Jump to content

DDE

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,818

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by DDE

  1. DDE
    Well, the r/space thread on Korona amusingly degenerated into a chain of complaints how it's a copy of Falcon 9 and BFR based on stolen tech.
  2. DDE
    Drop the air-tightedness, it cannot be relied upon to last in combat.
  3. DDE
    It wasn't exactly invested into staying there.
  4. DDE
    It's more overt, thanks to having a third spaceport. The military doesn't touch Vostochny, and guess what happens.
  5. DDE
    I'm beginning to actually see how Makeyeev can get this funded. They'll pitch it to the military. And then they'll mention Zuma. And USA 207. And aliens. And promise a manned version with autocannons. Because ultimately, thus far the Russian booster line-up is entirely driven by military requirements.
  6. DDE
    LOL, is that an Atlas-style skirt with two RD-0120s I see in the first iteration?
  7. DDE
    I dunno. Conventional wisdom says big rocket engine + no ullage = kaboom.
  8. DDE
    It’s also repurposed bovine waste because reflective armour, any reflective armour, chars to black under high-intensity lasing light, so you’re back to square one. Yes, which makes superficial comparisons ever more asinine.
  9. DDE
    ...more like 4chan threads. Except 4chan has better loading times. See above for what I've dug up.
  10. DDE
    That's for the first stage. It took me some digging to find out that the second stage DOES have four Dracos. Geez, the documentation of SpaceX rockets is almost as spotty as Russian ones... Well, @tater, to clear my conscious for today, I've found this random thread on Novosti Cosmonavtiki: http://novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/forum/messages/forum13/topic9042/message374367/#message374367 It's from 2008, around the time the program for RD-0124A, a restartable engine for URM-2, was dropped. The user highlighted states in no unequivocal terms that URM relies solely on the four gimbaled nozzles; at best a "semi-hot" staging. The whole thread is basically a discussion of ullage motors (cold gas, monoprop, hypergol, even Buran's kerolox) and other ways to resurrect the restartable/tug URM-2, up to and including orbital refueling. *laughs in Musk*
  11. DDE
    Not entirely the same. But sadly there's no word ANYWHERE on Angara's ullage thrusters. I see clear mention of first stage separation retromotors, but I don't recall non-reaction ullage system for kerolox (Anatoly Zak has just published a section on LK's hypergolic Blok Ye and its capillaries); Angara's URM-2 has no RCS. Blok D has dedicated ullage motors on top of RCS, BTW, and so does KVTK. Ditto for weekly flip-flopping between all-Russian LEO station, DSG and manned Moon landing.
  12. DDE
  13. DDE
    Hydrolox SSTO. Feasible? Perhaps. Monies? Nope.
  14. DDE
    Except when it's not part of the standard rocket. Apparently it's neither a hot-stage NOR has ullage motors.
  15. DDE
    >Removes responsibility from Disney >Somehow makes it to the front page of Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2am02gCzcOA My tinfoil hat has spawned a tinfoil hat.
  16. DDE
    (c) some guy on r/worldofwarships
  17. DDE
    @Ultimate Steve, hold my bear, where’s that Salyut-era Soviet album... You know, the one with vinyl recordings of Gagarin.
  18. DDE
    Cycler from where to where? That’s the rub. Cycler orbits are between planets. There’s no advantage in making Mars a stopover point for ore shipments from the belt...
  19. DDE
    That’s about the size of the problem. Archeotech boilers that nobody knows how to fix anymore, and the overhaul got postponed. But hey, at least this time, she didn’t need that tug. B5 and Andromeda are exceptions to the rule. They’re also TV series, so they don’t really compare. Because I didn’t mean WWII in the first place. I meant the Cold War, because @Cassel asked for an example of a carrier battle in the age of missiles.
  20. DDE
    I’m talking about the second half, the one where the other side didn’t really even bother with carriers.
  21. DDE
    @Cassel That said, a strike aircraft (especially unmanned and with tanker support) still outranges even the most optimistic railgun ranges. Dammit, I need to find out the limitations of merging...
  22. DDE
    No. Primarily because only one nation even has full-fledged fleet carriers. The second half of the XXth century has been an era of asymmetric naval warfare.
  23. DDE
    Hm... about naval units... I'm afraid that anti-orbital submarines will be incredibly annoying.
  24. DDE
    So it's not a carrier but a landing helicopter dock I actually completely agree, and, for more or less fighter-esque aircraft, did exactly that with my "corvette carriers" (as in, they carry corvettes). Someone might retort about orbital bombardment, but a) you still require tactical troop insertion and b) close air support may be faster than orbital artillery, although likely slower than ground-to-ground artillery.
  25. DDE
    @tater @ARS Burnside's Zeroth Law is love, Burnside's Zeroth Law is life. Villains need not to be sympathetic. Nah. ~3 missiles per fighter for older models, 0.9 fighters per missile as currently assured by manufacturers. So, probably with generous assumptions about countermeasures.
×
×
  • Create New...