Military Review

She flies, but how beautiful is that?

160
So, the heavy "Angara" successfully started, judging by Rogozin's tweets, rather in spite of than anything else. But - it is definitely worth rejoicing for several reasons at once, which we will now consider.



Source: roscosmos.ru

The second and successful launch of the rocket was perceived even too enthusiastically, but this is not from a good life.

Let's start by giving ourselves an answer to the question: what is a heavy launch vehicle, and is it really needed.

In our age of rapid miniaturization of everything, satellites also become smaller. In this connection, both the Americans and the Chinese are already launching them into orbit in batches. Communication, internet, weather monitoring - all this is common and commonplace.

Precisely because satellites are getting smaller, there is such a huge demand in the world for light and ultralight rockets that can launch vehicles into low orbit. And because in the commercial sector there is such a huge demand for light launch vehicles, who wants to wait until they have enough of a large rocket?

What about a heavy rocket?

But with heavy missiles, the situation is completely different.

On the one hand, a large rocket means big problems and even more money, but a heavy launch vehicle is, first of all, deep space and spacecraft in geostationary orbit. Therefore, if someone only needs their own satellites in orbit, welcome to the sector of light carriers, and whoever wants to fly far or equip a space station in orbit, then there is no way without heavy equipment.

And the third point. Military equipment. Military satellites are a completely different group of spacecraft, designed for slightly different operating times and functionality. Therefore, if you look at the launches, then military satellites are not put into orbit in batches. Basically - one at a time, less often in pairs. They are very bulky.

And to put such large satellites or space station elements into stationary orbit, heavy carriers are needed. Moreover - for flights to other objects of the solar system.

Upper stages, a large supply of fuel for acceleration and maneuvers are the main components of success. The upper stage and the spacecraft itself account for up to 30% of the mass, the rest is fuel.

Here's the conclusion: heavy rockets are needed to operate in a stationary orbit with large objects and fly over considerable distances in deep space.

True, today there is a lot of talk about the fact that it is realistic to put the necessary equipment into orbit with the help of several launches with light launch vehicles, assemble it in orbit, and then launch along the planned route.

All this, in general, is more reminiscent of the fantasy of the "close-range sight", because the "assembly shop" in orbit is, of course, beautiful, but as the practice of today shows, astronauts are not always able to replace the solar battery on the ISS, then what to say about modular assembly of a deep-space aircraft?

Not only is it difficult and daunting to work in space, but also the maneuvers and docking themselves require a breakthrough of fuel. Plus, the reliability of such a system will also drop in direct proportion to the number of starts. And God forbid, if one of the launches in the chain fails. It is clear that the entire space construction will stop until duplicate modules are made.

So multi-launch systems in our time and with our level of technology are still very risky. And here all the hope is precisely on heavy launch vehicles, which are still the future of long-range flights.

It is quite natural that all (or almost all) space powers have heavy launch vehicles in their arsenal. And some even have super-heavy ones.

The United States has fully flying Falcon-9 (puts up to 22,9 tons into orbit) and Delta-IV Heavy (up to 28,7 tons), and in 2021 the first launch of Vulcan (27,2 tons) and New Glenn - a super-heavy rocket is planned , capable of launching up to 45 tons into orbit.

China has been using Changzhen-5 for a long time, which will output up to 25 tons, and in the future, Changzhen-9, which, according to some information, will have a carrying capacity of 30 to 32 tons.

Europeans operate Ariane-5 ES (21 tons).

And only we actually had a big gap in this regard. The main heavy LV in Russia remained the Proton, developed in the 60s of the last century. Yes, the Proton was modernized several times, but the fact that it flew on the most perfect poison made it a constant target of attacks from environmentalists.

Quite rightly, by the way, since the whole world has long abandoned a mixture of asymmetric dimethylhydrazine and nitric tetroxide.

As a result, after "only" 55 years of use, the "Proton" was abandoned. But a refusal is a refusal, and what can replace it? Well, "Angara". Not a record PH, but it exists and it flies.

I would very much like it to fly not in spite of, but because. And the launch of the "Angara" is not a single action, but the rocket can be fired regularly and, most importantly, there will be work for it. That is, military satellites, ships, interplanetary stations.

But even when all six successful test flights of the Angara-A5 are over, a lot still needs to be done for normal operation.

To begin with, the heavy "Angara" needs a normal cosmodrome. Plesetsk is not bad, but for satellites launched into polar orbits, when there is no need to fight the Earth's rotation. But in order to launch into a geostationary orbit, then on the contrary, the closer to the equator, the more the planet itself helps with its rotation.

Well, everyone has already understood - Vostochny ... I don't want to comment on the affairs at this cosmodrome yet.

The second problem. Ship. The fact that the Soyuz has nothing to do at long distances (we are talking about the same lunar program) is understandable. It seems that there is "Eagle", aka "Federation", for which there is no launch vehicle yet. For the launch of the "Eagle" into space, "Rus" was planned, work on which was stopped. It is necessary to "sharpen" the "Angara" specifically for the "Eagle", which will take quite a lot of time.

So having a severe ROP is not even half the battle. The lack of a launch pad at the proper latitudes and the lack of a manned spacecraft do not look optimistic.

Yes, in the announced plans of Roscosmos there is a test launch of the "Eagle" on the "Angara-A5" at the end of 2023, already from the new launch pad at the Vostochny cosmodrome. And an unmanned flight to the ISS in 2024 and manned in 2025 ...

All this is good, and it would look just fine, if not one small nuance: these are the promises of Roscosmos. A corporation that is doing well with promises, but with performances ...

In general, as many of us said about Elon Musk's projects: when it flies, then we'll talk.

Moreover, with the lunar program, everything is not as smooth as we would like. The flight program, which was again announced by Roskosmos, is a multi-launch program using four Angara-A5V missiles with a cryogenic booster and three rendezvous: two in near-earth and one in near-lunar orbits.

Cumbersome schemes with multiple docking and assembly in orbit, as mentioned above, are not reliable. Plus, they are fuel-intensive.

Among other things, the most important thing is missing: the mentioned cryogenic booster unit. It still needs to be developed, built, tested ...

The Chinese, however, are going the same way. They also have a system of four Changjeen-5 launches, which has the same carrying capacity as the Angara. But the Chinese are working rapidly on Changzhen-9, which will have to solve all the problems associated with long-distance flights.

Well, if in the USA they successfully fly around their SLS carrier rocket, then they generally have no problems, since the SLS will put into orbit from 95 to 130 tons in one launch.

Moreover, we do not have to wait so long for the moment when SLS starts. 2021-1 is generally not far off ...

In general, all hope is for the very cryogenic stage that has yet to be developed.

Everything is very damp and uncertain. However, as usual with us. But the successful launch of the Angara can be viewed as a kind of ray in the darkness. At least, although we do not have a place in the market for commercial launches of heavy LV, but in 2025, when the Protons will finally go to history, they are replaced by a real and flying rocket.

It is very good.

At least 24,5 tons, which Angara-5A can carry into low-earth orbit, is quite enough for Russia to have no problems with launching any satellites, of any size and weight, into low-earth orbit. This is very optimistic.

It is possible with the same rocket to launch automatic stations for flight to the Moon and other celestial bodies.
The fact that "Angara" successfully flew, I repeat, is a ray of light in the darkness of outer space. But in order for the ray to turn into a ray that disperses the darkness, you need to work and work. Without being distracted by various nonsense.

Our Chinese competitors say that the journey of a thousand li starts with one step. Well, let the second successful launch of "Angara" become the same step for the Russian space.
Author:
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 17 December 2020 05: 37
    +2
    Well yes. We only have to
    "Hope and wait".
    1. Finches
      Finches 17 December 2020 06: 54
      +5
      Nevertheless, the rocket flew! Russia is a country that has two full-blooded cosmodromes of its own, no matter how things go and one historic friendly! It is not correct to compare with China - it did not have perestroika, a 500-day program, privatization, two most difficult Chechen military companies, the 90s, Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin with accomplices and much more ... If you think about it, it’s generally surprising that Angara flew ! Therefore, taking into account everything, this is undoubtedly the success of our space industry - the creation of a heavy-class launch vehicle, all elements of which are made from our parts, at our factories, and launches can be carried out from our cosmodromes!
      1. military_cat
        military_cat 17 December 2020 07: 12
        +11
        Since the article already includes a review, it is strange that it does not mention Falcon Heavy with a payload on LEO. > 63t, which has already flown twice (once with a commercial satellite) and is included in the Artemis program. And she also gave us an impressive video of the synchronized landing of the first two stages.

        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 17 December 2020 07: 54
          +12
          Falcon Heavy has flown three times.
          Well, Starship is also not mentioned. Now, if he flies into space, but in the announced quantity and prices. Here, in general, everyone will be a complete abstraction
          1. Temples
            Temples 17 December 2020 10: 26
            0
            Cumbersome schemes with multiple docking and assembly in orbit, as mentioned above, are not reliable.


            All manned space flights are in-orbit docking schemes.
            It is reliable.

            I repeat for the writing "geniuses":

            - All manned space flights are schemes with docking in orbit.
            - It's reliable.

            Angara is not just a rocket.
            Angara is a set of measures to recreate an independent and guaranteed spacewalk.
            Eastern is part of this program.
            And a huge number of engineers and workers are working to reproduce this whole complex in metal and concrete.

            And someone constantly whines that everything is bad with us.

            As they say, who studied what.

            Tongue to grind not to roll bags.
            1. Anatoly Mikhailenko 2
              Anatoly Mikhailenko 2 27 February 2021 01: 54
              +1
              The more expensive the program, the longer it takes to master it in order to steal more. It's time to grow up and not emit childish enthusiasm for our supposed achievements. So many years have been tinkering with this Eastern. In Soviet times, they would have built it in three years, because they built it for business, and not for making a profit.
          2. SID
            SID 17 December 2020 12: 55
            +4
            So what will happen ...? They will fly on our own, we on ours. What is the "absent" thing?
            1. Shopping Mall
              Shopping Mall 17 December 2020 23: 45
              +1
              Quote: SID
              So what will happen ...? They will fly on our own, we on ours. What is the "absent" thing?


