Military Review

RSC Energia has developed a space shuttle project for flights to the Moon from near-Earth orbit.

128
The corporation "Energy" developed a project of reusable manned spacecraft "Tug" for delivery to the Moon astronauts and cargo, transmits RIA News message of the representative of the corporation Yuri Makushenko.


RSC Energia has developed a space shuttle project for flights to the Moon from near-Earth orbit.


"The cost of the mission of the reusable manned ship" Charge "is a third lower than the cost of the mission of the manned transport ship Federation," Makushenko said in Korolev at the conference "Manned Space Exploration."

According to him, the “Wrench” system should be based on the International Space Station and run from it to the near-moon international platform, delivering cargo and cosmonauts to the Moon, who had previously flown to the ISS with the Soyuz series ships. ”

“The upgraded DMM acceleration block, launched with the help of the Angara-A5 heavy-class booster rocket and joined with the“ Chug ”in near-earth orbit, should serve as a means of acceleration from the first to the second cosmic velocity.

According to the developers, "the maximum mass of the complex is 11,4 tons, the flight time from the Earth's orbit to the Moon is up to 5 days".

What carrier “Tug” will be delivered from Earth to the ISS, the representative of the corporation did not specify.

Speaking about the advantages of the new system over the Federation project, Makushenko noted “there is no need to create a super-heavy launch vehicle or a heavy-class launch vehicle with hydrogen fuel.”

“In addition, since the Angara-A5 rocket will not be activated when launching cosmonauts themselves from Earth, there is no need for its certification for manned flights. Also, the new project allows to reduce costs and reduce the time it takes to create a domestic transport system, ”he added.

The agency recalls that the "reusable manned transport ship" Federation "was also developed at RKK Energia and is designed to deliver people and cargo to the Moon and near-earth orbit." It was reported that the first unmanned launch of the "Federation" is scheduled for 2021, the construction of the ship was supposed to begin this summer.
Photos used:
astrogalaxy1.narod.ru
128 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 26 May 2016 08: 38
    +7
    it would be nice to rekindle a new space race good
    1. Sluggish
      Sluggish 26 May 2016 08: 44
      -2
      Peaceful exploration of space is very good. But why should a man fly to the moon?
      1. Ami du peuple
        Ami du peuple 26 May 2016 08: 55
        +24
        Quote: Sluggish
        But why should a man fly to the moon?
        Behind Helium-3 - a new environmental type of fuel for thermonuclear energy that cannot be obtained on Earth
        Or ask the Americans why they flew there. By the way, you can try to search for traces of their stay on the moon. wink
        1. Red_Hamer
          Red_Hamer 26 May 2016 09: 03
          +15
          They "forbade" (naive) to approach closer than 5 km to their landing site on the Moon! laughing
          1. Flinky
            Flinky 26 May 2016 09: 06
            +13
            Their "bans" on Earth are ignored, and on the Moon they will be ignored all the more. lol
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Sagittarius YaNAO
            Sagittarius YaNAO 26 May 2016 12: 49
            +5
            Quote: Red_Hamer
            They "forbade" (naive) to approach closer than 5 km to their landing site on the Moon! laughing

            So let the guard put on the spot laughing
        2. edeligor
          edeligor 26 May 2016 09: 14
          +5
          Quote: Ami du peuple
          Or ask the Americans why they flew there. By the way, you can try to search for traces of their stay on the moon. wink

          That's right. And then for 50 years they have been trying to spool the whole world.
        3. zennon
          zennon 26 May 2016 16: 17
          +3
          Quote: Ami du peuple
          Behind Helium-3 - a new environmental type of fuel for thermonuclear energy that cannot be obtained on Earth

          Firstly, it can be found on Earth, albeit at a negligible concentration. The total amount of helium-3 in the Earth’s atmosphere is estimated at 35 tons. At present, helium-000 is not extracted from natural sources, but is created artificially when tritium decays. the price of helium-3 in 3 was $ 2009 per liter. For comparison, tritium costs $ 930 million per kilo. Secondly, there is not much of it on the moon. The content of helium-30 in the lunar regolith is ~ 3 g per 1 tons. Therefore, for mining tons of this isotope should be processed at least 100 million tons of soil. Do you have any idea what this enrichment plant is on the moon? Third, why do you need helium 100? You, apparently, are completely off topic. You can’t even imagine that this is thermonuclear energy. Even now we can’t get close to a controlled deuterium-tritium reaction! We don’t even know how to use the energy obtained as a result. There was only one model of the MHD generator. It was created by academician Velikhov. And this is only a model. It is unlikely that in 3 years we will be able to carry out controlled deuterium-tritium even as an experiment. About 50 kg of tritium must be used per year in the science-fiction reactor designed by the science fiction. On the whole earth it is now about 56 kg! This is together with unrecoverable tritium from the reactors! And to achieve helium-deuterium reaction must pass a significantly higher temperature threshold. It is necessary to reach a temperature of approximately a billion degrees so that it can begin! This is not even science fiction. Go clean the Kalashnikov assault rifle, and do not meddle in high-energy physics.
      2. Mikhail m
        Mikhail m 26 May 2016 10: 03
        .
        Why spend money on astronomy when the manure in the barn is not cleaned ...
        1. andj61
          andj61 26 May 2016 10: 12
          +14
          Quote: Michael m
          Why spend money on astronomy when the manure in the barn is not cleaned ...

          And so in this case we will only remove manure ... request
          To man - and to humanity! - need a dream and a worthy goal! hi
        2. Rash
          Rash 26 May 2016 10: 35
          +7
          Sometimes you need to break away from the trough and look up. fellow
        3. dmi.pris
          dmi.pris 26 May 2016 19: 01
          0
          Why do you need money for space, if it is completely thieves? So what? So now it remains to be strangled? Isn't it easier to go through Roskosmos and industry enterprises?
          Quote: Michael m
          Why spend money on astronomy when the manure in the barn is not cleaned ...
      3. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 26 May 2016 12: 19
        +1
        First, in order to stake a plot and increase the territory of the Russian Federation! And you won’t have time to blink, as the Moon will be divided!
        Second, various metals were found in the lunar soil, including rare, and even noble, in a native form, and many.
        Third: to create a bridgehead to fly to more suitable planets for humans (Mars, Venus, Jupiter’s moons) --- they are more suitable for colonization.
        Fourth, sooner or later people will start to mine asteroids, also for metals, there are more of them than on the moon, and it is easier to get them. Moreover, it is much more convenient and cheaper to "tow" them to the Moon than, say, to the Earth or to develop them on site.
        1. zennon
          zennon 26 May 2016 16: 24
          0
          Quote: Reptiloid
          To create a bridgehead, to fly to planets more suitable for people (Mars, Venus, Jupiter's moons) --- they are more suitable for colonization.

