If I recall correctly, Soyuz-2.3 was cancelled long ago. That said, if Soyuz-1 is successful then there could be an argument to resurrecting the programme.
Quote from: GW_Simulations on 01/02/2011 08:13 amIf I recall correctly, Soyuz-2.3 was cancelled long ago. That said, if Soyuz-1 is successful then there could be an argument to resurrecting the programme.That dovetails with what I've heard that they are waiting to see if Soyuz-1 is a success, and if it is then they will look at Soyuz 2-3.
Quote from: Downix on 01/02/2011 05:13 pmQuote from: GW_Simulations on 01/02/2011 08:13 amIf I recall correctly, Soyuz-2.3 was cancelled long ago. That said, if Soyuz-1 is successful then there could be an argument to resurrecting the programme.That dovetails with what I've heard that they are waiting to see if Soyuz-1 is a success, and if it is then they will look at Soyuz 2-3.According Anatoly Zak's website (http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz2_3_lv.html), Soyuz 2-3 payload capacity will be less than 13 tons to 200km, and that's from Korou. It becomes closer to 11 tons when launched from Baikonur or Plesetsk.Given that capacity, what payloads would it launch?
According Anatoly Zak's website (http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz2_3_lv.html), Soyuz 2-3 payload capacity will be less than 13 tons to 200km, and that's from Korou. It becomes closer to 11 tons when launched from Baikonur or Plesetsk.Given that capacity, what payloads would it launch?
Not sure if TsSKB or RKKE asked Roskosmos to move crewed launch to Soyuz-2, and Roskosmos refused -- in part because Soyuz-FG is not insignificantly cheaper.
About GLONASS, according to insiders posting to NK forums (Mr. Morin), the Chief Designer Mr. Kirillin plans to put upper stage Volga on the 1v. This explains how he plans to launch GLONASS, I think, although I did not look closely at Volga.
Note that Mr. Zak did not keep up with the news on the Soyuz-2-1V project. He still calls it "Soyuz-1" and lists NK-33-1 as propulsion, which was abandoned back in 2008.
Quote from: zaitcev on 01/03/2011 02:10 amNote that Mr. Zak did not keep up with the news on the Soyuz-2-1V project. He still calls it "Soyuz-1" and lists NK-33-1 as propulsion, which was abandoned back in 2008.I see the NK-33-1 still listed in Samara site. What will they use instead? Regrettably I don't speak russian and thus can't keep up with the latest news.
No, it is not. Ikar used 17D61 "Kometa"("Yantar-1KFT") KDU.
Its basically an Ikar stage, with about half the dry mass. Ikar is/was basically a copy of a Soyuz PAO. So, if you ever need a half sized Soyuz PAO, there you go.
Quote from: Danderman on 02/27/2011 09:36 pmIts basically an Ikar stage, with about half the dry mass. Ikar is/was basically a copy of a Soyuz PAO. So, if you ever need a half sized Soyuz PAO, there you go.Soyuz-TMA engine (S5.80) has а specific impulse 302 s. Ikar/Volga engine has а specific impulse 307 s.
I don't know how you can compare them like that. For one thing the mission duration is drastically different, which is why Soyuz PAO carries solar arrays and radiators.
Secondly, my suggestion is that Ikar is a copy of the Soyuz PAO from a functional perspective, it is not a duplicate. It has about the same mass, the same propellant load, about the same engine, about the same size, can be fuelled using the same facilities as the Soyuz PAO, etc.
Quote from: Danderman on 03/01/2011 06:30 pmSecondly, my suggestion is that Ikar is a copy of the Soyuz PAO from a functional perspective, it is not a duplicate. It has about the same mass, the same propellant load, about the same engine, about the same size, can be fuelled using the same facilities as the Soyuz PAO, etc.It has a different mass, engines, shape and size.