Military Review

The fire test of the RS-25 E2063 rocket engine in the United States has been recognized as successful.

243
The US space agency (NASA) has demonstrated the testing of a new rocket engine. It is reported that the engine will allow for the implementation of the program for the development of the celestial bodies of the solar system. This is a RS-25 E2063 rocket propulsion system. Speech about the so-called fire tests of the engine for super-heavy launch vehicle Space Launch System.


The press service of the American department declares that the engine can be used to carry out missions to the moon, as well as to the planets of the solar system - primarily to Mars.

RS-25 E2063 tests were conducted at NASA named after J. Stennis, located in Mississippi. Observation of the fire test of the power plant was carried out from a distance of about a kilometer.



The duration of the test was a few minutes. As noted, this is the time that a super-heavy rocket needs in order to rise from the launch pad.

The plans for the United States - test flight of the launch vehicle Space Launch System in 2019 year. A manned flight using this rocket is scheduled for 2021 of the year. It was noted that the test launches of the new engine will continue until a manned flight.

Specialists a few days after the tests presented a report that the fire tests were successful. More than 20 computers, which monitored the fuel supply process, engine temperature changes and its operating parameters, did not reveal abnormal situations.
Photos used:
NASA
243 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Some kind of compote
    Some kind of compote 28 October 2017 09: 49 New
    17
    will allow the implementation of the program for the development of the celestial bodies of the solar system

    Can you fly to Venus and Mars?
    1. MIKHA-M
      MIKHA-M 28 October 2017 09: 57 New
      +8
      Import substitution in the USA ..? Well, let them try ..
      1. just exp
        just exp 28 October 2017 10: 19 New
        42
        What, do you think the states that did things and more difficult will not master the launch rocket?
        another Rogozin with a trampoline.
        and then there will be wailing about how we space prospro @ whether.
        mattresses should not be underestimated; they are doing well with finances and with personnel and patents, if they can, and if they can, then they would not lose the market.
        1. Ulan
          Ulan 28 October 2017 10: 32 New
          26
          I also think that one cannot underestimate the American potential. It will not lead to anything good.
          Underestimating the enemy leads to a guaranteed defeat.
          1. stolz
            stolz 28 October 2017 10: 43 New
            14
            While we sold them our engines, rolled the Americans to the ISS, they created their own engine. Now, as always, we have an activity - to catch up and overtake.
            1. himRa
              himRa 28 October 2017 11: 26 New
              +5
              Flag change
            2. telobezumnoe
              telobezumnoe 28 October 2017 11: 35 New
              +5
              that engine was still used on the shuttles, what's new? greatly increased the specific impulse? or is it designed for hundreds of inclusions?
            3. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 12: 44 New
              12
              Quote: Stolz
              they created their own engine.

              RS-25 engine
              April 12, 1981
              Application Space Shuttle (Space Shuttle), SLS
              Production
              Designer Roquetdine, USA
              Established 1972-1977
              It was produced since February 18, 1977

              Rather, they got out of the pantry.
            4. Sharansky
              Sharansky 28 October 2017 13: 37 New
              +6
              Quote: Stolz
              they created their engine

              The RS-25 was still used on the Shuttles. Then they slightly modernized it. But the completely new methane BE-4 is yes.
              1. oops
                oops 28 October 2017 18: 21 New
                +7
                "But the all-new BE-4 methane is yes."
                Yeah ...
                Sharansky is not a reader ... Sharansky is a writer! More recently, in an article about RD-180 and about BE-4, comments were written. Sharansky, NO BE-4 yet! There is a set of individual pieces of reduced size undergoing tests. Only Russia has working prototypes of methane-oxygen engines!
                The advantage of methane over kerosene is very controversial: the specific impulse as fuel is slightly higher, but the rocket turns out to be larger and heavier. The only tangible property of methane is its cheapness. The deposits of very pure oil from which they drove very pure kerosene were depleted and now the rockets are fueled with synthetic fuel. And it’s getting more expensive.
                If you read Wikipedia zapadlo, then read the Blue Origin website. They, unlike the advertising tinsel and the chatter Mask, draw a more or less real state of affairs.
            5. chidoryan
              chidoryan 28 October 2017 13: 47 New
              +4
              are you from the states writing about catching up and overtaking? Come, work here, contribute to the development of the economy, so that it is like catching up and overtaking. And urapatriotic coco-comments from behind a hillock, everyone writes much. Patriots are figs.
        2. sabakina
          sabakina 28 October 2017 10: 39 New
          18
          just explo, tell me, if they did such cool engines, where did they put their feces in flight to the moon? Ate? They still cannot master the "space toilets", they use ours on the ISS!
          1. Logall
            Logall 28 October 2017 10: 47 New
            12
            Glory, welcome!
            More difficult, of course, they didn’t! And they weren’t on the moon, they even began to deny less.
            But they will do, one fig. Let more time go, but they will!
            So do not relax, but progress ...
            1. sabakina
              sabakina 28 October 2017 10: 52 New
              +5
              Sasha pryuvet! Of course they will make the engine, there is no doubt about it. BUT! Only to the Atlantic! Sasha, I came across an article in which the author thought how they were able to shove their rover into the descent module? There really is no room for a rover!
              1. NIKNN
                NIKNN 28 October 2017 11: 15 New
                +5
                Quote: sabakina
                There really is no room for a rover!

                Hello, Glory! hi With life-giving Sabot! smile They him (the rover on the balcony kept ... like everyone who does not have a garage ... wink
              2. Svarog51
                Svarog51 28 October 2017 13: 11 New
                12
                Glory hello hi You raised a good question. good I really didn’t think about it, but then I had to ponder. Well, you can figure out a folding buggy. But here is the engine. ICE immediately sweep - no air. Remains electric - suitable for moon pokatushek. But here is the issue with the batteries. Then at -30 you run into it, and on the moon it will be colder. And then there were other technologies. What is it? Filmed for the night and in the cockpit for charging? So that kubrick itself was charged by solar panels during the day. More and more questions, dumb answers. Our Lunokhod in this plan is made by mind. He opened the "hood", oriented the solar cells and is charging. And they do not understand everything like that.
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 28 October 2017 13: 19 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Svarog51
                  Then at -30 you run into it, and on the moon it will be colder.

                  Temperature is a property of matter, but there is no atmosphere on the moon. Like Captain Wrangel: The temperature of sea water cannot be measured due to the lack thereof.
                  The problem is quite the opposite - where to put the excess heat?
                  1. Svarog51
                    Svarog51 28 October 2017 14: 32 New
                    10
                    Namesake hi Well, VrUngel! wink
                    The problem is quite the opposite - where to put the excess heat?

                    How is this where? For the good of the cause. In a vacuum, it’s cold. -273K. These are not surpluses - these are stocks. good
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 28 October 2017 20: 42 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Svarog51
                      Well, VrUngel!

                      Bliiiin so screw up.
                      Quote: Svarog51
                      How is this where? For the good of the cause. In a vacuum, it’s cold. -273K. These are not surpluses - these are stocks.

                      You read inattentively, in a vacuum there is no temperature in view of the absence of a temperature carrier. Stocks - at plus 5 Celsius, at plus fifty - there are already surpluses.
                      1. Svarog51
                        Svarog51 28 October 2017 21: 48 New
                        +9
                        Namesake, hi
                        Bliiiin so screw up.

                        Let's write it down on T9, it's his fault wink
                        For the rest - I read carefully, I know and agree good
                        Well Saturday lol drinks This is a joke about stocks then.
                2. Sharansky
                  Sharansky 28 October 2017 13: 40 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Svarog51
                  And they do not understand everything like that.

                  And it is also unclear how chocolates are filled with liquor.
                  1. Svarog51
                    Svarog51 28 October 2017 14: 34 New
                    +8
                    Okay, persuaded. Tomorrow I will go to the Krasnaya Zorya confectionery factory and ask, especially for you. wink
            2. Letun
              Letun 28 October 2017 21: 39 New
              0
              Quote: Logall
              And they weren’t on the moon, they even began to deny less.

              Yes, they’re just tired of proving obvious truths to country guys like you. No sense.
          2. Sharansky
            Sharansky 28 October 2017 13: 38 New
            +7
            Quote: sabakina
            where did they put their feces in flight to the moon?

            The circle of interests of a true patriot of Russia is immediately recognized.
            1. Settlement Oparyshev
              Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 21 New
              0
              Why feces? From fear and from dry fasting, feces end on Earth, but urine, oddly enough, is excreted every day. In flight, urine is distilled by water and drunk.
            2. Svarog51
              Svarog51 28 October 2017 15: 25 New
              +9
              A true patriot is also interested in this issue. There is little garbage on the streets, so also in space to crap? Well, the street is easier to clean, less cost.
              1. Sharansky
                Sharansky 28 October 2017 15: 51 New
                +1
                Yes, the patriot, after all, has no other problems, he just has to poke around in American feces.
                1. Svarog51
                  Svarog51 28 October 2017 16: 09 New
                  11
                  Poking around is not necessary, this is another contingent of interest. But you need to wash off after yourself, after other people come, and here it is impudent. It is even non-patriots required to know.
          3. just exp
            just exp 28 October 2017 14: 36 New
            0
            and they flew there for a month?
            1. Felix99
              Felix99 30 October 2017 10: 48 New
              0
              not for a month but to the moon
        3. Orionvit
          Orionvit 28 October 2017 11: 40 New
          12
          Quote: just EXPL
          what do you think the states that did things and more difficult will not overpower the carrier rocket

          When mastered, then say gop. By the way, where is their "most" F-1? They “flew” to the moon on it, but they cannot repeat it. Like Saturn 5. By the way, your phrase, what they did and more complicated, absolutely does not prove anything. Any engineer (especially aerospace) will tell you that it’s more difficult to do, a lot of mind is not necessary. But to make a workable unit, while not complicating it once again, this is skill. What was the genius of the Soviet engineering school. Any overly complex unit will fail much faster.
          1. Viktor.12.71
            Viktor.12.71 28 October 2017 12: 25 New
            +8
            Elon Rive Musk would laugh at all of you. SpaceX is considered the cheapest program, asking for $ 62 million per launch. According to the head of Roscosmos Igor Komarov, SpaceX poses a certain threat to Roscosmos. According to Komarov, Roscosmos will focus on reducing the cost of launching rockets in order to compete with SpaceX and other private companies. Elon Musk wants to reduce the price per launch of the launch vehicle by 10 times if the test of landing the first stage of a heavy rocket is successful. A businessman from the USA has been competing with states in space for 12 years. I read an interview with Mask, if he does what he dreams about, then in 20-30 years colonization of stars will become possible.
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 28 October 2017 13: 29 New
              +5
              Quote: Viktor.12.71
              if the test of landing the first stage of a heavy rocket succeeds.