          Is Venus suitable for colonization? At a temperature on the surface of Venus (at the level of the average radius of the planet) - about 750 K (477 ° C), and its daily fluctuations are insignificant. The pressure is about 93 atm, the gas density is almost two orders of magnitude higher than in the Earth’s atmosphere. Two orders of magnitude is 100 times! Well, well ...
    2. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 26 May 2016 08: 44
      +3
      a good shot, the moon then turns out to be brown, and not cement-gray, as in Amer films.
      1. Flinky
        Flinky 26 May 2016 09: 00
        +3
        Depends on the lighting.
        1. Infinity
          Infinity 26 May 2016 09: 19
          +1
          From lighting, filters used, the camera itself.
          And so it is gray, with tones of brown (so are the soil samples, and so the astronauts themselves describe it)

          The issue of the entire Roskosmos is money (or rather, their use). The project is very expensive. Only recently they cut money on the same Moon and postponed the flight.
        2. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 26 May 2016 09: 21
          +6
          Quote: Flinky
          Depends on the lighting.



          Scientific evidence: the surface of the moon is brown!
          1 - 1954. Spectral observations of Soviet astronomers




          http://bolshoyforum.com/forum/index.php?page=965



          1. Red_Hamer
            Red_Hamer 26 May 2016 09: 40
            +4
            This is the same globe from the Geography office! Dear, how you made me happy, ehh, where are these wonderful years!
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Red_Hamer
        Red_Hamer 26 May 2016 09: 17
        +5
        I’m still in our (USSR) globe of the moon, we stood in the geography cabinet, I remember in brown. And I also remember the pictures of the brown moon. I do not know why, at that time it was not spoken about. It's just that in the USSR it was a given. Americans, as always, in their profit interest, so that no one could identify minerals, presented, and presented with misinformation.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Red_Hamer
          Red_Hamer 26 May 2016 09: 51
          +9
          View from the moon to the earth. Do you remember these pictures?
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 26 May 2016 09: 58
            +5
            The moon can be like that
            1. Pavel Ordynsky
              Pavel Ordynsky 26 May 2016 10: 02
              +1
              Quote: Vadim237
              The moon can be like that


              the closer to the surface of the moon, the more brown the moon becomes.
          2. Vadim237
            Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 00
            +2
            And it happens
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 24
              +1
              Colors depend on the camera, filters and lighting.
              1. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 26 May 2016 12: 38
                -2
                So it turns out --- green Ganymede, purple Callisto, etc.
          3. Pavel Ordynsky
            Pavel Ordynsky 26 May 2016 10: 00
            0
            It’s still interesting to find some pictures on which the stars are visible on the moon, so that the American Hlyuda would soon come to the truth.
            1. Infinity
              Infinity 26 May 2016 10: 42
              +4
              There are no stars in any modern photo (except those taken with shutter speed). Only the brightest ones (as in the American pictures, there are some of the brightest stars.
              No stars
            2. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 26 May 2016 12: 43
              0
              The stars are not visible because THESE pictures are SPECIALLY obscured, because otherwise there is nothing to see! Yes, the Earth’s atmosphere delays most of the visible light, but there is still hard radiation!
          4. Infinity
            Infinity 26 May 2016 10: 39
            +3
            Oh, legendary photos! What a delight everyone was when they saw them!
            These are now flights into space and photos of the Earth seem to be something ordinary ... And then bully
        3. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 26 May 2016 12: 35
          0
          I read in many books and on the Web that atmosphereless planets, or with a very rarefied atmosphere and rock surface (Moon, Mercury, asteroids, Mars satellites, Jupiter satellites), even when a surface of a different color is exposed in some area, due to SUNNY CORPULAR RADIATION gradually acquires a dark yellow or dark orange color.
          By the way, when we see bright, colorful images of planets - this is a SPECIAL tinting to "improve perception". At one time, they talked about it here.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. siberalt
      siberalt 26 May 2016 08: 53
      +12
      What a space race there is. The state has allocated "almost 11 billion rubles" for the repair of Russian roads, which is comparable to the cost of the Yeltsin Center. One thing reassures us that our builders do not pave roads to the Moon. laughing
      1. Ami du peuple
        Ami du peuple 26 May 2016 09: 19
        +3
        Quote: siberalt
        One reassures that our builders do not pave the way to the moon.
        It reassures me even more that the Yeltsin Center will not be built on the moon. Although, who knows?
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 May 2016 09: 31
          +1
          The Gorbachev sign of the center will be landed on the moon, of course, after the loss of Mikhail Sergeyevich.
    5. Bobxnumx
      Bobxnumx 26 May 2016 09: 08
      +2
      There was Buran - a work of art, a wonderful apparatus. Let's see what they’ll do now. what
      1. atalef
        atalef 26 May 2016 09: 13
        -4
        Quote: Bob0859
        There was Buran - a work of art, a wonderful apparatus. Let's see what they’ll do now. what

        Has Buran ever flown in a manned version? How many times did he fly? So the link to the snowstorm is not entirely successful
        1. edeligor
          edeligor 26 May 2016 09: 19
          .
          Do not go to the grandmother! According to garlic, I’m not sure that Gagarin was the first in space. Come some sort of convict before squirrels and arrows plowed open spaces ... laughing
          1. Mikhail m
            Mikhail m 26 May 2016 09: 48
            +6
            The garlic agronomist is no good at judging space. The habit of looking only at the ground interferes.
            1. edeligor
              edeligor 26 May 2016 09: 53
              -9
              Where are we already from the earth? Look from righteous anger, do not tear yourself, do not burn the sofa!
        2. andj61
          andj61 26 May 2016 09: 36
          +6
          Quote: atalef
          Has Buran ever flown in a manned version?

          And at least any ship in the "space shuttle" program flew in automatic mode? wink
          No - since this is accomplished - especially landing - it is technically much more complicated.
          Buran for his flight, not without reason, entered the Guinness Book of Records. The USSR did not have the economic opportunity to continue this program, and launching satellites in the usual way was almost an order of magnitude cheaper. Buran, of course, did not show all its advantages and advantages, since it actually made only one flight, but it is in no way inferior to the shuttle. And the booster will be even cooler yes The shuttles on the carrier have solid fuel boosters, and at the time, Korolev said that flying on solid rocket rockets was like flying on a barrel of gunpowder. And the Challenger disaster confirmed this. request
          Greetings, Alexander. hi
          1. atalef
            atalef 26 May 2016 09: 48
            -4
            Quote: andj61
            And at least any ship in the "space shuttle" program flew in automatic mode?

            Hi Andrew
            Well, I was at the launch of Buran and believe me, one flight in the 2 orbit and landing, no one will ever call a successful space program.
            In fact, she was not, or rather, she died before she could show anything

            Quote: andj61
            No - since this is accomplished - especially landing - it is technically much more complicated.

