Military Review

Remove from the geostationary. Is the famous NPO Mashinostroyenia developing space weapons for high orbits?

47
Remove from the geostationary. Is the famous NPO Mashinostroyenia developing space weapons for high orbits?

Scheme of the small spacecraft flight in the standby orbit and the approach of the autonomous maneuvering module for the purpose of


Legend:
1 - Earth;
2 - "Targetable", that is, the attacked spacecraft (the direction of the linear flight speed VСКА is shown by the arrow);
3 - MCA (direction of linear flight speed (shown by an arrow) at the moment of detachment of one autonomous maneuvering module and imparting an impulse ΔVMKA to the autonomous maneuvering module);
4 - MCA standby orbit;
5 - GSO;
6 - transfer orbit of autonomous maneuvering module flight;
7 - small spacecraft after separation of the autonomous maneuvering module;
8 - MCA, base unit;
9 - autonomous maneuvering module.


Legend:
10 - homing head of the autonomous maneuvering module;
11 - propulsion systems of the autonomous maneuvering module;
12 - MCA power plant;
13 - propulsion system MKA;
14 - onboard means of observation of the small spacecraft for the target.

Who is Herbert Alexandrovich Efremov, now very many know. Hero of Labor, Hero of Socialist Labor, Knight of the Order of Lenin, the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called with swords, and many other Soviet and Russian awards and state awards, 87-year-old professor, honorary general director and general designer of JSC MIC "NPO Mashinostroyenia" - and that's all about him, about Efremov. Recently, he communicated with the President and Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the RF Armed Forces V.V. Putin via video link (for obvious reasons), where he informed him that he had been awarded the highest award of Russia. In the conversation, Putin compared the creation of the Avangard system (a planning winged unit, PKB, 15Yu71 for the 15A35-71 ICBM) with the conquest of space. At one time, the author of this article also compared the creation of such systems weapons with the same, therefore it is pleasant to agree with the head of state himself.

Herbert Efremov's merits, of course, will be enough for ten: the creation of KR and anti-ship missiles P-5, P-6, P-35, 3M44 "Progress", 3M25 "Meteorite", P-500 "Basalt", P-1000 "Vulkan" , P-700 "Granit", P-800 "Onyx", 3M22 "Zircon", ICBMs of the "hundred" series - UR-100, UR-100K, UR-100U, UR-100N, and UR-100NUTTH (15A35, which now turns into "Vanguard"). He was also engaged in space technology - "Almazy", satellites "Condor". But it turns out that Herbert Alexandrovich was engaged and certainly has a relationship now to work, also related to space. But, how to say it, with an approach from the other side.

De-orbit


In 2014, in April, when the well-known events took place with the return of Crimea to its native harbor and the beginning of the uprising in Donbass, a patent application 2014114880/11 was filed by Efremov and a number of his colleagues (Leonova A.G., Palkina M.V. and others), the patent holder for it was JSC "MIC" NPO Mashinostroyenia ". The invention was called "a multi-module spacecraft for cleaning the geostationary orbit (GSO) and a method for cleaning the geostationary orbit." A seemingly peaceful and useful invention. Indeed, the GSO, unlike the other orbits, is very densely populated, because it is, in fact, one. "Clark's Belt" (as it is often called in the West, since the future great science fiction writer Arthur Clark predicted this orbit back in 1945) is packed with satellites, the number of points allocated to each state is also limited. Satellites with expired SAS - the period of active existence, on the geostationary it is supposed to withdraw from these points to the so-called. a disposal orbit several hundred kilometers above the GSO. But this does not always work out - the satellite may break down, communication with it cannot be established, etc. Such a satellite cannot go out of orbit on its own, under the influence of the remnants of the atmosphere, it is not 400 km, but 36000 km. So the issue of cleaning this particular orbit is quite relevant and the relevance will only increase.

So what is offered and developed at NPO Mashinostroyenia? After all, such applications for patents in our defense industry are most often written when the idea is already in active work and the result is not far from practical implementation. Let's turn to the patent.

The invention relates to space technology and can be used to implement programs for information from the geostationary orbit (GSO) of failed man-made objects - spacecraft (SC), SC inspection at the GSO, solving other problems that require contact or non-contact (information) interaction with the SC located in GSO, as well as in some cases in other orbits.