              This mask of yours is not the discoverer, the Russian and American design bureaus tried to keep the first step in everything in conceivable and unthinkable ways.
              1. just exp
                just exp 28 October 2017 14: 39 New
                +3
                Che remembered the gum club, it was about a porn actor.
                - Mom, remember, you and I dreamed of living in Moscow? and so it came true, we dreamed, I live.

                it's me that the Russian and American design bureaus could crush the radish with a screwdriver into triangles, but return the first step managed Mask, not "Russian and American design bureaus."
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 28 October 2017 20: 44 New
                  +1
                  Quote: just EXPL
                  but the Mask managed to return the first step

                  You probably do not know, but not only did you succeed in Mask, but in view of the complexity and insecurity, this function was refused both in our country and across the ocean.
                  1. just exp
                    just exp 29 October 2017 10: 44 New
                    +1
                    and who succeeded and why is it reliable for the Mask, but not for the previous ones?
                  2. models
                    models 29 October 2017 15: 23 New
                    0
                    Quote: Setrac
                    You probably don’t know, but not only did you manage to Mask
                    Indeed, I am not aware that someone saved liquid step to the mask. There were no such heroes.
              2. models
                models 29 October 2017 15: 21 New
                0
                Quote: Setrac
                Russian and American design bureaus tried to preserve the first stage of everything in conceivable and inconceivable ways.
                So tried, so tried.

                In the USSR, on the topic of "Rise", tons of paper were exhausted for examination of which of the rescue options is promising. And they safely chose the one that turned out to be inoperative in practice (step on a parachute up the steppe). Then another ton of paper was exhausted for a feasibility study of the most expensive and complex way of salvation (Baikal), but suddenly the money ran out.

                In the United States, the Space Shuttle is the same. Tons of paper were written out to decide what and how to save, and when it came to practice, it turned out that the TTU could not be refilled without a complete disassembly (who would have thought!). Then they decided that the steps were no longer fashionable and began to knock out money to create a one-stage and reusable system (Delta-Clipper, Venture-Star).
            2. Orionvit
              Orionvit 28 October 2017 14: 02 New
              +3
              Quote: Viktor.12.71
              A businessman from the USA has been competing with states in space for 12 years.

              To begin with, Musk implements his projects in the framework of cooperation with NASA, and for their money.
              if the test of landing the first stage of a heavy rocket succeeds.
              If. It seems like they have already passed, but it is still a long way to regular launches.
              then in 20-30 years colonization of stars will become possible
              They would have written galaxies, which is trifling there. laughing But seriously, I don’t trust this Mask. Any space program is only within the power of the state, with its material and human resources. Private corporations, whatever they are, are able to participate in these programs only by contractors. For example, in Europe, the countries are not at all poor, and they are united in ESA, since they didn’t pull outer space individually.
              1. Sharansky
                Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 41 New
                +4
                Quote: Orionvit
                To begin with, Musk implements his projects in the framework of cooperation with NASA, and for their money.

                Is it Tesla or Hyperloop for NASA money? NASA is just one of the clients of one of the Mask projects. And even for SpaceX, these are the US Department of Defense and a bunch of commercial customers. After all, almost the entire Proton market went to him.
                1. Orionvit
                  Orionvit 28 October 2017 18: 45 New
                  0
                  Quote: Sharansky
                  Is it Tesla or Hyperloop for NASA money?

                  And here is Tesla or Hyperloop? We are talking about space projects. And what is Tesla? Stylish electric car on Chinese batteries at an insane price. A kind of iPhone in the world of cars.
                  1. Sharansky
                    Sharansky 28 October 2017 21: 34 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Orionvit
                    We are talking about space projects.

                    I already wrote about projects. Musk carries out his projects with his own money, which he earns, including on orders from NASA.
                    Quote: Orionvit
                    A kind of iPhone in the world of cars.

                    Americans only make iPhones with a quarter of the budget of all of Russia.
                    1. Orionvit
                      Orionvit 28 October 2017 23: 57 New
                      +3
                      Quote: Sharansky
                      Musk carries out his projects with his own money, which he earns, including on orders from NASA.

                      Do you work with him as an accountant?
                      Americans only make iPhones with a quarter of the budget of all of Russia.
                      What’s this all about? Type Russia quilted jackets and well done Americans? The only factor dominating the United States in the global economy and science is the money press. Where in collusion, with their bankers, they have essentially as much money as they want. And you want me to consider them a country of geniuses, or heroes? All that America has is the result of the deception and robbery of the whole world. If an “iPhone” is a sign of everything on Earth for you, change the flag and live in the country of your dreams.
                      1. MadCat
                        MadCat 29 October 2017 00: 43 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Orionvit
                        What’s this all about? Type Russia quilted jackets and well done Americans? The only factor dominating the United States in the global economy and science is the money press. Where in collusion, with their bankers, they have essentially as much money as they want. And you want me to consider them a country of geniuses, or heroes? All that America has is the result of the deception and robbery of the whole world. If an “iPhone” is a sign of everything on Earth for you, change the flag and live in the country of your dreams.

                        you have in your head a continuous propaganda of cheap slap and slogans, by the way, in the West, too, there are such, consider Russia a country of killers of thieves and alcoholics. Maybe enough labels to hang on a whole country?
            3. japs
              japs 28 October 2017 19: 24 New
              +8
              Viktor.12.71]
              "I read an interview with Mask, if he does what he dreams about, then in 20-30 years colonization of stars will become possible."

              How everything is started ... (C).
              I won’t read fiction anymore. What for?
              Elon Musk is our everything!
            4. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 28 October 2017 19: 43 New
              +1
              ", for one launch of the launch vehicle they ask for 62 million dollars." ////

              And on the used first stage - 1 million or less. Depending: the second or third flight.
          2. oops
            oops 28 October 2017 18: 33 New
            +1
            F-1 is not able, but unwilling to repeat because it is expensive and ineffective. The same applies to Saturn 5.
          3. Krabik
            Krabik 29 October 2017 02: 51 New
            0
            I don’t know where F-1 and Saturn-5 are, but I know where NK-33 and turbines for frigates are.

            One forgot how to do the others remained in Ukraine.

            How would the experience to forget the old technology, we also have.
        4. Maz
          Maz 28 October 2017 14: 54 New
          +2
          And you don’t worry, those colleagues for the mattresses so much, it’s better to keep your fingers in the knot for your trampolines. And then the United States is already 200 children as they do not fight on their land, and all on our muck combine. You look and build a station on the moon with the Chinese and build it.
          1. Settlement Oparyshev
            Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 16: 36 New
            0
            Yes, the Americans destroyed so many 30 million Native Indians, thinned out the freedom-loving Confederates, what should they share now? The fact that Vietnam gave them a warm-up is not very scary, not on their own land. But to be under Statum 6 and be washed away into the Ocean, like dumb. Really?
      2. xetai9977
        xetai9977 28 October 2017 10: 33 New
        18
        Well done Americans. Perform their space program without "noise and dust." They do not engage in banter and venomous comments, caused mainly by envy, do not make empty statements. They work.
    2. newcomer
      newcomer 28 October 2017 10: 02 New
      13
      I do not advise on Venus. we were already there in unmanned flight mode. the atmosphere there consists of a gaseous sulfur compound, rivers of liquid sulfur rush across the planet, the temperature there (oh, I don’t remember exactly, getting old), which is about a couple of hundred degrees. in my opinion, only after the second failure, ours understood what was the matter, and sent a “Venus rover” from titanium, which lasted several minutes, but this was enough to transmit data about the planet.
      1. avt
        avt 28 October 2017 10: 20 New
        +3
        Quote: newbie
        after the second failure, ours understood what was the matter, and sent a “Venus rover” of titanium, which lasted several minutes,

        wassat Evono how pereklinilo that! Just a brief summary, "The countries of the crimson clouds", well, about
        Quote: newbie
        “Venus rover”

        bully And who made it, and when did it send it? Enlighten us sinners. bully And then Az is not versed in hens, except ,, Venus "with soil sampling devices and a venereal soil analyzer in a station without wheels and other tracks.
        1. newcomer
          newcomer 28 October 2017 10: 34 New
          14
          we launched the devices on Venus from 61 to 82gg (if I'm not mistaken). your sarcastically satirical tone suggests Saturday. you are special from aviation. but really not in the know about our program on Venus? personally to you, “sinful”, to help the “masterpiece” Internet. (By the way, the panel “Venus rover” is taken by quotes, which is something to complain about with “caterpillars”.
          1. maxim947
            maxim947 28 October 2017 11: 02 New
            +2
            There were no vener rovers; there were spacecraft that drove into the atmosphere of Venus, but due to high atmospheric pressure, which is about 100 atm. they worked for several minutes managing to transmit some information while dying in the atmosphere.
            1. newcomer
              newcomer 28 October 2017 11: 19 New
              12
              maxim947, our devices were used to the surface. the first was, again if memory serves, Venus7. 1970
              1. maxim947
                maxim947 28 October 2017 17: 57 New
                +1
                Guilty, with Venus I crawled ...) forgot. And in the course of not only the seventh.
            2. Orionvit
              Orionvit 28 October 2017 11: 43 New
              +4
              Quote: maxim947
              they worked for several minutes managing to transmit some information while dying in the atmosphere.

              Why, a couple, three pictures from Venus were transferred.
              1. newcomer
                newcomer 28 October 2017 11: 55 New
                +6
                some devices were “centenarians.” one of these “lived” 53 minutes, but all devices failed after 24 minutes.
            3. avt
              avt 28 October 2017 12: 04 New
              +2
              Quote: maxim947
              they worked for several minutes managing to transmit some information while dying in the atmosphere.

              bully To the captain, mana! And who then sent pictures of the surface of Venus to the near-proven probe to the MCC? Planets, or a lunar rover? bully
            4. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 13: 04 New
              +3
              Quote: maxim947
              they worked a few minutes

              Venus 13 two hours seven minutes.
          2. avt
            avt 28 October 2017 11: 04 New
            +1
            Quote: newbie
            personally to you, “sinful”, to help the “masterpiece” Internet.

            bully Well, as I understand it, Wikipedist! bully insured
            Quote: newbie
            quotes taken

            Quote: siberalt
            There was no "venus rover." There was a descent module.
            yes
            And not one, they tried to send in pairs. That is, according to TASS, there was all one victory of the Soviet cosmonautics, but in practice they insured by duplication. For example, one pickpocket earned after one of the sensors triggered, its own probe drifted right by parachute in the atmosphere. But unlike the Martian apparatuses of the USSR, all the same, there were fewer failures on venereal probes. So the pictures were received on the second attempt.
            1. newcomer
              newcomer 28 October 2017 11: 25 New
              10
              avt, you kind of, unlike some, write sensible things, but there is always the feeling that you are not just commenting, but trying to mock, from the top. I am not tormented by either Wikkipidism or Google. I recall from memory what the Soviet education system put in there, plus, and I myself was a lover of space themes. I will assure you, I will refresh my memory, not by Google, but I will get the books from the shelf.
              1. avt
                avt 28 October 2017 11: 58 New
                +1
                Quote: newbie
                I recall from my memory that what the Soviet education system put in there,

                bully The Soviet education system could not contribute ANYTHING to you about the space program besides TASS reports, especially in details that did not quite fit with the victorious reports. Due to the lack of banal access for schoolchildren. Although books from the shelf of that time are certainly better to get than REN TV to watch. Although, in fairness, REN TV somehow shot frames, but according to the lunar program, with an interview with Egorov, in the 80s the KBOM department of a subordinate, even as a friend of I.V. Barmin (the son and heir of the same Barmin), who here, at the head of the team of authors on the site, noted an article. Enough to complete the discussion on the study of venereal conditions in the atmosphere and soil of the surface of Venus? bully
                1. newcomer
                  newcomer 28 October 2017 12: 15 New
                  +6
                  you are wrong about education. in graduation (10/11) classes I was a political informant. still made a couple of reports on space activities. and okay, let's finish, just insist, I didn’t actually start the discussion itself.
          3. Svarog51
            Svarog51 28 October 2017 13: 28 New
            10
            Garik, welcome hi
            you are special from aviation

