Military Review

Roscosmos resumes testing of the Angara-A5 launch vehicle

81
Roscosmos resumes testing of the Angara-A5 launch vehicle

Roskosmos resumes testing of the Angara-A5 heavy-class launch vehicle, the rocket was sent to the Plesetsk cosmodrome. This was reported by the press service of the state corporation.


The second flight prototype of the Angara-A5 rocket has been prepared for shipment to the cosmodrome, where tests will continue. The rocket launch is scheduled for this fall, tentatively in early November. The rocket with the Briz-M upper stage will have to put a mock-up of the spacecraft into geostationary orbit.

The universal rocket modules of the Angara-A5 heavy rocket loaded in special wagons are awaiting the decision of the State Commission to send them to the northern cosmodrome. The rocket has successfully passed tests at the Control and Test Station of the Khrunichev Center and is ready to resume flight and space tests

- said in a statement.

The first Angara-A5 rocket was launched into space in December 2014. In total, the test program for the heavy launch vehicle provides for six launches, which should take place in the period 2021-2022.

Angara-A5 is the first Russian heavy-class launch vehicle developed entirely in the post-Soviet period. It will be able to launch into space from four to 24 tons of payload, depending on the height of the orbit. The launch vehicle runs on environmentally friendly fuel and is assembled from unified rocket modules, which can significantly reduce the cost of its production and maintenance.

According to information previously released by the media, the serial production of the Angara launch vehicle should start in 2023, and from 2024 it should completely replace the Protons. A whole family of these missiles has been developed, starting from the light Angara-1.2 and medium Angara-A3, ending with the heavy Angara-A5, the modernized Angara-A5M and the increased carrying capacity of the Angara-A5V.
81 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 14 August 2020 11: 10
    11
    In 2024, it should completely replace the "Protons"

    - By the decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 6, 1995 "On the development of the Angara missile complex" the work on the creation of the "Angara" missile system is defined as work of special state importance. In March, an order from the Russian Ministry of Defense was issued on this complex.
    - On August 26, 1995, the Government of the Russian Federation issued a Decree, which determined the stages of the creation of the Angara complex, approved the general schedule for the creation of the complex, the amount of its financing, as well as the cooperation of co-executors.
    1. vkl.47
      vkl.47 14 August 2020 11: 23
      -11 qualifying.
      We are waiting for whiners in the comments.
      1. snucerist
        snucerist 14 August 2020 11: 34
        +8
        Um ...
        Do you understand at all what the article is about?
        Are you familiar with the characteristics of the RN Angara family?
        With the history of its creation?
        With opportunities to compete in the international space market?
        With a price ruler?
        Do you have reasons to be optimistic? Is there a reason to say that everything is fine?
        1. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 14 August 2020 12: 03
          -3
          Quote: snucerist
          Is there a reason to say that everything is fine?

          A number of projects are being created not for commerce, but so that later "payload mockups" would merrily scurry about in the orbits of potential "partners" and over their heads wink
        2. kamui91
          kamui91 14 August 2020 12: 31
          13
          Well, the very fact that they continue to do Angara is a reason for optimism.
        3. keeper03
          keeper03 14 August 2020 14: 05
          -1
          Yes, you can just close your production and buy everything you need from Ilona! Is that what you wanted to say ?! wassat
        4. shinobi
          shinobi 15 August 2020 13: 17
          +2
          Without exception, all RNs are made for domestic use. The international market follows a leftover principle. The USA is also welcome. The main customer and consumer is the state. Everywhere. Hence the question, why is everyone so clinging to the international market? Stuck in the heads of the 90s?
          PS: And so, by the way. The Musk company divided the tender for launches of Pentagon satellites with YULA in a ratio of 40% to 60%. YULA has disposable missiles. Why would that be?
        5. ont65
          ont65 16 August 2020 05: 51
          +1
          There is no point in crying over these questions. - There is not and will not be an alternative in the coming decades. There is not much to talk about competition in general. These products will not be supplied to the international market and will not be supplied by anyone. The main thing is that it is able to meet current needs with acceptable costs. And more is not required. Everyone (Japan, China, India, EU, States) makes such equipment for themselves as and what they can. This concludes all the discussions.
      2. Civil
        Civil 14 August 2020 11: 34
        -2
        Quote: vkl.47
        We are waiting for whiners in the comments.

        That's exactly what these all-propals got out! What do you want like in Ukraine? Donbass is not enough for you? Rogozin is the world's best space manager, Roskosmos is the leader of launches, and you dance there on your Maidans. Believe in the propaganda of the State Department, in fact, Musk is the actor Bruce Willis, all the launches of Pace X are filmed in Hollywood. And in general, have they forgotten that the first woman in space is Tereshkova ???
        1. parusnik
          parusnik 14 August 2020 11: 41
          15
          And in general, have they forgotten that the first woman in space is Tereshkova ???
          ... Let us not forget Tereshkova ... As the first woman in space ...
          1. mdsr
            mdsr 14 August 2020 12: 00
            +6
            Quote: parusnik
            Let's not forget Tereshkova ..

            Yes-ah, this is not forgotten repeat
      3. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 14 August 2020 11: 46
        +2
        Quote: vkl.47
        We are waiting for whiners in the comments

        Well, what is it for?
        the fact that in roskosmos the problems are higher than the roof and so it is clear and voicing these same problems is not whining for sure
      4. volodimer
        volodimer 14 August 2020 19: 28
        +1
        Here's never a whiner, but your comment does not make sense. request Forgive me, but I didn't notice ... How do you yourself assess this event? Good, bad ... or they are building and already well, or are they building and this is already bad? Like a comment
        We are waiting for whiners in the comments.
        does not express your own opinion. Well, absolutely "No!" request
    2. Wedmak
      Wedmak 14 August 2020 11: 39
      -3
      Angara-A3 was cut to please Union-5, I hope there will be no more reductions.
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 14 August 2020 11: 44
        +2
        Quote: Wedmak
        there will be no more reductions.

