Military Review

A rocket capable of "destroying" the space industry of Russia

129
Falcon 9 is a two-stage booster of the middle and heavy class, developed by the American company SpaceX.


At the beginning of the 21 century, NASA’s National Aerospace Agency was in a difficult position. The old strategy, when this office was in charge of almost all the space, was no longer working. The space shuttle "Space Shuttle" is already obsolete, and the crash of "Columbia" in 2003, killed not only the crew, but the entire program. As a result, the Russian Soyuz rockets became the only way to send their astronauts into space.

Over time, private companies became involved in the space race, among which SpaceX became the leader. Having proposed breakthrough technologies, in particular, on the return of the first stage of the rocket to the earth and its secondary use, the company Ilona Mask began a rapid seizure of the space launch market.

Having launched 18 launch vehicles in 2017, the American company overtook the leader in this field - Russia.

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vard
    Vard 10 January 2018 10: 28
    +9
    So far, they have companioned the military ... The conclusions of the commission ... Formal attitude to work ... another couple of such launches and they just go broke on insurance ...
    1. Igar
      10 January 2018 10: 51
      17
      whether our business, yes? launch "like clockwork"
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 10 January 2018 21: 59
        +4
        Something "clockwork", something "Vaseline" ...
      2. Slavors Gart
        Slavors Gart 11 January 2018 13: 06
        0
        Of course, it’s easier and easier to shoot in wood - as usual ....
    2. _TANKIST_
      _TANKIST_ 10 January 2018 11: 07
      11
      .... so far our not one, but several satellites and rockets for 2017 have been killed ....
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 10 January 2018 21: 59
        +2
        What matters is not quantity, but the quality and price of lost satellites. wink Musk is out of competition.
        1. Anatoly R
          Anatoly R 11 January 2018 04: 28
          +8
          Cannonball - What a competition there! Americans are trying to creep Russia out, including throwing huge amounts of money on propaganda and technical projects for their alleged superiority. And where is this superiority? They flew to the moon with the help of Kubrick on plywood saturn 5. What can only be believed in the superiority of cheeky lies. What other proof of the weakness of US technology is needed? The Chinese, with their lunar rover, hoped to find a landing site for amerskie lunar and did not find ANYTHING !!!!!
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 11 January 2018 08: 24
            +1
            Quote: Anatoly R
            They flew to the moon with the help of Kubrick on plywood saturn 5.

            Americans have always been masters of fake. Is there any evidence that Elon Mask is also a fake ????
          2. Cannonball
            Cannonball 11 January 2018 20: 42
            +9
            Competition, in this case, in the amount of dollars sent to the bottom of the ocean instead of space orbit.
            As much as we would like the other, but the Americans also have worthy achievements in the field of space exploration, especially far-off.
            Were the Americans on the moon? Yes they were. There are modern photographs of the moon with traces left by American astronauts. If they were not there, then who left these traces?


            As for the Chinese, they didn’t sit there, the distance and Apollo landing sites were too great, and therefore they did not see
            1. Igor_1
              Igor_1 15 January 2018 09: 46
              +3
              Whether or not Americans were on the moon is a matter of faith in the greatness of America, because there is no 100% evidence of either one ...
              1. Cannonball
                Cannonball 15 January 2018 22: 05
                +1
                Already crocodile
                Choked Thomas:
                From the mouth of the beast
                Head sticks out.
                To shore
                The wind carries the words:
                “Wrong ...”
                I don’t ...
                Alligator sighed
                And, full,
                Dived into the green water.
                Underpants and shirt
                Lying in the sand.
                No one is swimming
                On the dangerous river.
              2. ivankursk46
                ivankursk46 18 January 2018 01: 18
                +1
                Quote: Igor_1
                Whether or not Americans were on the moon is a matter of faith in the greatness of America, because there is no 100% evidence of either one or the other.