            Why did you write a shark in pilots? Of course they "fly", only not high and not long

            It was necessary to send a submarine to Venus ... titanium. She would have managed to collect more information. good drinks
            1. newcomer
              newcomer 28 October 2017 13: 56 New
              +4
              I welcome, Sergey! So avt worked on the TU 160 program, but on a civilian specialty. I learned this Old from communication on VO. about the submarine “Shark” you did a great job. shake your hand. (damn it, again the browser does not give emoticons, e).
              1. Svarog51
                Svarog51 28 October 2017 14: 49 New
                +9
                Garik, so I thought about the problem with a "clear" look, and the idea was not trivial from that. And the Tu-160 also carries titanium body elements. Maybe an avt colleague knows more about our latest developments than ours? Then I’ll only scout with my hands what I don’t know, I don’t know. request
              2. avt
                avt 28 October 2017 19: 51 New
                0
                Quote: newbie
                I welcome, Sergey! So avt worked on the TU 160 program, but on a civilian specialty. I learned this Old from communication on VO.

                bully You are my seals in the teeth! It is necessary to read and remember more carefully. For Tu 160 and avionics in particular, God worked for him and let God give him health, the site visitor works under the name SSI But here
                Quote: Svarog51
                about the latest developments

                Quote: Svarog51
                Tu-160

                He will tell you something vryatli. Not his upbringing bully Because, as we were taught in due time
                Quote: Svarog51
                about the latest developments?

                ,, For the guessed answer, you will receive ten years. " bully
                Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                The failures on Venus are not all technical, the losses were due to a frequency jump in the difference in speeds between Venus and Earth. They arrived, and there the difference in speeds and communication frequencies shifted. The whole device was lost until it was calculated and cut into the subject.

                bully bully Where were you cute-ah! Well, when Khimki lost one such in flight before the next orbit adjustment. So it would have prompted, otherwise I had to call, disgrace at NASU and they showed the device where it wanders. Not! Actually Ascetic lacks ! request Just like Putin, in the absence of Rabindranath Tagore, there seems to be no one to talk to bully Well, maybe, God forbid, he’s busy with his profession.
                1. Svarog51
                  Svarog51 28 October 2017 22: 21 New
                  +9
                  Avt colleague, I welcome you hi
                  You are my seals in the teeth!
                  good Pleased.
                  For Tu 160 and avionics in particular, God worked for him and God grant him health, a site visitor works under the name SSI
                  That’s why a friend was handed over to American spies? wink Now they will annoy him with their questions - what and how. bully
                  He will tell you something vryatli.
                  He will do it right, because there is a secret to keep it safe. And here we have enough information for the eyes and ears. Knowing colleagues will hint, and we will try to understand. About the "White Swan" I hinted at something recently, a post about the restoration of their production was recently. So there someone laid out a scheme with an arrangement of titanium elements, so I thought about a titanium submarine in the seas of Venus. Well, why - there is a Lunokhod, a Mars rover, too, let Venus be floating. wink
        2. siberalt
          siberalt 28 October 2017 10: 54 New
          +2
          There was no "venus rover." There was a descent module.
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. Settlement Oparyshev
        Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 56 New
        +1
        The failures on Venus are not all technical, the losses were due to a frequency jump in the difference in speeds between Venus and Earth. They arrived, and there the difference in speeds and communication frequencies shifted. The whole device was lost until it was calculated and cut into the subject.
      3. sharp-lad
        sharp-lad 28 October 2017 20: 16 New
        0
        The temperature on the surface of Venus is 467 degrees Celsius at a pressure of 93 bar.
    3. Alex20042004
      Alex20042004 28 October 2017 10: 08 New
      +2
      Yes, they have already visited the moon. laughing laughing laughing
      1. st25310
        st25310 28 October 2017 10: 18 New
        10
        Now let them fly in the sun! and so as not to burn let them fly at night. laughing
        1. Spnsr
          Spnsr 28 October 2017 11: 16 New
          +1
          Quote: st25310
          Now let them fly in the sun! and so as not to burn let them fly at night. laughing

          I laughed laughing wassat
      2. figwam
        figwam 28 October 2017 10: 29 New
        16
        Quote: Alex20042004
        Yes, they have already visited the moon. laughing laughing laughing

        Well, there’s such a thing, you know, well, they just accidentally erased kilometers of videotape, lost all the lunar soil, accidentally lost all the rocket technology, spacesuits, etc. But the technology of lies and deception they have under strict control.
      3. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 28 October 2017 10: 31 New
        +4
        Quote: Alex20042004
        Yes, they have already visited the moon. laughing laughing laughing

        Have you heard that Alexei Leonov answered the jokers on this subject? Search the internet.
        1. siberalt
          siberalt 28 October 2017 10: 56 New
          +4
          Leonov gave a non-disclosure subscription, like many involved in the "lunar" Hollywood. laughing
          Prikinte what will be in irreplaceable diapers in half a month! laughing
        2. Winnie76
          Winnie76 28 October 2017 13: 12 New
          +5
          Quote: Aaron Zawi
          Have you heard that Alexei Leonov answered the jokers on this subject? Search the internet.

          Leonov’s uncle is authoritative, but doubts remain. A lot of coincidences. It’s like with Hillary. All around the packs are dying, but it is kind of white and fluffy. And in general it’s strange, no one will pull the lunar program today, including the Americans, and then it’s easy.
          It is flung to me, there was some kind of agreement between the USSR and the USA. The USSR pretends to believe in flying to the moon, the Americans are doing something in return. And Leonov fits into this scheme.
          1. Settlement Oparyshev
            Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 59 New
            0
            Leonov himself strangely went out into space. He flies in boots, in sneakers, then with the inscription of the USSR, then without it. Well, let’s leave the little things
          2. nmaxxen
            nmaxxen 28 October 2017 17: 00 New
            +3
            Leonov Alfa Bank (where he works as the wedding general vice president) pays so much that he will say what is pleasing on behalf of the owners
          3. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 28 October 2017 18: 09 New
            0
            Quote: Winnie76
            It is flung to me, there was some kind of agreement between the USSR and the USA. The USSR pretends to believe in flying to the moon, the Americans are doing something in return. And Leonov fits into this scheme.

            Easily fellow
            www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st56.htm hi
          4. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 October 2017 19: 48 New
            +6
            That's just with the help of five corner reflectors installed in the Apollo landing sites, scientists from all countries, including Russia, have been calibrating instruments on Earth for half a century.
            Here are those. Still plowing on the moon, in spite of conspirators and ignoramuses.
            1. Locksmith
              Locksmith 28 October 2017 20: 56 New
              +3
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Here are those. Still plowing on the moon, in spite of conspirators and ignoramuses.

              It is a pity that the warrior did not read the popular literature on laser location wink
              The laser spot will be almost from the half moon, and a plus of 2-4 photons, from the target is certainly awesome for the exact location, damn, I'm lying under the table ....
            2. zoolu350
              zoolu350 29 October 2017 04: 32 New
              0
              Corner reflectors were part of the landing simulation kit. Which each of the Apollo dropped flies to the moon.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 29 October 2017 14: 10 New
                0
                "Which each of the Apollo dropped flies to the moon." ///

                ABOUT! Apollo, it turns out, flew up to the moon! good To admit it is huge
                progress for conspiracy theorists. But upset: corner reflectors are impossible
                "reset" - they must be installed and oriented, so that they work.
                This can be done either by people or devices on the moon - like Lunokhod, for example.
                1. zoolu350
                  zoolu350 31 October 2017 10: 10 New
                  0
                  Of course flew up. The big lie (landing on the moon) can only be hidden behind the big truth (flights to the moon). Near-Earth space at that time was tightly controlled and here it was impossible to hide the deception. But the activity of the moon is a completely different matter.
            3. Settlement Oparyshev
              Settlement Oparyshev 29 October 2017 09: 32 New
              0
              there should not be such traces on the Moon because of the dryness and friability of the soil.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 29 October 2017 14: 19 New
                0
                There were no Soviet Lunokhods either ??? belay

                Here are the clear traces of Lunokhod-1. There are also pictures of the tracks of Lunokhod-2.
                Clear marks on supposedly “dry and loose ground”.
                Both the traces of the Lunokhods and the traces of the Rovers are still clearly visible.
                on the moon. The probes of NASA, the Japanese, the Chinese took their pictures. There are no winds there - everything is saved.
                1. Settlement Oparyshev
                  Settlement Oparyshev 29 October 2017 14: 43 New
                  0
                  The tracks are different, the photos are more real not with steep edges.
        3. Settlement Oparyshev
          Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 13: 23 New
          0
          Leonov has something to cover. Unfortunately, Gagarin’s “flight”.
          1. Golovan Jack
            Golovan Jack 28 October 2017 13: 36 New
            +9
            Quote: pp to Oparyshev
            Leonov has something to cover. Unfortunately, Gagarin’s “flight”.

            Something you said right now - I did not understand ... request
            1. Settlement Oparyshev
              Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 14: 00 New
              0
              To make it easier to understand, pay attention to the "funny" and cheerful astronauts and astronauts immediately after the "flight" with overloads and weightlessness to Komarov and to the Shuttle astronauts. After the next flights, the astronauts were pumped out, three heart attacks from Nikolaev and severe health injuries others. Yes and other factors.
              1. Golovan Jack
                Golovan Jack 28 October 2017 14: 09 New
                10
                Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                pay attention to the "funny" and cheerful astronauts and astronauts immediately after the "flight" with overloads and weightlessness

                So ... the idea is clear.
                Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                To Komarov and to the Shuttle astronauts

                Inclusive?
                Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                After the next flights, the astronauts were pumped out, three heart attacks in Nikolaev and severe health injuries in others


                Gagarin flew less than two hours, EMNIP. Mosquitoes - a day. Nikolaev - almost four days the first time and 18 days the second. Does this not tell you anything?
                Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                Yes, and other factors

                Come on, come on ... let's, let's give your "factors" ...
                1. Settlement Oparyshev
                  Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 14: 18 New
                  0
                  Komarov died, as you know, the Earth rest in peace! It was expected that the bottom of the ship would burn out, and it burned out.
                  I can’t jump about you on topics. I like the details. Let us spin the space in the capsule for an hour with overloads, jump slightly, focus, regain consciousness, and then refuse to have a physical examination and run to the press. Oh you are our little rascal!
                  1. Golovan Jack
                    Golovan Jack 28 October 2017 14: 43 New
                    +8
                    Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                    Let's spin you in Cosmos in a capsule of a little watch with overloads, jump slightly, focus, regain consciousness, and then refuse to have a physical examination cheerfully and run to the press

                    We forget about selection, about training - we also forget ... you are somehow strange ... or at home not everything is already (this is just an assumption, nothing personal).
                    I - will not pull, of course. Gagarin - pulled. Do not allow this?
                    Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                    Oh you our little rascal!

