Military Review

Creating a super heavy rocket requires 700 billion rubles

73
In Roskosmos said that the creation of a super-heavy rocket that has a payload of 70-80 tons will require about 700 billion rubles. According to the ministry, currently it is necessary to draw up a schedule for financing the project. Work on the development of a new super-heavy rocket is planned to be completed by 2028, reports TASS with reference to the chairman of the Scientific and Technical Council of Roscosmos, Yuri Koptev. According to him, the council recommended to continue work on creating the necessary scientific and technical reserve for the development of the rocket and the application of new technologies. Thus, an engine for a super-heavy rocket can be created, which will use natural liquefied gas as a fuel, noted Yuri Koptev.


At the same time, Koptev noted that the financing of the project of the Russian space program for 2016-2025 years is planned to be reduced by 10%. At the same time, the former head of Roscosmos, Igor Komarov, said that the agency’s management would try to do everything in the current situation in order to preserve all the key projects for the space industry in the best possible way.

Pressing costs made the situation that has developed in the Russian economy. The Ministry of Economic Development pledged inflation at the level of 4%, which today is completely at odds with the realities. The current situation leads to the fact that the increase in the cost of each project is already on average 27%. According to Koptev, in the current situation, Roscosmos considers its main priority to be the development of the Russian orbital constellation of satellites, which is designed to solve the tasks of the defense, science and socio-economic development of the country. He explained to reporters that by assuming the obligation to support manned space flight, which often amounts to 50% of the total funding, the rest is funded by the residual principle. “And we still wonder why we don’t have a remote satellite constellation, the meteorological satellite constellation doesn’t meet the requirements of the times, and why the Chinese satellite constellation is already more Russian,” the official said.



Koptev also told reporters that the fleet of launch vehicles in Russia is not enough for the needs of the Ministry of Defense. This applies to the introduction into orbit of the Earth of heavy military satellites. “There are a number of projects in the interests of the Russian Defense Ministry, where we are not able to provide a payload to the target orbit, and because of this, we have to remove some target equipment,” said Yuri Koptev, explaining the need to develop a missile in Russia 35-37 tons when putting cargo into low Earth orbit.

He told about the project of creating a new Angara missile of a heavy class and the cost of this project. According to him, the new Angara-A5B will receive the third level of oxygen-hydrogen and will be able to put into geo-transfer orbit up to 12-12,5 tons of cargo, while the Angara-A5 rocket, equipped with a hydrogen overclocking unit, could put all 7 into such an orbit tons of cargo. The addition of the third oxygen-hydrogen stage will also allow the Angara-A5В rocket to bring up to 27 tons of cargo into the reference orbit against Angara-A24 tons of 5 tons.

Thanks to this, Russia will be able to compete with modern American and European heavy-class missiles. For example, the European heavy rocket Arian 6 is able to deliver up to 10-11 tons of payload to the geotransition orbit, the American heavy Delta Heavy rocket is supposed to deliver 12-14 tons to this orbit, and the Chinese heavy rocket up to 10 tons. At the same time, according to Roskosmos estimates, the cost of work on creating a new modification of the Angara-A5B rocket is estimated at 37 billion rubles.



The beauty of the Angara-A5B rocket is that it will consist of transportable blocks that can be easily transported by rail, including through tunnels, which will save us from the need to build plants at the cosmodrome to refuel the rocket stages. With the same rocket in Roscosmos pin some hopes on flights to the moon. This option was worked out by the Ordno Space Complex and showed that with the twin launch of Angara-A5B it will be possible to ensure the creation of a space complex in orbit by docking. This complex will be able to fly to the moon, landing and staying on the surface of two cosmonauts, said Yuri Koptev.

At the same time, Koptev reminded everyone that the issue of creating super-heavy rockets and flights to the Moon should not be overestimated. He noted that at one time the Soviet Union had spent a huge amount of manpower and resources on its lunar program. It took 35% of all space resources. Koptev also recalled the Buran program, which gave us 600 new technologies, but ended up with just two launches and wasted money. According to Yuri Koptev, who was still involved in the work on the Soviet lunar mission, the question of Russia's exploration of our natural satellite can be linked to the question - are Russian women ready to change their boots once in 3 for the moon?

Does Russia need a super heavy rocket?

Viktor Murakhovsky, a member of the Expert Council under the Chairman of the Military Industrial Commission under the Government of Russia, and Ivan Moiseev, who is the head of the Space Policy Institute, expressed their opinion on the need to create a super-heavy rocket in Russia in an interview with the Free Press.

If we are planning to carry out manned interplanetary flights to Mars, etc., in the perspective of the development of our space program, then Russia needs a super-heavy rocket, notes Viktor Murakhovsky. At the same time, he believes that the time has not yet come to set such ambitious tasks before our country and industry. He also believes that such large-scale projects, which, of course, include journeys into deep space, the launch of super-heavy payloads into supporting orbits, should and can only be international. In this regard, most likely, it would be correct to rely on joint work, for example, with our BRICS partners. Perhaps, over time, the political situation will improve and allow Russia to cooperate in this direction with the European Space Agency.



The tasks of the current and medium-term prospects for Russia are still much more modest. Yes, the question of the orbital station of the future is still relevant after 2020, when the ISS develops its resource. This large-scale project would also be more profitable to use in cooperation. At the same time, it is much more useful today to focus on the reconstruction of a full-fledged Russian space satellite constellation, which would cover all areas from multispectral intelligence to missile attack warning systems (SPRN), communication systems, maintenance of the GLONASS constellation, etc. Also, Russia could focus on the development of automatic vehicles designed for the study of interplanetary objects like asteroids and other planets.

Why Roscosmos might need an extra-heavy rocket, it's still clear, but why does the Ministry of Defense need a new rocket? The big question. The Russian military is quite satisfied with the parameters of the launch vehicles provided by the Angara. For the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, it would be much more important to ensure the mass production of Angara light and heavy rockets in order to have enough of them on hand in the period of aggravation of the international situation. This will help to quickly put into orbit additional satellites, allowing to solve current problems, said Murakhovsky. To date, there is no stock of missiles in Russia that could be used to quickly build up our satellite constellation in the right country. These tasks need to be addressed first and foremost, and not to talk about the withdrawal of some extra-heavy load on the orbit, said Victor Murakhovsky.