              The fact is that their capabilities for launching PN into space may exceed ours by an order or two.
          3. Vadim237
            Vadim237 17 December 2020 20: 50
            0
            As an unmanned cargo system, Starship will come down in its current form, but as a manned spacecraft, there is no very extreme landing system, no SAS system for the crew and much more.
            1. Alexander Grizodub
              Alexander Grizodub 6 February 2021 04: 17
              0
              In its present form, they do not even have the first stage yet. And the second has already twice kissed her face on the asphalt. There is still a long time before the real product.
          4. Shopping Mall
            Shopping Mall 17 December 2020 23: 42
            +5
            Quote: BlackMokona
            Falcon Heavy has flown three times.
            Well, Starship is also not mentioned. Now, if he flies into space, but in the announced quantity and prices. Here, in general, everyone will be a complete abstraction


            If Starship does what it promises, it will be an achievement comparable to the first flight into space or a nuclear reactor. The consequences are still difficult to assess.
        2. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo 17 December 2020 10: 01
          -31%
          Quote: military_cat
          Since the article already includes a review, it is strange that it does not mention Falcon Heavy with a payload on LEO. > 63t, which has already flown twice (once with a commercial satellite) and is included in the Artemis program. And she also gave us an impressive video of the synchronized landing of the first two stages.

          There is no place for Maskophiles in VO.
        3. Analkara
          Analkara 30 December 2020 21: 16
          -1
          You answer me. Where did the statesmen deliver the Saturn-5 launch vehicle with a payload of up to 140 tons lol while in Russia under Boris Yeltsin, cosmonautics was lost drinks but Unions are still flying now?
      2. Civil
        Civil 17 December 2020 07: 32
        +17
        It is not correct to compare with China - it did not have perestroika, a 500-day program, privatization, two hardest Chechen military companies, the 90s, Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin with accomplices and much more.

        Exactly 20 years later (from 1945 to 1965) after the Great Patriotic War, and this is exactly how much has passed after your Yeltsin:
        1. The USSR completely rebuilt what was destroyed by a terrible war.
        2. Had a nuclear weapon.
        3. Was in space number 1.
        4. Became the world's leading economy.
        5. The whole world admired and joined the socialist camp.
        6. Conducted successful proxy wars with the West in its zones of influence.

        And yes, EBN's accomplices are all in power. For example Chubais.
        1. Finches
          Finches 17 December 2020 08: 11
          -36%
          What power does Chubais have? Minister, Prime Minister ... Who?
          However, the dispute is useless - this is the page of all the scammers! laughing
        2. My doctor
          My doctor 17 December 2020 10: 04
          0
          Quote: Civil
          1. The USSR completely rebuilt what was destroyed by a terrible war.

          On the enthusiasm of the people, which is possible once in history. This will never happen again.

          Quote: Civil
          Became the world's leading economy.

          What kind of boy?
          Quote: Civil
          The whole world admired and joined the socialist camp.

          IN ASIA Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge and the DPRK. In Africa, cannibalistic regimes or terrorist rebel groups with which the US did not want to do business. There is no need to talk about Europe, until the end of history, Eastern Europe will remember Russia from the USSR.
          1. Roman070280
            Roman070280 17 December 2020 10: 25
            +5
            On the enthusiasm of the people, which is possible once in history. This will never happen again.


            In a situation where 90% of the country's funds go to yachts and villas over the hill, the people's enthusiasm will not be repeated .. here you are right ..
            Moreover, I will tell you in confidence that we would not have won the Second World War either .. because there are not so many bad guys to go to war for Sechin and Miller outside this site ..

            But this does not in any way make the people guilty, and does not detract from their merits ..
            It is not the people’s fault that they have brought them to such a state where there is no enthusiasm ..
            So the person is higher, citing arguments about those 20 years, and the present ones are absolutely right .. The current government itself does not even try to think about some kind of enthusiasm .. and therefore, the results are as follows ..

            Quote: Civil
            Became the world's leading economy.


            What kind of boy?

            Why nonsense .. It's true .. Let not the first place. and the second ..
            1. zlinn
              zlinn 17 December 2020 15: 09
              -5
              and on the second, it was not when, it is very difficult to accurately assess the GDP of the USSR (closeness and planning), but it seems that it was up to 5 places (it does not count by PPP, there was no real opportunity to calculate it, and the ruble exchange rate was a virtual value)
              1. Victorio
                Victorio 17 December 2020 22: 55
                +1
                Quote: zlinn
                and she was never on the second

                ===
                here they write something else: / The USSR was in first place in the world for the production of almost all types of products of the basic industries [35]: oil, steel, cast iron, metal-cutting machines, diesel locomotives, electric locomotives, tractors, prefabricated reinforced concrete structures, iron ore, coke, refrigerators , woolen fabrics, leather footwear, butter, natural gas production, production of mineral fertilizers, lumber, reactor uranium (50% of world production), railway freight and passenger traffic, production of many types of military equipment [15], according to the total number of launches of space flying devices (50% of the total number of launches in the world), gross yield of potatoes, sugar beets; in second place in the world in terms of fish catch and production of other seafood, sheep, pigs, electricity production, gold mining, cement production, coal mining, the total length of railways, road freight traffic, air cargo and passenger traffic [36] [37] ...

                The Soviet Union remained the world's second largest economy in both nominal GDP and GDP (PPP) for much of the Cold War until 1988, when Japan's nominal GDP became the world's second largest. [38] /
                1. zlinn
                  zlinn 18 December 2020 01: 58
                  +2
                  here, only this is almost all lies, postscripts, and very tricky accounting and reporting, where an ordinary household drill was recorded in metal-cutting machines, where transport companies increased the mileage, and the excess gasoline did not even sell to the left, but simply poured into a ditch where the exchange rate held at around 68 kopecks, simply because to significantly increase economic indicators, and had nothing to do with its real exchange rate, and therefore nominal GDP was overestimated by about 5 times, and if we analyze the declared GDP by PPP per capita, it turned out, that the Soviet people lived better than the French and West Germans, all this was done to throw dust in the eyes, that our teaching is omnipotent, because it is true
                  1. Victorio
                    Victorio 18 December 2020 10: 51
                    0
                    Quote: zlinn
                    this TBut this is almost all lies, subscripts, and very cunning accounting and reporting, where an ordinary household drill was recorded into metal-cutting machines, where transport companies increased the mileage, and did not even sell excess gasoline to the left, but simply poured into a ditch where the exchange rate was kept at around 68 kopecks, simply because in order to significantly increase economic indicators, and had nothing to do with its real exchange rate, and therefore the nominal GDP was overestimated by about 5 times, and if we analyze the declared GDP by PPP per capita, it turned out that the Soviet people lived better than the French and Western Germans, all this was done to throw dust in the eyes, our teaching is omnipotent, because it is true

                    ===
                    Well, yes, you know everything, everything has been calculated and exposed. so share your "knowledge"
          2. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 December 2020 10: 43
            0
            Quote: MyVrach
            IN ASIA Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge and the DPRK. In Africa, cannibalistic regimes or terrorist rebel groups with which the US did not want to do business. There is no need to talk about Europe, until the end of history, Eastern Europe will remember Russia from the USSR.

            Quote: Civil
            5. The whole world admired and joined the socialist camp.

            Yes, you are talking about the same thing. Unless I will note that Pol Pot is already the mid-70s, so its activity is not on the conscience of the USSR. This is a French university leftist, backed by a fine man, Jimmy Carter, to keep up with democracy in Iran. They embodied the ideals of '68, so to speak.
            As for African cannibals, this is a direct consequence of the Atlantic Charter, so the USSR did not smell here either, boys the Laborites and the Democratic Party were sniffing, and he was standing nearby.
            Quote: MyVrach
            Became the world's leading economy.

            What kind of boy?

            Well, the person got excited a little.
            Quote: MyVrach
            The USSR completely rebuilt what was destroyed by a terrible war.

            On the enthusiasm of the people, which is possible once in history. This will never happen again.

            I never really rebuilt it. If we are talking about the First World War, of course.
          3. krizis
            krizis 2 February 2021 11: 35
            0
            The opposite is true. just the USA and Europe with the most cannibalistic regimes had more deals than the USSR.
            And first of all this concerns Kampuchea.
        3. Simargl
          Simargl 17 December 2020 12: 24
          -4
          Quote: Civil
          namely, so much has passed since your Yeltsin:
          And before that, 23 years had passed after the revolution, 18 years after the civil one. And before that it was bourgeois, which did not last a year on the fragments of autocracy.
          We too are reaping the fruits of the bourgeois revolution (bourgeois renaissance?).
          1 - Are you personally ready to work in the same way as the people of the USSR from 1945 to 1965? I think that neither you nor the majority of people: after all, according to the Constitution, our ideology is prohibited, therefore, you can push through any, so they push the game.
          2 - What is the analogy today? I have a rough idea, but this job cuts are the wildest.
          3 - Well, after Gagarin I started to lag behind.
          4 - Leading? Significant, but ...
          5 - Why did they run away now and move away from the ideas of communism?
          6 - And today we start again.
          1. Roman070280
            Roman070280 17 December 2020 12: 37
            +6
            Are you personally ready to work in the same way as the people of the USSR from 1945 to 1965?

            I wonder .. was there something wrong with those people ??
            Korolev was ready to work.
            Maybe he was a fool, intoxicated by ideology ?? Or worked under the threat of execution ??
            Or maybe he was less happy than our contemporaries ??
            Why do they initially think that his conditional children / grandchildren are not capable of the same continuation?
            Or maybe now a teenager, lying in jeans with a can of beer in front of a tablet, and spitting at the ceiling, feels like he is in paradise, and in heaven with happiness in comparison with children of the 7s and 70s. years who came home from the hill all in the snow, rushed for a piece of bread with sugar, and ran back ??

            The question about such readiness is like a monastery, where monks have lived quietly and decorously for decades, growing their own food, suddenly bring prostitutes, arrange a disco, start feeding and drinking wine .. And when they still can’t resist, and will go to " jeans and gum ", then after a few months ask if they want to return to their old life ..
            They won't! Like the Indians, intoxicated by Europeans, they did not want to give up the "waters of fire" ..
            1. Temples
              Temples 17 December 2020 14: 17
              +7
              Quote: Roman070280
              Korolev was ready to work.

              Separate patties from flies.
              Korolev "worked" because he was obsessed with his idea. In a good sense, the word is possessed. This was the meaning of his life. The country's leadership first put him in jail for this.
              And then they gave him the opportunity to make his dream come true.

              Sikorsky was forced to leave where they gave him to make his dream come true.

              And so is every scientist or engineer.

              There is no communism or capitalism here.