                    It rather concerns you yes
                    1. Settlement Oparyshev
                      Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 01 New
                      0
                      Well, what can I say, training is one thing, but what really happened there is not known. Maybe very small overloads, so it came up a little to the throat, and maybe such that the brains stuck to one side of the skull. I don’t know. The result is the same for all the first period of the manned. Probably I'm wrong. I'm worried.
                      Think for yourself.
                2. Settlement Oparyshev
                  Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 05 New
                  0
                  Yes, up to 5 days, the impact is not comparable less than in flights of more than 5 days, but in my opinion and not only, astronauts, as one, immediately transferred from an unburned capsule to boats and waved their hands on board battleships smiling.
                  1. Golovan Jack
                    Golovan Jack 28 October 2017 15: 11 New
                    +8
                    Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                    Yes, up to 5 days, the impact is not comparable less

                    Oh, state service ... I thought it was all completely hopeless.
                    It turns out he was wrong. Not really laughing
                    Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                    ... but in my opinion and not only, astronauts, as one, immediately transplanted from an unburned capsule into boats ...

                    Uh, what language is it written in? I kind of know Russian well, and I sort of understood your idea, but there is no certainty about this.
                    In short:
                    - Are you sure that Gagarin did not fly into space. You cannot prove it, your faith is your private affair
                    - everything else, to be honest, I'm not interested. I understand you, thanks for communicating hi
                    1. Settlement Oparyshev
                      Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 23 New
                      0
                      It is a pity that in the end you turned off thinking, and I was hoping for a productive development of the topic. For something new.
              2. MadCat
                MadCat 28 October 2017 17: 55 New
                +1
                Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                To make it easier to understand, pay attention to the "funny" and cheerful astronauts and astronauts immediately after the "flight" with overloads and weightlessness to Komarov and to the Shuttle astronauts. After the next flights, the astronauts were pumped out, three heart attacks from Nikolaev and severe health injuries others. Yes and other factors.

                absolutely "witnesses" of universal conspiracies flew from the coils, but is it nothing that tourists are flying quietly now? fool
                1. Settlement Oparyshev
                  Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 18: 03 New
                  0
                  And you, our humanities, have worked out the technology and much has become clear. Nothing that, not knowing many cosmonauts, ruined their health even during excessive training?
                  Do you even understand what you wrote?
                  It is obvious that space has stepped far in comparison with the first flights.
                  1. MadCat
                    MadCat 29 October 2017 00: 51 New
                    0
                    Quote: pp to Oparyshev
                    And you, our humanities, have worked out the technology and much has become clear. Nothing that, not knowing many cosmonauts, ruined their health even during excessive training?
                    Do you even understand what you wrote?
                    It is obvious that space has stepped far in comparison with the first flights.

                    Gagarin was an Air Force officer trained in the program that today's astronauts can only dream about in a nightmare, his flight lasted 2 hours.
                    But talking with your brother witnesses to reptilian conspiracies is like talking to pigeons. hi
                    1. Settlement Oparyshev
                      Settlement Oparyshev 29 October 2017 01: 30 New
                      0
                      Oh, dove you are ours. Do you have any idea, even if you have a distant understanding of the flight of a fighter, from a flight of a spacecraft? A person can break in a split second, and you have two hours of flight, it’s passion on an attraction in the park. Or such a two-hour hard blow that selection and training is enough, that the astronaut will withstand everything in a row. The spacecraft of that time had not yet been worked out and the loads were with great runaways. If you are satisfied with the version, you feel comfortable. Remain happy, do not tear the fart in powerless anger.
                2. Locksmith
                  Locksmith 28 October 2017 21: 06 New
                  +2
                  Quote: MadCat
                  But is it that tourists are flying quietly now?

                  Of course nothing, tourists TWO YEARS TRAIN IN our center.
                  And those that fly like a stone from a slingshot, up and down immediately, orbital flight, even in one turn, is a harsh and unpleasant reality for people with this stranger.
                  Previously, they did not know what to do and the astronauts were simply taken out of the ship, they were not able to move, after 5 days in zero gravity.
                  Much later, when the USSR, using its orbital flight practices, came up with HOW to save astronauts from zero gravity, this problem decreased its relevance, but before that, ABSOLUTELY everyone from the ship just literally crawled out, and there was no talk of any vigorous bouncing movement. laughing
                3. Settlement Oparyshev
                  Settlement Oparyshev 29 October 2017 01: 20 New
                  0
                  I remembered one moment. The American astronauts all forgot as one what they did and how they flew. Well, they can’t remember, are shy and make excuses.
                  Try to justify and prove what is in the order of things in your theory of manned flights.
        4. Sharansky
          Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 43 New
          +2
          Quote: Aaron Zawi
          Have you heard that Alexei Leonov answered the jokers on this subject? Search the internet.

          in vain you are so with the sectarians.
      4. sabakina
        sabakina 28 October 2017 10: 43 New
        +5
        Quote: Alex20042004
        Yes, they have already visited the moon. laughing laughing laughing

        Not only visited, but also marked, well, how animals mark the territory! laughing The only question is, how did their cutaneous-muscular process withstand cosmic temperature?
        1. siberalt
          siberalt 28 October 2017 12: 36 New
          +2
          They also noted that not all frames of the shooting were hidden. In the reflection of the helmet, the shooting operator is visible.
        2. Svarog51
          Svarog51 28 October 2017 13: 41 New
          +9
          Glory, yes. Vessel, pump and sluice. And then you can really freeze the economy. It's just that it is not convenient to move around with such equipment between the legs. So on the moon the attraction is small, so they jump like ... well, I won’t be sad about it. lol
        3. Locksmith
          Locksmith 28 October 2017 21: 10 New
          +2
          Quote: sabakina
          Not only visited, but also tagged

          Really-drew, do not erase. I especially like re-reading favorites ...
          Like ... "Damn, here we have the water spilling onto the floor (in a vacuum (!)), We will scoop it out onto the street ... belay
    4. Maz
      Maz 28 October 2017 15: 01 New
      +5
      I put a can of moonshine against Scotland and a bucket of whiskey, they won’t fly anywhere in the inhabited module beyond the moon. Purely from a military point of view, this time. Purely from the commercial are two. And the mentality of the United States is not in a position with good intentions to give some kind of humanity something in the solar system. They on earth also try to suck blood from everyone who lives and wherever possible and impossible.
    5. opoffis
      opoffis 28 October 2017 22: 46 New
      0
      According to the documentation and statements of 4 of these engines are equal to 1 Russian RD-170!
      But how much these real numbers are not known, as well as the dimensions are many times larger than our RD, and there is nothing good in it, we need a very THICK ROCKET, which is difficult to create in order to be reliable, and also difficult and expensive to transport.
  2. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 09: 55 New
    +4
    The fire test of the new rocket engine RS-25 in the United States is recognized as successful
    I also think the main thing is to acknowledge by ourselves and to the stars! And to the space station, how, again, by the “union”?
    1. Pirogov
      Pirogov 28 October 2017 10: 00 New
      +3
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      I also think the main thing is to acknowledge by ourselves and to the stars! And to the space station, how, again, by the “union”?

      .................................................
      ... The U.S. plans to have a test flight of the Space Launch System launch vehicle in 2019. A manned flight using this rocket is scheduled for 2021. It was noted that the test launches of the new engine will continue until the manned flight .................................... .......
      .................................................
      ....................................... ........... ......................................
      .................. They themselves admit that the work there is not an edge, and there will still be dozens of such tests. If not hundreds. And the intended use of the rocket for 2021 may well be transferred to 2031 and beyond.
      1. quote
        quote 28 October 2017 10: 14 New
        +8
        Noble steam generator turned out, but where is the "fire"? Or is the flame jet secret?
        Correctly, according to the spectra, you can evaluate this masterpiece. And so, how would a song! We master the money.
        1. Settlement Oparyshev
          Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 10: 31 New
          0
          Just steam. And here I think that Ms. smoke is not like smoke.
          1. Sharansky
            Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 45 New
            +4
            RS-25 is an oxygen-hydrogen engine. And the product of the combustion of hydrogen in oxygen is pure H2O, that is, water. So in the video we see exactly water vapor. Absolutely environmentally friendly engine.
            It’s just that the patriots apparently skipped chemistry at school.
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 18: 03 New
              +3
              Quote: Sharansky
              RS-25 E2063RS-25 is an oxygen-hydrogen engine. And the product of the combustion of hydrogen in oxygen is pure H2O, that is, water. So in the video we see exactly water vapor. Absolutely environmentally friendly engine.
              It’s just that the patriots apparently skipped chemistry at school.

              Yes dear. School will not help you. H2O at a temperature of 3000g. milk steam? Well, at least see the launch of the Shuttle on the Internet, maybe you will find the difference. Far NOT a Hooray patriot, but a simple gnome.
              1. sharp-lad
                sharp-lad 28 October 2017 20: 51 New
                +1
                2800 to be exact. With the expansion and as a result of radiation, mainly in the infrared range, the temperature of the vapor drops rapidly and it condenses into an already clearly visible and familiar white vapor.
                1. Mavrikiy
                  Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 21: 03 New
                  +2
                  Quote: sharp-lad
                  2800 to be exact. With the expansion and as a result of radiation, mainly in the infrared range, the temperature of the vapor drops rapidly and it condenses into an already clearly visible and familiar white vapor.

                  Ku-ku. At a distance of 4-5 meters from the nozzle exit, the temperature dropped below 100 g.? Yes, the school will not help.
                  You do not need to write common truths with a smart look, you need to think what you write and to whom. (professional holiday - April 12)
                  Cool tons of hot gas / sec, what’s this? The transfer and radiation in such quantity, and the "table" will melt. Is it only "pioneering"
                  1. sharp-lad
                    sharp-lad 28 October 2017 22: 46 New
                    +1
                    Have you seen the water under the table? Do you know everything about gas and diesel burners? The distribution of gas flows and temperatures in fire tube boilers, two-way, three-way, four-way, with condensation mode, was considered? My profession does not have a special day, but without those like me on winter evenings, it is somehow not comfortable to become in most apartments and part of private houses.
                    1. sharp-lad
                      sharp-lad 28 October 2017 23: 06 New
                      +1
                      In a hot water, three-way, steel boiler with a capacity of about 500 kilowatts, the path of the chimneys takes about 7-8 meters, during which the temperature drops from 1960 degrees for methane to 160 - 200 degrees. And for the first 4 meters, a drop of about 1000 degrees.
                      1. Mavrikiy
                        Mavrikiy 29 October 2017 08: 48 New
                        +1
                        Quote: sharp-lad
                        In a hot water, three-way, steel boiler with a capacity of about 500 kilowatts, the path of the chimneys takes about 7-8 meters, during which the temperature drops from 1960 degrees for methane to 160 - 200 degrees. And for the first 4 meters, a drop of about 1000 degrees.

