The first rocket engine delivered in the United States to replace the Russian RD-180

The first American rocket engine BE-4 manufactured by Blue Origin, designed to replace the Russian RD-180 in the future, was delivered to the United Launch Alliance. This was reported by the company itself on its page on Twitter.

The BE-4 engine for the Vulcan Centaur rocket was delivered to a facility in Decatur, Alabama. ULA's next-generation rocket is planned to be launched in 2021

- said in a statement.

At the same time, it is specified that the engine is not serial, it is planned to be used for testing together with a launch vehicle. The second BE-4 engine should be delivered before the end of July this year.

Recall that the American BE-4 rocket engines are planned to be used in the first stage of the Vulkan launch vehicle, which should replace the Atlas family of rockets equipped with the Russian RD-180.

At the same time, it is noted that although the US Congress calls for a complete abandonment of the Russian RD-180, this is unlikely to be possible until 2024. The main reason is the high cost of the American analogue and the unpreparedness for its mass production. Since 1999, Russia has supplied the USA with 116 RD-180 rocket engines.

Comments

[Lipchanin]

Oh, really born

[Mitroha]

First flight, then statement of childbirth

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Mitroha

First flight, then statement of childbirth

So it doesn’t seem like giving birth, Caesarean section

It is specified that the engine is not serial,

[Gardamir]

First flight, then statement of childbirth

Strange for Russia, this item does not apply. We started drawing for the message, everyone is happy jumping and breaking the keyboard, as if they had already given birth.

[Mitroha]

This is not for Russia. This is for your narrow sofa-internet world.

[Gardamir]

narrow sofa-internet world

You probably have a mirror behind you. We all were proud of the Soviet Union. Both flew into space, and mastered Antarctica. What are you proud of now? The retirement age raised their zeal. Amer treasury bought happiness again. Rogozin made trampolines screaming. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, except for the mat, did nothing for you again in Russia.
Ask you how the people in Russia live, what do you say?

[forpost]

this is your one jumping and yelling

[lazy]

so you tell me how you live? or are you not people? if bad I sympathize with you. only desirable in figures and facts and not unfounded

[Vyacheslav gomanov]

You mentioned the retirement age out of place. The IMF strangled it in a childish way and raised it.

[smart ass]

This is called urapatriotic syndrome.

[lis-ik]

Quote: Clever man

This is called urapatriotic syndrome.

The brain that occurred in connection with the revision of federal channels.

[smart ass]

But this is my favorite topic, I love it when they have Roskosmos together with Rogozeybalabol)) what kind of a close-minded person should be, in order to seriously believe that the first economy of the world will not be able to create such an engine, it was clear to all adequate people this question of time.

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: Clever man

one must be a near-minded person in order to seriously believe that the first economy of the world will not be able to create such an engine, all adequate people understand this question of time.

So it is so, but it is not clear to adequate people, where did the engine go, on which the world's first economy flew to the moon?

[smart ass]

In fact, purple) most likely they did not fly anywhere, it is important what is happening now. Flying to the moon is like a mystery of the woodpecker pass, you will never know the truth.

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: Clever man

In fact, purple) most likely they did not fly anywhere,

In-in! Yes, so that the world's first economy does not fly to the moon! Despite the fact that there was a cry about it ... What "adequate" person would doubt this? For thirty years!

[smart ass]

I do not understand your gloating

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: Clever man

I do not understand your gloating

Because this is not gloating, but bewilderment from the fact itself and from your peremptory confidence in the "first economy of the world."

Quote: Clever man

it was clear to all adequate people that it was a matter of time.

[smart ass]

Let me help you. Falcon will not fly !!! Eeeemm ?! Well .... Steps do not sit down !!!! Americans are fools this is impossible !!!! Ehhh mmm again by !!! But they won’t deliver astronauts to orbit anyway! Let malacholny use trampolines !!! .... what's again?! ... and why do I believe in the first economy of the world ??? Interesting...

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: Clever man

Let me help you...

It's funny Cite what you said, but it is in my performance?

Quote: Clever man

and why do I believe in the first economy of the world ??? Interesting...

There another word was:

Quote: Vasyan1971

Your peremptory of confidence

.
Believe, of course. "Though the hell out of it, it was evil for everyone." © Do not pray.

[Mikhail3]

Quote: Clever man

Flying to the moon is like a mystery of the woodpecker pass, you will never know the truth.

Choi is that? That’s right here never ?! Well, if you launch a satellite with a NORMAL camera around the Moon, which for some mysterious reason no one has yet done, most of the questions will instantly disappear. Here it is right away. But we are not interested, right? Just think of the moon! Nobody wants to know anything about her ...
And secondly, everything will immediately become clear when the ship lands in that area, with normal broadcasting. And that doesn't happen either, right? Hehe ...

[Vyacheslav gomanov]

Everyone has long known why there was a performance with a flight to the moon.

[pytar]

So it is so, but it is not clear to adequate people, where did the engine go, on which the world's first economy flew to the moon?

Here it is! F1 is the largest engine created by man!

He once fulfilled his tasks. It is possible to recreate it again, but it's like creating a car engine from the mid-60s to put it on a modern car!
BF-4 is a modern methane-oxygen, reusable (25 tbsp.) Engine working on the principle of autogenous boost.

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: pytar

It is possible to recreate it again, but it's like creating a car engine from the mid-60s to put it on a modern car!

Maybe. But since the 60s, auto engines have stepped far forward and more than once ...
Are you talking about progressive development, have you heard anything?

[pytar]

Maybe. But since the 60s, auto engines have stepped far forward and more than once ...

I’m talking about this and ... Automotors, rocket engines, but everything has gone far ahead. One cannot understand such a complex process as being isolated in one country.

Are you talking about progressive development, have you heard anything?

Classics in the genre. I use it myself to work.

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: pytar

rocket engines, but everything has gone far ahead.

Nevertheless, they were born only now, and even then, somehow clumsily.

The main reason is the high cost of the American analogue and the unpreparedness for its mass production.

Quote: pytar

Classics in the genre. I use it myself to work.

[pytar]

Nevertheless, they were born only now, and even then, somehow clumsily.

I think that they were born right away as soon as the need arose. At a new technological level, with new features!

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: pytar

I think they were born right away

Not really like that ...
Is that: "as soon as so right away."

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Vasyan1971

But since the 60s, auto engines have stepped far forward and more than once ...

Can you name modern American rocket engines of the level of our old NK-33 (11D111) of 1968?

[smart ass]

What auto engines stepped forward? May I have a closer look?

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: Clever man

What auto engines stepped forward? May I have a closer look?

Or so:

[Whirlwind]

The engine was, only now, what and whom was he moving to, if they still cannot achieve stable combustion in the short circuit? Therefore, the United States and wag their tail ...

[Bad_gr]

Quote: pytar

Here it is! F1 is the largest engine created by man!

F-1 is the largest, and our RD-170 is the most powerful:
~~~~~~~~~~~ F-1
Thrust ---- Vacuum: 790 tf (7,77 MN)
----------- Lv. of the sea: 690 tf (6.77 MN)
~~~~~~~~~~~ RD-170
Thrust ----- Vacuum: 806,2 tf (7906 kN)
------------ Lv. of the sea: 740 tf (7257 kN)

Quote: pytar

It’s possible to recreate it again, but it's like re-creating a car engine from the mid-60s

Our "Union" (RD-107, RD-108) will be older, but still it is profitable to fly on them.

[pytar]

F-1 is the largest, and our RD-170 is the most powerful

It's like autofan fans: "- My car is more powerful!; - And mine is faster!"
And Ilona Mask is the best!
The essence of the RD-170 is 4-chamber, it is 4 engines with a common turbopump system. The most powerful single-chamber still remains the F-1, and it was he who sent the heaviest and most powerful Saturn-5 rocket to Space and to the Moon. The first Saturn-5 with F-1 started in November 1967, and in the USSR began work on the RD-170 in 1976.

Our "Union" (RD-107, RD-108) will be older, but still it is profitable to fly on them.

Great engines, but their time is gone. The results show:
https://topcor.ru/15444-amerikancy-v-2-raza-operedili-rossiju-po-kolichestvu-kosmicheskih-zapuskov.html?utm_source=finobzor.ru

[Bad_gr]

Quote: pytar

The essence of the RD-170 is 4-chamber, it is 4 engines with a common turbopump system.

Engines are counted by pumps, not by combustion chambers. On the same "Union" is not 20 engines, but 5 engines.

Quote: pytar

The most powerful single-chamber still remains the F-1

What's the point? why is one combustion chamber better than the 4th?
And if you count by nozzles, then in general, it will turn out interesting:
RD-107 has 6 (4 large and 2 small), and RD-108 has 8 (4 large, 4 small)

[Bad_gr]

I apologize, screwed up:
The sentence with the phrase "And if you count the nozzles ..." was supposed to be a little higher, where is the comment about the combustion chamber

[Vyacheslav gomanov]

F1 was not created for flights but for washing away the dead presidents.

[alexmach]

So it’s true, but it’s not clear to adequate people where the engine went, on which the world's first economy flew to the Moon

It’s still here, it’s in the museum, because in the first place it is hydrogen, which, in general, will do for a flight to the moon in the 70s, and now it’s too much to launch satellites and cargoes to the ISS. Even Russia is now switching to environmentally friendly "kerosene" missiles.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: alexmach

firstly it is hydrogen

Actually, it’s kerosene. An open cycle, which suggests that he was a noble child.