        The hangara is already outdated today. At 24, she will be a mammoth compared to Western and Chinese. This project will be of interest only to military and state corporations, which do not care about the cost of the flight. spend state money, our money.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 14 August 2020 11: 55
          +3
          Why is it suddenly outdated? What's so breakthrough about Western and Chinese RNs? Landing steps and beautiful design? So it's all based on the technologies of the last century and modern electronics. Our Angara is assembled from identical blocks for different loads - why not an achievement? Unlike Western missiles, where each missile is under its own load.
          Hopefully, the Eagle will be finished and we will have a beautiful design ship, the Martians will admire ...
          1. mdsr
            mdsr 14 August 2020 12: 07
            +3
            Angara is outdated in terms of competitiveness. It loses significantly even to the ancient Proton-M. For its time, 80 - 90 years, when they began to develop it, it was a good rocket. But 25 years have passed since then.
          2. snucerist
            snucerist 14 August 2020 12: 42
            +2
            Who or what is preventing Russia from mastering these technologies of the last century and creating at least some semblance of a reusable stage?
            The fact that the Angara is assembled from the same blocks for different loads by attaching side boosters is far from an achievement, it is a forced move. This is a minus. Korolyov himself was not delighted with his "seven" with a bunch of sausages in the first stage, but this was a necessary measure, because the problem of imbalance in the critical section of the engine chamber was not solved at that time. But H-1 was designed in a different way, like Saturn-5.
            But this is not even the main point. The main thing today is the launch price. But Angara has a problem with this. Large and, alas, insoluble. And no one needs such a product without a reasonable price.
            The fact is that, in principle, the very concept of URM is flawed. For the reason that they burn out after the start, along with everything else. Only the reusability of the stage or the same booster can give a gain in price.
            I am generally silent about the characteristics of the Angara. What will these URMs give? Even if you take a product with an URM-3V (and this, for a minute, is already hydrogen plants with two RD-0150s)?
            PN compared to the Angara-A5 launch vehicle will increase by:
            - for LEO - from 24,5 to 38 tons.
            - for GPO - from 7 to 12 tons.
            - for GSO - from 5,5 to 7 tons.
            Is this a win? Was it worth building a garden for this? Given that the launch price is significantly higher than the Proton price?
            Where to go with such a product? Who needs it? It will not be in demand even in Russia due to its high cost. This project is outdated today because it is not competitive. Only the RF Ministry of Defense may be interested in it.
            You can't go into the world market with him. It is not even a competitor to Musk products.
            "Nine" Mask throws almost 23 tons on LEO without any problems for significantly less money, and there is no point in competing with Falcon Heavy at all. How to kill almost 64 tons in LEO?
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 14 August 2020 12: 53
              -2
              So I waited for you to mention this rogue. I have argued a lot here on this topic and continue to believe that Musk:
              a) takes funding from NASA and the Pentagon (this has already been confirmed from various sources)
              b) his rockets are assembled from shit and sticks, using technologies transferred from NASA and are not a breakthrough, but a repetition in a more attractive shell
              c) the first flight of Dragon with the crew almost ended in failure for the crew, pure luck (see about fuel vapor measurements after landing)
              d) economically, to whom and for what purpose it is necessary to throw 64 tons on LEO? By the way, this has not been proven, but you can say anything you want.
              e) no private space will be able to explore space in the near future, it is very expensive

              The bottom line: a bluff on old technologies in a new wrapper with the money of the same buyers - NASA and the Pentagon.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 14 August 2020 13: 24
                -1
                a) Performs contracts like its competitors, but much cheaper
                b) The technologies were developed by SpaceX itself, the launch success is better than that of Proton
                c) The detected pollution is two orders of magnitude lower than the norm.
                d) The Pentagon buys the launches, the Arabs bought the launch, and they don't complain about anything.
                e) Many private corporations are richer than average countries
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 14 August 2020 14: 05
                  +1
                  a) Performs contracts like its competitors, but much cheaper

                  Financial reporting is not transparent, there is no data on how much it costs to detect the steps after their return, their transportation by sea, the cost of their repair and maintenance, how the steps are selected for start-up, etc.
                  b) The technologies were developed by SpaceX itself, the launch success is better than that of Proton

                  Nonsense. All technologies were transferred to NASA during the creation of SpaceX.
                  c) The detected pollution is two orders of magnitude lower than the norm.

                  Why are you telling a lie? "Found an excess of the norm of dinitrogen tetroxide, in large quantities it can be toxic, therefore, out of caution, we expect a decrease in its indicators," - said the host of the broadcast.
                  And this is after swimming in water ... The very appearance of this poison raises questions about the safety of the capsule.
                  d) The Pentagon buys the launches, the Arabs bought the launch, and they don't complain about anything.

                  Price for the Pentagon? For the Arabs? Where is the funding of the program from the Pentagon and NASA to be attributed - to launches or support of SpaceX pants?
                  e) Many private corporations are richer than average countries

                  Middle countries and even more so corporations do not participate in the development of launch vehicles and orbital stations. They send tourists there. What really private traders have developed are toys that have not reached the border of space.

