totm dec 2019 Russian Launch and Mission Thread

[DDE]

12 hours ago, Spacescifi said:

Is there a Russian version of Elon Musk around?

That may be their only chance to compete with SpaceX NOW rather than later.

Or even if there was or is...  would the ministry of finance block a wealthy businessman from funding it?

I mean compared to the US, it's a good deal more authoritarian over there... from what is shown on TV to how law is carried out.

I think ROSCOSMOS would love if Elon shifted his space venture to Russia... but that is unlikely to happen.

I think I'll have to quote myself and others from a few pages back:

On 7/27/2020 at 4:46 PM, sh1pman said:

...that individual would emigrate to US.

Roscosmos views such startups as dangerous competition and will use all of its power to shut them down. I agree with @DDE, Russian civilian space program should be restarted from scratch. Its ideology needs to be completely reinvented, with focus on commercialisation of space activities. Otherwise it will be perpetually stuck in abandoned projects, unrealised proposals and use of ancient archeotechnology.

 

On 7/27/2020 at 8:47 PM, DDE said:

Russia has gone from a wild and corrupt privatization to re-nationalisation and dirigisme to mature state capitalism. You're not supposed to enterprise and innovate without state participation - although, sadly, the taxpayer money rarely comes with proper oversight. Whether it's the perks or the job security, the best jobs, the ones most in demand on the market, are in the vast bureaucracies of the state corporations. Why would anyone want to be an entrepreneur if not from desperation and lack of credentials?

We're headed full-tilt for the Chinese model where the public sector is nebulous but all-penetrating; our high and mighty think the US runs under the same model despite pretending otherwise, hence all the complaints about Musk being subsidized by the Pentagon.

Problem is, the state-led model of innovation is highly competitive if the state actually gives a damn (which, in cases of Russia's many, many past superprojects, it didn't). Corporations merely replicate the same top-down approach of setting a direction, mobilizing resources, and shutting out uninvited competing ideas as distractions.

 

And as a final addition, this sort of public-private work is usually funded not by MinFin but by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RFPI). Which for last few years have been mostly adjacent to the Ministry of Defence, bringing us full circle to the idea of elimination of Russia's civilian space program in any and all forms.

[Spacescifi]

42 minutes ago, DDE said:

I think I'll have to quote myself and others from a few pages back:

 

 

And as a final addition, this sort of public-private work is usually funded not by MinFin but by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RFPI). Which for last few years have been mostly adjacent to the Ministry of Defence, bringing us full circle to the idea of elimination of Russia's civilian space program in any and all forms.

 

Thank you. And... not surprised either.

I may be ignorant of the country's space ventures, but what you said certainly fits what I know of the Cold War rival... which to be frankly honest... is still going on. Just with more subtlety.

I think this song demonstrates the lack of giving up, the determination, and the sheer tension that still exists.

 

So long both sides exist.

Edited August 8, 2020 by Spacescifi

[DDE]

4 hours ago, Spacescifi said:

I may be ignorant of the country's space ventures, but what you said certainly fits what I know of the Cold War rival... which to be frankly honest... is still going on. Just with more subtlety.

To draw this conclusion is a great mistake. You're talking about the country that still hoped to join the EU and perhaps even NATO in the early 'naughts. If you want the narrative from the Russian side, start with Yugoslavia and the scrapping of the ABM treaty.

Spoiler

A few decades later:

 

[SOXBLOX]

I believe any semblance of Cold War remaining is the fault of you-know-who. The Cold War has shifted to another certain other nation. Ahem.

[DDE]

Sounds like Roscosmos is just desperate to generate silly headlines this week. Asteroid landing, now Venus sample return...

https://ria.ru/20200807/1575474087.html

3 hours ago, SOXBLOX said:

I believe any semblance of Cold War remaining is the fault of you-know-who. The Cold War has shifted to another certain other nation. Ahem.

Sadly the I-know-whos vary from person to person, and within the Anglosohere, even within the same political alignment.

But ultimately, calling this the renewed Cold War is another incorrect conclusion that obfuscates a very core truth: one side is fighting the Cold War while the other is playing the Great Game. I too will let you figure out which is which.

