-
#200
by
Danderman
on 16 May, 2015 23:38
-
There is clearly a serious problem at Khrunichev, mostly due to the reality that the original designers are gone, and there are not have adequate replacements. This is likely due to the near collapse of the industry in the 1990s, with an entire generation of workers either being laid off or moving to other industries due to economic factors.
At the same time, the vehicles produced by Khrunichev require a lot of skilled labor, which is now in short supply (skilled in operating these specific vehicles). It is not likely that Khrunichev is going to significantly invest in securing personnel to operate Proton, which is going to leave operations in the next few years in favor of newer systems.
One solution might be accelerated use of Angara, since at least the designers for that vehicle are available.
-
#201
by
rcoppola
on 17 May, 2015 00:25
-
I think we are starting to witness the unfortunate results from the planned re-consolidation of Russia's space sector. Ironically, a plan put into place to fix things, not make them worse.
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20130904/183163496.htmlAnd if these latest events weren't impacted by those decisions, then they certainly weren't helped by them either.
Either way, between the quality control failures and the continuing issues with Vostochny, Russia needs some new space leadership. As well as to honestly re-evaluate whether returning to a consolidated industry with central planning is the right thing to do at a time when the commercial launch industry is moving at an ever increasing agility and efficiency.
Russia is a great and proud spacefaring nation. They deserve better than this.
-
#202
by
Llian Rhydderch
on 17 May, 2015 01:19
-
I'm expecting Rogozin on site to "" at Khrunichev.
-
#203
by
Rocket Science
on 17 May, 2015 01:43
-
Korolev is probably rolling over in his grave...
-
#204
by
baldusi
on 17 May, 2015 01:48
-
There is clearly a serious problem at Khrunichev, mostly due to the reality that the original designers are gone, and there are not have adequate replacements. This is likely due to the near collapse of the industry in the 1990s, with an entire generation of workers either being laid off or moving to other industries due to economic factors.
I wonder if they didn't put their A team on Angara and what's little left, was put to keep churning Protons. Obviously accelerating Angara might be the right answer in that case.
-
#205
by
kch
on 17 May, 2015 02:05
-
Korolev is probably rolling over in his grave...
... and Chelomei, too.
-
#206
by
edkyle99
on 17 May, 2015 04:33
-
If I'm counting right, this puts Proton's failure rate well over 10% since 2010.
Eight Proton or Proton upper stage failures since 2010 inclusive, a period that has seen 53 Proton launches. It was also the 48th failure in 404 Proton flights all-time. Proton failed less than half as often during the 1990-2009 period (11 failures in 169 launches) as during this decade. Note that the increasing failure rates have coincided with phase-in of Proton M/Briz M.
- Ed Kyle
-
#207
by
DJPledger
on 17 May, 2015 08:09
-
It is time to retire Proton-M immediately and replace it with Angara 5. Proton-M is far too unreliable for launching expensive comsats.
-
#208
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 17 May, 2015 08:21
-
Have they found the wreckage yet? They might not find much as the vehicle was at over 100mi when the engine prematurely shut down and the apogee was probably even higher. As with Progress-59, this LOM investigation will likely have to rely on what little telemetry that they have and engineers' brainstorming meetings.
Korolev is probably rolling over in his grave...
After the loss of Mars 1, Korolev made one of the first 'space is hard' comments (although in his usual flowery and poetic language). He also was reluctant to cooperate with finger-pointing investigations, even when his own head was on the chopping block.
-
#209
by
Lars-J
on 17 May, 2015 08:48
-
It is time to retire Proton-M immediately and replace it with Angara 5. Proton-M is far too unreliable for launching expensive comsats.
Impossible without Russia losing almost all capability in that payload class. Angara production is gearing up slowly, but it will be years before proton can be fully retired.
-
#210
by
kevin-rf
on 17 May, 2015 11:23
-
Before everyone jumps on the Proton is unreliable, time for Angara 5 bandwagon. Doesn't the Angara 5 also use the Briz M? Briz M which has been implicated in more than it's fair share of recent failures.
-
#211
by
jacqmans
on 17 May, 2015 12:20
-
http://www.federalspace.ru/21492/ROSCOSMOS: APPROVED Interdepartmental Commission
17/05/2015 13:49
Today, May 17, 2015, Roscosmos has approved the interdepartmental commission investigating the crash launch May 16, 2015 from the Baikonur cosmodrome rocket "Proton-M" with the satellite 'MekSat-1'.
