Roscosmos showed the latest rocket engine RD-171МВ

Roscosmos for the first time published in his Twitter video telling about the RD-171MV engine, which is by far the most powerful in the world. The engine is being developed for the new Soyuz-5 (Irtysh) middle-class launch vehicles and the Yenisei super-heavy class.

According to Igor Arbuzov, director general of NPO Energomash, where a new engine is being developed, the power of the RD-171МВ is 246 thousand horsepower, and the thrust with a mass of 10 tons exceeds 800 tons. The first engine is planned to be transferred to the customer in 2021 for installation at the first stage of the Soyuz-5 launch vehicle (Irtysh), which is scheduled to launch on 2022 year from the Baikonur cosmodrome.

NPO Energomash noted that the new RD-171МВ engine is a modification of the RD-171М engine, which is used in the first stage of the Zenit launch vehicle. Terms of development of the new engine are maintained and go in the schedule.

On the assembly of the first instance of the engine RD-171МВ and preparing it for fire tests reported in early February, the head of Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin.

The Soyuz-5 medium-class booster (Irtysh) is being developed by the Energia Rocket and Space Corporation according to the draft design previously approved by Roscosmos. Creation of the rocket is going to be completed by the 2021 year, and in the 2022 year to conduct its first test. The new rocket is planned to be used for launching the Federation spacecraft into low-Earth orbit.

Comments

[CommanderDIVA]

Good luck!

[Alexey Sommer]

Quote: CommanderDIVA

Good luck!

Only here he is soooooooo !!!
What do you think under the Queen that everyone managed so quickly ?!

[Beringovsky]

Woke up in Lahti?
This engine has been flying "good luck" for 30 years, since 1988, because it is not "new", but old RD170. Another "victory".

[ALEX_SHTURMAN]

So I wanted to write about the same thing, where is it new. The development of this engine has been going on since 1976 and the engine was intended for LV Energiya, as it stood on the Zenith LV. We learned how to make commercials, but unfortunately missiles missed out!

[Mestny]

So is that a hoax? Cartoons?
Fffuh, well, finally, but we have already begun to doubt. "put your way".
Thank you, ekperdy.

[ALEX_SHTURMAN]

Well, actually, Yes - it's a hoax! The old engine is a new development! You already attributed to Putin about me!

[rayruav]

hangar, Irtysh, Yenisei and tell me where they are

[Fregate]

Quote: rayruav

hangar, Irtysh, Yenisei and tell me where they are

In Siberia.

[NEXUS]

Quote: rayruav

hangar, Irtysh, Yenisei and tell me where they are

I really hope that everything becomes and flies, but ... it would be nice to check the leadership of Roskosmos for treasury and theft. Moreover, from the top to the top managers, including the team leaders. And then, I recall the question of Karamzin-How is it in Russia? Answer-Steal.

[Dude]

What can a team leader steal at a plant subordinate to Roscosmos? And, most importantly, how to endure? Here the leadership, yes, there is room for creativity, so to speak

[NEXUS]

Quote: Dude

What can a team leader steal at a plant subordinate to Roscosmos? And, most importantly, how to endure? Here the leadership, yes, there is room for creativity, so to speak

Have you forgotten where you live? Then give the person the opportunity to steal something, he will do it, even if he works at a shit-processing enterprise, and there our Russian Vanka will find what to put through a broken shtaketin in the fence ..

[Fat]

Quote: NEXUS

at the shit-processing enterprise, and there our Russian Vanka will find what to put through a broken shtaketin in the fence ..

