Military Review

Rogozin will reforming the space industry

73
According to officials, the recent crash of the Proton-M launch vehicle does not have serious environmental consequences. At the same time, an emergency launch of a rocket may have a different effect. From the new statements of Deputy Prime Minister D. Rogozin, it follows that the main consequences of the incident will affect the entire space industry, namely its organizational structure.




Despite the available launch statistics, which generally looks positive (this year only one launch from 16 ended in an accident), the country's leadership intends to sort out the reasons for the latest failure and take appropriate measures. Moreover, according to D. Rogozin, extremely tough conclusions and consequences will affect not only individuals whose actions led to the accident, but also the entire rocket and space industry. In the present condition, as stated by the Deputy Prime Minister, this part of the Russian industry cannot move on. It must be reformed and transformed as soon as possible.

Rogozin expressed a proposal that all enterprises of the rocket and space industry should be combined into a single structure, as was previously done with the aircraft and shipbuilding industries. It is proposed to create a certain organization, which will be transferred to all existing shares of the state employed in the space program. The type of this organization has not yet been determined and Rogozin proposed to create an open joint-stock company. In the same way, the name of the future JSC is also absent. In his speech, the Deputy Prime Minister used the code name of the Rocket and Space Corporation. Judging by the names of other integrated structures, the option proposed by Rogozin may be formalized.

At the moment, the transformation of the rocket and space industry is at the preliminary proposal stage. In the near future, a draft decision of the president will be prepared, in which all the basic principles for the transformation of the relevant industry sector should be described. At the same time, it is already claimed that a part of organizations and objects will remain under the jurisdiction of Roskosmos. So it is planned to do with the Baikonur, Plesetsk and Vostochny cosmodromes. All factories and design offices, in turn, will become part of the new unified corporation.

The first step on the path to reforming the space industry was the decree of Russian President V. Putin, according to which a special commission will be created in the near future. She will prepare all the documentation necessary for organizing and carrying out all the planned reforms. Deputy Prime Minister D. Rogozin was appointed head of the commission. Specific details of the future transformation of the industry have not yet been named, but the first details should be expected in the near future.

Speaking with journalists, D. Rogozin paid much attention to the recent accident of the Proton-M launch vehicle. According to the official, the investigation is underway and the first conclusions will be made soon. So, by the evening of Wednesday (the conversation with the press took place on Tuesday, July 2) the telemetry data should have come, which can serve as the basis for the first versions. Also requires a complete analysis of all the remaining elements of the rocket. As Rogozin told, the Proton-M rocket that exploded was manufactured back in the 2011 year and then sent to prepare for launch at the Baikonur cosmodrome.

As for the environmental consequences, the explosion of the rocket, according to the deputy prime minister, did not cause serious damage to the environment. The official explained that the most dangerous substance - heptyl rocket fuel (asymmetric dimethylhydrazine) - burned down in the first seconds, after which a cloud of oxidant (nitric acid) remained. Due to precipitation, the cloud fell to the ground and probably did not have a serious impact on the ecological situation.

It should be noted that the current proposal to reform the rocket and space industry is not an impulsive decision provoked by a missile accident. Back in November last year, Prime Minister D. Medvedev demanded that ways be determined for the further development of Russian cosmonautics. In particular, he proposed to reorganize the entire control system of cosmonautics. Shortly thereafter, the head of Roscosmos V. Popovkin told about the upcoming creation of five or six large holdings, which would include most of the enterprises involved in the space program. In the future, the possibility of creating a state corporation was not excluded.

Thus, the creation of a commission to transform the rocket and space industry is part of the plan created several months ago. Considering last year's statements by the responsible persons, we can draw the appropriate conclusions. It is quite possible that the last words of Rogozin and the actions of the country's leadership regarding the reform simply coincided with the accident at Baikonur. However, we cannot exclude another version, according to which the unsuccessful launch of Proton-M made the government and the president raise the priority of changes in the space industry and speed up the planned work. However, regardless of the reasons, the current plans for restructuring should be carefully worked out and fully implemented. If in time there is no improvement in the work of all enterprises involved in the space program, then in the future the ratio of successful and emergency launches may change in favor of the latter, and this cannot be allowed.


On the materials of the sites:
http://ria.ru/
http://kommersant.ru/
http://vz.ru/
Author:
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Kremlin
    Kremlin 4 July 2013 09: 10
    -9
    how unfortunate it did not sound, BUT RUSSIA IS ALREADY NOT A SPACE HOLD! Remember the USSR, where the number of failures was equal to zero ...
    1. experienced
      experienced 4 July 2013 09: 20
      25
      Its early reform and transformation is necessary.

      After that, it will be possible to put an end to Russian space
      Rogozin made a proposal according to which all enterprises of the rocket and space industry should be combined as part of a single structure, as was previously done with aircraft and shipbuilding. It is proposed to create a kind of organization, which will be transferred to all state-owned shares of enterprises engaged in space exploration.

      They will unite, pump in billions of budget money and privatize on the sly for a "penny". As a result, Russian space will become the space of Chubais, Abramovich ... How tired of this farce with reforms, corporations and so on. Moreover, neither the aircraft industry nor the shipbuilding as a result of the creation of corporations made a "breakthrough", only the "feeders" became "personalized" hi
      1. little man
        little man 4 July 2013 10: 18
        +2
        Exactly!
        Words reform and transformation driven into longing. Reforms of the army and education have already passed.
        1. Sobol
          Sobol 4 July 2013 19: 30
          +2
          But you have to do something with It! Or we’ll continue to look at the falling rockets.
        2. Vlad-32
          Vlad-32 4 July 2013 20: 36
          +1
          I will support you in this matter. Something reform is already associated with some bad word.
      2. theadenter
        theadenter 4 July 2013 10: 20
        +1
        UAC (United Aircraft Corporation) did not fail, after all, they riveted the PAK-FA, Yak-130 and are modernizing the planes. Regarding civil aircraft, so far, unfortunately, is a problem, but I think that this is just "the first pancake is lumpy.