            Why? Because the States did not do this? And there is one question, but did they need it?
            Quote: andj61
            but he is in no way inferior to the shuttle

            He was inferior to everyone. Andrey Buran’s flight - there were 2 turns in an uninhabited version, but you won’t prove to me that this is equivalent to a 2-week (standard) shuttle flight with 7 (8) (mine) astronauts
            Quote: andj61
            And the booster will be even cooler

            I can’t say anything, Energy flew only 2 times

            Quote: andj61
            The shuttles on the carrier have solid fuel boosters, and at the time, Korolev said that flying on solid rocket rockets was like flying on a barrel of gunpowder. And the Challenger disaster confirmed this.

            Perhaps, but they made more than 100 successful launches over the course of more than 25 years. Having fully completed the program.
            1. andj61
              andj61 26 May 2016 10: 02
              +5
              Quote: atalef
              they have completed more than 100 successful launches over more than 25 years. Having fully completed the program.

              Who can argue, only this program ended in exactly the same way as the lunar program - its complete curtailment and complete loss of technology. However, like the Energia-Buran program. It's just that the United States will still be richer than the USSR and Russia. So this program was completed. And the cost of a human flight and the launch of a satellite by means of this shuttle in terms of costs exceeded the old proven method at times, if not tens of times. And this program did not receive any development - and this also shows its initial inconsistency. And now, in order to resume both the lunar and the "shuttle" programs, everything needs to be developed anew. And into space, cargoes and satellites are delivered by ancient "Soyuz", while the United States actually does not even have a normal carrier.
              As for Energia, it was created, among other things, with the expectation of using it to launch combat space stations into orbit. And for Buran. And for prestige. yes And there was simply no real cargo for launching into orbit under the conditions of "perestroika" - everything could be thrown into space with smaller rockets.
              True, I was not at the launch of "Bran", but in the 80s I had a chance to work in Podlipki after institute at the Research Institute-4 of the Ministry of Defense (Strategic Missile Forces) as an engineer, and even a reserve (purely military) MCC was on the territory of the unit. A lot of specialists were in the subject, and back in 1985-86 they talked about the unpromising nature of Buran and Energiya (and shuttles too!), Except for propaganda, of course, precisely because of the lack of cargo for this system.
              1. atalef
                atalef 26 May 2016 10: 22
                -1
                Quote: andj61
                Who argues, only this program ended exactly the same as the lunar program - its complete curtailment and the complete loss of technology

                These are problems of American manufacture.
                The program ends, private plants do not receive funding for the preservation of technological chains.
                Quote: andj61
                It’s just that the USA will still be richer than the USSR and Russia. So this program was completed.

                Well, what can you do about it
                Quote: andj61
                And the cost of a person’s flight and the launch of a satellite through this shuttle in costs exceeded the old proven method at times, if not tens of times.

                Then why did the USSR try to launch the same program?
                In general, one (only one case) - the repair and modernization of Hubble paid for a huge part of the project. Hubl toil more than 3 billion bucks, and without a shuttle it would not be possible to repair it, and how many similar cases?
                The Space Shuttle was another dullness in the development of space, the Americans passed it, in the USSR - no
                Quote: andj61
                now, in order to resume both the lunar and the "shuttle" programs, everything needs to be developed anew. And into space, cargoes and satellites are delivered by ancient "Soyuz", while the United States actually does not even have a normal carrier.

                No one really knows how. what they are developing now, their drone dangles in space for a year and a half, new direct-flow engines, private space-- they are not dull on trifles. there are ways and options for delivering goods into space - that's what they are focusing on now - it's interesting
                1. andj61
                  andj61 26 May 2016 10: 48
                  +4
                  Quote: atalef
                  Then why did the USSR try to launch the same program?

                  I already wrote - military space stations - their launch (Energy) and maintenance (Buran) ... Do you think it would be better if this project were implemented? what
                  But in the 80s of the USSR, he could no longer be pulled, and its value was prohibitive. But the transport system was created. There was no exploitation of it - that’s true, but to say that the USSR did not go through this stage means to sin against the truth.
                  Quote: atalef
                  No one really knows how. what they are developing now, their drone dangles in space for a year and a half, new direct-flow engines, private space-- they are not dull on trifles. there are ways and options for delivering goods into space - that's what they are focusing on now - it's interesting

                  Of course, interesting!
                  That's just private space requires quick economic returns - at least in the form of state funding. And this is just not there - and is not expected. Rather, the prospects are extremely vague. 50-60 years ago, the USSR and the USA, as well as humanity, had ambitious tasks - and they were, in general, solved. Now there are no such tasks, but those that exist are in the field of economics. And space is not among them.
            2. Aleksey_K
              Aleksey_K 26 May 2016 10: 36
              +1
              Quote: atalef
              Well, I was at the launch of Buran and believe me, one flight in the 2 orbit and landing, no one will ever call a successful space program.
              In fact, she was not, or rather, she died before she could show anything

              And the first Shuttle did not fly into space at all.
              The Enterprise Shuttle (OV-101) was originally built, which at the end of the 1970 was used to practice landing methods and did not fly into space. There is nothing to be proud of.
              1. atalef
                atalef 26 May 2016 10: 48
                -1
                Quote: Алексей_К
                And the first Shuttle did not fly into space at all.
                The Enterprise Shuttle (OV-101) was originally built, which at the end of the 1970 was used to practice landing methods and did not fly into space. There is nothing to be proud of.

                Aleksey, I didn’t understand the post at all, they made more than 100 manned launches, having fully worked out the program - why not be proud of anything?
            3. MMX
              MMX 26 May 2016 12: 00
              +2
              Quote: atalef

              He was inferior to everyone. Andrey Buran’s flight - there were 2 turns in an uninhabited version, but you won’t prove to me that this is equivalent to a 2-week (standard) shuttle flight with 7 (8) (mine) astronauts


              In no way was he inferior to the Shuttle. Different designs with their own advantages and disadvantages. The shuttle was a dead end, which subsequent events showed. At the time of Buran’s creation, perestroika was rampant in the USSR and there could be no talk of any expensive space programs (and Buran refers to such).
              1. atalef
                atalef 26 May 2016 14: 04
                -1
                Quote: MMX
                In no way was he inferior to the Shuttle

                We could say such a thing in the case of manned Buran flights and the experience of its operation. but .... there’s nothing after all, since one can say that?
                Quote: MMX
                The shuttle was a dead end, which subsequent events showed.

                So Schattle is a dead end, but Buran is not.
                The shuttle at that time was the next technological step in the development of the cosmos and they passed it
                1. MMX
                  MMX 26 May 2016 17: 47
                  0
                  Quote: atalef

                  We could say such a thing in the case of manned Buran flights and the experience of its operation. but .... there’s nothing after all, since one can say that?


                  Of course, as we can not say the opposite. Right?

                  Quote: atalef

                  So Schattle is a dead end, but Buran is not.


                  I did not say that Buran in this sense is different from the Shuttle.

