Military Review

SpaceX launched a new satellite, but missed the Falcon 9 fairing

259

SpaceX, an American private space company, launched the Singapore-Japan satellite JCSat-9 / Kacific-18, which should provide access to broadband Internet in the Asian region, with the help of the Falcon 1 booster rocket.


The launch did not go quite smoothly, as the special vessels hired by the company could not "catch" parts of the head fairing, which descended by parachutes. They planned to catch them in special networks, but "missed."

"Ms. Tree "and" Ms. Chief »almost caught the fairing halves - our team is working to return them for use in the next run

The company said on Twitter.


At the same time, a number of experts are already predicting extremely difficult times for the famous company Ilona Mask in connection with increasing competition.

Blue Origin Jeff Bezos’s New Glenn is under development, which could be a sensation in the 2020s. The concept of reusable media from Blue Origin is largely similar to SpaceX, but has a more modern and promising engine.

Less venerable competitors also do not stand still. It was previously reported that the United States is experiencing a real boom in the construction of private spaceports. In addition, a lot of media attention is paid to space startups from China, Japan, New Zealand and other countries.
Photos used:
SpaceX
259 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 17 December 2019 10: 31
    -29
    At the same time, a number of experts are already predicting extremely difficult times for the famous company Ilona Mask in connection with increasing competition.
    What Rogozin’s statements are worth ...
    1. Andrey Chistyakov
      Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 10: 36
      +41
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      At the same time, a number of experts are already predicting extremely difficult times for the famous company Ilona Mask in connection with increasing competition.
      What Rogozin’s statements are worth ...

      The note does not seem to say a word about Rogozin. Do you have something personal for him?
      1. maxim947
        maxim947 17 December 2019 10: 42
        +15
        Fairings are nonsense, this is not even worth taking into account.
        1. Vyacheslav Viktorovich
          Vyacheslav Viktorovich 17 December 2019 11: 28
          -22
          The fraudster lost his fairings, disgraced himself and burned out.
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 17 December 2019 13: 14
            +8
            Quote: Vyacheslav Viktorovich
            The fraudster lost his fairings, disgraced himself and burned out.

            Cool, damn it, scammers. They took the satellite where they wanted. They drowned cheap (compared to the price of the rest of the rocket) fairings, but intend to get them.
            Not that Rogozin. He promised in the 2006th to the 2015th inhabited base on the moon, and already in the 2018th explained that the base will never be.
            25.12.2006/XNUMX/XNUMX - Russia will build a permanent station on the moon in nine years
            https://lenta.ru/news/2006/01/25/moon/

            10.04.2014/XNUMX/XNUMX - Russia will build a permanent station on the moon in sixteen years
            https://ria.ru/20140410/1003393642.html

            06.11.2018/XNUMX/XNUMX - Russia will build a base on the moon, but only robots will dwell there. The timing is not yet clear.
            https://www.rbc.ru/society/06/11/2018/5be0e0229a7947072442225c


            1. poquello
              poquello 17 December 2019 18: 02
              -2
              Quote: Shurik70
              That promised in the 2006th

              in 2006, the Americans went wild, but now they run away from Turkish air defenses, didn’t they remember anything older?
              1. Shurik70
                Shurik70 17 December 2019 20: 25
                +2
                Quote: poquello
                Quote: Shurik70
                That promised in the 2006th

                in 2006, the Americans went wild, but now they run away from Turkish air defenses, didn’t they remember anything older?

                And how could Turkish air defense justify the failure to fulfill Rogozin’s promise to build a station on the moon by 2015?
                And what does he promise by the 2030th, will you justify the failure to seize the American airliner by Somali pirates?
                1. poquello
                  poquello 17 December 2019 21: 12
                  -2
                  Quote: Shurik70
                  Quote: poquello
                  Quote: Shurik70
                  That promised in the 2006th

                  in 2006, the Americans went wild, but now they run away from Turkish air defenses, didn’t they remember anything older?

                  And how could Turkish air defense justify the failure to fulfill Rogozin’s promise to build a station on the moon by 2015?
                  And what does he promise by the 2030th, will you justify the failure to seize the American airliner by Somali pirates?

                  for those especially gifted with direct text, in 2006 even the Georgians didn’t rush to Tskhinvali, but it turns out that Rogozin should have known all the events
                  1. tracer
                    tracer 18 December 2019 04: 50
                    -1
                    For some near-by problems of the world, specific people must know and beat everyone of course. And it is natural to put them up to date, and perhaps even consult. Well, is it really because of old age that some have such a roof crawling. Forgive me the elderly. And since it’s creeping, there’s nothing to fool others
                    1. poquello
                      poquello 18 December 2019 19: 37
                      +3
                      Quote: tracer
                      For some near-by problems of the world, specific people must know and beat everyone of course. And it is natural to put them up to date, and perhaps even consult. Well, is it really because of old age that some have such a roof crawling. Forgive me the elderly. And since it’s creeping, there’s nothing to fool others

                      thoughtful phrase, sorry I didn’t understand anything)
            2. ALEX_SHTURMAN
              ALEX_SHTURMAN 18 December 2019 16: 25
              +2
              They didn’t drown them, they pulled them out of the water, just the ships couldn’t catch the cowl flaps in the net. This is done in order to prevent contact with sea water.
        2. Fraracol_2
          Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 23
          +3
          Well, do you have to write something? Nothing more.
      2. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 17 December 2019 10: 44
        -18
        I have a personal touch with any loud statements, poorly supported by real deeds. Let's wait for the implementation of his declared "lift"?
        And what is your relationship with Mr. Official?
        1. Andrey Chistyakov
          Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 10: 46
          +13
          Quote: Leader of the Redskins
          I have a personal touch with any loud statements, poorly supported by real deeds. Let's wait for the implementation of his declared "lift"?
          And what is your relationship with Mr. Official?

          I'm talking about a note. When they write about Rogozin, then you will "come off" to the fullest.
          1. The leader of the Redskins
            The leader of the Redskins 17 December 2019 10: 50
            -15
            That is, "step to the left, step to the right? .." Don't you need to look wider? And why, then, are the competitors listed in the note "stepping on the heels"? They are not to the fairings from any side. And the corporation led by Rogozin could be a competitor to the mask.
            And you, unlike me, did not answer the question about your feelings for the mentioned official.
            1. Andrey Chistyakov
              Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 10: 54
              +12
              Quote: Leader of the Redskins
              That is, "step to the left, step to the right? .." Don't you need to look wider? And why, then, are the competitors listed in the note "stepping on the heels"? They are not to the fairings from any side. And the corporation led by Rogozin could be a competitor to the mask.
              And you, unlike me, did not answer the question about your feelings for the mentioned official.

              You have a very bad perception. What kind of competitors ?! Re-read. For you.
              "For those of the famous company of Elon Musk, a number of experts are already predicting extremely difficult times due to the intensifying competition.

              Blue Origin Jeff Bezos’s New Glenn is under development, which could be a sensation in the 2020s. The concept of reusable media from Blue Origin is largely similar to SpaceX, but has a more modern and promising engine.

              Less eminent competitors do not stand still either. Earlier it was reported that the United States is experiencing a real boom in the construction of private spaceports. In addition, a lot of media attention is paid to space startups from China, Japan, New Zealand and other countries. "
              1. The leader of the Redskins
                The leader of the Redskins 17 December 2019 10: 58
                -24
                That is, the companies / start-ups that you listed and copied by you are not competitors, but friends who are the worst and partners? !!
                Dear, maybe your perception is not in order? ...
                1. Andrey Chistyakov
                  Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 10: 59
                  +24
                  Quote: Leader of the Redskins
                  That is, the companies / start-ups that you listed and copied by you are not competitors, but friends who are the worst and partners? !!
                  Dear, maybe your perception is not in order? ...

                  Find the surname Rogozin. Give a magnifier?
                2. Mainbeam
                  Mainbeam 17 December 2019 12: 14
                  +16
                  Quote: Leader of the Redskins
                  not competitors

                  Rogozin was not mentioned, therefore, not a competitor))
                  1. poquello
                    poquello 17 December 2019 18: 06
                    +3
                    Quote: MainBeam
                    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
                    not competitors

                    Rogozin was not mentioned, therefore, not a competitor))

                    where are the Chinese?
                  2. Kazbek
                    Kazbek 18 December 2019 00: 15
                    +3
                    Crap is full. In 2019, Russia made 20 launches. US as much. Where do you get 60% from Mask and 10% from RK? This nonsense is good to post in every topic !!!

                    PS. The Chinese have 32 launches. Where are the Chinese ??
              2. Fraracol_2
                Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 27
                +12
                Absolutely correct question about Rogozin, as a competitor. Have you completely put an end to Russian cosmonautics?
            2. bk316
              bk316 17 December 2019 10: 57
              +14
              That is, "step to the left, step to the right? .."

              This is not a step to the left - it is a flood. And I think simulacrum.
              1. The leader of the Redskins
                The leader of the Redskins 17 December 2019 11: 03
                -20
                Flood (from incorrectly spoken [1] English flood “flood, stream”) - the same type of non-topic posts in Internet forums

                Here is the definition of flooding. Can you tell me the same type? Or do you think this official is not related to space? I didn’t mention Pushkin.
                1. Mestny
                  Mestny 17 December 2019 11: 38
                  +9
                  This has nothing to do with the topic of the article.
                  Well, that's it for this article - no way.
                  Therefore, yes - flood.
                  1. Invoce
                    Invoce 17 December 2019 13: 24
                    +5
                    Quote: Mestny
                    This has nothing to do with the topic of the article.
                    Well, that's it for this article - no way.
                    Therefore, yes - flood.

                    Yes, here is the whole discussion not of the article itself, but of claims

                    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
                    Flood (from incorrectly spoken [1] English flood “flood, stream”) - the same type of non-topic posts in Internet forums
                    Here is the definition of flooding. Can you tell me the same type? Or do you think this official is not related to space? I didn’t mention Pushkin.

                    one individual on the originality of thinking and his special life position ...
                    Definitely FLOOD, memory and delirium "about nothing" yes
                  2. Fraracol_2
                    Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 30
                    +3
                    The question is directly related. The article mentions competitors, if Roscosmos is not a competitor at all, then okay.
                2. Tersky
                  Tersky 17 December 2019 16: 49
                  +2
                  Quote: Leader of the Redskins
                  Here is the definition of flooding.

                  What is so selectively? To voice what is beneficial and to keep silent about the essence is, as it were, to put it mildly, cunning. In the VO rules, the definition of flooding as a violation of the latter is unequivocal: c) flooding, comments not related to the subject of the article, and the meaninglessness of the comment.
                3. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 18 December 2019 10: 56
                  +1
                  Chief of the Redskins (Nazarius)
                  Here is the definition of flooding. Can you tell me the same type? Or do you think this official is not related to space? I didn’t mention Pushkin.

                  You are not a fluder, but a simple populist. That is, you intentionally mention Rogozin for hype, and not for the sake of objectivity. A kind of stamp to get more likes. But something today did not grow together with you ....
              2. Shaitan_by
                Shaitan_by 17 December 2019 13: 46
                +5
                you do not confuse flood and offtopic?
            3. The comment was deleted.
            4. orionvitt
              orionvitt 17 December 2019 11: 28
              +4
              Quote: Leader of the Redskins
              And the corporation led by Rogozin could be a competitor to Mask.

              But what, not a competitor? When the Americans scorched in their space programs, but it was necessary to fly into space, that they bowed to Rogozin Corporation. Yes, and you might think that in the American space program, only successes, and failures, only Roskosmos. Or, on the contrary, I see a speck in my eye, but I don’t notice a log in someone else’s. I repeat, when the Americans send a manned spacecraft into orbit, with astronauts on board, then I admit that they still caught up with Russia in space technology.
              1. The popuas
                The popuas 17 December 2019 11: 57
                +6
                Rogozin Corporation belay it’s like ...
                1. Jack O'Neill
                  Jack O'Neill 17 December 2019 12: 08
                  -8
                  Korolev himself shook hands with Rogozin, called his brother! And Glushko, by the way, called Rogozin - the father of Soviet cosmonautics!
                2. orionvitt
                  orionvitt 17 December 2019 19: 59
                  0
                  If you read correctly, then I wrote about Roscosmos. So, taken out of context, and think that they are smarter than everyone.
              2. Kirill Dou
                Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 12: 11
                -1
                But what, not a competitor?
                - in the market of commercial launches - almost no competitor, unfortunately.

                I repeat, when the Americans send a manned spacecraft into orbit, with astronauts on board, then I admit that they still caught up with Russia in space technology.
                - why wait so long? Until 2011, the United States was in full use of the manned Space Shuttles.
                1. fighter angel
                  fighter angel 17 December 2019 12: 25
                  +8
                  kiril dou
                  “... I repeat, when the Americans send a manned spacecraft into orbit with astronauts on board, then I admit that they have caught up with Russia in space technology.
                  - why wait so long? until 2011, the United States was using manned Space Shuttles with might and main ... "

                  And you count how many of our "Unions", "Progress", "Cosmos" and others. AES accounted for one launch of the American "shuttle" ???
                  They did not "use" at all.
                  "Shuttles" flew through a stump-deck, on average, once every five years. The largest catastrophes also occurred in the "shuttle traders". There is nothing to say about the cost - prohibitively expensive.
                  1. prodd
                    prodd 17 December 2019 13: 16
                    -5
                    The shuttles finished flying in 2011 and only last year the unions were able to surpass them in the number of flights. So they flew every five years. more than 130 times. Why compare cargo progress with manned launches?
                    1. fighter angel
                      fighter angel 17 December 2019 13: 51
                      +11
                      Ahhh, gentlemen amerophiles began to pull themselves up ...
                      Kiryusha "asked for reinforcements" ?!

