Military Review

The Makeyev SRC developed the concept of a new super-heavy launch vehicle

179
The Makeyev SRC developed the concept of a new super-heavy launch vehicle

Russia has developed the concept of a new super-heavy launch vehicle for flights to the Moon and Mars. The new rocket was named "Leader", the press service of the State Missile Center named after Academician V.P. Makeev (GRC) said.


A concept has been developed for the creation of a number of super-heavy launch vehicles based on the Leader rocket - for circling the Moon, for implementing the lunar program and for missions to Mars

- TASS cites an excerpt from the GRTs documents.

In the basic version, the super-heavy rocket "Leader" will have two side blocks of the first stage with oxygen-kerosene engines RD-171M and a central block of the second stage with hydrogen engines RD-0120. The missile's warhead will include a booster block, an interorbital tug and a manned spacecraft "Eagle".

According to the developers, with a dead weight of 1143 tons, the new rocket will be able to launch 53 tons of load into a low reference orbit. The height of the carrier, together with the installed Orel spacecraft, will be 91 meters.

To support the lunar base, it is proposed to use a double rocket "Leader", i.e. it will consist of four side and two central blocks on the first and second stages, connected by power belts. With a total mass of 2284 tons, such a rocket will be able to lift 106 tons of load into space. It is specified that the "double" "Leader" will not be used in manned flights.

Accordingly, the Martian version of the rocket implies a bunch of three Leader rockets. Such a bundle will be able to launch up to 160 tons into space. It is also not planned to be used for manned flights.

It should be noted that the VP Makeyev State Missile Center JSC is the main developer of strategic missile systems. The complexes "Station-2", "Sineva", "Liner" and "Sarmat" were created in the GRC.
179 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Hypertension
    Hypertension 31 October 2020 11: 12
    41
    I love the enormous size of our plans, the sweep of the steps of the sazhen.
    I rejoice in the march with which we go to work and to battles. (C)
    1. slipped
      slipped 31 October 2020 13: 33
      +8
      Quote: Hyperion
      I love the enormous size of our plans, the sweep of the steps of the sazhen.
      I rejoice in the march with which we go to work and to battles. (C)


      It's just a concept previously submitted to the super heavyweight competition. We chose another option from RSC Energia.
      1. bayard
        bayard 31 October 2020 22: 10
        +4
        Quote: slipped
        We chose another option from RSC Energia.

        And praise to Ahura-Mazda for not choosing this!
        It's even creepy to imagine this bundle ... as a doublet ... as a triplet ... brrrr.
        There is a concept proven by the practice of the Energia launch vehicle, where these engines RD-170 (now RD-171M) were used at the first stage (s) and RD-0120 at the second. This is much more harmonious and promising.
        But where are they going to get money that is "not there"?
        If you fly to the moon, then not for the sake of prestige and false pathos, but for a long-term mission, a serious program, with a clear goal and clear objectives.
        What are they going to do there?
        To extract helium-3? lol
        Make up a normal program, present it for discussion to the people, who will implement / pay for these Wishlist.
        Or are they all right on Earth?
        ... However, they have ... apparently - yes ...
        1. slipped
          slipped 31 October 2020 22: 17
          +1
          Quote: bayard
          This is much more harmonious and promising.


          STK "Yenisei" of the first stage has six rocket modules with RD-171MV engines, a central rocket unit with an RD-180MV engine, and a booster and braking unit based on DM-03. At the second stage of modernization, a hydrogen stage with RD-0150 engines will also be added.
          1. bayard
            bayard 1 November 2020 01: 51
            +2
            It's a strange concept, considering that the RD-180 is a two-chamber engine - half the size of the RD-170 ... Here you have to look at the whole scheme with weights, count, but if you have already decided to return to hydrogen engines, then it would be better "Energy" - 100 tons. into low orbit with four blocks of the first stage and up to 200 tons - with eight booms of the first stage and an enlarged second ...
            This is if they are definitely going to the moon.
            Or dance from the "Union-5", aka "Phoenix", aka the updated "Cyclone". Hanging additional blocks along the sides, like Musk's, is not an example? You can even remember that they (the first steps "were also reusable to be made and planted by parachute ... a very dubious occupation. But of course it's a pity to exhaust the engines at one time - they can withstand up to 30 times of repeated use.)
            1. Maikcg
              Maikcg 1 November 2020 04: 45
              -2
              I saw folk art on the Internet, at the blocks of the first stage, the wings unfold and on them they plan to the nearest airfield, an empty stage of tea is not a hundred-ton brick such as Buran or Shuttle, which did not prevent them from landing.
              1. bayard
                bayard 1 November 2020 05: 33
                +4
                This is not folk art, but the creativity of the Ilyushin people, headed by Rogozin Jr. - they were trying to disrupt the budget for such an opportunity.
                Delirium is - wing, mechanization and turning unit, landing gear, increased lateral stiffness for the ability to land on the aircraft, the tail unit will gobble up most of the payload. And what engines should he sit on? Rocket launchers can't fit turbojets? belay
                Or planning without engines?
                Bullshit .
                Severe and schizophrenic.
                The integrity of the structure cannot be preserved on parachutes.
                But the engines are a pity - they were tested for 30 repeated cycles.
                Like Musk, you can't land it either - he takes off on nine engines, landing on one - the central one. We will not succeed - the engine is four-chamber.
                Means only one-time use. A reusable rocket must be designed together with the engines from the very beginning, because it is necessary to land on a much lower thrust with throttling, and the landing engine must be on the axis of the rocket body.
                Musk did just that.
                And reusable rockets are justified only (!) If a very high rate of launches is planned. Only then will this undertaking be justified technically and, most importantly, financially. The United States has a large program of launching a huge number of commercial satellites, for them this program is justified. And for the sake of naked prestige, you should not start with such a thing.
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 1 November 2020 11: 47
                  0
                  Quote: bayard
                  This is not folk art, but the creativity of the Ilyushin people, headed by Rogozin Jr. - they were trying to disrupt the budget for such an opportunity.

                  "..... by the end of 1989, upon the recommendation of the Ministry of General Machine Building and other ministries, establish a procedure for further work on promising reusable space systems, including aerospace and aerospace aircraft, reusable cruise missile units of the Energaya system - "Buran". ....
                  The project of the reusable system GK-175 was developed by the teams of designers V.N.Lakeev, V.P. Klippa, A.N.Babintsev, Yu.A. Mikheev, I.I. Ivanov and A.G. Reshetin .... "
                  http://www.buran.ru/htm/41-3.htm

                  1. bayard
                    bayard 1 November 2020 16: 19
                    0
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    .. by the end of 1989 according to the

                    Yes, I remember, such a theme sounded, but ... what a horror in the picture !!! Just look at all these folding wings (the Ilyushinites offered at least one-piece rotary), the landing gear, the stiffening beam for almost the entire length of the step, the tail unit and ... is this a turbojet engine in his nose ???
                    And how much will this "beauty" of the payload output?
                    And how much will all this pleasure cost?
                    The Americans splashed down the steps of their "Shuttle" into the ocean and reused it ... So they have the ocean at their side. And the first steps are solid fuel.
                    The only working scheme is the one used by Musk, but at his stage there are 9 (!) Engines. Landing on one - central. In this case, no wings, no chassis, no extra rigidity, no additional turbojet engine are needed.
                    It would be possible to try to save only the engines by shooting them and landing them by parachute - on retractable pin supports with a soft landing. After all, the most valuable thing in a stage is the engines.
                    1. Bad_gr
                      Bad_gr 1 November 2020 18: 35
                      0
                      Another option with wings "Baikal" (http://www.buran.ru/htm/strbaik.htm)


                      1. bayard
                        bayard 1 November 2020 19: 13
                        +1
                        I hope this will never be realized.
                        For the same reason as described above.
                        No need to monkey. I really want a reusable system, remember "Mriya" and the rocket stage on his back with a payload. Normal take-off from the airfield and landing on it. only the accelerating stage is lost. The weight of a stage with a payload at Mriya is 200 - 250 tons - quite a load like that of an average payload rocket.
                        Or do like Musk.
                        From scratch.
                        By selecting suitable motors with throttling capability.
                        And only if there is a deliberate need for a LARGE number of launches of certain weights and dimensions.
                        And I saw similar pictures back in the late 90s / early XNUMXs.
                      2. slipped
                        slipped 1 November 2020 21: 41
                        +1
                        Quote: bayard
                        I hope this will never be realized.
                        For the same reason as described above.


                        They are already doing it and you are wrong about the reasons. The theme is called "Wing-SV". An ultralight methane carrier will be made, returning to the airfield on its wing.
                      3. bayard
                        bayard 1 November 2020 22: 47
                        -1
                        Quote: slipped
                        They are already doing it and you are wrong about the reasons. The theme is called "Wing-SV"

                        I heard, but still hoped it was a bluff or simple PR. I hope it remains a bluff.
                        And what is the need for a methane carrier, if the country is full of kerosene? It has long been proven that the specific unit of the fuel-oxygen mixture on methane is slightly higher in calorific value than kerosene, but there are more difficulties with liquid methane - cryogenic, lighter than kerosene, which means it will take up a larger volume yes ... difficulties with storage and refueling (it is impossible to simply release oxygen in the tanks evaporated at the starting position into the atmosphere) and a number of other inconveniences.
                        What for ? If kerosene engines are reliable, efficient, safe and do not require additional investments of finance and labor?
                        Truly Rogozin is a unique manager of budget utilization. And with the maximum harm to the task entrusted.
                        I admire him .

                        We cannot organize the production of passenger and transport aircraft, but here we are swinging for a project similar in complexity to the Burana program.
                        Genius!
                        To divert the engineering and design personnel from the really necessary topics and burn their time and energy on a failed adventure ... fellow
                        Well, who can compare with this. good bully
                      4. slipped
                        slipped 1 November 2020 23: 27
                        0
                        Quote: bayard
                        Quote: slipped
                        They are already doing it and you are wrong about the reasons. The theme is called "Wing-SV"

                        I heard, but still hoped it was a bluff or simple PR. I hope it remains a bluff.


                        Do not expect. laughing

                        Quote: bayard
                        And what is the need for a methane carrier, if the country is full of kerosene?


                        It is an ultralight winged carrier for operational replenishment of groups of small spacecraft.
                        The methane engine, and in this medium it even has a proper name - "Whirlwind", is required just for the minimum post-flight maintenance.

