-
#480
by
Greg6721
on 22 Aug, 2010 21:59
-
yes thats what i meant. i asked about the difference and the dealer told me it was "natural to have slight differences- write your name 100 times and see" im not so sure!
i will need to get further clarification i think. only thing i find strange is that he has offered me £1000 for it- why if its not gagarin?
i have sent out a few emails- hopefully someone will help me get to the bottom of things!
-
#481
by
Stan Black
on 24 Aug, 2010 18:20
-
-
#482
by
anik
on 24 Aug, 2010 18:46
-
Can some one confirm launch times for Almaz and Kosmos-2139/2140/2141; both in 1991? It looks like 91 hours between launches?
Almaz-1 - 31.03.1991 15:12:00 UTC
Kosmos-2139/2140/2141 - 04.04.1991 10:47:12 UTC
3 days 19 hours 35 minutes 12 seconds
-
#483
by
Colds7ream
on 26 Aug, 2010 12:30
-
-
#484
by
Mark Dave
on 26 Aug, 2010 13:39
-
In general I have been wondering why there isn't a movie made about any of this? Most of the films made about space has NASA and the shuttle.
-
#485
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 26 Aug, 2010 17:20
-
-
#486
by
Colds7ream
on 26 Aug, 2010 17:25
-
Would anyone know, by any chance, where I can get a higher resolution of this image, what date it was taken, and which orbiter and mission it was taken from? Many thanks. :-)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mir_entre_l%27espace_et_la_Terre.jpg
This picture was taken at the end of STS-79 mission, on september 24th, 1996.
Thanks very much!
Now I know the mission number, I've been able to find the ID, so getting a hi-res image will be much, much easier! Thanks!
-
#487
by
Stan Black
on 29 Aug, 2010 13:34
-
СОЗ vernier timings timings can be found in http://coopi.khrunichev.ru under ‘newsposting’.
That is a fabulous source. It surely is more detailed than I could have hoped for. It will likely help to narrow things down in a quiet hour. Thanks Stan Black.
Briz maximum burn time 1,000 seconds
http://www.eurockot.com/pb-pic/20041083.pdf
So if there is upto 14,600 kg in the extenal APT / ДТБ and the Briz core has up to 5,200 kg; then external tank should be able to provide 2,808 seconds of burn time?
- as per table 2-8 the propellant mass is 3300 + 1665 = 4995 kg
- adding the fuel required by the Verniers to produce the advertized total impulse of 4 x 141120 Ns one gets to about 5200 kg; that would explain where the figure 5200 comes from
- the given isp 325.5s and total impulse 2 x 10^7 Ns pin down the max. burn time to 797 s, where burn time = total impulse / (isp * g)
It would take 6.263 kg of propellants to produce a total impulse of 20 MNs. Table 2-5 in the Eurockot manual gives a total impulse of 2 x 107 Ns which is most likely a misprint in the exponent. Apart from that there is no free parameter to explain the discrepancy of 6263-4995=1268kg. This makes me believe that the max. burn time of 1000 s is an engine specification, rather than an actually achievable performance parameter in the given configuration.
One can extrapolate the increase in burn time based on an APT capacity of 14600 kg as (14600/4995) * 797 = 2330 s. Then the total burn time of the Breeze-M is 797 + 2330 = 3127 s, give or take a few seconds. Remember the assumption that the Breeze-KM numbers in the Eurockot manual dated Nov. 2004 are applicable to the Breeze-M as used with the Proton.
The enhanced Briz-M has two 80 litre high-pressure tanks; are these only used by the 11D458M and 17D58E verniers?
-
#488
by
Stan Black
on 01 Sep, 2010 17:41
-
Since 1985 GLONASS launches with blok DM have seen the Proton deliver the DM into an initial 64·8° orbit. But when Briz-M was used the Proton-K headed into a sub-orbital -1,196·11 x 181·09 at 51°33’10”.
Anyone know why that launch too did not head into a 64·8° degree orbit?
And do you think next year the launch of Sirius FM-6 will follow, wheres the DM3 launches went into initial 64·8° orbits?
http://coopi.khrunichev.ru/main.php?id=300
-
#489
by
ycs86
on 05 Sep, 2010 18:09
-
How come Russian launchers have some so many small rocket nozzles, whereas US launchers use only 1 or 2 big nozzles? Any explanations?
-
#490
by
ycs86
on 05 Sep, 2010 18:45
-
How come Russian launchers have some so many small rocket nozzles, whereas US launchers use only 1 or 2 big nozzles? Is it because Russia does not have the knowledge or technology to produce big nozzles? Like those SSMEs? Back then, N1 rockets had many nozzles, now Soyuz launchers also have so many small nozzles. Why not use big ones and not several small ones on one launcher? Any explanations?
-
#491
by
Stan Black
on 05 Sep, 2010 19:01
-
It’s an old design. You are only looking at five engines. A big pump feeding several combustion chambers. Original intention was for a single big chamber per blok/stage but suffered from combustion stability problems. The verniers (the small nozzles) are for steering.