                Well, yes, as one good person said, if you want to check the adequacy of a person - ask about landing on the moon)
            2. A B B A
              A B B A 18 January 2018 22: 05
              +1
              Cannonball, here you write "Were there Americans on the moon? Yes, they were. There are modern photographs of the moon with traces left by American astronauts. If they were not there, then who left these traces?"
              I answered myself. "Modern photographs of the moon" with traces left by amers. How can they be modern if they haven’t flown further than the ISS for 20 years, and even then not themselves. This time. Traces left supposedly then would have long been erased even in the absence of atmosphere. So modern footprints are fake. And the most important thing. If there is technology (not plywood!) - why not fly now, huh? They don’t have a damn and didn’t! We had to stretch ourselves out of our last strength (backlog then in space they were stable) and fart earlier than ours to create noise. At least be the first! And then Gagarin the first is ours, the girl the first is ours, the companion the first is ours. This greatly messed them up. Well, they farted. As it now turns out - crap at the same time ...
              1. Cannonball
                Cannonball 19 January 2018 19: 42
                +1
                Neighing. laughing
                If only I had not been dishonored by my dullness in the fields of physics, astronomy and cosmonautics.
                Photographs of the traces of expeditions on the moon were taken by the American AMS Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), launched in 2009.

                On July 17, 2009, before the 40th anniversary of the first moon landing, photographs taken by Orbiter were published. For the future, shooting of other memorable places of the Moon is planned, for example, the sites of the Lunokhods.

                September 6, 2011 NASA presented more detailed images of manned expedition sites made by LRO, for which the probe was transferred to a lower orbit above the lunar surface.

                Photos of the landing sites are on Wikipedia on the LRO page.
              2. Berkut-UA
                Berkut-UA 19 January 2018 22: 18
                0
                Traces left supposedly then would have long been erased even in the absence of atmosphere. So modern footprints are fake.


                And why did those traces disappear? Someone rubbed them with an elastic band?
                But I don’t quite believe that PEOPLE were there. The machine could be controlled remotely (Lunokhods - as an example)
                But if you landed the lander and ride from parking to parking ... and to show - those same tracks and flags ... maybe I will believe ... about people
                1. Cannonball
                  Cannonball 20 January 2018 09: 18
                  0
                  Americans, unlike ours at that time, did not yet know how to remotely control "cars" on the moon. And their "cars" were not adapted for this.
              3. Scalpel
                Scalpel 15 February 2018 23: 42
                0
                , into space just so that it is - this is mania. Normal people always have a goal. After the Union-Apollo and before the flight of the first Shuttle, the Americans also had a break in the manned space program and nothing fell apart. At the same time, they launched several important automatic missions to Mars, Venus and other planets of the solar system.
            3. Indifferent
              Indifferent 30 January 2018 15: 55
              0
              All the "traces" of the US stay on the moon were made by Photoshop. Read carefully all articles and photos on this topic! 6 accident-free launches with landings (except for the 13th, and even there a fake with an oxygen cylinder) are impossible according to probability theory with the reliability level of the devices there far below 100%. Really in the "school" did not teach the theory of probability?
            4. Red_Hamer
              Red_Hamer 10 March 2018 05: 05
              0
              There is modern photos of the moon with traces
              Photography, and even modern, is of course "strong evidence"! lol "We are all gentlemen here, and in our game of cards, it’s customary to take our word for it! And then, I got so fucked up!"
    3. Do not care
      Do not care 10 January 2018 16: 39
      +6
      Quote: Vard
      So far, they have companioned the military ... The conclusions of the commission ... Formal attitude to work ... another couple of such launches and they just go broke on insurance ...


      The loss of the Zuma satellite is so far only rumors based on the fact that no official information from the owner of the satellite followed the launch.

      SpaceX, in turn, issued an official statement that the Falcon 9 worked properly and without comment
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 10 January 2018 22: 01
        0
        Yeah, but the State Department says that the United States is the beacon of democracy.
        1. misti1973
          misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 18
          +1
          Are there any other applicants?
          1. Cannonball
            Cannonball 11 January 2018 22: 46
            +2
            North Korea ))
      2. barsik92090
        barsik92090 11 January 2018 01: 04
        +2
        The normal reaction of the offenders to cover the ass, like on the Titanic, is all about bad rivets.
      3. dustycat
        dustycat 11 January 2018 14: 35
        +2
        So the Union also worked properly without comment.
    4. Abel
      Abel 10 January 2018 21: 53
      0
      And we ditched. So what?
  2. Azim77
    Azim77 10 January 2018 10: 44
    +8

    As a result, the Soyuz rockets became the only way to send their astronauts into space.
    ..
    Having launched 18 launch vehicles in 2017, the American company overtook the leader in this field - Russia.

