Military Review

Floating Cosmodrome Sea Launch will be restored

89
Floating Cosmodrome Sea Launch will be restored

The floating cosmodrome Sea Launch will be restored, the work will require about 35 billion rubles. This was announced by Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov within the framework of the Army-2020 forum.


According to the Deputy Prime Minister, there are already preliminary conclusions of the expert commission, which is dealing with the issue of restoring Sea Launch. The final results of the experts' work will be received shortly.

Undoubtedly, Sea Launch will be restored, I had a conversation with the President about this. I reported on the interim results of the work of the working group, which was created on my behalf. Tentatively, the amount for the restoration of Sea Launch is about 35 billion rubles, and its commercial success is possible with at least five launches a year. It's all possible

- said Borisov.

The Deputy Prime Minister emphasized that the floating spaceport is a unique structure and it would be foolish not to use it, letting it go for scrap. He noted that all the main equipment on the platform and the escort ship was preserved, as it belongs to Russia.

Decisions on launches from Sea Launch will be made after its restoration; it is possible that the cosmodrome will launch rockets for foreign customers as well.

The Sea Launch floating spaceport consists of the Odyssey floating launch platform and the command vessel. In total, 36 launches were made from the sea launch site, of which 33 were successful. In 2014, the last rocket was launched, as Russia stopped supplying missile components to Ukraine, including the RD-171 rocket engines.

At present, Sea Launch is located in the Russian Far East, the project has been frozen "until better times."

Earlier, USC General Director Alexei Rakhmanov said that USC had plans to build its own floating cosmodrome, which would be more efficient than Sea Launch.
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Temples
    Temples 24 August 2020 15: 21 New
    11
    There is a barge, but what will fly into space from it?

    35 lard what do they require? request
    1. g1v2
      g1v2 24 August 2020 16: 34 New
      +7
      Union variation 5. It is largely unified with Zenith, so there should not be any special changes in the platform.
      1. slipped
        slipped 24 August 2020 18: 30 New
        +5
        Quote: g1v2
        It is largely unified with Zenith, there should not be any special changes in the platform.


        It is "unified" with "Zenith-2" only in the size of the tail section.

        The engines are different - for Zenit-2 RD-171M, RD-120, for Soyuz-5 - RD-171MV, RD-0124MS.
        The diameter of the tanks is different - for Zenit-2 - 3,9m, for Soyuz-5 - 4,1m.
        The control system - at Zenit-2 - NTSAP, at Soyuz-5 - NPOA.
        Output to LEO - at Zenit-2 - ~ 14 tons, at Soyuz-5 - ~ 18 tons.

        "Soyuz-5" is longer and thicker, therefore, in the basic version it does not fit on the SL.
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty 24 August 2020 16: 47 New
      +2
      By the time the money is found, this complex will rot, or else it will be recognized as unsuitable for restoration due to the high wear and tear of the entire complex! You need one "Shark" from the pair that is in the queue for disposal to be converted into a sea spaceport - it can easily go out in any weather, anywhere in the world, and quickly launch a booster rocket with a satellite, or satellites on board!
      1. slipped
        slipped 24 August 2020 18: 33 New
        +4
        Quote: Thrifty
        You need one "Shark"


        Previously, we developed the Volna and Shtil conversion carriers for launching from a submarine. The only satellites that can be launched in this case are the MCA. Heavy spacecraft are launched from the SL at the GPO.
    3. snerg7520
      snerg7520 25 August 2020 08: 13 New
      +1
      Only Rogozin should not be allowed for this business ...
      Otherwise, this "budget sawing machine" will again have a Khokhloma with a trampoline set on a sea launch and fly into space in the next millennium.
  2. Magic archer
    Magic archer 24 August 2020 15: 28 New
    12
    Frozen until "better" times. And these times have come chtoli !? Or am I just not understanding something ?!
    1. Temples
      Temples 24 August 2020 15: 52 New
      0
      Apparently they have arrived.
      Everyone wants to build something for space.
      You need to master the loot.
      Rather, send the loot into space. fellow
      It doesn't matter for what purpose. It is important to master the money while giving.

      But "better times" have come only for those who can get their hands on these grandmothers.

      And we have everything as before.
      We are waiting for the second wave of the crown.
      Then the flu.
      Then the world crisis.
      Or in reverse order. laughing
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 24 August 2020 16: 04 New
      11
      Quote: Magic Archer
      Frozen until "better" times. And these times have come chtoli !?

      There is an interesting fact in the history of the Soviet military-industrial complex. On the northern lands of the USSR, he set up atomic beacons. I could not understand why ... the whole point is that the first, in the event of a nuclear conflict, will be consumed by navigation satellites. So these same atomic beacons were an alternative to the satellite constellation. At the same time, to this day, the Russian Federation is in no hurry to abandon these beacons.

