Russia to Develop Rocket for New-Generation Manned Spacecraft

[Danderman]

Might as well use an A7 without upper stage then. The problem isn't RD-0124, that one's supposed to take over manned flight from the RD-0110 on Soyuz anyway.

You don't want to drag a full Angara core into orbit. The mass penalty is significant for bringing a full core up.

Yes, we all understand this. The Russians understand this. What you don't seem to understand is the safety over efficiency trade.

Besides, did you complain that the Shuttle brought the entire ET to a near orbit?

The Russians did the trade in the late 1950s, when they decided to outfit the Sputnik launcher with a small upper stage for the purpose of launching manned space capsules into orbit. They found that the launcher was much more efficient with the additional upper stage, and the safety issues involved in the extra upper stage were minor compared with the additional capability.

[asmi]

The Russians did the trade in the late 1950s, when they decided to outfit the Sputnik launcher with a small upper stage for the purpose of launching manned space capsules into orbit. They found that the launcher was much more efficient with the additional upper stage, and the safety issues involved in the extra upper stage were minor compared with the additional capability.

Maybe they've revised that after 2011 Progress failure?

[fregate]

The Russians did the trade in the late 1950s, when they decided to outfit the Sputnik launcher with a small upper stage for the purpose of launching manned space capsules into orbit. They found that the launcher was much more efficient with the additional upper stage, and the safety issues involved in the extra upper stage were minor compared with the additional capability.

Maybe they've revised that after 2011 Progress failure?

Could you please elaborate what do you mean?
Facts:
1. Progress cargo spacecraft of series M (Current configuration) for ISS supply is launched on top of Soyuz-U LV with third stage (Soviet and Russian airspace engineers count boosters as Stage I) Block I propelled by a single LRE RD-0110.
2. Soyuz-TMA manned spacecraft of series M (Current configuration) is launched on top of man-rated Soyuz-FG LV with the same third stage Block I propelled by a single LRE RD-0110 (since Soyuz TMA-1 mission in October 2002).
3. Before RSA cleared Soyuz-FG for manned flights it tested man-rated Soyuz-FG LV (2001-2002) by launching 3 Progress-M spacecraft.
4. RSA is planning to replace Soyuz-FG LV with man-rated version of Soyuz-2.1A that (surprise, surprise !) has the same engine RD-0110 on Block I.
So, pardon my question - what exactly had been revised after 2011 Progress failure except clearing of RD-0110 engine usage (please note that next Progress-M and Soyuz-TMA were successfully launched later in October 2011 and November 2011 accordingly)? 
   

[fregate]

Science section of Russian ITAR-TASS online edition. 9th of June 2014 

Остапенко: новая российская сверхтяжелая ракета-носитель получит метановый двигатель
Стартовый комплекс для новой ракеты появится на космодроме Восточный.

СИМФЕРОПОЛЬ, 9 июня. /ИТАР-ТАСС/. В России ведется работа по созданию метановых ракетных двигателей для сверхтяжелых ракет-носителей. Об этом сообщил глава Роскосмоса Олег Остапенко в Таврическом национальном университете имени Вернадского.
Он напомнил, что в России ведутся работы по созданию тяжелой и сверхтяжелой ракет. По словам Остапенко, на первом этапе не будет создаваться ракета грузоподъемностью 120 тонн, так как для нее пока нет задач. "Мы сейчас ставим задачи до 80-85 тонн, этого пока достаточно для лунной программы", - пояснил он.
Остапенко отметил, что сверхтяжелая ракета будет модернизироваться "за счет замены двигателей, систем управления и так далее". На первом этапе создания ракеты двигатель будет работать на кислороде, керосине и водороде. В последующем планируется создать метановые двигатели, которые позволят ракете выводить на орбиту нагрузку до 190 тонн, рассказал Остапенко.
Руководитель Роскосмоса проинформировал, что стартовый комплекс для новой ракеты появится на космодроме Восточный.

