Military Review

Zeroing the space program, or All hope is now on the "Petrel"

173

The Burevestnik nuclear rocket dramatically expands Russia's space prospects. This opinion was expressed by one author. Quite a controversial opinion, and therefore, before arguing, I want to figure it out.


So the West is scared? Not. In the West, in general, they look very critically at Flying Chernobyl. However, there is an opinion that the developments that were implemented in the process of creating the "Petrel" will be able to return to Russia the lost leadership in space.

True, this opinion exists in the Russian environment. It is clear that today the situation in the space industry is such that you need to grab at any straw or the last hairs on your head, but pull the Russian cosmonautics out of the huge swamp.

For even though Rogozin blurted out that, they say, Russian cosmonauts are ready to fly on ships from Mask, but who else would have allowed them there. And if he did, then how much will it cost us? We beat the Americans in full. It is unlikely that they will start scattering discounts in response.

In any case, what Rogozin said is simply surrender. The age in which we were monopoly orbital cabbies is over. And how everything will turn out in the near future, it is still difficult to say.

And here is the business newspaper Vzglyad and Aleksandr Timokhin, well-known to readers of the Review, who claims that Burevestnik is a kind of breakthrough tomorrow for the Russian space industry, because ... Because ... In short, it is not entirely clear, but there is a change.

Nuclear rocket "Burevestnik" dramatically expands space prospects of Russia.

Further, there will be quotes in italics from Timokhin.

“However, the significance of this missile goes far beyond military scope. In the future, this development will be able to return Russia's leadership in space exploration. "

In the future, some weapon, about which little more than nothing is known, may return Russia's leadership in space exploration. Debatable, you know, but we will not rush.

“To begin with, let's make a reservation: the military significance of the Burevestnik is limited. As a weapon of retaliation, this missile makes no sense: if we do not miss the first strike from the Americans, then our retaliatory strike will wipe the United States off the face of the earth anyway. And if we oversleep such an attack, then a few "Petrel" who survive it will not change anything dramatically. "

I agree with every word. Very logical. Moreover, today it is generally too early to speak of this "Petrel" as a weapon. That's when he starts flying, then we'll talk. The accelerator start shown in the video is not a flight. It's just a start.


So far, to draw conclusions based on rumors and gossip, since all the works seem to be classified - well, that's just ridiculous. As well as unconditionally believe in the very existence of this missile, because Putin said so. You know, he talked about a lot. And not all of what he had promised came true.

So I completely agree with Timokhin in the sense that it is too early to consider the Burevestnik as a weapon. A nuclear-powered missile, subsonic, besides ... Doubtful. Yes, it will be able to hang out in the upper layers of the atmosphere for a very, very long time. There is no doubt about it. But it will be much easier to cope with the same NORAD system with a subsonic apparatus than with a hypersonic one.

But, in any case, we will be happy to talk about the combat capabilities of the Petrel when there are numbers and facts, and not bare words and staged videos. Not earlier.

Moving on.

"The fact is that, in any case, the program for the creation of the Burevestnik can yield many results, much more important than another type of missile in service."

And again ... I agree. When the Burevestnik will fly there normally, this is another question that will excite the minds for a long time. If it flies, it’s good, it won’t fly ... Timokhin believes that all the developments on the Burevestnik must be used in the peaceful exploration of space.

It's hard to disagree. Except for this phrase:

“Yes, the Burevestniki are still flying very close. But nobody has anything comparable today. "

Well, in fact, this is all very exaggerated. And then the author himself gives a wonderful historical an overview of nuclear-powered vehicles that were invented in the USA and the USSR. And from which, I note, they refused.

Timokhin issues a fair comment that none of the vehicles (NB-36N and Tu-119) ever flew in a nuclear reactor. More precisely, the planes flew with a working nuclear reactor on board, but on conventional engines. Both ours and American.

Zeroing the space program, or All hope is now on the "Petrel"

Nuclear bomber NB-36N



Tu-119 aircraft

Indeed, aircraft with a nuclear installation on board, how to put it mildly, assumed the use of disposable crews. Because, in fact, at the exit there were half-corpses with disabilities, affected by radiation.

Rockets with a ramjet engine, which had a small-sized nuclear reactor instead of burning fuel, suffered no less fiasco.

The work was carried out by both sides with approximately equal success. The Americans, perhaps, have gone further with their Pluto project, during which they have developed the SLAM intercontinental unmanned bomber, which is very similar in essence to this Petrel.


And here, by the way, it is worth reminding everyone why the Pluto project was not implemented, although the work on it actually reached the end.


A nuclear-powered rocket of a rather large size (they say, with a locomotive) was supposed to fly at an ultra-low altitude (12-15 meters) at a speed of Mach 3, scattering hydrogen bombs along the way. An additional factor of destruction was the shock wave from a supersonic flight at such an altitude and radioactive exhaust. Someone humorous among the designers had an idea that after the ammunition was dropped, the rocket would continue to cut circles over the territory of the USSR, contaminating the soil and water.

But then something came down to us from the Pluto project that allows us to think about the innovation of the Burevestnik.

To accelerate to the speed at which a nuclear ramjet engine would begin to operate, the flying nightmare SLAM used several conventional chemical accelerators, which were then undocked and dropped to the ground. After starting and leaving the populated areas, the rocket was supposed to turn on the nuclear engine and circle over the ocean (there was no need to worry about the fuel), waiting for an order to accelerate to the M3 combat speed and fly to the USSR.

The Petrel will be circling too. Either at a great height, or something else. And also contaminating everything with exhaust. But the principle was developed in the sixties of the last century, so it doesn't look very modern.

In general, nothing new is yet seen in Burevestnik. All this was invented in the USSR in the sixties of the last century, more than half a century ago. Apparently, the projects were pulled out of the archives and now, using new technologies, first of all, compacting the same reactors, we are trying to create something that can scare the whole world in general and our potential partners in particular.

But let's be serious. I don’t know when we will be able to bring the "Petrel" to mind and start churning it out in such quantities that it will actually pose a threat. Most likely never. Why? It's simple.

Conventional ICBMs and KRs fueled with chemical fuel were fired in such quantities that they can demolish all living things several times. I don’t understand what they will be able to add to this bacchanalia (I mean the last world war) a few puffs on nuclear reactors. And can they?

After the incident in Nyonoksa, there are a lot of doubts.

Space…

With space, everything is more complicated. Quote again.

“The fact is that no single-stage apparatus operating on chemical fuel could go into space then, and cannot now. Overcoming gravity is a huge energy cost. Huge energy consumption - these are engines with very powerful thrust, but they require a lot of fuel on board, and a lot of fuel is a large mass, which also requires a large aircraft structure, which together requires even more powerful engines that ... Exit none of these vicious circles. "

Well said. Physics will not be canceled even for Rogozin. Everything in this world, including space flights, takes place in accordance with the laws of physics. Alas.

Yes, a long time ago, in 1974, the idea was developed of a certain aircraft with a nuclear engine, capable of overcoming the force of gravity and going into space. In the USSR, there was a project of the Myasishchev Design Bureau called M-19.


Vladimir Mikhailovich Myasishchev with the layout of the M-19 rocket plane

In the work on this project, many options for nuclear jet engines were considered, but none of them went into work for various reasons. Although the M-19 considered various by-pass engines, that is, where the working fluid of the NRM does not come into contact with the outside world and does not cause environmental contamination.

But the M-19 project lost to the Buran-Energia system in all useful parameters, from cost to payload, and was forgotten.

And here is "Petrel", about which nothing really is known. From a few non-animated frames, we can conclude that the device is not hypersonic, and there is information that its engine is single-circuit. That is, the air, due to the release of which the reactive moment appears, will definitely be radioactive.

A step forward compared to the M-19? I wouldn't say so.

“Such an engine is quite suitable for weapons used in a nuclear war - nature will not be much worse from it. But apart from that, he is not suitable for anything. "

And again one cannot but agree with Timokhin. Moreover, the same question arises: how to carry out normal tests? That is, a question that the Americans could not answer in 1967 and therefore closed the Pluto project.

And it turns out that the release of radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere does not bother us at all? Interesting alignment, isn't it?

Considering that not everything is going smoothly with the Burevestnik (yes, Nenoksa, yes, the background increase from 0,11 μSv / h to 2 μSv / h), only the tests will bring us many surprises. Radioactive, as practice shows.

So what can you take from the Petrel, apart from radiation in the atmosphere and the rather illusory possibilities of striking the enemy?

And then the fun begins.

According to Timokhin, the development of a “new” and “advanced” compact engine will allow in the very near future to create a bypass engine that will not contaminate the air with its exhaust.

"Such an engine will automatically give Russia the opportunity to acquire aircraft with unlimited flight range, including manned aircraft."

This is where it becomes unbearably boring. And if you read this, then it's completely sad.

“And placing on such an aircraft either a nuclear jet engine (if it is possible to create protection of the working fluid from radiation), or at least some highly efficient liquid-jet engine with high thrust will already make it possible to launch such an aircraft into space. And then the long-term dreams of engineers about a transport system capable of delivering people and goods to the near-earth orbit without any detachable stages will become a reality. "

I wonder who will create this? Those engineers, designers, production specialists who have not been able to finish the "Science" module for 25 years? To make the launch vehicle to fly at least no worse and no more expensive than the Proton, which will soon be 60 years old? A manned ship that can replace the Soyuz, which is also about that?

Not funny.

In the state to which our former space industry has been brought, it is not worth talking about any of these projects. Simply because over the past 20 years there have been a lot of loud and beautiful words, but there were no deeds from the word "absolutely".

To other planets flew vehicles of any country, but not Russia. We didn't work on asteroids. We didn't photograph satellites and comets. Yes, we weren't everywhere. We only regularly carried food, water, fuel and crews to the ISS, which was also built mostly not by us. On ships and rockets sixty years ago.

This is what "we" can do. More precisely, “Roskosmos”, turned into a platform for money laundering.

“Of course, this is a long way off, even if the development of the project in this direction is given the green light, if funding is allocated. But in any case, Burevestnik is the first step in this direction. "

Oh yes, here Timokhin is right again. I can already hear how the saws howled, ready to work out and master the next budget billions. We can do that too.

They can beautifully tell tales about nuclear rocket planes, reusable polymer spacecraft, lunar stations ... Zipper, zip, zip ...

I understand that in our time there simply must be at least some kind of reversal. Well, at least a tiny one, the size of this "Petrel", which does not fly yet, but already fills in full on the pages of the media. Another scary tale for the whole world.

For the sake of fairness: this "Petrel" did not frighten the Americans at all. They understand that raising a crowd of F-16s and shooting down a subsonic apparatus with missiles is a trifling matter. More resentment is in Europe, over which these radioactive missiles can fly.

Even if something is feared overseas - it's quite a chemical ICBM and hypersonic missiles.


The fact that the old Soviet YARD project was removed from the archives and collected from new materials is not a step forward. This is two steps back. From impotence to do something really modern. We have neither personnel, nor technology, nor opportunities for this.

Alas, this is so. Hence "Poseidon" and "Petrel", to which there are so many questions that there is no one to answer them. Old Soviet developments, which were abandoned in the USSR due to their insolvency.

And now is this our perspective?

A sad prospect, I must say.

“Petrel may have even more ambitious prospects. We all just need to really want it, and everything will work out. "

Well yes. Bury in a hole, pour with water, salt and say the magic words "Crack, fex, pex." And wait for the magic tree to grow.

Alexander Timokhin wrote a very optimistic tale. Beautiful. For a minute, even allowing us to believe that the project sixty years ago will allow us to make some kind of leap forward and get ahead of everyone in space ...

But all the difference between a fairy tale and reality is that it is a fairy tale. And reality does not necessarily have a happy ending in the form of tricolor rocket planes with nuclear engines taking off from the Yuzhny cosmodrome and heading for Saturn.

Indeed, too much has been reset over the past two decades. And our space industry, from development to production, in accordance with a mathematical formula tends to zero.

And to hope that "Burevestnik" will be able to interrupt this process is somewhat ... presumptuous.