              There are talented scientists and engineers.

              And the power only gives these people the opportunity to realize themselves, any way suppresses such people ..

              For engineers, we are betting on communism and capitalism. They live differently. Like the vast majority of people.
            2. Simargl
              Simargl 17 December 2020 19: 44
              +2
              Quote: Roman070280
              I wonder .. was there something wrong with those people ??
              I have no questions for "those" people. However, you are very inattentively reading or understanding the text of the problem:
              Quote: Simargl
              Are you personally ready to work in the same way as the people of the USSR from 1945 to 1965? I think that neither you nor most people
              Don't you think that you just expanded my answer? No? It's strange. After all, this is exactly what I wrote: the absolute majority of people in our country are not ready to work for an idea, the absolute majority no longer believe in a bright future! If earlier they believed that children would live better, now they “know” that there will be only blackness.
          2. krizis
            krizis 2 February 2021 12: 03
            0
            "1 - Are you personally ready to work in the same way as the people of the USSR from 1945 to 1965? I think that neither you nor the majority of people: after all, according to the Constitution, our ideology is prohibited, therefore you can push through any, so they push game."

            - why the question is what the ideology. When - as in 45m there is nowhere to go - the people work. And ideology has nothing to do with it. It's another matter if he knows. that tomorrow will be better than yesterday, and your work turns not into palaces and yachts, but into your better life tomorrow - it works much better.
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 2 February 2021 18: 55
              0
              Quote: krizis
              After all, according to the Constitution, ideology is prohibited in our country, therefore, you can push through any, so they push game.
              What is this for? Ideology is not prohibited!
              Quote: Article 13 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation
              1.In the Russian Federation ideological diversity recognized... 2.No ideology can be established as state or mandatory.
              Push any, within the law and you will be happy!
              And how does this compare with the motivation to work?

              Quote: krizis
              It's another matter if he knows. that tomorrow will be better than yesterday, and your work turns not into palaces and yachts, but into your better life tomorrow - it works much better.
              So life does not seem to get worse now: yesterday a push-button telephone - today there are only three of them. And if you don't drink, you can also borrow money for a car ...
              The problem is that now, not really straining to have much more than before - pushing with all your might. Drive any "protester" into the shoes of an average citizen of the USSR until the 60s - howl!
              1. krizis
                krizis 5 February 2021 08: 46
                0
                "So life does not seem to be getting worse now: yesterday there was a push-button telephone - today there are only three of them. And if you don't drink, you can also borrow money for a car .."
                is the improvement of technology abroad, not life in the country.
                "The problem is that now, not really straining to have much more than before - pushing back with all his might."
                - yah? and raise another child? it’s not at all a fact that it’s getting easier, not more difficult, even over the past 15 years.
                After a couple of post-war years, life improved en eyes. Another such transition is simply difficult to imagine.
                "Drive any" protester "into the shoes of an average citizen of the USSR before the 60s - howl!"
                - and what will happen when transplanted into a citizen of the Republic of Ingushetia of the 19th or 18th century :) or even not the Republic of Ingushetia, but any other country :)
                But most importantly, you changed the subject, we are talking about the influence of ideology on post-war growth.
                1. Simargl
                  Simargl 5 February 2021 19: 15
                  0
                  Quote: krizis
                  is the improvement of technology abroad, not life in the country.
                  Maybe this is an improvement in foreign technology, but I do not feel the deterioration of my life. Say, for periods of 10 years, I would not want to be at that level - neither 10, nor 20, nor 30 years ago. Well, perhaps the carcass is not averse to returning those years. The difference is that 30 years ago, importing was a coveted dream, but now it's in the store. And against this background, our goods were not weak.

                  Quote: krizis
                  - yah? and raise another child? it’s not at all a fact that it’s getting easier, not more difficult, even over the past 15 years.
                  90% of the reasons for this - we are lazy. As before, you need to invest your soul and time in the "seedlings". Do you know one interesting fact? A very large %% of great people were born at seven months. In the days of nascent medicine as such, such children were not viable without investment from the parents, especially the mother. And it so happened that such children developed better than nine-month-olds.
                  You can provide a minimum and get a minimum, you can invest your soul and time, get a person.

                  Quote: krizis
                  After a couple of post-war years, life improved en eyes.
                  Until 98, there was no light at the end of the tunnel. At all. Then the Cherenkov radiation also went out. After about 2002, the light appeared. Are you sure we are not in the post-war years?
                  During the war, half of the camp was destroyed, and in the 90s - all! Do you want to compare losses?

                  Quote: krizis
                  - and what will happen when transplanted into a citizen of the Republic of Ingushetia of the 19th or 18th century :)
                  Do we say average? About a widespread agrarian society? Almost everyone will die without thinking twice in torment.

                  Quote: krizis
                  or even not RI, but any other country :)
                  At 19 V, the difference was already large, at 18 - I don't think it was very noticeable.

                  Quote: krizis
                  But most importantly, you changed the subject, we are talking about the influence of ideology on post-war growth.
                  No, I haven't. I say that people are not ready to repeat those feats in spite of any invented ideology. We need a clear plan with fair pay.
        4. Dart2027
          Dart2027 17 December 2020 19: 07
          -1
          Quote: Civil
          Became the world's leading economy

          Quote: Civil
          The whole world admired and joined the socialist camp.

          Really?
          Quote: Civil
          The USSR completely rebuilt what was destroyed by a terrible war.

          But at the same time, it was necessary to work hard as today's workers (namely, they) never dreamed of.
        5. Analkara
          Analkara 30 December 2020 23: 42
          -1
          Here count at least two WWII soldier survived.
          Before the collapse, the population of the USSR was 293 million.
          Already in the Russian Federation (2002) there are 145, 2 million.
          Voucher privatization (1992-1994)
          Monetary privatization (1994-1999)
          As well as the rule of the seven bankers until 2003
          Total: about 90% of enterprises were privatized during the mentioned period.
          “So, the value of the state and national property, which was launched under the hammer, was understated tenfold.
          In other words, they were taken out of the cordon. bully
          "This is not to mention the fact that the industrial and economic potential of the country has been pushed back to the level of the 60s."
          For comparison: in the war with the Nazis, the population of the USSR fell by more than 13%.

          To point 5 and 6, simply fool
          They were so successful that no traces of them remained except for debts and frightened the West in the form of the DPRK and the Chinese pseudo-communists.
          Do not suffer any more hats and all the best in the new year
      3. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 17 December 2020 09: 48
        +9
        Quote: Finches
        It is not correct to compare with China - it did not have perestroika, a 500-day program, privatization, two most difficult Chechen military companies, the 90s, Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin with accomplices and much more ...

        If you start in the mid 80s, then China then had one rifle a bowl of rice for two, so no excuse.
        1. Kart
          Kart 17 December 2020 10: 22
          -9
          They are making progress now.
          About half of the Chinese now have one bowl of rice for each.
          And of course capitalism, painted red on the outside.
          1. val43
            val43 2 February 2021 11: 09
            0
            Long ago from China?
        2. Finches
          Finches 17 December 2020 20: 23
          +1
          If my memory serves me, then their reforms began in 1978, but in line with the Communist one-party concept, and in 1989, unlike Gorbachev's venal policy, in China there was a man who did not commit betrayal and made them smear the guts of the students and buzaters on the paving stones of the square ... who bought into the sweet temptations of the West! That's the whole story!
          1. Alexander K_2
            Alexander K_2 17 December 2020 20: 31
            -1
            Maybe Great Russia needs a great MAO? Do you personally want? am
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 17 December 2020 20: 57
              -1
              MAO is not the same person who said that the population should be poor because the poorer it is, the more revolutionary it is.
              1. Alexander K_2
                Alexander K_2 17 December 2020 21: 05
                +4
                I can't say about the revolution, but request I know for sure this is the one who, instead of books, put hoes into the hands of everyone "eggheads" and sent them to the fields to catch sparrows
            2. Finches
              Finches 18 December 2020 08: 03
              -4
              Russia in all ages flourished under a strong ruler and collapsed with rags ...
          2. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 18 December 2020 00: 40
            -1
            Quote: Finches
            their reforms began in 1978,

            Ага.
            Quote: Finches
            but in line with the Communist one-party concept

            Capitalism + one-party concept + guts in the square is more fascism than communism, but they did not change the name so as not to complicate things.
            Quote: Finches
            who did not commit betrayal and forced to smear the guts of the students and bozaters on the pavement of the square ... who bought into the sweet enticements of the West!

            The political views of the protesters in China in 1989 are a rather obscure question, who speaks are democrats, who speaks are true Maoists. But the fact that the people were kept in strictness is that you are right, of course.

            In Russia, by the way, they came to about the same thing as in Belarus, for example. Only with the economy, something does not add up anyway.
            Quote: Finches
            unlike Gorbachev's venal policy


            They say "THE KING IS NOT REAL !!!"
      4. Roman070280
        Roman070280 17 December 2020 10: 16
        +8
        Comparing with China is not correct - he didn't have perestroika, the 500-day program, privatization, the two hardest Chechen military companies, the 90s, Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin with accomplices and much more ..


        For 20 years now, neither we nor China have had anything of the above.
        At the same time, 20 years ago, China was still far behind .. but in our country, whatever one may say, there was a huge backlog ..
        So it was God himself who ordered to look, compare, and draw conclusions!

        Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin with accomplices and much more..

        In comparison with the successes of China, the reason clearly looms .. and it does not lie in 20 years ago.
        1. Kart
          Kart 17 December 2020 10: 23
          -10%
          Ask how long the Chinese work in factories, how they live, what kind of pensions they have, what about the environment, and so on.
          Do you agree to live like this?
          1. Roman070280
            Roman070280 17 December 2020 10: 30
            +7
            Why play around ..
            Zyablintsev wrote that it would be incorrect to compare achievements and successes over the past 20 years.
            He was told in Russian - that there are reasons to compare!
            Now let's talk about agree or disagree ..
            A belated question .. Now it doesn't matter whether we would agree to live this way, and what we could achieve in such a time - because we can't turn back .. We can now only look, compare, and bite our elbows ..
          2. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 December 2020 10: 49
            +10
            Quote: Carte
            how long do the Chinese work in factories,

            40-48 hours a week.
            Quote: Carte
            how do they live then

            They live in every way, who is better, who is worse, as elsewhere. Life expectancy is significantly higher than in Russia.
            Quote: Carte
            what are their pensions,

            In Shanghai, Beijing - at the Moscow level, across the country - at the national average.
            Quote: Carte
            what about the ecology,

            How is ecology in Chelyabinsk?
            Quote: Carte
            and so on.

