totm dec 2019 Russian Launch and Mission Thread

[kerbiloid]

Just another successful launch of Angara.

[DDE]

Eyes on Orion

https://t.me/kiam_ison_network/195

[DDE]

Nani?

[DDE]

And if you thought Leodr would miss the date, you'd be wrong.

Astrogator 12042024

[DDE]

...and an ICBM launch from Kapustin Yar. Looks like everyone's celebrating Friday, so no ID on the type of missile.

Edit: are, here we go, a video. Looks like a Yars to me.

https://t.me/fotozak/6480

Edited April 12 by DDE

[kerbiloid]

11 hours ago, DDE said:

and an ICBM launch from Kapustin Yar

No fireworks. Not counted.

[DDE]

Korona SSTO has been making rounds in the press again. I find it alarming that it's still a thing alongside Amur-SPG (Falcon-Methanski) and is getting more and more official endorsement. The last thing Roscosmos needs on their plate is a Korolev-Chelomei situation, but instead they're just throwing more and more things at the wall (Angara, Soyuz-5, Bartini's Krylo, even Don/Yenisei SHLV is still making noises).

[Codraroll]

1 hour ago, DDE said:

Korona SSTO has been making rounds in the press again. I find it alarming that it's still a thing alongside Amur-SPG (Falcon-Methanski) and is getting more and more official endorsement. The last thing Roscosmos needs on their plate is a Korolev-Chelomei situation, but instead they're just throwing more and more things at the wall (Angara, Soyuz-5, Bartini's Krylo, even Don/Yenisei SHLV is still making noises).

Of course. Impressive announcements and PowerPoint slides are cheaper than impressive hardware. As the capabilities of the Russian space program dwindle into nothing, expect their announcements to become ever more grandiose. Ars Technica had a recent article on Borisov announcing a rocket able to throw infinite payload to space by running on reusable unicorn farts, starting next week. Or, well, that's not quite what he said, but he might as well, because what he promised will be equally impossible to deliver in the time frame:

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/04/russian-space-chief-says-new-rocket-will-put-falcon-9-reuse-to-shame/

Expect instead Soyuz to fly for a few more years until the budget or political situation will put a stop to manned Russian spaceflight forever.

Edited Tuesday at 08:22 AM by Codraroll

[DDE]

9 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

Or, well, that's not quite what he said, but he might as well, because what he promised will be equally impossible to deliver in the time frame:

Oh, it is possible to deliver in that timeframe.

But what if, hear me out, we gave the rocket scientists about a tenth of the necessary budget, and were utterly amazed they preferred to twiddle their thumbs, find excuses and set up rat lines and Swiss bank accounts instead of working? After all, that's how Angara happened. For the first decade, it received 4% of the funding it was supposed to.

Combine that with a stalwart example of KB feudalism (Makeyev's pet Korona) and you have an absolute swamp that needs a new authoritarian like Korolev or Webb to sort it out.

Borisov, meanwhile, just rattles off what his grammar-deficient PR team pushes his way. Be happy they don't boast of building a factory to produce carburetors for electric cars (there's such a scandal going on right now, someone included a news article from the equivalent of the Onion in a regional ministry's annual report, to great public embarrassment).

[Codraroll]

8 minutes ago, DDE said:

Oh, it is possible to deliver in that timeframe.

A Falcon equivalent operational within five years, without having any hardware and no budget at the present? I'd call that unlikely at best. Remember that it took five years from the debut of Falcon 9 until they actually landed a first stage. 

Sure, it might be possible given infinite funding and competent management, but ... what's the saying again? "If a fish had wheels, it would be a bicycle"? Those missing factors are, well, quite far removed from what is actually available in the present situation. And frankly, quite a bit more than Russia can be expected to make available with things being the way they are at the moment.

[kerbiloid]

2 hours ago, Codraroll said:

unicorn farts

So, basically methalox.

[SunlitZelkova]

13 hours ago, DDE said:

For the first decade, it received 4% of the funding it was supposed to.

Yikes. At least Soyuz got a quarter of the funding requested in 1964.

[kerbiloid]

Just a matter of taste.

While the Americans enjoy wasting money by cancelling projects implemented in metal, the Russians prefer to do it to the projects implemented in paper.

The paper is cheaper.