Although there is one option when "Petrel" can be useful. This is if you fuck them here:


And then, as we always had historically, roll up our sleeves and start again from the beginning. Then maybe something will work out.
Author:
173 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. gvozdan
    gvozdan 6 August 2020 05: 22 New
    -15
    The petrel and Poseidon have a very specific goal, to show the United States that it will not work under any circumstances to sit out overseas and under the umbrella of missile defense. And show it not to military specialists, who already know everything perfectly well, but not to distant congressmen and the political elite of the United States. This was done at the height of anti-Russian hysteria in the West. Pure PR move. Rough but easy to understand. Whether these projects will appear or not is no longer important. Plus, START was still in question at that time, and an extra bargaining subject would not interfere with the negotiations.
    1. Greenwood
      Greenwood 6 August 2020 06: 15 New
      46
      Quote: gvozdan
      to show the USA that it will not work under any circumstances to sit out overseas and under the missile defense umbrella
      And what, the actual ICBMs in service do not show anything to anyone? And the drawn cartoon suddenly has to show something. lol
      1. YOUR
        YOUR 6 August 2020 07: 04 New
        24
        I will add. How imperceptibly the word “zeroing” entered our everyday vocabulary.
        1. Mitroha
          Mitroha 6 August 2020 08: 35 New
          25
          Roman, well, in fact, your articles are very predictable and too uniform. Only the themes change, the texts remain the same. In the first third, you can tell who wrote and what will happen next in the text. It seems to me that this needs to be radically changed, otherwise you risk remaining, figuratively speaking, "an actor of the same role."
          Good luck to you.
          1. mr.ZinGer
            mr.ZinGer 6 August 2020 09: 02 New
            -7
            I disagree with you, the journalist should have his own style of presenting the material. This is how he differs from the actor.
            1. Mitroha
              Mitroha 6 August 2020 11: 50 New
              12
              Agree - style, yes, but not a template
          2. snucerist
            snucerist 6 August 2020 09: 18 New
            10
            Maybe it's not Roman who needs to change something? And someone else?
            At least an approach to financing the field of astronautics?
            Are there arguments to challenge the facts presented in the article? Hardly.
            Russia today has remained on the sidelines of the development of cosmonautics. Take his taxi to the ISS a little more (if Musk allows).
            It may be possible to intercept some dubious commercial cargo contract.
            That's all. There is no backlog.
            The devices of Korolev and Chelomey were good for their time, but the 21st century is now. New developments, technologies, design solutions are needed. And they are not. Replacing the Proton with a hangara, which has a higher launch price, is not the best solution.
            But what to talk about if the Khrunichev State Research and Production Center is essentially bankrupt? How long will the state be pulling out of the hole by the scruff of his neck? It is enough to drive the desired query into the search and you will find yourself on this:
            "The Khrunichev Center is considered the most problematic and unprofitable enterprise of Roscosmos. One of the failed projects of the enterprise is the development of a family of carriers" Angara ", which in the heavy version should replace the" Proton-M. " . Currently, the debts of the Khrunichev Center exceed 80 billion rubles, which is comparable to the annual budget of the state corporation. "
            1. Nastia makarova
              Nastia makarova 6 August 2020 09: 23 New
              0
              it's too late to change, it will take 20 years
              1. military_cat
                military_cat 6 August 2020 09: 49 New
                10
                Quote: Nastia Makarova
                it's too late to change
                This is called the "sunk cost trap" when a large amount of thrown away resources on an unsuccessful project forces you to throw more resources on it in the hope of saving what has already been thrown out. It is also called the "Concorde effect".
                1. snucerist
                  snucerist 6 August 2020 10: 27 New
                  18
                  Right.
                  But where is the logic?
                  Here's a stream of new data:
                  "Roskosmos has increased funding for the Angara launch vehicle by 1,7 times" ...
                  "The contract for the development of the missile complex has increased in price from 26,2 to 45,5 billion rubles." ...
                  "" The price of one new rocket will exceed 6 billion rubles. "...
                  “According to RIA Novosti, the cost of the first Angara-A5M missile for testing in 2023–2024 will amount to 6,1 billion rubles. The second missile of this type should be ready in 2023–2025, 6,2 billion rubles. "...
                  Why, one wonders, drive such a loot into an unprofitable project today? "Nine" Mask will select all contracts with a withdrawal of up to 22 tons. Does the customer need suvetyazh?
                  It is enough for the mask to attach two boosters to the carrier, and Heavy, in terms of carrying capacity, will block the capabilities of the most sophisticated Hangara by more than one and a half times. Despite the fact that the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy carriers are already flying, and with the Hangara, the prospects are very vague.
                  So why do it at all if it will not be in demand on the world market? For your needs? Is Russia so rich that it can ignore the cost of the carrier and delivery of the cargo? Is it cheaper to order delivery from the same Mask?
                  Well, yes, the RF Ministry of Defense will pick up, without bread will not leave. They don't count money there. But will the essence of the title of the article "Zeroing the Space Program" somehow change?
                  1. Romalist
                    Romalist 7 August 2020 23: 35 New
                    +3


                    Approximate prices for rocket launches. If 6.2 billion rubles are divided by the dollar rate (approximately 70 - 75 rubles per dollar), we get 83 - 88 million dollars, which is already quite competitive at the price of Falcon-9. Long-term serial production will make it possible to reduce the cost of launches in the future. In terms of the ratio of the cost of launch to the output load, we will never catch up with the states. Canaveral 28 ° 28'30 ″ s. w... against East 51 ° 53'04 ″ s. w, Plesetsk 62 ° 57′37 ″ s w.... Theoretically from Baikonur 45 ° 57'58 ″ s. w You can still try somehow, but there you will have to share with Kazakhstan.
            2. nickname7
              nickname7 6 August 2020 11: 42 New
              +5
              ... if the Khrunichev State Research and Production Center is essentially bankrupt

              As it was the news, the proton fell and the managers went there on a charter flight worth several million rubles, such a waste, bankrupt managers are strange, and all effective millionaires.
              Secondly, they wrote that the main debt of Khrunichev arose due to very high prices for fuel, which fuel the missiles, someone bought the fuel plant. Khrunik is collecting debts and the private trader earns.
              Private firms are built into the supply chain through which money is pumped out.
              Roskosmos is a sawing office.
            3. astepanov
              astepanov 6 August 2020 11: 56 New
              -2
              In my opinion, the implementation of three projects is visible, two of which are mentioned - "Burevestnik" and "Poseidon", and the third is left behind the scenes: a space transport system with a nuclear electric propulsion system of a megawatt class. The latter is known the most and is perhaps the priority. Common to all these projects is the use of small-sized nuclear reactors. It was originally planned to use the nuclear power plant on modules capable of flying to other planets.
              Variants of using a nuclear power plant in a project to clean up space debris using special automatic modules were considered.
              In 2016, the Arsenal Design Bureau named after M. V. Frunze proposed using the nuclear power plant on electronic warfare satellites.
              In February 2018, the general director of S7 space, Sergey Sopov, announced that the Orbital Cosmodrome project plans to use a space tug with a megawatt-class nuclear power plant. For October 2018, it is planned to develop proposals to accelerate the development of the nuclear power plant project.
              In an interview published on May 27 by Dmitry Rogozin on the Soloviev Live YouTube channel, it was announced that KB Arsenal and the Keldysh Center continue work on a nuclear space tug. In the report of the TASS agency dedicated to this interview, the next planned date for the launch of the space tug with nuclear power plant is announced - 2030.
              God grant ...
            4. oldbuddy
              oldbuddy 6 August 2020 19: 49 New
              -2
              Lenta.ru?
              :)

              There is such a profession - to smear the homeland.

              Wherein:

              "Internet editions Lenta.ru and Gazeta.ru will receive a state subsidy for salaries of employees
              RBC writes about this with reference to the data of the federal treasury. Lenta.ru received more than 40 million rubles, Gazeta.ru - more than 30. "
        2. prior
          prior 6 August 2020 10: 54 New
          +3
          "How imperceptibly the word entered our everyday dictionary - zeroing"

          How interesting you have noticed a mathematical phenomenon - zeroing.
          Any number multiplied by zero results in zero.
          That is, no matter what the zeroed president does, the output is ZERO.
          It's hard to argue with mathematics .......
        3. snake
          snake 6 August 2020 11: 42 New
          0
          Quote: YOUR
          How imperceptibly the word “zeroing” entered our everyday vocabulary.

          Unnoticed? So many copies were broken, and unnoticed? This word entered our everyday dictionary loudly. To the fanfare.
        4. kris_67
          kris_67 6 August 2020 14: 39 New
          +7
          Quite rightly, we noticed "Zeroing the space program", "Zeroing the presidential term" - now you can zero everything, only there is no sense in it.
      2. 5-9
        5-9 6 August 2020 10: 53 New
        -1
        Everyone is accustomed to ICBMs .... well, what a hype from a very real Sarmat, which is really oh-ho ???
        Neither joy in the hearts of compatriots, nor fear and doubt in the hearts of the lohoctorate of partners can be sown ... but here is new! Unknown nano-innovative! Consider like Musk, only totalitarian and nuclear!
      3. lopvlad
        lopvlad 7 August 2020 16: 52 New
        -2
        Quote: Greenwood
        And what, the actual ICBMs in service do not show anything to anyone?


        no, they do not show, for to counteract them, methods and rules have been spelled out in the United States for a long time for many years. And in general, the United States is already teaching its population and the population of Europe to the fact that a limited nuclear strike with low-yield nuclear charges is not scary and acceptable.
        Considering that an ICBM has a limited range, all missile silos and launch areas are under constant NATO control. And the most important thing in the ICBM word is that the missile is ballistic, that is, after US control detects its launch, it will immediately be known where this very missile will arrive. and thus prepare for the reflection.
        How does the YARS differ from the older Soviet missiles with multiple warheads, for example? The main difference is that YARSA has a shorter active flight phase, that is, it throws a warhead into space faster and then the warhead begins a free uncontrolled flight (and in fact begins to fall) along a ballistic trajectory.
        Countermeasures;
        1) easily gets lost in the active phase of the flight (with the engine running)
        2) gets lost in space in the passive phase of flight
        3) warheads (separating warheads) are knocked down in the atmosphere at the end of the flight.

        So, in terms of countering ICBMs, there is and will not be anything new. This is an old weapon against which methods of counteraction have long been developed for many years.
        Of course, the United States will have to spend money to cover the direction of the strike from Russia through the South Pole (Sarmat will fly and intercept warheads (avant-garde)), but there is nothing irreparable in this, especially if it is known when, where and where the enemy ICBM will arrive, especially since the United States prints money and the world's best in kinetic interception.

        And now we go out to "gaiety" and understand that at the moment in Russia, and in the world, only two types of weapons are being tested in relation to which it is impossible to answer the very notorious questions "When, Where and Where" will fly. most "Petrel" and "Poseidon".

        So the West is scared? Not. In the West, in general, they look very critically at the "Flying Chernobyl".


        this is a sure sign that it is precisely on the development and refinement of this weapon that it is worth focusing efforts.
        And I am more than sure that in the future the Petrel will become hypersonic because the nuclear engine gives great prospects in this direction. grouping in space, then only Poseidon can covertly get to the US coast with a nuclear warhead.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 8 August 2020 22: 52 New
          +1
          Quote: lopvlad
          So, in terms of countering ICBMs, there is and will not be anything new. This is an old weapon against which methods of counteraction have long been developed for many years.


          And how do they work?
          1. lopvlad
            lopvlad 12 August 2020 00: 52 New
            -1
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            And how do they work?


            work perfectly, missile defense bases in Europe instantly "zeroed" a number of Russian ICBMs from "Satan" to poplar M "Yes, so Russia first urgently began to issue Iskander missiles with the threat of deployment in Kaliningrad. Then the development of a time by the active phase of the flight (thus, on which it is easiest for missile defense systems located in Europe to shoot down ICBMs).
            By the way, Russia had not annexed Crimea in 2014 and the advantage of the modern YARS ICBM by the missile defense base located there would have been greatly reduced.
            The advertised complex "Avangad" is only a warhead for a conventional ICBM, and therefore on the active phase of an ICBM flight (well, the very same when the ICBM engine throws it into space) has a high chance of being shot down.
            The main advantage of the Sarmat ICBM is the increased range allowing it to fly from the direction where the United States has not yet built an echeloned missile defense system, but this one.
            Immediately after launching any ICBM (even from a nuclear submarine, even from the ground), both the United States and Russia instantly become aware of it, and intensive work is underway to ensure a "warm" reception.
            The moves are scheduled and the methods of struggle are worked out.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 12 August 2020 09: 14 New
              +1
              work perfectly, missile defense bases in Europe instantly "zeroed" a number of Russian ICBMs from "Satan" to poplar M "

              Clear. It's funny. Pancake zeroer. It doesn't work in any way, from the word in general ...
              The deployment of Iskander in Kaliningrad is correct and understandable without raving about zeroing the Strategic Missile Forces of Russia. And just in case, study the deployment of the Strategic Missile Forces divisions and measure the distance with a ruler, where are the missile defense bases, and where are the launch areas.
              I will not describe why this is all wrong. More than enough has been written about why, at this technical level, no missile defense can survive a massive strike of 50-60 ICBMs
              1. lopvlad
                lopvlad 13 August 2020 21: 00 New
                0
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                More than enough has been written about why, at this technical level, no missile defense can survive a massive strike of 50-60 ICBMs


                in order to prevent a massive strike from the United States and place missile defense in several rings between the US land territory with its own missile defense and Russia.
                Simply put, only a few of the Russian ICBM army will reach the United States, which will be successfully destroyed over the United States by local missile defense elements.

                And now a reasonable question arises: Will the Russian missile defense system hold back those same 50-60 MBRs without missile defense elements not in the ocean or on the territory of other countries, only with missile defense elements located on its territory? active leg, intermediate leg, final leg).

                where are the missile defense bases, and where are the launch areas.


                do you want to say that there are no ICBMs in Russia up to the Urals? .And all that to the Urals, the United States gets it.
                By "immediately after launch" was meant "shooting down on the active phase of the flight" and not at the start.
                So use your suggestion about the ruler and measure at what distance from the start the same active phase of the flight ends. Perhaps you will come to understand that the US military is not stupid and its military designers are not armless bunglers.
                1. Cyril G ...
                  Cyril G ... 13 August 2020 21: 58 New
                  +1
                  Quote: lopvlad
                  Simply put, only a few of the Russian ICBM army will reach the United States, which will be successfully destroyed over the United States by local missile defense elements.