                  Quote: atalef

                  The shuttle at that time was the next technological step in the development of the cosmos and they passed it


                  The shuttle was indeed a logical step - reusable ships. But this step at that time could not be properly implemented. So it turned out that the launch cost became really "cosmic". It's like with Leonardo Da Vinci's "tank" - a progressive idea, but no implementation. Therefore, the Shuttle never became a step forward, rather an attempt ... unsuccessful. Time will pass and they will return to the topic with new technologies, and then we can say that we have taken a step. Until then, alas.
                  1. atalef
                    atalef 26 May 2016 21: 04
                    0
                    Quote: MMX
                    Of course, as we can not say the opposite. Right?

                    No, it’s not true. The opinion is compiled according to the result - but it was not
                    Quote: MMX
                    Time will pass and they will return to the topic with new technologies, and then it’s possible to say that they took a step. In the meantime, alas

                    Already returned, or rather moved to a new level
                    The Boeing X-37, also known as the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV), is an experimental orbital aircraft designed to test future technologies. This reusable unmanned spacecraft is a 20% increase in the derivative of X-40 Russian. The aircraft is designed to operate at altitudes of 200-750 km, is capable of quickly changing orbits, maneuvering. It is supposed to be able to carry out reconnaissance missions, deliver small cargoes into space (also return).

                    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37
                    1. MMX
                      MMX 27 May 2016 04: 17
                      0
                      Quote: atalef
                      Quote: MMX
                      Of course, as we can not say the opposite. Right?

                      No, it’s not true. The opinion is compiled according to the result - but it was not
                      Quote: MMX
                      Time will pass and they will return to the topic with new technologies, and then it’s possible to say that they took a step. In the meantime, alas

                      Already returned, or rather moved to a new level
                      The Boeing X-37, also known as the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV), is an experimental orbital aircraft designed to test future technologies. This reusable unmanned spacecraft is a 20% increase in the derivative of X-40 Russian. The aircraft is designed to operate at altitudes of 200-750 km, is capable of quickly changing orbits, maneuvering. It is supposed to be able to carry out reconnaissance missions, deliver small cargoes into space (also return).

                      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37


                      1. We compare the design, and Buran was more perfect on it.
                      2. Have you moved on to the next step? Those. this is when they curtailed the SpaceShuttle program and began to fly on our ships or use our similar systems at home ??? Oh well.
                      3. About the drone from the Boeing. If you follow your logic, then this is not passed, because he is still an experiment. And by analogy with Buran, there is still no step (if, again, follow your logic). Moreover, the comparison is incorrect, since there are completely different devices in their functions (manned controlled and unmanned aerial vehicles).
                2. Aleksey_K
                  Aleksey_K 26 May 2016 20: 43
                  0
                  Quote: atalef
                  We could say such a thing in the case of manned Buran flights and the experience of its operation. but .... there’s nothing after all, since one can say that?

                  Do you know how to read? I clearly wrote that traitor Gorbachev began disarmament of Russia... What do you not understand? How many missiles, aircraft, tanks were cut and the "Buran" system was closed at his insistence, although the second "Buran" was ready for flight, and besides, at the same time, Soviet Shuttles "Baikal" were being built - three pieces (you wrote that there were when they launched Buran, so they knew and deliberately lied to us, for those who do not know). Why were they built if, as you say, this program in the USSR is a dead end? And if the Shuttle program is not a dead end, then why did it stop, do you understand that everything progressive has further development, and not stay in the American space dump? Now the Americans have imposed full pants of sanctions on Russia, but are forced to buy Russian space engines. Where are their rockets with their engines for space exploration. A complete impasse at the Americans.
                  1. atalef
                    atalef 26 May 2016 21: 00
                    0
                    Quote: Алексей_К
                    Do you know how to read? I clearly wrote that the traitor Gorbachev began the disarmament of Russia. What do not you understand?

                    this is not clear, I'm not talking about the reasons for the closure of the Buran system. I say that how can one compare what has not been exploited and assert. that it is a priori better.
                    Quote: Алексей_К
                    although the second "Buran" was ready for flight, and besides, at the same time Soviet Shuttles "Baikal" were being built - three pieces (you wrote that you were there when Buran was launched, so they knew and deliberately lied to us, for those who do not know).

                    But you never know what was being built. Yes, it did not go wrong. It was not in operation, there is no experience in use - it reminds me of a writer writing on the table, but at the same time approving. that he is the best in the world. although in theory. readers must say so.
                    Quote: Алексей_К
                    And if the Shuttle program is not a dead end, then why did it stop

                    because she worked out her technology and was in demand at that stage in the development of technology. Now all this can be achieved cheaper and easier.
                    Quote: Алексей_К
                    You understand that everything progressive has a further development, and not being in an American space dump?

                    Of course, the Shuttle system has evolved into a new system -
                    X-37 Bee (X-37B) is one of the projects in the United States that replaces the Space shuttle program. The military is engaged in it, and a lot of secrets surround the novelty. The Americans sent a ship into orbit, which predicted a great space future. NTV correspondent Alexei Veselovsky watched the start.

                    This project was created by the US Air Force for 10 years in the strictest confidence. The X-37 Bi (X-37B) unmanned robotic spacecraft is capable of independently entering a given orbit, and then also landing independently without the help of the Mission Control Center specialists.

                    Externally, the spaceship is a bit like the usual shuttle, weighs about four tons, about nine meters in length. It can be in orbit for up to nine months. This is almost all the published data, the technologies used to create the ship are still classified.

                    Quote: Алексей_К
                    Now Americans have imposed full pants on sanctions against Russia, but are forced to buy Russian space engines. Where are their rockets with their engines for space exploration. A complete impasse at the Americans.

                    Are you sure ?
                    http://topwar.ru/36003-k-2017-godu-nasa-planiruet-otkazatsya-ot-poletov-na-rossi
                    yskih-soyuzah.html
                    There was an article on VO.
                    By the way, in 2017, the states have already refused Unions for delivery to the ISS - this is burning about that. that they have everything ready.
        3. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 26 May 2016 10: 16
          +3
          Quote: atalef
          Quote: Bob0859
          There was Buran - a work of art, a wonderful apparatus. Let's see what they’ll do now. what

          Has Buran ever flown in a manned version? How many times did he fly? So the link to the snowstorm is not entirely successful

          You are probably proud of Israeli drones? And here is a huge space plane "Buran". You have probably read somewhere about large unmanned aircraft capable of carrying a dozen or two tons of missile and bomb loads. No one in the world has such airplanes, and even "Buran" nobody could repeat, which was created in the last century. And he flew little, tk. the traitor Gorbachev began to disarm the USSR. And then, you should know well how many Jews fled to Israel. That is why good drones have appeared in Israel, otherwise, without Soviet Jews, you would not have seen your drones as your ears.
          1. atalef
            atalef 26 May 2016 10: 54
            -1
            Quote: Алексей_К
            Are you probably proud of Israeli drones?

