Military Review

There is no super heavy carrier

82
While other countries are rapidly moving forward in the development of new missiles, Russia is marking time and losing precious time.


In August of this year, Moscow will host for the first time the participants and guests of an important space forum - the 40, the jubilee scientific assembly of the International Space Research Committee (COSPAR). Several thousand scientists from dozens of countries and 13 international organizations - COSPAR participants will gather at the Moscow State University named after MV Lomonosov to discuss topical issues of space exploration.

At the round table "Space Research: New Tasks, New Projects", which was held in the capital in early April, Vice-President of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), Director of the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, member of the COSPAR Bureau Lev Zeleny told reporters that out of three thousand reports on the forum, several hundred will be prepared by Russian scientists. The spectrum of interests of domestic space explorers is very wide: from the study of distant galaxies to the exploration of the near-Earth orbit.

Answering a question about promising ambitious plans to be included in the next space program of Russia for 2016 – 2025, Green called first of all the study and exploration of the Moon. It is supposed to begin the lunar program with an in-depth study of the Earth satellite, which in the future should lead to the creation of an inhabited base there that will work in rotational mode. Thus, as the academician noted, a trunk line is being built, where it is possible to merge unmanned and manned cosmonautics, in which we are traditionally strong.

In turn, Denis Lyskov, State Secretary, Deputy Head of the Federal Space Agency (Roskosmos), said that at present Roskosmos together with the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Council on Space of the Russian Academy of Sciences are preparing a space exploration program, which will be an integral part of the next Federal Space Program (FKP) of Russia on 2016 – 2025 years. To the question whether the new FKP envisages the development of new heavy and super heavy rocket launchers (RN), allowing to realize an ambitious lunar program, Lyskov answered the following: “To really talk about the flight to the Moon, we need a carrier of extra heavy class with a payload of about 80 tons. Now this project is in the development stage, in the near future we will prepare the necessary documents for submitting them to the government. At this stage, the project to create a new superheavy rocket is not on the plan. ”

There is no super heavy carrier

Photo: Mikhail Khodarenok


Seeing the bewilderment on the faces of the journalists, the State Secretary of Roscosmos hurried to assure: “At the moment there are no problems - we have the fifth Angara (a heavy version of the Angara, Angara-5), which is soon will fly. All issues related to the development of automatic devices will be solved with the help of the "Angara". Lyskov clarified that the launch complex for this launch vehicle is planned to be installed at the Vostochny cosmodrome.

Following the logic of the state secretary of Roskosmos, the bet in the future lunar program of Russia is on a rocket that has never flown. The first launch of the light version of the Angara from the Plesetsk cosmodrome is scheduled for 25 this June, and the heavy Angara-5, according to the latest information, should start at the end of this year. The question of the carrier for manned flights remains open.

Plenty of plans

Back in early March, the head of Roscosmos, Oleg Ostapenko, acknowledged that the Angara does not meet the ambitious tasks facing the national space program. This heavy rocket - within 25 tons - is not enough for flights to Mars, the Moon, asteroids, for the construction of inhabited lunar bases. In connection with this, Ostapenko also spoke of the need to create a new carrier of the super heavy class, including for manned missions. All countries, especially the USA and China, which have serious space programs, are following this path today.

According to the head of Roscosmos, Russia has all the possibilities for creating missiles of this class. At the first stage, you can make a rocket capable of putting 70 – 80 tons of payload into low Earth orbit. After upgrading, it can carry 120 and more tons. As for the future, then, from the point of view of Ostapenko, we are talking about 190 tons.

Roskosmos has developed its proposals taking into account the potential of the leading enterprises of Russia - the Energia rocket and space corporation, the TsSKB-Progress Samara and the Khrunichev State Space Research and Production Center (GKNPT). As Oleg Ostapenko stressed, only the most advanced was taken and in the near future the scientific and technical council of the military industrial complex should begin consideration of documents.

At the same time, the head of Roskosmos noted that the experience of producing the extra-heavy rocket “Energy”, created for the reusable Buran spacecraft, will be taken into account, especially with regard to propulsion systems. This, as Ostapenko noted, will allow saving large amounts of money and at the same time solving problems at a completely new technological level.

Indeed, the system "Energy" - "Buran", which more than a quarter of a century ago launched into space over 100 tons with an indicator of constructive perfection in 4,3 mass percent (the ratio of the mass of the payload to the launch mass of the PH. - Ed.) remains unattainable for competitors. This legacy should emphasize the most powerful and efficient in the world of liquid-propellant rocket engines manufactured by NPO Energomash, working on environmentally friendly rocket fuel components.

Oleg Ostapenko clarified that the design of a super-heavy PH with a load-carrying capacity of 2016 – 2025 tons will still be envisaged in the FKP for 70 – 80 years: “The FKP has not yet been approved. There is its formation. In the near future we will publicize it. Work on the super heavy rocket in the PCF included. " In his opinion, the PH with a carrying capacity of 70 – 80 tons, which will be created at the first stage, will close all promising tasks for the next 20 – 25 years.

From the perspective of the 20 – 25 years, everything seems to be understandable. If the PCF is adopted and implemented, Russia will probably receive superheavy media through 10 in years, with the help of which many tasks of space exploration can be accomplished, including long-distance ones. The question remains: on what to perform space programs in the coming years, especially manned?

Unrealized ideas

As the military-industrial complex weekly wrote several times, in Russia in recent years, Roskosmos set the task of creating new carriers only on paper.

When the need to develop a promising rocket, including for manned programs, became obvious, in 2009, a competition was held for a draft design of a medium-class PH of increased payload, known as Rus-M. It was assumed that the launch complex (SC) for this carrier will be built at the Vostochny space center.

The winner of the competition was the project presented by three leading rocket and space companies: Samara-based TsSKB-Progress, RSC Energia and the V. P. Makeyev State Rocket Center. In Samara, active work has begun on creating a draft design. Young talented specialists were invited to it, offering interesting creative ideas and new technological solutions. But in October, 2011, the former leadership of Roscosmos announced that work on the Rus-M project was allegedly suspended due to lack of funds.

At the same time, it was announced that instead of the new SC under the Rus-M on the East, the SC will be built under the modernized Soyuz-2, with which it is supposed to launch manned expeditions as well. However, from the launch complex, which is being built on the new cosmodrome, only automatic vehicles can be sent to the Soyuz-2 PH. It is not suitable for launching manned spacecraft of the Soyuz TMA-M series delivering to the orbit of the ISS crews. Not to mention the Perspective Manned Transport System (PCT), where a carrier is provided capable of putting an 20-ton ship into orbit.

In the 2012 year, however, there was information that work on the Rus-M LV was resumed, but there are still no concrete results. At the same time, in 2012, Roskosmos held a competition for the creation of a conceptual design of the Amur heavy class rocket complex, which was also intended for the Vostochny space center. The competition caused many questions to the specialists, since it was written in the technical requirements for the development work that the new RN should put at least 20 tons into low orbit. But after all, in GKNPTs them. Khrunichev for almost 20 years developed heavy PH "Angara-5" with a similar load capacity. Why do another rocket, which according to its characteristics is very similar to the "killed" RN "Rus-M", and on the links in the technical task - "Angara"? However, the tender was held and won it, of course, GKNPTs them. Khrunichev, since other firms did not even apply for the competition, initially focused on the "Angara". Two years have passed - nothing is heard about Amur. The new leadership of Roscosmos has shifted to other ambitious projects.