Well, yes, tradition. "Take every nail from the factory, you are the owner here, not the guest" (c) Some time ago I was a private entrepreneur. I go into the workshop in the evening, and there the production manager paints the grilles on the windows of his country house with expensive primer. When asked what are you, a bad person, doing? replies: "Oh! You won't get poorer!" If the frame was easily replaceable, it would gobble up together with the de-m, in his highly qualified head. I endured, time has shown that in vain. Due to the consequences of the crisis, the enterprise still crashed, including because of such specialists.
Now it’s even becoming fashionable to boast that they stole something in their own company. Courage.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Thick

Well, yes, tradition. "Bring each nail from the factory, you are the owner here, not a guest" (c)

Here I am about that. I also have a story ... I once worked at a furniture company, and the next workshop was engaged in plastic windows. The owner was alone with us. So this owner, his uncle, arranged for him in the company as a watchman, concurrently with a full-blooded bastard. So this uncle, a radish, took an expensive German profile for windows and made them for rabbits Canura, from a double-glazed window of it. So to speak gratis (the voice of the Owl from Winnie the Pooh). For a while, the nephew was silent, but gritted his teeth. That uncle has more than 300 goals. The last straw was that when the nephew looked at his uncle, a dog was sitting in the yard, and her canura was made completely, including the roof, guess what ... this is the mentality, you’ll get the hell out of it.

[Errr]

rayruav:
"hangara, irtysh, yenisei and tell me where they are"

In Russia, in the earth, in Russia!

[orionvitt]

is by far the most powerful in the world

But what about the legendary F-1? Oh yes, he’s lost in the museum and blueprints.

[Subergeil]

But what about the legendary F-1? Oh yes, he’s lost in the museum and blueprints.

Please restore the Buran project (this is me, in general, not for you personally). Find those scientists and designers (and resurrect some), collect and prepare all the documentation, restore machines, logistics and much more ...
It seems you just don’t understand how complex the whole system is.
The main thing is that their engines WERE, they FLYED to the Moon, and EVIDENCE was presented to the whole world.
And all these spiteful arguments about "lost drawings" and "flags fluttering in space" should be left to illiterate
PS admire handsome outdoors

[img] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Pratt_%26_Whitney_Rocketdyne_Division.JPG/1280px-Pratt_%26_Whitney_Rocketdyne_Division.JPG [/ img]

[orionvitt]

Quote: Subergeil

they flew to the moon, and evidence was presented to the whole world.

What kind? There are only questions and no answers, either classified or just ridiculous. NASA is either impudently lying, or stupidly silent. Understand correctly, I am not against the Americans on the moon, but there is NO EVIDENCE. In addition to official statements that they seemed to be there.

[Topgun]

in the sense of no evidence? open google - google
or what evidence do you need? people recorded, filmed, photographed, museums are full of technology, everything is documented what else in nature can there be evidence to suit you? what kind?
listen to what the cosmonauts say, especially from such heirs as you, the honored ones, who did everything for the first time in the history of mankind, “burn”, what would grandfather Leonov tell you?
just a little more and they will begin to deny space flights, tin, in general, and will flying planes become the iron birds of some gods?

[Kelwin]

Yes, elementary, be kind to show us (give up)) - how did you manage to mate in zero gravity ??

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

What kind? There are only questions and no answers, either classified or just ridiculous. NASA is either impudently lying, or stupidly silent. Understand correctly, I am not against the Americans on the moon, but there is NO EVIDENCE. In addition to official statements that they seemed to be there.

Are you serious?
The Americans brought soil from the moon. Our requested samples as evidence. In response, the USSR sent lunar soil samples taken by a Soviet automatic station to NASA. In the laboratories of the USSR and the USA, a comparative analysis of the samples was carried out - the results completely coincided.
This is a historical fact. Not to mention the fact that the USSR never accused the United States of lying about flying to the moon. Thousands of hams around the world listened to NASA's talks with Buzz Aldrin. This is not to mention that Soviet (and not only) space objects tracking stations accompanied and recorded the entire flight of Apollo to the Moon and back.
Therefore, I advise you to study this issue in more detail and never write such nonsense again.

[Rust0626]

Soil can not be evidence of the flight of people to the moon, because it can be collected by machine guns. The question is not whether there were American spacecraft on the moon; there are no doubts here, but were there cosmonauts?

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

The ground can not be evidence of the flight of people to the moon

Thank. I don’t need further evidence of your level of education.
Farewell!

[orionvitt]

Quote: Obi Wan Kenobi

The Americans brought soil from the moon.

And where is he? All 360 kg., Of course, is classified. As always. He is, but we will not show it to you.

The results are completely consistent.