            Good
            Quote: Алексей_К
            And here is a huge space plane "Buran". You've probably read somewhere about large unmanned planes capable of carrying a dozen or two tons of missile and bomb loads

            Alex, neither mixing soft with warm.
            Buran was not made to make 2 turns around the earth and land in the machine.
            It was manufactured and designed as a habitable, reusable space device, with 5 cosmonauts on board.
            Quote: Алексей_К
            No one in the world has such planes and even "Buran" nobody could repeat,

            And who needs this at all?
            By the way, the Amer drone flies in space for a year and a half and also lands in the machine - but this is not the main thing.
            Quote: Алексей_К
            . And then, you should know well how many Jews fled to Israel. That is why good drones appeared in Israel

            Well, again, pennies for fish.
            Drones in Israel appeared when the Buran did not fall at all.
            Quote: Алексей_К
            and so, without Soviet Jews, you would not see your drones as your ears.

            Alexei, well, every time on the same rake.
            Israel’s defense industry does not have a large number of immigrants from the USSR, no. Believe me.
            1. Aleksey_K
              Aleksey_K 26 May 2016 21: 00
              0
              Quote: atalef
              Drones in Israel appeared when the Buran did not fall at all.

              Of course you are right, the first real UAV in the USSR appeared in 1960. We didn’t even dream about Buran then, Gagarin flew only in 1961. Of course, the USSR was not the first state in the manufacture of drones, although it dealt with this issue. The championship belongs to the USA, and not to Israel, which only in 1979 introduced its first UAV. Feel the difference 1910 - USA, USSR - 1930-1941, and Israel is only 1979.
              1. atalef
                atalef 26 May 2016 21: 09
                0
                Quote: Алексей_К
                You feel the difference 1910 - the USA, the USSR - 1930-1941, and Israel only 1979.

                And now what? the impression is that we are claiming the invention of UAVs, while it does not bother us to be the leading manufacturers of UAVs in the world.
            2. Aleksey_K
              Aleksey_K 26 May 2016 21: 20
              0
              Quote: atalef
              Israel’s defense industry does not have a large number of immigrants from the USSR, no. Believe me.

              Massive Jewish emigration from the USSR began in the 1970 years. And after that, and only after this emigration to Israel in 1979 did the first drone appear. Before that, even the Jews didn’t think about it in Israel, because the first Jews who captured Palestine did not study in the USSR and did not have a higher technical education, the best in the world. Most European Jews are traders and money changers, generally without education.
              1. atalef
                atalef 26 May 2016 21: 26
                0
                Quote: Алексей_К
                Massive Jewish emigration from the USSR began in the 1970s. And after that, and only after this emigration to Israel in 1979, the first drone appeared.

                Alexei . we have a small country and we (who have been living here for 25 years or more) do not need to rub something that is not really there.
                Ask any Israeli on this site and he will answer you, the number of returnees in the defense industry is scanty. Their children are another matter.
                We ourselves would also like to have a greater representation of the people who came from the USSR in the defense industry, but alas, no - no.
                Quote: Алексей_К
                Before that, even the Jews didn’t think about it in Israel, because the first Jews who captured Palestine did not study in the USSR and did not have a higher technical education, the best in the world

                What nonsense.
                Quote: Алексей_К
                Most European Jews are traders and money changers, generally without education.

                Alexei, you’re an old-timer on the site, don’t fall into senile senility.
        4. shuhartred
          shuhartred 26 May 2016 10: 33
          +4
          Quote: atalef
          Has Buran ever flown in a manned version?

          To space no.
          Quote: atalef
          How many times did he fly?

          Into space once.
          Quote: atalef
          So the link to the snowstorm is not entirely successful

          So it's not because the ship is bad
        5. 0255
          0255 26 May 2016 13: 09
          0
          Quote: atalef
          Quote: Bob0859
          There was Buran - a work of art, a wonderful apparatus. Let's see what they’ll do now. what

          Has Buran ever flown in a manned version? How many times did he fly? So the link to the snowstorm is not entirely successful

          Atalef, all claims to Gorbachev, in which money was found only for 1 flight of "Buran", and to Yeltsin.
      2. godofwar6699
        godofwar6699 26 May 2016 09: 15
        -1
        There was a Buran.

        Buran for landing on the moon? belay
        1. edeligor
          edeligor 26 May 2016 09: 21
          0
          Cho so scared? We also have Ilona Masks laughing
      3. Infinity
        Infinity 26 May 2016 09: 23
        0
        Technically, yes, economically - a monster. The Americans, too, went with the Shuttles. The attack of euphoria from reusability passed very quickly.
    6. NEXUS
      NEXUS 26 May 2016 09: 22
      +4
      Quote: godofwar6699
      it would be nice to rekindle a new space race good

      I understand that this program is one of the stages aimed at Mars. And the race is already underway. And there are much more players in it.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 26 May 2016 09: 33
        +2
        Only in this race to Mars we already lose the United States significantly.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 26 May 2016 10: 47
          +1
          Quote: Vadim237
          Only in this race to Mars we already lose the United States significantly.

          Oh how! And the USA has an engine for a mission to at least the moon, let alone Mars?
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 26 May 2016 14: 20
            0
            Liquid RS 25 and RS 68 for flights to the moon are still suitable, and the rocket is the same - they promise to launch an analogue of Saturn 5 at the end of 2018.
            1. kugelblitz
              kugelblitz 26 May 2016 14: 37
              0
              The RS-25 is a good but expensive infection. As for the RS-68, the dubious engine, eats a lot, an open cycle, greatly simplified. Truth is made as a Soviet engine, which greatly reduced its cost.
              This one would be revived, but it’s not known where to adapt it; there was a credible monster.

            2. NEXUS
              NEXUS 26 May 2016 15: 14
              +1
              Quote: Vadim237
              analog of Saturn 5 at the end of 2018 promise run.

              The most important thing I have highlighted.
            3. Aleksey_K
              Aleksey_K 26 May 2016 21: 13
              0
              Quote: Vadim237
              Liquid RS 25 and RS 68 for flights to the moon are still suitable, and the rocket is the same - they promise to launch an analogue of Saturn 5 at the end of 2018.

              But what does not fly?
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 27 May 2016 00: 19
                0
                Yes, you do not worry - as the SLS rocket flies, then they will fly to the moon.
          2. Infinity
            Infinity 26 May 2016 15: 01
            0
            Oh how! And what's the difference, whose engines they use (and they have their own engines, they’re just practical guys)? How many rovers do we have on Mars now and how many do they have? I give a hint, we have none! Only Exomars with a "demonstration" landing module flies (the rover itself only in 2018) flies and then half European!

