a billion dollars and ten years. Four years have passed, and they say: yes "Six years have passed. Another years have passed, they say: another eight years have passed. Seventeen years have passed, and they have not reproduced a single engine. Now they only need billions of dollars for bench equipment for this," he said back in 2012. the creator of the RD-180 engine, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Boris Katorgin ". https://lenta.ru/articles/2017/05/17/rd180/

    But the Americans are developing and some samples are already undergoing fire tests:
    Currently, the American Blue Origin and Aerojet Rocketdyne are creating a replacement for the Russian RD-180 engine. The companies compete with each other, each plans to certify its unit no later than 2019. Young Blue Origin presented a working sample of BE-4 (Blue Engine-4) in March, but bench tests conducted in May were unsuccessful. The Aerojet Rocketdyne, which created the engines for the American lunar rocket and time-tested, seems to be lagging behind: only in May did it carry out the first fire tests of the precamera of the AR1 unit

    Well, about the fact that the Chinese could not "tear" the turbines - they mastered the technology of growing turbine single-crystal blades and the resource of the turbines is already approaching the original.
    The world does not stand still - everything is developing.
  23. The comment was deleted.
    1. Sharansky
      Sharansky 24 October 2017 11: 32 New
      +2
      you yourself would first get out of it before dipping others
      1. Just a man
        Just a man 24 October 2017 11: 46 New
        +2
        So get out, or else you stink until the end of your awkward life
  24. Ryabtsev Grigory Evgenievich
    Ryabtsev Grigory Evgenievich 24 October 2017 11: 28 New
    +2
    If any process parameter is not set correctly, the result will be unpredictable. Figuratively speaking, it is possible to observe the composition of Damascus steel up to thousandths of a percent, but it is worthwhile to make a mistake in the forging temperature by five degrees and in the force of impact when forging a bundle of metal rods (I'm not talking about the sequence of forging packages) and the output instead of the blade is a nail. Yes, alloyed, beautiful, but not with the characteristics and capabilities that we expected. It is the exact observance of the entire technological process that allows you to get the expected result. I doubt, however, that they would sell ALL technology to the mattress.
  25. Rey_ka
    Rey_ka 24 October 2017 11: 49 New
    +8
    With such a level of education as we are now, we will soon catch up with the “teachers” and overtake ... Let me remind you in the USA that the study of fractions and equations begins in the 8th grade. But I was indignant at the clan assembly that this multiplication table was extended to the whole third class ... At one time, I remember with a belt hanging next to it I learned one evening in the evening ...
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 24 October 2017 14: 36 New
      +9
      Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye!
      I also remember such a cute \ effective stimulator of brain activity ... officer belt !!!
      It seems like brrrr, but I remember the multiplication table at least during the day, at night ... and I still have time for cashiers to indicate errors in checks.
      Here it is the dignity of the SOVIET education !!! Yes, and "progressive" methods of education !!!
  26. Radikal
    Radikal 24 October 2017 12: 50 New
    +2
    Quote: Vlad.by
    To help the FSB. Special lists and all that. At the right moment, the shipovye and their lizuns will be called in.

    good
  27. Vard
    Vard 24 October 2017 12: 52 New
    0
    A grain of chicken ... this is part of the company, so that when you conclude a new supply contract to bring down the price ... like even already on Topwar they say that the engine is out of date ...
  28. neoshef
    neoshef 24 October 2017 12: 54 New
    +3
    I don’t understand why such articles are needed. Patriots are well aware of what our country is capable of, it is simply impossible to prove something to Kam Shepilov. These critters-grant-eaters, living on handouts from the State Department, and throwing in the money from there, will never change.
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. The comment was deleted.
  31. kaon3000
    kaon3000 24 October 2017 13: 55 New
    +3
    There is a lack of an effective manager .. Such as I.V. Stalin ...
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 24 October 2017 14: 53 New
      +7
      What about Beria? For all that, an effective MANAGER was ....
      Stalin is, in my opinion, the one who set a certain development vector ... something like that.
  32. groks
    groks 24 October 2017 14: 42 New
    +1
    Probably there is some kind of agreement with P & W, and there it is necessary to look at who owns the rights to the engine. Moreover, there is a joint venture. Moreover, the documentation has been transferred. It can easily turn out that everything belongs and really does not belong to us. For which we know who thanks. That's them and it is worth swearing at, and not at someone who takes advantage of the situation and decided to make fun of. Yak von Lockheed stubbornly, without any agreements at all.
    Hatred is not patriotism.
  33. bk316
    bk316 24 October 2017 14: 47 New
    +9
    It would be so long ago.
    It is time to understand the war has begun and the weapon of our enemy lies in it. And it doesn’t matter that the lie is small.
    If you just keep silent the damage done to us will all grow and grow and someday another feather will break the back of a camel.
    Every EVERY citizen of the Russian Federation should know THEY - LIARS.
  34. rocket757
    rocket757 24 October 2017 14: 49 New
    +6
    Quote: neoshef
    I don’t understand why such articles are needed. Patriots are well aware of what our country is capable of, it is simply impossible to prove something to Kam Shepilov. These critters-grant-eaters, living on handouts from the State Department, and throwing in the money from there, will never change.

    In the process of disputes and reading you get the same useful INFU !!! I noticed interesting, rummaged around the sources and oops! there is infa, which he himself might not have noticed.
    It really helps to puzzle the “youngsters” from the atishniks ... otherwise they are very “smart”, “well-read” ... in short, to know everything!?!?!?
    Believe me, more than once it turned out to be puzzling, forcing them to reflect, to seek confirmation or refutation of information.
    They are gambling guys, they don’t like to lose ... not always, but often I manage to convince them.
    I think this is mine ... in short, they started to think well.
  35. opus
    opus 24 October 2017 14: 55 New
    12
    Quote: Author: Roman Skomorokhov
    Summary:

    what is it about (in the article)? and who is Andrei Shipilov-xs!
    1 and 2 answer was not given by Shipilov, but by academician Boris Katorgin (one of the creators of RD-180, TNA in particular)

    Question: - Why Americans, having received the right to reproduce RD-180, can not do it for many years?