      Roughly speaking, these beacons were robotic. Depending on the time of year and day, they turned on when it was necessary, and sent radio signals, which were guided by passing ships. Similar lighthouses were located on the Kola Peninsula, on the shores of the White Sea and on the Novaya Zemlya archipelago. Several of these structures are located on the shores of the Baltic, as well as on Kamchatka. After the collapse of the USSR, they remained ownerless and unnecessary, but still they worked properly for some time.

      There the fuel was for 30 years of autonomous operation. Then, after the collapse of the USSR, the vandals, out of their stupidity, tried to plunder these beacons, which is why they received not a frail dose of radiation. There have been cases of lethal doses.
      The RTG was based on the strontium isotope - strontium-90 - radioactive waste resulting from the operation of a nuclear reactor. Its half-life is 30 years, and that is how long it could support the work of the lighthouse.

      But now in Russia they put not strontium-90, but nickel-63.
      The RTG reprocessing project was completed in 2016. However, Russia is not going to give up using this technology anytime soon. On the contrary, as RIA Novosti reported, Rosatom plans to build new similar installations that will operate on Nickel-63. Of course, this time everything will be done to ensure the safety of storage and operation of radioactive materials. Installations based on nickel-63 will be used both in the Arctic (and not necessarily in places where old RTGs were located), and in other hard-to-reach areas, as well as in the space industry.

      According to the developers, the properties of nickel-63 make it possible to create extremely compact batteries that will last 50 years.

      I have all this for what ... all these developments of the Union, as I said, are returning and will return in a modernized form.
      1. An64
        An64 25 August 2020 09: 32 New
        +1
        the point is that the first, in the event of a nuclear conflict, will be consumed by navigation satellites.

        Don't read science fiction and children's books. A little logical thinking and the question naturally arises: who and by what means will use up several dozen satellites in an orbit of 20000 km?
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 25 August 2020 09: 34 New
          +1
          Quote: An64
          Well, who will use up satellites in orbit of 20000 km and how?

          Is it necessary to shoot down these satellites? GPS can be jammed without shooting down satellites, which is tantamount to the destruction of the satellite constellation in essence.
          1. An64
            An64 25 August 2020 13: 23 New
            +2
            GPS can be jammed without knocking down satellites

            The point of suppressing GPS is not to crush the navigation signal, but to jam the consumer's receiver with interference. Suppression range - line of sight of electronic warfare means, that is, in the area of ​​the battlefield, no more. Globally suppressing will not work.
            Can't you suppress a beacon that sends radio signals? Probably you can, if you put (throw) a jammer next to it.
        2. Old Orc
          Old Orc 25 August 2020 14: 34 New
          0
          Now all over the United States and Russia are working on satellites as "inspectors", one of whose functions is the possibility of "close contact" with the satellites being checked. they can disable the satellites in the geostationary.
  3. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 24 August 2020 15: 29 New
    16
    It is unclear ... it was infa that this Sea Launch was acquired by S7, and now what does the government have to do with it? Who does remember? Now this barge is being “forced” into a burden on the state budget?
    1. Pereira
      Pereira 24 August 2020 15: 41 New
      +7
      Once they ask the state for money, therefore, the profitability of the venture is very doubtful. Profit, loss to the state?
      Who intends to give them missiles and for what purposes? Rogozin? Musk? Chinese with Indians?
      How does the company itself feel during the crisis?
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 24 August 2020 15: 41 New
      0
      Well, first, the state budget got rid of the encumbrance in the form of the Sea Launch double ban, and now S7 wants to sell it back to the state. ... Probably also wants money for it.
    3. Lopatov
      Lopatov 24 August 2020 16: 38 New
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It is unclear ... it was infa that this Sea Launch was acquired by S7, and now what does the government have to do with it?

      S7 airline. They should survive now ....
      Without the help of the state, Sea Launch can be safely cut on pins and needles.
      1. Brancodd
        Brancodd 24 August 2020 17: 36 New
        +4
        Used S7 for a special operation. State the structure would have no chance of being redeemed. As soon as the platform was towed to Vladivostok, Fileva tragically died (co-owned by S7)
    4. K-36
      K-36 25 August 2020 00: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Now this barge is being “forced” into a burden on the state budget?

