Military Review

"Angara" need an alternative

86
What can replace the proposed launch vehicle in the Federal Space Program


12 March 2015 of the Scientific and Technical Council (NTS) of Roscosmos unanimously recommended that the Federal Space Program of the FNT-2025 should continue to work on the Angara project for another ten years, despite the fact that they have already been carried out on the 22 of the year. After bringing this decision to the public on the pages of the “Military-Industrial Courier”, a heated discussion was expectedly expected. There were a lot of negative feedback on the conclusions made by the NTS. At the same time, no one was surprised that every one of the council members voted for Angara.

The flaws of the "Angara" project were noted in a wide range and presented with serious technical arguments. Let us briefly describe the essence of these responses, claims to the plans of Roskosmos.

In the methodical part it is:

“Knockout sanctions from space will fall on Russia at the very beginning of the 2020-s with the launch of the American space system SLS / Orion”
initially the wrong choice of target, which has led today to a critical lag behind the world level in the field of space launch vehicles (CRN);
the hushing up of the overriding role of the super-heavy launch vehicle (RN) as a guarantor of our presence in orbits and the creation of parity primarily in the defense field and only then in deep space research;
the denial of the fact that knocking sanctions from space will fall on Russia at the very beginning of the 2020-s with the commissioning of the American space system SLS / Orion. From this point on, the entire worthlessness of the Angara program with its multi-launch expedition to the moon in the 2030s will manifest itself;
fake confidence that the US will not dare to use the SLS missile for military purposes.

Negative aspects of the technical side:

the helplessness of both the Angara-5 and the Angara-5В in front of the American SLS rocket in the fight for the information space;
the weakness of the first stage of “Angara-5”, as a result, the unreality of increasing the mass of the payload (PN) to thirty-eight tons;
uselessness and uselessness of the implementation of the variant "Hangars-5В". Even if a thirty-monosmiton pH is created, it will not affect the balance of forces. Waste of time and money;
the small scale of the final tasks, their vague wording, prudently removed to a safe time interval for the authors. As a result, responsibility for the result is not personalized.

Virtually any item listed above is sufficient to doubt the feasibility of this project.

That is, according to the results of the public discussion, the “Angara” project cannot be recommended as the basis of the PCF-2025.

Russia is losing the race

The significance of the identified deficiencies is largely masked by the inadequate advertising of the project, as well as the clearly favorable attitude of the top government officials towards it. The latter, unable to grasp the technical side of the process, see its main attractiveness in the fact that there is a long-awaited opportunity to complete the privatization of another huge piece of domestic industry and applied science. And this commission is the only one of all promised that will be completed to the end.

"Angara" need an alternative


Such a modest, if not to say miserable task, like the creation of a thirty-miton missile in thirty years, does not pull to the rank of national. The limitations and far-fetchedness of the Angara-5В program, in which some of the main strategic goals are:

delivery to the 2025, the automatic vehicle on the moon and its manned flyby;
the landing of astronauts on the moon to 2030 as a result of the four-launch operation.


All this has already happened. The Soviet lunar rover walked on the moon back in the 70s. In December, 2013 threw down the Chinese "Yuytu". American lunar flights and astronauts began as early as 1969. It makes no sense to repeat this path. This will only be a visual confirmation of our sixty-year lag behind the United States and a demonstration of technical weakness. Applying a four-launch flight scheme where the rivals cost the single-start one is an act of self-humiliation. It is the same as to beat Sergey Bubka’s unique six-meter jumper record by jumping six meters by meter.

It is clear that if the Angara-5В program is elevated to the rank of the main state task in space for the next ten years, this will inevitably cause a sharp decline in Russia's rating in the eyes of foreign countries and specialists. Today, the Russian Federation ranks second in the ranks of space powers. In the future, speaking with his ridiculous plan for a manned expedition to the moon by 2030, China, France (going to launch the rover in 2018), India, and Japan will have to miss ahead. As for the USA, they are planning a manned expedition to Mars by this time on the SLS / Orion rocket and space system.

In all cases, the appearance of the FKP with Angar will be a clear signal to foreign strategists that Russia has been blown away under the pressure of sanctions and in the struggle for the information space, for the place of our spacecraft (SC) in orbits is falling out of distance.

However, the biggest "merit" of the program "Angara" is that it finally and irrevocably leads the Russian space away from the global path of development of launch vehicles (SV). Loss of time and opportunity may be irreparable. Therefore, it is necessary to find "Angara" a worthy alternative.

Was there a competition?


The undoubted task of any branch of the defense industry is to create and maintain parity with the capabilities of the likely adversary. Giant engineering forces and industrial facilities are concentrated in Roscosmos. But the results of their activities leave much to be desired. With the completion of the operation of the Space Shuttle, the parity of the launch vehicles is maintained only by the Proton. But in the near future, by the year 2020, the American SLS missile carrying capacity of 70 – 130 tons will go into low-earth orbit (NOO) against our 25 tons. Given the country's dependence on space information systems, this gap should be considered critical. Common sense and the instinct of self-preservation require the establishment of parity in the means of elimination. Moreover, this is a political task, without the solution of which Russia can become enslaved in bondage to the threats and whims of our foreign counter-partners.



It was logical to assume that all this will be reflected in the upcoming FKP-2025, primarily in the program of the competition of rocket companies. From this angle we will briefly review the content of the materials submitted for the competition.

RSC Energia in 2013 rejected the competition, but later offered a line of Energiya-K rockets with a payload of NOU from sixteen to eighty-five tons. The development was based on the intellectual and technical groundwork from the previous "Energy", simplified by eliminating oxygen-hydrogen technology, which is practically lost today. This proposal was an undoubted step forward in comparison with the "Angara", as it assumed the release of an "extra heavy" rocket and promised a reduction of four to five years. But in December 2014-th at a meeting in Roscosmos this obstacle was carefully removed from the “Angara” road.

The Progress Rocket and Space Center (RCC) will begin development of the Phoenix launch vehicle in 2018. By 2025, the creation of the Soyuz middle class RN is planned. The line includes three versions: "Soyuz-5.1", "Soyuz-5.2", "Soyuz-5.3" with a loading capacity of 9,2, 16,5 and 26,5 tons, respectively. The basic engine of the first stage is a two-chamber RD-180. Note that the Soyuz-5.3, having a starting mass of six hundred and fifty tons (one hundred and ten tons lighter than the Angara), lifts the NOU by one and a half tons more than the Angara-5, which again indicates that the latter is not optimal.

In cooperation with related enterprises, the State Rocket Center (SRC) “KB them. V.P. Makeeva presented the development of the Rossianka launch vehicle with a starting mass of seven hundred and fifty tons with a lifting capacity of twenty one and a half tons per NOU. A novelty here was a high-precision scheme for returning spent first-stage engines to Earth with a hit of three to five kilometers from the launch site to the 50x50 platform.

All contestants were invited to develop methane liquid-propellant rocket engines (LRE) - a novelty of the last century. While the proposal is not implemented by anyone, because it is in fact a high-cost and ineffective event.

The State Space Research and Production Center (GKNPT) named after MV Khrunichev for the second time history put on a twenty-two-year-old RV "Angara". For the first time, an advance project was exposed as a competitor of the finished Energy-M rocket in 1993.

From the presented materials it is clear that the TZ issued to the contestants required the development of a middle class PH with characteristics close to Angara-5. So we met in the final “Soyuz-5.3” (26 tons), “Rossiyanka” (21,5 tons) - both in the initial design stage, and “Angara-5” twenty-two years old. As a result, "Angara-5" fought with itself, won itself and was the only contender for the PCF. Moreover, the competitive offer of RSC Energia was previously rejected.

As a result, the upgrade of the Angara-5 to a loading capacity of thirty-eight tons is recommended as the main content of the FKP-2025.

From the above we can draw the following conclusions:

1. The objectives and recommendations of the competition do not correspond to the priority needs of the Russian space in the current foreign policy environment, did not meet with support in public discussion and therefore cannot become the basis of the PCF-2025.

2. The materials submitted for the competition are based on scientific and technical solutions of the last century and do not take into account current global trends in the creation of space launch vehicles.

