-
#20
by
baldusi
on 11 Oct, 2013 01:26
-
So, RSC Energia, TsSKB-Progress, Khrunichev, Polyot, ISS Reshetnev, Lavochkin, NPO Energomash, KBKhA, KBKhM, etc. all will be made into one single company?
Who will they leave out? NPP Zvezda, Makeyev, OAO Kuznetsov?
Seems complete madness to me. The level of "temptation" for whoever handles the corporate affairs is terrible. When you have a big problem you divide it into small manageable ones, you don't mix them one in one big problem. Is like trying to mix and solve all equations simultaneously instead of solving each equation in series.
believe that OAO Kuznetsov is part of the TsSKB-Progress group?
Absolutely not - they only share the same location Samara.
I thin that Zvezda makes ejection seats for aircrafts, Makeyev designs ICBM, And I think that Kuznetsov supplies military turbines, in particular the ones on the TU-160. All seemed mor importnat as military suppliers than space. Please add some Russian perspective.
-
#21
by
Prober
on 11 Oct, 2013 01:32
-
So, RSC Energia, TsSKB-Progress, Khrunichev, Polyot, ISS Reshetnev, Lavochkin, NPO Energomash, KBKhA, KBKhM, etc. all will be made into one single company?
Who will they leave out? NPP Zvezda, Makeyev, OAO Kuznetsov?
Seems complete madness to me. The level of "temptation" for whoever handles the corporate affairs is terrible. When you have a big problem you divide it into small manageable ones, you don't mix them one in one big problem. Is like trying to mix and solve all equations simultaneously instead of solving each equation in series.
believe that OAO Kuznetsov is part of the TsSKB-Progress group?
Absolutely not - they only share the same location Samara.
I thin that Zvezda makes ejection seats for aircrafts, Makeyev designs ICBM, And I think that Kuznetsov supplies military turbines, in particular the ones on the TU-160. All seemed mor importnat as military suppliers than space. Please add some Russian perspective.
Kuznetsov also makes turbines for the Oil industry
-
#22
by
Prober
on 11 Oct, 2013 01:35
-
It should be noted that this will be the third successive Roskosmos chief who previously had served as head of the Space Forces.
1st one however in charge of what looks like a nationalization of the industry.
In many ways, the industry was always nationalized. What is different now is the plan to consolidate former competitors within a single "company". Basically, this would be similar to the Soviet practice of placing design bureaus and production facilities under a ministry, in theory. In practice, this muddies the water, since it is not clear if Roskosmos will continue to function as a customer, nor how the new consolidated company is going to operate.
or if tankage from one firm can be used in a different companies launcher.
-
#23
by
Danderman
on 11 Oct, 2013 02:29
-
The weakness of Roskosmos has always been a lack of technical expertise to allow the agency to function as a lead integrator for national projects.
For example, Roskosmos should have been responsible for integration of the heavy lift launcher, or any Proton replacement - rather than issue periodic RFPs for individual companies to respond as integrators. Saturn V was the product of several companies, with NASA serving as the lead integrator, as was Shuttle, but Russia never adopted that approach.
If the new holding company is simply a pass-through for cash, then Russia will have missed this opportunity, as well.
-
#24
by
owais.usmani
on 11 Oct, 2013 08:00
-
Congrats to Mr. Oleg Ostapenko on his new job. He'll be there for an year, at least.
Remember there's another Glonass-Proton/DM-3 launch scheduled in 2014, so if everything goes as planned, we'll have a new Roscosmos chief before 2015.
-
#25
by
woods170
on 11 Oct, 2013 10:11
-
You really should have used a smiley face.
-
#26
by
Prober
on 11 Oct, 2013 15:14
-
The weakness of Roskosmos has always been a lack of technical expertise to allow the agency to function as a lead integrator for national projects.
For example, Roskosmos should have been responsible for integration of the heavy lift launcher, or any Proton replacement - rather than issue periodic RFPs for individual companies to respond as integrators. Saturn V was the product of several companies, with NASA serving as the lead integrator, as was Shuttle, but Russia never adopted that approach.
If the new holding company is simply a pass-through for cash, then Russia will have missed this opportunity, as well.
Speaking of holding companies, wonder where ILS and Sea/Land Launch fit in this takeover?
-
#27
by
Lars_J
on 11 Oct, 2013 16:47
-
Nationalizing the space industry seems like such a backwards move. What are they thinking, that this will magically solve their problems?
-
#28
by
Danderman
on 11 Oct, 2013 17:34
-
The weakness of Roskosmos has always been a lack of technical expertise to allow the agency to function as a lead integrator for national projects.
For example, Roskosmos should have been responsible for integration of the heavy lift launcher, or any Proton replacement - rather than issue periodic RFPs for individual companies to respond as integrators. Saturn V was the product of several companies, with NASA serving as the lead integrator, as was Shuttle, but Russia never adopted that approach.
If the new holding company is simply a pass-through for cash, then Russia will have missed this opportunity, as well.
