Jump to content

Russian Launch and Mission Thread


tater
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Currently the supply ships are Soyuz and Progress.

No need in Oryol to get in LEO, and it's at least a decade till the lunar flights get required.

No need for Orel itself, that much is true. But the pace at which it is developed is indicative of a few "hiccups" in the organization, as it were. If that project hasn't even gone beyond the not-to-scale-mockup stage well over a decade into its development, I'd say it's unreasonably optimistic to assume a space station would be ready in just a few years. 

17 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Some country just had a decade rest from its own spaceflights, iirc.

The situations are different. The US had a destination, but lacked a reliable shuttlecraft. Having a project partner with an available shuttlecraft, it was decided to shelf the unreliable STS and hitch a ride with the partner's shuttlecraft instead, until a domestic alternative could be developed. Russia without the ISS would have a shuttlecraft, but no destination for it to go, and thus nothing practical to use it for - and then nothing practical for the astronauts to do, since the Soyuz is too small to serve as anything but a shuttlecraft. 

17 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

But keep hoping that Starship will ever fly, or LOP-G/Orion get to the halo orbit.

Again, different situations. Starship and Orion have hardware on the launch pad undergoing active test programs. Orel has, what, a plastic mockup at two-thirds scale they sometimes drag out for PR purposes, most of the design details still far up in the air, a project management team shifting people faster than the revolving door of the average hotel lobby, three name changes and counting, still no launch vehicle, and a budget that has mostly gone towards buying dachas in faraway sunny regions. 

LOP-G is a terribad idea, though. But that's quite far removed from the current discussion.

2 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Politician: "... and we'll be out by 2024, to make our own space station! With card games, and seamstresses!"

Engineer: *whispers something in politician's ear*

Politician: *threatens the engineer with a reassignment to Siberia and an accidental fall out of a seventh-story window*

Engineer: *keeps whispering*

Politician: "Uhh, make that 2028! For now!"

Edited by Codraroll
Cleared up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Codraroll said:

No need for Orel itself, that much is true. But the pace at which it is developed is indicative of a few "hiccups" in the organization, as it were.

"Musk time".
"Constellation".
"Ares"
And almost a decade of "coming soon" SLS, Orion, CST, LOP-G, Bigelow expandable station, and the Boca-Chica disneyland with a huge rocket tower attraction.
After a flightless decade.
So, you may repeat this song again and again, but the facts are that the hiccups at the Russian side are at least not bigger and much cheaper. 

8 hours ago, Codraroll said:

The situations are different. The US had a destination, but lacked a reliable shuttlecraft.

"You don't understand, it's something different."

8 hours ago, Codraroll said:

Russia without the ISS would have a shuttlecraft

That's USA without the ISS had a shuttlecraft and no point to go, if you forgot.
Russia had its own stations, though not so much overgrown.
All Russia needed was money, and this had satisfied both parties.

The ISS is a museum of excessive and useless solutions, never needed for a Soviet/Russian station, like the shuttle-dependent  Western modules (the self-propelled Soviet/Russian ones never needed a shuttle).
Or the androgynous docking port, to attach 300 t objects (will you have any?), and always used in incomplete non-androgynous versions. Designed to let Buran be docked by a rescue ship, and never used at the Russian segment, because classic ones are enough.
Or the CBM berthing port with its optimistically1.27 m wide opening, to match the androgynous tunnel on the US ships, which was never used for anything wider than the classic 0.8 m, becuase it requires disassembly of the docking mechanism. The Western modules full of 2 m holes for those ports, instead of a node module like Prichal.
The ugly asymmetric thing with IDA adaptor, just to let the shuttles dock, because their cargo bay geometry was not designed for docking.
Or the ugly practice of arm'ed berthing of the ships instead of docking.
So, a significant part of ISS is made so only to match the hopes and design lacks of the American side, and actually was not required or should be done in other way.

8 hours ago, Codraroll said:

Again, different situations. Starship and Orion have hardware on the launch pad

That's all you need to know about them to the day.
So, who would laugh more.