                  All that Musk did was collect the technology given to him by NASA, the Pentagon money and, without regard to strict safety, environmental friendliness and technical processes, made rockets. It worked, lucky. He even returned the people alive. Also with a bit of luck.
                  Let's see what will happen next. With his dreams of settling Mars ... a dreamer.
                  1. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 14 August 2020 16: 21
                    +1
                    1) For whom not, and for whom not. For example, it has long been announced that the cost of launching a second-hand is significantly less than 50% of the cost of building a new one.
                    2) It remains only to find out where NASA can get these technologies, given that corporations are developing rockets and ships for it.
                    3) It was also later stated that there were 3 parts per billion, which is two orders of magnitude lower than the norm. Also, astronauts in spacesuits are not afraid of them even 3-4 orders of magnitude higher than the norm. And where it came from is already clear, because of the shape of the ship and the direction of the nozzle, a little gas accumulated in one place near the hatch and at the same time it was not washed off with water. They are going to fix it a little so that it is washed during planting.
                    4) The price of all government contracts of SpaceX is known and is lower than that of competitors from the ULA and Orbital
                    5) How do they also participate, and who do you think made Saturn-5, Skylab, Delta, Atlas, Pegasus, Minotaur, etc.? NASA or what? Haha
                    A simple example
                    The space shuttle program has been developed by North American Rockwell and a group of associate contractors on behalf of NASA since 1971.
                  2. eklmn
                    eklmn 15 August 2020 05: 29
                    +1
                    “The financial reporting is not transparent, there is no data on how much it costs to detect the steps after their return, their transportation by sea, the cost of their repair and maintenance, how the steps are selected for start-up, etc."
                    Nonsense, nonsense and nonsense are being driven !!! Serious business is not interested in the “cost of shipping by sea”, it is interested in the cost of launching and launch reliability!
                    Serious businesses are investing $$$ into SpaceX - dozens of different funds have already invested in his company Space Exploration Technologies.
                    Data for today:
                    “SpaceX raised a total of $ 1,33 billion in three rounds of funding in 2019. In April 2019, the Wall Street Journal reported that the company was raising $ 500 million in funding. In May 2019, Space News reported that SpaceX "raised $ 1,022 billion" the day after SpaceX launched 60 satellites as part of its 12000-satellite plan, called the Starlink broadband constellation.. By May 31, 2019, SpaceX's value rose to $ 33,3 billion. In June 2019, SpaceX began raising $ 300 million, most of which came from the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, which then managed approximately $ 191 billion in assets.
                    As of February 2020, SpaceX has raised an additional $ 250 million in share placement. In May 2020, the company's valuation reached $ 36 billion. ”
                    And now - which investor is interested in the “cost of repair and maintenance”? It is impossible to understand the work of his business, having behind the back the experience of working as a dealer of yuzannyh cars - another level ...
                    And by the way - where did he get the money from the very beginning on SpaceX?
                    From here:
                    “SpaceX's original funding came from Musk, who used most of the money from the PayPal sale as capital for the project. He also received funding from Founders Fund, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, and Valor Equity Partners. In January 2015, Google and Fidelity invested $ 1 billion in a purchase of just under 10%. ”
              2. snucerist
                snucerist 14 August 2020 16: 07
                0
                and). Speaking about sources, it would be nice to give links to them. Otherwise, sorry, this ... we will not continue. Further. Well, you have to be at least a little in the subject before starting a conversation about it.
                NASA is far from a sponsor of SpaceX, but rather a competitor and blood enemy. Let's leave to the side all the revelations of Musk's struggle with NASA over the certification of the Falcons and Dragons. Let's forget that because of this, both projects were implemented much later. Let's delve into the history of relationships. After Bush's team, NASA only dealt with deep space and new technologies, the agency had to rely on start-ups. This is how the Commercial Orbital Transportation Systems (COTS) program was born, from the depths of which Elon Musk emerged.
                But whatever one may say, COTS is a direct competitor to NASA. And NASA's attitude towards it was extremely negative. That is why SpaceX was chosen as a "partner" in near space, which had 3 out of 4 Falcon-1 launches in emergency (it seemed like an outsider, a fool). But Musk suddenly took it - and got up! Made a nine, made a heavyweight, made a full-cycle methane engine that really has no analogues in the world.
                And NASA is forced to finance Musk today, because - where to go? The agency itself has nothing to offer in near space today, and the tasks of the government must somehow be fulfilled. And the fact that such funding has gone today is Musk's full credit. And no more. Musk has already laid the agency down. On July 23, NASA made a decision that the second regular manned flight to the ISS will use the first stage B1061, which is now being prepared for the launch of the first Crew-1 mission. But the ship for the second voyage will be used the one that is now docked to the ISS, serial number C206, proper name "Endeavor". So, here you will not only give money, here you will raise your hands up against the background of other people's successes.
                Now about the Pentagon money. Do you even follow the news? Do you know how the Pentagon's money was distributed over the next five years? 60% of the money for Vulcan contracts from ULA and only 40% of SpaceX. And even then, because there is nowhere to go, because the products of the Mask really work.
                b). What specific technologies did NASA transfer to Musk? Blueprints for F9? FH? On Dragon? The Raptor? On his alloys? Yes, NASA did not have any of this. This is all exclusively developed by the SpaceX team. Why lie?
                in). I not only looked at the measurements after splashdown, I also know why they were carried out. Look at what chemical protection suits the crews of Apollo and X-37B were wearing. Remember what hydrazine is. After that, it will become clear why measurements are needed and why you need to check the QC for leaks.
                d). Why is the Artemis project needed? Flights to Mars? Mars rovers? Deep space exploration? Starlink? Starship?
                Why all this?
                If you can sit idly by the Soviet legacy for two decades and be proud of the royal "seven", the poisonous Proton and the ancient Progress?
                I am finishing. In less than that same 20 years, con artist Musk has done:
                - the world's first reusable first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket;
                - a powerful two-stage rocket Falcon 9;
                - the most powerful Falcon Heavy rocket in operation in the world;
                - the world's first (and so far the only) one-piece reusable cargo-passenger ship of the capsule type Crew Dragon;
                - a truly unparalleled full-cycle methane engine in the world;
                - started the implementation of promising projects Starlink and Starship.
                What can Russia boast of?
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 14 August 2020 16: 42
                  +4
                  What can Russia boast of?