                      Well then, let's figure it out.
                      The number of Shuttle flights is really 135, and all of them were manned.
                      Soyuz has 143 launches in manned mode, plus 23 more in automatic.
                      This means that Soyuz has 166 flights.
                      In what past year and by how much were we supposedly able to surpass them?
                      What kind of absurdity?
                      Did we immediately make 31 launches in one year?
                      The couple was not like that?
                      So what the hell is bald, are they like us, "surpassed"?
                      The fact that "shuttles" cannot fly in automatic mode, and especially land, is their huge disadvantage! Our "Buran" could fly, and work in orbit, and maneuver, and land in fully automatic mode! Yankes, and could not "portray" anything like that on their Shuttles! And you could, you see, there would not have been 14 people killed in the Challenger and Columbia ...
                      The shuttles could not fly in automatic mode.
                      And our "Soyuz" and "Buran" flew quite normally!
                      Take the average duration of the shuttle flight. It is 2-4 days, maximum 5-7 days. Not more. "Unions" fly for much longer periods.
                      Progress is essentially the same Soyuz, only cargo, and fully automatic.
                      Therefore, it will be logical to add the number of Progress flights to the number of Soyuz flights! How many were there? And there were more than 40 of them ...
                      So the total score is 206/135. And it is clearly in favor of the Soyuz.
                      1. Good_Anonymous
                        Good_Anonymous 17 December 2019 13: 56
                        +1
                        Quote: fighter angel
                        The number of Shuttle flights is really 135, and all of them were manned.


                        But not so long ago you stated that "on average, once every five years." It turns out, you lied? feel
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 17 December 2019 14: 20
                        +5
                        Good Anonymous.
                        What would you understand was, "once every five years" is a figurative expression.
                        It does not imply specific figures.
                        I clarified the numbers and cited in the following comment ...
                        And "shuttles" are generally "quick-fighters", they will only announce their launch in the news, you see, and he is already landing at Cape Canaveral ... You do not have time to fix such a "flight" in your thoughts and memory ... But Soyuz "- if you go on a flight, then seriously and for a long time! That is why they are remembered more than "shuttle traders" ...
                      4. Good_Anonymous
                        Good_Anonymous 17 December 2019 22: 48
                        +1
                        Quote: fighter angel
                        And the "shuttles" - in general, "fast-firing", they will only announce the launch in the news, you look, and he is already landing at Cape Canaveral ... You do not have time to fix such a "flight" in your thoughts and memory ... But Soyuz "- if you go on a flight, then seriously and for a long time!


                        Takeoff and landing are the most difficult and dangerous moments of flight.
                      5. prodd
                        prodd 17 December 2019 14: 00
                        +1
                        We are talking about successful manned launches. Parity over them with a long-flying shuttle
                      6. The comment was deleted.
                      7. The comment was deleted.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 17 December 2019 16: 16
                        +9
                        And because for Unions and Progress, the total number of launches / flights is considered.
                        They, in contrast to the "shuttle" machines are universal!
                        They can fly with the crew, but they can - in automatic mode!
                        Shuttles cannot do this, they are only being piloted!
                        This is a big minus of shuttles, and you, wanting to turn it into a plus, for yourself, are trying to consider only "manned" flights.
                        Unsuccessful attempt to get out and present white and black.
                        Shuttles do not have the same capabilities as Alliances and Progress.
                        For shuttles, the total number of flights is equal to the number of manned flights, but for Unions, the total number of flights is the sum of manned and automatic flights.
                        That is why, experts take exactly the total numbers of launches.
                        And then it turns out that "the pride of America" ​​is in the ass!
                      10. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 15: 52
                        -6
                        Ahhh, gentlemen amerophiles began to pull themselves up ...
                        Kiryusha "asked for reinforcements" ?!
                        - Kiryusha will now "smear" you himself, like butter on bread.

                        So, let's begin.

                        The number of Shuttle flights is really 135, and all of them were manned.
                        This means that Soyuz has 166 flights.


                        And now we look at the years of operation of these ships.
                        Soyuz: 1966 - 2019 - 53 years old.
                        "Shuttle". 1981 - 2011 - 30 years old.

                        Total: flying 23 years less Soyuz, Shuttles made only 31 flights less, and if we count purely manned flights (which was originally discussed) - then only 8 less.

                        And if it is entirely fair, then, given the years of operation of the Soyuz, manned launches of the Gemini (11) and Apollo (also 11) spacecraft must be added to the manned space shuttle launches. Total - 157, which is more than manned Soyuz launches to date. And I consider this only manned, without taking into account the Apollo launches in unmanned modes.

                        And you count how many of our "Unions", "Progress", "Cosmos" and others. AES accounted for one launch of the American "shuttle" ???
                        - why should I count the launches of Progress, Cosmos and other satellites, if the conversation you got into with your "very valuable" (no) opinion was about manned spacecraft?

                        The fact that "shuttles" cannot fly in automatic mode, and especially land, is their huge disadvantage!
                        - actually the only thing in which the Shuttle could not be automatic was landing. But what is the "huge minus" here is not clear. This is a manned ship, it was designed to be operated by people. For unmanned missions, the Americans had automatic vehicles.

                        Yankes, and could not "portray" anything like that on their Shuttles! And you could, you see, there would not have been 14 people killed in the Challenger and Columbia ...
                        - the disasters of both Shuttles were not in any way related to the fact that they could not land in automatic mode.

                        "And our Soyuz and Buran flew quite normally!"
                        - our "Buran" flew only once. Without a payload and a crew, which, in fact, it was intended to launch into orbit. And I still do not understand the meaning of unmanned spacecraft launches, which were intended specifically for manned flights.

                        Take the average duration of the shuttle flight. It is 2-4 days, maximum 5-7 days. Not more. "Unions" fly for much longer periods.


                        The longest autonomous (that is, without docking to the orbital station) flight of the Soyuz (Soyuz-9) - 17,8 day. The maximum long-term flight of the Shuttle (mission STS-80) - 17 days 16 hours (as much as 66 minutes less). So all your "Soyuz flew much longer" and "Shuttles flew a maximum of 5-7 days" simply do not correspond to reality.

                        And I'm not even talking about the fact that the Shuttles, in contrast to the Soyuz, did not just fly, but were used to repair and maintain satellites, information satellites from orbit, various scientific experiments (thanks to the built-in laboratory "Spylab", etc. .d.

                        And if, as I wrote above, we add Apollo to the Shuttles, then the Americans really surpassed us - they landed their astronauts on the moon 6 times, which the USSR / Russia never achieved.
                      11. Connor MacLeod
                        Connor MacLeod 17 December 2019 16: 06
                        +9
                        Only for some reason did you forget to mention that the cost of launching the Shuttle is £ 400, and the cost of launching the Union is $ 000. They forgot ... They were carried away by the story ...
                      12. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 01
                        +1
                        Quote: Connor MacLeod
                        Only for some reason did you forget to mention that the cost of launching the Shuttle is £ 400, and the cost of launching the Union is $ 000. They forgot ... They were carried away by the story ...


                        I did not forget - just the question of cost was not raised. But well, let's take a closer look at it.

                        So, the cost of 1 launch of the shuttle is $ 400 million. At the same time, the shuttle can put up to 1 people into orbit and at the same time - 8 tons of cargo. In addition, the Shuttle can repair satellites in orbit, as well as return satellites (or cargo from the station) back to Earth. And thanks to the Spacelab laboratory installed in its instrumentation compartment, it also allows complex experiments to be carried out in orbit (right in the Shuttle).

                        The cost of launching Soyuz is $ 40 million. However, he can only take on board 3 people and 30 kg of cargo. It cannot repair or return satellites from orbit, and from the station it can return no more than 100 kg of cargo in a descent capsule. Further, the Soyuz's ability to transport cargo will not be taken into account for simplicity, because this ability is negligible. We will only take into account its ability to put people into orbit.
                        In other words, to deliver to orbit as many people as the Shuttle (8 people), you need 3 launches of the Soyuz. 3 multiplied by $ 40 million - we get $ 120 million.

                        But the Shuttle can simultaneously withdraw 24,5 tons of cargo. Trucks for Russia are "Progress" with a maximum carrying capacity of 2,5 tons (10 times less) and a launch cost - about the same $ 40 million. At the same time, "Progress" is not able to do anything except to deliver the cargo to the station - it cannot even return anything from orbit, because it completely burns up in the atmosphere.
                        In total, to simply deliver the shuttle's 24,5 tons of cargo into orbit, 10 Progress launches will be required. multiplying 10 by 40 million dollars - we get 400 million dollars.

                        In total, Russia will need $ 1 million to launch as many people and cargo as the Shuttle brought into orbit at one time.

                        And this is just to put people and cargo into orbit, because not to repair the satellite. neither return it from orbit, nor return cargo from the Soyuz and Progress stations.

                        These are the prices.
                      13. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 18 December 2019 10: 30
                        0
                        kirill dou /
                        But there are, and most often, such launches, when the "super-duper" carrying capacity is not needed at all!
                        You don’t need to carry 24.5 tons of cargo into orbit, but you only need to take 2-3 tons.
                        Shall we chase the shuttle?
                        Will we carry the "Gazel" cargo on the "Kamaz" ???
                        And pay for the "Gazelle" at "Kamaz" rates?
                        Whose patient are you in this case?
                        Prices - by prices, and profitability - by profitability!
                        Here is such a reality ...
                      14. fighter angel
                        fighter angel 17 December 2019 16: 55
                        +3
                        Once again, for the stupid "smears" and "cramps" I will repeat.
                        Consider all flights of the shuttles, and they are all manned, and all flights of the Unions.
                        And compare. The fact that the shuttle started flying later is the problems of the Indians ...
                        Intensive exploitation also led to the disaster of "Columbia".
                        How much after it all the shuttles became funny?
                        And how long did they anchor after the Challenger?
                        Buran flew only once, but then flew!
                        Amersam turned this out of power. If it were not for the treacherous collapse of the country, they would now have a versatile reusable spacecraft in service, moreover, with the possibility of working in the drone mode and for military use.
                        You do not understand the meaning of unmanned launches of manned ships?
                        What time were you lost?
                        Everywhere is the development of unmanned vehicles in almost all areas!
                        Do you question the global trend?
                        Then ask your "friends", for whom you are here trampling: why the hell are they "global hawk"?
                        Moon landing 6 times?
                        Why not 10? Yes, let's get 50 right away!
                        Why trifle something ...
                        The entire landing on the moon is Kubrick's secret film shot in the pavilion!
                        There was no landing, there was a global global swindle!
                        There were only Soviet interplanetary automatic stations on the Moon, created at the SA Lavochkin Design Bureau, and our "Lunokhod", which was successfully controlled from Earth. There were no Apollos with "lunar" modules there.
                      15. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 03
                        -2
                        The entire landing on the moon is Kubrick's secret film shot in the pavilion!
                        There was no landing, there was a global global swindle!
                        - after this, you can no longer communicate with the patient.
                      16. Genry
                        Genry 17 December 2019 17: 09
                        +5
                        Quote: Kirill Dou
                        manned space shuttle launches must be supplemented with Gemini manned launches (11)

                        The "specialist" is immediately visible.
                        Gemini can be called a training capsule, since they never entered orbit and at the top of the trajectory had a speed close to zero, like a stone thrown up. Upon landing, they did not enter the atmosphere at a speed close to the first space one and did not have thermal protection. MiG-31 makes such flights when it jumps into space from the stratosphere.
                        With the Apollo, there were also misunderstandings, since one was even caught by Soviet sailors and then transferred to the United States.

                        And how those Apollo could fly for a long time, with their small internal volume and the absence of a sanitary facility.
                      17. Avior
                        Avior 17 December 2019 17: 25
                        +2
                        . Similar flights are made by MiG-31

                        Is it possible in more detail? Space begins at 100 km altitude
                        Mig really can it?
                      18. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 36
                        -5
                        The "specialist" is immediately visible.
                        - Yes, you are really immediately noticeable.

                        Gemini can be called a training capsule, because they never went into orbit
                        - about how. Now let's turn to reality - for example:

                        Flight Gemini 7 (December 4, 1965) - duration: 13 days 19 h.

                        The MiG-31 makes such flights when it jumps out. to space from the stratosphere


                        Let's turn to reality again. The maximum ceiling of the MiG-31 is up to 30000 m (30 km)
                        Karmana line (officially accepted space border) - 100 km.

                        How could a plane, whose ceiling is 30 km, "jump into space", which starts at an altitude of 100 km - only your psychiatrist knows.

                        This is already enough to understand how "well" you understand the topic.

                        Where do you come from?
                      19. Genry
                        Genry 18 December 2019 01: 34
                        +5
                        Quote: Kirill Dou
                        Now let's turn to reality - for example:
                        Flight "Gemini 7" (December 4, 1965) - duration: 13 days 19 hours.

                        He was probably suspended on a cable and this flight will be recorded as "true" for a lie detector.
                        By design, with doors such as a refrigerator that open under pressure, it is almost impossible to ensure tightness.

