-
#860
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 11 Aug, 2014 17:06
-
This is a question about the launch processing of the Soyuz rocket (or the Semyorka):
Earlier this month 2 launches of the Soyuz were done from the same pad in the span of less than 10 days (Meteor-M #2 on July 8 and Foton-M #4 on July 18, both from pad 31/6 at Baikonur, with the later being a unique launch that requires the rocket rolling out just 1 day before launch due to last-minute load of biological experiments!), something that even the R-7 hasn't done for quite some time. My questions are:
1. How much maintenance is needed for the Soyuz pads between launches?
2. Can a same pad support a 10-day turnaround between 2 launch operations for more than a few launches if necessary?
3. Are there any configuration changes required at the pads between different R-7 variants flying today (of course the new Soyuz-2.1v would need some changes, but what about between a Soyuz-2 and a Soyuz-U? What about the Molniya-M when it used to fly?)
4. In theory, how many launch operations can the different Soyuz pads (at Baikonur, Plesetsk and at Kourou, as well as at Vostochny in the next year or 2) support today in one calender year?
I must say that I am impressed at the launch pace the R-7 can support even in 2014, especially considering that I heard the launch processing of the Soyuz rocket requires quite a bit of manual operations and unique procedures for rockets worldwide (e.g. using hydrogen peroxide for powering engine turbopumps)! A certain SoCal aerospace company might be able to learn from the engineers of Samara.... 
Bumping this since I really want to know how on Earth the pad turn-around is so quick!? I mean look at SpaceX trying to get a 3 week turn-around and it looks like the limit isn't very far from that......
-
#861
by
Danderman
on 12 Aug, 2014 03:16
-
Remember that R-7 was designed to fly frequently from a single pad at Baikonur, and was conceived at a time when missiles flew frequently from a handful of pads around the world.
Long pad times are a US invention.
-
#862
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 12 Aug, 2014 05:02
-
Remember that R-7 was designed to fly frequently from a single pad at Baikonur, and was conceived at a time when missiles flew frequently from a handful of pads around the world.
Long pad times are a US invention.
....but how much of the original R-7 design still lives on in, say, the Soyuz-2 series? You can't use the Soyuz-2 as an ICBM after all.....
-
#863
by
Danderman
on 12 Aug, 2014 20:09
-
Remember that R-7 was designed to fly frequently from a single pad at Baikonur, and was conceived at a time when missiles flew frequently from a handful of pads around the world.
Long pad times are a US invention.
....but how much of the original R-7 design still lives on in, say, the Soyuz-2 series? You can't use the Soyuz-2 as an ICBM after all.....
To be specific, the core Soyuz 2.1a stage, as an example, is quite similar to the Sputnik R-7 stage. The engines are slightly different, and the avionics are digital, but other than that ........
-
#864
by
markododa
on 13 Aug, 2014 20:03
-
Is the Proton LV erected on the launch pad fully fueled?
-
#865
by
anik
on 13 Aug, 2014 20:18
-
Is the Proton LV erected on the launch pad fully fueled?
No, only spacecraft and upper stage fueled (Briz-M - fully, DM - partially).
-
#866
by
Stan Black
on 01 Oct, 2014 13:03
-
Kosmos-2382 GLONASS number 711 is a bit of an oddity. It was the only GLONASS with 5 years of resource; but it was not a 14F113 GLONASS-M.
http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/pdf/sap/2004/vienna/presentations/wednesday/pm/revnivyk.pdf
http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/pdf/sap/2006/zambia/presentations/02-03.pdf
Looking back at some older articles from 1998 there are references to GLONASS M1 and GLONASS M2.
News from Moscow No. 41/98
For GLONASS they have already implemented a small improvement to extend the life from 3 to 5 years. This modification is named GLONASS M1 to be still hermetically sealed. For GLONASS M2 they propose a new platform with the life extended to 7 to 10 years and decreased overall weight.
…
PM-4.1 Satellite Bus
Applications
Navigation and geodetic satellites on
circular inclined orbits.
Characteristics
Orbit: 1000 to 20000 km, circular
Bus weight: 1180 kg
Payload weight: 340 kg
Bus power supply: 1590 W
Payload consumption: 1100 W
Orbital life: 7-10 years
Launcher: clustered launches on Proton with Breeze upper stage (Baikonur); single launches on Soyuz 2 with Fregat upper stage (Plesetsk)
Project: GLONASS-M (2000); Tsykada-M-UTTKh (2001); GEO-IK-2 (2002)
December 1998
Also included is an accurate picture of what the GLONASS-M did turn out.