Edited August 9, 2020 by DDE

[kerbiloid]

3 hours ago, DDE said:

https://ria.ru/20200807/1575474087.html

Not only Soviet/Russian probes have landed on Venus. One of four Pioneer Venus 2 subprobes has unexpectedly landed, too, and worked for about an hour on ground, on its own, just4lulz.
 

Edited August 9, 2020 by kerbiloid

[DDE]

6 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

[A machine] worked for about an hour on ground, on its own, just4lulz

2021. Venusian ambassadors unexpectedly arrive to Earth.

Spoiler

 

[kerbiloid]

Also, the space weapons keep being prohibited by new international treaties, and any country can join.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/we-re-all-losers-space-arms-race#:~:text=Last month%2C the Russian Foreign,to place weapons in space.&text=The last time countries came,in the Outer Space Treaty.

[DDE]

 

2 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Also, the space weapons keep being prohibited by new international treaties, and any country can join.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/we-re-all-losers-space-arms-race#:~:text=Last month%2C the Russian Foreign,to place weapons in space.&text=The last time countries came,in the Outer Space Treaty.

Quote

Two weeks later Russia conducted an anti-satellite missile test using its Nudol missile system – not itself a violation of the agreement, since the system is ground-based, but it’s a potent reminder that not all space-related weaponry needs to be “placed” in space.

It's important to note that the Nudol is the equivalent to the US GBI, and any exoatmospheric anti-missile is functionally indistinguishable from ASAT.

Problem is, Russia doesn't design "missile defense systems". It designs "air and space defence missile systems".

https://eurasia.expert/chem-otlichayutsya-podkhody-ssha-i-rossii-k-sistemam-pro/

That's because, judging by an old Almaz-Amtei graphic at around the time specifications for the S-500 would be set, we're expecting the US to gain the capability for a combined air and space assault by the 2030s.

[Spacescifi]

20 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Also, the space weapons keep being prohibited by new international treaties, and any country can join.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/we-re-all-losers-space-arms-race#:~:text=Last month%2C the Russian Foreign,to place weapons in space.&text=The last time countries came,in the Outer Space Treaty.

 

Burundi signing a space treaty with RUSSIA?

That's almost like the USA signing a space treaty with Chad!

Pardon my ignorance if Burundi DOES have suborbital or space launch capability.

Times do change. Especially when national superpowers get involved....

[Guest]

It is actually rather typical. Treaties like this are most readily signed by countries that have nothing to lose from them. Same as, for example, with treaty that bans cluster bombs, which was signed by everyone except those countries that use cluster bombs a lot. It's especially easy to comply with a treaty when you won't have the capability to break it for several decades at least. It's an easy way to pad out the list of signatories, if nothing else.

[Spacescifi]

4 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

It is actually rather typical. Treaties like this are most readily signed by countries that have nothing to lose from them. Same as, for example, with treaty that bans cluster bombs, which was signed by everyone except those countries that use cluster bombs a lot. It's especially easy to comply with a treaty when you won't have the capability to break it for several decades at least. It's an easy way to pad out the list of signatories, if nothing else.

 

That is hilarious.

It's like all the nations are in middle school. The less popular students do stuff to rise in popularity, while the most popular students jockey for position and fight over who is most popular.

[DDE]

1 hour ago, Spacescifi said:

That is hilarious.

It's like all the nations are in middle school. The less popular students do stuff to rise in popularity, while the most popular students jockey for position and fight over who is most popular.

That's not an inaccurate description. Wait until you see the signatories and terms of the nuclear weapons ban.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons

[magnemoe]

4 hours ago, DDE said:

That's not an inaccurate description. Wait until you see the signatories and terms of the nuclear weapons ban.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons

Who is an obviously idiotic idea as it will let any tin pot dictator to try to play I'm US in 1946 and want world dominance. 
Plan fails as everybody cheated. Russia say they are very sorry for the loss of an B2 bomber who was inside the fireball of one of their heavy anti ship missile submarines who happens to have nukes and did an nuclear strike on the enemy, also pointing out that the B2 was on the same mission as it was loaded with nukes based on the fallout. 

