Military Review

Roskosmos has begun assembling Angara-A5 serial heavy launch vehicles for the Ministry of Defense

49
Roskosmos has begun assembling Angara-A5 serial heavy launch vehicles for the Ministry of Defense

The Ministry of Defense will soon receive the first serial heavy-class launch vehicles "Angara A5". As follows from the information on the public procurement portal, the Khrunichev Center, which is part of Roscosmos, has begun assembling missiles for the military department.


(...) the financing of the contracts is carried out within the framework of the implementation of the state contract (...) dated May 21, 2020 for the manufacture of Angara-A5 launch vehicles for the needs of the Ministry of Defense

- says the materials.

According to the contract, the Khrunichev Center is to assemble the first four serial Angara A5 launch vehicles for the military. The delivery should take place by 2024. In total, at the first stage, it was planned to assemble six missiles for flight tests, two of them have already been launched. The first start took place in December 2014, the second - in December 2020.

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

Oxygen-kerosene universal rocket modules - URM-1 (for the first and second stages of the launch vehicle) and URM-2 (for the upper stages of the launch vehicle) serve as the basis for creating variants of the Angara launch vehicles. The number of URM in the first stage determines the carrying capacity of the launch vehicle. The universal rocket module is a complete structure consisting of oxidizer and fuel tanks, connected by a spacer, and an engine compartment.
49 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. military_cat
    military_cat 26 March 2021 07: 24
    -10%
    In total, at the first stage, it was planned to assemble six missiles for flight tests, two of them have already been launched.

    Two test launches weren't enough?
    1. Thrifty
      Thrifty 26 March 2021 07: 27
      +2
      Military cat - ONLY 6 missiles, and only 2 are declared for testing, the rest means for the launch of cargo into space hi
      1. military_cat
        military_cat 26 March 2021 07: 33
        +1
        I thought so too, but I read the text of the news, and it is written quite definitely: "six missiles for flight tests."
      2. Cosm22
        Cosm22 26 March 2021 11: 14
        -1
        Which two?
        Who told you such nonsense? When? Where?
        As of today, it is only known for certain that 6 launches of the Angara will be carried out within the framework of the LKI.
        3 from Plesetsk and 3 from Vostochny. I emphasize: within the framework of the LCI. This is exactly what the deputy head of Roscosmos Sevastyanov said. It should not be forgotten that LCIs are carried out not only for testing the launch vehicle, but also for the SC.
        Therefore, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation paid for these 6 test launches, because the workers must be paid money.
        As for PN - yes, perhaps some insignificant one will be present, not only the blanks itself. But not unique or expensive. And so it will be until the product goes into series.
    2. slipped
      slipped 26 March 2021 11: 30
      +7
      Quote: military_cat
      Two test launches weren't enough?


      The standard procedure is 10 starts. But here, according to the results of previous tests, they reduced it to eight - six heavy assemblies, two light missiles. Some of the launches are from the main computer, the rest with spacecraft. Serial missiles for the Ministry of Defense are not included in the test. Serial missile launches will begin in 2023.
  2. Ros 56
    Ros 56 26 March 2021 07: 25
    -9
    How interesting, ours decided to puzzle the striped ones again for the next elections.
    1. mark1
      mark1 26 March 2021 07: 32
      -9
      They will marry Harris on some of our mischievous starlings and at the hour of H they will merge dirt.
      You will say - and what does Angara have to do with it? But on it, then it (starring) will be delivered winked
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 26 March 2021 08: 02
      -4
      And how will this puzzle them? Just an analogue of Proton at a higher price and increased environmental friendliness compared to Proton. And that's it
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 26 March 2021 09: 19
        +11
        Quote: BlackMokona
        And how will this puzzle them? Just an analogue of Proton at a higher price and increased environmental friendliness compared to Proton. And that's it

        no, not "just an analogue of Proton"
        because the Angara is modular
        and due to the use of universal missile modules (URM), in theory, the developers should replace several missiles of different classes.
        Due to its modularity, it is easier to transport, which is very important.
        And in the A5 configuration (not the maximum one) it is already more carrying capacity than the Proton.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 26 March 2021 10: 11
          -3
          Only now this was actually abandoned.
          Project A7 is closed, A3 is closed.
          And the difference between A5 and Proton is negligible.
          From the large lineup, only the light Angara and the Heavy are now left. Moreover, the light one will compete for loads with a bunch of Russian-made missiles, and the A5 will be flanked by Soyuz-5, Soyuz-7 and a bunch of other things.
          1. Flooding
            Flooding 26 March 2021 10: 21
            +7
            Quote: BlackMokona
            And the difference between A5 and Proton is negligible