        Why do you think that the United Rocket and Space Corporation will suddenly kill the Russian space industry?
      3. Dimanrus86
        Dimanrus86 4 July 2013 13: 41
        +8
        Now in Kazakhstan belay
        1. Karabu
          Karabu 4 July 2013 19: 29
          +1
          I read a very interesting version of this disaster that drank loot and launched a dummy. it was all very theatrical. across all the media, and Putin and the boyars did not seem very surprised. who knows ... everything can be with modern Russia. the main thing is that the pea king pay tax
    2. fzr1000
      fzr1000 4 July 2013 09: 27
      +7
      In the USSR, the number of failures did not equal 0. It’s a bad thing; we are still flying on the backlog of the USSR, there are very few of our own new ones.
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 09: 52
        -4
        count how many failures in the USSR and now? then let's talk!
        1. Tatar
          Tatar 4 July 2013 10: 12
          +4
          At all times, missiles have fallen both here and there, but in the USSR, for the most part, this is when testing new systems. let’s recall that H1 did not take off.
          1. Kremlin
            Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 28
            -1
            but this is when tested ...
          2. Locksmith
            Locksmith 4 July 2013 20: 07
            +1
            Quote: Tatar
            let’s recall that H1 did not take off.

            More precisely, which was not allowed to fly — three partially successful launches is the minimum, the fourth launch was canceled and forced to destroy all the missiles and touched, Now the amers fly on the very same engines, from the very same missile — EMERGENCY !!!! Conclusion, either it was done politically, or someone tried to fly am
      2. postman
        postman 4 July 2013 13: 40
        +1
        Quote: fzr1000
        In the USSR, the number of failures did not equal 0.

        not true
        Americans have a better rate
        1. Locksmith
          Locksmith 4 July 2013 20: 10
          +2
          Quote: Postman
          Americans have a better rate

          Well, for sure, Saturn 5 exploded during testing - it absolutely didn’t stop after a while to START it, but already with people on board, EMERGENCY several times, and NONE of the tested systems did not fly and did not pass the test = I'm lying under the table .....
    3. TRAFFIC
      TRAFFIC 4 July 2013 09: 46
      +2
      Remember the USSR, where the number of failures was equal to zero
      Well, read at least about the same Proton.
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 09: 53
        0
        and all? and now ... the equipment of the USSR ... there's really nothing new ... all the upgrades ...
      2. Locksmith
        Locksmith 4 July 2013 20: 13
        +1
        Quote: TRAFIC
        Well, read at least about the same Proton.

        And how did the proton differ for the better from the Amer movie rockets ?? He all clearly passed the tests, exploded the prescribed number of times, and the summer is almost accident-free for 40 years !!
    4. Kremlin
      Kremlin 4 July 2013 09: 51
      -4
      who puts a minus, he does not understand the strategy at all!
    5. KazaK Bo
      KazaK Bo 4 July 2013 09: 55
      +2
      Quote: Kremlin
      Remember the USSR, where the number of failures was equal to zero ...

      My heart aches no less than yours for failures for a number of objective reasons ... but you probably just didn’t know about accidents and disasters in the USSR ... it wasn’t advertised ... unlike the USA. The American astronautics had no less losses than ours. But, sadly, we had failures ... and severe ones, including ... New things in science and technology always break through through losses and losses ...
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 00
        0
        I had military acquaintances ... they spoke all the way and there was enthusiasm, but now only personal gain ...
        1. theadenter
          theadenter 4 July 2013 10: 49
          0
          About enthusiasm, you are unfortunately right. There is no enthusiasm for discoveries that was earlier ... But then, before, there was still fresh joy and pride in the great breakthrough of mankind - the launch of satellites, animals, and then people, into space. Over time, this became more of some commonplace. Now people hardly even watch videos of rocket launches. On the contrary, they watch a video where rockets ... fall.
          1. Kremlin
            Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 57
            0
            right now people want to fill their stomach and drain their liquids .. that's all the entertainment ...
    6. Kremlin
      Kremlin 4 July 2013 09: 55
      -6
      look at China and the Russian Federation who is the power?
      1. Zlodeey
        Zlodeey 4 July 2013 10: 16
        +1
        Quote: Kremlin
        look at China and the Russian Federation who is the power?

        Look at the rocket launches into space in Russia and China, and again I want to note that in China there was no such devastation as ours!
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D1%EF%E8%F1%EE%EA_%EA%EE%F1%EC%E8%F7%E5%F1%EA%E8%F
        5_%E7%E0%EF%F3%F1%EA%EE%E2_%D0%EE%F1%F1%E8%E8_%E2_2013_%E3%EE%E4%F3 в конце статьи таблица по запускам.
        1. postman
          postman 4 July 2013 14: 14
          +3
          Quote: ZloDeey
          in China there was no such devastation as ours!

          in china, 30 years ago, Vorobyov drove and built blast furnaces in every yard
      2. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 58
        -1
        I don’t understand why people like to live in a lie ???? You yourself are deceiving yourself ... the Russian Federation is not a power and we must come to terms with it and not think about what has not been around for 20 years!
    7. tegezen
      tegezen 4 July 2013 10: 05
      13
      -Russia has a full production cycle of any space technology.
      -Russia carries out half of the space launches on the planet
      -Russia has its own global positioning system, one of two.
      -Russia has Plesetsk, Vostochny as well as Baikonur and Kura
      is American missiles fly on our engines and not vice versa
      - These are American and European astronauts flying on our ships and not vice versa.
      - Russia has a key role on the ISS.

      Etc. etc.
      If Russia is not a space power then WHO is a space power?
      Both in the USSR and in the USA there were failures. So there is no need to bullshit.
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 16
        -3
        China ... who is ... she collects from batteries to spaceships ... and you still live without offense in "your own world." The question is: what money are these spaceships, on which foreigners fly, going in Russia? who sponsors?
        1. tegezen
          tegezen 4 July 2013 11: 03
          +1
          Quote: Kremlin
          China ... who is ... she collects from batteries to spaceships ... and you still live without offense in "your own world." The question is: what money are these spaceships, on which foreigners fly, going in Russia? who sponsors?

          About "space China", which is about to have all, I have heard for fifteen years. So far, they have only enough intelligence to copy our Soviet space technology. The fairy tale affects quickly, but the work is not done quickly. They still have to work and work. Let's wish them good luck. The space industry in Russia is unprofitable only at first glance. These are thousands of supplier enterprises, salaries of workers, research and development, etc., a huge promulgation effect in the most high-tech industry. The money spent on buying a rocket, for example, is circulated in the economy many times. It is necessary to support the industry and develop no matter what the costs are.
    8. avt
      avt 4 July 2013 10: 05
      +1
      Quote: Kremlin
      where the number of failures was equal to zero ...