                  A minimum of 75 percent of the Strategic Missile Forces will get there, with which the local missile defense system can no longer do anything. And adequate managers from THAT SIDE are not at all mentally retarded and perfectly understand the result. And you still take the ruler. And the Iskanders are aiming at the ABM bases, just so that the ABM bases are occupied by self-defense. And this must be done in any case ... Although in reality the ABM bases will show real effectiveness, at best, 3-5 interceptor missiles on ICBMs in the active sector. I don't even take into account naval ICBMs
                  1. lopvlad
                    lopvlad 13 August 2020 22: 10 New
                    0
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    At least 75 percent of the Strategic Missile Forces will reach


                    Well, unless it is only in your Wishlist, you can throw hats and Iskander (with today's range of no more than 500 km) missile defense bases around the world.
                    I see the proposal for a ruler is irrelevant because you need to know how to use a ruler.
                    The most important nonsense is that as many as 75% will overcome several echelons of missile defense.
                    1. Cyril G ...
                      Cyril G ... 15 September 2020 21: 30 New
                      0
                      Quote: lopvlad
                      Iskander (with today's range of no more than 500 km) missile defense bases around the world can be reached.


                      It's hard with you. It is enough that the bases in Poland and Romania will take out .. There are basically no other ABM bases except on the territory of the USA.

                      I see the proposal for a ruler is irrelevant because you need to know how to use a ruler.


                      That's for sure - you don't know how to use it.

                      Quote: lopvlad
                      The most important nonsense is that as many as 75% will overcome several echelons of missile defense.


                      Your stupidity is to begin with that there are simply no trains. The second earth is not flat but spherical. And most likely the active section ends here already over the Arctic. And then the enemy will have on the radar screen not one target, but dozens, maybe hundreds and all of them will have to be killed somehow - as a result, when the warheads begin to slow down in the atmosphere and the blende will burn out or will lag behind in the worst case

                      The moves are scheduled and the methods of struggle are worked out.

                      There are no their methods of struggle. Do not work from the word at all ...
    2. military_cat
      military_cat 6 August 2020 06: 32 New
      19
      Quote: gvozdan
      Pure PR move. Rough but easy to understand.
      It is imperceptible that it was somehow especially intelligible. Our media routinely tell how the Pentagon and the State Department are in a panic, but the United States withdrew from the INF Treaty and does not plan to conclude a new strategic offensive arms. Abstracting from the extent to which Russia needs these treaties, such behavior does not sound like panic from an unprecedented new threat.
      1. Snail N9
        Snail N9 6 August 2020 07: 11 New
        +2
        It’s not Roman to “fuck up” with “Burvestnik” it is necessary to “another place” - when “everyone” will gather there and the “partners” will come from overseas ...
      2. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 6 August 2020 10: 01 New
        11
        Quote: military_cat
        our media routinely tell how the Pentagon and the State Department are in a panic

        At least once I read a panicking article in foreign media. Rather, it resembles indifference. That these projects, that Armata and Su57 do not cause any interest there.
        The strengthening of China is a real concern.
        1. military_cat
          military_cat 6 August 2020 10: 08 New
          +5
          Read in The National Interest. But The National Interest is conventionally foreign, its publisher lives in Moscow and hosts propaganda talk shows on Russian television. lol
          1. Pirate
            Pirate 7 August 2020 07: 44 New
            +1
            Why did you reveal a great secret? good
        2. oldbuddy
          oldbuddy 6 August 2020 19: 59 New
          +1
          American news portal We are the mighty shows indifference to Bulava


          This Russian rocket may be the last thing you will ever see
          This Russian missile could be the last thing you ever see

          ...... This is a recipe for absolute destruction. Each submarine can destroy, conservatively, 72 targets the size of a city.
          It's a recipe for absolute destruction. Each submarine can take out, conservatively, 72 city-sized targets.

          But since the missiles have been successfully tested and could destroy entire regions of America, it could legitimately be the last thing that millions of Americans will ever see if there is a nuclear firing between the US and Russia. But hey, at least the wait won't last long.

          But since the missiles have had successful tests and can take out entire regions of America, it could legitimately be the last thing millions of Americans ever see if there's a nuclear shooting match between the US and Russia. But hey, at least the suspense won't last long.

          https://www.wearethemighty.com/military-culture/russian-nuclear-missile-bulava-submarine?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1
          1. Ivanchester
            Ivanchester 8 August 2020 18: 57 New
            0
            And the author of the article did not write on which particular boat 72 Maces? belay
            1. oldbuddy
              oldbuddy 8 August 2020 23: 02 New
              -2
              No, he's not for such fools as you wrote.

              Therefore, Logan Nye (the author of this article) wrote:
              About the rocket:

              "Estimates of its punching power vary, but it's thought to carry between 6 and 10 independently targeted warheads. And each warhead has a 100-150 kiloton yield."
              Estimates of its striking power vary, but it is believed to carry between 6 and 10 independently targeted warheads. And each warhead has a yield of 100-150 kilotons.

              And the submarine:
              "Oh, and each sub carries 12-16 missiles"
              Yes, and each submarine carries 12-16 missiles.

              Now, given your level of mental development, let's continue further, using arithmetic:

              minimum score
              12 missiles x 6 warheads = 72 targets

              maximum rating:
              16 missiles x 10 warheads = 160 targets

              I have explained it easily, but what about my alternatively gifted friend?
              1. The comment was deleted.
        3. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 7 August 2020 14: 33 New
          0
          Quote: Grazdanin
          The strengthening of China is a real concern.

          They don't care about economic, military reinforcement ... But the PRC Navy is of interest, though purely as an uh partner, sorry pear for sparring ...
    3. antivirus
      antivirus 6 August 2020 08: 21 New
      +5
      Stormweed is .. "I will buy you an owl, or a turtle .." and there is no need to look for any meaning in it
    4. Per se.
      Per se. 6 August 2020 08: 24 New
      14
      Quote: gvozdan
      The petrel and Poseidon have a very specific goal, to show the United States that it will not work under any circumstances to sit out overseas and under the umbrella of missile defense.
      Rather, the goal here is to raise ratings within the country, in a showy "butting" with the West. They have "optimized" science and education in general, so that to puff out something really meaningful to give birth. Here, it remains.
      “The aggressor must know that retribution is inevitable, that he will be destroyed. We, as martyrs, will go to heaven. And they will simply die ”(statement of VV Putin at the Valdai Forum).
      Then, obviously, you can give out nuclear martyrs' belts to our diplomats, or in general, threaten to blow up all your nuclear arsenals right on your territory.
    5. SOVIET UNION 2
      SOVIET UNION 2 6 August 2020 09: 25 New
      10
      Who will not be able to sit out overseas? For those who have accounts, real estate and voters there? Why would states bomb Russia? Is Russia a technological competitor to the United States? Well, the United States does not even bomb China! The oligarchs stopped taking money out of Russia and started investing everything in Russia? Is this not observed? So what are the reasons to bomb Russia?
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 6 August 2020 10: 05 New
        +9
        Quote: SOVIET UNION 2
        Why would states bomb Russia?

        And what bad is Russia doing to the United States? The Russian authorities are doing everything the US needs, it’s better not to come up with it. The economy is not competitive, the army is outdated, we spend money on useless projects, people leave the country en masse, we sell resources for candy wrappers, the space industry has been destroyed, etc.
        1. Pirate
          Pirate 7 August 2020 07: 49 New
          -1
          America is to blame for everything!
        2. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 7 August 2020 14: 37 New
          -1
          Quote: Grazdanin
          the army is outdated, we spend money on useless projects,

          You have done it well now, the United States, and the army is outdated, and money is being spent on meaningless projects. Our corrupt officials never dreamed of cuts there. Moreover, they spend cosmic amounts ...

          Quote: Grazdanin
          people leave the country en masse,


          The truth is coming back no less, but who cares so?
    6. Pirate
      Pirate 7 August 2020 08: 02 New
      +1
      While hellish poseidons sculpt in the depths of Mordor

      The next 57 SpaceX satellites for the Starlink constellation are planned to be launched into orbit. As a secondary payload, it is planned to launch 2 small BlackSky Global 5 and 6 LeoStella satellites for Earth observation. Their flight will take place as part of SpaceX's SmallSat Rideshare Program for the joint launch of small vehicles into orbit.
      1st Stage Rescue: Floating Platform OCISLY, 634 km from the launch site in the Atlantic Ocean.
      Fairing flaps rescue: ships Go Ms Tree and Go Ms Chief, 695 km from the launch site.
      Features of the mission:
      - 5th flight of the 1st stage B1051
      - 10th mass launch of Starlink satellites
      - 2nd flight under the SmallSat Rideshare Program.
      It will be SpaceX's 13th launch this year, Falcon 90's 9th launch, and the company's 98th launch.
      Jump Starship SN5 150 m
  2. mark1
    mark1 6 August 2020 05: 27 New
    -4
    So far, to draw conclusions based on rumors and gossip, since all the works seem to be classified - well, that's just ridiculous.

    True truth. Why all the other conjectures and conclusions based on them? I can only say one thing - even though they are fools in Russia, this is one of the problems, I still do not think that their livestock in the Ministry of Defense (as a customer) exceeds the average concentration per 1 sq. Km in the country. So with Burevestnik, in technical terms ,everything will be good.
    1. military_cat
      military_cat 6 August 2020 07: 11 New
      +4
      Quote: mark1
      I can only say one thing - even though there are fools in Russia, this is one of the problems, I still do not think that their livestock in the Ministry of Defense (as a customer) exceeds the average concentration per 1 sq. Km in the country. So with Burevestnik, in technical terms ,everything will be good.
      The general, who was already at the head of an entire defense research institute, launched a propulsion device on a satellite that violates the law of conservation of momentum into space (although the scientists explained to him that it would not work), so anything can happen.
      1. mark1
        mark1 6 August 2020 07: 25 New
        -2
        One general even
        Quote: military_cat
        put already at the head of a whole defense research institute

        its voluntaristic decision will not launch anything. And the point in this matter (when scientific opinions are close to fifty-fifty) had to be put on which we are given "experience, son of difficult mistakes"
        1. military_cat
          military_cat 6 August 2020 07: 40 New
          -3
          Quote: mark1
          One general (...) by his voluntaristic decision will not launch anything.
          And this makes it even sadder.

          Quote: mark1
          And the point in this matter had to be put on which we are given "experience, the son of difficult mistakes"
          Well, and with "Petrel" why can't it be?
          1. mark1
            mark1 6 August 2020 08: 24 New
            -2
            Quote: military_cat
            Well, and with "Petrel" why can't it be?

            With "Petrel" can be anything, but the fact that the project does not include a flying Chernobyl (not even from "humane" considerations, but because of the requirements for at least elementary secrecy) I am sure. I am also sure that this is not a weapon of retaliation, but of a first strike, like the Poseidon.
            1. SVD68
              SVD68 6 August 2020 12: 29 New
              +9
              Quote: mark1
              I am also sure that this is not a weapon of retaliation, but of a first strike, like the Poseidon.

              Neither Stormcloak nor Poseidon can be first strike weapons due to their low speed.
  3. Ilshat
    Ilshat 6 August 2020 05: 35 New
    11
    Is this kind of serious?
    How can you even discuss this?
    Like "petrel" is there something in space?
    The working fluid comes from the atmosphere, it flows out with a low temperature, limited by the materials of the heat exchanger.
    If you launch it into space, you need to carry the working fluid with you.
    And heated to a high temperature, to obtain a normal specific impulse and, accordingly, acceptable tank dimensions.
    Yes, anticipating objections - you can heat hydrogen up to 3000 Celsius ...
    And get double the win over LH2 / LOX
    But this is clearly not "" a petrel, it does not need this, such a temperature - the working fluid around!
    1. Ilshat
      Ilshat 6 August 2020 06: 17 New
      +1
      I will add that for products like the "petrel", the minimum possible overheating is desirable both for reasons of structural reliability and infrared visibility.
      That is, such an engine is as far from space as possible.
      It does not mean that it is "bad" - its purpose is completely different.
      1. oldbuddy
        oldbuddy 6 August 2020 20: 14 New
        -4
        Nobody knows the details about the "petrel".
        There is nothing to discuss here.

        But this is a well-known thing:
        RD-0410 (GRAU index - 11B91, also known as "Irgit" and "IR-100") - the first and only Soviet nuclear rocket engine. It was developed at the Khimavtomatika design bureau, Voronezh.
        Void thrust: 3,59 tf (35,2 kN)
        Thermal power of the reactor: 196 MW
        The specific impulse of thrust in the void: 910 kgf · s / kg (8927 m / s)
        Number of Inclusions: 10
        Work resource: 1 hour
        Fuel components: working fluid - liquid hydrogen, excipient - heptane
        Weight with radiation protection: 2 tons
        Dimensions of the engine: height 3,5 m, diameter 1,6 m
        Years of development: 1965-1985

        It is also important to note that the tests of the Soviet NRE, in contrast to the lengthy refinements of American engines under the NERVA program, which, even at the end of the tests, continued to suffer from the removal of radioactive elements into the jet stream of the engine, showed a complete absence of radioactive products from the reactor core in the NRE jet stream.
        That is - the exhaust of the Soviet nuclear rocket engine was also extremely "clean"
        1. Ilshat
          Ilshat 6 August 2020 20: 19 New
          +1
          You can discuss - the purpose is well known, but miracles do not happen.
          Quote: oldbuddy
          That is - the exhaust of the Soviet nuclear rocket engine was also extremely "clean"

          I do not believe.
          That is, I do not believe at all - tritium should have formed anyway.
          1. oldbuddy
            oldbuddy 6 August 2020 20: 32 New
            -5
            Why believe or not?
            Have you been banned from Google?