3. It is necessary to hold an additional competition for the creation of a domestic super-heavy RN on the modern principle of a combined first stage.

The competition can be completed in three to four months. Without this, it is impossible to choose the right path for the further development of the national space and hastily set up the PCF will fire idly. It is necessary to wake up the initiative of the leading design bureaus and protect them from possible administrative opposition.

Unsurpassed 38 tons


At the presentation of the FKP in Roskosmos 22 on April 2015, the main speaker Igor Komarov said that, at the request of the Ministry of Defense, the level of modernization of the Angara rises from thirty-five to thirty-eight tons by NOU.

From this point on, according to experts, it became obvious that the Angara-5В program is like an adventure, and the promises made by its developers are technically unfeasible and they are issued in the hope that they will not have to answer for it.

As arguments we will give the calculations of the same participants of the competition, carried out at different times. The limiting factor is the low thrust of the “Angara-5” first stage, which is 980 tf. With such a launch, the mass of the rocket at the start should not exceed 830 tons, which corresponds to the overload at the start n = 1,18. If the rocket proves to be heavier, it will slowly move away from the launch pad, burning excess fuel and damaging the launch position. If it is also possible to dispute some kind of additive to 830 tons, then no more than 10 – 15 tons, and there is already a limit of limits, the rocket simply does not take off.

So what do the calculations show?


Somewhat earlier, introducing the line of Angara family of rockets, the GKNPTs them. Khrunichev launched the Angar-7.2 with a starting weight of 1154 tons as a thirty-five. At the same time, its thrust at the start was 1372 tf, which corresponds to the value of the mass efficiency coefficient 0,031.

"Angara" need weight additive (1154 - 830) = 324 tons.

It should be noted that it was not the “Angara”, but the LV from the rocket-space corporation “Energia”, that was created for the first time in domestic practice according to a modular principle. A series of rockets with a variable number of RD-170 side accelerators was proposed as a series of 2, 4, 6, 8. The main "Energy" had four side RD-170. And the “youngest” in the “Energy-M” family was obtained due to the simplest transformation of the standard “Energy” - by removing two lateral RD-170 and reducing the number of second-stage engines from four to one. Energia-M was ready to begin flight tests in the 1994 year, worked on non-toxic components and had those dimensions that we dream of now: the load capacity on the NOU is thirty tons, the mass of the rocket at the start is fifteen thousand tons. "Angara" and in comparison with this PH need weight additive (1050 - 830) = 220 tons. At the same time, at the second stage of Energia-M there was a highly efficient oxygen-hydrogen engine from the Voronezh design bureau of chemical automation RD-0120 (it is planned to recreate it for Angara-5В). However, in the year 1993, at the already mentioned competition, the hangars project “Angara” won and the practically finished “Energy-M” was put under the knife, and with it the accumulated technology of oxygen-hydrogen fuel rocket engines.

The Special Design Bureau of the Makeyev State Research Center did not carry out special calculations on this topic, but working on “Rossiyanka”, it came to the conclusion that for a thirty-five-ton monitor of the “Angara” dimension it is necessary to change it. The calculations show that we are talking about increasing the launch mass of the rocket to one thousand and fifty tons in the presence of an oxygen-hydrogen second stage and up to one thousand one hundred fifty-four tons when using only oxygen-kerosene LRE.

If we recalculate the figures from thirty-five tons to a thirty-cmiton rocket, then these figures must be raised by another ninety-six, bringing them to the mass values ​​at the start of one thousand one hundred and forty-six and one thousand two hundred and fifty tons, respectively.

Obviously, the existing first stage of the "Angara" with a 980 mc tactile can not tear such a rocket from the launch pad.

So, speaking of the thirty-sammiton Angara-5В, we should keep in mind the creation of a completely new rocket, starting with an increase in the thrust of the first stage to the level of 1500 ts at least. This is a new and more complex development than Angara-5. But the main thing is that the country does not need a thirty-eighthsmith, as the balance of forces does not change. These facts, as well as other calculations of RSC Energia and the GKNPTs them. Khrunichev says that “Angara” is a dead end, and the proposals on “Angara-5В” in FKP-2025 do not have any technical grounds.

After the speeches of the Chairman of the Scientific and Technical Council of Roskosmos, Doctor of Technical Sciences Yuri Koptev and Doctor of Technical Sciences Yuri Kuznetsov (“MIC”, No. 32), all points above i around the Angara launch vehicle project seemed to be set. But the expert community of Russia still have questions. Which way to go further must answer the government and the political leadership of the Russian Federation.

During Soviet times, the constant rivalry between the socialist and capitalist structures for many years served as a powerful stimulus for the development of science and technology. In particular, in the space industry, this led to the development of two of the most powerful space launch vehicles in the history of mankind. Their appearance has become a landmark event in the development of world cosmonautics.

Two worlds, two ways to space


Having reached the level of 100 tonnes carrying capacity for low near-earth orbit (NOO), the USSR and the USA once again confirmed their leadership in the world, to which they came almost in the same way - by creating superheavy rockets with liquid rocket engines (LRE) at all levels.

However, after reaching this milestone, the further paths of development of cosmonautics in the USSR and the USA diverged dramatically.

The United States of America, as they have paid serious attention to increasing the carrying capacity of super-heavy LVs, continues to this day.

In the process of implementing the lunar program on the example of the Saturn launch vehicle (PH), American engineers realized that the results achieved were close to the limit. A further increase in the power of first-stage LREs led to an inordinate complication of technical problems and an increase in the cost of their solution exponentially. So at one time aircraft designers rested on the sound barrier, but found a workaround. Having created an air-jet engine and a thin swept wing, they escaped into the space of supersonic speeds.

In our case, American engineers also found a way out. It consisted in the development of powerful solid-propellant rocket engines (solid propellant rocket motors) with a 800 – 1600 ton-force, which, due to transportation conditions, were assembled from separate sections. Such solid-propellant rocket motors, being integrated into the first stage of the LV as accelerators, sharply raised the thrust-to-weight ratio at the start and opened the way to an increase in the payload capacity of the LV, reducing the cost of the payload delivery system (PF) to orbits. Solid fuel boosters (TTU) were introduced in stages in the Titan-4 and Space Shuttle missile systems, where at the start of the TTU they are switched on simultaneously with the first stage LRE (combined scheme), and in the newest SLS and Ares the Americans went even further: here is the first level is purely solid.

Thus, foreign practice has shown that the use of TTU is a method that allows abruptly increase the payload capacity of the launch vehicle and reduce the cost of delivering a launcher to orbits.

And since the "Saturn", the Americans have embarked on an increase in load capacity.

The further way from our side was chosen not by the USSR, but by the Russian Federation proclaimed 26 of December 1991. Space management was removed from the patronage of the Ministry of General Mechanical Engineering (IOM). In 1992, the Russian Space Agency (RSA) was created, its head was appointed Yuri Koptev.

In the years when the foundations of the state collapsed, many lost their sense of responsibility towards the country, and when changing moral and technical guidelines, there were also those who, in their decisions, were guided by the rule “everything that is not forbidden is allowed”. On this wave, the program “Energy” - “Buran” that started so successfully was closed. In 1993, it was announced the creation of a domestic heavy-class PH. According to the competition for this role, Angara was appointed with a starting weight of 640 tons and a lifting capacity of NOU 24,5 tons. It is unlikely that anyone will be able to explain this step today, but right now his absurdity has manifested itself. It was from this turning point that the national cosmonautics left the global path of development of launch vehicles. Over the past 22 of the year, we have achieved the appearance of the "Angara-5", which we need to finish 10 for years, and still it will be weaker than the foreign counterpart four to five times.

The USA from “Saturn” grew SLS and Ares, and in Russia from “Energy” - unfinished “Angara”.

Serious experts are wondering if we should spend time understanding the obvious: we get lost and go wrong? It remains to hope that the point of no return has not yet been reached, and the country's leadership, having objectively weighed all the pros and cons, will give the order to press the brakes.

Ten calm years we will not. Space expansion will begin earlier than the FKP-2025 is completed.

Terms of Reference from the President


During his public speeches, Vladimir Putin is often concerned with the creation of new types of military equipment. Having identified and summarized these fragments, one can clearly understand how the next stage in the development of our space is seen by the President of the Russian Federation.