News from Moscow No. 1/99
Speaking of the future GLONASS launches, Mr. Milov said that build and assembly of the first GLONASS M satellite were not yet complete, so two options are looked at now for the next GLONASS launch: either three standard GLONASS satellites or two standard
GLONASS + one GLONASS M1.
Mr. Milov, deputy director of the Russian Space Agency
January 1999
The next launch did not occur until October 2000.
14F17 is associated with Kosmos-2382; but the following article just seems to confuse things.
http://lnfm1.sai.msu.ru/~turyshev/material/Shargorodsky-laser-ranging-1uas-2007.pdf
| Тип КА | Высота орб. км | Год запуска | Кол. КА | Кол. СВ на КА | Размер системы ретрорефлт.,мм |
| ГЛОНАСС-М (Россия) | 19 100 | 2000 | 1 | 132 | ∅1660-∅2380 |
| ГЛОНАСС 14Ф17 | 19 100 | 2002 | 1 | 124 | 804х804(крест. зона) |
| ГЛОНАСС М2 | 19 100 | 2003 | 1 | 112 | ∅1510-∅2311 |
| ГЛОНАСС | 19 100 | 2003 | 2 | 132 | ∅1660-∅2380 |
Another way to refer to GLONASS-K1 is GLONASS-K block I; and GLONASS-K2 as GLONASS-K block II. It sounds like the first K2 will be satellite number 13.
http://www.iss-reshetnev.com/images/File/magazin/2010/m11-screen_en.pdf
The 11F654 Uragan GLONASS satellites also underwent several iterations starting with block I (1413, 1490, 1491, 1519, 1520, 1554, 1555, 1593, 1594, 1650), IIA (Kosmos 1651, 1710, 1711, 1778, 1779, 1780, 1987, 2022, 2023), block IIB (Kosmos 1838, 1839, 1840, 1883, 1884, 1885, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1946, 1947, 1948) and then block IIV (I’m working off some scribbled notes so I might have made a mistake with those numbers).
Further information about the 14Ф17
http://www.kik-sssr.ru/Navigation__history_NPO_PM.htm
-
#867
by
TakeOff
on 19 Oct, 2014 13:14
-
-
#868
by
CardBoardBoxProcessor
on 21 Oct, 2014 19:14
-
Does anyone know the core Diameter of the Angara 1st and 2nd stages?
OR where images of RD-175 can be found?
-
#869
by
Danderman
on 23 Oct, 2014 14:14
-
-
#870
by
Danderman
on 23 Oct, 2014 14:16
-
Question of the day:
In Russia, it is not uncommon for some workers to be put on 24 hour shifts, ie they come to work twice a week, but for 24 hours at a time.
Does this practice extend to aerospace industry? I don't know if trains service places like Korolyev on a 24 hour basis, so it doesn't seem likely to me.
-
#871
by
manboy
on 02 Jan, 2015 22:53
-
Does Strela use hydraulics to extend and unextend?
-
#872
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 03 Jan, 2015 08:40
-
Does Strela use hydraulics to extend and unextend?
No. Electric engines.
-
#873
by
manboy
on 03 Jan, 2015 09:56
-
Does Strela use hydraulics to extend and unextend?
No. Electric engines.
Can you be more specific?
-
#874
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 03 Jan, 2015 14:11
-
Can you be more specific?
No, I can't
-
#875
by
CardBoardBoxProcessor
on 15 Jan, 2015 14:32
-
-
#876
by
JWag
on 17 Jan, 2015 11:58
-
I had just recently learned that as well. Here's another source:
http://russianspaceweb.com/soyuz_lv_stage3.htmlAfter the third stage separates from the second stage, the aft section also separates from the third stage and splits into three segments.
-
#877
by
Stan Black
on 17 Jan, 2015 13:36
-
-
#878
by
CardBoardBoxProcessor
on 17 Jan, 2015 20:06
-
Neet
so I guess it splits into 3 sections. and my goodness that booster sep is nutty.
-
#879
by
Stan Black
on 17 Jan, 2015 21:11
-
Neet so I guess it splits into 3 sections. and my goodness that booster sep is nutty.
Soyuz has several unique features. Notice how the 1st stage boosters separate; they pivot upwards, remain attached at the top before tumbling away with the oxygen tanks venting to propel them. Also that burst as the payload separates from the third stage, once again an oxygen tank vent opens to push the third stage free.
For Proton there is a similar type of open lattice structure between its first and second stages, but it appears that the cylinder surrounding the second stage engines remains attached to the first stage. This is similar to the Long March rockets.
so I guess it splits into 3 sections. and my goodness that booster sep is nutty.