                        Quote: bayard
                        difficulties with storage and refueling (it is impossible to simply release oxygen in the tanks evaporated at the starting position into the atmosphere) and a number of other inconveniences.


                        There are no difficulties with storage and refueling.

                        Quote: bayard
                        What for ? If kerosene engines are reliable, efficient, safe and do not require additional investments of finance and labor?


                        Only in reusable systems with them is much more difficult in post-flight service.

                        Quote: bayard
                        Truly Rogozin is a unique manager of budget utilization. And with the maximum harm to the task entrusted.


                        Blizzard carry dear. laughing

                        Quote: bayard
                        We cannot organize the production of passenger and transport aircraft, but here we are swinging for a project similar in complexity to the Burana program.


                        And it's not even close to the difficulty. Much easier and more efficient.

                        Quote: bayard
                        To divert the engineering and design personnel from the really necessary topics and burn their time and energy on a failed adventure ... fellow


                        What to distract from? Enough to drive already. lol There is a design bureau based on TsNIIMash. soon the first discharge from the plane, and in a couple of years they already have launches.
                      5. bayard
                        bayard 2 November 2020 00: 18
                        0
                        Quote: slipped
                        soon the first discharge from the plane, and in a couple of years they already have launches.

                        Well, I persuaded, I will wait a couple of years - before starting. Light / ultralight, it's still simpler, let's see what the merchants say there.
                        But about the difficulties / labor intensity in the post-flight / inter-flight preparation of kyrosin engines in comparison with methane engines - I agree, the argument is accepted.
        2. Maikcg
          Maikcg 2 November 2020 14: 53
          -2
          >> Or planning without engines?
          >> Delirium of the gray mare.
          Do you even know that Buran and the Shuttle landed without engines?
          1. bayard
            bayard 2 November 2020 19: 10
            0
            Quote: MaikCG
            Do you even know that Buran and the Shuttle landed without engines?

            Moreover, I took part in ensuring his (Buran's) landing, as well as the landings of many other spacecraft.
            Quote: MaikCG
            >> Or planning without engines?

            All engines used in modern rockets (for all types of Angara, Cyclone, Soyuz-5) are a legacy of the Energia program RD-180 (and its family), RD-190 (and its family) is a product division of the legendary RD-170 (4 cameras) - RD-180 has 2 cameras and half the power, RD-190 has 1 camera and a quarter of the power.
            All families of these engines are very good, with record chamber pressure and power density. But you won't be able to take off and land on such, only take off.
            An empty rocket stage without a payload weighs more than 10 times less than a fueled and loaded one, therefore, the thrust during landing is needed as much less. This cannot be done on the RD-170 family. Unless what to do like Musk, but a VERY large rocket with nine RD-190 \ 191 and developed thrust throttling at the center / axial. Their total starting thrust will be about 2000 t. From. Here is a rocket with such a propulsion system at the first stage can be made reusable with vertical landing on a prepared platform. And it will be a heavy-class rocket.
            It is possible in this remote control to replace the peripheral eight RD-190 \ 191 engines with four RD-180, to simplify the management of this bundle, to somewhat reduce the cost, use 4, not 8 fuel pumps and two fewer supply pipelines (fuel and oxidizer).
            Here is the concept of such a heavy rocket with a launch weight of about 1500 tons. It could be implemented as a reusable one. But it will be a very difficult work in technical terms, with a high coefficient of novelty, mainly due to the need for vertical landing of such a stage. But at least it was economically and ergonomically justified, in comparison with the concept of a vertical launch and an airplane landing - in terms of the ratio of dry weight and launch mass in a fueled form, and hence a much higher weight return to the reference orbit.

            And in order to
            Quote: MaikCG
            Buran and Shuttle landed precisely without engines

            it was necessary to build several landing strips ... of a special class (the main one at Baikonur and several more on the territory of the entire Union (mainly expanding and lengthening the existing military).
            So this is for such grandiose programs. And here for light / ultra-light, reusable. And if this fool misses and crashes with an average passenger airliner, with residual fuel in the tanks ... In addition, on both projects of the previous time, an air-jet engine was always provided for - take a closer look at the pictures above.
            And ESPECIALLY pay attention to the entire volume and dimensions of the suspended passive load:
            - a powerful load-bearing beam, a beam of almost the entire length, protruding like a hump;
            - large lengthening wings, folding or all-turning;
            - mounting and turning unit with all the necessary mechanization;
            - tail unit relatively large area;
            - chassis with fairings-nacelles and all necessary mechanization;
            - air-jet (turbojet) engine with all accompanying power set, mountings, air intake, hot gas exhaust duct with nozzle, internal thermal protection;
            - additional equipment on board the stage ...
            Now just figure it out - by eye, looking at the picture, HOW MUCH IT WILL WEIGHT. And this weight will have to be subtracted from the weight of the fuel and payload!
            In any good deed, BALANCE is needed.
            With the winged descent of the first steps, this balance is not observed.
            1. Maikcg
              Maikcg 3 November 2020 16: 06
              -2
              I repeat, a dry step sits, gliding on the wings. No jet engines are needed for it and no fuel is needed. At the same time, a dry step is five times lighter than a landing Buran, and its aerodynamic quality will clearly be more than one. A passenger Boeing from 10 km altitude plans without engines at a distance of 200 km, and this is a heavy elephant, and not a hang glider made of a race and sticks. The Union drops the first stage at an altitude of 45 km and at a distance of 45-50 km from the starting stage, there is enough room to turn around.

              Wings, tail

              Only steps do not need to fly 5000 km, so not much more.
              The jet engine and all components are unnecessary. No fuel needed.
              Chassis

              Also not very big.
              And the landing parachute from the Tu160 to the ass, then the runway will not be particularly long.
              1. bayard
                bayard 3 November 2020 20: 15
                +2
                Well, try it, if there are no other worries. Rogozin has a lot of money, it’s not a pity for the state ... but the results are sad. Even Solntseliky chided the other day, but ... "we don't throw our own" ...
  • Leonid Batsura
    Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 12: 19
    0
    Have you already made Angara-A5? Something even the president did not remember about it ... Yeah, like, five times more expensive than the Proton-M launch vehicle
    1. bayard
      bayard 5 November 2020 21: 12
      0
      Nevertheless, they decided to revive the Angara-A5 and use it to launch a large series of military satellites (there are simply no other missiles now - the Protons are being removed from production and operation, because of the toxic fuel components - a requirement of Kazakhstan. Categorical). At the end of November, a test launch from Plesetsk with a satellite simulator is to be carried out. With satellites (if everything works out) they will launch from the East.
      And in order to equal the prime cost with "Proton", you need to work for 20 years trouble-free, so that all the costs of development / launch of production / debugging of cooperation will pay off.
  • Bar1
    Bar1 2 November 2020 10: 04
    -2
    again, a leader, an English one, but will there be Ruska? These nouns, that everything is not Rus, or what?
  • Alien From
    Alien From 31 October 2020 11: 12
    +5
    Development is good. The hangar must first be taught how to fly.
    1. Sinugamb
      Sinugamb 31 October 2020 11: 22
      -6
      Quote: Alien From
      Development is good. The hangar must first be taught how to fly.

      Not all at once, remember how the Army was rearmed? The main thing is not to brag, but to work systematically.
      We will also show the west "Kuz'kina's mother" .. lol
      1. Temples
        Temples 31 October 2020 19: 04
        -2
        Quote: Alien From
        The hangar must first be taught how to fly.

        And what is wrong with the ability to fly at the Angara? request

        And how do you think she should be taught to fly? wink
        1. Aibolit
          Aibolit 31 October 2020 20: 00
          0
          Quote: Temples
          And what is wrong with the ability to fly at the Angara?

          Angara is the only case in the history of world cosmonautics when a new rocket is worse in all respects than the old one.

          There are no commercial prospects - the rocket is twice as expensive as the Proton.
          If "Phoenix" / "Sunkar" is released, they will forget about Angara
      2. bayard
        bayard 31 October 2020 22: 12
        +1
        Quote: Sinugamb
        We will also show the west "Kuz'kina's mother" ..

        Yes, you better show them to Kuzma, they will be more frightened. yes
    2. 7,62h54
      7,62h54 31 October 2020 11: 39
      +7
      Why teach Angara if the money has already been eaten for it? We must now throw in a new idea.
      1. bayard
        bayard 31 October 2020 22: 19
        +1
        Quote: 7,62x54
        Why teach Angara if the money has already been eaten for it? We must now throw in a new idea.

        Behold at the root. New ROCs are the key to enrichment.
        Finally launch the "Hangar".
        Build and launch "Soyuz-5", on its basis you can build a launch vehicle with a carrying capacity of up to 70 tons.
        And you need heavier - the Energia launch vehicle - from 100 to 200 tons, a wonderful Soviet legacy.
        1. Disant
          Disant 1 November 2020 13: 10
          0
          And you need harder - LV "Energia" - from 100 to 200 tons, wonderful Soviet heritage

          what will we carry?
          Build and launch "Soyuz-5", on its basis you can build a launch vehicle with a carrying capacity of up to 70 tons.

          what will we carry?
          1. bayard
            bayard 1 November 2020 16: 28
            0
            For Soyuz-5, there will definitely be a load, sufficient and regular - all military, scientific and commercial topics.
            For "Energia" and in Soviet times, no tasks were found, so I say "if you need it harder" - to the moon if you feel like it, to Mars, to the rings of Saturn ... if it really comes to mind, it is better to get the Energia project out of the store and not make people nervous.
            1. Disant
              Disant 2 November 2020 12: 52
              0
              bayard, you see - there is no load. There is no need to get anything from the stores and spend money on Super Union-5 and Energy - there is enough that is. It is necessary to tighten the element base for satellites, and the production of all the necessary missiles has been established. TEM, of course, stands aside - this is a separate song.
              1. bayard
                bayard 2 November 2020 17: 10
                0
                Quote: Disant
                and spend money on Super Union-5

                But this rocket is just needed, it is mainly replacing the Proton, which is high time to be removed from production for environmental reasons - heptyl (and amyl) are very toxic substances and Kazakhstan constantly demands to stop its launches - the whole steppe is poisoned by its debris and "splashes".
                And it is categorically impossible to launch such rockets as "Proton" from the East - the taiga is much more sensitive and vulnerable to any nasty things.
                "Angara-5" turned out to be very expensive, which is why its launch into series was slowed down - a concept that was unsuccessful from the beginning.
                But the "Cyclone" and its improved version "Soyuz-5" are optimal - both in characteristics, and price, and quality, and the ability to launch from the Sea Launch (do not go to waste, it can be towed to the equatorial zone and from there launched with maximum weight return).
      2. Disant
        Disant 1 November 2020 13: 13
        0
        Why teach Angara if money has already been eaten for it?