At the moment, Russia does not even have specific plans for developing a promising RN. At the Vostochny cosmodrome, with which the future development of astronautics is linked in our country, the construction of the launch vehicle for the Soyuz-2 and Angara missiles is in full swing. According to many experts, this is an unforgivable mistake: you can not base the development of the industry for the coming decades, focusing on the media created by the technologies of the last century.

A reliable “horse” of the national cosmonautics - the Soyuz launch vehicle, no matter how modernized it is, was developed in the 50s of the last century. The carrier is made with the use of old technological solutions, moreover, many people are involved in its preparation for the launch, which is unsafe and economically inefficient.

If you choose from already existing carriers, then first of all you would have to pay attention to Zenit, which was originally conceived as a replacement for the royal Seven. In this space rocket complex all modern and progressive design solutions are laid. Currently, it is the only carrier capable of competing with the American Falcon-9 produced by the private American company SpaceX. Zenit has an excellent engine, besides it has an excellent ground complex - an automated start with a minimum of people in preparation for launch. By the way, it was on this rocket that PPTS tests were planned in an unmanned version with Zenit IC at Baikonur.

Only one thing: formally, Zenit is a Ukrainian rocket, although 80 percent of its components are Russian products. In order to start its manufacturing in Russia, an intergovernmental agreement is necessary, and given the political situation in Ukraine, such an agreement is unlikely to be concluded. There is another option. On the basis of the Russian engine and the existing technological background, in the shortest possible time to design a carrier similar to Zenit. This will be a new rocket, even if it turns out to be very similar to the original.

But according to Oleg Ostapenko, it is pointless to reproduce Zenits in Russia and generally rely on them, you can only use certain developments in new missiles. Ostapenko does not specify when this will be done and in the development of any RN.

Thus, in the coming years, the choice of Russia remains small: the old, although repeatedly modernized "Soyuz", environmentally "dirty" and technologically obsolete "Protons" and the family of the Angara.

Old age perspective

In many speeches of representatives of Roskosmos and the government of our country, it was often said that in the space program of Russia for the coming decades, the stake was made on the Angara carrier rocket system. That is, the rocket, which today, having never taken off, has already become morally obsolete, since its development has been going on since the beginning of the 90s of the last century. During this time, technology and technology have stepped far forward. And most importantly: the heavy "Angara-5" is considered as a replacement for the "Proton", but so far its technical and economic parameters, according to experts, are much inferior to those of the Soviet rocket, winning only in environmental performance.

In this situation, the manned cosmonautics of the future generally remains without carrier, since the Angara, as experts believe, is very difficult and most importantly, it is expensive to adapt to manned ship launches. It was originally conceived as a means of launching automatic spacecraft primarily into geostationary orbits. “Angara”, experts say, is not suitable for a manned program with a number of parameters. Mainly because of its constructive capabilities, it is not able to ensure the safety of the crew.

The former leadership of Roskosmos, having refused in October 2011 of the year to work on the creation of a new Russia-M launch vehicle and lobbying Angara in the Russian government, pursued its own interests. The official motivation for the refusal of Rusi-M production was as follows: more than 37 percent of the Roscosmos budget before 2015 was allocated for the development of a new carrier, but these funds are still very small, therefore, with such funding, the first launch from the Vostochny space center is planned speech can not be. Following the logic of the officials, it is necessary to quickly build launch complexes at the new cosmodrome under a reliable, albeit outdated, Soyuz rocket and the Angara that has not yet flown. Perhaps with the help of God let us put something in the 2015 year, as promised to the government, and then we'll see. The officials didn’t think about the billions of rubles of taxpayers who are currently digging into the East, creating the insurance company for obsolete rockets, because the bureaucracy will have to be responsible for others.

The overwhelming majority of industry experts are convinced that the decision of the former Roskosmos leadership to abandon Rus-M not only put an end to all promising work on launch vehicles, discarding the development of domestic astronautics a few years ago, but also led to tangible financial and temporary losses. While other countries of the world, primarily the United States, are rapidly moving forward in the development of several new LVs and ships, Russia, having vast experience and scientific and technical potential, is marking time and losing precious time.

Apparently, General Oleg Ostapenko, appointed in October instead of Vladimir Popovkin, perfectly understands what inheritance he inherited from his predecessor. This is evidenced by his speech at a closed meeting in Roscosmos, which nevertheless managed to learn something. In particular, Ostapenko expressed the belief that this rocket for the East is a dead end and will not give an opportunity to develop. Moreover, according to Ostapenko, in the future we will be forced to invest huge amounts of money again in order to build something else. The head of Roscosmos proposed to prepare a new convincing program for the report to the president, no matter how difficult and unpleasant it may be, in order not to waste money and not to wait.

This scandalous speech instilled hope in the patriots of the Russian cosmonautics. It seemed that the industry finally got a manager who, in addition to his impeccable reputation, also has the courage to report to the president and the government about the erroneous decisions of his predecessors in order to prevent even more serious mistakes and financial losses.

However, hope was not given to come true. After a while, Oleg Ostapenko actually abandoned his words, publicly stating that journalists misunderstood him. Apparently, the influence of the officials who had lobbied for years in the upper echelons of the Angara RN power, for which billions of budget rubles were spent over the past two decades, is still too strong.

Competitors are not asleep

According to experts, the Energia-Buran space system, created in our country over 25 years ago, is planning to make a new, super-heavy domestic RN, at least half a century ahead of its time and remains inaccessible to competitors. It’s hard to say how long this advantage will last: Russia’s competitors are already advancing on their heels.

The most brilliant results are demonstrated by the private American company SpaceX, in which in just a few years and with relatively little funding, the Falcon launch rocket family and the Dragon ship have been created. The latter in the very near future can compete with Russian spacecraft. The cargo version of the “Dragon” has already successfully docked to the ISS three times and returned to Earth, and at the present time its piloted version is being prepared.

True, behind the rapid birth of the new PH and the ship is the entire long-term, more precisely, many decades of NASA experience: experimental and technical work, materials. But we must pay tribute to the specialists of SpaceX, led by the billionaire enthusiast Elon Mask: both Falcon and Dragon were made quickly, efficiently, using the right technical solutions.

And most importantly, in the USA it is not the only private space complex that can compete with Russia. In January, 2013 was successfully docked to the ISS by the Signus, launched with the help of the Antares PH from Orbital Sciences Corporation. On the way some more RN and ships for deep space exploration.

When, after the completion of the Space Shuttle program, the USA was left without its own means of delivering astronauts to near-Earth orbit and to the ISS, they had to reconsider their space program, the financing of which, by the way, was significantly curtailed. To reduce costs and promote the development of the space industry, NASA decided to create a new manned spacecraft for low orbits by private companies. The agency has directed its own forces to develop a system for flights into deep space based on the Orion project and the super heavy SLS carrier. Currently, there are at least four more private firms in the United States that are successfully developing space rockets and ships.