A bit of history


But at the same time, interestingly, Efremov and his comrades do not refer to peaceful experience, but to the work of "maneuvering satellites", as they were modestly called in those years, that is, interceptor satellites. There were many of them: Polet, IS, IS-M, IS-MU. In principle, of course, the task of rapprochement is the task of rapprochement, for whatever purpose it may be carried out, but, of course, this is not the only issue. First of all, what is being developed at NPOM is a combat anti-satellite system for geostationary, geosynchronous orbits, orbits of satellites of global navigation systems (20 thousand km). At one time, the USSR bypassed all the circles by two in the anti-satellite race, an anti-satellite system based on interceptor satellites was created and improved and stood on alert, which reached the modification of the IS-MU, and the IS-MD was prepared specifically for the geostationary ... then the Union collapsed ... In low orbits, spacecraft interceptors have lost their relevance, and the new anti-space defense systems being tested by Russia are usually built on different principles.

The fact is that there are a lot of satellites in orbit and there are more and more satellites, and the interception system based on space rockets and the killer satellites they launch, not even disposable exploding like ISs, but equipped with some kind of reusable weapon, simply cannot organize a large-scale attack quickly and with the desired scope. We need other systems with greater efficiency and scale of application. These are either anti-missiles with an additional anti-satellite function (from the A-235 missile defense system, the Nudol long-range intercept missile, 77N6 from the S-500), or complexes for blinding and disabling equipment on the spacecraft of the enemy reconnaissance group (Peresvet, which is already covering many missile divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces with PGRK, and air-based Sokol-Echelon-2). There is also an airborne anti-satellite missile called the Burevestnik (not to be confused with the well-known nuclear-powered missile launcher, presumably having the 9M730 index), which "shone" under the MiG-31BM.

In the West, researchers write that the "inspector satellites" known to many, now actively tested by Russia, are in fact reusable interceptors, and they should be withdrawn normally by the "Petrel", at least some of the "inspectors" being tested. Well, perhaps it is. Perhaps the Petrel is using a disposable interceptor, say kinetic or explosive.

But in any case, such systems are capable, if desired, of organizing an attack on dozens and perhaps hundreds of satellites in low orbits at once. But there is also a geostationary. There are fewer satellites, but they are in the outset of a large-scale war (and no one will attack the enemy under any other spacecraft, the attack on the orbital grouping itself is already a "casus belli") are no less important. Efremov and his colleagues obviously offer their own solution.

Work principles


Let's turn to the patent. It says that there are different ways of bringing two automatic spacecraft closer together in order to de-orbit one of them and devices for this purpose. The first method was used for spacecraft of the IS series, it consists in placing the IS spacecraft into an orbit close in its parameters (inclination, longitude of the ascending angle, perigee argument, altitude, eccentricity) to the target spacecraft orbit in the period immediately preceding its use. ... In flight, the IS, making maneuvers on commands from ground control points, moves to an area close to the location of the target, detects it using an airborne radar seeker, and autonomously carries out final guidance. The disadvantages of this method are the high costs of the characteristic speed for maneuvering to reach the target area (up to 1/3 of the onboard fuel supply) and, in this regard, the impossibility of repeated maneuvers to another target. In addition, the satellite will simply self-destruct, but now we are not talking about the method of defeat.

But there are also less energy-intensive devices and methods for de-orbiting several spacecraft by interacting with them, including on a collision course. For example, by shooting (launching) unguided rockets from a space-based carrier (as planned in the Brilliant Pebbles missile defense system, and the remaining stillborn). The disadvantages of the system are that the missiles have no GOS and control on the trajectory, which leads to their increased consumption, the need to find the carrier in close proximity to the target, the impossibility of changing target designation after launching the shells. For ground-based or sea-based anti-satellite missiles and anti-satellite missiles, a method is possible in which the carrier rocket accelerates a maneuvering combat stage with a seeker and engines, which is aimed at the target, hitting it either kinetically or by exploding the warhead. The rocket brings the combat stage, maneuvering the spacecraft, to the calculated point of capture by the homing head of the target satellite, including on collision courses, after which the maneuvering spacecraft maneuvers to approach and de-orbit the target (disable the target).