      Stupidity, please speak and minus deservedly.
      Quote: Kremlin
      count how many failures in the USSR and now? then let's talk!

      There have never been a hike on the site and conduct statistics according to TASS. fool There were all sorts of things and 500ka, nicknamed over the hill, flew more often, practically because of her, they refused to fly around the moon, do not believe me - then at least look for Leonov's statements on this matter. The question is different, the campaign begins cutting the leftovers and playing in a joint-stock casino. Instead of REAL correction and arrangement of the industry, they will capitalize "through a joint-stock company, print shares - chips, exchange them for real money, budgetary and attracted, and go to play on the casino stock exchange. negative And what exactly can one expect from top managers, now they are only trained in this, ordinary currency speculation, proudly called the market mechanism, they are not interested in any other mechanisms, except for prestigious cars under the buttocks.
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 19
        -1
        let's say ... but not to the same extent ...
    9. ed65b
      ed65b 4 July 2013 10: 28
      +1
      Failures were present in the days of the USSR, they just learned about it only after the death of people.
      1. Locksmith
        Locksmith 4 July 2013 20: 18
        +1
        Quote: ed65b
        Failures were present in the days of the USSR, they just learned about it only after the death of people

        What if chatting "chernukha" on the first channel will increase the vitality of people? I think they did the right thing that they did not flap in vain and did not frighten people, in principle, if you approach the issue cynically, you can also scoff amers so that they will not come out of DotA for their favorite "food"
      2. Cyber7
        Cyber7 4 July 2013 20: 44
        +1
        You are unlikely to be an engineer. IMHO.
        Although, maybe you can imagine why mechanisms with a six to eight-fold degree of duplication suddenly fail.
        It just happens. There are many reasons.
        But this happens, and nothing can be done about it.
        I work with such mechanisms. And sometimes I wonder how they still haven't bent even without duplication, after 20-30-40 years. Some of them still bear the "Quality Seal". Maybe that's why?
        Missile technology is much more complicated than what I'm dealing with.
        But the fact that Gagarin entered orbit and returned alive to Earth half a century ago, I consider it a miracle.
        And the fact that "in the days of the USSR" they learned about tragedies less often than now ...
        Now the news feed is teeming with messages about all sorts of "murders, rapes, pogroms, accidents and tyda".
        Is it easier, happier for you to read such news?
        Does this stop you from dreaming about something high and striving for this dream?
        It does not bother me.
        I just don't read this "news".
    10. KazaK Bo
      KazaK Bo 4 July 2013 10: 34
      +1
      Quote: Kremlin
      Remember the USSR, where the number of failures was equal to zero ...

      Alas! Over the past 25 years, only in 2001 ... 2004 and 2009, the number of successful launches was equal to the number of launches ... t. e. - ZERO!
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 44
        -1
        are you sure what EVERYONE is telling you ???? you know how many things, the number of launches is much more only hiding, if everything is on the air then, if not, then in the stamp "secret". Here .. and you with noodles on your ears!
    11. Kremlin
      Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 59
      -2
      cons you put yourself and not the TRUTH! THIS IS AND DIE IN YOUR DECEPTION ABOUT RF!
    12. royk
      royk 4 July 2013 12: 41
      0
      And how many memorable days are in the space history of the USSR? + how many are not advertised even for the military ...
  2. Vanek
    Vanek 4 July 2013 09: 17
    0
    Education reformed - ...

    The army was reformed - ... Well, not everything is so bad.

    Now they want the RAS and Space ...
    1. Canep
      Canep 4 July 2013 10: 23
      +4
      In Russia, the term “reform” seems to be becoming synonymous with “bury”.
    2. Constantine
      Constantine 4 July 2013 13: 42
      +1
      With the RAS they went too far. The fact that you need to find an effective way to rejuvenate the staff is a fact. Fresh ideas in science are good and useful. They went over precisely in terms of structural changes. So, for example, I believe that narrow-profile RAS should remain separate and narrow-profile, with people who know the area entrusted.

      As for ROSKOSMOS, the question is ripe in any case. The fact that it is GLONASS that fall so loudly, in my opinion, is no accident. It is necessary to identify those who crap, to increase control, etc.
  3. AK-47
    AK-47 4 July 2013 09: 25
    0
    ... the unsuccessful launch of Proton-M will force the government and the president to increase the priority of changes in the space industry ...

    That's it!
  4. smprofi
    smprofi 4 July 2013 09: 52
    +6
    ogums ... converts ...
    Will ORSIS take up space?

    2057, Russia, Cosmonautics Museum. the guide takes five-piece from exhibit to exhibit and, poking a pointer, tells with inspiration:
    - and this, children, a spaceship, it serves to fly into space. Once upon a time, our ancestors who lived on the territory of our country built such ships and went out onto the borders of our planet, where there is no air, where there is infinite space, where planets and stars are separated by enormous distances. look how skillfully, how precisely the details are worked out, what power is felt in these engines. everything indicates what a great level of development our great-grandfathers had. even now, a hundred years after the first flights, we cannot repeat what was once done by the human hands of our compatriots. the secrets of production and technology, unfortunately, have long been lost and it is impossible to say whether we will ever be able to at least equal those who took their first steps into space ...

    standing aside, Vovochka, now and then looked back at the guide and briskly poked his fingers into the keyboard on the smartphone screen:
    "To the most holy curator of the school, the museum guide blasphemes, denies the existence of the firmament, and claims that our ancestors could fly far from the earth ..."
    1. Tatar
      Tatar 4 July 2013 10: 19
      +4
      there is something to laugh and cry about, in our universities more hours of subjects such as religious studies, political scientists, sociology are being introduced in exchange for sopromat, termeha, and tcm. tmm. And then we will argue that the primary matter or consciousness, instead of what would create from this very matter!
      1. Canep
        Canep 4 July 2013 10: 28
        +2
        At Pavlodar University, they took and combined 6 specialties of the machine faculty (technology, machine tools, internal combustion engines, cars and tractors, foundry workers, stampers) into one "mechanical engineering", they reduced the term of study to 4 years, and now they graduate not engineers, but bachelors.
        1. avt
          avt 4 July 2013 10: 36
          +1
          Quote: Canep
          reduced the training period to 4 years, and now graduate not engineers, but bachelors.