                  Construction of a new cosmodrome from scratch in the forests of Siberia.
                  Development of the Angara modular rocket.
                  Dozens of successful launches, on which the Americans flew too.

                  But this is not the funniest thing, for the last 20 years we have been doing:

                  By raking up wars and conflicts unleashed with the help of the United States at our borders and within the country.
                  Preservation of industry, agriculture, science, etc., after the hard collapse of the USSR, when all production chains remained abroad.
                  Restoring almost from scratch the factories that remained abroad on their territory.
                  Let me remind you that all this time the United States and the European Union have been putting a spoke in their wheels, where and as soon as possible. They didn't need a competitor in any industry at all.
                  Survival under the sanctions of the United States and the European Union, when development was hampered by all means and measures, taking only what they themselves did not have, buying it for freshly printed dollars.
                  The Anglo-Saxons just wanted to have a controlled country from which they could cheaply suck hydrocarbons and other resources. Themselves meanwhile developed economically and bought up technologies, scientists, engineers around the world. Moreover, the development took place by banal theft of resources from other countries and luring people with large salaries.
                  And like a cherry, they planted in our officials a lot of thieves and outright saboteurs, who are now very difficult to expel from their homes. This also includes constant attempts to muddy the waters and sow chaos and mistrust throughout the Russian Federation.
                  I hope you understand that all this is connected: the economic state, industry, space and so on ...
                  We are just emerging from this whole pit (although a different name is needed here). Alas, but somewhere, in parts, we are still sitting in it.
                  1. snucerist
                    snucerist 14 August 2020 17: 46
                    +2
                    1. We will modestly keep silent about how much money was stolen for the construction of this cosmodrome. This is the scope of the UK. We are interested in something else - have the problems with logistics already been solved? Why was it necessary to build a cosmodrome in this place?
                    2. The Angara project is unprofitable and not competitive. Nobody needs him. I already showed it on my fingers.
                    3. Dozens of successful starts were on the Soviet legacy. What's in the asset today?
                    4. It is not worth describing the reasons why I supposedly didn’t. We are in the know. First we create problems, then we heroically overcome them. Everything is as usual.
              3. U-58
                U-58 14 August 2020 17: 41
                0
                In fact, the main task is to send 20-25 tons to the GSO.
                Better yet, 35 ..
            2. figwam
              figwam 14 August 2020 14: 16
              +3
              Quote: snucerist
              How to kill almost 64 tons in LEO?

              Such a mass of the falcon never deduced that interrupt that?
              1. snucerist
                snucerist 14 August 2020 16: 14
                0
                And what, Angara flew with the declared PN?
                Is it difficult to understand that we are talking about TX?
                1. figwam
                  figwam 14 August 2020 16: 18
                  +2
                  Quote: snucerist
                  Is it difficult to understand that we are talking about TX?

                  TX must be confirmed, but anything can be declared.
                  1. snucerist
                    snucerist 14 August 2020 16: 33
                    0
                    Well, then we will assume that the Angara brings only 1 ton to LEO. What is the problem?
                    You never know what Roscosmos says there.
                    1. figwam
                      figwam 14 August 2020 16: 50
                      0
                      Quote: snucerist
                      Well, then we will assume that the Angara brings only 1 ton to LEO.

                      The problem is that the Angara is still being tested and the maximum load during the tests will be launched into orbit, and the falcon, during the test, brought an empty car into orbit)))
                      1. snucerist
                        snucerist 14 August 2020 17: 36
                        +1
                        Yah???!!!
                        And where then did poor Angara-A5.1L flew away on December 23, 2014 from the USK 12P211 launcher of the Plesetsk cosmodrome? With PN 2 t (vehicle weight)?
                        I can remind you - on the GSO with a height of 35,8 thousand km.
                        In orbit, that means she was not ... Well, well ...
            3. MMX
              MMX 14 August 2020 16: 29
              +4
              But this is not even the main point. The main thing today is the launch price. But Angara has a problem with this. Large and, alas, insoluble. And no one needs such a product without a reasonable price.