        launches of all large and small hangars are on schedule - what's wrong ???
        1. Kart
          Kart 2 November 2020 11: 22
          -1
          Well then.
          The topic is about space, and in the manuals it is written that everything is gone, we are lagging behind, we are masking.
    3. The popuas
      The popuas 31 October 2020 12: 33
      19
      This is not even a development, but a concept! Soon, articles will begin to appear from the category, I dreamed of a spaceship ... fool
      1. Alien From
        Alien From 31 October 2020 12: 55
        0
        As in my avatar)))
  • Observer2014
    Observer2014 31 October 2020 11: 15
    +5
    The Makeyev SRC developed the concept of a new super-heavy launch vehicle
    Well done! good A beautiful picture. I, too, all my childhood and adolescence loved to draw similar pictures and fantasize about heavy rockets too. It remains a mere trifle. Find a lot of money and embody this fantasy in metal, so to speak. Good luck to the Makeev SRC in this matter! I hope whoever reads this will live to see this bright day when this rocket is put on stream. And with its help, they will methodically explore the depths of space! hi
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 31 October 2020 12: 08
      16
      There remains a mere trifle. Find a lot of money and make this fantasy come true in metal so to speak

      Heaps of money, moreover, in cash, are regularly found in the apartments of high-ranking officials. Unfortunately, for some reason, space is not financed from the confiscated funds. Probably, the confiscated property is being moved to other apartments.
    2. slipped
      slipped 31 October 2020 13: 36
      +5
      Quote: Observer2014
      Well done! good Nice picture.


      In the picture, the concept of a super-heavy carrier A7 from the center of them. Khrunichev.
      1. Observer2014
        Observer2014 31 October 2020 13: 38
        +4
        In the picture, the concept of the super-heavy carrier A7 from the center of them. Khrunicheva
        I don't even argue hi And what's the difference. The essence of my first comment does not change yes
        1. slipped
          slipped 31 October 2020 13: 41
          +4
          Quote: Observer2014
          This does not change the essence of my first comment. yes


          We are currently developing the super-heavy Yenisei. The prototype of its first stage will be assembled next year.
          1. Disant
            Disant 1 November 2020 13: 26
            0
            We now have a super-heavy "Yenisei" in development

            It seems to me that Yenisei will be shut down - it duplicates the tasks of the heavy Angara.
            our competitors are drawn into the lunar race, while they themselves lead a pencil across the empty boards of the drawing board
            1. slipped
              slipped 1 November 2020 21: 45
              +2
              It cannot "duplicate the tasks of the heavy Angara". These missiles carry different weights. "Yenisei" takes out four times more heavy "Angara". And we have not had drawers for a long time.
              1. Disant
                Disant 1 November 2020 23: 28
                0
                slipped, I judge by what is written:
                Angara A5B - 38-40 tons will be removed, the development cost - 150 billion rubles with ground infrastructure, intended for the lunar program, the launch pad is under construction, test launches -2025-26gg
                Yenisei - 70 tons will be withdrawn, development cost - 1-1.5 trillion.ruble, intended for the lunar program, test launches are planned in 2028.
                .
                yes, it is possible that the deduced masses by the altitude of the orbits do not beat me (I think this is the most important secret figure for the next five years), but their purpose is equally... And to the layman, there will be three or four starts - one fig is a one-time mission, if there is no other load.
                .
                correct me (otherwise, below in the text, some subscribers wrote about super-duper irradiators of echelons)
                with respect
                1. slipped
                  slipped 1 November 2020 23: 44
                  +1
                  Quote: Disant
                  slipped, I judge by what is written:
                  Angara A5B - 38-40 tons will be removed, the development cost - 150 billion rubles with ground infrastructure, intended for the lunar program, the launch pad is under construction, test launches -2025-26gg


                  А5В will be able to bring about 12,5 tons of payload to the OLO. That is why this rocket will be engaged in launching modules of the lunar orbital station or cargo supply ships of the "Progress-L" type, which are delivered one way.

                  Quote: Disant
                  Yenisei - 70 tons will be withdrawn, development cost - 1-1.5 trillion.ruble, intended for the lunar program, test launches are planned in 2028.


                  STK "Yenisei" is to deliver to the lunar orbit a PTK NP with a mass of at least 22 tons. A LPHC with a mass of at least 27 tons for a polar OISL with an altitude of 200 km. What "70 tons" are you talking about? laughing

                  Quote: Disant
                  And the layman does not care, there will be three or four starts - one fig is a one-time mission.


                  No. We are planning to build a planetary base. Rosatom has already started working on the energy sector for it.
                  1. Disant
                    Disant 1 November 2020 23: 59
                    0
                    slipped, thanks for the clarification.
                    of course, in terms of the output load, I described the masses that are given in the descriptions of the near-earth orbit.
                    The moon, as I understand it, is a project. The Americans will print dollars ten more times and, without prejudice to themselves, then they will say that the technology piloted by living people is further than the Earth - that later, now we are closing the shop.
                    nuclear TEM and robots are our everything.
                    No. We are planning to build a planetary base. Rosatom has already started working on energy for it

                    if there is an open link, then please give it. It is clear that the ends are in the moon - and let's cool. But why are they all muddied up with living people on the moon?
                    1. slipped
                      slipped 2 November 2020 00: 32
                      +1
                      Quote: Disant
                      slipped, thanks for the clarification.
                      of course, in terms of the output load, I described the masses that are given in the descriptions of the near-earth orbit.


                      The Yenisei will launch more than 100 tons into low-earth orbit.

                      Quote: Disant
                      The moon, as I understand it, is a project.


                      No. We have an automatic landing station "Luna-25" flying to the moon next year.

                      Quote: Disant
                      nuclear TEM and robots are our everything.


                      The robots on the moon will be a bit earlier than the transport and energy modules in its orbit.

                      Quote: Disant
                      if there is an open link, then please give it.


                      Of course there is, TASS will suit? https://tass.ru/ekonomika/7190913. The Kurchatov Institute is involved in the work on the reactor.

                      Quote: Disant
                      But why are they all muddied up with living people on the moon?


                      Rotational service on the planetary base.
                      1. Disant
                        Disant 2 November 2020 13: 13
                        0
                        Rotational service on the planetary base.

                        Well, that's what I wrote about - projection. The base is exactly for us with people what do you think? The article does not say anything about inhabited alunar base (after all, the watch assumes constant duty) - only about the landing in the 30th year. This landing is a red rag for competitors - so that they run in the direction we need.
                      2. slipped
                        slipped 2 November 2020 14: 29
                        +1
                        Quote: Disant
                        only about the landing in the 30th year. This landing is a red rag for competitors - so that they run in the direction we need.


                        Nobody is going to sit in an empty sea, as it was in the late 60s with flagging, or as the Americans want now - for the sake of politics, no one is going. Prior to that, a lunar automatic test site with remotely controlled and unmanned systems will be deployed at the landing site - the same planetary base. Study at NPO named after Lavochkin all this has been going on for a long time. People are needed there mainly for the inspection of work, well, if they screw up the robots, it would be wrong to give such complex work to the mercy of only hardware. laughing
  • Leonid Batsura
    Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 12: 30
    0
    The question whether the Americans flew to the moon is open to question. Is radiation protection needed? There is no radiation protection in the crew compartment (MC). Maybe have? And the Federation is incomprehensible, it is also the Eagle: is there radiation protection provided there? If "YES", then this is Apollo's incriminating evidence ... And this, perhaps, is the problem of the Federation, that is, Orel
  • ximkim
    ximkim 31 October 2020 11: 15
    -5
    The name is too loud ..
    1. Alexey Sommer
      Alexey Sommer 31 October 2020 11: 38
      -4
      Like an icebreaker.
      1. Hypertension
        Hypertension 31 October 2020 11: 41
        +6
        Like Putin.
        1. Grandfather
          Grandfather 31 October 2020 11: 52
          +5
          Quote: Alexey Sommer
          Like an icebreaker.

          Quote: Hyperion
          Like Putin.

          and like a destroyer ... and there is nothing.
          1. Dikson
            Dikson 31 October 2020 12: 30
            0
            it's time to open an LLC with this name, you look, too, they are putting money in your pocket for a super-duper project ..)))
          2. Hypertension
            Hypertension 31 October 2020 13: 42
            -1
            Quote: Dead Day
            Quote: Alexey Sommer
            Like an icebreaker.

            Quote: Hyperion
            Like Putin.

            and like a destroyer ... and there is nothing.

            Putin is there.
  • silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 31 October 2020 11: 16
    +4
    Returning to RN Energia in a new reading ... it was interesting that it finally came to light that the superheavy has tasks in space ... or is there simply nothing to offer besides the ideas of the USSR?
    1. U-58
      U-58 31 October 2020 11: 36
      +4
      The understanding of the need for STN did not disappear.
      At this time, the topic is more than relevant.
      Defense issues require already tomorrow to have such a carrier that can deliver a heavy anti-missile defense station to the GSO.
      And then there will be all sorts of mars, venus, moons, asteroids ..
      1. U-58
        U-58 31 October 2020 11: 56
        14
        Somehow it was in the Soviet plans
        something like this
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 31 October 2020 14: 55
          +3
          Quote: U-58
          was in Soviet plans


          Yamal, Siberia. By the way, the Makeyevites had a project of a reusable single-stage vertical takeoff and landing rocket "Korona"
          1. Aibolit
            Aibolit 31 October 2020 19: 45
            +1
            Quote: Bad_gr
            "Yamal", "Siberia"

            in the Soviet plans this was not, and could not be

            Quote: Bad_gr
            By the way, the Makeyevites had a project of a reusable single-stage vertical takeoff and landing rocket "Korona"


            The development of the Korona rocket was carried out by the State Missile Center. Makeev from 1992 to 2012; the USSR ceased to exist in 1991.
            Scientists of the South Ural State University in cooperation with the S. V.P. Makeeva (Miass), JSC "NIIMash" (Nizhnyaya Salda) have been developing the unique space complex "Korona" since 2017.