The disadvantage of this method is the critical dependence of the result of the maneuvering spacecraft on the accuracy of the missile reaching the target location area, the impossibility of changing target designation after the launch of the carrier rocket from the Earth, the impossibility of using such an apparatus for several targets.

The aim of the present invention is to create a spacecraft device for cleaning the geostationary orbit from anthropogenic objects due to the kinetic energy of collision and the cleaning method, characterized by the possibility of flexible changes in the flight program (selection of a new target), information from orbit of several spacecraft, reduced costs of the characteristic speed for maneuvers.

This goal is achieved by the fact that the spacecraft (SC) for cleaning the GSO from anthropogenic objects, containing a propulsion system with fuel reserves, a power plant and a control system with a complex of means for observing and determining the parameters of the motion of a spacecraft being de-orbited (SCA), is designed as its board houses at least one autonomous maneuvering module with a propulsion system, a control system, a homing head, a payload, with the ability to separate the module at a given time.

I will translate it from patent language into human language: the interceptor satellite is equipped with space-to-space homing missiles or is itself a block of such missiles. By the way, at one time in the USSR they tested not only a 23-mm cannon of a special modification for destroying enemy spacecraft, but also developed a similar "space-to-space" rocket based on the smallest in the world (in those days, and now, too, if you do not take SAM MANPADS used in this capacity) UR "air-to-air" type R-60 / 60M. But the topic was then abandoned for some reason.

The scheme of operation of a satellite interceptor on the GSO will look like this. We launch the interceptor spacecraft into a standby orbit close to the GSO, say, under the guise of a peaceful spacecraft. The orbit should be opposite to the attacked grouping of the enemy spacecraft. Why are we launching an attacking "multi-module stage" (the MCA in the patent is a multi-module spacecraft). From the control point we transfer data on the coordinates of targets, movement elements and the time of the predicted physical contact to the spacecraft. When a small spacecraft passes through a standby orbit for more than one orbit, using the spacecraft equipment, they autonomously find the assigned targets and refine the parameters of their orbit, calculate the parameters of the maneuver for physical contact with the target or targets, separate one (several) "autonomous maneuvering modules" (rockets) to perform the maneuver , physical contact (attack, hitting the target) with the target spacecraft and "removing it from orbit" (elimination). The attack can be carried out both sequentially against several targets, and, in the case of the proximity of the physical location of targets and elements of their movement, simultaneously.

The movement in the orbit of the interceptor vehicle (MCA) on duty until the time of the maneuver (attack signal) received by the commands from the Earth is carried out in the mode of reduced power consumption or temporary deactivation of at least one technical system (the so-called MCA sleep mode) ... In principle, the device can generally pass itself off as broken.

Moving along the turns of the duty orbit, the small spacecraft autonomously determines and maintains a given inclination and altitude relative to the geostationary orbit (orbits of the target or targets). While the small spacecraft is in the standby orbit, the ground control stations determine the coordinates of the spacecraft intended for "information" and transmit them to the spacecraft; the parameters of the time (time interval) of the target "information" maneuver with the GSO are also transmitted. Upon receiving the aforementioned information from the Earth, the spacecraft automatically calculates the time to recover from the "sleep mode", selects the module that will attack the target. After exiting the "sleep mode" with the use of onboard surveillance equipment, the spacecraft autonomously identifies the target in the GSO, specifies the parameters of its movement, calculates the time, direction and magnitude of the thrust impulse for maneuvering the corresponding module on the GSO and physical contact with the target.

In the event of receiving information from the ground control points about the change in the choice of the spacecraft being brought down from the GSO, the MCA recalculates the maneuver parameters of the autonomous maneuvering module. After separation from the multi-module spacecraft, if necessary, repeated rendezvous for the purpose of rendezvous or rendezvous with another target (set by commands from the base unit of the small spacecraft), the autonomous maneuvering module (rocket) independently calculates and maneuvers temporarily out of the geostationary orbit and maneuvers back to the area where the spacecraft is located.

After separation and departure of all modules for rendezvous with the spacecraft to be brought down, the small spacecraft (base unit) can remain in the standby orbit, make rendezvous and contact with the selected target on the GSO; to perform a maneuver to transfer to a burial orbit or a maneuver from Earth orbit.