Кто займется производством ракеты
Ранее Остапенко на пресс-конференции в ИТАР-ТАСС сообщил, что проект разработки новой сверхтяжелой ракеты-носителя включен в федеральную космическую программа 2015-2025 годов, однако сама программа еще не утверждена.
Говоря о том, какое предприятие займется созданием ракеты, он отметил, что будет принято оптимальное решение. "Есть прекрасное предложение по РКК "Энергия", по Центру имени Хруничева и по ЦСКБ "Прогресс". Не исключаю, что это не будет проект какого-то предприятия, что это будет комплексный проект", - пояснил глава Роскосмоса.
Остапенко также отметил, что под производство ракеты не будет создаваться отдельная площадка, а будут задействованы существующие. В качестве примера он привел производственные мощности самарского предприятия ЦСКБ "Прогресс".

Ostapenko: New Russian SHLV would get a methane-propelled rocket engine 
Launch Complex for new rocket will be built on Vostochny Spaceport.  Simferopol, 9th of June /ITAR-TASS/ Russia is developing methane-propelled rocket engines for SHLVs, said the Head of Roscomos Oleg Ostapenko in Tavrida National V.I.Vernadsky University.   
He remained that Russian space industry is developing HLV/SHLV. According to him, Stage of this program I does not include LV with payload capability 120 tonnes, because there are no missions planned for such LV. Currently mission planners are working with payloads in range of 80-85 tonnes a quite sufficient LV capability for national Lunar program, he clarified.         

Ostapenko also noted that SHLV capability would be enhanced by replacement of rocket engines, control system etc. For Stage I of this program he mentioned about three-propellant LPRE (LOX, Hydrogen and Kerosene).
After that newly-developed methane-based LPREs would allow to achieve SHLV with LEO capability 190 tones, said Ostapenko.     
Head of Roscosmos informed that a Launch Complex for brand new LV will be built on Vostochny Spaceport.

Who would produce such LV?
In the end of last month during his press-conference in ITAR-TASS, Ostapenko announced that new SHLV Project had been included into Federal space program 2016-2025, however this program so far had not being endorsed.     An optimal decision would be made about major contractor - there are excellent proposals from RSC Energia, Kchrunichev Center as well as from TsSKB Progress. He also mentioned a joint venture option rather than an exclusive contractor.   

Ostapenko also noted, that for LV production there is no need to invest into a brand new industrial plant - for example, existing facilities of Samara Space Center TsSKB Progress might be considered.

[Danderman]

It certainly appears that the Russian HLV program is at the stage of proposed technology development, much as NASA was involved in a technology development program around the year 2000 that produced some useful technologies. However, there is no indication that this program is to be funded.

[fregate]

An article from new issue of official NPO Lavochkin quarterly magazine "Vestnik NPO Lavochkina" (Cosmonautics & Rocket Engineering) 2014, N 2, pp. 128-136
"Past, Present and Future of Super Heavy Launch Vehicles for Research & Exploration of the Moon and Mars"
By A.Yu.Daniluk, B.Yu.Klyushnikov, I.I.Kuznetsov, A.S.Osadchenko

[Prober]

An article from new issue of official NPO Lavochkin quarterly magazine "Vestnik NPO Lavochkina" (Cosmonautics & Rocket Engineering) 2014, N 2, pp. 128-136
"Past, Present and Future of Super Heavy Launch Vehicles for Research & Exploration of the Moon and Mars"
By A.Yu.Daniluk, B.Yu.Klyushnikov, I.I.Kuznetsov, A.S.Osadchenko

Mars 2018 mission looks like I've seen a US design like that

something for everyone in this however, even SpaceX followers.

