Jump to content

Russian Launch and Mission Thread


tater

Recommended Posts

Spoiler

An interesting rocket is depictured on the book cover.

The lunar landscape, the spacesuits. So, no air.

But the head of the rocket carries some fins or wings. So, it should fly to the Earth.

But its shape is conical, so it isn't designed for horizontal flight.

Probably the painter has pictured an interplanetary ballistic missile with a guided warhead ballistic reentry vehicle.
(If I get the English terms right, a "warhead" is that what's inside the "reentry vehicle").

As the rocket is not hidden in a storage/launch container, probably it's a very archaic design, probably early 1960s.

The spacesuits also look archaic, with unusual helmets, with long antennas. The right one also has an external air hose.

Probably, it's some early lunar IPBM base built on the Moon in early 1960s.

So, Apollos were not first on the Moon.
When they had landed, this old hidden Soviet base did not react on them to keep her position in secret.

And that's why Americans were developing their Horizon project. To find this base.

 

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2019 at 2:40 PM, sh1pman said:

Fregat engineers must be opening champagne right now. Unlike Soyuz-2 engineers. In their case it’s probably vodka.

Correction: it's all vodka. Fregat engineers are opening celebratory vodka; Soyuz-2 engineers are opening conciliatory vodka.

But damn, that's as "everyday Kerbal" as anything I've ever seen. "Whoops, accidentally selected retrograde during the insertion and now my insertion stage doesn't have enough dV. But heyyyyyyyyyyy look at all this monopropellant!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first private spaceport will be built in Russia

Quote

The Nizhny Novgorod Region and the Republic of Tatarstan are considered to be a place for the cosmodrome, Izvestia writes. The platform will be used for suborbital launches to an altitude of about 200 km. Since lightweight rockets do not require a large exclusion zone around the launch site, it is possible to build in densely populated areas in Central Russia. So say businessmen from Skolkovo, who got the idea to make money on space tourism. 

The construction was announced by CosmoCourse LLC (Skolkovo resident). The cosmodrome on the 2.5 × 2 km section will be equipped with one launch pad with two non-buried launch tables - the main and the backup, made under a simplified scheme (without robotized elements), as well as service towers that provide people access to the rocket. The territory of the complex will house a system for refueling and storage of fuel, transport and installation unit and some other elements. Project cost - $ 40 million. 

 

Edited by sh1pman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Nightside said:

Do they actually have a rocket to launch?

Not yet. They have an engine that they're testing, and a CGI of the rocket.

Spoiler

 

The rocket will run on ethanol. :)

ifsurqo.png

Edited by sh1pman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

What really happened during the EgyptSat-A launch?

According to industry sources familiar with the investigation into the anomaly during the February 21 Soyuz launch, the available telemetry registered an emergency engine shutoff, known in Russian as AVD, as the 3rd stage of the rocket was completing its firing. The emergency command was issued based on the loss of pressure in the combustion chambers of the propulsion system. As a result, the emergency cutoff took place around six seconds prior to the so-called GK-3 command, which performs the nominal shutdown of the engine on the third stage. As a result of the premature cutoff, the rocket (and its payload) ended up on a trajectory with a perigee 57 kilometers lower than planned.

Fortunately, the flight control computers aboard the Fregat upper stage had detected the AVD command and determined that it had enough propellant for compensating the deficiency in velocity and altitude, as planned under such circumstances. 

The computers aboard Fregat then commanded its separation from the third stage and the activation of its main propulsion system, which lasted 17 seconds longer than planned. The resulting transfer orbit turned out to be close to what was originally planned for the mission, with the exception of the longitude of the ascending node (the point, where the ground track of the orbit crosses the Equator from Southern to Northern Hemisphere of the Earth).

Underfueled overfuel

On February 22, Head of Roskosmos Dmitry Rogozin accused "unscrupulous" media of distorting information about the launch of EgyptSat-A, which he blamed for the postponement of the next launch of the Soyuz rocket scheduled in Kourou, French Guiana. Rogozin denied reports about the formation of an investigative commission into the incident.

In the meantime, according to posters on the web forum of the Novosti Kosmonavtiki magazine, investigators analyzed the telemetry from the Angosat-A launch and established that the loss of pressure in the engine had been caused by the premature consumption of liquid oxygen, which serves as an oxidizer for the kerosene fuel.