            What's next?
            Quote: Carte
            Do you agree to live like this?

            There are pluses, there are minuses.
            And of course capitalism, painted red on the outside.

            Well yes. In the mid-80s, China turned into fascism, as an economic model that was more effective in relation to socialism, and Russia - into democracy according to the Indian version, which, moreover, came about in terms of political freedoms. The result is democracy and human rights like in China, and mess and theft like in India.
            1. Kart
              Kart 17 December 2020 11: 01
              -14%
              So the point is not how it is in Chelyabinsk.
              They love to contrast capitalism as in Russia and supposedly socialism as in China.
              But in practice, it suddenly turns out that both there and there - in different ways.
              And socialism is there only in name and newspaper propaganda, but in fact the most that neither is capitalism.
              Did the Chinese do it better? Although not a fact, but all the same we will agree, and say - then it’s not about him, and not about socialism?
              And here is the next conclusion - whatever you give us, everything is somehow crooked.
              The monarchy was not built - a complete collapse and revolution.
              Socialism was not built - a complete collapse and revolution.
              Now we are building capitalism - again, not thank God. Break everything again?
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 December 2020 11: 11
                +2
                Quote: Carte
                And socialism is there only in name and newspaper propaganda, but in fact the most that neither is capitalism.

                What another. Pre-Roosevelt, let's just say.
                Quote: Carte
                say - then it’s not about him, and not about socialism?

                Well, socialism turns out to be about the same everywhere, but capitalism, yes, in very different ways.
                Quote: Carte
                whatever you give us, everything is somehow crooked.

                A cursed place. However, I have to note that the distance between Russia and normalcy was minimal under the damned kings and no less damned Clinton-Bush Jr.
                1. Kart
                  Kart 17 December 2020 11: 46
                  -5
                  Again, I would like to note that if everything were exactly like this, the Russian Empire would not have collapsed so shamefully. The same goes for the USSR.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 17 December 2020 12: 06
                    +5
                    Quote: Carte
                    The same goes for the USSR.

                    Well, I didn't say anything good about the USSR. On the other hand, those countries where they did not give up their principles - Cuba, North Korea - are quite blooming and smelling. Another question is what they smell like.
                    Quote: Carte
                    The Russian empire would not have collapsed so shamefully.

                    I am compelled to note that 4 empires collapsed in that scrape, and two more were badly worn out. So, again, if we talk about the distance to normality - the 17th year is not an argument.
      5. Akuzenka
        Akuzenka 17 December 2020 11: 03
        +2
        If you think about it, it is generally surprising that the Angara flew! Therefore, taking everything into account, this is undoubtedly the success of our space industry - the creation of a heavy-class launch vehicle, all elements of which are made from our parts, at our factories, and launches can be carried out from our cosmodromes!
        Well, not a creation, but just a building. The Angara project is deeply rooted in the "totalitarian USSR". I was not so optimistic. This is an indicative launch, the next one simply may not be at all. They will say - there is no launch target for the carrier and that's it. The money is cut, the personnel and the element base - no. In my opinion, the launch of "Angara" is Roscosmos' swan song. There are too many small details about this. The most important thing is the lack of a space exploration program. Even low orbits. About the "conquest of the moon" - keep quiet.
      6. Cosm22
        Cosm22 17 December 2020 11: 10
        +7
        Yes, she flew. True, so far practically without PN. But that's okay.
        But is there any great reason for joy? The issue is controversial.
        Let's start with the concept. I already talked about it, it is yesterday compared to today. For there is no alternative to the reusability of the first stage. Burning absolutely everything in the first and last flight is the height of extravagance. The Mask even Falcon Heavy is essentially reusable, because instead of the URM, there are nine steps.
        Further. Launched 6 years after the first start. What's new in the design? Nothing. Absolutely. We just tried for 6 years to adjust the characteristics to the requirements of the MO. Whether it was possible to do this is unknown, because the RN left again essentially without PN.
        Further. Engines. Nothing new. What is RD-191 LPRE? Just half of the RD-180 (a quarter of the RD-170). The thrust-to-weight ratio leaves much to be desired - 89: 1. Against 190: 1 for the same Merlin-1D +. Therefore, I had to sculpt 5 pieces. For the weight efficiency of the Angara is only 3,234% versus 4,15% for, say, the Falcon 9. With the same fuel and practically comparable PN.
        And now all this wealth, all these 5 expensive engines, along with communications, irrevocably burn out immediately after the start. Hence - the competitiveness of the product in the world market is zero. For its price is prohibitive (even not only in comparison with the Proton). There is no hope for mass production, because neither the Moscow Region nor the Republic of Kazakhstan have enough orders to bring down the price at least for the domestic market by mass production. In addition, the RN has a complex architecture, which makes the product even more expensive.
        After all, Angara A5 is in fact a four-stage (3 standard stages + upper stage). Nine of the same Mask is only two-stage, moreover, with a reusable first stage (two of them have already started and landed 7 times).
        Yes, 28 years ago a modular URM scheme seemed like a godsend. But today it is an anachronism.
        So there is nothing for Angara on the world market, its future is only in the hands of the RF Ministry of Defense. Will it be able to provide the manufacturer with at least a minimum load?
        1. Kuz
          Kuz 17 December 2020 18: 07
          +15
          hi I have a question: If there is a family of Angaras, then it is not clear why revive Soyuz-5 with a carrying capacity of 17 tons? There is a nearby Angara-A3 (14,5 tons).
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 17 December 2020 21: 02
            +1
            Soyuz 5 will be cheaper in terms of launch cost than Angara A3 - and its modification, the reusable first stage on methane Amur LNG, which is promised to be launched in 2025, will be even cheaper for launches of $ 30 million or less per launch.
      7. Proxima
        Proxima 17 December 2020 11: 24
        +1
        Thanks to the author for the interesting article. If we remove all the negativity from Angara, then what optimistic do we have? And we have a real replacement for "Proton", which is not extremely environmentally friendly, and with the kerosene Hangara everything is in perfect order. Moreover, on Angara we can develop manned space exploration, in contrast to the dangerous heptyl Proton. This implies the launch into orbit of heavy manned spacecraft and orbital modules. Plus, Angara is a modular rocket, a transforming rocket that can adapt to almost any segment of carrying capacity - from small - medium to heavy missiles. The prospects are simply colossal! Only one thing is scary - the pace of mastering this rocket is just super-slow !!!!negative Let me remind you that in the 14th Angara was launched in the A1 version, then in the same year it was launched in the A5 version. And then there was a six-year failure. Why? - unclear! But in 2017, a manned flight of the Angara from the Vostochny cosmodrome was supposed to take place! Oh, this Roskosmos with its promises, the price of which is worth a penny !!
      8. zenion
        zenion 17 December 2020 16: 25
        +5
        Zyablitsev (Eugene). China was lucky that they are smart and did not allow the likeness of the Tagged One to come to power. What happened in the USSR absolutely should not have happened, but the people were hung on the ears of the tones of concrete and the people were so stupefied and believed that the creators of the country for the people, never this country, would not kill or rob this country. In addition, smart people immediately understood with whom they now have to live, rushed out of Russia. And if the Chinese said we were waiting for you, they would be in China, and not in the bandit USA. And the Angara was created in order to drag its source to the moon and then master the manufacture of rubber products. Forget the fact that the rocket is made of Russian components. Part of it is still the USSR, and the rest of the honor was bought in the west on the black market, as spare parts for aircraft.
      9. 1970mk
        1970mk 17 December 2020 17: 02
        +8
        Yeah ... China did not have a Golden rain of petrodollars ... and trillions of dollars were not withdrawn from China ... In China The authorities care about the country. The simplest example is the salary in China is higher than in the Russian Federation. So what? Enough to nod at someone already. Nod at Vovochka and his friends!
      10. Mikle2000
        Mikle2000 19 December 2020 22: 55
        +1
        Well, what an eastern cosmodrome. You look at the list of starts from the moment of opening. And compare with the same Baikonur.
    2. Civil
      Civil 17 December 2020 07: 22
      +10
      Well, the point is different:
      1. Endless throwing in launch vehicles and ships, sometimes "Rus", then "Eagle", then "Federation", then "Angara", then "Soyuz-5", but no, let's go back to the old "Union" and so on.
      2. Let's build a lunar station, but no, let's go to Mars without the Americans, but no, let's go to a nuclear tug, but no, let's give a new near-earth station.
      3. Let's have a new cosmodrome "Vostochny", but no better we will modernize "Plesetsk", but better "Baikonur", and some other figures have brought "Sea Launch".
      4. It is necessary to transfer production to the Far East, but it is not better in Western Siberia, but no pancake, let it be where it is.

      At the same time, the financial flow, which is, turns out to be smeared on all these projects in a thin layer, if decomposed in a time schedule. I generally keep quiet about the journalist.

      Well, in the end you need a clear, straightforward strategy. And not annually, or even more often, changes in plans and development strategies. This is not an LLC that sells hosiery, which endlessly changes its assortment to please customers.
      1. military_cat
        military_cat 17 December 2020 07: 54
        +1
        By the way, news in the topic:

        MOSCOW, December 16 - RIA Novosti. The project of a new Russian super-heavy rocket intended for research and development of deep space will be based on methane technologies, a source in the rocket and space industry told RIA Novosti.
        Earlier, from the publication of the head of Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin on Facebook, it became known that the project of the Russian super-heavy rocket Yenisei would be revised. Instead of current technologies, the rocket will use new technical solutions. Because of this, the first Russian manned missions to the moon will be conducted using missiles of the Angara family.
        (They will not, infa 100%, everything will just leave again in 2050)
      2. pyagomail.ru
        pyagomail.ru 17 December 2020 10: 05
        -6
        It seems to me that you are overly picky. In the 40s - 60s of the last century, ordinary people did not know anything at all about the missile programs of the USSR. And now everything is discussed at the stage of not even draft designs, but only ideas. And, perhaps, the fog is being admitted on purpose. These are my answers to your points 1 and 2. On point 3: "Eastern" is needed, "Plesetsk" is military and is located in the north, "Baikonur" is not ours, and it is unclear what will happen to Kazakhstan in the future. Sea Launch is kind of private and, I think, will find its niche in commercial launches of light rockets, moreover, from the equator. We also use Kuru for commercial launches - apparently, it is profitable. 4. It is sometimes difficult for a person to move to a new place, but here the most complicated production facilities, thousands of specialists can be moved thousands of kilometers .. Something will probably be transferred earlier, something later, something will be left in place. Therefore - no panic, not everything is lost.
        1. Roman070280
          Roman070280 17 December 2020 10: 35
          +6
          It seems to me that you are overly picky. In the 40s - 60s of the last century, ordinary people did not know anything at all about the missile programs of the USSR.

