The leadership of the US Air Force urged not to rush to abandon the Russian rocket engines

60
The Pentagon may remain without the Russian engines RD-180, and without American counterparts, said Mark Welsh, chief of staff of the United States Air Force. About this newspaper writes Look with reference to tass.

The leadership of the US Air Force urged not to rush to abandon the Russian rocket engines


The general said that "the command of the Air Force, like the legislative power, would like to ensure as soon as possible competition in the market of space launches in the United States in the interests of the Pentagon."

Meanwhile, “moving in accordance with the schedule worked out by Congress from the starting point we are at and which is characterized by accusing us of having a monopoly (in this sphere),” the Ministry of Defense risks being in a position “when over the next couple of years, there will be no access to the RD-180 or a replacement for it in the form of a US-made rocket engine, ”said Welsh.

He stressed that the established by the lawmakers “the tight schedule of movement to complete cessation of operation from the RD-180 in the United States does not guarantee the emergence of stronger competition in the local market of space launches over time, meeting the interests of the Air Force as a customer of such launches”.

According to the general, it is completely inexpedient “not to save budget funds by using already acquired and accessible engines due to a political decision that aims to create a domestic ability in the field of space launches”.

“We all agree with this (ie such a goal). The only question is how quickly we can achieve it, if we look at things realistically. We should not tie our hands to ourselves, ”he added.

When asked whether "the possibility of acquiring a license from Russia is still being considered with a view to setting up production of the RD-180 in the United States," Welch replied: "I don’t know how this is now."

The newspaper reminds that in December 2014 Mr. McCain introduced an amendment to the Senate to the defense budget, prohibiting the purchase of RD-180 rocket engines manufactured by Energomash. An exception is the consortium of Boeing and Lockheed Martin, which is allowed to purchase engines under the current contract to 2019.

The defense budget was signed by Obama at the end of last year with the McCain Amendment. That is, after the 2019, the Pentagon will be able to use the RD-180 only if they were produced before the Crimea joined the Russian Federation.

Meanwhile, RSC Energia stated that “Russian specialists adapted RD-180 engines supplied to the USA for Atlas missiles for manned launches.” It was also announced the signing of a contract for the supply of 60 rocket engines RD-181 American company Orbital Sciences Corporation.
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +25
    April 9 2015 14: 19
    I will sell second-hand engines from China. Inexpensive.
    For the US Air Force discounts ...
    1. +9
      April 9 2015 14: 22
      Like it or not, but without our rocket engines, mattresses are nothing in this area anymore.
      1. good fair
        +3
        April 9 2015 15: 41
        Quote: Thought Giant
        Like it or not, but without our rocket engines, mattresses are nothing in this area anymore.

        Are you going to the moon again? Or already directly to Neptune?
        The leadership of the US Air Force urged not to rush to abandon the Russian rocket engines

        Dig up Werner von Braun.
      2. +1
        April 9 2015 17: 13
        Quote: Giant thought
        Like it or not, but without our rocket engines, mattresses are nothing in this area anymore.