            by carrying capacity - yes
            but there are other factors besides carrying capacity and avoiding poisonous heptyl
            this is what Proton is launched from Baikonur
            and the task of the Russian space program is to get rid of the launch from Kazakhstan
            Quote: BlackMokona
            Project А7 closed, А3 closed

            what will prevent you from returning to them after thorough development and adjustment of launches of the most urgent projects today?
            on the contrary, it would be foolish not to take advantage of the modularity of the rocket if it justifies itself
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 26 March 2021 11: 00
              -1
              1. There is no problem to build a launch pad for Proton on Vostochny or Plesetsk.
              2. The fact that other missiles are already being developed in their place, for example. Now a new universal line based on Soyuz-5. The basic Soyuz-5 overlaps the A3, and the Soyuz-5 assembly overlaps the A7, while the Soyuz-5 itself, in the naval Launch version, kicks the A5
              1. slipped
                slipped 26 March 2021 11: 48
                +9
                Quote: BlackMokona
                1. There is no problem to build a launch pad for Proton on Vostochny or Plesetsk.


                The Proton-M launch vehicle cannot be developed further. KRK "Angara" - possibly up to the heavyweight A5VM.

                Quote: BlackMokona
                2. The fact that other missiles are already being developed in their place, for example. Now a new universal line based on Soyuz-5. Basic Soyuz-5 overlaps A3


                First of all, the A3 is actually Zenit-2. But for new payloads, this capacity is not enough. In addition, A3 cannot use both the already built launch for Zenit at Baikonur and Sea Launch without their complete restructuring. Which is economically disadvantageous. Yes, you can use the UKS in Plesetsk and Vostochny. Perhaps in the future, with the appearance of the corresponding PNs, they will return to the A3 version.

                There is no "base Union-5" - this is a complete complex. It will have different versions of the CGC - with different GO and RB.
                The main launch site is SC "Baiterek".
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 26 March 2021 12: 14
                  -3
                  1) Who and what forbids the development of the Proton?
                  2) Yes, you are clearly not following the news well. A new superheavy will be assembled from Soyuz-5.
                  1. slipped
                    slipped 26 March 2021 12: 23
                    +7
                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    1) Who and what forbids the development of the Proton?


                    Today - Kazakhstan and its (Proton) obsolete fuel pair. The cost of modernizing the Proton-M with the creation of new SC will be comparable to the commissioning of the Angara missile complex.

                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    2) Yes, you are clearly not following the news well. A new superheavy will be assembled from Soyuz-5.


                    What am I doing? Am I watching? Do not make me laugh. You are mistaken - not from Soyuz-5. Soyuz-5 is a two-stage launch vehicle.

                    At the moment, the technical design of the STK implies that only the first stage rocket module from the Soyuz-5 will be used as the first and second stages of the STK. In addition, there is a proposal from NPO Energomash to replace the first and second stage engines at STK of the second stage with methane RD-182 engines.
                    1. Blackmokona
                      Blackmokona 26 March 2021 12: 28
                      -2
                      1) As of today, it has already spent a billion dollars on the Angara. But physically and technically, nothing interferes. Well, kerosene for the Angara is also an obsolete fuel, now methane is in vogue.
                      2) Clearly don't follow
                      Enessey Vicky.
                      The concept of creating a superheavy assumes that all its parts should be aircraft with serial production and launch statistics [61].

                      First stage: will consist of 6 blocks, each block will consist of the first stage "Irtysh" / "Soyuz-5" (RD-171MV engine) [116].

                      The second stage: will consist of one unit - the first stage "Soyuz-6", the engine - RD-180 [116].

                      Upper stage: KBTK [116].

                      Accelerating braking unit: Block DM [116
                      1. slipped
                        slipped 26 March 2021 12: 47
                        +5
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        1) As of today, it has already spent a billion dollars on the Angara. But physically and technically, nothing interferes. Well, kerosene for the Angara is also an obsolete fuel, now methane is in vogue.