                        And will lead to a permanent stay in a spacesuit.


                        And then the question arises: how to eat and how to poop?
                        Even opening the visor, the toilet is impossible. You consider it normal to swim in a suit in your excrement for more than 13 days.

                        And here are the relative sizes: Apollo - Gemini - Mercury with the corresponding launch vehicles. This is the question: where and how did the tins of Gemini and Mercury fly.

                        Well, for sure - a bucket: there is no thermal sheathing, part of the screws and washers fell off.

                        Quote: Kirill Dou
                        The maximum ceiling of the MiG-31 is up to 30000 m (30 km)

                        Flight record at a static height of 37650m.
                        I’m talking about dynamic altitude, when the plane accelerates and makes a hill (bounces).
                      20. Mityay65
                        Mityay65 18 December 2019 18: 15
                        -2
                        wink Competently!
                        You gave me an inspiration for a new and unexpected side of American astronautics: the Gemini and Apolon crews are actually "space flights"? laughing
                        This is enchanting!
                    2. orionvitt
                      orionvitt 17 December 2019 20: 05
                      +2
                      Quote: prodd
                      Shuttles finished flying in 2011

                      That's it, finished. And since then, they fly only on Russian ships. I don’t understand what you want to prove? Eight years have passed and where is the American space? Iron has been sent to space, everyone has already learned, but man, now only Russia. China, too, seems to be slipping.
                      1. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 22: 52
                        -3
                        Your comment sounded like this:
                        I repeat when the Americans send a manned ship into orbit, with astronauts on board, then I admit that they still caught up with Russia in space technology.
                        .

                        So, actually the Americans sent their astronaut into orbit back in 1962.
                      2. orionvitt
                        orionvitt 17 December 2019 23: 43
                        +1
                        Well, if you are tempted, I will paraphrase, especially for you. "then I admit that they do once again caught up with Russia in space technology. "
                  2. Fraracol_2
                    Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 35
                    -5
                    You are too lazy to see on the Internet, there are only 122 of ours, American 343. The question is removed?
                    1. fighter angel
                      fighter angel 17 December 2019 15: 50
                      +5
                      Rude lies, dear.
                      Have you come up with?
                      A link to the source, please!
                      Without this, you spoil the pond and scare the fish in it.
            5. Incvizitor
              Incvizitor 17 December 2019 15: 44
              +2
              You do not need to look wider?
              you need to look at things wider and treat people softer? In the Union of such re-educated and now something with alcoholics, parasites, hooligans GDP played up ...
          2. doodlez
            doodlez 17 December 2019 22: 13
            0
            I'm talking about a note. When they write about Rogozin, then you will "come off" in full. Everything is clear from which hands you feed.
      3. LifeIsGood
        LifeIsGood 17 December 2019 10: 53
        +14
        What do you mean .. this is also a great excuse to leave the "soft and smelly". And no matter what topic. Now there will be people who will also start to remember the "raising the retirement age". smile
        1. Andrey Chistyakov
          Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 10: 56
          +7
          Quote: LifeIsGood
          What do you mean .. this is also a great excuse to leave the "soft and smelly". And no matter what topic. Now there will be people who will also start to remember the "raising the retirement age". smile

          What are we talking about. The "comrade" is trying.
        2. The popuas
          The popuas 17 December 2019 11: 57
          -3
          Let's talk about the mask dear.
          1. Mestny
            Mestny 17 December 2019 14: 38
            -2
            What kind of mask? Whom?
            For some reason, any message about the launch of something into space immediately causes a storm of eruptions in the comments.
            Well launched, well, not without problems, not fatal. So what? Normal, ordinary launch.
            1. Alex rex
              Alex rex 17 December 2019 20: 02
              -1
              Look at the number of patents registered by Elon Musk’s campaigns, there are a lot of developments in many areas, from logistics to space. There are more than a hundred such patents, and each of them is a unique idea, which appeared on paper thanks to the fantasy and money of the Mask. But Rogozin is just a balabol who cuts folk money and eats his mug. Gagarin would be ashamed of what Soviet space technology and programs, once the best in the world, had turned into. Ugh on you, Mr. Rogozin!
      4. Hunter 2
        Hunter 2 17 December 2019 10: 55
        +9
        Quote: Andrey Chistyakov
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        At the same time, a number of experts are already predicting extremely difficult times for the famous company Ilona Mask in connection with increasing competition.
        What Rogozin’s statements are worth ...

        The note does not seem to say a word about Rogozin. Do you have something personal for him?

        Duck at All-Finger ... Space - Rogozin - propalipolymers, synonyms! Regardless of the Country, the BLOOD regime and Rogozin are to blame at the same time ... fool
        You’ve asked a question to a tank with a jammed tower in the avatar! good
        1. The popuas
          The popuas 17 December 2019 11: 58
          +5
          Let's talk about fairings
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 17 December 2019 12: 05
            +13
            "Let's talk about fairings" ///
            ----
            Fairings (two halves) they still catch out of the water. But after contact with seawater, the fairings require a "rehabilitation" process to re-launch. And those caught dry do not.
            The cost of two halves is $ 5 million.
            1. Fat
              Fat 17 December 2019 14: 13
              0
              For the money you can dive)))
            2. Mestny
              Mestny 17 December 2019 14: 39
              0
              Although it would seem - what is there in those fairings of 5 million?
            3. slipped
              slipped 17 December 2019 16: 58
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              "Let's talk about fairings" ///


              Quote: voyaka uh
              The cost of two halves is $ 5 million.


              Declared the price of $ 6 million. And it is very expensive. That's why they catch it.
              1. Kirill Dou
                Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 06
                -2
                You, as I understand it, are close to the national cosmonautics - can you tell me how much the proton fairing costs?
                1. slipped
                  slipped 17 December 2019 17: 08
                  +4
                  Quote: Kirill Dou
                  You, as I understand it, are close to the national cosmonautics - can you tell me how much the proton fairing costs?


                  If memory serves me right, then in rubles (if translated into dollars) is half the price. And the largest composite Union is three times.
                  1. Kirill Dou
                    Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 21
                    -1
                    Thank. In principle, the benefit in returning a fairing is small, but still there.
                  2. Mityay65
                    Mityay65 17 December 2019 17: 31
                    -6
                    Ilona must be told that duralumin will not be much heavier in weight, but duralumin, unlike a composite, does not care for sea water. True, he will sink, we need floats. belay
                    1. Vadim237
                      Vadim237 17 December 2019 19: 57
                      -1
                      The sea water doesn’t care for this composite either.
                      1. Mityay65
                        Mityay65 17 December 2019 20: 40
                        -2
                        Ilon thinks differently.
            4. SASHA OLD
              SASHA OLD 17 December 2019 19: 55
              0
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Fairings (two halves) they still catch out of the water. But after contact with seawater, the fairings require a "rehabilitation" process to re-launch. And those caught dry do not.

              this is understandable: fairings after water should flow around ..) laughing
              Good day
      5. Hog
        Hog 17 December 2019 10: 56
        -13
        The article is about experts (Rogozin is one of them).
        1. Andrey Chistyakov
          Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 10: 58
          +3
          Quote: Hog
          The article is about experts (Rogozin is one of them).

          True? "Look wide" ...
          1. Hog
            Hog 17 December 2019 11: 00
            +3
            It was an irony
            1. Andrey Chistyakov
              Andrey Chistyakov 17 December 2019 11: 00
              0
              Quote: Hog
              It was an irony

              Then I apologize.
      6. Azazelo
        Azazelo 17 December 2019 11: 05
        +9
        They all have something for Rogozin. He is almost the second Putin. No matter what happens in the world regarding space - immediately Rogozin Rogozin Rogozin ... Probably in a dream they do not part with him.
        1. Fraracol_2
          Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 43
          0
          And what about space does the head of the Veterinary Directorate need to remember?
      7. Fraracol_2
        Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 22
        -1
        You see that you don’t expect Rogozin to compete with American space entrepreneurs?
        1. Mestny
          Mestny 17 December 2019 14: 40
          -2
          Is he also a "space entrepreneur"?
          1. Fraracol_2
            Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 49
            +1
            Well, something is also sort of taking it. What would you call a Mask, etc.? Not an official?
    2. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 17 December 2019 10: 50
      -3
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      At the same time, a number of experts are already predicting extremely difficult times for the famous company Ilona Mask in connection with increasing competition.
      What Rogozin’s statements are worth ...

      don’t care ... the main thing is that the neighbor’s cow died!
      1. bessmertniy
        bessmertniy 17 December 2019 11: 02
        +6
        In fact, I would like to understand where we are in this race, and what are our chances of not being in the tail. what
        1. Mestny
          Mestny 17 December 2019 14: 41
          -3
          We are in this race while in the leading positions.
          The race is not about who will bring more small trash into orbit.
          The race is who will begin to deliver heavy loads there, and master the moon. Wow, the race.
          1. Fraracol_2
            Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 51
            +1
            Would you really like something more detailed on this topic? A very curious and unexpected statement.
          2. Kirill Dou
            Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 17
            -2
            The race is who is there heavy loads will begin to deliver and master the moon. Wow yes race
            - but then Russia is all the more not in the leading positions.
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 17 December 2019 15: 52
          0
          In terms of reusable first stages, superheavy missiles and reusable cargo ships, Russia has long been in the tail.
    3. svp67
      svp67 17 December 2019 12: 28
      +6
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      What Rogozin’s statements are worth ...

      Well, where is he without it ... So far, the Mask cannot be outdone, but "spit", so on time ...
      Less venerable competitors also do not stand still. It was previously reported that the United States is experiencing a real boom in the construction of private spaceports. In addition, a lot of media attention is paid to space startups from China, Japan, New Zealand and other countries.
      What a pity that our country has slipped from the first positions to the position of "other countries"
    4. Alex rex
      Alex rex 17 December 2019 20: 01
      -5
      The first deputy general director of Roscosmos, Yuri Urlichich, said that “some comrades” forbid him from quoting Ilon Mask at official events.

      “Some comrades forbid me to quote Ilon Mask, so I quote Stalin ... Personnel who have mastered technology decide everything,” RIA Novosti quoted Urlichich as saying. The first deputy director general of Roskosmos did not specify which "comrades" were in question.

      Recall that previously the general director of the state corporation "Roskosmos" has repeatedly criticized the activities of Ilon Mask. In particular, Rogozin accused Musk of lowering the cost of rocket launches into space in order to remove Russia from this market. In addition, Rogozin doubted Musk’s ability to create rocket engines that could outperform Russian ones.

      However, despite this, Dmitry Rogozin said that Russia plans to use some technical solutions developed by Ilon Mask. “In general, I believe that he (Ilon Mask - approx. Ed.) Should be taken very seriously. For example, I carefully analyzed some of his technical solutions with our specialists and I can say that we are ashamed, but we will use something, ”Rogozin said.

      Elon Musk is the head of SpaceX and Tesla. One of the latest achievements of the Mask was the launch by SpaceX of the Falcon 9 rocket with satellites, which should give Internet access to all the inhabitants of the Earth. In addition, it was reported that Space X planned its first flight to Mars in 2022.
  2. knn54
    knn54 17 December 2019 10: 33
    +1
    Probably the parachutes were Chinese.
    1. Piramidon
      Piramidon 17 December 2019 10: 43
      0
      Quote: knn54
      Probably the parachutes were Chinese.

      Rather network. laughing
      They were planned to be caught in special nets, but "missed".
    2. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 52
      -1
      Unlikely. But parachutes for fairings are still okay, bad when all the electronics.
  3. Graf56
    Graf56 17 December 2019 10: 34
    +6
    So why post this at all? In this subtext?
    To cheat someone else's, for there is none?
    Is this a difficult time for Mask? Or Roscosmos?
    Who really is not able to catch up with competitors?
    1. Horon
      Horon 17 December 2019 11: 25
      +1
      To cheat someone else's, for there is none?


      Stopped flying into space?
      1. Kirill Dou
        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 37
        -1
        Well, the Proton-M launch vehicle (of the same class as the Falcon-9) has actually almost stopped flying.
        1. Horon
          Horon 17 December 2019 11: 54
          +4
          "Almost" doesn't count. There are no orders for this PH. There are too many factors to reduce the number of flights, so now is not the best time for Russian space. The Americans have now created greenhouse conditions for their companies, so there is a "seething of the masses" there, while Russia has to work in not the best conditions, including the lack of priority in the development of space. Thank God they didn't abandon space at all!
          1. Kirill Dou
            Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 12: 02
            +2
            Quote: Horon
            "Almost" doesn't count. There are no orders for this PH.
            - well, generally there is a little. But most of them are not commercial, but "internal".

            The Americans have now created greenhouse conditions for their companies, so there is a "seething of masses"
            - right. The Americans are great in this regard. Our not.
            1. Horon
              Horon 17 December 2019 12: 11
              +2
              The Americans did not tug at their state, did not lose allies and territory. Therefore, I am glad that this industry has not been profiled at all, though it's not over yet. Some other "reformer" will come and then it will be possible to put an end to it.
              1. Good_Anonymous
                Good_Anonymous 17 December 2019 14: 02
                +3
                Quote: Horon
                Therefore, it pleases that this industry has not been completely profaned, though it is still not evening.


                By evening, they will have 2 companies with reusable launch vehicles.