Other space countries also have plans to increase the mass of the payload put into orbit, but, by and large, the United States does not see a particular need for these projects. At present, the Americans are satisfied with the existing potential, the designs that they are already using now, and with reliance on Russian engines. The Chinese, in any case, will try to produce such launch vehicles on their own, but they are moving along the Russian path, using our experience in the field of manned space, as well as the delivery of various cargoes into orbit. Murakhovsky believes that the Chinese will soon come to understand that it is cheaper and faster to cooperate in this direction with Russia.



Ivan Moiseev stressed that it is possible to develop a super-heavy rocket in Russia, but this is a very expensive pleasure, the implementation of which will require not just a lot of money, but also time. “We have already drawn a rocket, and the Russian leading enterprises presented their versions (even the Makeyev Design Bureau, which had never done that before). However, it is one thing to draw, and quite another to carry out the project, find sufficient funding for it and keep it at least 10 years old. This is an extremely difficult task, which, frankly speaking, is currently very heavy for Russia, ”Moiseyev said.

You know, representatives of the Ministry of Defense, of course, can say that they need an extra-heavy carrier, but when it comes to him, as a rule, it all comes down to the following scenario: if they give a military of this class, they will be happy to take it think of what you can use heavy satellites. But the Ministry of Defense itself does not want to engage in such a project because of its very high cost.

At the same time, in Russia there is the possibility of further strengthening the second and third stages of the accelerating blocks - heavy Angara-A5 to the Angara-A7 version (the number in the title indicates the number of universal blocks used) for placing the increased payload into orbit. So far, even a lot of things can be squeezed out of the Angara launch vehicle. That is, you can move in an evolutionary way, without working on the creation of a new project. At the same time, it is clear that in this way the rocket will not be able to be strengthened at times, says Ivan Moiseyev. There is a lot of talk nowadays that the Chinese or Americans can bypass Russia in bringing payload to space. To this, Moses responds as follows: “If you compete with each other, who will quickly create an extra-heavy carrier, then most likely we will be left behind. However, if we look at the effectiveness of the withdrawal, we are able to hold our own positions even without such a carrier. ”

Information sources:
http://svpressa.ru/war21/article/116743
http://www.gazeta.ru/science/2015/03/24_a_6612873.shtml
http://tass.ru/kosmos/1851187
Author:
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim April 2 2015 06: 39 New
    16
    It’s necessary to clean the top and the rocket is cheaper and faster!
  2. qwert
    qwert April 2 2015 06: 51 New
    12
    "The question is: does Russia need such a missile?" Yes, of course, like a rocket for Russia, let the oligarchs buy new yachts, islands, real estate abroad?
    When, without question, we begin to restore the industry and stop sitting on the oil and gas needle?
    1. Ivan Pavlovich
      Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 22: 43 New
      0
      We are no longer sitting on the needle. on tablets for diarrhea - yes. it all ended gentlemen of the jury. Kudrin let us loose his curls and took the oil money away and we didn’t build a damn thing. -- Almost . and that they built it without his consent - in a tyhari. Thank you PUTIN, and this is not enough. industry was launched and what was left in Ukraine - if. we developed in ancient times - the Baltic states, Ukraine and the countries of eastern Europe, lifted Cuba and Angola from our knees and so on. and in Russia pigs grazed. we pulled the strap for everyone. and everyone worked, and now a lot of people do not produce anything, but live for a brush of tenants, that is, for a brush of old men and mothers built in ancient times. WELL AND WHAT DO WE WANT?
  3. saag
    saag April 2 2015 07: 05 New
    12
    their classification is interesting, if 70-80 is superheavy, then what is the name of the same Energy, which delivered more than 100 tons to a low orbit?
    1. Cosmos1987
      Cosmos1987 April 2 2015 07: 09 New
      13
      or modification of Energy - Volcano with g / p 175 tons!
    2. Col.
      Col. April 2 2015 12: 27 New
      +7
      Quote: saag
      then what is the name of the Energy that delivered more than 100 tons to low orbit?


      The meaning of modern Russian business is "assimilation" of funds. It is profitable to do the same work several times, as if anew, each time receiving a lot of money. Therefore, they really do not want to cheaply restore "Energy", it is better to beg more money for supposedly new developments. Although it has long been known that everything new is well forgotten old ...
      1. Ivan Pavlovich
        Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 22: 23 New
        -1
        IN UKRAINE MAKED A HOUSING - TANK OF ENERGY. SOMETHING IN KAZAKHSTAN AND THERE IS DOCUMENTS. FRIENDS TALKED THESE. WILL NOT GIVE
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. glasha3032
          glasha3032 April 3 2015 02: 02 New
          -1
          Drawings are not made in ONE copy! In KB all drawings are.
    3. opus
      opus April 2 2015 15: 52 New
      +3
      Quote: saag
      their classification is interesting, if 70-80 is superheavy, then what is the name of the same Energy, which delivered more than 100 tons to a low orbit?

      Depending on the by weight of payloaddisplayed on the NOU, launch vehicles are divided into classes:
      super-heavy missiles (more than 50 tons);-> "Energia-M", which, with a launch weight of 1050 tons, ensures the launch of spacecraft weighing up to 34 tons into low orbits of an artificial Earth satellite and weighing 3,0-7,0 tons (depending on the modification of the upper stage) into a geostationary orbit.
      heavy missiles (up to 30 tons); -> "Proton"
      middle class missiles (up to 15 tons); -> "Union"
      light class rockets (up to 2-4 tons); -> "Rokot" (The first two stages are a block of accelerators for the strategic missile RS-18 (SS-19), as the third stage is a new upper stage "Briz-KM
      ultralight class rockets (up to 300-400 kg)... -> "Shtil-1" - is a serial rocket R-29RM (RSM-54)

      ====================
      1. Cosmonautics. Encyclopedia. - M.: Publishing House “Sov. Encyclopedia ", 1985. - 527 p.
      2. Engineering reference book for space technology. Ed. A.V. Solodova. - M.: Military Publishing, 1977 .-- 430 p.
      .Alexandrov V.A., Vladimirov V.V. and other launch vehicles. - M: Military Publishing, 1981. - 351 p.
  4. Cosmos1987
    Cosmos1987 April 2 2015 07: 05 New
    +6
    There is already RN Energia, there are already exhausted and mass-produced engines, to process the drawings of the rocket itself, I think it will be several times cheaper and faster than creating a new one !!!
    1. saag
      saag April 2 2015 08: 12 New
      10
      Quote: Cosmos1987
      to process the drawings of the rocket itself, I think it will be several times cheaper and faster than creating a new one !!!

