Military Review

Development of reusable rocket resumed in Russia

323
Russian State Rocket Center. Academician V.P. Makeeva (SRC) is developing a reusable rocket, reports Lenta.ru report the message of the general designer of the enterprise Vladimir Degtyar.


Landing the first stage of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle onto the landing platform, December 2017 year.

According to the general designer, this is a fully reusable, single-stage launch vehicle for vertical takeoff and landing of the Korona. The project to create it was frozen in 2012 year, and now resumed.

He noted that today in the USA, the technology of soft landing of the first stage of the Falcon launch vehicle and its reuse has already been developed.

Our development, the Corona launch vehicle, unlike the American one, does not have detachable stages and is in fact a soft take-off and landing spacecraft, which opens the way for long-distance interplanetary flights with crews on board
Degtyar said.

SRC is one of the largest research and design centers in Russia for the development of rocket and space technology. From 1992 to 2012, the company conducted work on Crown, in particular, identified key technical and technological solutions. Then the project froze due to lack of funding.

Recall that at the first stage of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle of the American company SpaceX, equipment was installed for its return and vertical landing on a landing pad or a floating platform. In the future, the stage can be used to restart.

In addition, in December, the American company Blue Origin tested the reusable New Shepard 3 system. The launch and landing of the missile of the same name and the upgraded capsule were considered successful.
323 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. RUSS
    RUSS 3 January 2018 11: 42
    35
    And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask
    1. bulvas
      bulvas 3 January 2018 11: 53
      +1
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask


      Compete, who will do something!

      It is necessary to somehow justify its existence and budget

      1. SRC P-15
        SRC P-15 3 January 2018 12: 08
        13
        Development of reusable rocket resumed in Russia

        Well, while they are developing, you see the Americans will refuse such missiles and everything may happen again as with the Buran: after a successful flight, the Crown will be put to joke.
        1. hrych
          hrych 3 January 2018 12: 22
          22
          Quote: СРЦ П-15
          as with the “Buran”: after a successful flight, the “Crown” will be put to joke.

          Buran’s inferiority came to the conclusion that after making one unmanned launch, the Americans needed to lose half of the ships and 14 people, reaching the same result, and throwing themselves in a manned astronautics to the hitchhiking. Now the lunar race has begun, all are hiding behind Mars, therefore
          "Crown" - unlike the American one, has no separable steps and is actually a soft takeoff and landing spaceship
          do not confuse with Falcon Mask, where he is trying to reduce the profitability of launches, while maintaining the first step. Crown - a separate spacecraft with a soft landing. Although Musk also dreams of interplanetary flights, where a soft landing is needed precisely because of the lack of atmosphere on the moon. There is a rarefied atmosphere on Mars, it has less gravity, so a soft landing is also relevant, but so far the moon and again the moon.
          1. karish
            karish 3 January 2018 12: 32
            24
            Quote: hrych
            Buran’s inferiority came to a conclusion by making one unmanned launch

            Haha
            Well it is necessary to write such nonsense.
            There was simply not enough money for Buran.
            Quote: hrych
            Americans needed to lose half of the ships and 14 people, reaching the same result

            And only 135 launches and 30 years of manned program.
            Envy is a bad thing
            Quote: hrych
            coming to the same result, and throwing himself in manned astronautics to the hitchhiking.

            well, of course, their reusable dangling year in space - you certainly do not know anything about this
            laughing
            Quote: hrych
            Now the lunar race has begun, all are hiding behind Mars, therefore

            race, nostril to nostril wink
            Quote: hrych
            do not confuse with Falcon Mask, where he is trying to reduce the profitability of launches, while maintaining the first step. Crown - a separate spacecraft with a soft landing.

            this is Mask - a separate ship with returnable steps.
            And the Crowns are simply not.
            maybe it will be, of course, only who would explain to me - why plant the entire rocket? laughing
            From 1992 to 2012, the company worked on the “Crown”, in particular, key technical and technological solutions were identified. Then the project was frozen due to lack of funding.

            for 10 years?
            1. hrych
              hrych 3 January 2018 13: 15
              22
              Quote: karish
              Mask has a separate ship with returnable steps.

              What are you talking about? Only the first step and point is returned.
              Quote: karish
              There was simply not enough money for Buran.

              Complete nonsense, the first flight revealed a number of problems that led to the abandonment of the program. Including problems with the casing, which killed the first and last Israeli astronaut in Colombia wassat All you think on shekels laughing In fact, we now have the absence of Buran and the Shuttle, 14 dead astronauts, including yours, a hitchhiking on Russian ships and NASA, which will no longer take Israelis into space wassat
              1. Going
                Going 3 January 2018 13: 41
                +3
                Only NASA stubbornly does not want to admit it, but invents all sorts of fables.
              2. hrych
                hrych 3 January 2018 13: 46
                16
                The USSR did not count money for starts and spat at all on the cost of removing the payloadthan the capitalists - bookkeepers always dream of. On the same Buran were ready to burn the carrier - Energy and spit. Stanislav Aksyonov - one of the developers of Buran said the following: "... after warming relations with the US, the need for Buran disappeared - he, as I said, was imprisoned for military needs. Buran was not ready to carry out civil space programs, besides, for this purpose our country is completely "Protons" and "Unions" were enough. "
                Also at the start, it was necessary to cool the concrete tray, where gases heated to 3500 degrees go. For this, it was necessary to divert the waters of the Syr Darya into a man-made underground lake. And the water consumption at startup is greater than that of all the fountains of Peterhof! Well, you need all this if all problems are solved easier, cheaper and more reliable. Shuttle reliability is silent ... for a minute. The so-called diving bombing was also a bluff, although Colombia dived very successfully ...
                1. karish
                  karish 3 January 2018 14: 15
                  +7
                  Quote: hrych
                  In the USSR, they did not consider money for launches and did not care at all about the cost of removing the payload, which capitalists, bookkeepers, always dream of.

                  Result on the face.
                  There is neither Buran nor the USSR
                  Quote: hrych
                  Also at the start, it was necessary to cool the concrete tray, where gases heated to 3500 degrees go. For this, it was necessary to divert the waters of the Syr Darya into a man-made underground lake. And the water consumption at startup is greater than that of all the fountains of Peterhof! Well, you need all this if all problems are solved easier, cheaper and more reliable. Shuttle reliability is silent ... for a minute

                  The first launch of Energy was partially successful - it was not able to put a mass-size model into orbit
                  The first launch of the Energy-Buran ligament was canceled 2-3 minutes before the launch.
                  And only after 2 weeks they were able to launch it.
                  And that’s it - the whole program ended there.
                2. Anyone
                  Anyone 3 January 2018 22: 28
                  +2
                  To grunt ... Some sick nonsense you spew. Even commenting makes no sense.
              3. karish
                karish 3 January 2018 13: 58
                +9
                Quote: hrych
                What are you talking about? Only the first step and point is returned.

                surpriserise
                The company Ilona Mask for the first time in the history of space exploration successfully launched and planted the already flying first stage Falcon 9. However, this is not the only achievement of the company. SpaceX was also the first company to bring the head fairing back to Earth.

                Quote: hrych
                Complete nonsense, the first flight revealed a number of problems that led to the abandonment of the program.

                tell tales to another.
                I attended the launch of Buran
                Quote: hrych
                Including problems with the skin

                And because of this, they abandoned Buran - it is difficult to come up with more nonsense.
                EMNIP - Buran has peeled off 17 heat-insulating tiles.
                About Colombia (you, as always, write nonsense, simply not familiarizing yourself with the topic)
                In Colombia, I hit and pierced the wing with a piece of heat-insulating foam coming off the accelerator
                Quote: hrych
                In fact, we now have the absence of Buran and the Shuttle

                In fact, we have tens of billions of rubles spent on Buran with zero exit and 30 years of a manned program - the Space Shuttle with 135 launches-- if this is the same for you, then sorry fool
                Quote: hrych
                14 dead astronauts, including yours, hitchhiking on Russian ships and NASA, which will no longer take Israelis into space

                Merzkova something like that from your comment, do not choke on your saliva.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 3 January 2018 14: 35
                    11
                    Quote: hrych
                    You can be mocked like, and when you yourself become an object of sarcasm, you don’t like it. You are enemies in an enemy military bloc (although not NATO, so that the West can legitimately merge you), so the death of enemy pilots should not be regrettable.

                    Do you propose to rejoice on the next branch of the death of your pilots in Syria? Not. I won’t go down to your level.
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 3 January 2018 14: 37
                      +7
                      Quote: Professor
                      Do you propose to rejoice on the next branch of the death of your pilots in Syria? Not. I won’t go down to your level.

                      You still rejoice at heart amclimbed to comment on the wires ...
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 3 January 2018 15: 12
                        +5
                        Quote: hrych
                        Quote: Professor
                        Do you propose to rejoice on the next branch of the death of your pilots in Syria? Not. I won’t go down to your level.

                        You still rejoice at heart amclimbed to comment on the wires ...

                        Do not judge others by yourself.
                    2. hrych
                      hrych 3 January 2018 15: 38
                      +9
                      Quote: Professor
                      Do not judge others by yourself

                      So, if the aggression against Egypt had not been stopped in the Six Day War, the USSR would have prepared to deliver a nuclear strike against Israel, in particular eight P-6s with nuclear warheads from the K-172 boat. So, what is next? In 1967-68, you Eugene may not have been born in ... the USSR. Normal situation, they would burn everyone without exception. Also now, if there is a war, then the thing will be done. Humane snot has nothing to do with it. War is war, and the fact that you are spreading hatred for New Russia and its achievements is not a secret, although it has not done anything to you yet.
                  2. karish
                    karish 3 January 2018 14: 39
                    +4
                    Quote: hrych
                    You can be mocked like, and when you yourself become an object of sarcasm

                    I prove my position without ever mentioning the Soviet dead astronauts.
                    Quote: hrych
                    You are enemies in an enemy military bloc (although not NATO, so that the West can legitimately merge you), so the death of enemy pilots should not be regrettable

                    Well, I said - you have vile commets.
                    Quote: hrych
                    So we are preparing the air defense of Syria, Egypt, Turkey and even the SA, in order to bring down Israeli planes in batches, perhaps we ourselves will strike at you, for all the good ...

                    You along with Meehan (as I understand it) - look from the sofa, do not fall hi lol
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 3 January 2018 14: 40
                      +5
                      Quote: karish
                      You along with Meehan (as I understand it) - look from the sofa, do not fall

                      And you I look at the walking space interceptor
                    2. KaPToC
                      KaPToC 3 January 2018 17: 53
                      +4
                      Quote: karish
                      You along with Meehan (as I understand it) - look from the sofa, do not fall

                      Why are you even post all this bile? If you hate Russia so much - what are you doing on this site? Are you pushing your propaganda?
                      1. dubovitskiy.1947
                        dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 22: 48
                        +3
                        Quote: KaPToC
                        Quote: karish
                        You along with Meehan (as I understand it) - look from the sofa, do not fall

                        Why are you even post all this bile? If you hate Russia so much - what are you doing on this site? Are you pushing your propaganda?

                        Envy. He feels the evil, leaning against Israel. Where to go, they will give the machine and put in position.
                      2. karish
                        karish 5 January 2018 14: 54
                        +1
                        Quote: KaPToC
                        Quote: karish
                        You along with Meehan (as I understand it) - look from the sofa, do not fall

                        Why are you even post all this bile? If you hate Russia so much - what are you doing on this site? Are you pushing your propaganda?

                        Thank God - Hrych and Mikhan - this is not all of Russia.
                    3. The comment was deleted.
              4. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm 3 January 2018 18: 04
                +8
                Quote: hrych
                In fact, we now have the absence of Buran and the Shuttle,

                We have no Buran and the Americans have an X-37 to which Dream Chaser will soon be added
                1. hrych
                  hrych 3 January 2018 18: 08
                  0
                  Quote: saturn.mmm
                  Americans have an X-37

                  But do not rush, let the pilots successfully go around it first, and then it will be clear.
                  1. saturn.mmm
                    saturn.mmm 3 January 2018 20: 55
                    +4
                    Quote: hrych
                    But do not rush, let the pilots successfully go around it first, and then it will be clear.

                    X-37 drone, flew in space for two years, Buran showed the way, and we have woodpeckers fly into power from time to time, so we have to catch up
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 3 January 2018 21: 34
                      +4
                      Quote: saturn.mmm
                      and with us, woodpeckers fly into power from time to time, so we have to catch up

                      You do not forget that, unlike the Shuttle, which climbed on its engine with reusable boosters, Buran burned expensive Energy, and the Shuttle burned only a large fuel tank. Here we must admit the superiority of the Shuttle because they strangle themselves for profit. True, all this ended badly, both during take-off and during landing in the form of disasters. I repeat, those tasks for which Buran was imprisoned, where in practice failed, where they lost relevance. Although they are engaged in these dead-end branches of progress, it’s easier for us to solve the problem of neutralizing such projects, such as stealth, where they rested, ditching a bunch of funds and other promising projects, and the problem is solved quite simply - the spacing of the emitter with the receiver, special frequency, ZGRLS and so forth. We made bast shoes, but refused and then did not spare money. But Buran is a kind of apostasy, when you were led to the SDI, etc. The crown, on the other hand, has other tasks. The price of the cast weight also has nothing to do with it. Although it can be stupid to be misinformation, so that Musk panicked and falls into hysteria, etc. While the royal scheme works fine and there is no need to risk the lives of people.
                      1. saturn.mmm
                        saturn.mmm 3 January 2018 22: 41
                        +1
                        Quote: hrych
                        You do not forget that, unlike the Shuttle, which climbed on its engine with reusable boosters, Buran burned expensive Energy, and the Shuttle burned only a large fuel tank.
                      2. dubovitskiy.1947
                        dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 22: 57
                        +3
                        Quote: hrych
                        Quote: saturn.mmm
                        and with us, woodpeckers fly into power from time to time, so we have to catch up

                        You do not forget that, unlike the Shuttle, which climbed on its engine with reusable boosters, Buran burned expensive Energy, and the Shuttle burned only a large fuel tank. Here we must admit the superiority of the Shuttle because they strangle themselves for profit. True, all this ended badly, both during take-off and during landing in the form of disasters. I repeat, those tasks for which Buran was imprisoned, where in practice failed, where they lost relevance. Although they are engaged in these dead-end branches of progress, it’s easier for us to solve the problem of neutralizing such projects, such as stealth, where they rested, ditching a bunch of funds and other promising projects, and the problem is solved quite simply - the spacing of the emitter with the receiver, special frequency, ZGRLS and so forth. We made bast shoes, but refused and then did not spare money. But Buran is a kind of apostasy, when you were led to the SDI, etc. The crown, on the other hand, has other tasks. The price of the cast weight also has nothing to do with it. Although it can be stupid to be misinformation, so that Musk panicked and falls into hysteria, etc. While the royal scheme works fine and there is no need to risk the lives of people.

                        Shuttle boosters, don't you think? Calculate the dry residue - they have 100 tons in orbit with a return to only two points in the country, because there is no resource for a second call. Not just a return, but a headache with a return. The system that stands for the ONLY possibility of putting a person into orbit. At the risk of ruining them there, since the descent can only begin when landing on these two points is possible. Given the period of rotation in orbit, this crew should wait for such an opportunity for almost an hour. Burning out from a fire or suffocating in a vacuum. A 100% guarantee that they won’t wait, and if you run at a fast pace, you will land without the possibility of falling softly. On a non-equipped surface. In the tightness of Union capsules, this can be done with the hope of surviving. Even if you flop on a parachute in Kalahari.
                  2. karish
                    karish 5 January 2018 14: 53
                    +1
                    Quote: hrych
                    Quote: saturn.mmm
                    Americans have an X-37

                    And take your time first let the pilots successfully tour him, and then it will be clear.

                    Are you talking about Buran?
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 5 January 2018 15: 10
                      0
                      No, about all NASA manned spacecraft projects
                2. RUSS
                  RUSS 4 January 2018 17: 32
                  +1
                  Quote: saturn.mmm
                  We have no Buran and the Americans have an X-37 to which Dream Chaser will soon be added

                  China has planned more than 40 space launches for 2018

                  Among the planned launches was the heaviest Chinese missile, Changzheng-5.
                  China can become a champion in the number of space launches - only in 2018, the Chinese National Space Administration has planned more than 40 space launches. At the same time, 35 launches out of the total number will be performed in the interests of private customers. These launches will be carried out using the Changzheng rocket.
                  Somehow like this......
                3. Atlas
                  Atlas 4 January 2018 18: 42
                  0
                  It really hurts like the Soviet "Spiral", this is your Dream Chaser.
            2. Igor V
              Igor V 3 January 2018 13: 26
              +4
              Karish, You are from such a country, but did not notice a clear blunder about attempts to reduce the profitability of launches! Is any of you an obvious bot !? I strongly doubt the profitability of Mask starts, and they still want to reduce it. smile
              1. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm 3 January 2018 18: 11
                +4
                Quote: Igor V
                I strongly doubt the profitability of Mask starts, and they still want to reduce it.

                $ 213,62 billion is the total revenue in the global commercial space market in 2016. In 2015, it was equal to $ 208,62 billion, in 2014 - $ 203,32 billion
                $ 6,45 billion - revenue from the launch services market in 2016. In 2015, it was $ 6,32 billion, in 2014 - $ 7,44 billion.
                $ 130 million - Russia's revenue from commercial space launches last year. For comparison: US revenue for the same period - $ 1,19 billion, Europe - $ 1,15 billion
                2 commercial launches were carried out by Russia in 2016, the USA - 11, Europe - 11
                SpaceX plans to take 65% of the commercial launch market in 2018. According to her estimates, Russia will have less than 10% of the market

                SpaceX first launched the previously used Dragon spacecraft on a used launch vehicle to the ISS. According to the company’s Twitter, the truck was put into orbit.

                Dragon launched the Falcon 9 rocket. According to TechCrunch, this is SpaceX’s first launch, where both types of previously used equipment are involved.