      I recommend that you (and, perhaps, all readers of this Topic) watch this video about the fate of the Sea Launch.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=bEfFJWVhBig&feature=emb_logo
      The video is long - 46 minutes. But the information in it will radically help improve knowledge on the topic. Academician Vitaly Lopota is Korolev's successor. About how Elon Musk came to Russia 29 years ago with plans to create a joint commercial project. On the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome. About how Lopota himself fought to leave the Sea Launch in Russia ... Vitaly told a lot. What for me _ so I with an open mouth caught his every word.
      Yours faithfully, hi
    5. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 25 August 2020 00: 37 New
      0
      And who would have sold this thing to Roscosmos. S7 was a gasket. It's a pity that the owner of S7 died strangely. The purchase took place after Crimea.
    6. An64
      An64 25 August 2020 09: 36 New
      +1
      Initially, Sea Launch completely bought out RSC Energia, which served as a fatal blow for it, after which the corporation was never able to rise. And then S7 got involved /
  4. Errr
    Errr 24 August 2020 15: 41 New
    +3
    You can treat Borisov's statements in different ways, but if the military department really gets down to business, we have real hope for the restoration of Sea Launch. Here the grandmother did not speak in two, you can not go to her. smile This platform, obviously, will still do a good job of the orbital component of the Russian shield.
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 24 August 2020 15: 53 New
      +2
      Quote: Herrr
      This platform, obviously, will still do a good job of the orbital component of the Russian shield.

      What, this is an option good
  5. Kefir
    Kefir 24 August 2020 15: 42 New
    -5
    Well, it was not for nothing that it was bought out, although there was only one skeleton left, all were cut by the Amers.
    Here now they will start to resent, sawing, etc. Everything was planned and money too.
    And if they started curtailing space programs? Again, a bunch of dissatisfied, etc.
    Well, how else to communicate with you Everything is lost))))
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 24 August 2020 15: 44 New
      +6
      This was again Rogozin's lies, nothing significant was cut off.
      Borisov noted that about a week ago he returned from Vladivostok and personally walked through the Sea Launch. “There are all sorts of rumors that the Americans have removed the equipment - yes, they have dismantled the equipment, but it is mainly equipment that provides positioning associated with JPS technology. We can replace them with GLONASS technologies. But the launching system itself - that is, loading and placing the rocket, refueling the rocket in automatic mode - these are all Russian technologies, ”he told reporters.

      And now Rogozin's quote
      The head of Roscosmos said that before the transfer of the complex to S7, all the space launch control equipment "literally" with meat "was torn out." - quoted by Rogozin TASS.

      How do you care?
      In fact, the Americans only removed the GPS receiver and that's it.
      1. Garm
        Garm 24 August 2020 15: 53 New
        -2
        GPS receiver for 35 billion?
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 24 August 2020 16: 14 New
          -1
          So this is the cost of a complete restoration of work. Firstly, all Sea Launch employees have long been fired, that is, they need to hire new ones. Secondly, it is necessary to overhaul all systems, it has not been done for a long time, and so on.
      2. Kefir
        Kefir 24 August 2020 16: 39 New
        0
        Quote: BlackMokona
        How do you care?
        In fact, the Americans only removed the GPS receiver and that's it.

        Well, maybe I won't argue .. There was an article recently that ours based on this, that they want to apply something very tricky (it is not specifically said what exactly)
        But this statement is very interesting ..
        Tentatively, the amount for the restoration of Sea Launch is about 35 billion rubles, and its commercial success is possible with at least five launches a year. It's all possible

        This is a very bold statement, such a return on the brink of fantasy ..
        Something our Kulibins have clearly conceived .. Let's wait!
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 24 August 2020 17: 26 New
          +1
          "........ For example, from Baikonur, the Zenit launch vehicle is able to put 3,8 tons of cargo into a commercial - geo-transfer orbit, and when launched from Sea Launch - up to 6,2 tons per due to the optimal position of the platform at the equator. Plus the ability to launch into low and medium orbits up to 16 tons of cargo with a wide range of orbital inclinations. .... "
          Sorry, the original source of the quote is lost.

          In general, launching rockets from the equator is a profitable business.
          1. Kefir
            Kefir 24 August 2020 18: 07 New
            +2
            Quote: Bad_gr
            "........ For example, from Baikonur, the Zenit launch vehicle is able to put 3,8 tons of cargo into a commercial - geo-transfer orbit, and when launched from Sea Launch - up to 6,2 tons per due to the optimal position of the platform at the equator. Plus the ability to launch into low and medium orbits up to 16 tons of cargo with a wide range of orbital inclinations. .... "
            Sorry, the original source of the quote is lost.

            This has been known for a long time, but I think that something else is very tricky to come up with .. Too bold statement and no special details are not said openly (well done)
            Quote: Bad_gr
            In general, launching rockets from the equator is a profitable business.