    Katorgin, Boris Ivanovich - Americans very pragmatic. In the 1990's, at the very beginning of working with us, they realized that in the energy field we were far ahead of them and we needed to adopt these technologies. For example, our RD-170 engine in one start due to a larger specific impulse could take out payload two tons more than their most powerful F-1, which meant at that time 20 millions of dollars in gain. They announced a competition for 400 tons of thrust engine for their Atlases, which our RD-180 won. Then the Americans thought they would start working with us, and in four years we’ll take our technologies and reproduce them ourselves. I immediately told them: you will spend more than a billion dollars and ten years. Four years have passed, and they say: yes, it takes six years. Years passed, they say: no, we need another eight years. Seventeen years have passed, and they have not reproduced a single engine. They are now only on the stand equipment for this need billions of dollars. We at Energomash have stands where the same RD-170 engine can be tested in the pressure chamber, the jet power of which reaches 27 million kilowatts.

    3. Yes, on American money.
    However, like all the other LRE Russia.
    Based on the USSR LPRE

    Katorgin solved the problem of suppressing high-frequency combustion instability due to the development of antipulsation walls in the same combustion chamber
    and thanks to this we have a lineup based on RD-170
    4. It is made strange.
    Verification of the RF SP showed that in 2008-2009gg. the enterprise’s activity was unprofitable moreover, the main share of the loss was work on the implementation of RD-180 and RD-171М.

    "In this regard, only in 2008-2009gg. Loss from their sales amounted to about 880 million rubles, or almost 68% of all losses of Energomash during this period,"
    - noted in the materials of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation.
    If you translate into household:
    The Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation revealed that the Energomash enterprise was selling Russian RD-180 rocket engines for the US Atlas-5 launch vehicles for half the cost of their production.
    All this is strange and confirmation of the RD-191 (half RD-180, quarter RD-171).

    RD 191 standing on the "armament" of the Angara RN, in relative prices, is considered one of the most expensive kerosene LPR in the world - 36 000 $ / ton (250 million rubles). / on 2014 /
    / a would have cost 60% of RD-180, i.e. 10 mil $ * 60% = 6mil. $. however, WORTH, WHY THAT, FOR 9 MIL $ - in 2014 prices.
    So the RF SP is right?
    The most "cheap" closed-cycle engine can be considered LRE XK NUMX-33. On condition that production is restored, the price of the 1-33 NK modification for the new 1-2 Union PH can be up to 3 25 $ / ton (000 million $). / on 4,5 /
    1 - Gas generator; 2 - Turbine; 3 - Fuel supply (kerosene); 4 - Oxidant supply (oxygen); 5 - Fuel Pump; 6 - Oxidizer Pump; 7 - Removal of part of the fuel to cool the nozzle; 8 - Removal of gas / fuel / oxidizer gas generator mixture from the turbine to the combustion chamber; 9 - Transfer the oxidizer to the gas generator


    5. Can not
    RD-180 we can not use for themselves

    therefore, they were also wise with the RD-180M: no one in their right mind would sculpt a new LRE (analogous to the RD-180) having both the technology and the "rights"
    RD-180 with a 400 ton load is two times smaller than a 170 RD with 800 ton load. In the RD-191, designed for our new Angara missile, the thrust is 200 tons. What do these engines have in common? All of them have one turbopump each, but the RD-170 has four combustion chambers, the “American” RD-180 has two chambers, and the RD-191 has one. Each engine needs its own turbopump unit - because if a four-chamber RD-170 consumes about 2,5 tons of fuel per second, for which a 180 turbine pump of thousands of kilowatts was developed, for example, more than twice the capacity of the reactor of the Arktika atomic icebreaker, then the two-chamber RD-180 is only half, 1,2 tons.
    The combustion chamber on all these engines is the same (almost), only their number is different.
    In one such chamber with a diameter of just 380, millimeters burns a little more than 0,6 tons of fuel per second
    6. "titanic"?
    what
    If only the clown McCain to see.
    Titanic is: the lunar program, the atomic bomb, and so on.
    And so not shaky not rolls.
    Private traders (the same BE-4), at their own expense
    Blue BE-4 Blue Origin does not require a single taxpayer dollar.
    Its development is fully paid for by the private sector, does not require government funding for research and development. NASA's recent conclusion, “Justification for another than a full and open tender” for the purchase of additional Shuttle-Shuttle engines, says that a traditional engine development program will cost over 2,2 billion dollars.
    Blue BE-4 will provide a higher thrust - 1,1 million pounds against 860 000 pounds sterling for RD-180, which increases payload and eliminates side steps with an RDTTL cost of more than 10 million dollars in a single launch for comparable missions.
    https://www.blueorigin.com/be4

    Yes, the Americans and North Korean engines on the PH "Atlas would have put (" Scits in God's eyes dew "), if they were, and if they got it CHEAPLY (see the comparison of the cost of RD-180 and RD-191)

    Quote: Author: Roman Skomorokhov
    Blue Origin introduced the new engine, BE-4, which is expected to replace the RD-180 with 2020 of the year.
    The key word is presumed. If it works as it should - we'll see.


    Ready in 2019
    X-NUMX-X-NUMX, meeting the congressionally mandated deadline. At least 4 extends beyond 2019.

    Yes they will.
    Over Mask, too, mocked.
    "Pasta monster Ilona Mask, or the logical outcome of the adventure" Dmitry Konanykhin
    https://topwar.ru/95392-makaronnyy-monstr-ilona-m
    aska-ili-zakonomernyy-itog-avantyury.html
    1. groks
      groks 24 October 2017 16: 19 New
      +3
      All this is strange

      Nothing strange. The strange thing is that the joint venture saw this.
    2. Rplay
      Rplay 24 October 2017 17: 54 New
      +1
      Quote: opus
      Quote: Author: Roman Skomorokhov
      Summary:

      what is it about (in the article)? and who is Andrei Shipilov-xs!
      1 and 2 answer was not given by Shipilov, but by academician Boris Katorgin (one of the creators of RD-180, TNA in particular)

      Question: - Why Americans, having received the right to reproduce RD-180, can not do it for many years?

      Katorgin, Boris Ivanovich - Americans very pragmatic. In the 1990's, at the very beginning of working with us, they realized that in the energy field we were far ahead of them and we needed to adopt these technologies. For example, our RD-170 engine in one start due to a larger specific impulse could take out payload two tons more than their most powerful F-1, which meant at that time 20 millions of dollars in gain. They announced a competition for 400 tons of thrust engine for their Atlases, which our RD-180 won. Then the Americans thought they would start working with us, and in four years we’ll take our technologies and reproduce them ourselves. I immediately told them: you will spend more than a billion dollars and ten years. Four years have passed, and they say: yes, it takes six years. Years passed, they say: no, we need another eight years. Seventeen years have passed, and they have not reproduced a single engine. They are now only on the stand equipment for this need billions of dollars. We at Energomash have stands where the same RD-170 engine can be tested in the pressure chamber, the jet power of which reaches 27 million kilowatts.