                        Naphthyl is not an "obsolete" fuel. laughing And methane is needed only for reusable stages, and here, too, some questions arise.

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        2) Clearly don't follow
                        Enessey Vicky.


                        Enessey Viki - is this a new name for the carrier ?! Wai-kiki. laughing

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        First stage: will consist of 6 blocks, each block will consist of the first stage "Irtysh" / "Soyuz-5" (RD-171MV engine)


                        I understand you are not Russian. laughing But not so much. Above, what have I written? You are confusing a full-fledged medium with a part of it.
                      2. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 26 March 2021 13: 41
                        -1
                        1) Naphthyl is a type of kerosene, developed back in the USSR at the beginning of the space race.
                        http://free-inform.ru/pepelaz/kerosene.htm
                        In the future, starting with the R-9 ICBM for the engines RD-111 (8D716) - the first stage, RD-461 (11D55) - the second stage, it was decided to switch to the rocket fuel kerosene RG-1 (naphthyl) specially developed for use in space )

                        Accordingly, for the third-stage engine of the Soyuz-U launch vehicle RD-0110 (11D55), as a descendant of RD-461, kerosene RG-1 is used.

                        In relation to the RD-107 and RD-108 liquid propellant rocket engines (modifications 11D511, 11D512) in 1970. work was underway to transfer engines of this type from T-1 fuel to RG-1 fuel. The possibility of switching to RG-1 was considered both in terms of the unification of fuels on various engines, and in terms of increasing the specific impulse of engine thrust. Tests have shown that when converting engines from fuel T-1 to RG-1, there is no increase in specific impulses of the draft of the combustion chambers. Further work on switching to RG-1 fuel was discontinued [10].

                        2) Like the Angara, not everything consists of URM.
                      3. slipped
                        slipped 27 March 2021 03: 12
                        0
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        1) Naphthyl is a type of kerosene, developed back in the USSR at the beginning of the space race.


                        AND? Just a good fuel with good storage and transport performance and high calorific value when combusted. The specific impulse paired with oxygen is higher than that of conventional kerosene. Relatively inexpensive.

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Regarding LPRE RD-107 and RD-108


                        At Soyuz-5, RD-171MV at the first stage, and RD-0124MS at the second stage, both engines use naphthyl as fuel. It is not clear what the engines of the first and second stages of the Soyuz-2 have to do with it.

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        2) Like the Angara, not everything consists of URM.


                        A1.2 consists of URM-1 and AM ("thinner" URM-2), A5 consists of URM-1, URM-2 and RB. URM-5 will also be added to the A3B.
                      4. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 27 March 2021 08: 52
                        -1
                        1) Methane is even cheaper and the characteristics of engines on it are even higher.
                        2) I cited when this "modern" fuel was invented.
                        3) And it was planned that everything would consist of a single URM. That was the name of the universal rocket module, but during the development they could not and there was a de-unification of the launch pads and new URMs began to appear.
                      5. slipped
                        slipped 27 March 2021 12: 36
                        0
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        1) Methane is even cheaper and the characteristics of engines on it are even higher.


                        The issue is controversial. There you have to consider everything in a complex. We burned the same RD-180 engines on methane, but no significant advantages were revealed.

                        But I will reassure you - the Amur-LNG design and development project is in the process of designing and there may be interesting solutions at the exit. For example, the installation at the first stage, including the RD-182, made according to the "gas-gas" scheme.

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        2) I cited when this "modern" fuel was invented.


                        Such fuel as firewood has been invented for a long time. But looking at the attempts of someone to freeze SP2, one can see the ardent desire of some to still use them. laughing

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        3) And it was planned that everything would consist of a single URM. That was the name of the universal rocket module, but during the development they could not and there was a de-unification of the launch pads and new URMs began to appear.