            We'll see, but consider what kind of protection Vladimir Russia will have to keep!
            Here I clearly smell something else ... Let's wait
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 24 August 2020 20: 31 New
              +2
              Quote: Kefir
              consider what kind of protection Russia will have to keep
              That will make sense in long-range Pacific Fleet campaigns
      3. slipped
        slipped 24 August 2020 18: 43 New
        0
        Quote: BlackMokona
        In fact, the Americans only removed the GPS receiver and that's it.


        Not. The Americans took their equipment - and there was a lot of it.
    2. Avior
      Avior 24 August 2020 15: 55 New
      +2
      It was bought by S7 under the government's promise not to interfere with the purchases of Ukrainian Zenits.
      But as they gave their word not to interfere, they took it away.
      S7 not only managed to buy Sea Launch, but also ordered Zenits in Ukraine, for which it transferred 30 million.
      But at some point, the government changed its mind and blocked cooperation with Yuzhmash on Zenith, as they decided that the launch should wait for Russian missiles, and S7 was forced to abandon Zenith.
      30 million remained with Yuzhmash.
      And while no one is flying where, although they should have already
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 24 August 2020 16: 30 New
        +2
        Quote: Avior
        not to interfere with the purchases of Ukrainian Zenits. But as the word was given not to interfere, they took it away.

        Is this possible? To interfere with what cannot happen ...
        After all, the Ukrainians have basically refused to cooperate with the "aggressor state."
        1. Avior
          Avior 24 August 2020 16: 49 New
          +1
          Specifically in this case, everything is strictly the opposite. The rocket was finally to be assembled in the States.
          ... On February 13, 2018, the general director of S7 Space Transport Systems (a subsidiary of the S7 group) Sergey Sopov told the media that the company ordered the production of 12 launch vehicles from Yuzhmash until 2023, based on the project's self-sufficiency in 3-4 launches in year. Each Zenith includes a fully Russian-made first stage RD-171M engine, a second stage combustion chamber, a control system and many other components. In total, about 150 domestic enterprises are involved in cooperation. Their share in value terms of the cost of the rocket is 80%. Fulfillment of the contract for 12 Zenits will bring Russian enterprises half a billion dollars [57].

          At Yuzhmash, Zenits have already begun to make, then S7 was forced to refuse - permission for a robot with Ukraine was not given, although they initially promised.
          But then everything was redrawn in favor of Soyuz-5, work with Ukraine was blocked, Soyuz-5 has not yet been born, there is nothing to adapt to the Sea Launch.
          As a result, the sea launch is laid up, there is nothing to start from it.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 24 August 2020 16: 52 New
            +1
            Quote: Avior
            Specifically in this case, everything is strictly the opposite. The rocket was finally to be assembled in the States.

            Also, the States had to be forced to cooperate and waive the sanctions?
            Well, you very much overestimate the capabilities of the Kremlin
            1. Avior
              Avior 24 August 2020 17: 35 New
              0
              Why would the States force it if S7 canceled the contract?
              There is nothing to collect.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 24 August 2020 18: 32 New
                +1
                Quote: Avior
                Why does the States force

                But you declare that "the Kremlin is to blame." Couldn't force Ukraine, couldn't force USA
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 24 August 2020 17: 27 New
            +2
            Quote: Avior
            Specifically in this case, everything is strictly the opposite. The rocket was finally to be assembled in the States.

            Mmmm ... in the very States that regularly impose new sanctions on the Russian Federation?
            The general director of C7 Space Transport Systems was a very great optimist ... or a connoisseur of the oral work of Khoja Nasreddin. smile
            1. Avior
              Avior 24 August 2020 17: 36 New
              0
              Nevertheless, the ambush came not from the States, but from the government.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 24 August 2020 18: 18 New
                +3
                Quote: Avior
                Nevertheless, the ambush came not from the States, but from the government.

                And I can even say why.
                Because the end of this story was a little predictable: there is no money, the rocket is in a warehouse in Ukraine / in the United States, arrested as a sanctioned product / product with details of companies that fell under US sanctions, everyone requires the state to take some action to release the company's private property, deciding that she is the smartest and nothing will touch her, the S7 company cries and demands compensation from the state. smile
                1. Cristall
                  Cristall 25 August 2020 00: 34 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  And I can even say why.
                  Because the end of this story was a little predictable: there is no money, the rocket is in a warehouse in Ukraine / in the United States, arrested as a sanctioned product / product with details of companies that fell under US sanctions, everyone requires the state to take some action to release the company's private property, deciding that she is the smartest and nothing will touch her, the S7 company cries and demands compensation from the state.