The threat to Russia's leadership in space is coming both from the West and from the East. We attack on the heels of not only the United States, but also the PRC. Of course, the Chinese borrowed a lot from space programs of other countries. So, their manned ship in appearance is the same “Soyuz”, but its dimensions are larger, it was created on a new element base, all electronics are of their own production.

Chinese RZh of the Changzheng family (“Great March”) are made on the technological basis of the Russian Proton. The Chinese are widely used hydrogen, which in our country has long been "tied". Their carriers are almost at the Russian level, only the engines are a little under-powered. China is working on the creation of super-heavy media. And what is very important - China already has three national cosmodromes, and another one is under construction, while Russia has only one in Plesetsk, intended mainly for military launches. Baikonur, from where the overwhelming majority of launches are carried out, including all manned ships, is rented by the Russian Federation from Kazakhstan.

China, having a good base, is gaining experience. Large funds are invested in astronautics, it has the potential - both financial and technological. The country is not very fast, but very confidently goes to the exploration of outer space, developing its programs, including the colonization of the Moon. In the 2030 year, according to Chinese media reports, it is planned to land a man on the moon, and then proceed to create a lunar base, with which in 2050 man will be able to go to such remote planets as Mars.

While Russia is making plans, developing endless strategies and programs, competitors are moving forward. It’s not a fact that in such a state of affairs a country that in the 20th century paved the way for space for all of humanity in the XXI century will be able to stay at least in the first three world leaders in the field of conquering the universe.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/20244
82 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. bairat
    bairat 16 May 2014 08: 37
    +14
    Today, a proton with a communications satellite burned out in the atmosphere. Everything is sad in this area. Although starting from scratch, start all over.
    1. Mareman Vasilich
      Mareman Vasilich 16 May 2014 09: 11
      +5
      Yes, it's a shame. I think that this is negligence or sabotage.
      1. Ivan Petrovich
        Ivan Petrovich 16 May 2014 09: 42
        +4
        during the time of comrade Stalin I.V. so quickly would put things in order ...
        1. Ataman
          Ataman 16 May 2014 10: 10
          -1
          The author is a liar and provocateur. Now, without cooperation with Russia, neither the United States, nor China, nor Europe can simply fly into space.
          1. Goodmen
            Goodmen 16 May 2014 10: 41
            +15
            Quote: Ataman
            The author is a liar and provocateur. Now, without cooperation with Russia, neither the United States, nor China, nor Europe can simply fly into space.


            Until ... until they can. About this in the article and speech.
            Zadolbali already hurray-patriots ... We have problems in the space industry! There is! And from the fact that constantly repeating the mantras "we are fine" they will not disappear!
            If there are problems, you need to solve them. And in order to start solving, you first need to at least voice the problem, and not keep silent !!!
            Comprehensively need to consider topics, and not go to extremes!
            1. Ivan Petrovich
              Ivan Petrovich 16 May 2014 13: 04
              0
              it would be more correct to say "p.oc.r.eoty", we must distinguish them from patriots
          2. Penzyac
            Penzyac 16 May 2014 11: 30
            +1
            Quote: Ataman
            The author is a liar and provocateur. Now, without cooperation with Russia, neither the United States, nor China, nor Europe can simply fly into space.

            Not yet. And after 3 - 5 years?
        2. thinker
          thinker 16 May 2014 10: 46
          0
          At the time of Comrade Stalin - Korolev S.P. teeth knocked out during interrogations! hi
          1. Goodmen
            Goodmen 16 May 2014 10: 59
            +2
            Quote: thinker
            At the time of Comrade Stalin - Korolev S.P. teeth knocked out during interrogations!


            So they fought with the Trotskyists. And as practice has shown not in vain. And Korolev, when his teeth were knocked out, was not yet what he later became! ))))) And in general he mistakenly got into the batch.
            There were excesses, so to speak ...
            1. qwert
              qwert 16 May 2014 12: 18
              +10
              All right. Moreover, Korolev was an ideological communist until the end of his life, and he never tried to find that NKVD officer or expressed claims against Stalin, like many who were not even arrested. He understood the necessity of that era and its costs and did his job.
              But Solzhenitsyn's teeth were not knocked out, but he did not hesitate to write that under the influence of "MORAL (!)" Torture was forced to incriminate people.
              Everyone chooses his heroes in his warehouse.
              And Korolev, he is thoroughly Soviet ...
          2. Lyubimov
            Lyubimov 16 May 2014 11: 04
            -4
            And how many pieces were knocked out?
          3. Setrac
            Setrac 16 May 2014 12: 19
            +2
            Quote: thinker
            At the time of Comrade Stalin - Korolev S.P. teeth knocked out during interrogations!

            And how Korolev worked after that, an effective method comes out.
            1. Ivan Petrovich
              Ivan Petrovich 16 May 2014 13: 02
              +3
              and as life was shown not only by Korolev :) everyone worked ...
      2. avg
        avg 16 May 2014 11: 29
        +3
        Quote: Mareman Vasilich
        Yes, it's a shame. I think that this is negligence or sabotage.

        Everything is much simpler. The place of scientists, real fans of space exploration, was taken by officials from science, skilled sawmills of budget funds. request
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Grenader
        Grenader 16 May 2014 11: 43
        +2
        Quote: Mareman Vasilich
        Yes, it's a shame. I think that this is negligence or sabotage.

        In the good old days, they answered for something like this:
      5. VNP1958PVN
        VNP1958PVN 16 May 2014 14: 11
        0
        This is twenty years of selfless friendship with "zabugr" request
        1. VseDoFeNi
          VseDoFeNi 16 May 2014 21: 52
          0
          This is the destruction of the USSR by corrupt communists in 1991. By the way, the second time in the last century.
    2. HollyGremlin
      HollyGremlin 16 May 2014 09: 16
      +12
      So the most annoying thing is that again with ours. What time already. How to launch a foreigner - everything is in order, as our rocket either does not reach the orbit or even burns out.
      2 cases - coincidence, 3 - is a regularity. So you can draw conclusions
    3. 1812 1945
      1812 1945 16 May 2014 10: 58
      +2
      Quote: bairat
      Today, a proton with a communications satellite burned out in the atmosphere. Everything is sad in this area. Although starting from scratch, start all over.

      Costs of "commercializing consciousness". The damned "mantra" is "market economy"! This is just a tool, even - in economics - not the only one! Thus, thinking - "according to the market", lost their intellectual potential; lost professional workers, making workers' specialties not prestigious, but they bred nepotism, corruption, theft, industrial espionage and theft in the most traditional sense. Rogozin alone, with all his enthusiasm, will not change the state of the industry. Systemic changes are needed in the state policy of organizing the entire national economy. It is Narodny! And not privatized by toothed stomachs with meager intelligence of everything and everyone. F.M. Dostoevsky gave an exhaustive description of successful grabbers: "A certain stupidity of the mind seems to be an almost necessary quality, if not of any activist, then at least of any serious money-maker." -
      "I.d.io.t" F.M. Dostoevsky ................... PS Even the title of the work cannot be written. Due to censorship.
      1. saag
        saag 16 May 2014 14: 15
        0
        understand correctly, it is thanks to the system that was before 1991 and such people and achievements arose
    4. Mihaylo Tishayshiy
      Mihaylo Tishayshiy 16 May 2014 12: 58
      +1
      Quote: bairat
      Today, a proton with a communications satellite burned out in the atmosphere. Everything is sad in this area. Although starting from scratch, start all over.