      It is doubtful that there is no equipment for the production of the rocket itself, there is no cooperation between the enterprises that supplied all the components, and most importantly there is no goal, both for a specific production and for society as a whole, if such a goal was acceptable - development, industrial production, raising the level automation and mechanization of production, the further path of development is the removal of some production from the earth to obtain materials inaccessible in the conditions of Earth's gravity, expansion into space for the development of scientific and technical progress, the production of materials and devices for the needs of extra-land, biomedical research, etc. This is a slightly different ideology for society, where a person is presented as a creator and conqueror of nature, who improves himself morally ...
    2. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs April 2 2015 09: 35 New
      0
      Quote: Cosmos1987
      I think it will be several times cheaper and faster than creating a new one

      A simplified copy of it has already been developed on the basis of Energy. Cupid is designed for just 70 tons. The work was performed by RSC Energia. And she even took part in the heavyweight competition. There is only one drawback: the lack of modularity does not allow running various loads. And this is the main trend in the world.
    3. Ivan Pavlovich
      Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 22: 19 New
      -1
      E all over the hill in the Kazakhs and somewhere else left. and you don’t give a damn.
  5. Crown
    Crown April 2 2015 07: 26 New
    +3
    Still need to return to the project reusable orbiter Buran. We reinvent the wheel once again, but the hens don’t peck for money. Lift the documents of the Energia launch vehicle.
  6. Russ_Dry
    Russ_Dry April 2 2015 07: 28 New
    +4
    why everyone is so pressing on "should and can only be international" and that if not international then it will not cope in any way. For me, this is almost a transfer of technology and after almost nothing: we will invest seventy percent, and the international partners will just be unfastened from the royal bounty in terms of interest.

    PS: this is what I thought: after Gagarin’s flight, after landing on the moon, many dreamed of flying to Mars in the 21st century. But something does not fly. What is the matter?
    Aaaaa ... I know without a "comprehensive international cooperation" with what kind of intergalactic, certainly democratic, power. And then we ourselves can’t cope. On planet Earth, there are no resources or smart specialists. And Russia is also a barren desert with a population of one and a half crippled. Everything is only in cooperation and nothing else.
    1. saag
      saag April 2 2015 08: 14 New
      +2
      Quote: Russ_Dry
      why is everyone so pressing on "should and can only be international"

      Some I repeat others who say that "there is no money" in a veiled form, in general the meaning is "abroad will help us" :-)
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas April 2 2015 08: 17 New
      +5
      Quote: Russ_Dry
      That's what I thought: after Gagarin’s flight, after landing on the moon, many dreamed of flying to Mars in the 21st century. But something does not fly. What is the matter?

      Duc think it's a good thing. But usually after "think" you should "well, how will I look on the Internet ...", which did not work out for you.
      Mars rovers have been running around Mars for many years, and artificial satellites have been exploring Mars from space. All this is made in USA.
      1. Pfcts
        Pfcts April 2 2015 08: 47 New
        0
        We are talking about manned flights. unmanned rovers and venus rovers were back in the 60s.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm April 2 2015 20: 37 New
          0
          Quote: Functional
          We are talking about manned flights. unmanned rovers and venus rovers were back in the 60s.

          There were no American vener rovers; there were only Soviet ones.
          Americans only have satellites.
      2. Dry_T-50
        Dry_T-50 April 2 2015 12: 46 New
        0
        Quote: Nayhas
        All this is made in USA.

        That's just the point. Cosmos remained in 1991.
    3. Ivan Pavlovich
      Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 19: 45 New
      +1
      This is because there is no sense of dignity and confidence.
      And where does the thief have a sense of dignity and self-confidence?
      And where does dignity and confidence from a robbed people come from?
      there is a project on nuclear tablets beyond the hill
      and it takes a lot of iron.
      And We have an explosive substance and a device for it, and it is as strong as a baboon. like an atomic bomb. So it is necessary on the basis of this explosive to stick tablets and to feed them little by little into the blasting chamber. In will fly. anything will raise. and went to the stars cheers. The pills have just been stolen and sold to the west. AND WILL BUY NEW BOOTS TO WIFE AND CAN FOR CHILDREN.
      urgently need to build a giant boot factory and distribute boots to all without charge. and so we will fight theft and corruption.
      And forward to Mars. ONLY THERE WILL NOT BE OBTAINED BY THE LORD, FOR THE THIEF HE IS IN THE SOUL OF THE THIEF AND STARS DO NOT ALARM him.
    4. Ivan Pavlovich
      Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 21: 45 New
      +1
      there is a project on nuclear tablets beyond the hill
      and it takes a lot of iron.
      And We have an explosive substance and a device for it, and it is as strong as a baboon. like an atomic bomb. So it is necessary on the basis of this explosive to stick tablets and to feed them little by little into the blasting chamber. In will fly. anything will raise. and went to the stars cheers. and don’t need to do modules and factories of darkness and landing and orbital blocks. and with the whole machine sit down and rise after the work done. and continue to fly to explore another object. and this is not a fantastic plan but real and affordable. The pills have just been stolen and sold to the west. AND WILL BUY NEW BOOTS TO WIFE AND CAN FOR CHILDREN. .
      And we all choosing and voting for a certain version of the medium are afraid of the country doing tremendous damage (stealing tobish) because if you agree with us and accept our choice, then the country will spend not small money on our will. So for ANGARA-5 I vote .and for ANGARA-5 (B) too. for the new block will still come in handy later on for other options with other more powerful first blocks. here it will be a super duper .and so we will reach 100ton. and maybe more. and with such a scope and perspective, it is necessary to make a new block of thirds, and then the second stage of the new ANGARA. AND UNDER THIS NEED A TABLE IN THE EAST. BECAUSE THERE IS LESS IN THE DESK.
  7. Blondy
    Blondy April 2 2015 07: 55 New
    11
    I like the term "super heavy" with a payload of 70 - 80 tons and begging for 700 miiliards. And to what type, then, should the carriers (pardon the tautology) "Energia" with a carrying capacity of 100 - 200 tons - "megasaurs" be attributed, which have become extinct and are now inaccessible? It seems to me that the use of "super-heavy" ones can only be reached when the line is at least 100 tons, otherwise, in the shadow of Soviet achievements, all this PR and beating oneself in the chest looks wretchedly.
  8. fktrcfylhn61
    fktrcfylhn61 April 2 2015 07: 57 New
    +4
    But it would be very interesting and informative for everyone to see the decryption of this amount called "creation" of the rocket! So to speak, an example of the zeal of the state!
  9. MMX
    MMX April 2 2015 08: 27 New
    +5
    Mdaaaa, at the Vostochny construction site, so far "only" 16 billion rubles have been stolen. And here the numbers are an order of magnitude more ... Now you vaguely imagine how much rotten in the post-perestroika period. How ineffective and how much in this area there are all kinds of fattening evil spirits just waiting for the next budget trough. That is why we have few real effective, professional entrepreneurs, since half of all "businessmen" have amassed a fortune on fraud with state money. Such "businessmen" do not need a real business with its risks and costs, therefore they do not have the skills to create, and therefore this contingent cannot create a competitive economy. Corruption is a two-way traffic ...
    1. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs April 2 2015 09: 30 New
      +3
      Quote: MMX
      Mdaaaa, at the Vostochny construction site, so far "only" 16 billion rubles have been stolen.