                  in such cases, the risks are usually calculated. And only after receiving clear guarantees they begin to do
                  Considering the advance payment of $ 30 million to Yuzhmash and the start of work on 12 Zeniths (which was clearly written by the newspapers of the Russian Federation and Ukraine, mentioning that these are private companies and everything is permitted and approved)
                  In Ukraine, there was not a single hint of disruption to work with a private company. In general, they work with private traders as they work. The same Lukoil and others have been supplying the same. There are problems with the state. HERE there may be sanctions.
                  But the contract with S7 in Kiev was considered profitable, since then it is possible not to subsidize at Yuzhmash - we will be self-sufficient. And then there are 12 missiles ... a fat contract.
                  But suddenly everything stopped and tore apart.
                  Blame Ukraine for not being a problem. S7 gave guarantees at a high level and then forced them to terminate the contract to support the local (well, damage to the neighbor).
                  But the locals are not ready yet. And when it will be, not soon.
                  This is also bad for Ukraine. A fat contract from a private Russian company is an acceptable option for work even now. Moreover, with private companies, it is all allowed.
                2. Avior
                  Avior 25 August 2020 00: 40 New
                  +1
                  When do you think S7 bought Sea Launch? The money was paid in 2018 for the purchase.
                  It is clear that not everything was as obvious as you write, otherwise they would not have bought, having previously secured the government's consent not to interfere, which did not hold back.
                  Moreover, Sea Launch was transported to Russia
                  So what?
                  On April 23, 2020, the owner of S7, Vladislav Filev, said that the implementation of the project was postponed indefinitely. At the same time, he noted that the cost of basing the Sea Launch complex in Russia is two times more expensive than in the United States, although initially, upon agreement, the Russian side promised conditions similar to those of the American
  6. Roman246810
    Roman246810 24 August 2020 15: 48 New
    -4
    This music will be eternal ..))
  7. RMT
    RMT 24 August 2020 15: 50 New
    +5
    "Alexei Rakhmanov said that USC has plans to build its own floating cosmodrome, which will be more efficient than Sea Launch."
    It seems to me alone that this is a replica from a completely different life? Another spaceport?
    1. Aag
      Aag 24 August 2020 17: 29 New
      +4
      Quote: RMT
      "Alexei Rakhmanov said that USC has plans to build its own floating cosmodrome, which will be more efficient than Sea Launch."
      It seems to me alone that this is a replica from a completely different life? Another spaceport?

      Well, someone with logic is definitely not at ease (apparently, not me, because you also paid attention to THIS drinks )
      Unfortunately, in recent years, such statements have become commonplace. Apparently, so that later it could be said, we said! ..... but everyone said. belay
  8. Blue fox
    Blue fox 24 August 2020 15: 55 New
    +4
    Decisions on launches from Sea Launch will be made after its restoration; it is possible that the cosmodrome will launch rockets for foreign customers as well.

    Isn't it more logical to first make a decision about what ?, where ?, how? and for whom? will run before deciding to restore?
    1. Pereira
      Pereira 24 August 2020 16: 04 New
      +5
      Yeah, Fox! With you budget money can not be cut.
  9. Maks1995
    Maks1995 24 August 2020 15: 55 New
    +1
    Half a lama bucks are excellent braces for the country.
    2 floating Cosmodrome - 2 luxurious cuts.
  10. prior
    prior 24 August 2020 16: 02 New
    +2
    "Sea Launch" is another "sawmill", which will then "sink" like PD-50. And there is no one to ask ...
  11. 1536
    1536 24 August 2020 16: 05 New
    +2
    Why do we have such limited rich people? Yachts, convertibles, casinos, business jets, etc. A bit small, everything within the framework of Russian literature of the XNUMXth century: Ostrovsky, Chekhov, Leskov, Gorky described the approximate type of a Russian rich merchant. But the XXI century is in the yard, even the "Roman unit" has gone ahead ... Is there really no one who could buy a cosmodrome for himself, and not just to put it into a blast furnace, but launch rockets to the stars. For example, in honor of a beloved woman, a spaceship of the same class is launched. Then, in honor of the other, the next launch. Well, or something like that. This is a joke, of course. And yet, it's interesting to do this. And satellites can be launched communications, research, and much more to do. Anything is better than han eating with grooms under the scorching sun.
    1. Vladimir Demyanov
      Vladimir Demyanov 24 August 2020 17: 00 New
      0
      Sea launch is not allowed in a blast furnace, as suggested here, for the simple reason that the blast furnace is not designed for this. As an option - a converter or an electric furnace, but it may still serve faithfully for its purpose.
    2. Doliva63
      Doliva63 24 August 2020 18: 40 New
      +1
      Quote: 1536
      A bit small, everything within the framework of Russian literature of the XNUMXth century: Ostrovsky, Chekhov, Leskov, Gorky described an exemplary type of a Russian rich merchant.