                        Thank you, I learned a lot about boilers. Only in small countries and think in small. Have you heard about the transition from quantity to quality? How so, and ..... This is philosophy, dialectics, the forbidden fruit.
                        The power of the Shuttle engine (one) is 12 kW. For the experience, go to the kitchen, light a match (under 000g) and you don’t need 1000-7 meters, at 8 m there is nothing. Fill the stand with water for cooling and spray water in a stream of gas. Hence the steam condensate gas stream. Do you know the heat capacity of water?
                        PS Because water is not visible - steam. And the pipelines, they are in Africa ....
            2. Settlement Oparyshev
              Settlement Oparyshev 29 October 2017 09: 38 New
              0
              Young man! Otto Brown, did not forgive the Americans for defeating and humiliating his Germany. From all his life in America he skillfully hung NASA noodles. He created a large-scale fake Flight to the Moon. Saturn5 with Fu1, that’s an indicator. So, go ahead, who don’t , did not fly to the moon.
        2. Mavrikiy
          Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 10: 58 New
          +1
          Quote: devis
          Noble steam generator turned out, but where is the "fire"? Or is the flame jet secret?
          Correctly, according to the spectra, you can evaluate this masterpiece. And so, how would a song! We master the money.

          Good girl! (+).
        3. NIKNN
          NIKNN 28 October 2017 11: 25 New
          +5
          Quote: devis
          Noble steam generator turned out, but where is the "fire"?

          You turn on the video, and not just look at the picture, there is video and fire ... smile But the engine’s work for eight minutes without failures, this is a serious achievement ...
          1. Svarog51
            Svarog51 28 October 2017 13: 46 New
            +8
            Nicholas hi And his it, after another eight minutes, you can run? Or has he worked out the whole resource? recourse
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 28 October 2017 14: 18 New
              +5
              Quote: Svarog51
              Nicholas hi And his it, after another eight minutes, you can run? Or has he worked out the whole resource? recourse

              Well, actually it’s one-time ... (maybe they’ll run this one again for testing) But 8 minutes, it’s possible to give an impulse (with the corresponding weight, of course) is good. Everything is limited by the amount of fuel on board. In my opinion, tests are carried out before installation, but there seems to be a minute (I don’t know for sure) The resource of these devices is very limited ... Yes, there’s no point in doing it, it’s still an acceleration step into the ocean, and in 8 minutes (again with fuel) you can accelerate to Mars ... They’re testing the returning first stage, I don’t know how profitable it is, the engines are still in the bulkhead, and laying the reusability of these engines will obviously impair the traction characteristics, or use super-expensive materials and technologies. My opinion is not justified as the versatility of the F-35 no
              Well, something like that, in amateurish ... hi
              1. Sharansky
                Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 51 New
                +4
                Quote: NIKNN
                Well, actually it’s one-time ...

                Well, actually RS-25 is initially reusable. Only one modification was made for SLS, due to which they were able to improve performance.
              2. Svarog51
                Svarog51 28 October 2017 14: 55 New
                +9
                Well, something like that, in amateurish ...

                Yeah, got it. For me, this is quite enough for my own thoughts, otherwise the "balls with rollers" will rust. Thank. hi
        4. sharp-lad
          sharp-lad 28 October 2017 20: 38 New
          0
          Well they burn hydrogen! 2 H2 + O2 = 2 H2O! When cooling, it precipitates, that is, it appears as a white vapor! The flame of hydrogen burning is really barely visible!
    2. Ugolek
      Ugolek 28 October 2017 10: 02 New
      16
      You probably are clearly a gall man. The Union is out of date, the Russian Federation does not have its own station, there are no heavy engines, terrible theft and corruption in Roscosmos, so where does this bile come from? Unlike Russia, the Americans are moving systematically towards the goal, not without problems but in stages, since their strategy has been defined for years to come and it does not change. And what's going on here? In a strange ocean, they noticed a mote, but do you not notice the logs in yourselves?
      1. Pirogov
        Pirogov 28 October 2017 10: 13 New
        +8
        Quote: Ugolek
        You probably are clearly a gall man. The Union is out of date, the Russian Federation does not have its own station, there are no heavy engines, terrible theft and corruption in Roscosmos, so where does this bile come from?

        Corruption certainly exists and there are many problems. But for the engines you dear dear, how else to explain that Russia is selling America the engines RD-180, as well as RD 181? Of course, I am already looking forward to your answer that the RD-180 and 81 engine are not heavy, etc. ......
        1. Sharansky
          Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 55 New
          +1
          Quote: Pirogov
          how to explain that Russia is selling the RD-180 engines, as well as the RD 181 engines to America?

          it’s impossible to explain why Russia is selling its latest high-tech products to a country that has imposed sanctions against Russia, including on space technology, allowing it to launch into space, including military satellites, which are used against Russia.
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 28 October 2017 20: 48 New
            +1
            Quote: Sharansky
            why Russia sells its latest high-tech products

            Are you sure they are the last?
            1. Sharansky
              Sharansky 29 October 2017 10: 31 New
              0
              If you talk about something newer and more perfect, which is used on Russian media, I will be grateful to you. Maybe I missed that.
      2. Locksmith
        Locksmith 28 October 2017 10: 41 New
        11
        Quote: Ugolek
        Unlike Russia, the Americans are moving systematically towards the goal, not without problems but in stages, since their strategy is defined for years to come and it does not change

        Actually, it’s an old hydrogen from the shuttle, and this miracle costs TEN TIMES more expensive than RD180, with a pull of TWO TIMES lower. Because it doesn’t change much momentum, it is unsuitable for stage 1, it’s the second stage engine and it turns on at the same time with the first stage, due to problems with the conservation of hydrogen.
        1. zoolu350
          zoolu350 28 October 2017 10: 57 New
          +2
          Quote: Locksmith
          Because it doesn’t change a big impulse, it is unsuitable for stage 1, it is a second stage engine and it turns on simultaneously with the first stage, due to problems with hydrogen conservation.

          Stupidity. The difference between oxygen-hydrogen RDs is that, due to much better cooling parameters and MI, they are able to remove STs at the OO in one step. Therefore, the RS-25 and turns on simultaneously with the TTU, to provide greater traction. Disadvantages: low hydrogen density (volumes) and high cost of infrastructure.
          1. telobezumnoe
            telobezumnoe 28 October 2017 11: 45 New
            +2
            you are aware that the nozzles for the atmosphere and for the vacuum are different. and the nozzle designed for vacuum will not give the same impulse as the nozzle for the atmospheric section, and vice versa. Sailing and problems with single-stage missiles
            1. zoolu350
              zoolu350 28 October 2017 11: 56 New
              0
              In the know, but this problem was solved in RD - 0120. The problem is that the cost of withdrawing 1 ton of cargo to the cargo base using the LV on the ASWR is much higher than on the ASRC.
              1. nmaxxen
                nmaxxen 28 October 2017 17: 03 New
                0
                that is why the CERD is stupid nonsense for a bureaucratic drink and puffing
                1. zoolu350
                  zoolu350 28 October 2017 18: 33 New
                  +1
                  No. If we discard the price, then only the combination of CVRD and KKRD allows you to get a LV delivering 5% of the mass on the GS.
          2. Locksmith
            Locksmith 28 October 2017 18: 12 New
            +1
            Quote: zoolu350
            Stupidity

            If it’s not difficult to cite, at least one example of the use of hydrogen atoms in the second stage, and so that they are switched on after the first stage, and then we will all discuss YOUR Naive Nonsense together.
            1. zoolu350
              zoolu350 28 October 2017 18: 30 New
              0
              j-2 CVRD 2 stages of the Saturn-5 and Saturn-1B launch vehicles.
              1. Locksmith
                Locksmith 28 October 2017 19: 01 New
                +2
                Quote: zoolu350
                j-2 CVRD 2 stages of the Saturn-5 and Saturn-1B launch vehicles.

                This is fabulous - no one can really say what they flew on, HYDROGEN TODA THERE WAS NOT laughing
                1. zoolu350
                  zoolu350 29 October 2017 04: 21 New
                  0
                  Well, of course. KVRD RL-10B-2 is also crazy?
                  1. Locksmith
                    Locksmith 29 October 2017 18: 26 New
                    0
                    Quote: zoolu350
                    Well, of course. KVRD RL-10B-2 is also crazy?

                    Of course, to whom did the engine with a thrust of 7 tons stand? The Chinese flew to the moon using heptyl - there were no hydrogen conservation technologies in those years for a long time and now there is none. laughing
          3. Locksmith
            Locksmith 28 October 2017 18: 19 New
            +3
            Quote: zoolu350
            Therefore, RS-25 and turns on simultaneously with the TTU, to provide greater traction

            It is therefore not switched on at the same time - the hydrogen there is simply WATERFUL, it boils and evaporates and the second stage explodes even during the first operation - if hydrogen gas is not discharged, let me remind you that it boils slightly above absolute zero, this is the worst fuel in terms of storage. While it is evaporating intensively - it cools the tank, the process will cease to go - the boom is inevitable. the Americans have already done this trick with its stage — the very one that should carry the lunar module to its destination, it could not hold on to the hydrogen supply and was eliminated in orbit laughing
            That is why they turn on the second stage at the same time as the first one - oil just squander valuable fuel just like that, and our Energy flew exactly the same. Threat; the third stage, malacholny, there you need less fuel at times - this is anticipating your next question lol
      3. sabakina
        sabakina 28 October 2017 10: 48 New
        +6
        Ugolek, I'm more interested in the shooting will be Hollywood or Bollywood! I'd rather look at Bollywood!
      4. newcomer
        newcomer 28 October 2017 10: 49 New
        10
        Ugolek, “Union” cannot become obsolete, for it is reliable to the limit of the dreams of any “NASA”. about the strands, so on our way “Soyuz5“, “Angara5“. Well you at least take an interest, read.
        1. Sharansky
          Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 56 New
          +4
          Quote: newbie
          Angara5

          A5 hangar in carrying capacity is equal to the same Proton or Falcon-9. This is by no means heavy in this context. And Union 5 is currently something of Rogozin’s fantasies, right?
          1. newcomer
            newcomer 28 October 2017 16: 03 New
            +5
            Sharansky, I dare say that the “Angara” itself is modular. From it you can collect both heavy and heavyweight, by the word “Hangar A7“ has a payload of 35 tons. and “Soyuz5“ _ is the latest “generation of“ “Unions”, let’s say, that will consist of one of the modules of the accelerating blocks of the “Federation”.
            1. Sharansky
              Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 15 New
              +4
              Quote: newbie
              to the word “Hangar A7“ has a payload of 35 tons.

              Hangar A7 does not exist and will never exist. This Wishlist did not go beyond the paper.
              Quote: newbie
              “Soyuz5“ _ is the newest “generation of“ Soyuz ”, let’s say, that will consist of one of the modules of the accelerating blocks of the“ Federation ”.