    And how many launches with astronauts were there? Or are we missing something?
    1. Vard
      Vard 10 January 2018 10: 52
      0
      You will see this ... A flaming rocket fell blazingly ... In general, in my opinion, everyone has already refused a bunch of engines ...
    2. Cannonball
      Cannonball 10 January 2018 22: 03
      0
      On the "Unions" or on the Falcon 9?
      On the "Unions" - a lot, on Falcon 9 - not a single one.
    3. Oleg666
      Oleg666 11 January 2018 06: 31
      0
      Why they will now launch the PROTEIN AND THE ARROW in the rye I can’t have a useful efficiency for them to launch zero
    4. ivankursk46
      ivankursk46 18 January 2018 01: 22
      +2
      And how many launches with astronauts were there? Or are we missing something?

      Don’t rush, everything is still ahead)
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 18 January 2018 19: 29
        +1
        Nasruddin says that he once argued with the emir of Bukhara that he would teach his donkey theology in such a way that the donkey would know him no worse than the emir himself. It takes a purse of gold and twenty years of time. If he does not fulfill the conditions of the dispute - a head from his shoulders. Nasruddin is not afraid of imminent execution: “After all, in twenty years,” he says, “one of the three of us will surely die - either the emir, or the donkey, or me. And then go figure it out who knew theology better! ”
  3. ImPerts
    ImPerts 10 January 2018 11: 14
    +4
    They could, well, they could.
    Our need to decide on the concept, and not shy away from side to side.
    Or is it such a plan to hide real plans. It is not profitable for Roskosmos and the state to lose a profitable piece.
    I remember about the shale gas and oil also predicted a collapse of everything and everyone. Did not happen.
    1. tforik
      tforik 10 January 2018 11: 58
      +5
      But didn’t the collapse happen? Didn't oil drop 2-3 times? Hasn't the ruble collapsed 2 times?
      1. ImPerts
        ImPerts 10 January 2018 12: 48
        +6
        Oil became at 10 dollars per barrel?
        Ruble stepped over 100 rub mark?
        Have you heard about such forecasts?
        I remember even better:
        1. tforik
          tforik 10 January 2018 19: 26
          +4
          What does 10 have to do with it? from $ 140 to $ 40 / barrel, this is already a collapse. And the fall of the ruble is directly related to this. 2 times, (with jumps even more) is it not a collapse of the ruble? What does it have to do with 100 rubles or 1000 rubles?))
          And Saakashvili is that clown, here I agree with you))
          1. ImPerts
            ImPerts 10 January 2018 23: 13
            +2
            How to look at all this.
            The Americans believed that the atomic charge of the USSR could be created in 1951 or 1952 years.
            Saakashvili wanted to supply food to us in August 2015.
            Many theoretical political consultants predicted mass rallies.
            And?
            I read a lot about how shale oil, shale gas will replace everything and raska end.
            It happened?
            There are problems. Did they lead to problems?
            We survived the default 1998.
            Let it be technical (I think you understand the difference), but default.
            Live?
            We live.
            And you do not get sick.
        2. tforik
          tforik 10 January 2018 19: 52
          +1
          By the way, I personally remember Putin, he believed that oil would not fall below 70 below, and then when it fell below, he said that the faster it would bounce))) Then these statements were erased somewhere)
          Then 70 per barrel seemed a disaster)
          1. ImPerts
            ImPerts 10 January 2018 23: 15
            +3
            Quote: tforik
            by the way I personally remember Putin, he considered