      3. Yes, on American money.
      However, like all the other LRE Russia.
      Based on the USSR LPRE

      Katorgin solved the problem of suppressing high-frequency combustion instability due to the development of antipulsation walls in the same combustion chamber
      and thanks to this we have a lineup based on RD-170
      4. It is made strange.
      Verification of the RF SP showed that in 2008-2009gg. the enterprise’s activity was unprofitable moreover, the main share of the loss was work on the implementation of RD-180 and RD-171М.

      "In this regard, only in 2008-2009gg. Loss from their sales amounted to about 880 million rubles, or almost 68% of all losses of Energomash during this period,"
      - noted in the materials of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation.
      If you translate into household:
      The Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation revealed that the Energomash enterprise was selling Russian RD-180 rocket engines for the US Atlas-5 launch vehicles for half the cost of their production.
      All this is strange and confirmation of the RD-191 (half RD-180, quarter RD-171).

      RD 191 standing on the "armament" of the Angara RN, in relative prices, is considered one of the most expensive kerosene LPR in the world - 36 000 $ / ton (250 million rubles). / on 2014 /
      / a would have cost 60% of RD-180, i.e. 10 mil $ * 60% = 6mil. $. however, WORTH, WHY THAT, FOR 9 MIL $ - in 2014 prices.
      So the RF SP is right?
      The most "cheap" closed-cycle engine can be considered LRE XK NUMX-33. On condition that production is restored, the price of the 1-33 NK modification for the new 1-2 Union PH can be up to 3 25 $ / ton (000 million $). / on 4,5 /
      1 - Gas generator; 2 - Turbine; 3 - Fuel supply (kerosene); 4 - Oxidant supply (oxygen); 5 - Fuel Pump; 6 - Oxidizer Pump; 7 - Removal of part of the fuel to cool the nozzle; 8 - Removal of gas / fuel / oxidizer gas generator mixture from the turbine to the combustion chamber; 9 - Transfer the oxidizer to the gas generator


      5. Can not
      RD-180 we can not use for themselves

      therefore, they were also wise with the RD-180M: no one in their right mind would sculpt a new LRE (analogous to the RD-180) having both the technology and the "rights"
      RD-180 with a 400 ton load is two times smaller than a 170 RD with 800 ton load. In the RD-191, designed for our new Angara missile, the thrust is 200 tons. What do these engines have in common? All of them have one turbopump each, but the RD-170 has four combustion chambers, the “American” RD-180 has two chambers, and the RD-191 has one. Each engine needs its own turbopump unit - because if a four-chamber RD-170 consumes about 2,5 tons of fuel per second, for which a 180 turbine pump of thousands of kilowatts was developed, for example, more than twice the capacity of the reactor of the Arktika atomic icebreaker, then the two-chamber RD-180 is only half, 1,2 tons.
      The combustion chamber on all these engines is the same (almost), only their number is different.
      In one such chamber with a diameter of just 380, millimeters burns a little more than 0,6 tons of fuel per second
      6. "titanic"?
      what
      If only the clown McCain to see.
      Titanic is: the lunar program, the atomic bomb, and so on.
      And so not shaky not rolls.
      Private traders (the same BE-4), at their own expense
      Blue BE-4 Blue Origin does not require a single taxpayer dollar.
      Its development is fully paid for by the private sector, does not require government funding for research and development. NASA's recent conclusion, “Justification for another than a full and open tender” for the purchase of additional Shuttle-Shuttle engines, says that a traditional engine development program will cost over 2,2 billion dollars.
      Blue BE-4 will provide a higher thrust - 1,1 million pounds against 860 000 pounds sterling for RD-180, which increases payload and eliminates side steps with an RDTTL cost of more than 10 million dollars in a single launch for comparable missions.
      https://www.blueorigin.com/be4

      Yes, the Americans and North Korean engines on the PH "Atlas would have put (" Scits in God's eyes dew "), if they were, and if they got it CHEAPLY (see the comparison of the cost of RD-180 and RD-191)

      Quote: Author: Roman Skomorokhov
      Blue Origin introduced the new engine, BE-4, which is expected to replace the RD-180 with 2020 of the year.
      The key word is presumed. If it works as it should - we'll see.


      Ready in 2019
      X-NUMX-X-NUMX, meeting the congressionally mandated deadline. At least 4 extends beyond 2019.

      Yes they will.
      Over Mask, too, mocked.
      "Pasta monster Ilona Mask, or the logical outcome of the adventure" Dmitry Konanykhin
      https://topwar.ru/95392-makaronnyy-monstr-ilona-m
      aska-ili-zakonomernyy-itog-avantyury.html

      I will support the quote. An article about cheers. But we must write about the facts that take place. RD-180 is not used in Russian carriers. Instead, the stub RD-191 is used. Those. instead of a normal URM with a thrust of 360 tons, we have a very "environmentally friendly" missile that performs unclear what tasks.
      Regarding the Mask and Bezos - they will finish their moves, only for a long time it will be. Especially the Mask according to the scheme with full gasification. No one has made such serial engines, only the USSR in its RD-270 for the unflown UR-700 and the USA in the experimental engine.
      1. SPACE
        SPACE 24 October 2017 20: 43 New
        +1
        Quote: opus
        Therefore, we cannot use RD-180 for ourselves, and we were wise with RD-180M: no one in their right mind will sculpt a new LRE (analogue of RD-180) having both technology and "rights"

        Quote: Rplay
        . But we must write about the facts that take place. RD-180 is not used in Russian media

        For the carrier Rus-M, it was supposed to use exactly RD-180, and RD-180M as such does not exist. In general, the RD-180 is not peculiar to the Russian rocket engine, in fact it is the only asymmetric liquid propellant rocket engine, all engines are either single-chamber type RD-190, or four-chamber type RD-170, such arrangements with symmetrical nozzle arrangement are in all respects rational. Of course, they sucked it into the Americans, it still surprises, how?))) But like all two-chamber cameras, for those who think it is, in principle, unpromising.
        Z.Y. The article is correct, you need to fight lies, and you need to educate idiots ...
        1. opus
          opus 24 October 2017 21: 24 New
          +1
          Quote: SPACE
          For the carrier Rus-M it was supposed to use RD-180, and RD-180М

          180M, but I brought it (It’s not liberasty- this JSC NPO Energomash named after academician V.P.Glushko drew)

          if you do not see, then left down.
          There are many variations of them: RD-180 * (and for Russia M and something else for which), all 4.
          But on paper

          RD-180 was never intended (and could not) to the "Rus-M"
          http://engine.space/dejatelnost/engines/rd-180/

          Quote: SPACE
          This is the only asymmetrical LRE,

          cool new term ..
          What do you mean by "symmetry"?
          What is there to baby "symmetry"?