            Director of the SUSU Polytechnic Institute, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Sergey Vaulin:

            We have passed the stage of the technical proposal, three variants of spacecraft have already been developed. If we start work in 2020, then the prototype of the launch vehicle should be ready in 2028. It is planned to develop the platform for five years, and for the entire complex - eight years
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 31 October 2020 20: 03
              0
              Quote: Bad_gr
              "Yamal", "Siberia"
              Quote: Aibolit
              Quote:
              in the Soviet plans this was not, and could not be
              Maybe. I did not find additional information on them, but constructively (in appearance) they are not far from the "Union", so I assumed their age.
              Quote: Aibolit
              ... "Crown" ..... from 1992 to 2012 ... from 2017 .....
              This was not an addition to the USSR, but to the central theme for the development of the Makeyev SRC. In my opinion, the "Crown" theme is much more interesting, and more in demand (a reusable rocket in manned space exploration) than a heavy rocket.
              1. Aibolit
                Aibolit 31 October 2020 20: 46
                0
                Quote: Bad_gr
                , but constructively (in appearance) they are not far from the "Union"


                "Siberia", "Yamal", these are all attempts of the 90s of crumbling Russia.
                They also lived there about the methane engine.
                "constructively" is "Soyuz-2-3"


                Quote: Bad_gr
                In my opinion, the "Crown" theme is much more interesting, and more in demand (a reusable rocket in manned space exploration) than a heavy rocket.

                whether manned space exploration will be in demand ... that is the question.
                The rocket leaves the Earth, reaches the near-earth orbit and brings the platform into the desired orbit. After that, she will return to Earth to later fly again and, if necessary, pick up the platform that has completed its tasks. The platform can go into deep space or to an asteroid and deliver a spacecraft to it.

                * They are not intended to be manned.
                * I guess we won't succeed. Even our promising one is inferior to the acting one from Mask

                the train left
                30% of Mpn ...... you will lose.there is no chance of a commerce
                1. slipped
                  slipped 31 October 2020 22: 03
                  +2
                  Quote: Aibolit
                  the train left
                  30% of Mpn ...... you will lose.there is no chance of a commerce


                  The data in the table is out of date and incorrect. laughing
      2. Disant
        Disant 1 November 2020 13: 34
        -1
        you at least roughly indicate what kind of miracle Yudo is -
        heavy anti-missile defense station
        , for the sake of which everyone needs to tighten their belts and exert all their strength, while leaving everything?
        1. U-58
          U-58 1 November 2020 13: 43
          +1
          This is such an iron structure in the form of a large barrel. Inside there is a filling.
          At the right time, this filling affects the guidance systems of the first echelon of missile defense.
          With a bold flight of imagination, it will affect the second echelon.
          Something like that.
          The presentation style is softened for your perception.
          Technical details, as you yourself might guess, are both premature and unnecessary.
          Regarding tightening the belts: this is a debatable question. The belts are already tightened nowhere: the construction of the submarine and surface fleets, the Sarmat, Yars, Bulava programs have already forced them to "give up everything."
          There is nothing more to throw.
          1. Disant
            Disant 1 November 2020 13: 58
            0

            This is such an iron structure in the form of a large barrel. Inside there is a filling.

            Thanks for clarifying.
            right, why do we need all the other branches of the national economy, and space itself is useless.
            Everything is in the pipe.
            The main thing is not to confuse trains with carriages.
            then I vote for this nonexistent barrel and non-existent carrier, or better at once for thirty or forty barrels.
    2. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 12: 46
      0
      If without hydrogen, then something else can be harvested. With hydrogen - death to the project in concept. The Shuttle has a fuel mass fraction in the hydrogen part of 0,95. WHIT SSME (female) 455 p. And it was a bluff. Energia had the same thing: Fuel mass fraction 0,95, UIT RD 0120 455 s. And it turned out to be a purchase from the Americans. In fact, in fact: 133 successful launches of the Shuttle made it possible to put 1600 tons of NG into space. This is 12 tons per piece (launch). This means that the fraction of the fuel mass in the hydrogen part was about 0,8-0,84, and the UIT "void value" was about 410 s
      Here is USYO with hydrogen and with any project of a rocket with hydrogen. Look back at the US - with hydrogen, all US projects are in the cesspool. True, here is the SLS, which is "made" from the date of the first shuttle launch.
      And they will do, that is, talk to talk. Because these conversations have provided thousands of high-paying "jobs" in half of the US states for thirty years.
  • Trojan_wolf
    Trojan_wolf 31 October 2020 11: 19
    +9
    Tucked into tablets
    Space cards,
    And the navigator clarifies
    The last time is the route.
    Come on guys
    Sing before the start -
    We still have in stock
    Fourteen minutes.
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 31 October 2020 12: 10
      11
      The original was: "Let's smoke before the start", but the Ministry of Health warned - "Smoking is bad for your health", and the song was remade.
  • Sinugamb
    Sinugamb 31 October 2020 11: 19
    -14 qualifying.
    A concept has been developed for the creation of a number of super-heavy launch vehicles based on the Leader rocket - for circling the Moon, for implementing the lunar program and for missions to Mars

    How do you like Musk? This is a serious and high-tech space program of Russia (based on the foundation of Soviet developments) ..
    Not every country will pull it in the world! Now, of course, some will say that pensioners are starving, housing and communal services have increased and the roads are broken))))
    Well, for the Russian space, not all were plundered and destroyed by demons in the 90s drinks hi
    1. Senka naughty
      Senka naughty 31 October 2020 11: 31
      -11 qualifying.
      Quote: Sinugamb
      (based on the foundations of still Soviet developments) ..

      You will probably be surprised, but the Elon Musk brand also creates its space programs on the basis of Soviet developments ..
      1. RUSS
        RUSS 31 October 2020 11: 35
        +8
        Quote: Senka Naughty
        Quote: Sinugamb
        (based on the foundations of still Soviet developments) ..

        You will probably be surprised, but the Elon Musk brand also creates its space programs on the basis of Soviet developments ..

        Yes ? Are you seriously?
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 31 October 2020 12: 06
        +5
        "You will probably be surprised, but the Elon Musk brand also creates its space programs on the basis of Soviet developments .." What are these? What's in Falcon 9 Dragon 2 and Soviet Starship?
        1. Whirlwind
          Whirlwind 31 October 2020 12: 33
          -12 qualifying.
          Concept ... In his Starship there are 37 RD at the first stage, and in the Soviet N-1 there were 30 of them.
          Something Saturn did not inspire him ...
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 31 October 2020 13: 36
            +4
            What a nafig concept - the H 1 did not have reusable engines as well as a reusable first stage, and the number of engines on carriers would not be a similar concept.
            1. Whirlwind
              Whirlwind 31 October 2020 14: 22
              -1
              This is where the reusable taxiway and steps ??? It's too early to wishful thinking ...
              And 37 RD is really another exclusive from Mask. Noble fireworks ...
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 1 November 2020 17: 15
                0
                "It's too early to wishful thinking ..." If you don't see your problems beyond your own nose.
                And 37 RD is really another exclusive from Mask. The fireworks are notable ... 27 engines have already flown to Falcon Heavy three times and no fireworks have been observed - which will prevent 31 from working - according to the latest project, there will be just that many raptors in the first stage of raptors.
                1. Whirlwind
                  Whirlwind 1 November 2020 18: 24
                  -2
                  Let Musk drive it into orbit at least 33 times, then it will bridge next to the Union, but it's too early. And this is not the main thing. The main problem is that Russia would finally have the possibility of an independent space policy. Enough to be space cabbies for a country that has declared Russia its enemy and harms it in every way!
      3. Sinugamb
        Sinugamb 31 October 2020 13: 08
        -4
        Quote: Senka Naughty
        Quote: Sinugamb
        (based on the foundations of still Soviet developments) ..

        You will probably be surprised, but the Elon Musk brand also creates its space programs on the basis of Soviet developments ..

        I am not surprised, as well as at the expense of China in their leap forward in economic and technological terms.
        Russia "generous soul", how many different firms and states have risen at our expense (except for Ukraine and the Baltic states) negative They managed to stop the looting, but again someone dreams of restoration
        90s, now in order to finally finish off Russia and tear it to pieces ..
        We are interfering with the globalization of the world and we do not want to walk around with rainbow flags kneeling in front of everyone with a consumer system ..
      4. Leonid Batsura
        Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 13: 05
        0
        Actually, Musk's successes are cartoons. In this manner, the Americans presented a cartoon (they say that 6 cartoons) about the shocking accident of the Proton-M rocket on 02.07.2013/65/75, which marked the beginning of the defeat not only of Proton-M, but also of the RKZ and the Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center itself. Well, Musk-heavy, Musk did casually, with a wiggle of a finger, XNUMX tons on LEO. Considering that the SLS of the first stage from PN to LEO is XNUMX tons, then why are the Americans soaring with SLS? For thousands of high-paying jobs in half of the US states !!!
        The Americans also presented Russia with a cartoon (spaflight101.com) to simulate the "first launch" of the Angara-A5 on December 23.12.2014, XNUMX.
        And "Angara-A5" is Delta 4 Heavy abortion material. Therefore, for 6 years already, there has been no talk of a "second" launch of the "Angara-A5". True, the second imitation was scheduled for the day before yesterday, now it has been postponed to November 24, 2020. Rogozin's case lives on and flourishes "They will allocate funding - draw them." IULTIK, MULTIC !!!
  • U-58
    U-58 31 October 2020 11: 22
    +4
    It was a sinful thing to think that the GRC would offer a product made of blocks based on Sarmat, which would be quite understandable.
    And as a result, the proposed option conceptually differs little from the super-heavy Angara and STN based on Soyuz-5 and Vulcan
    https://im0-tub-ru.yandex.net/i?id=9ffc7ae86ba8a691d15ce11d21c159cd-l&n=13[/img][/center]
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 31 October 2020 12: 01
      +4
      Quote: U-58
      and Vulcan

      ".... a promising carrier Vulcan. It was unified with Energia, but unlike it, it had not four, but eight upper stages of the first stage and differed in the placement of cargo in the head section. Starting from the same starting structure as Energia, the Vulcan rocket would launch up to 200 tons into low-earth orbit .... "
      .
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 31 October 2020 12: 08
        -8
        The launch alone would cost a lot of money - nowadays such disposable monsters as Vulcan are no longer rolling in reusability trends.
        1. vadimtt
          vadimtt 31 October 2020 13: 11
          +4
          Actually, in Energy, reusability was laid down, but to the military it seemed like the fifth leg and they did not bring it to mind laughing
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 31 October 2020 13: 38
            -3
            The fact of the matter is that they did not bring it up.
  • Mouse
    Mouse 31 October 2020 11: 25
    +5
    Lord ... to put things in order on my own ball ... it explodes here and there ... but apple trees on Mars do not give us rest ...
  • sergo1914
    sergo1914 31 October 2020 11: 28
    +3
    Fine. With the weight of launching into orbit from a hundred square meters, you can collective farm serious projects. Well, 160 is generally a luxury. Now they would.
  • Svetlana
    Svetlana 31 October 2020 11: 31
    +6
    Have you mastered 3DMax?