Thesis first. When investing resources to use the old development, repeating the path already passed, is inefficient. Need a new idea.



In our case, such is the combined first-stage scheme (LRE + RDTT) of the super heavy CRH.

Thesis of the second. At the birth of a new model of military equipment, it is necessary to provide a way to counter possible non-nuclear threats. This is one of the main requirements of the new Military Doctrine approved in December 2014.

For us, such a non-nuclear threat is the possibility of expelling our spacecraft (SC) from orbits through the use of American super-heavy SLS and Ares PH.

The third thesis. In special cases, when the achievement of a large state political goal is required and this is in conflict with the economy, a political task is preferred.

In this sense, the achievement of parity of forces in the field of space launch vehicles of Russia and the United States is a matter of national importance.

Thesis the fourth. Looking for a super heavy RN and a cosmodrome for it.

This is no longer a general thesis, but a mature solution to a specific technical and political problem at the national level.

The persistent pushing through of the "Angara" in the FKP does not meet the requirements of any of the listed postulates and moreover, directly contradicts them. We trace the points.

The first. All the goals discussed at the Scientific and Technical Council of Roskosmos are based on a long time ago, in the last century, solved problems. The most modern and promising option with a combined first stage was not considered at all. Moreover, in 1994, Russia had a ready-made Energia-M missile with “clean” components and a payload of 35 tons.

The second. The danger of losing information space will arise in 2018 – 2020 with the launch of the SLS PH. But Roscosmos persistently and without argument argues that SLS will not be used for military purposes. This is an extremely dangerous and strange delusion.

Third. The reference to the lack of funding for the development of a serious rocket hides behind itself the stubborn desire of Roskosmos to prevent the appearance of the Russian super-heavy rocket, since its hands are tied to the task of attaching Angar. This is confirmed by the fact that in the proposals in the FKP no backlog under super heavy is not visible.

Fourth. In April, 2015, a discussion of the revised FKP-2025 project was held. Keynote speaker Igor Komarov said that, at the request of the Ministry of Finance, the volume of the PCF was cut by 844,9 billion rubles. Without waiting for the approval of the results of the competition, Roscosmos redistributed resources to the means of launching, above all, the super heavy class. As a result, the FKP-2025 project provides for the rejection of the immediate creation of an extra-heavy carrier, while retaining plans for an in-depth exploration of the Moon from orbit, as well as for landing automatic spacecraft on its surface.

So, the project "Angara-5В" does not meet the state interests of Russia and theses of the president.

We emphasize: we do not state this in a completely categorical form. But we call once again to weigh everything soberly, using the window of opportunity, which is still open.

Competition required


In the discussion on the topic of "Angara" on the pages of our newspaper ("MIC", №№ 10, 14, 17, 19, 27, 32, 37) given enough facts to ensure that the situation could not only understand a narrow specialist, but also an ordinary reader interested in technology.

Critics of "Angara" believe that during the competition and the preparation of the draft program of the FKP-2025 program, not all the potential possibilities of domestic science and industry are taken into account.

The question of creating a super-heavy LV was not considered, in any case, no material on this was published. Global trends in the development of launch vehicles are ignored.

It is also easy to neglect the complicated military and political situation in the world. Therefore, before opening the purse of the FKP-2025, it is necessary to eliminate this gap by announcing an express competition for the creation of a Russian super-heavy rocket based on new principles, that is, with a combined first stage. Studies on this topic are available in several design bureaus, but they contradict the general line of Roskosmos. Accordingly, the initiative from the general designers can not wait. In the conditions of the unfolded total reform of Roskosmos it is fraught to contradict the authorities.

To resolve the stalemate, the competition must be conducted by order. The order should come from a high corporate authority. A similar precedent for a sharp turn of events in the history of Russian rocket science has already been. Then the tough administrative-party vertical of power obliged the outstanding designer Academician Viktor Makeev to develop the first solid-fuel missile system for underwater fleet. A fan of the liquid propellant rocket engine, having already achieved outstanding results in this area, managed to rebuild, led a new cooperation of enterprises and created one of the world's best solid-fuel rockets (ZM65) with an underwater launch. A similar turn of events towards the requirements of the XNUMXst century can take place now, if a firm political will manifests itself. Only after the completion of this express competition for superheavy launch vehicles and the evaluation of its results by an independent state commission, it will be possible to consider that all possible ways of developing domestic launch vehicles have been considered and the best option has been found. This choice has long and far gone beyond the competence of one particular corporation. Weaknesses of the Angara project have been identified, concrete proposals for further actions have been formulated. There is nothing more to wait.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27270
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Engineer
    Engineer 8 October 2015 14: 49 New
    14
    Replacement? Is the author all right? So much has been done, let's drop everything and will spend billions on a new rocket? What for?!!! A hangar is a whole class, from light to heavy. Lungs, and medium why clean? If you need superheavy, but it is not necessary, then why close the Angara? Some kind of idiocy. I still do not understand why we need an extra-heavy rocket? When Energy flew, it turned out to be useless to anyone. There were no tasks for her in orbit. Even for World and World-2 Proton was enough. And why now such a rocket? Under what loads, under which systems? American is created under Orion. And what do we need for a new superheavy rocket?
    1. jjj
      jjj 8 October 2015 15: 08 New
      +4
      Yes, it's very democratic, to cross everything out and start spending money again. And why should such questions be discussed so widely? This is a topic for the insider. And so again it gives away "polymers"
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Temples
        Temples 8 October 2015 15: 40 New
        +9
        This will only be a clear confirmation of our sixty-year backwardness from the United States and a demonstration of technical weakness.

        Oh how! Sixty years old, no less !!!
        Why can't they get to the ISS on their own?
        We are 60 years behind !!!
        Or is it their trip to the past?
        The USA from "Saturn" grew SLS and Ares

        And why the hell did it grow ??? After all, Saturn 5 is able to launch a load of 118 tons into orbit, and SLS-70 is possible !!! 70 will output.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Oberon812
      Oberon812 8 October 2015 15: 22 New
      +4
      For example, so that the rights to a new rocket do not belong to the Americans.


      In 1993, GKNPC, RSC Energia and the American corporation Lockheed created a joint venture Lockheed-Khrunichev-Energia (LCE). The LHE joint venture was reorganized on June 7, 1995 into the International Launch Services Inc ..

      International Launch Services (ILS) has the exclusive marketing and commercial rights to the Russian heavy-class launch vehicle Proton and the promising Angara space rocket complex.

      http://www.khrunichev.ru/main.php?id=67


      Ever wondered why on our missiles 2 flags, ours and the mattress? Sad but true. 90s, [censorship] ...
    4. Civil
      Civil 8 October 2015 16: 04 New
      +6
      The mess in Roscosmos, nepotism and corruption ... until they begin to plant, there will be no result in the industry.
      1. ver_
        ver_ 9 October 2015 06: 36 New
        +1
        ... but shouldn't we return to the "sharashkin offices" of the times of Lawrence ...? - there was nowhere to spend money except for tea brewing - ascetic and health benefits ... grace ..
    5. War and Peace
      War and Peace 8 October 2015 16: 58 New
      +4
      They made up their heads with this hangar, let it go into the fog, no further than yesterday that there was an article by a certain Vladimir that we didn’t need a heavy rocket at all, but the hangar itself.
      We need carriers capable of lifting 200 tons to remove heavy structures for mounting new plant factories in orbit, and this hangar is done slowly and stupidly
      In fact, after all, the same P7 -SOYUZ can be transferred to HK33 and 10 engines will be able to raise the same 30-40 tons, like a hangar, so what's the matter? But the matter as is the case in conspiracy theories, are there any enemies at the top of the state and does Russia really have sovereignty or obey orders from the west? It is already clear that all these creeps from the main path of progress to small-town problems are what Russia was forced to ...
    6. akmalinin
      akmalinin 8 October 2015 18: 25 New
      -1
      Why chase amers? We don’t need such a rocket as SLS yet, and for exploring the moon you can start in 4 stages.
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 8 October 2015 19: 37 New
        +1
        And the secret is simple: his name is megacorruption, because the usual embezzlement in the top Russian mess is at least an order of magnitude higher, and most interestingly, Putin personally confirmed that he would not destroy megacorruption - instantly repainted Serdyukov as a witness, and then Vasilyeva’s release is confirm. Or unwillingness to restore order in the construction of the East. Meanwhile, the matter concerns a strategically important industry.
    7. Scraptor
      Scraptor 9 October 2015 04: 46 New
      +2
      And why did America need SLS and why did it have to destroy 5 ready-made Soviet Energies?