          Two-chamber mean?
          So what.
          On the basis of RD-170 will make and three-chamber
        2. Gransasso
          Gransasso 24 October 2017 21: 30 New
          0
          Quote: SPACE
          For the carrier Rus-M, it was supposed to use exactly RD-180, and
        3. Gransasso
          Gransasso 24 October 2017 21: 33 New
          0
          Quote: SPACE
          For the carrier Rus-M, it was supposed to use exactly RD-180



          For Russia-M, a modification of the RD-180V was developed .. and they managed to cut some money ....



          The scientific and production organization Energomash stopped working on the engine for the Rus-M rocket. According to Interfax with reference to the executive director of the enterprise, Vladimir Solntsev, this decision is due to the fact that earlier Roskosmos abandoned the rocket itself.
          Engines for Rus-M were designed on the basis of RD-180 engines. These are export engines supplied to the United States for use in Atlas missiles: despite the fact that they are formally sold by the joint venture NPO Energomash and Pratt & Whitney, the RD-180 is entirely produced in Russia. According to Solntsev, the designers have already completed the stages of preliminary and technical design of the new engine, however, due to the inability to use them anywhere other than in the Rus-M rocket, the work had to be curtailed.
      2. opus
        opus 24 October 2017 21: 07 New
        +3
        Quote: Rplay
        full gasification scheme.

        "full gasification" - what kind of beast is this?
        but sorry it came to (RD-270): full flow staged combustion cycle (Full flow staged combustion, FFSCC)

        Quote: Rplay
        only USSR in his RD-270

        The USSR did not make it either, much less in series.
        1) V.P. Mishin. Korolev, S.S. Kryukov, K.D. Bushuev and M.V. Melnikov
        memorandum "On the inexpediency of developing engines on AT + UDMH with a thrust of 600 t"
        2) Expertise of NII-88 (director Yu.A. Mozhorin) on the advisability of developing an 600 thrust engine
        3)
        During firing tests of the engine, high-frequency oscillations were noted in the reducing gas generator. GGV went through a certain amount of testing on models, but it was not enough to choose a promising design option. In full-scale version, the completion of the GGV could not be completed.
        4) In total, from 23 October 1967 to 24 July 1969, 27 fire tests of 22 lapping engines were carried out. Three engines were retested, and one three times. All tests were short-term, with a pressure in the combustion chamber up to 255 atm.

        1 2 + + + 3 4
        August 1969 - as directed by the Ministry of General Engineering, work on the RD-270 engine was suspended due to the lack of a decision on further work on the LV-700 LV.

        December 31 1970 - the cessation of all work on the UR-700 rocket, including the development of the RD-270 rocket engine.

        reference: TO THE HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RD-270 LIQUID ROCKET ENGINE
        FOR UR-700 CARRIER ROCKETS
        Sudakov V.S., Kotelnikova R.N., Chvanov V.K.
        NPO Energomash named after Academician V.P. Glushko, Khimki, Russia

        Quote: Rplay
        and USAA in a prototype engine.

        1.RS-25, in fact:
        -2 * gas generator
        - Hydrogen is completely gasified, passing entirely through gas generators, oxygen is partially gasified, non-gasified residue enters the mixing head of the chamber in liquid form.
        -Fully solved the problem of low-frequency ripple in the gas generator and the chamber, synchronization of the joint operation of two heat pumps.
        WHAT SO AND COULD NOT SOLVE IN RD-270
        Creepy (in appearance and in fact), engineering. A masterpiece of course ...



        2. Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator, Rocketdyne and Aerojet

        Given his experience with RS-25, numerical modeling, the presence of smart computer, unlimited finance
        I think the Americans will make the full-flow step cycle of combustion (FFSCC) -first
        1. models
          models 27 October 2017 16: 04 New
          0
          Quote: opus
          I think the Americans will make the full-flow step cycle of combustion (FFSCC) -first
          If someone had mastered the Mask report in Guadalajara before “disassembling it for parts”, he would have known that the Raptor with the gas-gas scheme (FFSCC in American terminology) has been running the AIS for a long time (I hope the decoding of this abbreviation is not required for space observers?) .
          1. Negro
            Negro 27 October 2017 18: 23 New
            0
            Quote: modeller
            AIS has been running for a long time

            Do not quibble. Yes, the Raptor has already worked at the stand for 1200 seconds, of which 100 in a row. But this does not mean that he will ever fly. For the most offensive reason: the best engine in history is now completely unnecessary. SpaceX need now cease finish the rocket all the time, finalize the design and start collecting accident statistics. While it is much worse than his competitors. That is, he will receive satellites for 200-500 million, and some kind of James Webb for $ 5 billion - in no case.
            1. models
              models 28 October 2017 07: 00 New
              0
              Quote: Negro
              For the most offensive reason: the best engine in history is now completely unnecessary.
              The US Air Force did not consult with you and have already invested in Raptor with money.
              Quote: Negro
              SpaceX now you need to stop all the time to finish rocket
              Here he rolls out Block-5 with the same raptor in the second stage - and ceases to finish Falcon. And it will start sawing ITS.
              Quote: Negro
              While it is much worse than his competitors
              Amos did not get into statistics because it wasn’t at launch, so 1 accident for 43 starts if you count all Falcons-9. And if according to versions, then Block-3 and 4 are generally trouble-free.
              Quote: Negro
              That is, he will receive satellites for 200-500 million, and some kind of James Webb for $ 5 billion - in no case.
              The mask should not be a record at the price of a neglected one, but money must be earned. And for money, many satellites are 200 more promising than 1 in 5000.
              1. Negro
                Negro 28 October 2017 10: 02 New
                0
                Quote: modeller
                The US Air Force did not consult with you and have already invested in Raptor with money.