                The company launched the Dragon for the first time in June - it sent the same SpaceX cargo capsule to the ISS in 2014.

                In March, the company first launched the Falcon 9 with a reusable first stage. The engine in this part of the rocket is one of its most expensive parts. The reusable first stage will reduce the cost of space launches from 60 to 40 million dollars, wrote The Verge.

                To doubt this is not bad, when in doubt I begin to carefully check everything that gives me additional knowledge.
            3. Simargl
              Simargl 3 January 2018 13: 39
              +5
              Quote: karish
              Quote: hrych
              Buran’s inferiority came to a conclusion by making one unmanned launch

              Haha
              Well it is necessary to write such nonsense.
              There was simply not enough money for Buran.
              There was not enough money for Energy. Buran then had only to be updated.
              But RN - wildly expensive turned out.
              In order to at least somehow reduce the price, launches were needed, and finding a load under them was another task.
              + collapse.
              The system appeared late (fell under the collapse of the USSR), and early (it would have been useful during the next race to Mars). And the space shuttle cargo system is defective, despite 130 launches ...

              Quote: karish
              Quote: hrych
              Americans needed to lose half of the ships and 14 people, reaching the same result

              And only 135 launches and 30 years of manned program.
              Envy is a bad thing
              There is no envy. Due to the fact that there wasn’t a normal series, they couldn’t work out neither flight safety nor exit the program when they realized that it cost a lot.
              And when they closed it, it turned out that there was nothing to fly on! ... However, if something happened, we had it too.
              In addition, as it turned out, an orbital station with a constant shift - it may turn out to be cheaper and better (in terms of experiments in orbit).

              Quote: karish
              Quote: hrych
              coming to the same result, and throwing himself in manned astronautics to the hitchhiking.
              well, of course, their reusable dangling year in space - you certainly do not know anything about this
              laughing
              Enlighten.

              Quote: karish
              Quote: hrych
              Now the lunar race has begun, all are hiding behind Mars, therefore
              race, nostril to nostril wink
              If this is sarcasm - I agree.

              Quote: karish
              Quote: hrych
              do not confuse with Falcon Mask, where he is trying to reduce the profitability of launches, while maintaining the first step. Crown - a separate spacecraft with a soft landing.
              this is Mask - a separate ship with returnable steps.
              And the Crowns are simply not.
              maybe it will be, of course, only who would explain to me - why plant the entire rocket? laughing
              Yes, while there is no Crown in space, and then - on Earth (at least) - there is nothing to talk about.
              Plant the whole rocket ...
              1 - theoretically, you can get a cheaper start.
              2 - can be planted on any suitable planet.

              Quote: karish
              From 1992 to 2012, the company worked on the “Crown”, in particular, key technical and technological solutions were identified. Then the project was frozen due to lack of funding.
              for 10 years?
              For 20.
              If about 10 people worked on the problem, what is wrong?
            4. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 3 January 2018 15: 20
              +2
              Quote: karish
              why plant an entire rocket?

              I have the same opinion ... and I don’t have anything "sharply negative" against the concept of an "aerospace plane" ... but, I believe that the concept of returning a spacecraft in separate steps will justify itself.
            5. KaPToC
              KaPToC 3 January 2018 17: 49
              0
              Quote: karish
              for 10 years?

              Do you have other arguments besides Baba Yaga against?
            6. dubovitskiy.1947
              dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 21: 31
              +3
              Quote: karish
              Quote: hrych
              Buran’s inferiority came to a conclusion by making one unmanned launch

              Haha
              Well it is necessary to write such nonsense.
              There was simply not enough money for Buran.
              Quote: hrych
              Americans needed to lose half of the ships and 14 people, reaching the same result

              And only 135 launches and 30 years of manned program.
              Envy is a bad thing
              Quote: hrych
              coming to the same result, and throwing himself in manned astronautics to the hitchhiking.

              well, of course, their reusable dangling year in space - you certainly do not know anything about this
              laughing
              Quote: hrych
              Now the lunar race has begun, all are hiding behind Mars, therefore

              race, nostril to nostril wink
              Quote: hrych
              do not confuse with Falcon Mask, where he is trying to reduce the profitability of launches, while maintaining the first step. Crown - a separate spacecraft with a soft landing.

              this is Mask - a separate ship with returnable steps.
              And the Crowns are simply not.
              maybe it will be, of course, only who would explain to me - why plant the entire rocket? laughing
              From 1992 to 2012, the company worked on the “Crown”, in particular, key technical and technological solutions were identified. Then the project was frozen due to lack of funding.

              for 10 years?

              Clever enough to make one run. look at the results, congratulate yourself on the achievements and put aside. There are advances in technology, and, most importantly, in politics. You can talk on equal terms. But the premature one needs to be drunk 135 times, to threaten trillions of “achievements”, which can be written in the book of records, but nothing more. The crew of 7 loafers and a week of flight. No energy-intensive experiments. Shuttle energy no. Equipment can only be used in line and only in minutes. One cooks an experiment - six husk seeds. The start itself. Mahina in 2 thousand tons and 23 tons of payload returned from orbit. Which was there a week. Just bring it here and there, that's all. Boxes that even had no time to unpack. Is this ACHIEVEMENT?
              Buran and Energy are fundamentally different. The missile is autonomous and can drag not only Buran into orbit. The buran is autonomous and can be displayed by another carrier.
              The shuttle is a Siamese freak, one half of which cannot live without the other.
              1. KaPToC
                KaPToC 3 January 2018 23: 11
                +1
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                The start itself. Mahina in 2 thousand tons and 23 tons of payload returned from orbit. Which was there a week.

                Loudly call this action - "expedition".
              2. karish
                karish 5 January 2018 15: 00
                +2
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                Clever enough to make one run. look at the results, congratulate yourself on the achievements and put aside.

                It’s enough for a smart man to understand at the design stage whether it is promising or not, and not to invest billions.

                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                But the premature one needs to be fucked 135 times, to threaten trillions of “achievements”, which can be written in the book of records, but nothing more.

                Are you serious ?
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                The crew of 7 loafers and a week of flight. No energy-intensive experiments. Shuttle energy no. Equipment can only be used in line and only in minutes.


                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                Buran and Energy are fundamentally different. The missile is autonomous and can drag not only Buran into orbit. The buran is autonomous and can be displayed by another carrier.

                In this I agree - neither one nor the other has done anything in either deep or near space
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                The shuttle is a Siamese freak, one half of which cannot live without the other.

                None of this prevented them from flying 135 times into space XNUMX times tongue
            7. Aqr009
              Aqr009 4 January 2018 17: 17
              +1
              By the way, the moon race objectively nostril to nostril!
              The ship Federation is very good good
              The Sunkar launch vehicle is a substantially revised Zenith. A pack of five Sunkars, by traction, is almost the same SLS.
              We will build an inhabited near-moon station together (plus the Japanese, Europeans, maybe the Chinese ...).
              Landing modules, in both, only in the drawings.
              And Mars Americans will not pull, times are not those No.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 3 January 2018 14: 09
            11
            Quote: hrych
            On the inferiority of Buran came to the conclusion

            What a fright then? Buran worked perfectly. Speaking of Buran’s inferiority, first study why it was created at all. In fact, it was the first space unmanned bomber. And Mechny with his friendship with mattresses buried this project. If it weren’t for this amphibian, our VKS would have been armed with a space bomber long ago ... and in general in the UAV theme we wouldn’t be lagging behind mattresses and Jews now.
            1. hrych
              hrych 3 January 2018 14: 23
              +2
              Quote: NEXUS
              Speaking of Buran’s inferiority

              Buran himself has nothing to do with the flaw of the application scheme itself. The so-called dive into the atmosphere with bombing in practical implementation turned out to be rubbish. And that is a fact. His other specialization in the form of removing satellites and returning them for repair to the ground, in connection with the development of radio electronics, also lost relevance, earlier it was necessary to return the development film from spy satellites, etc. All this is expensive and inefficient, and even dangerous. One of the right examples when learning from other people's mistakes.
              1. karish
                karish 3 January 2018 14: 36
                +4
                Quote: hrych
                СAm Buran, flaw in the application scheme itself

                What a twist belay
                Quote: hrych
                His other specialization in the form of launching satellites and returning them for repair to the ground, in connection with the development of radio electronics, also lost relevance

                It’s a pity that the Americans were not busy repairing the Hub

                Quote: hrych
                All this is expensive and inefficient, and even dangerous.

                Well, yes, the Hub was worth more than 3 billion. It was cheaper to drown it laughing
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. Svetoch
                  Svetoch 3 January 2018 15: 01
                  +4
                  Quote: karish
                  It’s a pity that the Americans were not busy repairing the Hub

                  I won’t argue with anyone, but if I don’t confuse anything, no one returned to the ground for repair.
                  1. Topgun
                    Topgun 3 January 2018 15: 58
                    +2
                    it was repaired in space, take a look at any documentary about the hubl
                    1. Svetoch
                      Svetoch 3 January 2018 17: 04
                      0
                      Just before that it was said about the return of satellites to the ground for repair. Then karish mentioned the hub in this context. I think this is not correct. And yes, I know that his repair took place in space.
                  2. saturn.mmm
                    saturn.mmm 3 January 2018 18: 15
                    0
                    Quote: Svetoch
                    I won’t argue with anyone, but if I don’t confuse anything, no one returned to the ground for repair.

                    What karish writes about.
                3. dubovitskiy.1947
                  dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 21: 52
                  +3
                  Quote: karish
                  Quote: hrych
                  СAm Buran, flaw in the application scheme itself

                  What a twist belay
                  Quote: hrych
                  His other specialization in the form of launching satellites and returning them for repair to the ground, in connection with the development of radio electronics, also lost relevance

                  It’s a pity that the Americans were not busy repairing the Hub

                  Quote: hrych
                  All this is expensive and inefficient, and even dangerous.

                  Well, yes, the Hub was worth more than 3 billion. It was cheaper to drown it laughing

                  And could you approach the Hubble only on this aircraft carrier? Hubble itself could only be brought out on the Shuttle? And why not Saturn 5? How much more could you put various and necessary things into the Hubble, if it weren’t necessary for him to launch 160 tons of ballast from orbit after launch? Nobody needs canned food in the form of a Shuttle hull? Saturn launched Skylab weighing 70 tons. And only 23 tons can get into the Shuttle. And limited sizes. Repairs. This is, in general, a joke. Throw a truck of 2000 tons several times to deliver the pliers.
            2. The comment was deleted.
              1. Topgun
                Topgun 3 January 2018 15: 59
                0
                vigorous loaves need to be served on this and need a return - the whole thing is
            3. ZVO
              ZVO 4 January 2018 21: 04
              0
              Quote: NEXUS

              In fact, it was the first space unmanned bomber.


              Andrew!
              I ask for the future not to repeat the myth that the Shuttle does not know how to be unmanned.
              The shuttle has autopilot and it is on autopilot that it lands.
              The only thing. what he needs to do manually is to release the chassis.
              such was the requirement of astronauts in the USA.
              Do at least something with your hands during landing. they were only given the chassis lever.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 5 January 2018 01: 24
                +3
                Quote: ZVO
                I ask for the future not to repeat the myth that the Shuttle does not know how to be unmanned.

                Where I talked about the Shuttle ... I talked about Buran.
              2. dubovitskiy.1947
                dubovitskiy.1947 5 January 2018 10: 09
                0
                Quote: ZVO
                Quote: NEXUS

                In fact, it was the first space unmanned bomber.


                Andrew!
                I ask for the future not to repeat the myth that the Shuttle does not know how to be unmanned.
                The shuttle has autopilot and it is on autopilot that it lands.
                The only thing. what he needs to do manually is to release the chassis.
                such was the requirement of astronauts in the USA.
                Do at least something with your hands during landing. they were only given the chassis lever.

                Interestingly, and who will release the wheels manually, if, for example, the crew is not in it? The example of democracy proves even with this example that the authoritarianism of the chief designer in these matters is more important.
          3. avt
            avt 3 January 2018 15: 47
            +2
            Quote: hrych
            Buran’s inferiority came to a conclusion by making one unmanned launch

            wassat Really
            Quote: karish
            Well it is necessary to write such nonsense.

            The Energy-Buran program was just for ANOTHER Country with a completely different space program. For a start, it was two vehicles, or rather, the Energy carrier for interplanetary flights and an orbital, heavy reusable vehicle.
            Quote: karish
            only who would explain to me - why plant an entire rocket? laughing

            Azochenway! Only Rogozin in social networks can reveal such a secret. bully
        2. Simargl
          Simargl 3 January 2018 13: 06
          +4
          Quote: СРЦ П-15
          Well, while they are developing, you see the Americans will refuse such missiles
          This is a catch-up problem.
        3. just exp
          just exp 3 January 2018 14: 43
          0
          hardly the future for reusable devices.
          1. SRC P-15
            SRC P-15 3 January 2018 14: 52
            +1
            Quote: just explo
            hardly the future for reusable devices.

            The future for reusable devices will come when the anti-gravity engine is invented. yes
      2. Proxima
        Proxima 3 January 2018 13: 27
        20
        Quote: bulvas
        It is necessary to somehow justify its existence and budget

        This projection is clearly DAMAGED! belay
        We’ve gathered on the moon, then we’ve been developing the nuclear tug for 5 years, Amur, Phoenix. About the "East" I better keep quiet. It would not hurt these thieves to recall the conditions under which Baikonur was built when the builders dragged concrete to the top of the launch pad IN TARPAS BAGS on their hump! Now, any equipment all kinds of concrete pumps. What is missing? Financing? Now Cosmos is allocated for the ORDER (!!!) more funds than is permissible in 2000. Maybe conscience? Well this is understandable, thieves have no conscience. It is only in the literature that shy blue thieves are found. The worst thing is that this mess is due to our wallets. I am not against space programs, but I do not want to stupidly give money to unscrupulous thieves.
        1. Lycan
          Lycan 3 January 2018 14: 14
          +6
          Quote: Proxima
          Can conscience?

          Well, people with this property will not be taken to leadership positions during the “time of changes” (which is practically permanent here). Well, imagine: I got some "main" access to 100% of budget money for my company, counting with all controversial situations, and I sent all 100% to, say, the purchase of machine tools + to upgrade infrastructure + to pay late. salaries .... Noo. this is simply not permissible!. Not only will this not be allowed into the East, but they will be demoted altogether ... to the deputy deputy freelance. How, say, to share the allocated budget with this? There are also specialists in:
          - re-marking,
          - competent "unplanned. situations",
          - "to refinancing in view of correction of mistakes of previous generations",
          - "smearing" of dates due to climatic conditions. conditions
          - and "end-to-water",
          must contain.
          Plus - employment of affiliated persons, without proper qualifications. How without them?
          ... But he is so honest that he comes and invests 100% of the allocated budget into production, road construction, the salaries of specialists who have been tested for decades (lifting up to 50-70tyr), throws out earmarked funds for specialized re-qualification of young students, for the re-equipment of the enterprise with edema. production, updates the infrastructure of the enterprise and surrenders officially returns to the budget.
          This is short-sighted. How will he provide his children in Cambridge-Harvard-Oxford and his spouse, an unemployed representative of the high Moscow elite?
          Quote: Proxima
          I do not want to stupidly give money to unscrupulous thieves

          And how do you think poor thieves live? Nobody will take them to work if he immediately says that he is a professional budget sawler? The deprived layer of society. # they are people. Jesus taught to turn the other cheek, if they hit: if you observe a thief, smile and transfer more to their account. If they do, it means they really need to wassat
        2. ghby
          ghby 3 January 2018 17: 16
          +1
          Quote: Proxima
          then we’ve been developing the nuclear tug for 5 years,

          everything is fine with him. and not five years but more. Work on the installation of the installation was started in 2009, the planned completion date is 2018. It is planned to conduct flight tests in 2020. Everything is according to plan. tfu tfu tfu.
          By the way, if it is crossed with the “Crown” it will be “fun”.
        3. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 3 January 2018 18: 27
          +1
          Quote: Proxima
          I am not against space programs, but I do not want to stupidly give money to unscrupulous thieves.

          There is a European-Russian program of flights to Mars, the first flight was carried out in 2016. On the Russian side, everything worked properly, the Europeans had the jamb, their device could not slow down in time and crashed.
      3. SHURUM -BURUM
        SHURUM -BURUM 3 January 2018 15: 37
        +3
        It’s interesting, but what kind of car will we screw as a payload? I am sure the issue was discussed at the New Year tree))
    2. 210ox
      210ox 3 January 2018 11: 56
      +4
      In the beginning of the 90s there was news about the development of a plane-stage return that we have .. All this is good if they reanimate .. And Rogozin (if he is capable of anything) will not bring it home. The order is in the office. Not in the sense of a personal account ..
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask
      1. karish
        karish 3 January 2018 13: 10
        +3
        Quote: 210ox
        In the early 90s, there was news about the development of a returnable aircraft stage.

        in the news - have always been strong - in fact?
        Zilch
        Quote: 210ox
        All this is not bad if resuscitating ..

        to reanimate a completely decomposed corpse is not possible.
        Cheaper to re-develop.

        Quote: 210ox
        .And Rogozin (if he is capable of something) will not lead at home. The office has order. Not in the sense of a personal account.

        lol
        1. Lock36
          Lock36 3 January 2018 13: 26
          +5
          Quote: karish
          in the news - have always been strong - in fact?

          It was precisely at this point that the representatives of the state of Israel should be tactfully silent. laughing
          Living in a glass house, they say .. laughing
          1. karish
            karish 3 January 2018 14: 00
            +4
            Quote: Lock36
            It was precisely at this point that the representatives of the state of Israel should be tactfully silent.

            Why
            We have our own space program, we release world-class satellites.
            This is with a population of 8 million and a constantly warring country.
            Why keep quiet?
            1. Lock36
              Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 00
              +9
              You count our launch vehicles of different classes and compare with your own, which are capable of putting 350 kg into orbit, calm down and understand that Israel has remained a little further from Russia than ever.
              Well, for a snack, count the percentage of your unsuccessful starts (20% for a minute) and cry quietly.
              This is the question of who is strong in the news, and who in fact.
              You look like a second grader commenting on a world boxing champion.
            2. dubovitskiy.1947
              dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 23: 08
              +1
              Quote: karish
              Quote: Lock36
              It was precisely at this point that the representatives of the state of Israel should be tactfully silent.

