The end of Baikonur?

The end of Baikonur? by Tobi on 09 Jan, 2016 17:51
A question to the community: Has anything yet been announced officially concerning the end of launch operations at Baikonur?

The last Tsiklon launch occured in 2006.
Dnepr launches have been shifted to Dombarovsky in 2010.
Zenit operations have reportedly been stopped in 2015.
Soyuz launches from Vostochniy are due to begin in 2016.
Proton launches are scheduled to be transferred to Angara.
Manned Soyuz and Progress launches will be shifted to Vostochniy in 2019.

So what will remain at good old Baikonur? Is the base going to be closed completely?
#1 by russianhalo117 on 09 Jan, 2016 23:14
Quote from: Tobi on 09 Jan, 2016 17:51
A question to the community: Has anything yet been announced officially concerning the end of launch operations at Baikonur?

The last Tsiklon launch occured in 2006.
Dnepr launches have been shifted to Dombarovsky in 2010.
Zenit operations have reportedly been stopped in 2015.
Soyuz launches from Vostochniy are due to begin in 2016.
Proton launches are scheduled to be transferred to Angara.
Manned Soyuz and Progress launches will be shifted to Vostochniy in 2019.

So what will remain at good old Baikonur? Is the base going to be closed completely?

if lease ifs not extended then yes it will be closed to Russians. Current Agreements state KAZKOSMOS and Republic of Kazakhstan will inherit the Cosmodrome as is and will then make the decisions as to which types of rockets can fly. they have already said that they will only allow clean non toxic fuel and oxidizer once the transfer of ownership occurs. All ICBM (and other missile systems) and Military assets would leave with Russia.
#2 by Nicolas PILLET on 10 Jan, 2016 06:08
Quote from: Tobi on 09 Jan, 2016 17:51
Manned Soyuz and Progress launches will be shifted to Vostochniy in 2019.

This is not correct. There is no plan to launch manned Soyuz from Vostochnyi.
#3 by B. Hendrickx on 11 Jan, 2016 13:23
In January 2004 Putin and Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev reached an agreement on extending the lease of Baikonur to 2050. Therefore the official stance is that Baikonur will continue to exist as a launch base until at least 2050. Roskosmos chief Igor Komarov reiterated this this last June (see this TASS report, only in Russian) :

http://tass.ru/kosmos/2021495

He said that piloted flights from Baikonur will continue until at least 2024, but at the same time added that "piloted flights, commercial missions and all other missions" will be gradually transferred to Vostochnyy. Therefore one does wonder how legally binding the lease agreement is. It's hard to imagine the Russians continuing to pay Kazakhstan $115 million a year for the use of Baikonur if they're going to shift all their launches to Vostochnyy long before 2050.

So what remains in the offing for Baikonur? Piloted Soyuz launches until 2024 or possibly longer if ISS operations are extended or if Russia splits off part of its segment from the ISS to operate as an independent station (and assuming the Soyuz successor, which will fly on Angara from Vostochnyy, is further delayed, which is entirely plausible). Unmanned Soyuz launches could theoretically all be transferred to Vostochnyy within a matter of years.

Proton is expected to be phased out in favour of Angara by 2025. Other than that, there is the joint Russian-Kazakh Baiterek venture, which originally planned to use the Angara-5, then switched to Zenit and now finds itself without a launch vehicle, even though new proposals for Baiterek are expected to be formulated before 25 January according to this TASS report (in Russian) :

http://tass.ru/kosmos/2562543

All in all, despite all the official statements, Baikonur's future is looking pretty bleak...
#4 by notsorandom on 11 Jan, 2016 15:13
Crewed Soyuz flights from Vostochnyy would have portions of the ascent where an abort would drop the capsule in hazardous terrain. If the Russians are unwilling to accept those risks and wish to continue their human spaceflight program then they need to develop their next follow on vehicle or continue flying the Soyuz and stay at Baikonur. Another factor is that the Proton is cheaper than Angara and is a pretty big money maker for the Russian space industry. It can only fly from Baikonur. Of course Kazakhstan is rightfully concerned about the propellants the Proton uses. As much as they and the Russians would like to retire the Proton I wouldn't be surprised if the Proton proves to be pretty durable and remains operational well into the life of the Angara.
#5 by Prober on 11 Jan, 2016 18:29
Quote from: notsorandom on 11 Jan, 2016 15:13
Crewed Soyuz flights from Vostochnyy would have portions of the ascent where an abort would drop the capsule in hazardous terrain. If the Russians are unwilling to accept those risks and wish to continue their human spaceflight program then they need to develop their next follow on vehicle or continue flying the Soyuz and stay at Baikonur. Another factor is that the Proton is cheaper than Angara and is a pretty big money maker for the Russian space industry. It can only fly from Baikonur. Of course Kazakhstan is rightfully concerned about the propellants the Proton uses. As much as they and the Russians would like to retire the Proton I wouldn't be surprised if the Proton proves to be pretty durable and remains operational well into the life of the Angara.

some kind of formulation going on regarding Soyuz (very confusing to the outsider)

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz5.html

would you build a new launcher for Baikonur (don't think so)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39208.0
#6 by notsorandom on 11 Jan, 2016 19:18
I should have been more specific in my previous post. I was talking about the Soyuz space craft, not the rocket. The capsule's landing ellipse is big because it cannot maneuver in the last phase of reentry. That is okay if you are coming back from orbit over a large mostly flat expanse like the Kazakh steps. However during ascent out of Vostochnyy there are parts of the flight where an abort would have the capsule landing in unsurvivable terrain. The PPTS capsule will have the ability to maneuver to a landing similar to the Dragon 2. That means that if it needs to preform an abort it could fly itself to a landing area that was clear and flat. So the limitation for crewed flights out of Vostochnyy is the capsule and not the rocket.
#7 by baldusi on 11 Jan, 2016 19:56
That and the fact that if they fly from Vostochny to the ISS they would have a big window of water landing in case of aborting. For which also Soyuz is not optimized and it would need to deploy a whole fleet of recovery seaships just in case.
That sort of operation is probably in the tens of millions of USD price range. And it would also mean that good sea weather would have to be added to the launch commit criteria. Unless they make a high precision landing Soyuz, Vostochny won't host that historic capsule.