    That is, students and postgraduates can invent and create in virtual space, but today's industry is basically unable to bring ideas to life. Until now, reliably, we fly into space only on the Soyuz.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 31 October 2020 12: 08
      -2
      We have mastered all the CAD systems.
      1. vadimtt
        vadimtt 31 October 2020 13: 15
        -1
        And who knows at all what the defense industry and space are mainly on? Compass, AutoCAD or Dasso?
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 31 October 2020 13: 41
          -3
          AutoCAD, Compass, SolidWorks, there is CAD from Siemens
          1. nobody75
            nobody75 31 October 2020 18: 51
            0
            The compass is even domestic ... It contains the Great Principle of Domestic Design: "You draw the main stamp, where Dear People will sign. And the rest - then ...". There is a song with autocad ... He has a macro language - VisualLisp. For FP fans. As an alternative to VBA. Something serious - for the CAD itself and welcome to ARX with C #, C ++. The main problem with all these CAD systems is that they are not CAD systems out of the box.
            Sincerely
  • RUSS
    RUSS 31 October 2020 11: 34
    +4
    More promises, tales and chatter
  • gridasov
    gridasov 31 October 2020 11: 45
    0
    People do not understand that increasing the number of engines increases the amount of fuel, etc. Therefore, engines must be built on different principles. Even if they didn't show their inability to solve the problem
    1. vadimtt
      vadimtt 31 October 2020 13: 16
      -1
      Here we will learn how to make nanotubes with a length of a meter, and immediately we will zapabakhaem space elevator, with cables from these nanotubes laughing
      1. gridasov
        gridasov 31 October 2020 13: 40
        0
        This reasoning itself allows us to draw conclusions about the adequacy of people
      2. nobody75
        nobody75 31 October 2020 18: 52
        0
        Here's how to make nanotubes about a meter long

        Such "fullerenes" are already from the field of Soft Body Physics ...
        Sincerely
      3. ont65
        ont65 31 October 2020 20: 55
        +1
        To begin with, you need to put a station of the Mir type into a geostationary orbit, so that there is something to pull this elevator to, and for this you need such Leaders.
    2. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 13: 40
      0
      Rational placement of fuel in rocket blocks in the "Proton-M" LV. On the first rocket block (first stage) 64%. In "Angara-A5" on the first rocket block (first stage) 89% of rocket fuel!
      "Proton-M" on the first stage carry extra weight of 30,6 tons. Angara-A5 should carry "extra" 86 tons of iron to a height of 84 km. So - this is the explanation for the stillbirth of "Angara-A5" - the miscarriage of D4X. The first (Sukhoi) rocket block of the "Proton-M" LV falls (guaranteed) into an ellipse with axes of 20X40 km. BB "Angara-A5" from a height of 86 km fall individually - as "Columbia" (4 "Columbia") and sow an area 800 km long and 200 km shishrshina. This is the reason for the collapse of "Baiterek". In Kazakhstan, there are no longer such territories of 800X200 km, which can be allocated for the Angara-A5 RP. This size of the RP explains the choice of the Eastern one: more than the Eastern one, everything can burn with a clear fire up to the Kuril ridge ... Here, it MEANS how !!!
  • rubin6286
    rubin6286 31 October 2020 11: 46
    +1
    It’s good that we have developed such a concept. The main thing is that it is proactive and the developers are not paid for it except the official salary. There are as many developers on this site on any topic as there are stars in the sky.
  • ont65
    ont65 31 October 2020 11: 50
    +1
    The Makeyevites are great, every time they somehow diversify the overall picture, but, unfortunately, their projects remain on whatman paper. The topic of superheavy vehicles has been dragging on for a long time (Amur-5, Yenisei-5, Angara-A7, Rus ...) and some of them also include the allegedly deceased RD-0120, while the latest Energy project involves the development of a new one much less powerful RD-0150. In essence, this is a large part of the difference between the same modular concepts.
    1. mark1
      mark1 31 October 2020 13: 27
      +2
      The most interesting thing is "Crown". What is the fate of the project at the moment, who knows?
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 31 October 2020 15: 06
        -3
        None, and is spinning proactively without funding
    2. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 13: 45
      0
      The most interesting thing is that according to RD 0120 you can at least find something, and according to RD 0150 - perhaps "Gorokhov" There is no such liquid-propellant engine. The main thing is that it is not conceivable, apparently, in the thoughts of "pea
  • Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 31 October 2020 11: 56
    -1
    "... the concept of creating number of launch vehicles super heavy class based on the Leader rocket ... "

    Someone clearly misled the budget of Roscosmos and NASA ..
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 31 October 2020 12: 12
      -2
      No one will give money for this project here, the super-heavy Yenisei will cost a trillion rubles for R&D, serial production and a launch pad with the necessary infrastructure.
      1. Knell wardenheart
        Knell wardenheart 31 October 2020 12: 35
        +1
        Without a plan for how to at least partially monetize money for this, they will not give money for this - such a plan is now on the verge of fiction, in view of the pitiful abilities of the managers of our space, the fact that they are very tightly "herded" by higher-ranking functionaries, taking into account also the mass of Western sanctions (guaranteed to complicate third-party financing ) and a rather serious cold snap with all potential interests of participation in this project.
        Until we establish diplomacy and improve management outside, we can forget about this way out.

        Another way out is to build up our own economy, in the case of long-term efficiency of which we may have both large funds for space, and possibly sufficient internal interests for such large and costly projects. But this task is three heads steeper than the question of solving the problems of external cooperation.

        The third way out is the most powerful conceptual work on reducing costs along the entire front of our RKO work - approximately a similar thing was done by Elon Musk. That is, it is very cool to "comb" our entire space from costly and unproductive articles and projects, the remaining ones to try to unify as much as possible, go to a qualitatively new level of thoughtfulness of long-term planning of projects, the issue of multiple work to reduce the cost of manufacturing products, the number of labor involved in this, lease of space, etc. This requires a very high professionalism, Will, adequate management, very powerful control over funds.
        In terms of complexity, this path hangs somewhere between 1 and 2, depending on how bad everything is at the moment.

        Without all this, our space in the 21st century can be forgotten
        1. CT-55_11-9009
          CT-55_11-9009 1 November 2020 23: 07
          0
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          In terms of complexity, this path hangs somewhere between 1 and 2, depending on how bad everything is at the moment.

          Closer to the 2nd. The mess is fierce. Let's start with the fact that more than half of some spacecraft are not domestic! And domestic research institutes (not even talking about factories!), Developing them, for some elements no longer exist. Rebuilding and founding - a huge amount of funds, they are much more needed for yachts, palaces and football clubs ...
          1. Knell wardenheart
            Knell wardenheart 1 November 2020 23: 53
            0
            I believe (but I understand those who disagree with my opinion) that in an amicable way, the most realistic way to preserve our comic power and relevance would be to strive to merge in symbiotic ecstasy with the work of the EC. There, too, things are not shaky, not shaky, and there is interest in space, as well as money. Like the ITER cooperation, it would be possible to stir up such cooperation in space and consistently deepen it, maximally distancing this direction from low politics. We have no other options - we cannot work with the Chinese, due to the closed nature of their approach, we have the coolest relations with the United States, work with the Indians is hampered by both geographical isolation and a strong difference in approaches to programs (in my opinion). The same problem + politics with the Japanese. If we leave out the brackets "we want ourselves" - in view of the inevitable economic problems of sponsoring, objective interested parties of such activities inside the country (outside the orbit their interest ends), the least energy-consuming way is cooperation with the EU (as a direction)
            In an amicable way, we should aim at this politically already the day before yesterday) But in fact, all this, unfortunately, is hypothetical, because no one here will do this out of principle or image considerations.
            1. CT-55_11-9009
              CT-55_11-9009 3 November 2020 21: 41
              0
              Quote: Knell Wardenheart
              that in an amicable way the most realistic way of preserving our comic power and relevance would be to strive to merge in symbiotic ecstasy with the work of the EC.

              Good. Now we have many (if only not all) civilian vehicles are assembled from foreign diesel fuel: English, German, French, Belgian (it seems there are also) parts. Well, at least the case is domestic, and the cable network. I am exaggerating, of course, the most important components are supplied from abroad. More precisely, they supplied. They stopped because of politics. So in order to copy with ESA, Russia will have to fulfill all the wishes of Europe, that is, fall apart, become absolutely tolerant, etc., otherwise they will blackmail us by breaking up cooperation. Fine? A citizen living in Germany (right?), This may be normal, but a Russian citizen living in Russia, who likes the bacchanalia in Europe from the word at all, does not like it from the word at all. So cooperation is a forced step that deprives Russia of a large part of its independence. And the real way out is the development of the economy, first and foremost, production, and the domestic market. And there will be funds for the full cycle of development and production of missiles and spacecraft. Now ZAO "RF" is being sold piece by piece and the cabbage obtained is stacked offshore. And in 20-30 years there will be practically nothing left of Russia, if the situation is not radically changed, it is not so important, from above or below, - the difference will be only in the amount of blood.
              1. Knell wardenheart
                Knell wardenheart 4 November 2020 00: 40
                0
                I outline the most logical and "easy" option for taking our space out of the current swamp - deliberately leaving out the political aspect of the problem. Europe, whether we like it or not, is our future objective partner in a world in which such parameters as cultural and / or demographic / industrial power (more and more often precisely by the sum of these parameters) dominate quite rigidly - and in such scenarios, we are separate and The EU lacks the capacity (and is vulnerable enough) to face such challenges. Europe is not too fond of the hand of America, which is rummaging there now. This discontent is growing and is being quenched ever worse in the process of intersection of the interests of the overweight EU and squeezed by competition with what we call the "potential multipolar world" of the eternally starving US.