[alexmach]

Indeed, the second stage was hydrogen

The first stage worked for 2,5 minutes and accelerated the spacecraft to a speed of 2,68 km / s (in an inertial reference frame) [15]. The second stage, S-II, used five J-2 oxygen-hydrogen engines with a total thrust of 5115 kN.

[atalef]

Quote: Vasyan1971

Quote: Clever man

one must be a near-minded person in order to seriously believe that the first economy of the world will not be able to create such an engine, all adequate people understand this question of time.

So it is so, but it is not clear to adequate people, where did the engine go, on which the world's first economy flew to the moon?

Good luck where and Energy with Bran.
Try to restore production - litter that creating a new cheaper

[Vasyan1971]

Quote: atalef

Good luck where and Energy with Bran.

And why not the Space Shuttle, then?

Quote: atalef

Try to restore production

Why "restore" it, if even then they abandoned it?

Quote: atalef

create new cheaper

At the same time, it is noted that although the US Congress calls for a complete abandonment of the Russian RD-180, this is unlikely to be possible until 2024. The main reason is the high cost of the American analogue and the unpreparedness for its mass production.

Some kind of not convincing "bulk" You got ...

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: atalef

Good luck where and Energy with Bran.
Try to restore production - litter that creating a new cheaper

Do you forget the Russian language, however, Bran is from the game of thrones? Everything is fine with the production of litter.

[atalef]

Quote: mikhailovich22

Do you forget the Russian language, however, Bran is from the game of thrones? Everything is fine with the production of litter.

the phone, however, that he died with his corrections

[Souchastnik]

what would he die with his corrections

Watch out. I have died just now. I had to buy a new one

[atalef]

Quote: Souchastnik

what would he die with his corrections

Watch out. I have died just now. I had to buy a new one

it gives me work - let it die.

[Mikhail3]

Quote: Clever man

the first world economy will not be able to create such an engine,

Well yes. Socialist China - the first economy in the world, has long created good engines for itself. What does America have to do with it?

[NEXUS]

Quote: Clever man

what is the first economy

This is the first economy in the world that gave birth to the counterpart RD-180 for more than 30 years! This is with industrial capacities, technologies and money. By the way, the RD-180 is one of the most reliable engines in the world. But to the fact that the mattresses are cut out, there are very big questions about reliability.

[snucerist]

In addition to reliability, any device needs more demand. Otherwise, what is the point of producing it?
Now tell me, pliz, where in the world is this super-reliable RD-180 engine used?
In Russia, there is no use for him, because under him there is stupidly no carrier. And will not be. Rogozin tales about the Angara -6 are already tired.
RD-180 is taken only by the States. And only for the Atlas carrier. More in the world it is not in demand. The Atlas program will be closed; even NASA is tired of containing such an expensive project.
What will happen next with the RD-180? Which is reliable but no one needs?

[slipped]

Quote: snucerist

Now tell me, pliz, where in the world is this super-reliable RD-180 engine used?

The RD-180 was developed specifically for the Atlas rocket, using American money and some secondary American technologies at the request of the customer.

Quote: snucerist

In Russia, there is no use for him, because under him there is stupidly no carrier. And will not be. Rogozin tales about the Angara -6 are already tired.

Such a carrier as Angara-6 does not exist in nature. It is planned to create Soyuz-6 and Yenisei carriers that use the RD-180MV engine in their composition.

Quote: snucerist

What will happen next with the RD-180? Which is reliable but no one needs?

I wrote above. Moreover, the price of this engine as a result of modernization has been significantly reduced.

[snucerist]

The amendment is accepted. Of course, Soyuz-6 is just a reservation.
Nevertheless, the tale now about Soyuz-6 does not become a reality from this. Like the tale of the whole Angara family. Like everything, however, Rogozin said.
The epic with the Federation-Eagle will be repeated in detail.
The fact that the price of the engine is reduced does not mean that it has become more in demand. Zimbabwe and Venezuela will not need him.
In Russia, there is no use for him. And will not be. As there will be no Union-6.
Atlas program will be closed.
The remaining engines will go to scrap. Everything is simple.
We cannot understand one simple thing: Rogozin says, and Musk does.
Resting on our laurels half a century ago is a dead end. We must go further.
And this is a problem.
However, if there had not been a Soviet backlog, there would have been no problems at all. Like the whole of Russian cosmonautics.

[slipped]

Quote: snucerist

The amendment is accepted. Of course, Soyuz-6 is just a reservation.

Wow.

Quote: snucerist

Nevertheless, the tale now about Soyuz-6 does not become a reality from this.

For example, I have a proof from the general director of the RCC that flight tests of Soyuz-6 are planned for the year 2025. And you?

Quote: snucerist

Like the tale of the whole Angara family. Like everything, however, Rogozin said.

A fairy tale that right now is making a come true https://www.roscosmos.ru/28751/

Quote: snucerist

The epic with the Federation-Eagle will be repeated in detail.

What relation does a product manufactured by another enterprise - RSC Energia have to do with the manufacturer of Soyuz? By the way, what kind of "epic" is this? The contract for the production of PTK NP RSC Energia was concluded in 2016. Today, the structural elements of the ship are being tested. There is a release of design documentation for new products. Launch in the year 2023.

Quote: snucerist

The fact that the price of the engine is reduced does not mean that it has become more in demand.

Once again - this engine is designed for use in the Soyuz-6 and the Yenisei launch vehicles.

Quote: snucerist

We cannot understand one simple thing: Rogozin says, and Musk does.

Ah, inadequate sectarian with mantras. So this was where we had to start.

[Rostislav Prokopenko]

What Musk is doing - let's see on August 28 - is the planned date of the splashdown of his prodigy.

[atalef]

Quote: slipped

Once again - this engine is designed for use in the Soyuz-6 and the Yenisei launch vehicles.

Are you talking about RD180?
But as far as I know, it was developed with American money and they are its copyright holders.

[slipped]

Quote: atalef

Are you talking about RD180?

Not. I'm talking about RD-180MV.

Quote: atalef

But as far as I know, it was developed with American money and they are its copyright holders.

The main patents for the main engine components are assigned to Russia. RD-180MV is a completely Russian development.

[military_cat]

Quote: slipped

For example, I have a proof from the general director of the RCC that flight tests of Soyuz-6 are planned for the year 2025. And you?

And I have a proof from the head of RSC Energia that the Russian base on the moon will be built in 2015.

[slipped]

Quote: military_cat

] And I have a proof from the head of RSC Energia that the Russian base on the moon will be built in 2015.

From what gray-haired year is the proof? From 2006? This is when there was no money in the industry as a result of Yeltsin’s reforms, right? So this is not proof.

[military_cat]

Yes, that chapter turned a little into a pumpkin. This is their peculiarity - when it comes time to report on promises, it turns out that they have already managed to turn into a pumpkin.

[slipped]

Well, there’s another proof, 10 years newer, about the American Constellation program. They all turned into a pumpkin too, right?

[military_cat]

It’s better to tell us what’s stopping you from saying in 2025 that as of 2020, not all the consequences of the reforms of the nineties in the industry have yet been eliminated, so the proofs from 2020 are not considered proofs?

[slipped]

Quote: military_cat

Better tell what will stop you in the 2025th to say

In 2024, a giant asteroid will fall to the earth and we will all die out.

[Souchastnik]

This is their feature

Worthy heirs of Haji Nasredin

[Bad_gr]

Quote: snucerist

The remaining engines will go to scrap. Everything is simple.

What is an RD-180 engine? This is the half (2 combustion chambers instead of 4) of the RD-170 (RD-171) engine, which we stood on the sides of the Energy, on the Zenit rocket launcher (RD-171) and will be on the Soyuz- 5 "(aka Irtysh). Half of the RD-180 (one combustion chamber) is the RD-190 engine. Unification is called. So that the pump and piping can go to the warehouse, and the combustion chamber can be installed on some engine from the same line. And even that is unlikely: the NK-33 engines in the warehouse have been lying for decades, and still correspond to the advanced engines, I’m sure the same can be said about the RD-180 (not today, so tomorrow it will find its client)

[shahor]

Quote: Bad_gr

NK-33 engines have been in stock for decades, and still correspond to advanced engines, I’m sure the same can be said about RD-180

The NK-33 engines have been in the warehouse for several decades - so modern and useless. I agree with you- RD-180 is waiting for the same fate. Well, if only RD-180 ... In general, it's time for Roskosmos to get out budget financing for the construction of unparalleled warehouses ... on the moon.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: shahor

NK-33 engines more they have been in the warehouse for several decades - so modern and useless.

NK-33
"- .... It was used in the first stage of the Antares launch vehicle (Taurus II) of Orbital Sciences Corporation (AJ-26 is a family of modifications of the NK-33 engine (AJ26-58, AJ26-62) developed by Aerojet and licensed in the USA) on American launch vehicles (including Antares).
- It is used in the first stage of the Soyuz-2.1 V launch vehicle; it is planned to use the Soyuz-2-3 launch vehicle. (After exhausting the supply of old engines (there are about 20 of them), a new RD-2.1 engine, developed on the basis of RD-193 [191] will be installed on Soyuz-6v [XNUMX]. ....)

So, the engine is in demand, applied and applied until its stocks run out.