Specialists then turned to the ground processing documentation related to the propellant loading into the third stage and quickly discovered that specifications for the amount of propellant to be loaded aboard the booster had been switched between fuel and oxidizer, apparently due to a human error. As a result, the stage was loaded with insufficient amount of liquid oxygen and an excess of kerosene.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/egyptsat-a.html#investigation

specifications for the amount of propellant to be loaded aboard the booster had been switched between fuel and oxidizer

...

how can you... how is it even... 

 e105585c89eeaedd3b6214580fede0e1.jpg

What kind of frickin’ space program is this. I’m done.

Edited by sh1pman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

specifications for the amount of propellant to be loaded aboard the booster had been switched between fuel and oxidizer

 

There are small oofs and, well, there are big oofs. I thought initially that the Russian space program was just having bad luck, but, yeah, it's all of the old guys leaving and the new guys not knowing what to do combined with management, etc. Basically, unless they can get their act together, the Russian space program is about to become one very, very big oof.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sh1pman said:

specifications for the amount of propellant to be loaded aboard the booster had been switched between fuel and oxidizer

That doesn’t exactly sound physically possible, given significant disparity in mass and volume - or it would surface way earlier than six seconds until end of burn.

Quote

Under normal circumstances, the third stage was to receive 15.7 tons of liquid oxygen and 7.2 tons of kerosene.

It’s the equivalent of pouring gasoline into the passenger comparment instead of the tabk, and the issue onlu surfacing about six hundred miles later. I’m forced to doubt Zak’s forum post sources.

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sh1pman said:

specifications for the amount of propellant to be loaded aboard the booster had been switched between fuel and oxidizer

This would never happen if AI was doing that instead of the weak humans.

P.S.
I can imagine an "underfueled" tank. But an "overfueled" one... How?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that liquid oxygen at its boiling point has a density of 1.141 g/cm3, with kerosene having a density of about 0.8 g/cm3. 

That gives us 13.76 m3 of LOX, and 9m3 of kerosene, which still doesn't quite add up, unless the Soyuz is using deep cryogenic LOX. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

This would never happen if AI was doing that instead of the weak humans.

P.S.
I can imagine an "underfueled" tank. But an "overfueled" one... How?!

You can always stuff more into the tanks. Like stuffing all your clothes into a hiking bag or your luggage after a holiday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MinimumSky5 said:

unless the Soyuz is using deep cryogenic LOX. 

Old Soyuz derivatives have.

11 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

I can imagine an "underfueled" tank. But an "overfueled" one... How?!

Ullage space? Overdrsigned but kept long for compatibility with higher-dV launchers?

10 hours ago, MinimumSky5 said:

which still doesn't quite add up

I’m still hung up on the propellant running out in something like the last 0.5% of the loading duration despite apparently wildly askew ratio of propellants in tanks.

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sevenperforce said:

Yeah no part of this makes sense.

Occam’s Razor would say it’s the Voronezh guys and their shoddy worksmanship again...

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2019 at 12:39 AM, DDE said:

It’s the equivalent of pouring gasoline into the passenger comparment instead of the tank

Maybe more like plugging the gasoline supply into the air intake and vice-versa.

Unless they want cosmonautsicles. Mmm...

16 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Yeah no part of this makes sense.

Ditto. You'd think they would have markings on the hoses and fuelports or something...

Edited by GearsNSuch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bart Hendrickx is active again.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45734.0

He’s traced a fuel tank and thruster design to both Nivelir and Burevestnik satellites.

Looks like part of the same bus. The assumption - now rather weak - is that Burevestnik is the ultimate, weaponized version of the inspector under development.

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GearsNSuch said:

Maybe more like plugging the gasoline supply into the air intake and vice-versa.

Unless they want cosmonautsicles. Mmm...

Ditto. You'd think they would have markings on the hoses and fuelports or something...

Better idea: make the connectors different enough that one physically cannot mistakenly cross them up. It's something I call "designing with a high level of idiot resistance". ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said:

Better idea: make the connectors different enough that one physically cannot mistakenly cross them up. It's something I call "designing with a high level of idiot resistance". ;)

For every idiot-proof design there will be one really persistent idiot with a sledgehammer...

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...