                In the amount of 40, it seems, million raccoons. By industry standards, this is a sign of sympathy, no more.
                Quote: modeller
                Here it rolls out Block-5 with the same raptor in the second stage

                Not once did Musk or Shotwell, NYA, say that the raptor will be used on nine. Moreover, block 5 is a finalized, it seems, version of the Falcon, and not a version with a new second stage, a new engine, a new fuel pair.
                Quote: modeller
                Amos did not get into statistics because it wasn’t at launch, so 1 accident for 43 starts if you count all Falcons-9.

                Two total payload losses. One partial loss of payload. For commercial astronautics it’s normal, but for super-satellites and manned early to declare, because the Americans have missiles and more reliable. Both EELVs did not lose load even once in 99 starts. Twice there was an underfill of orbital speed due to the work of the second stage. Once (from Atlas) the satellites reached out on their own, the second time (from Delta) a blank flew in a test launch.
                The industry-standard reliability standard for critical starts, set by EELV and Arian, is now incredibly high. The commercial standard that Proton set at the beginning of the work of Mask was incomparably lower.
                In favor of the Mask says that he runs the most. So accident-free statistics are generated relatively quickly.
                Quote: modeller
                And for money, many satellites are 200 more promising than 1 in 5000.

                So no one argues. But Mask has ambitions for manned and distant astronautics, which he has not yet publicly refused. And for this, much remains to be done.
                1. models
                  models 28 October 2017 14: 03 New
                  0
                  Quote: Negro
                  In the amount of 40, it seems, million raccoons. By industry standards, this is a sign of sympathy, no more.
                  Even with us, if the military distributes 40 million as part of sympathy, the prosecutor’s office sometimes comes to them.
                  Quote: Negro
                  Not once did Musk or Shotwell, NYA, say that the raptor will be used on nine.
                  When and where? And then the flyers gave 40 million specifically for the development of oxygen-methane for the upper stage.
                  Quote: Negro
                  Moreover, block 5 is a finalized, it seems, version of the Falcon, and not a version with a new second stage, a new engine, a new fuel pair.
                  When we moved from 1.0 to 1.1, we replaced the engine and almost the entire first stage seriously altered the second. Then the subcooling of the components was introduced without a trace after certification for the missile air force without them.
                  Quote: Negro
                  Two total payload losses.
                  One. The accident at the rehearsal in the statistics is not what Musk was talking about last September. With the same success, they could get a 2.72 satellite during unloading.
                  Quote: Negro
                  and manned early
                  Here are just a contract for manned has already been signed including NASA.
                  Quote: Negro
                  Both EELVs did not lose load even once in 99 starts
                  There was a conclusion to an off-balance Atlas-5.
                  Quote: Negro
                  The industry-standard reliability standard for critical starts, set by EELV and Arian, is now incredibly high.
                  And Musk did not know and passed certification for Air Force launches back in 2015. And no one is going to select it judging by the X-37 flight on Falcon.
                  Quote: Negro
                  The commercial standard that Proton set at the beginning of the work of Mask was incomparably lower.
                  There is no commercial standard — there is a price for an insurance policy. On which the same AMOS did not affect.
                  1. Negro
                    Negro 28 October 2017 14: 14 New
                    0
                    Quote: modeller
                    Even with us, if the military distributes 40 million as part of sympathy, the prosecutor’s office sometimes comes to them.

                    Unlike our military, there is no particular doubt in the country's benefits there.
                    Quote: modeller
                    on the development of oxygen-methane for the upper stage.

                    The top stage of a rocket, do not remind?
                    Quote: modeller
                    When we moved from 1.0 to 1.1, we replaced the engine and almost the entire first stage seriously altered the second. Then the subcooling of the components was introduced without a trace after certification for the missile air force without them.

                    And this is not equal to installing a methane engine.
                    Quote: modeller
                    not what Musk was talking about last September

                    He spoke, of course. What should he do?
                    Quote: modeller
                    Here are just a contract for manned has already been signed including NASA.

                    With the ability to take all starts, except one, to the Boeing / Atlas, if Musk blows up something again. And just in case tickets bought for the Union.
                    Quote: modeller
                    There was a conclusion to an off-balance Atlas-5

                    I wrote about it.
                    Quote: modeller
                    And Musk did not know and passed certification for air force launches back in 2015

                    Yes, and gets so-so launches, like GPS. To go nuts as important launches - until it receives.
                    Quote: modeller
                    There is no commercial standard - there is a price of insurance policy

                    Yes, in commercial launches this is the case. But in politically significant launches (including manned launches), the rules are different.

                    Again. I have no doubt that the SpaceX are intelligent guys. I fully admit that they will take CCDev to the maximum. However, to solve this problem, they need a finalized Falcon, and not at all an additional performance of the high-pulse second stage. Pefomanza is enough for them with a slide.
                    1. models
                      models 29 October 2017 08: 44 New
                      0
                      Quote: Negro
                      Unlike our military, there is no particular doubt in the country's benefits there.
                      Quote: Negro
                      The top stage of a rocket, do not remind?
                      There would be two options: Falcon-9 and BFR. I somehow fail to introduce the US Air Force financing the creation of the BFR. In short, on the near-space resources, a Falcon with a methane top has long been considered real plans. The primary sources, sinful, did not seek. And now it's easier to wait for Block 5.
                      Quote: Negro
                      And this is not equal to installing a methane engine.