              You’ll decide whether this is a project of a launch vehicle or something amorphous, which will consist in one of the modules of the accelerating blocks of the “Federation”
              If you are talking about a carrier rocket, it’s also not heavy, the carrying capacity is lower than that of Proton. The trouble is that this carrier does not exist. There is only a project.
              By the way, the Angara A5V project is also closed, but I remind you that it was the carrier of the Federation.
              So it goes.
              1. newcomer
                newcomer 28 October 2017 16: 27 New
                +5
                I remind you, "Hangar", modular, as a constructor, it’s more understandable. so, more precisely, there is no “table” for her, but this is not problematic and solvable. so dear man, you yourself decide on what topic to debate? What does “amorphous” mean? you are “out of date“ “Unions“, get “Soyuz5“! I don’t understand where the essence of your dispute is, do you indicate what’s called, where to laugh?
                1. Sharansky
                  Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 36 New
                  +2
                  The sense of modularity if the A7 is incompatible with everyone else and its design is officially closed. She is not and never will be.
                  Quote: newbie
                  What does “amorphous” mean?

                  I don’t know, explain your phrase
                  this is the newest “generation of“ “Unions”, let’s say, that will consist of one of the modules of the accelerating blocks of the “Federation”.
                  I’m not twisting her, I can’t understand anything in this set of words. The generation that will consist of one of the modules of the upper stage is what?

                  Quote: newbie
                  you already indicate what is called, where to laugh?

                  Here you need to cry and not laugh. Of all of the above, nothing exists in the metal. From the word at all. AND perhaps someday Union 5. will be realized someday. Although, in the light of rumors about Sunkar, it will most likely also be closed.
                  1. newcomer
                    newcomer 28 October 2017 16: 38 New
                    +5
                    cry further, but without me.
                    1. Sharansky
                      Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 39 New
                      +4
                      Goodbye. Cozy to you maniamir. The main thing is not to face reality
      5. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 11: 04 New
        +3
        Quote: Ugolek
        You probably are clearly a gall man. The Union is out of date, the Russian Federation does not have its own station, there are no heavy engines, terrible theft and corruption in Roscosmos, so where does this bile come from? Unlike Russia, the Americans are moving systematically towards the goal, not without problems but in stages, since their strategy has been defined for years to come and it does not change. And what's going on here? In a strange ocean, they noticed a mote, but do you not notice the logs in yourselves?

        You are mistaken in everything, not our gall! Russia always has something to answer both the USA and the state liberals. The United States flies on our missiles, and where they "go systematically" .... I think from the Kyrgyz Republic it is more visible than from the United States laughing
        1. Sharansky
          Sharansky 28 October 2017 14: 58 New
          +3
          The Turks were answered with a ban on tomatoes. And now even allowed again. Decently, the whole world immediately began to respect.
          1. Mavrikiy
            Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 16: 02 New
            +5
            Quote: Sharansky
            The Turks were answered with a ban on tomatoes. And now even allowed again. Decently, the whole world immediately began to respect.

            Surprise, respect. Are you against it?
            No, if for 2 years you stupidly look at tomatoes, then ..... bar .... it turns out, however. And if you look at the political result, then a lot of respect. And the Saudis to bow and German prezik ..... By the way, the oil hub in Croatia, what do you think to provide without the Bosphorus? This is the economy.
            1. Golovan Jack
              Golovan Jack 28 October 2017 16: 11 New
              +7
              Quote: Mavrikiy
              No, if you stupidly look at the tomatoes, then ..... the ram turns out

              Definitely! good laughing good
              And if you recall that from time to time they call it "tomatoes" ... repeat ... that's for sure. It was he, and Buridanov laughing
            2. Sharansky
              Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 17 New
              +3
              Quote: Mavrikiy
              And if you look at the political result, then a lot of respect. And the Saudis bow and German prezik .....

              They looked straight at the tomatoes and respected. And what, you have a good maniamir.
              Quote: Mavrikiy
              By the way, the hub of oil in Croatia, what do you think to provide without the Bosphorus?

              What do I care about Croatia in general?
              1. Mavrikiy
                Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 18: 10 New
                +3
                Quote: Sharansky
                Quote: Mavrikiy
                And if you look at the political result, then a lot of respect. And the Saudis bow and German prezik .....

                They looked straight at the tomatoes and respected. And what, you have a good maniamir.
                Quote: Mavrikiy
                By the way, the hub of oil in Croatia, what do you think to provide without the Bosphorus?

                What do I care about Croatia in general?

                That's for sure. It seems that Russia doesn’t care either, only its beloved and its wallet. Gnomes are not people, they must live in the land of the elect.
      6. Orionvit
        Orionvit 28 October 2017 11: 55 New
        +6
        Quote: Ugolek
        The Union is outdated, the Russian Federation does not have its own station

        I don’t know how the Soyuz is out of date to you, maybe design? laughing Flies regularly, astronauts carry, including staff. By the way, the Americans, (great moonwalkers), at this stage, do not even have this. Satellites launch, this is true, and then what? By the way, half of the ISS are Russian modules, and they service the station, for the most part Russian cosmonauts, while all foreign ones, are engaged in some sort of “research” at the station. That is why, Russia announced its intentions to launch its own orbital station, in response to which the Americans began to boil boiling water.
        1. Sharansky
          Sharansky 28 October 2017 15: 00 New
          +2
          Quote: Orionvit
          I don’t know how the Soyuz is out of date to you, maybe design?

          Yes ktozh knows what it is out of date. Apparently the Angara was just designed as a replacement for the Union. The truth has not grown together, but 160 billion. rubles and 20 years of work spent.
          1. newcomer
            newcomer 28 October 2017 16: 07 New
            +4
            most likely, “Angara” will replace “Proton” if it cannot be rehabilitated.
            1. Sharansky
              Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 19 New
              +1
              not replace, Angara is a commercially failed project. Rather, one can believe that they can make a copy of the Zenith called Sunkar and launch it from Baikonur. Why is it true that they tuffed the ofigiards into the East then it becomes unclear.
              1. newcomer
                newcomer 28 October 2017 16: 35 New
                +6
                Listen, Sharansky, your type deny everything, I already understood. even the fact that the “Protons” are now on a “trial period,” the slightest “but,” they are being written off. although sorry. (I remember the story of the grief engineer). in my opinion this is generally a diversion.
                1. Sharansky
                  Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 38 New
                  +2
                  My type is not to wishful thinking and tell the truth. And the truth is that the Angara failed. It will be launched once a year purely so as not to lose the technology and that’s it. This was admitted by Roskosmos itself. So then what are you arguing with?
                  1. newcomer
                    newcomer 28 October 2017 16: 49 New
                    +6
                    What is the failure of the Angara project? speak commercially? where is the justification, who made this verdict? don’t you think that very soon, when they take up Rosskosmos and all our similar offices, it will turn out that the “failures” of the projects are too expensive. the projects themselves cannot be failures, in the “Angara” vat, she did not fly, which would indicate her indicator. “Unions” are reliable, they will fly for a long time, whether you like it or not. “Proton” is where the commercial failure is, don’t find (how much money he has already buried in the ground), although I repeat, I’m sure the failures of “Proton” are pure deversion.
                    1. Sharansky
                      Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 54 New
                      +2
                      Quote: newbie
                      “Angara” project failed? speak commercially? where is the justification, who made this veriut?

                      The market has endured. Look at the price of the removal of goods by the Hangar, the Union and, for example, Falcon-9.
                      Quote: newbie
                      “Proton” is where the commercial failure is, don’t find

                      Quote: newbie
                      “Unions” are reliable, they will fly for a long time

                      Until reusable private systems of a light class become cheaper than the Union. Then the same thing will happen that has already happened with the Protons.
                      Quote: newbie
                      “Proton” is where the commercial failure is, don’t find

                      I find it. And the A5 hangar costs twice as much as the Proton with the same output load.
                      Where will the commercial client go? To Roskosmos with the Angara and the half-dead Proton, or to SpaceX?
                      In general, Roscosmos thinks the same thing, and therefore began to turn off the Angara and invest in Sunkar, which is a copy of the Ukrainian Zenith.
                      1. newcomer
                        newcomer 28 October 2017 17: 11 New
                        +6
                        yeah, then the market ?! hell no words! how can one make grounds if the “product” did not really fly? as I understand it, first “Serve the Angara” to serve the country, then into commerce, then cheapness will come, after a break-in of all the technical solutions, now it’s raw, I'm talking about the “Angara”. it’s just for and for the sake of reusable space systems that the theme of “Hangars” needs to be developed. Moreover, I’ll tell you a secret that ours harnessed from the Yankees to assemble a station in lunar orbit, guess what is at the forefront? _ “Federation”. and you say amorphous. By the way, deadlines are 24/25. it is not amorphous, it is very powerful. Yes, I almost forgot. the reincarnation of “Zenith”, is carried out according to the design of the launch pad “Sea Lunch”. I am not aware of any other fountains.
                      2. avt
                        avt 28 October 2017 17: 26 New
                        +6
                        Quote: Sharansky
                        The market has endured.

                        bully
                        Quote: newbie
                        yeah, then the market ?!

                        But why ? A standard set from the sectarian ,, Witnesses Gaidarov "sang the mantra - ,, The market will regulate everything bully Tovarisch really thinks that launch quotas are sold like seeds at the metro station bully And the fastest selling one is the one who will give a cheaper price. Well, judging by
                        Quote: Sharansky
                        Where will the commercial client go? To Roskosmos with the Angara and the half-dead Proton, or to SpaceX?
                        fool It is a pity that now serious people from the site, such as Ascetic, have really disappeared, now we read this enchanting delusion.
  3. Settlement Oparyshev
    Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 09: 58 New
    0
    Thrust, nozzle diameter, how many of them, what fuel, similarity to RD180? Author Ale!
    1. Herculesic
      Herculesic 28 October 2017 10: 03 New
      +1
      This is a prototype that will be redone a hundred times, depending on the desire of the customer, and the capabilities of the manufacturer, now everything is about there!
      1. Locksmith
        Locksmith 28 October 2017 10: 43 New
        +8
        Quote: Herkulesich
        This is a prototype that will be redone a hundred times

        Actually, this is an old hydrogen from the shuttle, the second stage. laughing
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 10: 19 New
      +2
      Quote: pp to Oparyshev
      Thrust, nozzle diameter, how many of them, what fuel, similarity to RD180? Author Ale!

      Google is in a hurry to help.
      1. Settlement Oparyshev
        Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 10: 24 New
        +4
        Krasava! Let’s write headlines here and google the rest!
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 13: 16 New
          +1
          Quote: pp to Oparyshev
          Krasava! Let’s write headlines here and google the rest!

