First Flight of Significantly Enhanced Zenit Rocket Family Targeted for Mid-2016

[russianhalo117]

Per linked document from Sea Launch AG via RSC Energia et al, available starting in Middle of 2016 will be new next generation Modernized Zenit launcher family (NG Zenit Family is mentioned in some info as Zenit-4 as well as earlier by name Zenit-3SM). This series of new started upgrades and heavy modernization is referred to as the Enhanced Zenit Rocket Family. First commercial use of this NG Zenit family is expected via Sea Launch in the middle of 2016.

The following is an excerpt from an 20 April 2013 interview conducted by SSPI with Sea Launch AG's Jell Karlsen:

"Q4: Are there any planned changes to the configuration of the Zenit-3SL in the coming years?
Given the need for larger and heavier satellites, we have developed a concept, capability and detailed plans on a development program that will increase the lift capability and spacecraft size that Sea Launch can launch. The upgrades being evaluated are low-risk; primarily incremental changes based upon identified mass reduction opportunities to the vehicle, together with improvements to the envelope of our fairing. This will not only enable us to lift heavier satellites, it will also give us the possibility to launch dual missions of the latest generation small satellites, direct insert larger satellites and generally increase the address the overall addressable market for our vehicle. We anticipate that with RSC Energia’s leadership in instituting these upgrades, we should be able to offer an "Enhanced” SL vehicle in mid-2016 period."

PDF LINK: http://www.sea-launch.com/upload/Press/Interview%20Kjell%20Karlsen%20-%20SSPI%20Orbiter%20April%202013.pdf

[ChileVerde]

Per linked document from Sea Launch AG via RSC Energia et al, available starting in Middle of 2016 will be new next generation Modernized Zenit launcher family (NG Zenit Family is mentioned in some info as Zenit-4 as well as earlier by name Zenit-3SM).

Well, that sounds fairly modest, do-able and worth doing. I kinda like Zenit and SeaLaunch overall and wish them luck.

But we'll see. Russian pronouncements for what's going to happen haven't generally turned to be a good predictor of what actually happens.

[russianhalo117]

Per linked document from Sea Launch AG via RSC Energia et al, available starting in Middle of 2016 will be new next generation Modernized Zenit launcher family (NG Zenit Family is mentioned in some info as Zenit-4 as well as earlier by name Zenit-3SM).

Well, that sounds fairly modest, do-able and worth doing. I kinda like Zenit and SeaLaunch overall and wish them luck.

But we'll see. Russian pronouncements for what's going to happen haven't generally turned to be a good predictor of what actually happens.

Design work has already started for the first two stages. Implementation and introduction is to be done in phases like Proton-M. Some sources I have looked at say stages will be stretched some and launcher family will switch to using advanced composite materials are to be implemented as well as much more. I am trying find new versions official designation as the one's I used at the top are not confirmed officially.

[Stan Black]

According to the user’s guides Zenit-3SL has already seen at least three enhancements already. Would be curious to know when they were introduced, and what they involved.

Revision B: July, 2000

Launch Date Payload Capability to
Standard GTO
Additional Performance Capability
Current 5250 kg
Late 2001 5400 kg + 150 kg
Early 2002 5500 kg + 250 kg
Mid 2002
Note: This additional performance increase will only be available as an extra cost option.
5700 kg + 450 kg

Revision C: January, 2003

In addition, several enhancements have been made to the Zenit-3SL to
upgrade the performance capability from 5250 kg to 6000 kg to GTO.
These changes fall into three categories:
• Energy increase (includes Block DM-SL engine extended nozzle,
second-stage main engine thrust increase from 87 tons force to
93 tons force, and the addition of propellant for all three stages)
• Mass reductions across all three stages and payload accommodations
• Optimisation of the propellant usage in all three stages

Jeff Foust just tweeted from Satellite 2012 conference:
https://twitter.com/#!/jeff_foust/status/179623695084564481

Sea Launch planning upgrades to the Zenit-3SL that will increase capacity to 6400 kg and then 6700 kg to GTO. #satellite2012

Any info on how do they plan to do that? Does that involve the Fregat-SB, for example?

[Danderman]

Note that this is all about just a few hundred extra kilograms of payload to GTO, not a major increase in capability. I am sure the enhancements will be phased in, and barely noticeable to us.

Let us hope that an improved thrust actuation system is included.

[Salo]

Payload will increase on 320 kg after replacement encapsulated Boeing's fairing with aluminium membrane.

[Danderman]

I am reading correctly that RSC Energia will produce this new aluminum membrane payload fairing?

[Salo]

There is membrane in Boeing's fairing.
RSC Energia will produce fairing without membrane.

[Salo]

"RSC Energia.1996-2001" p.1011.

[hkultala]

Why don't they increase stage 1 tank size?

Is it limited by some railway infrastructure between the factory and the port where they ship the first stage to integration?

Zenit has quite high thrust-weight ratio so it could lift much more by just having more fuel, without need for higher thrust stage 1 engine. And just making the first stage few meters longers shouldn't be very expensive, the expensive part is the engine?

[Danderman]

Another way to add more prop is to add external drop tanks. Making wider prop tanks is not an option for Zenit, due to transport bottlenecks.

Of course, any such change would cost a lot of money, and 99% of the effort would be in raising the money.

[Prober]

Another way to add more prop is to add external drop tanks. Making wider prop tanks is not an option for Zenit, due to transport bottlenecks.