      Ragozin held a meeting on TV yesterday. 63 billion rubles were paid, confirmed by acts of delivery or work performed for 21 billion rubles, 32 billion rubles were not confirmed by any documents (that is, there is nothing to show). The rest is in varying degrees of production.
  10. ROMANO
    ROMANO April 2 2015 08: 33 New
    -2
    Quote: Krona
    Still need to return to the project reusable orbiter Buran. We reinvent the wheel once again, but the hens don’t peck for money. Lift the documents of the Energia launch vehicle.


    Too expensive, in every sense, this reusability cost. So much so that even non-poor states abandoned them. And many of us, long before the start of the system, understood this. Including (here's the irony!), And the chief designer of "Buran" Gleb Lozino-Lozinsky.
    By the way, in spite of its uniqueness, the super-heavy Energia never put any other payload into orbit, except for a single shuttle. There were simply no other loads. And it won't be found for a long time.
    1. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs April 2 2015 09: 28 New
      -1
      Quote: ROMANO
      And for a long time there is still no.

      But why. In connection with the lunar program, loads will appear. That's just really super expensive.
    2. Ulan
      Ulan April 2 2015 13: 18 New
      +1
      Lozino-Lozinsky had his own project, "Spiral". It was necessary to develop it, not copy the Americans, and then we would be the first to build a reusable system that would be much cheaper.
      1. ROMANO
        ROMANO April 2 2015 19: 07 New
        +1
        Spiral had its pluses and minuses. And the cost of the system did not belong to the latter. Still, reusable space systems were sharpened not so much for the withdrawal of the payload, as for the conduct of hostilities in / from space. Accordingly, the withdrawal of a load unit by the "Soyuz" was TEN (!) Cheaper than the "Shuttles". And it is quite natural that the new generation of (American) shuttles, both in size, have decreased many times, and switched to cheap disposable media.
  11. Ajent cho
    Ajent cho April 2 2015 08: 52 New
    +2
    In Roskosmos told

    Sounds like an OBS.

    about 700 billion rubles will be required

    More and more, I begin to understand Comrade Stalin ...
  12. rotor
    rotor April 2 2015 09: 00 New
    +2
    The addition of the third oxygen-hydrogen stage will also allow the Angara-A5V rocket to launch up to 27 tons of cargo into the reference orbit against 24 tons at the Angara-A5
    .

    Here, probably, a typo, Angara-A5V will have to output 35 tons.
    1. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs April 2 2015 09: 25 New
      0
      Quote: rotor
      Here, probably, a typo, Angara-A5V will have to output 35 tons.

      The leaders of Roscosmos love to chat, it just so happened. Experts have calculated that the A-5V will not be able to bring out 35 tons. I recommend the forum of the journal Cosmonautics News.
  13. ecologer
    ecologer April 2 2015 09: 13 New
    +2
    Under Stalin, large-scale projects were implemented due to four factors: 1. Clearly set goals. 2. Design and construction were done by real professionals. 3. The corruption component was absent 4. For dullness and sloppiness people were responsible. If we pay more attention to these issues now, successively working out these issues step by step, the situation would radically change.
  14. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs April 2 2015 09: 19 New
    11
    First. 100 billion rubles were spent on the creation of the Angara. and 15 years old. They intended to take over the entire foreign market, even concluded an agreement with the American company "Nortrop ... (I don't remember further) on the exclusive right to launch international loads. That's it. However, conceptual mistakes were made. Suddenly the concept of national sovereignty in admission issues appeared in the world China, India, South Korea, Japan, Israel have developed their rockets and the process goes on. That is, the market for international services is rapidly shrinking and only those rockets that are well insured by international insurance companies take advantage. Proton is in first place here in The hangar is naturally in last place. And the shutdown of the Proton will not lead to the transfer of loads to the Angara, but rather they will go to China, France and the United States. The lack of large serial production will leave the launch price at the same level, and this is 160 million rubles for the first A-5, which is Much more expensive than Proton (100 million rubles). The grandiose cut of money on the project has already led to the fact that there are only A-1.2 and A-5. A-3 and A-7 do not even have working drawings. Moreover, the starter table for the A-5 is not suitable for the A-7 and here the end of all versatility. After the impossibility of the A-7 became clear to everyone, the A-5B variant appeared in Roscosmos, with the addition of a hydrogen third stage and the approach of the payload to the A-7. This again demanded 35 billion rubles. and 8 years old.
    Second. For the declared capture of the world market, another 100 billion rubles were spent. in fact, the creation of a new giant production on the basis of the Omsk "Polet" with a program of production of URMs from 70 to 100 pieces per year. It is completely unclear what it will produce now, unless it competes with the Samara Progress, but this is clearly not to the benefit of the state.
    The third. To launch the Angara, they planned the creation of the Vostochny cosmodrome with the declared value, at that time, again in the amount of 100 billion rubles. Of these, 80 billion have already been spent; television speaks about the size of the cut almost every day. Thank God someone came to their senses and a year ago they changed the order of construction of launching tables. Instead, the Angara force Soyuz-2. Whether the table for the Angara is still unknown. In Plisetsk, an empty table for Zenith was rebuilt under the table for the Angara, but since the Zenith is lighter than the Angara, the construction of the table will not withstand more than 20 starts. The scandal around the Angara is growing like a snowball, the chief designer of the Angara has already been dismissed.
    Fourth. The terms of reference for the Angara stipulated the possibility of further modernization to loads of 50-70 tons into a low orbit. This requirement was not fulfilled. Angara-7 is not capable of modernization, since a mistake was made when creating a single URM. They danced from a minimum load of up to 3 tons, of which there are quite a lot in the world, and laid the URM with a thrust of 200 tons, and at least 300 tons had to be done. Because of this, the whole future lunar program hung. Russia has no prospects for heavyweight. The birth of option A-5B is associated with the possibility of a two-start launch and docking in Earth orbit to deliver at least something to the moon. And it will be very expensive, and not quite that.
    Fifth. Heavyweight Russia is needed. Here we are not going anywhere. And the declared 700 billion rubles. (taking into account the depreciation of the ruble) have to allocate. I just would like before that they would shoot those who deceived Russia, inflicted irreparable damage on it and cast off our astronautics for another 15 years. I suggest starting with Koptev.
    1. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs April 2 2015 09: 20 New
      +6
      And the last thing. For some reason, no one talks about the biggest problem of our astronautics. All the same, we make rockets faster than payloads. The blocks for the Mir station were made for so long that when the last block was docked, the first one had already run out of all, even extended, guarantees. With this approach, we will never reach the Moon not only to Mars, but also to the Moon. The blocks of stations are manufactured by the Khrunichev firm together with the Proton rocket. It is desirable to have two or three such companies, perhaps to reorient Omsk Flight again.
      1. rotor
        rotor April 2 2015 10: 07 New
        +1
        Angara-7 and Angara-7V also have different central modules, due to the fact that they carry different loads.
        1. rotor
          rotor April 2 2015 10: 30 New
          0
          A 70t hangar would have an even larger central module size.