        here, amers got a big haemorrhage, if they refuse our engines, by the way, reliable, tested and trouble-free, they will have to craft their power unit. And this is 7-8 years, depending on funding and attracted scientists and designers. In other words, if if the Americans abandon our engines, they will be covered with a copper basin with a lot of strategic programs, including the one that involves improving GPS navigation ... the United States, of course, can try to come to an agreement with Japan or Europe on the issue of engines, but I think if Americans initially bought our engines, neither the Japanese nor European power plants they are not staged. hi
        1. +2
          April 9 2015 18: 20
          I like the guys. Ukrainians beg for discounts on gas from the one with whom at war. Mattresses, too - it is necessary to punish Russia, but you sell us engines. I think it's time to send both those and others away and in words that they understand!
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +5
      April 9 2015 14: 36
      A very "good" amendment, well done McCain. Not from a great mind, of course, but simply from insanity. After 2019, mattress toppers will either be left without rocket engines at all. Or they will have to fly in "old", release of 2013. Since March 2014 CRIMEA OUR. And the fact that the mattress cover itself is "tight" to make your engine, I wrote even the weather back. When this amendment was just being considered.
      1. -12
        April 9 2015 14: 55
        Did you guys ever hear about SpaceX ?! And what about other private companies that NASA harnessed to build rockets? Why so much urapatriotism in VO? Has anyone wondered how Energy will make up for financial losses in a crisis?
        1. +7
          April 9 2015 14: 58
          Let's look at how Energy will make up for losses ...
          And the fact that both India and China will fly into space, and indeed, can be pulled up by someone else. What problems?
          After all, when a country is drained, it is drained from all markets and from all warm places at once. So the United States is draining, the path is not at that pace.
          After all, no one is calling for us to refuse supplies. It’s just a political way to solve a few more problems, having in sight to lower the United States below the bottom.
          They will be able to make their own engine - honor and praise, they will not be able to, well, so what questions?
          1. -5
            April 9 2015 15: 49
            If it is so easy to pull China, India, why not do it now? Or why has this not been done? Enlarge the series, provide additional financing for Energy. Only for some reason we sell to the Americans, despite the situation in the world. Like titanium for Boeing and watermelons.
            1. +1
              April 9 2015 16: 19
              Less to you for the comment.
              Because now it will be considered as "here, just buy", but it is necessary that they themselves asked. Can you catch the difference?
              And another question: why suddenly tomorrow again, and the Russian Federation will not sell all its stocks of treasuries? Do not know?
              That's when you can figure out the answers yourself, then you will not have silly questions.
              1. +3
                April 9 2015 16: 51
                I have a classmate at the RKK working. Wife on maternity leave, little daughter and car loan. How long should he wait until China and India ask us something? These countries have neither a rocket for these engines nor the requirements for the volumes that sworn friends take. The hangar has just begun to fly - it will take a long time before the RD-191 loads the RKK capacities. You claim that the aim is to lower and merge the United States - how does the sale of rd-180 for NASA dollars contribute to this?

                I don’t know why you are telling me that you set a minus. I do not pursue the rating - I am simply annoyed by comments about suckers-Americans who cannot space without us. And the competition in Petrosyan with a million pluses for each other.
        2. jjj
          +2
          April 9 2015 15: 00
          Americans are not Chinese. We never learned to copy
          1. +2
            April 9 2015 15: 36
            Below dignity. Exceptional fellow the nation will never copy anything from the underdeveloped.
          2. The comment was deleted.
        3. +6
          April 9 2015 15: 02
          They didn’t hear anything, please enlighten me. It is advisable to start with success in the design and manufacture of the American analogue of the RD-180, plans for the number of engines produced on an annualized basis. And other private companies that NASA has harnessed, please do the same about their success. We are waiting, sir. hi
          1. 0
            April 9 2015 15: 54
            On wedge-wedge light on rd-180? While we finish the Angara and Soviet engines to a potential enemy for green papers, we sell Ilon already made a falcon with a dragon. The oligarch suddenly decided to spend the money not on yachts and clubs abroad, but all of a sudden on private astronautics flying the US flag.
            1. +1
              April 9 2015 19: 40
              And their carrying capacity is small.
              1. 0
                April 9 2015 21: 34
                Quote: sharp-lad
                And their carrying capacity is small.


                AND? But they are cheaper and reusable in the long term. I don’t want to say that the Americans have an analogue of the RD-180. They themselves admit that not yet. I want to say that it is already sickening to read comments in the style - "fuckers can do nothing, they can fly on a trampoline." I am a patriot, I work in a defense design bureau, and at the same time I respect American engineers and the school there. They flew on shuttles, admitted their futility, abandoned them, began to cut the constellation, admitted that they could not afford the money, began to cut sls. At the same time, the developments and funding were donated to private hands. They found Elon Musk, who ALREADY launched a dragon on a falcon to the ISS and is already taking orders from Roscosmos (asiasat). Our clipper, Russia and a promising ship are still only on paper. Moreover, the falcon is reusable and only a storm prevented it from returning to the floating platform. They found Branson who, with the guys from Microsoft, saws his spaceship and, despite the disaster, does not despair. They have Amazon (sic!) Announced the start of tests of the rocket engine. We also have something to be proud of - a hangara with a modular structure implemented for the first time and a successful engine. But it is being sculpted by the state with a delay in time and budget inflation. And our oligarchs for some reason prefer to dump in London at the first opportunity.
            2. 0
              April 9 2015 19: 40
              And their carrying capacity is small.
        4. +3
          April 9 2015 15: 22
          "Harness for the construction of an engine" and build, and even more so have an engine, as they say (said) in Odessa - after all, these are two different things.
          Besides why do they need our engines? ..... They seem to have flown to the moon ... 8 times .... they even had a lunar buggy car.
          1. Viktor Kudinov
            0
            April 9 2015 17: 22
            They had a lot of things in the past, and now they have strongly crippled their industry, leading harmful enterprises to other countries. The ruins of Detroit alone are worth a lot in evaluating what the United States now has with its science and technology. feel
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. good fair
            +2
            April 9 2015 18: 43
            Quote: Severomor
            .... They seem to have flown to the moon ... 8 times .... they even had a lunar buggy car.

