Author Topic: Russia to Develop Rocket for New-Generation Manned Spacecraft (Read 256070 times)

madscientist197 · « **Reply #40 on:** 08/28/2009 03:23 am »

Just imagine what a well sized RD-0120 based upper stage would do to the big one!

mr_magoo · « **Reply #41 on:** 08/28/2009 05:24 pm »

I wouldnt be surprised by a renewed Russin commitment to space but they are currently hobbled by oil prices and a major effort to modernize their army.

A pragmatist would stick with the army modernization. Someone hungering for prestige might throw some dice on space.

nooneofconsequence · « **Reply #42 on:** 08/29/2009 12:55 am »

Quote from: Danderman on 08/27/2009 06:00 pm

Quote from: patchfree on 08/27/2009 05:47 pm

"whereas Russian projects are delayed, descoped, but rarely vanish."

Hum... I am a fan of soviet and russian space but I would remind that they cancelled 2 enormous projects at the final phase: LV lunar N1 and Energia-Buran!! Now fortunately they are more pragmatic (money!)

Patch

Perhaps I was not being sufficiently precise in my statement. The lunar program and Energia/Buran did not exactly vanish in these sense of X-33, NASP, etc. Both programs produced both flight tests and resulting technologies used today. In fact, Energia/Buran was canceled in the sense that Apollo was canceled, as the Russian program met its program goals and then was killed.

The Zenit rocket is a result of Energia/Buran. It still flies today.

Incorrect. Better way to put it is that partially complete projects are "reintegrated" into a new project proposal. The motivation is to save development costs.

Whereas in the US when a project goes, usually the people who know it are gone too, and too little of the project remains to go anywhere else. Also, everything usually starts as a "clean sheet".

The russian approach has downsides - sometimes recycling the past is a bad idea. For the moment, there is so much to recycle from the former Soviet Union / army sources, there's lots to play with. At some point this won't be as helpful of a source.

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #43 on:** 08/29/2009 01:48 pm »

There is one reason why I can see the current Russian government pursuing this project (even if they only go as far as the new crew vehicle and the Variant-1 LV). That reason is national prestige. The current ruling elite are quite ferverantly nationalist. They want to show the world that Russia is back in the top league after the post-Communism collapse. Something that shouts 'national prestige' like space technology, would definately have their interest.

That doesn't mean they are going to throw money at this. Maybe a little extra dedicated development cash per year but that is it - They have problems with crumbling primary infrastructure like power generation and defence equipment replacements that has to be their first priority in terms of funding.

However, I can see the project being a political priority and Roscosmos being told so. This might mean a downsizing of their science objectives until the new beast is in the air.

fregate · « **Reply #44 on:** 09/04/2009 10:41 am »

Politics aside - those Angara tender pictures clearly shows a RSC Energia historical roots of a proposed Rus' M LV (from NK forum - thanks to Salo):

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #45 on:** 09/04/2009 02:13 pm »

Quote from: fregate on 09/04/2009 10:41 am

What is that thing on the right? The configuration looks all wrong for it to be an LV. Is it some kind of deep space transfer vehicle?

Downix · « **Reply #46 on:** 09/04/2009 02:38 pm »

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 09/04/2009 02:13 pm

Quote from: fregate on 09/04/2009 10:41 am

What is that thing on the right? The configuration looks all wrong for it to be an LV. Is it some kind of deep space transfer vehicle?

I dunno, with the right engine design (RD170 or such) it would work very well. when you don't need more lift, just longer burns, such as for deep space penetration. Would not have huge lifting capacity, I'd guess about 20-25mT or so, but could get the load into deeper orbits through longer burns.

Danderman · « **Reply #47 on:** 09/04/2009 03:01 pm »

The thing on the right was the original Angara concept proposed by Khrunichev, which actually won the competition. Reality subsequently intervened, and Khrunichev turned Angara into an EELV-Lite modular concept, using 50% scale Atlas V core modules that could be clustered.

The Energia concept lost, but clearly, Energia never threw away the PowerPoints, and when Roskosmos asked for a competitor to Angara, Energia simply re-proposed their original Angara concept. I have the feeling that this one won't go anywhere, though, especially now that Angara is flying. The next iteration will probably be Yet Another Soyuz Upgrade Proposal (Soyuz III).

William Barton · « **Reply #48 on:** 09/04/2009 03:02 pm »

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 09/04/2009 02:13 pm

Quote from: fregate on 09/04/2009 10:41 am

What is that thing on the right? The configuration looks all wrong for it to be an LV. Is it some kind of deep space transfer vehicle?