          This engine is a hundred years old at lunch.
  4. Herculesic
    Herculesic 28 October 2017 10: 01 New
    +1
    If the fuel also escapes on the rocket, as well as on the fire stand, then we’ll call the explosion of the carrier! fool And that the withdrawal of the flame will be sideways, the pit of the spokes mind is not enough to dig out? ?? fool
    1. Topgun
      Topgun 28 October 2017 19: 09 New
      0
      where is the fuel escaping?
      and why dig a pit at the stand if you can not dig it?
  5. Just a man
    Just a man 28 October 2017 10: 08 New
    16
    It’s strange what's new. Here is the NASA news from July 30 last year - the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration conducted fire tests on Friday of the RS-25 E2063 rocket engines, upgraded to the parameters of a heavy SLS launcher. The RS-25 engine worked for 650 seconds. Engines were previously installed on shuttle space shuttles, the operation of which was completed in 2011 after 135 launches. RS-25 improved and equipped with a new control unit. What is a breakthrough and innovation?
    1. ADmA_RUS
      ADmA_RUS 28 October 2017 10: 19 New
      +2
      They are trying to recover technology.
      Although having a masterpiece f-1 is not clear why messing around with this very expensive engine.
      1. Settlement Oparyshev
        Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 10: 27 New
        +6
        "masterpiece Fu1 !!", in large nozzles, dangerous fluctuations of fuel and oxidizer occur, which lead to explosions. Our topic began to disappear for a long time and began to make multi-nozzle motors. And Americans (dumb) welded a huge nozzle and waited for your admiration.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Do not care
        Do not care 28 October 2017 10: 29 New
        +4
        In times when there was no computer design, masterpieces were created at the “fingertips”. Missed the period of the evolutionary transfer of technology to a new generation, everything - Consider the product lost. The same thing happened with the Russian hydrogen engine RD-120.
      4. zoolu350
        zoolu350 28 October 2017 11: 02 New
        +2
        There is an opinion that the parameters of the single-chamber F-1 rocket engine are overestimated by 20% of the thrust, therefore it was not used on mass launch vehicles, but on the Saturn-5 launch vehicle, where the shortfall of thrust was hidden by the launch vehicle volumes.
    2. Gray brother
      Gray brother 28 October 2017 10: 48 New
      +7
      Quote: Just a man
      What is a breakthrough and innovation?

      In May, they managed to blow it up at the stand.
  6. Wolka
    Wolka 28 October 2017 10: 10 New
    +6
    surprisingly, how did the Yankees then sigal to the moon and back ...
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 10: 22 New
      +3
      Quote: Volka
      surprisingly, how did the Yankees then sigal to the moon and back ...

      On f-1.
      1. sabakina
        sabakina 28 October 2017 10: 58 New
        +6
        Mikhail, no, well, Baron Munchausen even flew at the core, but how about F-1? She’s a grenade ... laughing
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 12: 08 New
          +4
          Quote: sabakina
          Mikhail, no, well, Baron Munchausen even flew at the core, but how about F-1? She’s a grenade ...

          This is our grenade and they have a rocket engine
        2. Svarog51
          Svarog51 28 October 2017 14: 22 New
          +8
          Glory, well, you ask uncomfortable questions. It will be necessary to Munchausen, fly, cram into the "nozzle" and fly. Here are the consequences for him will be disastrous. The lemon is still fragmental, it would be RGD-5, and it can do without consequences. wassat
  7. Prisoner
    Prisoner 28 October 2017 10: 13 New
    +1
    Look you. They can already jump over the launch pad. laughing Progress is not progress, but whoever does not ride is not a kangaroo.
    1. Spnsr
      Spnsr 28 October 2017 13: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: Captive
      but who does not ride that
      moskal laughing
  8. Mwg
    Mwg 28 October 2017 10: 16 New
    +1
    "Fire test of a new RS-25 rocket engine in the USA" - they took the engine, doused it with gasoline and set it on fire. The arson was successful))))
  9. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 28 October 2017 10: 22 New
    +6
    This engine is OLD and about the project and ON TIME of manufacture.

    This is the engine from the Shuttle; 2063 is, in my opinion, the serial number by which you can track the production time of this particular iron and its subsequent operation in shuttles.
  10. stolz
    stolz 28 October 2017 10: 47 New
    +3
    Quote: xetai9977
    Well done Americans ....

    Do you admire a probable adversary? Who are you working for? Contra, unfinished?
    1. ul_vitalii
      ul_vitalii 28 October 2017 11: 59 New
      +7
      He was offered to change the flag. It seems clear the oath.
  11. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 28 October 2017 10: 47 New
    +1
    That's all for now. Let them fasten to the rocket and take off. This is a decent distance ...
  12. AlexanderVP
    AlexanderVP 28 October 2017 10: 49 New
    +2
    Modification of the Shuttle engine RS-25. Great reusable engine in its class was, well, or there :)
  13. stolz
    stolz 28 October 2017 10: 52 New
    0
    Quote: MVG
    "Fire test of a new RS-25 rocket engine in the USA" - they took the engine, doused it with gasoline and set it on fire. The arson was successful))))

    Is it that such humor is primitive or vice versa, a deep knowledge of the subject and the realities of reality?
    1. Mwg
      Mwg 28 October 2017 18: 47 New
      +3
      This is sophisticated humor. As sophisticated as the tried and tested engine is new.
      With all due respect to your flag, the USA is not a country, but a business. And in business, taking someone else’s and passing off as their own is the norm, well, or take a dilapidated one, make up your lips and give it like new
  14. 32363
    32363 28 October 2017 11: 44 New
    0
    But what kind of rocket, about the tests of which, the other day A. Karaulov blabbed through the first channel, was invented in Russia?
    supposedly according to Amer’s estimates, it is 55 years ahead of all Merikotov’s developments
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 28 October 2017 18: 17 New
      +1
      Quote: 32363
      But what kind of rocket, about the tests of which, the other day A. Karaulov blabbed through the first channel, was invented in Russia?
      supposedly according to Amer’s estimates, it is 55 years ahead of all Merikotov’s developments

      No, Karaulov was mistaken, not for 55 years, but only for 53,5 years (you need to be like this fool to give so foresee, Wang)
  15. Old26
    Old26 28 October 2017 12: 58 New
    +9
    Quote: Stolz
    While we sold them our engines, rolled the Americans to the ISS, they created their own engine. Now, as always, we have an activity - to catch up and overtake.

    And not one. The BE-4 engine, which runs on methane and is being tested, is also not mentioned. We have been talking about methane for 10-15 years, and things are still there. But they simply took and done over the years. In this case, not bothering with "speed". We acted on the principle of "quieter ride, you will continue." We spent certain amounts on the RD-180, and they calmly made their own engine. And they didn’t give a damn that we pounded our hooves on the chest and shouted that without us the Khan’s astronautics, that they would have to get to the ISS on trampolines. As a result, they had 3-4 ships, both cargo and manned, entering serial production, and our "Federation" once again "departed", now in 2023.

    Quote: sabakina
    just explo, tell me, if they did such cool engines, where did they put their feces in flight to the moon? Ate? They still cannot master the "space toilets", they use ours on the ISS!

    Stop raving. There are three in orbit (on the ISS). One in our segment, one in the US and one (standby) portable. Well, there was a malfunction in the American (clogged or whatever), they began to use the portable. Or can this not happen with ours in our segment? Why raise a permissible malfunction to the rank of almost the fact that they do not know how?

    Quote: newbie
    I do not advise on Venus. we were already there in unmanned flight mode. the atmosphere there consists of a gaseous sulfur compound, rivers of liquid sulfur rush across the planet, the temperature there (oh, I don’t remember exactly, getting old), which is about a couple of hundred degrees. in my opinion, only after the second failure, ours understood what was the matter, and sent a “Venus rover” from titanium, which lasted several minutes, but this was enough to transmit data about the planet.

    I do not know. Something I do not remember, that there were found "rivers" even if liquid sulfur. And the climate there is really not very. Atmospheric pressure is more than 100 atmospheres at zero and the temperature is about 450 degrees.

    Quote: sabakina
    Sasha pryuvet! Of course they will make the engine, there is no doubt about it. BUT! Only to the Atlantic! Sasha, I came across an article in which the author thought how they were able to shove their rover into the descent module? There really is no room for a rover!

    And that author did not write (by accident) that the rover was folding? And was not in the descent lunar module, but on its surface?

    Quote: newbie
    we launched the devices on Venus from 61 to 82gg (if I'm not mistaken). your sarcastically satirical tone suggests Saturday. you are special from aviation. but really not in the know about our program on Venus? personally to you, “sinful”, to help the “masterpiece” Internet. (By the way, the panel “Venus rover” is taken by quotes, which is something to complain about with “caterpillars”.

    But avt is absolutely right. No "Venus rover" was sent to Venus. Both we and the Americans used exclusively descent vehicles. And the number of successful ones was somewhat different.

    Quote: Orionvit
    Quote: just EXPL
    what do you think the states that did things and more difficult will not overpower the carrier rocket

    When mastered, then say gop. By the way, where is their "most" F-1? They “flew” to the moon on it, but they cannot repeat it. Like Saturn 5. By the way, your phrase, what they did and more complicated, absolutely does not prove anything. Any engineer (especially aerospace) will tell you that it’s more difficult to do, a lot of mind is not necessary. But to make a workable unit, while not complicating it once again, this is skill. What was the genius of the Soviet engineering school. Any overly complex unit will fail much faster.

    The question is not what does not master. And in a slightly different plane. And in the plane WHY IT IS NECESSARY.
    For the mid-60s, the F-1 engine was truly a masterpiece in its characteristics, as was the Saturn-5 rocket. But 50 years have passed, why return to the old. In-1 lost a number of technologies. Now some of those materials are not used. Now the same Americans have engines with higher characteristics than the F-1, although there may be less thrust. The meaning of this huge engine was to reduce their number on carriers. Our domestic experience suggests that 30 single-chamber engines of small power could not work synchronously and all flights of our lunar rocket ended “over the hill”. And all due to the fact that we could not make an engine of the same traction (like the F-1). We were able to make it (an engine) even with higher performance in only 20 years for Energy. In the same way, the views of Americans on the constructive design of missiles have changed. They have the last at least a quarter century have become modular, rather than monoblock. like Saturn 5. And by varying the number of blocks (sidewalls), they can receive carriers of different carrying capacities. Tell me, why go back half a century back, copying those systems ?? For example, we can now reproduce the ancient RD-100 engine from R-1, which worked on 78% alcohol and liquid oxygen. The question is - why, when there are engines of similar traction, created with modern technology? Sometimes it is much more difficult to reproduce something again than to create a machine anew. There are no materials, those that used toga, production lines. So try, for example, to play one in one our old “Victory” now? What time does it pour out? So with American carriers and engines ...
    1. Settlement Oparyshev
      Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 13: 34 New
      +3
      Theoretically, it is impossible to create an engine with a huge nozzle of type Fu1, the processes in it are uncontrollable. These are explosions and explosions. Buying RD180, the Americans signed their insolvency in the theory of combustion in combustion chambers. the difference of torches, what is the advantage.
      1. Sharansky
        Sharansky 28 October 2017 15: 05 New
        +3
        Quote: pp to Oparyshev
        insolvency in the theory of combustion in combustion chambers. You have to check the knowledge question: torch ФУ1 focused or sprayed and what is the difference of torches, what is the advantage.

        judging by the enchanting delirium about the torch, it is you who are insolvent. Do you even know that the nozzle and the combustion chamber are two different things?
        1. Settlement Oparyshev
          Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 15: 26 New
          +1
          Allow me not to answer a stupid question.
          1. Sharansky
            Sharansky 28 October 2017 15: 33 New
            +1
            If there is nothing to answer, you can not answer. Your right. RD-0120 probably also does not exist and Energy did not fly. This is all Mosfilm.
            1. Settlement Oparyshev
              Settlement Oparyshev 28 October 2017 16: 09 New
              +1
              I mean, that you are a loafer and on the very first serious question they were wooing. I was too lazy to google the tricks of the flame. If the flame was sprayed, like on FFU1, then this is a fake engine, a props burning.
              1. Sharansky
                Sharansky 28 October 2017 16: 20 New
                +1
                Your pseudo-scientific theories are of little interest to me. I did not skip physics at school.
                Once again I repeat with the question, are you at least aware that the combustion chamber and the nozzle are two different things?
                The flame in his spray, had not laughed like that for a long time. Well, tell me what it means to “flame sprayed” so that it is not sad.
    2. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 28 October 2017 18: 29 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      For the mid-60s, the F-1 engine was truly a masterpiece in its characteristics, as was the Saturn-5 rocket.