            I wonder where they downloaded it, albeit folded? Did this violate the alignment? How was the unloading carried out (the landing module is high, remember the ladder? Or was it dropped there by parachute in the container? wassat ), assembly, reduction to working condition, so to speak? How much time it took, every liter of oxygen counts!
            The rover is equipped with four DC motors (engine per wheel), each with a power of 0,25 liters. with. (190 W) at speeds up to 10 rpm, transmission through a reduction gear 000: 80 and two steering engines, one for the front and rear wheels (probably wire harder ) The power source is two non-rechargeable silver-zinc batteries with a voltage of 36V x 121 A (backup emergency neta source, you never know what ).
            The wheel design included an aluminum disc ( and why not knitting needles from the same titanium, because it is easier and not so prone to deformation upon impact ) and a tire with a diameter of 81 cm and a width of 23 cm ( 4 pieces, decent volume, however) The tire was made of braided steel wire with a thickness of 0,84 mm with a zinc coating (here they are, a disk made of solid lumine, and then a galvanized steel wire, where are the light alloys? every gram is worth its weight in gold!) About 50% of the tire area was occupied by a special titanium tread for reliable contact with the ground.
            Above the wheels were dust shields. ( excess weight )
            The speed is 8-10 km / h, in some sections up to 16 km / h, and even setting a record of 18 km / h. (shaitan - arba, they cannot live differently: shows and records are obligatory!)
            During pokatushek dust shield was torn off ( Yu. Cernan hooked with a hammer, did not hit, it hooked, probably glued at the factory with office glue ), repaired with adhesive tape ( vacuum, t +130, hands in cosmic thick gloves inflated from the inside by pressure, bend your fingers belay , try using ordinary gloves to tear off the tip of the tape from the roller, and in general, they say that we have everything on the snot) Etc.
            I don’t want anymore, tired, good. Who cares about my nonsense - in PM. You can still about weight, power. . .
            Be healthy! Till. hi
            1. +1
              April 9 2015 20: 07
              Bravo! It’s time to say that there were no Americans on the moon. And there was no rocket that could ensure the sending of people to the moon.
              And even now it is impossible. No wonder the plans for manned flights begin in 2030. Let the grandchildren then understand, but for now they will master the budgets. Both in the States and in Russia. The main problem is the Earth's magnetosphere and cosmic radiation.
        5. 0
          April 9 2015 18: 59
          ... will mark the 2012 engines
        6. 0
          April 9 2015 21: 03
          Quote: BerXen
          Did you guys ever hear about SpaceX ?! And what about other private companies that NASA harnessed to build rockets?


          All of these structures are being developed for a slightly different application, and if they could do something serious, then we would not buy engines from us, but they order it, having started for sanctions.
          1. 0
            April 9 2015 21: 36
            In fact, it is for this application. Heavy Falcon is made on the basis of the falcon. And Elon Musk filed a lawsuit demanding to ban the purchase of rd-180 just after the imposition of sanctions.
    4. 0
      April 9 2015 19: 17
      Quote: Metallurg
      I will sell second-hand engines from China. Inexpensive.
      For the US Air Force discounts ...

      McCain will be very unhappy. He recently reminded the US military that, after 2018, the purchase of Russian engines is not planned since Congress voted so.
  2. +9
    April 9 2015 14: 21
    Where there is profit, Americans will close their eyes to anything. But no one else will be allowed to do this! An example of all this sanction hysteria!
  3. +4
    April 9 2015 14: 21
    let Obama deliver the rocket into orbit by exhaust from his ass!
  4. The comment was deleted.
    1. +3
      April 9 2015 14: 23
      Alas (grandmothers do not smell although in some transactions a specific such darling ((which is sad ...
  5. +5
    April 9 2015 14: 22
    If something is profitable for the Americans, then they are ready to give a damn about all the bans
  6. +1
    April 9 2015 14: 24
    I would agree that it could supply rocket engines to the USA if we made new ones at factories and not from warehouses. And the factories would then work and our warehouses would be ready to supply them for us. And from the warehouses, I am against. soldier
    1. +6
      April 9 2015 14: 36
      From which warehouses ??? These are new engines, both 180 and 181, NK-33 - the former SNTK im. Kuznetsova, Samara, so do not be discouraged.
  7. +4
    April 9 2015 14: 25
    When asked whether "the possibility of acquiring a license from Russia is still being considered with a view to setting up production of the RD-180 in the United States," Welch replied: "I don’t know how this is now."