[fregate]

At 1st of July 2014 State Scientific & Manufacturing Rocket Space Center TsSKB-Progress had been transformed into open joint-stock company Rocket & Space Center Progress
From interview with Alexander Kyrillin (General Director of the company) 

Участвует ли РКЦ «Прогресс» в проектировании сверхтяжелой ракеты-носителя?
В 2013 г. специалисты тогда еще ГНПРКЦ «ЦСКБ-Прогресс» принимали участие в работе комиссий Роскосмоса по разработке предложений по созданию носителя сверхтяжелого класса и представили свой проект создания такого носителя. Есть также проекты, предложенные ФГУП «ГКНПЦ им. М.В.Хруничева» и РКК «Энергия» им. С.П.Королева.
Во время последнего визита руководства Роскосмоса в центр «Прогресс» мы показали готовность наших производственных площадей под этот проект, и была дана оценка, что из всей отрасли наш центр наиболее подготовлен к его реализации.
Безусловно, создание носителя супертяжелого класса не под силу одной организации - в этом должна участвовать вся ракетно-космическая отрасль и смежные отрасли.

Q Does RSC Progress participate in SHLV Design?
A In 2013 specialists from GNPRKTs TsSKB-Progress participated in Roscosmos's taskforce (that carried out a preliminary feasibility study of the SHLV program),  and presented their findings along with teams of experts from GKNPTs Khrunichev and RSC Energia (named after Korolev).
During last visit of Roscosmos management into Center Progress we were able to demonstrate readiness of our production facilities for this project; they also admitted that our company is the best suited for project implementation across whole aerospace industry.
Obviously creation of SHLV should be a joint effort across aerospace and other industries rather than a huge challenge for a single enterprise.   

[Prober]

At 1st of July 2014 State Scientific & Manufacturing Rocket Space Center TsSKB-Progress had been transformed into open joint-stock company Rocket & Space Center Progress
From interview with Alexander Kyrillin (General Director of the company) 

anyone care to explain what this transformed into open joint-stock company means in Russian terms?

[Danderman]

At 1st of July 2014 State Scientific & Manufacturing Rocket Space Center TsSKB-Progress had been transformed into open joint-stock company Rocket & Space Center Progress
From interview with Alexander Kyrillin (General Director of the company) 

anyone care to explain what this transformed into open joint-stock company means in Russian terms?

Typically, it means converted from privately held to publicly held stock.

[fregate]

At 1st of July 2014 State Scientific & Manufacturing Rocket Space Center TsSKB-Progress had been transformed into open joint-stock company Rocket & Space Center Progress
From interview with Alexander Kyrillin (General Director of the company) 

anyone care to explain what this transformed into open joint-stock company means in Russian terms?

Became a Public Listed Company (not sure about equivalent US term).
My sincere apologies    if this had been "Lost in translation" - "Jim, I am a doctor, not an ECONOMIST" 

[Danderman]

Obviously creation of SHLV should be a joint effort across aerospace and other industries rather than a huge challenge for a single enterprise.   

This is key.

Since Roskosmos does not have a great technical base, I don't know how a large launch vehicle project that requires multiple developers could be organized.

[asmi]

This is key.

Since Roskosmos does not have a great technical base, I don't know how a large launch vehicle project that requires multiple developers could be organized.

Well it's always been this way - the company that wins the contract gets ultimate authority to manage all cooperating companies as sub-contractors, but that doesn't mean the prime contractor ("head organization" is Russian officialspeak) needs to design & develop everything down to the screws - it defines the requirements for components and assigns their development to the sub-contractors. For example, take a look at how Energia was developed & built.

[fregate]

This is key.

Since Roskosmos does not have a great technical base, I don't know how a large launch vehicle project that requires multiple developers could be organized.

Well it's always been this way - the company that wins the contract gets ultimate authority to manage all cooperating companies as sub-contractors, but that doesn't mean the prime contractor ("head organization" is Russian officialspeak) needs to design & develop everything down to the screws - it defines the requirements for components and assigns their development to the sub-contractors. For example, take a look at how Energia was developed & built.

Yes, I agree - for instance Boeing is the prime contractor for the design, development, test and production of the SLS cryogenic stages, as well as development of the avionics suite, while certain sub-systems would be designed and implemented by third-party sub-contractors. Boeing in this example serves as a major integrator and takes full responsibility for the final product (regardless point of origin of particular sub-system).   
In case of Russian SHLV Roscosmsos after finalising tener results could distribute program artefacts by assigning each stage of LV to different companies (based on their expertise) and make another one as Head Organization to supervise, govern and integrate all "building blocks" into final product. (some kind of LEGO play on larger scale)    

[fregate]

From interview with RSC Energia President V.Lopota at Farnborough International AirShow 2014 on 16th of July 2014:

Какой проект сверхтяжелой ракеты-носителя и в кооперации с кем корпорация будет предлагать Роскосмосу?