                And if Skylon takes off ...
              2. Fraracol_2
                Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 57
                -1
                The reformer has not come yet?
          2. Fraracol_2
            Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 56
            -1
            No, but in general will be? What should change in the future in favor of Proton? Do you see any factor? What are you saying?
      2. Graf56
        Graf56 17 December 2019 13: 37
        -2
        We are still flying. The key word is bye.
        But, you know, it is hardly worth being proud of the role of a space cab to the ISS. Moreover, the transportation is carried out on vehicles based on the royal "seven". The genius of the Queen cannot be belittled, but what does today's Russia have to do with this? Only what assembles the units? Designed in the last century?
        And there is nothing more to be proud of.
        There are no new carriers. Including heavy type "nine" Mask.
        No new spaceships.
        No new space technology.
        But there are Rogozin dreams of lunar bases.
        We have long lost priority in space, you just have to honestly admit it. And the legacy of the USSR no longer saves.
        And today they rule in space others.
        Other rovers launch.
        Probes are planted on asteroids.
        Bring the apparatus beyond the limits of the solar system.
        They dream of a global satellite Internet and are already taking real steps to implement this.
        1. Alex rex
          Alex rex 17 December 2019 20: 06
          -6
          You are completely right! Lost all leadership positions! It is enough to recall, for example, how many patents Musk has handed over to the World, and Rospilkosmos, in addition to assimilating and cutting money for more, is not capable!

          https://patents.justia.com/company/tesla


          Here is a real achievement. This is a list of patents that Elon Musk gave to the world at no cost from Tesla. You can read and analyze on your own how this or that technology is unique and useful for society.
    2. Mestny
      Mestny 17 December 2019 14: 42
      -7
      Well, and who?
      Don’t tell me.
      1. Graf56
        Graf56 17 December 2019 15: 55
        +2
        That's for me?
        Do you offer me to list the list of NOT Russian achievements of recent years?
        Excuse me
        Kepler Orbital Telescope (Kepler). By the way, it is already fulfilling mission K2.
        The Rosetta space probe sat on the surface of the moving comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko. 
        Japanese apparatus "Hayabusa-2."
        Heavy carrier Falcon Heavy Mask.
        Mars rover Curiosity.
        Mars rover Opportunity.
        InSight research robot to study the same Mars.
        Cassini space probe to study Saturn.
        TESS station.
        Chinese station Chang'e.
        Launch by the American Aerospace Agency of the newest Orion multiple spacecraft aboard the Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle.
        Falcon 9 carrier with Dragon.
        The Voyager 2 probe has left the boundaries of the solar system.
        Parker Solar Probe probe to observe the sun.
        BepiColombo mission apparatus for exploring Mercury.
        Space probe Dawn.
        Ultra-light rocket Electron.
        InSight spacecraft to explore Mars.
        NASA OSIRIS-rex space probe to study Bennu asteroid.
        Spacecraft SpaceShipTwo ...
        Tired of listing, the list is huge.
        Now the counter question: what achievements in space can Russia boast? I emphasize - not the USSR, but modern Russia?
        I ask you not to mention the transport to the ISS and the repair of the toilets; this is already sore.
        For the state is not offensive?
        To me - very much.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 17 December 2019 20: 01
          +1
          The spectrum of the WG, Radioastron, Rosatom is completing the nuclear power and propulsion system, Energomash is conducting research on DDR.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 54
      +2
      Absolutely right. Well, it's so nice to people, and calmer. Only then do not be surprised at anything.
  4. The comment was deleted.
    1. eagle owl
      eagle owl 17 December 2019 10: 49
      -2
      S-ss! Do not tease! And now about pensions will begin ...
      1. Alex rex
        Alex rex 17 December 2019 20: 08
        -2
        Lev Leshchenko, in a conversation with the correspondent of Komsomolskaya Pravda, expressed his attitude to low payments to Russian pensioners. The artist completely sends his pension to charity, but, seeing how much money his wife receives every month from the state, he is horrified.

        “Let me be condemned as you please, they say, I’ve got stuck and all that. But this is a shame. My wife receives 8500 rubles. Although she worked in a creative environment. How can it be?" - the artist is perplexed.

        At the same time, Leshchenko emphasized that the average pension in Russia is declared in the amount of 25 thousand rubles. This information Leshchenko called “lies” with which he can’t put up with.

        “This is blasphemy! Thank God that I do not receive my pension - or rather, I do, but I spend on charity. Because she is so miserable - it is humiliating to follow her, ”said the singer. It is reported by Rambler. Further: https://news.rambler.ru/starlife/43284678/?utm_content=news_media&utm_medium=read_more&utm_source=copylink
        1. eagle owl
          eagle owl 17 December 2019 20: 15
          +1
          Fseprapala, we fseumrem! Give Navralny to power! He will immediately send you to retire from school! Well, of course, when he returns from the 25th vacation in a year, he is tired at work ... Although he is unemployed? belay Retired, probably
          1. Alex rex
            Alex rex 17 December 2019 20: 21
            -1
            The FSE has not disappeared yet, but officials are striving for this! It is strange that in Great Russia, pensions are lower than in the backward USA
  5. tihonmarine
    tihonmarine 17 December 2019 10: 38
    +3
    It was previously reported that the United States is experiencing a real boom in the construction of private spaceports. In addition, a lot of media attention is paid to space startups from China, Japan, New Zealand and other countries.
    The pursuit of profit pushes space exploration forward, so you look at the end of the century, the moon and Mars will populate.
    1. Loess
      Loess 17 December 2019 10: 43
      +3
      Quote: tihonmarine
      so you look at the end of the century the moon and Mars will populate.

      Well, if they find oil there)
      1. bessmertniy
        bessmertniy 17 December 2019 11: 04
        +2
        Oil from the moon will not pump. Unprofitable. feel
    2. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 59
      +4
      It should be so. This is the advantage this capitalism.
      1. Kirill Dou
        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 16: 15
        0
        I agree completely.
  6. eagle owl
    eagle owl 17 December 2019 10: 47
    -4
    Now the sect will come out again ... Approximate text: "Get ready! It was intended!"
    laughing
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 17 December 2019 10: 53
      +11
      Well, they were catching a fairing. Now not caught. All the others in the world are all disposable, but they don’t even plan to catch the fairing. For now.

      However, this article is 100% true:
      Blue Origin Jeff Bezos’s New Glenn is under development, which could be a sensation in the 2020s. The concept of reusable media from Blue Origin is largely similar to SpaceX, but has a more modern and promising engine.

      Less skilled competitors also do not stand still. It was previously reported that the United States is experiencing a real boom in the construction of private spaceports. In addition, a lot of media attention is paid to space startups from China, Japan, New Zealand and other countries.


      However, at the moment - in 2019 year:
      10 - Falconov-9, of which 3 are new and 7 are unions.
      2 - Falcon Heavy

      Musk launched more than India and Europe combined for 2019. At the same time, 6 launches were paid by private customers (mainly foreign, only 1 private launch with the money of an American company in 2019).
      1. eagle owl
        eagle owl 17 December 2019 11: 00
        -8
        Falcon restoration price WHAT? U-oops, who will tell you this ... The rest did not catch? And they do not work in MMM - LLC My Brains Mask, such an office. Why the hell do you need a charred piece of iron? But if you already boiled a kilo of sect noodles on your ears, that it is o-very environmentally friendly and even more economical - you need to catch ... And even the sect will not believe it. Especially Koga about real profitability in numbers - do not talk. And then even the plane after departure has to be serviced - long and expensive.
        But the sect will get away with a fairy tale that it is enough to catch two burnt leaves and a broken gas tank, to say "Fuck-tibidoch!" - and here you have a rocket like new, ready to fly again, and without any money!
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 17 December 2019 11: 09
          +7
          "What the heck needs a burnt piece of iron" ///
          ----
          On this charred piece - engines of the first stage. And the price of a charred piece is 1-75% of the cost of the entire rocket.
          The burnt piece is inspected visually, the "legs" and engines are checked and run again.
          Without replacing and repairing the engines.
          Two burnt pieces have already successfully launched satellites into orbits 4 times.
          And a few - three times.
          The cost of repeated launches of Falcon-9 does not exceed 20-25 million dollars. Fairing costs 5 million.
        2. Kirill Dou
          Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 16
          -6
          Falcon restoration price WHAT? U-oops, who will tell you this ...


          In fact, SpaceX themselves said:

          SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell, speaking at the 33rd Space Symposium, said the renovation costs were "significantly less than half the cost of a new first stage".


          And that's how you always have it, Owl. Either manned launches on Protons (they are on Soyuz), NASA orders a "lunar ship" from SpaceX (NASA has ordered only a spacecraft for the ISS), now this is it.
          1. eagle owl
            eagle owl 17 December 2019 11: 39
            -9
            When the Guardian came to Musk at Gigafactory and found out that he had no advertised robots there, and the Mexicans were manually "carrying Tesla into the future", plowing for 12 hours seven days a week, a sour scandal broke out ... Well, he was there, too, six months later to the sect he hung up on the ears that the working conditions on the plantation, that is, "we carry factories" - "improved by so many percent." From zero - the sect will devour.
            Significantly less - how much? Cost is how much? And in comparison with the competitor? And why do you launch your non-working satellites by Roskosmos?
            And the sect will devour and not that. Here he is not going to name the numbers - you name the number - they can be caught in a lie, again condemned for fraud. So - "much less"! And the "cost of the first step"! It is unclear whose - is it Falcone Heavy?
            Without sucker, life is bad - the motto of the sect.
            1. Kirill Dou
              Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 48
              +5
              Significantly less - how much?
              - it was written to you in Russian "less than half the cost of the new 1st stage"

              Cost is how much?
              - who cares? You talked about profitability? Spoke. Whatever price the new stage has, the inter-flight service is less, which means that the reusability is economically justified.

              And in comparison with the competitor?
              - commercial launch price disposable version Falcon-9 - 62,5 million dollars, the commercial launch of Proton-M - 65 million dollars.

              And why do you launch your non-working satellites by Roskosmos?
              - in which universe did Musk launch satellites with the help of Roscosmos? Is this from the same opera that you have "manned proton launches"?
              1. eagle owl
                eagle owl 17 December 2019 17: 12
                -1
                A sect is a sect laughing Funny ones - like bulk ... They will disappear - but they will not answer a direct question. Does the mask not say numbers? Because he is Boch! And he has his own numbers! Not subject to the fragile human mind! Harya mask, Harya Krishna ...
                1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Good_Anonymous
              Good_Anonymous 17 December 2019 13: 58
              +5
              Quote: Uhu
              When the Guardian pushed to the Mask on Gigafaktori


              Oh, Gigafactory has already gone into play. And there was a debate above that Rogozin should not be remembered - offtopic is smile
              1. eagle owl
                eagle owl 17 December 2019 17: 26
                +1
                Yeah, but with an example to explain why Musk NEVER says a specific price, just like the seller of "miracle vacuum cleaners" is offtopic? No. This is just a classic trick of fraudsters - to unravel about "advanced technologies" and "only today it is 10% cheaper", but not to say a specific amount - because it turns out that in the end it is a "miracle of nature" 20 times more expensive. As well as cram things that the user does not need. Yes, I give a fuck about what's coming back! I order delivery, and at least carry it into orbit in my hands!
                When I see that you yourself launch satellites at Roscosmos, I understand that by pushing ME your rocket, which you yourself do not use, you are injecting a miracle vacuum cleaner.
                And again: "hari mask, hari krishna"
                1. Alex rex
                  Alex rex 17 December 2019 22: 08
                  -5
                  For example, a comparison of Roscosmos and Musk missiles;
                  1. slipped
                    slipped 18 December 2019 00: 10
                    +4
                    Quote: Alex Rex
                    For example, a comparison of Roscosmos and Musk missiles;


                    False picture. There was no commercial launch in 2016; launch services on this rocket have never been offered to foreign customers. Only A1.2. The data on the withdrawn load are given theoretical for the Plesetsk cosmodrome for the RB "Briz-M". Cost is the price of a prototype, not a serial product.

                    Commercial operation of the launch vehicle will be possible from the Vostochny cosmodrome with different launch parameters and cost per launch vehicle.
                    1. Alex rex
                      Alex rex 18 December 2019 10: 13
                      -3
                      Well of course we are all the time! Nobody launches anything, only the Orthodox Rospilkosmos works
                      1. slipped
                        slipped 18 December 2019 18: 15
                        +1
                        Quote: Alex Rex
                        Well of course we are all the time! Nobody launches anything, only the Orthodox Rospilkosmos works


                        Are you ill? laughing It was about the A5.
                      2. Alex rex
                        Alex rex 18 December 2019 18: 29
                        0
                        About A5, I unsubscribed below
                    2. Alex rex
                      Alex rex 18 December 2019 13: 35
                      -4
                      Falcon 9FT
                      Main article: Falcon 9
                      First stage landing

                      The third version of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle (also known as Falcon 9 v1.2), is designed to provide the ability to return the first stage after launching the payload into any orbit, both low reference and geo-transition.

                      Among the main changes: increased engine thrust, supercooling of fuel components, an elongated second stage [6].

                      The launch vehicle will be used to launch the Dragon V2 manned spacecraft to the ISS.