Of course, the implementation of this technology will make it possible to reach the enemy's spacecraft in high orbits, which until now was a practically unrealizable task, but in itself was in demand, since we are engaged in large-scale anti-satellite systems of both destructive and non-destructive action. So let’s wait for "signals" to say that something like this is already being tested.
Author:
Photos used:
From the patent
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Rostislav
    Rostislav 9 October 2020 10: 30 New
    0
    Everything is correct. "If you want peace, prepare for war"
  2. Pavel57
    Pavel57 9 October 2020 10: 32 New
    +1
    Can such patents be open?
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 9 October 2020 10: 47 New
      -3
      And what is there unknown to the United States?
    2. Mityay65
      Mityay65 9 October 2020 22: 25 New
      0
      Solutions are patented which, by definition, are not "secret". If you want to hide something, then forget about the patent.
      The proposed rendezvous scheme has been known since the 60s, it is described in textbooks. The "novelty" is the presence of a certain "autonomous rapprochement module" with the GOS and DU.
      This is really the solution to beat the satellites in the GSO. Probably, the guys decided to patent in 14, because show up on the opening topic. And patent as widely as possible. And since they all seem to be from the same company as Efremov, and it was she who previously developed interceptor satellites, they were evidently aware of what was happening and how.
  3. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 9 October 2020 10: 40 New
    +2
    and. The resource margin must be greater than the target to be neutralized. Otherwise, the targets will simply dance until the inspector's supply is depleted and he will have a scanty chance of a successful convergence.
    b. The enemy is also not stupid, he will track the orbits from which the approach is likely, and pretend to be passing by will not work
    at. Too large (and it is necessary just a large) number of sleeping or "faulty" spacecraft - unmasks the plan
    d. unsuccessful encounters and self-destructing spacecraft will create a belt of space debris, which in itself will be dangerous
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 9 October 2020 15: 57 New
      0
      Quote: g1washntwn
      and. The resource margin must be greater than the target to be neutralized. Otherwise, the targets will simply dance until the inspector's supply is depleted and he will have a scanty chance of a successful convergence.
      What for? MCA can be launched at critical times.

      Quote: g1washntwn
      b. The enemy is also not stupid, he will track the orbits from which the approach is likely, and pretend to be passing by will not work
      With different orbital heights, satellites are constantly flying past.

      Quote: g1washntwn
      at. Too large (and it is necessary just a large) number of sleeping or "faulty" spacecraft - unmasks the plan
      There are already hundreds of them. And our equipment is not very reliable due to import substitution wink

      Quote: g1washntwn
      d. unsuccessful encounters and self-destructing spacecraft will create a belt of space debris, which in itself will be dangerous
      The decelerated fragments will fall into the lower orbits, the accelerated ones - to the higher ones. But the main thing is to bring down the necessary enemy satellite. Destruction is not a peaceful way, yes.
    2. Captain45
      Captain45 10 October 2020 16: 46 New
      0
      Quote: g1washntwn
      d. unsuccessful encounters and self-destructing spacecraft will create a belt of space debris, which in itself will be dangerous

      If it comes to destroying satellites in geostationary orbit, then you don't have to worry about the resulting space debris. those who will remain on earth are unlikely to be interested in space in the next 150-200 years, if anyone will be interested at all. As Einstein said there: "In the fourth world they will fight with stones and sticks." It seems so?
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 9 October 2020 10: 47 New
    0
    Interesting, of course, it looks like it is NECESSARY! But the prospect of Star Wars is so not inspiring!
    I want to live in peace and tranquility, BUT ......
  5. Pavel57
    Pavel57 9 October 2020 10: 59 New
    0
    Quote: BlackMokona
    And what is there unknown to the United States?

    The topic is closed and the patent must be closed.
    1. wolf7
      wolf7 9 October 2020 12: 46 New
      +1
      Read carefully: to clean the geological survey of space debris. Nothing closed. And the reverse side of the patent is the reverse, it can be used for any military purpose.
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 9 October 2020 12: 56 New
      -4
      What is the use if the United States has already begun the physical implementation of a program to reduce this closed topic to zero?
      1. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 11 October 2020 12: 00 New
        0
        What is the use if the United States has already begun the physical implementation of a program to reduce this closed topic to zero?