      Why, as always, the best is sacrificed ...
    8. theadenter
      theadenter 10 October 2015 02: 46 New
      -1
      I believe that Angara is good in its class. But for long-distance flights (to Venus, Mars and beyond), a heavier LV is needed. And as a bonus, the experience and experience with it can be used to create a heavy ICBM.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Riv
    Riv 8 October 2015 15: 10 New
    21
    I know what Angara needs. It is necessary to remove ten chief managers from their posts, declare them enemies of the people and send them to the camp for ten years. Assign new ones. After three years, if the host is not ready, repeat this. I guarantee: in about four years the Angara will start flying normally.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 8 October 2015 16: 29 New
      -2
      Quote: Riv
      I know what Angara needs. It is necessary to remove ten chief managers from their posts, declare them enemies of the people and send them to the camp for ten years.

      Then the rest together will dump over the hill.
      Quote: Riv
      After three years, if the medium is not ready, repeat this.

      And there will be no one to repeat with! hi
    2. War and Peace
      War and Peace 8 October 2015 16: 59 New
      +1
      Quote: Riv
      I know what Angara needs. It is necessary to remove ten chief managers from their posts, declare them enemies of the people and send them to the camp for ten years. Assign new ones. After three years, if the host is not ready, repeat this. I guarantee: in about four years the Angara will start flying normally.


      but can remove one and the most important thing, the one that places all the rest?
    3. War and Peace
      War and Peace 8 October 2015 16: 59 New
      -4
      Quote: Riv
      I know what Angara needs. It is necessary to remove ten chief managers from their posts, declare them enemies of the people and send them to the camp for ten years. Assign new ones. After three years, if the host is not ready, repeat this. I guarantee: in about four years the Angara will start flying normally.


      but can remove one and the most important thing, the one that places all the rest?
      1. Rusich is not from Kiev
        Rusich is not from Kiev 9 October 2015 00: 05 New
        +1
        Quote: War and Peace
        but can remove one and the most important thing, the one that places all the rest?

        And who places them? Maybe you can arrange it right? Putin in space understands no more than ours, and different people give him info and very convincingly.
        Why was our cosmos first? Because he was a patriot, a fanatic of his craft, Korolev and others. Like it or not, a person means a lot.
        1. War and Peace
          War and Peace 9 October 2015 02: 11 New
          -4
          Quote: Rusich not from Kiev
          Quote: War and Peace
          but can remove one and the most important thing, the one that places all the rest?

          And who places them? Maybe you can arrange it right? Putin in space understands no more than ours, and different people give him info and very convincingly.
          Why was our cosmos first? Because he was a patriot, a fanatic of his craft, Korolev and others. Like it or not, a person means a lot.


          do not understand space only idiots, if energy drags 100 tons, a hangar 20 tons, then you do not need to be seven spans in your forehead to understand that more is needed for space ...
          1. Rusich is not from Kiev
            Rusich is not from Kiev 10 October 2015 20: 04 New
            0
            Quote: War and Peace
            do not understand space only idiots, if energy drags 100 tons, a hangar 20 tons, then you do not need to be seven spans in your forehead to understand that more is needed for space ...

            Cool. Even very cool, you need to be president, and then take it and share it. It’s because when everyone is equally better than someone else, there’s no other way. wassat
    4. rosarioagro
      rosarioagro 8 October 2015 17: 03 New
      +2
      Quote: Riv
      declare enemies of the people

      First you need to pass a law that will interpret who will be declared an enemy, which means the enemy and the enemy of which people will be declared, and that in the Duma everyone would vote for it by majority, a funny picture will be :-)
    5. War and Peace
      War and Peace 8 October 2015 17: 36 New
      -1
      Quote: Riv
      I know what Angara needs. It is necessary to remove ten chief managers from their posts, declare them enemies of the people and send them to the camp for ten years. Assign new ones. After three years, if the host is not ready, repeat this. I guarantee: in about four years the Angara will start flying normally.


      but can remove one and the most important thing? the one who places such personnel as taburetkin, nabiulin, chubais and all the other oligarchs?
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 8 October 2015 20: 04 New
        +1
        Quote: War and Peace
        and for everyone in the Duma to vote for it by a majority, a funny picture will be :-)

        And it would be nice to forbid the Duma for all the good at all when such advances begin. All the same, after all, it is entirely parasites and pests. Spineless riddles, by whom the Duma is a sinecure for the figures who have appeared in circulation. The point is that the people who approve of the country’s initiative will approve without any Duma. And also, without her mediation, in the power to ban the harmful - take a look at Switzerland, where a referendum solves any minor issue. Or it can be done in a different way - in Stalin's style, where the Soviets decided, also filled with peasants from the plow and workers from the machine tool, and therefore acting in the interests of the people, and not as it is now when stars of all stripes are being dumped in the Duma with a view to self-PR.
  4. Editor
    Editor 8 October 2015 15: 18 New
    +7
    the coolest thing is that the author is already sure that in 2018 the American rocket will begin to fly ...
    Well, where does such confidence come from?
    Now the Angara has already taken off.

    http://topwar.ru/17013-amerikanskaya-sls-rvetsya-v-kosmos.html
    1. rosarioagro
      rosarioagro 8 October 2015 17: 04 New
      +1
      Quote: Redactor
      Well, where does such confidence come from?

      TTU SLS have been tested, why not fly it?
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 8 October 2015 19: 04 New
      +2
      Quote: Redactor
      the coolest thing is that the author is already sure that in 2018 the American rocket will begin to fly ...

      Three years later, we’ll be kidding, and over whom we’ll see hi
  5. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 8 October 2015 15: 19 New
    +2
    Let this writer quit writing better and let the water hang balutit the hangar where she is! Different writers wrote the same thing about the mace and what! I went darling.
  6. Sterlya
    Sterlya 8 October 2015 15: 19 New
    +4
    I do not know. and hardly anyone here thinks hard in such a closed topic as carrier rockets. And the discussion of such problems seems to me not the best place on the pages of VO. (my opinion)
    1. avt
      avt 8 October 2015 15: 22 New
      +3
      Quote: Sterlya
      I do not know. and hardly anyone here thinks hard in such a closed topic as carrier rockets.

      laughing Do not judge, let not you be judged. There are quite knowledgeable people. Ascetic for example.
    2. Temples
      Temples 8 October 2015 16: 50 New
      +2
      Here, and the country's leaders will not be enough))) smile
      But this is not a reason not to talk about life.

      The article is clearly custom !!! Just to excite people.
      Essentially nothing! One water!
      The feeling that someone was moved away from the feeder. And this one to us for the cosmonautics. Indeed, without it, everything is clearly bad and wrong!
      And we’re not moving there either!

      In the sixties, people understood no more than ours in this, but this was not an occasion to praise the bourgeoisie and shit in their own garden.

      Judging by the results. And the result is that we and the Angara have already been launched twice and the previous missiles fly stably. And specialists continue to work on new equipment.

      And don't pick on the word "stable". Statistics confirm that our missiles are the most reliable at the moment.
      1. Manul
        Manul 8 October 2015 17: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: Temples
        The article is clearly custom !!! Just to excite people.
        Essentially nothing! One water!

        It also seemed to me to be custom-made. The style reminds a recent article that we are fighting with old missiles in Syria. Everything is gone, in short.
  7. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 8 October 2015 15: 21 New
    +5
    The hangar is definitely needed, but at the same time, other projects are needed, so that later you will not be at an impasse. And during the construction of the spaceport it is necessary to take into account that it may be necessary to launch superheavy carriers from there, maybe on other principles and fuels
    1. avt
      avt 8 October 2015 16: 46 New
      +1
      Quote: Tatar 174
      , but at the same time, other projects are needed, so that later you will not be at a dead end.