They didn't match at all. They also got caught that the terrestrial rocks were saturated with rare isotopes in the reactor, hoping to pass it off as a lunar one. The states banned any research of the lunar soil, on pain of prison. All the "lunar technology" from American museums does not hold up to any criticism at all, especially the lunar "rover". Every gram of weight counts, and they dragged a little car to the moon, like an American without a car. What nonsense. Imagine that these shiny tin cans were on the moon can only be a person who piously believes in everything that is told to him .. And the hatches that open outward ... I saw the Soviet descent vehicle in the museum, so it is completely burnt in the upper layers of the atmosphere, it is clear that they flew on it. Conversations could very well go through repeaters, or were recorded in advance. As for the "silence" of the USSR, there is also a lot of darkness here. How do we know what the top politicians agree on behind closed doors. But the policy of the West in relation to the USSR, at that time, sharply changed to a favorable one. Moreover, they almost kissed, why would it be? The list can be endless. So for any question, no intelligible answers. Take our word for it. And finally, doubts about the American lunar program arose in the United States itself, and they know better there whether they flew somewhere or not. Six times in a row, almost without preliminary tests and without a single incident. Okromya Apollo 13, well, so probably a movie should have been made about the heroes.

[region58]

Quote: orionvitt

And where is he? All 360 kg., Of course, is classified. As always. He is, but we will not show it to you.

Well, it's you in vain. Houston Space Center. Johnson Building No. 31. Guided tours. Moreover - if you personally have some kind of research topic and the corresponding equipment, then a piece will be sent to you ... True, everything has already been examined along and across ...
PS Just do not believe it ... Say king the ground is not real not from there ...

[Lycan]

Quote: orionvitt

I am not against the Americans on the moon, but there is no EVIDENCE

Ka-a-ak? And the photos, and the video?

[Rostislav Prokopenko]

. They flew to the moon

But I can’t believe it ... They didn’t learn how to do toilets

[Hole puncher]

Quote: Rostislav Prokopenko

They didn’t learn how to do toilets.

Another "general from sorting" ...

[Rostislav Prokopenko]

The construction site starts from the toilet, and even a two-week flight in the confined space of three people cannot do without it.

[Vkd dvk]

Unfortunately, you say the desire for success with complete incompetence in this matter. It is impossible to revive Energy-Buran. How impossible it is to revive equipment, materials, devices, stands, workshops and specialists who did it all. It is impossible to restore the production and economic ties of thousands of industries involved in these projects.
Not "loss of blueprints." Much worse. Loss of the country. And in order to be in the forefront again, new efforts are needed not to revive, but to create a new one.

[figwam]

Quote: Subergeil

engines WERE, they FLYED to the Moon

Yes, if you write in capital letters, then immediately believe ...

[grandson of Perun]

Quote: Subergeil

Admire the winked handsome men in the open

Our engine operators say that practically impossible to achieve stable combustion in a chamber with a diameter of 1 meter like the "handsome" F-1. Inevitable the strongest longitudinal vibration. The stories of Rocketdyne representatives that they overcame the vibration with a helium "pillow", to put it mildly, are not serious.
Next: take a closer look at the photo of the "handsome" F-1. It can be seen that the load-bearing walls of the combustion chamber from 178 thin-walled tubes. Material - nickel alloy Inconel X-750, very problematic about fragility and except for the F-1 not used in rocket engines.

Quote: Subergeil

EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED TO THE WORLD

What exactly is the evidence that there were people, not machine guns?

[Kelwin]

it is almost impossible to achieve stable combustion in a chamber with a diameter of 1 meter like the "handsome" F-1

Who are you talking to, write them in Russian - go to the nozzle, with a whole bunch)

[Topgun]

funny, but what evidence of Gagarin’s flight and not another satellite recording allegedly negotiations with the ground?
how do you like this conspiracy thesis? and suddenly Gagarin’s flight is much more difficult to prove than flying to the moon :))
about practically! of the impossible: here in the USSR they could not make a steam catapult for aircraft carriers, will you deny that it does not exist?