[smart ass]

I remember how everyone said that the Americans will not be able to carry astronauts into orbit)

[slipped]

Quote: Clever man

I remember how everyone said that the Americans will not be able to carry astronauts into orbit)

So it was 9 years old - we still carry it.

[Grazdanin]

Quote: NEXUS

This is the first economy in the world that gave birth to the forward analogue of RD-180 for more than 30 years!

It is not an analog, RD 180 as it was and no one will remain to replace it. Here is our analogue of their BE-4 is only planned.
The Americans made a new engine, for a new ship, ours flies them on methane kerosene, our one-time reusable them. These are completely 2 different engines.

[Vyacheslav gomanov]

Only the daredevil will fly a second time on a flying rocket.

[Grazdanin]

Only the daredevil will fly a second time on a flying airplane.

[Souchastnik]

This is the first economy in the world, gave birth priest forward ...

The presence of a printing press does not guarantee the availability of technology. And creativity is difficult to organize by order.

[Maikcg]

Is it the Chinese that the engine did?

[Vyacheslav gomanov]

The first economy of the World in Saturn washed the bean from the heart. The engine will not explode if their conscience woke up.

[Victor_B]

Quote: Lipchanin

Oh, really born

It had to happen...
Inevitably in the current environment.

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Victor_B

It had to happen...

Yes, I mumble something like a drum when and how they happened.
Will cheek again

[Victor_B]

Quote: Lipchanin

Will cheek again

For this reason - not a sin!
Probably, they do not make more technological pieces of iron on planet Earth.
It is a piece of iron. Big one. Terribly complicated. Mechanical stress beyond the mind!

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Victor_B

For this reason - not a sin!

For what

It is specified that the engine is not serial

At the same time, it is noted that although the US Congress calls for a complete abandonment of the Russian RD-180, this is unlikely to be done until 2024. The main reason is called the high cost of the American analogue and the unpreparedness for its mass production

[Victor_B]

Quote: Lipchanin

It is specified that the engine is not serial

For such grandmothers - they’ll finish it!

[slipped]

Quote: Victor_B

For such grandmothers - they’ll finish it!

The BE-4 engine is designed for the Vulcan carrier, and not for the Atlas. By the way, RD-180 is certified for manned flight. When the same certification passes BE-4 is unknown.

[Avior]

. Celebrated at the same time

Find out more by whom all this is noted ......
At VO, a fashion for anonymized statements gradually began.
In the style of "experts note ...".
And what kind of experts, no one knows.
In this case, even experts have been reduced ....

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Avior

And what kind of experts, no one knows.

I know

[bar]

Probably, they do not make more technological pieces of iron on planet Earth.

Yasenpen. Only in the bastion of democracy is this possible.

It is a piece of iron. Big one. Terribly complicated. Mechanical stress beyond the mind!

Early to pour champagne. They have not yet run this big piece of iron and beyond reason.

[orionvitt]

Quote: Victor_B

Inevitably in the current environment.

As the saying goes "do not say gop, yet ..." further in meaning. The engine is experimental, not serial, which is not known to anyone. For the time being, they are not going to refuse Russian engines for at least another four years. Let's see what will happen next.

[TermNachTer]

Knowing how mattresses can delay debugging, I think that the year 2024 will not end. Well, if 2030, provided that no serious "sides" come out.

[Freemason Mason]

Not tightened. Blue Origin is a private company, they are directly interested in the result. Plus, in the same 2021, they plan the first launch of their rocket - New Glenn, with a lifting capacity of up to 45 tons and with a return first stage

[TermNachTer]

Not only private owners are interested in obtaining benefits. Purely technical problems are possible - a rocket engine, not a Chinese tablet.

[alexmach]

And were there any doubts? Trampoline 2.0

[zenion]

Where are those American engines that flew to the moon? Are the mice eaten, or the ants dragged?

[mag nit]

Comments Rogozin will be about the trampoline?

[slipped]

Quote: mag nit

Comments Rogozin will be about the trampoline?

Of course, here is the previously delivered RD-180 engine No. 105T to launch their next rover

good reliable trampoline

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: slipped

Of course, here is the previously delivered RD-180 engine No. 105T for launching their next rover

And what good is it? A quarter of a century we supply engines at a cheap price.

[slipped]

Quote: mordvin xnumx

And what good is it? A quarter of a century we supply engines at a cheap price.

Is it cheap? The United States, it costs three times more than its cost.

Moreover, during this time a new RD-180MV engine was developed, which is even cheaper - less than 500 million rubles.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: slipped

Is it cheap? It costs three times more to the United States than its cost.

It’s for cheap. Since the mid 90s

[slipped]

Quote: mordvin xnumx

It’s for cheap. Since the mid 90s

He has long paid off and made a profit.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: slipped

He has long paid off and made a profit.

In comparison with what paid off?

[slipped]

Quote: mordvin xnumx

In comparison with what paid off?

In comparison with its development, the creation of a line for its production. He recaptured these costs and brought tenfold profit. Its production line will continue to be used for promising Russian carriers.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: slipped

and brought ten times the profit.

What? What kind of profit?

[slipped]

Quote: mordvin xnumx

Quote: slipped

and brought ten times the profit.

What? What kind of profit?

The cost of the contract for RD-180 is over a billion dollars. All money paid.

[Aleksey Aleksandrovich]

Now the word is Rogozin ...

[fider]

Aleksey Aleksandrovich
"Now the word is Rogozin ..."
Rogozin has long had no words.

[convoy]

Quote: Alexey Alexandrovich

Now the word is Rogozin ...

Better not a word. But the thing ..

[slipped]

Quote: Konvoi

Quote: Alexey Alexandrovich

Now the word is Rogozin ...

Better not a word. But the thing ..

Duc exactly a month ago, in the research and development complex of JSC NPO Energomash, another successful fire test of the RD-180 rocket engine was carried out. The test program was carried out in full, the tests were completed as usual.

[convoy]

Quote: slipped

Quote: Konvoi

Quote: Alexey Alexandrovich

Now the word is Rogozin ...

Better not a word. But the thing ..

Duc exactly a month ago, in the research and development complex of JSC NPO Energomash, another successful fire test of the RD-180 rocket engine was carried out. The test program was carried out in full, the tests were completed as usual.

Yes, I know, only here Mask fans catch all the euphoria ..

[convoy]

The main reason is the high cost of the American analogue and the unwillingness to its

This is the eternal problem of Western products .. High cost and complexity!
Already what decade can not create a competitive space engine .. And the mask is your PR.
Here you have the backward Russia, which’s slurping its soup, and is a pure gas station .. Let’s shout fans of Amers and geyrops .. Damn it.

[Dmitriy444]

Only, as Karaulov said, the RD180 costs us twice as much as we sell it to Amers. What a strange business, don’t you?

[And why do you need]

it costs us twice as much as we sell it to amers. What a strange business, don’t you? The flow of currency into the country, this business is called

[Zefr]

Why do we need a currency? Anyway, she’s taken back by all means

[convoy]

Quote: Dmitriy444

Only, as Karaulov said, the RD180 costs us twice as much as we sell it to Amers. What a strange business, don’t you?

Well, rejoice)))) How else can you spit in the direction of Russia?
The guard is still a balabol ..

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: Dmitriy444

as Karaulov told

At a loss sold until 2010.

[snucerist]

To begin with, for some time, the Americans had no reason to create an analogue of the RD-180. If someone does not know, it was originally created for the needs of the United States.
For his "father", the RD-170 was not used in the Union at all after the inglorious demise of the initially failed Energy-Buran project. For there was no carrier for it. And now, no. And never will. Never.
The United States agreed to take the half-cut “dad”. In Russia, it also could not be used for the simple reason that there was no and no carrier under it. So Energomash should bow to the States belt for the fact that at least someone takes its goods, because in Russia, the RD-180 is impossible to adapt to something worthwhile (fantasies about Soyuz-6 are from the field of fairy tales by Baron Munchausen).
And the States take it only for the Atlases, no one else needs it there. In Russia, I repeat, no one needs him at all. By the way, Musk will soon close this shop, for Atlases are expensive, even by NASA standards. Is the fate of the RD-180 clear?
Junk
Although the engine for its time was excellent.
But BE-4 is methane. This is another generation.
And the SpaceX Raptor Mask has already surpassed the RD-180 in performance. This is despite the fact that the fraudster Musk, as everyone knows, does not stand still like Energomash, is not stuck in the last century, but is constantly moving forward.
Output? It seems to be unambiguous.

[slipped]

Quote: snucerist

For his "father", the RD-170 was not used in the Union at all after the inglorious demise of the initially failed Energy-Buran project. For there was no carrier for it. And now, no. And never will. Never.

We should forget about the 84 launches of the Zenit rocket together, right? RD-170 is the engine of the Energia launch vehicle parablock, RD-171 is its modification for Zenit-2, and RD-171M is a modification for SL. RD-171MV is a radically revised modification for the Soyuz-5 launch vehicle.

Quote: snucerist

The United States agreed to take the half-cut “dad”.

There was a competition with the participation of different companies, both the USA and Russia. With a huge margin won RD-180.

Quote: snucerist

In Russia, it also could not be used for the simple reason that there was no and no carrier under it.

At that time, it was planned to use this engine in the Rus program.