      This is where you come across all the difficult directions of the Kozhugetovichs? Campaign, long ago it was necessary to clone Shoigu. And then so will our old missiles, like old Chinese fireworks, please the eye. But painfully expensive pleasure - such fireworks!
  2. Alex 241
    Alex 241 16 May 2014 08: 43
    +14
    Are you talking about the A7 Hangar?
    1. igor_m_p
      igor_m_p 16 May 2014 09: 18
      +8
      Quote: Alex 241
      Are you talking about the A7 Hangar?


      It seems that the author of the article just did not hear about her. smile
      There is a grain of truth in the article, but nothing more. Too much pessimism. The experience gained in the development and construction of such launch vehicles as Energia has not gone anywhere, if desired, practically no one bothers to reproduce it - there is documentation, technical capacities have not gone anywhere.
      Healthy pessimism is useful in some cases, but in limited doses. Not so long ago, pessimists shouted that the Russian army was no longer there, that the country was defenseless, and so on. I think now someone is convinced that they were wrong, it just does not make sense, everyone can already see everything. Yes, there are many points that need improvement, there are problems that need to be addressed, but this does not look like collapse and ruin.
      Approximately the same situation is in the field of construction of heavy and superheavy missiles, except with a slight delay.
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 16 May 2014 10: 22
        +4
        Quote: igor_m_p
        Experience gained in the development and construction of such launch vehicles as Energia

        I am far from rocketry, so I ask the specialists to explain: I am haunted by the question - the Energia launch vehicle ALREADY flew, the Buran launched, i.e. everything has ALREADY been done over 25 years ago. If the tyam is not enough to do something new, nothing prevents from repeating what was brought to life under the USSR. And if you are so smart - modify it taking into account recent achievements and launch it! I remember conversations back in those days about the reasons for the oblivion of the Energia launch vehicle - there are no such cargoes, it is not needed. Now there will be loads, why not revive the wonderful carrier?
        We sell engines from N-1 to Americans, but we don’t want to use the wealth under our feet. Paradox.
        1. igor_m_p
          igor_m_p 16 May 2014 10: 50
          +1
          Quote: inkass_98
          Now the goods will be, why not revive the beautiful carrier?

          Actually, they would have been revived long ago, but one of the fuel components is liquefied hydrogen. It seems to be nothing so complicated, but it needs a lot for such a missile, namely, the capacities for its production during the years of perestroika and the post-perestroika mess have successfully lost. Well, of course, part of the production lines.
          I think that if you need it very much, then everything will be restored, it’s much easier to go along the already worked out path than starting all over again.
        2. andj61
          andj61 16 May 2014 10: 53
          +1
          Quote: inkass_98
          If it isn’t enough for Tram to do new things, then nothing can interfere with what was put into practice under the USSR. And if they are so smart, modify them taking into account the achievements of the last time and launch them!

          All the technologies by which Energia was manufactured have been lost. There are no specialists, factories, technical equipment, a lot of equipment, etc. Only technical documentation remained. In the same way, the Americans cannot now fly to the moon - everything must be recreated.
          And for the "Energia", which was created under the "Buran", there was simply no load at that time that it could bring into space.
          Superheavy media must now be developed, but not immediately. What will he launch into space? A ship to Mars? So he has not even been planned. Superheavy orbital station? It is simpler and cheaper to do in a few launches of lighter missiles. Ships to the moon?
          All this is a prospect, and a distant prospect.
          We still have time to create such a missile, all the more developments are underway, and I don’t think that we are so behind the USA and China, rather, even ahead of it.
          1. igor_m_p
            igor_m_p 16 May 2014 11: 24
            +2
            The production lines have not gone anywhere, many specialists are also available, with one even personally familiar, he really is not a production worker, he participated in the tests. Onsite technical documentation. Documentation combined with production facilities is technology. Even specialists in the iteration phase are no longer as important as they are when designing from scratch. And I do not think that those who are now making "Angara" have insufficient qualifications to deal with "Energia". There are still no tasks for it. And now it is more important to bring "Angara" to mind, the prospects there are very strong, given the modularity of the design.
            1. andj61
              andj61 16 May 2014 11: 31
              +3
              Everything is correct, only "Energy" was made piece by piece, and not on production lines. And all the technical equipment for her was cut long ago.
          2. Deff
            Deff 16 May 2014 12: 14
            0
            A quick jump I know the priority - the transfer of the energy platform to the moon is a new vector of politics. Universal warming and negative environmental conditions simply put this task super important.
        3. Tektor
          Tektor 16 May 2014 22: 38
          0
          Now the goods will be, why not revive the beautiful carrier?

          The whole problem is in the engines: Khrunichev has domestic ones, and Energy (-Buran) has South Mashev, i.e. Ukrainian. But I would not be so categorical as the author that there would be no super-heavy LV:
          The use of acetam not only significantly increases the energy of existing means of excretion, but also gives great savings.
          Ballistic calculations carried out by the Center for Innovation (CID) in conjunction with the Keldysh Center have shown that for the Soyuz-2.1b launch vehicle, replacing the RB oxygen-kerosene engine with an oxygen-acetam one will increase the payload mass by 30-40%.
          The A5 hangar will be able to put into orbit 200 km not 26 tons of payload, but about 35 tons only when switching to acetam.
          In the next six months or a year, it is planned to carry out a detailed analysis of the possibilities of using the new fuel at the first and second stages of the launch vehicle, as well as at the upper stages for other Russian launch vehicles (Proton, Angara, etc.).
      2. ovgorskiy
        ovgorskiy 16 May 2014 11: 49
        +1
        Not an article, but a libel on our space program. At first it seemed that the author was a fan of the development of our cosmonautics, but when he read with what enthusiasm he wrote about the successes of the Americans, he realized another liberal nonsense. I would like to ask the author, what are the particularly great successes of the rest of the world in space? Europe has stalled altogether, the Americans have given up to businessmen, by the way Falcon delivered 2 tons of cargo to the ISS, which is not at all 10 tons and not 60. Up to 100 tons are like cancer to China. China certainly has big ambitions, but you won’t be full of ambitions alone. Ours began to monitor the diversion of technology to China, so that the further development of the Chinese cosmos. The program does not look particularly brilliant. The author suddenly attacked the Angara, but did not prove anything what it is bad with. An ultra-heavy missile is certainly needed, but not now, and in the future, others also don’t have such a missile, so it’s too early to tell Chef, it’s gone. By the way, the same Falcon will develop up to 30 tons in the future. And by the way, I would like to ask the author to list the list of countries where cosmodromes similar to Vostochny are being built, and this money and money are not small.
      3. Skiff_spb
        Skiff_spb 16 May 2014 17: 58
        0
        It seems to me that the article is generally written in the spirit of "everyone has offended us."
        This is purely my IMHO, but it seems to me that such articles are written by those who were rejected for some very material reasons, but they believe that this is not fair.