            We need to catch up, otherwise we will remain a "minibus" to enter orbit!
      2. godofwar6699
        godofwar6699 26 May 2016 09: 35
        +2
        Quote: NEXUS
        I understand that this program is one of the stages aimed at Mars. And the race is already underway. And there are much more players in it.


        I hope so .

        India for the first time in history launched a prototype of a reusable spacecraft. The Indian shuttle should begin to work fully within 10-15 years.
        1. andj61
          andj61 26 May 2016 09: 48
          +1
          Quote: godofwar6699
          India for the first time in history launched a prototype of a reusable spacecraft.

          On May 23, a prototype of the first Indian reusable spacecraft RLV-TD was launched from the Satish Dhawan Cosmodrome. The flight lasted 770 seconds at an altitude of 65 km with a maximum speed of 6125 km / h, then the ship boarded the water in the Bay of Bengal 450 km from the coast.
          The flight was extremely experimental. Its main goal is to verify technologies, control systems, analysis of telemetry and navigation data. The design of the spacecraft has significant similarities with the "American" - X-37V. Its length is 6,5 meters, weight 1,75 tons. The development of the project cost $ 1,4 million. Http: //www.techcult.ru/space/3251-rlv-td

          This is not a ship at all - it’s 6,5 meters long and 1,75 tons in weight — like a passenger car. You can’t raise a person on it. And he was not in space, and even did not reach the first cosmic speed.
          Made purely for testing technology.
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 04
          +1
          In this direction, I like the Skylon project more. The first flight is promised in 2025.
          1. godofwar6699
            godofwar6699 26 May 2016 10: 15
            +1
            There are many space projects now.
        3. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 08
          +1
          The main thing is that this project is being financed and work is underway
      3. andj61
        andj61 26 May 2016 09: 40
        0
        Quote: NEXUS
        I understand that this program is one of the stages aimed at Mars. And the race is already underway. And there are much more players in it.

        Apparently, this program is designed to transport goods and passengers from the orbit of the Earth to the orbit of the moon. Everything will be delivered to the orbit of the Earth by the Progress Unions, and the Angara is here in the subject. But on the moon and from the moon will need some other shuttle.
        And here it is far from Buran, and such a program clearly does not reach Mars.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 26 May 2016 10: 50
          +1
          Quote: andj61
          And here it is far from Buran, and such a program clearly does not reach Mars.

          I believe that the programs on the Moon and Mars run in parallel and the teams on these projects are in close cooperation. Again, this is a new race, but now it’s not even for the Moon, but for Mars.
    7. Blondy
      Blondy 27 May 2016 09: 53
      0
      All this, of course, is great, but why the heck in this ISS project? Maybe enough already, it's time to switch to domestic bread, at least for the sake of observing safety precautions.
  2. cniza
    cniza 26 May 2016 08: 38
    +9
    The agency recalls that “the reusable manned transport vehicle Federation has also been developed by RSC Energia and is designed to deliver people and cargo to the moon and near-earth orbit.” It was reported that the first unmanned launch of Energia is scheduled for 2021. Construction of the ship was supposed to begin this summer.



    Cool, God forbid, and success.
  3. Gray brother
    Gray brother 26 May 2016 08: 44
    +1
    At the same time, the project of the tanker will not hurt - to bring fuel to it.
  4. techie
    techie 26 May 2016 08: 45
    +9
    Maybe even real people really will visit the moon. And not the Hollywood astronauts staged by Stanley Kubrick, scripted by Richard Nixon. laughing
  5. sa-ag
    sa-ag 26 May 2016 08: 46
    +2
    "" The means of acceleration from the first to the second space speed should be the modernized upper stage "DM", launched with the help of the launch vehicle of the heavy class "Angara-A5"

    Well, I also have a jerk, not even kerosene-oxygen pair, not to mention hydrogen-oxygen pair, the latter is the most profitable and for some reason they choose hydrazine, which will have much more to take because of the low specific impulse
    1. Gray brother
      Gray brother 26 May 2016 08: 54
      +3
      Quote: sa-ag
      Well, I also have a jerk, not even kerosene-oxygen vapor,

      In orbit, it is more convenient to work with single-component fuel.
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 26 May 2016 09: 03
        +2
        Quote: Gray Brother
        In orbit, it is more convenient to work with single-component fuel.

        In orbit, yes, but it is better to bring it to the take-off trajectory with high-energy fuel, because of the high specific impulse of fuel, less is taken and acceleration is faster, the payload is higher
        1. Gray brother
          Gray brother 26 May 2016 09: 31
          +1
          Quote: sa-ag
          payload higher

          The article says that they will be dispersed with a DM unit, its components are oxygen - kerosene, or oxygen - synthine (evil chemistry).
          It seems that I got excited about the tanker, read it inattentively, the block will most likely be disposable.
          At this kyrogas, still Soviet cosmonauts were going to send to the moon, and now he is loading GLONASS satellites into orbit.
    2. adept666
      adept666 26 May 2016 09: 22
      0
      for some reason choose hydrazine
      Because it spontaneously ignites on contact with an oxidizing agent.
  6. cap
    cap 26 May 2016 08: 53
    +5
    It sounds beautiful. God forbid to see the Russian flag on the moon. drinks
  7. Red_Hamer
    Red_Hamer 26 May 2016 08: 54
    +2
    Awesome news! good It is necessary to develop domestic production! You look Russia will receive a new impetus for development, no less important than in 50-60 years!
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 26 May 2016 09: 04
      +2
      This is not production yet, only a project. Which really raises a number of questions.
      For example, the quote is assumed: "" the "Dash" system should be based on the International Space Station and ply from it to the circumlunar international platform. "
      That is, it is necessary first to build this very "circumlunar international platform." But at the same time, the quote: "no need to create a super-heavy launch vehicle or a heavy-class launch vehicle with hydrogen fuel."
      How so? And who will deduce all this. and what? Moreover, the cost of the "circumlunar platform" will be more than the cost of the ISS (how many years it was built, how many countries, and how much they spent, take an interest).
      Shortly speaking. The project may be good for the finished infrastructure. Well, for example, a simple analogy is to propose the construction of an expensive high-tech train, but at the same time there are no railways or train stations.
      1. edeligor
        edeligor 26 May 2016 09: 24
        +3
        Quote: Mestny
        only project