      Needed! Of course we do! But not huge chemical barrels! This is really a dead end. We need devices based on other physical principles. Only these devices will be launched further into space from the earth's orbit. Reincarnation, or an analogue of Energies, is a step back. That's to put it mildly, but in fact it's a dead end. No money will be enough.
      1. rosarioagro
        rosarioagro 8 October 2015 17: 06 New
        0
        Quote: avt
        Reincarnation, or analogue ,, Energy "-step back

        And on what principles do you want to lift the payload from Earth?
        1. gridasov
          gridasov 8 October 2015 18: 41 New
          0
          The principles are very simple. It is very easy to ensure a high density of hydro-gas-dynamic flow. Then any composition of continuous media can be used as fuel. Surprisingly, simple solutions are hidden behind a wall of misunderstanding. In general, you just need to be able to work with information, with large amounts of information.
          1. avt
            avt 8 October 2015 20: 35 New
            +2
            Quote: gridasov
            . Surprisingly, simple solutions are hidden behind a wall of misunderstanding.

            The simplest solutions, as a rule, are very difficult to implement in metal at production - he himself faced a young specialist - idealism broke off in the first month of work. So for memory, it seems even in the Soviet "Technology of Youth", the jet engine was not built in an airplane in 1912, but I don’t remember the consequences - whether the inventor turned it on or not.
            Quote: gridasov
            In general, you just need to be able to work with information, with large amounts of information.

            But this, not only regarding the topic of the article, is really a disaster of the time! Well, even if you have the Internet and all kinds of search engines, users demand without fail that they would put it in his mouth! Awesome infantilism! I myself, through the life of the Soviet flood, a bummer is a triple, but against the modern background I feel like an academician and a Stalinist laureate. laughing
            1. gridasov
              gridasov 8 October 2015 21: 15 New
              +1
              Why do many inventions fail? The answer is obvious. The carrier of energy transformations is not the devices themselves, but what we do not perceive as obvious is, as usual, WATER, air, and further complicate everything and look for a substance - a panacea. Therefore, the conclusion is very simple and consists in the fact that you need to learn to see the properties of these non-obvious processes, the results of the transformation of which are always obvious.
              The same applies to working with information. Now there is no need to sometimes conduct initial experiments, so that one cannot look on the Internet and not see the transformation properties of many processes with already known substances. I am also from the same "spill barrel" and argue similarly. It remains only to remind that any analysis is productive if we consider all sides and aspects of the processes. And the deeper the analysis, the more accurate the conclusions can be drawn. I think this is true truth
  8. kizhe
    kizhe 8 October 2015 15: 22 New
    +2
    In short. They want money.
  9. K-50
    K-50 8 October 2015 15: 25 New
    +3
    Hit 5 rockets destroyed.

    Those politicians who made such a decision, even put on a stake, and then it will be few! am
    This is necessary! Millions of Soviet rubles, when the pension was one hundred or less, just throw it away! am
    It’s okay to be disposed of by launching the payload, but so! No words, some continents are voiced.
    As they say, neither write on the fence nor pronounce it rumor! am fool
    1. demon1978
      demon1978 8 October 2015 18: 13 New
      0
      Quote: K-50
      Hit 5 rockets destroyed.
      Those politicians who made such a decision, even put on a stake, and then it will be few!


      And "Buranov", 9 pieces were laid, if I'm not mistaken request Dostroili-2 (one for ground tests, the second, by some miracle, was given to fly) Where else 7 ??? !!! - in scrap metal request
      Yes Long live democracy !!! request
  10. e_krendel
    e_krendel 8 October 2015 15: 32 New
    +3
    Chesslovo, the author as a child, still believes in cartoons, how were American people on the moon? lol
  11. Diviz
    Diviz 8 October 2015 15: 33 New
    0
    A rocket is part of the space program. At the moment, the rocket displays the satellites and sends the crew to the ISS. A superheavy missile is too expensive an event and it will be difficult for one country to master it. And if you look further, then cosmodromes should be in every country.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 8 October 2015 16: 27 New
      -1
      Quote: DiViZ
      A superheavy rocket is too expensive an event and it will be difficult for one country to master it

      There is the main question - why is this superheavy rocket in principle needed? After all, a rocket is essentially a means of putting a payload into a desired orbit, and an extra-heavy rocket is needed to launch a heavy load, which, in principle, cannot be mastered by other rockets, and this is where the main question arises - WHAT is so heavy that we need to launch? After all, are we not going to develop a superheavy rocket in isolation from specific tasks?
      1. rosarioagro
        rosarioagro 8 October 2015 17: 09 New
        +1
        Quote: Albert1988
        - WHAT is so heavy we need to bring?

        Lunar modules, residential, energy, transport, scientific, biological, technological, radio telescope, infrared telescope, nuclear reactor, consumables, devices and machines
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 8 October 2015 18: 07 New
          +1
          Quote: rosarioagro
          Lunar modules, residential, energy, transport, scientific, biological, technological, radio telescope, infrared telescope

          To deduce this, you must first do it all, and so that it was all in that weight category, which would require superheavy missiles. So far, there is nothing of the kind.
          As for the nuclear reactor, for example, we have developed an atomic reactor (for the very "space tug") which weighs only 2 tons - that is, the modern Angara (the heaviest modifications) is quite enough for its withdrawal.
          As for any consumable, the question arises, what will be more cost-effective - to immediately remove a bunch of super-heavy media, or in portions of conventional media.
      2. Wheel
        Wheel 8 October 2015 23: 41 New
        +1
        Quote: Albert1988
        and here the main question arises - WHAT is so heavy we need to bring? After all, are we not going to develop a superheavy rocket in isolation from specific tasks?

        Wow, damn it!
        You are terribly far from the people ... :)
        Does it ever occur to you that the current payload designs do not exceed 25 tons for one simple reason, that there is simply nothing to bring heavier objects?
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 9 October 2015 08: 17 New
          0
          Quote: Wheel
          You are terribly far from the people ... :)

          Well, no further than any other ordinary citizen of Russia)))
          Quote: Wheel
          Does it ever occur to you that the current payload designs do not exceed 25 tons for one simple reason, that there is simply nothing to bring heavier objects?

          I know one thing - all the superheavy carriers, that ours, that the Americans were made for specific tasks, when it was already clear that it was necessary to derive and were developed (finalized) in parallel with its load ...
          Vott and draw the appropriate conclusions.
  12. starriuy
    starriuy 8 October 2015 15: 33 New
    +2
    I think over time the superheavy carrier will appear, and not in fifty years, but much earlier. Everything has its time ... two years ago, few people knew about Armata ..
  13. Nik_One
    Nik_One 8 October 2015 15: 39 New
    +2
    It is understandable the desire of individual figures to dislodge funding for their projects. This was the case in the days of the USSR, but with the difference that all this did not splash onto the open spaces of the media, but was discussed among specialists and decision-makers.
    All this speculation about the Energia launch vehicle and the urgent need for a super-heavy rocket comes from the evil one. Yes, it was a great achievement of the space industry of the USSR, you need to remember this. But at the same time, you need to live in the realities of our time and dynamically move in the chosen direction, solving current issues, and not hysteria about and without a reason.
    "Angara" is a good project that covers all the current needs of Russia. You need to calmly bring it to mind.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 8 October 2015 16: 44 New
      +5
      Quote: Nik_One
      "Angara" is a good project that covers all the current needs of Russia.

      How does the "Angara" - "cover all the current needs of Russia" if it does not fly? Today's queries cover all the same old "Protons" and "Unions". The conversation is just about the fact that when "Angara" matures, it will already become outdated and will be completely hopeless. Without a heavy carrier, manned missions to other planets and the launch of large objects into orbit can not even be dreamed ofhi
      1. Nik_One
        Nik_One 8 October 2015 17: 16 New
        0
        "Angara" is, first of all, already flying. Secondly, it will cover all the necessary Russian needs and replace the outdated and somewhat problematic Protons.
        In what way does it "become obsolete and will be completely hopeless"? Space tasks are solved not only and not so much by the mass of the launched object.
        At the expense of large objects. Is this an urgent task for us now? Or is this the main problem for someone in the world? Since the creation of the Energia launch vehicle to this day, there has been no such need. Everything that needs to be put into space fits perfectly into the load of existing rockets.
        And about missions to other worlds I’d better keep silent .. You can dream, but with all this, the world is ruled by pragmatism, not fantasy ...
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 8 October 2015 17: 53 New
          +2
          Quote: Nik_One
          "Angara" is, first of all, already flying.