                      This is something more.
                      Quote: Negro
                      He spoke, of course. What should he do?
                      He said "accident will not affect the price of the insurance policy." He does not control insurers and it makes no sense to lie - a fraud will quickly become clear, but he just did not have enough at that moment.
                      Quote: Negro
                      With the ability to take all starts, except one, to the Boeing / Atlas, if Musk blows up something again.
                      Even Musk will not be able to blow up with the death of astronauts because SAS. And if astronauts are taken away without death, Musk will begin to remind the media and Congress how they flew on the Shuttles after two accidents with 14 corpses.
                      Quote: Negro
                      And just in case tickets bought for the Union.
                      I have a suspicion that from NASA tickets someone gets kickbacks. For it does everything in its power to ensure that both private ships (including the Boeing one) fly later.
                      Quote: Negro
                      But in politically significant launches (including manned launches), the rules are different.
                      Others. There passes the start-up certification and receives a launch package if it wins a competition with other certified ones. But at the same time, there are no requirements to have an accident rate all the time higher than that of ULA in the conditions of certification.
                      Quote: Negro
                      Yes, and gets so-so launches, like GPS. To go nuts as important launches - until it receives.
                      X-37B is surprised at your post.
                      Quote: Negro
                      However, to solve this problem, they need a finalized Falcon, and not at all an additional performance of the high-pulse second stage. Pefomanza is enough for them with a slide.
                      Performance is enough for them with hypothermia. Which in the case of a manned flight requires refueling with the astronauts on the rocket. On which the NASA barrel rolls due to alleged danger (sitting in a capsule with the CAC turned on is certainly more dangerous than taking an elevator next to a fueled rocket)
                      1. Negro
                        Negro 29 October 2017 12: 56 New
                        0
                        Quote: modeller
                        There would be two options: Falcon-9 and BFR

                        The third is Havik; for the time being, it is only needed for experiments, the fourth is the third fallback to Vulcan.
                        Quote: modeller
                        on the near-space resources, a Falcon with a methane top has long been considered real plans. The primary sources, sinful, did not seek.

                        Unfortunately, the near-space resources are full of experts like you or me. Theoretically - of course, you can put. By interests - no.
                        Quote: modeller
                        He said "accident will not affect the price of the insurance policy." He does not control insurers

                        The first phrase contradicts the second.
                        But yes, there are all sorts of troubles with startup insurance and insurance before launch.
                        Quote: modeller
                        Even Musk will not be able to blow up with the death of astronauts

                        You underestimate him in vain)))
                        Quote: modeller
                        Musk will begin to remind the media and Congress how they flew on the Shuttles after two accidents with 14 corpses.

                        Will not help. When flying, there were 2 working competitors (Boeing, Orion) + Union.
                        Quote: modeller
                        I have a suspicion that from NASA tickets someone gets kickbacks. For it does everything in its power to ensure that both private ships (including the Boeing one) fly later.

                        This is the usual behavior of bureaucrats. If the astronauts are killed on the American ship, they will ask from NASA, if they are not in the Union. And so on Dragon, life support systems were originally.

                        Quote: modeller
                        There passes the start-up certification and receives a launch package if it wins a competition with other certified ones. But at the same time, there are no requirements to have an accident rate all the time higher than that of ULA in the conditions of certification.

                        Oh well
                        Quote: modeller
                        X-37B is surprised at your post.

                        This thing has been flying for 7 years and it’s unknown what its benefits are. It is possible that just a demonstrator.
                        Quote: modeller
                        Performance is enough for them with hypothermia

                        They had enough performance for the ISS even on the first version.
                    2. models
                      models 29 October 2017 14: 29 New
                      0
                      Fucking engine.
                      Quote: Negro
                      Will not help. When flying, there were 2 working competitors (Boeing, Orion) + Union.
                      Will help. For the refusal of a contract due to an accident without loss looks (and is) unfair competition. By the way, the Union after the start of flights CST-100 and Dragon-2 is not an alternative. Orion for flights to the ISS is not adapted.
                      Quote: Negro
                      the fourth is the third fallback to Vulcan.
                      The Raptor can no longer be a backup option for the Volcano because it has a thrust of only 170 tf versus 240 for the BE-4. Moreover, there is an opinion that a 100-ton under-raptor is being tested at McGregor. It is all the more unsuitable for the second stage of the Volcano because it is hydrogen.
                      Quote: Negro
                      Unfortunately, the near-space resources are full of experts like you or me.
                      Like something bad. Recently, it seems like professionals were broadcasting that the step on the barge would not sit down.
                      Quote: Negro
                      The first phrase contradicts the second.
                      It does not contradict. The accident was not at launch, but at an event ensuring the safety of the launch itself.
                      Quote: Negro
                      This thing has been flying for 7 years and it’s unknown what its benefits are.
                      This thing is very small-scale and most likely carries unique experimental products into orbit.
                      1. Negro
                        Negro 29 October 2017 16: 53 New
                        0
                        Quote: modeller
                        For the refusal of a contract due to an accident without loss looks (and is) unfair competition

                        Not so Americans and gentle as you think. Vidosik with a torn launch pad will cover the talk about the ideals of capitalism, like a bull sheep.
                        Quote: modeller
                        Orion for flights to the ISS is not adapted.

                        This is a very strange statement.
                        Quote: modeller
                        he has a thrust of only 170 tf vs. 240 for the BE-4

                        They promised 300 on the final sample.
                        Quote: modeller
                        Moreover, there is an opinion that a 100-ton under-raptor is being tested at McGregor.

                        Yeah. This will fit just the second stage.
                        Quote: modeller
                        It is all the more unsuitable for the second stage of the Volcano because it is hydrogen.

                        There is no volcano yet.
                        Quote: modeller
                        Like something bad.

                        Yes. With Mask, and so hard, he talks too much, and then there are enthusiasts like dogs uncut.
                        Quote: modeller
                        It does not contradict.

                        Neither I, nor you, nor even Musk knows insurance arrangements.
                        Quote: modeller
                        This thing is very small-scale and most likely carries unique experimental products into orbit.

                        And sticks out there for a year with these products? HZ.
                        My IMHO - if 37 was transferred to Falcon, then it is not so dear to the heart. However, I do not impose my opinion on you and I do not know the real dealings.
                    3. models
                      models 29 October 2017 17: 28 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Negro
                      Not so Americans and gentle as you think. Vidosik with a torn launch pad will cover the talk about the ideals of capitalism, like a bull sheep.
                      Vidosik from the "scattered" platform was already - not covered. No need to engage in mass telepathy.
                      Quote: Negro
                      This is a very strange statement.
                      To begin with, this fool can be pulled by the Delta Heavy minimum on the DOE. And I want to see how they will certify Delta Heavy with its manned flight fireball.
                      Quote: Negro
                      They promised 300 on the final sample.
                      They promised 300 tons last year. Now Musk said that 170. And he promised 300 tons, but atmospheres (now 200, they plan to reach 250 soon) and "in the long run".
                      Quote: Negro
                      Yeah. This will fit just the second stage.
                      You give the impression of a person who can understand why this is not so.
                      Quote: Negro
                      There is no volcano yet.
                      And the second step is already for him. Centaurus is called. Then they will replace it with ACES, but this is a modernization of Centauri.
                      Quote: Negro
                      Yes. With Mask, and so hard, he talks too much, and then there are enthusiasts like dogs uncut.
                      He speaks no more than others (but also periodically rolls out reusability or Raptor, with which others have trouble). And there are no more enthusiasts than haters judging at least by this resource.
                      Quote: Negro
                      Neither I, nor you, nor even Musk knows insurance arrangements.
                      Musk is obliged to know by job (director of the aerospace corporation). And he said that Amos did not affect the insurance policy.
                      Quote: Negro
                      And sticks out there for a year with these products?
                      As if iron for satellites is obliged to work in space for years.
                      Quote: Negro
                      My IMHO - if 37 was transferred to Falcon, then it is not so dear to the heart.
                      According to the law, they are obliged to hold a competition among certified operators and run on the one who asks for less, and not to decide who will fly on whom. That’s how GPS went to Mask. ULA is now servicing contracts concluded prior to SpaceX’s admission to the military and launches what Falcon-9 cannot physically fulfill (for example, direct withdrawal of 10-ton fools to GSO for SPRN).
                      1. Golovan Jack
                        Golovan Jack 29 October 2017 17: 46 New
                        +7
                        Quote: modeller
                        They promised 300 tons last year. Now Musk said that 170. And promised 300 tons, not atmospheres