      Aha laughing Here is this "masterpiece" wink
      free-inform.ru/pepelaz/pepelaz-13-0.htm
    3. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 20: 41 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      But avt is absolutely right. No "Venus rover" was sent to Venus. Both we and the Americans used exclusively descent vehicles. And the number of successful ones was somewhat different.

      Tell the people how the Americans lowered their device to Venus, very interesting.

      In addition to the USSR, no one was veneered on Venus.
  16. Old26
    Old26 28 October 2017 13: 00 New
    +3
    Quote: 32363
    But what kind of rocket, about the tests of which, the other day A. Karaulov blabbed through the first channel, was invented in Russia?
    supposedly according to Amer’s estimates, it is 55 years ahead of all Merikotov’s developments

    Oh, Karaulov doesn’t say that. Surprised to be only 55 years old. You did not ask yourself the question of how, having approximately equal technological development, one country can do something that will overtake another by half a century?
    1. 32363
      32363 28 October 2017 15: 23 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Quote: 32363
      But what kind of rocket, about the tests of which, the other day A. Karaulov blabbed through the first channel, was invented in Russia?
      supposedly according to Amer’s estimates, it is 55 years ahead of all Merikotov’s developments

      Oh, Karaulov doesn’t say that. Surprised to be only 55 years old. You did not ask yourself the question of how, having approximately equal technological development, one country can do something that will overtake another by half a century?

      Well, he seems to be literate people, like to listen to him, right now I wanted to find a video of that moment in YouTube, but he’s not in the program anymore, it’s good that I shot it on the phone, there he talked about his meeting with Clinton, he asked him about the UFO that had fallen from the mericots Clinton replied that there was such a thing, but the Pope asked not to spread it ...
      The video is on the phone, but YouTube does not miss.
  17. cedar
    cedar 28 October 2017 14: 58 New
    +1
    Quote: Old26
    Quote: 32363
    But what kind of rocket, about the tests of which, the other day A. Karaulov blabbed through the first channel, was invented in Russia?
    supposedly according to Amer’s estimates, it is 55 years ahead of all Merikotov’s developments

    Oh, Karaulov doesn’t say that. Surprised to be only 55 years old. You didn’t ask yourself a question, how, having approximately equal technological development, can one country do something that will overtake another by half a century?


    That's it. How??? In a year, it will be just 50 years of the American lunar epic or lunar series ...
    By the way, in the same 1969 lunar year, the church of Satan, the father of LIES and the murderer was legalized and registered in the USA ... The correlation is, frankly, worthless, and even very ... Since then, Americans have been satanizing from year to year. They lie and lie on the creep ... and their goal, like the sleepwalkers .., is to keep alive 500 million, the rest overboard. One name for them is the Satanic States of America. Or the moon ..?
    1. Sharansky
      Sharansky 28 October 2017 15: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: cedar
      in the same 1969 lunar year, the church of Satan, the father of LIES and the murderer was legalized and registered in the USA ..

      Generally speaking, the Church of Satan is just one of the sects within Christianity, by the way.
      Do you think that without sprinkling rockets with holy water, as Roskosmos does, they cannot fly?
  18. nmaxxen
    nmaxxen 28 October 2017 15: 37 New
    +6
    1.
    The RS-25 passed its first fire test in March 1977.
    Then he flew on shuttles until 1981-2011.

    Why is it called new in the news?
    If this is a simplified (in order to avoid reusability) modification of the RS-25E then it was necessary to write it. Moreover, the sinking of such a simplified modification (for use in the now already obviously distant future of SLS) has been going on since 2015.
    Only the propagandists of the bureaucratic swamp of NASA can name such a new engine.
    The purpose of this pseudo-news is to indicate that some kind of movement is being carried out - it is not in vain that we are eating up taxpayer money.
    1. nmaxxen
      nmaxxen 28 October 2017 15: 49 New
      +2
      2.
      The press service of the American department declares that the engine can be used to carry out missions to the moon, as well as to the planets of the solar system - primarily to Mars.

      How can a simplified RS-25 modification allow this?
      Why then the RS-25 tested in 1977 and flying over 1981-2011 did not allow this?
      The press service of NASA is still those confusing clowns.
    2. nmaxxen
      nmaxxen 28 October 2017 16: 52 New
      +3
      3.
      SLS - the last freak from the Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicle panopticon. (Launch vehicles based on shuttle components)
      Shuttle-C 1987
      Ares V 1996-2010
      Space Launch System (SLS) 2011
      (neglected minor projects)
      despite the fact that the first Shuttle-C was introduced back in 1987,
      all of them are united by the planned use of the key parts of the shuttles - 2hRTTU shuttle,
      and SSME RS-25 engines.
      In turn, they were considered and canceled until they reached and did not stop (from hopelessness) on the SLS.
      Although the most robust of all this parade of squalor was the earliest - Shuttle-C - - because it expected minimal changes from the shuttle and could even use the entire launch infrastructure from it.
      Naturally, the SLS retains all the shortcomings of the shuttles, primarily the absurd high cost.
      In addition to this, its launch is continually delayed - and so quickly that the Russian-language Wikipedia (and behind it the Russian-speaking nasa propagandists) does not sing up to display these delays. They write that at the beginning of 2019 - while the English-speaking one already writes that NOT EARLIER than December 2019 - which in translation from a cunningly bureaucratic means no earlier than the end of 2020)
  19. Popovich
    Popovich 28 October 2017 16: 36 New
    +2
    There is a lot of smoke - a little sense ...
    1. nmaxxen
      nmaxxen 28 October 2017 17: 06 New
      +2
      There is just no smoke - one steam - but this is the only good thing in this engine - it is very expensive and complicated.
  20. The comment was deleted.
    1. nalogoplatelschik
      nalogoplatelschik 28 October 2017 17: 55 New
      0
      Can not bake pies shoemaker and boots stitch a pie. There was no such thing in the history of mankind.
    2. nmaxxen
      nmaxxen 28 October 2017 18: 38 New
      +3
      What does Rogozin's sons have to do with the farting of the old rs-25?
      then the fact that the same bureaucrats sawyers as the nasa that smuggles this antiques as evidence of powerful technological "progress" in space technology?
  21. UAZ 452
    UAZ 452 28 October 2017 19: 36 New
    0
    Quote: Ulan
    I also think that one cannot underestimate the American potential. It will not lead to anything good.
    Underestimating the enemy leads to a guaranteed defeat.

    I agree. The most dangerous enemies for any state are hurray patriots, haters. The All-Fenders are at the other extreme, but their danger is much lower. It’s better to overtake than not finish :))
  22. Vadim237
    Vadim237 28 October 2017 20: 18 New
    0
    In the USA, they will make a base on Mars, and in our country only 2035 will make a heavy rocket by the year.
    1. ADmA_RUS
      ADmA_RUS 30 October 2017 12: 15 New
      0
      They won’t do it. They have lagged behind in manned space exploration for decades.
  23. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 28 October 2017 20: 53 New
    +2
    Quote: nmaxxen
    The purpose of this pseudo-news is to indicate that some kind of movement is being carried out - it is not in vain that we are eating up taxpayer money.

    I think the goal is to show significant progress in the United States, I believe that the new BE-4 engine, which was tested only by a precamera, is far from complete
    1. ZaRif
      ZaRif 28 October 2017 22: 10 New
      +1
      I think in those and others, and Sharansky - HZ who is ...
      1. ZaRif
        ZaRif 28 October 2017 22: 10 New
        0
        Sori - they lie and those and others ...
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 29 October 2017 00: 16 New
      0
      In 2 - 3 years it will fly.
      1. nmaxxen
        nmaxxen 29 October 2017 00: 22 New
        +2
        Who? SLS?
        Did you subtract from the figure 19 in the news text the figure 17 figure XNUMX?
        very constructive and useful comment :)
        I’m ready to mortgage that if it flies then later than after 3 years.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 29 October 2017 10: 55 New
          0
          The BE 4 engine. Yes, and the SLS rocket too - they have everything for this. You can add to all this and rocket engine "Raptor" - Mask.
  24. Orionvit
    Orionvit 29 October 2017 08: 01 New
    +1
    MadCat,
    in your head a continuous propaganda of cheap slap and slogans
    Yah? However, think whatever you want. By the way, something I have not seen for a long time on the pages of VO, probably at the meetings of Navalny disappeared?
  25. kas1
    kas1 29 October 2017 15: 24 New
    +1
    And what is so smoking? Is oil eating?
  26. Eurodav
    Eurodav 29 October 2017 16: 05 New
    0
    How to believe? Maybe they cooked up again in Hollywood?
  27. Eurodav
    Eurodav 29 October 2017 16: 07 New
    0
    Quote: kas1
    And what is so smoking? Is oil eating?

    Right! We need to raise the hype in the media, as they are about our Kuzyu!
  28. Eurodav
    Eurodav 29 October 2017 16: 14 New
    0
    Quote: Sharansky
    Quote: cedar
    in the same 1969 lunar year, the church of Satan, the father of LIES and the murderer was legalized and registered in the USA ..

    Generally speaking, the Church of Satan is just one of the sects within Christianity, by the way.
    Do you think that without sprinkling rockets with holy water, as Roskosmos does, they cannot fly?

    A sect cannot be inside Christianity, it is apostates from Christianity ...
  29. sharp-lad
    sharp-lad 29 October 2017 16: 43 New
    0
    Mavrikiy,
    Well, you were arguing about the steam visible too close to the engine! And the laws of physics work not only in Africa but also on April 1 throughout the universe.
  30. alien308
    alien308 29 October 2017 20: 27 New
    0
    Warrior, the first time I see a photo similar to the truth. But under the descent vehicle there are no traces of a jet of engines. And, when landing before touching it was a hang. The engine thrust is about 0.5-1 ton-force. The temperature of the jet stop above 2 thousand degrees. The breed is fused nafig. There remains a pit or a glass puddle.
  31. Valery Valerevich
    Valery Valerevich 21 March 2018 22: 26 New
    0
    Paternalism is impossible in democracies, because they themselves will be completely liberal or imitative, sometimes even mafia, where money plays a major cult of personality. Paternalism will play a role when the state is autocracy, people can be provided with temporary housing, education and work in that specialization in which he is a professional, later we will not lose a person and will not leave him to himself, the people cannot be deprived of housing and not may be deprived of his government.

    CMNRP Party