                      The first launch of this version of the launch vehicle took place on December 22, 2015. 11 Orbcomm-G2 satellites were launched into orbit. During the mission, the first stage returned to the launch site and successfully landed at the site of Landing Zone 1 [7] [8] [9]. This is the first ever landing on the ground of an orbital launch vehicle stage. Falcon 9 v1.1
                      Falcon 9 v1.1, debut launch
                      Last launch of Falcon 9 v1.1
                      Main article: Falcon 9

                      The second version of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle, which replaced version 1.0. New Merlin 1D engines and extended fuel tanks have significantly increased the mass of the payload launched by the rocket.

                      In the Falcon 9 1.1 (R) modification, the first stage of the launch vehicle is equipped with a number of additional elements (landing racks, lattice steering stabilizers, reactive control system) that allow it to return after separation of the stages and make a soft landing [17].

                      The first launch of this version took place on September 29, 2013, the Canadian satellite CASSIOPE was launched from the SLC-4E launch pad at Vandenberg base [18].

                      The launch vehicle is used to launch the Dragon spaceship to the International Space Station under a contract with NASA, as well as to launch research vehicles and commercial satellites.

                      Several landings of the first stage to the water were carried out, as well as 3 unsuccessful attempts to land the stage on the Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship floating platform.

                      The latest launch of the Falcon 9 v1.1 version took place at 18:42 UTC on January 17, 2016 from the SLC-4E launch pad at the Vandenberg base, the Jason-3 oceanographic satellite was successfully launched into orbit.

                      In total, 15 launches of this version of the launch vehicle were made, one of which failed (see SpaceX CRS-7).
                      1. slipped
                        slipped 18 December 2019 18: 20
                        0
                        Quote: Alex Rex
                        Falcon 9FT


                        Right Clinic. Why is this your bunch? Falcon 9 is a good American rocket. A couple of times epic jerked. Now flies little by little.
                  2. Mavrikiy
                    Mavrikiy 19 December 2019 04: 32
                    0
                    Alex Rex (Alex Rex) You throw your Hohlyad textbooks in the trash. With us, any child without hesitation will say 1 $ = 60 with a penny. Shale. negative Yes, and what is included in the program?
        3. The comment was deleted.
        4. arkadiyssk
          arkadiyssk 17 December 2019 22: 08
          -1
          Judging by the fact that they restart the stage 5 of the Block within a week (for example, as this start is mentioned in the article), i.e. it takes only 2-3 days to prepare a stage; the rest is pre-launch procedures such as transportation and burning, the price of a stage restoration cannot be physically large. There is simply nowhere to cram a lot of man hours.
    2. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 21
      0
      Sample text: "Get ready! It was intended!"
      - But no one says that except you.
  7. DAC scratch
    DAC scratch 17 December 2019 10: 49
    +6
    Quote: Graf56
    So why post this at all? In this subtext?
    To cheat someone else's, for there is none?
    Is this a difficult time for Mask? Or Roscosmos?
    Who really is not able to catch up with competitors?

    even when fadcon heavy was launched, the title said "https://topwar.ru› News
    The upper stage of the Falcon Heavy rocket crashed during landing "
  8. Sitearvi
    Sitearvi 17 December 2019 10: 49
    +1
    "Ms. Tree "and" Ms. Chief »nearly caught the fairing halves - our team is working to bring them back for use in the next launch»

    It was they who congratulated our rocket men.

    In what year does our beloved Roscosmos promise to launch and catch something similar?
    1. JonnyT
      JonnyT 17 December 2019 11: 20
      +2
      Rogozmos has already successfully caught stagnation. And he doesn’t doze off - he produces water fittings, a new product that will tear competitors
    2. slipped
      slipped 18 December 2019 00: 14
      +2
      Quote: Saitarvi
      In what year does our beloved Roscosmos promise to launch and catch something similar?


      And we do not need to catch GO - it’s more profitable and pragmatic to make a new one. laughing
  9. DAC scratch
    DAC scratch 17 December 2019 10: 55
    +2
    in the United States since the end of the 90s, more than 10 cosmodromes have been built, so many that there aren’t enough missiles on them, but we can’t build one at https://m.hightech.plus/2018/09/06/v-ssha-bum- stroitelstva-kosmodromov-dlya-kotorih-ne-hvataet-raket
  10. Berkut24
    Berkut24 17 December 2019 10: 57
    0
    I have a purely financial issue. And the cost of a one-time fairing, by chance, is not cheaper than the construction and operation of several special vessels with special networks?
    Sometimes it seems to me that the "reusability" of the Mask is a kind of fix idea, poorly consistent with the real profitability of the project.
    1. Avior
      Avior 17 December 2019 11: 14
      +1
      Do you think that they built special vessels for catching fairings, and for each fairing at each launch - a new vessel?
      1. Fraracol_2
        Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 15: 07
        +1
        There 2 ships are needed for one half of the fairing. The network must be attached from 2 ends. It is unlikely that they thought of another, because the late Zadornov could not lie.
    2. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 20
      +2
      fairing cost for Falcon-9 - 5-7 million dollars.

      the cost of the exit of the ship-catchers for catching the fairing during landing is equal to the cost of the consumed fuel + payment for staff work. It is much, much less.
      1. Berkut24
        Berkut24 17 December 2019 11: 25
        +2
        The cost of a one-time fairing is about $ 50. That's the question of how much reusable fairings are needed.
        Right now 7 million have been lost. They again missed, as has already been the case with the steps. But these are all issues of profitability.
        1. Kirill Dou
          Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 35
          -3
          about 50 dollars.
          - where did the information come from?
          1. Berkut24
            Berkut24 17 December 2019 12: 15
            +2
            From my profession. Another thing that depends on the size, requirements for the payload, the need for additional elements, etc.
            1. Kirill Dou
              Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 14: 19
              0
              From my profession.
              - what is your profession?
              1. Fraracol_2
                Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 15: 09
                -2
                The Mask makes cost estimates for the production of fairings.
              2. Berkut24
                Berkut24 17 December 2019 17: 31
                +1
                Profession - Defend the Homeland. Let's just say - closer to bodies flying into space.
                1. Kirill Dou
                  Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 17: 48
                  -3
                  Profession - Defend the Homeland.
                  - I'm interested in a specific position. If you use information obtained from professional activities as an argument, you need to know what kind of activity it is.
                  1. Berkut24
                    Berkut24 17 December 2019 21: 15
                    +1
                    My dear, I won’t tell you more. So pass it to the SBU.
                    1. Kirill Dou
                      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 22: 55
                      -1
                      So pass it to the SBU
                      - I can’t transfer this to the SBU, because I am a citizen of Russia.

                      I won’t tell you more
                      - understandably. So you took your "50000" from the ceiling. Q.E.D.
                    2. slipped
                      slipped 18 December 2019 00: 21
                      0
                      The cost of civil defense of the Union is ~ 120 million rubles, and this is not secret information, since the rocket is successfully sold to foreigners.

                      1. slipped
                        slipped 18 December 2019 02: 07
                        +1
                        The cost of Proton GO (14С75) is ~ 186 million rubles



                        all numbers are publicly available
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 17 December 2019 11: 28
      +10
      Price 5-7 million - depending on the subtype.

      They parachuted.



      Initially, it was believed that catching in the net would not be difficult. But the first attempt failed. Significantly increased the network. Perhaps there will be some other changes to do.

      In general, a fairing fairing will help squeeze out some more economy / profit for the start. Therefore, it is justified.
    4. Errr
      Errr 17 December 2019 14: 07
      +6
      On the topic of head fairings there is an explanatory article on Habré:
      https://habr.com/ru/post/410619/
      Given all the factors of the fairing and, accordingly, the requirements for it, the latter simply can not be cheap. This is a pretty high-tech product. Therefore, its reuse is very beneficial.
  11. Hog
    Hog 17 December 2019 10: 59
    +6
    Space X has problems; they did not catch the fairing.
    Roscosmos has problems, they didn’t catch the rocket.
  12. Kirill Dou
    Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 07
    -4
    Blue Origin Jeff Bezos is developing New Glenn
    - even when New Glenn is ready, it will take time to "gain a reputation." Musk's commercial clients did not immediately flood with a shaft either.

    However, the appearance of competitors SpaceX will only benefit.
  13. Lord of the Sith
    Lord of the Sith 17 December 2019 11: 11
    -1
    Mdaa, in comparison with shuttles, crafts Mask look unconvincing, and also lose parts))
    1. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 29
      +3
      also lose parts))
      - Nothing that the Shuttle lost this red bandurin too?

      crafts Mask look unconvincing,
      - but more profitable at times.
      1. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 17 December 2019 11: 37
        -7
        This "red bandurina" is cheaper than a Zaporozhets, the shell, in principle, should not land.

        Cost-effective for what purpose?
        1. Kirill Dou
          Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 56
          +5
          Quote: Lord of the Sith
          This "red bandurina" is cheaper than a Zaporozhets, the shell, in principle, should not land.
          - And the non-returnable 2-stage Falcon-9 is also inexpensive.

          Cost-effective for what purpose?
          - to display the payload into orbit. Shuttle Launch Cost 1 kg per DOE 13 000-17 000 dollars, and Falcon-9 - 2 684 dollars.
          1. Lord of the Sith
            Lord of the Sith 17 December 2019 12: 48
            -5
            Oh, well, now let's talk about money, you see, like counting other people's money under the bed))

            Compare the capabilities of the former shuttle and this Falcon, pour Coca-Cola and calm down))
            1. Kirill Dou
              Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 14: 29
              +4
              Oh, well, now let's talk about money, you see, like counting other people's money under the bed))
              tell it to NASA, because the overly high cost of launching and servicing the Shuttles has become one of the main reasons for the closure of this program.


              Compare the possibilities of the former shuttle and this Falcon
              - the capabilities of the Shuttle were really much higher than the capabilities of Falcon (like any other launch vehicles) But only after the construction of the ISS did these capabilities become redundant, and the cost of launches and maintenance remained high. This is the unprofitability of the Shuttle.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 18: 25
                        -1
                        To offend me
                        - Oh, I have not even started to insult you.

                        and in the absence of logic, imagination and decency decides
                        - good that you are so self-critical.

                        deciding to spit words here
                        - I gave you a detailed explanation of why Falcon-9 is more profitable than the Shuttle. He backed it up with specific data on the cost of launching cargo on these two carriers. In response, you heard the meaningless "see you like to count other people's money under the bed", although the cost of launching a payload is one of the most important indicators of the efficiency of any space transport system.

                        so the only one who "crap with words" is you. And, given the lack of content and outright deceit (This "red bandurina" cheaper than cossack) of your comments - the bot is just you.

                        For reference: NASA cost estimates showed that the fuel tank is costing in 22% of the total cost of one launch of the Shuttle. Let me remind you that the average cost of one shuttle launch was 450 million... Can you calculate 22% from here? I will help you. - 90 million. 90 million was worth a "disposable shell", which, in your "authoritative" opinion, is cheaper than a Zaporozhets.
                      3. Kirill Dou
                        Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 18: 28
                        -1
                        And anyway, what am I arguing
                        - you do not argue. The argument suggests that both parties have at least some idea of ​​the topic of discussion. You have no idea about her.
          2. Fat
            Fat 17 December 2019 15: 02
            +1
            Quote: Kirill Dou
            Shuttle launch cost of 1 kg per NOU 13 000-17 000 dollars, and Falcon-9 - 2 684 dollars.

            This despite the fact that two shuttles were lost out of five and not one of the Shuttles flew off even half the resource, the largest 49 of the planned 100 flights. Maybe the number 13-17K was somehow considered differently, do not enlighten?
            1. Kirill Dou
              Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 16: 03
              0
              Maybe the number 13-17K was somehow considered differently, do not enlighten?
              - this figure came out exactly from the calculation of the real number of starts. If the Shuttles had rolled out as much as NASA had originally planned, the price tag would have been completely different. That was the problem with this undoubtedly amazing and unique project.
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 17 December 2019 16: 03
          0
          This is a cryogenic fuel tank for oxygen and hydrogen - it costs more than a hundred million green ones and it’s on its cost, and also on the cost of fuel for a turbojet engine, this program stumbled.
    2. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 15: 17
      -1
      If the most important thing for you is what it looks like, then you should go to the Tretyakov Gallery.
  14. donavi49
    donavi49 17 December 2019 11: 18
    +19
    Less skilled competitors also do not stand still.


    Well, this is the main task as a whole. Show that you can earn here, but you need to work. As a result, in the West there is now a boom of launch vehicles - mainly up to 500 kg of abandoned, but even 5 tons in concepts.

    From the first generation - discoverers yet:
    Peter Beck - who by the way is an engineer, assembled a rocket bike at school, then he collected garage rockets for a long time, then there was a startup where he and his friend actually created the concept of Rutherford and the rocket itself.
    Now they have already launched 6 missiles this year and will be the seventh. The second site is being built in the USA and with its launch there will be a pace of 12+ (Beck wrote that he has 36-40 strong intentions from American customers, but with the condition of launching from the USA). They have already launched the production of rockets at 1 unit per month. Also in the last launch, they collected a lot of data on the return. Now the priority area for improving the Electron launch vehicle is return and reuse.


    Well, then the second generation:
    Fireflies - they can already be placed after Bezos. And they will fly earlier. Really, the guys are working, but they are not rendering, they are making presentations. They are distinguished by the FAMILY - alpha carries 1t to low, on the basis of this rocket you can make Beta - 4t to low, and Gama - 6t to low, but this is already quite distant plans. Now testing is in progress. The first flight in 2020 with 26 school satellites. And in the fall of 2020, the first commercial launch with 4 British satellites is already planned.