            "It should be noted that for the entire time of the NRE test, despite the open exhaust, the release of radioactive fission fragments did not exceed the permissible limits either at the test site or beyond and was not registered in the territory of neighboring states."

            "Solid-phase" YARD "
            A. Borisov specially
            for "News of Cosmonautics"
            1. Ilshat
              Ilshat 6 August 2020 20: 35 New
              +2
              Voooot!
              Tolerance and cleanliness are not the same thing.
              That said, there is a clause about the fragments, which I believe in.
              And in order to know that tritium is formed in the neutron flux, I don't need Google.
  4. Thrifty
    Thrifty 6 August 2020 05: 36 New
    +2
    A sad article came out, and we’ll go back to the Stone Age, we will drive saber-toothed tigers with rusty machine guns across the desert Siberia. .. But seriously, Roman, where did the information come from that Burevesnik is subsonic? And, by the way, Timokhin is right, the old projects of the USSR helped Russia to create hypersonic maneuvering weapons, and we are also creating a missile with a yard THANKS to the Soviet backlog and narobotkami. And, to the question that everything is too long, please remember the main problem of our defense industry - poor financing of development. This problem has been going on since the days of the USSR, but then 75 percent of the requested funds were allocated for development, and now they allocate a maximum of 50 percent, and 30 percent of the requested amounts reach the research institutes and design bureaus. So, Timokhin is right in many respects, we have only one option at the moment, this is to bring the rocket to mind from a yard, and use it as a carrier for manned flights to the ISS and to the Moon. By the way, Buran, whose photo you have at the beginning of the article, was also created primarily for the needs of the army, but he turned out to be a "stepson" for whom there was no cargo! So there was one flight. ..From a yard in general, everything is much more complicated, and not all variants of such engines will "flicker" during flight. Another thing is that nowadays no funds are allocated for such an option, which will not throw out a gamma of particles in flight. and our specialists are trying to bring what we have to the level of environmental safety for a penny.
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 6 August 2020 05: 59 New
      -12
      Quote: Thrifty
      so our specialists are trying to bring what is to the level of environmental safety for a penny.
      Is there a need for this? Do doomsday weapons have to be environmentally friendly? fool "We don’t need a world without Russia!"
      For even though Rogozin blurted out that, they say, Russian cosmonauts are ready to fly on ships from Mask, but who else would have allowed them there.
      The very idea is idiotic. We don't need space on American rockets! angry Let's do ours. Cheaper and better. We will only replace successful managers. repeat It worked with the sun, God willing, it will work out with the cop. recourse
      1. Greenwood
        Greenwood 6 August 2020 06: 17 New
        16
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        Let's do ours. Cheaper and better.
        How many years have they been making Angara? Was it really cheap?
      2. Lipchanin
        Lipchanin 6 August 2020 06: 26 New
        -1
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        For even though Rogozin blurted out that, they say, Russian cosmonauts are ready to fly on ships from Mask,

        When I read this, I suspected that one of his ancestors was from the outskirts.
        That suggests zashtatnikov switch to trampolines, now I'm ready to fly on their ships to the ISS.
        In one phrase, all the signs of the Khokhlomind.
        And "American can help" and complete lack of logic
      3. Not_invented
        Not_invented 6 August 2020 07: 29 New
        +4
        When will successful managers be replaced? We have been changing for 20 years, but we cannot change. Suspicious ... Or is it because the replacement project has no analogues?
        1. Abram Ivanovich
          Abram Ivanovich 6 August 2020 09: 22 New
          +4
          Only executions, Zhora. Only executions.
      4. Thrifty
        Thrifty 6 August 2020 07: 29 New
        -3
        Mauritius -yard is different, and in general, why did it suddenly become a weapon of the end of the world? Don't you think that the Burevesnik project is actually a platform for testing new technical and technological solutions and materials, including a yard and for interplanetary flights? ????
    2. military_cat
      military_cat 6 August 2020 06: 39 New
      +1
      Quote: Thrifty
      Where did the information come from that Burevesnik is subsonic?
      TASS data.

      "In January, at one of the test ranges, the most important stage of testing of the subsonic missiles of the Burevestnik complex - tests of a nuclear power plant, "the agency's source said.
      https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6124827
      1. Thrifty
        Thrifty 6 August 2020 07: 35 New
        -1
        Militari cat -TASS is just the beginning of a news agency, they write what they will be told, not an analytical center, and in our interests, information leakage is unacceptable, so TASS could only receive part of the information, which is quite natural! Militali cat, is your name Roman in normal life ? ?? Your writing style is painfully familiar. ...
        1. military_cat
          military_cat 6 August 2020 07: 49 New
          +5
          Quote: Thrifty
          in our interests, information leakage is unacceptable, so TASS could only receive part of the information, which is quite natural!
          It can be assumed that behind the veil of secrecy is hidden anything, even an intergalactic starship. But in fact, there is an indication that the Petrel is subsonic, but on the contrary - no, none.

          (No. I'm Vyacheslav Viktorovich.)
          1. stalki
            stalki 6 August 2020 08: 40 New
            -3
            It can be assumed that behind the veil of secrecy is hidden anything, even an intergalactic starship. But in fact, there is an indication that the Petrel is subsonic, but on the contrary - no, none.
            This reasoning is out of the ordinary: fish live in water that breathe with gills, which means that only those who breathe with gills can live in the water. what
            1. military_cat
              military_cat 6 August 2020 09: 35 New
              +1
              This is a duck heuristic. "If something looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it is most likely a duck." In theory, there is a possibility that this is some kind of robo-simulator of a duck, but Bayes's theorem suggests that in the absence of other data, it is most likely a duck.
              1. stalki
                stalki 6 August 2020 11: 48 New
                -2
                This is a duck heuristic. "If something looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it is most likely a duck." In theory, there is a possibility that this is some kind of robo-simulator of a duck, but Bayes's theorem suggests that in the absence of other data, it is most likely a duck.
                This is an example. An erroneous logical form. Words with "most probable", "theoretically", "possibility" in any theoretical research are just bare theory. When the facts are there, the theory is either confirmed or refuted. I am impressed by the factual base. I do not want to prove anything yet there is no official data and I am also not a supporter of denials. hi only facts, nothing personal.
                1. military_cat
                  military_cat 6 August 2020 12: 39 New
                  +1
                  Quote: stalki
                  When the facts are there, the theory is either confirmed or refuted.

                  Not certainly in that way. Probability estimates are normal practice. Take the open Higgs boson, for example. Its existence was established with a statistical significance of 5 sigma, that is, there is still a 10 ^ (- 7) probability that an unsuccessful coincident random noise was detected instead of a boson.
                  1. stalki
                    stalki 6 August 2020 12: 43 New
                    0
                    I don’t argue. This search for truth is good. But a perfectionist has always lived in me, sometimes it's harmful, but that's how my brain works. There are no facts, no statements.
                    1. military_cat
                      military_cat 6 August 2020 13: 23 New
                      0
                      So you continue to live in a world where the Higgs boson is still not discovered?
                      1. stalki
                        stalki 6 August 2020 14: 02 New
                        0
                        I live in reality, not in theory. If there is no direct evidence and there is even a drop of doubt that with regards to some important things or achievements, then I either look for facts, or leave the search to others and wait for the results. Theory is necessary and important, but it is just a preamble to reality. In childhood, they read fairy tales and want to believe in them, and the child has the right to do so. In adulthood, fairy tales go away and the child remains only in the soul, this sometimes helps to stay afloat. But you should not run far from reality, you can get lost.
                        PS Yes, at the expense of the Higgs boson. As Sherlock Holmes said: "The Earth revolves around the Sun. But it will not be useful to me in my business!"
    3. KCA
      KCA 6 August 2020 06: 47 New
      +4
      Gamma particles are something new in nuclear physics, previously scientists believed that this is electromagnetic radiation
      1. Thrifty
        Thrifty 6 August 2020 07: 39 New
        +1
        KSA - and any kind of radiation in its physics is an electromagnetic field, the difference is in a bunch of parameters and characteristics of this radiation! !!!!
        1. military_cat
          military_cat 6 August 2020 07: 54 New
          +4
          Quote: Thrifty
          any kind of radiation in its physics is an electromagnetic field
          Alpha radiation is not an electromagnetic field.

          Gamma radiation, however, can be viewed as a stream of particles (photons).
    4. nickname7
      nickname7 6 August 2020 11: 58 New
      0
      old USSR projects helped Russia create hypersonic maneuvering

      Under EBN, CIA workers walked in the Kremlin as if they were at home, it seems that all the old developments were copied and taken out, so they all know about the developments.

      ... this is to bring to mind a rocket from a yard, and use it as a carrier for manned flights and to the ISS


      You would be settled closer to the launch area, maybe radiation will make you smarter.
      Even from the heptilka scandals, and to infect the cosmodrome and the surrounding area and astronauts with radiation, is this ISS worth it?
      ... so our specialists are trying to bring what is to the level of environmental safety for a penny.

      Once the specialists can do everything. Then it is better to do a space elevator right away.
  5. Lipchanin
    Lipchanin 6 August 2020 05: 49 New
    -2
    Another horror story that scared no one, but only at best, made them smile.
  6. parusnik
    parusnik 6 August 2020 06: 15 New
    13
    All this was invented in the USSR back in the sixties of the last century, more than half a century ago.
    .......Those. those galoshes ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 6 August 2020 12: 49 New
      +2
      Quote: parusnik
      .......Those. those galoshes ...

      Nope, the same defense industry:
      Yes, my dear, yes. No need to discuss. The fact is that what we produced (and we don’t have to wave our hands), nobody needed, because nobody bought our galoshes, except for the Africans, who had to walk on the hot sand. That is the whole point.
      We had a defense industry - cool, strong, and we are still proud of it. We are grateful to our grandfathers and our fathers for creating such a defense after the Great Patriotic War.
      From the audience: ... And the first satellite.
      Vladimir Putin: Both the first satellite and the first man in space are our common pride, these are the achievements of the Soviet government, of which we are all proud. These are nationwide achievements.
      But consumer goods ... Zhirinovsky has already said this. Where were they? There were none. Let's not lie to each other and the people. The people know what was and what was not.

      Nobody looks at the primary sources - everyone is content with fake news with clip cutting.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 7 August 2020 07: 47 New
        -1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Nobody looks at the primary sources - everyone is content with fake news with clip cutting.
        It's not about "fake news", our president was still cunning with galoshes, noting only the defense industry. What, all our consumer goods were bad? Soviet cameras, watches, dishes, my mother's Biryusa refrigerator still works properly. Already after the collapse of the USSR, he himself witnessed how visiting Germans were stocking up on Soviet electric stoves, because it was cheap and angry, they bought our demi-season purely woolen coats, for the same reason (they hung unclaimed from us). Was that shit? If we compare the products, their quality, I personally would prefer the Soviet stew and bread, like many other things. This is what we are talking about, speaking about the "galoshes" behind which there is education, health care, and all socialism. Also, by the way, it is somehow not right, not beautiful when a KGB officer and a communist suddenly becomes a capitalist.
  7. Not_invented
    Not_invented 6 August 2020 06: 36 New
    +4
    There is such a British project: Skylon - a reusable space plane. The idea there is that while it is flying like an airplane, the oxidizer is taken from the atmosphere, and when it changes the regime to the taxiway, then from the internal tanks. The result: reusability and savings in oxidizer weight. If they do, there will be a very dramatic reduction in the cost of launching the payload.
    Theoretically, such a scheme can be used with a NRE. But why?
    1. vadimtt
      vadimtt 6 August 2020 09: 58 New
      0
      I think the launch cost will be less (if any) only due to the reusability of the entire structure and the minimization of infrastructure (for an aircraft), but to get an oxidizer in flight, fuel will be burned. Considering the efficiency of the process (the entire cycle, from the efficiency of refrigerators and compressors to the turbine), a lot of fuel will be needed. What balance will come out is not known exactly. The designers, of course, have everything in superlatives, otherwise funding will not be seen laughing
    2. ycuce234-san
      ycuce234-san 11 August 2020 00: 23 New
      +1
      It may have a cryogenic plant on board that separates air in flight and fills oxygen tanks. True, such a cryogenic installation in itself will be an extreme technique, since you need to collect oxygen in literally tens of minutes.
      And nuclear automatic atomic aircraft with a bypass engine in the military sphere will most likely exist in the form of "flying arsenals", which are more difficult to hit due to their high mobility and which can spend years in the air, in flight, over the country's territory - an analogue of ground-based missile systems.
  8. shinobi
    shinobi 6 August 2020 06: 46 New
    +3
    Who wrote this opus? Ah-ah, Skomorokhov. This can be sent through the radio OBS. Especially pleased was the saying that the Energia-Buran system bypassed M-19 in all respects. Where did the dear one get such information? the decision, that would be like the Americans. And not otherwise. Although the Central Committee and Gorbachev personally, with the numbers, convinced that it was not worth it. But no. As time has shown, they were right otherwise the Americans would not have turned their shuttle program. one way or another, a return to Myasishchev's program is inevitable. Without nuclear power plants in large space, there is nothing to do.
    1. parma
      parma 6 August 2020 08: 13 New
      +7
      Quote: shinobi
      Who wrote this opus? Ah-ah, Skomorokhov. This can be sent through the radio OBS. Especially pleased was the saying that the Energia-Buran system bypassed M-19 in all respects. Where did the dear one get such information? the decision, that would be like the Americans. And not otherwise. Although the Central Committee and Gorbachev personally, with the numbers, convinced that it was not worth it. But no. As time has shown, they were right otherwise the Americans would not have turned their shuttle program. one way or another, a return to Myasishchev's program is inevitable. Without nuclear power plants in large space, there is nothing to do.