          It is clear that for 7 matches you need completely different starting tables, because this is a completely different series of missiles, where the size and design of the central unit, and not the number of side blocks, increase depending on the load output.
          1. rotor
            rotor April 2 2015 11: 07 New
            +1
            And if for Angara-7 at 35t it was planned to use a launch pad in Plesetsk, then for Angara-7V at 50t they were going to use another table at Vostochny cosmodrome.
            1. Tektor
              Tektor April 2 2015 13: 21 New
              +2
              Probably, the A5 in the modification will be able to output a payload of 35 tons to LEO and 12+ tons to the geo-transfer. Hence the conclusion: we must abandon the A7. And to design a new modular rocket for a payload range of 70 - 170 tons, where for the initial take the A7B, transferring it to the "A3" but with new URMs - for thrust of 400 tons or more. KMK. For the central block, you can take the one that was designed for Energy, for example.
              1. Jurkovs
                Jurkovs April 2 2015 14: 14 New
                +1
                Look at the plans of Samara "Progress" to create Soyuz-5 and its further modernization to Soyuz-50. This is much more realistic in today's environment.
              2. saag
                saag April 2 2015 14: 29 New
                0
                Quote: Tektor
                And to design a new modular rocket for a payload range of 70 - 170 tons, where for the initial take the A7B, transferring it to the "A3" but with new URMs - for thrust of 400 tons or more. KMK. For the central block, you can take the one that was designed for Energy, for example.

                Well, as it were already, Energy and Energy-M for 35 tons
      2. Noncombatant
        Noncombatant April 2 2015 13: 17 New
        +4
        Our main problem is not launching tables, not the lack of competent entry to the market, not excessively long production times, but PEOPLE. The backbone of Soviet specialists has gone, I must admit it - he left, almost 25 years have passed. Yes, they managed to leave the groundwork and educate a number of specialists, passing them their secrets, best practices, traditions and the school of Soviet engineering. All. What is the percentage of these students? At best, 40%? Where and how new resources are scooped. How and on what basis are they trained. What prospects await them. Questions, questions.
        They are answered with a "smart" look by heads with fat mugs, whose education is far from technical, for whom space, that for a pig the stars.
        I live in Nizhny Novgorod, here is the well-known automobile enterprise "GAZ", an auto giant (already in the past). So, on one of the checkpoints, a wonderful phrase is written in wide letters (apparently, as a mockery):
        PEOPLE ARE OUR MOST VALUABLE ASSET.
    2. Falcon5555
      Falcon5555 April 3 2015 00: 26 New
      +3
      Jurkovs: When someone suggests starting to shoot, it becomes clear that all that he wrote at first is nonsense. Because if there were brains, then he would not call the devil. He would understand, I’m not even talking about humanism and other things that they don’t know, and he would understand a simple thought that when they start to shoot, then this happens to those who started it. Reasons to always find. Here he offered to shoot an innocent outstanding engineer (Koptev), so come to the basement.
      If the launch pad for Angara on the east, which has not yet been built, is not suitable for Angara A7 - which does not yet exist, then what is the problem? No, and no trial. Calm down, do something useful or pleasant. In technology, all sorts of nuances always happen. There is no need to grab pistols right away. And it will be like in the Stalinist NKVD. Summoning it is like enrolling in a Satanist sect. If you need A7, they will build both her and the launch pad for her. And not one, as I understand it, will have to be built. And not only for a 50-70 ton rocket. To fly to the moon - you need a rocket several times larger. And according to commercial demand, if you believe, then Koptev could not have foreseen that "suddenly ..." and further on in your text. You yourself wrote that it happened suddenly. Nobody pulled you by the tongue. So why do you propose to shoot him?
  15. Baloo
    Baloo April 2 2015 09: 26 New
    +2
    I'm not in the subject, layman. I remember back in the USSR at hygiene classes we were told that the start of a rocket changes weather conditions, geomagnetic constants and weather in a radius of 300-400 km per week.
    The environmental consequences of launching heavy missiles, do we need these heavy missiles? It may be economically feasible, but in combination? winked hi
  16. Vedroid 5.0
    Vedroid 5.0 April 2 2015 09: 28 New
    +5
    First clean up, plant thieves, and only then give money.
  17. Enoch
    Enoch April 2 2015 10: 35 New
    +2
    Creating a super heavy rocket requires 700 billion rubles


    Even Chubzaits did not dream of such money; he was urgently to entrust this matter to him - with the nano-shard it is already the norm - nothing is visible.
  18. gridasov
    gridasov April 2 2015 10: 39 New
    0
    From the amount of money, scientific thought will not become more objective, and therefore there will be no progress in solving complex engineering problems. Moreover, money is certainly not the latest argument in favor of progress. So take wishful thinking is the lot of science fiction writers. but in reality everything is simpler. From a scientific point of view, you just need to remove the proportionality depending on the useful take-off weight and the weight of the fuel. This again displays the key component of the rocket — on its engine. In short. Turbo-fuel pump operates within its objective and real capabilities. From the concept of the organization of physical. You can’t squeeze out processes in this device anymore. The risk of its failures also grows. It is possible to increase the energy density and throughput of this key device only by fundamentally changing the algorithm of processes in it. But this also requires a theoretical basis for understanding what is happening in the hydro-gas-dynamic flow, but you also need to see an engineering and design solution to the question. Obviously, there is not even a banal alternative to modern solutions. Therefore, in this state of affairs, there is no future. Rather, it is like a step back.
  19. srha
    srha April 2 2015 10: 56 New
    +1
    Yes, somehow the quoted statements of responsible people do not correspond well to real trends.