              Why
              We have our own space program, we release world-class satellites.
              This is with a population of 8 million and a constantly warring country.
              Why keep quiet?

              Your friends from overseas have made sure that you are a little wrinkled by neighbors. Soon you will not be up to the heights of Cosmos.
              1. MadCat
                MadCat 4 January 2018 01: 52
                0
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                Your friends from overseas have made sure that you are a little wrinkled by neighbors. Soon you will not be up to the heights of Cosmos.

                And who is we so brave? lol
      2. Simargl
        Simargl 3 January 2018 13: 57
        +2
        Quote: 210ox
        At the beginning of the 90s there was news about the development of a returnable aircraft stage at our place .. All this is not bad if we are reanimated ..
        Most likely, they will not return - too much mass (relative to the mass of the step) of the landing system (wings, stabilizers, chassis) and the need to increase the strength of the step in order to carry the transverse load.
        At Mask, the step both took off and sat down - vertically. This is more literate.

        So Baikal is most likely dead.

        But the air launch system, in my opinion, deserves attention. No wonder sworn friends indulged in Pegasus and muddied with a new, heavier system.


        Here, in 2013, they wrote about our attempts, but this system is a crutch: if only it were, I think.


        Need to do as Stratolaunchbut with an eye on dynamic launch: the rocket is laid on its back, the carrier accelerates at maximum height and makes a slide, on top of which the rocket separates and leaves.
        ... something like this...
        1. prosto_rgb
          prosto_rgb 25 January 2018 18: 14
          0
          This one is more promising in my opinion, but essentially do it with "0"
          but what are the prospects
          https://raigap.livejournal.com/436818.html
      3. Simargl
        Simargl 25 January 2018 17: 46
        0
        Quote: 210ox
        In the early 90s, there was news about the development of a returnable aircraft stage.
        They thought they were crying. The program is closed. And rightly so.

        Quote: 210ox
        And Rogozin (if he is capable of something) will not lead at home. The office is in order.
        Not capable, apparently.
    3. GRF
      GRF 3 January 2018 11: 57
      +4
      If Che, then you are there, with Akhedzhakova apologize for us,
      Did not make out the "genius".
      But you are wrong, I personally continue to laugh ...
      And not only above him ...
      Ooooooooooooooooo ...

      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask
      1. 210ox
        210ox 3 January 2018 12: 09
        +8
        And what? The "genius" has good specialists. Most likely there are ours too .. Since the Beetles and Rogozins rule the Motherland ...
        Quote: GRF
        If Che, then you are there, with Akhedzhakova apologize for us,
        Did not make out the "genius".
        But you are wrong, I personally continue to laugh ...
        And not only above him ...
        Ooooooooooooooooo ...

        Quote: RUSS
        And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask
      2. donavi49
        donavi49 3 January 2018 12: 15
        18
        Musk launched the most in 2017 year, showed the greatest reliability in 2017 year (100%) and the most attractive prices. Therefore, his turn is on the displayed load.
      3. RUSS
        RUSS 3 January 2018 12: 20
        +3
        Quote: GRF
        If Che, then you are there, with Akhedzhakova apologize for us,

        If you do this to me, I’ll disappoint you, I don’t know Akhejakova, and I won’t for sure apologize for someone, but you laugh further, you tell tales to fools on TV, so you all laugh
    4. DEDPIHTO
      DEDPIHTO 3 January 2018 11: 59
      0
      it is a fully reusable, single-stage vertical take-off and landing launcher Corona. The project to create it was frozen in 2012, and now resumed.
      In March ,, successfully ,, will land .. exactly at the same place from where it took off.
    5. svp67
      svp67 3 January 2018 12: 15
      +7
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      And now you can laugh, as he was a "PR man", so he remained. It was worth cutting off the preferences for electric cars, as his business in this segment became unprofitable. It works as long as there is STATE money. But PR is very beautiful.
      The question is different, how many more will we be "sausage" from one to another. Well, well, this project was resumed, and what about “Burlak”, what about “Clipper”, “Federation” ... the list with such “what” will certainly take a page. It’s time not to “cut” the money, but to give products of the uproar. If we do not start to do this, then in this industry we will lose everything. Already, because of the "cuts", they forgot how many things did not fail to affect the accident rate.
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 3 January 2018 12: 25
        +3
        Tesla has suffered net losses since the day it was founded.
        As they had from the beginning, gross margin remained
      2. RUSS
        RUSS 3 January 2018 12: 27
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        And now you can laugh, as he was a "PR man", so he remained. It was worth cutting off the preferences for electric cars, as his business in this segment became unprofitable

        Tesla introduced the Semi electric wagon. This was the brand’s debut in the commercial vehicle segment, as previously only premium cars were listed in the product line - Roadster, Model X, S and Model 3.

        Tesla Semi is an economical and fast truck. It takes just 400 minutes to charge 643 miles (30 km) of batteries. The power reserve of the new model is 800 km. The electric car introduced by Ilon Musk accelerates to 60 miles per hour (96 km per hour) in 5 seconds, with a minimum load in 20 seconds. “We made the Tesla truck look like a bullet,” the billionaire said at the presentation. The car received an improved autopilot system, which includes automatic emergency braking. Four independent engines deliver maximum power and acceleration and lower energy costs per mile.
        Unmanned and fuel-efficient cars have a future, and we already have developments.

        In Russia, tests of the Matrёshka project are underway - the first unmanned buses, or, as they are also called, smart buses, which may soon appear on the country's roads.

        These cars run on electricity, drive at an average speed of 30 kilometers per hour, but in theory they can accelerate to 100 kilometers per hour. The battery charges in four hours and lasts for 130 kilometers.
        1. svp67
          svp67 3 January 2018 12: 30
          +1
          Quote: RUSS
          “We made a Tesla truck look like a bullet.”

          Yes, this is all excellent, it remains to find out how much this "bullet" can carry commercial cargo and what volumes
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 3 January 2018 12: 58
            +2
            15 tons 800 km, standard truck volume
      3. spirit
        spirit 3 January 2018 13: 17
        +4
        It’s interesting to Rusnano how long it will last without a state) there’s not even much to PR)
      4. Vadim237
        Vadim237 3 January 2018 14: 48
        +1
        It seems to us that the Angara has become unprofitable, in the course of the next few years and it will befall the fate of its predecessors.
    6. APASUS
      APASUS 3 January 2018 12: 27
      13
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      So he is a quack, what is the problem then?
      PayPal was created in December 1998, and then it was called Confinity. Initially, the company planned to write software for handhelds. The founders are our compatriot, Soviet Jew Max Levchin, as well as Peter Thiel, Luke Nosek and Ken Howery.
      PayPal was coined inside Confinity at 1999 as a service for quick money transfer. Under this idea, money was taken from an investor, BlueRun Ventures.
      After the appearance of a fat investor and on his advice, the purchase of similar start-ups begins (standard move). And one of these startups is X.com, unprofitable at that time, which wants to be an online bank. 10 has invested millions of dollars in X.com, but it’s in a loss, business isn’t going. There works I. Mask. Mask comes to Confinity, draws dazzling perspectives, and his startup is bought among the packs of others, and he is put in to do marketing advertising.
      Once again - buy in bulk. This technique is well known - for example, Cisco, which makes a year before the 500 acquisitions - that is, works. the market is simply cleared of potential competitors, plus promising developments are bought up at the root. Yes, it's expensive - but something will shoot - and if that happens, the successful will be immediately renamed to Cisco. So that later people would admire “how many developments and inventions they have”. They have money.
      So, the Mask firm is bought in bulk together with another trifle, but it is placed not on a technical, but on an advertising position. Now, you know, there is such a thing - technology evangelism - when the techie is replaced by a showman (there are, of course, exceptions, but they die out naturally, that is, they pay more for the show than for the technology) - then, that term was not promoted but the essence is the same.
      According to the results of technology from X.com in the paper are not used, but Musk has a share. The very same brand X.com quickly jammed, because after polls it turns out that users associate it not with a bank, but with a porn resource.
      And then, when PayPal rises and spins, it is already buying at a high price (one and a half billion) eBay. And after all this, PayPal’s share of Mask is selling. For a lot of money - well, the dotcom boom began zero and all that.
      Now compare this with “Ilon Mask single-handedly created PayPal from scratch, wow, that means - a genius, an inventor, a techie.”

      Tesla Motors was founded in 2003 by two people - Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning. They came up with the concept of "electric sports car". There was no Mask nearby. Mask appeared later, as one of the representatives of investors. The product at this point was already developed.
      During the 13 years (!!!) of evolution, Tesla has released several models that differ in design and interior. The technical part does not change, Tesla does not lead its developments. The batteries used are Chinese 18650 elements, which run the entire Chinese electric transport - from scooters to buses. These are standard elements on 3.7В, visually similar to finger-type batteries. Of these, batteries with the required parameters are collected - for example, for scooters, these are blocks of 12 volts and 12 or 20 amp-hours (for example, such). Tesla buys them in bulk from Panasonic, and he places an order in China. His production that Tesla, that Panasonic - no. There are no “special secret battery modules” either, Tesla has no patents related to technical solutions in terms of the battery module. The controller at the battery pack was developed in Shenzhen - and, by the way, based on the same in Chinese electric buses. In fact, Tesla simply buys what the Chinese have invented and implemented, so in terms of technology, Tesla is always catching up - she will have those batteries in the new model that have been used by the Chinese seller for 1200 yuan for six months.
      Tesla’s motors are also made in China - a separate rotor, a separate stator, Tesla just puts his own label on them (see http://www.cens.com/cens/html/en/news/news_inner_
      43640.html, “Fukuta Elec. & Mach. Co., Ltd. is the only Taiwanese supplier of the motor on the Model S featuring high-conductivity die-cast copper rotor for higher efficiency, lower power consumption, compact size and lighter weight ”). This "complex" action is beneficial - it allows you to "honestly" supply the place of production to the USA, and import motors at tariffs for components

      And so you can find Old for each of his super inventions, unless of course this interests you!
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 3 January 2018 13: 02
        +4
        Extremely ridiculous copy-paste, then PayPel just throws out 10 million, then we ignore a lot of Tesla's patents, then we ignore R&D for hundreds of millions of dollars a quarter, etc.
        1. APASUS
          APASUS 3 January 2018 13: 20
          10
          Quote: BlackMokona
          Extremely ridiculous copy-paste, then PayPel just throws out 10 million, then we ignore a lot of Tesla's patents, then we ignore R&D for hundreds of millions of dollars a quarter, etc.

          What are the specific patents of Tesla, plizzzzz?
          I look you do not even bother the GENIUS Mask?
          For what he does not undertake, he turns around grandmothers! Without education, he produces electric supercars, without education, he undertakes the construction of rockets, not to mention separate sciences such as chemistry (for the production of the same fuel), higher mathematics (for engine calculations) metallurgy, polymer chemistry, but what do you that you are a genius!
          For me, he is not a bad organizer and advertiser, he has nothing to do with invention, they give money under his name.
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 3 January 2018 13: 24
            +2
            Actually, he has two higher educations, one technical in physics, the other economic. Plus, before his career, he even managed to enter graduate school in physics at Stanford.
            https://science.d3.ru/patenty-tesla-motors-816724
            /? sorting = rating Here's the patent
            1. APASUS
              APASUS 3 January 2018 13: 36
              +6
              Quote: BlackMokona
              Plus, before his career, he even managed to enroll in graduate school in physics at Stanford

              You don’t tell anyone else!
              In 1990, an ambitious young man entered one of the most prestigious universities in the country and the world - Queens University in Kingston. And after 2 years, he moved to the American University of Pennsylvania. After graduating from it, he became the holder of a bachelor's degree in two disciplines - physics and economics.

              I think you know what bachelor means. But just in case:
              Title of a person who has received basic higher education (according to the program of 4 years); step to the title of master

              As I understand it, he does not have a higher education in mathematics? And then!
              Then an outstanding young man became a graduate student at Stanford University with the aim of obtaining a doctorate in physics, but left his studies to do business

              So I don’t see super education in metallurgy, chemistry or rocket science, let’s not talk about specific areas like polymers or heat capacity of materials
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 3 January 2018 13: 51
                +2
                Title of a person who has received basic higher education (according to the program of 4 years); a step to the title of master (see).

                Ie there is a tower
                Quote: APASUS
                As I understand it, he does not have a higher education in mathematics? And then!

                Korolev and Von Braun had a math tower?
                1. APASUS
                  APASUS 3 January 2018 14: 10
                  +5
                  Quote: BlackMokona
                  Ie there is a tower

                  This is not a tower in full understanding, this is an elementary higher education, although for you this is a Doctor’s degree
                  A shame! So do not be interested in the life of the Queen
                  ,
                  Having entered the Kiev Polytechnic Institute in the field of aviation technology in 1924, Korolev for two years mastered general engineering disciplines in it and became an athlete, glider. In the fall of 1926, he was transferred to the Moscow Higher Technical School (MVTU) named after N.E. Bauman.

                  Since you don’t know about the Queen’s life, there’s no point in talking about Von Braun’s life
                  In 1930, Brown entered the Berlin Higher Technical School (now Berlin Technical University), where he joined the Verein für Raumschiffahrt group (VfR, Space Travel Society), where he helped Willy Leu test a rocket engine with liquid fuel together with Herman Obert. Then Brown studied at the University of Berlin, Friedrich Wilhelm and at the Swiss Higher Technical School of Zurich. Although he worked for the rest of his life mainly on military rockets, space travel remained his main interest.

                  They had a specialized education on the subject of rocket science and, being a genius, did not release cars, programs, rockets and interfaces in the process.
                  Korolev wrote in his memoirs on how many hours he slept, he did not have enough time for his work, not to mention left-hand jobs
                  1. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 14
                    0
                    In your quotes there is no math tower at Korolev
                    1. APASUS
                      APASUS 3 January 2018 14: 33
                      +3
                      Quote: BlackMokona
                      In your quotes there is no math tower at Korolev

                      Do I need to prove to you that Bauman Moscow Technical University is a technical university with a rocket technology department?
                      It's funny!
                      1. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 37
                        0
                        You need to prove the math tower
                2. Lock36
                  Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 34
                  +2
                  Quote: BlackMokona
                  Korolev and Von Braun had a math tower?

                  laughing Does the crown press you?
              2. Vadim237
                Vadim237 3 January 2018 14: 53
                0
                For this, there are programs and reference books, and the basics, he can receive it himself - there are a lot of literature for self-study.
          2. karish
            karish 3 January 2018 13: 31
            +8
            Quote: APASUS
            For what he does not undertake, he turns around grandmothers! Without education, he produces electric supercars, without education, he undertakes the construction of rockets, not to mention individual sciences such as chemistry (for the production of the same fuel), higher mathematics, 9for engine calculations, metallurgy, polymer chemistry, but what do you that you are a genius!

            Bill Gates - Unfinished Higher
            Steve Jobs - Unfinished Higher
            Zuckerberg, little?
            He does not need to consider engines - he is a genius in organizing and seeing promising projects.
            Quote: APASUS
            For me, he is not a bad organizer and advertiser, he has nothing to do with invention, they give money under his name.

            Not bad, of course, where did he go to Rogozin
            Dmitry Olegovich Rogozin (born December 21, 1963, Moscow) - Russian statesman, diplomat, Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of Engineering
            1. APASUS
              APASUS 3 January 2018 13: 41
              +1
              Quote: karish
              He does not need to consider engines - he is a genius in organizing and seeing promising projects.

              It feels like you have not read my comment.
              Quote: karish
              Not bad, of course, where did he go to Rogozin

              And in what matters did Rogozin run into Mask?
              Want to talk about Rogozin
              1. RUSS
                RUSS 3 January 2018 14: 00
                0
                Quote: APASUS
                And in what matters did Rogozin run into Mask?
                Want to talk about Rogozin

                Rogozin is a populist, for example, he is very concerned about the fact that Volgograd was not renamed Stalingrad, etc., he is more concerned with finding a job for his son, but for rockets and falling satellites he will be blamed for the camera and that’s all .....
              2. karish
                karish 3 January 2018 14: 03
                +4
                Quote: APASUS
                It feels like you have not read my comment.

                Read .
                and did not understand your doubts about his genius.
                Beria did not have the same stars in science from heaven, but from the point of view of organizational abilities, he was above all praise.
                Quote: APASUS
                And in what matters did Rogozin run into Mask?

                Everyone seems to be the head of the space program.
                Quote: APASUS
                Want to talk about Rogozin

                No, I remember the voices of URayayayayayaya during the VO when he was appointed deputy prime minister.
                Want to talk about it?
                1. APASUS
                  APASUS 3 January 2018 21: 35
                  0
                  Quote: karish
                  Beria did not have the same stars in science from heaven, but from the point of view of organizational abilities, he was above all praise.