      Is it okay that the space shuttle has made many times more flights to the ISS with cargo and passengers over 10 years of flights to the ISS (since 2003 there was a break for a couple of years because of the tragedy) than we have in all 22 years of the project's existence? Nothing that the space shuttle built the ISS (except for 6 modules)? Oh what stupid Americans, more often than we fly into space ...
      1. shinobi
        shinobi 6 August 2020 10: 48 New
        -2
        Dear, did the Yankees turn off their program? Turned off. Why? Oh, it's expensive. And no matter how much he flew. For the price of launching one shuttle (420-500 million £), you can buy 6 Unions together with maintenance and launch from the cosmodrome. 70 million in total, with the cost of 1 shuttle at 3 billion. Speak many times more? Really? Really? During the entire existence of the program, shuttles flew 135 times. Modification Soyuz 2 alone, from 2004-2020 performed 106 flights. How many flights of all modifications of the family were performed R-7, to which the Soyuz also belongs, is known only in Rosskosmos. It is known that 1726 items of this series were just manufactured and handed over to the customer for the entire period of the program's existence. Did you brag about all the modifications of the shuttles? How many times more, you say? As the numbers say the opposite is just what is easily found on the net.
        1. parma
          parma 6 August 2020 11: 05 New
          +2
          Quote: shinobi
          Dear, did the Yankees turn off their program? Turned off. Why? Oh, it's expensive. And no matter how much he flew. For the price of launching one shuttle (420-500 million £), you can buy 6 Unions together with maintenance and launch from the cosmodrome. 70 million in total, with the cost of 1 shuttle at 3 billion. Speak many times more? Really? Really? During the entire existence of the program, shuttles flew 135 times. Modification Soyuz 2 alone, from 2004-2020 performed 106 flights. How many flights of all modifications of the family were performed R-7, to which the Soyuz also belongs, is known only in Rosskosmos. It is known that 1726 items of this series were just manufactured and handed over to the customer for the entire period of the program's existence. Did you brag about all the modifications of the shuttles? How many times more, you say? As the numbers say the opposite is just what is easily found on the net.

          well, if the difference is 1,3 times only the number of launches (the shuttle delivered almost 250 people, we brought less than 200, the Americans threw about 201 tons of cargo on the ISS, we 180), despite the fact that the shuttle has not been flying for 10 (!!) years for you a trifle, then ok, we can all ... True, there are almost no ships in near or deep space, and as can be seen from recent events, soon no one will fly into space with us ...
          1. shinobi
            shinobi 6 August 2020 11: 20 New
            -3
            But there was no need to distort the facts. I’m just too lazy to paint all that and how by dates. You bow to the United States? And the flag is in your hands. You just don’t need to lie. What are the problems in the space industry? And who argues. We are the only ones. The Yankees gave space to private owners? Is this not a sign of stagnation and crisis of ideas? I agree, Rogozin must be driven out for a long time, like all Medvedev's appointees. But this is a general policy and has an indirect relationship to engineering design, although at times it is very disgusting ...
            1. Brancodd
              Brancodd 6 August 2020 11: 58 New
              0
              Rogozin is not Medvedev's appointee. Their relationship cannot be called friendly. In 2017 Rogozin is not a Tula gingerbread, so that someone would "like". Look at the results. He headed Roscosmos in May 2018.
              As for the "professionals". Such "professionals" effectively managed Khrunichev and Energia for 15 years with a well-known result. In the nuclear industry, everyone remembered one such professional named Adamov for a long time.
            2. parma
              parma 6 August 2020 12: 27 New
              +4
              Quote: shinobi
              But there was no need to distort the facts. I’m just too lazy to paint all that and how by dates. You bow to the United States? And the flag is in your hands. You just don’t need to lie. What are the problems in the space industry? And who argues. We are the only ones. The Yankees gave space to private owners? Is this not a sign of stagnation and crisis of ideas? I agree, Rogozin must be driven out for a long time, like all Medvedev's appointees. But this is a general policy and has an indirect relationship to engineering design, although at times it is very disgusting ...

              And who distorted the facts? If we take the data on the ISS for 1998-2011 (when the shuttle flew, even lowering the break of 2003-2006), then the picture is quite sad ... for 2011, the Americans delivered to the ISS 3 times longer than people, 20 tons more cargo (this taking into account the fact that we actually saved the project in 2003-2006, while they were not flying) and even after 2011 we could not catch up with them .... I will not even compare the number of experiments and spacewalks ... Yes, even after considering 3 projects - the MIR, ISS and Freedom stations, it becomes clear that the ISS is a crumb MIR grown up to the American Freedom ...
              PS: no, I don't see the problem that the Americans gave space to private hands ... Musk only fulfills orders, just like the lockhead for the Pentagon produces airplanes ... But there is competition on the market .. We have a joint friend of state corporations everywhere. with a friend, but there is no result ... There are no hangars, there is no PAK FA in the series, there are no 3rd generation ATGMs, there are no civil aircraft, but wherever you look - there are no progress, there are either cartoons or promises ... And it's not about Rogozin or else which individual member of the government, but in the system as a whole
              1. shinobi
                shinobi 6 August 2020 13: 07 New
                -2
                And which is more? Is this an indicator of quality for you? Good. Shuttle-151 people, Soyuz-48. Of these expeditions: Shuttle-61 people, Soyuz-42 people. That is, out of 151 people, 90 visitors. 90 against 6? Amazing efficiency. If we remove the short-term ones (we simply do not have them), then the figure is generally not serious. More cargo was delivered just because our trucks are engaged in this.
          2. shinobi
            shinobi 6 August 2020 12: 31 New
            -4
            Will not fly? Who? The Yankees will not be? And so what? One flight on a crooked dragon and that's it? The end of Russian manned space exploration? It's funny. Moreover, the Yankees will make their ship it was clear from the beginning, not a surprise and generally rocked for a long time. having their own medium and heavy PHs, very long. And if they had not declared a "new cold war" to Russia and China, they would have continued to spend money buying places in the "ancient" Unions of the backward country of the gas station.
            1. parma
              parma 6 August 2020 13: 49 New
              +3
              Quote: shinobi
              And which is more? Is this an indicator of quality for you? Good. Shuttle-151 people, Soyuz-48. Of these expeditions: Shuttle-61 people, Soyuz-42 people. That is, out of 151 people, 90 visitors. 90 against 6? Amazing efficiency. If we remove the short-term ones (we simply do not have them), then the figure is generally not serious. More cargo was delivered just because our trucks are engaged in this.

              1) Um .... Yes, the number of takeoffs and the number of people delivered to the station is the result for me .... And it doesn't matter whether a person was part of the permanent crew or not (the number of crews is limited by space in the lander for evacuation, if anything). ..
              2) I considered the cargo delivered by both manned and unmanned vehicles ...
              Quote: shinobi
              Will not fly? Who? The Yankees will not be? And so what? One flight on a crooked dragon and that's it? The end of Russian manned space exploration? It's funny. Moreover, the Yankees will make their ship it was clear from the beginning, not a surprise and generally rocked for a long time. having their own medium and heavy PHs, very long. And if they had not declared a "new cold war" to Russia and China, they would have continued to spend money buying places in the "ancient" Unions of the backward country of the gas station.

              This is not the end, this is only the beginning of the end ... We have already missed the cargo launches, both in numerical terms and in the percentage of accidents of these launches ... ... Now they have successfully returned, which means that the United States can afford to fly .... Considering that the American segment of the ISS (and here we can add the modules of our country funded by them) more than MIR + our segment of the ISS, they can build their own station .... Thus, they have the technology for any kind of activity in low-earth orbit, and the resources for this and, most importantly, the budget with desire! And with the Moon and Mars, I am sure they will succeed too, because they not only tell what wonderful cities they will build there, they say we plan and fulfill our plans ...
              PS: Who will fly? If you look at the composition of those missions that we took to the ISS, we get a funny picture - mostly foreigners were transported ... and now the United States has its own rocket, the Chinese have their own, the Europeans and the Japanese have their own ... Even Iran and India are trying fly into space ...
              We got one of the strongest space industries in the world, 30 years have passed and everything is changing upside down, and there is no need to bow to the United States, it is enough to weigh everything reasonably ...
              1. shinobi
                shinobi 6 August 2020 14: 10 New
                -4
                I understand. I didn’t immediately catch your phrase about our political system. I consider further discussion to be meaningless. I have been listening to this burdensome song of yours since 1984. The country and its affairs are alive despite your lamentations. Really crappy it became in the 90s, exactly when they tried to do as your kind wanted and under the careful guidance of "boys from the USA with good faces", to change the system. Thanks, that's enough. No more need. I understand the USA as a model for you? 21,9 trillion & external and 5,8 trillion domestic national debt. Think about it. This bummer will not last forever. For this I say goodbye.
    2. Ilshat
      Ilshat 6 August 2020 10: 02 New
      0
      Quote: shinobi
      Without nuclear power plants in large space, you can't do it.

      But with a high specific impulse.
      "Petrel" is not involved at all here.
      1. shinobi
        shinobi 6 August 2020 11: 26 New
        -2
        But hell knows. It seems to be out of business, but on the other hand, the circuit is gas-cooled (the outside air heated by the reactor is used for thrust) and if you close it and replace the air with helium, you will get a full-fledged reactor for generating energy for plasma generators / ionics Let's take a look.
        1. Ilshat
          Ilshat 6 August 2020 11: 31 New
          0
          Benefits not obvious.
          Although some developments may be useful.
          In principle, everything new is useful, as a rule.
          And in this respect, the "petrel" can only be welcomed, at least they did something, brought to the result.
  9. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 6 August 2020 06: 53 New
    +6
    Although there is one option when "Petrel" can be useful. This is if they fuck it here

    yes good
    As long as science is run by “effective managers” devoid of promising ideas and plans, as long as money is working to increase the “satiety and contentment” of the fattening (2% of the population) class, there is no need to wait for “golden eggs” from broilers.
    Those who say that this "Roskosmos" is engaged in Soviet developments of past years, passing them off as "know-how", are right. However, they do not take into account not only the fact that the Soviet space did not develop in the administrative office in Moscow, but also the fact that as a result of "digestion" of once closed projects, "how-know" can be obtained.
    In general, social rock opera in Russia sounds louder and more distinct:
  10. Kar Karych
    Kar Karych 6 August 2020 07: 05 New
    -3
    Again, the article in style is gone.
    1. Fan-fan
      Fan-fan 6 August 2020 18: 38 New
      +1
      And it has long disappeared, the latter disappears, but there is no new one.
  11. SovAr238A
    SovAr238A 6 August 2020 07: 25 New
    +5
    Recently, the thought regularly arises that the creation of "Petrel" and "Poseidon" is a follow-up to the pure disinformation received from our enemies.
    The Americans brought their supposed fears into someone's responsible ears "and the development began ...
    And here with this Poseidon, incomprehensible expediency, the extreme complexity of control and guidance in fact, super-expensive developments of the device itself and the carriers to it, and most importantly - the zero possibility of the carrier leaving the base without the accompaniment of 1-2-3-5 enemy nuclear submarines, which Belgorod, too, will not be given a chance to "fart in silence" ...
    Petrel, ditto.
    It is unrealistic to experience. Never.
    Without engine testing, nothing will be in any quantity.
    Accordingly, it will not be.
    1. Fan-fan
      Fan-fan 6 August 2020 18: 41 New
      +3
      For a long time it seems to me that we will never see either the Petrel or Poseidon in service. This is all a grand bluff.
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 8 August 2020 19: 18 New
      0
      Or maybe exactly the opposite?
  12. Operator
    Operator 6 August 2020 07: 41 New
    -6
    Once Skomorokhov and Timokhin argued about the Petrel, about which they "really don't know anything" bully

    "Subsonic, savetsky, space, unnecessary" - what else does the foreign training manual say about the Petrel?
  13. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 6 August 2020 07: 44 New
    -3
    yes, Nenoksa, yes, background increase from 0,11 μSv / h to 2 μSv / h

    Who was measuring the background there? Navalny?
  14. Varyag71
    Varyag71 6 August 2020 08: 03 New
    +2
    The first photo only brings tears
  15. Vladimir61
    Vladimir61 6 August 2020 08: 07 New
    +2
    And here is the business newspaper Vzglyad and Aleksandr Timokhin, well-known to readers of the Review, who claims that Burevestnik is a kind of breakthrough tomorrow for the Russian space industry, because ... Because ... In short, it is not entirely clear, but there is a change.
    And what, in the Delovaya Gazeta there are dumb and inept people? The audience is there, God forbid, each publication. Envy and anger are bad counselors. An evil person is like coal: if he doesn't burn, then he blackens.
    And with what fright, suddenly the Russian audience was asked to use the Ukrainian word "peremoga"? So don't understand who is playing which side!
    1. Fan-fan
      Fan-fan 6 August 2020 18: 42 New
      -1
      which side is playing!
      The author plays on the side of common sense.
  16. Brancodd
    Brancodd 6 August 2020 08: 31 New
    0
    And our space industry, from development to production, in accordance with a mathematical formula tends to zero.