    Some kind of non-Russian question - if only to sell everything.
    "Where does the Motherland begin ...?"
    1. +2
      April 9 2015 15: 07
      Are you not yet accustomed to the fact that "Gazprom is a national treasure"? fellow
  8. 0
    April 9 2015 14: 25
    Dear, these prostitutes are already lying to themselves, but good teachers from the Ukrainians, you will soon not only get the engines and your beloved democracy from us, where you get to whores
  9. +1
    April 9 2015 14: 25
    Like in that saying about a cat and a frog - it’s nasty to eat and it’s a pity to quit.
  10. +1
    April 9 2015 14: 25
    There are, however, far-sighted people in America.
  11. +4
    April 9 2015 14: 26
    And where did those American engines go, on which they "flew" to the moon??? what laughing
    1. +4
      April 9 2015 14: 34
      And where did those American engines go, on which they "flew" to the moon ???

      Left on the moon. Back boys on the way got.
    2. +3
      April 9 2015 16: 21
      Quote: K-36
      And where did those American engines go, on which they "flew" to the moon ???

      1. At the bottom of the sea or in a landfill

      sometimes get out (for a museum or study guides)


      2.And where to put it?

      3.Construction of the combustion chambers of the American pre-Saturn and Saturn engines H-1, F-1, J-2, RL-10 based on the use of a large number (from 178 to 320) of soldered
      between themselves thin-walled tubes of stainless steel or a nickel alloy as a cooling jacket and the use of jet nozzles in the nozzle head
      .

      This is a purely American invention, which was used only in the USA and was never used anywhere else. Modern rocket engines, ALL WITHOUT EXCLUSIONincluding post-Saturn American,use "Soviet technology" . "Tubular" American engines either lie in a landfill or stand in museums, or “fly” in old missiles (modification of the H-1 engine), such as the Delta-2 or in the Japanese H-1.

      So:

      super terribly expensive

      =======================================
      Engines made on the basis of “Soviet technology” use a cooling jacket from two welded shells, of which the inner (fire wall) is made of bronze
      alloy, and external (power)



      The Japanese, when developing the LE-5 and LE-7 hydrogen engines, initially tried to use tube technology (they had previously purchased a license to produce H-1 engines for their H-1 rocket), but, realizing her hopelessness, switched to a two-shell "Soviet"

      The basis of the Chinese rocket engines (type YF-2,20,22,73) are, as a rule, their own developments (probably made according to the scheme without afterburning).

      1. 0
        April 9 2015 17: 02
        J-2, as it has been drafted all this time for areres, continues for sls
        1. +2
          April 9 2015 17: 15
          Quote: BerXen
          J-2, as it has been drafted all this time for areres, continues for sls

          J-2X

          RS-24 LRE is very expensive

          RS-25D in stock 15 pieces

          the same is expensive, and there is no carrier for this range of heights
          1. 0
            April 9 2015 17: 33
            And then rs-24? Initially, the question was where the engines of the lunar program had gone. The correct answer is added for promising launch vehicles. In the same way as the engines for the Angara dopped rd-170.
            1. +2
              April 9 2015 19: 04
              Quote: BerXen
              And then rs-24? AND

              J2X INSTEAD OF RS-24, shopping mall
              And here
              Quote: BerXen
              Aresa continues for sls
              (AREX and SLS) ???
              When
              Quote: BerXen
              Initially, the question was where the engines of the lunar program had gone.

              ??
              Ares was supposed to use the available RS-24 (shuttle variant-RS-25).
              refused, maybe
              Quote: opus
              RS-24 LRE is very expensive
              , made on the basis of the estimated (60 years) J2 modern J2X
              SLS proposed the use of the RS-25D / E 1 stage and the J-2x vacuum box
              Is it clear what?
              ------------------
              moreover, J-2X is not J-2 (a completely different LRE, not 60's, American technology is not
              Quote: BerXen
              finish up

              made according to the "Soviet scheme":
              Quote: opus
              use a cooling jacket from two welded shells, of which the inner (fire wall) is made of bronze alloy, and the outer (power)


              Rocketdine: J-2X: http: //www.rocket.com/j-2x-engine

              1. 0
                April 9 2015 21: 10
                There is some misunderstanding. J-2x is an in-depth upgrade to j-2, the lunar apollon engine. They replaced the combustion chamber technology - approx. This technology was used by us initially - approx. But at the heart of j-2x ce is j-2.
                1. +1
                  April 10 2015 03: 15
                  Quote: BerXen
                  There is some misunderstanding. J-2x is an in-depth upgrade to j-2, the lunar apollon engine. They replaced the combustion chamber technology - approx. This technology was used by us initially - approx. But at the heart of j-2x ce is j-2.