                Trying to imagine the situation "through their eyes" (through the eyes of Europe), I look at our external activities of the last 20 years and see that we are "de jure" establishing some kind of formal contacts with Europe, "de facto", in fact, we pushed water in a mortar a la "construction of a union state with the Blr", which seems to have been going on for many years in the same way, but in fact it is being softly and systematically sabotaged. Likewise, our (probably mutual) integration into some European affairs and processes was mutually sabotaged by both the EU and us. And it was aggravated by the fact that in our perception of the world, probably, the "early GDP" considered the CIS as a kind of "treasure of the sun", which was postponed for later for our exclusive needs, and which they planned to do on some exclusive, separate rights, in order to muddy something resembling the defective capitalist version of the USSR. In such a construct, excessive rapprochement with the EU was illogical and dangerous, which did not happen "de facto". On the other hand, we needed European money and contracts for raw materials, so "de jure" we kissed them and stung the crab (Berlusconi, Schroeder, Jacques Chirac, etc.) at every opportunity.

                It was also beneficial for the EU, because cheap and stable resources / energy were one of the pillars of their industrial efficiency in competition (and hence their employment and their well-fed standard of living). At the same time, the EU "de facto" represented by Germany (probably) and the eastern countries (where the US influence is strong) tried to keep us at a certain distance, so that we would not think about changing our supplier conditions for the better for us (and we at that time they loved to nightmare and play "the trumpet"), and even in their grave they saw the big Russian money getting into the European business with their inherent dumb smell and methods (we are talking about the early 2000s and up to 2010, which in the context of the history of sanctions spilled over into the present day).

                Now the situation in the EU (since the 2000s) has changed dramatically - because the US has taken up the "manual control" mode and militarization that is completely unnecessary for Europe, and most importantly, they are increasingly sticking their hands in symbiotic resource ties between us and the EU, Iran and the EU, North Africa and the EU -and so on. Europe DOES NOT like this, because it does not fit well with their inevitably outlined operation to reduce costs (given the competition with Asia, the United States and a number of developing countries, it is increasingly difficult for Europe to maintain the attractiveness of its products and even more so to grow its economy, it inevitably has to move from growth - to optimize and reduce costs, because the growth potential outside is practically exhausted).

                And here we come to the 2020+ scheme, in which, on the one hand, they (the EU) are objectively interested in our cheap resources, the European world, some cultural community and the dem-industrial-economic-scientific maintenance of the world "weight" with the growing giants crushing markets (China, Japan, the USA, India in the future) - and on the other hand, we, whose "new CIS project", judging by what has been observed for 10 years, has practically failed, and internal "successes" do not allow us to hope for funds and will updating. We need money to maintain the status of a superpower, renew the fleet, support science, while we have a very bloated defense industry (with modest resources for it) for our country.

                In general - to summarize - God himself told us with the EU to slide towards some kind of symbiosis, otherwise the EU is waiting for an economic DECLINE which will come more sharply than they prepare their saving measures, but we will continue to spend most of the profit on maintaining our external potential and gloss, and become outdated economically, technologically and demographically.
                In the increasing show jumping. struggle for int. markets with our resources are not even a competitor to the EU, which will inevitably be inferior to the above countries. Only together would we have a future in a rapidly growing world. It's not a matter of preference - it's a matter of survival.

                Z. Sori for longread, I like to express my thoughts as concretely as possible.
                1. CT-55_11-9009
                  CT-55_11-9009 5 November 2020 21: 49
                  0
                  Quote: Knell Wardenheart
                  Z. Sori for longread, I like to express my thoughts as concretely as possible.

                  Yes, no question, I myself like to write "mnogabukaf" on a topic that is sore or interesting to me.

                  As for the topic ... I agree with what was written, and with everything. Almost without reservation. Nearly. But ... You and I are clearly from different camps of guardians for the fatherland. You are an obvious Westernizer who sees the future of Russia in symbiosis with the EU (by the way, why not with China? They are about the same beetles ...). And I am a conditionally Slavophile who sees his own, special way for Russia, not in fusion with the West or the East, but in mutually beneficial cooperation. And this is not a symbiosis, but a less interpenetrating form of cooperation.
                  By the way, what kind of symbiosis can we talk about, what kind of mutual work, if in the European Union they cannot agree on what and how to do? The most obvious example is migrants. The center said - settle, and Italy, for example, Hungary, and the same Poland (this is a separate topic with a bunch of nuances, I agree), they saw it in the grave. And dynamite with might and main. North Stream-2. An equally fun topic with a similar "agreement". Why did South Stream rest in Bose? Although it was specifically so mutually beneficial. Drives here policy... By the way, why didn't the young capitalist Russia join NATO? What kind of an alliance would it be? True, without Russia as an enemy, it would have lost all its meaning, but this is not the main thing, right? Therefore, for respect and real cooperation, you need to develop from within, and there will be more and more potential partners, because development is an increase in capital, and this is always good. And they will be drawn to SUCH economy for cooperation. Is not it?
                  1. Knell wardenheart
                    Knell wardenheart 6 November 2020 00: 21
                    +1
                    For a fairly decent time, I also believed in a special path and our "potential" - until the awareness of the historical and cultural opposition of all elements of this potential possibility began to rub the eye too hard, and the observed contradictions of this scheme did not become so much that the construct more and more resembled fantasy with assumptions, but not something solid and unshakable.
                    When industrialization was carried out in the USSR, it was clear why this was being done. In the prom. plan and economy. plan we were lagging behind the west 20-30 years. Then we dispersed the industry and the economy - we needed markets - we overgrown with satellites, put together CMEA, and what Europe did not buy from us - CMEA took from us. It was a more or less (potentially) adequate design until, with our efforts, we dragged the CMEA and satellites to such a standard of living and industrial competence, when what we were doing ceased to be of interest, and these states had a greater temptation to do a lot of this by yourself or to buy outside the CMEA. Then we started giving out some stupid loans, if only we could buy. And also strenuously rivet what they bought - for example, weapons, unbalancing the distribution of funds within the state PLANED technological cycle. As a result, we got a critical lag in many science-intensive areas, credited satellites - and the only source of REAL BOBL, in general, remained in the European direction. Gas / oil / resources - which continues to this day.

                    Potentially - yes, we can probably. To create a product, to acquire satellites - we have the remains of the CIS and more or less allied states that are ready to buy something from us. But objectively, the situation with the economic capacity of these areas has become EVEN WORSE than during the times of the USSR and the CMEA, which I wrote about above. That is, if we clung to it wisely, we would probably live better than now (and more fun), but vryatli could compare this power with what China or the EU or the USA has now. With all that it implies. Whether we like it or not, the EU is our stable economic partner.
                    Some time ago I pulled to write an article (maybe I'll add it, who knows) about what and in what proportion we trade with our neighbors - and here's the paradox, all our neighbors in the European direction have a strictly negative balance, two-fold, three-fold , in relation to us (we have much more profit from selling them than they are to us). Even in these troubled, sanctioned times. In fact, despite all this clucking about the turn to the East and multi-vector, it is the European direction that allows us to make ends meet.

                    So, thinking about deepening relations with the EU (albeit theoretical) is not just building from scratch.

                    As for economic cooperation with the PRC, it is culturally excluded. At the moment, the conditional worker in the PRC receives similar / somewhat more money in comparison with the Russian - BUT works in worse conditions, exporting a disproportionately higher labor productivity. That is, from the point of view of the Chinese, we do not know how to work effectively, and our labor force mostly does not have benefits relative to the Chinese.
                    Therefore, they are not particularly interested in investing in us (on a wide front)
                    As a potential. sales market - our market is a pale shadow of the US or EU or even Latin America or BV. Given that the waterway preferred by the Chinese for saturating our territory with goods is associated with extreme inconveniences, and the throughput rate. ground path is frankly weak (and investment in improvement is absolutely incomparable with the exhaust from our market). For the same reason, China is not exactly interested in our resources (excluding those directly bordering on China) - they prefer to buy in Africa / Australia.

                    That is, China sees us as such an ally with poor workforce, terrible logistics and a lot of inconveniences. Secondary-tertiary direction.

                    As for the European migrant madness, I hardly understand why they do it. Probably there was originally an idea to reduce the cost of a slave. force and "lure minds" like the United States, but then stupid dogmatism (unfortunately we are familiar with this) joined in and brought the idea to the point of absurdity.

                    Sev.Pot-2 did not say "NO", this is generally quite a clear message that they want to complete it, but this is OUR problem as the initiator. Denmark was rockin 'to "revise" something in permits and environmental approvals - but instantly got a handle. Another thing is that the EU does not want to crawl under US sanctions, they understand very well the incomparability of our market and the US market.

                    As for "not taken to NATO" - I can roughly imagine why they didn't (because we didn't really want to - it would be the simplest answer). And we didn't really want to because we had tens of thousands of tanks, hundreds of aircraft and a colossal internal technology built up. cycle for OUR weapons, calibers, cartridges, standards, etc. The guys from NATO would come and say - ohoho! Now you need to spend 1.5% of the budget on NATO. And somewhere else to take a bobble over_dohren for reorganization and transition to NATO standards. These are ABSOLUTELY horse, outrageous, wildest sums for us in the 90s, 2000s, and even now. And it is also a deadly crap for NATO, which would have to integrate THIS THIS IS EVERYTHING in its decades-old system. Unprofitable for both parties.