Timothy Varfolomeyev wrote some good articles on the R-7 in Spaceflight magazine from the B.I.S.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22540.0 Such a solution was also used for the Zenit rocket; the RD-171 engine.
N1’s engines came about from a dispute. Check out ‘Space Race’ from the B.B.C.
-
#492
by
pathfinder_01
on 06 Sep, 2010 01:12
-
Combustion instability. Basically large combustion cambers are very prone to this. The US masted how to make large rocket combustion cambers before the Soviets.However the Russians do not throw out a good working rocket quite as much as the US and so you see the same rockets in use 40-50 years latter.
-
#493
by
Space Pete
on 06 Sep, 2010 02:31
-
If you are refering to the smaller nozzles around the edges of the main engines, then those are called vernier thrusters. On US rockets, the main engines typically gimbal to steer the rocket. On Russian rockets, the main engines are typically fixed and the smaller verniers move (in two planes - up/down, left/right) to steer the rocket.
-
#494
by
Alpha_Centauri
on 06 Sep, 2010 09:48
-
Combustion instability. Basically large combustion cambers are very prone to this. The US masted how to make large rocket combustion cambers before the Soviets.However the Russians do not throw out a good working rocket quite as much as the US and so you see the same rockets in use 40-50 years latter.
This.
-
#495
by
kevin-rf
on 07 Sep, 2010 16:12
-
However the Russians do not throw out a good working rocket quite as much as the US and so you see the same rockets in use 40-50 years latter.
Don't know, The RL-10 is the workhorse of US upper stages and it dates back to the 60's. The AJ-10 (Delta II upper, Shuttle OMS, Apollo CSM) dates back to Vanguard. The main engine of the pre RD-180 Atlas and Delta II's came from the Navaho Intercontinental Cruise Missile program.
It's only with the EELV, and new COT's launchers (Falcon 9, Taurus II) that new rocket engines have been adopted. Before that the last major change was the SSME back in the early 1980's.
-
#496
by
Stephan
on 07 Sep, 2010 18:26
-
Block DM seem to leave two "aux motor" in orbit according orbital elements (see last Glonass launch).
Nicolas and I were discussing if it was the "SOZ" motors (used on block DM for ullage), but we can't find any info about jettisoning them.
Question is : what are these "aux motor" ?
(pictures from
http://www.kosmonavtika.com/lanceurs/proton/partie2/4.html )
-
#497
by
Nickolai
on 07 Sep, 2010 21:03
-
It's good that you recognize them as nozzles and not engines. Like Stan Black said, there are only 5 engines there, and the Soyuz design is pretty old.
Splitting up an engine into multiple combustion chambers + nozzles helps with combustion stability, but it does hurt your thrust to weight ratio. Of course, if your single chamber rocket keeps exploding it doesn't really matter what its T/W is!
It's not a question of know-how or technology, just look at the RD-0120 (Russian version of the SSME).
-
#498
by
Stan Black
on 08 Sep, 2010 18:51
-
Block DM seem to leave two "aux motor" in orbit according orbital elements (see last Glonass launch).
Nicolas and I were discussing if it was the "SOZ" motors (used on block DM for ullage), but we can't find any info about jettisoning them.
Question is : what are these "aux motor" ?
(pictures from http://www.kosmonavtika.com/lanceurs/proton/partie2/4.html )
The SOZ are the auxiliary motors?
-
#499
by
Stan Black
on 08 Sep, 2010 21:02
-
Block DM seem to leave two "aux motor" in orbit according orbital elements (see last Glonass launch).
Nicolas and I were discussing if it was the "SOZ" motors (used on block DM for ullage), but we can't find any info about jettisoning them.
Question is : what are these "aux motor" ?
(pictures from http://www.kosmonavtika.com/lanceurs/proton/partie2/4.html )
The SOZ are the auxiliary motors?
Do their orbits match these?