                  And please provide at least some evidence that 2 and 2x are the same?
                  It would be interesting.
                  I assure you this is not so! And you will not find an identity.
                  (according to your logic: all the HDDs are identical to v-2, you think there are no prechambers, a spherical head, wall cooling, and it works on TC, and not on peroxide)
                  Right?
                  1. 0
                    April 10 2015 10: 17
                    God forbid! I do not think so. I read that on the basis of j-2, they made j-2x through separate improvements.
                    1. 0
                      April 10 2015 16: 28
                      I am somewhat familiar with the topic, I assure you not quite the way you write.
                      Comrade, that from above (opus) is more right than you.
                      Only tna (redone) and geometry are similar there. Materials traction, impulse other
  12. +3
    April 9 2015 14: 26
    to ensure competition in the US space launch market for the Pentagon


    It turns out that now Russia is helping the Americans in this. It is clear that a lot of money, but we must also respond to their anti-Russian actions.
    1. +3
      April 9 2015 14: 44
      That is how the Rotmistr60 is not the fact that these engines will not work against us. And then we dig a hole for ourselves!
    2. The comment was deleted.
  13. +2
    April 9 2015 14: 27
    I feel that I don’t understand something. Well oh well would be smart would become a member of the government. But maybe something like this:
  14. +2
    April 9 2015 14: 28
    No, really! Sanctions so Sanctions !!!!
    1. +10
      April 9 2015 14: 40
      Quote: prabiz
      No, really! Sanctions so Sanctions !!!!
  15. +4
    April 9 2015 14: 31
    Is the electromagnetic catapult, which the Indians were steaming, poorly used? For engines you need to take gold, enough for paper to advance their priority in space.
  16. +14
    April 9 2015 14: 34
    and let them sharply rise in price laughing
    1. +3
      April 9 2015 15: 57
      Quote: vanavate
      and let them sharply rise in price

      The cost of one engine as of 2010 year was $ 9 million.
      Now about 10-15mln $ (RD 180 (RN Atlas 5) nominally costs NASA half the price - in 30 000 $ / tf (11 million $) than RS 68).



      -RS 68 standing on the Delta 4 launch vehicle cost NASA 60 000 $ / ts thrust (20 million $). at sea level 365с and traction in 295тс.
      -RN 191 standing on the "arms" of the Angara, in relative prices is considered one of the most expensive kerosene rocket engines in the world - 36 000 $ / tf (250 million rubles).
      -price 171 RD, on the basis of which the 191 RD was created, is within 22 000 $ / tf (13-15 million $). This scatter is partly due to the fact that the LRE was created for the domestic marketAnd, in particular, for Atlas 5 launch vehicle (180 taxiway as the main engine of the central unit, and 191 taxiway as the engine for side blocks). However, the 191 RD remained unclaimed in the United States, even after the creation of a more budgetary 193 RD (version without UVT).
      -The “cheapest” engine a closed loop can be considered a rocket engine 33-1. Subject to the restoration of production, the price of modification of the 33-1 NK for the new Soyuz 2-3 launch vehicle can be up to 25 000 $ / tf (4,5 million $).
      ================================
      And NOW MAIN:
      Merlin 1D with an approximate price of 15 000 $ / tf (~ 1 million $), very successfully "joined" the US rocket engine domestic market.

      Merlin 1D is capable of developing traction near the ground in 67t and 82t in vacuum (Melin 1D Vacuum), with a mass of about 600kg. The Falcon 9 1.1 LV uses 9 of such common thrust engines in 600ts.

