-
Rogozin: "Competitors [Musk] are stepping on our toes"
by
Space Ghost 1962
on 30 Dec, 2015 23:19
-
Russia Says Elon Musk is 'Stepping On Our Toes'“The main goal today is to make space cheap. Competitors are stepping on our toes. Look at what billionaire Musk is doing with his projects.”
So, how serious is this? With Roscosmos as a state corporation, even with a lean budget, could this amount to much?
Or is it, as usual, posturing of an over committed, under financed, decades behind - state run organization, mouthed by an arrogant politician for hype?
As I said
in this post:
The smart strategy would be tiger team spin-outs for something like a Delta II class vehicle that's eventually recoverable, e.g. just how SX did Falcon 9. If things work, then spin-in. That's how other industries do such.
So with all of the massive assets at hand, and a "corporate form", and supposedly a desire to advance in a "respected direction" - what can/should/would need to be done to make this serious?
-
#1
by
TrevorMonty
on 30 Dec, 2015 23:38
-
The Falcon LVs are a serious threat to Proton's commercial satellite business. They can match or better Proton on price and are just as or more reliable eg 5% failure rate for F9 is better than last few years for Proton.
Dragon v2 and Starliner will take Soyuz ISS business.
On plus side SpaceX are forcing the Russians to develop a RLV. Combined with the new capsule, Russian could start to build a space tourism business
-
#2
by
QuantumG
on 31 Dec, 2015 00:40
-
Gotta love the "billionaire" jab..
-
#3
by
Space Ghost 1962
on 31 Dec, 2015 00:51
-
The Falcon LVs are a serious threat to Proton's commercial satellite business.
Not only Proton. And not only Russian. SX already steals Ariane launches.
Note that Rogozin at least is the first to take seriously the challenge as a challenge.
Unlike Arianespace CEO Stephane Isreal: “We will never be launching 30 times per year,” (Arianespace’s initial assessment is that a [SX] rocket would need to launch 30 times per year to close the business case).
If SX were to launch 30 times a year, both Russia and Europe would have significant hits to launch service revenue - it would come out of both of their hide's. The only recourse would be to discount launches and insist on significant budget increases to cover the shortfall.
No provider is in a good position for this, but the Russians seem especially challenged, as the last three decades of design choices seem to go counter to the formula that Musk is counting on for re-usability, and at least Europe has the high end launch services secured from rivals, although that seems to be the most likely source of ULA future manifest wins to steal away.
Gotta love the "billionaire" jab..
Yeah, like no kleptocrat in Russia will lay hands on any of the funds, right? So how's that new Vostochny Cosmodrome working out?
-
#4
by
Dalhousie
on 31 Dec, 2015 00:55
-
The Russophobes are out in force I see.
-
#5
by
QuantumG
on 31 Dec, 2015 01:13
-
The Russophobes are out in force I see.
Yep, totally just made up fears.
-
#6
by
Rocket Science
on 31 Dec, 2015 01:15
-
-
#7
by
Oli
on 31 Dec, 2015 02:11
-
Roscosmos has bigger things to worry about than Musk's experiments.
Cheap launch isn't that important.
-
#8
by
notsorandom
on 31 Dec, 2015 14:25
-
Russia has extensive liquid propulsion expertise and a stable of in production and heritage engines that are reusable. Until a just few years ago they were the only ones with any experience in large methane fueled engine. If they wish to develop a reusable booster system they are in a very good position to start from. The challenge Russia faces isn't technological, it is organizational and financial.
Rogozin, what ever one thinks of the man, is perceptive enough to realize that the status quo may become obsolete in the next few years. If changing the Russian space industry to be able to compete is going to be done from the top down then the top leadership needs know what the factors are that have allowed their competitors to be successful and the changes needed to replicate those factors. Based on the numerous threads and countless posts here on NSF debating about why SpaceX has been so successful I think it is safe to say the we don't fully understand why ourselves. Rogozin has a difficult task ahead of him.