As far as I know, it's the original (obsolete) Angara design (the one with external tanks). This was the ref that popped up first:

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/angara.htm

fregate · « **Reply #49 on:** 09/13/2009 11:41 am »

Back to the main topic - article from MAKS-2009 brochure by Igor Afanasyev

Quote

Launch vehicle for next-generation spacecraft.
The MAKS 2009 pavilion of the Roscosmos Federal Space Agency features a mock-up of the Rus-M two-stage heavylift launch vehicle under development by the Samara-based TsSKB-Progress design bureau.
The Rus-M is intended for carrying new-generation manned craft and resupply vehicles to the orbit from Russia’s new Vostochny cosmodrome.
TsSKB-Progress is co-developing the preliminary design with the Energia Rocket and Space Corporation and the Makeev design bureau. The
launch vehicle is a modular design, with the first stage using three URB-1 blocks with Energomash RD-180 oxygen/kerosene engines.
The second stage’s four RD-0146 engines run on a liquid cryogenic fuel of oxygen and hydrogen.
With an all-up weight of 673 tons, the Rus-M can insert a 23.8-ton payload into low earth orbit. If an additional upper stage is used, the rocket can deliver a satellite weighing 4 tons into geostationary orbit.
Development testing is set to begin in 2015. From 2018 the rocket should start launching new-generation manned spacecraft.

fregate · « **Reply #50 on:** 09/15/2009 08:55 am »

Forum NK from MAKS-2009

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #51 on:** 09/28/2009 02:39 pm »

Let me get one thing straight: The baseline for this LV is the tri-core version shown in that model? There is no EELV-style single-core version?

Dmitry_V_home · « **Reply #52 on:** 09/29/2009 03:00 pm »

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 09/28/2009 02:39 pm

Let me get one thing straight: The baseline for this LV is the tri-core version shown in that model? There is no EELV-style single-core version?

robertross · « **Reply #53 on:** 10/29/2009 12:40 am »

Sorry I didn't find anywhere to post this, but apparently Russia is claiming they want to build a Nuclear-powered rocket.

It will cost upwards of 17 billion rubles (~$600M) to build, and will feature a 1MW reactor.

I can't copy & paste with this stupid computer, but it was featured on AP, through Yahoo.

They clearly state in the article that it's probably a sucker-bait thing, and probably won't get funding.

hop · « **Reply #54 on:** 10/29/2009 01:35 am »

Mentioned here http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jfhjVbCZfHYXlG0zJNKwYr8BtNqgD9BK6NBG0

and here http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Russian-space-chief-proposes-apf-619421809.html?x=0&.v=5

but too short on specifics to say anything really. NEP ? NTR ?

major_tom · « **Reply #55 on:** 10/29/2009 10:44 am »

Quote from: fregate on 09/15/2009 08:55 am

If you look to the upper right hand corner of this picture of Roscosmos
MAKS 2009 stand, there you have the picture of a NEP interplanetary
tug.

I think this is the spacecraft Perminov is talking about.

(I love the so-called "analysts" in these articles guessing around, while
I get a pretty good hunch about what's going on, just looking
at a picture publicly available in a web forum... maybe I should get
payed for this

)

IMHO, in what concerns exploration aplications, it is good enough for
cargo transport, or flagship unmanned missions but leaves the crew
transport unaddressed.

One could well end up busting the budget trying to develop such NEP tug
and have no money left for interplanetary manned craft or anything else...
(sounds just Constellation PoR)

major_tom · « **Reply #56 on:** 10/29/2009 11:27 am »

Other picture of the MAKS stand, featuring the NEP tug:

Quote from: grdja on 08/24/2009 04:38 pm

Lars_J · « **Reply #57 on:** 10/29/2009 02:59 pm »

Have they really done any work on a NEP tug, or is it just pie-in-the-sky PR?

Because it looks VERY similar to NASA's JIMO (Jupiter Icy Moon Orbiter) spacecraft project that was cancelled in 2005: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Icy_Moons_Orbiter

major_tom · « **Reply #58 on:** 10/29/2009 03:42 pm »

Quote from: Lars_J on 10/29/2009 02:59 pm

Have they really done any work on a NEP tug, or is it just pie-in-the-sky PR?

Because it looks VERY similar to NASA's JIMO (Jupiter Icy Moon Orbiter) spacecraft project that was cancelled in 2005: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Icy_Moons_Orbiter

It is basically the solar electric tug Energia proposed some years ago for a Mars mission, but they now replaced the huge solar power arrays by a nuclear reactor.
http://www.energia.ru/english/energia/mars/concept.html

The solar powered version must have been too much in terms of required
orbital assembly operations (mentioned in the following link), so they opted for the nuke.
http://www.energia.ru/english/energia/mars/condition.html

Anyway, for manned moon missions the acceleration time should make
it uncompetitive with chemical propulsion. So you either use it for
destinations beyond the Earth-Moon system, or you use it just
for cargo.

Thande · « **Reply #59 on:** 10/29/2009 09:22 pm »

I was going to say it looked like JIMO as well. Although not exactly the same. Wouldn't be the first time someone else has run with a concept Nasa dropped.