        A la "I invented a perpetual motion machine, I say -" give money for super development ", but for some reason no one understands me, and they continue to make these past-century ICEs, and develop no less ancient electro!"
      4. Ascetic
        Ascetic 16 May 2014 18: 01
        +2
        Quote: igor_m_p
        It seems that the author of the article just did not hear about her


        This is because of the content of the article two years ago, from the time of the scandals with Baiterek, Rus-M and the promotion of the Khrunikov hangar without a competition and estimates of the scientific and technical commission. Now the bet is on the Angara and all these frictions and problems should be forgotten, as well as the story of the sea Mace, MIT and Makeev’s Design Bureau from the same opera. It’s necessary to bring to mind the chosen project and not again to interfere with the guano in a barrel with manure, you can’t return the invested money, and no one can say that Russia would be better than the Angara. The lighter Angara is already at the testing stage, a lot of money was invested in the construction of tables for her in Vostochny and Plesetsk. the first launch of Angara 1.2 is scheduled for June this year. I have already said for a long time that all problems mainly occur then. When the corporate interests or preferences of one or another Roskosmos leadership and lobbying structures do not coincide with the interests of state policy in the most promising areas of Russian cosmonautics.
        if it is expressed diplomatically. Well, about the Stalinist methods here already mentioned above. Still, Rogozin, Ostapenko and Shoigu inspire more optimism than, for example, Popovkin and Serdyukov
  3. Good cat
    Good cat 16 May 2014 08: 47
    +6
    "While other countries are rapidly moving forward in the development of new missiles, Russia is marking time and wasting precious time" - if it's not a secret, who is moving by leaps and bounds to Mars? That's what a journalistic habit, there is a headline, the topic is not disclosed
    1. arkady149
      arkady149 16 May 2014 08: 54
      +3
      I agree, the article is some kind of "all-prospolipolymer".
  4. iCuD
    iCuD 16 May 2014 08: 50
    +3
    It is a pity that the fate of the Energia launch vehicle ended so ingloriously. We will not launch anything comparable with it for another 10-15 years (if not 20 at all). It's no joke, we can't even build a copy of the Energia launch vehicle now!
  5. LVMI1980
    LVMI1980 16 May 2014 08: 51
    +1
    ... the bet is placed on the Angara family launch vehicle. That is, on a rocket, which today, having never before flown up, is already morally obsolete, since its development has been carried out since the beginning of the 90s of the last century
    Development of the Iskander also began in 1988.
  6. Bayonet
    Bayonet 16 May 2014 08: 52
    0
    One blah blah blah ... It seems that Roskosmos itself does not know what to do! Of course, this does not apply to salaries.
    1. grandfather_Kostya
      grandfather_Kostya 16 May 2014 13: 00
      0
      In fact, while we will treat space programs as show business ("I will bring a gorgeous picture from the Moon, and I will arrange a talk show from Mars"), we will stagnate and squeeze money from each other stupidly ... For a start, it would be possible to announce a tender for the search for an economically viable super task in space, such as the release of ultrapure materials from raw materials of an iron asteroid, a solar power plant, etc. And then, already under the formulated task, to look for solutions: launch vehicles, production technologies, and so on ...
  7. Dragon-y
    Dragon-y 16 May 2014 08: 53
    0
    At the end of this year? Well, let's see ...
  8. erased
    erased 16 May 2014 09: 00
    +4
    What will be is an important issue. And here is why Protons fall - the question is urgent! Either criminal negligence (up to 15 years of strict regime of confiscation), or enemy intrigues (capital punishment with confiscation). But we all are in silence, who the hell will be punished, the hell who will be planted, and the rockets will continue to fall.
    Huevina with situevina!
  9. crambol
    crambol 16 May 2014 09: 00
    0
    At the first stage, it is possible to make a rocket capable of placing 70–80 tons of payload into a low Earth orbit. After modernization, it can carry 120 or more tons. As for the prospects, then, from the point of view of Ostapenko, we are talking about 190 tons.


    It looks amazing against the background of another failure. Isn't it better to learn how to make non-dropping media?
  10. GRAY
    GRAY 16 May 2014 09: 02
    +3
    Headline upset. However, after reading the text, I realized that the media will still be.
    The article smacks of rotten, the author seems to be from the all-adherents.
  11. saag
    saag 16 May 2014 09: 09
    +2
    Yes, hydrogen needs to be developed, and so we ran into an oxygen-kerosene pair, such as a budget so it’s more realistic to master
    1. andj61
      andj61 16 May 2014 11: 01
      +2
      Quote: saag
      Yes, hydrogen needs to be developed, and so we ran into an oxygen-kerosene pair, such as a budget so it’s more realistic to master

      There, along the way, everyone with liquid hydrogen has problems, it is cheaper and more reliable to use only oxygen. For liquid hydrogen, the boiling point is -253 degrees, for oxygen - -183 degrees. For hydrogen, problems with cryotechnics increase by an order of magnitude.
      1. saag
        saag 16 May 2014 12: 53
        +1
        all this physics has long been known, and also the fact that the specific momentum of hydrogen is still greater and noticeable than that of oxygen-kerosene, but difficult, but if this is not developed, then there will be standing still
      2. Bayonet
        Bayonet 16 May 2014 22: 27
        0
        How does it feel to “use only oxygen?” Rocket fuel consists of two components - a fuel and an oxidizer. Oxidizer oxygen, fuel - hydrogen, kerosene, alcohol was on V-2, many other options.
  12. Indifferent
    Indifferent 16 May 2014 09: 10
    +3
    As I understand it, we do not have a space program that is clear to everyone. But there is no program, it is not clear why we need new missiles. So the Unions and Protons continue to fly. Space is a very costly area of ​​industry, and our budget is full of holes. Therefore, I do not have time for fat, I would live. Of course, Space needs to be dealt with. We need communications, meteorology, military intelligence, and so on. But with ambitious projects, I think you need to postpone! Mars is an absolute fantasy. The moon is more realistic, but manned flights are also questionable. It is still not clear whether the Americans were on the moon or not. After all, all living things that were sent through the radiation belts of the Earth died. A powerful lead capsule from radiation is needed there. It was not on Apollo, and filming astronauts on the moon raises more questions than answers. Even the clumsy jumps of the astronauts correspond to gravity, not lunar gravity. I am not talking about any double or triple shadows, or a flag waving in the wind. It is also not clear where the most powerful rocket engine in the world went, from Saturn-5, and the head of von Braun was fired in the midst of lunar flights.
    This means that there is no flight experience and everything needs to really start from scratch. Armstrong's Hollywood booths and companies do not count.
    And then figure it out, what do we need? To poison people with a huge life support complex or several robots that will do the same thing? What do we need on the moon? It is clear that it is extremely unprofitable to transport minerals from there. What then? Sitting on the moon in order to be ahead of the rest of the planet? We seem to have had this "childhood disease".
    So we need to decide what we will do in space in the next 50 years. And when all priorities are identified, build rockets under them.
    1. sir.jonn
      sir.jonn 16 May 2014 10: 07
      +1
      Quote: indifferent
      So we need to decide what we will do in space in the next 50 years. And when all priorities are identified, build rockets under them.