| 1 | 1982-100F | 396 | x | 19077 | x | 51·9 | 1982-100G | 377 | x | 19074 | x | 52·1 | |
| 2 | 1983-084G | 395 | x | 19165 | x | 51·9 | 1983-084H | 375 | x | 19165 | x | 52·0 | |
| 3 | 1983-127G | 398 | x | 19051 | x | 52·0 | 1983-127H | 425 | x | 19046 | x | 52·0 | |
| 4 | 1984-047G | 401 | x | 19132 | x | 52·0 | 1984-047H | 420 | x | 19136 | x | 51·9 | |
| 5 | 1984-095G | 376 | x | 19153 | x | 52·0 | 1984-095H | 397 | x | 19154 | x | 51·9 | |
| 6 | 1985-037G | 406 | x | 19150 | x | 51·9 | 1985-037H | 386 | x | 19150 | x | 52·0 | |
| 7 | 1985-118K | 414 | x | 19132 | x | 64·8 | 1985-118L | 414 | x | 19132 | x | 64·7 | |
| 8 | 1986-071G | 408 | x | 19130 | x | 64·7 | 1986-071H | 412 | x | 19126 | x | 64·8 | |
| 9 | 1987-036F | 175 | x | 15854 | x | 65·0 | 1987-036H | 195 | x | 11992 | x | 64·7 | DM failure |
| 10 | 1987-079G | 407 | x | 19118 | x | 64·9 | 1987-079H | 407 | x | 19118 | x | 64·8 | |
| 11 | | | | | | | | | | | | | DM failure |
| 12 | 1988-043G | 415 | x | 19111 | x | 64·9 | 1988-043H | 412 | x | 19120 | x | 64·8 | |
| 13 | 1988-085F | 413 | x | 19112 | x | 64·9 | 1988-085G | 411 | x | 19115 | x | 64·8 | |
| 14 | 1989-001G | 406 | x | 19114 | x | 64·8 | 1989-001H | 407 | x | 19113 | x | 64·9 | |
| 15 | 1989-039G | 609 | x | 18872 | x | 65·0 | 1989-039H | 632 | x | 18850 | x | 65·1 | |
| 16 | 1990-045F | 635 | x | 18859 | x | 65·3 | 1990-045G | 647 | x | 18836 | x | 65·2 | |
| 17 | 1990-110G | 416 | x | 19126 | x | 64·9 | 1990-110H | 417 | x | 19126 | x | 64·7 | |
| 18 | 1991-025F | 403 | x | 19084 | x | 64·9 | 1991-025G | 397 | x | 19121 | x | 64·7 | |
| 19 | 1992-005G | 412 | x | 19127 | x | 64·7 | 1992-005H | 412 | x | 19126 | x | 64·8 | |
| 20 | 1992-047G | 406 | x | 19130 | x | 64·9 | 1992-047H | 401 | x | 19131 | x | 64·8 | |
| 21 | 1993-010G | 402 | x | 19130 | x | 64·8 | 1993-010H | 401 | x | 19131 | x | 64·8 | |
| 22 | 1994-021G | 405 | x | 19128 | x | 64·8 | 1994-021H | 399 | x | 19133 | x | 64·8 | |
| 23 | 1994-050G | 414 | x | 19119 | x | 64·9 | 1994-050H | 416 | x | 19118 | x | 64·8 | |
| 24 | 1994-076G | 418 | x | 19095 | x | 64·9 | 1994-076H | 410 | x | 19104 | x | 64·7 | |
| 25 | 1995-009G | 394 | x | 19136 | x | 64·8 | 1995-009H | 391 | x | 19137 | x | 64·8 | |
| 26 | 1995-037J | 413 | x | 19113 | x | 64·8 | 1995-037K | 413 | x | 19114 | x | 64·8 | |
| 27 | 1995-068G | 402 | x | 19120 | x | 64·8 | 1995-068H | 408 | x | 19115 | x | 64·8 | |
| 28 | 1998-077H | 395 | x | 19125 | x | 64·8 | 1998-077J | 394 | x | 19129 | x | 64·8 | |
| 29 | 2000-063G | 405 | x | 19124 | x | 64·7 | 2000-063H | 400 | x | 19118 | x | 64·8 | |
| 30 | 2001-053G | 385 | x | 19132 | x | 64·8 | 2001-053H | 385 | x | 19131 | x | 64·8 | |
| 31 | 2002-060E | 393 | x | 19133 | x | 64·8 | 2002-060F | 391 | x | 19135 | x | 64·7 | |
| 32 | | | | | | | | | | | | | Briz-M |
| 33 | 2004-053G | 397 | x | 19141 | x | 64·7 | 2004-053H | 397 | x | 19142 | x | 64·8 | |
| 34 | 2005-050E | 387 | x | 19141 | x | 64·8 | 2005-050F | 387 | x | 19140 | x | 64·9 | |
| 35 | 2006-062G | 416 | x | 19119 | x | 64·9 | 2006-062H | 412 | x | 19119 | x | 64·7 | |
| 36 | 2007-052F | 399 | x | 19130 | x | 64·8 | 2007-052G | 400 | x | 19130 | x | 64·9 | |
| 37 | 2007-065F | 401 | x | 19129 | x | 64·6 | 2007-065G | 401 | x | 19129 | x | 64·8 | |
| 38 | 2008-046G | 397 | x | 19143 | x | 64·8 | 2008-046H | 397 | x | 19144 | x | 64·7 | |
| 39 | 2008-067G | 464 | x | 19591 | x | 64·9 | 2008-067H | 398 | x | 19138 | x | 64·7 | |
| 41 | 2009-070E | 396 | x | 19139 | x | 64·8 | 2009-070F | 399 | x | 19133 | x | 64·7 | |
| 40 | 2010-007G | 398 | x | 19137 | x | 64·6 | 2010-007H | 400 | x | 19136 | x | 64·8 | |
| 42 | 2010-041G | | | | | | 2010-041H | | | | | | |
Thanks to Mr. McDowell
http://planet4589.org/space/log/satcat.txt
Now I know the mission number, I've been able to find the ID, so getting a hi-res image will be much, much easier! Thanks!