- При определении облика новой ракеты-носителя сверхтяжелого класса РКК "Энергия" предлагает в максимальной степени использовать практический опыт и достижения, полученные корпорацией и организациями отрасли при создании ракеты-носителя "Энергия" и ракетно-космического комплекса "Энергия-Буран" в целом. Технические характеристики, достигнутые в этой великолепной работе, до сих пор остаются непревзойденными в мире.

Проводится анализ нескольких вариантов компоновочной схемы ракеты-носителя. Базовым принципом в них является применение в составе блоков первой ступени самых мощных кислородно-керосиновых жидкостных ракетных двигателей РД-170 с тягой (на Земле) 740 тс. Модификация этого двигателя - РД-171М - используется в составе первых ступеней ракет-носителей "Зенит", которые мы запускаем с космодрома морского базирования "Морской старт".

Конечно, создание перспективной ракеты-носителя потребует использования в качестве горючего и жидкого водорода, технологии работ с которым, к сожалению, утрачены после прекращения работ по программе "Энергия-Буран".

По результатам предварительного многокритериального анализа предпочтительным является вариант компоновочной схемы ракеты-носителя сверхтяжелого класса с параллельным расположением кислородно-керосиновых блоков первой и второй ступеней и с последовательным расположением по отношению к ним кислородно-водородного блока третьей ступени. Грузоподъемность ракеты-носителя около 100 т.

Эволюционное развитие модульной структуры, как это было реализовано в ракете-носителе "Энергия", позволит также обеспечить в данной разработке создание ряда ракет-носителей грузоподъемностью 16 тонн, 36 тонн и 75 тонн. Особо следует выделить 75-тонную ракету-носитель, необходимую для решения широкого спектра перспективных задач в околоземном и дальнем космическом пространстве, в том числе в части обеспечения более высокой национальной безопасности и обороноспособности страны. Такая ракета-носитель, использующая лучшие отечественные достижения, может существенно поднять имидж и конкурентоспособность России на мировом космическом рынке.

Особое внимание, как и при создании ракеты-носителя "Энергия", будет уделено наземной экспериментальной отработке. Предусматривается этапность летной отработки основных элементов ракеты-носителя/

Задача создания ракеты-носителя сверхтяжелого класса может быть решена при задействовании практически всех предприятий и институтов отрасли под руководством Роскосмоса и Объединенной ракетно-космической корпорации.

Will translate later - in nutshell optimal 100 tones SHLV configuration chosen by Energia is:
1nd stage (boosters) KeroLOX based on RD-170 propulsion [IMHO rather RD-170M];
2nd stage (central core) KeroLOX [IMHO based on RD-171M propulsion];
3rd stage (upper stage) HydroLox [propulsion is unspecified but I suspect would be either RD-0120/RD-0122 high-altitude version]

[aga]

3rd stage (upper stage) HydroLox [propulsion is unspecified but I suspect would be either RD-0120/RD-0122 high-altitude version]

what about rd-0146? too low thrust?

[fregate]

3rd stage (upper stage) HydroLox [propulsion is unspecified but I suspect would be either RD-0120/RD-0122 high-altitude version]

what about rd-0146? too low thrust?

Please make an effort to calculate - assuming that 100 tones SHLV delta-V with gravity losses would be around 10,000 m/sec, upper stage should be able to produce delta-V around 3334 m/sec. Now if pmf is around 0.85 you could calculate total mass of propellant and mass of stage. Obviously T/W for a propulsion system based on a single RD-0146 (thrust 10000 kgf) would be too low (even without upper stage mass it would be 0.1), but major constraint would be nominal engine burn time - a single RD-0146 would not be able to burn all propellant! More calculations to DO! Need to check if S-IV schema with 6 RD-0146 might be a workable solution for upper stage.   