                        Got it ... cat looks with surprise, sfig would?
                        Plus, I haven’t laughed like that for a long time laughing
                      2. Negro
                        Negro 29 October 2017 18: 38 New
                        0
                        Quote: modeller
                        Vidosik from the "scattered" platform was already - not covered.

                        Vidosik from the torn pad cost 4,5 months of downtime. Again. Commercial and manned launches are different topics. The Dragon stops for half a year - and the order flows to Boeing. See the situation with Antares.
                        Quote: modeller
                        To begin with, this fool can be pulled by the Delta Heavy minimum on the DOE.

                        Yes, there is some problem due to SLS delay, you are right. There will be a Boeing, Union and possibly a dreamchaser.
                        Quote: modeller
                        They promised 300 tons last year. Now Musk said that 170. And he promised 300 not tons, but atmospheres

                        It was both. About pressure - Musk recently in Adelaide. About tons - Muller, I remember, up to 800 agreed in 2014-2015. Musk in 2016 spoke about 300, and in Adelaide already about 170, you are right.
                        [
                      3. Negro
                        Negro 29 October 2017 18: 45 New
                        0
                        Then some garbage, "text that is not acceptable for publication." HZ, what's wrong.
                    4. models
                      models 30 October 2017 05: 33 New
                      0
                      Quote: Negro
                      The Dragon stops for half a year - and the order flows to Boeing. See the situation with Antares.
                      Well, look. Leaking orders from Zignus to the Dragon point-blank I do not see.
                      Quote: Negro
                      Yes, there is some problem due to SLS delay
                      On SLS + Orion to the ISS? Monsieur understands a lot about perversions.
                      1. Negro
                        Negro 31 October 2017 01: 41 New
                        0
                        Quote: modeller
                        Leaking orders from Zignus to the Dragon point-blank I do not see.

                        But there is a replacement of the launch vehicle with the Atlas.
                        Quote: modeller
                        Monsieur understands a lot about perversions.

                        And nothing more, as you rightly noted. Too healthy.
                        However, it is quite an American scale)))
    3. Negro
      Negro 24 October 2017 23: 44 New
      +1
      Thank you for the expanded post. I am glad that not everyone here discusses the issues of liberalism and cesspoolization.
      I would venture to add a few words.

      Quote: opus
      Blue BE-4 Blue Origin does not require a single taxpayer dollar.
      Its development is fully paid by the private sector; it does not require state funding for research and development.

      It is true, but not all. The US budget does not finance BE, but still throws money for a rocket under it (Volcano). Competing engines - from Aerodzhet and from SpaceX - are developed in the same way with the financial participation of the military (in the first case determining, in the second - minority). Moreover, the future of the Aerogeta is causing the greatest doubts.
      So the Americans took up import substitution without joking.
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 27 October 2017 16: 38 New
        0
        The volcano is ULA rockets, and New Glen is BO rocket. An important point.
        1. Negro
          Negro 27 October 2017 17: 55 New
          0
          Quote: BlackMokona
          The volcano is ULA rockets, and New Glen is BO rocket.

          Yes, Bezos does not receive money directly. But the noise about replacing the RD-180 is connected precisely with Vulcan
  36. opoffis
    opoffis 24 October 2017 15: 43 New
    +2
    Do You Know WHAT The USA RD-180 Replacement Engines Are MORE THAN 2 TIMES WEAKER THAN 1 RD-180 Engine!?
    Real data:
    BE-4 = 173t.s.
    RS-25 = 187t.s
    WHEN AT RD-180 = 390,2 t.s.
    If the United States creates its new Engines, they will need at least TWO PIECES FOR 1 and the same missile launch.

    But you might think that the RD-180 also consists of two small "engines" (nozzles), i.e. 2 new kihs are almost equal to 1 RD-180, But that's not quite true.
    The diameter of 1 BE-4 engine is GREATER THAN THE WHOLE RD-180 (i.e. 2 nozzles) from here Install two BE-4 engines Failing to change the design of the Rocket (its thickness is 2 times thicker, which affects the complexity of transportation) or reduce the lift Cargo.
    1. opus
      opus 24 October 2017 16: 00 New
      +5
      Quote: opoffis
      MORE THAN 2 TIME WEAKER

      what does "weaker" mean?
      what
      RS-25
      452,5 c specific impulse in vacuum
      363 c at sea level
      Performance Characteristics
      Thrust 222,6 tf in vacuum (104,5% thrust)
      181,4 tf at sea level
      Dry Weight 3390 kg

      RD-180
      Specific Impulse Vacuum: 337,8 c
      Sea level: 311,3 s
      Thrust Vacuum: 423,4 tf
      Sea level: 390,2 tf
      Dry weight 5 480 kg

      which of them is "weaker"?


      Quote: opoffis
      But you might think that the RD-180 also consists of two small "engines" (nozzles), i.e. 2 new kihs are almost equal to 1 RD-180, But that's not quite true.

      "nozzle"?
      fool
      maybe combustion chambers?
      Quote: opoffis
      Missiles (its thickening is 2 times, and this affects the complexity of transportation) or reduce the load lifted.

      just do some nonsense
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 24 October 2017 21: 41 New
        +1
        Quote: opus
        which of them is "weaker"?

