Jump to content

Russian Launch and Mission Thread


tater
 Share

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

When Almaz (as Nauka) is thrusting, they are unhappy.

When Almaz (#206) stays still, they are unhappy.

WHEN are they happy?!

This orbitalstationophobia makes me sad...

Can Nauka really be called Almaz? I’m pretty sure it’s FGB, not DOS. I know the two vehicle designs were supposed to be parts of one station, TKS was never meant to be a core section (and was then never flown until Almaz was cancelled). And people are happy when station modules don’t block the road or act up like... say... the Russian Orbital Segment until a few years ago. Or MIR before someone smashed up Spektr. People were happy then. It’s not a phobia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, OrdinaryKerman said:

Can Nauka really be called Almaz? I’m pretty sure it’s FGB, not DOS.

Almaz includes both OPS and TKS. It's an expendable module of Almaz turned into a cargo ship TKS-M, then into a station module.

14 minutes ago, OrdinaryKerman said:

And people are happy when station modules don’t block the road or act up like... say... the Russian Orbital Segment until a few years ago.

Don't they want a miracle once in their grey, ordinary life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OrdinaryKerman said:

Can Nauka really be called Almaz? I’m pretty sure it’s FGB, not DOS. I know the two vehicle designs were supposed to be parts of one station, TKS was never meant to be a core section (and was then never flown until Almaz was cancelled).

I'd like you to introduce you to two words that are all over Russian military and technical thought: "complex" (noun) and "system".

https://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200083920

So you can (if not officially, then at least conceptually) have Almaz as the DOS, Almaz as the DOS+FGB, Almaz as the DOS+FGB+Proton SLV, and that's without mentioning attendant ground infrastructure. Yes, it's a matryoshka of systems and complexes, many of them with their own GRAU/GUKOS alphanumerics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, a casual search for Kotov made me stumble across this: https://aboutspacejornal.net/2021/08/12/беседа-журналиста-с-анонимом-сотруд/ (warning: Cyrillic URL) A few observations from, or based on, said article, in no particular order.

1. (my) That anonymous TASS interview is posted to the Roscosmos Facebook https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=3018722488382418&id=1398327333755283&__tn__=-R I know "RT =/= endorsement", but posted without comment? I funno, sounds a lot like endorsement.

2. (author's) A week ago Rogozin dropped by to Soloviev Live, a podcast hosted by one of the hardcore, hawkish right-wingers of Russian TV, Vladimir Soloviev, to discuss that very same Ars Technica article. Well, I haven't sat down to listen for the whole thing, but Irina Doroshenko points out that Soloviev called Serena a "girl in a fit of hysterics", so that's bound to be fun.

3. (author's links, my observation) Mentions of Serena's blod clot have been cropping up since at least April 2021; a Roscosmos anon certainly wasn't the first to leak these details, although Kondakova can be described as "Roscosmos-adjacent" (I don't know where she's working right now) https://m.gazeta.ru/science/2021/04/19_a_13564838.shtml 

There's also at least one crude fake of a NASA disciplinary order "confirming" Serena's "misuse of government property" (issued in 2016, uh-huh) floating about the bowels of Russian geopolicial forums.

Edit: and here's an earlier mention of the clot directly after her return to Earth in 2018, this time while dismissing the accusations.

https://www.kp.ru/daily/26923/3970283/

Edited by DDE
Trimmed an unnecessary phrase
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they are doing this because of the upcoming election into the russian parlament.  All of this storm will most likely end after the election. They thought that they can easily gain approval form extreme conservatists/loyalists by doing this but when things started to heat up they quickly backed off. This is how informational autocracy works after all.

Edited by ra4nd0m
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ra4nd0m said:

I think they are doing this because of the upcoming election into the russian parlament. 

@JoeSchmuckatelli asked about the geo-political goal and not the domestic political goal.

Your take isn't a bad one, although it's a foregone conclusion that this is authorized from on high. This sort of personal crusading isn't entirely unheard of within Russian government and business structures (e.g. Malofeev and Donetsk/Lugansk in April to August of 2014); they are more decentralized than many wish to admit, with Putin and the labyrinthine Administration of the President serving as an arbitrator for bureacratic fiefdoms, rather than having a hand in every little happening. Heck, it was that way even under Stalin; there are only 24 hours in a day, after all.

1 hour ago, ra4nd0m said:

They thought that they can easily gain approval form extreme conservatists/loyalists by doing this but when things started to heat up they quickly backed off.