        Kudrin has already been granted admission to cash flows. Projects will remain projects. The most important project on Kudrin to provide the West elves with energy. And you, space, the greatness of the country ...
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 May 2016 09: 35
          +1
          Of course it is necessary, only the budget of Roscosmos will not pull this project, and there is no such project in the 2025 program.
          1. godofwar6699
            godofwar6699 26 May 2016 09: 44
            +1
            In April 2016, SpaceX announced its plans for a mission to Mars in 2018. Although astronauts will not be part of this mission, the company's mission is to test and demonstrate a number of key technologies. Dragon capsule will go to Mars and make a soft retroactive landing on the surface of the Red Planet. Another capsule of SpaceX, the Falcon Heavy rocket, will deliver the capsule to space.
  8. valent45
    valent45 26 May 2016 08: 57
    +3
    On the moon it is necessary to build a station. With the prospect of developing Helium-3 and delivering it to Earth.
  9. engineer74
    engineer74 26 May 2016 08: 57
    +1
    And what will the adherents of Elon Mask say? wassat
    This is the asymmetrical answer! Instead of "cheap" launching into near-earth orbit, offer cheap flights to the Moon and, I think, in the future, Mars and beyond! good God grant that, at least this time, everything grows together ...
    1. Flinky
      Flinky 26 May 2016 09: 04
      +2
      Orbital launches will still remain relevant for at least one hundred to two hundred years.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 May 2016 09: 52
      +1
      And the adherents of Elon Mask will say that at the end of this year his company will launch a Falcon Heavy rocket with a payload capacity superior to the 5B Angara, and the Orion ship is already being tested for flights to the Moon in the USA. How not to twist the United States in the space sector bypasses us.
      1. godofwar6699
        godofwar6699 26 May 2016 10: 20
        -1
        50 years of Mars exploration drinks

      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Igor Polovodov
        Igor Polovodov 26 May 2016 10: 21
        -4
        not in a sphere, but a scam! what sasha really circumvents
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 49
          0
          It’s not their scam, but it’s right here in Roscosmos - hundreds of billions of rubles just evaporate every year, and the accident rate is increasing.
      4. Awaz
        Awaz 26 May 2016 11: 08
        0
        This is what the Apollo lander looks like. And, are there many differences?
        1. kugelblitz
          kugelblitz 26 May 2016 11: 42
          +2
          If you plunge into the jungle of conspiracy theories, starting from the point of the lunar scam, we can assume that the achievements of the never-flying Apollo came to the court of the real owners of all this circus.
          If we recall the failures of NASA and ULA on Saturn-5, Shuttles, the unreplayed RD-180 on the Atlas and so on, perhaps the management decided to file a pseudo-partial project, catching a rage like with Ogryzk products ....
          Well, you got it ?! wassat
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 May 2016 14: 24
          +1
          The shape is the same, but the difference is in materials and equipment.
          1. kugelblitz
            kugelblitz 26 May 2016 14: 39
            +1
            Still would not differ, the more the atmosphere of Apollo was radically different. And electronics!
      5. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 26 May 2016 11: 34
        0
        Key word "SOON" (c). wassat
      6. Gray brother
        Gray brother 26 May 2016 14: 32
        +1
        Quote: Vadim237
        . How not to twist the United States in the space sector bypasses us.

        By the number of fried astronauts - for sure.
  10. aba
    aba 26 May 2016 09: 00
    +1
    ultimate mass of the complex is 11,4 tons

    With the mass, everything is clear, but what is the payload?
  11. Max repp
    Max repp 26 May 2016 09: 05
    +1
    Damn what kind of garbage, the Americans and the Europeans have just thought of any advertising where why why and everything is colorful and in all the media. About our own developments, if only in some specialized publications or as of now in VO. Of course there are articles on the Wiki but not knowing what to look for.
    1. Irokez
      Irokez 26 May 2016 09: 44
      +1
      Quote: Maks Repp
      Damn what kind of garbage, the Americans and the Europeans have just thought of any advertising where why why and everything is colorful and in all the media. About our own developments, if only in some specialized publications or as of now in VO. Of course there are articles on the Wiki but not knowing what to look for.

      It’s just a different approach to business and such a mentality. Some calmly and quietly do without publicity, while others sneeze and immediately spread it around the world about it (spread the infection).
      There are everywhere pluses and minuses of both hiding information and its advertising, you just need to use when necessary these pluses for a short duration of the effect or for a long term like broads, and we have such a nice thing and the whole world in a sensational out. It's like "Armata" and our 5th generation fighter - rumors and speculation, and then bang and here it is and this is an awesome effect rather than advertise it from the beginning, and then flow around if it didn't work out like with the F-35.
      1. RedBaron
        RedBaron 26 May 2016 11: 55
        -3
        There are almost more advertisements for T50 and Almaty and 3.14 times about them than for f35 and abrams with a space program fellow
  12. fa2998
    fa2998 26 May 2016 09: 10
    0
    Quote: Gray Brother
    At the same time, the project of the tanker will not hurt - to bring fuel to it

    And this just concerns the topic-MULTIPLE. To throw this "canoe" to the ISS requires a powerful carrier (which will burn in the atmosphere). Then you need to deliver people, cargo and FUEL (you cannot fly to the moon and back on parole). launches of "Soyuz" (which will burn in the atmosphere) - in its "multiple" something confuses! And yet, why do we need the Moon! Was there extra money in the budget? Give the "uncles" something to cut? negative hi
  13. RUSS
    RUSS 26 May 2016 09: 12
    +1
    It was reported that the first unmanned launch of Energia was planned for 2021. The construction of the ship was supposed to begin this summer.



    Well, but in the end it is not clear that the construction of the ship will begin in the summer or ....?
  14. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 26 May 2016 09: 17
    +1
    Speaking about the advantages of the new system over the Federation project, Makushenko noted “no need to create an extra-heavy launch vehicle or a heavy hydrogen carrier rocket. ”
    And I heard yesterday that foreign partners are being offered to join the development of a heavy rocket. Is there money, or what? That is why, I think, the Federation is being "pushed in." That's how it seems to me.
  15. Engineer
    Engineer 26 May 2016 09: 19
    +2
    RKK Energia, the developer of the PPTS Federation, claims that this very Federation didn’t work very well for a flight to the Moon and they already have a project to replace it by a third cheaper. Under comrade Stalin, they would have been shot for such a thing. And then Ilona Mask is called a swindler!
  16. sinoptic
    sinoptic 26 May 2016 09: 19
    0
    should be based on the International Space Station

    Some kind of strange decision - like with the ISS we are going to round off.
    And the ISS will have a resource soon.

    Although the idea must be said not bad - a reusable shuttle that will run from platform to platform.
    It can be made much easier, since it can’t fly in the atmosphere.
    Even if you make it on nuclear fuel - a universal shuttle for outer space - in general, beauty will work.
  17. masiya
    masiya 26 May 2016 09: 21
    0
    Of course, it’s a necessary thing, technically possible, but is it really necessary now, and the economy is not the same, and there are too many people who want to suck in, the staff cleaning is good, and the screening of applicants for participating in such projects is fierce, because they are ready to sell the whole country for five time.
  18. ver_
    ver_ 26 May 2016 09: 21
    +2
    Quote: Bob0859
    There was Buran - a work of art, a wonderful apparatus. Let's see what they’ll do now. what

    ..And Buran and Spiral, however, the achievements did not disappear in vain .., besides all of the things listed now there is a very large selection of materials, which at that time simply did not exist, as well as technologies and IT technologies ... Tepericha is not that davicha ..
  19. KRIG55
    KRIG55 26 May 2016 09: 27
    -3
    Of course, all the problems at home on Earth have been resolved, now forward to the Moon. So I’d like to ask: Do you yourself understand what you’re doing? (For fans of minus, for a quarter century of work in this area, I can very roughly imagine how much money was wasted ..).
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 14
      0
      Roscosmos understands everything perfectly - now they will start financing the project, and in a few years it will be closed at the completion stage like all the previous ones - Clipper, Rust M, MAKS, the first return stage, air launch.
  20. Riv
    Riv 26 May 2016 09: 30
    -2
    On Earth, like, all things have already been done, but can’t reach the eggs?
  21. fa2998
    fa2998 26 May 2016 09: 37
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    And then Ilona Mask is called a swindler!

