If you launch an Atlas 5 or an Ariane 5 without any other in assembly at the moment of the launch, you will also wait for two years the following liftoff !
And the fact that there was no Angara in assembly at the moment of the 2014's launch is not the consequence of some economical problems. It is a strategy which has been decided long before the first launch.
But if they want to compete with SpaceX, they are going to have to pick up the pace a little...
Maybe it isn't slow, and we're just used to the fast pace of what SpaceX is doing. But if they want to compete with SpaceX, they are going to have to pick up the pace a little...
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 05/31/2016 10:31 pmMaybe it isn't slow, and we're just used to the fast pace of what SpaceX is doing. But if they want to compete with SpaceX, they are going to have to pick up the pace a little...So far the only thing that is "fast" about SpaceX is their PR. For example FH was supposed to fly in 2013...
A comparison is in order here. Angara project was approved by Russian govt in 1997, that is nearly 20 years ago, and about twice as long as entire history of SpaceX.
Quote from: asmi on 06/01/2016 02:26 pmQuote from: Coastal Ron on 05/31/2016 10:31 pmMaybe it isn't slow, and we're just used to the fast pace of what SpaceX is doing. But if they want to compete with SpaceX, they are going to have to pick up the pace a little...So far the only thing that is "fast" about SpaceX is their PR. For example FH was supposed to fly in 2013...A comparison is in order here. Angara project was approved by Russian govt in 1997, that is nearly 20 years ago, and about twice as long as entire history of SpaceX.
Quote from: gospacex on 06/01/2016 02:33 pmQuote from: asmi on 06/01/2016 02:26 pmQuote from: Coastal Ron on 05/31/2016 10:31 pmMaybe it isn't slow, and we're just used to the fast pace of what SpaceX is doing. But if they want to compete with SpaceX, they are going to have to pick up the pace a little...So far the only thing that is "fast" about SpaceX is their PR. For example FH was supposed to fly in 2013...A comparison is in order here. Angara project was approved by Russian govt in 1997, that is nearly 20 years ago, and about twice as long as entire history of SpaceX.SpaceX has been around since 2002 - 14 years1997 was 19 years ago. 19/14 is 1.35x, not "twice as long".
Quote from: ncb1397 on 06/01/2016 06:43 pmQuote from: gospacex on 06/01/2016 02:33 pmQuote from: asmi on 06/01/2016 02:26 pmQuote from: Coastal Ron on 05/31/2016 10:31 pmMaybe it isn't slow, and we're just used to the fast pace of what SpaceX is doing. But if they want to compete with SpaceX, they are going to have to pick up the pace a little...So far the only thing that is "fast" about SpaceX is their PR. For example FH was supposed to fly in 2013...A comparison is in order here. Angara project was approved by Russian govt in 1997, that is nearly 20 years ago, and about twice as long as entire history of SpaceX.SpaceX has been around since 2002 - 14 years1997 was 19 years ago. 19/14 is 1.35x, not "twice as long".I accept your correction.It's is still illogical to complain that SpaceX is so "slowly" developed two new LVs, one new capsule, and three new engine families, but not have similar feelings towards Angara which took *longer* to develop one (modular) rocket and one new derivative of venerable RD-170.
Indeed, the situations are utterly different.Unlike SpaceX, Angara developers did not have to earn one rusty ruble of R&D money, they had it all handed to them by Russian govt.
Quote from: gospacex on 06/02/2016 12:41 pmIndeed, the situations are utterly different.Unlike SpaceX, Angara developers did not have to earn one rusty ruble of R&D money, they had it all handed to them by Russian govt.Just what exactly is your issue with Angara, surely on here we should have similar enthusiasm for all launcher systems.
Quote from: Star One on 06/02/2016 01:06 pmQuote from: gospacex on 06/02/2016 12:41 pmIndeed, the situations are utterly different.Unlike SpaceX, Angara developers did not have to earn one rusty ruble of R&D money, they had it all handed to them by Russian govt.Just what exactly is your issue with Angara, surely on here we should have similar enthusiasm for all launcher systems.I have enthusiasm for all launch systems which make trips to space cheaper.Why I should be positive towards organizations which would very much like to prevent that from happening, I don't understand. Khrunichev is one of them.
You are not addressing my point: Angara has almost no orders now, and will have rather low chances of getting new orders in 2020+. Of course, Russian govt payloads will fly on Russian LVs. But hardly anything else. Under these conditions, Angara will stay more expensive than today's Proton.
A lot of belly-aching here! I'm just glad they're finally replacing Proton, which is a crazy environmental disaster every launch. Angara is a nice step, the first big basically clean-sheet rocket since the end of the Cold War. I wish the Russians luck.
Quote from: gospacex on 05/31/2016 12:49 pmYou are not addressing my point: Angara has almost no orders now, and will have rather low chances of getting new orders in 2020+. Of course, Russian govt payloads will fly on Russian LVs. But hardly anything else. Under these conditions, Angara will stay more expensive than today's Proton.Only Angara-1.2 variant is presently the only variant available for commercial orders. In order to accelerate its launch rate the ICBM conversional launcher fleet must be retired because their prices are to low compared to Angara, Which by the way is still in the flight test and certification phase. Until Vostochny pad(s) for Angara are built and come online there will only be Medium payload class launches to GTO and SSTO via Plesetsk. The government plan once Vostochny pads are online is to first phase out government Proton missions and then kick the commercial payloads over to Angara-A5 by setting in thew second phase a finite amount of Proton-Ms available for order and by setting retirement dates for all of Khrunichev Space Centres' hypergolic launchers.
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 06/08/2016 05:48 pmQuote from: gospacex on 05/31/2016 12:49 pmYou are not addressing my point: Angara has almost no orders now, and will have rather low chances of getting new orders in 2020+. Of course, Russian govt payloads will fly on Russian LVs. But hardly anything else. Under these conditions, Angara will stay more expensive than today's Proton.Only Angara-1.2 variant is presently the only variant available for commercial orders. In order to accelerate its launch rate the ICBM conversional launcher fleet must be retired because their prices are to low compared to Angara, Which by the way is still in the flight test and certification phase. Until Vostochny pad(s) for Angara are built and come online there will only be Medium payload class launches to GTO and SSTO via Plesetsk. The government plan once Vostochny pads are online is to first phase out government Proton missions and then kick the commercial payloads over to Angara-A5 by setting in thew second phase a finite amount of Proton-Ms available for order and by setting retirement dates for all of Khrunichev Space Centres' hypergolic launchers.What commercial payloads?