Also, the strange SpX game with assembling/disassembling rockets on the launch pad is something Russia was never doing, indeed.
Oryol at least is just a mockup which takes not that much money. The Angara boosters have been tested several times in flight and worked perfectly.

8 hours ago, Codraroll said:

LOP-G is a terribad idea, though. But that's quite far removed from the current discussion.

Much terrible idea is putting all eggs into the never-had-flown rocket, full of strange ideas from sci-fi.
LOP-G is just a lesser evil, possible to be built.

There is no discussion here, only a repeatitive ritual dance around any Russian problem, when the opposite side has much bigger ones of its own, just more money to patch the organization holes.

Don't hope too much, the rocket tech is from 1960s, and the only real problem is fine equipment, which will also be mastered, at least to keep making the high-precision missiles.

8 hours ago, Codraroll said:

Politician: "... and we'll be out by 2024, to make our own space station! With card games, and seamstresses!"
Engineer: *whispers something in politician's ear*
Politician: *threatens the engineer with a reassignment to Siberia and an accidental fall out of a seventh-story window*
Engineer: *keeps whispering*
Politician: "Uhh, make that 2028! For now!"

An absolute lack of understanding.
Politician: ".... let's be out asap, but keep being in until the asap."
Engineer: (doing routine things)

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

"Musk time".
"Constellation".
"Ares"
And almost a decade of "coming soon" SLS, Orion, CST, LOP-G, Bigelow expandable station, and the Boca-Chica disneyland with a huge rocket tower attraction.
After a flightless decade.

I do not think "but what about the US" is a good argument when discussing the state of the Russian space program. Let us stick to what happens in Russia instead of going back and forth over what NASA or SpaceX or anybody else are or aren't doing.

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Oryol at least is just a mockup which takes not that much money.

That is one way to see it, true. But the program was launched with higher ambitions than taking ten years to build a mockup. The fact that it's still on the mockup stage isn't really compensated by the relatively small sums of money spent in the process, from a project management perspective. If the objective was to not waste money, the whole project could have been shelved instead without much difference on the hardware side of things.

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The Angara boosters have been tested several times in flight and worked perfectly.

That much is a success, at least. But still, there have only been five launches across a period of eight years. Angara has yet to become a "workhorse" despite a very long development period; it still remains on the testing stage and it will take a long time before it will carry people. It remains to be seen if it can be produced in sufficient numbers, at sufficiently low costs, to get out of the testing stage.

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

There is no discussion here, only a repeatitive ritual dance around any Russian problem, when the opposite side has much bigger ones of its own, just more money to patch the organization holes.

Given how complex and problem-riddled of an activity spaceflight is in general, that money is a quite necessary ingredient if one wants to get anywhere, however. Ambitions are fine, but achieving them tends to be expensive, and that discrepancy between ambitions and funding is the whole crux of the problem. The know-how is obviously there, but it's not supported by the boatloads of currency required to make the nice plans reality.

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Don't hope too much, the rocket tech is from 1960s, and the only real problem is fine equipment, which will also be mastered, at least to keep making the high-precision missiles.

That is probably what will happen, indeed. A shift of focus towards missiles while the crewed space program is put on the back burner. Given the recent hullaballoo and the aforementioned lack of boatloads of currency, I have my doubts that a space station can be realized in the same time frame as an exit from the ISS. Without any other destinations for crewed activities, it's reasonable to wonder whether they will keep flying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

Given the recent hullaballoo and the aforementioned lack of boatloads of currency

Rumor is that Borisov only took the post on the condition of a 400 bln funding boost. That's about a quarter over current.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

I do not think "but what about the US" is a good argument

The whole your posts are a pure what-about-Russians-ism.

It's nice when the world is full of not indifferent people worrying about others' problems so much.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DDE said:

Rumor is that Borisov only took the post on the condition of a 400 bln funding boost. That's about a quarter over current.

Great if true. If not for the hullaballoo, it might have been a real kick in the pants. But now some challenges have been taken on that might cost more than a bit extra funding to fix.

Just now, kerbiloid said:

They whole your posts are a pure what-about-Russians-ism.