Quote: snucerist

So Energomash must bow to the States belt for the fact that at least someone takes its goods, because in Russia, the RD-180 is impossible to adapt to something worthwhile (fantasies about the Union-6 are from the field of fairy tales of Baron Munchausen).

Bow - it’s on the map to the left. they got used to it there. According to RD-180, Russia obligatory fulfilled its contract clearly and on time. And "fantasies" are now directly being created.

Quote: snucerist

Is the fate of the RD-180 clear?

Quote: snucerist

But BE-4 is methane. This is another generation.

Generation? This is generally a different medium. By the way, dunno, RD-180 burned on methane.

Quote: snucerist

Output? It seems to be unambiguous.

Aha. Illiterate comment.

[snucerist]

We are talking about the current situation with space in Russia. Not in Ukraine, sir.
In particular, specifically about the fate of the RD-180 engine. What does it have to do with modifications Or modifications to the RD-170?
And his fate is indicated absolutely clearly - junk.
Russia does not need it.
States will not need it in a year or two.
Questions?

[slipped]

Quote: snucerist

We are talking about the current situation with space in Russia. Not in Ukraine, sir.

Oh, there’s a horror on the map on the left. Two-thirds of the employees fired. All that can be sold to someone without hitting, and that which is not possible - too. They complain that they can’t sell anymore. The remaining engines are burned to show that at least something else remains.

Quote: snucerist

In particular, specifically about the fate of the RD-180 engine. What does it have to do with modifications Or modifications to the RD-170?

I told you - the RD-180MV engine was developed.

[snucerist]

I'm not interested in what, where and by whom it was developed.
I ask a specific question: where is the RD-180 in demand today? In Russia in particular? What media?
The options "will ... make ... produce ... design ... design ... develop and other types when the cancer on the mountain whistles or after a rain on Thursday" do not offer.

[slipped]

Quote: snucerist

I'm not interested in what, where and by whom it was developed.
I ask a specific question: where is the RD-180 in demand today? In Russia in particular? What media?

So there you have a specific answer.

In Russia, two carriers are now in operation. Soyuz-2 of various modifications and Proton-M of the third and fourth phases of modernization, which are being prepared to replace the launch of the Angara series missiles. On these media NOT the RD-180 engine is installed, since it was developed for the American carrier Atlas, which successfully completed 90 accident-free launches.

A new RD-180MV engine has been developed in Russia for installation on promising carriers.

Is there something wrong with understanding obvious things?

[UserGun]

Quote: Konvoi

And the mask is your PR man.

Well, as a "PR man" ....

"It became known that the space company Ilona Mask SpaceX overtook Russia by the number of launches for 2020. In addition, according to information published in Ars Technica, the company also bypassed Europe and Japan in this indicator. "

And not for the first time. Think so, about the Mask and further, lying on the couch)))

[slipped]

Quote: UserGun

the company Ilona Mask SpaceX overtook Russia in the number of launches for 2020

Oh, how, the year 2020 has not yet ended, and sectarians are already calculating. Itchy.

Quote: UserGun

And not for the first time.

And when was it again, if it is "not the first time"?

[UserGun]

Quote: slipped

Oh, how, the year 2020 has not yet ended, and sectarians are already calculating. Itchy.

And this is not even how you crow about the "sectarians", but the naked official statistics about which you can, without straining, google on an ury-sofa)))

Quote: slipped

And when was it again, if it is "not the first time"?

In 2017, dear man))) Unpatriotic pagan SpaceX))) in a frantic outburst, vilely bypassed the Russian Federation))) Now she has bypassed everyone with a choch))) With what I patriotically congratulate you! )))

[slipped]

Quote: UserGun

And this is not even how you crow about the "sectarians", but the naked official statistics about which you can, without straining, google on an ury-sofa)))

Official statistics are recorded at the end of last year, and not in the middle of it.

Quote: UserGun

In 2017, man)))

Yes? We look at the 2017th year:

USA - 29 launches (of which F9 - 18 launches).
Russia - 19 launches.

Quote: UserGun

Unpatriotic-minded pagan SpaceX))) in a frantic outburst, meanly bypassed the Russian Federation))) Now she has bypassed everyone with a choch))) With what I patriotically congratulate you! )))

I watch not tearing on a dec?

[UserGun]

Quote: slipped

Yes? We look at the 2017th year:

USA - 29 launches (of which F9 - 18 launches).
Russia - 19 launches.

Hehe))) in 2018 how? Epicail ?! ))) Well, the erefia doesn’t already have leadership, which in vain clicks in vain, wringing hands and drooling at the monitor from the ury-sofa))) Be afraid and humble yourself, for you have written a new constitution and now you need to listen to it and scream approval)))

[slipped]

Quote: UserGun

Hehe))) in 2018 how?

We look at the year 2018:

In 2018, the launch of 20 launch vehicles from spacecraft for various purposes was ensured. https://www.roscosmos.ru/25906/

USA: 31 launches + 3 New Zealand (of which Ф9 - 20 launches, ФХ - 1 launch (with a car)).

It turns out that they were ahead of one running car. Well cool, what

Quote: UserGun

Well, there’s no leadership in erefia,

We immediately look at the year 2019, otherwise it’s somehow not to skip comme il faut:

During the year, launches of 25 space rockets were provided. https://www.roscosmos.ru/27907/

USA: 21 launches + 6 New Zealand (of which F9 - 11 launches, FH - 2 launches.)

Epicail? I don’t think so. The number of launches is only growing.

[Jurkovs]

You can’t stop progress by speeding up conversations. The engine, of course, has a lot of childhood illnesses, but the Americans have already secured themselves, only they have delivered and stored RD-180 for all launches up to 25 years. For whom did the bell ring?

[donavi49]

With the current launch program there until the age of 30. Atlas also decided to market.

The military also has its own cow - Delta4 (and on DeltaHavi holidays) the last most expensive missile in the world at the launch price (and will remain until the SLS is put into operation) for today. Therefore, they have no particular problems.

[Gennady Fomkin]

Quote: Dmitriy444

Only, as Karaulov said, the RD180 costs us twice as much as we sell it to Amers. What a strange business, don’t you?

Well, yes, Karaulov is a "major specialist"

[convoy]

Quote: Gennady Fomkin

Well, yes, Karaulov is a "major specialist"

Another anal tightened now .. He likes to count other people's money, except for his own ..

[Avior]

. The Accounts Chamber conducted an audit and found that OAO NPO Energomash sold the United States RD-180 rocket engines for half the price.

880 million loss

. Russian RD-180 engines sold in the USA at half price
OAO NPO Energomash sold Russian RD-180 rocket engines in the United States for half of their production costs. Sergei Ryabukhin, an auditor of the Accounts Chamber (SP) of the Russian Federation, told reporters, the joint venture came to this conclusion as a result of an audit of the research and production association.

[U-58]

But Toko does not need to think that Energomash itself sets the price for the engine for Americans.
On the contrary, in this story from the very beginning, from the time of Yeltsin and the Gor-Chernomyrdin commission, Energomash is, firstly, a party subordinate to the government (RF, for a minute) and, secondly, the affected party. It is in terms of prices for a) technology transferred and b) for delivered products.
And the fact that after raking out the foreign currency proceeds by the government, Energomash fell crumbs to keep the company afloat for 25 years after happiness

[slipped]

Quote: Avior

880 million loss

The loss has long been returned a hundredfold.

[Gennady Fomkin]

Academician, general director of NPO Energomash, Boris Katorgin, wrote that the States spent 4 years to develop and launch the RD-180, but could not create this production in 10 years, it is so unique. As a result, the USA and NASA decided to go by creating your own engine, so as not to depend on Russia. NASA responded to the call: SpaceX, Orbital ATK, Sierra Nevada and Boeing. As well as the company: Blue Origin, in 2011 it began work on the BE-4 reusable engine (249 tf thrust, methane / oxygen fuel, two BE-4s will be installed on the rocket), and Aerojet Rocketdyne has been creating AR- since 2010 1 (thrust 226 tf, kerosene / oxygen fuel, two AR-1s will be installed on the rocket). Until 2013, Rocketdine was a division of Pratt & Whitney. It was Rocketdine that developed the RS-25 rocket engine for the Shuttle program, in principle it can be considered a replacement for the RD-180 engine, but its cost alone is $ 65 million and hydrogen / oxygen fuel, which does not allow the use of RS-25 for Atlas rocket launches, moreover, it is very complex and explosive. In principle, it has long been outdated.

[Blackmokona]

Something you wrote in general left.
First, only two responded to the call to replace the RD-180. This is the Roquetdine with the AR-1 engine, and the BO with the BE-4 engine that they began to develop many years before the order, for use in their New Glen rocket, and the supply of ULA engines is simply an opportunity to get the dough out for business.
Musk, with his SpaceX, is absolutely not interested in selling his Merlin and Raptor, since he wants to squeeze out all the launches for himself.

[donavi49]

Not. Generally there is fun. NASA started the program, and all sorts of startups climbed into it, without anything, but give me the money. In the end, it didn’t work out. The aerojet made the AR-1, but it’s difficult / expensive to convert the Atlas to it. Plus, the unique operating time for the accident is lost and all certifications fly right away. It is not worth it. Like a straw for a rainy day. As a result, in order not to be lost, now Aerojet is trying to sell these engines to private owners, in particular fireflies.