    LauncherOne is the heaviest and most advanced air launch rocket. Moved from under the Christmas tree the first start, on 1Q 2020. Already sold 26 starts.


    Terran 1 is what Relativity Space breakthrough technology has grown into. Again, a high-risk project - if they survive the economy, it will be a new 9ka in the 1t class at 500km. If they fail, then in loans. But overall, for the industry this is a clear plus.



    I missed this:
    New Glenn from Bezos.
    VolcanoCentaurus from Lockheed
    Omega from Northrop, which makes a failed Orbital (the creator of Swan and Anters - who fly to the ISS).
    Various ultra-high-risk projects, for which they nonetheless give money, for example, Ravn X.
    The Chinese - where's your boom.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 17 December 2019 11: 34
      +4
      Your comment is really interesting, so congratulations on your well-deserved title!
    2. Avior
      Avior 17 December 2019 12: 05
      +2
      . next second generation:
      Fireflies - they can already be placed after Bezos. And they will fly earlier. Really, the guys are working, but they are not rendering, they are making presentations. They are distinguished by the FAMILY - alpha carries 1t to low, on the basis of this rocket you can make Beta - 4t to low, and Gama - 6t to low, but this is already quite distant plans. Now testing is in progress.

      Owner Svetlyachkov- gynecologist from Zaporozhye Maxim Polyakov
      So then joke about gynecologists :)
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 17 December 2019 12: 56
        +4
        Well they are generally:
        - Maintained an optimal balance between innovation (risk) and conservatism. The technological process is advanced, but the rest is conservative.
        - promise to withstand a low price for the start.
        - they immediately make a family (alpha in iron for 20 years, 2 starts and beta for 21 years + gamma in the project) from 1 to 4 (already 6) tons low.

        Therefore, if it flies, they can withstand the economy, then a completely demanded system will be. For it closes well startup requests.
        1. Arkon
          Arkon 17 December 2019 13: 36
          +1
          Quote: donavi49
          Therefore, if it flies, they can withstand the economy, then a completely demanded system will be.


          I think the vast majority of all these new projects will go bankrupt. Because no technique starts working right away. And a long period of debugging (counting, lack of money), can only survive the big ones, or figures like Mask, who are sucked by the state. "Max Polyakov", I think no one needs nafig there.
          1. donavi49
            donavi49 17 December 2019 14: 32
            +4
            Beck - the first rocket banged if that. And he had money only in the last year well.

            And he generally started with garage rockets.


            And after the explosion of the rocket, everything was very tense for them, but now they have excellent prospects, the company of the year, etc. Difficulties will always be.

            1. Arkon
              Arkon 17 December 2019 14: 58
              -2
              Quote: donavi49
              And after the explosion of the rocket, everything was very tense for them, but now they have excellent prospects, the company of the year, etc. Difficulties will always be.


              This is all crap - marketing pure water. Americans have a very well developed venture. Venture companies can pour decent amounts of money into the project (hundreds of millions of dollars), but they are not fools - they look where the wind blows. Wind, in this case, means state support. Always all real financial breakthroughs occur where the state expresses interest. Now it’s clear that the US state supports private space - excellent, we will try to grab the state. money in this area, and, therefore, venture willingly invests in this industry. However, the specifics of the space industry are such that, accustomed to informational startups, venture kings, it seems to me, are seriously screwed up on rockets. If for infoprojects the payback period of 3-5 years is quite normal, then here it is necessary, at least, to double the numbers, or even triple.
              Venture companies are not ready for this, and, therefore, will prematurely leave the business, trying to sell it. That is my prediction.
              Time will tell. ;)
          2. Kirill Dou
            Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 14: 32
            +3
            or figures like the Mask who are sitting on a choke from the state.
            - he does not sit on the state’s suction, he fulfills the state’s orders under the contract.
          3. Avior
            Avior 17 December 2019 15: 18
            0
            there is a 10 billion contract for small developers
            Firefly among them.
            scheduled launches
    3. slipped
      slipped 18 December 2019 00: 56
      +1
      Well, in Russia they do not stand still:

      Launches of conversion Topol, the Start-1 launch vehicle, will soon resume. The launch price of such a launch vehicle in the 6s was ~ $ 000 per kg for 400 kg PN into a sun-synchronous orbit.



      The company Glavkosmos announced successful tests of the third stage engine of the Soyuz-2 launch vehicle at a reduced thrust, which reduces the cost of launching the payload by this rocket by 30% and will amount to less than $ 30 million for a cluster launch of a bus from an ISV.



      In addition, private traders are tightened:

      The National Space Company, together with Lin Industrial, a Russian startup that creates ultralight space rockets, is going to conduct fire tests of a 3D-printed liquid-propellant rocket engine in Krasnoyarsk.



      The engine undergoing fire tests is a reduced copy of the one that will be installed on the second stage of the light launch vehicle "Siberia", designed to launch a load weighing up to 1000 kg into low-earth orbit.

      The Sputniks company presented a model range of its own developed cubsat satellites.



      And yes, also new missiles in production:

      "Angara" from the plant. Khrunicheva
      Irtysh from the Progress Rocket and Space Center
  15. Kirill Dou
    Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 23
    -1
    The fairings are saved anyway and will be used in other launches. The fact that they were not caught "in flight" is a pity, of course, but not essential.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  16. Whisper
    Whisper 17 December 2019 11: 29
    +8
    Ha ha ... The boom in the construction of private spaceports. It would be funny, but I want to cry. We really live in another world ... behind glass.
    1. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 15: 26
      +5
      We are also building. The world's first cosmodrome was built, where landings began earlier than the launches.
  17. rocket757
    rocket757 17 December 2019 11: 29
    +2
    Everything in our space industry ... less loud statements and more normal, reliable work! Successful launches, of course, as a result of all their work.
    1. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 11: 58
      +2
      Quote: rocket757
      fewer high-profile statements
      - yeah. Have you forgotten about the lunar station in 2015, about the Angara in 2018, about the Luna-25 in 2014, about the Federation in 2015 and other promises?
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 17 December 2019 12: 03
        -1
        Quote: Kirill Dou
        and other promises did you forget?

        Why would you?
        We write about that, less (if they cannot completely exclude) chatter, do business. That's all.
        1. Kirill Dou
          Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 12: 07
          +2
          Ah, that was your wish. Sorry, did not recognize immediately
  18. donavi49
    donavi49 17 December 2019 11: 36
    +4
    And yes, in general this is a normal launch, it is strange that it was mentioned.

    Soon a really interesting Soyuz-Kourou rocket is flying inside.

    An advanced planetary seeker that everyone has been waiting for. Will search for planets from Venus. And study the atmospheres of hot Jupiters and other giants in other systems.
    No streaming yet.
    1. LiSiCyn
      LiSiCyn 17 December 2019 12: 39
      +8
      hi
      The launch was canceled. Emergency triggered. No data yet.
      1. slipped
        slipped 18 December 2019 01: 19
        +1
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        hi
        The launch was canceled. Emergency triggered. No data yet.


        Automation stopped the launch in about twenty hours. Moved to the reserve date, on December 18 at the same time.
  19. Vkd dvk
    Vkd dvk 17 December 2019 11: 40
    -6
    Quote: maxim947
    Fairings are nonsense, this is not even worth taking into account.

    Of course, there is no such urgent need. Add to this list of things that pay attention to Mask nonsense, the following is not worth it:
    1. Entering into space about the main vehicle.
    2, Lies with the reusability of launches of their missiles. Moreover, duplicate this record in five copies, starting with his oath to do this already with the Falcon-1 modification.
    3. A few records with his electric cars, which he makes only on an ADVANCE PAYMENT, are repaired only in his technical centers, and for which spare parts are not sold widely. Brewing someone else's money on their accounts for several years.
    4. A vacuum locomotive moving in a pipe at supersonic speed.
    5. Metro, transporting passengers in their own cars, submerged from street platforms into the bowels of the earth, and transporting, according to a given program, to anywhere in the city, and unloading it to the surface, asleep and not knowing anything about the passenger.
    6. Solar power plants for every citizen returning the generated energy to the network, giving him the opportunity to tower.
    7. Launch of 500 thousand satellites, giving all inhabitants of the Earth high-speed free Internet.
    True, only for its pre-installed receivers, apparently, still for a good price, and with the ability to block the wretch at any time.
    1. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 15: 33
      -1
      Drop dead is ridiculous, but it is precisely such people who make progress, by the way for the whole of humanity, and make history.
    2. Stone
      Stone 17 December 2019 16: 50
      0
      Well, you and an addict with experience.
  20. Po-tzan
    Po-tzan 17 December 2019 11: 49
    +4
    Local dodgers relish the terrible failure of the Mask in catching parts of the fairing. I would like to ask them - how many fairings did Rogozin catch?
  21. bar
    bar 17 December 2019 12: 07
    0
    Blue Origin Jeff Bezos’s New Glenn is under development, which could be a sensation in the 2020s.

    Or maybe not. Oh, this news in the future tense ...
  22. Last centurion
    Last centurion 17 December 2019 12: 44
    -3
    New Glenn will plug everyone in the belt. the first reusable and even methane, which means after-flight engine cooling is even cheaper and easier. No one else does not test such engines, or even assembled them in iron in one pile.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 17 December 2019 12: 57
      +1
      In fact, SpaceX’s methane jet engine Raptor even flew into the sky.
      Well, the first reusable, have you heard about Falcon-9?
    2. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 14: 34
      +4
      No one else does not test such engines, or even assembled them in iron in one pile.
      - Musk has already tested and is making methane "Raptors"
  23. Klingon
    Klingon 17 December 2019 12: 52
    +2
    Quote: Andrey Chistyakov
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    That is, the companies / start-ups that you listed and copied by you are not competitors, but friends who are the worst and partners? !!
    Dear, maybe your perception is not in order? ...

    Find the surname Rogozin. Give a magnifier?

    comrade correctly wrote well, there is no surname Rogozin here so what? the absence of Rogozin's name does not improve the situation in Roscosmos, everything flies and is built on us, only in words and in reports on cutting dough. And by the way, I am also waiting for the Angara and the Eagle to fly there, and the aforementioned elevator too. And you can joke over Max for an arbitrarily long time, but the dude, although he grinds his tongue, but also does it, though not everything is always successful
  24. prodd
    prodd 17 December 2019 13: 20
    +1
    It's funny that the author considers be4 more modern than the Raptor, probably the author knows nothing about these engines.
  25. dgonni
    dgonni 17 December 2019 13: 30
    +1
    So yes. Difficult times due to competition. Only trouble is that Roscosmos does not even participate in this race!
  26. K-50
    K-50 17 December 2019 13: 33
    -1
    How much time, effort and money is spent on "fishing" the halves of these fairings from the ocean? Can it be much easier, faster and cheaper to build new ones? not to mention reliability. what lol
    1. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 14: 37
      +1
      The cost of the head fairing that SpaceX uses is $ 5-7 million. The output of 2 ships at sea for their fishing costs much, much less
  27. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 13: 34
    +2
    Quote: fighter angel
    kiril dou
    “... I repeat, when the Americans send a manned spacecraft into orbit with astronauts on board, then I admit that they have caught up with Russia in space technology.
    - why wait so long? until 2011, the United States was using manned Space Shuttles with might and main ... "

    And you count how many of our "Unions", "Progress", "Cosmos" and others. AES accounted for one launch of the American "shuttle" ???
    They did not "use" at all.
    "Shuttles" flew through a stump-deck, on average, once every five years. The largest catastrophes also occurred in the "shuttle traders". There is nothing to say about the cost - prohibitively expensive.

    Yes, here's about THIS SUCH a ratio.



    And what is the ratio?



    With an overwhelming number of launches with us, they have an overwhelming number of dead.
  28. gansovsky.vlad
    gansovsky.vlad 17 December 2019 13: 44
    +6
    Quote: fighter angel
    kiril dou
    "Shuttles" flew through a stump-deck, on average, once every five years. The largest catastrophes also occurred in the "shuttle traders". There is nothing to say about the cost - prohibitively expensive.

    Are you sure that every five years ???
    Shuttles: 135 launches over 30 years of the program is an average of 4.5 launches per year. At 7-9 launches per year in the 90s.
    Unions: 143 launches in 52 years, averaging 2.75 a year.

    About the biggest disasters. What does the largest mean? Their ships accommodated from 2 to 8 people in practice (and up to 11 in planned missions).
    Unions simply did not fit so much. . And so there is only one result - the death of the entire crew, however that may be.
    And the rest in terms of reliability:
    Shuttles have 2 unsuccessful missions for 135 launches, including 2 catastrophes with the death of the crew
    The Unions have 11 unsuccessful missions to 143 reserves. Of these, 2 accidents with the death of the crew, 5 non-launch into orbit, 5 unsuccessful dockings with the station and 1 engine explosion before docking.
    Everything is in official statistics.
    Program price yes, dear. But their program was also solved by other tasks that the Unions, in principle, could not fulfill. This is a QC of a different generation and difficulty level. Actually, Buran was also prohibitively expensive. It’s just that their economy could afford it, and ours, alas, no.
  29. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 13: 45
    -3
    Quote: Klingon
    Quote: Andrey Chistyakov
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    That is, the companies / start-ups that you listed and copied by you are not competitors, but friends who are the worst and partners? !!
    Dear, maybe your perception is not in order? ...

