Jump to content

Russian Launch and Mission Thread


tater

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

But you are right, launching metal barrels to space is a magic, restricted to only a few.
Say, look at EU and UK. Still nothing like Vostok is launched, so we can cooperate when the Starship dream will bury viable projects.

Again with the whataboutism. The fact that the UK or EU doesn't have a crewed space program will not change Russia's prospects of being able to afford one. The main engine of the economy is shut off, the workforce is fleeing the country or dying in the fields of Ukraine, a mix of sanctions and draconian domestic policies hamper any prospects of industrial or commercial development, and military expenditure will be dominated by the need to replace war losses for many years to come. UK/EU cooperation with Russia will be off the table for a decade or more, if Russia remains on its current course. But as the situation becomes ever more untenable, a total collapse seems more likely. Or at best a situation where expenditures are cut to the bone, and crewed spaceflight is the first to go on the chopping block. Space activities might be reduced to military applications only, i.e. satellites and missiles.

All the "what about"s don't change the fact that an economy that was barely the size of Spain's got hit by an economic and military broadside with long-term implications. It will be a big surprise if a space program, one that has barely run at sustenance levels for three decades before this, can emerge on the other side unscathed.

Edited by Codraroll
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Codraroll said:

The main engine of the economy is shut off

It's so shut off it's been flooding us with unprecedented amounts of cash (the significant difference between Russian and global rouble-dollar exchange rate was one sign), and OPEC+ is negotiating another supply squeeze deal right in the face of preparations for the vaunted 'price cap' (which is already getting so many caveats added it's going to be a complete joke - simultaneously decreeing that third-party processed Russian oil isn't subject to restrictions and vowing not to sanction violators of the price cap).

Treating either combatant in this war as a house of cards about to collapse has proven to be an abysmal approach.

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, if you would allow me to direct your attention to the draft 2023 federal budget right here:

https://sozd.duma.gov.ru/bill/201614-8

According to Annex 12 (out of the 592 files bundled in with the draft, jeez), page 1904, Roscosmos is allocated 236 bln RUB, vis a vis 191 bln RUB for 2022.

https://spending.gov.ru/budget/grbs/730/

Some say Borisov only took the job on the condition that "his pie" got 30% bigger...

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mods every time a group of five or so members (including myself) veer off into Earth politics while trying to walk the line between OT and space/science policy.

FXUof5TXgAAWzcP.jpg
 

As much as those space policy (funding? regulatory? I don’t know what to call it but it can’t fall under politics as defined by the forum rules because those types of discussions seem to slide often across this section of the forum) discussions are fun and enlightening, it would be nice to get updates on ROSS without the economic spiel and back and forth that seems to automatically generate below it each time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

The mods every time a group of five or so members (including myself) veer off into Earth politics while trying to walk the line between OT and space/science policy.

It's the Mûmakil in the room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

As much as those space policy (funding? regulatory? I don’t know what to call it but it can’t fall under politics as defined by the forum rules because those types of discussions seem to slide often across this section of the forum) discussions are fun and enlightening, it would be nice to get updates on ROSS without the economic spiel and back and forth that seems to automatically generate below it each time.

The problem is that space policy is politics. Nothing can happen without money, and the money has to come from somewhere. When sources of money are drying up, or the relevant government gets other pressing spending priorities, there will be implications for spaceflight.  If we overlook the political landscape and only discuss the fancy renders and lofty plans crapped out by agencies whose ambitions far outpace their abilities, the discussion will eventually become very incongruent with reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2022 at 3:57 AM, Codraroll said:

The problem is that space policy is politics. Nothing can happen without money, and the money has to come from somewhere. When sources of money are drying up, or the relevant government gets other pressing spending priorities, there will be implications for spaceflight.  If we overlook the political landscape and only discuss the fancy renders and lofty plans crapped out by agencies whose ambitions far outpace their abilities, the discussion will eventually become very incongruent with reality. 

I disagree. We regularly discuss how Artemis might go, or how SLS might go, or how ESA’s human space flight ambitions might go, without bringing up the mess of American and European economics and domestic politics (beyond a few casual remarks aimed at the pork farmers).

In addition, it is possible to discuss the outside economic situation without turning it into clear OT. Discussion in simple terms and keeping it plainly in the context of space funding is possible.

To do this, posts should also not be inflammatory. “The Russian economy isn’t doing too well, they may not be able to afford their new space station”, is fine, but comments like “the crewed Russian space program will probably cease to exist” are going to trigger people. It’s on the same level of someone saying “Starship has an untenable reentry heat shield concept”. It isn’t constructive, it is the opening of a flame war*. He responds which in turn causes your far more detailed and clearly OT reply.