          And not even grocers, this is also a necessary specialty. Well, a bachelor .... the campaign sounds proudly and you have a laurel in soup and a tank for him.
          1. Rakti-kali
            Rakti-kali 4 July 2013 16: 43
            0
            Quote: avt
            Well, the bachelor .... the campaign sounds proudly and you have a laurel in soup and a tank for him.

            But-but ... there are also different baklanavors. Moreover, the problem here is most likely not in universities, but in vocational schools. The system, it has long been developed, but competently assemble and operate it soon, unfortunately, there will be no one. And nothing will change until the waiter or merchandiser earns more than a skilled worker.
      2. smprofi
        smprofi 4 July 2013 17: 02
        +2
        Quote: Tatar
        , in our universities more hours of subjects such as religious studies are introduced


  5. doctor3006
    doctor3006 4 July 2013 09: 58
    0
    Has no serious consequences? But is it so that the entire cosmodrome was evacuated due to the spill of heptyl? I’m silent about losses of $ 400 million from the budget, our taxes ...
  6. RussianRu
    RussianRu 4 July 2013 09: 58
    +2
    Already said and still repeat. Criminal liability should be for their work in all areas of production. Otherwise, no reforms will protect against sabotage and sabotage.
    1. Gato
      Gato 4 July 2013 11: 25
      +3
      A control system for military orders was developed in the USSR - at each enterprise there were representatives of the customer (or military representatives) who directly controlled all stages from R&D to mass production and at the same time held personal (including criminal) responsibility for accepting low-quality products . As far as I know, military acceptance from the KGB worked in parallel in the nuclear and rocket and space industries (this is in addition to counterintelligence support).
      And as components are now being accepted at various private firms and firms, I have no idea request
  7. Apollo
    Apollo 4 July 2013 09: 59
    +3
    greetings to all hi

    citation-According to officials, the recent accident of the Proton-M booster has not serious environmental impacts.

    So there are consequences, but it’s not even ecology, the country's prestige has been irreparably damaged, it’s worse than environmental or economic damage. This is a political issue.
    Again, reform, reorganization, merger ....... how much is possible?! How long will this mess last. Responsibility is what is missing.
    I, as I understand it ... that now came system crisis. It is not a matter of flammable rockets. exploding shells at firing ranges and falling helicopters. complex measures above all systemic nature and not just a separate industry like rocket science.
  8. antiaircrafter
    antiaircrafter 4 July 2013 10: 15
    0
    In our space industry there are no professionals who can deal with its development?
    So far, from the reforms there are only proposals for the creation of holdings and the transfer of shares - just a redistribution of property.
  9. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 4 July 2013 10: 18
    0
    What did you celebrate, son?

    “Now the facts: over the past five years, Russia every year three times ahead of the United States in the number of space launches. Moreover, of the six types of carriers currently operating in the United States, two use engines purchased in Russia, and another engine is assembled according to Russian drawings.

    So, learn to live with it: the current space launches are the patrimony of Russia. Accidental deviation is simply a natural consequence of this fact. ”

    Who do you think wrote this? Of course you guessed it. This is a typical commentary on what is happening on the English-language Internet. Specifically, I found these two paragraphs on the CNN website:

    https: / edition.tsnn.tsom/2013/07/02/shchorldeurope / russia-arotsket- ehplosion / ...

    You already know that yesterday the creaks had a holiday. Russian Proton rocket exploded on take-off with three GLONASS satellites. For a long time I have not seen so much pure and bright joy in the comments of these grumblers ...

    Perhaps this is how German citizens rejoiced after the destruction of the English battleship during World War II. Or, if you will, English citizens after the destruction of the German battleship. In fact, the enemy has problems, is this not a reason for fun?

    It was funny, by the way, to ask creaks directly: why are they so happy. No one had the courage to admit the obvious that they hate modern Russia and consider it their personal enemy. Instead, there were some stupid excuses in the spirit of "ПЖиВ, ПЖиВ" and "do not pay attention to the smile, I grieve so much." However, I did not expect anything else from them ...

    Okay, smoothly move on to the essence of the post. Here is the layout of successful and unsuccessful launches in recent decades:

    https: //zoloneltsassad.livejournal.tsom/1125148.html? thread = 64386844? 64386844

    Continued below
    1. Mizhgan
      Mizhgan 4 July 2013 10: 19
      12
      1986. Number of launches: 94 Successful launches: 90 (95.74%)
      1987. Number of launches: 97 Successful launches: 96 (98.97%)
      1988. Number of launches: 94 Successful launches: 90 (95.74%)
      1989. Number of launches: 75 Successful launches: 74 (98.67%)
      1990. Number of launches: 78 Successful launches: 74 (94.87%)
      1991. Number of launches: 61 Successful launches: 59 (96.72%)
      1992. Number of launches: 55 Successful launches: 54 (98.18%)
      1993. Number of launches: 48 Successful launches: 46 (95.83%)
      1994. Number of launches: 49 Successful launches: 48 (97.96%)
      1995. Number of launches: 33 Successful launches: 32 (96.97%)
      1996. Number of launches: 27 Successful launches: 23 (85.19%)
      1997. Number of launches: 29 Successful launches: 27 (93.10%)
      1998. Number of launches: 25 Successful launches: 23 (92%)
      1999. Number of launches: 28 Successful launches: 26 (92.86%)
      2000. Number of launches: 35 Successful launches: 32 (91.43%)
      2001. Number of launches: 23 Successful launches: 23 (100%)
      2002. Number of launches: 24 Successful launches: 22 (91.67%)
      2003. Number of launches: 21 Successful launches: 21 (100%)
      2004. Number of launches: 22 Successful launches: 22 (100%)
      2005. Number of launches: 26 Successful launches: 23 (88.46%)
      2006. Number of launches: 25 Successful launches: 23 (91.30%)
      2007. Number of launches: 26 Successful launches: 25 (96.15%)
      2008. Number of launches: 27 Successful launches: 26 (96.30%)
      2009. Number of launches: 32 Successful launches: 32 (100%)
      2010. Number of launches: 31 Successful launches: 30 (96.77%)
      2011. Number of launches: 32 Successful launches: 28 (87.5%)
      2012. Number of launches: 24 Successful launches: 23 (95.8%)


      As you can see, a few percent of launches stably fail. The only way to avoid failure is to act in the spirit of the civilized countries of the West and Africa. Do not launch any missiles. Then nothing will fall.
      1. Mizhgan
        Mizhgan 4 July 2013 10: 19
        0
        By the way, if we take Gagarin’s times, which storytellers set as an example, we will naturally find out that in those years there were almost more failures than successful launches. So, in 1961, out of 9 launches, only 5 were successful. Yuri Gagarin was a real hero: he risked a lot.