                    As for the latter, I agree. If you read what I am writing here, you will see that I am a very consistent supporter of a certain regional isolationism at this stage of our development. We must direct our views and money into ourselves and subordinate the remnants of the CIS to our interests - other foreign policy and "big games" are now the hussars.
                    However, I regret to understand that this is the most energy-consuming path from which we could take a worthy place in the world. The history of the last 200 years says that in matters of energy-consuming routes, our people are not as stable and stable as we like to paint ourselves. They may fail and everything will be as in 1917 or 1991 - with trash, chaos, losses and uncertainty. The level of adequacy of our planning and competence has historically caused me great doubts even in the best periods of our country, not to mention now, so I see this option rather as a light-naive fantasy, in which I want to believe as in Grandfather Frost. Europe is a completely utilitarian option. But, of course, I do not pretend to be omniscient.
    2. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 13: 48
      0
      And what is the budget of the "super-heavy" SLS, which in 2015 was planned to be closed in 2018? And here is the talk about
  • Dikson
    Dikson 31 October 2020 12: 10
    0
    For some reason, in every village there is necessarily a shabby and shabby stall near the track with the proud name "Leader" .. The race for premiums is in full swing .. And NASA in 26 is planning a flight to an asteroid, which, according to estimates, is worth more than the entire world economy. ...
  • evgen1221
    evgen1221 31 October 2020 12: 13
    +1
    I, too, can give out concepts every day! If I was paid for concept projects, I would probably be richer than Gates.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 31 October 2020 12: 38
      0
      You are wrong! All your fantasies will reflect the boundary possibilities of seeing processes.
  • acetophenon
    acetophenon 31 October 2020 12: 17
    0
    If those who stole the previous project did not go to jail, the next one is just a way to continue stealing. Let them shove their fools pictures up their ass.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 31 October 2020 12: 19
    +1
    Concepts, plans, projects-projects ... and the matter is until the logical conclusion, i.e. will rockets fly?
    So far, the concept of still Soviet designers is working and pulls out at least some kind of space program of the state.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 31 October 2020 12: 21
    +4
    Well. how can you not remember the OTRAG project!
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 31 October 2020 12: 36
      0
      PS How much to FEEL Elon Musk!
      1. Leonid Batsura
        Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 13: 56
        0
        This is Musk-Heavy with a LEO carrying capacity of 65 tons (see, until removed). And he did it carelessly, on the tip of his tongue, and it cost him the cost of drawing a cartoon. It is noteworthy that when working on the first stage, Musk-Heavy consumes 92% of the fuel stored in the rocket. It's basically a single stage rocket! So this is how it is!!! And Rogozin was so impressed, so impressed - he just sobbed with emotion
    2. gridasov
      gridasov 31 October 2020 12: 37
      0
      Someone sees rockets in the drawings, but I see the ideology and logic of the developers and submitters of ideas
      1. Sinugamb
        Sinugamb 31 October 2020 13: 13
        -6
        Quote: gridasov
        Someone sees rockets in the drawings, but I see the ideology and logic of the developers and submitters of ideas

        Remember "Putin's Cartoons"? They are already on alert. lol
        1. fa2998
          fa2998 31 October 2020 13: 28
          +6
          Quote: Sinugamb
          Remember "Putin's Cartoons"? They are already on alert.

          But so far no one has seen it, except for the Iskander under the MiG-31.
          1. Sinugamb
            Sinugamb 31 October 2020 13: 54
            -5
            Quote: fa2998
            Quote: Sinugamb
            Remember "Putin's Cartoons"? They are already on alert.

            But so far no one has seen it, except for the Iskander under the MiG-31.

            A couple of missiles from "Avangard" have already been put on duty .. But they keep quiet about the "Poseidon", you see, too, somewhere lay on the bottom .. wink The "gentlemen" is working to harm all the hayalschikov of Russia and its capabilities ... Thunder struck, the peasant crossed himself!
        2. gridasov
          gridasov 31 October 2020 13: 50
          +1
          When I see stabilizers of longitudinal stability of flight on the so-called hypercorrected rockets, it is already clear that people do not understand the processes of distribution of magnetic processes on the body, which means the reasons for the destruction and the impossibility of achieving high speeds in the elastic medium of the atmosphere
          1. Sinugamb
            Sinugamb 31 October 2020 14: 24
            0
            Quote: gridasov
            When I see stabilizers of longitudinal stability of flight on the so-called hypercorrected rockets, it is already clear that people do not understand the processes of distribution of magnetic processes on the body, which means the reasons for the destruction and the impossibility of achieving high speeds in the elastic medium of the atmosphere

            Was that what I read guys? wassat What do you smoke, share .. laughing
            The answer is for you ..))
            Sustainability is a must for every rocket enthusiast. The rocket should fly to where we sent it, i.e. be resilient. An unstable rocket is dangerous to others, and therefore unacceptable.

            The vast majority of amateur rockets are simple vehicles that do not have active controls and fly at low altitudes in the atmosphere. Therefore, it will focus on aerodynamic stability.

            empirical rocket The theory of this issue is well stated in the literature on rocket modeling (Avilov M. "Models of rockets"; Kanaev V. "Key to the start"; P. Elshtein "Designer of rockets models"). I will state my understanding of this issue, and I will try to make it clear to rocket scientists of any level.

            laughing hi
            1. gridasov
              gridasov 31 October 2020 14: 50
              +3
              In my opinion, I wrote about hyperspeed flights, and in this case all theories only matter for lower speeds.
              1. Sinugamb
                Sinugamb 31 October 2020 15: 04
                -2
                Quote: gridasov
                In my opinion, I wrote about hyperspeed flights, and in this case all theories only matter for lower speeds.

                Mushrooms need to be clever in other topics fool
                And to know who to contact you are an old-timer here hi ..Clearly explained, I hope? And then the clever guys got divorced balabols ... Eight years, no mind on the site? wassat
                You are not fixable .. winked
                1. gridasov
                  gridasov 31 October 2020 15: 10
                  +2
                  I have not been clever for a long time and do not share my developments. If not to say at all did not reveal their essence. Therefore, everything can be called word games. By the way, discussions are very useful only for thinking people. So don't take me seriously.
                  1. Sinugamb
                    Sinugamb 31 October 2020 15: 19
                    -1
                    Quote: gridasov
                    I have not been clever for a long time and do not share my developments. If not to say at all did not reveal their essence. Therefore, everything can be called word games. By the way, discussions are very useful only for thinking people. So don't take me seriously.

                    Got it .. I'm certainly not particularly "thinking", but on the account of the discussions I agree with you, they do not give me alas)))
                    Good luck to Gribasov, the main thing is not to drain something here again .. There are many hunters sitting here!
                    1. gridasov
                      gridasov 31 October 2020 15: 43
                      +1
                      Thanks! The duality of circumstances for me is that here I, knowing the language of clarifications, remain an outcast expressing my thoughts. Elsewhere I am more, one might say, in comfortable conditions, but without the depth of the ability to clarify.
            2. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 1 November 2020 19: 09
              0
              Do not offend Gridasov, without him it will be boring here.
          2. Alexey Sommer
            Alexey Sommer 31 October 2020 16: 11
            -2
            Quote: gridasov
            When I see stabilizers of longitudinal stability of flight on the so-called hyper-corrosive missiles, it is already clear that people do not understand the processes


            The Dagger developers have no idea about this.
            1. gridasov
              gridasov 31 October 2020 16: 40
              0
              That's it! During a hyperspeed flight of a body in the atmosphere, the ionization process is formed by magnetic force processes in its geometric body. And the change in the potential difference in the linear vector of the dipole, simultaneously form rotating magnetic fluxes. Therefore, at the boundary levels of tension, the body breaks. I could even tell at some level, but I will not get people. Because to depolarize the magnetization of the case, I think it's not worth telling at all. Hence, the longitudinal stability stabilizers are absolutely not a rational solution.
              1. Alexey Sommer
                Alexey Sommer 31 October 2020 18: 25
                -4
                Quote: gridasov
                That's it! During a hyperspeed flight of a body in the atmosphere, the ionization process is formed by magnetic force processes in its geometric body. And the change in the potential difference in the linear vector of the dipole, simultaneously form rotating magnetic fluxes. Therefore, at the boundary levels of tension, the body breaks. I could even tell at some level, but I will not get people involved.

                Have a bite! hi
                1. gridasov
                  gridasov 31 October 2020 18: 55
                  +1
                  Really! Why does a bull need resistance?
                  1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Leonid Batsura
        Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 14: 07
        0
        Well, you see the ideology of the Federation (eagle). Share, otherwise, apart from the truncated cone, nothing is visible. The ideology of the Apollo crew compartment. As one young talent wrote, the ideology of the Eagle is the OE of "Apollo". The ideology of D4X is included in the "ideology" of Angara-A5
        The ideology of D4X is to make a cartoon about its launch (once a year - more precisely - 0,75) and put a billion dollars in their pockets for nimble guys supposedly for launching a real D4X. So the ideology is the same of the "Angara-A5" IRS. They have been letting go for 6 years. let go. Apparently, this is a lucrative business: every year to run on "Angara-A5"
    3. vadimtt
      vadimtt 31 October 2020 13: 21
      -1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Well. how can I not remember the OTRAG project


      It's a pity during the time of this project there was no Kerbal Space Program yet, that would be where the designers deployed to the full wassat
      1. gridasov
        gridasov 31 October 2020 13: 52
        0
        Designers must first know the physical processes and algorithms of their changes, and only then take on the design.
  • Whirlwind
    Whirlwind 31 October 2020 12: 48
    0
    Or in the near future on the planet we will deploy the military budgets of 200 countries of the world for the exploration of outer space, or the arms race will finally drive everyone crazy and humanity will die.
    It is good that Russia is looking forward to the cosmic future of Mankind and is creating such concepts, which means that not everything is lost.
    1. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 14: 14
      0
      Many believe that the COVID-19 epidemic is a substitute for World War III. The goal (theoretical) is to knock out of the number of living people who still remember (besides, make jokes) about the "US flights to the moon." "But something went wrong." Therefore, the pandemic is being promoted with caution: how not to run into anti-coronavirus riots. On the brink, so to speak, they are balancing.
      1. Whirlwind
        Whirlwind 5 November 2020 18: 55
        0
        There is a hybrid war, where biological warfare with its viruses is one of the types of destruction of the enemy. We have been balancing on the brink since the emergence of strategic nuclear missile weapons.
        There will be riots. They enter hybrid war as well as biological war, like rebellion-war ...
  • Operator
    Operator 31 October 2020 13: 08
    -7
    Will not take off - only hardcore (hydrogen with oxygen) plus an uncooled rocket engine without a turbo pump and a fully packaged first stage.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 31 October 2020 16: 43
      0
      Turbo fuel supercharger required! But it must work on a completely different algorithm of the processes in it.
      1. Leonid Batsura
        Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 14: 17
        0
        TNA - turbo-pump fuel supply. Is there another ALGORITHM? Offer -
        1. gridasov
          gridasov 5 November 2020 17: 58
          0
          They call me an old-timer here and all the time I propose. only no one is ever ready to listen. Not to mention hearing. Because I don't even know what to say
  • fa2998
    fa2998 31 October 2020 13: 12
    +2
    Quote: Hyperion
    I love the enormous size of our plans, the sweep of the steps of the sazhen.