*I’m not sure if you saw the discussion surrounding it but it was pretty messy and ultimately ruled borderline OT. Mods intervened at one point or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

I disagree. We regularly discuss how Artemis might go, or how SLS might go, or how ESA’s human space flight ambitions might go, without bringing up the mess of American and European economics and domestic politics (beyond a few casual remarks aimed at the pork farmers).

In addition, it is possible to discuss the outside economic situation without turning it into clear OT. Discussion in simple terms and keeping it plainly in the context of space funding is possible.

The problem in this case is, well, the elephant in the room. Or the Mûmakil, as DDE put it, because the ordinary allegory doesn't quite suffice. The US and EU might have issues with their economics and domestic policies, but Russia has issues. It is difficult to go into details or provide any sort of context without sounding overly negative or coming off as unpleasant, because there's just so many aspects that create worry for the space program. And without details or context, what sort of discussion is there to be had?

I think “The Russian economy isn’t doing too well, they may not be able to afford their new space station” is putting it very mildly. I dare even call it a euphemism. The aforementioned issues have broader and deeper implications than calling into question the space station project. I wouldn't consider it an exaggeration that the Russian space program itself is in danger for multiple reasons, half of which aren't even related to the, er, "events of 2022".

It is kinda difficult to have any sort of discussion of the Russian space program without acknowleding that it is threatened by all sorts of concurrent perils at the moment. I would consider it relevant to (if not entirely overshadowing) pretty much any sub-topic worthy of discussion. But if discussion is only permitted if the issues aren't mentioned, or swaddled in multiple layers of euphemisms, it loses all purpose. How can one meaningfully talk about the Russian space program without acknowledging any of the numerous complicating circumstances under which it is presently operating? Things are, or at least seem, bad at the moment. They've seemed bad for a long time, but now it's really time to bring out the italics.

Following the rule of caution, I haven't responded to several posts that responded to mine. I definitely think there are fallacies in them, but I keep them to myself because it's pretty much impossible to formulate a counter-argument without stepping over the red line. Sure, it keeps the thread clean, but I really think it stifles the discussion.

So what is left to talk about? Laconic reports on the various launches along the lines of "A Soyuz launched today", with a strict "never discuss matters outside the frame of the picture/video" policy? Pretending that all is fine and dandy with a "no negative news" rule? Saying nothing? Because if the inconveniences are to be ignored or never talked about, there's precious little else to discuss regarding the Russian space program at the moment. Never mind that forcing silence about political issues can be a political statement in itself. In that case, you might as well lock the entire thread instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

The US and EU might have issues with their economics and domestic policies, but Russia has issues.

I don’t think this matters, insofar as deciding what is relevant to discussion and what isn’t.

Starship is intended to land humans on Mars in the 2030s. I myself believe the relationship between *the country SpaceX is located in* and *the country in the process of building a modular space station called Tiangong* are so grave that before talking about Starship on Mars we need to “talk” about the possibility of Boca Chica going up in a 5 megaton mushroom cloud, but I don’t bring that up because it doesn’t contribute to the discussion.

Just as discussing the possibility of nuclear war doesn’t add to the discussion of Starship, I don’t think detailed analysis of Russian economics is relevant to the ROSS.

As far as what contributes and what doesn’t, I think it goes like this-

Is the issue “small” enough that it can easily be solved and make a change in spaceflight AND directly relates to spaceflight and not some other issue? Then it contributes. An example of this is how people have mentioned the retirement of Senator Shelby from Alabama as a possibly stepping stone towards the retirement of SLS. That’s a thing that is now happening and might make a contribution to spaceflight. Those comments have been made before, and slide despite technically being politics.

Is the issue gargantuan? Then it does not contribute to the discussion. Why bring up geopolitics or economics when even professional analysts themselves have no idea how to solve these problems? To share these issues with no plausible solution available is either a complaint (if there is no intent to attract replies) or blatant off topic (if the intent is to initiate a political or economic discussion).

10 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

very mildly

If there was no “no politics” rule here, I can’t help but think the actual space discussion would pale in comparison to the political and economic arguments that would spring up in this thread.

It needs to be kept mild for a reason.

12 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

It is kinda difficult to have any sort of discussion of the Russian space program without acknowleding that it is threatened by all sorts of concurrent perils at the moment.

I think that is partially because of a lack of interest in Russian spaceflight rather than the program supposedly being tied to economics. If it had the level of following and available information we do with SpaceX, we would have discussions about Russian spaceflight with the depth and passion we get with SpaceX and Rocketlab. That’s on the poor organization of the program too though obviously.

