[News] Roscosmos News

[PeterRoss]

Quote:

Originally Posted by santy86

 I think the russian space program (future launcher and spacecraft(s)) is being developed in secret (something similar is happening for the USAF X-37A/B/C) probably they are worried of possible sabotages and/or espionage.

It is much more probable that they're secretly not developing anything, I'm afraid.

[Alfastar]

Well, I got less and less trust that there ever become a Angara. Why there ever started with the whole Angara project?

[santy86]

Quote:

Originally Posted by N_Molson

 You are kidding, relieve me ?

I'll relieve you now Don't get me wrong dude, no conspiracy theories here. Though the fact that there has been space-tech espionage from various country, aimed especially against US companies (Lockheed Martin and Boeing) but also against russia, is undeniable.
I'm referring to the various claims of cyber-espionage which the world has known in recent years. I guess, that because of these cyber-espionage events, the US and Russia are doing High-tech R&D in secret, and under the cover of military programs, to keep the stuff classified until the "operative status" (X-37C might be the replacement of the space shuttle for LEO missions, while Orion should be more about Moon/Mars missions)


P.S. I don't even know whether Angara actually exists anymore. By now, the original Angara concep should be "junk" of the 90s, maybe there's something else going on behind the curtains.

[N_Molson]

I'm getting a bit pessimistic about Angara too. Proton still works well, and with the new cryogenic upper stage, it will get even better. I think they wanted to do something like the US EELVs, but don't really have the use for them with the old but very reliable Soyuz and Proton.

It would have an use if a serious replacement for Soyuz-TMA was planned, but things seem rather foggy in that direction too. Again, TMA works very well, is compatible with an extremely reliable launcher, they have an incredible flight experience with that combo, and it's capacity is reasonable given the ISS needs (normal operation of the station has been sustained even after the Shuttle retirement...)

Or if there was deep space exploration projects... But nothing on the horizon there...

[MattBaker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by N_Molson

 with the old but very reliable Soyuz and Proton.

And cheaper one as well, especially since it doesn't need any R&D anymore.
In the end it's always about money and if you already have two working options, which are cheap and tested in more than 2000 launches combined, why change the running system for billions?
It might be argued if the Proton is reliable: 67 launches since 2006 and 7 failures results in 89.55%, although only one was a real problem with the Proton (2007, JCSAT-11: 1st/2nd stage separation failure) and the rest was trouble with the Briz-M/DM-3, so maybe the Proton is reliable but its upper stages are not.

Although you also have to say that the Angara would bring new possibilities for Russian spaceflight. The 7-engine version would have performances up to 40mT to LEO, nearly twice as much as the Proton. A nation/space agency that starts with martian/lunar probes again and surely has plans about Russian moon landings in mind could use such a lift capability.

[Urwumpe]

The advantage of the Angara would also be economic, since the Proton uses specialized engines which require their own special assembly lines. The Angara would simplify this a lot.

[N_Molson]

Quote:

The advantage of the Angara would also be economic, since the Proton uses specialized engines which require their own special assembly lines. The Angara would simplify this a lot.

Honestly, I'm not sure. A new launcher means a lot of new R&D costs, as said above, and at least, in those assembly lines, lost bolts don't end in the turbopumps. That counts. And there's all the flight experience. And the juicy contracts with ILS.

I'm absolutely not against the idea a new launcher, but in the mind of the very conservative russian space program managers, I think there is little benefits and a lot of risks in such a transition. "When it works, don't fix it" seems to be their motto, and well, until now it works rather well.

[Urwumpe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by N_Molson

 I'm absolutely not against the idea a new launcher, but in the mind of the very conservative russian space program managers, I think there is little benefits and a lot of risks in such a transition. "When it works, don't fix it" seems to be their motto, and well, until now it works rather well.

Well, it is pretty much an old-timer. The toxic fuel combination gets more and more uncommon, now that Russia also switches to solid fuels for ICBMs. The engines are special, and even if you already know them well and have usually pretty well running assembly lines, this does not mean that you can't carry the experience over to the new engines.

Also, the ground infrastructure is still a second generation one. While less people involved than for previous rockets, it is still requiring much more manual labor than third generation launch complexes, like Energia used or Zenit uses.

[Alfastar]

Well, why Russia stopped with the Energia a long time ago? It is even in some points a better rocket then the Angara.

[santy86]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alfastar

 Well, why Russia stopped with the Energia a long time ago? It is even in some points a better rocket then the Angara.

Because the soviet union collapsed and the resulting economical crash, stopped the Energia-Buran program altogether.
Even Energia, today would have to be redesigned from scratch probably with new construction materials and new technologies/computers/hydraulics and so forth. The original Energia would not be advantageous today, the same way as the Space Shuttle wasn't a couple of years ago.

[N_Molson]

Yes, like if the USA were developping an heavy launcher with Shuttle-derived technologies... Oh wait, they actually do it