[Infinity]

By the way, foreign conspiracy theorists claim that Gagarin allegedly did not fly either. And then there was supposedly an agreement, they say, you recognize Gagarin, and we recognize the Apollo. Of course, our conspiracy theorists say that "religion does not allow", so they get out as best they can, with some kind of agreements, etc. It is clear that both conspiracy theories are bullshit.
Well, against all this background, the plane-dealers bloom and smell

In general, our designers - Feoktistov and Chertok - spoke about this (what they were). The latter generally said that in all this conspiracy the people are doing grandmothers, and people believe that they are being exposed to the "great cosmic lie"

[grandson of Perun]

Quote: Topgun

and what evidence of Gagarin’s flight

Does anyone (with the exception of stubborn Russophobia) doubt Gagarin’s flight?

Quote: Topgun

in the USSR could not make a steam catapult for aircraft carriers

What does it have to do with it?
But since they hinted, no one doubts the existence of steam catapults, because experts from many countries personally observed their work.
But no one watched Apollo flights. More precisely, ours tried, but the Yankees by means of electronic warfare prevented this. Fans of conspiracy theory can explain why they interfered, what they hid.

[K-612-O]

And what are the tasks for it? It was developed as a weapon; in civilian space it was then, and even now, not needed. Before you fraternize for something, you need to decide: why.
To fly to the moon, it’s easier to launch the ship’s modules into orbit with a few rockets and collect there, why orbital stations are needed.

[Blackmokona]

Well, actually the most powerful jet engine is the SRB
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Боковой_ускоритель_МТКК_Спейс_шаттл
Thrust 1400 tons
It is planned to put it on a new SLS rocket, it used to be on the Shuttle

[poquello]

Quote: BlackMokona

Well, actually the most powerful jet engine is the SRB
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Боковой_ускоритель_МТКК_Спейс_шаттл
Thrust 1400 tons
It is planned to put it on a new SLS rocket, it used to be on the Shuttle

Well vashcheta it dviglo another plan

[Blackmokona]

But also jet dviglo.
Correctly write the most powerful liquid jet engine, and the most powerful jet engine about the RD171MV is a lie

[poquello]

Quote: BlackMokona

But also jet dviglo.
Correctly write the most powerful liquid jet engine, and the most powerful jet engine about the RD171MV is a lie

and takeout payload?

[Blackmokona]

If you are interested in the ratio of thrust to engine mass, then SpaceX is the best Marilyn engine in this parameter.
He has a thrust of 192 exceeds the mass of the engine

[poquello]

Quote: BlackMokona

If you are interested in the ratio of thrust to engine mass, then SpaceX is the best Marilyn engine in this parameter.
He has a thrust of 192 exceeds the mass of the engine

why did they go to Merlin? Merlin has its own shortcomings, but you started a speech about the shuttle, and yet

Quote: poquello

payload carrying

and not the ratio of traction to mass, not ants in proportion to scale, we consider - they are also somewhere stronger than an elephant, if they are the size of an elephant

[Blackmokona]

You give a characteristic, I show you the engine best in this characteristic, we are talking about the best.

and not the ratio of traction to mass, not ants in proportion to scale, we consider - they are also somewhere stronger than an elephant, if they are the size of an elephant

If you are talking about PN in space, it depends entirely on the rocket and the engine there is only one of the thousands of elements defining this characteristic.
The same RD-171MV is much better than the F-1 in terms of the set of parameters, but Saturn-5 dragged the PN more than it plans to drag the Yenisei

[poquello]

Quote: BlackMokona

We are talking about the best.

that's just the best ones do not depend on one characteristic, which is why RDs are recognized as the best

[Blackmokona]

Who is recognized?

[poquello]

Quote: BlackMokona

Who is recognized?

who besides you is not recognized?

[Blackmokona]

Any other major manufacturer of space engines.
Roquetdine will tell how their engines bend all of them according to the UI.
SpaceX Tells Their Merlin's Best Value For Money
The Chinese just love to hang out
Well and so on

[Lieutenant Senior]

This is generally not a rocket engine, but a large powder keg, firecracker.
And here we are talking about liquid taxiways.