        I'll tell you more ...
        "! preparing the ground!"
        as soon as in 2021 we put into service the first regiments of the S-500 air defense system
        on 1 stage Russia will close low orbit to an altitude of 110 km for flights over our territory.
        on 2 At this stage, Russia will close the passage of any objects in transfer and low orbits at altitudes up to 450 km. again when projected over the territory of the Russian Federation.
        Monopoly for launching spacecraft only on medium and heavy class LVs in 1 and 1,5 revolutions
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 11 October 2020 12: 50 New
          -3
          In the same way as the S-400 covered the skies of Syria? wassat
          1. Romario_Argo
            Romario_Argo 11 October 2020 13: 00 New
            0
            for you it is imperative to bring down someone that will be in your understanding close (?)
            in reality, everything is more complicated. there is a concept close:
            1.passive location - indicate presence
            2.fighting regime during the threatened period
            3.fighting mode to defeat in direct combat
            in Syria, the militants have no aviation, so the S-400 is used only for item 1
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 11 October 2020 15: 59 New
              -4
              They fly over Syria, they bomb whatever they want. Means not closed. It's simple
  6. RealPilot
    RealPilot 9 October 2020 11: 04 New
    0
    I am delighted with Herbert Alexandrovich Efremov! This is a genius ... He did so much for the Motherland good

    How nice it is to understand that all sorts of unworthy namesakes with their bad lawyers are just a rejection ...
  7. Vladimir Vladimirovich S
    Vladimir Vladimirovich S 9 October 2020 11: 06 New
    -1
    Right now, the screeching of the "Partners" will be: Russians - Aggressors! ...
    1. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 9 October 2020 12: 28 New
      -1
      They have any sidelong glance there - already harassment. That is why men live with men.
      They do not need any reasons, they will squeal simply by inertia.
  8. Pavel57
    Pavel57 9 October 2020 11: 36 New
    -1
    The first thing that the Americans took out of Germany was patent information, including rejection decisions.
    All ideas are very valuable for further work.
    1. Mityay65
      Mityay65 9 October 2020 23: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Pavel57
      The first thing that Americans took out of Germany was patent information

      According to the decision of the Potsdam Conference, all intellectual property in Germany, with the exception of Reich citizens living outside the Reich, became the property of the victorious countries and became publicly available.
  9. pyc.arpeccop tornado 150
    pyc.arpeccop tornado 150 9 October 2020 11: 39 New
    0
    The scheme of operation of a satellite interceptor on the GSO will look like this. We launch the interceptor spacecraft into a standby orbit close to the GSO, say, under the guise of a peaceful spacecraft. The orbit should be opposite to the attacked grouping of the enemy spacecraft. Why are we launching an attacking "multi-module stage" (the MCA in the patent is a multi-module spacecraft). From the control point we transfer data on the coordinates of targets, movement elements and the time of the predicted physical contact to the spacecraft. When a small spacecraft passes through a standby orbit for more than one orbit, using the spacecraft equipment, they autonomously find the assigned targets and refine the parameters of their orbit, calculate the parameters of the maneuver for physical contact with the target or targets, separate one (several) "autonomous maneuvering modules" (rockets) to perform the maneuver , physical contact (attack, hitting the target) with the target spacecraft and "removing it from orbit" (elimination). The attack can be carried out both sequentially against several targets, and, in the case of the proximity of the physical location of targets and elements of their movement, simultaneously.

    In short. He started, flew up to the target, took aim, fired. The process itself has already been worked out a thousand times. I attached a shooter to the satellite and all the business. Why litter-litter? If there was actually something serious, secret, nobody would have made the scheme in the VPTB publicly available.
  10. yfast
    yfast 9 October 2020 11: 54 New
    0
    And where will the thousands of debris fly?
  11. agond
    agond 9 October 2020 12: 03 New
    0
    Alternatively, it is possible to get into a geostationary orbit by flying at the beginning to the Moon and make a revolution around it (perhaps not one) and then go back to the Earth, but in order to enter the "opposite lane" of the geostationary orbit, in terms of energy consumption it will be approximately the same as traditional in a way to bring the device to the geostationary station in the "passing" direction, but in the traditional way you cannot get into the "oncoming" lane, and then, being on the opposite side, choose what to remove.
    1. Mityay65
      Mityay65 9 October 2020 22: 42 New
      0
      Quote: agond
      in terms of energy consumption, this will be approximately the same as the traditional way to bring the device to the geostationary station in the "passing" direction

      No. It will be much more energy consuming, longer and more noticeable.
  12. ccsr
    ccsr 9 October 2020 12: 05 New
    +2
    Author:
    Ya. Vyatkin
    By the way, at one time in the USSR they tested not only a 23-mm cannon of a special modification for destroying enemy spacecraft, but also developed a similar "space-to-space" rocket based on the smallest in the world (in those days, and now, too, if you do not take SAM MANPADS used in this capacity) UR "air-to-air" type R-60 / 60M. But the topic later abandoned for some reason.