                  This is what I want to convey to some, he is a PR manager of a good level, but what about a genius at once in several areas I will never believe. Moreover, the network is full of information about his punctures
    7. spirit
      spirit 3 January 2018 13: 15
      +1
      This month Heavy should start wink
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 3 January 2018 15: 20
        +5
        Already on the site.
        https://www.instagram.com/p/BdeEU2glMJT/?taken-by
        = spacex
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 3 January 2018 17: 50
          +4
          If it successfully flies, it will turn out that he will overtake us for 15 years, in superheavy carriers, 63 tons on DOE - according to the most optimistic forecasts, such a rocket will be assembled by 2030.
    8. siberalt
      siberalt 3 January 2018 13: 25
      0
      The crew will not pull such a board. Radiation protection is not the same. lol How much can you hang noodles on your ears with the same American "sleepwalkers"?
    9. Orionvit
      Orionvit 3 January 2018 13: 40
      0
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      They still laugh at him. At least literate people. Successful testing of something is not yet an indicator of efficiency and profitability.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 3 January 2018 17: 30
        +4
        "They still laugh at him. At least literate people." The literate have long ceased to laugh at him - only the illiterate and the enviers remain.
      2. forty-eighth
        forty-eighth 3 January 2018 18: 17
        +2
        Literate people in such things have no habit of laughing at all
    10. Ivan Ivanov
      Ivan Ivanov 3 January 2018 14: 36
      0
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      And they explained it logically, by the uneconomicity of the project, by the need to carry extra. fuel, etc.
    11. dubovitskiy.1947
      dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 23: 11
      +1
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      Open the dictionary of the Russian language and see the correct spelling of the word "charlotte." You will become uncomfortable. Moreover, having such a nickname.
    12. Nikolai Grek
      Nikolai Grek 4 January 2018 03: 55
      +1
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      what what what Surely he went in plus ??? recourse wassat wassat wassat laughing laughing laughing
    13. co-creator
      co-creator 4 January 2018 03: 55
      +1
      Quote: RUSS
      And more recently, they laughed at the “charlotte” by Elon Mask

      Well, he is Charlotte, or rather zits-chairman.
  2. Tusk
    Tusk 3 January 2018 11: 44
    0
    Well, let them try ... Although this is a waste of budget money! Would bring that to mind ..
  3. SpaceCom
    SpaceCom 3 January 2018 11: 45
    +2
    Nothing more to write about? News a year ago! Only in the original was the still cooling fantasies of the remark still cooling. The fact that the creation of such a rocket is impossible without a fundamentally new engine. But about its creation, only something the most general and indefinite ...
  4. win9090
    win9090 3 January 2018 11: 45
    +1
    Normal would run fine.
  5. Pereira
    Pereira 3 January 2018 11: 47
    +8
    As I understand it, we’ll not laugh anymore at Ilon Mask, and his crazy projects are no longer crazy?
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 3 January 2018 12: 05
      +6
      Why not? Planting the first stage and almost the entire rocket are two different things. Although I still think that this is all nonsense.
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 3 January 2018 12: 10
        +1
        Another project is underway with the reusable Soyuz-5, there the landing of the first stage only.
    2. fa2998
      fa2998 3 January 2018 12: 09
      +4
      Bull's-eye! About ten years we pinned on Mask, talked about the rest of the fuel. It was possible to drop a load into high orbit, or take an extra payload. This idea turns out to be productive, and we will develop it! So in this case, we are already 10-15 years behind. Yes, they came up with a new one. It is necessary to recall that the launch of our cheap Buran led to the loss of Energy.
      They learned better how to launch what is available. They began to get confused in new launch vehicles. How is the new “Angara” doing, for which more than one billion has already been spent? hi
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 3 January 2018 14: 57
        +1
        The "hangar" will be closed.
      2. co-creator
        co-creator 4 January 2018 03: 58
        0
        Quote: fa2998
        It turns out this idea is productive, and we will develop it!

        why did you decide that this is a productive idea? It’s just that our “managers” want money, that's all. Instead of bringing to mind the existing projects, they will cut money and then say - they say this is unproductive.
    3. dubovitskiy.1947
      dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 23: 24
      +1
      Quote: Pereira
      As I understand it, we’ll not laugh anymore at Ilon Mask, and his crazy projects are no longer crazy?

      We will laugh at the idiots who believe this swindler.
  6. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 3 January 2018 11: 48
    +2
    “Our development - the Korona launch vehicle - unlike the American one does not have detachable stages and is actually a soft take-off spaceship” ////

    What good is this? It is necessary to launch commercial satellites at a low price.
    To compete with the Americans. The returned 1st stage allows to reduce the cost of the rocket as a whole, and reduce the cost of launching a satellite for the client.
    And who needs a soft landing of the entire rocket on Mars? belay
    1. SpaceCom
      SpaceCom 3 January 2018 11: 56
      +2
      The good thing is that it will even lower the cost of launches. The bad thing is that this is a theory ...
    2. vlad007
      vlad007 3 January 2018 12: 28
      10
      Quote: voyaka uh
      The returned 1-th stage allows you to reduce the cost of the rocket as a whole, and reduce the cost of launching a satellite for the client.

      The descent requires fuel to land the rocket and thus reduces the mass of the payload being launched into orbit, and significantly. In publications about the launches of the Mask, they never write about the mass of the payload put into orbit and about other characteristics - how much fuel was needed to launch and launch the rocket, etc.
      SpaceX is the brainchild of NASA. Prior to Mask, NASA commissioned launches by the ULA (United Launch Alliance), a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin. These were monopolists and their price was corresponding - $ 110 million dollars worth the launch. Many experts believe that this was a significantly overpriced, as is the case in the absence of competition. NASA decided to ARTificially create a competitor to reduce the cost of launches and were not mistaken. With the arrival of the commercial launches market, Ilona Mask, the launch price fell to $ 60 million dollars, which was required. Musk did not create SpaceX from scratch, but lured leading experts from the best companies to himself. There is no place to write more
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 3 January 2018 12: 35
        10
        "In publications about the launches of the Mask they never write about the mass of the payload put into orbit" ////

        Always write.

        "SpaceX is the brainchild of NASA" ////

        Nothing like this. NASA put on Boeing and Lockheed Martin (you yourself wrote about it).
        NASA and the Pentagon had to work with SpaceX when Musk threatened to sue them.

        "With the entry into the market of commercial launches, Ilona Mask, the launch price fell to $ 60 million,
        as required "////

        Starting with the first stage returned earlier is beneficial to the Mask even at a price of 40 million dollars.
        But it charges customers with superprofits. Since there was a line for him. All of 2018 is already packed to the limit.

        "not from scratch, but lured leading experts of the best firms" ////

        Naturally. He offered higher salaries, more interesting innovative work. That's right! good
        1. vlad007
          vlad007 3 January 2018 13: 10
          +7
          How many missiles flew more than once? Waiting for an answer!!!!!!!!!
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Starting with the first stage returned earlier is beneficial to the Mask even at a price of 40 million dollars.

          I didn’t think you were so naive! Restarting requires inter-flight maintenance, which can only be carried out under specially created conditions, and it is impossible to give a% guarantee with 100. It is necessary to maintain buildings, staff, etc. It costs money. Why is Musk landing his rockets on an offshore platform? After all, it is then necessary to deliver the rocket to its original position, and it costs money. If everything is so cool, as you think, then why not put the rakect on the take-off place? He is afraid to damage the spaceport in case of a failed landing. The cosmodrome is much more expensive than a rocket, and the Cosmodrome Mask got free, it launches rockets from the old A39 cosmodrome.
          Quote: voyaka uh
          NASA and the Pentagon had to work with SpaceX when Musk threatened to sue them.

          Well, yes, NASA and the Pentagon were AFRAID that some unknown Mask would win the trial and decided to launch the satellites with Mask rockets. You yourself are not funny? This is a play, a well-played show, and this is a MUST GO ON show!
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 3 January 2018 13: 13
            +4
            Quote: vlad007
            Why is Musk landing his rockets on an offshore platform?

            As he puts a lot of missiles at the spaceport, the choice between a platform and a ground platform is determined by the characteristics of the mission. Large cargo platform, smaller back to the spaceport.
            Quote: vlad007
            How many missiles flew more than once? Waiting for an answer?

            Five pieces
          2. karish
            karish 3 January 2018 13: 22
            +6
            Quote: vlad007
            How many missiles flew more than once? Waiting for an answer?

            Do you have a mask?
            in my opinion - about 10 times he returned the step.
            Quote: vlad007
            A second launch requires inter-flight service, which can only be carried out under specially created conditions, and it is impossible to give a 100% guarantee. N

            Nevertheless, it flies and this reduces the cost of launch.
            EMNIP - that one step was sent into space a day after its return-- that is, is it clear what is meant or decrypted?
            Quote: vlad007
            Why is Musk landing his rockets on an offshore platform?

            not only on the platform (at the beginning, US authorities forbade landing on the territory of the country due to security concerns) now

            By the way, pay attention to where the repair hangar is located.
            Quote: vlad007
            If everything is as cool as you think, then why not put the rakect on the take-off place

            What for ? cheaper to plant next to the repair complex (which we see in the video)
            Checkmate wink
            Quote: vlad007
            The Cosmodrome Mask got free, it launches rockets from the old A39 cosmodrome.

            And why not get for free what is not used anyway? request
            Quote: vlad007
            Well, yes, NASA and the Pentagon were AFRAID that some unknown Mask would win the trial and decided to launch the satellites with Mask rockets. You yourself are not funny

            No, in the USA in general for protectionism you can go to jail.
            Quote: vlad007
            This is a play, a well-played show, and this is a MUST GO ON show!

            only the ending of this performance looks like this - in terms of startups and profitability, Musk overtook Russia.
            And yes, if not Musk (as you are trying to prove) - then call it simply US, USA - as you please.
            The result so far is one - are they ahead, or do you think China is developing missiles for them? Or was it stolen in the USSR?
            1. vlad007
              vlad007 3 January 2018 13: 34
              +4
              Quote: karish
              only the ending of this performance looks like this - in terms of startups and profitability, Musk overtook Russia.

              With the funding that Roscosmos has, it is not difficult to overtake Russia.

              No need to make me a “urapatriot”, in my comments there is not a single mention of Roskosmos, it’s ridiculous even to compare. This is not about Roscosmos, but about the future of world cosmonautics.
              1. Korsar4
                Korsar4 3 January 2018 13: 44
                0
                And for 2013, the graphics froze? Although, of course, fundamentally little changes.

                However, during the heyday of the national space program, the solutions were interesting with a minimum budget. And now the priorities have changed slightly.
              2. vlad007
                vlad007 3 January 2018 14: 00
                +4
                NASA (USA) was already “ahead” of Roscosmos when the Shuttles were launched - count how many there were: “Challenger”, “Columbia”, Discovery. “How much noise there was for the whole world! In 1985, NASA planned that by the 1990 year it would happen 24 launches per year, and each of the spacecraft will make space flights before 100, but in practice they have been used much less - 30 launches (including two catastrophes) were made during 135 years of operation. “Discovery.” So what? Where are the results?
              3. karish
                karish 3 January 2018 14: 05
                +4
                Quote: vlad007
                With the funding that Roscosmos has, it is not difficult to overtake Russia.

                A good dancer always gets in the way.
                Only Roskosmos has existed for 50 years (as a successor to the USSR program as well). and how many Musk do their program?
                Quote: vlad007
                Do not make me a “urapatriot”, in my comments there is not a single mention of Roskosmos, it’s ridiculous even to compare

                What is funny to compare?
                1. vlad007
                  vlad007 3 January 2018 14: 14
                  +2
                  Quote: karish
                  What is funny to compare?

            2. Lock36
              Lock36 3 January 2018 13: 45
              +2
              Quote: karish
              only the finale of this performance looks like this - on launches and profitability Musk overtook Russia.

              How I love people who reason on a topic in which neither ear nor snout. good
              Well, caught the tongue? Tell us in detail about the profitability of Mask launches, financing of his company and its financial results. Come on, if you can answer for the words! Very interested! laughing
              1. karish
                karish 3 January 2018 14: 08
                +4
                Quote: Lock36
                Well, caught the tongue? Tell us in detail about the profitability of Mask launches, financing of his company and its financial results. Come on, if you can answer for the words! Very interested!

                Let's argue.
                Let's bet on the number of starts?
                On profitability?
                Come on
                1. Lock36
                  Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 17
                  +3
                  Quote: karish
                  Let's argue.

                  Lets do it!
                  Let's start with a simple check: do you know the meanings of the words that you throw here so much?
                  First question: state procedure for calculating the profitability of the services provided. Any. Whether it’s putting cargo into orbit or cleaning the office.
                  Everything, time has gone.
            3. Orionvit
              Orionvit 3 January 2018 13: 47
              0
              Quote: karish
              No, in the USA in general for protectionism you can go to jail.

              A new joke. States have been doing this since its inception. Lobbyism is legitimate and America is "above all."
              1. karish
                karish 3 January 2018 13: 50
                +2
                Quote: Orionvit
                Quote: karish
                No, in the USA in general for protectionism you can go to jail.

                A new joke. States have been doing this since its inception. Lobbyism is legitimate and America is "above all."

                I mean the domestic market.
                you're just not in the subject
                1. Orionvit
                  Orionvit 3 January 2018 14: 31
                  0
                  Quote: karish
                  I mean the domestic market.
                  you're just not in the subject

                  Read carefully about lobbyism, which in the states is blooming violently legally. And a bunch of different scandals in the US government and Congress related to the distribution of orders of the Pentagon and NASA. And how much money is laundered on this.
                2. Filxnumx
                  Filxnumx 3 January 2018 23: 59
                  +1
                  and why the topic "procedure for calculating the profitability of the service. Anyone. Whether it’s moving the cargo into orbit or cleaning the office" we move out? Or nothing to say?
            4. Muvka
              Muvka 3 January 2018 14: 09
              +3
              Yes, no matter how many times he returned the step. The question is: how many launches were there with the stage already used? After all, the whole point is to plant in this, and not to stupidly return the first step.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 38
                +1
                I already wrote five starts with a BU stage
                1. Muvka
                  Muvka 3 January 2018 14: 51
                  +2
                  And the evidence in the form of links?
                  1. The comment was deleted.
            5. prosto_rgb
              prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 30
              0
              Quote: karish
              How many missiles flew more than once? Waiting for an answer?
              Do you have a mask?
              in my opinion - about 10 times he returned the step.

              only in 2017 - 14 pieces landed successfully out of 14 planned for return
              Quote: karish
              EMNIP - that one step was sent into space a day after its return-- that is, is it clear what is meant or decrypted?

              Not at the moment.
              But
              they carried out 2 launches within 48 hours (actually 59), but of different missiles and from different launching tables:
              October 9, 2017 12:37 p.m. Baz Vandenberg, SLC-4E
              October 11, 2017, 22:53 p.m. with Kennedy CC, LC-39A
              Quote: karish
              The Cosmodrome Mask got free, it launches rockets from the old A39 cosmodrome.
              And why not get for free what is not used anyway?

              Cosmodrome or rather the infrastructure of KC Kennedy - SpaceX is rented.
              LC-39 - launch complex, consists of three launch sites - LC-39A, LC-39B and LC-39C.
              Since 39, the LC-2014A platform has been leased to SpaceX, refitted to launch the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles. The first launch of the Falcon 9 rocket from the site took place on February 19, 2017.
              therefore, everything here is far from being as free as some think (not you).
              by the way on the sites
              The LC-39B platform is in the process of refitting to launch the SLS super-heavy rocket with the Orion manned spacecraft, the first launch is expected no earlier than 2018.
          3. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 3 January 2018 14: 44
            +6
            "How many missiles flew more than once? Waiting for an answer !!!!!!!!!" ////

            More than three - for sure.
            The last time on the used 1st stage, the Dragon truck successfully flew to the station.
            Moreover, the Dragon itself was also already "used".
            Two lateral boosters on a heavy rocket, which launches a trial trial this month for the first time - also used the 1st stage.
            1. prosto_rgb
              prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 09
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              More than three - for sure.

              4 flew and returned
    3. Simargl
      Simargl 3 January 2018 14: 05
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      And who needs a soft landing of the entire rocket on Mars?
      Those who want to fly back and forth.
      This is likely to happen in front of today's youth.
    4. KaPToC
      KaPToC 3 January 2018 18: 00
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      And who needs a soft landing of the entire rocket on Mars?

      Firstly, not on Mars, but on the Moon.
      Secondly, thermonuclear energy is needed.
    5. dubovitskiy.1947
      dubovitskiy.1947 3 January 2018 23: 27
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      “Our development - the Korona launch vehicle - unlike the American one does not have detachable stages and is actually a soft take-off spaceship” ////

      What good is this? It is necessary to launch commercial satellites at a low price.
      To compete with the Americans. The returned 1st stage allows to reduce the cost of the rocket as a whole, and reduce the cost of launching a satellite for the client.
      And who needs a soft landing of the entire rocket on Mars? belay

      Space tourists who flew on it at the call of this space rogue. Nevertheless, in a descent capsule, goods for exchange with local aborigines can be taken less than in a whole rocket.
  7. Egorovich
    Egorovich 3 January 2018 11: 52
    +2
    Finally, the money appeared. Bravo!!! How many copies are broken on this reusable launcher.
    1. SpaceCom
      SpaceCom 3 January 2018 11: 58
      0
      But about the financing in the article is not a word!
      1. Egorovich
        Egorovich 3 January 2018 12: 33
        +4
        For those who are dull, it is imperative to write that funding has been resumed. Once development is continued, then finance has gone. Nothing is done on bare enthusiasm.
        1. SpaceCom
          SpaceCom 9 January 2018 09: 33
          0
          For the dull, I explain that much is being done in the order of the so-called proactive development. Just the case when enthusiastic about in the hope of future funding.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 3 January 2018 12: 00
      0
      And it will fly in ten years, and maybe it will, and before that they will spend a hundred billion rubles.
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 3 January 2018 14: 08
        +1
        10 ?! wassat
        Optimist!
  8. cannabis
    cannabis 3 January 2018 11: 54
    +5
    How interesting ..... 48 years ago, the Americans had technology for landing on the moon, and then suddenly got lost. Funny ..... Now about the reusable rocket .... The rocket will be like a primus from barracks of 50 years. He cooked the soup - he cleaned the holes with a wire, refilled it with kerosene, pumped up the air and set the porridge to cook. Very funny .... But since money is allocated, then this nano-primus will definitely fly!
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 3 January 2018 12: 09
      +9
      Well then, NASA had a budget of 4,5 US GDP, a staff of under 400000 people, and spent the trillion dollars by the current standards on the entire program of flights to the Moon - even despite the fact that the Vietnam War was going on in the 60s and early 70s. If NASA had such a budget all the way until today, they would have built a city on Mars and carried out a manned flight to Saturn.
      1. cannabis
        cannabis 3 January 2018 12: 11
        +3
        Understood nothing. What a time! Everyone from the president to the computer interlocutor talks about money. What except money in nature does not exist?
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 3 January 2018 12: 14
          +6
          Morning money, evening chairs. No money, no chairs. Everything is simple.
        2. Simargl
          Simargl 3 January 2018 14: 20
          +2
          Quote: cunning
          What a time! Everyone from the president to the computer interlocutor talks about money.
          Do something for someone thanks for spending, say, 5000 (yes, yes! Three zeros) hours. Spend at least 7 hours a day.
          How do you - maybe answer the question.
          1. cannabis
            cannabis 3 January 2018 14: 31
            +2
            Ah ..... got it! So you designed this flying ashtray? Congratulations.
        3. Korsar4
          Korsar4 3 January 2018 14: 31
          +2
          Exist. But, even if a team is assembled for an idea, it is necessary to feed it. And not just drink tea. Otherwise, it is amateurism.