        Curious people can check all the calculations here:

        https: //ru.shchikipedia.org/shchikers/Space_list
        kih_start_Russia

        Thus, colleagues, the violent reaction to another failure looks, to put it mildly, simulated. Russia has the most advanced space industry in the world. The percentage of unsuccessful launches for several decades has been approximately at the same level that suits customers: both ours and foreign ones. At the same time, the same States, which launch much fewer devices than Russia, also regularly lose their devices. There are disasters among the Chinese:

        https: //ru.shchikipedia.org/shchikers/Space_list
        kih_start_in_2011_year

        Against this background, the absence of insurance is absolutely understandable. If the average percentage of failures fluctuates at the level of 5%, paying insurers a premium of 20% of the cost of equipment - or how much they demand now - does not make sense. It is trite unprofitable for money.

        But, of course, in terms of PR, unsuccessful launches are very convenient. Shouting “a car accident in Russia, this is the end, Putin’s regime resigned” is somehow embarrassing: no one will behave. But it’s already possible to repeat the same trick with airplanes or, better, spaceships. Rolls.

        I will end with a comment from Habr:

        https: //habrahabr.ru/post/185304/

        You have a chicken and she laid 10 eggs that you went to sell, you broke 2. On the way, your neighbor has no chicken at all and she did not lay eggs. But he bought 5 eggs from you. Is it possible to say that your neighbor is much more successful in the production of eggs and does not break them, if he does not produce eggs at all, and he bought the five that he has, spending money and enriching you?

        Honestly spiz.no Internet
        1. doctor3006
          doctor3006 4 July 2013 13: 18
          -2
          And nowhere else in the world do rockets fall, with us only. Googly, Internet lover.
          1. Mizhgan
            Mizhgan 4 July 2013 15: 00
            0
            Quote: doctor3006
            And nowhere else in the world do rockets fall, with us only. Googly, Internet lover.

            Do not fall for those who do not launch rockets.
            1. Locksmith
              Locksmith 4 July 2013 20: 28
              0
              Quote: Mijgan
              Do not fall for those who do not launch rockets

              Absolutely in the hole. smile - recall the flight of amers to the moon on a completely untested rocket wink
        2. smprofi
          smprofi 4 July 2013 15: 22
          +1
          Quote: Mijgan
          By the way, if we take the days of Gagarin, which storytellers set us as an example

          so, for Ctrl + C - Ctrl + V - so be it, offset, you know how to clave. but for the selection - in general, it’s not good.
          I will not tell tales about "Gagarin's time". only in those days this entire technique was only created and worked out. and with accidents it was not surprising.
          now, when everything is on the stream, such "incidents" only say that they don't want to do anything normally. or do not know how. or at the same time.
          how in the days of the Union they massaged the tailbone and put klystir in production with acceptance 5 - I know. I can only guess about the 9th acceptance.
          but now priests censer and holy water are swinging at the start - this marriage will not fix and will not replace brains.
        3. postman
          postman 4 July 2013 19: 02
          0
          Quote: Mijgan
          By the way, if we take the days of Gagarin, which the storytellers give us as an example, we will naturally find out that in those years there were almost more failures than successful launches.

          not correct.
          Rocket building then only developed (and theory and practice and stands and personnel)
      2. postman
        postman 4 July 2013 14: 12
        +3
        Quote: Mijgan
        As you can see, a few percent of launches stably fail.

        MTBF
        Not much wrong statistics show
        1986. Number of launches: 94 Successful launches: 90 (95.74%) -acceptable
        2012. Number of launches: 24 Successful launches: 23 (95.8%) -no
        if in 2012 there were 94 launches (with such dynamics), then would have had% success: 24,46%
        2004. Number of launches: 22 Successful launches: 22 (100%) too little
        In 1967-73, produced 13 launches of the Saturn-5 launch vehicle. All Successful

        [img]http://bookre.org/loader/img.php?dir=f2bb6b0c56c5a0a2b6b5fbb742da9a38&file=
        393.png [/ img]


        Quote: Mijgan
        act in the spirit of the civilized countries of the West

        ?
        Arian 1
        Arian 2
        Arian 3
        Arian 4
        Arian 5
        I assure you that EADS does and how it was, only the variations of the Arian-5 launches were something around 65 (successful, partial and failures)
        Quote: Mijgan
        Do not launch any missiles. Then nothing will fall.

        This is true, it does not make mistakes, the one who does nothing. BUT! for Proton-M, failure is shame
        1. sedoj
          sedoj 4 July 2013 21: 43
          +1
          Quote: Postman
          if in 2012 there were 94 launches (with such dynamics), then would have had% success: 24,46%

          I beg your pardon. Where does such a low percentage come from?
          Of 24 launches, one is unsuccessful.
          Of the 94 launches, four failed. Following your logic, we multiply 24 by four and get 96. The number of failed starts must also be multiplied by four. Conclusion: out of 96 starts, 4 failed. The percentage is almost the same.
    2. royk
      royk 4 July 2013 13: 24
      0
      smile Your links do not work
      1. Mizhgan
        Mizhgan 4 July 2013 15: 04
        0
        Quote: royk
        Your links do not work

        Hmmm ... really, the site engine didn’t turn it upside down.
        http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/1125148.html?thread=64386844#t64386844

        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_космических_запусков_России

        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_космических_запусков_в_2011_году

        http://habrahabr.ru/post/185304/
    3. Locksmith
      Locksmith 4 July 2013 20: 25
      0
      Quote: Mijgan
      Moreover, of the six types of carriers currently operating in the United States, two use engines purchased in Russia, and another engine is assembled according to Russian drawings.