    These developments were for the Almaz combat stations, and therefore, as soon as this program was closed, the need for such missiles disappeared. Now they have returned to those projects, but most likely not because there will be a real war in space in geostationary orbits, but there is a need to destroy satellites over which control has been lost, and it does not matter who they belong to. Especially when you consider that some "penny" satellite twenty years ago threatens the latest telecommunications satellite worth hundreds of millions of dollars or a satellite from the early warning systems of missile attack. There is one more aspect - now about forty satellites in geostationary orbit have not been identified at all by us according to their tasks, which means that we can expect a dirty trick in a threatened period, and it is not bad to have something that can protect our geostationary constellation from various American "surprises".
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 12: 35 New
      +2
      Quote: ccsr
      there is a need to destroy satellites over which control has been lost, and it does not matter who they belong to. Especially when you consider that some "penny" satellite twenty years ago threatens the latest telecommunications satellite worth hundreds of millions of dollars or a satellite from the early warning systems of missile attacks.

      What's the point if instead of one satellite there is a bunch of debris?
      Quote: ccsr
      There is one more aspect - now about forty satellites in geostationary orbit are not identified by us at all according to their tasks, which means that we can expect a dirty trick in a threatened period, and it is not bad to have something that can protect our geostationary constellation from various "surprises"

      This is perhaps closer to reality.
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 9 October 2020 12: 47 New
        0
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        What's the point if instead of one satellite there is a bunch of debris?

        The main thing is that our satellite is not damaged, and let those who wanted to harm us think about the wreckage.
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        This is perhaps closer to reality.

        As well as the fact that we ourselves can use a surprise attack against the American geostationary grouping, if we understand that the war will irreversibly begin in the next hours or minutes.
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 12: 55 New
          +2
          Quote: ccsr
          The main thing is that our satellite is not damaged, and let those who wanted to harm us think about the wreckage.

          These debris will threaten everyone. And ours and not ours. Not only was the Earth turned into a trash heap, but also the ocean and the entire space were littered. Disgusting like that.
          1. ccsr
            ccsr 9 October 2020 13: 01 New
            +3
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            These debris will threaten everyone. And ours and not ours. Not only was the Earth turned into a trash heap, but also the ocean and the entire space were littered. Disgusting like that.

            For this not to me - I am not from the society of Mother Teresa, I am more concerned about the security of my country, and for this I am ready to accept some inconveniences in my personal life in the form of space debris.
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 13: 09 New
              +2
              Quote: ccsr
              I am more concerned about the security of my country, and for this I am ready to accept some inconveniences in my personal life in the form of space debris.

              The gouging of inactive own satellites has nothing to do with our security. It's like playing "whoever God sends." With the same success, we can inflict damage on our satellite constellation. Personally, it reminds me of the actions of a monkey with a grenade.
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 9 October 2020 13: 21 New
                +1
                Quote: Mordvin 3
                With the same success, we can inflict damage on our satellite constellation. Personally, it reminds me of the actions of a monkey with a grenade.

                I will not dissuade you, but believe in our videoconferencing is not going ... s serve, and the "mozhayka", although not the one that was in the days of the USSR, still produces competent specialists. And for some reason I believe in their professionalism ...
                1. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 13: 37 New
                  +1
                  Quote: ccsr
                  And for some reason I believe in their professionalism ...

                  I also believe, and I hope that they will not allow such stupidity. Because other countries will not silently watch, looking at how Russia poses a threat to all operating satellites. And it will be like that proverb about a good foreman and a brigade who got together and knocked on his hat.
                  1. ccsr
                    ccsr 9 October 2020 18: 31 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Mordvin 3
                    Because the rest of the countries will not silently watch,

                    What can they do specifically against a nuclear power, if the DPRK has seen them all with their projects in a coffin?
                    Quote: Mordvin 3
                    And it will be like that proverb about a good foreman and a brigade who got together and knocked on his hat.