                        Not certainly in that way. The launch pads for the complexes are the same, and the unification of the modules in terms of components is underway and is planned for the serial production of the A5M over 90%. Those. URM-1 will be the same for all assemblies. URM-2 and AM will differ only in diameter - this is required by the optimization of the light carrier for the output PN, and the URM-3 with a fuel pair - to increase the carrying capacity of the carrier.
                      6. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 27 March 2021 14: 01
                        -1
                        1) There is a different engine for each type of fuel. Look how Musk boasted about how his engine bypassed ours, so our experts and designers screamed en masse. That it has methane, not kyrosine. And here we have methane, too, super cool.
                        2) Methane will flow through SP2.
                        3) In any case, it was planned to 100% unify and assemble rockets of any dimensions from the stock right at the cosmodrome. It was with such statements that the competition was won in due time. What is cool then, too, there were chances to jump from the Angara. For example, there was a proposal at the end of 2011, almost 1 in 1 like the Falcon-9, which now dominates the market.
                      7. slipped
                        slipped 27 March 2021 19: 25
                        0
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Look how Musk boasted about how his engine bypassed ours, so our experts and designers screamed en masse.


                        Are you talking about the RD-180? I have not heard of "yelling". There was only a response from the designer Energomash to Musk's writings on the network that the pressure in the compressor station at the RD-180 is possible and more than 280 atm (the Rapotor had 268) and that the motor circuits are different.

                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        3) In any case, it was planned to 100% unify and assemble rockets of any dimensions from the stock right at the cosmodrome.


                        And so it will be in the end. Only not at the cosmodrome, but at the manufacturer - before shipment, the assembly is always tested, and then it is disassembled into wagons and assembled for repeated tests already at the MIC of the cosmodrome.
                      8. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 27 March 2021 19: 31
                        -1
                        1) The Raptor has already reached 330.
                        2) Only now they said that you can just keep a supply of URM and collect everything you need. And now a bunch of different URMs will not work
                      9. slipped
                        slipped 27 March 2021 22: 54
                        0
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Only now they said that you can just keep a supply of URM and collect everything you need. And now a bunch of different URMs will not work like that


                        And so it will be. Three different URMs for different upper stages (AM, URM-2, URM-3) are maximally unified in terms of components, while the first stage for all carriers (URM-1) will be the same module (today it is not yet So).
    3. mark1
      mark1 26 March 2021 13: 08
      +2
      RD-182 will have a thrust of 250 tons at RD171 - 800 tons. When replaced, the number of engines is at least 3: 1 (taking into account the difference in specific thrust) - that is, the "STK of the second stage" is a completely different product. which has yet to be developed (having mastered a lot of money accordingly). In general, to the present, it is customary to use oxygen-kerosene engines at the first stages, as having the greatest thrust, and on subsequent stages to use methane / oxygen or hydrogen / oxygen due to a higher specific impulse
      1. slipped
        slipped 27 March 2021 03: 26
        0
        Quote: mark1
        RD-182 will have a thrust of 250 tons at RD171 - 800 tons. When replacing, the number of engines is at least 3: 1 (taking into account the difference in specific thrust)


        The diameter of 4,1 fits two single-chamber RD-182. Or one two-chamber. The central unit will have to be made wider, and if we want to return it (why do we need methane?), We will have to install five single-chamber engines.

        Quote: mark1
        - that is, "STK of the second stage" is a completely different product. which has yet to be developed (having mastered a lot of money accordingly).


        So far, these are only suggestions for further development. There are many factors that are currently being considered.
  • Flooding
    Flooding 26 March 2021 11: 58
    +3
    Quote: BlackMokona
    There is no problem to build a launch pad for Proton at Vostochny or Plesetsk.

    well yes. build infrastructure for the missile, which they plan to abandon. this is the height of thrift and prudence
    Quote: BlackMokona
    Now a new universal line based on Soyuz-5. The basic Soyuz-5 overlaps the A3, and the Soyuz-5 assembly overlaps the A7, while the Soyuz-5 itself, in the Sea Launch version, kicks the A5

    I did not understand anything about the three versions of Soyuz-5 and its line.
    In fact, Soyuz-5 is a modernization of Zenith. That is, there is an element of novelty, but to a much lesser extent in comparison with the new Angara project. The main task was the complete localization of Zenith.

    While Angara is a new project with a significant modernization stock
    Kommersant has an extensive article on this issue.
    Firstly, Zenit is one of the most damaged missiles (Zenit's failure-free indicator is the lowest in the domestic cosmonautics and one of the lowest in the world - 0,857). Secondly, Zenit is a morally obsolete complex. So if Soyuz-5 is intended to become a modernized Zenit, then by the time it goes into flight tests (not earlier than in 7-8 years) its main technical solutions, on the basis of which it is being created now, will be more than 40 years old. In addition, Soyuz-5 also loses to the same Proton-M in terms of carrying capacity: the latter, when launched from Baikonur, puts cargo weighing 3,5 tons into geostationary orbit, and Soyuz-5 - no more than 2 tons


    Read more at https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4214792
    1. slipped
      slipped 26 March 2021 12: 35
      +7
      Quote: Flood
      In fact, Soyuz-5 is a modernization of Zenith. That is, there is an element of novelty, but to a much lesser extent in comparison with the new Angara project. The main task was the complete localization of Zenith.