          But now nothing prevents us from getting acquainted with what happened in the 40s - 60s .. and how it all happened ..
          And such ten-year throwing, as described above, was not even close ..
          1. pyagomail.ru
            pyagomail.ru 17 December 2020 11: 03
            -3
            Not everything that happened in those years is open now: design bureaus competed with each other and, perhaps, not always honestly. And take aviation design bureaus - what is the percentage of production aircraft out of the total developed? Searching for something new is always fraught with failure. So, this is not throwing - this is a search.
            1. Roman070280
              Roman070280 17 December 2020 11: 14
              +5
              "Rockets and People" B. Chertok
              Everything is more than open !! And about the competition between design bureaus and their leadership, and about the Party, and about developments that did not find a place in life .. Then there was a search .. and movement forward ..
              Now it is exactly 20 years of throwing and marking time ..
              1. pyagomail.ru
                pyagomail.ru 17 December 2020 14: 23
                -6
                Novel 70280.
                In order to assert something exactly, you need to know it, be inside this process. In open sources, social networks, probably not everything is stated and biased enough? I also want our cosmonauts to stick a flag on the Moon, and on Mars too. I hope that not "throwing and marking time", but a warm-up before the jump.
      3. swzero
        swzero 17 December 2020 11: 22
        +4
        There will be no order in the industry as long as it is led by all sorts of journalists and other effective managers. Such serious knowledge-intensive industries should be run by professionals with the necessary education and experience in these areas, and not by people on the street. We achieved the greatest success in space when the space program was headed by an engineer Korolyov. Wait, the money is allocated a lot, but there are probably no results. This speaks of management problems. Well, the spending of the salary fund is mainly on the management team, and everyone else works for a penny, with this approach nothing can be achieved.
      4. Nastia makarova
        Nastia makarova 17 December 2020 12: 07
        -6
        about 4 lard rubles have already been allocated for the nuclear tug
      5. Dizel200
        Dizel200 17 December 2020 12: 39
        0
        There are no former journalists)))) The cook still cannot run the state
      6. Max Lebedev
        Max Lebedev 17 December 2020 14: 57
        +22
        Quote: Civil
        At the same time, the financial flow, which is, turns out to be smeared onto all these projects in a thin layer, if decomposed in a time schedule

        Can you imagine how much is deposited in the parasites that have been fed? And all from impunity.
      7. zenion
        zenion 17 December 2020 16: 31
        +5
        Civilian (Vadim). This is for rushing about, so that from the place where the money flows from to confuse the tracks. Reminiscent of an American joke about father and son at the opera. The son asks his father - why is the uncle, when he sings constantly sways and rushes. Father to son - you understand son, it's harder to hit a moving target. That's how they rush about in Russia, so as not to find where the rope is rolling. And the rope rolls not to the ball, but from the ball to someone's yachts, palaces and estates. That would be, in general, everything that would have been, as under Tsar Peas.
    3. Bar1
      Bar1 17 December 2020 10: 23
      +3
      for Skomorokhov to have his own opinion means to rely on the opinion of others, not his own: "all over the world, the Chinese are going this way, etc." We do not need to look back at the opinion of others, who cannot even make their engine similar to the RD170 / 180/190, NK33, we have our own way. We should not accept Western terminology either, because the "heavy rocket" is the Soviet Energia-100-150 tons into a low orbit, and not the unfortunate 20-25 tons: it is clear that there is a "heavy rocket" in the understanding of the West, which cannot make such a rocket. Talk about this Angara can have a positive only in one thing - that kerosene is safer Angara has no other advantages than heptyl and EVERYTHING, this has already been discussed a hundred times here. And why this hangar has such a name I have already said.
      By the way, all missiles and all stages of missiles have a "cryogenic block", because the fuel is initially cooled and liquefied.
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 17 December 2020 10: 45
        +8
        Quote: Bar1
        You should not accept Western terminology either, because a "heavy rocket" is Soviet Energy-100-150 tons ..

        A heavy rocket is considered to be an apparatus capable of delivering a load weighing 22 - 50 tons to LEO, above 50 - this is already a super-heavy rocket, which was our Energia.
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 17 December 2020 11: 08
          -3
          Quote: Proxima
          A crucible rocket is considered to be a device capable of delivering a load weighing 22-50 tons to LEO, above 50 - this is already a super-heavy rocket, which was our Energia.

          I say, this is Western terminology, not ours.
        2. zenion
          zenion 17 December 2020 16: 33
          -1
          The marked individual showed energy and killed the Energy.
  2. nPuBaTuP
    nPuBaTuP 17 December 2020 05: 38
    +6
    Absolutely rightly noted, we will look at further flights ... And I'm so happy for our Rosskosmos ... But my joy has nothing to do with the journalist ... When will he be sent to what newspaper to build effective management?
    1. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 17 December 2020 05: 49
      -2
      Roman, it should have been clarified that ...
      The Khrunichev Center is the most problematic and unprofitable enterprise of Roscosmos. One of the company's failed projects is the development of a family of carriers "Angara", which in the heavy version should replace the "Proton-M". The creation of missiles has been going on for more than a quarter of a century and required more than three billion dollars (according to other estimates, more than five). Currently, the debts of the Khrunichev Center exceed 80 billion rubles, which is equivalent to half the annual budget of the state corporation.
      this is for clarity.https: //lenta.ru/news/2020/12/14/angaraa51/
      1. nPuBaTuP
        nPuBaTuP 17 December 2020 07: 10
        +1
        You were probably mistaken .... I am Nikolai and your answer is how it relates to my post?
  3. ont65
    ont65 17 December 2020 05: 49
    +3
    The orbits and the weight of the vehicles put on them are different, therefore the carriers were divided into categories. Let's say to bring a telescope of the Hubble type to one of the libration points, the capabilities of the Angara -A5B are not enough. For deep space, superheavy is needed to work with the loads carried by heavy carriers into low orbits. The club of their owners will never be big. This is the privilege of the superpowers. Now we have just announced a program for creating a diverse infrastructure, but there are no funds and tools. The money allocated for science is insignificant and it is unlikely that anything will change. In Europe, the situation is a little better, but not much. There is no instrument base and suitable electronics for the same reason - apart from the defense industry, there is no customer, but what they do is unique things, well, at a very expensive price. In general, space exploration is not about us for a long time, well, if only foreign colleagues help, pay. Manned missions to the Moon, yes, will require superheavy, but by definition they will not be in any way permanent. There is nothing there that would bring profit, and the costs are such that they cannot be sustained by a weak economy. The needs of the defense industry will certainly be covered by Angara, but that looks like it’s all for the next decade.
    1. Snail N9
      Snail N9 17 December 2020 11: 42
      +4
      "Heavy rocket" ... So far, this "heavy rocket" has put into orbit (they are silent on what) ... 2,4 tons of load. The previous launch which was .... 6 years ago - 2,04 tons of load ... Progress, however, 400 kg of load in ... 6 years ... "Heavy", yes .. 24, 5 tons of load - yes .. Only taking into account the progress of -400 kg in 6 years how long these 24,5 tons will have to wait ... I don’t know how anyone, but the situation with this "damn it, she flies!" Nasruddin's parables about "the donkey and the padishah" ...
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 17 December 2020 22: 26
        -2
        Quote: Snail N9
        "Heavy rocket" ... So far, this "heavy rocket" has put into orbit (they are silent on what) ... 2,4 tons of load. The previous launch which was .... 6 years ago - 2,04 tons of load ... Progress, however, 400 kg of load in ... 6 years ... "Heavy", yes .. 24, 5 tons of load - yes .. Only taking into account the progress of -400 kg in 6 years how long these 24,5 tons will have to wait ... I don’t know how anyone, but the situation with this "damn it, she flies!" Nasruddin's parables about "the donkey and the padishah" ...

        Dear, if a heavy rocket throws 2,5 tons into orbit, then this is normal. You need to figure out what kind of orbit she put the satellite into. for example, the difference between the reference orbit and the geostationary one is order! fellow Understand the topic of the question first.
  4. Vladimir61
    Vladimir61 17 December 2020 06: 25
    +3
    Astronautics, like one of its areas of rocketry, suffered the same losses in the "turbulent years" as all science, production and the economy. Therefore, there is nothing to be surprised at. We are gradually restoring aircraft construction, and we are also restoring astronautics.
    The only alarming thing is the incorrigible situation with large thefts, which is inextricably linked with the selection and placement of personnel, as well as harshness and ill-founded rushing from one project to another, which is also quite often associated with corrupt actions of managers.
  5. svp67
    svp67 17 December 2020 06: 27
    +2
    The good thing about "Angara" is that it is modular, and from these "modules" it is possible to assemble missiles of different classes from "light" "Angara-1.2" to super-heavy "Angara-A7"
    1. ont65
      ont65 17 December 2020 06: 57
      +9
      Modularity is not worth much if it results in an ineffective carrier. A hangara with more efficient fuel and engines outputs the same as a correctly calculated Proton, and weighs 50 tons. more, not to mention the cost. The 'correct' (not modular) hangar was supposed to be output at 6t. more and this despite the fact that every gram is registered, for the money that is not there, but 'you need to hold on'. To compensate for the effect of modularity, they are forced to create variants M and B with decent investments for engine modification.
      1. svp67
        svp67 17 December 2020 07: 00
        +1
        Quote: ont65
        not to mention the cost