I see no backing down whatsoever. What I see is inflammatory claims by anonymous sauces against the backdrop of conciliatory but non-contradicting statements by official sources (indeed, a narrative to reconcile the two claims NASA is pressuring Roscosmos to stay silent). Thus the salacious statement was made, but no-one can accuse Roscosmos of making it; Roscosmos can have their cake, and eat it too.

It's elementary PR and is used all over the place, particularly by governments. Journalists prize this type of access to government types (especially spooks) because it guarantees catchy headlines.

2 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

What is the geo-political goal of all this? 

Anatoly Zak's reading is that it's posturing against NASA with regards to the ISS extension. His sauces tell him that NEM isn't going to the ISS and is going to become the core of the new high-latitude station.

In the most extreme case, I guess, Roscosmos wants to stick NASA with the bill for Russia's maintenance of the ISS.

The only geopolitical goal Russian manned (he-he) spaceflight seems to have is prestige, which is best served by Roscosmos's other white whale - the 2030 moonshot.

Edited by DDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a friendly trolling after NASA for unknown reasons had rejected both tool revision and polygraph test (I believe the latter is a fake science, but anyway).

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

So... Apparently Russia is getting ready to test their nuclear powered cruise missile again. 

How do these things work?  Are they atmosphere limited - or could the technology be upscaled for orbital launches? 

All signs point to a nuclear-propelled, airbreathing Kh-102 ALCM look-alike. I highly doubt they're even supersonic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

They were thinking it's not supersonic, too.
And then it - tah! - rammed!

Supersonic in multiple directions at the same time. A really dangerous missile for those on the giving (and, as it turns out, receiving) end.

Edited by Codraroll
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DDE said:

...oh

So… what’s the planned purpose of the docking port on Nauka we see there, facing… aft? towards the Soyuz? Is that where the airlock module still mounted to Pirs-2 at the top of the pic is going to go? Doesn’t seem like that could dock anything else there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

So… what’s the planned purpose of the docking port on Nauka we see there, facing… aft? towards the Soyuz? Is that where the airlock module still mounted to Pirs-2 at the top of the pic is going to go? Doesn’t seem like that could dock anything else there. 

mlm_iso_exterior_2sides_1.jpg
Yes. And that port's facing forward, same direction as PMA-2.

Also it's called Rassvet, not Pirs-2.

Edited by OrdinaryKerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

So… what’s the planned purpose of the docking port on Nauka we see there, facing… aft? towards the Soyuz? Is that where the airlock module still mounted to Pirs-2 at the top of the pic is going to go? Doesn’t seem like that could dock anything else there. 

The Aperture Science Prichal is going to join the party this fall too pessimistically autumn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prichal_(ISS_module)

Spoiler

Mockup_of_Prichal_Module.jpg

Prichal Node Module to launch in 2019resize-img.php?pth=0&img=progress-m-um__

1 active, 5 passive.

Another such one is planned for ROSS.

And also the expendable habitat for the PTKNP long-term missions looks familiar, so it's a family.

Spoiler

1051e40563eb.jpg

 

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

The Aperture Science Prichal is going to join the party this fall too pessimistically autumn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prichal_(ISS_module)

  Reveal hidden contents

Mockup_of_Prichal_Module.jpg

1 active, 5 passive.

Another such one is planned for ROSS.

And also the expendable habitat for the PTKNP long-term missions looks familiar, so it's a family.

  Hide contents

1051e40563eb.jpg

 

Yes its a bit familiar, why not increase its size rather than the return module. 
And why does the return module has an docking port? An backup if the orbital module got problems, guess the artist was clueless. 

Like the side heat shield and the downward extension,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, magnemoe said:

why not increase its size rather than the return module. 

It's an optional part,for long-term flights (lunar, etc).

It isn't needed for LEO.

10 hours ago, magnemoe said:

And why does the return module has an docking port?

To dock the habitat after gettintg into LEO, like Apollo with LEM.

(The habitat is to be placed in the interstage below the craft, like LEM).

10 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Like the side heat shield and the downward extension,

No side heatshield. A front heat protection at the windward side.

The downwind side is lighter, and the RCS is placed on it.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

And also the expendable habitat for the PTKNP long-term missions looks familiar, so it's a family.

 

1 hour ago, magnemoe said:

Yes its a bit familiar, why not increase its size rather than the return module. 
And why does the return module has an docking port? An backup if the orbital module got problems, guess the artist was clueless. 

Frankly I find the Soyuz OM concept too brilliant to abandon. Yes, a conventional LES means a docking is requiredz but it's a small price to pay.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...