***

Anyway, there is actually nothing to do on the Moon until portable fusionuke reactors provide power for mining and refining, while Soyuzes keep flying from time to time, to keep the honor guard at the orbital station.

Edited Wednesday at 08:25 AM by kerbiloid

[DDE]

9 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Yikes. At least Soyuz got a quarter of the funding requested in 1964.

Yeah, basically Khrunichev went bust developing it exclusively out of their own pocket. This in turn became a great excuse to sell off the expensive land under Khrunichev, forcing Angara's production to move to the stillborn Energiya Block A production line at Omsk, which didn't do the timeline any favors.

[SunlitZelkova]

My question would be if this is lack of resources rather than lack of interest in space.

Part of the reasons the Soviets were underfunded is because the CPSU had economic issues and the task of building up the nuclear arsenal on their hands. There probably wasn’t money to afford fully funding everything even if they wanted to.

Is it the same in Russia? Apart from the obvious “if we spent a fraction of what we do on military on space we’d be on Mars by now” that can apply to all of the big three (US/RU/CHN).

[DDE]

4 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

My question would be if this is lack of resources rather than lack of interest in space.

Part of the reasons the Soviets were underfunded is because the CPSU had economic issues and the task of building up the nuclear arsenal on their hands. There probably wasn’t money to afford fully funding everything even if they wanted to.

Is it the same in Russia? Apart from the obvious “if we spent a fraction of what we do on military on space we’d be on Mars by now” that can apply to all of the big three (US/RU/CHN).

I think the missing link is the unexpected commercial success and the Shuttle woes. Basically, at roughly the time you'd have expected a resurgence of government space spending, instead the mamy-named Russian space industry first began to scoop up commercial space launches, and then it got the biggest one of all - the Soyuz seat-sharing agreement with NASA.

I think at this point a dubious decision was made to wean it off into a commercial venture, despite little evidence that it would be sustainable, which was promptly exemplified in the pre-Rogozin disaster spree.

Premature attempts to monetize something are not an uncommon problem, and politically it's rather difficult to fish not for a one-time bailout, but a near-permanent garden hose of money.

[DDE]

Korolev's brainstorming for the name "Vostok"

Everything up to and including Volna, Vulkan, Veter (wind), Vykhod (escape), Voskhozdeniye, Vzlyot (ascent) and Vozrozhdeniye (renaissance).

Love how Vostok was still his first idea, followed immediately by Voskhod

[SunlitZelkova]

38 minutes ago, DDE said:

Korolev's brainstorming for the name "Vostok"

Everything up to and including Volna, Vulkan, Veter (wind), Vykhod (escape), Voskhozdeniye, Vzlyot (ascent) and Vozrozhdeniye (renaissance).

Love how Vostok was still his first idea, followed immediately by Voskhod

Does a document like this exist for L1 or L3?

I know a few names were listed in Kamanin’s diaries. I always go with Rodina for the flyby and Znamya for the orbiter-lander combo in my alt histories.

[Codraroll]

10 hours ago, DDE said:

Premature attempts to monetize something are not an uncommon problem, and politically it's rather difficult to fish not for a one-time bailout, but a near-permanent garden hose of money.

But also, to continue the metaphor, they are fishing in a pond rather than a lake, and there's a limit to the amount of fish in there (and several other agencies are also fishing in the same waters). That presents a problem to any plans that depend on getting a whale on the hook. In the end, they will have to make do with a bass instead, then complain that it only presents 4% of the whale that was required for the plans to truly work as intended. But instead of drawing up new plans based on the availability of fish in the pond, they keep making plans that require a whale. The absense of whales at the end of the fishing line appears to come as an unpleasant surprise every time.

And then somebody decided to trawl the entire pond and spend all the fish on a failed military venture, permanently damaging the pond's ability to sustain an ecosystem. Yet still, more spaceflight plans are drawn up with the assumption that there's a whale to be caught somewhere in there. It doesn't seem like that will go anywhere this time either.

[DDE]

Russia vetoes UNSC resolution against placement of nuclear weapons in space after a Russo-Chinese amendment adding a call against conventional weapons in space fails in a closely-tied vote

https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148951

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, DDE said:

Russia vetoes UNSC resolution against placement of nuclear weapons in space after a Russo-Chinese amendment adding a call against conventional weapons in space fails in a closely-tied vote

https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148951

Textbook escalation on both sides.  Déjà vu all over again.  <sigh>