      Savva Morozov financed the Bolsheviks, the Bolsheviks, as a result, flew into space. Why is there no monument to Morozov on Boykonur? laughing
  12. Beringovsky
    Beringovsky 24 August 2020 16: 09 New
    +6
    It will, it will, it will, it will be ... By 2025, 2027, 2030, 2035 ... We will fly to Mars, we will make an aircraft carrier, we will finish the Su57, we will catch up with Portugal ...
    What we have enough is promises
    1. sevryuk
      sevryuk 25 August 2020 21: 01 New
      0
      Che there with polymers?
      1. Beringovsky
        Beringovsky 25 August 2020 23: 15 New
        +1
        There will be. Soon. Lot.
  13. Dikson
    Dikson 24 August 2020 16: 46 New
    +2
    NNNda ... we saw enough of Elon Musk with his pontoons .. and decided - well, they, in figs, these Vostochnye with trampolines .. - we will push rockets into space from the landing stage, like smart and cunning Americans ... and if it doesn't work out what - so at least we will spend money!
  14. xomaNN
    xomaNN 24 August 2020 16: 48 New
    0
    Times have definitely changed! In the 90s, the "activists" would have been looking for someone to sell scrap metal wassat
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Tonpengof
      Tonpengof 24 August 2020 17: 51 New
      -3
      Quote: xomaNN
      Times have definitely changed! In the 90s, the "activists" would have been looking for someone to sell scrap metal wassat

      Liberda wrote that now they will quietly saw it.
  15. donavi49
    donavi49 24 August 2020 16: 49 New
    11
    commercial success is possible with at least five launches per year. It's all possible


    Let's open the story - 36 launches, peak years:
    2006 - 5 launches
    2008 - 5 launches
    2005 - 4 launches

    All other years 0-3 launches. No sanctions. With a super profitable rocket for that time. With US registration and all the goodies. Let me remind you that the unique advantage of the MS was that there was no need to break through the permit to export the load from the USA.

    Now Russia + sanctions + the US administration will probably try to repeat the trick with SP2, will invest 95% of the money, and then it will hurt and stop the project.

    Plus, the launch market has already changed significantly, and in 5 years it will change even more. The same Chinese will eat the launch market with all their might. They are already doing it. Commercial and foreign withdrawals have grown significantly in China. There are many private projects with innovations and a good basic economy, without sea start and other things. And there is a clear stagnation in launches in Russia + a catastrophic reduction in foreign load to virtually zero indicators (1-2 launches per year).
    1. Aag
      Aag 24 August 2020 18: 06 New
      0
      "... Let's open history - 36 launches, peak years:
      2006 - 5 launches
      2008 - 5 launches
      2005 - 4 launches ... "
      Yes, and already ... EMNIP, the 2000th launch from Plesetsk was celebrated in 1989!
      It is clear that most of them are military, but there were enough "civilians" too. Somewhere the photo was from the museum of the cosmodrome. Two bundles of gold wire: one voluminous, military; the second, three times smaller, "civilian" launches. start-up, - one wire. How unsuccessful were designated, - I don't know ...
  16. georggy
    georggy 24 August 2020 16: 52 New
    0
    Another cut of the dough with the command: "the grandmother must be done."
  17. APASUS
    APASUS 24 August 2020 16: 56 New
    +1
    Well, that's all the conversations are over, otherwise they are going to build something new. It is logical that S7 bought it for third parties
  18. Aag
    Aag 24 August 2020 17: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: prior
    "Sea Launch" is another "sawmill", which will then "sink" like PD-50. And there is no one to ask ...

    Apparently, that's why they say - we can build a new one ...
    Baikonur, Plesetsk are no longer interesting? Are they working? On the Vostochny one you can't turn around, did you burn the feeder?
  19. Tonpengof
    Tonpengof 24 August 2020 17: 46 New
    +3
    Comrades, wait, I saw I bought S7 groups. And here at the army in 2020, the military announced.
    Did I miss something?
    1. Disant
      Disant 25 August 2020 04: 30 New
      0
      Musk is also supposedly a private trader, and the military gave him all the cosmodromes and sites for nothing, the engineers were transferred to him, all the licenses were given both technology and power.
      From a sea launch, satellites can be launched into orbits that are inaccessible to any other cosmodrome, and this is primarily the military
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 25 August 2020 09: 06 New
        0
        It is not true. The sites at the cosmodrome are on lease, he himself rebuilt the launchers for his missiles, you cannot put another rocket on one launcher. Even for Angara, they could not create a single launch pad, let alone completely different missiles. He bought the testing facilities from a bankrupt private company that tried, like him, into space, but could not. The plant he bought the old Boeing plant for the production of aircraft fuselages. From which he made a plant for the production of jet engines, missiles and ships.
        They could not give him licenses and technologies, the state does not have them. Since they belong to Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop, Rocketdyne and others. Which are competitors to Musk and continue to compete with him right now.
        1. Disant
          Disant 25 August 2020 18: 33 New
          0
          Well, it's not true - here is an excellent and clear alignment - what they gave, who gave and at whose expense:
          https://periskop.su/1567867.html
          I think you are perfectly familiar with this article - a small investigation from four years ago.
          and elbowing with other companies is just a crush.
          in the same article, the answer is given why the American state needs private companies - nationalization of losses and privatization of profits
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 25 August 2020 18: 45 New
            -1
            Only facepalms can be placed above the article, and many facepalms are from positive aspects for the Mask.
            What can we say about negative
            The engine is good, it provides excellent energy.