[Blackmokona]

Jet engine

A jet engine is an engine that creates the necessary traction force for movement by converting the internal energy of the fuel into the kinetic energy of the jet of the working fluid

SRB ideally falls under the definition, the news speaks about a powerful jet engine, and not about a powerful liquid jet

[Lieutenant Senior]

But for some reason everyone flies on chemical, I wonder why, and solid fuel is extremely rarely used))

[Errr]

Solid propellant rocket engines are chemical reactive (rocket) engines. They are used, in general, not so rarely. Here the trick is that they have higher thrust, but they don’t start again in the same flight.

[poquello]

Quote: Herrr

Solid propellant rocket engines are chemical reactive (rocket) engines. They are used, in general, not so rarely. Here the trick is that they have higher thrust, but they don’t start again in the same flight.

they have a large dead weight in relation to traction

[Errr]

Then already consider, together with the mass of the rocket engine and the mass of its fuel, because almost 100% of the mass of solid propellant is the mass of solid fuel loaded into it. Otherwise, this remark is just a trick on your part. ;-) The greater thrust of the solid propellant rocket engine relative to the thrust of the rocket engine is due to the combustion of a large amount of fuel per unit time due to the very large area of ​​its simultaneous combustion immediately along the entire length of the central channel in the solid fuel of the stage (accelerator). If you are interested, I’m attaching a YouTube video:

[Blackmokona]

They are often used, solid-fuel boosters are regularly installed in Deltas-4 and Atlases-5

[Lieutenant Senior]

Wiki prompts:
Rarely used in domestic astronautics (for example, Start (launch vehicle)), however, they have been widely used and are used in rocketry from other countries. These are mainly elements of the first stage (side boosters)

Barrel of gunpowder. The technology that the Chinese have mastered even five hundred years ago.

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

Barrel of gunpowder. The technology that the Chinese have mastered even five hundred years ago.

This technology in terms of the amount of know-how will give odds to any liquid engine, in addition it requires the highest production culture, everything is important there: from the size and shape of the particles of the fuel components to the shape of the hole of the checker.
For good, only the United States can do normal solid propellant rocket motors.
In the USSR, for example, they could not do an intelligible solid-fuel rocket (we recall the submarines of project 941 and the monstrous missile to them, which was much inferior in all respects, with significantly larger dimensions, to its counterpart, the Trident).
In modern Russia, too, is not very good with solid propellant rocket motors, long-suffering "Bulava" for how many years taught to fly ...

[Lieutenant Senior]

And, of course, in Russia there are silver-footed peasants who can’t do anything, and the Yankees are ahead of the rest. They don’t even buy our rocket engines, it’s all enemy propaganda, and they fly into space, only so that no one sees, at night

[Flying Dutchman]

Do not confuse liquid-propellant engines and solid propellant rocket engines, with the Yankees we have approximate parity with the Yankees, they have better hydrogen, kerosene and stinkers with us, now the Yankees are ahead in terms of methane, and with solid propellant rocket engines everything has always been bad for us, only recently they began to catch up with them, but they are still far ahead. In any case, even close to anything like SRB is not even in the project.

PS
Soon our engines will stop buying, they will take methane BE-4 from Bezos.

[Lieutenant Senior]

Do not confuse rocket engines and solid propellant engines

It never occurred to me to be confused))
And you should not confuse boosters with rocket engines.

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

And you should not confuse boosters with rocket engines.

Is there an engine or a booster in the Bulava or Topol?

[Lieutenant Senior]

We are talking about astronautics. I wonder why no one flies into space for 100% solid propellant rocket?

In general, this argument is meaningless. I’m not saying that one type of engine is good and the other is bad

Everyone is good for their own purposes. And each has advantages and disadvantages.

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

We are talking about astronautics. I wonder why no one flies into space for 100% solid propellant rocket?

Fly: Chinese, Yankees, Yap, Israel, Europe.
The Yankees, at least, Taurus aka Minotaur-C, Athena, Omega.
The Chinese have Long March 11.
The Yapis have the Mu family.
Israel has Shavit.
Europe has Vega.
So what about "nobody flies" - you are greatly mistaken.