Without nuclear weapons we had an WW3 in the 50-60's, lot more focus on precision weapons. B-36 bombers with TV guided tallboys is an hint but stuff would evolve very fast. 
 

[DDE]

7 hours ago, Spacescifi said:

It's like all the nations are in middle school. The less popular students do stuff to rise in popularity, while the most popular students jockey for position and fight over who is most popular.

Now onto more serious discussion... an Israeli international relations college ran a model UN (the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space specifically, IIRC). The result was that a few 'space superpowers' and some adjacent nations with space-related competencies to offered tried to evade any international restrictions on their activities... while the 'third world' proceeded to demand a piece of the pie, either by coercing the space industry to shift production and import technologies there, or through literal payouts.

Something similar already happened in 1976, where a number of countries without space programs tried to stake a claim over geostationary orbit sectors: https://bogotadeclaration.wordpress.com/declaration-of-1976/

[SOXBLOX]

39 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Who is an obviously idiotic idea as it will let any tin pot dictator to try to play I'm US in 1946 and want world dominance. 
Plan fails as everybody cheated. Russia say they are very sorry for the loss of an B2 bomber who was inside the fireball of one of their heavy anti ship missile submarines who happens to have nukes and did an nuclear strike on the enemy, also pointing out that the B2 was on the same mission as it was loaded with nukes based on the fallout. 

Without nuclear weapons we had an WW3 in the 50-60's, lot more focus on precision weapons. B-36 bombers with TV guided tallboys is an hint but stuff would evolve very fast. 
 

Pretty much correct. Nuclear weapons have drastically increased the cost of war. Without that increase, the superpowers would have had less aversion to conflict. Proxy wars, for example, *could* have escalated drastically. 

5 minutes ago, DDE said:

Something similar already happened in 1976, where a number of countries without space programs tried to stake a claim over geostationary orbit sectors: https://bogotadeclaration.wordpress.com/declaration-of-1976/

The common heritage of mankind, or something like that...

[Spacescifi]

2 hours ago, DDE said:

Now onto more serious discussion... an Israeli international relations college ran a model UN (the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space specifically, IIRC). The result was that a few 'space superpowers' and some adjacent nations with space-related competencies to offered tried to evade any international restrictions on their activities... while the 'third world' proceeded to demand a piece of the pie, either by coercing the space industry to shift production and import technologies there, or through literal payouts.

Something similar already happened in 1976, where a number of countries without space programs tried to stake a claim over geostationary orbit sectors: https://bogotadeclaration.wordpress.com/declaration-of-1976/

In that case... Star Trek got one thing right about the future... even though they get most things wrong too.

A divided nationalistic world is not optimal for a space faring civilization.

Because being divided they cannot pool their true power, resources, and intellect.

Nevermind how non-optimal it is when dealing with not-humans in scifi, when some nations love them and others want to shoot them.

The general reputation of humans in such a scifi universe, assuming scifi aliens did not act just like them would be:

Humans: They are like pets. If you raise them you can tame them. Leave with each other and they will be wild. Can't trust them.

Which leads to A: No alliance with Earth governments whatsoever, anymore than humans make allies of wild animals they don't tame.

And B: Friendship with humans only on the basis of 'taming' them. And this is much easier to do with children, however disturbing that may be to humans.

Sorry for the scifi tangent... could not help myself.

Ideas pop in and out all the time.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Spacescifi

[kerbiloid]

Idk about the stationary orbits (they are large), but how many starlinks of different owners can provide the LEO before we get a Dyson sphere?

[DDE]

7 hours ago, Spacescifi said:

A divided nationalistic world is not optimal for a space faring civilization.

Since when did this sort of swarming at the UN General Assembly ever led to anything?

7 hours ago, Spacescifi said:

Because being divided they cannot pool their true power, resources, and intellect.

All of these are highly concentrated with the 'haves' rather than 'have-nots', so again, the weaker nations are essentially insignificant.

[kerbiloid]

A division provides competition and concentration.
So, any viable civilization will be always divided either into nations, or into parties.