    The "analyst" 'second - "expert" tends to zero (absolute). A set of habitual tantrums and howls. Well, the verdict at the end. How without a verdict. ...
  17. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 6 August 2020 08: 36 New
    +3
    The opinion of the author of the article: it is better not to do it. But Russia does. So either the engineers are stupider than the author, or the author does not know something.
    1. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 6 August 2020 12: 11 New
      +3
      Quote: Jurkovs
      The opinion of the author of the article: it is better not to do it. But Russia does. So either the engineers are stupider than the author, or the author does not know something.


      There is one more topic that is very strongly developed in our research institutes. Since Soviet times.
      The development of the Mobius strip is called.
      This is when people deliberately make a product that does not have achievable goals, is infinitely expensive, with a complete lack of justification for the cost of resources ...
      And so many, many years.
      And if it's simple: then people make themselves a feeding trough for many years, without any responsibility ...

      The main thing then in polemics, with aspiration and insult to say: "But we are making rockets ... Daggers, petrels, Poseidons - substitute the necessary and emphasize ...

      Chen employees of the Samara Central Design Bureau Progress are famous for this ...
      They live in their little world of pink, unafraid ponies. And they still laugh at Max ...
      And I understand why they laugh.
      Because so many thousands of idlers at TsSKB Progress receive salaries in total for the year, more than all the Mask employees.
      Launching one, two or three missiles a year. And mask workers - twenty missiles.

      Well, it's understandable why they laugh, the masked ones work in the sweat of their brows, like slaves in galleys, and ours don't bother - they drive teas from 7.00 to 16.00.
    2. strelokmira
      strelokmira 6 August 2020 17: 29 New
      -1
      But Russia does.

      Makes the Federation and the Eagle, makes the Science module and the Angara ... Still, something of this would fly, and not only do
      1. Fan-fan
        Fan-fan 6 August 2020 18: 45 New
        0
        So they are paid their salaries, so they are doing, and will continue to do anything, even the "Death Star" just to cut the budget.
  18. Wilderness
    Wilderness 6 August 2020 09: 02 New
    -2
    "Petrel" (as well as "Poseidon") is more like a weapon of personal retribution. A kind of nuclear ice ax in the skull. Or a killing machine sent to the future. At the moment of the retaliatory strike, the location of the villains who unleashed the war is unknown, or they are rapidly changing their location. But after additional reconnaissance, when there are no more intercontinental carriers (everything that has not taken off will be destroyed), and the desire to convey a hot "blast" remains ... hemisphere where champagne is being opened for a new world order. And the petrel from the neighboring barn will fly out. Straight to a cozy ranch in the middle of (for example) the Australian desert.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 6 August 2020 10: 23 New
      0
      It will not work like this, all VIPs will sit in the bunker for a couple of years waiting for the radiation level in the world to fall after the exchange. During this time, the engine will run out and the missiles will fall.
  19. Maks1995
    Maks1995 6 August 2020 09: 06 New
    +4
    The author is 100% right.
    Reanimated old projects, good for technology development, money washing and PR, but not doing the general weather.

    Moreover, the real military and the designer somehow fell silent in their assessments soon after the elections, and experts and cartoons frolic.

    it's disgusting when a cartoon is slipped over the launch frame during trials ... and hang noodles about foam in the Pentagon ...
  20. Kart
    Kart 6 August 2020 09: 12 New
    -10
    Is that what I just read?
    A selection of screams and groans of Internet skakuas about Roscosmos?
    The word "training manual" has sparkled with new colors. Poured so to speak with real meaning.
    1. Brancodd
      Brancodd 6 August 2020 12: 37 New
      -3
      .
      Quote: Carte
      Is this what I just read? A selection of screams and groans from Internet skakuas about Roscosmos?

      Yes, that is right. The Smerdyakovs have an aggravation, and they cannot do without foreign "friends." Why has activity increased? Real prospects have appeared for the space industry to overcome the crisis. Year and 10 months without accidents, realistic program and feasibility of implementation. Therefore, we need to read out another sentence to us ...
      1. Fan-fan
        Fan-fan 6 August 2020 18: 48 New
        +1
        There are real prospects for the space industry to overcome the crisis.
        And here in more detail, where are the prospects?
        1. Brancodd
          Brancodd 6 August 2020 19: 48 New
          +3
          It is possible in more detail:
          Roskosmos was formed in 2015 from the Federal Space Agency. Prior to this, the space industry was represented by a set of semi-feudal disparate enterprises and institutions. Roscosmos' task was to consolidate the industry. Revision of all resources and their mobilization for the implementation of the state space program. Which includes the civil and military sections.
          Roscosmos budget is $ 3 billion. In 2017, funding for the space program was cut in half.
          In 2017, NASA expenditures amounted to $ 18,1 billion. Total US budget expenditures amounted to $ 47,5 billion. That is 13 times more than Russia’s expenses.
          EKA European Space Agency has a budget 4 times the budget of Roscosmos.
          At the same time, in 2019, EKA completed 9 launches, including 1 emergency. Roskosmos has -25 (all trouble-free). The United States - 21. China - 34 (2 emergency). Such is the efficiency in comparison.
          The period without emergency launches of Roscosmos is 1 year and 10 months. In total - 40. This is a record for the entire post-Soviet period.
          More than half of Khrunichev's debt has been removed. It was 100 billion rubles. and was formed during the period of management by “professionals”. As well as 50 billion rubles. Energy debt.
          Pre-production Hangara A5M starts this year
          At the Omsk plant, not without problems, but the production of the Angar (heavy and light classes) is being established. From 2023 it will be released on a planned series of 11 units per year. Voronezh "Khimavtomatika" should complete the creation of a hydrogen / oxygen engine for the third stage in 2023
          In 2023, Soyuz 5 will be tested. This is a modernized Zenith. He must become the main carrier of the middle class. 30% of the expenses (for the launch complex) are covered by Kazakhstan within the framework of the joint project "Baitrek". The total cost of the Soyuz 5 project is $ 900 million. I know the planned cost of launching a commercial launch of Soyuz 5. Even taking into account the errors, it will surprise “'experts”. It remains to wait a little.
          The construction of the second stage of the Vostochny cosmodrome is proceeding slightly ahead of schedule. The first start from the East Angara should take place in 2023. And it will take place. Funding for the construction goes through the Treasury. The Accounts Chamber has not a single claim to the second stage.
          Next year, in April, the "Science" module will be launched to the ISS
          Next year we will return to the lunar program. Station Luna 25 will be launched. (NPO Lavochkina)
          In 2024, the first unmanned flight of the Eagle manned spacecraft from Vostochny will take place. A manned launch of the Eagle is scheduled for 2025.
          There is no "finishing off the Russian space program". There is an understanding of the tasks, the daily work of the teams involved in the implementation of the program, and confidence in the achievement of the tasks set. Ignoring the whine of the Smerdyakovs at the moon.
          1. Falcon5555
            Falcon5555 7 August 2020 03: 24 New
            -1
            Quote: Brancodd
            More than half of Khrunichev's debt has been removed.
            As generally at the state. enterprises may have a debt load? .. And where does Rogozin? Did he take it out of his pocket? Probably not - there, according to some media outlets, the "debt load" is moving in the opposite direction. Sold out assets? .. Something is wrong at the conservatory.
            1. Brancodd
              Brancodd 7 August 2020 09: 17 New
              +3
              The Federal Space Agency was not worried about these debts. The situation with insurance payments in case of accidents did not cause concern either. The "free float" of the space industry was rolling from loss of control to pure crime
              This is not a state. enterprise (the legal term is a specified enterprise) and a joint stock company with a stake in the state. Debt was generated from "'effective management" by "professionals." In the same way as in other Jscs with state participation, for example, in Rosneft, Gazprom, Russian Railways or UAC. Or in private ones - such as the Bolotin tractor plants, a completely private company. She had huge orders for BMP3 and managed to get into debt commensurate with Khrunichev's - 100 billion rubles. So it doesn't really depend on the form of ownership and "professionalism" of managers.
              there, according to some media outlets, the movement of the "debt load" in the opposite direction
              We are aware of these "some" media. These are Mamut's media resources - Lenta.ru, rambler. Their aim is to shift the focus of the negative from the military-industrial complex as a whole to Roscosmos. It is because of their own analysis. When everything collapsed, 5 accidents a year, and the complete absence of a coherent strategy, their space industry did not care. But now - very much worried. Every morning Lenta.ru throws another negative. The others pick up. Mamut is very closely associated with Kudrin and Timakova (former secretary of Medvedev). In 2017, Medvedev halved funding for the federal space program. Now Kudrin, through Siluanov, has struck another "cut", which will affect not only the Sphere program, but also the program for the creation of promising launch vehicles, and the construction of facilities on Vostochny (a launch complex for a superheavy).
              When they get everything under the table, they will calm down again and switch to a new topic. For example, our atomic program
              1. Falcon5555
                Falcon5555 7 August 2020 17: 12 New
                -1
                I was not even interested in whether it was a joint-stock company, although it’s easy to type in yandex, but laziness. If this and it - everyone understands that this is fiction. This is not Gazprom or Rosneft, which are also not clear what, but they can earn themselves. And Khrunichev is completely dependent on orders from the state. And in production and in financing R&D, I am sure, too. They are not developing the Angara at their own expense. So de facto it is a state. company.
                I do not read the tape, but I imagine that the Americans give reasons to compare and criticize. Of course, I respect that ours are being launched and developed. As one journalist said, this gives our children the opportunity to dream, unlike children from the vast majority of other countries, even a hundred times wealthy. But the Americans are overtaking in all directions, alas. So we will criticize you - you seem to be from this industry. sad
                What do you mean "Precisely because of their own analysis."?
                1. Brancodd
                  Brancodd 7 August 2020 22: 00 New
                  0
                  Lenta.ru is the main trigger. With minor edits, his information will be re-posted by Echo of Moscow, Novaya Gazeta, etc.
                  Mamut has a think tank. Gathered some good propaganda masters. Specialists in various sectors of the economy and defense industry advise. The goal is one - to prove that they can't do anything here anyway, and if they can, they will steal, and even if they do not steal, it is still worse than the "civilized society". Considering general fatigue, nervous tension and frustration from 35 years of perestroika, it works. Well, they cover its structure seriously. Now the alignment is approximately the same, if the sequestration of the space program (already twice sequestered) is adopted at the next meeting of the government, then the freezing of those few programs that had a chance of implementation will follow. There will indeed be massive layoffs. And as you say, lagging behind the leaders will already be very dangerous ...
                  1. Falcon5555
                    Falcon5555 7 August 2020 22: 26 New
                    0
                    Well, is Mamut Professor Mariarty?
                    And will this Rogozin build a skyscraper on the site of Khrunichev's site?
                    If so, he will hire an army of Tajiks, so that unemployment will not worsen on average. smile What difference does it make that shepherds with shovels will be employed instead of associate professors with candidates. At the same time, they will contribute to an increase in the population ... There are a lot of them at the construction site ... smile
                    They talk about national projects, about breakthrough development, about "there is no time for buildup", and space is sequestered - this is strong ... fool
                    1. Brancodd
                      Brancodd 7 August 2020 23: 03 New
                      -1
                      On the squares of Khrunichev there will be not a Roscosmos office but the National Space Center. There will be not managers but developers and branches of departments of leading universities. This is a joint project of the Moscow government and Roscosmos. How it will turn out, we'll see. Not long left.
  21. yehat2
    yehat2 6 August 2020 09: 19 New
    -7
    The petrel's main goal is to get the United States to think about a perimeter defense so that it does not concentrate forces in a narrow set of points, sharply increasing the pressure.
    During the Cold War, 4 F-15 regiments were stationed in North America, not in Europe or Saudi Arabia.
    Huge forces were deployed not in the Baltic or the Black Sea, but on the defensive line in the Atlantic.
    that's what it is about.
    And if the stormworm works, then the United States will have to defend all of its considerable territory, and this is money that they will not invest in offensive forces.
    1. Dmitry V.
      Dmitry V. 6 August 2020 10: 38 New
      +6
      Quote: yehat2
      And if the stormworm works, then the United States will have to defend all of its considerable territory,


      1. It is cheaper to destroy a threat than to create protection for each separate area.
      2. The issues of interception of single RCs have been resolved long ago and are quite effective.