        The PH cost depends on the number of units issued. And as soon as this RN goes into series, in various versions, the price will immediately drop. And at the expense of "no" fuel, so let it be better than what is on the "Proton", which poison everything in the circle for many years.
        1. ont65
          ont65 17 December 2020 10: 11
          +3
          Well, yes, they said the same about the Shuttles, they say we will launch for cents / kilogram, just order launches in batches. What happened is what happened, but this year Proton flew only once. The funniest thing is that the plans are now for the transfer of manned programs to the Angara, and this is when the Eagle weighs 22,5 tons! Where is the Union cheaper? - It's true? I'm afraid with such funding, manned launches will be launched once every couple of years.
        2. Cosm22
          Cosm22 17 December 2020 12: 04
          +7
          What "series" are we talking about?
          About a series of fables by Mr. Rogozin about lunar bases?
          Do you know that MO was initially focused on 4-6 launches per year maximum, taking the Angara under its wing? This is a series ??? !!!
          Let's not make people laugh.
          And we will only rely on facts. And they are like that.
          1. On the world market Angara does not shine because of the cosmic price.
          2. In the domestic civil market of the Russian Federation - the same. For a similar reason.
          3. Only the RF Ministry of Defense can give some kind of load to the manufacturer, actually taking money from the state budget. There is no smell of any profit here.
          4. Everyone! The rest of Manilov's dreams of the type of our own OS (this despite the fact that even the unfortunate gap in the Russian module "Zvezda" cannot be repaired for several months already) will be left for the RK's fun.
        3. Mikle2000
          Mikle2000 19 December 2020 22: 57
          +1
          He will not go into series. There is nothing of our own, but commercial launches have polymerized everything.
      2. Alexey Sommer
        Alexey Sommer 17 December 2020 08: 17
        +7
        Quote: ont65
        Hangar with more efficient fuel

        This is not a true statement.
        Proton is more energy efficient.
        The hangara is more environmentally friendly.
        If you do not agree, sort out this issue yourself on the Internet. hi
        1. ont65
          ont65 17 December 2020 10: 02
          0
          It is more efficient in only a few parameters, except for the cost of fuel, the total cost of engines, the number of stages, and in particular in terms of the mass output. The UDMG-AT pair at the surface differs little in efficiency from kerosene-oxygen and, in general, its energy is lower. Sea level: RD-275 Proton - 288s, RD-191 Angara - 311s. If you want, check it yourself.
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 17 December 2020 07: 57
      +4
      The existence of the Angara-3 project indicated in your picture is now directly refuted by Rogozin.
      Angara-7 project is closed. Two missiles remain, of which Angara 1.2 is under threat.
    3. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 17 December 2020 08: 56
      +2
      "Modularity" ... I am convinced, wherever modularity is applied, everywhere it is bad. In the Navy, in Space, everywhere. Hangar 1.2 has been redesigned because the initial concept did not satisfy the customer and did not correspond to the technical specification. And now it is not just a URM 1 piece. A3 and A7 - do not exist anywhere except pictures.
    4. Cosm22
      Cosm22 17 December 2020 12: 46
      +8
      Again. This scheme is flawed, re-read my comment above. She was out of despair, for there was nothing else at hand, but something had to be done. Yes, and URMs 28 years ago seemed like a brilliant idea (until Mask's nine flew, burying this concept).
      Now specifically. RD-170 was more or less rationally used at Zenith. RD-180 - on Atlas V 401. If Russia had gone along this path at one time, it might have turned out to be something sensible.
      And what happened in fact?
      Figuratively speaking, the RD-180 was cut into 4 parts. Received 4 quarters. Part 1 was named RD-191 (URM). Now 5 quarters were stuck back together, each of which turned out to have its own risks and the possibility of failure. Moreover, the fifth quarter is the fifth wheel in the cart, because it is needed only as a compensator for the excess weight of this entire cumbersome modular system.
      All this architecture is an example of backwardness.
      Look at the nine Mask. That's where the concept comes in. Successful architecture. Hence - the possibility of the first stage reusability and, as a result, a cheap launch price.
      Kazakhstan has already started talking about switching to reusability and is thinking about a methane engine. Though it pleases.
      But who will return the lost time?
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 17 December 2020 22: 38
        -5
        Quote: Cosm22
        Figuratively speaking, the RD-180 was cut into 4 parts. Received 4 quarters. Part 1 was called RD-191 (URM) ................... All this architecture is an example of backwardness.
        Look at the nine Mask. That's where the concept comes in.

        Complete ignorance of the topic of the question! fool RD-180 two-chamber engine and how can it be cut into 4 quarters?request
        1. Cosm22
          Cosm22 17 December 2020 23: 30
          +4
          Did you notice the mistake?
          Bravo!
          A smart one, of course, will understand that it was about the RD-170. Check out my other comment above.
          But please your vanity. Look for another missing comma. Maybe it will feel better. There are no other arguments, as I understand it? Because of complete ignorance of the topic of the question.
    5. arkadiyssk
      arkadiyssk 17 December 2020 20: 35
      +2
      The most surprising thing is that with all the assurances of "modularity", all the sidewalls, although similar, are different from each other.
    6. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2020 21: 09
      0
      In fact, the Angara is created only in three modifications A5, A5P, A5B
  6. 210ox
    210ox 17 December 2020 06: 31
    +10
    The path of a thousand years begins with one step. And this step is putting things in order (in the country, Roscosmos, etc.).
  7. Thrifty
    Thrifty 17 December 2020 07: 21
    +5
    Is "Eagle" already available? Come on! !! Show me some pictures of him! And, regarding light satellites, until we restore in our country the production of microprocessors, especially protected, military class, and with anti-radiation protection, we better keep silent about light satellites for the good! !!
    1. Kart
      Kart 17 December 2020 09: 11
      -5
      There is a production of such processors.
  8. apro
    apro 17 December 2020 07: 27
    +1
    For a long time I have not followed Russian space attempts. There is no sense. Today, after 30 years of correct capitalism, a long-term space program has not been developed. And it is not clear what the Russian Federation wants in space. And there are situational throwing.
    1. Aleksandr21
      Aleksandr21 17 December 2020 10: 02
      +3
      Quote: apro
      a long-term space program has not been developed and it is not clear what the Russian Federation wants in space


      Hence the whole trouble, we do not know how to build long-term goals and achieve their fulfillment, but maybe we just don't need it ... we start to move when competitors (USA, China) develop their programs and we, with an eye on them, start to portray something, and so the lag behind the United States / China in space is only increasing and increasing every year, especially in the part of spacecraft and research of the solar system with automatic machines, the PC is still breathing, but if Musk manages to finish the Starship then it will just be a different level of manned cosmonautics, or at least SLS, will complete and implement Artemis ... and a man on the Moon is also a level, after all, and with regard to Roscosmos, I'm honestly not sure that with the help of Angara we will be able to implement Rogozin's statements on the 4x launch scheme to the Moon, so there are too many pitfalls there + Angara A5B is not yet available ... and it’s good if it appears with KBTK by 2030, so the prospects are so-so, and other competitors are not asleep, take the same India, by 2030-2040, as if we were not by crowding in (conditional leaderboard) + private traders are developing very actively ...
      1. ont65
        ont65 17 December 2020 10: 16
        +3
        Rogozin had an interesting plan to send tourists to Soyuz to fly around the moon. KVTK is suitable for this mission. However, this comrade has a whole carriage and a cart. :) And what? Cheap and cheerful, and most importantly profitable.
  9. rocket757
    rocket757 17 December 2020 07: 59
    -3
    She flies, but how beautiful is that?

    There are many questions to which I would like to hear true answers !!!
    In the meantime .... we are happy, of course, BUT ......
  10. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 17 December 2020 08: 43
    0
    There remains one, but the main question.
    WHAT FOR
    What our helmsmen want.
    From space, from rockets, from satellites ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2020 21: 20
      +1
      They, like the United States, China, India, Japan, want to get to the space resources of the same rare earth metals on the moon, meteorites and asteroids - since everyone understands who is the first and trillions of profits.
  11. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 17 December 2020 08: 47
    +1
    Thank you for launching the launch vehicle, of course. But again, as in 2011, only the payload mockup was displayed. Is it because there is no satellite yet or it exists, but there was no confidence in the normal operation of the launch vehicle?
    1. Tsoy
      Tsoy 17 December 2020 09: 51
      +1
      Thank you for launching the launch vehicle, of course. But again, as in 2011, only the payload layout was displayed. This is because there is no satellite yet or it exists, but there was no confidence in the normal operation of the launch vehicle.


      One more launch is needed for certification and then the payload will be entrusted.
  12. Roman070280
    Roman070280 17 December 2020 10: 11
    0
    I would very much like it to fly not in spite of, but because. And the launch of the "Angara" is not a single action, but the rocket can be fired regularly and, most importantly, there will be work for it. That is, military satellites, ships, interplanetary stations.

    For some reason, only one thing comes to mind "The hopes of young men are nourished" (c)


    But even when all six successful test flights of the Angara-A5 are over, a lot still needs to be done for normal operation.

    To begin with, the heavy "Angara" needs a normal cosmodrome.

    The second problem. Ship. The fact that the Soyuz has nothing to do at long distances (we are talking about the same lunar program) is understandable. It seems that there is "Eagle", aka "Federation", for which there is no launch vehicle yet. For the launch of the "Eagle" into space, "Rus" was planned, work on which was stopped. It is necessary to "sharpen" the "Angara" specifically for the "Eagle", which will take quite a lot of time.

    Well, here I would like to say - more likely cancer whistles on the mountain than all of the above will be done in our country !!
    At least 5 years on the Angara .. then the cosmodrome, then the ship, and then the "project is outdated", "new funds are needed to develop a new rocket", etc. infinitely..
  13. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 17 December 2020 10: 13
    +1
    Novel! This:
    Everything is very damp and uncertain. However, as usual with us. But the successful launch of "Angara" - it can be seen as a kind of ray in the darkness. At least, even though we are not looking for a place in the market for commercial launches of heavy LV, in 2025, when the Protons will finally go down in history, they will be replaced by a real and flying rocket.

    - frivolous whining. The fact takes place. The rocket on environmentally friendly fuel flew and:
    It is very good.