Bezos has long been working on methane for his launch vehicle. And then there was the opportunity to enter into a partnership in YULA, get money, experience and other useful things. They broke due to the LNG concept at the competition AR-1 for the first stage of the Volcano-Centaurus and took the contract. But this is not a specially designed engine to replace the RD-180, it is a private trader who wants to gobble up commercial launches like Mask and a mask too (his system is a little more progressive than 9ka and FH).

The rest did not respond. The orbital generally bent and began to make Omega on HTPB (solid fuel) as requested by the new owner (he makes these engines Castor).

[Vadim237]

The RS 25 is explosive - but for all the years of operation on the Shuttles it never exploded.

[Grazdanin]

Quote: Gennady Fomkin

Katorgin wrote that the States spent 4 years to master and launch the RD-180, but could not create this production in 10 years, it is so unique

It will only occur to Russia to spend a lot of money on creating production of products created using outdated technologies when there is a ready-made solution at a bargain price on the market.

[convoy]

Quote: Grazdanin

It will only occur to Russia to spend a lot of money on creating production of products created using outdated technologies, when there is a ready-made solution at a bargain price on the market

You are just like "our government with the Gaidar and Chubaisem" in 90- directly stated
Why should Russia produce something when you can just buy in the west ..))))
And then bang sanctions ..)))) And get on your knees red and the whole country ..

Remember the men of the iconic childhood film of our USSR?

[donavi49]

This is not an analogue of the RD180. And the other direction is methane engines. Here Roscosmos is already forced to catch up. And the gap is decent.

In the Voronezh missile center engine tests already conducted a series of fire tests of a model gas generator. It will also become an element of RD-0177. Among others, specialists have studied the processes of mixture formation with various versions of the nozzle head.

According to the developers, the choice of several design and technological solutions was made based on the requirements for increased reliability of the gas generator and the possibility of its multiple use in the engine. KBHA chief designer Victor Gorokhov said that the next task is to develop another key unit - the combustion chamber. Only then to manufacture and assembly of a prototype RD-0177 oxygen-methane engine.

“The test results and the results obtained gave an obvious understanding of the best gas generator design that should be used in the engine being created. The next stage of work, which we have already begun and are planning to carry out in the near future, is the development of another key unit - the combustion chamber. After that, it will be possible to proceed to the manufacture and assembly of a prototype of the RD-0177 oxygen-methane engine, ”experts say.

That is, there is not even a prototype yet. Whereas BE-4 is already in the pre-series for Centaurus and Glen. And he passed the main bench tests.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: donavi49

That is, there is not even a prototype yet. Whereas BE-4 is already in the pre-series for Centaurus and Glen. And he passed the main bench tests.

Quote: Gennady Fomkin

"Rocketdine" developed the RS-25 rocket engine for the Shuttle program, in principle it can be considered a replacement for the RD-180 engine, but that's just its price 65 million dollars and hydrogen / oxygen fuel

Where is the unique RS-25 now? Reincorporated in Raptor? How much does the Mask cost?
Let's see what the price and reliability of the BE-4 will be.
RD-180 launched 90 Atlases, all successful, cost $ 9 million. And RD-0177 will be finished if that makes sense.

[Blackmokona]

Raptor is a completely separate development. The cost of the Raptor is 1 million dollars a piece, with mass production they expect to reach 200 thousand dollars a piece.
RD-180 cost 15 million when sold for half the price of the cost

[orionvitt]

Quote: BlackMokona

The cost of the Raptor is 1 million dollars a piece.

What would the Americans, a rocket engine, cost a million, even better, 200 thousand? Are you joking like that? Yes, Americans, for a million dollars, do not even scratch themselves. Here are other details

$ 1,79 billion contract between NASA and Aerojet for the production of 18 RS-25 engines

Dofiga turns out. And the price of one "raptor" is 62 million green. At $ 25 million. RD-180. http://gadgets-news.ru/sravnenie-raketnyh-dvigatelej/

[Blackmokona]

1) So this is Musk, he constantly loves such tricks.
2) The raptor has nothing to do with RS-25

Ps: According to your link, the price of the Raptor is 2 million dollars.
But by reference, the old information has already become cheaper.
Also not the freshest.
https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1179107539352313856

Raptor cost is tracking to well under $ 1M for V1.0. Goal is <$ 250k for V2.0 is a 250 ton thrust-optimized engine, i.e. <$ 1000 / ton

[orionvitt]

Quote: BlackMokona

Raptor price of 2 million dollars

This is the estimated price per flight. And how many flights he flies off is unknown. It may not work out its estimated resource.

[Blackmokona]

No, this is the price of the engine. The price of a flight of about 40 such engines less than 10 million is declared, with everything all everything

[orionvitt]

Yes, there are no such prices in America. For a million, you will only be driven to a new Tesla, or the services of a lawyer who is not very expensive.

[Blackmokona]

How Tesla's top-end 0,1 million costs

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: BlackMokona

Raptor is a completely separate development.

The Raptor is designed according to a two-shaft fuel component supply scheme (methane can only leak into the methane and oxygen paths, only the oxygen path, unlike RS-25, where to prevent leakage along the turbine shaft on which the pumps of both components are located

Quote: BlackMokona

The cost of the Raptor is 1 million dollars a piece.

Why not a thousand?

Quote: BlackMokona

RD-180 cost 15 million when sold for half the price of the cost

Is it possible to prove the fact? And then Wikipedia writes that for 2010 the price was 9 million, this is already profitable.
We must pay tribute to the Mask, the Raptor is a good engine.

[Blackmokona]

1) Because it's a complicated thing.
2) Yes, I made a mistake.

The 1997 agreement provided for the supply of 101 RD-180 engines for a total amount of about $ 1 billion

So the cost was 18-20 million dollars.

https://ria.ru/20110511/373020049.html
https://m.lenta.ru/articles/2018/07/09/energomash/amp/

[military_cat]

Quote: mikhailovich22

Where is the unique RS-25 now?

Installed on the new superheavy rocket SLS.

Reincorporated in Raptor?

The raptor is based on a different scheme and uses a different type of fuel.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: military_cat

Raptor is based on a different scheme.

And how are the schemes fundamentally different?

[military_cat]

The raptor is made according to the scheme "with complete gasification of components." This is the only engine of such a circuit that has successfully taken off the ground. In RS-25, only fuel with a small part of the oxidizer passes through the gas generator, and in Raptor, all fuel is entirely.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: military_cat

The raptor is made according to the scheme "with complete gasification of components"

The Raptor has two gas generators: reducing and oxidizing. Raptor differs from RS-25 in that an oxidizing gas generator is added. Before the Raptor, Americans could not create oxidative gas generators, unlike the USSR. The Americans do not have closed-cycle engines with a kerosene-oxygen fuel pair.
A circuit similar to the Raptor was developed back on RD-270.

[military_cat]

Quote: mikhailovich22

A circuit similar to the Raptor was developed back on RD-270.

She never took off to the Raptor. This is just an objective fact, there is nothing to argue with.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: military_cat

She never took off to the Raptor.

Because on the horizon appeared RD-170 which solved the necessary tasks.
I’m not saying that they came up with anything fundamentally new to Mask, although the Raptor turned out to be a good engine, respect for the engineers.

[military_cat]

Quote: mikhailovich22

I mean that they didn’t come up with anything fundamentally new to Mask.

Did you talk about this? Strange, I talked about how the Raptor circuit is fundamentally different from the RS-25 circuit.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: military_cat

Strange, I talked about how the Raptor circuit is fundamentally different from the RS-25 circuit.

I already wrote to you about this.

Quote: mikhailovich22

The Raptor has two gas generators: reducing and oxidizing. Raptor differs from RS-25 in that an oxidizing gas generator is added.

[U-58]

Voronezh well done. For more than 20 years, at their own risk and peril, they have been pulling the methane theme. And now there are already quite tangible results.
True, the current head of Energomash, very avid for honorary titles and awards comrade, will attribute all the achievements and successes to himself))))).
Everything will be according to the well-known scheme:
-Humor
-Confusion
-Punishment of the innocent
- Rewarding the uninvited))))

[slipped]

Quote: donavi49

Here Roscosmos is already forced to catch up. And the gap is decent.

There is no lag. Moreover, no one is catching up. In Russia, the technology for burning engines for LNG has long been mastered.

Quote: donavi49

KBHA Chief Designer Victor Gorokhov said that the next task is to develop another key unit - the combustion chamber. Only then to manufacture and assembly of a prototype RD-0177 oxygen-methane engine.

And before that, Gorokhov did the same RD-0162D2A, and before that, other engines. RD-0177 prototype RD-0169 for the promising carrier Soyuz-LNG, which is the initiative development of the Progress plant.

So, let's say this is not the last, advance project of such a carrier from the RCC "Progress", in one-time and reusable versions, which appeared on the network:

Quote: donavi49

That is, there is not even a prototype yet.

So there is no rocket yet. Even EP.

[Engineer Schukin]

For reference, over the past 4 years, Atlas-5 (on which RD-180 is at the first stage) has only 15% of all launches in the USA.

[mark2]

So ... News about the American engine has passed. We will soon wait for an analytical article. No, two in the opposite direction.
One will prove to us that now Roskosmos is now over and Rogozin is no longer an inheritance, and that Russia will lose the competition because everyone is stealing everything, and the mask is great, yulia geniuses.
And the second, on the contrary, is not the end.