          With all due respect to Visbore.
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 12: 12
      0
      So the technology of landing on the moon is nowhere to be done, their devices are regularly planted on Mars.
      1. Lock36
        Lock36 3 January 2018 13: 50
        +2
        Our rockets, which we developed as part of the lunar program, fly so far.
        And where and how do American counterparts fly? Tell us more! Well there was such a breakthrough!
        Surely over the years they improved that engine - and its thrust increased, and the cost price decreased, right? Well, tell me about it!
        Or is it a matter of money? What’s the Fed’s printer broken? Or what other problem? Say, man, enlighten us!
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 02
          +1
          So they created new engines, the most powerful operating LV in the world now, Delta Heavy flies on American engines
          1. Lock36
            Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 30
            +5
            Lord, how I love such "experts." Well, where are you going to write about this? !!!
            The points
            Quote: BlackMokona
            the most powerful currently in use in the world by Delta Heavy

            She flies on the RS-68, which has a thrust of 300,7 tons of forces at sea level.
            And the F1 engine, on which the Americans "flew to the moon" produces supposedly 690 tf, do you feel the difference? Wow development huh?
            For example, our RD-170, which really flew, produces 740 tf.
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 3 January 2018 21: 20
              0
              And now, compare all these engines.
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 3 January 2018 14: 37
          +2
          "Our rockets, which we developed as part of the lunar program, are still flying." This is where this H 1 flies?
          1. Lock36
            Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 32
            +3
            This is Proton, read, not smart.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 3 January 2018 17: 33
              +1
              And what about Proton, somehow related to the lunar program?
        3. Vadim237
          Vadim237 3 January 2018 14: 40
          0
          In 2019, a new superheavy rocket will fly, and with it everything else. The breakthrough has not gone anywhere, it continues to develop.
        4. Simargl
          Simargl 3 January 2018 15: 24
          0
          Quote: Lock36
          Our rockets, which we developed as part of the lunar program, fly so far.
          The proton was not made for the Lunar program, the Korolevskys, too. They forgot about N-1 and R-56.
          Quote: Lock36
          And where and how do American counterparts fly? Tell us more! Well there was such a breakthrough!
          In the same place as N-1. Even our sworn friends did not need a carrier for the price of gold. V.F. Brown was driven at the end of the project and hit solid fuel boosters. SLS and Space Shuttle are just with them.
          Quote: Lock36
          Surely over the years they improved that engine - and its thrust increased, and the cost price decreased, right? Well, tell me about it!
          The very concept of an engine with a tubular nozzle (I forgot how to call it correctly) is outdated even before the F-1 and M-1 were made. The pressure in the combustion chamber is almost 3,5 times lower than that of the RD-180 and 2+ than that of the NK-33. The Merlins are not much higher, but for the sake of reusability, as I understand it.
          Quote: Lock36
          Or is it a matter of money? What’s the Fed’s printer broken? Or what other problem? Say, man, enlighten us!
          In expediency.
          1. Lock36
            Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 42
            +2
            Quote: Simargl
            Proton not for the lunar program did

            Yah? Really?
            The Proton LV was a means of launching all the Soviet and Russian orbital stations Salyut-DOS and Almaz, modules of the Mir and ISS stations, planned manned spaceships TKS and L-1 / "Probe" (Soviet lunar-flight program), as well as heavy satellites for various purposes and interplanetary stations.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 3 January 2018 17: 36
              +1
              The proton was made to launch the payload, but its creation was not related to the Lunar program.
              1. Lock36
                Lock36 3 January 2018 17: 50
                +2
                Yes, and the moon was not planned to fly around him, right?
            2. Simargl
              Simargl 3 January 2018 22: 44
              +1
              The fact that the R-7 clones dragged the lunar glands does not make them lunar.
              The proton is the UR-500. UR - universal rocket. Tie it only to the moon - nonsense! Moreover, according to the lunar program, there would be 1-2% of launches.
              1. Lock36
                Lock36 7 January 2018 22: 57
                +1
                Stop! Was the moon circled on these engines as part of the lunar program? Or not? Answer unambiguously.
          2. prosto_rgb
            prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 45
            0
            Quote: Simargl
            The pressure in the combustion chamber is almost 3,5 times lower than that of the RD-180 and 2+ than that of the NK-33. The Merlins are not much higher, but for the sake of reusability, as I understand it.

            NK-33
            The pressure in the combustion chamber is 142 kgf / cm2 (147 atm.)
            Merlin 1D +
            The pressure in the combustion chamber is 108 kgf / cm2 (108 atm.)
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 22 January 2018 21: 11
              0
              And-and-and-and ?!
              Merlin 1D + is not the F-1 successor we're talking about (or have I forgotten something?)
              1. prosto_rgb
                prosto_rgb 22 January 2018 21: 17
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                And-and-and-and ?!
                Merlin 1D + is not the F-1 successor we're talking about (or have I forgotten something?)

                in my koment it is not about that
                and I don’t even know what to say, if before that you write:
                The very concept of an engine with a tubular nozzle (I forgot how to call it correctly) is outdated even before the F-1 and M-1 were made. Combustion chamber pressure almost 3,5 times lower than the RD-180 and 2+ than the NK-33. Merlins are not much higher, but for the sake of reusability, as I understand it.

                unless I can suggest dividing 108 by 142
                1. Simargl
                  Simargl 23 January 2018 15: 39
                  0
                  The pressure in the combustion chamber (F-1 and M-1) is almost 3,5 times lower than that of the RD-180 and 2+ than that of the NK-33.
                  The Merlins are not much higher (than the F-1 and M-1), but for the sake of reusability, as I understand it.
                  Instead of clarifying the ambiguities - continue to think out how convenient.
                  The thrust ratio of the Merlins, nevertheless, is almost 2 times higher than that of the F-1. And the RD-180 - below, by the way.
                  1. prosto_rgb
                    prosto_rgb 25 January 2018 18: 22
                    0
                    Quote: Simargl
                    Instead of clarifying the ambiguities - continue to think out how convenient.

                    what to think of if this is a quote from your same comment:
                    Quote: Simargl
                    The very concept of an engine with a tubular nozzle (I forgot how to call it correctly) is outdated even before the F-1 and M-1 were made. The pressure in the combustion chamber is almost 3,5 times lower than that of the RD-180 and 2+ than that of the NK-33. The Merlins are not much higher, but for the sake of reusability, as I understand it.

                    I just gave the pressure in the combustion chambers for Merlin 1D + and NK-33
    3. karish
      karish 3 January 2018 12: 34
      +7
      Quote: cunning
      so interesting ..... 48 years ago, the Americans had technology for landing on the moon, and then suddenly got lost. Funny

      they are not lost, just often to revive (all the more obsolete) is more expensive than creating a new one.
    4. spirit
      spirit 3 January 2018 13: 30
      +2
      How interesting we used to have and the aircraft carriers built both vertical aircraft and the turbines were, and where everything went) is very funny ...
    5. Simargl
      Simargl 3 January 2018 14: 12
      +1
      Quote: cunning
      How interesting ..... 48 years ago, the Americans had technology for landing on the moon, and then suddenly lost.

      There is technology.
      There is no technological chain, nor is it necessary. We have Energy technology. We can’t collect at least 5 years if they give the go-ahead.
      Saturn cost more than a lard in the money, now about five (probably 7). Even though, as they say, they print loot, the population will not understand such expenses, and even if with an accident ...
      1. Lock36
        Lock36 3 January 2018 16: 57
        +1
        Quote: Simargl
        Saturn was worth more than a lard in that money, now it’s about five (probably 7). Even though, as they say, they print loot, the population will not understand such expenses, and even if with an accident ...

        This means that people will understand to buy engines from us (despite the fact that the howl is on the issue for the whole congress). And by themselves, it means, to make, so to speak, make-up great egein - this is their people will not be able to understand theirs. belay
        What a mysterious people, the Americans ...
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 3 January 2018 19: 39
          +1
          Saturn's receiver 5 is due to fly by the end of next year.
        2. Simargl
          Simargl 3 January 2018 22: 54
          0
          They are put Antares instead of the licensed NK-33 and Atlas-5.
          Now open the page of the pediatric test and count %% of launches with these engines (I give a hint: the lion's share of US launches is in general for Mask).
          Well, buying cheap and reliable engines is the same as buying an expensive rocket with archaic engines ... just the opposite.
          They have a lot of their engines.
          We are waiting for the SLS for 2-3 years, after that weep. I think it will be like with Mask: - Leave me alone ... I can’t ... I don’t want ... Not now ... Not there ...
          1. Lock36
            Lock36 11 January 2018 12: 16
            +1
            Quote: Simargl
            We are waiting for the SLS for 2-3 years, after that weep.

            Yes, you began to sob long before all this, you can not stop - what if they succeed?
            By the way, under the contracts concluded with Boeing and another office in 2011, they should have carried the astronaut to the ISS in 2017. But she somehow couldn’t.
            And you cry, do not be shy.
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 22 January 2018 20: 54
              0
              Quote: Lock36
              By the way, under the contracts concluded with Boeing and another office in 2011, they should have carried the astronaut to the ISS in 2017. But she somehow couldn’t.
              Why didn’t you? Is the program closed? The contract was taken away? The story goes on, failure to meet deadlines is a common thing.
              Unfortunately, it may turn out that they can plant a pig for us, as the most honest players in the competition: several emergency manned launches.

              I do not cry about their successes, but about our stagnation (and degradation).
              1. Lock36
                Lock36 24 January 2018 12: 41
                +1
                Quote: Simargl
                Why didn’t you?

                Yes, because you need to look at the calendar, and not ask stupid questions.
                Could not be on time. And not the fact that they can this year.
                1. Simargl
                  Simargl 24 January 2018 12: 57
                  0
                  What kind of nonsense?
                  Until the project is closed, the deadlines are just shifted and we can only say that failed on time. The rest is speculation!
                  1. Lock36
                    Lock36 24 January 2018 19: 22
                    +1
                    I couldn’t meet the deadline and today I couldn’t do it at all - Can you read? You can clearly say in English: They havn't done yet. All is clear.
                    1. Simargl
                      Simargl 24 January 2018 20: 23
                      0
                      Quote: Lock36
                      I couldn’t meet the deadline and today I couldn’t do it at all - Can you read?
                      Well, judging by the materials of the brachopedia, someone is lying: it says that the first flight with the crew is planned at the end of 2018, i.e. at least, the project has not been abandoned, and it’s impossible to say that it’s “unhappy”!
                      There’s Buran - they didn’t take it, and Dragon V2 ... we look and rejoice for the successes of others, because the declared start-up date, even for Orion, is closer than for the Federation.
                      1. Lock36
                        Lock36 25 January 2018 13: 46
                        +1
                        Should have been in 2017, now - in 2018.
                        If you couldn’t do something there, sit in a corner and cry. Not small, educate yourself.
                    2. Simargl
                      Simargl 25 January 2018 17: 58
                      0
                      Well, with what fright does this mean that "nishmagla" ?!
                      Our Admiral Golovko was also stuck at the shipyard, but at the moment I would not say that they’re “nishmagli,” but “Ukraine” is definitely nishmagli.
                      Is the difference clear?
    6. prosto_rgb
      prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 32
      0
      Quote: cunning
      How interesting ..... 48 years ago, the Americans had technology for landing on the moon, and then suddenly lost.

      30 years ago, the USSR / RF had Energy-Buran
      and now?
      1. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack 5 January 2018 02: 16
        +4
        Quote: prosto_rgb
        Quote: cunning
        How interesting ..... 48 years ago, the Americans had technology for landing on the moon, and then suddenly lost.

        30 years ago, the USSR / RF had Energy-Buran
        and now?

        And what, in the USA also had its own Gorbachev and its own Yeltsin? And also had their own "90s"?
        Either I overslept something in this life, or you stupidly troll, man ...
        1. prosto_rgb
          prosto_rgb 7 January 2018 23: 15
          0
          Quote: Golovan Jack
          Quote: prosto_rgb
          Quote: cunning
          How interesting ..... 48 years ago, the Americans had technology for landing on the moon, and then suddenly lost.

          30 years ago, the USSR / RF had Energy-Buran
          and now?

          And what, in the USA also had its own Gorbachev and its own Yeltsin? And also had their own "90s"?
          Either I overslept something in this life, or you stupidly troll, man ...

          where does the American Gorbachev and Yeltsin with the 90th?
          Saturn-5 was closed, instead of it they made a shuttle and flew further
  9. bald
    bald 3 January 2018 12: 10
    +1
    Makeev’s center is credible and can be trusted, the torpedoes alone are worth it - good luck to you guys and new developments (Mash Gorodok).
  10. zyzx
    zyzx 3 January 2018 12: 12
    +3
    Yes, there is no point in such missiles. Overweight, testing costs, after the flight, etc., etc. ....
  11. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 3 January 2018 12: 33
    +5
    Ilon Maski invariably remains a quack. "Falcon" was not developed by him, NASA gave it to him. I have heard about this rocket for a long time. It is unlikely to be profitable.
    Perhaps they will make an “air start”, but it turns out to be a very difficult thing. We need to put rockets on the stream, and generally more launches - but the question is - why? To develop the lunar program - for what?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 January 2018 12: 43
      +9
      "Ilon Masks invariably remains a quack" ///

      For you - I have no doubt. laughing Whatever he achieved.
      Because he is an American.
      1. Awaz
        Awaz 3 January 2018 12: 56
        +4
        Well, he’s not exactly American. Secondly, the United States has all successes in astronautics associated only with foreigners .. Thirdly, so far nothing of the super duper Musk has done. All he uses is technology from the time of the Queen. Well, and the fantastic ability to hang noodles on the ears of the layman is a normal American practice ...
        1. Ronald Reagan
          Ronald Reagan 3 January 2018 13: 24
          +9
          Ilon managed to do something unique - to return enthusiasm to space exploration. Meanwhile, other “greats” are tweeting and shooting themselves in the legs. laughing
          1. prosto_rgb
            prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 47
            0
            Quote: Ronald Reagan
            Meanwhile, other “greats” are tweeting and shooting in the legs.

            if only this
            so also drown the dogs!
        2. Simargl
          Simargl 3 January 2018 14: 27
          +1
          Quote: AwaZ
          In the third, so far nothing such a super duper Musk has done. All he uses is technology from the time of the Queen.
          Here's the problem: some things came about as a result of using technologies that were invented long ago. They only joined together and "licked".
          A simple example: the lion's share of pistols is the Browning system (the earring is the original, but now a copier neckline). For over 100 years they have been making various models based on this scheme, but it turns out differently for everyone, although in your opinion, nothing new.
        3. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 3 January 2018 14: 48
          +5
          So you can say about Korolev - everything that he used -
          technology from the Fau-2 Von Braun. And it will be a lie. Like about the Mask - a lie.
          Each of them advanced rocket science and astronautics forward.
          1. Awaz
            Awaz 3 January 2018 16: 16
            +2
            Korolev really advanced astronautics several levels forward. Musk hasn’t come up with anything new yet. I do not deny his abilities for PR and do not exclude that his activity will really push someone to something new, which will give an impetus to the development of astronautics. However, Musk cannot stand next to the Royal. Musk is a crook used by various services to achieve some goals, primarily for the sake of dough. Korolev is a techie and business executive who really created and created new things. At the moment, people can fly into space only on what Korolev came up with. no one has the technology to do this yet. I understand that Korolev’s technology is already too old and something needs to be done, but even Musk so far only repeats what he managed to steal or take, or buy from Korolev and Von Braun. Maybe he creates the prerequisites for something new, or maybe not. The topic of reusing the first stage is not new, but it has weaknesses that cannot be covered by current technologies.
            It’s even visible to the amateur that the Mask, with its space program (I won’t even bracket it), was created to create problems for NASA’s competitors. It is possible that they are trying to fight both Boeing and Lockheed slightly in terms of costs, but also with Roskosmos and other competitors. At the moment, I think - if the Mask project does not make any major breakthrough, all this will close after some time, like most American space projects. Its activities can cause damage to what is Russian, what is European, what is Chinese, and space projects, but they can be destroyed at best by the European one, brutally omit the Russian one and are unlikely to affect the Chinese.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 3 January 2018 16: 22
              +5
              "will not make some serious breakthrough" ////

              The breakthrough is that he overtook Roscosmos - a state organization for several years
              with 60 years of experience - by the number of launches per year.
              1. Awaz
                Awaz 3 January 2018 16: 28
                +5
                It is unlikely that you know all the nuances associated with Mask and NASA. Under US law, NASA seems to give everyone their technology for free. But try it yourself or me ... It's useless. If that were the case, the USSR could have been interested in everything for a long time.
                Americans can sell goods very well. Even at my work, at the same time, they hired an American as a sales manager ..
                But I don’t care about sales (although I don’t care so much) I’m just wondering if Musk did something new and breakthrough. However, not yet. He has nothing to brag about here. Compared to Korlev, he’s nobody .. His whole business is charity of NASA and the US authorities.
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 3 January 2018 16: 34
                  +3
                  "His whole business is NASA's charity" ////

                  His entire business is the proceeds from the launch of commercial communications satellites.
                  Internet service providers signed contracts with him
                  to launch satellites a few years ago. They pay him 50-70 million in cash.
                  dollars for satellite launch.
                  NASA and the Pentagon are its additional customers. Profit from them is relatively small.
                2. forty-eighth
                  forty-eighth 3 January 2018 18: 30
                  +2
                  All documents that NASA recognized as the heritage of mankind are available on a special site, and absolutely anyone can download them. So the mask went to NASA technology. He did not beg them from anyone, he just downloaded them.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 4 January 2018 01: 23
                    +2
                    "He did not beg them from anyone, he just downloaded them." ////

                    Why are their RosKosmos too lazy to download? After all, they are in the public domain ... wink
                    1. forty-eighth
                      forty-eighth 5 January 2018 01: 44
                      0
                      I think the question is rhetorical ...
                    2. prosto_rgb
                      prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 58
                      0
                      Quote: voyaka uh
                      Why are their RosKosmos too lazy to download?

                      it seems they were busy with a trampoline
                    3. Simargl
                      Simargl 22 January 2018 21: 00
                      0
                      Quote: voyaka uh
                      Why are their RosKosmos too lazy to download? After all, they are in the public domain ...
                      Download, don’t worry!
                      Here are just those technologies - the legacy of mankind, the stage passed and, like BE, everyone knows, by and large.
                      The main problem is to make a complex mechanism - technological connections.
            2. Simargl
              Simargl 3 January 2018 23: 37
              +1
              Quote: AwaZ
              However, Musk cannot stand next to the Royal.
              Does he need this? He is a businessman and PR agent.