    So the weight curve of the displayed spacecraft from year to year is growing.

    And there is less and less space on the GSO.

    And the effectiveness of some missiles in the states, for example, it says Falcon 9, begins to compete with Russian ones - even at topwar noticed http://topwar.ru/37566-proton-m-zhdet-sereznaya-konkurenciya-s-amerikanskoy-rake
    toy-falcon-9.html.

    And the Boeing company due to the use of ion engines when changing its orbit on the Boeing 702HP platform, only due to the fact that it is not necessary to drag extra tons of fuel to the DOE, it receives a 30% gain when moving to GSO.

    Yes, super-heavy rockets based on the technology of the last century are not needed! But we need new economical engines and technologies for space exploration. Where is it in Russia? Just don't talk about the "hangar" - everything is not clear with the economy there, but with the technology - absolutely - there are no new ones (except for electronics in the control system). And about the lunar project, too, so far there is nothing ... And about the manned project - I do not see any new tasks, my own station cannot relate to them after salutes and peace.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov April 2 2015 11: 20 New
      0
      American progress is an objective reality of the development process. Russians have reached the limits of perfection. More precisely, a certain boundary level and slowed down. The Americans, while continuing to move on the same path. So they are aligned.
      So-called ion engines also have very limited marginal levels of improvement. It is obvious that they will not provide a sufficient energy density. In this case, the very essence of the ion engine is logical. This is equivalent to the fact that the entire surface of the aircraft will be ionized by level potential. But!!! Again, there should be such an energy source that can be inexhaustible in operation in a closed loop, but also bring the potential to the surface of the aircraft’s shell. This is what you should think about. And the decision is not very difficult. And this at least puts an end to nuclear power plants for well-known and objective reasons.
  20. shorner
    shorner April 2 2015 11: 11 New
    0
    with such "chairmen of the Scientific and Technical Council of Roscosmos" this industry has sad prospects!
  21. gridasov
    gridasov April 2 2015 11: 25 New
    0
    Let me add that modern electronics also works at the extreme levels. The basic principles of creating an elemental base relies on linear geometry. and not spatial. Therefore, in extreme conditions, including space conditions, it simply has extreme levels of work. In general, the time has come to connect the understanding of how to combine geometry with the principles of potential distribution not in linear algorithms, but in spatial ones.
  22. abc_alex
    abc_alex April 2 2015 11: 47 New
    +1
    Or can someone clearly explain why heavyweight is needed, if the reliable system for connecting vehicles in space has already been developed? The ISS is to this day a chandelier with a chandelier; no heavyweight can bring such a thing out. Why make a rocket with a g / p of 70 tons, if you can withdraw 2 times and assemble in orbit?

    By the way, srha, ion and plasma engines are in Russia. Moreover, the Fakel Design Bureau can order them literally from the catalog, and EADS Astrium, Thales Alenia Space and Space Systems / Loral use them precisely. In Voronezh, they are working on a magnetoplasmodynamic engine.
    Remember the "2014-28E object scandal" that hopped in orbits and flew up to satellites? Everyone knows how he was a shkodil, but the fact that he was doing this for almost 3 months is not particularly spread. Experts agree that new engines have been tested.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov April 2 2015 11: 52 New
      +1
      A perfectly logical solution for the modern level of development. But this is still a private decision for a certain stage. Therefore, the search for optimal power plants is inevitable.
    2. srha
      srha April 2 2015 17: 00 New
      0
      It is wonderful that there are ionics, but the plans of the "big leaders" do not hear about them!

      It's not so much about the engines as about the development strategy. And it is defined by "big". And now we have not heard about the support of the development strategy in space exploration on new approaches and technologies, and somehow we have not heard clearly about the strategy itself. And the world is moving on.

      Heavyweight.

      First lyrical, watched a video with skipping astronauts on Skylab (4 minutes)



      and envied.

      Then rhetorical, and why supertankers do not dock from smaller tankers?

      And finally material. Economical heavyweight is a job for the future. The one who succeeds in this will become the leader and collect the main pies from the shelf of space. And there are a lot of them, you are tormented to list: heavy heavy-duty platforms on the GSO, deployment of solar energy, observation of the Sun from the back to the Earth, flight to the Sun, flight to the Oort cloud, stake out the best territories on the Moon - polar caps, mining of asteroids, for the military something to lead large and terrible, deploy a fleet of space tugs, put up repair bases, etc. etc.

      But in fact, a development plan is needed to determine priorities and distant prospects, but nothing definite is heard about it.
  23. mango68
    mango68 April 2 2015 11: 48 New
    +3
    # The beauty of the Angara-A5V rocket is that it will consist of transportable blocks that can be easily transported by rail, including through tunnels, which will save us from the need to build refueling stages at the cosmodrome.

    This makes no sense.
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. Vadim237
    Vadim237 April 2 2015 12: 08 New
    +1
    Russia does not need a heavy rocket, but a reusable aerospace plane.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov April 2 2015 12: 23 New
      0
      Russia needs technology, which means knowledge on which both heavy and reusable aircraft will be built and much more. And in order to create air-space-water engines, or more simply, an all-round propulsion engine, one needs to understand the essence of the difference between these media and their properties, which will be basically transformed by such devices. But even more primary are the methods and methods for analyzing complex and multidynamically and multidirectionally occurring information processes. It is impossible to possess practical knowledge without understanding the essence of the theory.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 2 2015 16: 39 New
        0
        In the UK, such an airplane and engine are now being made in full.
        1. gridasov
          gridasov April 2 2015 16: 41 New
          0
          I can assure you. that the result is known in advance. All work in extreme modes. Old technologies do not give a chance for a breakthrough.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 April 2 2015 23: 13 New
            -1
            There the engine is fundamentally new.
    2. Ivan Pavlovich
      Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 16: 14 New
      0
      Russia needs both heavy and super heavy and reusable space aircraft. and from the new principles take everything from complete. and I would throw ideas. only no one. all the koptev and koptev wherever he went. Look and see the HANGAR will be cut down.
      and if everything has been thrown into money, then how much has been donated and continue to give. give and give and banks around the world we create that would not get their money. and after all there is colossal money, and in this grand fornication.
  26. Ivan Pavlovich
    Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 12: 24 New
    0
    At least Angara-5 to bring to use and not to fail the case.
    if thieves, crooks and traitors are not transplanted, then there are more of them.
    So we can’t do without cruel laws, - Are you scared?
    1. gridasov
      gridasov April 2 2015 12: 30 New
      0
      I'll put it simply. Politicians are manipulators of the consciousness of the masses. In ancient times, societies were ruled by priests and sages. I will not say that even now everything does not depend on scientists and specialists. Scientists are "gray cardinals" of the development of all mankind. Scientists, and especially REAL SCIENTISTS, are people on the verge of the blessed. We are governed by thought and the desire to comprehend the truth. Worldly concerns are secondary to us. And fear controls only the ignorant.
  27. Ivan Pavlovich
    Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 13: 02 New
    +1
    In any case, you cannot steal. and do not worry about thieves - they are no longer blissful. the meaning of life does not need to be comprehended - it is already clear - do not steal and live honestly.
    worldly concerns are always primary to all. and do not be afraid of it, for it will only save us. HONESTLY WORK THE LORD! You think in vain that simple honest workers and peasant women do not drive progress. They also move and how they move, and they are held by all people of science and government.
  28. The comment was deleted.
  29. Dragon-y
    Dragon-y April 2 2015 14: 33 New
    0
    And one more thing: maybe not "refueling", but "additional assembly" of missile bodies? The missiles are being refueled already at the launch pad, before launch.
  30. xtur
    xtur April 2 2015 14: 42 New
    +2
    all these worries about women’s boots on Koptev’s lips look wistful — not what he says and care about. Space leaders should set space tasks, and the country's leadership should think about financing.