            Is Marilyn version 1.0 a good engine? wassat wassat wassat
            1. Disant
              Disant 25 August 2020 19: 08 New
              0
              Well, we put a label on the article https://periskop.su/1567867.html -
              Only facepalms can be placed above the article

              but it is clearly written there
              from a purely engineering point of view, the Falcon 9 is a masterpiece
              .
              no one belittles the organization of the process and the ability of engineers transferred to the Mask with ready-made and proven solutions.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 25 August 2020 19: 22 New
                -1
                What are the proven solutions? Show me a rocket replica of Falcon, or Marilyn's engine, or who gave him the engineers? And do you know NASA does not have the necessary specialists, they all work for Musk's competitors.
                Well, to call Falcon-9 a masterpiece, especially in version 1.0, to put it mildly, will not work. Vaughn New Glen new from Blue Origin is just a Falcon-9 at maximum speed without all this mess and chaos of living for a penny with student designers and general designer in the form of Musk, who had zero design experience.

                Nonsense that some kind of pro on proven solutions, three times blew up a super simple Falcon-1 rocket in a row, with supkr simple and oak engines with ridiculous characteristics of thrust and UI
                1. sevryuk
                  sevryuk 25 August 2020 21: 06 New
                  -1
                  That sho you ... Oh great Musk, oh great ...! And what capitalization ... More Gazprom and Lukoil!
                2. Disant
                  Disant 25 August 2020 22: 50 New
                  0
                  BlackMokona, well, you have good comments - you are trying to defend your position over and over again, but why ask me the second time, where did Musk get engineers, solutions, who sponsors? I gave a link to an old four-year article, no one refutes it:
                  https://periskop.su/1567867.html
                  humble yourself

                  - Falcon at first openly sponsored the state in the person of the military (DARPA) As I understand it, it is documented.
                  - The territory of workshops, test sites - given by the military (not disputed). - Spaceports - military (not disputed).
                  Renting these things is a cover for the Mask. Behind Musk are big people who feed on success (profit) and solve their problems at the expense of the state, using their influence and / or official position. Everything is in business, everyone is good. This is a new form of American lobbying.
                  - engineers all came from TRW (personnel-120 thousand people, satellites and ballistic missiles) at the snap of their fingers + NASA
                  - documentation and technologies - from the lunar program + TRWshniki brought with them. The giant Northropgruman hinted that it was his own, but got it in court on the wort. How so? It's very simple - TRW has a friend of Bill Gates, who in turn represents a group of people with their own interests.
                  1. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 25 August 2020 23: 09 New
                    -1
                    I said that they bought the test benches from an exploded company that did not work out (spacex is not the first, not the last, and not the only) workshops near Boeing where he made airplane fuselages, that sites at cosmodromes require a complete redesign in order to launch any other missiles , and not those for which the sites were made. If you do not read what I am writing, then is there any point in writing further?
                    1. Disant
                      Disant 26 August 2020 16: 33 New
                      0
                      Well, why - I read.
                      .
                      https://periskop.su/1567867.html
                      Test benches
                      the rocket engine stands were built by Beal Aerospace by enthusiastic engineer Andrew Beale. And all this was done within the NLI - National Launch Initiative, "National Launch Initiative". But the NLI program ended in 2000, and Andrew Beale's company was effectively ruined.

                      ravaged, it means ends in water. everything was done at the expense of the state.
                      This is loss nationalization.
                      .
                      workshops from Boeing
                      What is the engineering complexity of rebuilding the Boeing assembly shop to suit your needs when money is pouring in? The main thing is to lay rails, bring in equipment, control and measuring instruments. The workshop is the same, the cranes are the same, the light is the same, the engineers are given. You don’t even need to spend your money, because you are already being led under white little hands.
                      1. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 26 August 2020 20: 00 New
                        -1
                        National Launch Initiative

                        It is a private company, not a public company.
                        Nobody forbids using the words national in the names of companies.
                        For example, a national fruit company, a private shop in Russia
                        http://www.nfc-nn.ru/texts/O_kompanii/15/
                        What is the engineering complexity of rebuilding the Boeing assembly shop to suit your needs when money is pouring in?