              Quote: AwaZ
              At the moment, people can fly into space only on what Korolev came up with. no one has the technology to do this yet.
              Those. Do you think the story is over? I dare to say that we are at the very beginning! And this "no one has the technology to do this yet"- complete nonsense! There are technologies, only ours, so far, cheaper and more reliable.
              And judging by their opportunities, after they finish their manned systems (this will happen regardless of our desire), unsuccessful manned launches may occur at us!!! Guess why and why!

              Quote: AwaZ
              Korolev’s technology is already too old and something needs to be done
              You always need to do something! Look at the Space Shuttle program: the idea is good, but due to the very slow change of generations - it ran out of steam, and due to the lack of an alternative - they took us into cabs.
              Judging by the movements of Roscosmos, the "effective managers" did not draw any conclusions.

              Quote: AwaZ
              Musk so far repeats only what he managed to steal or take, or buy from the Queen and Von Braun
              Not just repeating, but "licking" what is. It's not bad. There is NASA, which conducts basic research, which it will sell / transfer to commerce.

              Quote: AwaZ
              You can even see the amateur with no armed eyes
              The amateur sees only what they show him.
              Quote: AwaZ
              designed to create problems for NASA rivals
              Dumping is one of the methods of economic warfare. Who says competition is only fair?

              Quote: AwaZ
              At the moment, I think - if the Mask project does not make any major breakthrough, all this will close after some time, like most American space projects
              So big, but you believe in fairy tales! For breakthroughs and serious tasks, there is NASA! Huckster-Mask is not a researcher - he is a PR worker, huckster and industrialist (precisely in this sequence). His job (why he was hired) is to bring down the price and, in the second place, work out well-known technologies.
            3. prosto_rgb
              prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 56
              0
              Quote: AwaZ
              or buy from the Queen and Von Braun.

              And where is this wonderful store located?
              Where Korolev himself, coupled with Von Braun, is selling technology or giving it up in good hands.
        4. prosto_rgb
          prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 52
          0
          Quote: AwaZ
          In the third, so far nothing such a super duper Musk has done. All he uses is technology from the time of the Queen.

          And how many in the days of Korolev returned the first stages of missiles and launched them on supercooled fuel components ??
          Quote: AwaZ
          Well, and the fantastic ability to hang noodles on the ears of the layman is a normal American practice ...

          The cost of launching the Falcon 9 FT for $ 62 million is an eternal noodle, and a completely self-fulfilling economic indicator.
          1. dubovitskiy.1947
            dubovitskiy.1947 5 January 2018 10: 25
            0
            Quote: prosto_rgb

            The cost of launching the Falcon 9 FT for $ 62 million is an eternal noodle, and a completely self-fulfilling economic indicator.


            You are bad and don’t know everything. Musk, who has promised multiple launches, enters into agreements with NASA for these “multiple launches,” being chained to his debts to this government organization. You know for sure that Americans can forgive billions of dollars in debt, and people lobbying
            Welfare to this rogue do not want to make excuses to their voters? How much in the price of "repeated" launches are the dough returns included?
            After all, if Musk wants to get everything profitably, then what will the crook say with the credentials of senators?
            Where could this beetle from 10 years re-create the space industry? Of the space programs given to him by illiquid assets, the running-up design bureaus were bought at the root, and billions of billions of assets — equipment, launch complexes, etc. — were leased out.
            Now it's time to pay the bills. The Mask fee is the dumping prices for starts.
    2. karish
      karish 3 January 2018 12: 44
      +7
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Ilon Maski invariably remains a quack.

      This charlatan overtook Russia in the number of launches
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      "Falcon" was not developed by him, NASA gave it to him

      And in NASA (if you believe in your stupidity) - probably someone developed it the same? Or as always stolen in the USSR?
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It is unlikely to be profitable.

      Envy is a bad thing
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      We need to put rockets on the stream, and generally more launches - but the question is - why? To develop the lunar program - for what?

      everything according to your logic - if Russia lags behind in something - then this (Mask development) is either a fake or not at all.
      1. dubovitskiy.1947
        dubovitskiy.1947 5 January 2018 14: 42
        0
        Quote: karish
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Ilon Maski invariably remains a quack.

        This charlatan overtook Russia in the number of launches
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        "Falcon" was not developed by him, NASA gave it to him

        And in NASA (if you believe in your stupidity) - probably someone developed it the same? Or as always stolen in the USSR?
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        It is unlikely to be profitable.

        Envy is a bad thing
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        We need to put rockets on the stream, and generally more launches - but the question is - why? To develop the lunar program - for what?

        everything according to your logic - if Russia lags behind in something - then this (Mask development) is either a fake or not at all.

        This charlatan will NEVER overtake the USSR-Russia by the number of launches.
        We launched the proton more than 400 times. ONLY of these trucks. Only 16 can count it 8 starts ... (I have XNUMX warnings, so read the points.)
    3. RUSS
      RUSS 3 January 2018 16: 19
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Ilon Maski invariably remains a quack.
      With congratulations to Ilon Mask, who made another breakthrough in space exploration on the eve, Vice Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin began a meeting of the Space Expert Council on Friday (March 31, 2017). It so happened that it was on this day that Roscosmos was going to discuss its further strategic development. So, Musk announced that his company had nevertheless managed to reuse the most expensive part of the launch vehicle, which was previously returned to the ground, its first stage. Despite the recent sarcastic attacks against the Americans, Rogozin had to admit his success.
    4. prosto_rgb
      prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 01: 46
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      "Falcon" was not developed by him, NASA gave it to him.

      aha
      on the shuttle brought straight from orbit

      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It is necessary to put rockets on the stream

      they are already on stream
  12. Citizen 90
    Citizen 90 3 January 2018 13: 28
    +2
    We have, as usual, "later, but better," if, of course, they do at all ...

    By the way, who would tell what the chiefs of the concerns get the money for? .. Because everything was done in the old enterprises and everything is done, only someone made a feeder for themselves ... oh, the tip for “managing” all this, and collecting money from enterprises to the concern.
    No, I understand how this should work. Smart guys know the whole picture, they know which plant to send which order. True, in fact, "their relatives" are lobbying and spreading the rest. And all the eggs in one basket, and hundreds of enterprises exist on the verge of collapse, while others are building on TOTAL money allocated from the concern. And then they drive orders saying "modern plant". Vicious circle.
  13. Bronevick
    Bronevick 3 January 2018 13: 30
    0
    All roads lead to Buran
  14. WIN969
    WIN969 3 January 2018 13: 40
    +3
    Something does not fit, in 2012 there was no money for the project, but now they have suddenly found it. Obviously, this reusable missile is not just a cheap way to deliver goods, here both pin-sy and our something are muddied secretly. bully

    Think for yourself WHY in terrestrial airspace you need vertical landing technology ??? After all, it is incredibly difficult, and pointless. This technology is not even reliable in the atmosphere of Mars. Remember the Soviet multi-ton devices landed on parachutes. After modernization, our Union lands on Earth by parachute anyway, and even the new Federation ship, I’m most sure will not refuse such landing technology.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 05
      0
      Parachutes do not provide a sufficiently soft landing and weigh a lot.
      1. Awaz
        Awaz 3 January 2018 16: 19
        0
        I don’t argue, we need new technologies, but the idea is still bespont ...
    2. Simargl
      Simargl 3 January 2018 15: 33
      +1
      Quote: WIN969
      Something does not fit, in 2012 there was no money for the project, but now they have suddenly found it.
      You probably haven’t noticed - we usually have 2 options:
      1 - we come up with something, the idea is abandoned, the West is developing - we are buying from it expensively,
      2 - we come up with something, the idea is abandoned, the West is developing ... we are catching up, stumbling.
      We live with caution. Already not one hundred years. Not tired?

      Quote: WIN969
      Think for yourself WHY in terrestrial airspace you need vertical landing technology ???
      Then, that this system is the least manageable. Musk puts it where the cross drew (let, so far only steps). And we?
      With the growth of mass, by the way, parachutes are becoming less effective: brake squibs are already being used. The Federation, in the initial version, had to sit on the engines, but they were afraid - this is now an additional opportunity.
  15. tchoni
    tchoni 3 January 2018 13: 53
    +5
    Taki OP! Ideology Mask won? But are all smart gentiles with foam at the mouth proving that the reusable first stage is profanity, sheer loss, minus the payload and, generally, freshly show-offs?
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 3 January 2018 15: 40
      0
      Quote: tchoni
      Ideology Mask won?
      At this stage, it has a right to exist. Time will tell whether this is dumping or not.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 3 January 2018 16: 27
        0
        Quote: Simargl
        At this stage, it has a right to exist. Time will tell whether this is dumping or not.

        If you bring up articles on HE devoted to the topic of reusable spacecraft and, in general, space flights, then, among commentators, there is a whole category of people who claim, moreover, not always unfoundedly, but with a reference to literature and some mathematical calculations, that a multi-core system will, at best, roll into space - from space itself, leaving no place for the payload. One believes this very willingly, especially if one compares the mass of an empty “union” with the payload output.
        1. Simargl
          Simargl 3 January 2018 23: 10
          +1
          Quote: tchoni
          ... a multi-base system will, at best, roll into space - from space itself, leaving no place for the payload ...
          Like BE ... everything was returned from the Space Shuttle except for the tank, which weighed a little less than 40 tons.
          Those. 2 MTTK, rocket and up to 14,5 tons of cargo from orbit!
    2. Awaz
      Awaz 3 January 2018 16: 22
      +1
      the idea of ​​a reusable first stage still probably existed at the time of the Queen. In any case, I read about it in the TM magazine back in those years when I was in school. I don’t remember, but it seemed that in the USSR and even in the USA they tried to do this. The problem is that so far there is no breakthrough technology that would allow to realize this with a real positive effect. Although I agree that the idea can be essentially not bad ..
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 3 January 2018 17: 41
        0
        And I remember that an empty union weighs about 25 tons without a payload. And it takes 7-8 tons to low Earth orbit. Even if through the use of various kinds of composites, etc. it will be possible to reduce the weight of the structure by 20-30% .... Well, let’s save as much modzh due to the structural study of the structure (say, giving it the shape of a ball - you can almost halve the surface area) ... But, anyway, such a design can barely reach noo, without a payload. And she still has to go back, but it needs the same fuel ....
  16. cedar
    cedar 3 January 2018 14: 17
    +4
    Quote: APAST That poppyUS
    So, the Mask company is bought in bulk along with another trifle, and it is put not on the technical, but on the advertising position. Now, you know, there is such a thing - technology evangelism - when a techie is replaced by a showman (there are, of course, exceptions, but they will die out naturally, that is, they pay more for the show than for technology) - well, then such a term was not promoted, but the essence is the same.



    Since 1969, there has been a growing technology moon, this is when the lies of a cosmic scale created by them convinced US bankers that humanity, led by the USSR, is capable of swallowing any false, information product seasoned with abundant financial sauce ... and now they are rampantly filling with lies all conceivable spheres of human life and activity on Earth, in including space ...
    Of all the money in the world serving the global economy, only 3% (three percent!) Is real money, and 97% (!) Is virtual money, of a virtual economy, of the virtual world of NONSTERS, inflated to a cosmic scale.
    Look at the root, dear. And wonder. What kind of economy, what kind of world, for what kind of money does Musk and his ilk serve?
    I wish Makeevites and our entire cosmonautics real success, in the real world, in the real Universe.
  17. Zomanus
    Zomanus 3 January 2018 14: 33
    +1
    Guys, for starters, work out 100% successful launches of regular ships,
    and then get down to reusable.
    And then, there are many reusable ones with these reusable ones.
    It’s essentially a matter of sorting out a rocket after each departure.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 42
      +1
      It’s not necessary, according to the statement of Mask this year there will be a version of Block 5, which will need 24 hours to prepare for a new start
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 3 January 2018 15: 14
      +1
      For the "feed" that is opened for officials of Roscosmos - at least 100 billion rubles, a dozen years will be worked out, and then the topic will be closed, but a different leadership is already under the pretext of "hopelessly."
    3. Simargl
      Simargl 3 January 2018 15: 39
      0
      Quote: Zomanus
      Guys, for starters, work out 100% successful launches of regular ships,
      What for?! If you need 100% - lie on the ground. But this is not 100%.

      Quote: Zomanus
      It’s essentially a matter of sorting out a rocket after each departure.
      So what? Not quite all: only responsible loaded nodes. Unfasten the engine, change consumables and test. It’s not cheap to inflate a tank ... but even the final 10% savings is normal. This is only hucksters give at least 50% profit! The West is working for the future.
  18. APASUS
    APASUS 3 January 2018 14: 46
    +1
    Blackmokona
    You need to prove the math tower

    Korolev has a specialized education in profile, he studied to be a rocketer. This is his profile. What’s not suitable for you?
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 55
      0
      You demanded a math tower from Mask, not a profile one. I stated that Korolev and Von Braun did not have a math tower. You stated that I am wrong. Let's get here without lies and casuistry
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 3 January 2018 15: 04
        +3
        Quote: BlackMokona
        You demanded a math tower from Mask, not a profile one. I stated that Korolev and Von Braun did not have a math tower. You stated that I am wrong. Let's get here without lies and casuistry

        You really do not know what the Moscow Technical University, the Berlin Technical University, the Swiss Higher Technical School of Zurich, or just pretend to be?
        Although, I think you do not understand:
        In Higher technical education - higher mathematics comes in automatically!
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 3 January 2018 15: 12
          0
          The mathematics tower and higher mathematics are not equal to each other.
          If the university is such a profession of mathematics.
          Musk studied higher mathematics while receiving his diplomas. In physics and economics, higher mathematics is widely used.
          1. APASUS
            APASUS 3 January 2018 15: 31
            +1
            Quote: BlackMokona
            Musk studied higher mathematics while receiving his diplomas. In physics and economics, higher mathematics is widely used.

            What it will not undertake - it turns everything into gold!
            Well, just no words, where are Kapitsa, the Queen, Tsiolkovsky, Zander just a boy!
            That is to collect from all the grandmothers, buy up the company - this is a genius!
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 3 January 2018 15: 33
              0
              What can you do, things are going well with him.
              1. Lock36
                Lock36 3 January 2018 17: 52
                +2
                Yes, he’s great. The shareholders and creditors of his companies - usually not very. The same Tesla 10 years generate some losses - another would have been shot for a long time, and this ...
                Genius is one word! laughing
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 3 January 2018 21: 09
                  0
                  As last year's shareholders received 50% of the return on their investments
              2. APASUS
                APASUS 3 January 2018 21: 57
                0
                Quote: BlackMokona
                What can you do, things are going well with him.

                If this is great, how should it look bad on the Mask?
                Tesla investors are horrified: in the third quarter of the year, one of the most innovative companies in the world (second line in the Forbes rating) reported a loss that was a record for the entire history of an electric car manufacturer - $ 671 million. It turned out that the company was critically behind the schedule for mass production of the new Tesla Model 3, which was pre-ordered by half a million people. Following the failed financial report, Tesla Motors creator Elon Musk lost 4% of his fortune, losing $ 800 million in one day.
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 4 January 2018 09: 53
                  0
                  Investors are terrified, only 50% of the annual profit for them. Magazines such Magazines
                  1. APASUS
                    APASUS 4 January 2018 10: 59
                    0
                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    Investors are terrified, only 50% of the annual profit for them. Magazines such Magazines

                    Is your Elon Musk banning with drugs?
                    Where do you get such numbers, at least show one source of information, from your finger ...........
                    With all its fame, Tesla is not yet a profitable company. According to the latest financial report, for 9 months of 2016, the company's revenue amounted to $ 4,7 billion (an increase of 68% compared to the previous year), and a net loss of $ 553,6 million due to rising costs.

                    More difficult. Solar City was founded by Cousins ​​Mask and since 2016 has become a subsidiary of Tesla Motors. In August 2016, Solar City received an offer to buy for $ 2,6 billion - over the year, the company's capitalization fell by almost half amid intense competition. In October, The Economist estimated its capitalization at about $ 1,9 billion, and Musk’s personal stake in Solar City at about 22%.

                    The company is also unprofitable: a recent financial report shows that with revenue growth of 79%, to $ 508,9 million, Solar City ended three quarters of 2016 with a net loss of $ 758,7 million. The risks from the new policy are also similar to Tesla, especially given Mask’s statement that he plans to consolidate the companies ’operations.