      At the same time, the United States has enough funds to create both effective offensive and defensive weapons, + investment in scientific research.
      The Russian Federation has investments mainly in offensive weapons, missile defense only for Moscow, funding for science on a leftover principle - Russia is lagging even faster in development.
      The threat of a lag in scientific and economic development is a threat incomparably greater than a military confrontation.
      1% of Russia's GDP growth is marking time.
  22. Out
    Out 6 August 2020 09: 55 New
    +1
    The article should have probably been called like this: "Analysis of the problems of transporting a substance in a liquid aggregate state in
    vessels with a perforated bottom. "A collection of rumors spiced with a sauce of personal opinions.
  23. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 6 August 2020 10: 04 New
    -4
    In any case, what Rogozin said is simply surrender.
    Pancake. Surrender to whom to whom ?! What is this author about? Well, the Americans seem to have their own orbital foundling. Just simply. And who surrendered, why? What is this pointless chatter?
    The Americans froze their Pluto because they hope to survive a nuclear war. Therefore, such a wild and strange application technique - why dangle over the ocean ... nonsense. After a nuclear war, there will be no survivors, so the radioactive contamination of the territory can be ignored. And to shoot the Petrel at once, and the nuclear engine has a huge flight range, so that, immediately accelerating to maximum speed, the rocket can fly around the entire globe to attack from an unpredictable trajectory, and even from an ultra-low altitude. This makes modern missile defense systems powerless, and not insane and useless circling over the sea at subsonic speed.
    As for the fact that there is no one to finish the Petrel, I agree. As for going into space with its help ... The classical scheme simply cannot be implemented with a double-circuit nuclear engine. There is no wall material. Single-circuit is possible. Moreover, this engine, in contrast to a rocket engine, can consume atmospheric air gases while passing through the atmosphere, which gives a colossal economy of the working fluid. But the fact that there is no one to calculate and design this, and the system for working with new technologies is arranged in such a way that these technologies do not work, this is true ...
  24. ont65
    ont65 6 August 2020 10: 17 New
    +3
    One can only guess about closed topics, which is what the author is doing. The cruise of the rocket does not speak of its exclusively subsonic speeds, and the ramjet engine can have parameters from subsonic to hypersonic. Why direct flow? - At the initial stage, accelerators are used. Today it is just a high-speed air platform with a global range, on the basis of which anything can be created, and the variant of an explosive delivery vehicle is probably not the most optimal for such a unique system. Don't use fiction-type templates.
    1. Dmitry V.
      Dmitry V. 6 August 2020 12: 34 New
      0
      Quote: ont65
      Today it is just a high-speed air platform with a global range of action, on the basis of which you can create anything and the variant of an explosive delivery vehicle is probably not the most optimal for such a unique system.


      Nothing that "a unique system poisons the air" and water worse than toxic heptyl missiles?
      Or were there not enough testers killed?
      Their deaths, not only on the leadership of the nuclear center, but also on those who made the decision to develop - for a long time in our country, missilemen did not die on tests.
      I am beginning to think that in the years of "stagnation", the political bureau of the USSR - not so marasmatics were in charge - in comparison with the current situation.
      1. ont65
        ont65 6 August 2020 16: 11 New
        0
        You yourself write about the testers and immediately talk about the allegedly exorbitant pollution and toxicity. If this were so, there would be no testers within a kilometer radius, as well as the tests themselves, most likely. The place was chosen by the wave itself inhabited. Nothing is known about the design of the engine, and it is too early to talk about the safety achieved by that time, so it would be more correct.
      2. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 7 August 2020 09: 18 New
        -1
        Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
        Nothing that the "unique system poisons the air" and water,

        Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Let it poison itself. As a weapon of the last chance, Petrel is already out of competition. Their massive use, which will cause significant damage to the environment, is planned when the warheads of these missiles will cause damage to the environment hundreds of thousands of times greater. This is not a hair dryer or a bread maker, but the deadly weapon of the last war. Do you feel the difference?
  25. Dmitry V.
    Dmitry V. 6 August 2020 10: 21 New
    +5
    I agree with the author on all points.
    The uselessness of a ramjet NRE for cosmonautics is obvious even for non-specialists in jet propulsion.

    Depressing in this matter is the level of competence in the country's leadership, in order to give oneself "to pour into the ears" about the "indisputable advantages" of petrels and poseidons from developers and not think a couple of steps ahead - at what cost to test?
    The first victims of the tests are the consequences of ill-considered decisions, what about the poisoned water area in case of unsuccessful launches?
    Although after the events of 2017 with ruthenium emissions from the Mayak and blaming the mythical satellite, which was confirmed by the "authoritative" state commission, there has not been such a shame since the Chernobyl disaster for the laughter of the entire world community (since such objects are under control).
    This is largely indicative of the level of trust in the established system of government in Russia.
    Does the maniacal concern of preserving one's own integrity at any cost overshadow logic?
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 6 August 2020 10: 50 New
      +3
      Most of all it resembles an IDB - imitation of violent activity.
    2. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 7 August 2020 12: 53 New
      0
      What "obvious" arguments! Already a tear breaks through! And what horrors and disgraces happened? Radioactive emissions? While hundreds of times more radioactive materials are washed into the sea from Fukushima EVERY DAY? Kashmar-kashmar! Let's stop developing weapons that will intimidate our enemies ... Self-preservation in the furnace! Isaak Izrailevich offers to surrender! So logic tells him! Ugh...
    3. ycuce234-san
      ycuce234-san 11 August 2020 01: 00 New
      +1
      The uselessness of a ramjet NRE for cosmonautics is obvious even for non-specialists in jet propulsion.


      It is quite possible for an engine to move in powerful alien atmospheres and in sub-ice oceans (on steam generated from heat) - in the systems of gas giant planets and on Venus - will be in demand.
  26. demo
    demo 6 August 2020 10: 57 New
    +3
    In the state to which our former space industry has been brought, it is not worth talking about any of these projects. Simply because over the past 20 years there have been a lot of loud and beautiful words, but there were no deeds from the word "absolutely".

    With the phrase "Nothing, guys! From the word nothing!" I remembered an anecdote: Military airfield, thick fog, board comes in for landing. The flight director from the ground calls the board: "38th, report visibility!" The board answered: "Visibility is zero, I go by the instruments, I see nothing! Nothing! I repeat in letters: Nikolay, Ivan, Khariton, Ulyana, Yakov. Nothing!"
    This is about Rogozin and Roscosmos.
  27. The comment was deleted.
  28. Engineer
    Engineer 6 August 2020 13: 00 New
    0
    Anyone following Glonass?
    It seems that the launch of GLONASS-K is planned for today
    1. Brancodd
      Brancodd 6 August 2020 15: 59 New
      0
      In August. The exact date is not yet known. According to the plan, they should have been today on August 6.
  29. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 6 August 2020 13: 04 New
    0
    Everything is written correctly
  30. yehat2
    yehat2 6 August 2020 14: 21 New
    0
    Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
    2. The issues of interception of single RCs have been resolved long ago and are quite effective.

    it's not that the missile cannot be intercepted
    the point is that it will have to be solved on a huge perimeter, and not in a window of 500 km.
    and that while they decide, they will not build another +5 AUG.
  31. Old26
    Old26 6 August 2020 17: 50 New
    +5
    Quote: ont65
    The cruise of the rocket does not speak of its exclusively subsonic speeds, and a ramjet engine can have parameters from subsonic to hypersonic

    However, the aerodynamics of a rocket can tell a lot. Like the plane configuration ...
    1. ont65
      ont65 10 August 2020 12: 41 New
      0
      Well, yes, only her pictures are taken after having covered it with a cover. :) It's still not possible to say a little overhead. - KK Clipper was also designed as a winged aircraft, and it enters the atmosphere on hypersound. Without calculations and purging, all this will be a finger in the sky, as in the Chinese media.
  32. Umalta
    Umalta 6 August 2020 22: 04 New
    0
    “We only regularly carried food, water, fuel and crews to the ISS, which was also built mainly by us, on ships and rockets sixty years ago.” Objection: "In 1984, US President Ronald Reagan announced the start of work on the creation of an international orbital station; in 1988 the projected station was named" Freedom "(" Freedom "). At that time, it was a joint project of the United States, ESA, Canada and Japan A large-sized controlled station was planned, the modules of which would be delivered one by one to orbit by Space Shuttle vehicles from 1981. But by the beginning of the 1990s, it turned out that the cost of developing the project was too high and it was decided to create the station together with Russia "- well Where are the retarded without us!
    "Russia, which inherited from the USSR the experience of creating and launching into orbit the Salyut orbital stations (1971 - 1991), as well as the Mir station (1986 - 2001), planned to create the Mir-1990 station in the early 2s, but due to economic difficulties, the project was suspended. " Well, that everything was clear, it was necessary to steal urgently, as always!
    "On June 17, 1992, Russia and the United States entered into an agreement on cooperation in space exploration. In accordance with it, the Russian Space Agency (RSA) and NASA developed a joint Mir-Shuttle program. This program provided for flights of American reusable Space Shuttle ships to the Russian space station "Mir", the inclusion of Russian cosmonauts in the crews of American shuttles and American astronauts in the crews of the spacecraft "Soyuz" and the station "Mir".
    In the course of the implementation of the Mir-Shuttle program, the idea of ​​combining national programs for the creation of orbital stations was born. In March 1993, the general director of the RSA Yuri Koptev and the general designer of NPO Energia, Yuri Semyonov, proposed to the head of NASA Daniel Goldin to create the International Space Station.
    At the same time, in 1993 in the United States, many politicians were against the construction of a space orbital station - in June 1993, the US Congress discussed a proposal to abandon the creation of the International Space Station; this proposal was not accepted by a margin of only one vote: 215 votes for refusal, 216 votes for building the station.
    On September 2, 1993, US Vice President Albert Gore and Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin announced a new project for a "truly international space station." From that moment on, the official name of the station became "International Space Station", although the unofficial one - the "Alpha" space station was also used in parallel. On November 1, 1993, the RSA and NASA signed a "Detailed Work Plan for the International Space Station." Yes, but otherwise it is difficult to disagree with the author, one might even say roughly that pigs are not able to see the stars, they only see the trough. Regarding the use of a nuclear power plant in space, about a year ago I read that our mafusailles from the Russian Academy of Sciences invented something there in terms of cooling the core and nozzles in zero gravity, but there is an international treaty prohibiting the use of this in space, but about the Petrel we'll wait, if we can, we'll see.
  33. Adequate
    Adequate 6 August 2020 22: 33 New
    -2
    Both the author of the article and the commentators cackled. Maybe we’ll wind up all projects?
  34. Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 6 August 2020 22: 42 New
    0
    “The fact is that no single-stage apparatus operating on chemical fuel could go into space then, and cannot now. .. even more powerful engines, which ... There is no way out of these vicious circles. "

    Well said. Physics will not be canceled even for Rogozin. Everything in this world, including space flights, takes place in accordance with the laws of physics. Alas.

    The quote is long, but makes you think. And why did Mr. Timokhin decide so? Well, that a single-stage rocket on chemical fuel is in no way possible?

    Generally speaking, there has long been a project of the KORONA booster rocket from the GRTs Makeyev, like not quite dreamers, rocket scientists .. The financing of the project was closed, so it remained on paper.

    There are also foreign projects, for example "Delta Clipper" or McDonnell Douglas DC-X:

    This is a smaller prototype and even flew. Not far and low, however, the scheme works.

    Where do gentlemen journalists make their discoveries from? Oh, this Timokhin. wink
    1. timokhin-aa
      timokhin-aa 6 August 2020 23: 01 New
      +1
      Don't you see contradictions in your words yourself?
      Not far and low, however, the scheme works.

      laughing
      Does it work exactly?
      Technical systems scale very poorly
      1. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse 7 August 2020 22: 32 New
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Does it work exactly?

        Doesn't it work exactly? And how can you prove it? laughing

        Common sense dictates that rocket specialists will not develop projects and build expensive prototypes according to an obviously unfit scheme. There were no reports that they ran into unsolvable problems either.

        Hence a reasonable question, where did you get such a firm confidence that "it will not fly"? Are you a rocket scientist too? wink
        1. timokhin-aa
          timokhin-aa 7 August 2020 23: 22 New
          0
          Everything is very simple - SSTO is the blue dream of mankind from the moment of realizing what it takes to overcome the "gravity well" of our Mother Earth.
          And if it were really done, it would have already been done.
          Because whoever does it first will own near space - for him there will be no such thing as "the cost of launching into orbit", it will literally be equal to the cost of fuel and depreciation of the aircraft.
          Well, the cosmonauts have more salaries.

          And if no one has done this yet, then there are very serious reasons. In principle, the Tsiolkovsky formula describes them well
          1. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 8 August 2020 03: 07 New
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            It's very simple - SSTO is the blue dream of humanity

            And these are all arguments? laughing

            Delta Clipper was held back by doubts about the project's commercial success. But that was almost 30 years ago! Since then, materials technology and control systems have changed significantly. What Musk is doing now with his Falcon is in fact allowed by the "Delta Clipper". Musk simply chose to share the risks. So as not to risk the whole rocket at once.
            1. timokhin-aa
              timokhin-aa 8 August 2020 08: 05 New
              0
              This is nothing more than your speculation, and very illiterate.
              Just compare how high Falcon separates the second stage and how high it should bring the satellite. But there is already a speed of at least 1,7 km / sec.

              In fact, Musk's focus is due to the fact that he shoved 9 out of ten engines into the first stage. This allows him to recoup all acrobatics as the stage is returned, and at the same time to provide high speed by the time the second stage is separated.

              Within the framework of your logic, using the same methods, it would be possible to further drag the payload and the entire first stage on one engine to the second, so what?

              Don't think you're smarter than all the world's rocket designers put together.
              1. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 8 August 2020 19: 42 New
                0
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Don't think you're smarter than all the world's rocket designers put together.

