Shake-up in Russian Space Industry (Translation)

[coypu76]

Translation of Russian article (linked at end)

Russia Is Being Sidelined in the Space Industry

15 February 2018  (Analysis)

In its just-published quarterly report for 2017Q4, specialists from the Energia Space and Rocket Corporation assessed not only the work of Energia, but the Russian Space Industry as a whole. The report notes that world demand for manned and unmanned space launches is growing, but even if Russia became a leader in providing manned launch services after the U.S. Space Shuttle was retired in 2011, the country's leading position may be lost.

...

Translator:  R. Mitchell aka coypu76
http://allpravda.info/rossiyu-vynosit-na-obochinu-kosmicheskoy-otrasli-57284.html

edit/gongora:  Do not post copyrighted articles in their entirety.

[coypu76]

Video - Russia Space Industry in Deep Crisis

[J-V]

Nice find, and thanks for the translation!

  The PRC is already developing next-generation multi-use space transport systems - their prototype Shenlun winged shuttle is already undergoing atmospheric flight testing.

Has anyone heard anything from Shenlun before? My googling skills failed, and forum search didn't show anything either.

[coypu76]

A little article in Ars Technica last November:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/chinas-secretive-spaceplane-may-launch-in-2020/

[J-V]

Thanks.

[DreamyPickle]

This article seems to argue for *more* state intervention and control, the exact opposite of what seems to be working in the US. However Russia is significantly weaker than the Soviet Union ever was and it's not clear their government can afford to invest in the space program purely for prestige reasons (like China can). They no longer have a ideology to promote and their international reputation is awful and not going to improve.

Other than maintaining military capabilities the best hope for Russia in space is still commercialization.

[woods170]

This article seems to argue for *more* state intervention and control, the exact opposite of what seems to be working in the US. However Russia is significantly weaker than the Soviet Union ever was and it's not clear their government can afford to invest in the space program purely for prestige reasons (like China can). They no longer have a ideology to promote and their international reputation is awful and not going to improve.

Other than maintaining military capabilities the best hope for Russia in space is still commercialization.

The article is basically calling for resurrecting the Soviet Union space program: Full state control with spaceflight being part of an ideology (and thus a money sink) in stead of being profitable.

[AncientU]

Nailed it with a dramatic twist.

And to hide our heads in sand which is quickly setting like steel-reinforced concrete - is extremely counter-productive.

[AncientU]

Translation of Russian article (linked at end)

Russia Is Being Sidelined in the Space Industry

15 February 2018  (Analysis)

In its just-published quarterly report for 2017Q4, specialists from the Energia Space and Rocket Corporation assessed not only the work of Energia, but the Russian Space Industry as a whole. The report notes that world demand for manned and unmanned space launches is growing, but even if Russia became a leader in providing manned launch services after the U.S. Space Shuttle was retired in 2011, the country's leading position may be lost.

...

Translator:  R. Mitchell aka coypu76
http://allpravda.info/rossiyu-vynosit-na-obochinu-kosmicheskoy-otrasli-57284.html

edit/gongora:  Do not post copyrighted articles in their entirety.

Is a link to the previously-posted translation available?

[limen4]

Nice find, and thanks for the translation!

  The PRC is already developing next-generation multi-use space transport systems - their prototype Shenlun winged shuttle is already undergoing atmospheric flight testing.

Has anyone heard anything from Shenlun before? My googling skills failed, and forum search didn't show anything either.

The space plane real name is Shenlong (not Shenlun). There is a separate thread on this topic (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11130.msg223035#msg223035)

[coypu76]

Mods edited my translation, but it is posted in full here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/spacexgroup/permalink/10156321346131318/
I've posted for educational purposes only and am not selling or paid anything, so I think the translation is fair use.  The Russians can have all the money I make from the translation.

[coypu76]

Hey mods, unless I am mistaken a translation for educational or reporting purposes is covered under Fair Use Doctrine.
*******************
Copyright Law and the Fair Use Doctrine

The unlicensed use of a copyright is not an infringement unless it conflicts with one of the specific exclusive rights conferred by the copyright statute.  ... One of the exclusive rights of a copyright holder is the right to authorize the preparation of derivative works based upon the copyrighted work.  17 U.S.C. §106(2).  A derivative work is defined as one “based upon one or more preexisting works, such as translation, musical arrangement ... or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted.  A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other remodifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a ‘derivative work’”.  17 U.S.C. §101.  Section 107, the legislative endorsement of the doctrine of “fair use” is one of the various exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by §106.  Section 107 provides four factors to be considered in determining whether the use made of a work is a fair use:
1)   the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for     
nonprofit educational purposes; ...
a preference for fair use will be granted to works that are created for noncommercial or educational purposes rather than for commercial purposes.
... the purposes specifically contemplated by the fair use provision -- (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching.

My translations are non-commercial and provided for scholarship and research, news reporting, and teaching, and I think they are covered under Fair Use Doctrine.