                        The same is the difficulty in deploying the production of missiles, engines and ships in an empty workshop. Since the equipment for assembling fezulages is in no way suitable for assembling engines and ships.
                        And nobody poured money like a river, you are obviously confusing with SLS, they pour it over there.
  20. garri-lin
    garri-lin 24 August 2020 19: 28 New
    +2
    And it is not easier to buy out a small island in Oceania. Raise the Russian flag. And calmly launch rockets.
    1. Mustached Kok
      Mustached Kok 24 August 2020 23: 21 New
      +1
      Unfortunately no. Firstly, the vast majority of the islands already belong to other countries. Some islands themselves are independent (which, by the way, is a promising direction of politics, to establish friendship with the island state, and build a cosmodrome there). And those that do not belong, or are too far from civilization, are wild themselves - so the construction of a cosmodrome and all the infrastructure will cost a lot of money. Secondly, the sea launch has such an advantage over the islands as the ability to change the launch site. If a storm starts in the water area of ​​the island, you will have to wait for its end. A sea launch can afford to sail to an alternative launch site and launch.
      Also, with a sea launch, it is possible to simplify the launch of satellites into polar orbits by simply sailing with a rocket into the same Laptev Sea.
      Of course, there are a lot of disadvantages to the sea start. But they are insignificant when it comes to launches of light, super-light, and partially medium launch vehicles. For heavy launch vehicles, Sea Launch, in the form in which it is implemented now, will not work.
      But as mentioned earlier. It will be very beneficial for both Russia and this state to have friendship with some kind of island state at the equator in order to build your own cosmodrome there. But there are not many such states.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 25 August 2020 02: 23 New
        +1
        Such a state will not be allowed to be friends with Russia.
      2. Mustached Kok
        Mustached Kok 25 August 2020 14: 26 New
        +1
        Not necessary. After all, everything is highly implementation dependent. If this is a very small and poor island state, then with the right political game, it can be presented as nobility (although ours can not always do that). In addition, they will not yell if the countries of the West, or even one large country of the West, receive any benefit. For example, the cosmodrome is not Russian, but "international" with a predominance of Russian shares. If you give the benefit of launches to the same ESA, then there will not be much screams.
        Although in a modern political situation - even this can serve as a pretext for another conflict.
  21. Lumpen
    Lumpen 24 August 2020 20: 44 New
    -1
    Canadian MLS, together with Yuzhmash, by the end of 22, will complete the cosmodrome for launching Cyclone-4 m rockets
  22. Prisoner
    Prisoner 24 August 2020 20: 53 New
    +2
    And that we have a queue for launches in kilometers long and spaceports are sorely lacking or there is nowhere to use money?
  23. Engineer
    Engineer 24 August 2020 21: 38 New
    +2
    Gentlemen, who is in the subject.
    Isn't Sea Launch the property of the private company S7?
    Why is the Deputy Prime Minister reporting on the future of the project at the Army -2020 forum?
    What do the official S7 press releases say?
    Anyone following the topic?
    1. Livonetc
      Livonetc 25 August 2020 08: 43 New
      0
      Read the comment thread.
      Many are following the topic and posted information.
      Including the reasons why S7 became the owner.
      And about the essence of this deal.
      Briefly.
      State structures simply would not be sold.
      Therefore, S7 was involved in the ransom.
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 25 August 2020 09: 26 New
        0
        Thank you for the information
  24. Mustached Kok
    Mustached Kok 24 August 2020 23: 12 New
    +1
    Marine is old, promising and needed. That's just a lot of money will be spent on its re-equipment, and with corruption, it's not a fact that it will be restored at all.
    And so I would like the project to work.
  25. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 25 August 2020 09: 58 New
    0
    Quote: Thrifty
    By the time the money is found, this complex will rot, or else it will be recognized as unsuitable for restoration due to the high wear and tear of the entire complex! You need one "Shark" from the pair that is in the queue for disposal to be converted into a sea spaceport - it can easily go out in any weather, anywhere in the world, and quickly launch a booster rocket with a satellite, or satellites on board!



    It was created to launch solid-fuel rockets. For liquid it is necessary to redo and strongly. And what to start up with? R-29 RMU - small payload ...
  26. czes
    czes 25 August 2020 10: 27 New
    +1
    We've already cut it once. Who is going to cut Sea Launch now?
    1. sevryuk
      sevryuk 25 August 2020 21: 09 New
      +1
      Puten with Rotenberg and the whole Ozero cooperative, of course. Maybe Lukashenka will settle in ... Although he is not up to it now. Until... ))