      From "Zenith" there is only the tail section. This is done. so that he sat in the UK at the 45th site. Everything else is absolutely new, not modernization, the diameter of the tanks is larger and a new control system from another manufacturer. Is that the basic HE from the Soyuz-2, but the RB has been upgraded to the Frigate-SBU.

      Quote: Flood
      In addition, Soyuz-5 also loses to the same Proton-M in terms of carrying capacity: the latter, when launched from Baikonur, puts cargo weighing 3,5 tons into geostationary orbit, and Soyuz-5 - no more than 2 tons


      Soyuz-5 is a medium-sized commercial spacecraft. Its task is to bring 5 kg to the GPO.
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 26 March 2021 12: 43
        +3
        Quote: slipped
        From "Zenith" there is only the tail section. This is done. so that he sat in the UK at the 45th site. Everything else is absolutely new, not modernization, the diameter of the tanks is larger and a new control system from another manufacturer. Is that the basic HE from the Soyuz-2, but the RB has been upgraded to the Frigate-SBU.

        thanks, interesting
        Quote: slipped
        Soyuz-5 is a medium-sized commercial spacecraft. Its task is to bring 5 kg to the GPO.

        just now noticed
        indeed, these figures from Kommersant are not reliable
  • Cosm22
    Cosm22 26 March 2021 11: 25
    -2
    Common sense will get in the way.
    For the A7, there is simply no PN. Do you have an option? Voice it out.
    With A3, too, there is nothing even to fence a garden. For the Republic of Kazakhstan and the whole of Russia as a whole are not so rich as to produce a bunch of launch vehicles with the same functionality. Why do we need A3, if the creation of Soyuz-5 is announced?
    As for easier transportation, we have not left this dubious advantage anywhere since the time of Korolev to this day, in order to fit into the railway gauge 4,1.
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 26 March 2021 12: 03
      0
      Quote: Cosm22
      Why do we need A3, if the creation of Soyuz-5 is announced?

      as I understood from what I read at the time of the announcement of the Union-5 on the Angara A3, very significant work has already been carried out
      Quote: Cosm22
      in order to fit into the railway gauge 4,1

      for the first time I hear about such a size
      1. Cosm22
        Cosm22 26 March 2021 13: 02
        -3
        Who is to blame that RK and Rogozin have seven Fridays a week, and the right hand does not know what the left is doing?
        Ask at your leisure about the 1-T standard and its parameters 5,3 × 3,4 m. And at the same time, why the designers were instructed to keep within the value of 4,1. And why the same Buran was already transported by air.
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 26 March 2021 13: 10
          +1
          Quote: Cosm22
          Ask at your leisure about the 1-T standard and its parameters 5,3 × 3,4 m.And at the same time, why the designers were instructed to keep within the value of 4,1

          I am familiar with the dimensions of the railway. PS
          and not only 1-T
          dealt with them for more than one year
          specifically 4,1 I don't understand
      2. mark1
        mark1 26 March 2021 13: 15
        +4
        These are the dimensions of the "Proton" adopted for the "Soyuz-5" in order to use the existing equipment in production. Zenith has a diameter of 3,7 m.
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 26 March 2021 13: 17
          +1
          Quote: mark1
          These are the dimensions of the "Proton" adopted for the "Soyuz-5" in order to use the existing equipment in production. Zenith has a diameter of 3,7 m.

          thank you for enlightening
          it turns out that the comrade had in mind the diameter of the rocket when discussing the railway. dimensions
          not realizing that this is far from the same
  • donavi49
    donavi49 26 March 2021 09: 08
    0
    Puzzled with what? Technology? But no - they are super conservative, there is no promising fuel pair, such as Methane-Oxygen, or any interesting features. Carrying capacity, so again no. With a drink and a price, so Yula laughs over the Angara, having a serial rocket (hydrogen by the way) with a price tag of 420-460 million for launch and the native MO buys it regularly wassat ... Lobbying, kickbacks and that's all a great thing.


