totm dec 2019 Russian Launch and Mission Thread

[CatastrophicFailure]

43 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Anyway, a little strange usage of a crewed ship to test RTG. Are they immortan?
Even 7K-VI, which was designed with two RTG instead of solar panels, was carrying them on two long bars to be extended right after the LEO insertion, i.e.several minutes after launch.
The Apollo-13 crew would spend ~4 (actually spent ~7)  days sitting next to it.
Was it really necessary just to test RTG for a long-term crewless lunar probe?
Ot looks rather strange and of course the Apollo-13 movie omitted the subject.

It wasn’t a test, it was to power surface experiments. All the Apollo landings except 11 carried it. Looks to have been stored in a special container on the LEM, probably with shielding, and some distance from the cabin. 

[Beccab]

1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

It wasn’t a test, it was to power surface experiments. All the Apollo landings except 11 carried it. Looks to have been stored in a special container on the LEM, probably with shielding, and some distance from the cabin. 

How can someone spend so much time on a conspiracy theory and not even learn about ALSEP is beyond me

[kerbiloid]

7 minutes ago, Beccab said:

How can someone spend so much time on a conspiracy theory and not even learn about ALSEP is beyond me

If you had read my post before commenting it, you would see that I believe in the ALSEP RTG conspiracy theory, not in the nuke.

P.S.
Still finding the idea of it onboard weird.

[CatastrophicFailure]

28 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

If you had read my post before commenting it, you would see that I believe in the ALSEP RTG conspiracy theory, not in the nuke.

P.S.
Still finding the idea of it onboard weird.

The fuel was ²³⁸Pu, which primarily decays through alpha particles. Alpha particles are easily shielded, even by skin, and it was stored in a cask strong enough to survive reentry and impact (that’s a lot of shielding material). The only way it could pose a hazard to the crew was if the fuel leaked and they ate it…

They also used the stuff in pacemakers for comparison…

[kerbiloid]

22 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

The fuel was ²³⁸Pu, which primarily decays through alpha particles. Alpha particles are easily shielded, even by skin, and it was stored in a cask strong enough to survive reentry and impact (that’s a lot of shielding material). The only way it could pose a hazard to the crew was if the fuel leaked and they ate it…

They also used the stuff in pacemakers for comparison…

I believe that it was 238-based RTG, just because the American space militarists first speak then scrap (while some others first try then fail).

But the conspiracy rumors (and I'm reading for decades) were that exactly that flight was a continuation of the mentioned A-119 project, and Apollo-13 had 239 instead, to look at the nuke.

Not that I believe in specifically Apollo-13 ^*), but the A-119  project was definitely not for Mercury or Gemini.

***

^*) Especially since we have two absolutely honest and informed contradicting explanations of the 13's problem: an accidentally droppen oxytank with damaged valve, and a non-standard voltage welding the valve, lol.

Edited May 4, 2022 by kerbiloid

[SunlitZelkova]

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Do you know other boosters of such size?

Several sets of SRBs aren't really going to contribute to keeping a nuclear deterrent maintained.

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The original one stayed on paper.
Only help of Pentagon (who just had lost their DynaSoar) and design change helped to get the necessary money to build a much bigger spaceplane than NASA wanted.

NASA wanted a small bay for scientific tools. Pentagon needed a bay for any railroad payload.
Spysats match the railroad payload standard.
To improve the position, the bay size was declared as a universal cargo capability to replace other rockets and pay for the joy.

I recognize the Shuttle had a military mission, but it was not explicitly military with civilian sidejobs tacked on.

It was reverse, with the military missions being tacked on to help pay for it. It was a civilian project, however. It remained in service long after the DOD withdrew from the program.

In regards to the whole Apollo nuclear thing, you should note that there are almost no documents from the program that are classified- only the ones revolving around using the camera in the CSM's payload bay to photograph the Earth in the event the S-IVB malfunctioned and the mission became Earth orbital. Conjecture isn't really evidence.

------

Thus, it can be inferred that there are various other reasons why space programs need to be kept intact, and Roscosmos isn't entirely without hope of surviving and finding some degree of stability amidst the new international situation.

[kerbiloid]

2 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

I recognize the Shuttle had a military mission, but it was not explicitly military with civilian sidejobs tacked on.

As I have written, it was double-purpose since its creation.

2 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Several sets of SRBs aren't really going to contribute to keeping a nuclear deterrent maintained.

There is no much application for large diameter SRB except strateic rockets and space boosters.
And you have to feed their manufacturers first of all, as it has been discussed in the SLS thread.

2 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

It was reverse, with the military missions being tacked on to help pay for it.

The whole idea of other rockets replacement was forced by the necessity to use the overgrown (and erroneously presumed to be cheap due to reusability) launch vehicle.

[Gargamel]

Let's make sure we keep this discussion aimed at Russian space launches et al.  If we'd like to have a discussion of Apollo era RTG's or other such topics, let's start a separate thread for that.  

[DDE]

Looks like one of the next-gen ISS modules they reportedly even started cutting metal for is going to be retooled as the core module (lower right).

[sh1pman]

59 minutes ago, DDE said:

Looks like one of the next-gen ISS modules they reportedly even started cutting metal for is going to be retooled as the core module (lower right).