    Another thing is that neither you, nor I, nor many other people see the second Korolev in Rogozin. This is a casual manager whom the new government has placed in positions and called on to portray activities for multimillion-dollar salaries. I'll tell you frankly, neither in Rogozin's speeches, nor in his deeds, nor in the device of his son, I see no progress for Russian space. For me, this is one of the most unpleasant people, whose duplicity is equated with arrogance and incompetence.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2020 21: 23
      0
      We hope that our Ilona Mask will appear in the future and we keep our fists so that he appears.
  14. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 17 December 2020 10: 37
    0
    successful start ... that's good ... it's definitely a Victory
    ... then only the development and comprehension of what we have ... and here the most important question is WHAT DO WE WANT FROM THE EXPLORATION OF SPACE ... this is important because it is clear what and when to create ... in the USSR there were quite concrete answers ... yes, yes, we want to see and explore, and they launched to the moon and to Mars and Venus ... and they mastered near-earth space according to the program ... now somehow everything is not clear ...
    1. ont65
      ont65 19 December 2020 04: 17
      0
      The meaning invested in the concept of 'development', everyone puts their own. For example, for Trump, these are resources, money is not a pity for this. Although many do not doubt this in vain. In the USSR, another was invested in it. In a Russia with effective Medvedev managers, in fact, neither scientific nor commercial sense is important. There is no money, but they will sit in armchairs anyway and will not put anyone else in them.
  15. grandfather_Kostya
    grandfather_Kostya 17 December 2020 10: 38
    +4
    The fact that the Soyuz has nothing to do at long distances (we are talking about the same lunar program) is understandable.

    "Soyuz" was created specifically for the lunar program (which "did not go"). This is hinted at by an additional utility compartment, which is not very needed for a short-term ascent to low orbit and is fired back when descending into the atmosphere.
  16. mark1
    mark1 17 December 2020 10: 42
    +2
    "Angara" in a good way, let's hope that it will be kind and long.
    Now about the lunar program;
    as a big sofa specialist in interplanetary communications, I can say that we have every opportunity to start manned flights to the moon even "tomorrow". The Soyuz is nothing more than a modified lunar ship; there is the Science module. We put "Soyuz" out, put "Science" into orbit, put out the upper stage, dock and ... on a long journey (of course, everything modified - adapted and not removed from the "shelf"). We fly around our night star, undock "Science" and leave it in orbit as an orbital station, and ourselves back by "small steam". This is the first mission - the beginning of a large lunar program. RN- "Soyuz", "Proton" are all available.
    Details can be improved, but the "skeleton" is.
    Now swear.
    1. Kart
      Kart 17 December 2020 11: 07
      +4
      Duc, why swear.
      The Science module is not enough for the autonomous functioning of the module itself, more modules are needed.
      But they are not, and it seems that there are no plans.
      1. mark1
        mark1 17 December 2020 11: 16
        0
        Everything could be improved, it would be a barrel, and whoever said that everything will end in one module
        the first mission is the beginning of a large lunar program.
        1. mark1
          mark1 17 December 2020 11: 23
          0
          We have NEM and "Berth" - create, invent, try ... (for not very big money)
          1. Kart
            Kart 17 December 2020 11: 44
            +5
            And household? The most important thing.
            Although, who knows them there. Rogozin is understandable, just a talking head.
            1. mark1
              mark1 17 December 2020 11: 52
              -1
              We used to live up to the household one (or we adapted something, we have rich experience, we would attach a couple of sleeping bags and a toilet somewhere), all the same, at the first stage, it is not a permanently operating station that is obtained
              But the Americans, with their contracts, would nervously light a cigarette.
              1. Lad
                Lad 17 December 2020 19: 41
                0
                [mark1] We would have lived up to everyday life (or we have adapted something, we have rich experience, we would have attached a couple of sleeping bags and a toilet somewhere) anyway, at the first stage, it turns out not a permanently operating station, but a visited one
                But the Americans, with their contracts, would nervously light a cigarette.


                When you fly in the clouds at least do not completely lose sight of the Earth. Otherwise, fly away to the astral plane. Well, or think about the numbers in this picture before making Americans nervously smoke on the sidelines. (Although why would a dreamer need numbers?)

                1. mark1
                  mark1 17 December 2020 19: 57
                  -1
                  Well, I wiggle and wiggle, but I'm not nervous. What are you showing me pictures - different tasks, different energy consumption, especially since we are talking exclusively about the first stage in the visited version, everything is developing (like the ISS in its time) and no one excludes the power module for the future
                  1. Lad
                    Lad 18 December 2020 12: 20
                    0
                    So it's not just this picture.
                    Don't like the power consumption? Okay, take the other basic stuff to the ISS. The difference will be at times.
                    Don't like the ISS at all? Okay, take the cost of Proton and compare it to Hangara. The difference will be at times.
                    Don't like the cost at all? Well, okay, take the timeframe from the start of development to the start of operation of the Angara and compare with the same SpaceX. The difference will be at times. The hangara is being developed soon, as it has already been four decades. It is already outdated. And she has not yet been developed, although she has already tried to fly. More than one year will go into development.
                    Don't like deadlines at all? Okay, take something else. Well, at least something. Well, you can't sit and dream about how Americans will nervously smoke, at a time when those damned Americans, it seems, have already quit smoking altogether, and lung cancer from smoking threatens just someone else.
                    Although yes, I agree, if you close your eyes, see nothing, hear and not notice, then you can dream about anything. Why not? You can even sit in a madhouse tied to a bed and dream that you are the greatest emperor of the galactic empire. But it will have nothing to do with reality. From the word in general.
                    1. mark1
                      mark1 18 December 2020 12: 34
                      0
                      Don't be so nervous, take care of your health by retirement age, oh, how will it affect ...
                      I just wrote that the Great and Mighty gave us the opportunity to appear on the moon earlier than the Americans (after the second coming) and for less money. I do not dispute their technological superiority, I do not dispute the greatness of the ISS and our insignificant role in it (although not so insignificant) I just point out that we have preserved what they have lost and are forced to create anew, and how great it would be to take advantage of this advantage (temporary). And for this we do not need any "Eagle", "Eaglet".
                2. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 18 December 2020 09: 33
                  -1
                  Quote: Lad
                  Well, or think about the numbers in this picture

                  )))
                  Here the evil Russophobe is viciously Russophobic.
                  https://smoliarm.livejournal.com/461154.html
    2. Old Orc
      Old Orc 17 December 2020 12: 27
      +1
      "Where is the money Zin" where people with honest faces will earn on your plan. While there are no proposals, there will be no implementation. Although the dream with apples (trees are not politicians ..... though ...) that bloom on Mars is worthy of realization.
      1. mark1
        mark1 17 December 2020 12: 38
        +2
        People with honest faces will always find something to make money on. As a hint, the orbital station (placed in a timely manner, of course) is a big pin in a causal place for the Americans with their plans to dominate the moon. They will negotiate. And how people with honest faces will make money on joint programs, I can only guess (with difficulty), but given their almost manic desire to work together with Americans, they will earn something.
  17. kytx
    kytx 17 December 2020 11: 23
    +1
    Roskosmos seems to be going to "Sea Launch" revive
    1. Kart
      Kart 17 December 2020 11: 44
      +5
      Rosatom got together, together.
  18. SaLaR
    SaLaR 17 December 2020 12: 57
    +1
    Explain the people to me as a dilettante .. Why is it impossible to restore "Energia" as a heavy rocket?
    1. grandfather_Kostya
      grandfather_Kostya 17 December 2020 15: 32
      +2
      According to rumors, they have lost the infrastructure and skills for working with liquid hydrogen "as unnecessary". Now start everything from scratch.
      1. SaLaR
        SaLaR 17 December 2020 16: 14
        -1
        clear ... and then they wonder why the Americans Apollo can't launch ........... hi
      2. Kart
        Kart 18 December 2020 12: 21
        +3
        Quote: grandfather_Kostya
        According to rumors, they have lost the infrastructure and skills for working with liquid hydrogen "as unnecessary". Now start everything from scratch.

        The upper stage is just hydrogen. Works, lost nothing.
        It's just that if we now voice the cost of producing and launching Energy, the brains of the fighters against the regime will explode.
        1. grandfather_Kostya
          grandfather_Kostya 18 December 2020 12: 37
          0
          The difference is in the scale of the process: refueling units of cubic meters and hundreds of cubes requires different infrastructure.
          1. Kart
            Kart 18 December 2020 14: 16
            +2
            This refers to competence in engines.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2020 21: 25
      0
      Because the Energy is outdated, it is too complicated and too expensive to launch.
  19. SID
    SID 17 December 2020 13: 00
    -2
    Russia has its own universal RSC for launching a wide range of payloads into any orbits. This is joy.
    Those who see the meaning of life in the fact that everywhere they measure with pussy is a great sadness that the Americans are not outdone.
    To make a super-heavy rocket for Russia is quite possible and quite capable of doing the same. The question remains: "Why?"
    1. quaric
      quaric 17 December 2020 14: 54
      -1
      To make a super-heavy rocket for Russia the same is quite possible and quite capable. The question remains: "Why?"

      Saw Shura ... The production cost of the Angara-A5 heavy-class launch vehicle is 7 billion rubles, which is three times more than that of the Proton-M rocket to be replaced. The data follows from the financial report of the Khrunichev Center for 2019. Given that Proton exports 23 tons, and Rogozinskaya Angara - 24,5 tons.
  20. APASUS
    APASUS 17 December 2020 13: 53
    -1
    Roscosmos budget will be seriously cut in the coming years, space will only have to write
  21. Simargl
    Simargl 17 December 2020 19: 37
    0
    In fact, Angara is a replacement for Proton.
    No modularity will be used yet.
    And it will most likely not fly for a long time: it is expensive and disposable.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 December 2020 21: 29
      0
      It will fly for a long time since there will be no replacement for it in the next 30 years and for it there is work for the same 620 sphere satellites from 4-6 launches per year starting from 2024.
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 18 December 2020 08: 28
        0
        Quote: Vadim237
        It will fly for a long time since there will be no replacement for it in the next 30 years
        So that's not the problem. The problem is that it can become much more expensive than analogues. What if the same Musk shoots something again? And there are others in bulk. The air start has already appeared in two versions, although everything is dull so far.
        The Chinese are stepping on their heels, and in some places they have caught up.
        If we stand still, we will remain far behind.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 19 December 2020 01: 25
          0
          This rocket was created primarily for the needs of Russia and the Ministry of Defense, and the Mask so far will not shoot much, well, except for the unmanned cargo version of Starship - with a manned version, apparently there will be a bummer On the moon, it can land as well as take off, but from Mars Starship takes off without Superhavey it will no longer be able to, since the gravity there is almost the same as that of the Earth and the office itself admitted that they are now forced to refuel the Starship by 1/3, since three regular raptors are not able to lift more than 600 tons into orbit in the conditions of Earth's gravity - which means that on Mars, it will be necessary to build a full-fledged cosmodrome and somehow send Superhavey rockets to Mars or collect them on Mars itself, which is unrealistic, as well as to build a plant there for the production of methane and liquid oxygen. return flight to Earth - whatever Musk says, but no manned flight of people to Mars for at least another 15 liters em won't be in Starship's concept for sure.
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 19 December 2020 20: 41
            0
            Quote: Vadim237
            This rocket was created primarily for the needs of Russia and the Ministry of Defense
            It's like sworn "friends" eating cactus use Delta-5, but increasingly Vials. Even the military does not disdain.

