CatastrophicFailure Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 10 hours ago, magnemoe said: Was not the LES tower ejected just before booster separation? Think that was an weird time to do it rater than waiting to just after separation. Soyuz has like two (maybe 3) completely separate abort motors. The tower was indeed jettisoned just before BECO, the actual abort was performed by solid motors on the (still attached) fairing. Guess they figure that high up they don’t need the oomph of the entire abort tower to get away safely. Seems correct after this “test”, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Guess they figure that high up they don’t need the oomph of the entire abort tower to get away safely. They spared something like 60 kg with that set-up compared to an earlier version. Not sure what the third abort motor is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 The built-in engine in the service module is used during upper stage burns for escape, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 32 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said: The built-in engine in the service module is used during upper stage burns for escape, right? Right, I forget the number, but there was a flight with a failed core/upper stage sep, and they aborted with he Soyuz’s OM engine. I hear the steep descent was... most unpleasant. But still preferable to the alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 1, 2019 Share Posted February 1, 2019 11 hours ago, MaverickSawyer said: The built-in engine in the service module is used during upper stage burns for escape, right? Sorta, yeah, but I wonder how much TWR it has, especially post-Soyuz-TM without a second service engine to complement it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted February 1, 2019 Share Posted February 1, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, DDE said: Sorta, yeah, but I wonder how much TWR it has, especially post-Soyuz-TM without a second service engine to complement it. Enough to prevent a RUD propagation. Normal deorbit = 70-100 dV Time for soyuz deorbit~4min 0.05g, including rcs. Edited February 1, 2019 by Xd the great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 1, 2019 Share Posted February 1, 2019 Once selfie for men, one giant leap for the construction of a superheavy launchpad at Vostochnyi. Supposedly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted February 1, 2019 Share Posted February 1, 2019 9 minutes ago, DDE said: Once selfie for men, one giant leap for the construction of a superheavy launchpad at Vostochnyi. Supposedly. "We finally found a place for a launchpad, let's capture this historical moment and remember the heroes who were... choosing the place... whatever, just take the photo already!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 1, 2019 Share Posted February 1, 2019 Spoiler To the left - VAB, Tier 0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Last week’s hype wave launched by a Blue Origin wannabe has reached RT. https://www.rt.com/business/450384-tourists-russia-space-ship/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 2 hours ago, DDE said: Last week’s hype wave launched by a Blue Origin wannabe has reached RT. https://www.rt.com/business/450384-tourists-russia-space-ship/ Suborbital? Boring! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 1 hour ago, sh1pman said: Suborbital? Boring! Boring? Maybe. But it will be a testbed for technologies which eventually (hopefully) will make the way into space proper. And a source of valuable data about aerodynamic reentry, handling of propulsive landing and, most importantly IMO - economics of such venture. If suborbital hoppers prove they can make money, next step is quite obvious If it means more attention and money poured into space exploration, i'm all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted February 4, 2019 Share Posted February 4, 2019 (edited) First Russian hypersonic space drone... yeah. https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Flenta.ru%2Fnews%2F2019%2F02%2F04%2Fdrone%2F Seems to be suborbital, but hey, it's a start. Quote At altitudes of up to 160 kilometers, the aircraft will be able to reach speeds of up to seven Mach numbers. Also, the drone can be used as a means of launching satellites to an altitude of up to 500 kilometers. The 14D30 propulsion system (from the Briz-M upper stage), which the drone will receive, is designed for 50 flights. The launch of the drone will be carried out from the carrier aircraft, and return to the ground - with the help of a parachute. The project does not involve military drone application. In 2023, it is planned to conduct five flight tests of the UAV. Currently, the development of the drone attracted 25 million rubles from the Project-Technique Corporation and 30 million from the Skolkovo Foundation. At the second stage of work it is planned to attract 280 million. - Good morning, Mr. Starship, don't mind me, just flying by... observing... Edited February 4, 2019 by sh1pman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 4, 2019 Share Posted February 4, 2019 13 minutes ago, sh1pman said: The project does not involve military drone application. Briz-M uses hypergols and is a derivative of the Naryad ASAT. *X for doubt* Also, very DynaSoar aerodynamics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 4, 2019 Share Posted February 4, 2019 56 minutes ago, sh1pman said: Good morning, Mr. Starship, don't mind me, just flying by... observing... On that note, the US had a fun project that would rig the modified Nike Ajax ASAT with a Keyhole satellite’s photo system isntead of a nuclear warhead. This meant trying to photograph a target moving at orbital velocity while on a suborbital trajectory. ”Fun” doesn’t begin to describe it. Or, on a less serious note, the ultimate Inspector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 4, 2019 Share Posted February 4, 2019 Rogozin claims to have bumped up Roscosmos revenue by a third, cut overheads by 15% and got it to the point of a net profit. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3873717 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 17 hours ago, DDE said: Rogozin claims to have bumped up Roscosmos revenue by a third, cut overheads by 15% and got it to the point of a net profit. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3873717 "We reduced corruption to 15% from 10% of the annual budget, and made 20% cuts to engineerer salary". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 53 minutes ago, Xd the great said: "We reduced corruption to 15% from 10% of the annual budget, and made 20% cuts to engineerer salary". I think he merely got infected with the utter schizophrenia of trying to run a national space program as a profit-making venture... while being chastised for not spending the taxpayer cash being sent his way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 (edited) The astronomers should be searching for the notorious "platinoid asteroid". Then every national space program would get a kick. Edited February 5, 2019 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 (edited) It’s hapenn*gets drowned out by Raptor test fire* Final configuration appears to be: 4 x RD-171MV first stage, 2 x RD-171MV second stage, 1 x RD-180 third stage, all fired in parallel, and a smattering of hydrolox upper stages. Edited February 5, 2019 by DDE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 Man, I hope that thing flies. within my lifetime I wanna see that real-life asparagus staging! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 9 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Man, I hope that thing flies. within my lifetime I wanna see that real-life asparagus staging! Don’t Indians have an SRB asparagus system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 1 hour ago, DDE said: Don’t Indians have an SRB asparagus system? And Delta II, I think, but there’s dinky little SRBs and then there’s this glorious monstrosity. With cores so closely clustered together I really want to see how they manage separation without the whole thing going, well, Kerbal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said: And Delta II, I think, but there’s dinky little SRBs and then there’s this glorious monstrosity. With cores so closely clustered together I really want to see how they manage separation without the whole thing going, well, Kerbal. So you are telling me N-1 wasn't kerbal enough? Or the delta III? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: And Delta II, I think, but there’s dinky little SRBs and then there’s this glorious monstrosity. With cores so closely clustered together I really want to see how they manage separation without the whole thing going, well, Kerbal. It was done, but kind of a long time ago, in a Union far, far away. An elegant vehicle for a more... socialized age. Note the tiny separation between the boosters and the wings. The boosters would separate while still strapped together, and use a two-stage separation rocket to steer them clear of the wings, at a distance of 60 cm or less, without the exhaust hitting the TPS. And there was supposedly such a safety margin that it could still separate with either of the boosters having not expended their kerosene supply (there was a huge oxidizer dump valve to provide engine-out capability). Edited February 6, 2019 by DDE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.