    One more name. Soon we will get confused in these missiles. There is an "Angara" for which a lot of money was spent. They promised a hard option. There was also an "Energia" rocket, mastered by production, no, we need more. Pictures, clips, presentations, concepts - just give us money! hi No.
  • alex aircraft
    alex aircraft 31 October 2020 13: 13
    +3
    RN Energia launched 100 tons into a near-earth orbit and successfully flew 2 times, but here only 53 tons and 106 are some kind of double. We cannot repeat the Soviet success. By the way, look how long it took to make the energy-blizzard system and how many years have been poking around with the hangar. And there are also smart people who whistle about Brezhnev's stagnation ...
    1. BastaKarapuzik And
      BastaKarapuzik And 31 October 2020 14: 51
      0
      Well, this is modularity, based on the same blocks, to get a carrier for any load.
      Energy is a brilliant development by designers and industry, but a failure in planning.
      Get a great media that has no work to do. Why did they build if there were no tasks for it?
      We don't need to repeat that.
      1. ont65
        ont65 31 October 2020 20: 15
        -1
        Let me remind you that shuttles for which there were no loads flew from 81 to 11 years. What is a super heavy carrier? These are manned programs beyond the earth's orbit, high-orbit stations and the development of resources in space. A toy for super powers only.
  • Pavel73
    Pavel73 31 October 2020 13: 15
    0
    They had a good Victoria project.
  • fa2998
    fa2998 31 October 2020 13: 26
    0
    Quote: Alien From
    The hangar only needs to fly first

    Fairy tales were also told about "Angara" - single, double, triple - they had a gramophone record there! Money, fuck, let's get new ones for new fairy tales. hi
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 31 October 2020 13: 49
      0
      In our space, everything has long been stuck and jammed - sheer projecting, stealing and promising, but in fact sheer braking in all directions. - and there is no one to lubricate and wedge.
    2. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 14: 21
      0
      The second imitation of the Angara-A5 launch was scheduled for yesterday - it was postponed to November 24. New crews did not have time to draw a cartoon of the "second" launch of "Angara-A5"
  • Hog
    Hog 31 October 2020 14: 41
    +3
    Shaw, again?
    Projects, projects, and zero sense.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 31 October 2020 15: 04
      +2
      Exactly! They will scream with foam at the mouth about their righteousness, but things stand still, which in modern conditions is tantamount to lagging behind and degradation
    2. Leonid Batsura
      Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 14: 28
      0
      Why then? One woman lived with a man for 50 years - until his death. Than he took her (according to her words) - promises. So they will go on vacation to the Crimea (then they did not go to Ebipet yet), they will bask in the sun. Lulled, she fell asleep happy. But something objectively prevented them from going and she was the initiator of the cancellation. And the next year, he again made her happy ... 50 years is not khukhry-muhry
  • Dikson
    Dikson 31 October 2020 16: 03
    -1
    .. And one more cosmodrome for it should be built .. give each rocket its own cosmodrome!
  • andr327
    andr327 31 October 2020 17: 36
    0
    There should always be alternative options, not only in the global space, but also within the country. Monopoly is all dead-end, even in the USSR there was a constant struggle between design bureaus. At the same time, most often the product of only one bureau went into production. Ideas require implementation, albeit not always successful ones - this is an experience. But "effective managers" don't understand this.
    Thus, attempts to bring aircraft, helicopter, rocket, etc. into a single corporation. will not lead to good. Therefore, let there be developments of Khrunichevites and Makeevites.
  • yfast
    yfast 31 October 2020 17: 58
    +1
    Quote: Observer2014
    The Makeyev SRC developed the concept of a new super-heavy launch vehicle
    Well done! good A beautiful picture. I, too, all my childhood and adolescence loved to draw similar pictures and fantasize about heavy rockets too. It remains a mere trifle. Find a lot of money and embody this fantasy in metal, so to speak. Good luck to the Makeev SRC in this matter! I hope whoever reads this will live to see this bright day when this rocket is put on stream. And with its help, they will methodically explore the depths of space! hi

    With its help, you can move the opposition to Mars, for example. Methodically.
  • Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 31 October 2020 19: 26
    0
    Not a word about the return of the steps! What kind of "leader" is this ?! This is an outsider - and it should have been called. And they also have a "triple" leader. Which is actually a triple outsider. If the "double" and "triple" leaders are not supposed to be used for manned flights, then how do they plan to deliver astronauts to the lunar base and back? A single one is clearly not enough. Yes, and triple - barely. And their "triple" is considered "Martian"? .. laughing
    1. ont65
      ont65 31 October 2020 20: 27
      -1
      Leader, leader. The project is not worse, but in the approach to modularity and radically different. Regarding the delivery of crews - as it turns out, there are enough capabilities of the Angara-A5B, which is launching tankers, and the shuttle operating in orbit, to organize uninterrupted flights to the Moon.
      1. Falcon5555
        Falcon5555 1 November 2020 00: 04
        0
        The project is no worse
        Not worse than what? Now to start or propose to start the development of disposable missiles is a violation of common sense.
        Regarding the delivery of crews ...
        I don’t know what LPPC is, and it’s not interesting, because it is known that there is fish for fishlessness and cancer. It is possible and one hundred and five hundred leaders, "Hangar", shuttles, mysterious LPTC, "tankers-refueling", think up that one ship to the moon to send, which will increase both the price and the likelihood of disasters, and in general - not interesting.
        1. ont65
          ont65 1 November 2020 02: 33
          0
          Not worse than others. And LPPK is an abbreviation for a lunar take-off and landing ship. Are you not interested, but you want to express indignation? It happens, and for any reason. The time is now inconvenient for many. Something else?
          1. Falcon5555
            Falcon5555 1 November 2020 13: 30
            0
            What "something else"? .. Let me remind you - it was you who clung to my original post, not me to yours. I didn't have any questions for you. How are you, buddy? One feels that something bothers you ... It seems that you suddenly became interested in me, or not for me personally, but for a wider circle, to do psychoanalysis, or to speculate on the themes of time. More than worthy occupation ... Or something else?
        2. ont65
          ont65 1 November 2020 03: 05
          0
          In more detail, in the delivery scheme recently proposed by Roscosmos, the need for the next locomotive of the lunar weight of the Eagle or Soyuz in conjunction with the take-off and landing module disappears, and this is 20 tons. load.
        3. Leonid Batsura
          Leonid Batsura 5 November 2020 14: 38
          0
          The question of the return stage. There was a reusable TTU building in the MTKS (does anyone remember?) (This is Shutt - remember this?). They caught him, pulled him out of the water. Started with fuel - so 100 times ... "The soul calmed down on the fact that every time" reusable "they made a new one. And they were happy. Because reuse is still a hemorrhoid. For example, the methodology of reliability indicators, which has been in the work, is impossible to find a thread ... Not to mention other troubles
          1. Falcon5555
            Falcon5555 5 November 2020 17: 38
            0
            What are these abbreviations? Shutt? - I do not remember. belay
            Every time to do something new - that hemorrhoids tenfold more. It is generally impossible to understand the reliability of a non-trivial mechanism that has not been in operation. One can only believe or not believe.
  • BastaKarapuzik And
    BastaKarapuzik And 31 October 2020 22: 53
    0
    Quote: ont65
    shuttles for which there were no loads flew from 81 to 11 years

    And the launch cost only went up. They have caused serious damage to the US space program.
    We don't need to repeat this story, do we?
  • Maki maki
    Maki maki 1 November 2020 00: 16
    15
    Is this already the super-heavy one? Like the fifth.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 1 November 2020 17: 19
      0
      The second first Yenisei, which seems to be created.
  • Oleg4477
    Oleg4477 1 November 2020 18: 25
    0
    Strategy 2020: http://aaijsornel.temp.swtest.ru/
  • Robocat
    Robocat 1 November 2020 20: 23
    0
    Another mythical "Leader".
    The super destroyer "Leader" was not enough ...
  • CT-55_11-9009
    CT-55_11-9009 1 November 2020 22: 30
    0
    According to the developers, with a dead weight of 1143 tons, the new rocket will be able to launch 53 tons of load into a low reference orbit. The height of the carrier, together with the installed Orel spacecraft, will be 91 meters.

    To support the lunar base, it is proposed to use a double rocket "Leader", i.e. it will consist of four side and two central blocks on the first and second stages, connected by power belts. With a total mass of 2284 tons, such a rocket will be able to lift 106 tons of load into space. It is specified that the "double" "Leader" will not be used in manned flights.

    Accordingly, the Martian version of the rocket implies a bunch of three Leader rockets. Such a bundle will be able to launch up to 160 tons into space. It is also not planned to be used for manned flights.

    But them ... uh ... nothing like that! With an increase in the number of steps, the mass of the payload grows nonlinearly, if I remember everything correctly - back exponentially. So, if the number of steps is doubled, the PN mass will not be 106 tons, but less than a hundred, if tripled, if not 110-120 instead of 160. Whoever wrote the article is understandably unfamiliar with Tsiolkovsky's formula. Who wrote the brave report from Makeev? ..
  • Iluf
    Iluf 2 November 2020 11: 32
    +2
    You read such announcements and you are surprised. The electorate has been hanging noodles for 20 years in the spirit of "Russia is getting up from its knees", "we can repeat", "there are no analogues in the world and is not expected", "we will master Mars and the Moon soon", "30 swings", "like a meteorite, like a fireball etc. - and he does not get tired of believing in a miracle. Although elementary common sense and logic dictates that in a country where everything is aimed at enriching a very narrow group of people, nothing like this can happen. The budgets of Roscosmos and the Armed Forces are many times smaller than similar budgets (and this is not taking into account the total theft from these budgets!) Of the United States, and suddenly we "appear" breakthrough successes in the form of vanguards, Poseidons and other cyclones. Well, where does it come from? Any talented university graduate dreams of dumping west as quickly as possible. The main assets in production have not been mostly renewed since the times of the USSR. Management everywhere thinks first of all about getting rich. And Putin shows cartoons about "meteorite, fireball" and assures us that we are ahead of the rest of the planet. And even in Syria already 20 times - judging by the statements - they all won. They killed all the terrorists and donkeys and bombed all the sheds with calibers. Meanwhile, Russian soldiers continue to die there every day. As long as this thieves' clique is in power, headed by a nullified clique, the Russian people are in no danger.