      Yeah, and the remaining unreached are suing the first for the question of owning the same engines .... and wherever you are the vaunted Amersky F1, with a thrust of 800 tons and breaking all Russian engines 40 years ago ... tongue fool
  10. KazaK Bo
    KazaK Bo 4 July 2013 10: 24
    +1
    Transformations and reforms ... this is sometimes the right thing. The main thing is that they should be aimed at solving problems, and not for the glory of a reformer. D. ROGOZIN does not seem to be from this galaxy of reformers for the sake of reforms. I think he has enough intelligence to understand that this is not correct when one and the same person signs acts for the approval of the task plan for design work, R&D results, industrial production ... When he also approves the acceptance of products, the schedule for launching products, and most importantly - approves payrolls for premiums. In this case, there will be no good. All these decisions on the passage of the same launch vehicle from design development to launch should be independent of each other, of the signature of one official. Believe me, there is no nepotism ... I know from communication experience. Even with the QUEEN, there was only a BOARD OF MAIN DESIGNERS! He united 6 chief designers, and although this association was voluntary-compulsory, these leaders were independent of each other. Even KOROLEV could not order any Civil Code to change his disagreement with this or that technical solution. Remember the "war" QUEEN and GLUSHKO on the lunar rocket. KOROLEV was appointed Ch. curator of the lunar program ... but he could not change the decision of GLUSHKO to develop the carrier ... because. Korolev's proposal, although it accelerated the solution of the problem, was very technically dangerous and unpromising. With personal responsibility for the practical result of the signature ... no one will take the liberty of missing the freebie ... there are not three times ... but seven times they will be measured to give the go-ahead once to launch the product ... into production or into space.
    1. smprofi
      smprofi 4 July 2013 15: 42
      +5
      Quote: KazaK Bo
      D. ROGOZIN does not seem to be from this galaxy of reformers for the sake of reform. I think he has enough mind to understand

      Rogozin, Dmitry Olegovich, December 21, 1963, Moscow.
      It has philological and economic education. In 1986 he graduated with honors from the international department of the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University, for the first time in the history of the faculty, defending two diploma works at once. In 1988 he graduated with honors Faculty of Economics, University of Marxism-Leninism under the Moscow City Committee of the CPSU.




      uh huh! believe in the "reformer"!
      and don’t need to put next to such ... put the names of Korolev or Glushko
      1. postman
        postman 4 July 2013 19: 00
        +3
        Quote: smprofi
        and don’t need to put next to such ... put the names of Korolev or Glushko

        everything is correct. a typical balabol, leading livejournal and only for him is promoting himself. Wherever it goes: "it is necessary to unite and create a single corporation, holding", etc.
  11. go_by
    go_by 4 July 2013 10: 31
    +2
    The talks about the privatization of space have been going on for a long time. Accidents happen at the right time and place. First "unprofitable", then privatization and amputation of the industry. Alternatively, a joint venture with America. Everything is very predictable and suspicious.
  12. ed65b
    ed65b 4 July 2013 10: 32
    0
    Yes, something went wrong, sooner or later it should have happened, there is no more hope for Ukrainian partners, they also help to knock down protons with their blocks. it is necessary to reform, it is necessary.
    1. TRAFFIC
      TRAFFIC 4 July 2013 11: 17
      0
      Eeee, and what does Ukraine have to Proton? belay
  13. Ivan_Ivanov
    Ivan_Ivanov 4 July 2013 10: 43
    +3
    I believe that these statistics need to be repeated continuously.

    1986. Number of launches: 94 Successful launches: 90 (95.74%)
    1987. Number of launches: 97 Successful launches: 96 (98.97%)
    1988. Number of launches: 94 Successful launches: 90 (95.74%)
    1989. Number of launches: 75 Successful launches: 74 (98.67%)
    1990. Number of launches: 78 Successful launches: 74 (94.87%)
    1991. Number of launches: 61 Successful launches: 59 (96.72%)
    1992. Number of launches: 55 Successful launches: 54 (98.18%)
    1993. Number of launches: 48 Successful launches: 46 (95.83%)
    1994. Number of launches: 49 Successful launches: 48 (97.96%)
    1995. Number of launches: 33 Successful launches: 32 (96.97%)
    1996. Number of launches: 27 Successful launches: 23 (85.19%)
    1997. Number of launches: 29 Successful launches: 27 (93.10%)
    1998. Number of launches: 25 Successful launches: 23 (92%)
    1999. Number of launches: 28 Successful launches: 26 (92.86%)
    2000. Number of launches: 35 Successful launches: 32 (91.43%)
    2001. Number of launches: 23 Successful launches: 23 (100%)
    2002. Number of launches: 24 Successful launches: 22 (91.67%)
    2003. Number of launches: 21 Successful launches: 21 (100%)
    2004. Number of launches: 22 Successful launches: 22 (100%)
    2005. Number of launches: 26 Successful launches: 23 (88.46%)
    2006. Number of launches: 25 Successful launches: 23 (91.30%)
    2007. Number of launches: 26 Successful launches: 25 (96.15%)
    2008. Number of launches: 27 Successful launches: 26 (96.30%)
    2009. Number of launches: 32 Successful launches: 32 (100%)
    2010. Number of launches: 31 Successful launches: 30 (96.77%)
    2011. Number of launches: 32 Successful launches: 28 (87.5%)
    2012. Number of launches: 24 Successful launches: 23 (95.8%)

    It would be nice to compare it with the statistics of launches in the USA and the European Union.
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 4 July 2013 11: 11
      +3
      but, and for what are my cons? You do not like statistics? Let me find out what? Doesn’t fit into the views that liberal propaganda inspired you?
      1. Letun
        Letun 4 July 2013 21: 04
        0
        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        but, and for what are my cons? You do not like statistics? Let me find out what? Doesn’t fit into the views that liberal propaganda inspired you?