              Again mantras about the cost of launch. Only now, no one knows the cost of launching Musk's missiles, since the data is not public. But the sect is sure that it is the lowest wassat
              1. snucerist
                snucerist 14 August 2020 17: 22
                -5
                Yes, super accurate data to the nearest cent, perhaps not today. Nevertheless, some information is leaking out.
                Let's start with the fact that from the financial report of the Khrunichev center for the last year it follows: the production price of the Angara-A5 LV is THREE TIMES higher than the price of Proton-M and is equal to 7 billion rubles. It is planned to reduce it to 2024 billion by 3, but this is highly doubtful. For the cost can be reduced only as a result of mass production, and how to launch a completely non-competitive product into a series is unknown.
                But Proton has already been squeezed out of the international commercial space market by Musk carriers. Roscosmos tried to fight this. Since 2015, he was forced to reduce the cost of launches of his "Protons" for foreign buyers from $ 100 million to $ 70 million, and then to $ 65 million to compete with Falcon. But ... alas. Running from Musk is cheaper. Why?
                Musk chose the option with maximizing internal production and minimizing the turnover of external cooperation. Those. focused only on its own domestic production. As a result, the price of the product dropped already at this stage, since it excluded the profit of outside contractors and subcontractors, who increased their price on every detail.
                Further. SpaceX uses the most modern technologies, in particular, FSW (friction stirring) welding. This allows the power set to be made separately and then welded to the body. Material consumption, energy consumption, working time are saved and, ultimately, the price of the product is reduced again.
                The main thing is that Musk made the first stage of the carrier reusable, the most expensive. But if it is disposable and completely burns out during launch, its full cost is included in the cost of the rocket. But if a stage is used 10 times (and we are waiting for the launch of the stage for the 6th time already the other day), then even taking into account the costs of inter-flight service, the price drops sharply. Finally, Roscosmos has already realized this.
                That is why the re-launch of the Falcon 9 rocket costs about $ 50 million (for now, this figure will decline).
                That is why even Proton, let alone Angara, cannot compete with the Falcon 9.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 14 August 2020 17: 59
                  +6
                  that from the financial report of the Khrunichev center for the last year it follows: the production price of the Angara-A5 LV is THREE TIMES higher than the price of Proton-M and is equal to 7 billion rubles.

                  This is not the cost of producing one rocket. This is the production price of the Angara complex. And at the initial stage. This includes the ground service complex, control devices, and more. It needs new, because the complex is new. As you understand, the investment in the ground complex is one-time and then only service. In fact, the price of the Angara-A5 rocket is only slightly higher than the price of ProtonM. Again, this is before the series is deployed.
                  That is why the re-launch of the Falcon 9 rocket costs about $ 50 million (for now, this figure will decline).

                  It won't, the real price is approaching $ 100 million, so for some reason, the launch price does not include transportation of accelerators back, their troubleshooting, repairs, etc. Americans are very fond of juggling numbers, easily throwing millions out of the sum, which are not directly related, but very important in terms of preparing it for the start.
                  Let's see how many times Musk will have an accident with an already used unit and what damage it will cause - this time. Secondly, I strongly doubt that people will be launched on an accelerator that has already flown. Stupidly, insurance companies will not let this be done.
                  1. snucerist
                    snucerist 14 August 2020 18: 59
                    -3
                    If the price of the Angara-A5 rocket "is only slightly higher than the price of the Proton-M", be so kind as to voice it.
                    A number.
                    And at the same time, explain how you can launch a product into a series if there is no demand for it.
                    Proof for the price of 100 million for the "nine", pliz, in the studio, empty chatter and verbiage is already starting to tire.
                    The launch price includes EVERYTHING. You don't understand elementary things.
                    I will try to explain, also juggling numbers.
                    Let's say the PH stage has a cost price of $ 30 million (the data is purely conditional, I only show the price reduction algorithm itself).
                    If it is disposable, then it burns out entirely, its price is included in the cost of the entire product, since the depreciation of the step is 100%.
                    Now let's take a reusable stage, designed for at least 10 launches (in the plans - much more). Depreciation of the cost of production in this case occurs in 10 steps and is thus equal to 10%. Those. $ 3 million. If we now add to this figure the cost of interflight maintenance, the cost of a one-time 2nd stage, the price of a fairing (by the way, it will also be reusable and worth a decent amount), the cost of renting a launch complex, operating the cosmodrome infrastructure, fuel, then even with all this, the launch F9 with a reusable first stage will be much cheaper than with a disposable one.
                    Is it really incomprehensible?
                    Is it really incomprehensible what has already become clear even to Roskosmos, since it started talking about the development of a reusable stage for the same Angara?
                  2. Perseverance
                    Perseverance 14 August 2020 22: 32
                    -2
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    This is not the cost of producing one rocket. This is the production price of the Angara complex. And at the initial stage. This includes the ground service complex, control devices, and more. It needs new, because the complex is new. As you understand, the investment in the ground complex is one-time and then only service. In fact, the price of the Angara-A5 rocket is only slightly higher than the price of ProtonM. Again, this is before the series is deployed.

                    And when this Serria or even MOSCOW, August 6, "Angara-A5M" for flight tests from the Vostochny cosmodrome will amount to 6 billion rubles, follows from the materials of "Roskosmos" posted on the website of state purchases.
                    The materials of Roskosmos on the state procurement website say that 5 billion rubles will be spent on the manufacture of the first Angara-A2023M in 2024-6,1, and 2023 billion rubles for the second in 2025-6,2.
                    And then until 25, the price is 6.2 billion. Another 5 years no savings can be expected. Of course, the plans are enormous.
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    It won't, the real price is approaching $ 100 million, so for some reason, the launch price does not include transportation of accelerators back, their troubleshooting, repairs, etc. Americans are very fond of juggling numbers, easily throwing millions out of the sum, not directly related, but very important in terms of preparing it for the start

                    Already there "NASA said it had selected SpaceX to launch the Imaging X-Ray Polarimetry Explorer (IXPE) mission on Falcon 9 in April 2021 from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A. NASA said the agency's total launch cost is 50,3 million. dollars, including the launch itself and other "mission-related" costs. "
                    1. slipped
                      slipped 14 August 2020 23: 46
                      0
                      Quote: Perseverance
                      And when is this serria


                      Serial production of the A5 will begin in 2023.