            I remember Gorbachev.
            If we talk about shale oil, shale gas.
            The conversation about the fall of the crust began with 2011, they said the mattresses began to extract oil and gas from shale and now the end will come for autoparking.
            Has arrived?
      2. Ilya_Nsk
        Ilya_Nsk 11 January 2018 05: 40
        +2
        Oil has fallen, but not because of the shale. There are a lot of factors, Iran has joined, etc.
        Let the Falcons fly, maybe when they take the person, well, now. The hangar was flying too. Return, throttling ... And what is the motor life of the Falcon engine? if for three starts, then maybe this barrel should not be returned with such pathos? Ours, however, is also good, they bring down worked steps to Altai even without parachutes
      3. ssergn
        ssergn 13 January 2018 14: 17
        0
        Ruble collapsed and held at this level.
    2. Cannonball
      Cannonball 10 January 2018 22: 05
      0
      Ours needs to decide on financing and management, and our rockets are no worse than American ones.
    3. Anatoly R
      Anatoly R 11 January 2018 05: 07
      +1
      ImPertz - According to the most optimistic forecasts, the best layers can function up to 10 years. So, what is next. Here in the states they shout that they have shale oil in bulk in order to lower oil prices. And on January 10, the price of oil is only growing.
      1. misti1973
        misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 28
        0
        In the states, oil industry workers are shouting that production is growing to give loans at the bank! The production of shale oil now has become like a game of roulette. One was drilled, there is oil, and five others, figs!
    4. misti1973
      misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 23
      0
      You can assume that this "piece" is already lost! They are going up, and we are corking down. Soon they will fix everything and will be another country carrying out commercial launches.
      1. ssergn
        ssergn 13 January 2018 14: 22
        +1
        Can you not count?
  4. lance
    lance 10 January 2018 18: 35
    0
    most likely satellite Z in its low stationary orbit, this is known to me. but amers still catch up with us and
    1. Cannonball
      Cannonball 10 January 2018 22: 05
      +1
      Low stationary underwater orbit.
    2. vignat21
      vignat21 10 January 2018 22: 57
      +4
      But what is it - a low stationary orbit? And what is her apo and feather? Shaw you blurted out my friend, you farted into the water and the bulbs did not go.
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 10 January 2018 23: 40
        +4
        At the bottom of the ocean it lies stationary and rotates with the Earth.
      2. lance
        lance 15 January 2018 10: 33
        +1
        I hope you read new data about Z and understand what a low stationary orbit is.
  5. sappytoxin
    sappytoxin 10 January 2018 18: 57
    +3
    Roscosmos, as it was a monopoly in space exploration, will remain so and it’s not suitable for any SpaceX. You do not need to compare the commercial spaceX with a serious organization engaged in space exploration. They will not go further than launching commercial projects in the form of launching satellites into orbit, because At our level of development, serious state programs can be mastered only by state corporations.
    1. tforik
      tforik 10 January 2018 19: 55
      +5
      Well, God forbid success then Rogozin He has a heavy strap.
      But somehow, in my understanding, he is not a hero, like Korolev, but a mediocre businessman
    2. misti1973
      misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 31
      0
      And why do we need people in space if all the appropriations for science are cut back? And they, apart from satellites, do not need anything yet. They clean their and ISS.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Scalpel
          Scalpel 15 February 2018 23: 49
          0
          The average American is more concerned about his house and bank account)
  6. Panikovsky
    Panikovsky 10 January 2018 19: 35
    +3
    Can you find out the source of the post?
    1. passerby5
      passerby5 10 January 2018 19: 50
      +1
      Yes, under the leadership of current managers, they are engaged in budget development campaigns
  7. Abel
    Abel 10 January 2018 21: 52
    +1
    I don’t know all the details, but 18 starts a year is cool. The only thing I would like to know is the payload that it can put into orbit. It hurts a lot of engines sticking out
    1. Oleg666
      Oleg666 11 January 2018 06: 37
      +2
      Yes, the fact of the matter is that it takes out a payload into orbit less than my mother-in-law gives me tea and it has such an efficiency, it only costs to launch well, but the satellites have one thing and deliver cargo to the ISS is another tkt spase kuynya
      1. Scalpel
        Scalpel 15 February 2018 23: 50
        0
        On the ISS, he carries more than Progress, by the way.
  8. Cannonball
    Cannonball 10 January 2018 21: 57
    +2
    Article about nothing
  9. Anton Valerevich
    Anton Valerevich 10 January 2018 22: 55
    +5
    Return steps - a dubious advantage! The dry weight of the rocket increases significantly, the payload decreases, and the design of the rocket becomes more complicated. At the same time, its cost is reduced due to the reuse of components and assemblies, you can’t argue, but at what cost — to reduce the payload — actually what money is paid for. This can only be beneficial if the cost of the rocket is too high relative to the launch price.
    The analogy with airliners is complete nonsense, the loads are not comparable there, they differ by orders of magnitude - one turbo pump unit of a rocket engine is more powerful than the whole Dreamliner.
    1. ImPerts
      ImPerts 10 January 2018 23: 23
      0
      Quote: Anton Valeryevich
      The analogy with airliners is complete nonsense, the loads are not comparable there, they differ by orders of magnitude - one turbopump unit is more powerful than the whole Dreamliner.

      Wow...
      Quote: Anton Valeryevich
      Return steps - a dubious advantage! The dry weight of the rocket increases significantly, the payload decreases, and the design of the rocket becomes more complicated.

      Our Israeli colleagues are talking about something else.
      And they are famous for the score)))
      1. rice
        rice 14 January 2018 19: 26
        +2
        Quote: ImPerts
        Our Israeli colleagues are talking about something else.

        repeat It can be seen from my memory the problems began: please remind me from which spaceport and which rockets Israel launched?
        1. ImPerts
          ImPerts 14 January 2018 19: 30
          0
          Quote: Rice
          It can be seen from my memory the problems began: please remind me from which spaceport and which rockets Israel launched?