      Today, the lunar and Martian programs are just an element of popularizing the entire economically disadvantageous direction in the space program. Likewise, the USSR and the USA did the same at the dawn of the "Space Age", allowing military technology to go in front of it under the aura of stunning achievements.
      It is difficult to choose the most necessary, and maybe not at all possible when it comes to distant prospects. Growing onions on the ISS or developing a space toilet for a million bucks is all ridiculous, but at the same time necessary.
    2. Goodmen
      Goodmen 16 May 2014 10: 54
      +1
      Quote: indifferent
      So we need to decide what we will do in space in the next 50 years. And when all priorities are identified, build rockets under them.


      +10000000000000000
      I completely agree! Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye!
      ... only here we have it in everything ... something puffing-puffing ... without clear tasks and priorities. One RUSNANO is worth it!
    3. xtur
      xtur 16 May 2014 12: 20
      +1
      > As I understand it, we do not have a space program that is clear to everyone.

      KVM, in the market, all of its main active participants cannot have the same interests, therefore it cannot be equally interesting for all programs. This means that market participants will always understand / interpret this program in their own way, based on their interests.

      And the interests of market producers have nothing to do with the interests of the country and society, being reduced to the interests of their leading stratum.
      The issue can only be decided by the will of the state and coercion.
  13. 120352
    120352 16 May 2014 09: 10
    +2
    Our ignorance of something does not mean its absence.
  14. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 16 May 2014 09: 11
    +1
    We have the whole problem in the leadership of Roskosmos ... people come oriented to this or that design bureau.
    And what else is striking ... despite the vast experience of the leaders of Roscosmos (in fact, the command of the Aerospace Forces) ... the lack of integrated strategic approaches in the development of the industry ... what it is not a plan is shy from one topic to another when changing a leader.
  15. A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S 16 May 2014 09: 18
    0
    It’s time to disperse Rosskosmos, this organization has turned into a swamp where billions of dollars disappear, and so trillions of people’s money disappear. Rosskosmos has recently become an organized crime group for cutting government funds allocated for space exploration. Recently, an application was submitted to the government to increase the staff of officials and add funds and the rockets both fell and continue to fall. They start a space scam with the Moon, it’s a waste of money, if you plan, then the colonization of Mars and not the Moon, the American flag is on it.
  16. Wedmak
    Wedmak 16 May 2014 09: 21
    +4
    While other countries are rapidly moving forward in the development of new missiles, Russia is marking time and losing precious time.

    I read the beginning ... I ran the text diagonally. Well, of course - in the west, all in chocolate they are quickly moving to the exploration of the moon and are about to land a manned expedition to Mars, and Russia can not create a new carrier ....
    Something over the past few days has poured articles about how everything is bad with us in space technology. There is someone's order.
    and Falcon, and Dragon are made quickly, efficiently, using the right technical solutions.

    Really ... Why then do they fly on our rockets to the ISS? And do they buy our engines? Fly on your ashtrays. They are correct. Looks like it is really bad with the falcon, and other dragons, private traders began to raise the price? Or running out of money? Why did they suddenly get the idea that Russia needs a super-heavy launch vehicle here and now? What are you going to carry on it? Angara just goes to the launch pad, and already at all corners yelling "through the polymers".
    Russia launches Protons and Unions in series, several dozen a year. And these, gathered together, somehow riveted the heels of the Falcons - heroes! How to live now ....
  17. saag
    saag 16 May 2014 09: 22
    0
    Quote: indifferent
    Mars is from the realm of absolute fiction.

    strange, American missions work there and no fiction and even further
    Quote: indifferent
    It is still not clear whether the Americans were on the moon or not.

    Conspirology however
    Quote: indifferent
    It is also not clear where the most powerful rocket engine in the world, from "Saturn-5"

    In the museum of astronautics you can see him
    Quote: indifferent
    It is clear that it is extremely unprofitable to transport minerals from there.

    That's right, it is necessary to establish production of the final product there, and not for land, but for extra-land
    Quote: indifferent
    What do we need on the moon?

    Ask yourself this question - why do you need to launch telescopes and look for exoplanets from distant stars, moreover, look for planets in the habitable zone where liquid water can exist and the temperature regime is favorable for human existence, because we can’t get there, but they spend a billion on this thing, why do you think?
    1. andj61
      andj61 16 May 2014 11: 16
      0
      Quote: saag
      Mars is from the realm of absolute fiction.
      strange, American missions work there and no fiction and even further

      See which devices are sent to Mars from them, and answer the question, are superheavy carriers needed for this?
      Indifferent noted that Russia does not have an understandable space program, that space technology needs to be created for real tasks. Is that not so?
      About the extraction of minerals outside the Earth, about the exploration of the moon and the production of the final product for extra-land - this is not even the day after tomorrow. What we need on the moon is a rhetorical question. Only stake out a place - and in the next 20 years nothing more. Unless delivering lunar rock for sale at auctions.
      Regarding the fact that there were no Americans on the moon, this, of course, is too much. For experts, this fact is not in doubt.
      1. Deff
        Deff 16 May 2014 12: 24
        0
        Nonsense, if you do not transfer the energy base to the satellite, the Earth will suffocate in several decades. Or a significant reduction in life area. On the Moon: solar, atomic, energy of temperature changes. Simple energy-intensive production is transferred to the moon. Active development of high-power energy transmission lines from orbit is already underway: laser, microwave. The problems so far are the efficiency of such lines, not more than 50%. It seems there are prospects to bring to 75-79%
      2. saag
        saag 16 May 2014 12: 56
        0
        To the question "what do we need on the moon" there is most likely an answer "the development of money on earth", until something changes at the conservatory and we will ask a question about the moon, although for example they are already interested in the asteroid belt and is there an under-ice ocean on Europe in general there are missions to Pluto. The moon is a testing ground for technology development, for example, there is a lot (40%) oxygen in a bound form (mineral ilmenite) and the task of extracting it from there has not yet been solved, how to obtain and separate minerals, energy, astrophysics and much more, but do you see this not cost-effective as relaying a signal from a communication satellite.
    2. Penzyac
      Penzyac 16 May 2014 12: 23
      0
      Quote: saag
      Quote: indifferent
      It is clear that it is extremely unprofitable to transport minerals from there.

      That's right, it is necessary to establish production of the final product there, and not for land, but for extra-land
      Quote: indifferent
      What do we need on the moon?