    But it turns out that they receive money precisely for the lack of tasks.

    They don’t need the moon, they don’t need Mars, they don’t need manned astronautics, they are weak in electronics, they don’t need the ISS, they don’t need their own station ... And they sign an agreement until 2024 for space cooperation with the United States.
  31. Ivan Pavlovich
    Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 15: 14 New
    -1
    You speak correctly Mr., Citizen and Comrade XTUR. VERY TRUE!
  32. Ivan Pavlovich
    Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 15: 42 New
    +1
    You speak correctly Mr., Citizen and Comrade XTUR. VERY TRUE!
    Such flag RUSSIA trampled. and from me liberal Stalenist do.
  33. loaln
    loaln April 2 2015 16: 03 New
    +3
    Quote: Jurkovs
    First. 100 billion rubles were spent on the creation of the Angara. and 15 years old. They intended to take over the entire foreign market, even concluded an agreement with the American company "Nortrop ... (I don't remember further) on the exclusive right to launch international loads. That's it. However, conceptual mistakes were made. Suddenly the concept of national sovereignty in admission issues appeared in the world China, India, South Korea, Japan, Israel have developed their rockets and the process goes on. That is, the market for international services is rapidly shrinking and only those rockets that are well insured by international insurance companies take advantage. Proton is in first place here in The hangar is naturally in last place. And the shutdown of the Proton will not lead to the transfer of loads to the Angara, but rather they will go to China, France and the United States. The lack of large serial production will leave the launch price at the same level, and this is 160 million rubles for the first A-5, which is Much more expensive than Proton (100 million rubles). The grandiose cut of money on the project has already led to the fact that there are only A-1.2 and A-5. A-3 and A-7 do not even have working drawings. Moreover, the starter table for the A-5 is not suitable for the A-7 and here the end of all versatility. After the impossibility of the A-7 became clear to everyone, the A-5B variant appeared in Roscosmos, with the addition of a hydrogen third stage and the approach of the payload to the A-7. This again demanded 35 billion rubles. and 8 years old.
    Second. For the declared capture of the world market, another 100 billion rubles were spent. in fact, the creation of a new giant production on the basis of the Omsk "Polet" with a program of production of URMs from 70 to 100 pieces per year. It is completely unclear what it will produce now, unless it competes with the Samara Progress, but this is clearly not to the benefit of the state.
    The third. To launch the Angara, they planned the creation of the Vostochny cosmodrome with the declared value, at that time, again in the amount of 100 billion rubles. Of these, 80 billion have already been spent; television speaks about the size of the cut almost every day. Thank God someone came to their senses and a year ago they changed the order of construction of launching tables. Instead, the Angara force Soyuz-2. Whether the table for the Angara is still unknown. In Plisetsk, an empty table for Zenith was rebuilt under the table for the Angara, but since the Zenith is lighter than the Angara, the construction of the table will not withstand more than 20 starts. The scandal around the Angara is growing like a snowball, the chief designer of the Angara has already been dismissed.
    Fourth. The terms of reference for the Angara stipulated the possibility of further modernization to loads of 50-70 tons into a low orbit. This requirement was not fulfilled. Angara-7 is not capable of modernization, since a mistake was made when creating a single URM. They danced from a minimum load of up to 3 tons, of which there are quite a lot in the world, and laid the URM with a thrust of 200 tons, and at least 300 tons had to be done. Because of this, the whole future lunar program hung. Russia has no prospects for heavyweight. The birth of option A-5B is associated with the possibility of a two-start launch and docking in Earth orbit to deliver at least something to the moon. And it will be very expensive, and not quite that.
    Fifth. Heavyweight Russia is needed. Here we are not going anywhere. And the declared 700 billion rubles. (taking into account the depreciation of the ruble) have to allocate. I just would like before that they would shoot those who deceived Russia, inflicted irreparable damage on it and cast off our astronautics for another 15 years. I suggest starting with Koptev.