          And this is what?
          Or in order to talk about the military capabilities of the US Army, it is necessary to fight with it?
          1. rice
            rice 15 January 2018 15: 25
            +2
            Quote: ImPerts
            Or in order to talk about the military capabilities of the US Army, it is necessary to fight with it?

            So is it just to speculate? US reasoning EVERYTHING cooler than boiled eggs on Everest, but in fact, in many respects it’s not so. Although this applies to us repeat
            1. ImPerts
              ImPerts 15 January 2018 15: 34
              +1
              Here I am about the same. Here, in the vastness of VO, our colleagues from Israel popularly explained the advantage of the technical solutions of Ilon "not our" Mask.
              Therefore, it is not necessary to run.
              They have already calculated everything.
              1. tigrall
                tigrall 16 January 2018 11: 04
                +1
                Calculate then the cost of reducing the reliability of used second-stage, how do insurers by the way relate to used stages?
                Quote: ImPerts
                Advantage of technical solutions Ilon "not our" Mask.
                Musk is a manager, so about the technical solutions of Mask you are bent. He’s a great PR, you can’t argue with that.
                1. The comment was deleted.
  10. Wladwlad
    Wladwlad 10 January 2018 22: 59
    +1
    Not Russia, but the USSR — the United States is still competing with the USSR.
  11. Vdi73
    Vdi73 10 January 2018 23: 18
    +2
    The lag in space, unfortunately, is already very noticeable ...
    1. Cannonball
      Cannonball 10 January 2018 23: 42
      0
      In space, everything is relative
    2. Valery Saitov
      Valery Saitov 11 January 2018 09: 29
      +3
      What is the lag? Can they deliver astronauts to the ISS? Or products with air? They just deliver satellites (one per rocket), and ours deliver 30 (!) Pieces at a time. Do your own conclusions ....
      1. karish
        karish 11 January 2018 09: 35
        +6
        Quote: Valery Saitov
        What is the lag? Can they deliver astronauts to the ISS? Or products with air? They just deliver satellites (one per rocket), and ours deliver 30 (!) Pieces at a time. Make your own conclusions....

    3. Slavors Gart
      Slavors Gart 11 January 2018 13: 14
      +2
      Lagging in space ....... These unhealthy catch-ups didn’t lead to anything good, they were always in w .., they’ll stay there ...... well, if only they won’t make a movie again, this time - "Dunno on Lou ...., no - ...... on the Sun (on the Moon they were already 8000 times)
  12. shinobi
    shinobi 11 January 2018 05: 17
    +3
    “Kill,” “Bury.” These conversations and forecasts come from zero. As with engines, the same story. And the thing as it stood in one place is worth it.
  13. JETFLAG
    JETFLAG 11 January 2018 08: 25
    +3
    Dear beneficiaries from Izhevsk, of this resource. For fun, read on RuNet about the latest prospects for the project - the Angara. In this project, the return of rocket stages is also planned. And in general, I have long been suspicious of the fact that you do not stand hands to eat. Because the percentage of articles for - "all gone !!!" seriously began to roll over on your resource. Well, "good luck" to you in your "difficult" business ...
    1. Cannonball
      Cannonball 11 January 2018 20: 46
      +4
      Angara is no longer a promising project, and rather half-dead.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. misti1973
      misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 39
      0
      Why read something about the Angara, if it really did not fly? Why is it this Angara, if its launch is much more expensive than Progress, and its carrying capacity has already been recognized as unsatisfactory?
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 11 January 2018 22: 51
        +4
        There are so many mistakes in two lines laughing
        Two "Hangars" flew, light and heavy. “Progress” is not a rocket, so comparing it with the “Hangar” is nonsense.
        I have not seen a single document, which would have said the recognition of the carrying capacity of the "Angara" unsatisfactory. Obviously fake.
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 11 January 2018 10: 05
    0
    We need more Rogozins and we will succeed fellow
  16. Misha_an26
    Misha_an26 11 January 2018 10: 39
    0
    And whose engines?
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 11 January 2018 14: 46
      +1
      SpaceX copies the RD180.
      While copies of only 40 seconds can work.
      SpaceX iridium flower does not come out.
      Reusability is not even a question.
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 11 January 2018 20: 47
        +1
        No, it does not copy. RD-180 another company tried to do. Did not work out.
        1. misti1973
          misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 40
          0
          Well, it almost worked out. They fail to burn!
      2. misti1973
        misti1973 11 January 2018 22: 40
        +6
        Falcons do not fly on the RD-180!
    2. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 16 January 2018 09: 18
      +3
      The Americans have enough of their own engines, and the military themselves (without the Mask) launch their satellites on their own racks with their own engines with a low failure rate
      Or does someone think that the Americans, having the best (real) aircraft engine industry, are not able to create their own engines for rockets? Come on...
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 16 January 2018 19: 53
        +1
        The military does not have its own missiles. And engines like ours, they really do not know how to do. By the way, on the Atlases, which are launched by military satellites, the Russian RD-180s are just standing.
        1. Scalpel
          Scalpel 26 February 2018 11: 39
          0
          And on the Delta and some others - their own.
          1. Cannonball
            Cannonball 26 February 2018 20: 45
            +1
            And how much does one Delta launch cost? And what time is the Atlas?
            The first is 160-400 megadollars, the second is 110-230.
  17. Natasha Chekanova
    Natasha Chekanova 11 January 2018 11: 09
    0
    Wait and see.
  18. Slavors Gart
    Slavors Gart 11 January 2018 13: 08
    0
    Well, maybe finally to the moon .... something will fly American?
  19. dustycat
    dustycat 11 January 2018 14: 42
    0
    SpaceX does not have an iridium flower ...
    So far, a copy of RD 180 from SpaceX can work out and give out a project pulse of no more than 40 seconds.
    And then wedges the hydrodynamic bearings of the turbopumps.
    To output the standard load, you need to work 120 seconds ...
    There is no talk about reusability yet.