        I did not put down cons, but I want to note that the statistics are bad. If you launch 1 rocket per year, then the launch will most likely be successful, and the number of successful launches will be 100%
        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        1987. Number of launches: 97

        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        2012. Number of launches: 24
      2. fartfraer
        fartfraer 4 July 2013 21: 11
        0
        statistics is good. but it annoys me personally that before the year 90, more missiles were launched than in the same five lines, but already from the bottom of the list. although it’s clear, then the country was larger, some enterprises were in the republics, etc. .d., but still somehow sad. Almost three times fewer launches.
  14. Kremlin
    Kremlin 4 July 2013 10: 48
    -1
    You know ... here all these comments are a big scam: I WRITE THE TRUTH PEOPLE BECOME A MINUS, WRITE A SCAM A BETWEEN PLUSES ... YOUNG AMERICANS, FULFILLED THEIR MISSION ON THE DEGRADATION OF RUSSIANS! And THE MOST IMPORTANT RUSSIANS AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT DUKE !!
    1. theadenter
      theadenter 4 July 2013 10: 56
      +3
      RUSSIA IS NOT ALREADY A SPACE POWER!

      Remember the USSR, where the number of failures was equal to zero ...

      Who could ever seem true? Well deserved cons.
      1. Kremlin
        Kremlin 4 July 2013 11: 05
        0
        I do not agree with you ... you just rely on TV, I have military friends who served and are serving ... and what they show on TV .... that is not in the army .. and it's true!
        1. theadenter
          theadenter 4 July 2013 11: 17
          0
          I don’t have a TV at home. I rely on statistics of launches, their successes and failures. We have the largest number of launches in the world, and more than five countries use our satellite launch services. Or what do you think is a cosmic power?
    2. Kremlin
      Kremlin 4 July 2013 11: 07
      +1
      remember, these drawbacks are like bobbies to me ... you yourself simply confirm your incompetence ... hello dumb!
  15. Dimy4
    Dimy4 4 July 2013 11: 50
    +4
    Systematic failures with the output of GLONASS satellites evoke thoughts about a tune made by someone.
    1. Check
      Check 4 July 2013 17: 05
      0
      I, too, begins to slip such a thought, sabotage.
      although the more likely option is that employees suffer from RIP syndrome
      Ruchenki Iz Populki
  16. royk
    royk 4 July 2013 12: 40
    -1
    The main thing is that people are not hurt! If heptyl came out at a gas station, then half of the designers and managers would poison or even burn.
    1. doctor3006
      doctor3006 4 July 2013 13: 14
      -1
      Yeah ... Fuck with him that they lost 400 million dollars, most importantly, everyone is alive. But doesn’t it reach you that with such a development of events, will the rocket soon fall right at the start? And there will be victims, and even what.
      1. royk
        royk 4 July 2013 13: 19
        -1
        Under what "such" development of events? So I say at the start already exploded before and now they can.
  17. Strashila
    Strashila 4 July 2013 13: 45
    +3
    I am reading the next reply "The Proton-M launch vehicle with three Glonass-M satellites could have crashed due to the fact that it started ahead of the time when the first-stage engines did not gain the required power," a source in the rocket and space industry. "... this is nonsense. If the engines did not reach the design power and the parameters of all systems did not work in normal mode ... the rocket would not have lifted off the launch pad, it would not have started at all. The video clearly shows that there were problems with engine ... well, judging by the fox tail, there were problems with the supply of fuel to the combustion chamber. The video shows that everything is normal ... failure, oxidizer plume ... normal again, the rocket made an attempt to align ... the final failure in the fuel supply, distinct plume of oxidizer ... missile withdrawal followed by self-destruction.
    1. Foamas
      Foamas 4 July 2013 16: 49
      0
      Quote: Strashila
      Well, judging by the fox tail, there were problems with the fuel supply to the combustion chamber. The video shows that everything is normal ... a failure, a plume of oxidizer ... again normal, the rocket made an attempt to align ... a final malfunction in the supply of fuel, a distinct plume of oxidizer. ..

      Oxidizer Loop at Startup "Protons" this is normal.
      the excess boost of the oxidizer tank of the first stage is reset. The pipe is drawn between the engines, and it is sucked by a supersonic stream into the exhaust - everything is normal.
      (see other launches)
      1. Volkhov
        Volkhov 4 July 2013 22: 53
        +1
        In emergency start-up, there was a failure of the engine, and then the whole group of engines worked with a lack of oxidizer - the color of the flame is more red.
        - marriage
        - diversion
        - electricity (electron flow along the stream) - in this case, Rogozin must fire Medvedev, because when he was president, he received a letter on this subject, but the device unsubscribed. Previously (until the spring of 2012), electrons from the earth went up and the EMF was subtracted, but now they go down and the EMF are added ... and this is burnout and oxidation deterioration due to electron deficiency.
        This is at least the second missile that received a charge - there was still the Union that fell in Peru.
  18. runway
    runway 4 July 2013 14: 25
    +4
    Well, let Rogozin already do something, while only conversations, calls and slogans .... Based on the example of previous REFORMS, in other areas of our economy, it would be better not to touch what we have no idea .... After all, it turned out only worse.
  19. Vtel
    Vtel 4 July 2013 15: 47
    +1
    What if a tote has arrived - will it fly? - will not take off. For rent they began to supply defective plywood for cladding. But sho do you want that not a day they caught a fresh guber with a billion, then there are 300 lemons written off by the little things. In a country of order and in space, stars in place and rockets fly where they were ordered, and not vice versa. I suggest removing the return system from the rocket.