[Gennady Fomkin]

I have no doubt that this will happen if the BE-4 and AR-1 engines take place, if they are brought to mind. But I doubt very much that they will be brought to mind by that time. Since the American experts "always had a bad time" with the creation of liquid rocket engines. There are no necessary technologies. What is their secret:

“The supply of high-pressure kerosene in an oxygen-enriched environment leads to the instantaneous destruction of the most stable alloys. The RD-180 engine consumes about 1, 25 tons of fuel per second, which is supplied by a 180 kilowatt turbo pump, which exceeds the capacity of the Arctic icebreaker reactor" Arctic "more than twice. That is, in a single chamber with a diameter of just 000 millimeters, a little more than 380 tons of fuel per second burns out, releasing gigantic energy that modern American technologies will not be able to curb for a long time." And their story is with the engine on kerosene and oxygen F-0,6 LRE, which they allegedly used when flying to the moon.

[Rostislav]

Quote: Lipchanin
Will cheek again

For this reason - not a sin!

Still they would not be happy. Finally, we were able to repeat what Russia did 30 years ago.
You can once again yell about the most technologically advanced, long and far ahead of everyone ...

[donavi49]

Russia and the USSR did not go further than the demonstrators on this topic. And now they are catching up.

Rocket launch on methane engine will cost $ 40,5 million against $ 45,5 million from Soyuz-2.1b.

In 2018, Rogozin reported that the government should consider a project to create a Soyuz-5 rocket not on oxygen-kerosene, but on fundamentally new methane engine.

The presentation of Roscosmos states that the preparation time for launching a carrier rocket using liquefied natural gas (LNG) directly at the launch site of the Vostochny space center will take less than a day.

One of the slides compares the Soyuz-2.1b rocket currently in use and a promising medium. The time to prepare for launch at the launch complex at Soyuz-2.1b is from two to five days, while the new missile has less than a day.

By engines:
RD-0177 - they rolled off a model gas generator and will now work with a nozzle, then they will assemble a prototype. Delivery 24-25 years.
RD-0162 - conceptual design and individual field elements. Due to procrastination with money 21-22 years, the output on current indicators is 0177.

[slipped]

Quote: donavi49

Russia and the USSR did not go further than the demonstrators on this topic. And now they are catching up.

In Russia, methane engines have been burned successfully for quite some time.

Quote: donavi49

Rocket launch on methane engine will cost $ 40,5 million against $ 45,5 million from Soyuz-2.1b.

A new engine is always better than the old.

Quote: donavi49

In 2018, Rogozin reported that the government should consider a project to create a Soyuz-5 rocket not on oxygen-kerosene, but on fundamentally new methane engine.

This meant a modification of this carrier for methane. In the second stage, you can install two RD-0162. But not necessary.

Quote: donavi49

The presentation of Roscosmos states that the preparation time for launching a carrier rocket using liquefied natural gas (LNG) directly at the launch site of the Vostochny space center will take less than a day.

At Vostochny, an ultralight methane carrier is planned.

Quote: donavi49

One of the slides compares the Soyuz-2.1b rocket currently in use and a promising medium. The time to prepare for launch at the launch complex at Soyuz-2.1b is from two to five days, while the new missile has less than a day.

This is a promising Soyuz-LNG rocket.

Quote: donavi49

By engines:
RD-0177 - they rolled off a model gas generator and will now work with a nozzle, then they will assemble a prototype. Delivery 24-25 years.
RD-0162 - conceptual design and individual field elements. Due to procrastination with money 21-22 years, the output on current indicators is 0177.

And here you lie. "Separate full-scale elements" is a full-fledged RD-0162D2A engine with a thrust of 40 tons. The transitional stage to a more powerful engine, but can be used in the upper stages of missiles and RB. Passed successful fire tests.

[donavi49]

Demonstration Engine Only:
At the stand of KBHA JSC (part of the integrated structure of JSC NPO Energomash named after academician VP Glushko), successful tests of oxygen-methane engine demonstrator RD0162D2A.
It is reported that during the tests 10 engine starts were carried out.

[slipped]

Quote: donavi49

Demonstration Engine Only:
At the stand of KBHA JSC (part of the integrated structure of JSC NPO Energomash named after academician VP Glushko), successful tests of oxygen-methane engine demonstrator RD0162D2A.
It is reported that during the tests 10 engine starts were carried out.

Yes Yes. Hence the letters D2A in the title. After that, the engine was disassembled for flaw detection. But this does not mean that this engine cannot be assembled in the flight version, if it will be in demand in new promising products. In the same interorbital tugs for example.

But today, in our rocket science, RD-0169 was in demand. They do it.

[Avior]

This was done by the USSR 40 years ago
Rd-170.
The Soviet legacy is still being sold, sometimes at half price.

[Grazdanin]

Quote: Rostislav

We were finally able to repeat what Russia did 30 years ago.

The USA did not repeat the product made in Russia, they created a new one, reusable engine, for a new launch vehicle. It has nothing to do with RD180.

[U-58]

I do not understand sarcasm on the verge of screeching previous comrades.
For the Necromancers, everything goes as it should.
Engine development, prototype carrier development. The problems that arise in this case are not enough. And it is clear to any specialist that real LIs will not happen tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.
I repeat: it would be very strange if such a great technological power as America could not create its own engine

[Grazdanin]

They think that the Americans made a copy of the RD180, and not a new engine.

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

They think that the Americans made a copy of the RD180, and not a new engine.

"They think" ... huh journalism from RIA according to your heading unsuccessfully in this heading? Literally "about replacing the Russian engine" is taken from there. I was even surprised at what it was, a rocket then another in general. I would write - in the USA, a new BE-4 engine was delivered to the plant for testing as part of the new Vulcan rocket, which is planned to replace the Atlas-5, due to the ban on using technologies from Russia in the USA. And all the people would have become clear.

[Engineer Schukin]

Quote: mikhailovich22

Where is the unique RS-25 now? Reincorporated in Raptor? How much does the Mask cost?

You’d even be ashamed to carry such ignorant nonsense.
RS25 - hydrogen
Raptor - Methane

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: Engineer Schukin

RS25 - hydrogen
Raptor - Methane

So what? An oxidizing gas generator was added to the Raptor.

[Grazdanin]

Who did not understand, again, the United States DID NOT DO a copy of the RD-180, they did not plan and were not going to repeat this engine, they did absolutely new engine.
RD-180 runs on kerosene and liquid oxygen
BE-4 (Blue Engine 4) methane + liquid fuel

[Grazdanin]

BE-4 is also a reusable engine.

[kpd]

They also differ in traction:
RD-180 produces 390 ton-force at sea level, and BE-4 only 245 ton-force at sea level.

[Grazdanin]

Different engines for different launch vehicles with different tasks.

[kpd]

Namely, a direct replacement of the engine will not work on the existing launch vehicle, so this is not a replacement, but an analogue.

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

Different engines for different launch vehicles with different tasks.

Not. Stop. What are these “different tasks”? “Volcano” officially goes to replace the Atlas-5. Under the same tasks.

[Grazdanin]

Atlas 5 and Vulcan are different rocket carriers, RD180 uses kerosene, BE-4 methane, RD-180 disposable, BE-4 reusable (up to 25 times reuse) there is nothing common in these engines.

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

Atlas 5 and Vulcan are different rocket carriers, RD180 uses kerosene, BE-4 methane, RD-180 disposable, BE-4 reusable (up to 25 times reuse) there is nothing common in these engines.

You read inattentively. I'm not talking about hardware, I'm talking about a task. The challenge is to launch the payload. As for the RD-180, it is also reusable. It’s just that this feature is used only when burning in fire tests before being sent to the customer. The design of the Atlas-5 does not allow it to be used this way in flight.

By the way, RD-107A is also reusable.

[pytar]

They also differ in traction: RD-180 produces 390 ton-force at sea level, and BE-4 only 245 ton-force at sea level.

Here it will be appropriate to make an analogy:
For racing on F1 cars, they put motors to the extreme limit! The engine runs at maximum, and only once, for more, it has no resource. This is a type of RD-180.
On ordinary cars, put less boosted engines, but with a service life of hundreds of times higher. Therefore, they are massive and affordable! The freight price below is obtained! We do not make trains, buses, airliners disposable !!! BE-4, Merlin, Raptor, and rockets created from them, reusable, therefore more economically effective.
The advantage of reusable missiles is obvious! The concept of reusability, quite natural, it is the next logical step in the evolution of space exploration! It has become a reality, thanks to the fact that NASA has opened Cosmos to private companies, and they are looking for efficiency! Healthy competition, in which, so far, Russia is not present ....!

[Bad_gr]

Quote: pytar

The engine runs at maximum, and only once, for more, it has no resource. This is a type of RD-180.

This is where they write about our reusable engine?
The RD-180 has a throttling mode. And this throttling is possible in the range of 40-100%. In other words, it’s like a gas pedal, if you want to start the engine at half power, you want to run at full power. This mode is not superfluous in manned astronautics. For example, in our “unions”, as fuel is generated, acceleration increases, and this is not buzzing. If you had a throttle engine, you can choose a mode where it is comfortable for the astronauts and the fuel is more profitable.
I came across the information that the BE-4 just had a throttling problem. I did not find additional information on this topic.

[pytar]

Throttle mode and reusability, different things! Such an expensive and perfect product as the RD-180 rumbles only once, and then goes into the trash, for a repeat it is not good. The BE-4 probably has some kind of childhood ailments. Correct, no doubt.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: pytar

Throttle mode and reusability, different things!