    There is also an idea (I can sell to Roskosmos, RSC Energia) - to make a REUSABLE MANNED LUNOOLET and a MANNED LUNOWIDE! True, in order for this to work, you need to deliver people to the Moon, cargo and fuel to the Moon by CONVENTIONAL means, but then cut a couple of trillions! laughing lol hi
  22. rotor
    rotor 26 May 2016 09: 57
    0
    The construction of the 14,4t Federation ship should begin in the summer, the first flight in 2021.

    And now a new project - 11,4t ship Jerk.

    Because of 3 tons of all fuss, is it not easier to remake the Federation under Angara-A5
    1. rotor
      rotor 26 May 2016 10: 33
      0
      In the end, you can send the Federation without a crew to the ISS with the help of the Angara-A5 and the interorbital tugboat pre-launched into orbit.
  23. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 26 May 2016 10: 11
    +1
    These "projects" have appeared and appear constantly, only now they are not being implemented anywhere. It seems to me that these "projects" are "drawn" like this - "for a tick" -type "look" and we also think something "about" space "," technologies ", etc., trying to keep up with the times "... Yeah.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 20
      +1
      In Russia, such projects are very slowly implemented.
  24. Yakut14
    Yakut14 26 May 2016 10: 16
    0
    And where to get all this money? AND?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 May 2016 10: 50
      -1
      Of course from the pockets of taxpayers.
  25. ilya_oz
    ilya_oz 26 May 2016 10: 25
    0
    Some kind of flawed project. The PN delivered to the lunar orbit is negligible.
  26. Verdun
    Verdun 26 May 2016 10: 30
    +1
    How much talk about these projects! "Clipper", then a couple more, the names of which I did not even remember. Now "Dash". They discuss it, show the president ... And where is the result? "Shuttle for flights from Earth orbit to the Moon". Why not just from the moon to Jupiter? Have we got new orbital delivery vehicles to take the next step into space? And if not, then such conversations are pure conjuncture ...
    1. Gray brother
      Gray brother 26 May 2016 10: 43
      0
      Quote: Verdun
      Have we got new means of delivery into orbit, allowing us to take the next step into space? And if not, then such talk is pure water ...

      The fact that "Angara-A5" is not yet ready does not mean that there is no need to develop tasks for it.
      And then the situation may turn into the other side: the carrier will be, but there will be no sense from it.
  27. geologist
    geologist 26 May 2016 11: 14
    +1
    We have not even reached the stage of civilization of the first order on the Kardashev scale. We fly on kerogazs. This is a dead end - we need new ideas.
    1. Gray brother
      Gray brother 26 May 2016 11: 49
      0
      Quote: geologist
      This is a dead end - we need new ideas.

      Rosatom is threatening to give birth, by 2018, to a megawatt class nuclear power plant.
      The layout of the reactor installation for the engine:
  28. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 26 May 2016 11: 50
    +1
    Soooo! This means that in the course of work on the "Federation" are in full swing, Angara A5 will be in a manned version, and in my opinion, the lunar program here is rather a demonstration of the capabilities of a fundamentally new space platform and launch vehicle.
    The video itself has been walking on the network for a long time, perhaps there’s an attempt to create a simplified version of a spaceship without a descent vehicle. Work is still underway on a nuclear reactor, which suggests thoughts of a national space station, whose high energy will reduce operating costs and become the basis for interplanetary flights.

  29. Filxnumx
    Filxnumx 26 May 2016 13: 44
    +1
    Quote: atalef
    Quote: Алексей_К
    And the first Shuttle did not fly into space at all.
    The Enterprise Shuttle (OV-101) was originally built, which at the end of the 1970 was used to practice landing methods and did not fly into space. There is nothing to be proud of.

    Aleksey, I didn’t understand the post at all, they made more than 100 manned launches, having fully worked out the program - why not be proud of anything?

    And the main goal they, I apologize, have achieved? Let me remind you of the main goal was to reduce the launch price by an order of magnitude and enter the schedule of 2 flights per month. The price has only risen, but will you calculate the intensity of launches yourself or say?
  30. 1536
    1536 26 May 2016 15: 07
    0
    If sanctions prevent our manned space program from developing, then Russia just needs to ruin as many European countries as possible so that Europioids are not tempted to even raise their eyes to our country! The ruin criterion is Ukraine.
  31. gadkobra
    gadkobra 26 May 2016 19: 50
    -2
    our moon
    Glory to Kabaev
  32. Alisher
    Alisher 26 May 2016 22: 11
    0
    For this news, the second half must be attached:
    RSC Energia and NASA are discussing a project to create a joint near-lunar station, which can be commissioned by the end of the next decade, said the representative of the rocket and space corporation Yuri Makushenko.
    "In fact, a circumlunar design of the conceptual platform, the composition of its elements, an assessment of cargo traffic have been developed. Recently, NASA has proposed a design documentation system, work on which has begun and there is already a description of individual elements and systems, and a discussion of standards and interfaces has begun. The base orbit has been determined. a proposal has been developed in detail for the deployment of a lunar station and its use by the end of 2020 "RIA Novosti http://ria.ru/science/20160525/1439368078.html
  33. Alisher
    Alisher 26 May 2016 22: 37
    0
    Since the flight is planned from the ISS (and what will remain of it at the end of the 20s?), With an orbital inclination of 51,6 °, then the entire flight should take place in this plane, and the near-moon station should also have such an orbital inclination (taking into account angle of inclination of the axis of rotation of the Earth), or rather to be in the same plane. And the start time must be calculated very accurately, otherwise the moon and its station may not be in place.
  34. Igor Polovodov
    Igor Polovodov 26 May 2016 23: 11
    0
    I dream of a light spacesuit for the Far East and the Arctic! When the temperature is lower than 40 gr., It is practically impossible to be on the street, and even with a piercing wind, of course it’s certainly warmer there than overboard the ISS, this dissonance, however, allows us to foresee the necessity of such a spacesuit, which is clear in its essence. Which in particular will entail the repeated recolonization of our now deserted north.