That said, however, this forum belongs to NasaSpaceflight and I acknowledge that the forum's owners and mods have every right to edit content as conservatively as they wish to avoid any possible risk of legal entanglements.  It's your forum and you have the right to exercise full editorial discretion.  I think translations should be okay, but if you think otherwise, it's your call, and I understand if you wish to err on the side of caution.

[RonM]

My translations are non-commercial and provided for scholarship and research, news reporting, and teaching, and I think they are covered under Fair Use Doctrine.

That's a reasonable interpretation of fair use if it's just for your use, but you posted it on a site that uses advertising and subscriptions to pay for its operations. Then it becomes a copyright violation by NSF if the mods don't remove it.

Post key quotes from the article and comment on them. Don't post the entire article.

[coypu76]

Fair enough.  Thanks for the clarification.

[Steven Pietrobon]

Thanks very much for the translation! I think the author is calling for more spending by Roscosmos on "non-profitable" areas such as planetary exploration.

[AntiAnti]

Interesting information.

Source: http://www.zakupki.gov.ru/epz/purchaseplanfz44/printForm/view.html?printFormId=11842538
This is state contract prices, i.e. they're close to prime costs.

[Space Ghost 1962]

This article seems to argue for *more* state intervention and control, the exact opposite of what seems to be working in the US. However Russia is significantly weaker than the Soviet Union ever was and it's not clear their government can afford to invest in the space program purely for prestige reasons (like China can). They no longer have a ideology to promote and their international reputation is awful and not going to improve.

Other than maintaining military capabilities the best hope for Russia in space is still commercialization.

The article is basically calling for resurrecting the Soviet Union space program: Full state control with spaceflight being part of an ideology (and thus a money sink) in stead of being profitable.

Perhaps they have decided that commercial launch services are not competitive in this market?

Then it becomes just national pride?

add:

The longer and deeper we commercialize the space industry, the more quickly we will be left behind, said the President of the Foundation for Scientific Research and Development Aleksei Anpilogov

If you don't stress entrepreneurship in your culture, then stimulating industry doesn't have benefits. So disruptive technology/economics is considered a negative (injuring older enterprises), where elsewhere it can be a positive (newer ones that work better out-competing old ones).

Sounds like a capitulation of sorts.

[groundbound]

This article seems to argue for *more* state intervention and control, the exact opposite of what seems to be working in the US. However Russia is significantly weaker than the Soviet Union ever was and it's not clear their government can afford to invest in the space program purely for prestige reasons (like China can). They no longer have a ideology to promote and their international reputation is awful and not going to improve.

Other than maintaining military capabilities the best hope for Russia in space is still commercialization.

The article is basically calling for resurrecting the Soviet Union space program: Full state control with spaceflight being part of an ideology (and thus a money sink) in stead of being profitable.

Perhaps they have decided that commercial launch services are not competitive in this market?

Then it becomes just national pride?

add:

The longer and deeper we commercialize the space industry, the more quickly we will be left behind, said the President of the Foundation for Scientific Research and Development Aleksei Anpilogov

If you don't stress entrepreneurship in your culture, then stimulating industry doesn't have benefits. So disruptive technology/economics is considered a negative (injuring older enterprises), where elsewhere it can be a positive (newer ones that work better out-competing old ones).

Sounds like a capitulation of sorts.

I wonder. I've had some disquieting thoughts about this topic that I was thinking about putting over in the ESA thread, but maybe they belong here.

I wonder if launch-services-to-LEO is about to become where electronics manufacturing capacity was in the mid 90s. That entered a prolonged global glut where anyone could buy capacity from multiple vendors. Most of the smart companies decided that competing on the basis of in-house manufacturing was a mug's game and got out. Some of those companies (looking at you, Apple) became amazingly successful as a result.

So maybe the smart-money thing to do right now is not to compete at a losing game. Instead go for the rest of the potential parts of the business -- spacecraft, tugs, services...

As I said, I'm not sure I'm entirely comfortable with the analysis and logic of this.

[speedevil]

So maybe the smart-money thing to do right now is not to compete at a losing game. Instead go for the rest of the potential parts of the business -- spacecraft, tugs, services...

As I said, I'm not sure I'm entirely comfortable with the analysis and logic of this.

There were of course periods after this when fab capacity became really difficult to obtain for smaller vendors, and small upsets caused really quite large spikes in prices.

[Space Ghost 1962]

The decision to "not compete" when approaching a potential "launch desert" is one thing.

The decision to not innovate but entirely rely on respinning soviet era antiques, including strategy, is another. This is the part mentioned in the article/translation about:

Nailed it with a dramatic twist.

And to hide our heads in sand which is quickly setting like steel-reinforced concrete - is extremely counter-productive.

The best part about russian space has been its relentless approach to space, found in Soyuz LV and ORSC engines. Unfortunately the leadership is cynical and uninterested in refining russian development strengths using its latest generation of space talent, and the brain drain reasonably asserts to places less screwed up.

At this rate russian space capability will erode away in less than a decade. Perhaps two decades to recovery?

They'll still accomplish things, but ... slower and more expensively.