Author Topic: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A  (Read 639826 times)

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #80 on: 09/04/2007 10:57 pm »
What about operational costs?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #81 on: 09/04/2007 11:48 pm »
Quote
tnphysics - 4/9/2007  6:57 PM

What about operational costs?

no difference between staged and gas generator

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #82 on: 09/07/2007 02:02 am »
Then why would an expendable SSME be more expensive than the RS-68?

It should then only be two-thirds as expensive (lower thrust).

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #83 on: 09/07/2007 02:15 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 6/9/2007  10:02 PM

Then why would an expendable SSME be more expensive than the RS-68?

It should then only be two-thirds as expensive (lower thrust).

thrust doesn't not equate to cost

The development costs of the expendable SSME prevent it from reducing the total costs

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #84 on: 09/07/2007 02:17 am »
Why did Proton go with hypergolic propellants?

I would have used peroxide/methylacetylene, if storability was a requirement, or else an LOX/methylacetylene first stage and LOX/LH2 upper stages.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #85 on: 09/07/2007 02:22 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 6/9/2007  10:17 PM

Why did Proton go with hypergolic propellants?

I would have used peroxide/methylacetylene, if storability was a requirement, or else an LOX/methylacetylene first stage and LOX/LH2 upper stages.

Not all decisions are based on performance.

Because hypergols were a favorite of Glusho, the engine designer and the soviets had the infrastructure for hypergols.  .

Peroxide has storage issues
so does methylacetylene

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #86 on: 09/07/2007 02:25 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 6/9/2007  10:17 PM

 an LOX/methylacetylene first stage and LOX/LH2 upper stages.

RP-1 would be better than methylacetylene

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #87 on: 09/07/2007 02:30 am »
Quote
Jim - 6/9/2007  10:22 PM

Quote
tnphysics - 6/9/2007  10:17 PM

Why did Proton go with hypergolic propellants?

I would have used peroxide/methylacetylene, if storability was a requirement, or else an LOX/methylacetylene first stage and LOX/LH2 upper stages.

Peroxide has storage issues
so does methylacetylene

What are they?

I know that you would need to dilute the peroxide, but why would that be an issue?

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #88 on: 09/09/2007 06:24 pm »
Quote
Jim - 6/9/2007  10:25 PM
Quote
tnphysics - 6/9/2007  10:17 PM an LOX/methylacetylene first stage and LOX/LH2 upper stages.
RP-1 would be better than methylacetylene
Methylacetylene has higher Isp.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #89 on: 09/09/2007 08:35 pm »
Quote
tnphysics - 9/9/2007  2:24 PM

Quote
Jim - 6/9/2007  10:25 PM
Quote
tnphysics - 6/9/2007  10:17 PM an LOX/methylacetylene first stage and LOX/LH2 upper stages.
RP-1 would be better than methylacetylene
Methylacetylene has higher Isp.

That is not the only parameter than matters

Offline Satori

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14482
  • Campo do Geręs - Portugal
  • Liked: 2017
  • Likes Given: 1178
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #90 on: 09/12/2007 06:25 pm »
The 11A511U Soyuz-U launcher for the Foton-3 will be transported to the pad PU-5 September 13th. Imagine that we have a major accident with this launch resulting on pad damaged. Was pad PU-6 ready to support manned launches?

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #91 on: 10/04/2007 12:19 am »
Could a LH2/LOX upper stage be added to Proton?

Could 3 Proton first stages be clustered a la Delta IVH?

Together those upgrades give 150 metric tons to LEO.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #92 on: 10/04/2007 12:25 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 3/10/2007  8:19 PM

Could 3 Proton first stages be clustered a la Delta IVH?

How would you attach them

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #93 on: 10/04/2007 12:34 am »
Could Zenit be stretched to increase the payload?

What about the Energia core? (If it was rebuilt)

What about combining 3 Energia cores?

Stretched Energia core with stretched strap-on boosters could put 160 metric tons in LEO (if there was enough thrust in the core after staging)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #94 on: 10/04/2007 12:41 am »
what if, what if, what it.   All it take is money

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #95 on: 10/04/2007 12:46 am »
My question is: If there was a market, would they be cost-effective?

Are these good ideas?

Probable market would be Soviet manned Moon mission (if done).

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37647
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21727
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #96 on: 10/04/2007 12:49 am »
Quote
tnphysics - 3/10/2007  8:46 PM

My question is: If there was a market, would they be cost-effective?

Are these good ideas?


nobody on here could answer those questions

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10298
  • Liked: 703
  • Likes Given: 727
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #97 on: 10/13/2007 02:00 pm »

Quote
tnphysics - 3/10/2007  5:19 PM  Could a LH2/LOX upper stage be added to Proton?

This is a long term plan for Khrunichev, so the answer is yes.

 


Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #98 on: 10/13/2007 04:37 pm »
Quote
Danderman - 13/10/2007  3:00 PM

Quote
tnphysics - 3/10/2007  5:19 PM  Could a LH2/LOX upper stage be added to Proton?

This is a long term plan for Khrunichev, so the answer is yes.

 


"Long term"? I thought Proton was up for retirement by 2010 or whenever.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15462
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8667
  • Likes Given: 1369
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #99 on: 10/13/2007 05:04 pm »
Quote
GW_Simulations - 13/10/2007  11:37 AM

Quote
Danderman - 13/10/2007  3:00 PM

Quote
tnphysics - 3/10/2007  5:19 PM  Could a LH2/LOX upper stage be added to Proton?

This is a long term plan for Khrunichev, so the answer is yes.


"Long term"? I thought Proton was up for retirement by 2010 or whenever.

The plan is to start test flights with Angara (which will be built by the merged Krunichev/PO Polyot company) in 2011, according to recent news reports.  Angara will eventually replace Proton.  It will use the Briz M upper stage initially, but long term plans call for a liquid hydrogen upper stage.  This stage is for Angara, however, and not for Proton to the best of my knowledge.

My guess is that there will be some overlap, with both vehicles flying during a several-year transition period.  (Russia, for example, it still flying both Proton K and Proton M vehicles, seven years after the first Proton M launch.)  Proposed plans to build a Baikonur complex for Angara might play a role in the transition timing.

 - Ed Kyle

Tags: Polyus laser budget 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1