[Lieutenant Senior]

I'm talking about manned astronautics, which is much more difficult than throwing a piece of electronics into space.

[Flying Dutchman]

Maybe enough already spinning like a frying pan?
Then give him a clean solid propellant rocket, then only a space solid propellant rocket, now only a manned solid propellant rocket.
Then what will be the requirement? Will a manned lunar solid propellant rocket or lunar one also be small? Maybe you need Martian right away?

PS Lost the controversy - have the courage to admit it.

[Lieutenant Senior]

Something you sir are carrying a clean snowstorm. Read above what I wrote.
Then think it over. If you can. Then think again. Then analyze. If you can. Then conclude what I'm talking about. If you can.

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

And you should not confuse boosters with rocket engines.

You wrote nonsense, complete, about the fact that the solid propellant rocket engine is not engines, but boosters ...
Then they tried to jump off this topic and exposed themselves while being a complete layman.
Here is my analysis.

[Lieutenant Senior]

Hmm, everything is really bad with you.

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

I'm talking about manned astronautics, which is much more difficult than throwing a piece of electronics into space.

The Space Shuttle is quite manned and, oddly enough, flew on the solid propellant.
Well, which of us is doing badly, aren't you?

[Lieutenant Senior]

Listen, dear Dmitry, are you always so boring?
What are you trying to prove to me?
And yes, on the Shuttle these are boosters, the main three Engines on the shuttle itself. These boosters then landed in the ocean.

[Flying Dutchman]

You are trying to prove to me that the solid propellant is not an engine but a kind of "booster".

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

It never occurred to me to be confused))
And you should not confuse boosters with rocket engines.

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

We are talking about astronautics. I wonder why no one flies into space for 100% solid propellant rocket?

Quote: Lieutenant Senior

I'm talking about manned astronautics, which is much more difficult than throwing a piece of electronics into space.

The sequential merging by you of all arguments is amusing.
Well, what will you have now after the manned shuttle?
Lunar manned solid rocket?

[Lieutenant Senior]

Damn you do nothing? Have you tried to work? I'm tired of your clinical delirium.

[Enemy]

Hello. Please don't call boosters "boosters". Russian words are no worse than English ones.

[Lieutenant Senior]

You talking to me? In english it call's "boosters")))

[Errr]

Quote: BlackMokona
Well, actually the most powerful jet engine is the SRB
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Боковой_ускоритель_МТКК_Спейс_шаттл
Thrust 1400 tons
It is planned to put it on a new SLS rocket, it used to be on the Shuttle

Let’s not put together a rocket engine and a solid propellant rocket engine - this is not the same thing.

[Blackmokona]

Under the definition of a jet engine, both fall

[Errr]

Totally agree with you.

[Errr]

quote by orionvitt
"is by far the most powerful in the world"
But what about the legendary F-1? Oh yes, he’s lost in the museum and blueprints.

F-1 is truly the most powerful single chamber LRE, but not the most powerful in general. Already on accelerators (stage 0) of the Energia launch vehicle (since 1987) four-chamber RD-170 were installed.
The capacity of the RD-170 is about 20 million liters. with., it is the most powerful rocket engine on liquid propellant components ever created (having four chambers, it is 2,1 - 5,65% more powerful than the American single-chamber F-1, installed on the first stage of the "Saturn V" launch vehicle, with dimensions smaller by 1,5 times, and the RD-170 consumes fuel much more economically, since it is built according to a closed cycle scheme, in contrast to the F-1, which uses a simpler but less efficient open cycle).

[ver_]

... Saturn 5 is a myth ..

[Silent cat]

Is it weak in an article to give information by how much superior? Specific thrust and all that? Why this info? She's about nothing.

[zed042]

the power of the RD-171MV is 246 thousand horsepower, and traction with a mass of 10 tons exceeds 800 tons.

[poquello]

Quote: Quiet Cat

Is it weak in an article to give information by how much superior? Specific thrust and all that? Why this info? She's about nothing.

lazy? http://engine.space/dejatelnost/engines/rd-170-171/

[RUSS]

Quote: Quiet Cat

Is it weak in an article to give information by how much superior? Specific thrust and all that? Why this info? She's about nothing.