Where am I arguing with this? Throttling allows you to use the engine not at full power, one of the advantages of which is the extension of the engine life.
And reusability is primarily a resource of the engine, which allows you to use this engine repeatedly. RD-180 was made on the basis of RD-170, which was originally planned for reusable use (Energy carrier rocket sides). Where does the information come from that the RD-180 is one-time?

[Gennady Fomkin]

Quote: Avior

. The Accounts Chamber conducted an audit and found that OAO NPO Energomash sold the United States RD-180 rocket engines for half the price.

880 million loss

. Russian RD-180 engines sold in the USA at half price
OAO NPO Energomash sold Russian RD-180 rocket engines in the United States for half of their production costs. Sergei Ryabukhin, an auditor of the Accounts Chamber (SP) of the Russian Federation, told reporters, the joint venture came to this conclusion as a result of an audit of the research and production association.

It was siphoned off successfully, junk which in the USSR was done for good and dusted in the warehouse

[Avior]

What else do you compose?
The RD-180 was developed only in the mid-90s, so there could be no Soviet stocks.
And at half price they sold in the 2000s
Two times cheaper than cost, at state subsidies it is not difficult

[Gennady Fomkin]

Hooray! Finally, American methane engines have achieved the UI of Russian kerosene !! Hurray, comrades !!!

[Gennady Fomkin]

Quote: Grazdanin

BE-4 is also a reusable engine.

An empty methane tank weighs more than an empty kerosene. The volume takes more, which means that the mass of the empty pH is greater. All things being equal. Here is the link: https://thealphacentauri.net/26473-raptor-spacex-korol-raketnyh-dvigatelei/

[Gennady Fomkin]

Well, if you buy a turbopump from Russia, which gives 300 atmospheres with a capacity of 1 ton per second, then the BE-4 will fly.

[Gennady Fomkin]

Quote: Avior

What else do you compose?
The RD-180 was developed only in the mid-90s, so there could be no Soviet stocks.
And at half price they sold in the 2000s
Two times cheaper than cost, at state subsidies it is not difficult

For the Shnobel Prize, definitely get

I'm tired of your pearls

[Red Dragon]

It seems that you talked about the Shnobel Prize An Avior colleague reports normal information. Otherwise, let me know when the Rd-180 was developed in your opinion?

[Gennady Fomkin]

Whistlers ran, offensively understand ...... for NASA

[Red Dragon]

Whistler here you are. Except nonsense and cheers of patriotism do not broadcast anything

[Avior]

Not tired of you still carrying this nonsense?

. RD-180 was created in the mid-1990s on the basis of the RD-170 liquid propellant rocket engine [1] under the direction of Boris Ivanovich Katorgin. In 1996, the RD-180 project won the competition for the creation and sale of Atlas-3 US rocket engines and Atlas 5 [3].

[Asad]

I read an article by Skomorokhov for 2017; it indicates the year 2030 of the end of the contract.

[Egor53]

The Americans said they made a new engine to replace the RD-180. It would be interesting to know what characteristics this American miracle has. Specific impulse, pressure and temperature in the combustion chamber. In all these parameters, American engines are inferior to RD, and very inferior.
The engine running on methane + liquid oxygen from the engine on kerosene + liquid oxygen is essentially the same.
The most modern American engines lag behind the RD for generations. No wonder the United States hide the cost of their launches into space.

[Blackmokona]

Here is an old tablet. During this time, the Raptor got better, but never mind.

[UserGun]

Quote: Egor53

The engine running on methane + liquid oxygen from the engine on kerosene + liquid oxygen is essentially the same.

What are you saying))) Do you agree that hydrogen + oxygen is no different from kerosene + oxygen))) Is it nothing that the proportion of hydrogen in methane is greater? Accordingly, the specific impulse is larger, not by much. but more. Actually the methane + oxygen scheme takes an intermediate place between the kerosene + oxygen and hydrogen + oxygen schemes in terms of efficiency. There are many more goodies with methane. You can enlighten at your leisure.

[voyaka uh]

Blue Origin is owned by Bezos, who has a $ 175 billion personal fortune.
The financial back is serious
The company was founded in 2000.

[Paranoid50]

calls for a complete abandonment of the Russian RD-180, this is unlikely to be done until 2024. The main reason is the high cost of the American analogue and the unpreparedness for its mass production.

Fact. As they say, clever enough. Petty bourgeoisie, read (if you can) not only headings.

[Andobor]

Yes, if it weren’t for Rossiyushka, he would have rode on a trampoline, hegemosh.
- While they are printing money, they will receive engines.

[donavi49]

If it weren’t for Russian, the military would dance and throw mega parties with Lockheed, for there is only one party with 100 million (Atlas5), but from 185-225 (Delta4 depending on configuration) or 420 (DeltaHavi) it’s completely different. And the American budget easily exports deltas .

In 2019, the US launches - 27 of them:
- 2 Antares for supplying the ISS with RD-181 engines. At the same time, the rocket is dead, now it has caught up with the Atlas at a price, with modest characteristics. NASA (the only customer) is exploring options for replacing this rocket after 22 years.
- 2 Atlases with RD-180. One launched the AEHF-5 reconnaissance satellite. The second Starliner in an unsuccessful attempt to reach the ISS.

In 2019, for example, 2 Delta4 (all for the military) flew and DeltaHavi also for the military.

[slipped]

Quote: donavi49

- 2 Atlases with RD-180. One launched the AEHF-5 reconnaissance satellite. The second Starliner in an unsuccessful attempt to reach the ISS.

In 2020, 3 Atlas-5 flew already and the fourth is preparing for launch. The first launched an automatic spacecraft for solar research, developed by ESA with the participation of NASA "Solar Orbiter", the second satellite AEHF-6, the third - the spacecraft X-37B (OTV-6).

The fourth Atlas 5 will soon be launched by the Persevere rover.

[donavi49]

And how many of these commercial launches?

A joint scientific mission with ESA (where the Americans not only displayed, but also participate in the project). Military 2 pieces. And the rover with the first Marisan helicopter-type UAV.

I just pointed out that, in general, Atlas, like Antares, did not fit into the markets, and now they live only at the expense of the state order (simplified). And he will take out the Delta. Especially for the military. There will only be happy. They and Mask rolled around the cabinets all the way, because there is nothing to settle there + lobbyism is weak.

[slipped]

Quote: donavi49

I just pointed out that, on the whole, the Atlas, like Antares, did not fit into the markets, and now they live only at the expense of the state order (simplified).

So problems of natives Russia should not worry much.

Both ULA and Northrop Grumman Corporation acquired a finite number of engines in Russia, deciding their market or any other problems. It turned out they have to create their model of launches or not - this is the tenth matter. Russia, in turn, carried out at the expense of these companies virtually flight tests of engines for its new missiles.

Therefore, we are more likely to be interested in the flights of the carriers themselves, and not in their internal competition - the flights are working on the results of the actual operation of the engines, and the performance is excellent - all launches are successful.

[Karaul20]

Again the damaged phone. This engine went exclusively to the Atlas rocket, since the Russian Federation won the tender long ago, so it is problematic to replace it. They have their own engines for other missiles and they fly successfully.

[Old26]

Quote: Vasyan1971

So it is, but adequate people do not understand where the engine went

And adequate people understand where, for example, the RD-0120 or RD-111 engine got to?
Or where did the M-407 or M-20 engines go?

Quote: Vasyan1971

Nevertheless, they were born only now, and even then, somehow clumsily.

In fact, they began this work as soon as they began to acquire our engines. And Katorgin explained through the media probably 20 or 30 times what, how and why. But why listen to a specialist in engines, we are "ourselves with a mustache"
Now they rolled out their BE-4. Not yet serial, but passed the EMNIP fire test cycle. But after how many years will our similar engine appear ?? They calmly, without haste, engaged in a whole set of new engines, simply buying from us those that they needed, but starting production at home was more expensive than buying from us.

Quote: alexmach

It’s still here, it’s in the museum, because in the first place it’s hydrogen,

Actually, it’s oxygen-kerosene

[slipped]

Quote: Old26

Now they rolled out their BE-4. Not yet serial, but passed the EMNIP fire test cycle. But after how many years will our similar engine appear ??

The program to create a domestic methane engine of the required thrust for a promising carrier in the current PCF is planned for the year 2023. More than half of the steps have already been completed. An intermediate engine RD-0162D2A was created and its AIS was carried out. We started production of RD-0177, which is the prototype of the final flight product - the RD-0169 engine. The RD-0169 engine in two versions is planned for installation on Soyuz-LNG LV.

[Grazdanin]

Quote: Old26

They actually started

The key question is who are they. There is NASA, there are private companies, politicians, and military, all of them have their own goals. But they certainly do not have a goal to overtake and overtake Russia. Therefore, their progress is moving, because they all have their own goals, just someone has more resources, someone less.
If Russia is useful for achieving the goals or they are the same, they will cooperate. If there is no benefit or cooperation is too expensive then they will not. That's all.
And what is Russia’s goal in space? What do we want in 20-30 years? Keep up with the US and China?

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

And what is Russia’s goal in space? What do we want in 20-30 years? Keep up with the US and China?

