1468
About patriotism and realism
On today's Russian space program in the Russian language Internet, there are two opinions: "We are the first in space" and "we are in space last".
With the "last" all clear enough: if not interested in astronautics, and a cursory glance view popular form of media, then get up before my eyes the picture of exploding rockets and corruption scandals. For example, last year's drop the "Proton" eclipsed, in the information field, the other three dozen successful launches. The same applies to the inflation news about corruption in the Russian Space Agency. It certainly is, but, despite it, the industry is working and evolving, though not as quickly as we would like.
Today I wanted to talk about "we are ahead of the rest." Quite objective indicators: leading position in the global market of space launches, stable reliable supply manned ISS program, export of rocket engines, missiles and boosters allow Russia to be in the list of leading world space powers. But those who are aware of these facts, bang in the opposite extreme - believe that Roscosmos took the top step of the podium of space.
Those who are so deluded, give simple facts that do not tally with the title of the leader:
First, Russia has no no of the current spacecraft beyond Earth orbit. Secondly, for all time of its existence the Russian Federation has taken only two attempts conquest of interplanetary space, and both ended in the Pacific. According to the program of Russian interplanetary bypass even China and India. Thirdly, on the general global market space Russian takes 2-3% ( if it starts to count). Fourth: 75% Electronic components in the Russian spacecraft - иностранного production (mainly the US and Europe). Fifth, one of the most long-lived of domestic vehicles - "Resource-DK» - exchanged only the eighth year that, compared with the Voyager, just mockery.
For clarity, you can look here this infographic, compiled in the community Deep Space Vkontakte:
Large size .
It is obsolete for a year, but for 2013 were added the US units (LADEE, MAVEN), India (Mars Orbiter mission), Europe ( Gaia a >) and two in China (Chang'e-3 and Yutu). In preparing the plan had in the sidebar to the right to add missiles to Russia was an occasion to remember - some European unit outputs our missiles. Booster unit "Frigate" next to Venus and Mars are now most distant Russian products in space. Of course they are not active and are actually a man-made asteroids.
But today I want to talk more about a favorite subject urapatriotov - on Russian engines, without which allegedly do not fly the American missiles. In the current political situation over the contradictions between the two countries, it has become fashionable word "sanctions" and to curtail the US-Russian space cooperation started talking not only the Internet, but the US Senate and the Security Council of the Russian Federation.
New wave noise rose when Americans said the termination of deliveries of its electronic components for Russian military satellites. Here in the minds of the "patriots" having second thoughts about the "symmetrical response" that resulted in the chatter: "stop supplying its rocket engines, will not carry Americans to the ISS, and NASA will be bent at once".
Get familiar with the validity of such arguments.
Today, two Russian companies supply engines for the US space program. This Khimkinskoye NGO "Energomash" with RD-180 , and Samara NTC them. ND Kuznetsova with NK-33 . The first engine - a "opolovineny" RD-170, which was created for the program "Energy-Buran" - the most powerful rocket in history. Second - the engine created for the Soviet manned lunar rocket "H1" - still the best, in the ratio of weight / traction.
To check how much the US space program depends on Russian engines, it suffices to compare the main "workhorse" of the American space. For this, I have prepared a visual diagram with medium and heavy missiles that now serve NASA and the Pentagon. Zoom is not met, the transfer of ascending, from light to heavy.
As we can see, only the lightest (from the middle), and the heaviest rocket depend on Russian engines. Therefore the termination of their supply will not cause significant harm transatlantic aerospace, but would deprive the Russian enterprises substantial income. For example 1, NK-33 stands 1-1, 5 million. Dollars. For each start Antares they need two pieces. Largely thanks to the American space program in Samara resume production of these engines, although initially the company Orbital Sciences rely only on those units that are stored "in oil" from the time of the lunar race.
RD-180 is worth ten times more expensive, and generally now fully loads the power "Energomash". These engines are so good that because of them Orbital Sciences sued the United Launch Alliance, accusing the latter of monopoly. The reason for such a passion for the products Khimki best выразил CEO of United Launch Alliance, Michael Gass: " In Russia did what our textbooks say," That's impossible " i>". But here we are talking about the price / quality / efficiency, not that the US does not remain rocket engines.
Say stop Russian supplies of engines, well rejoice in our "patriots" Fifteen minutes, and forget. And then the money will go to NASA and the Pentagon in the US economy on a more expensive, but their engines, and to develop new ones. Now, they go into the Russian economy, maintain and develop our industry.
Moreover, the cessation of exports of engines for ULA and Orbital Sciences will play into the hands of their competitors - the company SpaceX, which recently broke into the market of space launches, and intends to reduce its share to Roscosmos. That is to stop supplying engines, Russia manages to kick myself twice.
Generally cooperation in space the past two decades - perhaps one of the best examples of effective and collaborative US and Russia since the time of the anti-Hitler coalition. They pay for engines for flying its astronauts into orbit, set free our scientific instruments on their research vehicles on Mars and the Moon, together study the universe in the project " Radioastron "... why ruin such interaction in favor of the political situation, it would be a big mistake, as it would not want fans kvass, dolls and balalaika.