Lower-middle module with the arm is interesting. Spacecraft servicing platform?

[kerbiloid]

2 hours ago, DDE said:

Quote

300 Mbps

https://beelineru-ru.translate.goog/300-mbits?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru

 

[Minmus Taster]

5 hours ago, DDE said:

Looks like one of the next-gen ISS modules they reportedly even started cutting metal for is going to be retooled as the core module (lower right).

Uh...can't see the image, can someone provide a link?

Edited May 5, 2022 by Minmus Taster

[kerbiloid]

6 hours ago, Minmus Taster said:

Uh...can't see the image, can someone provide a link?

https://3dnews-ru.translate.goog/1065341/zaklyuchyon-kontrakt-na-razrabotku-eskiznogo-proekta-rossiyskoy-orbitalnoy-stantsii?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru

(Looks like Roscosmos blocks foreign access due to former DDoS attacks.)

[kerbiloid]

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5340612?from=spot

A yearly infographix of Space & Rososmos launches

(orange/pale brown = success, dark-teal / dark-brown = fail)

Spoiler

 

[Codraroll]

On 5/6/2022 at 10:03 AM, kerbiloid said:

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5340612?from=spot

A yearly infographix of Space & Rososmos launches

(orange/pale brown = success, dark-teal / dark-brown = fail)

  Hide contents

 

Really cool to see how SpaceX has evolved in the past decade or so. From a fledgling launch provider around 2010, to surpassing Roscosmos for the first time in 2017, to leaving it in the dust in recent years. If launches continue at the same pace for the remaining two thirds of 2022, Roscosmos is slated for 21 launches while SpaceX might surpass 50.

Roscosmos, meanwhile, seems to be fairly stable around 20-25 launches per year until now (a number that might be affected by the unmentionable, it's too early to tell how much).  Rogozin's plan to increase the number of launches beyond 40 after 2019 seems not to have come into fruition.  I think the years ahead will be exciting, one way or the other.

[Beccab]

On 5/6/2022 at 10:03 AM, kerbiloid said:

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5340612?from=spot

A yearly infographix of Space & Rososmos launches

(orange/pale brown = success, dark-teal / dark-brown = fail)

  Hide contents

 

Why is last year's Angara flight not counted as a dark teal? Whether that counts as a failure of Angara itself is arguable, but it still is a launch failure - considering that they also count Amost-6 in the faliures for SpaceX, that's quite disingenous

Edited May 7, 2022 by Beccab

[DDE]

A Brit (Benjamin Rich) and a Belarusian (Alina Zelupa) detained over conspiracy to trespass in the Buran MIK in Baikonur.

https://www.rbc.ru/society/07/05/2022/62769f479a7947e868c3fc53

Looks like it's the Benjamin Rich behind Bald and Bankrupt, who has made videos with an Alina from Belarus.

https://www.the-village.me/village/city/react/282303-bald_and_bankrupt? ; https://baldbankrupt.com/alina-with-mr-bald-summer-georgia-2019/

Edited May 7, 2022 by DDE

[kerbiloid]

https://t.me/rogozin_do/2614?single

Alina Tseliupa.

Алина Целюпа (?)

[DDE]

Well, that would be the Alina previously suggested.

Anyway, English coverage has caught up.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-crime-britain-youtube-idUKKCN2MT0FP

[DDE]

The "Let's take Hell's March from Red Alert 3 and use it entirely seriously" flash mob has reached Rogozin's agency:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNT-Z9FFeR4&t=1m12s

Spoiler

For reference, there is a version where the lyrics make sense

 

 

[DDE]

21 hours ago, DDE said:

A Brit (Benjamin Rich) and a Belarusian (Alina Zelupa) detained over conspiracy to trespass in the Buran MIK in Baikonur.

https://www.rbc.ru/society/07/05/2022/62769f479a7947e868c3fc53

Looks like it's the Benjamin Rich behind Bald and Bankrupt, who has made videos with an Alina from Belarus.

https://www.the-village.me/village/city/react/282303-bald_and_bankrupt? ; https://baldbankrupt.com/alina-with-mr-bald-summer-georgia-2019/

A "£60 fine", free tour of the non-proscribed part of Baikonur, and a lift to the train station. Ben is pretty non-plussed.

https://ria.ru/20220508/baykonur-1787516730.html

[DDE]

Temporary logo change. Old one was "too similar to yet another space agency".

It's nothing you haven't seen yet, though:

[insert_name]

Cosmos 2555 is dead, destructive reentry imminent

https://techartica.com/cosmos-2555-is-set-to-burn-cosmos-2555-will-be-burned/

[kerbiloid]

There were rumors in press that it was a short-term device with narrow beam communication.

[DDE]

6 hours ago, insert_name said:

Cosmos 2555 is dead, destructive reentry imminent

https://techartica.com/cosmos-2555-is-set-to-burn-cosmos-2555-will-be-burned/

Poor choice of press. It's already reentered by the moment you were posting this.

https://tass.ru/kosmos/14663549

Ultimately this probably was some technical demonstrator. After all, the upper stage then boosted itself into a higher orbit, therefore leaving the sat in a staging orbit doesn't make much sense unless it was expendable.