Based on engine specifications from manufacturer (KBKhA, Voronezh) web site:
Thrust 10,000 kgf
Specific Impulse 463 sec
Burn time 560 sec 
it's quite easy to estimate burn propellant mass and loaded propellant mass (assuming 1.8% margin for propellant remainder after stage burnout)

Propulsion	Usable Propellant, kg	Loaded Propellant, kg
1xRD-0146	12,095	12,313
2xRD-0146	24,190	24,626
3xRD-0146	36,286	36,939
4xRD-0146	48,381	49,251
6xRD-0146	72,571	73,877

For comparison ("reality check")- second stage of cancelled LV Rus-M (with propulsion based on 4xRD-0146) suppose to have 46,600 kg of usable propellant and nominal burn time 540 sec. Well, close enough

If propellant mass fraction 0.85, then fuelled stage mass would be 73,877/0.85=86,915 kg and burnout stage would have mass 14,344 kg.
Assuming mass of upper stage-payload adapter 3 tonnes, Delta-V would be:
delta-V = 9.81*463*LN((100,000+3,000+73,877)/(100,000+3,000+14,344)) = 1,863 m/sec

Remember that 3rd stage should have 3334 m/sec of Delta-V. Well, "You're Gonna Need a Bigger Boat!" (Jaws, 1975), in order to accommodate almost twice more propellant.  That's why S-IV stage design layout based on 6xRD-0146 is not ENOUGH for SHLV. 
     

[fregate]

Regarding Angara-A5P (P Pilotiryemaya in Russian or Manned in English).
From the ITAR-TASS new agency interview with Vladimir Nesterov (Former General Director[/font][/size] of GKNPTs Khrunichev, Moscow) on 5th of August 2014

- Правда ли, что с помощью "Ангары" нельзя осуществлять пилотируемые пуски?
- В настоящий момент она действительно не готова вписаться в программу пилотируемых пусков. Но при постановке соответствующей задачи этого можно добиться. При определенной доработке и без очень серьезных финансовых вложений "Ангара" сможет осуществлять запуски новых пилотируемых кораблей. Понятно, что именно для этого надо и как можно это сделать. Это не вызовет существенных изменений конструкции, не потребует много времени. Мы готовы сделать "Ангару" пилотируемой. Это абсолютно реально.

Q Is it true that Angara is not a man-rated Launch Vehicle?
A At present time Launch Vehicle is not quite suitable for manned launches. But we could make it happens if we would be challenged by such task. With certain modifications and without huge capital investments Angara LV might be capable to launch a new manned spacecraft [into LEO]. It is clear what exactly should be done and how to do it. Those modifications should not bring huge changes in a baseline design and would not require a lot of time to implement them. We are ready to transform Angara into a man-rated Launch Vehicle. That is an achievable objective, absolutely.         
   

[baldusi]

I lost all context with Google Translate, of course. But I got the impression he was rather selling the capabilities. In other words, it would seem to me that not only they are not currently working on A-5P, but it is not a sure thing.
Now, given that they are doing both Soyuz and Angara pads at Voistochny, I don't see many options for launching PTK, at least to LEO. On the other hand, Krunichev has been failing a lot lately, and RSC Energia is picking a lot of work from those failures. Now Lopota is at URKK. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't even have confidence in Krunichev for this.

[fregate]

I lost all context with Google Translate, of course. But I got the impression he was rather selling the capabilities. In other words, it would seem to me that not only they are not currently working on A-5P, but it is not a sure thing.
Now, given that they are doing both Soyuz and Angara pads at Voistochny, I don't see many options for launching PTK, at least to LEO. On the other hand, Krunichev has been failing a lot lately, and RSC Energia is picking a lot of work from those failures. Now Lopota is at URKK. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't even have confidence in Krunichev for this.

I could share you pain with translation . It's 1 AM local time - going to sleep. My best attempt to translate is below the quote. I got the same impression by reading "between the lines"- so far Roscosmos is not paying to man-rate Angara-A5P LV.