    HYDRODYNAMIC bearings wedge, Karl!
    1. Scalpel
      Scalpel 26 February 2018 11: 40
      0
      Falcon has its own engines. What kind of nonsense have you written?
  20. Nuclear fuel station
    Nuclear fuel station 11 January 2018 16: 22
    +4
    Returning the stage is just an additional option, there are non-returnable launches that put much more cargo into orbit, this all makes the company's offer more flexible for customers compared to competitors. You need to withdraw cheaply and a little - start-up with a return, you need to take out 2 times more - a classic start-up. Both options were launched in 2017 - most with a return, miniaturization of equipment and satellites no longer requires a huge load every time. So the company optimizes production. And with the launch and debugging of the Falcon Heavy production made conditionally from several Falcon 9, it will give a heavy rocket and modular assembly. Thanks to the falcons, the Angara will no longer have commercial success, it is outdated in advance and they are talking about freezing and revising the concept, and Proton, one of the most emergency missiles in the world, is already surviving the last decade.
  21. Gosh goshin
    Gosh goshin 12 January 2018 18: 51
    0
    Start for the recommended "UNION" and transporters. The codes will bring out a new scheme for launching spacecraft rockets or shuttles, the Americans will again have to catch up with us, both in arms and technology. Let them make their engines and not copy, that's why it does not fly. Like at school, I wrote off an excellent student - he’s 5 to you 4 or less.
    1. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 16 January 2018 09: 12
      +3
      Well, about the engines - this is of course a "duck" that the Americans "only fly on Russian engines." Space X is only a small part (albeit the most publicized) of the American space program. Do not underestimate the Americans
  22. Vladimir K.
    Vladimir K. 12 January 2018 22: 32
    +1
    How did they overtake Russia? In the number of successful launches per year? And why then do not carry their astronauts themselves? But because they are not sure of reliability. And their technology is not a breakthrough - experiments with a return stage were carried out in the USSR. Saving at this stage is a big question for many reasons. And here is the truly breakthrough technology that the Americans are now mastering - Dream Chaser - they have completely stolen in the USSR by copying our "Spiral".
    1. Nuclear fuel station
      Nuclear fuel station 13 January 2018 13: 23
      +7
      When the mask promised to return the stage you laughed, then he returned and promised to start the used one, you laughed, then Musk made more launches in 17 years than the whole of Russia, there were already nerves at Roskosmos, at the same time there were convulsions for Soviet unions delivering astronauts to the ISS, already Musk is not a competitor to Roskosmos, but Roskosmos is a competitor to Mask. Soon, the dragon will deliver the first crew to the ISS and all this, similar to the North Korean state shelupon, together with the Roskosmos and rockets from the 60s, will go to the dustbin of history.
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball 13 January 2018 20: 22
        0
        In the next life
        1. Scalpel
          Scalpel 26 February 2018 11: 41
          0
          The next life has already begun.
          1. Cannonball
            Cannonball 26 February 2018 20: 47
            0
            Where? Does Musk already launch astronauts on the ISS? Or flew to Mars?
      2. dm-itry
        dm-itry 14 January 2018 11: 43
        +1
        Honey, you don’t need to judge the space industry by such news, read something adequate. Your mask, like the entire American space program, has long been in jo_pe.
      3. Infinity
        Infinity 15 January 2018 09: 53
        +3
        Almost nothing has been done at Roskosmos. Almost all are Soviet developments. And Musk catches up with us at a rapid pace, and has already overtaken us by unmanned launches. There is something to think about! Private office and state company!
        I liked this picture. Once it was laid out somewhere on the site.
        1. Cannonball