          Well, let's not embellish smile One launch of each modification with ballast - does it fly? If it was taking out the payload, one could say it flies! Today they say that we do not need a heavy carrier, and if tomorrow we need it, a cry will rise 100% sure: "What did you think yesterday?!?!" Well, "surf the Universe" on what they came up with in the middle of the last century .. hi
          1. Nik_One
            Nik_One 8 October 2015 17: 58 New
            0
            Do not worry, the payload will also be coming soon. Such machines are not born overnight, it is a process stretched over time)
          2. WUS 068
            WUS 068 9 October 2015 11: 19 New
            0
            And what is the difference between ballast and payload? Do they have a different mass?
        2. Wheel
          Wheel 8 October 2015 23: 46 New
          +2
          Quote: Nik_One
          Since the creation of the Energia launch vehicle to this day, there has been no such need. Everything that needs to be put into space fits perfectly into the load of existing rockets.

          Since the creation of Energia, yusers have been writing with boiling water and have made every possible effort to bury this project.
  14. Bayonet
    Bayonet 8 October 2015 15: 43 New
    +4
    In 2012, in an interview with a reporter, Boris Vladimirovich Balmont, one of the organizers of the domestic space industry, Hero of Socialist Labor, laureate of the State Prize, when asked whether it is possible to resume production of the Energia rocket, answered the following:
    - But the Energy rocket, in my opinion, was sent off early to retire. Such a powerful carrier would be useful today, and even more so tomorrow. I talked about this in the late 80s and early 90s, when the fate of Energy was decided. I remember that in Germany, where I worked as an adviser-envoy on economic issues, the general designer of NPO Energia Yuri Semenov, his deputy Valery Ryumin, and the chief designer of the rocket Boris Gubanov came. We then tried to find foreign companies that, together with our specialists, would undertake the operation of an extra-heavy carrier, offering various services on the global launch market. Energia could launch three 18-ton communication satellites at once, which, having occupied three different points in space orbits, would replace less efficient spacecraft. Modules for future extraterrestrial plants could also be derived. I'm not talking about sending automatic stations to the moon, Mars or other planets. But then it was not possible to find interested firms. I think that today the situation would be different.
    The documentation is intact and some of the specialists are still working. The main thing is equipment. We used to buy machines in France for precision and ultra-precise machining of metal parts. Even today they seem to be standing at the Samara plant. In a word, if you set such a problem, it can be solved in 5-6 years. The question, however, arises of how to deliver the blocks to Baikonur. Not an easy thing. It will be necessary either to rent Mriyu from the Ukrainians, or to create your own aircraft of this type. But these are solvable issues.
  15. Asadullah
    Asadullah 8 October 2015 15: 45 New
    +4
    Refined delirium. Especially touching is the comparison of SLS in the drawings and the almost finished "Hangara". Angara will fly with the optimal load, but will Orion fly with 70 tons? The comparison with Saturn 5 is even more amusing. That is, the Americans take two steps back to take a step forward, the author is satisfied with this, and Russia, carefully assessing its capabilities, taking a step forward, oh, how bad !?

    So why the hell, the Americans create Orion from scratch, and even more untested and untested methods, and even less carrying capacity when they have it in the museum "the most effective rocket in history, lifting 140 tons in one fell swoop"how the Brave Tailor in one fell swoop?
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 8 October 2015 16: 31 New
      0
      Quote: Asadullah
      So why the hell would the Americans create Orion from scratch, and even more untested and untested methods, and even less carrying capacity, when they have "the most efficient rocket in history, lifting 140 tons in one fell swoop" like the Brave Tailor in one fell swoop?

      Everything is trivial - they simply simply shut down the production of all kinds of saturns at one time ... for it turned out to be unprofitable - why didn’t they come up with such missiles for flights to the Moon, now everything has to be done from scratch (yes and to cut a budgetary on a new development is also a great opportunity), although it’s still not clear - what will they put into orbit with such missiles? Are they really going to build a Death Star? wink
      1. Asadullah
        Asadullah 8 October 2015 18: 26 New
        -1
        Are they really going to build a Death Star?


        Most likely they are trying to drag Russia into the space race. For, cost-effective space, these are low orbits. This means commerce, communications, orders, service and methods of force majeure. The Americans are lagging behind in this; putting an order into orbit costs a lot of money and time. And heavy rockets and heavy loads are very expensive. They completely stand apart from commercial launches. To jam the Russians into high orbits, their cherished dream is to free up space in the low ones.
      2. Bayonet
        Bayonet 8 October 2015 18: 36 New
        +2
        Quote: Albert1988
        and what will they put into orbit with such missiles?

        There are many options. Research systems (Hefty Hubble, put the Shuttle into orbit), Launch of several satellites into orbit, construction of a future station, devices (possibly manned) for planet exploration, etc. etc. There will be a carrier, there will be programs!
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 8 October 2015 16: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: Asadullah
      So why the hell, the Americans create Orion from scratch, and even more untested and untested methods, and even less carrying capacity, when they have in the museum "the most effective rocket in history, lifting 140 tons in one fell swoop."

      The fact is that "Orion" and "Saturn 5" are completely different things. smile Saturn 5 is a carrier rocket developed in the sixties of the last century, and Orion is a multipurpose, partially reusable transport manned spacecraft under development. Launched into orbit by a carrier rocket. hi
      1. Asadullah
        Asadullah 8 October 2015 18: 13 New
        0
        The fact is that "Orion" and "Saturn 5" are completely different things.


        I mean the SLS program with "Blocks". The only thing is that the second-stage boosters from the shuttles, where is the new thing here? And the first step, the restoration of von Braun's early works. And all the parameters of the "obsolete rocket of the sixties" are head and shoulders above the capabilities of the "new" projected rocket. And this "development" lived for six years. The same is true if you built a poultry farm to breed one chicken per egg, after which the chicken was slaughtered with another chicken, and the factory was used for firewood. So the question is trivial, but was there a boy.
    3. rosarioagro
      rosarioagro 8 October 2015 17: 13 New
      +1
      Quote: Asadullah
      That is, the Americans take two steps back

      It's like TTU + hydrogen in the second stage of the SLS, where are the steps back?
      1. Asadullah
        Asadullah 8 October 2015 17: 59 New
        0
        Solid fuel, step back. For these are the first experiments of Werner, they pressed pyroxylin and fired with checkers, one horseradish, it was very difficult to maintain combustion stability at high power. Hydrogen is what they flew on and will fly. Mark my word, the first unsuccessful tests on pyroxylin, and will reduce the carrying capacity, replacing the first stage with hydrogen. They searched for a long time for how to increase the density of the reference gases and returned to Werner, who told her daughter in the sunset of life - probably my dream could come true in Russia.
    4. Scraptor
      Scraptor 9 October 2015 05: 00 New
      0
      the tailor was shaking too much and was unreliable. less load-bearing SLS due to frail reusable engines from the Shuttle standing on its second stage