                    And finally, SpaceX. For two weeks now, market discussions around the publication of The Wall Street Journal, whose analysts said they had access to the financial indicators of the company, have not ceased. According to the publication, a commercial aerospace company made a small operating profit in 2013 and 2014, and in 2015 faced a loss of $ 260 million due to an unsuccessful launch of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Because of this, the company had to reduce the number of launches in that almost a year, which led to a decrease in annual revenue by 6%.
                    1. Blackmokona
                      Blackmokona 4 January 2018 13: 35
                      0
                      https://ru.investing.com/equities/tesla-motors
                      January 1, 2016, the price of one share is 191.20 dollars
                      January 1, 2017 251.93 dollars
                      January 1, 2018 317.25 dollars.
                      1. APASUS
                        APASUS 4 January 2018 15: 04
                        0
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        January 1, 2016, the price of one share is 191.20 dollars
                        January 1, 2017 251.93 dollars
                        January 1, 2018 317.25 dollars.

                        Kindergarten!
                        Until the very last second of September 15, 2008, when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy and asked for protection from creditors, his rating was the highest.
                        Revenues in the fiscal year ending November 30, 2006 were $ 46,7 billion, net profit $ 4 billion. Assets $ 503,5 billion.

                        The exchange value is a bit like MMM, there are many indirect factors that do not reflect the realities. Just take Bitcoin, from an empty place it turned out a super profitable business
            2. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 3 January 2018 17: 37
              +5
              "What does not take - everything turns into gold!" ////

              A sharp contrast with Rogozin. He takes the gold and
              with a confident hand turns him into ...
              And nothing. A highly respected person.
              1. Lock36
                Lock36 3 January 2018 18: 39
                +3
                Quote: voyaka uh
                A sharp contrast with Rogozin.

                Oh, what a contrast with Zvi Avnon - You won’t believe it!
  19. Mentat
    Mentat 3 January 2018 14: 50
    +6
    I already wrote that the Mask was essentially put on the state post of “manager of the technological advancement of the USA in the USA”, and he himself was actively promoted as a “genius”. Meanwhile, there is nothing brilliant behind him, except for the development of state subsidies, for which, in fact, his companies exist.
    "Where he appears, money arises there." There are subsidies to advertise the incredible steepness of the United States, to be more precise.
    Here, on the site, this mold also spins. Already, the "professor" noted with a statement that at the "MegaFactory" (name-PR) super-qualified work on the assembly of batteries Israeli engineers (TM). After showing pictures of what these batteries are (an assembly of Chinese finger-type batteries), the truth disappeared somewhere.

    All this nonsense with Musk (for example, his statement about the imminent flight to Mars) resembles, IMHO, an attempt to drag into projects that are obviously unprofitable or unrealizable today due to technological reasons.
    Max is a PR projector who imitates certain achievements to create the image of an advanced state and a reason for information pressure, which we see even here on the site.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 14: 56
      +1
      How many subsidies did he receive? What amount?
  20. Mentat
    Mentat 3 January 2018 14: 57
    +5
    Quote: tchoni
    Taki OP! Ideology Mask won? But are all smart gentiles with foam at the mouth proving that the reusable first stage is profanity, sheer loss, minus the payload and, generally, freshly show-offs?

    What nafig "ideology Mask"? This idea is 100 years old at lunch (in addition, we already have leading developments that lay under the cloth because short-term profitability was lower), like all other “Mask ideas”, however. For example, the idea of ​​a transport pipe appeared in the 19th century, and repeatedly surfaced in the 20th.
    Musk makes at the expense of state subsidies certain movements that look like an attempt to drag them into unprofitable projects. This must be considered very carefully.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 3 January 2018 17: 43
      +1
      Here, too, Rusnano, led by Chubais, makes some movements at the expense of state subsidies, only, unlike Musk, this one has a solid zero at the exit.
      1. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack 4 January 2018 14: 26
        +4
        Quote: Vadim237
        ... unlike Mask, this output has a solid zero ...

        Then the mask at the exit minus wink
        Promise 20000 Tesla, and release 200 is how? belay
  21. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 3 January 2018 16: 01
    +1
    Do not scold, men, do not scream! stop I suggest: "neither yours nor ours!"

    Sometimes rocket scientists get crazy ideas. A vivid example is the OTRAG project of the German businessman Lutz Kaiser. In general, the idea was simple - to create the cheapest rocket possible and build a business on it.
    The story begins in the year 1971. Then the German government announced a competition to create a cheap new-generation rocket. Kaiser put forward a number of ideas that made it possible to achieve 10-20% savings when launching rockets compared to existing models. In particular, Kaiser proposed building an incredible rocket operating on fuel oil and nitric acid. The first stage of this rocket was to consist of 6 modules, each of which had 36 engines. The second stage consisted of one 36-motor module. However, these were only the first sketches that formed the basis of the future rocket.

    Kaiser believed that the production and operation of existing rockets was not optimized. To solve this problem, he put forward the following principles:
    Cost reduction due to technologies available on the market (for example, the manufacture of tanks from steel pipes).
    Reducing the cost of developing engines through the use of small simple designs, instead of more powerful and naturally more complex and expensive engines.
    Reducing production costs by simplifying technology and introducing the principles of mass production, used, in particular, in the automotive industry.
    Reduce operating costs through the use of low-cost fuel components.
    In 1974, Kaiser founded OTRAG (Orbital Transport und Raketen AG). He decided to enter the space transportation market on his own, and become the first space businessman in history.


    Let us dwell on a rocket. It was a bunch of unified modules, each of which was, in fact, a piece of steel pipe with a diameter of 27 mm, filled either with fuel (kerosene) or an oxidizing agent (nitric acid) under pressure up to 40 bar. The fuel supply system was displacing. During operation, the pressure in the tanks dropped from 40 to 15 bar.
    The rocket was equipped with engines with an average thrust of about 3 tf. Each engine had a diameter of 27 mm and a length of 1 m. Of a meter of length 60 cm, it was a combustion chamber, and the rest were valves and nozzles. The engine did not have such complex moving parts as pumps or gas generators. The fuel and oxidizer control system consisted of two electric valves from automobile wipers. The combustion chamber did not have active cooling systems, but was covered with an ablative layer of asbestos. Since the engines were installed motionless, flight control was carried out by adjusting the supply of fuel components to part of the engines.
    Fuel tanks and engines were arranged in such a way that each engine was simultaneously under the fuel tank and the oxidizer tank.
    Depending on the estimated payload, the rocket could be equipped with a different number of modules. In this case, the modules were added in concentric layers, that is, the surface layer of the modules was the first stage of the rocket, followed by the second. When entering the orbit, the rocket in turn dropped steps-layers. In addition to the number of modules, their length also varied.
    In total, the project provided for the commissioning of a series of launch vehicles with payloads from 200 kg to 10 tons.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 24 January 2018 20: 45
      0
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      During operation, the pressure in the tanks dropped from 40 to 15 bar.
      .
      The engine did not have such complex moving parts as pumps or gas generators.
      The question is immediately: what is the pressure in the combustion chamber? The answer is not enough!
  22. Dormidont
    Dormidont 3 January 2018 16: 31
    0
    For our Western and Middle Eastern partners and reusable missiles do not mind
  23. vlad007
    vlad007 3 January 2018 16: 33
    +2
    For fans of Elon Musk, exclusive:
    From the site "TASS-news agency of Russia" 31 March 2017 year.
    http://tass.ru/kosmos/4141245

    SpaceX for the first time in history re-launched the Falcon 9 rocket stage

    Cosmos 31 March 2017, 1: 32 update date: 31 March 2017, 7: 43 UTC + 3
    NEW YORK CITY, 31 MARCH. / Corr. Tass Ivan Pilshchikov. US company SpaceX on Thursday first reused the Falcon 9 rocket stage at launch, and was also able after that to successfully land this element of the carrier on a special platform. This was stated by leading broadcasts of the launch from the launch site at Cape Canaveral (Florida).
    The first stage of the Falcon 9 already visited space in April last year during the launch of the Dragon spaceship with cargo for the crew of the International Space Station (ISS). SpaceX was the first in the world to re-use the first stage of a rocket to deliver the device to Earth’s orbit. Shortly after the launch of the Falcon 9, company employees also managed to carry out a controlled descent of this carrier element onto an offshore platform in the Atlantic Ocean.

    “It’s incredibly proud that the SpaceX team has reached this historic milestone in space. The next goal is to restart within 24 hours,” SpaceX founder Ilon Musk wrote on his Twitter page.

    More on TASS:
    http://tass.ru/kosmos/4141245
    1. vlad007
      vlad007 3 January 2018 16: 50
      0
      Forgot to add - THE FLIGHT CONTINUED 9 (only nine, Karl) minutes!
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 3 January 2018 17: 47
        +5
        He already has five pieces of the first steps, repeatedly flew.
      2. RUSS
        RUSS 3 January 2018 19: 17
        +1
        Quote: vlad007
        Forgot to add - THE FLIGHT CONTINUED 9 (only nine, Karl) minutes!

        The first flight of the Wright brothers was 12 seconds.
      3. prosto_rgb
        prosto_rgb 5 January 2018 02: 05
        +1
        Quote: vlad007
        THE FLIGHT CONTINUED 9 (only nine, Karl) minutes!

        But how much is needed for the first stage?
        3 hours, or three days?
      4. Simargl
        Simargl 24 January 2018 20: 55
        0
        Quote: vlad007
        THE FLIGHT CONTINUED 9 (only nine, Karl) minutes!
        If this is a complete withdrawal cycle before successful separation, then it is a successful 9 minutes.
        Does the Union have much more?
        The gun barrel "lives" seconds. So what?
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 January 2018 18: 06
      +2
      "For fans of Elon Musk, exclusive:" ////

      For those who do not know English and use illiterate translations from English

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_an
      d_Falcon_Heavy_launches

      Number 43: On October 11, 2017, the five-ton EchoStar satellite was launched.
      This was the THIRD time a satellite with the 1st stage used was launched.

      Numbers 43, 45, 46 - launches with reuse of the 1st stage.

      October 11, 2017, 22:53 F9 FT
      EchoStar 105 5,200 kg
      (11,500 lb) GTO
      Third time a booster was reused
    3. parathyron
      parathyron 3 January 2018 20: 23
      0
      “It’s not necessary, according to the statement of Mask this year there will be a version of Block 5, which will need 24 hours to prepare for a new start”
      Karish: "EMNIP - then one step was sent into space a day after her return-- that is, is it clear what is meant or decrypted?"
      A problem! Somehow it’s all unlikely, maybe again they are cunning, as with the moon?
  24. Mentat
    Mentat 3 January 2018 18: 21
    +2
    Quote: BlackMokona
    How many subsidies did he receive? What amount?

    An urgent full-time singer of US technical superiority drew on the VO site.
    I perfectly remember your praises of the mighty US railgun weapons. As well as your shameless lie about his alleged readiness. How inappropriately the program was canceled (completely ready!), Right?
    You are all so aware of success, but here - oh! past all the information flew straight.
    "Robert Murray, an outspoken Donald Trump supporter and the CEO of the Murray Energy Corporation - America's largest coalmining company - went after Musk on CNBC's Squawk Box on Monday and called Tesla “a fraud”.
    "Musk's gotten $ 2bn from the taxpayer, has not made a penny yet in cashflow, ”Murray continued. “Here again: it's subsidies. ””
    (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/
    11 / elon-musk-robert-murray-coal-green-subsidies)
    "Elon Musk didn't become a billionaire without brass, and this week he floated one of his most outrageous bets: an offer by his taxpayer-subsidized Tesla Motors to buy his taxpayer-subsidized SolarCity. "Tesla shareholders and Wall Street analysts are howling, but didn't they always know they were buying a business model that depended on the kindness of politicians?" (https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musks-subsidy-
    aggregation-1466638430)
    “Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $ 4.9 billion in government subsidies” (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-su
    bsidies-20150531-story.html # page = 1)
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 January 2018 18: 35
      +3
      "CEO of the Murray Energy Corporation - America's largest coalmining company" ///

      Well, yes the director of America’s largest COAL company, for which the electric revolution
      The mask - the death of his industry and his own profits, ran into him. smile
      1. Lock36
        Lock36 3 January 2018 18: 47
        +4
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Well, yes the director of America’s largest COAL company, for which the electric revolution
        The mask - the death of his industry and his own profits, ran into him. smile

        Did they even go to school? Where did you get such a game from your head?
        How is the coal industry (even coal generation) connected and the Mask business?
        Batteries, if you do not know, need to be charged. Even when there is no sun and the panels do not work.
        Can modern cars ride on coal? Or Max Teslami plans to stoke blast furnaces?
        Well, at least you think a little, and do not immediately start writing.
        1. sabotage
          sabotage 3 January 2018 21: 01
          +4
          Offhand. Tesla will install industrial Powerpack batteries to store electricity generated by a hybrid solar-wind farm in Australia.
          https://hightech.fm/2017/10/23/worlds-first-solar
          -wind

          This news at the coal magnate should cause to set fire to a chair. So "not everything is so simple"
          1. KaPToC
            KaPToC 3 January 2018 23: 15
            0
            Quote: sabotage
            Offhand. Tesla will install Powerpack industrial batteries

            it’s even scary to ask how much they cost
            Quote: sabotage
            So "not everything is so simple"
            1. sabotage
              sabotage 4 January 2018 00: 27
              +1
              And where does it count how much? That is, it has become free to build and operate pumped storage power plants? Has it become free to sell all generation?

              There is no need to approach this highly complex industry in such a collective way. It is only in Russia that you can steal a power plant and sell electricity at prices that you set yourself through all kinds of deputies and other dishonorable people. In other places there is a market and a struggle for the consumer. (but we don’t want to, but it will be like in Ukraine)
            2. dubovitskiy.1947
              dubovitskiy.1947 4 January 2018 01: 01
              +1
              Quote: KaPToC
              Quote: sabotage
              Offhand. Tesla will install Powerpack industrial batteries

              it’s even scary to ask how much they cost
              Quote: sabotage
              So "not everything is so simple"

              Nothing is impossible. You can even calculate how much this battery costs. We have 129 megawatts of installed power.
              We have a capacity of one Chinese “finger” -3,4 ampere hours at a voltage of 3, 7 volts. Multiply. 3,4 * 3,7 = 12,58 watts per hour. Let's take the power given in one hour of operation. Divide 129 million watts by 12,58
              129 million watt hours / 000 = 000 12,58 10 pieces of fingers.
              I don’t know the price in the USA, according to the Russian price list, in Penza, it’s about 400 rubles apiece. It turns out something about
              4 101 million rubles. Something seems to me, this is a lot. The Husky submarine will cost a little less.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 4 January 2018 09: 52
                0
                Within the framework of the agreement, the Severodvinsk nuclear submarine of Project 885 Yasen will cost the Ministry of Defense 47 billion rubles, and the submarines Yuri Dolgoruky and Alexander Nevsky of the 955 Borey project 23,2 billion rubles each.
                At the rate of 2011.

                Well, you forget about mega wholesale for such bulk deliveries
                1. dubovitskiy.1947
                  dubovitskiy.1947 4 January 2018 18: 51
                  0
                  Quote: BlackMokona
                  Within the framework of the agreement, the Severodvinsk nuclear submarine of Project 885 Yasen will cost the Ministry of Defense 47 billion rubles, and the submarines Yuri Dolgoruky and Alexander Nevsky of the 955 Borey project 23,2 billion rubles each.
                  At the rate of 2011.

                  Well, you forget about mega wholesale for such bulk deliveries

                  You forget the manufacturer’s economic interest. He will not sell below cost, even out of thoughts about fighting competitors.
                  You did not consider the main thing. I deliberately did not write about it. The calculation is made on the basis of the exhaustion of the energy of the megabyte in one hour. Look first, I'm not lying. Then what to do with these billions? to look and wait for some time, perhaps a day, to charge? And ferment food in the refrigerator and count losses?
              2. KaPToC
                KaPToC 4 January 2018 23: 18
                0
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                We have the capacity of one Chinese "finger" -3,4 ampere hours

                You overestimated the capacity of the "finger", and by orders of magnitude.
                1. Simargl
                  Simargl 24 January 2018 21: 20
                  0
                  Quote: KaPToC
                  You overestimated the capacity of the "finger", and by orders of magnitude.
                  Well, why? So, I just looked at the laptop battery - 4,4 Ah.
                  Last month, Tesla signed a contract with wind turbine manufacturer Vestas to install Powerpack batteries for energy storage in Australia.
                  .
                  The station will be supplemented with 15MW of solar power and 4 MW • h batteries.
                  We consider: the capacity of the elements is 4 / 000 = 000 A.ch. With a capacity of 3,7Ah per cell, it is 1081081 units, at a price of 5 r / unit - 216216 million rubles (rounded up), or 100 million at a price of 22 r per unit. If you consider that Musk guessed for Tesla to order block batteries, and not to force finger batteries ...
                  $ 1500 per kW is a normal price.
                  1. KaPToC
                    KaPToC 25 January 2018 13: 48
                    0
                    Quote: Simargl
                    Well, why? So, I just looked at the laptop battery - 4,4 Ah.