      I absolutely agree with you just for this, and the Moon is needed.
      Cosmodrome plus the production of heavy spacecraft and fuel for them. It’s not from the Earth to carry all this, the one gravitational force of the earth is worth what. And on the moon, almost all the raw materials are. The truth with fuel is a snag, but I think this problem can be solved if desired. For example, it’s simply dangerous to launch and transport nuclear engines from Earth to space, or rather, not the engines themselves, but nuclear fuel.
  18. Augustswsw
    Augustswsw 16 May 2014 09: 26
    0
    "Trouble for both your houses!"
  19. GRune
    GRune 16 May 2014 09: 34
    +2
    "Angara" does not meet the ambitious tasks facing the domestic space industry. This heavy rocket - within 25 tons - is not enough for flights to Mars, the Moon, asteroids, for the construction of inhabited lunar bases
    For these freaks, the "Proton" which has been used up until it rings, falls every other time, and they are about the "Angara". In Soviet times, the entire leadership would have been sitting for such disasters ...
  20. UVB
    UVB 16 May 2014 09: 35
    +1
    I don't understand why to reinvent the wheel? Isn't it easier to revive the unsurpassed "Energy", naturally, on a modern element base? Why create a new super-heavy carrier from scratch, and with obviously worse characteristics? (70-80 tons of load versus more than 100 for Energia)
  21. GRune
    GRune 16 May 2014 09: 38
    +1
    Why make another rocket, which in its characteristics is very similar to the "killed" LV "Rus-M", and the links in the terms of reference - "Angara"?
    For drank denyuzhki! The author is very naive in raising such questions.
  22. Eragon
    Eragon 16 May 2014 09: 44
    +3
    This makes no sense. I explain.
    1. No competent specialist (manager) will tell the truth for one simple reason - this is a state secret.
    2. 30 years ago the Energia carrier rocket has a working capacity of 100 tons, maximum (calculated) up to 120. My father was engaged in the development and completion of the engines for it (that's why I know).
    3. If memory serves, then both "Zenith" and "Angara" are converted and slightly modernized ballistic missiles to deliver "gifts" to America and other "partners". What does this have to do with superheavy carriers based on them?
    4. Yes, "Protons" are falling, but this is not a design problem, but a hardware problem.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 May 2014 12: 20
      0
      Quote: Eragon
      Yes, "Protons" fall, but this is not a design problem, but a hardware design

      It's right! Previously, Proton was considered a very reliable carrier.
  23. saag
    saag 16 May 2014 09: 49
    +1
    Quote: Eragon
    If memory serves, then Zenit

    Zenith is a sidewall from Energy
    1. Eragon
      Eragon 16 May 2014 10: 23
      +1
      Thanks for clarifying
    2. The comment was deleted.
  24. Weniamin
    Weniamin 16 May 2014 09: 53
    +3
    At this pace, until we get to Mars, China will sow everything with rice and corn there.
  25. Cormorants
    Cormorants 16 May 2014 10: 11
    0
    Yes, they’re tired, like they united all the enterprises in one structure, but what's the point? a closer association is needed, plus the leadership should be cleaned up, many thieves like to sit there, plus quality control should be returned, and the floor of the Soviet system should be built. they only think there.
  26. Monax
    Monax 16 May 2014 10: 40
    0
    No need to strive to do fast, you need to strive to do quality. We need mid-level specialists: turners .... etc. It is strange why fooling around new projects when there is a proven Energy. Waste of money or cut ....
  27. Nik SU
    Nik SU 16 May 2014 10: 40
    +3
    On the Energia rocket launcher, RD-170 engines were used, then, due to the lack of demand for this engine in Russia, NPO Energomash, having underestimated the characteristics, created the RD-180 with which it entered the international market, in particular the American one. Assessing the outstanding characteristics of the engine, which still has no analogues, the Americans signed a contract with NPO Energomash for its purchase. The well-known Atlas rocket was redone for this engine. NPO Energomash, on its own initiative, developed a new RD-191 engine, today the most powerful in the world. Experts say that with the help of this engine, using the Energia rocket carrier scheme, it is possible to create an ultra-heavy rocket with a carrying capacity of 5-100 tons over 150 years. However, an incomprehensible "mouse fuss" in Roscosmos is cutting down any attempts to create this missile. Anonymous sources suggest that perhaps this is related to finances. Namely, with the development of considerable money, which the state plans to allocate for the development of super-heavy carrier rockets in the future. Since they are well aware that the longer they “dynamize” with the creation of this missile, the more funds will be able to be pumped out of the state. So, for the sake of “managers”, the missile industry is crumbling from management.
    1. qwert
      qwert 16 May 2014 12: 24
      0
      As the old man Mikoyan said in the early 90s, "You say the mafia-mafia, and do not know what to do with it. But we called them enemies of the people and fought successfully."
  28. Asan Ata
    Asan Ata 16 May 2014 11: 09
    +1
    Success is investment in industry and people minus corruption. Lead your thieves.
  29. MolGro
    MolGro 16 May 2014 11: 21
    +2
    The author is not in the subject !! not only does the whole list of the Angara not know yet and the conclusions are not complete!
  30. shinobi
    shinobi 16 May 2014 11: 23
    +3
    The author of the article decided to promote himself, this time. Our rosskosmos relied on a modular layout of pH, this is two. There is already a super heavy pH on paper and it will not be allowed into the hardware before the official launch of the lunar program, because while it is not needed, there is no cargo under it. This is three. Before the lunar prog should earn an "orbital locomotive" on a nuclear power plant. Will pull off to one place for assembly orbital modules in structures for different purposes. Well, there are satellites in high orbits to raise, and a lot of things.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 May 2014 12: 16
      0
      Quote: shinobi
      There is already a super-heavy pH on paper and it will be released into the iron no earlier than the official launch of the lunar program

      Maybe at first "rivet" and conduct tests? And then we will take on the lunar program, and the carriers will fall.
  31. Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 16 May 2014 11: 57
    0
    I understand perfectly well the need for a certain place for Russia in the space race)))), but what I really don't catch up with is what to do in a vacuum? At minus 271? satellites Mona and the Royal "seven" to throw, but the presence of three or four people in orbit ... well, I just can't establish it -)))) soon spawning with us, cosmonauts damn it)))
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 May 2014 12: 13
      +1
      Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
      Well, in any way I can not justify it -)))) soon we spawn, astronauts damn)

      Do not understand and do not have to strain - you have spawning soon, so take care of what is close and understandable to you. Good luck
    2. saag
      saag 16 May 2014 13: 11
      +1
      Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
      Minus 271

      except for Pluto, on the moon at night the temperature drops only to -160
    3. Setrac
      Setrac 16 May 2014 13: 40
      +1
      Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
      but here’s what I’m not really catching up with - and what is there to do in a vacuum?

      Energy, unique production conditions, rare minerals.
  32. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 16 May 2014 12: 07
    +2
    This is Roscosmos' new business now. Development. They fiddle money for the development of one or the other. Already quite ready, on paper, they throw a rocket and begin to "develop a new one." Nobody cares about the fate of the newly "developed" one, everyone understands that it will not fly anywhere, it was not "developed" for that. They came up with some kind of exploration of the moon, but the simplest satellite themselves, a hundred years ago, cannot launch a spent rocket. This is the decline of the industry, no "development" will change anything, they will master the money, yes, it will be happy to "develop" something else. Now they want to "develop" rockets on methane, eat deliciously for 5-10 years, earn good money, then the results are on the shelf and there are no guilty ones, people worked. Although it is already clear that a gas rocket has no advantages. By the way, the Americans will have a heavy launch vehicle by 2017, and possibly on our engines. But the most interesting thing is that we do not need these old and best engines in the world, and if the American contract is lost, the plant will be closed and the people will be dispersed, there is no other consumer and is not planned. I am sure they will "develop" a new, "environmentally friendly" one. With this approach, at best, it is good if it is possible to maintain strategic nuclear missiles at a more or less working level. And with the moon, by the way, the situation is the same, if you don't hurry now, then you can not hurry. Places where it makes at least some sense, or you just can build a base is extremely small. And if the Americans build the first, they will also come up with rules according to which, let's say, no one can build within a radius of 200 miles, then suitable places can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and there are also Chinese who do not suffer from garbage, but work.
    1. Sinbad
      Sinbad 16 May 2014 12: 28
      0
      Totally agree with you. All the work of the Roskosmos leadership is to knock out the budget and "cut" it. The rearrangement of leaders from place to place can give nothing, except collapse and theft. Personal responsibility is necessary, criminal and material, real responsibility. And then, as with the stool, they "try" and let him go.
    2. saag
      saag 16 May 2014 13: 09
      -1
      Quote: chunga-changa
      Although it’s already clear that a gas missile has no advantages