Source: habrahabr.ru/post/216695/
With the "last" all clear enough: if not interested in astronautics, and a cursory glance view popular form of media, then get up before my eyes the picture of exploding rockets and corruption scandals. For example, last year's drop the "Proton" eclipsed, in the information field, the other three dozen successful launches. The same applies to the inflation news about corruption in the Russian Space Agency. It certainly is, but, despite it, the industry is working and evolving, though not as quickly as we would like.
Today I wanted to talk about "we are ahead of the rest." Quite objective indicators: leading position in the global market of space launches, stable reliable supply manned ISS program, export of rocket engines, missiles and boosters allow Russia to be in the list of leading world space powers. But those who are aware of these facts, bang in the opposite extreme - believe that Roscosmos took the top step of the podium of space.
Those who are so deluded, give simple facts that do not tally with the title of the leader:
First, Russia has no no of the current spacecraft beyond Earth orbit. Secondly, for all time of its existence the Russian Federation has taken only two attempts conquest of interplanetary space, and both ended in the Pacific. According to the program of Russian interplanetary bypass even China and India. Thirdly, on the general global market space Russian takes 2-3% ( if it starts to count). Fourth: 75% Electronic components in the Russian spacecraft - иностранного production (mainly the US and Europe). Fifth, one of the most long-lived of domestic vehicles - "Resource-DK» - exchanged only the eighth year that, compared with the Voyager, just mockery.
For clarity, you can look here this infographic, compiled in the community Deep Space Vkontakte:
Large size .
It is obsolete for a year, but for 2013 were added the US units (LADEE, MAVEN), India (Mars Orbiter mission), Europe ( Gaia a >) and two in China (Chang'e-3 and Yutu). In preparing the plan had in the sidebar to the right to add missiles to Russia was an occasion to remember - some European unit outputs our missiles. Booster unit "Frigate" next to Venus and Mars are now most distant Russian products in space. Of course they are not active and are actually a man-made asteroids.
But today I want to talk more about a favorite subject urapatriotov - on Russian engines, without which allegedly do not fly the American missiles. In the current political situation over the contradictions between the two countries, it has become fashionable word "sanctions" and to curtail the US-Russian space cooperation started talking not only the Internet, but the US Senate and the Security Council of the Russian Federation.
New wave noise rose when Americans said the termination of deliveries of its electronic components for Russian military satellites. Here in the minds of the "patriots" having second thoughts about the "symmetrical response" that resulted in the chatter: "stop supplying its rocket engines, will not carry Americans to the ISS, and NASA will be bent at once".
Get familiar with the validity of such arguments.
Today, two Russian companies supply engines for the US space program. This Khimkinskoye NGO "Energomash" with RD-180 , and Samara NTC them. ND Kuznetsova with NK-33 . The first engine - a "opolovineny" RD-170, which was created for the program "Energy-Buran" - the most powerful rocket in history. Second - the engine created for the Soviet manned lunar rocket "H1" - still the best, in the ratio of weight / traction.
To check how much the US space program depends on Russian engines, it suffices to compare the main "workhorse" of the American space. For this, I have prepared a visual diagram with medium and heavy missiles that now serve NASA and the Pentagon. Zoom is not met, the transfer of ascending, from light to heavy.
As we can see, only the lightest (from the middle), and the heaviest rocket depend on Russian engines. Therefore the termination of their supply will not cause significant harm transatlantic aerospace, but would deprive the Russian enterprises substantial income. For example 1, NK-33 stands 1-1, 5 million. Dollars. For each start Antares they need two pieces. Largely thanks to the American space program in Samara resume production of these engines, although initially the company Orbital Sciences rely only on those units that are stored "in oil" from the time of the lunar race.
RD-180 is worth ten times more expensive, and generally now fully loads the power "Energomash". These engines are so good that because of them Orbital Sciences sued the United Launch Alliance, accusing the latter of monopoly. The reason for such a passion for the products Khimki best выразил CEO of United Launch Alliance, Michael Gass: " In Russia did what our textbooks say," That's impossible " i>". But here we are talking about the price / quality / efficiency, not that the US does not remain rocket engines.
Say stop Russian supplies of engines, well rejoice in our "patriots" Fifteen minutes, and forget. And then the money will go to NASA and the Pentagon in the US economy on a more expensive, but their engines, and to develop new ones. Now, they go into the Russian economy, maintain and develop our industry.
Moreover, the cessation of exports of engines for ULA and Orbital Sciences will play into the hands of their competitors - the company SpaceX, which recently broke into the market of space launches, and intends to reduce its share to Roscosmos. That is to stop supplying engines, Russia manages to kick myself twice.
Generally cooperation in space the past two decades - perhaps one of the best examples of effective and collaborative US and Russia since the time of the anti-Hitler coalition. They pay for engines for flying its astronauts into orbit, set free our scientific instruments on their research vehicles on Mars and the Moon, together study the universe in the project " Radioastron "... why ruin such interaction in favor of the political situation, it would be a big mistake, as it would not want fans kvass, dolls and balalaika.
Source: habrahabr.ru/post/216695/