      there are still "political" questions ...
  16. Sterlya
    Sterlya 8 October 2015 16: 01 New
    +2
    it is necessary to modify the Angara and build superheavy, since there is such a need
  17. Skiff_spb
    Skiff_spb 8 October 2015 16: 05 New
    +2
    Catch up and overtake.
    The author has a fever. As if everything came up against the load capacity)))
    Even laziness to answer is expanded ... Well, as a child, chesslovo.
  18. Bthuk
    Bthuk 8 October 2015 16: 53 New
    -3
    It is necessary to develop space with the Chinas! Money and sanctions are not terrible there. And most importantly, some military-space interests :)
  19. 1536
    1536 8 October 2015 16: 54 New
    0
    I now look at some of our "problems", and it becomes clear that if the problem begins to be discussed "with the whole world" and "all and sundry" there is nothing good to expect.
    In my opinion, it is necessary to leave the space industry alone, to finance, of course.
    Scientists, designers and engineers will figure out what to do.
    But it is necessary to prioritize. Flying to the moon - primarily dual-use technology - is actually a space application, and application in other industries that produce goods for ordinary people.
  20. Arktidianets
    Arktidianets 8 October 2015 16: 54 New
    0
    An author like guano even commented somehow dumbly
  21. loaln
    loaln 8 October 2015 16: 55 New
    +1
    Everything is logical! The Soviet "cosmic gingerbread" is gorged, sucked and bitten. They want to give it a fresh look. The darkness is not enough! All sold! And that failed, they defiled. It would be better if we had spent on drink. Then, in a drunken stupor, maybe a brilliant insight would come to at least someone.
    And now... ? Out of nowhere, with indifferent performers ... yes, you got there, "troubadours" of capitalist reality!
  22. rosarioagro
    rosarioagro 8 October 2015 17: 15 New
    0
    Without hydrogen, there will be no forward movement, at least how many modules are there, extensive development
  23. NDR-791
    NDR-791 8 October 2015 17: 27 New
    0
    Virtually any item listed above is sufficient to doubt the feasibility of this project.
    That is, according to the results of the public discussion, the “Angara” project cannot be recommended as the basis of the PCF-2025.

    1. Half of the above items - an empty ring and they will remain.
    2. What kind of society did you discuss?
    3. The basis of the Federal Space Program ANY! - education starting from school, the possibility of design developments, the ability of the industry to produce those developments, and most importantly the consistency of all this. And nifiga not specifically taken rocket.
  24. sisa29
    sisa29 8 October 2015 17: 32 New
    0
    As it’s all very difficult. To me. It seems like spraying into new heavy rockets you need a little fuss. Firstly, there is no task for them in Russia so far. Secondly, it is probably more correct to activate resources for the solution of new physical principles of flight, and not royal modernization. Thirdly, is this new space needed? Can these forces be thrown to aviation more correctly, otherwise we feed the Boeing and Airbus ???
  25. NDR-791
    NDR-791 8 October 2015 17: 34 New
    0
    Virtually any item listed above is sufficient to doubt the feasibility of this project.
    That is, according to the results of the public discussion, the “Angara” project cannot be recommended as the basis of the PCF-2025.

    1. Half of the above - while dreams and not the fact that they will be realized.
    2. What kind of society did you discuss?
    3. The basis of ANY FKP-25 is education starting from school, the possibility of design developments, the possibilities of industry to translate these developments into metal. And most importantly - agreed opportunities !!!
  26. gridasov
    gridasov 8 October 2015 17: 41 New
    +1
    All current modern and promising rocket engines have a key component - a turbo fuel supercharger. Without understanding the fundamental laws in the field of electric. magnetism, it is very difficult to understand that this device has its own boundary parameters of operation and why, which means any increase in the number of engines, equivalently increases the amount of fuel, and hence the weight. This proportional relationship can be avoided if we rely on the process model, the essence of which is to use the potential energy of air or water. Then all the "fuel" is in the rocket's flight space. Especially on takeoff. It is impossible to scale up on the old algorithms of the physical process taking place in the turbocharger. which means an increase in the take-off weight of the rocket. It is obvious that in order to make a breakthrough in the creation of effective rocket and aircraft engines, one must first of all abandon self-deception and expand the scope of analysis of those physical phenomena that occur around us.
  27. Aksakal_07
    Aksakal_07 8 October 2015 17: 52 New
    +3
    Quote: Engineer
    let's drop everything and will spend billions on a new rocket

    No need to distort the facts, Alexander Vladimirovich! The author proposes, first, to once again discuss the prospects of the Angara-class LV. Secondly, maybe there is a reason not to reinvent the wheel, but to take as a basis the project of the Energia-M rocket, which has already been embodied in metal, capable of launching 35 tons of payload into low orbit?
    1. Nik_One
      Nik_One 8 October 2015 18: 01 New
      0
      It is already impossible to take "Energy" as a basis, because everything that can not be restored just like that. This is a process similar to creating media from almost scratch.
  28. Ilya77
    Ilya77 8 October 2015 18: 39 New
    0
    He simply pushes someone away from the feeder, and he is hysterical, because a big rocket is a lot of money.
  29. da Vinci
    da Vinci 8 October 2015 18: 45 New
    +2
    Everything is very confusing, but the fact is that the lack of a promising carrier is obvious! If so - mercilessly tear off shoulder straps, titles, positions, awards. This is a form of robbery of the state. And about reworking from scratch - a vivid example is the history of the creation of the Su-27, the same launch vehicle Soyuz. But the implementation period is up to 3 years. We have experience, we have the groundwork, we have technology. There are no cadres - to disperse all the "academicians", to create Baumanki and MAI from the last year with a salary of 10 thousand dollars. Let it be 3 more years, but the result will be! wink
  30. Old26
    Old26 8 October 2015 18: 53 New
    +1
    Quote: demon1978
    And "Buranov", 9 pieces were laid, if I'm not mistaken

    Five. Nos. 3 and 4 were destroyed on the slipways, as their EMNIP readiness was less than 15% in one and 5-7 percent in another

    Quote: Skiff_spb
    As if everything rested on the load capacity

    Oddly enough, this is one of the fundamental factors. Which is easier when constructing, for example, a 200-ton structure. Launch 2 launchers with a lifting capacity of 100 tons, 4 launchers with a loading capacity of 50 tons, or launch a dozen of 20 tons each? It's like on earth. It can be translated by one MAZ truck (with a wheel arrangement of 16x16), a pair of KAMAZ trucks or a dozen or so "Gazelles" ...

    Already, we are beginning to lose the European Union, the United States, and Japan, and China in the near future. And one of the factors determining, among other things, commercial success will be precisely the carrying capacity and only secondarily the price
  31. ZAV69
    ZAV69 8 October 2015 19: 00 New
    0
    The author has put everything together. Superheavy carriers are not needed to display communication satellites, navigation, weather surveillance and espionage. But what would go further into space? And all the nods toward the amers .... well, this is not a gate that does not climb. They were not on the moon, they were not. Otherwise, for 50 years, if there was a flight technology and its development, there would already be a permanent base. And with such a good Saturn 5, it makes no sense to fence sls with much worse data. Or maybe there was no Saturn? Or were the specifications an order of magnitude less than stated? Now, if she introduced 200-250 tons into orbit, then yes. And so it is quite similar to disobob Russia got into this race and would use up resources. A couple of cheek-blown mockups and Russia will put the entire budget into space to the detriment of other projects, as has been the case with soy.
    While there is no technology for using the atom and thermonuclear poison to go into orbit, everything else is children's toys. Or an orbital elevator. Actually, there were a lot of projects in 70, a fountain of ideas. Tod is the same air start. Where is everyone? It seems that someone just slowed down humanity on the threshold of space.
  32. Mestny
    Mestny 8 October 2015 20: 29 New
    0
    Quote: War and Peace
    but can remove one and the most important thing, the one that places all the rest?