It is the Russian Launch and Mission Thread, after all. It is on-topic to discuss the state of the Russian space program in here, don't you think?

Edited by Codraroll
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Beccab said:

I wonder why, considering this is the russian launch and mission thread

"Launch and mission". 

7 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

Great if true

I want to believe it's said genuinely, lol.

Don't get disappointed if it indeed happens.

***

When I was criticizing the Space-X fantasy fiction in its thread, I was bringing pure physical arguments about why their... thing... looks doubtful.

The "Russians lose!" saga in this thread is just an expression of hope.

Of two hopes that the Russians will lose, and the Starship will fly.

I doubt that the former will happen (and you better hope for it won't, as the splash can exceed the expectations), and I same doubt that disneyland rockets can fly.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The ISS is a museum of excessive and useless solutions, never needed for a Soviet/Russian station, like the shuttle-dependent  Western modules (the self-propelled Soviet/Russian ones never needed a shuttle).
Or the androgynous docking port, to attach 300 t objects (will you have any?), and always used in incomplete non-androgynous versions. Designed to let Buran be docked by a rescue ship, and never used at the Russian segment, because classic ones are enough.
Or the CBM berthing port with its optimistically1.27 m wide opening, to match the androgynous tunnel on the US ships, which was never used for anything wider than the classic 0.8 m, becuase it requires disassembly of the docking mechanism. The Western modules full of 2 m holes for those ports, instead of a node module like Prichal.
The ugly asymmetric thing with IDA adaptor, just to let the shuttles dock, because their cargo bay geometry was not designed for docking.
Or the ugly practice of arm'ed berthing of the ships instead of docking.
So, a significant part of ISS is made so only to match the hopes and design lacks of the American side, and actually was not required or should be done in other way.

“Your docking port is ugly” is an insult I never thought I would hear lol.

Just now, Codraroll said:

That is probably what will happen, indeed. A shift of focus towards missiles while the crewed space program is put on the back burner. Given the recent hullaballoo and the aforementioned lack of boatloads of currency, I have my doubts that a space station can be realized in the same time frame as an exit from the ISS. Without any other destinations for crewed activities, it's reasonable to wonder whether they will keep flying.

I’ve been thinking about the back and forth between you two. Here are my thoughts.

I don’t think comparing Oryol and ROSS necessarily makes sense. For whatever reason, crewed spacecraft development in particular is really hard for the USSR/Russia.

Let’s take a look.

Soyuz 7K-OK took years longer than expected to fly while the US pumped out Geminis, 7K-L1/Zond was plagued with issues that would have been fatal to crew on board, 7K-OKS killed people, the successive Soyuzs were successful but that was the culmination of effectively a decade of development that involved deaths (!). Meanwhile TKS flew sporadically in portions throughout the 70s and 80s but never got to the point of carrying crew. Come the economic troubles of the late 80s and then the decline of the 90s, Zarya is a footnote in history, Kliper is limited to a neat rendering, while the Soyuz derivatives intended for lunar flight that would have been developed jointly with Europe went nowhere because of both economic and political reasons. So it makes sense that now (if you get what I mean) Oryol would be delayed.

But looking at space stations, the story is different. While the economy declined in the 70s and 80s, the bugs were worked out and reliability improved (!)leading to Mir. Mir was literally built as the USSR was reaching its economic and political nadir. American money was required for the ISS and evidence has emerged that the feared exodus of scientists and engineers to other countries interested in obtaining ballistic missiles was real to some extent, but even amidst the events of the 90s, Mir was maintained and the ISS was built.

On the other hand, Nauka did take time. But this doesn’t actually appear to be symptomatic of the Russian space program per se. Nauka had very specific circumstances. It was a victim of being considered an “add-on”; with part of the ISS flying, there wasn’t really a need for the full thing as what was there was enough, giving the government an opportunity to withdraw funding.