What for? The main propaganda.

[andr327]

Added a letter, but what's new? Drawings of RD-171M transferred to digital? And it is not, but it can be. When it flies, then we can talk about what place it takes.
Something about new technologies would be said. As a mechanic for me, design and drawing are one thing. but when it turns in iron - it’s different, real!
Do not scold. this turns out to be my 1000 comment

[K-612-O]

So his second year at the stand is being driven, he is in the iron, flight tests are only needed and revision according to their results. It is impossible to dazzle the engine for the LV without ensuring its highest reliability. In this industry, rush leads to very sad consequences.

[g1washntwn]

Sometimes one letter decides. For example, TU-22 and TU-22M are essentially "M" - a completely different, new project. And knowing the urge of "specialists" to confuse cards with different adversaries, with one letter everything is not so simple

[Silent cat]

Is it weaker on the rd0120 central unit than on accelerators? Super

[Errr]

"Weaker" times 4. Not minus, but you should at least read "Vicky" ... ;-)

[donavi49]

By the way, the Chinese launched the anniversary 300 - Long March successfully.

This week will be very hot at the launches:
Union - 14
Vega - 15
Delta - 15
Electron - 16

[Silent cat]

It’s just better when the article gives full Old: it became. By the way on RD 171 and 0120 did not understand. Google. Thrust 0120 150-200t. There are 4. There are 171 800t. What is it like? Why then need 4 pcs 0120? It is on energy. Do you have any specialists?

[andr327]

120 for the second stage, there above such capacities are not needed, and the operating modes in vacuum, and not on the ground

[MBRSS]

Quote: andr327

120 for the second stage, there above such capacities are not needed,

Well, power is needed everywhere. Thrust RD-0120 220t + the ability to build + high UI + hydrogen as a cleaner fuel. The prospect, it seems, is for hydrogen, but, as they said in Roskosmos, "cryogenic technologies have been largely lost in our country."

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: Silent Cat

Thrust 0120 150-200t. There are 4. There are 171 800t. What is it like? Why then need 4 pcs 0120? It is on energy. Do you have any specialists?

RD-170 was used on side accelerators, oxygen / kerosene fuel.
RD-0120 was used in the first stage, oxygen / hydrogen fuel is the most efficient fuel pair, but for a number of reasons, the main one being the extremely low density of liquid hydrogen, it is optimal to use it already in a vacuum, where maximum specific impulse and thrust parameters can be achieved.

At the initial stage of the flight, accelerators took up the main work, their task was to save fuel of the first (hydrogen) stage for flight in vacuum.

[Cowbra]

Well, the only thing we are losing is in the beauty of the presentations ... No, to put the engine on the old Laiba, call all this not an upgrade, but a completely new project with a beautiful name - and launch it into nowhere, for example Navalny. Call it "Liberalism's Access to New Heights" ... The Maskophiles and other de Bills would like it ...
However, what for us to produce de Bill?

[XXXIII]

The engine is being developed for the new medium-class carrier rockets "Soyuz-5" (Irtysh) and the super-heavy class "Yenisei".

How much space in our country, I am proud of these achievements .....
50 years ago, on January 16, 1969, two manned spacecraft Soyuz-4 and Soyuz-5 met above the Earth. For the first time in the world, after docking in near-earth orbit, a Soviet space station with a crew of four cosmonauts began operation: Vladimir Shatalov, Boris Volynov, Alexey Eliseev and Evgeny Khrunov.

[Evkur]

This is great news, but the next revolution is curbing nuclear energy, nuclear control engines already have experiences and rockets seem.

[astepanov]

Quote: BlackMokona

Write correctly

No, not "right". And the numbers in the text of the article are complete nonsense. 246 thousand horsepower with a thermal power of 27 million kW - this is an efficiency of less than 0,1%. Meanwhile, the efficiency of rocket engines is usually above 70%. So the uncle from the desk seems to be a manager in the manner of his boss Mitriy Olegych. And he measures horsepower in the old fashioned way, and three orders of magnitude for him is a trifle.
By the way, Gagarin's "Vostok", I remember, had over ten million horses - with a thrust of only 83 tonnes of power. Think about it.
And the engine, of course, is gorgeous. Let him have as much work as possible.