    Who is this? Do not Tomi.
  33. cosmos-PS
    cosmos-PS 8 October 2015 21: 07 New
    0
    The attitude to the article is ambiguous. Some kind of a hodgepodge turned out. No doubt, the project on the Angara was delayed and greatly. But the rocket was created in difficult times. In reality, they began to work on it only after 2010, and before that there was a stomp on the spot. Moreover, there was no launch pad. In Plesetsk, they began to work actively on the table also in 2010, and build the East with active funding in 2012. Before that, there were just words, not work, and consideration of projects. Recall that they proposed to re-design the Rus rocket, an analogue of the Angara, although the development of the Angara was already not small. Only in 2012 they abandoned the Rus rocket. Sober people were found. Given the success in launching the Angara-1,2 and 5, we can hope that the rocket turned out reliable. The price will be seen later, but alliances and protons were also expensive at first. Get cheaper in time. In any case, a replacement for Proton is needed and the Angara-5 can become a worthy receiver. Therefore, the cost of the Angara is worth it. As for Angara-1.2, it has a good competitor - Soyuz-2.1v, with the NK-33 engine. Choose what you like !!! This shows that not everything is so bad. This shows that we have new missiles that have already flown, Angara-1.2, Soyuz-2.1v, Angara-5 (replacing Proton), which are waiting for the completion of work on the East. They will be able to carry out any tasks today, especially for commercial projects. And do not write off Unions-2.1a and 2.1b. They will also take off not only from Baikonur, but also from the East. As for the heavy-class launch vehicle, still let's define the tasks and what we want to get at the exit. Recall that the Energy project was not just excellent, it was a masterpiece of Russian cosmonautics. But there were no longer any tasks for the Energia LV at that time, so everything collapsed. It’s not worth returning, a lot of time has passed. It will be necessary in fact to start all over again. Stomping on the spot is another. Therefore, it would be best to persistently bring the Angara to the end, no matter how they scolded him for long-term construction and obsolescence. And if you start something new, then something fundamentally new, because on what all the advanced countries are now creating, you can’t fly beyond the geostationary orbit. Well, except for prohibitively expensive research satellites)))).
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 8 October 2015 21: 29 New
      -1
      Simple reasoning allows you to build algorithms for solving the problem. The rocket will fly and do it with any weight if there are engines. The engine is not an abstraction, it is a completely specific device operating on logical and well-founded principles. And here's the question. Is this process reasonable enough or is it the inability of the "crowd" to find the person who will say that everything is somewhat underestimated or overestimated. In short. A rocket engine, a good engine, is, first of all, a turbo-fuel supercharger. The efficiency of the entire engine depends on the operation of this unit. And it contains fundamentally outdated and ineffective principles of work. Up to a certain point it was possible to ensure its performance, but the increase in the lifting weight of the rocket brought the mode of this device beyond its physical ability to provide those physical processes that it was required to perform. If someone does not understand this, then it is not yet time for our participation. It's pretty simple.
  34. NordUral
    NordUral 8 October 2015 21: 39 New
    -1
    Decisions on the country's space program are made either by very narrow-minded people, or simply hidden enemies. The good potential of techies and developments of the Union is lost in vain. All problems in the ideology of power.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 8 October 2015 21: 52 New
      0
      I would not be so radical. In worldly vanity, everyone exists according to their own laws. But fundamental discoveries are born in silence and tranquility and far from this fuss. Therefore, everyone, apparently, should be able to do what he does. Institutions are also needed. Everything is needed in the infrastructure that exists. But discoveries are still made by people who are on some line between the rational and the fantastic. And this rational is different in that it is justified in its objectivity and the ability to be embodied in reality. The same Americans ten years ago already predicted that significant discoveries would be made by completely unknown people from non-academic circles.
  35. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 8 October 2015 22: 29 New
    0
    And after all, under this misfortune, a cosmodrome is also being built. Our future.) It's a pity Putin knows nothing, he would put things in order.)
    In ten to fifteen years, when you will answer to the children-grandchildren the question - why now we don’t fly into space at all, do not forget to tell how proud we were of the hangar and tell Rogozin’s joke about the trampoline.
  36. Old26
    Old26 9 October 2015 00: 01 New
    0
    Quote: chunga-changa
    And after all, under this misfortune, a cosmodrome is also being built. Our future.) It's a pity Putin knows nothing, he would put things in order.)
    In ten to fifteen years, when you will answer to the children-grandchildren the question - why now we don’t fly into space at all, do not forget to tell how proud we were of the hangar and tell Rogozin’s joke about the trampoline.

    good
  37. Butt
    Butt 9 October 2015 03: 37 New
    0
    Bayonet (5) SU  Yesterday, 15:43 PM
    Think correctly, if you live more than one day, then the forgotten project of "Union" is not too late to raise on a promising basis, an open competition of all design bureaus is needed. This is to prevent squabbles!
    The point is political will, if we want that in the future there would not be a shame for the power!
    Interestingly, maybe GDP will say something?
  38. Oml
    Oml 9 October 2015 04: 13 New
    0
    Che for an article, a campaign translation from Western articles.
  39. hitech
    hitech 9 October 2015 12: 55 New
    0
    The author is well done, SUPER HEAVY ROCKET IS NECESSARY FOR RUSSIA. DOT. OTHERWISE ALL OUR ROCKETS WILL SOON FUTURE WILL BE THE SAME IN DEMAND AS LADA "KALINA" FROM VAZ.
    1. Disant
      Disant 9 October 2015 14: 49 New
      0
      so in the first comment they asked - under what goods? What tasks do you need an extra heavy rocket for? and in response - NEED A POINT.
      1. gridasov
        gridasov 9 October 2015 15: 06 New
        0
        Among other things. and carrying something is just a very important technology, the priority of ownership of which cannot be overestimated in the future.
        1. Disant
          Disant 9 October 2015 15: 38 New
          0
          You are somehow inconsistent - you convince yourself that you have to wait until they develop delivery vehicles on fundamentally new engines, and now again in the opposite direction. It is clear that the technology of launching 100-150 tons at a time into orbit is important in itself, but then the technology of launching 1000 tons at a time is even more important. Let's stay without the last cowards, but with technology that comes in handy in the future - like with Buran
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 9 October 2015 15: 50 New
            0
            Nobody encroaches on your underpants ... although it would be worth it, because it came in handy on the X-37.
            1000 tons of course is also more important, but there may be environmental consequences from the launch.
            1. Disant
              Disant 9 October 2015 16: 16 New
              0
              You do not understand me - where there are 1000, maybe 2000, and 10 thousand.
              Let's immediately design and build for 10 thousand. or not, immediately at twenty suggest what nothing to trifle about.
              .
              Well, understand - do not invest in space - it will still be not enough for him. there is no limit to perfection.

              about cowards - judging by the American flag of your avatar - cowards are really mine.
              1. Scraptor
                Scraptor 9 October 2015 16: 26 New
                0
                Wasn’t Russian just above?

                You did not understand this - there was something written about the possible environmental consequences of the launch.

                Well, it must be achieved ...
      2. Scraptor
        Scraptor 9 October 2015 15: 57 New
        0
        Look for example "5th Element" more often so that such questions do not arise. Now a new movie has also been released in which the Russian astronaut somehow did not find a place ...
        1. Disant
          Disant 9 October 2015 16: 21 New
          0
          I looked. Back to my underpants again. some vicious circle straight turns out.
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 9 October 2015 16: 24 New
            0
            Why do they bother you so much? In the Scottish Guard they serve somehow without them ... lol
      3. Scraptor
        Scraptor 9 October 2015 16: 09 New
        0
        Another interesting article, especially for Russia (1000 tons for materiel, within 100 - for paratroopers):
        http://news.rambler.ru/articles/31574713/
        but the site will not miss by its name wink
        write bourgeois who already have bases around the world.

        It wouldn’t hurt to throw the usual kiloton on occasion somewhere. If not far, then there will be no big consequences at the launch site. There will be no target in place either. repeat
  40. srha
    srha 9 October 2015 16: 59 New
    0
    People, yes look at the facts, do not close your eyes! Look at the statistics of the average satellite weight by years since 1957 - it is growing. Look at diplomatic battles for a place in a geocentric orbit - intensified. Look at the cost of launching 5 satellites on 5 small missiles, or just the whole five on one big one. Estimate the time of preparation and launches of one large or five small rockets from the cosmodrome. Tell me, can a small rocket be able to send something efficient to Pluto? Yes, part of the Russians is no longer necessary, but do not speak for everyone.
    And the Roskosmos leadership has rotted. The development and implementation time is chosen according to the principle of Khoji Nasredin: either check or donkey. Note, near intermediate goals such as completed mission-missions, which can be estimated by an ordinary person, are not indicated at all! No goals have been chosen, prospects do not see where they do not know where to move, and, accordingly, there is no development program. Only old technologies, rocket launchers, satellites, but the ISS are finalizing.

    But the world does not stand still, here is another example: "The private Israeli company SpaceIL signed the first-ever contract to send a commercial vehicle into space, which is designed to land on the lunar surface ... The contract was signed between SpaceIL and the American company Spaceflight Industries. and launch scheduled for the second half of 2017 using a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle ".

    Read more: http://www.km.ru/science-tech/2015/10/09/765294-nazvana-data-zapuska-pervogo-cha

    stnogo-lunokhoda