                      Quote: Perseverance
                      otherwise MOSCOW, Aug 6, "Angara-A5M" for flight tests from the Vostochny cosmodrome will amount to 6 billion rubles, follows from the materials of "Roskosmos" posted on the website of state purchases.


                      This is an upgraded A5M carrier. You have written about it.

                      Quote: Perseverance
                      And then until 25, the price is 6.2 billion. Another 5 years no savings can be expected. Of course, the plans are enormous.


                      You confused the missiles. The contract for the launch of 4 A5 carriers was concluded for ~ 18 billion rubles.
                      1. Perseverance
                        Perseverance 15 August 2020 11: 44
                        -1
                        Quote: slipped
                        Serial production of the A5 will begin in 2023.

                        They are that will A5 and A5M simultaneously do wow wassat A5 is so crooked that you need to immediately redo it into A5M, A5M is so expensive that it will not be put into production and even A5 cannot be replaced wassat
                        Quote: slipped
                        You confused the missiles. The contract for the launch of 4 A5 carriers was concluded for ~ 18 billion rubles.

                        So, by 2024 it should be 4 bn. Rub.

                        As RIA Novosti notes with reference to government procurement data, under the April 2020 contract, the cost of manufacturing a Proton-M rocket to launch the Express-AMU4 telecommunications satellite is 2,33 bn. Rub.
                        That is promise (plans, as always to the bulk) will be only almost twice as expensive as a proton. Which already lost almost the entire market tongue
                      2. slipped
                        slipped 15 August 2020 12: 22
                        0
                        Quote: Perseverance
                        They are that will A5 and A5M simultaneously do wow wassat


                        No. A5 - series, A5M - tests. It also clearly states. Something no one says "wow" when F9 and F9FT are flying at the same time.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        A5 is so crooked that you need to immediately redo it into A5M


                        This is why such a conclusion? laughing Great rocket. Perfect for a wide variety of tasks, including commercial.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        A5M is so expensive that it cannot be put into production and even A5 cannot be replaced


                        A5M goes into series after its tests. The price will be comparable to the serial A5.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        So, by 2024 it should be 4 billion rubles.


                        Yes, at the start of serial production. With an increase in the series, the price of the rocket will decrease.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        the cost of manufacturing the Proton-M rocket for launching the Express-AMU4 telecommunications satellite is 2,33 billion rubles.


                        The Proton-M rocket had a fairly large series earlier, which helped to reduce its cost. Now the release of its components has been discontinued. Russia is switching from poisonous heptyl to environmentally friendly components.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        That is promise (plans, as always to the bulk) will be only almost twice as expensive as a proton.


                        The cost of services for the launch of a preliminary contract for A5 ~ $ 64mln. which is comparable to the services of launching the Proton-M rocket.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        Which already lost almost the entire market


                        The "market" of launches in this segment for Russia is now closed by various protective conditions, this is a direct ban on the launch of satellites with American components from 2023 and high insurance for launches from Western companies. Therefore, Russia will now focus on proposals for the creation of satellites based on domestic serial satellite platforms with the sale of turnkey launch services. The nearest such launch is the Angosat-2 communications satellite.
                      3. Perseverance
                        Perseverance 15 August 2020 16: 00
                        -1
                        Quote: slipped

                        No. A5 - series, A5M - tests. It also clearly states. Something no one says "wow" when F9 and F9FT are flying at the same time.

                        Exactly, that he flew on this counterattack at one cost, without a rise in price.
                        Angara is the champion of sawing wink
                        Quote: slipped

                        This is why such a conclusion? Great rocket. Perfect for a wide variety of tasks, including commercial.

                        Duc facts. Where are the commercial orders? We didn't have time to make the A5, but the A5M is already needed, which is not only more expensive, so more tests are required wassat
                        Cheaper A5 does not affect A5M laughing it wassat

                        Quote: slipped
                        Yes, at the start of serial production. With an increase in the series, the price of the rocket will decrease.

                        The plans are enormous. Something is always all about the future. laughing
                        Quote: slipped
                        The cost of services for the launch of a preliminary contract for A5 ~ $ 64mln. which is comparable to the services of launching the Proton-M rocket.

                        So where's the sales contract for $ 64? Now so "Express-AMU4" is 2,33 billion rubles.
                        The materials of Roskosmos on the state procurement website say that the production of the first "Angara-A5M" in 2023-2024 is planned to spend 6,1 billion rubles, the second in 2023-2025 - 6,2 billion rubles.
                        And there is no need again about the "plans to the community"
                        Quote: slipped
                        Therefore, Russia will now focus on proposals for the creation of satellites based on domestic serial satellite platforms with the sale of services for their launch on a turnkey basis. The nearest such launch is the Angosat-2 communications satellite.

                        laughing laughing
                        On April 20, the Minister of Telecommunications and Information Technologies of Angola, Jose Carvalho da Rocha, in an interview with the Jornal de Angola newspaper said that the Angosat-1 satellite was officially declared inoperable and that Russia was obliged to build a new satellite under the contract.
                      4. slipped
                        slipped 15 August 2020 16: 43
                        0
                        Quote: Perseverance
                        Exactly, that he flew on this counterattack at one cost, without a rise in price.


                        Testing is always more expensive for the manufacturer. The price for launching a new media can be set the same as the old one.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        Angara is the champion of sawing wink


                        This is just your IMHO and that's it.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        Duc facts. Where are the commercial orders?