                    Where is the laptop battery, and where is the palm? The difference in capacity is three orders of magnitude, hence all your reasoning sharply rises in proportion.
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 21: 25
      0
      The reasons for the closure of the railgun were published; it was not possible to obtain the required performance characteristics in the project time frame. Rate of fire too low.
      And so it is issued 4,9 billion. As a result, two corporations appeared with a total value of 70 billion. Good exhaust. I'm not saying that the Dragon flew the money to the ISS a dozen times, put the satellite into orbit, the X-37B, etc. That is, 4,9 billion could go to pay for ULA services, with $ 210 million per start-up excluding truck prices
      1. dubovitskiy.1947
        dubovitskiy.1947 4 January 2018 01: 10
        +1
        Quote: BlackMokona
        The reasons for the closure of the railgun were published; it was not possible to obtain the required performance characteristics in the project time frame. Rate of fire too low.
        And so it is issued 4,9 billion. As a result, two corporations appeared with a total value of 70 billion. Good exhaust. I'm not saying that the Dragon flew the money to the ISS a dozen times, put the satellite into orbit, the X-37B, etc. That is, 4,9 billion could go to pay for ULA services, with $ 210 million per start-up excluding truck prices

        Yes, it's not about the rate of fire. The ability to hit a target, mainly a moving one, and from a moving object — an airplane, a steamer, or from somewhere else. Moreover, it is impossible to shoot beyond the horizon - at sea the horizon = 20 kilometers. With a worrying surface, mind you. Not a guided projectile. Not having a combat charge. Therefore, a miss by 0,1 meter is already a final miss. Irreversible miss.
        Here, another thing is to cut the loot and try to drag us into these costs. When cunningness did not come out, they abandoned it themselves.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 4 January 2018 09: 46
          0
          Official reasons published, claims to accuracy were not there
  25. Mentat
    Mentat 3 January 2018 18: 40
    0
    Quote: Vadim237
    Here, too, Rusnano, led by Chubais, makes some movements at the expense of state subsidies, only, unlike Musk, this one has a solid zero at the exit.

    Oh really? Umm, an adult, and you know what Chubais is? The fact that you are not aware of the behind-the-scenes movements on this character, obviously, none of the “mere mortals” knows this, but did you miss any well-known things?

    Chubais is a product of Yale and the American instructors from the 90s. Why didn’t it follow the path of Khodorkovsky? If you're interested, try to figure it out.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 3 January 2018 19: 46
      +1
      Yes nafig I need him - to be interested in yet.
  26. Mentat
    Mentat 3 January 2018 18: 51
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "CEO of the Murray Energy Corporation - America's largest coalmining company" ///

    Well, yes the director of America’s largest COAL company, for which the electric revolution
    The mask - the death of his industry and his own profits, ran into him. smile

    You would broaden your horizons. It is not clear for what reasons, but you are not aware of basic things. Today, electricity is produced in overwhelming volume due to the burning of fossil fuels.
    So the "electric revolution Mask" is fed exactly from the thermal power plants burning the same coal (as well as fuel oil and gas).
    The electric revolution does not come because some kid jumped out and shouted: “And let's all cars be electric !!” And he bluntly proclaimed a fierce death with his mighty boyish cry to all the oil, coal and gas magnates (they already can’t eat now!) - the revolution comes in connection with the upcoming breakthrough in the methods of mass generation of electricity.
    And your ideas about the revolutions, masks, clowns on which these masks are stained, and the surrounding reality need, IMHO, to expand.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 3 January 2018 19: 49
      0
      Then Lockheed Martin vomits and marks that by 2023 he will create a working model of a thermonuclear reactor - probably Mask is waiting for this.
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 21: 17
      0
      Musk is still actively producing and selling solar panels.
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 January 2018 22: 57
      0
      "Electric revolution Mask" eats exactly from thermal power plants /////

      Of course not. Musk plans to generate electricity by solar panels and
      accumulate it in batteries. Both that, and that - own production.
      I am always glad to expand your horizons. smile
      1. KaPToC
        KaPToC 3 January 2018 23: 17
        +1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        I am always glad to expand your horizons.

        Broaden your horizons on the question of what resources are spent on the production of these solar panels and how much thousands years they will pay for themselves.
        1. ZVO
          ZVO 4 January 2018 15: 46
          +1
          Quote: KaPToC
          Quote: voyaka uh
          I am always glad to expand your horizons.

          Broaden your horizons on the question of what resources are spent on the production of these solar panels and how much thousands years they will pay for themselves.


          In Germany, the payback period is 10 years, thanks to the excessive "return sale" and rebates from the state.
          In Nevada, Egypt - a couple of years.
          In Sochi - about 20 years.
          In Saratov, it’s 50-60 years old.
          In Novy Urengoy - never
          1. dubovitskiy.1947
            dubovitskiy.1947 4 January 2018 18: 40
            0
            Quote: ZVO
            Quote: KaPToC
            Quote: voyaka uh
            I am always glad to expand your horizons.

            Broaden your horizons on the question of what resources are spent on the production of these solar panels and how much thousands years they will pay for themselves.


            In Germany, the payback period is 10 years, thanks to the excessive "return sale" and rebates from the state.
            In Nevada, Egypt - a couple of years.
            In Sochi - about 20 years.
            In Saratov, it’s 50-60 years old.
            In Novy Urengoy - never

            Read and stop pounding with spoons. http://aurora.network/forum/topic/55864-solnechny

            https://bezgin.su/articles/140-jenergetika/55864-
            solnechnye-jel-fy-kalifornii-chast-2-krivaja-utki


            https://aftershock.news/?q=node/585618&full

            e-jel-fy-kalifornii-chast-2-krivaja-utki
  27. rocket757
    rocket757 3 January 2018 19: 31
    +4
    Not economical. Until they invent new engines, fuel or finally open up new principles, they will not be able to completely replace disposable rockets.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 4 January 2018 01: 32
      +1
      1st stage - 70-75% of the cost of the entire rocket. Reuse can be 3-4 times.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 4 January 2018 01: 46
        +3
        That's when they use it three four times, they will calculate the costs of troubleshooting and replacing the bent nodes, and even the costs of putting the payload into orbit, then we'll talk ... for now, there can only be! Or maybe not!
        Denyushka, expenses and other bookkeeping she will show everything !!!
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 4 January 2018 09: 47
          0
          Used BU 5 times, according to SpaceX, the price is much lower than 50% of the new price.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 4 January 2018 10: 54
            +3
            There is a lot of fog in this business!
            If economically viable, the story will continue, if not 2 - 3 years and crawl away quietly. We will see the statistics.
            I’ll immediately point out that I’m not against progress and for the Yankees, I don’t doubt how many engines of progress I am, just a skeptic and can count.
            I want to remind you, there is such a thing - We need a victory, we will not stand for the price! - this also happens, here only time and accounting can put an end to Y.
      2. dubovitskiy.1947
        dubovitskiy.1947 4 January 2018 18: 37
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        1st stage - 70-75% of the cost of the entire rocket. Reuse can be 3-4 times.

        And why are you dishonoring your idol? Why are you so offended by him?
        He claims to be at least 100 each and with a break in preparation after 24 hours.
  28. TOR2
    TOR2 3 January 2018 21: 11
    0
    According to the general designer, this is a fully reusable, single-stage launch vehicle for vertical take-off and landing of the Korona. The project to create it was frozen in 2012, and now resumed
    Tomorrow behind the puddle, the return latrine will be launched, we will also get involved in a similar race. It would be nice to look at our own developments ruined by various kinds of figures who do not know how to look to the future. But developing the initially purely military project "Spiral", Lozino-Lozinsky repeatedly noted that this project has a civil future.

    The role of the first stage is played by a transport aircraft and there is no need to arrange a circus with a return stage. In addition, how to determine the suitability of the engine for re-flight? Obviously not visual. The costs of partial disassembly and assembly of the engine, the replacement of some parts + fuel to return the stage. For some reason, I do not believe in the profitability of this idea.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 3 January 2018 21: 18
      0
      The USA has a Pegasus air launch vehicle, the most expensive kg in orbit, Falcon-9, even at a one-time price, the cheapest kg in orbit
      1. TOR2
        TOR2 3 January 2018 21: 43
        0
        according to the deputy. chief designer of the NGO "Lightning"
        https://youtu.be/L-76nBuxl9c?t=2118
        1. sabotage
          sabotage 3 January 2018 23: 22
          0
          Quote: TOR2
          according to the deputy. chief designer of the NGO "Lightning"
          https://youtu.be/L-76nBuxl9c?t=2118

          Yes, he fumbles nothing in the economy. He is a constructor!
  29. Mentat
    Mentat 3 January 2018 22: 54
    +2
    Quote: sabotage
    Offhand. Tesla will install industrial Powerpack batteries to store electricity generated by a hybrid solar-wind farm in Australia.
    https://hightech.fm/2017/10/23/worlds-first-solar
    -wind

    This news at the coal magnate should cause to set fire to a chair. So "not everything is so simple"

    Don't be so naive and talkative about showmen. Despite all the blunders surrounding Australia's solar energy, Australia produces up to 85% of its electricity by burning coal, the rest by burning gas and oil derivatives, and only a few percent come from renewable sources of energy. According to experts in Australia, the situation will be such for the next 40 years.
    So the next PR show from Mask with Australian super-batteries can scare coal oligarchs only with death from hiccups from wild laughter.
    In the global power generation, everything is absolutely unique at the moment. However, there are very serious glimpses and positive signals from the ITER team, therefore, and not because some mask-figure said something there, everyone began to feverishly prepare for potential "Shot" of thermonuclear fusion and the corresponding reduction in the cost and growth of electricity generation in the countries-owners of technology.
    1. sabotage
      sabotage 4 January 2018 00: 19
      +1
      Well, if I were a coal oligarch, I would have put off bricks to reduce sales of every ton of coal. Because the market is common and its reduction is that of gas, that the sun does not bear dough. And estimates of specialists can be sent to the scrap. Its accuracy is 0 point zero.

      And we are moving away from the topic: can statements of a direct competitor in the energy market be considered objective or should they be classified as speculative, given that all offices are traded on exchanges and pouring mud on each other has obvious benefits for someone?
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 4 January 2018 01: 53
        +3
        Solar power is expensive and there is no super duper battery yet. This possible future, everything depends on new technologies and scientists.
        We will see!
  30. MadCat
    MadCat 4 January 2018 01: 47
    +1
    The bureaucrats are such bureaucrats, until the roasted cock in the ass does not bite. It was no longer a laughing matter with Rogozin trampolines when orders for commercial launches ceased to come thanks to the Mask.
  31. Peter Ivanov
    Peter Ivanov 4 January 2018 03: 01
    0
    So on the moon at least three should remain from Dunno, Donut and the rest? Or am I beguiled?
  32. ZVO
    ZVO 4 January 2018 15: 38
    +1
    dubovitskiy.1947At the risk of ruining them there, since the descent can only begin when landing on these two points is possible.


    Learn the materiel - amers for shuttles had several dozens of reserve sites around the world for each turn.
    and in africa. and in europe. and in Australia, with Japan.
    Learn the abbreviations TAL, AOA, and others.
    1. dubovitskiy.1947
      dubovitskiy.1947 4 January 2018 18: 32
      0
      Quote: ZVO
      dubovitskiy.1947At the risk of ruining them there, since the descent can only begin when landing on these two points is possible.


      Learn the materiel - amers for shuttles had several dozens of reserve sites around the world for each turn.
      and in africa. and in europe. and in Australia, with Japan.
      Learn the abbreviations TAL, AOA, and others.

      While it has never been used, at least in unmanned mode, it is not. Only two were used from something.
      1. ZVO
        ZVO 4 January 2018 21: 10
        +1
        Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
        Quote: ZVO
        dubovitskiy.1947At the risk of ruining them there, since the descent can only begin when landing on these two points is possible.


        Learn the materiel - amers for shuttles had several dozens of reserve sites around the world for each turn.
        and in africa. and in europe. and in Australia, with Japan.
        Learn the abbreviations TAL, AOA, and others.

        While it has never been used, at least in unmanned mode, it is not. Only two were used from something.


        And why were our cosmonauts let down only in the Soviet Union?
        Asked yourself that question?
        Do you have logic like that?
        Do you even understand what is happening in the world and why?
        Causation is there?

        Why use backup bands if everything is working properly?
        Just to show someone?
        If the use of reserve strips creates a bunch of hemorrhoids in the form of - American property in a foreign territory, medical care by unskilled (in the field of cosmedicine) personnel. unskilled firefighters ...
        Lack of guaranteed safety of the ship and astronauts.

        And yes. unmanned shuttle maybe. just hang the chassis toggle switch on the radio altimeter - and it will quietly sit on wheels where necessary.
        If you don’t hang, it will sit on the bottom.
        1. dubovitskiy.1947
          dubovitskiy.1947 5 January 2018 14: 19
          0
          Quote: ZVO
          Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
          Quote: ZVO
          dubovitskiy.1947At the risk of ruining them there, since the descent can only begin when landing on these two points is possible.


          Learn the materiel - amers for shuttles had several dozens of reserve sites around the world for each turn.
          and in africa. and in europe. and in Australia, with Japan.
          Learn the abbreviations TAL, AOA, and others.

          While it has never been used, at least in unmanned mode, it is not. Only two were used from something.


          And why were our cosmonauts let down only in the Soviet Union?
          Asked yourself that question?
          Do you have logic like that?
          Do you even understand what is happening in the world and why?
          Causation is there?

          Why use backup bands if everything is working properly?
          Just to show someone?
          If the use of reserve strips creates a bunch of hemorrhoids in the form of - American property in a foreign territory, medical care by unskilled (in the field of cosmedicine) personnel. unskilled firefighters ...
          Lack of guaranteed safety of the ship and astronauts.

          And yes. unmanned shuttle maybe. just hang the chassis toggle switch on the radio altimeter - and it will quietly sit on wheels where necessary.
          If you don’t hang, it will sit on the bottom.

          You never sat in the cockpit.
          There is not a single identical band, there is not a single well-flown crew of a drive station, or a control center working on receiving this apparatus. Training at least not with the shuttle itself, but with an imitation of the most similar object.
          The theory is good only on the couch. To convince the designer with a quarter-century experience that you can use the emergency and emergency lane, you will not be able to do without training.
          Hang on you a billion dollar responsibility for the results - look at your enthusiasm. How your instructions and instructions on landing will fall from your hands. And you are feverishly, having lost your memory and feelings, flipping through in search of the necessary section. These things need to be done without thinking about how to assemble-disassemble the Kalashnikov assault rifle. Only an absolute amateur can write about the toggle switch, which will do everything correctly for the ground service and the crew.
          1. dubovitskiy.1947
            dubovitskiy.1947 5 January 2018 14: 33
            0
            Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
            .. I WILL CONTINUE, the adjustment no longer passes .....
            You even lack the understanding that an emergency landing is taking place, and the depth of emergency damage can be any. Including the complete loss of automatic and manual control algorithms. In such a situation, a completely different preparation is needed. orders of magnitude superior to the training of a regular full-time MCC.
            The shuttle with its bearing wings has a landing speed several times greater than the airplane. Not knowing about it and writing nonsense here is to have no head.
          2. ZVO
            ZVO 5 January 2018 18: 56
            0
            Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
            Only an absolute amateur can write about the toggle switch, which will do everything correctly for the ground service and the crew.

            You wrote a lot of clever words - but you did not understand one.

            The shuttle lands from the orbit to the touch of the strip - fully automatically.
            The role of the pilots is only to snap the landing gear toggle switch.
            It is programmed to all backup bands.
            He will do everything himself.

            Go and find this literature. Find the shuttle landing rollers.
            Maybe then learn to read. and not just write about MCCs and flaccidity ...
            1. karish
              karish 5 January 2018 19: 02
              +1
              Quote: ZVO
              The shuttle lands from the orbit to the touch of the strip - fully automatically.
              The role of the pilots is only to snap the landing gear toggle switch.
              It is programmed to all backup bands.
              He will do everything himself.
              Go and find this literature. Find the shuttle landing rollers.

              it’s quite simply described here
              https://vakhnenko.livejournal.com/240336.html
            2. dubovitskiy.1947
              dubovitskiy.1947 5 January 2018 20: 10
              0
              Quote: ZVO
              Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
              Only an absolute amateur can write about the toggle switch, which will do everything correctly for the ground service and the crew.

              You wrote a lot of clever words - but you did not understand one.

              The shuttle lands from the orbit to the touch of the strip - fully automatically.
              The role of the pilots is only to snap the landing gear toggle switch.
              It is programmed to all backup bands.
              He will do everything himself.

              Go and find this literature. Find the shuttle landing rollers.
              Maybe then learn to read. and not just write about MCCs and flaccidity ...

              Return to the beginning of the conversation. After all, it was a question of emergency descent, which can happen at any time. You don’t understand that there can be any accident, including with the destruction of the automatic control algorithm?
              Start of conversation - only two places of the Shuttle landing. Which is not enough.
              1. karish
                karish 5 January 2018 20: 14
                +1
                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                After all, it was a question of emergency descent, which can happen at any time. You don’t understand that there can be any accident, including with the destruction of the automatic control algorithm?

                those, and with Buran it could not happen a priori?

                Quote: dubovitskiy.1947
                Start of conversation - only two places of the Shuttle landing. Which is not enough.

                Why not enough?
                And how many places were there for the landing of Buran? If you are in the subject, can list?
  33. The comment was deleted.
  34. Mentat
    Mentat 4 January 2018 19: 48
    0
    Quote: sabotage
    And we are moving away from the topic: is it possible to consider statements of a direct competitor in the energy market

    Curiously, do you really seriously believe that Musk is a “direct competitor in the energy market” for a coal billionaire or a bargain for a given one? However, judging by some statements, the graduation class is yet to come, this somewhat softens the impression.
  35. garius
    garius 4 January 2018 22: 53
    0
    Jews, as a matter of fact, and we are Ukrainians. love everything american.
    But on the topic there are a lot of questions.
    1. Otkudova does Mask have technologies that many and the best minds of the planet have been working on for many years? Answer. Nasa handed him his achievements in the field of space. (The USA had no worse developments in this matter than the USSR). Just put everything on the "commercial track"
    2. Yes, Mask rockets fly, and I fly perfectly with commercial cargo. (item # 1)
    3. Send a couple of Americans or of Jewish origin (like "Profesor") on the ships of the Mask)))
    4. Stupidly my opinion. The first real spacecraft will be built in orbit and, at least, on "plasma" technologies.
  36. nemoXX
    nemoXX 10 January 2018 12: 42
    0
    Typically for Russia!
    As soon as a scientific and technological breakthrough is planned in the West, an organized pouring of mud on it and relishing of failures, real and fictional, begins.
    And then, with a lag - attempts to "catch up and overtake" ...
  37. Dimmedroll
    Dimmedroll 12 January 2018 18: 26
    0
    Ahah, lit up for spending.