But anyways, if you can’t discuss it without getting into politics you just don’t discuss it.

That’s why the ISRO thread is nearly silent instead of being a discussion about the economics of India and why they can’t do more in space. And why the JAXA thread is sparse instead of a discussion about population decline and economic stagnation and how that affects spaceflight.

14 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

So what is left to talk about? Laconic reports on the various launches along the lines of "A Soyuz launched today", with a strict "never discuss matters outside the frame of the picture/video" policy? Pretending that all is fine and dandy with a "no negative news" rule? Saying nothing?

That is practically what most of the threads in this section of the forum are; sharing tweets with news and then offering a little comment on them. Occasionally offering technical analysis spanning 3-4 posts.

If there is no news, you just don’t talk about it.

We don’t discuss SpaceX’s labor policies or the commercial viability of Starship. Those types of discussions usually start out in a “negative” post not unlike the ones you usually make in response to news about ROSS, devolve into personal comments and politics, and then get ruled OT following a thread lock.

Now I would like to make something clear. I am not saying your opinions aren’t valid or “negative thoughts should be kept to one’s self”. I am just saying they don’t belong on the forum, or at least ones beyond “mild” small remarks don’t belong here.

It seems like a double standard, and it arguably is (insofar “as politics are not allowed”, comments about the way Congress funds SLS should be removed and ruled OT as well, along with “pork” comments, just as discussion about whathaveyou in the CNSA and Russian threads are, yet they slide), but that’s how things roll here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allow me to derail this absolutely serious discussion with some tomfoolery.

Panorama, satire, October 3rd: "Starlink internet stops working across Ukraine for 'unknown reasons'"

The Financial Times, not satire, October 7th: "Ukrainian forces report Starlink outages during push against Russia"

:0.0: 

They do say The Onion and their ilk are the most reliable news sources out there...

Spoiler

Back to seriousness, though, the version suggested by Ukranian officials is dubious. Unofficial Russian channels have consistently suggesting against using captured Starlink terminals as anything other than coffee tables - apparently, almost all lost terminals are quickly accounted for, and their Internet access is disabled. A follow-on artillery strike on the guys fiddling with the terminals is optional, but likely.

Instead, Russian sources suggest a local application of Tirada-2 ECM.

 

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The word filter and forum rules wouldn't allow the direct link, but after the google "melnik musk diplomatic reply", maybe somebody just did what he was asked for...

That would put Musk in a whole world of trouble with the US government, so it's probably not his doing. Turning off Starlink to the Ukrainians wouldn't award him a "slap on the wrist" type of punishment, but years behind bars. Aiding the other side in a conflict where the US is involved by sabotaging services bought by the US government would be an act of treason.

I've seen speculation that it could be a type of geofencing. That Starlink only broadcasts noise in the Russian-occupied areas, and Ukrainian units are advancing across that geofence before it can be updated. After all, it's bad for operations security if you're constantly on the phone with your service provider telling them where your troops are. In that case, the issue could be solved by pulling back the geofence a bit. It's not like the war would be turned at this point by letting the occupied territories access Starlink.

It could also be a type of ECM, but the war has shown a certain disparity between the claimed capabilities of Russian ECM and their actual performance. If they had had the capability to jam Starlink extensively, it would have been put to use much earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt Starlink can be jammed at all, by anyone. Both sats and terminals have phased array antennas, so you'd have to fly the jamming device between the dish and the satellite, for every satellite in the sky above the targeted region. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the past few days, I've looked at Musk's statements and the way he acts. I've noticed that a lot of the time this guy is like "I can't make everyone satisfied, but I'm surely I can make everyone mad. So why not...?" But just to be clear, I neither like nor dislike him.

Another one has a comparable situation with him and his company, I think is DJI. I think it's all very observational and research worthy no matter what they choice or what they do.

Edited by steve9728
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www-rbc-ru.translate.goog/rbcfreenews/6347506c9a7947a6ccf621e6?from=newsfeed&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The head of Roscosmos Yuri Borisov announced accelerated works on the ROSS creation.

Russia will keep working on ISS as usually until the new station gets ready.

The ISS is planned to make a splash in Jan 2031.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The head of Roscosmos Yuri Borisov announced accelerated works on the ROSS creation.

Our earlier heroes, Panorama, now "report" that the Russian Orthodox Church has declared the creation of a Lunar Exarchate:

IJwSbv5dcGk.jpg?size=811x456&quality=95&

ZoVKkI5arJ8.jpg?size=811x456&quality=95&

VK comments be like: :wink: :P "Which mod is that?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...