                Look in the mirror, dear comrade Timokhin! laughing

                A single-hull rocket scheme, by definition, wins in the weight output of a locomotive. The difference is especially great if there is only one engine. Powerful, reusable and light enough. This is the only reason why we still fly on steam locomotives, such a direction has not been properly developed. But if you install the package of engines as on the same Delta Clipper, then the difference in cost and weight is not so great.

                Well, your categorical "will not fly" in the presence of real projects, let it remain on your conscience. What a journalist will not blurt out for the sake of a "catchphrase". wink
  35. Pavel Yashkov
    Pavel Yashkov 6 August 2020 22: 50 New
    +1
    Yes, this is a tin, guys, everything is lost and drank. On TV, on the Science 2.0 channel, they show cool programs about space, showing Western programs, you can see that neat scientists work in well-equipped laboratories and workshops, everything shines there, people are testing a new plasma engine, which in the future will allow you to fly between systems and not inside ours ... What do we have? When our programs show it is scary to watch, some theories and guesses about the prospects of life on the moon and tales about tying the earth and the moon with a cable for the transfer of useful cargo. And not a single worthy stand, laboratory and premises. Everything is rusty and terribly old, all the experiments and tests in the program of the 18th year of release, I saw 10-15 years ago on the same TV, there is no progress. Everything is dead. But you were ahead of the rest of the world ... And when you look at Rogozin's face, you wonder - who put you there as a journalist? Are you a scientist or what? Shame in general. In short, Yura, we all asked. Or ...
  36. timokhin-aa
    timokhin-aa 6 August 2020 22: 59 New
    +1
    Rabinovich still does not stop singing Caruso
    laughing
  37. Old26
    Old26 7 August 2020 15: 59 New
    0
    Quote: Mikhail3
    Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Let it poison itself. As a weapon of the last chance, Petrel is already out of competition. Their massive use, which will cause significant damage to the environment, is planned when the warheads of these missiles will cause damage to the environment hundreds of thousands of times greater. This is not a hair dryer or a bread maker, but the deadly weapon of the last war. Do you feel the difference?

    And there is no need to test it? Or during the test "Petrel" will not poison anything flying from the launch point to the finish point ???

    Quote: Adequate
    Both the author of the article and the commentators cackled. Maybe we’ll wind up all projects?

    Some of them can be minimized, because they will not contribute to protection. And only a "test shot" after all the parties involved have fired their entire arsenal of warheads. But the creation of this, by no means the most necessary weapon will cost billions and billions ...
  38. Enky
    Enky 7 August 2020 16: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: gvozdan
    The petrel and Poseidon have a very specific goal, to show the United States that it will not work under any circumstances to sit out overseas and under the missile defense umbrella. And show it not to military specialists, who already know everything perfectly well, but not to distant congressmen and the political elite of the United States. This was done at the height of anti-Russian hysteria in the West. Pure PR move. Rough but easy to understand. Whether these projects will appear or not is no longer important.

    Ask where the son of Medvedev, the daughter of Lavrov, the daughter of Putin, the children of Peskov and the rest of the Great robbers of pensioners and Nullands, lives and what owns, who do you scare with these, as Prof. Ostretsov, are you meeting with nonexistent projects? Children of the Kremlin? Does the Kremlin scare its children and threaten its billions in Western banks? What a twist! Brzezinski is not lying here: "500 billion of the Russian elite are kept in our banks, and I do not see any chance that Moscow will decide to strike, we still need to see whose elite it is, yours or ours." All these dead projects were taken out of a dusty shelf with one goal - to raise the degree of false patriotism, to create an image of an enemy, so that the herd would not scatter and march together at the behest of the shepherd to the meat processing plant. We read Orwell, everything about this has long been written and told.
  39. lopvlad
    lopvlad 7 August 2020 17: 55 New
    0
    So the West is scared? Not. In the West, in general, they look very critically at the "Flying Chernobyl".


    How do you want the American military and the government to write that they are scared and this once again confirmed to Russia that it is going in the right direction in developing new types of weapons?

    For even though Rogozin blurted out that, they say, Russian cosmonauts are ready to fly on ships from Mask, but who would have allowed them there still
    ..... In any case, what Rogozin said is simply surrender.
    ...... Alexander Timokhin, known to readers of the Review, who claims that Burevestnik is a breakthrough tomorrow for the Russian space industry,
    ...... “To begin with, let's make a reservation: the military significance of the Burevestnik is limited. As a weapon of retaliation, this missile makes no sense: if we do not miss the first strike from the Americans, then our retaliatory strike will wipe the United States off the face of the earth anyway. And if we oversleep such an attack, then a few "Petrel" who survive it will not change anything dramatically. "


    Of course, it's nice that Russia has its own "geniuses of thought" like the Ukrainian Vitali Klitschko, but building an analytical article on their sayings is clearly the height of optimism.

    Moreover, today it is generally too early to speak of this "Petrel" as a weapon. That's when he starts flying, then we'll talk. The accelerator start shown in the video is not a flight. It's just a start.


    Well, the "Dagger" complex is in service and you have identified the entire flight of its rocket? No, we haven't seen, only those very few seconds as in the variant with the "Petrel". Moreover, the ordinary public did not see the entire flight of the very same Caliber missiles that have been in service for ten years.
    We saw only the start and, at best, 10 seconds of flight, but this does not mean in any way that Russia does not have this type of weapon, the militants in Syria are ready to confirm.
    And in general, be glad that you showed at least a few seconds of flight of modern weapons for performance characteristics and the secrets of which all the intelligence services of the world are hunting.

    Alas, this is so. Hence "Poseidon" and "Petrel", to which there are so many questions that there is no one to answer them. Old Soviet developments, which were abandoned in the USSR due to their insolvency.


    the answers are known only by the type of weapon for which there are real methods and methods of counteraction. If these methods and methods are not there, then hence the questions.
    At the heart of any modern weapon are old developments and developments. US weapons are based on old American designs, and modern Russian weapons are "old Soviet designs."
    And in the USSR they refused not because of their insolvency, but because of the lack of materials and technologies at that time capable of implementing these projects. For example, with the same Poseidon, the problem was in the carrier for such a torpedo, and with the Burevestnik, problems were in the compactness of the nuclear engine and systems management.
    In general, this applies not only to developments in the field of weapons. The problem of lack of technology at a certain point in time forces many developments to be shelved, be they aircraft construction or consumer electronics.
    Few people know that, for example, a nickel-cadmium battery was invented back in 1899, and it was possible to bring it to real use only almost fifty years later, in 1947.

    For the sake of fairness: this "Petrel" did not frighten the Americans at all. They understand that raising a crowd of F-16s and shooting down a subsonic apparatus with missiles is a trifling matter.


    of course, but before you lift the F-16 into the sky, you need to know when, where and where the Stormy Rocket will arrive.
    Or, in the author's understanding, the F-16s are built as a continuous hedge along all American borders, so to speak, side to side?
    In general, the obsession with the topic of hypersonic weapons for some reason instantly made all non-hypersonic Russian weapons in the eyes of Russian inhabitants an easy target. At the same time, the effectiveness of American subsonic axes developed in 1972-1980 is not questioned.

    PS I really want a real analytical article and not an article in the form of transmission of gossip from the OBS category (one woman said) with everything from space to the monologues of fairy tale heroes.
  40. CTABEP
    CTABEP 8 August 2020 20: 22 New
    0
    Final paragraph for everything :).
  41. vVvAD
    vVvAD 9 August 2020 22: 34 New
    +1
    Roman, hello hi
    I fully share your regret about the bedlam in the country's space industry and your skepticism. And I treat your opinion with great respect.
    However, I do not agree with you.
    A sad prospect, I must say.

    I think this prospect is the only real breakthrough for space exploration. Let me explain: modern vertical launch rocket technologies, even multi-rocket technologies, are a dead end. They do not allow you to go beyond the near-earth space. Orbit - yes. The moon is yes. Mars ... gravity is 3 times that of Earth. No lander will return from there. Therefore, the only thing Musk could offer was the founding of a Martian base by volunteers flying one way. So there can be no talk of any development of even the solar system by manned astronautics using modern vertical launch technologies - this is really a dead end.
    The Americans got ahead of us while our space officials were resting on their laurels and joking about trampolines. Commercial space is now largely not ours, at least in the near future - a fact. This is the winner's laurels and money. Also not superfluous, in general.
    About Burevestnik, as far as I remember, it was mentioned in the specialized media that, thanks to new technologies in materials science, it was possible to develop a heat exchanger with sufficient thermal conductivity between the reactor and the WFD, i.e. the reactor is equipped with biological shielding, perhaps not continuous, but not bad.
    Perhaps the breakthrough is really not far - I would like to hope so. At the very least, progress in the development of ion thrusters also gives cause for optimism.
    SpaceX, Blue Origin and others will squeeze their technology to the maximum in the American way, investing in improving it to gain a competitive advantage and develop new affordable commercial opportunities based on it. And also in unrelated projects in other areas, expanding the penetration of business into public life, i.e. their attention will be focused on their topics. NASA failed alone and now acts as an organizer and financier, and this approach is likely to remain working. Developments in the field of compact nuclear systems in Russia have recently experienced a revival with the adoption of new levels, while having the maximum degree of closeness. The same cannot be said about the Americans. All this can lead to the fact that the latter can oversleep our breakthrough in this area.
    There is one more thing: military cunning, camouflage, cover and undercover operations in our military history have repeatedly shown outstanding successes. Perhaps we are seeing another what
    Roman, LET'S BE THE SAME OPTIMISTS!
  42. Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 10 August 2020 07: 52 New
    0

    Conventional ICBMs and KRs fueled with chemical fuel were fired in such quantities that they can demolish all living things several times.

    The author lives in the realities of the Cold War. It would be time to go out of the bunker into the white light. It's great, really.


    Although there is one option when "Petrel" can be useful. This is if you fuck them here:

    Author, are you sick? No banter, in fact.
    P.S. return the cons to the articles.
  43. Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 10 August 2020 18: 04 New
    0

    Conventional ICBMs and KRs fueled with chemical fuel were fired in such quantities that they can demolish all living things several times.

    The author lives in the realities of the Cold War. It would be time to go out of the bunker into the white light. It's great, really.


    Although there is one option when "Petrel" can be useful. This is if you fuck them here:

    Author, are you sick? No banter, in fact.
    P.S. return the cons to the articles.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 13 August 2020 10: 49 New
        0
        Quote: c2020
        During the years of fierce technological competition, the USA and the USSR were unable to create combat serial atomic aircraft.

        And thank God that they could not !!!! For complete happiness, the peoples of the former Soviet republics lacked only the still flying Chernobyls !!!
  44. Tagan
    Tagan 11 August 2020 12: 04 New
    0
    Roman Skomorokhov, as usual, in his role. He becomes uninteresting immediately after reading the title. Because it's predictable.
    As usual, he cheats, manipulates concepts. At first he seems to agree that there is not enough information about the program to make assumptions. Then, little by little, he still pulls out the theory (conjectures) by the ears. And then, taking his theory for granted, he begins to smash the constant object of criticism to smithereens)))
    This character is trying to hit in all directions. This is quite obvious from the cycle of his opuses. It is also obvious that it is unrealistic to be a great specialist in all the areas that he exploits at the same time - competence is in question.
    I am increasingly inclined to think that this indefatigable writer is paid for and is trying with all his might to work out the ration. Well, there is simply no other point in talking about the same thing. Thoughts about what kind of power he is offended somehow does not arise with all the desire.
  45. Horn
    Horn 12 August 2020 05: 58 New
    0
    A flight on an American carrier will not be much more expensive than ours, a maximum of 10 percent. But all 4 places need to be filled. Therefore, I think, both ours will fly on the American, and the Americans on ours.
  46. Mikhalych
    Mikhalych 12 August 2020 12: 36 New
    -2
    But it will also be much easier to cope with the same NORAD system with a subsonic apparatus than with a hypersonic one.

    The author has something with logic. The ramjet engine starts to operate at speeds of at least 3000 km / h.
    crying
  47. missile
    missile 14 August 2020 20: 51 New
    0
    There is an opinion and for quite a long time))) that the smart one knows a lot about small things, not smart ones)) - little about many things. So - the author gets very good articles about ships, airplanes, so develop this topic, you don't have to seem or try to seem)) an expert, and even more an Expert))) in all areas .........
  48. vel1163
    vel1163 15 August 2020 00: 48 New
    0
    Super! Well done Roman. He took everything off his tongue. Only very ideological people can not see a complete kapets and slow, sure and inexorable degradation. And this is always. We are building a class-based society of the late 19th century, when the children of the new nobles will take government positions and do nothing. And for them, for a penny, bowing low, will build rockets, etc. brilliant scientists and engineers
  49. monster
    monster 6 September 2020 11: 40 New
    0
    Comrade Stalin, Rogo ... - shoot Judas!
  50. Yuri Sivov
    Yuri Sivov 8 September 2020 11: 42 New
    0
    A question to the author, about the F16 ... to shoot down a subsonic missile: there are vague doubts that under the conditions of a nuclear apocalypse any of the aircraft, like ours. so they will be able to take off to carry out a combat mission. An electromagnetic pulse accompanying a nuclear explosion will turn off the instruments ... maybe a "trampoline"?