        RS-25 naturally, it is strange that you did not pay attention to the thrust-weight ratio.
        1. opus
          opus 24 October 2017 22: 47 New
          +2
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          Rs-xnumx naturally

          again what does "weaker" mean?
          Traction?
          so SRB out of competition (starting 12,45 MN)
          or ui?
          Quote: opus
          RS-25
          Specific impulse 452,5 c in a vacuum


          Quote: opus
          RD-180
          Specific impulse Vacuum: 337,8 c

          Delta 33%
          Thrust: the ratio of thrust to weight.
          RD is dumb

          Russian rocket engine RD-180
          Thrust = 3 820 kN
          dry weight 5 307 kg.
          TWR = 73,40.
          Can it work in the "dry" form.
          Without tripe, without TK?
          It should be remembered that the engine can not work without the body, tanks with fuel and so on.
  37. SerZh1972
    SerZh1972 24 October 2017 16: 40 New
    +4
    Quote: True
    Not on Kiselyov’s Twitter for an hour? There is only good news and victories, victories ...

    Well, how would it be softer to say? You just became like Shipilov. But if on a simple: to star - not toss the bags. The fact is that Kiselyov does not have an account on Twitter. Basically.
    1. True
      True 25 October 2017 00: 23 New
      +2
      Che, not found, upset? bully Well, on the "done with us come in.")))))))
      1. SerZh1972
        SerZh1972 25 October 2017 10: 47 New
        0
        Quote: True
        What. Well on

        Do you have clear cuts in the breaks between the husk of filming and star-throwing on Twitter and on “done with us”? Where to go this world ...
  38. Alex Nevs
    Alex Nevs 24 October 2017 18: 18 New
    0
    They have all the evidence from !!!! social networks of "the greatest trash of the century" ....... the finale ... Then follow the words of Lavrov.
  39. valton
    valton 24 October 2017 18: 56 New
    +3
    My applause to the author! ! !
  40. colorado
    colorado 24 October 2017 19: 03 New
    +2
    no words just rout
  41. Old military officer
    Old military officer 24 October 2017 20: 10 New
    +1
    Thank you for the article, the information is exhaustive, although I already perceive the "shipovye" kind of squeamish. I am a witness to the launches of the first satellites and first astronauts. I even had the opportunity to listen to a lecture with which Vladimir Shatalov performed in the great hall of the Kislovodsk Philharmonic. Imagine, for about twenty hours, the astronaut listened with bated breath. What after these gavkuny?
  42. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 24 October 2017 20: 12 New
    +2
    And what was wrong in that article ?: the engine is very good, but outdated.
    You can safely talk about the car "Victory", for example: "the car is very good, but outdated." And it’s completely wrong to say: “Victory Car is bad.”
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 24 October 2017 21: 55 New
      +3
      Quote: voyaka uh
      And it’s completely wrong to say: “Victory Car is bad.”

      The argument is, of course, killer, to see the Americans buy the RD-180 as antiques, but it’s strange that they fly into space at the Pobedy.

      They do not have such an engine at the moment, there are several developments that have not yet been brought to the extent that they would be put on the launch vehicle.
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 27 October 2017 16: 40 New
        0
        Most launches they have Falcons, with its engine Marilyn.
    2. Negro
      Negro 24 October 2017 23: 33 New
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      the engine is very good, but outdated.

      These are mutually exclusive paragraphs. While he is very good - he is not outdated. Not only that, the relatively old engine is the accumulated accident statistics, in the case of the Atlas it is also very good.
      Another thing is that now the Americans are building several engines that are even more advanced from an engineering point of view. But the need for new engines is not associated with the "obsolescence" of the RD-180
    3. aiden
      aiden 25 October 2017 01: 02 New
      +3
      Yes, judging by your answers, then everything is outdated. Moreover, I hear this from a representative of a non-space country. You don’t have one either
  43. Livonetc
    Livonetc 24 October 2017 22: 33 New
    +2
    Quote: voyaka uh
    And what was wrong in that article ?: the engine is very good, but outdated.
    You can safely talk about the car "Victory", for example: "the car is very good, but outdated." And it’s completely wrong to say: “Victory Car is bad.”

    The wheel is also an ancient fixture.
    And the lever .......

    Well, the Germans are apparently already moving to teleportation and telekinesis.
  44. misti1973
    misti1973 25 October 2017 00: 43 New
    0
    They actually can’t build a plant for the production of these engines in any way. And as for the engine itself, it’s not possible to burn there. It seems to me that it’s no coincidence :) But if we cut off supplies to them, they will drag us on ships, and they’ll come up with some engines. There, nobody believed that Mask would be able to build a rocket. But it did! They’ll come up with something else. They can spin the French on Arian, if there’s absolutely no margin, they can reduce the weight of the satellites. Until now, they buy RD-180 mainly because of low cost.
  45. Captain Nemo
    Captain Nemo 25 October 2017 01: 07 New
    0
    And can you read more about "and Shepilov who joined them"? Where to read about the hero?
  46. eleskin
    eleskin 25 October 2017 04: 03 New
    0
    Bravo!
    Everything is clear and to the point. One feels that a person owns information, and does not pull it out from various sources to confirm his ideology ("hatred of Russia") as Shipilov. About classics - it's cool !!!
  47. lance
    lance 25 October 2017 07: 29 New
    +2
    I enjoyed both the article and the comments. you can give 1001 + 1 examples and arguments to the minions of the usa, but today there is no more economical and cheaper engine. Well, so as to hurt you somehow: when will the Americans make nuclear engines? in Russia they are ready. or are Americans ready to launch a hundred-ton rocket? talkers.
  48. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 25 October 2017 11: 21 New
    0
    If the bastard began to hiss toward his homeland, then he wants to like the new owners in the sale of their Russophobia. But for such bastards, after all, everything will not be eternal, the time will come and torment without the MOTHERLAND
  49. Victor Zubkov
    Victor Zubkov 25 October 2017 11: 31 New
    0
    http://argumenti.ru/society/2017/07/543683?utm_re
    ferrer = https% 3A% 2F% 2Fzen.yandex.com
  50. Vladimir SHajkin
    Vladimir SHajkin 25 October 2017 12: 23 New
    0
    It is still necessary to defend hidden interests. Yes, we needed $, but they also need engines, and therefore it is necessary to defend our own production from the very beginning.