Meanwhile, in general the 2000s and 2010s saw stagnation in spaceflight. While Nauka was taking years in what has been described as a result of corruption and lack of funding at Roscosmos, Orion and it’s launch vehicle suffered “setbacks” that have led to it taking nearly a decade for it to finally launch, on a completely different launch vehicle than originally intended. Commercial Crew had its fair share of problems, remember that the first flights were originally intended for 2017.

Delays are certainly plausible- if not guaranteed- but Russia has done things. Nauka had the delays you mentioned earlier but the fact remains that it did launch.

I don’t think we will see the complete ROSS by 2030 or according to any original schedule, but the launch of a single module by 2028 would not be difficult.

It wouldn’t be the expansive Russian space program envisioned by various officials, but it would not be “the end of the Russian space program”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(ninja'd)

9 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

“Your docking port is ugly”

1. Not  "your" but "adopted from Buran", lol.

2. ISS is full of excessive equipment required only by Western optimists back in their days, and the docking thing is the most visible.

(Though, it lacks a bath.  Probably a tub didn't pass through the port.)

9 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

in general the 2000s and 2010s saw stagnation in spaceflight

The whole idea of building the new stations for... tourists... is sick.

It just means that NASA just doesn't know why need a crewed station.

When Roscosmos sends tourists, it does it for money with existing equipment. It doesn't build a new station for that.

When they plan a new station as a hotel, it means that somebody in NASA is very-very much afraid of reorganization.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

When they plan a new station as a hotel, it means that somebody in NASA is very-very much afraid of reorganization.

Well, then we're very lucky that no one is planning a station as a hotel! Axiom is a research facility in first place as well as capable of supporting space tourism; Orbitak Reef is a staging ground for lunar missions; and at this point we know next to nothing about Starlab, so who knows. 

32 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

When Roscosmos sends tourists, it does it for money with existing equipment. It doesn't build a new station for that.

Ah yes, the great touristic Soyuz flights. So great that Roscosmos couldn't afford to add a flight to the launch schedule and instead put them on a crew rotation mission, leading to one of the removed astronauts quitting from the agency. That's the example you choose to represent the way Roscosmos does touristic missions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Beccab said:

That's the example you choose to represent the way Roscosmos does touristic missions?

The example of using the existing station for additional money instead of planning Bigelow hotels and others.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www-rbc-ru.translate.goog/technology_and_media/29/07/2022/62e3d6029a794741c0c24d31?from=from_main_9&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru

https://www-interfax-ru.translate.goog/russia/854492?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru

Yu. Borisov stated that Russia will begin exiting from the ISS project in the middle of 2024 or beginning of 2025, but the exact date will depend on the actual state of the station systems, isn't defined, and Russia dodn't warn anybody about this intention, because to the date there is no necessity in doing that today, while there is no secret in the intention of doing that.

The process (when it begins) will take about two years, and Russia will do all its duties, including the station deorbiting.

***

300px-Babylon5_01.jpg

(ISS two hundred years later. 
See the spherical module. Can't decide is it Nauka or Prichal.
Currently they are the youngest modules and have the best chances. to survive for two centuries and get upscaled and upgraded.)

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Minmus Taster said:

Well to be fair to them it IS an improvement, now they actually need to build something.

Three Anticlimactic Gifs - Album on Imgur

First they need to fix up the crooked solar panels. Preferably not with greasy fingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2022 at 9:18 PM, DDE said:

The Challenge is having monetary challenges. At a nominal cost of RUB 905 mln (Roscosmos footed the spaceflight bill) it's fishing around for another 250 mln for groundside shoots and post-production.

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5535190

"In order to dispel anu doubts, we shall assign a symbolic release date - April 12, 2023"

"But will the film be ready in time?"

"Well, that is your problem, not mine"

https://www.1tv.ru/news/2022-09-02/437019-konstantin_ernst_ob_yavil_datu_vyhoda_filma_vyzov_chast_kotorogo_snimali_na_mks

Also, during today's EVA, MC-Moscow tried to get Artemiev to look for an "indeterminate free-floating object" near the solar array. After half a minute of trying, they told him not to bother.

Just in case anyone gets excited by UFO-esque headlines.

https://ria.ru/20220902/mks-1814164019.html

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...