Chairman of the commission: the head of Roscosmos, Igor Komarov.
Deputy Chairman of the commission: deputy director of the Khrunichev Khrunichev Alexander Medvedev.
Members of the commission: representatives of the Board of the Military-Industrial Commission under the Government of the Russian Federation; customer representatives - Roscosmos and the Russian Defense Ministry; ACCD, head of branch institutes and enterprises of the rocket and space industry.
On the conclusions of the Commission Roscosmos announced.
-
#212
by
Rocket Science
on 17 May, 2015 12:52
-
Have they found the wreckage yet? They might not find much as the vehicle was at over 100mi when the engine prematurely shut down and the apogee was probably even higher. As with Progress-59, this LOM investigation will likely have to rely on what little telemetry that they have and engineers' brainstorming meetings.
Korolev is probably rolling over in his grave...
After the loss of Mars 1, Korolev made one of the first 'space is hard' comments (although in his usual flowery and poetic language). He also was reluctant to cooperate with finger-pointing investigations, even when his own head was on the chopping block.
Who would you consider to be of the caliber of “Chief Designer” today?
-
#213
by
Skyrocket
on 17 May, 2015 14:09
-
Before everyone jumps on the Proton is unreliable, time for Angara 5 bandwagon. Doesn't the Angara 5 also use the Briz M? Briz M which has been implicated in more than it's fair share of recent failures.
And Angara has just performed 2 flights, so it is a little bit early to speak about Angara's reliability.
If Proton's problems come from problems inside the organisation (quality control, underpayment, over-working, loss of experienced workers, etc.), it is likely, that these problems might as well affect Angara in the same way.
-
#214
by
Chris Bergin
on 17 May, 2015 15:16
-
We should look to start a thread covering the Russian failures debate, while stressing everyone's gone through a bad period (been seeing those historical threads about those Titan failures in a row, etc.)
A central thread will allow the specific threads to stay specific. So if someone wants to set that up, probably in the Russian section as our Russian friends will have good input.
-
#215
by
mb199
on 17 May, 2015 15:30
-
Have they found the wreckage yet? They might not find much as the vehicle was at over 100mi when the engine prematurely shut down and the apogee was probably even higher. As with Progress-59, this LOM investigation will likely have to rely on what little telemetry that they have and engineers' brainstorming meetings.
Korolev is probably rolling over in his grave...
After the loss of Mars 1, Korolev made one of the first 'space is hard' comments (although in his usual flowery and poetic language). He also was reluctant to cooperate with finger-pointing investigations, even when his own head was on the chopping block.
Who would you consider to be of the caliber of “Chief Designer” today?
That has been the Russians problem, after Korolev died they had to many Chief Designers. They could never put all there resources into one project.
-
#216
by
Michael S
on 17 May, 2015 15:33
-
I'm trying to get a clearer picture. Given the recent spate of "bad luck", and the bizarre coincidence of 3rd stage issues.
Are both the Proton and Soyuz using the same 3rd stage?
Are both vehicles assembled in the same building and/or by the same people?
-
#217
by
Skyrocket
on 17 May, 2015 15:52
-
I'm trying to get a clearer picture. Given the recent spate of "bad luck", and the bizarre coincidence of 3rd stage issues.
Are both the Proton and Soyuz using the same 3rd stage?
Are both vehicles assembled in the same building and/or by the same people?
No and no.
-
#218
by
gospacex
on 17 May, 2015 16:25
-
That has been the Russians problem, after Korolev died they had to many Chief Designers. They could never put all there resources into one project.
At one point in time, US put all its resources into one LV project: STS. Did it work well?
-
#219
by
Patchouli
on 17 May, 2015 20:56
-
Before everyone jumps on the Proton is unreliable, time for Angara 5 bandwagon. Doesn't the Angara 5 also use the Briz M? Briz M which has been implicated in more than it's fair share of recent failures.
And Angara has just performed 2 flights, so it is a little bit early to speak about Angara's reliability.
If Proton's problems come from problems inside the organisation (quality control, underpayment, over-working, loss of experienced workers, etc.), it is likely, that these problems might as well affect Angara in the same way.
The Briz M does seem to have some reliability issues the question is are they QM or design related.
The Fregat supposedly had a design flaw where a a support that held both a hydrazine and helium lines acted as a thermal bridge causing the hydrazine to freeze under certain conditions.