    And it's not even worth talking about TsarRaspil the SLS rocket. By the way, she again caught some problems with the postponement of testing.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 March 2021 13: 38
      -1
      The first stage of the SLS was successfully tested - now only the assembly of the entire Orion rocket and launch in November this year.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 26 March 2021 07: 52
    +7
    So the order in the "troops" is a guarantee that everything will turn out as it should.
    Space affairs, business is not fast ... I hope to see that everything is done and flies as it should.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 26 March 2021 09: 14
      +2
      By the way, yesterday there was the second commercial launch of this year at Stars / Arianspace. 36 OneWeb Internet satellites flew away. The truth is still unclear what the British are counting on. Musk sent 240 in a month, and since the beginning of the year 400+, OneWeb 36. Mask already has 100+ Mbps in CBT for 15 subscribers, OneWeb has nothing yet, the stage of withdrawal of the grouping. As if OneWeb did not die again.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 26 March 2021 09: 19
        0
        Quote: donavi49
        36 OneWeb Internet satellites flew away. The truth is still unclear what the British are counting on. Musk sent 240 in a month, and since the beginning of the year 400+,

        "sowing" near-earth space ... that's what it is for?
      2. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 26 March 2021 09: 25
        -1
        Quote: donavi49
        The truth is still unclear what the British are counting on.

        Sell ​​more expensive. Until there is an alternative to the Falcon 9, they have no chance of competing with Musk. An alternative will appear, there will be those who want to compete with Starlink, it is more logical to invest in a ready-made system.
      3. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 26 March 2021 10: 13
        +1
        Moreover, Musk has twice the mass of satellites and about two and a half times the bandwidth. That is, each Musk satellite is 2,5 Oniveb satellites
      4. Genry
        Genry 26 March 2021 11: 33
        -2
        Quote: donavi49
        The truth is still unclear what the British are counting on. Musk sent 240 in a month, and since the beginning of the year 400+, OneWeb 36.

        Don't compare Musk's military project to the commercial OneWeb. Funding purposefully dedicated or casual investors.
      5. slipped
        slipped 26 March 2021 12: 13
        +4
        Quote: donavi49
        By the way, yesterday was the second commercial launch of this year for Stars / Arianspace. 36 OneWeb Internet satellites flew away.


        The first from "Starsem" - do not distort the name laughing ... Before that, there was a start-up from the "GK start-up services". The next launch at Starsem is in a month. As satellites are manufactured and supplied from Florida.

        Quote: donavi49
        The truth is still unclear what the British are counting on. Musk sent 240 in a month, and since the beginning of the year 400+, OneWeb 36.


        OneWeb already has 146 spacecraft in its orbits. There is no quantity that matters in this case. They will fully deploy their grouping by the end of 2022.

        Quote: donavi49
        Mask already has 100+ Mbps in CBT for 15 subscribers, OneWeb has nothing yet, the stage of withdrawal of the grouping. As if OneWeb did not die again.


        India will not give. laughing
    2. knn54
      knn54 26 March 2021 10: 49
      -1
      Let the adversary know that retribution is INEVITABLE.
  • xorek
    xorek 26 March 2021 09: 41
    -9
    Heavy missiles for the Russian Ministry of Defense !!!
    What are they going to launch there? ..
    Another surprise for Western "partners" wink
    And your Musk is silent .. Well, God forbid, everything will pass regularly!
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 March 2021 13: 41
      +1
      Today, Starship 11's fourth test launch should be - so Musk and his office are not silent.
  • Engineer Schukin
    Engineer Schukin 26 March 2021 14: 59
    +1
    Quote: slipped
    Serial missiles for the Ministry of Defense are not included in the test. Serial missile launches will begin in 2023.

    it's like?
    1. slipped
      slipped 27 March 2021 03: 37
      0
      Quote: Engineer Schukin
      it's like?


      This is so - when the rocket, before being sent to the cosmodromes, will be fully assembled and tested in Omsk. And from Moscow they will send in pursuit only the RBs required for the launch.

      And now, during the tests, Omsk collects only URM-1 and AM, as the latter masters, it will switch to URM-2, it is almost the same, only fat.