            Quote: Vadim237
            The mask will not shoot anything special yet, except for the cargo unmanned version of Starship
            Musk already has Dragon # 2, and we Yes в project "Eaglet" (which can be a replacement for the Unions).

            Quote: Vadim237
            the office admitted that they are now forced to refuel Starship by 1/3, since three standard raptors are not able to lift more than 600 tons into orbit in conditions of earth's gravity
            Some kind of porridge. The Raptor has a thrust of 200 tons, they want to stick 20 pieces, this is, for a minute, 4 tons of thrust (+/-). Three they stuck on trials. And there it is not 000/1 filled, but even less (the engines are not 3 but 20).

            Quote: Vadim237
            since the gravity there is almost the same as that of the Earth
            Less than 2,6 times, there is practically no atmosphere.

            Quote: Vadim237
            this means that on Mars it will be necessary to build a full-fledged cosmodrome and somehow send Superhevy rockets to Mars
            That's just the point, that is not. It is also necessary to plant a half-filled spacecraft stage on the "head".

            Quote: Vadim237
            whatever Musk says, but no manned flight of people to Mars for at least another 15 years will be in the Starship concept for sure.
            Its purpose is to warm up the public interest in order for money to be given. He misses the deadline, but he does it.
            And within 15 years it will be enough to hang in orbit with a crowd of people (2-3 people). Further - it will be seen.

            In general, it is more economically profitable to dig an asteroid.
  22. Ua3qhp
    Ua3qhp 17 December 2020 20: 41
    +1
    Quote: quaric
    Saw Shura ... The production cost of the Angara-A5 heavy-class launch vehicle is 7 billion rubles, which is three times more than that of the Proton-M rocket to be replaced.

    This is the R&D price for the development of a rocket and the manufacture of a prototype. The prime cost of even the first serial rocket, most likely, was not seen by anyone present here. And it should be significantly lower than the OCD price.
    1. Brancodd
      Brancodd 19 December 2020 11: 13
      0
      The contract price for MO Angara A5 is 4.7 billion at the current exchange rate ($ 65 billion). Not so dramatic anymore. The contract was concluded for 4 launch vehicles. The start of deliveries is 2022.
      In parallel, the production of heptyl will be stopped. I hope they will not return to this fuel again. In Kazakhstan, the consequences of using the Proton are indicative - the alienation area was 1500 km2. Those who advocate the continued use of Proton probably want something like that in the Amur Region. During the use of rockets on heptyl, the health of the service personnel suffered, both in our country and in the Americans and in China. Who counted the costs of producing this "fuel"? The topic of heptyl should be closed for a long time
      As stated by the Ministry of Defense, only they are ready to purchase up to 20 pieces. in year. For scientific programs, a severe ROP will also be required. Angara has a large supply of modernization. For example, the use of a hydrogen stage will allow the output of 37 tons.
      1. Intruder
        Intruder 19 December 2020 22: 50
        0
        For example, the use of a hydrogen stage will allow the output of 37 tons.
        and where is it ... except for the legendary Energy, with its 4 × RD-0120, there were no more hydrogen stages in the Russian Federation, all the upper stages (which can be the last stages of the launch vehicle) are now used on the "vigorous infection" AT + NDMH !?
        1. Brancodd
          Brancodd 20 December 2020 10: 59
          0
          Roskosmos has signed a contract worth over 20 billion rubles for the creation of an oxygen-hydrogen upper stage at KBTK
          https://vz.ru/news/2020/12/14/1075645.html
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 21 December 2020 00: 24
            0
            I wonder in what decade they will be able to "show" it to the world !? Methane liquid-propellant rocket engines have already been abandoned, or not yet ...?, Why so briskly rushed to the contract with the KV rocket engine of the booster?
            1. Brancodd
              Brancodd 21 December 2020 15: 19
              0
              Not briskly. The Ministry of Finance did not give more than a year of money ... The term of the contract is 2025.
  23. Brancodd
    Brancodd 17 December 2020 21: 03
    +2
    Arian 6 is the same age as Angara A5. They began to be created at the same time and have similar characteristics. But Arian 6 "damn it" does not fly. But the brand new Vega is flying. But more and more in the form of ashes on the heads of the EKA management ... So we have reasons for a good mood, Do you?
    1. Kart
      Kart 18 December 2020 12: 19
      +5
      They have the opposite. The more the Hangar will fly, the more despondency in the comments.
      The hangara as a carrier is needed for another project, about which commentators are generally silent like fish - a nuclear tug. It is with its help that they are going to display elements for assembly.
      One of the world's major space news has strangely remained outside the focus of public attention. And it, meanwhile, has, without any stretch of the imagination, planetary significance - on December 11, Roscosmos signed a contract worth 4,2 billion rubles for the development of a preliminary design of the Nuclon nuclear space tug for flights to the Moon, Jupiter and Venus.

      https://svpressa.ru/society/article/284692/
  24. Volga073
    Volga073 17 December 2020 21: 05
    -5
    the author is somehow omitted.
    I read the first lines - a dull gamnez.
    Further, it is no longer interesting /
  25. Intruder
    Intruder 19 December 2020 22: 38
    0
    The fact that the Soyuz has nothing to do at long distances (we are talking about the same lunar program
    , hmm, hmm .... a very strange statement, apparently the author forgot a little about the ancestor of modern "Unions", exactly how: about "Union 7k LOK",
    Soyuz 7K-LOK (LOK - Lunar Orbital Ship), according to the factory standard 11F93 - interplanetary spacecraft of the manned expeditionary complex L3, developed at the Korolev Design Bureau as part of the Soviet lunar landing program for the delivery of cosmonauts from Earth to the lunar orbit, as well as a manned descent vehicle - Lunar Ship (LC). The crew of the Soyuz 7K-LOK spacecraft consisted of two people, one of whom made a landing on the moon on the LK, and the other remained in lunar orbit on the 7K-LOK.
    and which would be displayed, just intended for this: the UR500K "Proton" launch vehicle.
  26. SID
    SID 23 December 2020 12: 20
    +1
    She flies, but how beautiful is that?

    Common talk ...
    If, in an adult way, then:
    At first, RSC "Angara" was developed in the USSR and for the USSR, it was supposed to fly 20 years ago.
    Secondly, after the collapse of the USSR and in the realities of the RF-Russia, in all ideological alignments, it should not exist at all.
    Thirdly, yes, she is "not cake"; yes, it is not an ideal and not "the latest fashion", but Angara does fly, and Russia has a universal RKK that gives Russia the opportunity independently use space, and progressively develop its space industry, ensure military security, develop science and sovereign state infrastructure in the information sphere, communications, logistics, etc., etc.
    Fourthly, no one bothers to modernize and improve the Angara RSC, for which it has great potential.
    ps .... the passions and moans of the looped forever measure pussies with America in fact do not decide anything.
    pss ... it flies and flies enough wonderful.
  27. Antonio_Mariarti
    Antonio_Mariarti 29 December 2020 19: 59
    0
    As for me, this is an attempt to show the world and our population what we can still do in space, as the domination of the Russian Federation has faded in recent years.
  28. misti1973
    misti1973 1 January 2021 19: 29
    -2
    Reflections of such a plan are absolutely unscientific, but reflect the author's "Wishlist". :) For example, why did he decide that a lot of fuel was spent on maneuvers in space? Not at all. Astro correction is performed constantly and somehow nothing :) So, probably, overcoming the Earth's gravity does not seem to the author a hindrance and does not affect the payload? In addition, anything in space can be used as fuel. What does the author mean by modular assembly? The antenna sometimes does not open as expected, and this is a marriage or inconsistency of fastening structures from the Earth (from the oredeneous "dog stoke" :) and so nothing complicated The main polished module will fly under its own power, and then only additional tanks hung and drove :) Just now the author forgot on other planets in the solar system? And what planets to fly to! Only to Mars. And the funny thing is what money is it for? No, well, if, of course, if Putin and Rogozin are passengers, then we will fold the whole world in order to safely send them "away to other worlds"!
  29. EXPrompt
    EXPrompt 8 January 2021 21: 54
    +1
    Quite rightly, by the way, since the whole world has long abandoned a mixture of asymmetric dimethylhydrazine and nitric tetroxide.

    Sorry, the author is either not in the know, or was joking too much ..
    SGT100 Starliner, Crew Dragon this is so good for you 2 extreme projects using dimitylhydrazine + amyl .. So exactly refused and right all over the world? \

    Where did you get the idea that the Super Draco engines are not based on hydrazine ..
    Did you see how you landed once, saw the boys in full chemical protection?
    And how did you see the SGT100 Starliner? - there the skirt falls charmingly to the ground and from it the orange cloud of this rubbish evaporates ..

    Well, if in the USA they successfully fly around their SLS carrier rocket, then they generally have no problems, since the SLS will put into orbit from 95 to 130 tons in one launch.

    And this muzzle will cost 2 yards per 1n launch, so calm down, SLS is unlikely to fly at all, however, like the Americans along Artemis Ave. to the moon.



    Teach materiel
  30. EXPrompt
    EXPrompt 27 January 2021 15: 28
    0
    Will the SLS fly soon ... that is the question

    Considering the latest tests of its engines, and their emergency shutdown.
    1. Ua3qhp
      Ua3qhp 27 January 2021 15: 54
      0
      I think heavyweight is a dead-end direction. Assembly from modules in orbit is the future. there is no limit on payload mass and fuel quantity.
      In this case, the reliability will be higher, because in case of a launch vehicle accident, only part of the payload will be lost, not all. Plus the reusability of the interplanetary spacecraft. Those. 12 missions to the moon require one interplanetary ship, not 12.
  31. Dimon-SPG
    Dimon-SPG 17 February 2021 13: 12
    0
    It's funny, Musk ruined another dragon, everyone squeals with delight, nothing, soon it will fly too heavy! Our rocket successfully flew, through clenched teeth, so what, who needs this super-heavy tries just do it? Double standards as they are.