                    They won't snitch if the brigadier has a grenade in his hand without a check.
                    Quote: Mordvin 3
                    I believe too,

                    "Let the believer find" - I fully support you in this ...
                    1. Mordvin 3
                      Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 19: 04 New
                      0
                      Quote: ccsr
                      What can they do specifically against a nuclear power, if the DPRK has seen them all with their projects in a coffin?

                      And the economy? These sanctions are still flowers compared to what they can do if a natural curtain is installed. 140 million citizens of the Russian Federation are nothing compared to the rest of the inhabitants of the globe.
                      1. ccsr
                        ccsr 9 October 2020 19: 34 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        And the economy? These sanctions are still flowers compared to what they can do if a natural curtain is installed.

                        Under Stalin, it existed - until now, the growth rates of the USSR economy amaze everyone who understands something about this.
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        140 million citizens of the Russian Federation are nothing compared to the rest of the inhabitants of the globe.

                        That is why the whole world should know that we have a "grenade without a check" in our hands. Let them always remember this when they are preparing some dirty trick for us.
                      2. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 19: 48 New
                        0
                        Quote: ccsr
                        Under Stalin, it existed - until now, the growth rates of the USSR economy amaze everyone who understands something about this.

                        There was no absolute curtain. And after the war - the CMEA bloc.
                        Quote: ccsr
                        Let them always remember this when they are preparing some dirty trick for us.

                        Well, we shouldn't forget about the donkey with gold, which the USSR destroyed, despite all its grenades.
                    2. Aviator_
                      Aviator_ 9 October 2020 20: 44 New
                      -1
                      140 million citizens of the Russian Federation are nothing compared to the rest of the inhabitants of the globe.

                      And how united are they, these "other inhabitants of the globe"?
                    3. Mordvin 3
                      Mordvin 3 9 October 2020 21: 04 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      And how united are they, these "other inhabitants of the globe"?

                      Unity is quite possible if someone will commit irreparable stupidity.
  • Undecim
    Undecim 9 October 2020 13: 51 New
    +4
    Again, the storyteller Vyatkin, especially for the "Military Review", has made another fable.
    To begin with, any development of a military orientation for outer space will never be in the public domain, since this is a direct violation of all international agreements on the peaceful uses of outer space. No country will be so stupid to substitute and show its cards to potential opponents.
    Further, the problem of space debris is not today's problem. Currently, the need for measures to reduce the intensity of man-made space debris has become particularly acute due to the possible "cascade effect" in the medium term, which may arise from mutual collisions of objects and space debris particles. This effect leads to a catastrophic increase in the number of orbital debris objects and, as a consequence, to the practical impossibility of further space exploration.
    Therefore, the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC), created back in 1993 by the space agencies of a number of states, developed recommendations included
    currently in all national and international standards, on the organization of two protected areas of outer space: low-earth orbits with an altitude of up to 2000 km above the Earth's surface and geostationary orbit. All spacecraft operating in these areas should, upon completion of their active operation, be transferred to disposal orbits, excluding collisions of decommissioned spacecraft with active spacecraft.
    Despite all measures taken by the manufacturers and operators of spacecraft, sometimes emergencies occur and the spacecraft becomes uncontrollable, while remaining in the GSO.
    In this case, it begins to drift in the protected area and pose a danger to active spacecraft in the GSO. At the same time, the number of space debris objects that pose a potential hazard is comparable to the total number of spacecraft: at the beginning of 2018, there were 17 inactive Russian-made spacecraft in the protected area of ​​the GSO, while the number of functioning Russian spacecraft on the GSO was 21.
    To ensure the safe operation of the spacecraft in near-earth orbits and in the GSO in the first
    turn, it is necessary to carry out the forced withdrawal of inactive spacecraft from the protected area
    GSO by means of special service devices. The complexity of creating a service spacecraft is
    the fact that in order to implement the program for the removal of the CM into the disposal orbit, the service spacecraft must
    be docked with the CM object, and this docking, due to the high GSO height and associated
    with this delay in the transit time of the radio signal, it should be automatic.
    At present, work on the creation of automatic spacecraft for cleaning near-earth orbits from CM is widely conducted by different countries and in many cases is at the stage of developing prototypes for flight tests.