          Cannonball 15 January 2018 22: 04
          0
          Now is January 2018. Where are you Falcon Heavy? Aw !!!
          Maskophiles, you are being fooled, and you have hung your ears.
        2. Arikkhab
          Arikkhab 16 January 2018 09: 03
          0
          https://www.atraining.ru/trainers/karmanov/myths-
          and-truth-elon-musk /
        3. tigrall
          tigrall 16 January 2018 11: 25
          +1
          This "private" office on a serious leak from the State Department, where do you not recall space technology from Mask? Did NASA give it engines along with a development team? And this is in a world in which they will be imprisoned for unlicensed Windows.
          1. Nuclear fuel station
            Nuclear fuel station 17 January 2018 02: 31
            0
            Remind me, what is the largest counter-counter in the Russian Federation, not at the state’s suction? If they subsidize and help - they’re doing the right thing, it’s not AvtoVAZ for you
      4. Arikkhab
        Arikkhab 16 January 2018 09: 08
        0
        "Musk made more launches in 17 years than the whole of Russia"
        So then it is, only what is the derived payload? Which orbits (no need to compare the low Earth orbit with the geostationary one - for obvious reasons)? How many Masks did you save on reusing “returnable” steps — the main “chip” of the entire program? (What? They’re not using it yet? That is, the launch cost has not radically decreased? There it is ...)
        1. Nuclear fuel station
          Nuclear fuel station 17 January 2018 01: 07
          0
          They use it, and the cost of starting, given the infernally expensive insurance for a lame proton, is already more profitable for Mask
          1. Cannonball
            Cannonball 17 January 2018 21: 21
            0
            What makes you think that insurance is "hellishly expensive"?
            1. Scalpel
              Scalpel 26 February 2018 11: 43
              0
              After accidents, insurance took off.
              1. Cannonball
                Cannonball 26 February 2018 20: 48
                0
                Announce the numbers, please. And then, without numbers, your statement looks like an idle talk.
  23. dm-itry
    dm-itry 14 January 2018 11: 40
    +1
    Lord, what nonsense you can’t read on the Internet. :)))
  24. VladVlad
    VladVlad 14 January 2018 14: 44
    0
    There is a technology for controlling gravity, inertia. Launches will be the cheapest in the world. There is no competition yet. But nobody in Roscosmos needs it!
    1. Cannonball
      Cannonball 14 January 2018 18: 49
      +1
      There is also a trampoline.
      1. lance
        lance 15 January 2018 10: 46
        0
        calmly men, the amers do not have the large-scale program for the exploration of near space (solar galaxy) that we have. and all budget and near-Earth repetition of what was passed at a higher level, but passed (including military).
        1. Nuclear fuel station
          Nuclear fuel station 17 January 2018 02: 36
          +2
          That's right, we have Phobos soil, but something he eventually studies the soil of the earth. Hubble, Kepler, Cassini, Mars rovers, and the future telescope of James Webb is so offhand. And the information received from the work of these Western programs is almost the only one with which astronomers of the Russian Federation can work
    2. tun5t
      tun5t 17 January 2018 04: 55
      0
      And in more detail about such developments? How and where
  25. Arikkhab
    Arikkhab 16 January 2018 09: 01
    0
    "Having completed 18 launch rocket launches in 2017, the American company overtook the leader in this field - Russia"
    One question - what orbit is the Falkon satellite capable of leading to, and to which orbits does the Roskosmos satellite launch?
    https://www.atraining.ru/trainers/karmanov/myths-
    and-truth-elon-musk /
  26. Dimmedroll
    Dimmedroll 16 January 2018 21: 44
    0
    What are you arguing about.
  27. tun5t
    tun5t 17 January 2018 05: 01
    0
    Quote: VladVlad
    There is a technology for controlling gravity, inertia. Launches will be the cheapest in the world. There is no competition yet. But nobody in Roscosmos needs it!