      Where to increase? Who will buy?
    2. good fair
      0
      April 9 2015 21: 41
      Quote: vanavate
      and let them sharply rise in price

      Let’s, in the amount of damage from sanctions. smile
  17. +1
    April 9 2015 14: 39
    And you want and prick and McCain does not order ... fool
  18. +3
    April 9 2015 14: 40
    It is necessary, to categorically refuse to supply engines to our enemy No. 1. Take profit from the "Chinese" method. State embezzlement, without merit and "pedigree". Public execution for treason to RUSSIA, at its own expense. Russia from this will only rise !!!
  19. +1
    April 9 2015 14: 44
    It is necessary for barter, they are engines, we are Alaska.
  20. +2
    April 9 2015 14: 50
    Money is certainly needed, but not at the price of selling priority in space exploration! Or even if you sell, it’s for rubles, and take the price at the rate of February 03 - 69,66.
  21. 0
    April 9 2015 14: 55
    Here is a way to set aside America's space exploration by ten years, and the Americans themselves have invented it. Gorgeous. I wrote the word "space" with a small one, and "America" ​​with a large one, probably it's time to change the spelling rules and put everything in its place, at least in order of the scale of the object!
  22. 0
    April 9 2015 14: 58
    Quote: Metallurg
    That is, the Pentagon after 2019 will be able to use the RD-180 only if they were produced before the Crimea entered the Russian Federation.

    It is necessary to legally prohibit the sale of engines in the United States manufactured before the accession of Crimea to the Russian Federation.
    1. -1
      April 9 2015 20: 16
      We need to understand this policy, so they are at a reasonable price rocket engines, and their space industry is starving. Only this is a great secret, so that it is silent.
  23. act
    act
    0
    April 9 2015 15: 17
    And why the Air Force command voices military issues in the press. Address to the Washington regional committee, in an instance, as taught in lieutenant years - There is sir!
  24. 0
    April 9 2015 15: 50
    since they will only take the engines that were released BEFORE the ACCESSION of Crimea, it means a warehouse under lock and guard, and new engines are 3 times more expensive!
    Let them think on what to fly into space! Though with the help of a slingshot!
  25. 0
    April 9 2015 15: 52
    Quote: Metallurg
    I will sell second-hand engines from China. Inexpensive.
    For the US Air Force discounts ...

    I offer the U.S. Air Force gas generator engines (wood and wood chips) produced in 1938. Competitor.
  26. -2
    April 9 2015 16: 03
    what When the domestic car industry could not be born an intelligent bucket and had to call all sorts of Renault and, God forgive me ..., Nissan - this is normal.
    And when the "neighbors" in a similar situation, as a result, lean on imports, they poke it in the nose.
    Double standards however ... request

    From them the question: "Is objectivity a virtue of the Citizen ???"
    1. 0
      April 9 2015 17: 21
      Quote: Yves762
      Double standards however ...

      If they did not get out with sanctions, no one would say a word. request In ordinary life, this is a mutually beneficial relationship. And now a different situation. hi Look at it from the other side - they help our enterprises earn money and keep them afloat. what
      1. 0
        April 10 2015 07: 21
        These very
        mutually beneficial relationship
        , in our realities, only gave a reason not to continue to engage in OWN car industry. As a result, "Horse meat" ; as it was a bucket, so it remained a night pot (I drive myself); and AZLK has completely died ...
        And something strange is happening with all sorts of non-Opeli, Nissan, Ford: some media write that they leave, others - that remain ... Not intelligible something.
        But (!), The story with "Vostochny" is also not immediately "popular" with RG and RIA ...
  27. +1
    April 9 2015 16: 22
    Quote: good fairy
    Are you going to the moon again? Or already directly to Neptune?

    Tests of the lunar engines are just going according to plan. Last week, another test of a solid fuel accelerator, the day before yesterday, a liquid propellant rocket engine.
    1. good fair
      0
      April 9 2015 21: 45
      Quote: Jurkovs
      Tests of the lunar engines are just going according to plan. Last week, another test of a solid fuel accelerator, the day before yesterday, a liquid propellant rocket engine.

      We will look, an autopsy will show.
  28. +2
    April 9 2015 17: 50
    We sell strategic goods to our enemies and wait for them to bomb us.
  29. 0
    April 9 2015 21: 14
    Such supplies must be treated
    very carefully.
  30. best_stas
    0
    April 10 2015 10: 19
    What prevents the despicable Yankees from copying our engine? !!!! Given the current situation in the world, everyone will soon spit on bans, contracts ... and there’s nothing to say about American decency !!! ((((
  31. 0
    April 11 2015 09: 05
    McCain introduced to the Senate an amendment to the defense budget prohibiting the acquisition of RD-180 rocket engines manufactured by NPO Energomash. An exception is the Boeing and Lockheed Martin consortium, which is allowed to purchase engines under a valid contract until 2019.
    this is all america! I forbid but buy!