Because only negative-loopback systems are stable.

Say, this forum.
While other space colonisation forums are about pink unicorns in da space, only KSP provides a way to try your ideas in brutal hardcore reality and to get disappointed in them practically.
So, only we here get a very developed point of view at all those spaces-bases.
Because we already got a negative loopback response from the modelled universe, while others are still dreaming.

Edited August 10, 2020 by kerbiloid

[kerbiloid]

Rogozin suspects that within 8..10 years Russia will get the technologies which will allow to perform a gravity maneuver around the Moon, get the cosmonauts to the Mars, and land there.

It will be really expensive, but if the country decides, the Roscosmos specialists will provide.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https://www.interfax.ru/russia/721061

He also suspects the existence of extraterrestrial life

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.interfax.ru%2Frussia%2F721051&sandbox=1

Upd.

Also he considers that US have destroyed their crewed space program in 2011 themselves, to the large extent committed the crime when destroyed their space transportation system and started buying the seats from Russia, and should be thankful to Russia for the ability of ISS flights.

Commenting the first Dragon crewed flight he considered that it's not a sensation and should happen years ago.
That's looking ironically when US, the richest state in the world, with 2.5 times greater population than Russia, with a lot of private hi-tech companies, for 9 years was flying in our Soyuz.
And it didn't behave very well to be spitting in our direction instead of saying "Thank you, dear comrades, friends, Russians _{(citizenship, not ethnicity)}!"

He said that the ability to get to the ISS is invaluable itself.
"We could even not sell these seats to them, then how much would they be ready to pay? Not 20 mln USD, not 40 mln, we could take a billion per seat.
Due to this, when they say 'We paid for that!', this is unfair from_(?) them. As a great country they could be more generous, instead of doing such petty calculations."

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https://www.interfax.ru/russia/721074

Edited August 10, 2020 by kerbiloid

[sh1pman]

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Rogozin suspects that within 8..10 years Russia will get the technologies which will allow to perform a gravity maneuver around the Moon, get the cosmonauts to the Mars, and land there.

It sounds crazy only on the surface. But in reality it makes sense. He aims big so that Roscosmos gets money for smaller things. If he says "We can get Angara to LEO in 2025", MinFin will say "Here's money to get it there in 2028". But when he proposes a manned Mars mission in 8 years, MinFin is likely to say "Mars too expensive, here's money for Moon landing instead". Same with Soyuz-5-6-7-8-etc, at least one or two will get funded. He's a career politician and has the right skills for this kind of "bargaining with bureaucrats" job.

Also, Russian launch thread seems to be even more active than SpaceX thread these days, all thanks to Rogozin, lol.

[DDE]

2 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Also, Russian launch thread seems to be even more active than SpaceX thread these days, all thanks to Rogozin, lol.

And I intend to keep it that way.

Imagine being the guy who makes filmreels on the N1 launch complex.

All the clearances you'd have to have.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, sh1pman said:

It sounds crazy only on the surface. But in reality it makes sense. He aims big so that Roscosmos gets money for smaller things. If he says "We can get Angara to LEO in 2025", MinFin will say "Here's money to get it there in 2028". But when he proposes a manned Mars mission in 8 years, MinFin is likely to say "Mars too expensive, here's money for Moon landing instead". Same with Soyuz-5-6-7-8-etc, at least one or two will get funded. He's a career politician and has the right skills for this kind of "bargaining with bureaucrats" job.

Yeah, that's a pretty common tactic. You make your first demand ludicrously large, and then act like you're making big concessions after they haggle it down to what you actually want. Then you make sure to go over budget (but not too much), so that they won't even think to give you any less next year. In a dysfunctional system like most bureaucracies, two wrongs are often needed to make a right.  

[kerbiloid]

15 hours ago, sh1pman said:

when he proposes a manned Mars mission in 8 years, MinFin is likely to say "Mars too expensive

(end of phrase)

***

7 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

In a dysfunctional system like most bureaucracies

Private ones still haven't gotten rather farther.

Edited August 11, 2020 by kerbiloid