-
#9
by
Rocket Science
on 31 Dec, 2015 14:38
-
Russia has extensive liquid propulsion expertise and a stable of in production and heritage engines that are reusable. Until a just few years ago they were the only ones with any experience in large methane fueled engine. If they wish to develop a reusable booster system they are in a very good position to start from. The challenge Russia faces isn't technological, it is organizational and financial.
Rogozin, what ever one thinks of the man, is perceptive enough to realize that the status quo may become obsolete in the next few years. If changing the Russian space industry to be able to compete is going to be done from the top down then the top leadership needs know what the factors are that have allowed their competitors to be successful and the changes needed to replicate those factors. Based on the numerous threads and countless posts here on NSF debating about why SpaceX has been so successful I think it is safe to say the we don't fully understand why ourselves. Rogozin has a difficult task ahead of him.
Free market enterprise in a true democracy is what made SpaceX successful as well as other corporations, it's not a secret. No one here on NSF doubts Russia's technical expertise that is hamstrung by it's politics.
If Mr. Rogozin is feeling hurt by having his toes stepped on, well perhaps it's time to slip on some "steel toed" boots and get to work like countless do in the west and create their own sucess...
-
#10
by
The Amazing Catstronaut
on 31 Dec, 2015 17:50
-
Cheap launch isn't that important.
ISS crew is. That's a pretty enormous stiletto aimed at a geopolitical toe there. Remember Rogozin is responsible for quite a lot of administration outside of Roscomos. Although whilst Rogozin (in my own mass media biased opinion) isn't the most charming of men he's not hitting out at at Musk. I got quite the opposite impression.
-
#11
by
Space Ghost 1962
on 31 Dec, 2015 18:19
-
Although whilst Rogozin (in my own mass media biased opinion) isn't the most charming of men he's not hitting out at at Musk. I got quite the opposite impression.
Me too. Why I created this thread.
Back to the underlying efficacy of the remark - empty only, Roscosmos "corporate" excuse, motivational only, or foreshadowing forceful decisions to slice/dice an out of control, impossible to manage structural assembly of a few thousand fiefdoms? And "how?" Not an easy, simple thing to attempt.
Or am I being to much of a "Russophobe", where my comments need to be nuanced to their fragile egos and delicate ears ...
add:
Mind you, when I've visited SX, always reminds me of Russian attitudes/appearances/approaches/mindset. Also always wondered if Musk's "take away" from attempting to buy Russian propulsion prior to SX was to observe methodology to understand the "why" behind it all.
-
#12
by
MattMason
on 31 Dec, 2015 18:35
-
SpaceX has lit a fire in the rocket industry long before they successfully recovered a booster.
Obviously the reason is not because of the potential of marketing cheaper flights for customers, but because recovering as much as you can of your launch vehicle will save your company money, even if you still charge a higher rate. Even the Indian Space Agency is working on a recovery mode, as is Arianespace and ULA.
ULA will likely be able to charge more not because they save money but (as SpaceX has not yet shown by the numbers) but because ULA has a very reliable launch record. It's like Apple selling their computers. Internally, they aren't much different than PCs but are priced higher (I know--I'm a certified Apple and PC tech). But people who buy Apple products tend to come back because of the company's reputation of a long-lasting product. ULA has made a similar reputation--but now they have competition and they are smart to change their hardware model.
Roscosmos's venerable Soyuz rocket and spacecraft work well, but technology must evolve, and people like Musk isn't waiting for governments, ideological wars, huge rocks falling from the sky, or national pride to get things moving. They'll adapt as they realize that this will likely become a practical matter.
-
#13
by
QuantumG
on 01 Jan, 2016 00:05
-
Mind you, when I've visited SX, always reminds me of Russian attitudes/appearances/approaches/mindset.
I've never associated dream cults with Russia, so I guess you're thinking about the totalitarian attitude
-
#14
by
KelvinZero
on 01 Jan, 2016 00:42
-
Russia Says Elon Musk is 'Stepping On Our Toes'
“The main goal today is to make space cheap. Competitors are stepping on our toes. Look at what billionaire Musk is doing with his projects.”