                        The rocket is just passing its tests. There are orders for it. Including a purely commercial foreign - South Korean satellite for A1.2.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        We didn't have time to make the A5, but the A5M is already needed, which is not only more expensive, so more tests are required wassat


                        Any new missiles require testing. The A5M is followed by the A5B. Angara is a family of missiles.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        Cheaper A5 does not affect A5M laughing it wassat


                        Affects. In the end, everything will be at the same price.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        The plans are enormous. Something is always all about the future.


                        Mastering the full cycle of rocket production in Omsk is not far off.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        So where's the sales contract for $ 64? Now so "Express-AMU4" is 2,33 billion rubles.


                        About $ 33 million for the launch of a heavy space satellite with a disposable rocket? laughing Musk would be jealous. No. 2,33 billion is the cost of manufacturing a rocket. The launch of the Express on the Proton-M LV costs more.

                        Quote: Perseverance
                        On April 20, the Minister of Telecommunications and Information Technologies of Angola, Jose Carvalho da Rocha, in an interview with the Jornal de Angola newspaper said that the Angosat-1 satellite was officially declared inoperable and that Russia was obliged to build a new satellite under the contract.


                        Angosat-1 was built by RSC Energia. After the emergency launch of this satellite, Angola received power from another spacecraft. "Angosat-2" creates ISS them. Reshetnev on the Express-1000N commercial platform.
          3. MMX
            MMX 14 August 2020 22: 46
            -2
            I still don't get it. Before talking about competitiveness, if you please, could you tell us the cost of launching Musk's rocket with reference to the source?
      2. Brancodd
        Brancodd 18 August 2020 12: 59
        0
        I generally keep quiet about the characteristics of the Angara

        Yes, sometimes it's better to be quiet. Otherwise you run the risk of offending the European "exceptional" people with your pathos. By all characteristics, including price, Angara is superior to Arian 6. But EKA for some reason does not stop the development of an "outdated" rocket
  • slipped
    slipped 14 August 2020 19: 50
    -2
    Quote: Wedmak
    Angara-A3 was cut to please Union-5, I hope there will be no more reductions.


    There were no cuts - the A3 was not developed further than the preliminary design. In addition, the Soyuz-5 brings more payload.
  • KCA
    KCA 14 August 2020 12: 08
    0
    And in August 1998, a default was declared by presidential decree, and the schedule went down the drain
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 14 August 2020 12: 13
      +2
      2020-1998 = 22 years ago.
  • silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 14 August 2020 11: 15
    -1
    good news ... the only thing that causes misunderstanding ... is the launch of the layout for a lot of money ... it would be possible to bring something useful in addition to the overall weight part ... there is also a risk on used products ...
    1. Sergey39
      Sergey39 14 August 2020 11: 25
      +3
      Who knows what they mean by the word "layout"?
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 14 August 2020 11: 26
        -2
        Concrete cube.
        1. Sergey39
          Sergey39 14 August 2020 11: 27
          +3
          Well this is unlikely.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 14 August 2020 11: 40
            +5
            Of course it is unlikely, there will be a cylinder. laughing
      2. Thrifty
        Thrifty 14 August 2020 12: 31
        -2
        Sergey 39 - Rogozin will be launched with a nanobatut from Chubais. ... lol
        1. Kart
          Kart 14 August 2020 16: 00
          0
          And I heard fighters with the regime will be launched to Mars.
    2. K-612-O
      K-612-O 14 August 2020 11: 29
      +7
      There will be a final launch with a payload, there is regulatory documentation on space, you can't violate it, smart people wrote it in the USSR.
    3. mdsr
      mdsr 14 August 2020 12: 15
      -6
      Quote: silberwolf88
      ... it would be possible to bring something useful in addition to the overall weight part ...

      Are you proposing to launch Lada Grant into space with the buggy Fedya robot, as an answer to Musk, with his Falcon and Tesla? I represent the headlines of foreign media: Fedya on Grant conquers space laughing
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 14 August 2020 12: 24
        +4
        A good idea. And someday, hundreds of years later, catch them as an artifact of a previous civilization ...
        1. mdsr
          mdsr 14 August 2020 12: 51
          -2
          Quote: Wedmak
          And someday, hundreds of years later, catch them as an artifact of a previous civilization ...

          But their safety in space will probably be excellent, in contrast to terrestrial conditions.
      2. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 17 August 2020 08: 11
        +1
        It makes no sense to launch one "Grant" into space (an accident with Tesla in the asteroid belt was not enough for us yet), and the whole AvtoVAZ will not fit into the rocket)))
    4. donavi49
      donavi49 14 August 2020 12: 26
      +3
      So this is minimizing losses.

      Well, that is, the launch itself is 200 million (for example), and which thread a military satellite in this launch can easily cost 500+. Therefore, it is better to lose 200 million than 700 wink .

      Plus jambs with insurance.

      Sometimes they start with useful, but not very expensive. For example KZ-11 flew directly from the Bilibili satellite and did not enter orbit. But in general, everyone is happy and Bilibili too, will fly to the next.

      The fireflies will have DREAM on their first flight - this is their own development for 26 seats (satellites) - and it seems they will be filled with different cubes from schools and universities at no cost. And another orbital tractor (which will be able to move satellites from orbit to orbit), in a demonstrator version.

      The methane volcano-centaurus on the first flight will carry the landing platform and the walker demonstrator to the moon right away wink ... But there the cost of the mission is ~ 100 million, excluding the launch. And the mission was collected by the type of startup + investment + grants from universities + ESA grant + NASA grant.

  • Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 14 August 2020 11: 15
    -11 qualifying.
    Rogozin bit the bit well, well
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 14 August 2020 11: 29
    +1
    As it is unexpected. Unas is all gone? Good luck in transportation, at the same time we will check the logistics. Russian Railways will cope, I can imagine how they are preparing to receive the lettered trains. repeat
    1. Nastia makarova
      Nastia makarova 14 August 2020 12: 01
      +3
      and that Russian Railways had problems with this?
      1. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 14 August 2020 12: 05
        -2
        On Baikanur this is one thing and in Plesetsk it is another.
        1. Nastia makarova
          Nastia makarova 14 August 2020 12: 41
          +6
          and that never missiles were delivered there?)))
  • Wwk7260
    Wwk7260 14 August 2020 12: 00
    -1
    interestingly, in light of the latest initiatives of Dmitry Olegovich, what kind of livery will Angara have? "Gzhel" or "Khokhloma"?
    1. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 14 August 2020 12: 08
      -4
      Painting "The Last Day of Pompeii." Well, you understand whose last day.
      1. Wwk7260
        Wwk7260 14 August 2020 12: 31
        -2
        hinting at the glamorous "Palekh"? anything can be.
    2. slipped
      slipped 14 August 2020 19: 19
      0
      Quote: Wwk7260
      interestingly, in light of the latest initiatives of Dmitry Olegovich, what kind of livery will Angara have? "Gzhel" or "Khokhloma"?


      It's amazing how it turns the net hamsters on laughing Especially non-brothers.

      They do not know that earlier rockets with prints of various ornaments were launched more than once, it looks very nice, like an example of the Olympic print of 2014:

  • Dikson
    Dikson 14 August 2020 12: 03
    +1
    But what about the East? Wasn't it made under the Angara?
    1. Genry
      Genry 14 August 2020 14: 30
      +2
      Quote: Dikson
      But what about the East? Wasn't it made under the Angara?

      Now they are building the second stage.
      https://www.roscosmos.ru/26799/
    2. slipped
      slipped 14 August 2020 19: 22
      +3
      Quote: Dikson
      But what about the East? Wasn't it made under the Angara?


      At the "Vostochny" they are building a start for the "Amur" spacecraft. For all types of Angara missiles. The launch pad equipment has just been delivered to Sovetskaya harbor along the Northern Sea Route, and now they are being reloaded onto a barge for delivery along the river to the cosmodrome:

  • RUnnm
    RUnnm 14 August 2020 12: 23
    +3
    "The booster runs on clean fuel" - Gretta applauds while standing! However, somehow it seems bad to me. But something else is more important - so that we do not give up the position of the leading space power .. No fluff!
  • Engineer Schukin
    Engineer Schukin 14 August 2020 12: 39
    +3
    Quote: K-612-O
    There will be a final launch with a payload, there is regulatory documentation on space, you can't violate it, smart people wrote it in the USSR.

    in fact, if a space market were developed in Russia and there were technologies for creating cubesats, it would be easy to fill test launches with university cubesats, which is very inexpensive and useful for student or commercial development.

    In the world over the past 6-7 years, 1300 cubesats have been withdrawn
    Now they are shoved into almost any launch, as an extra. load.
    Spire Global - about 150+ cubesats
    Planet Labs - about 350+ cubesats

    Russia occupies a little more than 1% of this market
    1. silberwolf88
      silberwolf88 14 August 2020 13: 28
      +3
      Well, I wrote about this (minus one thing) ... it was possible to connect universities free of charge ... and as if something was found at Baumanka ... MAI or the same Moscow State University ...
    2. slipped
      slipped 14 August 2020 19: 32
      +1
      Quote: Engineer Schukin
      in fact, if a space market were developed in Russia and there were technologies for creating cubesats,


      A line of cubesats for sale from the Russian private company Sputniks:



      Quote: Engineer Schukin
      test runs could be easily populated with university cubesats, which is very inexpensive and useful for student or business development.


      Not. GVMs are launched for specific purposes. Russian-made student and university satellites fly here in cluster launches. For example, in the near future, several such devices are to be launched, up to 5 kg 6U format:



      Quote: Engineer Schukin
      Now they are shoved into almost any launch, as an extra. load.


      Yes, it does.

      Quote: Engineer Schukin
      Russia occupies a little more than 1% of this market


      On the launch of the MCA - no. The launches of small spacecraft are only increasing annually.
  • vkl.47
    vkl.47 14 August 2020 13: 32
    +3
    Quote: Civil
    Quote: vkl.47
    We are waiting for whiners in the comments.

    That's exactly what these all-propals got out! What do you want like in Ukraine? Donbass is not enough for you? Rogozin is the world's best space manager, Roskosmos is the leader of launches, and you dance there on your Maidans. Believe in the propaganda of the State Department, in fact, Musk is the actor Bruce Willis, all the launches of Pace X are filmed in Hollywood. And in general, have they forgotten that the first woman in space is Tereshkova ???

    I did not dance on the Maidans)) I was born in Russia, I live here all my life. And in Ukraine the last time was when it was a Soviet republic. Something like that))
  • svp67
    svp67 14 August 2020 15: 46
    -1
    Lord, it didn't really happen ... crying
  • Kibl
    Kibl 14 August 2020 16: 38
    -1
    And when will Russia stop supplying the enemy with rocket engines?
  • slipped
    slipped 14 August 2020 19: 57
    +1
    The railway echelon with a heavy carrier rocket "Angara-A5" departed from the territory of the Center. MV Khrunichev at the Plesetsk cosmodrome. The rocket is to arrive at the northern cosmodrome to prepare for flight tests on August 17