    "- Do you know how many machine guns we have? Seven! No, six ... One seizes, the other jumps like a madman, and the third bastard shoots his own."
  20. Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 4 July 2013 16: 24
    0
    Rogozin, of course, is cool, but let him finish with one thing. In Russia, the proverb is, you are fishing for two hares, you will hang out. I’m afraid he, too, would not tear, but he did one thing, take care of the other.
  21. cpk72
    cpk72 4 July 2013 17: 06
    +1
    Yesterday in nature with friends and children in the evening we watched the film "Gagarin the First in Space" liked the film, but that's not what I mean. So, in the course of viewing (children 16-17 years old only passed the exam) they asked a question AND HE RETURNED? And you are talking about space and accidents, with such an education, we will not only forget how to make rocket science, but even forget how to make matches. Yes, and even the level of engineering training in construction simply reaches insanity, specialists who left the university have a level of knowledge of a simple installer, or even lower. The vast majority do not know how to read drawings. And the projects presented by the customer that are being developed by yesterday’s graduates - for example, a pipe with gas enters the pile and exits from it further, and it is shown that welding should be done at the entry point! Gas pressure 150 atm. A rocket is not a condensate collection unit, but a hundred or a thousand times more complicated and if people who bought knowledge are on the assembly and acceptance then there is nothing to be surprised. So the reform is needed not in terms of punishment, but in cleaning the ranks and brains at the assembly and acceptance stage.
    1. Cyber7
      Cyber7 4 July 2013 19: 18
      +1
      Under the USSR, everyone was striving for something, dreaming of something. The whole country (about developed socialism, universal equality, surpassing the Yankees, etc.) and each separately (to become a scientist, firefighter, astronaut ...). Now "everyone" dreams of how to make the last million. And one person dreams of a country. Most of the population below 30 smears snot on forums about "what a terrible totalitarian system was there" and "why there were only 2-3 varieties of sausage in stores."
      Now democracy - everyone says what they want, and columns of lesbians roam the cities. At the same time, no one in the Union forbade doing good deeds, but the majority understood and understands "freedom" usually in the sense of impunity. When you can shit on the sidewalk - and you will be nothing.
      But now there is no Union, there is no common striving for at least something, there is no responsibility (which has been eaten by "impunity").
      And what is there to clean?
      If to expel someone who sincerely wants to do something for the country, but still does not succeed, with whom should he be replaced?
      There are no less smart guys and girls. It just became more difficult for them to strive for what they still "brazenly" dare to dream about.
      IMHO, but how you bring up your children, so your future will be.
      Light or not.
      And no reforms can change this.
  22. s-serg
    s-serg 4 July 2013 17: 20
    +1
    Education is now mosaic; it does not have a full-fledged structure; they tear out pieces from different objects in the form of tests; as a result, a person who has received this elective can say two or three words when talking about the topic touched on and that’s all.
  23. valton
    valton 4 July 2013 20: 24
    0
    the Proton-M rocket was manufactured back in 2011 and after that it was sent to prepare for launch at the Baikonur Cosmodrome.


    And I think - why are they falling?
  24. pinecone
    pinecone 4 July 2013 20: 36
    0
    Quote: Postman
    Quote: ZloDeey
    in China there was no such devastation as ours!

    in china, 30 years ago, Vorobyov drove and built blast furnaces in every yard


    The campaign to eradicate sparrows and rats, as well as the construction of small blast furnaces in rural areas, was carried out in China during the so-called period. The Great Leap Forward, in the late 1950s.
  25. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 4 July 2013 20: 47
    +2
    Rogozin will take care of ... He has already advised the Kovrov designers on the Nerekhta, and at the IMDS - on the armament of ships. At the same time, he has already reformed the space industry: "The main reform of the space industry will be carried out before March 2013," he said. The cartoon was so Soviet - there the hare gave advice to everyone.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 4 July 2013 21: 02
      +1
      SP: The space industry has developed a system of collective irresponsibility
      The audit chamber during the audit found that the architecture of the state administration of space activities is extremely inefficient, which led to a multiple increase in costs in this area, the timing of projects and growing accidents.

      more details http://vz.ru/news/2013/7/4/639983.html
  26. alex20081308
    alex20081308 4 July 2013 22: 00
    +2
    Until fig what Rogozin threatens. But the owner will not give .... The truth and the owner is not. he is also afraid of being devoured. Garbage turns gentlemen ...... A smart man and a competent leader does not threaten but does. Or forgives or takes off. without any loud statements. And all these threats are a sign of impotence.
  27. I think so
    I think so 4 July 2013 22: 25
    +2
    It was easy to break the SYSTEM (cancellation of GOST, military acceptance, division into firms and firms), and this is the result that the country CANNOT launch satellites into space ... and only NOW they woke up ... For which the current goofs at the helm did not take EVERYTHING from them only CRASHED ... Will it be different now? I doubt it ... will be "the same eggs from the side ..."
  28. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 4 July 2013 22: 40
    0
    That's what interests me! The proton has been flying since 1967 - more than 45 years old - how it was necessary to "modernize-M", so that it would fall with such constancy lately ... crying

    Maybe here is the answer if this is true:
    Since 1993, Proton launch launch services marketing on the international market has been carried out by the International Launch Services (ILS) joint venture (from 1993 to 1995: Lockheed-Khrunichev-Energia). ILS has the exclusive right to marketing and commercial operation of the Proton LV and the promising Angara rocket and space complex. Although ILS is registered in the United States, its controlling stake is owned by the Russian State Scientific and Production Center named after M.V. Khrunicheva. As of October 2011, 72 launches of spacecraft using the Proton-K and Proton-M LVs were carried out as part of ILS
  29. waisson
    waisson 4 July 2013 22: 41
    +1
    The incident took place on Thursday, July 4, near the Russian Consulate in the city of Uralsk in western Kazakhstan. Artist Askhat Akhmedyarov and representative of the Abyroi social movement Maksat Aisautov held a protest against the unsuccessful launch of the Proton rocket at the Baikonur cosmodrome.

    Around 11:30 local time, a group of activists arrived at the building of the Russian diplomatic mission. One of the protesters, the artist Askhat Akhmedyarov, brought a piglet painted in the colors of the Russian flag with him on a leash.

    Akhmedyarov himself came in a white jumpsuit. He put on a black hat with a Kazakh national ornament on his head.

    The artist tried to drive the painted pig to the consulate, but the animal did not want to go inside. In the video that the eyewitnesses filmed on the cameras of mobile phones, one can notice how the grunting pig tries in vain to escape to a safe place.

    Akhmedyarov explained that with the help of his action he wanted to draw public attention to the accident of the "Proton" carrier rocket, which occurred on Tuesday, July 2, during the launch. The rocket disintegrated in mid-air and exploded, forming a poisonous cloud and a 200-meter crater.
  30. erg
    erg 5 July 2013 00: 50
    0
    My heart feels, the next appointment Shoigu will be the leadership of the space industry. True, it would be nice to give him another command of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
    1. Mikhail m
      Mikhail m 5 July 2013 06: 44
      0
      Maybe right away as president, let him command everything.