So, how serious is this? With Roscosmos as a state corporation, even with a lean budget, could this amount to much?
Or is it, as usual, posturing of an over committed, under financed, decades behind - state run organization, mouthed by an arrogant politician for hype?
Here is an expanded version of the quote:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-30/elon-musk-stepping-on-toes-in-space-race-russia-official-says“Competitors are stepping on our toes. Look at what billionaire Musk is doing with his projects. This is very interesting, well done, and we treat this work with respect.”So rather than an indictment of Russian attitudes, I think this teaches us about certain media's disrespect for the truth in the pursuit of inflammatory headlines.
(edit.. Come to think of it, I wonder if he meant to say "biting at our heels".. this seems the gist of the entire statement to me: Russia is ahead on cheap reliable launch and they can be proud of this but they could lose that position if they stagnate. In fact I think he is saying they deserve to lose it if they stagnate.)
-
#15
by
Stan-1967
on 01 Jan, 2016 01:15
-
I've noted many times that US news sources are inherently dismissive in their attitudes towards most all Russian political motives, and extending that towards SpaceX and E. Musk is par for the course.
After the latest F9 launch, I was on RT.com the following morning. RT.com was reporting it as a top story, and it was quite respectful. I am not surprised Russians would be respectful towards SpaceX accomplishments. The Russians have proven themselves a leader in space for decades. That leadership is not just the technical accomplishments, but the vision and dreams of it's people, and technology leadership. That all stems from a Russian culture that values the drive for exploration and pushing frontiers. Such vision within a culture is rare in today's world, and just a handful of countries are able to cultivate and sustain interest in space accomplishments.
NASA Spaceflight has been invaluable to me to in that it reports quite accurately and respectfully on all existing and aspiring space powers, including those that may be adversarial to the USA in some ways. ( China, Iran, Norks, etc.)
I hope the Russians can self examine their position in launch technology, and further reform their industrial base to stay competitive. I think they will need to consolidate some design bureaus and make a more vertical industry, but it would be a loss to the world if their engine technology passes into history.
-
#16
by
rcoppola
on 01 Jan, 2016 01:32
-
I prefer Rogozin's "respect" and "well done" response, to Stéphane Israël's "there's nothing to see here".
The sad but true fact is that Elon, running a private company, can make more decisions and make on-the-fly adjustments in one Monday morning meeting then either of them could in a year.
Add this latest tweet, and I'd say Rogozin understands exactly where this is all going. Russia has a proud and honored history of Space accomplishments. What they do not currently have enough of though, is the political, economic or cultural infrastructure to organically grow a company like SpaceX...and let them fly...I personally wish they could find a way to do so...
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/682717803166695425
-
#17
by
baldusi
on 01 Jan, 2016 03:05
-
Project Fenix is clearly the most rational and advances expendable rocket project that I've seen lately. Specially the gas-gas engines are quite similar to Raptor's projected specs. And they could work as excellent boosters for a SHLV.
The only issue is the lack of reusability. I had speculated that they could do a seven engine core if they also used an RD-0162SD for the upper stage. But regrettably the Voystochny transport restrictions required a bigger upper stage with the 74tonnes RD-0169.
-
#18
by
Oli
on 01 Jan, 2016 03:25
-
Cheap launch isn't that important.
ISS crew is.
?
Roscosmos launching American astronauts to the ISS was always only a temporary arrangement. The political situation might have accelerated commercial crew somewhat. SpaceX has nothing to do with it.
-
#19
by
QuantumG
on 01 Jan, 2016 06:37
-
?
Roscosmos launching American astronauts to the ISS was always only a temporary arrangement. The political situation might have accelerated commercial crew somewhat. SpaceX has nothing to do with it.
I don't know where you get this from. Soyuz doing crew rotation has been the plan of record since the station agreement was signed. It's Russia's primary contribution.