Interesting. It’s somehow strange that you argue “to lag behind, not to lag behind.” Russia is not chasing anyone. Today, Russia is preparing to deploy its radar and Arctic remote sensing groupings - restoring what has been lost and creating what has never happened before. As previously said, in the interests of the "national economy".

In the short term, all these groups, including the latest satellites of the so-called The “Internet of things” and communications will create the united “Sphere” grouping. And this is more than 600 spacecraft of various classes. Therefore, we will need launches of the Angara heavy rocket (which costs "three times more expensive" ) - to deploy such a large space segment. In addition, Russia must learn to maintain all of these spacecraft in working condition. But it is not enough to create a grouping in space - it is necessary to pull up the ground segment and link it with the end user, otherwise why is all this in space necessary?

As an example of the old approach to space systems, I can cite the Luch relay system - it has been deployed for a long time, but consumers are connecting to it only now, because they have not developed subscriber terminals in time.

But the "Sphere" is what is called the "pragmatic" cosmos. In the end, he generates income anyway. And there is fundamental scientific research, they bring nothing but knowledge. It is in the framework of such research that the Spectrum program of large astrophysical space observatories exists and is being successfully implemented in Russia. That is why in Russia there is and begins in practice from next year, the launch of the Luna-25 AMS, the Lunar program. That is why, as part of international cooperation, we are exploring Mars and are going to conduct research on Mercury.

As for the manned space program - by 2030 the infrastructure for servicing TEM will be created at the Vostochny Cosmodrome - the development of which is in full swing. And then the distant planets of our system will become available. That's all at once.

[Grazdanin]

All that was written is tasks and processes, without a goal.

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

All that was written is tasks and processes, without a goal.

Can't you see beyond your nose?

1. Space - to people.
2. Scientific space.
3. The moon.
4. Further everywhere.

So clear

[Grazdanin]

Oooooh, how's it going ...

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

Oooooh, how's it going ...

Not yet, just about to start everything, does it bother you?

[Grazdanin]

Good luck

[slipped]

Quote: Grazdanin

Good luck

have a nice one you too

In the meantime, we are exploring the possibility of flying over the ecliptic plane

[UserGun]

Quote: slipped

In the short term, all these groups, including the latest satellites of the so-called The “Internet of things” and communications will create the united “Sphere” grouping. And this is more than 600 spacecraft of various classes. Therefore, we will need launches of the Angara heavy rocket (which costs "three times more expensive" ) - to deploy such a large space segment. In addition, Russia must learn to maintain all of these spacecraft in working condition. But it is not enough to create a grouping in space - it is necessary to pull up the ground segment and link it with the end user, otherwise why is all this in space necessary?

As an example of the old approach to space systems, I can cite the Luch relay system - it has been deployed for a long time, but consumers are connecting to it only now, because they have not developed subscriber terminals in time.

Mixed in a heap, horses, people))) It’s not you who serves selected game to Rogozin, and then he telegraphes us all ?! )))

[slipped]

Quote: UserGun

Mixed in a heap, horses, people))) It’s not you who serves selected game to Rogozin, and then he telegraphes us all ?! )))

Difficult to perceive as a whole? Divide into particulars.

[Old26]

Quote: slipped

The program to create a domestic methane engine of the required thrust for a promising carrier in the current PCF is planned for the year 2023. More than half of the steps have already been completed. An intermediate engine RD-0162D2A was created and its AIS was carried out. We started production of RD-0177, which is the prototype of the final flight product - the RD-0169 engine. The RD-0169 engine in two versions is planned for installation on Soyuz-LNG LV.

Thanks for the info, comrade

[Engineer Schukin]

Quote: mikhailovich22

Quote: Engineer Schukin

RS25 - hydrogen
Raptor - Methane

So what? An oxidizing gas generator was added to the Raptor.

you'd better not be dishonored with such humanitarian fantasies, but get acquainted with at least the basic equipment. Yet in the public domain, do not be lazy.

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: Engineer Schukin

you'd better not be dishonored with such humanitarian fantasies

And where am I disgraced? The Raptor does not have an oxidizing gas generator or can it be in the RS-25? Instead of fucking about fantasies on the topic, they would write.

[Engineer Schukin]

Obviously where. Where you have a Raptor reincarnation of RS25. Thus, you showed absolute ignorance of the topic, with an irrepressible desire to philosophize in it.
And this is of course your right, but other users can read you, as far from the topic as you, and who can take your nonsense at face value. Is that bad.

[Engineer Schukin]

Quote: kpd

They also differ in traction:
RD-180 produces 390 ton-force at sea level, and BE-4 only 245 ton-force at sea level.

You just do not bother everything in a heap.
RD-180 is a two-chamber engine, and if absolutely in a good way, these are two engines in one package.
BE 4 - single chamber engine. And on the Volcano there will be 2 of them.

Then count yourself)

[mikhailovich22]

Quote: Engineer Schukin

and if it’s really good, these are two engines in one package.

One engine with two combustion chambers.
About two engines in one harness is just a representation of Dmitry Borisovich Zotiev who is a mathematician.

For a correct comparison with the RD-180, you need to divide the latter in half. In essence, it is a pair of engines in one "harness". The most critical and technologically complex unit in the LRE is a combustion chamber + nozzle.

[NF68]

For a long time, the Americans were busy with the replacement of the RD-180.

[Gennady Fomkin]

Quote: NF68

For a long time, the Americans were busy with the replacement of the RD-180.

We will see A lot of successes

[Trotil42]

For 18 years, from scratch, the reusable Falcon 9 launch vehicle and the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle, the Dragon reusable unmanned cargo ship, the Crew Dragon reusable manned spacecraft, have been created. Now we are assembling the Dragon 2nd generation cargo ship. Created own engines Merlin, Kestrel, Draco, SuperDraco and Raptor. This is only a Mask ..

[Gennady Fomkin]

Quote: Avior

Not tired of you still carrying this nonsense?

. RD-180 was created in the mid-1990s on the basis of the RD-170 liquid propellant rocket engine [1] under the direction of Boris Ivanovich Katorgin. In 1996, the RD-180 project won the competition for the creation and sale of Atlas-3 US rocket engines and Atlas 5 [3].

Whistle further laureate To begin with, the co-manufacturer RD-180 is indeed considered “Pratt & Whitney” to comply with US law. Shipilov deliberately missed the word "joint", and I emphasized it.

Engine manufacturer - NPO "Energomash". And "Pratt & Whitney" is not worth it here, since 100% of the engine is assembled in Russia and from Russian materials.

The sale of RD-180 was carried out by the joint venture Pratt & Whitney and NPO Energomash, called the RD-Amros Joint Venture (RD-AMROSS). Sale.

Purchase and installation were made by the United Launch Alliance. This is Boeing + Lockheed. And yes, ULA has the exclusive right to install RD-180 in the USA.

As for the “transfer of all rights and all documentation,” which, according to Shipilov, make the RD-180 an American engine, which is only being assembled in Russia.

We figured out the rights: RD-180 is an export version that was created for Atlas and can only be operated on it with the participation of the UL alliance. The article on Military Review was October 24 2017

[Gennady Fomkin]

Moscow. 5'th of July. INTERFAX.RU - The Pics Or It Didn't Happen mission to deliver seven small space satellites via the Electron rocket into orbit failed, according to Rocket Lab, an American private carrier development company.

The launch of a two-stage rocket from the launch site of the Rocket Lab company on the Mahia Peninsula in New Zealand went according to plan, but there were problems in the fourth minute of the flight. As a result, no one was hurt; the launch pad was also not damaged. Currently, the causes of the emergency are being established.

The company notes that the failure was preceded by 11 successful launches in a row, and eight more Electron rockets are now in production, which allows you to quickly resume work on putting satellites into orbit.

The rocket Electron of the aerospace company Rocket Lab can bring up to 250 kg of cargo into a low reference orbit. The cost of launching a rocket ranges from 4,9 to 6,6 million dollars, which is extremely small compared to the launch of medium and heavy classes. Thus, the Rocket Lab is committed to revolutionizing the space rocket market.

[Freemason Mason]

And why are we gloating? Does the neighbor's cow die?

[faterdom]

Something looks like ours. It's time to yell that the "copy" like the Chinese! And let them make excuses.

[Trotil42]

[quote = Vasyan1971] [quote = pytar] rocket engines, but everything has gone far ahead. [/ quote]
Nevertheless, they were born only now, and even then, somehow clumsily.
[quote] The main reason is the high cost of the American counterpart and the lack of readiness for mass production. [/ quote]
For 18 years, from scratch, the reusable Falcon 9 launch vehicle and the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle, the Dragon reusable unmanned cargo ship, the Crew Dragon reusable manned spacecraft, have been created. Now we are assembling the Dragon 2nd generation cargo ship. Created own engines Merlin, Kestrel, Draco, SuperDraco and Raptor.
We would be so clumsy .. the construction of the cosmodrome ...

[shahor]

Quote: TermNachTER

Knowing how mattresses can tighten debugging,

They should learn from us. How we brought Armata! And the Su-57! ISS module Science ... No, well, a lot of other things ... Envy, mattresses!

[Tom Johnson]

BE-4 is not an "analog" to the RD

[flight attendant]

Well, we have full-scale mockups up to ... a lot. Here they’ll burn through the cad and if they fly off, yes, the engine may be. And maybe not. According to the technological cards, the RD180 didn’t die, but here it is.