[Hole puncher]

Quote: astepanov

So the uncle from the counter seems to be a manager in the manner of his boss Mitri Olegovich. And horse horsepower is measured in the old fashioned way, and for him three orders is a trifle.

That is true. The Russian engineer could not say about horsepower; he works in SI.

[Narak-zempo]

The main thing is that no "khrushchev stockyard" (© Zharkov) poisons the lives of effective managers from Roscosmos. So let's fly!

[Mentat]

Quote: Subergeil

Please restore the Buran project (this is me, in general, not for you personally). Find those scientists and designers (and resurrect some), collect and prepare all the documentation, restore machines, logistics and much more ...
It seems you just don’t understand how complex the whole system is.

Quote: Vkd dvk

Unfortunately, you say the desire for success with complete incompetence in this matter. It is impossible to revive Energy-Buran.

Buran is not used because it is too expensive, and not because it is impossible to build it technologically, which is unscientific nonsense. It is not known who distributes such urban legends about allegedly missing technologies. All documentation on Buran has not gone anywhere, and in order to preserve its secret part, Lightning was recently bought by the Kalashnikov concern. Moreover, the ideas and materials used to create the Buran are applied in other areas.

[Maxwrx]

No matter what engine power, pressure in the chamber, its weight, etc. it doesn’t matter how perfect it is, the cost of 1 kg of cargo to be carried out in NOO and GSO is important. And this is done by the manufacturability of the engine itself and its reusability. And do not forget that now all missiles are being developed under environmentally safer fuels. The same spaceics to which all the commercials left made a cheap rocket for noo, but at GSO it already has serious competitors, because the engine does not work well in a vacuum due to the very composition of the fuel. Now they are making a new reusable ship which will actually fly by about 23, too, but it will output 150 (!) Tons to noo, and cost about 100 million for launch, compared to 100 million for a hangar with its 25 tons. And spaceics sooner or later build their rocket. And we will initially be outsiders

[Jurkovs]

The RD-171 engine had a thrust of 740 tons, that is, there were 185 tons per pot. During the development of the RD-180 and later RD-171 Energomash managed to raise the thrust by one pot to 196 tons. It was natural to expect that the RD-171MV will have a thrust of 784 tons. But Energomash announces that it will be over 800 tons. The question is how much more? And what will be the output payload of the Irtysh, if for launch vehicles with a sequential arrangement of stages, it slightly exceeds 3% of the launch mass. Indeed, even with a thrust of 800 tons, this will be 20 tons per LEO (the thrust of the first stage engines usually exceeds the starting mass in the range from 1,15 to 1,2). Is the declared "more than 800 tons" a hint of replacing the Proton with the Irtysh?

[Blackmokona]

It is stated that the Irtysh will carry 17 tons on the DOE, replacing Zenith

[Awaz]

Once such a booze has gone ... You guys can find out: has anyone seen a photo of a dragon that landed? Well, that is the piece of iron that fell into the ocean? I now wonder - how is his condition and is it all able to fly somewhere again?

[Flying Dutchman]

Quote: AwaZ

Once such a booze has gone ... You guys can find out: has anyone seen a photo of a dragon that landed? Well, that is the piece of iron that fell into the ocean? I now wonder - how is his condition and is it all able to fly somewhere again?

It’s capable that cargo dragons completely re-fly themselves, and Crew Dragon was made on their basis, another thing is that it can only re-fly in the form of a truck, such is NASA’s requirement - to carry people only for new ones.

[Awaz]

Well, I knew that at NASA is not a fool, but still so far there is no evidence that it was a really reusable passenger ship with all the reasons. The children of Mask were launched into the space truck, in which they made a luxury sham saloon and everyone is happy: they write hamsters on the ceiling, Mask the dough slashed, and NASA ... and where to go then ...

[ver_]

... they haven’t done it yet, but * cackle * pretty much ..