    Find the surname Rogozin. Give a magnifier?

    comrade correctly wrote well, there is no surname Rogozin here so what? the absence of Rogozin's name does not improve the situation in Roscosmos, everything flies and is built on us, only in words and in reports on cutting dough. And by the way, I am also waiting for the Angara and the Eagle to fly there, and the aforementioned elevator too. And you can joke over Max for an arbitrarily long time, but the dude, although he grinds his tongue, but also does it, though not everything is always successful

    Having got at his disposal a couple of dozens of ready-made engines from the abandoned lunar program, ownerless design bureaus, patents, launch complexes, equipment, stands, equipment, and incredible loot for the creation of his corporation in the name of enforcing the US law on ensuring competition in strategically important industries, operating time in electronics , metallurgy and other things. The USSR was forced to develop not rockets, but Korolev created industries, raising everything from the post-war devastation.
    It was not Musk who rushed up, but the USSR collapsed, and by no means, not without our intervention, too. The turtle will always overtake a standing car.
    The collapse of the USSR destroyed not only industry. Compare different things. Apparently, in such a comparison you have some kind of secret interest.
    1. Good_Anonymous
      Good_Anonymous 17 December 2019 14: 04
      +6
      Quote: Victor March 47

      Having at its disposal a couple of dozen ready-made engines from the abandoned lunar program,


      You're lying.

      Quote: Victor March 47
      The collapse of the USSR destroyed not only industry.


      Hm. Are you trying to say that the space industry of Russia was built from scratch, and not inherited from the USSR? belay
  30. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 14: 03
    -1
    Quote: BlackMokona
    In fact, SpaceX’s methane jet engine Raptor even flew into the sky.
    Well, the first reusable, have you heard about Falcon-9?



    We planned about such a repair after the flight,


    And got this.



    Mask is the same. Dust in the eyes and deceit of the gullible and d and about t about in.
    1. Fraracol_2
      Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 20
      +2
      Envy and hatred are bad feelings. Do not contribute to critical thinking.
    2. Zeev Zeev
      Zeev Zeev 17 December 2019 14: 21
      +2
      This "dust in the eye" almost halved the launch price, depriving Roscosmos of profits from commercial launches.
    3. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 16: 08
      0
      Mask is the same.
      - Have you been to Mask at the factory?
    4. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2019 16: 16
      -2
      Mask doesn’t have that close - he doesn’t have the Shuttle, but only the returnable first stage of the rocket and you don’t need to compare the Shuttle that was created in the 70s and Falcon 9 which was created from 2006 to 2016, the last modification of the rocket made in 2018 - now it is used.
  31. Fraracol_2
    Fraracol_2 17 December 2019 14: 18
    0
    Well done, at least 3 space systems are flying, or about to fly. Well, when there is competition, this greatly drives technological progress and lowers launch prices.
  32. Tarasios
    Tarasios 17 December 2019 14: 27
    +3
    The fact that such a crowd rushed to explore space is good. After some time it will not matter who was the first, second, etc. Or completely forgotten. It's like a wheel - FIG knows who and when he invented, but everyone uses it.
  33. Zeev Zeev
    Zeev Zeev 17 December 2019 14: 51
    +3
    Everything is bad with Musk. The fairings can't even catch. Is it a different matter for .... And who actually catches fairings for launch vehicles in order to reuse? Well, or at least plans to fish? Hmm. Nobody. Who plants the first stage for reuse? Also nobody? That is, Musk's company uses a unique technology that is not available to any competitor at the moment? So what are the real preconditions for "hard times" for Space X?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2019 16: 17
      +2
      There are no prerequisites - only the author’s schiz.
  34. Maxwrx
    Maxwrx 17 December 2019 15: 20
    0
    Spaceix with Falcon-9 has no full-fledged competitors in its weight.
    Electron (250kg, price 5-7 million, reusable first stage) - small satellites, there are very few companies (or requirements for orbit) that are willing to pay that kind of money to go on a separate rocket, most will fly as a passing load of large missiles
    New Glenn (up to 45t, price about 100mln, reusable first stage) - on the contrary, the rocket is too heavy for most customers, why pay more? The only ones who will order are spaceics competitors (for example, oneweb). But the company was founded already in 2000, the rocket should fly in 21g. And knowing them is not at all a fact that will fly. They are very slow. But the Falcon heavy (60t) can really pick up a couple of starts a year
    In fairness this year, Spaceics had very few 13 launches (2 with its own satellites) last year. 20. There simply is no longer any need for such a number of launches all over the world (except China). In general, Spaceics essentially provided itself with working with their satellite internet. Next year, 20 launches are planned for this only +16 for other customers. Total 36

    Reusable missiles are actively developed in China
  35. Mytholog
    Mytholog 17 December 2019 15: 22
    +1
    Private spaceports, private carriers ... In orbits, there is already a problem with space debris, and here are these tramps.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2019 16: 19
      -2
      In 2025, the Europeans promise to launch the first satellite to collect and orbit space debris from orbit.
  36. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 15: 44
    -1
    Quote: gansovsky.vlad
    Quote: fighter angel
    kiril dou
    "Shuttles" flew through a stump-deck, on average, once every five years. The largest catastrophes also occurred in the "shuttle traders". There is nothing to say about the cost - prohibitively expensive.

    Are you sure that every five years ???
    Shuttles: 135 launches over 30 years of the program is an average of 4.5 launches per year. At 7-9 launches per year in the 90s.
    Unions: 143 launches in 52 years, averaging 2.75 a year.

    About the biggest disasters. What does the largest mean? Their ships accommodated from 2 to 8 people in practice (and up to 11 in planned missions).
    Unions simply did not fit so much. . And so there is only one result - the death of the entire crew, however that may be.
    And the rest in terms of reliability:
    Shuttles have 2 unsuccessful missions for 135 launches, including 2 catastrophes with the death of the crew
    The Unions have 11 unsuccessful missions to 143 reserves. Of these, 2 accidents with the death of the crew, 5 non-launch into orbit, 5 unsuccessful dockings with the station and 1 engine explosion before docking.
    Everything is in official statistics.
    Program price yes, dear. But their program was also solved by other tasks that the Unions, in principle, could not fulfill. This is a QC of a different generation and difficulty level. Actually, Buran was also prohibitively expensive. It’s just that their economy could afford it, and ours, alas, no.

    Think if there is anything. What the hell are OTHER GOALS? A barn on Earth weighing 2 thousand tons. Shuttle payload 5 tons. Time in orbit = 23 days. No power ratio. 7 loafers, sitting and waiting in turn, while one or two conduct their experiments. There is no place for all at the same time, no energy. The most important thing at that time was conducting research for LONG FLIGHTS, which was quietly done at our stations. Repeated flights a year or more. Headache on descent from orbit of ballast of 7 tons. The ability to provide landing ONLY at two points on Earth. In the event of an emergency, and the urgent descent is necessary, you need to wait for the next turn and land from it to the nearest touchdown point. Would you like to stay in such conditions and fry slowly, waiting for almost two hours? Lack of emergency rescue system at startup. From the word AT ALL. Remember how the crew was saved in the accident at the start with us? It would be impossible for them. THREE visits to the Hubble telescope. Repairs. They brought a printed circuit board, a pair of pliers and one screwdriver. Three times. Starting from the Earth, having almost three thousand tons of iron. Efficiency - = zero. The same could be done with the Union, having 60 times less at the start. Launched by the Hubble Shuttle. How much would the Hubble be with great potential if it weren’t for the Shuttle ballast to orbit? As much as 10 tons more, and with energy, a hundred times larger.
    1. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 16: 13
      -1
      7 loafers, sitting and waiting in turn, while one or two conduct their experiments.


      Ahhhh, is that you, VDK DVK? laughing Have you learned how Skylab differs from Spacelab, or are you still confusing?)
  37. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 16: 03
    0
    Quote: Fraancol_2
    Drop dead is ridiculous, but it is precisely such people who make progress, by the way for the whole of humanity, and make history.

    These people make loot on the inability to think suckers. This crook did not invent anything, and did not move anything.
    If you were a little technically educated, you would understand what was worth his promise.
    You did not buy a ticket to Mars? Hurry, while they are sold for only 200 thousand. Speculators will raise prices tenfold. You, as a dropout, do not care that it is flying in one direction.
  38. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 16: 08
    0
    Quote: Good_Anonymous
    Quote: Victor March 47

    Having at its disposal a couple of dozen ready-made engines from the abandoned lunar program,


    You're lying.

    Quote: Victor March 47
    The collapse of the USSR destroyed not only industry.


    Hm. Are you trying to say that the space industry of Russia was built from scratch, and not inherited from the USSR? belay

    I want to say that Russia took what was left of the collapse of the USSR. And for us, the road needs, in fact, to begin from the beginning. Without the capacities created by all, but those who died or remained outside the borders of the country. Or you don’t know what the hell happened?
  39. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 16: 13
    -1
    Quote: Good_Anonymous
    Quote: Victor March 47

    Having at its disposal a couple of dozen ready-made engines from the abandoned lunar program,


    You're lying.

    Quote: Victor March 47
    The collapse of the USSR destroyed not only industry.


    Hm. Are you trying to say that the space industry of Russia was built from scratch, and not inherited from the USSR? belay

    LRE "Merlin" - an open cycle. Kerosene is used as fuel, liquid oxygen is an oxidizing agent.

    The Merlin engine uses pin injectors. This type of nozzle was first used in NASA's Apollo program on the lunar module landing stage engine, which was one of the most critical segments of this program. The fuel components are fed through a double impeller turbo pump located on the same axis. The pump also supplies high pressure kerosene to the hydraulic control system, which is then discharged into the low pressure channel. This eliminates the need for a separate hydraulic system to control the thrust vector and guarantees its operation during the entire operation time of the Merlin LPRE.
    You are lying.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 17 December 2019 16: 21
      -1
      And Marilyn is a jet engine, which means he took a couple from Ancient China and uses them. wassat
      Marilyn is the engine for the development of SpaceX and the production of SpaceX, they did not stay with any Lunar program.
    2. Victor March 47
      Victor March 47 17 December 2019 22: 40
      0
      MC-1 later designation
      After the cancellation of the FASTRAC program, NASA tried to save this design for use in other rockets, such as the Rotary Rocket "ROTON and s Orbital" s X-34 project. The rocket engine designation has been changed from Fastrac 60K to MC-1.

      heritage
      Fastrac design fundamentals (namely injector trunnions and ablative chamber cooling) lived on SpaceX in a 1A Merlin engine that used a turbopump from the same subcontractor. The Merlin-1A had a slightly larger engine with a thrust of 77000 pounds - force (340 kN) compared to 60000 pounds - power (270 kN) for Fastrac. The same basic design was capable of much higher traction levels after upgrading the TNO. The latest Merlin-1D variants achieve 185,500 LbF (825 kN) traction in April 2016, but is regenerative engine cooling.

      I apologize for the presentation style. Saved copyright.
  40. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 16: 40
    -1
    Quote: Fraancol_2
    Envy and hatred are bad feelings. Do not contribute to critical thinking.

    Yes, what envy? Delight. From the stupidity of a potential enemy. To have weapons in the form of iron hanging in space. The whole week. Which is not suitable for anything. Take a secret satellite from orbit?
    To get something like this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBQSQ_YVau0
    https://youtu.be/iBQSQ_YVau0
    Who will guarantee that the satellite being shot is not equipped with a self-destruction system? Carrier of some kind of weapon in orbit? But how to fly up to the right point in order to bomb not the Krasnoyarsk taiga, but a more weighty target? How much time does it take to reach the target? The circulation period is two hours. How much energy do you need to have with you there in orbit to perform a horizontal maneuver? And the risk of losing an expensive and contagious weapon at the start? Explosion leading possibly to nuclear? From the ground when starting from the mine, Satan will reach the goal in 20 minutes. How many such Shuttles can be held in orbit at a time, and how many Satans can be launched in one gulp?
  41. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 16: 58
    0
    Quote: Zeev Zeev
    This "dust in the eye" almost halved the launch price, depriving Roscosmos of profits from commercial launches.

    I agree, competition is knocking prices down. But while we carry passengers only. And therefore, while we are monopolists.
    And prices .... So, I use your sarcasm to the detriment of opponents who say that Musk made miraculous, almost free, orbits, without noticing that our prices were monopolist prices. And HIS prices are the prices of a debt-bound boy who received fabulous subsidies from NASA. If there were no stranglehold on the return received, it is not clear what would have happened to its prices. He receives subsidies in the name of the destruction of monopoly, both external Russia and China, and internal. The subsidies will disappear when they settle down there, they will carry people themselves, and not hire us, then we'll see. Let’s take a look at our prices, which are no longer monopoly.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 17 December 2019 17: 28
      -2
      Arian, who held half the market when we were supposedly a monopolist, looks at this with bewilderment.
  42. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 17: 04
    0
    Quote: Steen
    Well, you and an addict with experience.

    I can read and I have a good memory. Nerds, like you, and even reading the warehouses, it is not available.
  43. Starper-xnumx
    Starper-xnumx 17 December 2019 17: 16
    -3
    Well, what is Musk beloved by neoliberals .. Doesn’t it fly away to Mars?
    PR man he is your favorite mask ..
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    What Rogozin’s statements are worth ...