      Well, how can I tell you, if you make a proton on methane, then its specific impulse is higher than that of asymmetric dimethylhydrazine, so the carrying capacity will be a little more, environmental problems will go away right away
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 16 May 2014 17: 36
        +1
        Roughly speaking, methane will fit less than heptyl into the tank of the same volume at the same temperature, therefore it is necessary either to increase the tank, which also has weight, or gain in beats. impulse is leveled by less fuel. And all this bodyagion is planned for national money until 2030, agree to pay?
  33. Giant thought
    Giant thought 16 May 2014 12: 15
    +1
    First of all, it is necessary to restore order in the heads, and then in everything else. Astronautics used to be the country's leading industry, but now to put it mildly, there is a lot of mess there.
  34. qwert
    qwert 16 May 2014 12: 21
    +1
    Energy was developed as a heavy carrier. And the hangar as a commercial project. Superjet has proven that commercial projects fly badly. They have a different task.
    Why can’t you go so far as to work out and restore the production of LV Energy ????
  35. jayich
    jayich 16 May 2014 12: 24
    -1
    I’ve thought, we seem to have an aerospace defense, the aerospace forces, why in the sphere of recent events do not give a damn about the arms limitation treaty in space? And let the ships begin in orbit of 100 tons each, and here you have the loading under heavy launch vehicle.
    A fantastic idea has been hovering for a long time: At Energy, cargo is secured from the side, i.e. theoretically using 4 LV energy as accelerating blocks, you can try to put into orbit a cargo weighing up to 480 tons at a time, and this is a good boat to get on it and you can go to Mars. This is a very daunting task, but in 3 launches you can assemble a guard in orbit weighing up to 1300 tons. It is already possible to explore our solar system. And take the money from the reduction in the construction of the Navy. Yes, science fiction, but science fiction now, but in 20-50 years?
    Interestingly, this is possible to translate into metal?
    1. wizarden
      wizarden 16 May 2014 12: 46
      +1
      Fiction have read? The ISS is being built for 16 years by the efforts of 15 countries, its mass during this time reached 417 tons.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 16 May 2014 14: 05
        +1
        Quote: wizarden
        Fiction have read? The ISS is being built for 16 years by the efforts of 15 countries, its mass during this time reached 417 tons.

        Everything rests on technology, on chemical fuel we will not fly far. The key to space is being built in France - an experimental thermonuclear reactor.
      2. jayich
        jayich 16 May 2014 14: 13
        +1
        417 tons are 4 launches of RN Energia. With proper funding and with a ready-made project, even one launch per year, this is 4 years.
        And it’s not surprising if Proton is dragged into orbit. And given the level of funding.
        The key to space has long been at the KBHA, but for some reason no one needs it.
  36. Takashi
    Takashi 16 May 2014 12: 27
    +1
    our "trampling" I understand in this light:
    1. The level of development of cultures, nations and Technologies - reached the level when it became unclear where to move and why? Mars, the Moon, - ... sense to go there?
    2. The needs of space programs - it is enough to carry out current affairs (launch of satellites, ISS obsl). That is, Unions, Protons - they completely solve their problems and are quite cost-effective (maybe 50 years will still be effective).
    3. The top management / government - the space industry, in the light - permanent burned out satellites that have not been launched into orbit - causes a "toothache", and therefore they are wary of the proposals of our "managers", preferring to invest in the real military-industrial complex by modernizing the army \fleet.
    5. China \ India \ Japan \ Brazil \ Argentina \ .. - all of them are now catching up with Russia \ USSR, and in terms of the development of missiles are at the level of 60-70s.
  37. raven75
    raven75 16 May 2014 12: 38
    -1
    If the Americans were on the moon, then I must have been there. I'm not even talking about a bunch of absurdities in filming landings on the Moon, about a series of incomprehensible deaths of several astronauts supposedly on the Moon, about the mysteriously missing lunar soil, kind of delivered by the Apollo ... Someone wrote above that the specialists the fact of the Americans landing on the moon is beyond doubt. Sometimes you don't have to be an expert to see or understand the obvious. For example, if a person is banged on the head with an ax, then you do not need to be a certified traumatologist to understand that after such a person, at best, he will end up in intensive care. The example is clumsy, but it seems to reflect the essence. And in the end, since the director's widow, who was sinned that he filmed all the landing on the Moon in the pavilion, after the death of her husband, confirmed this fact. What kind of specialists are there ...
  38. teron
    teron 16 May 2014 13: 01
    +1
    Our people are not indifferent to cosmic affairs. Sick soul. It's just that this industry hasn't made us happy for a long time. First, this "Angara", which has been called promising for all 20 years, but it turns out that it does not allow launching manned spacecraft. Then the Clipper. I myself saw how Putin in 2004 (I may be wrong) announced that the aforementioned device would fly in 2007. Wrapped up. What? Why? Unclear. Then this "Rus". Now it turns out that it was also closed. Or not closed? In short, the turbidity is cloudy. Of course, the space industry has a bit of a secret, but if you already announce the project to the whole world, then why do you quietly close it later? What are you hiding? And not just once. All of this is frankly disappointing.
  39. 1536
    1536 16 May 2014 13: 59
    +1
    Nobody except our people needs our space industry. It is hoped that we will save her from plunder and death, as we saved Crimea.
  40. luxing
    luxing 16 May 2014 14: 11
    0
    Quote: HollyGremlin
    So the most annoying thing is that again with ours. What time already. How to launch a foreigner - everything is in order, as our rocket either does not reach the orbit or even burns out.
    2 cases - coincidence, 3 - is a regularity. So you can draw conclusions


    absolutely agree, already a pattern ...
  41. sv68
    sv68 16 May 2014 14: 57
    -1
    so that the government really understands what kind of collapse began in the space sprout, Medvedev should be enlisted in the cosmonaut corps and put him into space on a cargo rocket, preferably without returning to the ground and reporting that everything just happened by chance, it's not our fault
  42. oxotnuk86
    oxotnuk86 16 May 2014 15: 53
    0
    It’s not a matter of Proton, but of the load it carries. Our communication satellites are falling or going nowhere, while imported satellites are normally put into orbit. This is just a diversion and sits in Russia.
  43. Lone gunman
    Lone gunman 16 May 2014 17: 27
    0
    The author of "don't drive bullshit" - ANGARA up to 50-100 tons ...