    Right thoughts. Only nearby should be put those who ruined the Energy and began to parasitize on commercial launches.
  34. Tishka
    Tishka April 2 2015 16: 33 New
    +3
    Yes, let the author excuse me, but he minus the article! Yes, a heavy rocket is needed, and was needed yesterday, but all these reservations, maybe. and it will fly to the moon, maybe, and heavy satellites will be able to display, maybe, and the grouping will increase in the desired direction, maybe, when not, we will also display our station. Of course, everything is possible, but the first thing that struck me in the eyes was money, let's now, and let's draw up a schedule so that we know exactly how much, to whom and when, will get into the pocket! And the rocket, well, perhaps, will fly on liquefied gas, or maybe on hydrogen, and in general, whether it is needed or not, the grandmother said in two! And let the women decide what is more important to them, new boots, or the exploration of the moon! And in 10 years, we will leave, filling our pockets, and others will come to our place, from them, then ask, where is the rocket? And that everyone is so rushing about with this "Hangar", it's time to create a newer one, and not to stomp, with improvement 7, and all this pursuit of a fashion trend, unification and modularity is complete nonsense! We launch 10 tons into orbit, and 278 tons, destroy it in flight, not bad statistics! At the present stage of development, you can return to the Buran idea, develop a start from an aircraft carrier, return to the Spiral idea, using modern advances in science and technology, and a lot of things can be done, and not stagnate in one place, and not to nod to the west and that maybe in cooperation with someone. we will also launch a satellite to Mars, if it does not return to earth, because someone did not twist or confuse something! With such "effective" managers. we will definitely fly, but not to the moon, but fly into the tube, and in space, we can put a fat cross!
  35. romuchik
    romuchik April 2 2015 22: 41 New
    -1
    Silence, I also wanted to write about aviation carriers, for them I think the future. In the meantime, we are sculpting from old developments, even the Soviets cannot bring to mind.
    1. Ivan Pavlovich
      Ivan Pavlovich April 2 2015 23: 55 New
      0
      So we must continue like this. for having abandoned this, we will not proceed to the new for a long time and, as a result, not the old, not new. Do not be afraid of junk. The ancient SOYUZ IS DEMANDED AND WILL BE LONG. And the Angara will take power. they’ll make the third big step - it’s only thicker .and carry from Plesetsk for now. But in order to make an analog of the second stage to it and make the first blocks stronger if necessary, and maybe others, for example, from Sayuza2 if they are stronger and build on this in the East. and as a result, ekanomiya when creating an extra heavy, that is, I use the 3rd step from the HANGAR 5B and the first from UNION 2. It will only remain to create the second stage, and then this is almost a repetition of work with the third for the new hangar. AND DO AT THE SAME FACTORY. HERE OPTION WHEN NOT NEED NEW PLANTS. AND IT WILL BE CHEAPER
      And ONLY THROUGH ECONOMY, WE WILL NOT LOSE THE OLD AND WILL COME TOTAL TO A NEW AND FURTHER GO. For example, on tablets of a new type of explosive not nuclear type but close in strength.
      1. Tishka
        Tishka April 3 2015 02: 02 New
        +1
        Sorry, how so? To bang billions, and wait another 15 years for them to cross already with an elephant? Or they’ll plunder again, during the construction of the East, 16 million simply disappeared, 32 more can not find reports! You can continue to continue, then the Unions will stop flying, and the country, with such leaders, will turn into a space cab! Now they need another 700, and again they will create the Royal Seven, so we all, will live to see that we can only dream of space!
        1. Pablo. 1970
          Pablo. 1970 April 3 2015 11: 15 New
          0
          Rocket builders have completely lost touch with reality.
          Here Medvedev pompously allocated 500 million rubles for trolleybuses to the regions - so it was said that every ruble would justify itself! This is 100 trolleybuses to the Country !!!!!!!!!

          And the rocket launchers 700 ml. there .... 700 here .... here 16 yards were lost, there they can’t find 32 yards .... what are the little things ?!
    2. Tishka
      Tishka April 3 2015 01: 57 New
      0
      What happened in the USSR has already been brought to mind! Sell ​​America RD-180, everywhere put their hands, our cunning managers! With carriers, and with an air launch, everything is also complicated, there are weight restrictions, we need tropospheres, which also requires certain developments and tests, and about them I read in a book published in 65! But things, and now there!
  36. Vityura
    Vityura April 3 2015 03: 31 New
    0
    Do what you can with what you have, where you are.
  37. prosto_rgb
    prosto_rgb April 3 2015 08: 15 New
    +1
    And what is the meaning of a super-heavy rocket right now. (What will it put into orbit?)

    The hangar should be brought to mind and used, and not wasted money for dubious projects hiding behind space.

    And why did they turn off the Clipper? I remember they spent money, and then closed it half way, decided to start something else with "0".
  38. hoshinokoe
    hoshinokoe April 3 2015 23: 43 New
    0
    Quote: gridasov
    From the amount of money, scientific thought will not become more objective, and therefore there will be no progress in solving complex engineering problems. Moreover, money is certainly not the latest argument in favor of progress. So take wishful thinking is the lot of science fiction writers. but in reality everything is simpler. From a scientific point of view, you just need to remove the proportionality depending on the useful take-off weight and the weight of the fuel. This again displays the key component of the rocket — on its engine. In short. Turbo-fuel pump operates within its objective and real capabilities. From the concept of the organization of physical. You can’t squeeze out processes in this device anymore. The risk of its failures also grows. It is possible to increase the energy density and throughput of this key device only by fundamentally changing the algorithm of processes in it. But this also requires a theoretical basis for understanding what is happening in the hydro-gas-dynamic flow, but you also need to see an engineering and design solution to the question. Obviously, there is not even a banal alternative to modern solutions. Therefore, in this state of affairs, there is no future. Rather, it is like a step back.

    TNA is a "conventional" heat turbine, the power of which, like any heat engine, depends on the temperature of the working fluid. Modern TNAs operate with an excess of fuel to reduce the heat load on the turbine of the turbo pump. Applying new construction materials, it is possible to increase the temperature at the inlet to the TNA turbine, and increase the pressure in the combustion chamber and the THA itself. Well, this is so, empirically :-)
    Or can someone clearly explain why heavyweight is needed, if the reliable system for connecting vehicles in space has already been developed? The ISS is to this day a chandelier with a chandelier; no heavyweight can bring such a thing out. Why make a rocket with a g / p of 70 tons, if you can withdraw 2 times and assemble in orbit?

    to withdraw once 70 tons is cheaper than 2 times 35.
  39. KOSTIA
    KOSTIA April 17 2015 21: 49 New
    0
    Until we invest in science, education, we will have nothing. Other engines are already needed, and 100-150 is already not enough now. It’s expensive simply. It would be economical - there was a target use ...
    Sea with thermonuclear?)
  40. dew12
    dew12 April 18 2015 13: 48 New
    0
    15 years ago I tried to introduce technology to increase the efficiency of thermal machines by 2 times, but unfortunately I’m not an academician and there’s no academician’s uncle and I don’t care where it already appeared, but I haven’t seen anyone filimonenko yet, but its installation is real you and 100 tons and 1000 tons
  41. Old26
    Old26 22 June 2015 21: 19 New
    +1
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    There were no American vener rovers; there were only Soviet ones.

    There were no Soviet
  42. Old26
    Old26 22 June 2015 21: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: Krona
    Still need to return to the project reusable orbiter Buran.

    Even in the days of the Union, there were no burdens for him. What should women say now?
  43. Old26
    Old26 22 June 2015 21: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: Krona
    Still need to return to the project reusable orbiter Buran.

    Even in the days of the Union, there were no burdens for him. What should women say now?