    And at the expense of Rogozin, Musk recently praised him and would like to take him to work
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 17 December 2019 17: 28
      -3
      Until the terms of another 5 years of time wassat
      In an April 2009 interview, Michael S. Malone said during an interview with Elon Musk that they bet that SpaceX would send a man to Mars by 2020 or 2025. Since then, Musk has continued to repeat this rude term. This countdown clock expires on January 1, 2026 at 00:00 UTC. No pressure, Elon.
      1. Starper-xnumx
        Starper-xnumx 17 December 2019 17: 53
        0
        Quote: BlackMokona
        Until the terms of another 5 years of time

        And without Russians, everyone cannot send their astronauts to the ISS for how many years have passed? Even normal latches cannot create .. Everyone in diapers stinks at the whole station .. wassat
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 17 December 2019 19: 22
          -1
          They still made latrines on Skyleb, then others did on the Shuttle, but they didn’t on the ISS for this reason.
          Well, look at the whole chip, thanks to the purchase of toilets, Rosskomos is engaged in their maintenance and repair. Therefore, if the Americans clogged the toilet, then the Russian cosmonauts clean it. And they would put their toilet from the Shuttle, clean themselves.

          https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5b3b92829a79475ba0c7a25a
          1. Starper-xnumx
            Starper-xnumx 17 December 2019 20: 19
            -2
            Quote: BlackMokona
            They still made latrines on Skyleb, then others did on the Shuttle, but they didn’t on the ISS for this reason.

            Let them do it, otherwise the stench is there and even holes are drilled "to breathe air" he he he baba them negative
            Quote: Vadim237
            Do not worry - in the coming years this will happen, no matter how three new manned ships are tested.

            Yes, it would be quicker to see in how many decades how they take off "through thorns to the stars" ha ha ha
            Especially when you consider how our Roscosmos sanctions imposed cunning bastards ..
            PS I remember their challenger .. hi
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 17 December 2019 20: 51
              -2
              So why should they do if they repair Russian toilets, Russians? They will have to repair their own
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 17 December 2019 20: 04
          -1
          Do not worry - in the coming years this will happen, no matter how three new manned ships are tested.
        3. The comment was deleted.
    2. Alex rex
      Alex rex 17 December 2019 20: 12
      -3
      I would like to note that Rogozin uses the technology invented in the USSR for this. Russia's own projects are record long-term construction projects. Since the 94th year, we have not seen a new generation of missiles. SpaxeX is new and a pioneer in his field, but he is even less than that. The very process of launching astronauts is not Khukhra Mukhra. If everything was so simple, we would have seen the Angara in 2015 as we had before and promised already in commercial use. And so maybe we'll see in 2025m - maybe. The question is if in the next 2-3 years Boeing and Space X will launch manned flights, how long will they wait for the new Soyuz-5M, which, like Space, plans to return the steps? .... it’s worth asking what’s happening with the Eagle, which is the Federation? ... well, it's so simple, do it from scratch and run)
  44. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 18: 27
    +1
    Quote: Kirill Dou
    Quote: Connor MacLeod
    Only for some reason did you forget to mention that the cost of launching the Shuttle is £ 400, and the cost of launching the Union is $ 000. They forgot ... They were carried away by the story ...


    I did not forget - just the question of cost was not raised. But well, let's take a closer look at it.

    So, the cost of 1 launch of the shuttle is $ 400 million. At the same time, the shuttle can put up to 1 people into orbit and at the same time - 8 tons of cargo. In addition, the Shuttle can repair satellites in orbit, as well as return satellites (or cargo from the station) back to Earth. And thanks to the Spacelab laboratory installed in its instrumentation compartment, it also allows complex experiments to be carried out in orbit (right in the Shuttle).

    The cost of launching Soyuz is $ 40 million. However, he can only take on board 3 people and 30 kg of cargo. It cannot repair or return satellites from orbit, and from the station it can return no more than 100 kg of cargo in a descent capsule. Further, the Soyuz's ability to transport cargo will not be taken into account for simplicity, because this ability is negligible. We will only take into account its ability to put people into orbit.
    In other words, to deliver to orbit as many people as the Shuttle (8 people), you need 3 launches of the Soyuz. 3 multiplied by $ 40 million - we get $ 120 million.

    But the Shuttle can simultaneously withdraw 24,5 tons of cargo. Trucks for Russia are "Progress" with a maximum carrying capacity of 2,5 tons (10 times less) and a launch cost - about the same $ 40 million. At the same time, "Progress" is not able to do anything except to deliver the cargo to the station - it cannot even return anything from orbit, because it completely burns up in the atmosphere.
    In total, to simply deliver the shuttle's 24,5 tons of cargo into orbit, 10 Progress launches will be required. multiplying 10 by 40 million dollars - we get 400 million dollars.

    In total, Russia will need $ 1 million to launch as many people and cargo as the Shuttle brought into orbit at one time.

    And this is just to put people and cargo into orbit, because not to repair the satellite. neither return it from orbit, nor return cargo from the Soyuz and Progress stations.

    These are the prices.

    Did not try to count the other way around? To launch three people in the Union, do you need to have 10 times smaller ship and carrier on earth? How to take a magnificent seven for no more than a week? Where can I get energy for conducting experiments on the Shuttle? It has neither solar panels nor a nuclear installation. Only batteries. And the presence of buttocks in the form of a quickly installed module in the trunk is only to ensure quick preparation of the premises, carried out ahead of the start. But it does not increase either energy or the number of experimenters. This is a kind of side table.
    Three Hubble Recovery Starts. 7,5 thousand tons of iron, sent in total to orbit. to replace the circuit board there with two pliers and one screwdriver. Good use of heavy equipment.
    You are even more dumb than the Americans, who finally closed the program to destroy the dough. And, at the end, tell me, how many times out of 135 starts did they send with a full load? The answer is only two times. So, throw all your calculations in the ass.
    1. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 18: 35
      -3
      Have you already learned how "Spacelab" differs from "Skylab"? No? First finish teaching, and then come back.
  45. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 22: 07
    0
    Quote: Alex Rex
    Look at the number of patents registered by Elon Musk’s campaigns, there are a lot of developments in many areas, from logistics to space. There are more than a hundred such patents, and each of them is a unique idea, which appeared on paper thanks to the fantasy and money of the Mask. But Rogozin is just a balabol who cuts folk money and eats his mug. Gagarin would be ashamed of what Soviet space technology and programs, once the best in the world, had turned into. Ugh on you, Mr. Rogozin!

    I know (in absentia, of course) another patent-swindler. More than 2 thousand nakropal. But, interestingly, he worked at the patent office. And he was smart, a plague, so could distort someone else's thought when filing a patent that it looked completely new and unlike the one just passed through the bureau. And registered already as him. Albert Einstein is his last name.

    Making a patent is nothing complicated. From a technical point of view, of course. It’s difficult to write a formula with a legal one so that it is necessarily in something different from any earlier one. And you need loot. Mandatory in dollars. Now this is not a problem, but in the USSR, for holding this green piece of paper in your hands, you could get 7 years. Hence the weak work in this area, over time overgrown with sheepskin with the idea that we did not invent any horseradish in the USSR. So their supervisory authorities pressed us. And there was another tool to suppress activity in this area - instead of patents, the owner of which, of course, was the author, they gave a certificate of invention. But the owner of this little thing was the company where this Kulibin worked. In other words, the state. There was a case when Kilibin bit a bit and demanded a patent, not a certificate. To which he received, of course, a proposal to wind the hell out of the USSR, rightly, of course, since his interests were above the interests of the country.
  46. Kirill Dou
    Kirill Dou 17 December 2019 22: 47
    -1
    The launch went not quite smoothly
    - dear incompetent author, Launching went not just smoothly, but perfectly. The satellite is launched into the calculated orbit. Fairing caught on stage landingrather than launch.
  47. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 22: 47
    -1
    Quote: BlackMokona
    Arian, who held half the market when we were supposedly a monopolist, looks at this with bewilderment.

    Arian carries people to the ISS, or where else - a thread?
  48. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 17 December 2019 23: 01
    0
    Quote: Kirill Dou
    7 loafers, sitting and waiting in turn, while one or two conduct their experiments.


    Ahhhh, is that you, VDK DVK? laughing Have you learned how Skylab differs from Spacelab, or are you still confusing?)

    And I did not confuse. Different things having the same fate. Stupidity is punished by removal. Like one, just like the other.
    Both were worthless, for which they were rejected. The station lived through three visiting expeditions, mainly spent on repairs. She had no scientific price.
    In the same way, the transformer is a laboratory installed in the Shuttle. Its purpose is to quickly install a ready-made kit, pre-made before the flight. But not a watt that does not add power to the existing one. The sense of it in a weekly flight is 7 cents. If I were wrong, then these glands would have flown so far.
  49. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 18 December 2019 01: 52
    -1
    Quote: Kirill Dou
    Mask is the same.
    - Have you been to Mask at the factory?

    The main specialists left him not only in space technology, but also in automotive.
  50. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 18 December 2019 02: 04
    0
    Quote: Victor March 47
    Quote: Kirill Dou
    Mask is the same.
    - Have you been to Mask at the factory?

    The main specialists left him not only in space technology, but also in automotive.

    The centuries-old dream of mankind - a flight to Mars - was promised by the simple American billionaire Ilon Musk. About 10 years later. Then it is planned to establish regular communication with the Red Planet. And later, in general, to make it suitable for life by melting the ice at the poles of Mars using thermonuclear bombardment. These are the immediate plans for one of the main idols of the creative class, for whom Musk is the living embodiment of the dream of freedom and wealth.

    "Sensation!" - this is how literally all the world media commented on the next achievement of Elon Musk: for the first time, specialists from the private company Space X managed to land the first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket on a floating platform, and even with the help of retractable supports. This was reported by "TV Center".

    The businessman is already announcing plans to restart the rocket. It must be understood that this is the answer to all skeptic scientists who tirelessly insist on damages so significant that the first step can be sent again only to the scrap. And into space it is unprofitable and therefore pointless.

    Elon Musk always talks about the future as if it came yesterday, and solely thanks to his own efforts. Speaks often. From the latter: he promises to send a man to Mars in 2025, and a little later to colonize the planet altogether. The charismatic Mask is trusted by millions around the world. For millions, he is a living superhero. Not the prototype of Tony Stark in the Hollywood blockbuster, but the real "Iron Man".

    The image of Ilon Mask is such that it is difficult not to admire him. At 43, he is already a multi-billionaire, a brilliant inventor and a rebel missionary, changing the world for the better.

    "I am first of all an engineer. This is what attracted me since childhood. I always wanted to change the world, bring the future closer. So that everyone would look and be surprised:" Wow! how can this even happen, "he says about himself.

    But the main thing is that Elon Musk seems to be a 100% embodiment of the American dream: he was born in South Africa, moved to the USA, graduated from the university with grants, for the last money he rented a small office with his brother, where he lived and worked like a damn, for 20 hours in a day. From scratch, he founded the company X.com, which later became PayPal. When the company's capitalization grew to several hundred million dollars, it was sold. He founded SolarCity, SpaceX and Tesla. As a result, today Musk provides half of America with solar energy, sends ships into space, builds the best electric cars on the planet. And in every interview he emphasizes: nothing would have happened if he had lived in another country.

    "I remember thinking once: the United States is the capital of the world, which means it's a great place to live here!" he says.

    In general, not life, but an ideal story about the Great Land of Opportunities for creative people. Only in this plot there is more fiction than facts. In fact, the success of the "genius inventor" Elon Musk is largely a story of successful acquisitions and excellent management.

    "For many, he is known as the co-founder of the PayPal payment system. Although not everyone knows that he founded a company that was a competitor to PayPal, and then they merged. And Elon Musk strongly opposed the development of PayPal technologies, for which he was fired, he was left shares in this combined company. And when PayPal nevertheless shot and became a big monster, he earned many millions by selling his share, which he then invested, in fact, in the SpaceX project, "says publicist Ruslan Ostashko.

    He creates SpaceX in 2002 with the goal, as stated, to reduce the cost of rocket launches. Hires engineer Tom Muller, who worked for TRW, an aerospace company that, among other things, successfully developed Viking probes for the exploration of Mars. Together with Mueller, a whole team of specialists leaves for Mask. But the main thing is that he gets ready-made technologies, which, in fact, allows saving space amounts on infrastructure, development and testing. Soon TRW will sue SpaceX, but it will lose the lawsuit, having all the patents in hand. Experts say this is direct evidence of Musk’s support at the highest level. As well as the fact that both of his most high-profile projects, being, according to Forbes, unprofitable, miraculously develop.

    "Companies are supported by powerful PR, by attracting public money. Elon Musk's companies received $ 5 billion from the state in the form of orders. Both Tesla and SpaceX," Ostashko says.

    Tesla Motors can also be called the brainchild of Elon Musk at a stretch. It was founded in 2003 by completely different people - Martin Eberhard and Mark Tarpenning. It was they who came up with the concept of the "electric sports car". Musk decided to invest in this project when it was already developed. The developers and co-owners themselves were soon accused of inefficiency and fired. They also filed a lawsuit against Musk for libel and breach of contract, but again to no avail.

    "The last thing I will do is endure accusations that the company has gone badly because of me!" - exclaims Martin Eberhand.