Of course, any such change would cost a lot of money, and 99% of the effort would be in raising the money.

Is this redesign a joint effort with the Ukraine design team?  Not seen any talk of this.

[russianhalo117]

Another way to add more prop is to add external drop tanks. Making wider prop tanks is not an option for Zenit, due to transport bottlenecks.

Of course, any such change would cost a lot of money, and 99% of the effort would be in raising the money.

Is this redesign a joint effort with the Ukraine design team?  Not seen any talk of this.

Yes, it has been in joint team with complete design work for modernization of stages 1 and 2 beginning last year at the end of November 2012. As for Block-DM, I am not totally sure if complete design work for its latest modernization has begun fully or not.

[russianhalo117]

Note that this is all about just a few hundred extra kilograms of payload to GTO, not a major increase in capability. I am sure the enhancements will be phased in, and barely noticeable to us.

Let us hope that an improved thrust actuation system is included.

I was told and understand that the increase will allow new dual payload service to be introduced by Sea Launch with capablility expected to be close to that for planned Ariane 5 ME version.

[a_langwich]

Is this redesign a joint effort with the Ukraine design team?  Not seen any talk of this.

Yes, it has been in joint team with complete design work for modernization of stages 1 and 2 beginning last year at the end of November 2012. As for Block-DM, I am not totally sure if complete design work for its latest modernization has begun fully or not.

I'm fuzzy on the politics and history here...isn't Russia focusing on Angara to eliminate Zenit?  And focusing on entirely Russian-sourced rockets and components where possible?  Is that only for Russian government launches?  So is this only for business/export launches?

But aren't these companies very close to being state-run?  By which, I mean decisions like the decision whether or not to re-open the NK-33 production line are made by government agencies, are they not?  Or is that simply because Orbital/Aerojet have already declined contributing toward that end and there is no other source of funding?

Are the Ukrainian rocket companies slowly getting the squeeze? 

[Danderman]

I'm fuzzy on the politics and history here...isn't Russia focusing on Angara to eliminate Zenit? 
 

There is no "Russia" in this contest.

There are design bureaus and production bureaus. There are government customers. And there are commercial customers.

[a_langwich]

I'm fuzzy on the politics and history here...isn't Russia focusing on Angara to eliminate Zenit? 
 

There is no "Russia" in this contest.

There are design bureaus and production bureaus. There are government customers. And there are commercial customers.

Does the Russian government, which once launched payloads on Zenit, plan to continue launches on it, past the introduction-if-it-ever-happens of Angara?  Are there any other governments lining up to be customers of Zenit?  Were pads at Plesetsk planned for Zenit, then redirected to Angara?  Has the Russian government mentioned a preference for launching payloads on LVs designed by Russian design bureaus and produced by Russian production bureaus?  Or does the fact that Sea Launch is majority-owned by Energia, whose "shares are in Federal ownership and managed with the participation of the Russian Federation state," (in addition to Russian engines, Block DM upper stage, etc) give Zenit enough Russian economic interest to win launches from the Russian government?  The Russian Federation certainly has mentioned a preference for launching payloads on launch sites inside the Russian Federation, eg. Vostochny.

I may have clumsily stated the question, but "Russia" can't help but be a major factor, just like "EU" is a major factor in Arianespace, "US" is a major factor in EELV, "India" is a major factor in ISRO, etc etc.  The most nearly government-independent launch provider was SpaceX...before all the commercial cargo and crew contracts.  Let's not act like governments aren't heavily, heavily involved.

And the oddity is that the Ukrainian government is not a big enough launch customer to maintain its big design and production bureau, just as Kazakhstan is not able to generate enough government traffic to maintain its launch site.  One might envision an EU-type arrangement (call it "SU") of shared industrial contribution, but of course in polite company that requires very delicate negotiations of shared control vs political autonomy and carefully agreed upon payments.  That, in turn, might make one think Zenit vs Angara, Vostochny vs Baikonur were not-so-delicate negotiation strategies toward such an end, but who knows.  In the case of Vostochny, it seems any such negotiations have broken down.  In the case of Zenit, perhaps it has become Energia controlling the fate of Yuzhnoye/Yuzhmash, sort of a negotiating strategy of tightening one's grip on the other's privates.

Maybe this is too sensitive a topic.  I know US industrial policy, especially in regard to RD-180s on the Atlas, comes up almost daily in this forum, so I thought perhaps this wasn't too controversial.

[Danderman]

"Russia" will continue to launch payloads on Zenit as long as Zenit-class payloads are available. After that, Soyuz-2 and Angara will be used.

Kazakhstan and the Ukraine are dancing around the concept of continuing to fly Zenit from Baikonur after Russia leaves.

[owais.usmani]

"Russia" will continue to launch payloads on Zenit as long as Zenit-class payloads are available. After that, Soyuz-2 and Angara will be used.

Kazakhstan and the Ukraine are dancing around the concept of continuing to fly Zenit from Baikonur after Russia leaves.

What exactly do you you mean by "Zenit class payloads" can you explain?

[Danderman]

"Russia" will continue to launch payloads on Zenit as long as Zenit-class payloads are available. After that, Soyuz-2 and Angara will be used.

Kazakhstan and the Ukraine are dancing around the concept of continuing to fly Zenit from Baikonur after Russia leaves.

What exactly do you you mean by "Zenit class payloads" can you explain?

Too heavy for Soyuz-2, too light for Proton.