    For more information on this, turn on the mask of elon, it may turn out to stir up a local nap, unless they make you a tesla
  28. Peter Rusin
    Peter Rusin 17 January 2018 14: 57
    0
    In which I must pay tribute to Ilon Mask - that his aggressive advertising campaign of futuristic projects also makes our ROSKOSMOS with science - to revise and more quickly develop its traditional space systems !! But he is far from global competition!
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. Alexander Voronkov
    Alexander Voronkov 19 January 2018 13: 02
    0
    The author and commentator are stupid people.
  31. Simon
    Simon 20 January 2018 09: 21
    +1
    Quote: Berkut-UA
    Traces left supposedly then would have long been erased even in the absence of atmosphere. So modern footprints are fake.


    And why did those traces disappear? Someone rubbed them with an elastic band?
    But I don’t quite believe that PEOPLE were there. The machine could be controlled remotely (Lunokhods - as an example)
    But if you landed the lander and ride from parking to parking ... and to show - those same tracks and flags ... maybe I will believe ... about people

    American astronauts don’t have enough diapers to fly there! It’s only a week to fly there. Well, if only American diapers littered space, then there was no such technology at that time, how to throw these diapers into space. laughing
  32. akudr48
    akudr48 7 February 2018 21: 11
    +1
    A rocket capable of "destroying" the space industry of Russia

    If you thought that such a missile is a Falcon 9 - then this is a mistake.

    The space industry of Russia - or rather the USSR, because the new Russia has not created its own in rocket science and in cosmonautics as a whole. We are still flying on the royal R-7 rocket, which is already 60 years old.

    The ruling elites, aimed primarily at enrichment in any way, generating corruption at all nodes and levels of government, are fundamentally incapable of intellectual efforts beyond their selfish interests. Including in the space industry. And in this innovative, innovative field, success requires extra effort. Instead, we see only theft, at Vostochny Cosmodrome, in Glonass, with the Angara rocket, with Baikonur, etc.

    And the mass intellectual insignificance of the elite accompanying these processes. Traces of vices can be seen even in their photographs, compare, for example, portraits of Korolev, Glushko, Pilyugin, Keldysh, and modern "figures", Sechin, Miller, Rogozin ...

    Therefore, the ruling elite of the country itself is successfully destroying the space industry, and the "Falcon" E. Maska only fixes this medical fact.
    1. Sling cutter
      Sling cutter 7 February 2018 21: 58
      +1
      Quote: akudr48
      akudr48

      Quote: akudr48
      Therefore, the ruling elite of the country itself is successfully destroying the space industry, and the "Falcon" E. Maska only fixes this medical fact.
      Good day, Colleague! hi
      They say that the FSUE GKNPTS named after M.V. Khrunichev is breathing in the air.
      Amazed your yesterday’s analytics. Unfortunately, I can’t see how our ratings ended.
      1. akudr48
        akudr48 7 February 2018 22: 58
        +1
        Greetings, Colleague,

        Not in the know about Khrunichev. But here, as in a drop of water, it should be roughly identical to the overall picture.

        Yesterday's express analytics arose from a feeling of some kind of internal protest, well, it cannot be that the overwhelming mass of the Internet on this resource was so motivated to preserve the deadening state of affairs in the country. Statistics showed that nevertheless the advantage is behind those who are waiting for change. Although not impressive.
        Many people are afraid to even think about alternatives on their own, this is a disaster.
        1. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter 7 February 2018 23: 20
          +2
          Quote: akudr48
          Statistics showed that nevertheless the advantage is behind those who are waiting for change. Although not impressive.

          I reviewed it today, it seemed that our advantage was very significant, there were 402 comments in the morning, now 452, and at the time of counting 260.
          Thank you so much! I think we need to take such calculations into service. hi
  33. tap
    tap 16 February 2018 10: 12
    +1
    Here you are, Rogozin trampoline ...
  34. Evgeniy1980
    Evgeniy1980 April 1 2018 01: 51
    0
    This is how many decades will they still need for their feat?
    In order to achieve something, it’s not only money and preparation that decide
    and primarily in the presence of a solid education, patriotism and enthusiasm.
    In the warped countries, this is not enough. They do everything only for money.