Speaking of holding companies, wonder where ILS and Sea/Land Launch fit in this takeover?
They would be held indirectly via the Khrunichev and Energia holdings. But, yes this new corporation would have indirect control.
-
#29
by
Danderman
on 11 Oct, 2013 17:35
-
Congrats to Mr. Oleg Ostapenko on his new job. He'll be there for an year, at least.
Remember there's another Glonass-Proton/DM-3 launch scheduled in 2014, so if everything goes as planned, we'll have a new Roscosmos chief before 2015.
But if the new ORKK company is formed prior to the launch, the CEO of the ORKK can be fired so that the Roskosmos chief can stay in power.
-
#30
by
B. Hendrickx
on 18 Oct, 2013 22:52
-
In an article published on 11 October the Izvestiya newspaper quoted its sources as saying the sole reason for Popovkin's departure was his medical condition. He is to undergo lengthy medical treatment abroad and was "physically incapable" of staying on the job.
http://izvestia.ru/news/558641Several days before that the government newspaper "Rossiyskaya gazeta" reported that Popovkin had undergone eye surgery on several occasions and that the stress caused by last July's Proton failure had only exacerbated the problems with his eyesight. The newspaper says he was hospitalized after the accident and "nearly turned blind".
http://www.rg.ru/2013/10/07/popovkin-site.html
-
#31
by
Danderman
on 18 Oct, 2013 23:45
-
a couple of weeks ago, I was bemoaning the fact that Roskosmos does not have the technical expertise to serve as prime integrator for large space projects, which means that the various contractors have historically always jockeyed to get the role of prime integrator, which mixed results.
ORKK might be in a position to serve as prime integrator for large projects IF the company is provided the technical staff to serve that function. The question would also be the role of TsNIIMASH in regards to the new company.
-
#32
by
a_langwich
on 19 Oct, 2013 07:08
-
http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/37758russias-industry-consolidation-plan-aims-to-reduce-reliance-on-imports“Our main problem is the supply of components,” Rogozin told Putin, according to a transcript posted on the Kremlin website. “In order for us to be independent of their imports — and we understand that ... certain countries use their export controls, basically, to prevent us from buying all we need — this system will allow us to concentrate the funds and research on creating our own production of these components.”
The consolidation is not expected to affect Russia’s large prime contractors, such as the Khrunichev Space Center, RSC Energia, TsSKB Progress and Lavochkin, according to Yury Karash, a space industry expert in Moscow.
Imports account for 75 percent of parts used in building satellites, according to Dmitry Payson, development director of the space research center at Skolkovo Foundation, a think tank here.
Looking for context on this quote...when they say "imports" are they primarily referring to imports from former Soviet republics (eg, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc), or from European or American vendors? Was that a shot at ITAR--does that really have any effect on Russian designs? Or a shot at the Russian satellite countries?
Are these quotes directed toward satellites and away from launch vehicles (ie, not targeting Ukrainian LV builders, but perhaps western components like processors and semiconductor-based "stuff")?
If it's referring to American and European vendors, I find that 75 percent figure astonishing.
-
#33
by
Prober
on 20 Oct, 2013 01:35
-
http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/37758russias-industry-consolidation-plan-aims-to-reduce-reliance-on-imports
“Our main problem is the supply of components,” Rogozin told Putin, according to a transcript posted on the Kremlin website. “In order for us to be independent of their imports — and we understand that ... certain countries use their export controls, basically, to prevent us from buying all we need — this system will allow us to concentrate the funds and research on creating our own production of these components.”
The consolidation is not expected to affect Russia’s large prime contractors, such as the Khrunichev Space Center, RSC Energia, TsSKB Progress and Lavochkin, according to Yury Karash, a space industry expert in Moscow.
Imports account for 75 percent of parts used in building satellites, according to Dmitry Payson, development director of the space research center at Skolkovo Foundation, a think tank here.
Looking for context on this quote...when they say "imports" are they primarily referring to imports from former Soviet republics (eg, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc), or from European or American vendors? Was that a shot at ITAR--does that really have any effect on Russian designs? Or a shot at the Russian satellite countries?
Are these quotes directed toward satellites and away from launch vehicles (ie, not targeting Ukrainian LV builders, but perhaps western components like processors and semiconductor-based "stuff")?
If it's referring to American and European vendors, I find that 75 percent figure astonishing.
"75 percent of parts used in building satellites", not launchers. But Putin wishes some type of group of countries under Russia. Trade is being used as a weapon.
This action should be sending red flags all over the world.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-15/putin-builds-north-korea-rail-to-circumvent-suez-canal.html"North Korea is under United Nations sanctions for its atomic program"
http://glblgeopolitics.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/putin-builds-north-korea-rail-to-circumvent-suez-canal/The question becomes: why are funds for this rail being spent? We all hear about the problems for large transport via Russian rail due to tunnels etc. Why is the money being spent on this project and not upgrades for the new spaceport?