    It would be surprising if Russia, which is actively present in near-Earth space, did not carry out similar developments and a multi-module spacecraft (MCS) for cleaning the geostationary orbit from anthropogenic objects - just such a development.
    The rest is idle fiction "specially for Military Review."
    For those interested - the patent itself - https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_37829986_82248513.pdf
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 9 October 2020 14: 14 New
      +2
      Vyatkin, why are you minus? Can you confirm your tales for hamsters?
    2. Mityay65
      Mityay65 9 October 2020 23: 27 New
      0
      Quote: Undecim
      Currently, the need for measures to reduce the intensity of man-made space debris has become particularly acute due to the possible "cascade effect" in the medium term, which may arise from mutual collisions of objects and space debris particles.

      There is no such problem. And even more so on the GSO. The problem is there as a topic for "disbursement". We now have such a number will not work, and in the states there it is the height of the season for cutting the "space badle" ... St. Elon opened the way into space and called for fellow
      There is still a hypothetical task of supplying satellites in GSO with technological gases. She can get up sooner or later, but most likely not earlier than in 20 - 30 years. It is too early to think about it realistically.
      Quote: Undecim
      The rest is idle fiction "specially for Military Review."

      For many years Herbert Efremov headed the company that developed and put into service (the only one in the world !!) a satellite interception system.
      The proposed solution with a carrier satellite pre-launched into orbit, which is disguised as debris in orbit with nothing from the GSO, assumes just military applications. And a small spacecraft with a seeker and remote control, probably high-energy? These are short-range interceptor satellites with the ability to counteract the evasion maneuver of the target satellite.
      Such a scheme was chosen, probably for two reasons: to reduce the mass of the ISS's seeker and to be able to operate completely autonomously for predetermined targets, when communication with the control center on Earth is impossible.
      The words about garbage disposal are for the public. In this question, VO is right.
      The article is probably in light of the ongoing discussions on the extension of START III and the replacement of the DRMD. A clear allusion to the threat of the US early warning system, which basically keeps the early warning system satellites on the GSO. In principle, a fairly cheap asymmetric response to counter missile defense and missile defense systems. Moreover, the individual components of this system are suddenly reviving and changing orbit "space debris", after N years of hibernation, and "small maneuvering satellites", which in turn release "objects-inspectors" capable of chasing the foe's satellites in orbits and spending their working fluid has already been tested separately.
      Those. this is a demonstration of the possibilities of parrying the efforts of an adversary.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 9 October 2020 23: 34 New
        0
        There is no such problem.
        You decided so from the couch?
        1. Mityay65
          Mityay65 10 October 2020 11: 26 New
          -1
          Quote: Undecim
          You decided so from the couch?

          Well, you are the famous couch warrior of this site, and you have an opinion on any problem, you know better! tongue
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 10 October 2020 11: 28 New
            0
            Is that all you can tell to substantiate your point of view? Liquid foundation.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 10 October 2020 01: 04 New
    -1
    Quote: Mityai65
    According to the decision of the Potsdam Conference, all intellectual property in Germany, with the exception of Reich citizens living outside the Reich, became the property of the victorious countries and became publicly available.

    Are you sure this was observed, and on both sides?
    1. Mityay65
      Mityay65 10 October 2020 11: 23 New
      0
      Quote: Pavel57
      Are you sure this was observed, and on both sides?

      Do you have any reason to doubt?
      Patents are very difficult to keep secret. A patent is a legal form publicly securing the privilege to the invention. The meaning of the patent in publicly a statement of their privilege. They are published in special reference books, specialized periodicals, stored in special patent libraries and are dealt with by specially trained lawyers - patent attorneys.
      People in the embassies, like the atache in science, are also working on patents very carefully. Everything new is quickly registered, translated and published in specialized publications. It is impossible to hide.
      Therefore, I believe that all patents for inventions were transferred into the common property of the winning countries without lacunae.
      Another thing is secret developments that no one patented, and the "egg-headed bearers of secrets" themselves. They went to the winners on the principle of who snatched something. And they are much more valuable.
      1. Pavel57
        Pavel57 11 October 2020 12: 16 New
        -1
        What are the reference books during the war? And even more so for rejected decisions.