About patriotism and realism
There are two opinions about today's Russian cosmonautics in the Russian-language Internet: “we are the first in space” and “we are the last in space”.
Everything is clear enough with the “last”: if you don’t be interested in astronautics, and form a superficial glance from viewing popular media, then you will see pictures of exploding rockets and corruption scandals. For example, last year's fall of “Proton” eclipsed, in the information field, the remaining three dozen successful launches. The same goes for inflating the news of corruption in Roscosmos. Of course, it exists, but, despite it, the industry works and develops, although not as quickly as we would like.
')
Today I wanted to talk about "we are ahead of the rest." Quite objective indicators: the leading position in the world market of space launches, the consistently reliable provision of the manned ISS program, the export of rocket engines, rockets and upper stages, allow Russia to be on the list of the world's leading space powers. But those who are aware of these facts, hit the opposite extreme - they believe that Roskosmos occupies the top step of the space pedestal.
For those who are so mistaken, I will provide simple facts that do not fit in with the title of leader:
First: Russia does not have a single spacecraft operating outside the Earth orbit. Secondly: for all the time of its existence, the Russian Federation made only two attempts to conquer the interplanetary space, and both ended in the Pacific Ocean. According to the interplanetary program, even China and India bypass Russia. Thirdly: Russia occupies 2-3% of the total global market for space services (if you count it with launches). Fourthly: 75% of electronic components in Russian spacecraft are of foreign manufacture (mainly the USA and Europe). Fifthly, one of the longest-lived domestic devices - Resource-DK - exchanged only for the eighth year, which, compared to Voyager, is just a mockery.
For clarity, you can take a look at this infographic compiled in Vostaktet space community:
Large size .
It is obsolete for a year, but for 2013, the devices of the USA (LADEE, MAVEN), India (Mars Orbiter mission), Europe ( Gaia ) and two China (Chang'e-3 and Yutu) were added. In drawing up the scheme, it was necessary to add rockets in the sidebar to the right so that Russia could recall the occasion — some European vehicles were being output by our rockets. The “Fregat” overclocking units next to Venus and Mars are now Russia 's most distant products in space. Of course they are not active and in fact are man-made asteroids.
But today I want to talk in more detail about one favorite topic of Urapatriots - about Russian engines, without which American missiles are supposedly not flying. In the current political situation, contradictions between the countries have again become aggravated, the word “sanctions” has become fashionable, and the curtailment of Russian-American space cooperation has been talked about not only on the Internet, but also on the US Senate and the Security Council of the Russian Federation.
A new wave of noise rose when the Americans announced that they had stopped supplying their electronic components to the Russian military satellites. Immediately in the minds of the “patriots”, thoughts of a “symmetrical response” arose, which turned into chatter: “we will stop supplying our rocket engines, we will not carry the Americans to the ISS, and NASA will immediately bend”.
Let us deal with the validity of such arguments.
Today, two Russian enterprises supply engines for the American space program. These are the Khimki NPO "Energomash" with the RD-180 , and the Samara STC. N.D. Kuznetsova with NK-33 . The first engine is the RD-170, which was created for the Energiya-Buran program, the most powerful rocket engine in history. The second - the engine created for the Soviet lunar manned rocket “H1” - is still the best, in the ratio of weight / thrust.
To check how much the US space program depends on Russian engines, it is enough to compare the main workhorses of the American space. For this, I prepared a visual scheme with medium and heavy rockets, which are now serving NASA and the Pentagon. Scale of images is not met, listing in ascending order, from light to heavy.
As you can see, only the lightest (of the medium ones) and the heaviest rocket depend on Russian engines. Therefore, the termination of their deliveries will not cause significant harm to overseas cosmonautics, but will deprive Russian enterprises of substantial income. For example, 1 NK-33 is worth 1-1.5 million dollars. For each start Antares they need two pieces. Largely due to the American space program, Samara is resuming the production of these engines, although Orbital Sciences initially counted only on those units that have been stored “in oil” since the lunar race.
RD-180 is ten times more expensive, and in general now fully loads the power of “Energomash”. These engines are so good that because of them Orbital Sciences sued the United Launch Alliance, accusing the latter of monopolism. The reason for such a passion for Khimki products was best expressed by the Chief Executive Officer of the United Launch Alliance, Michael Gass: “ In Russia, they did what our textbooks say:“ This is impossible ”.” But here we are talking about the price / quality / efficiency ratio, and not about the fact that there are no rocket engines left in the USA.
Suppose Russia stops supplying engines, well, our “patriots” will be happy for fifteen minutes, and will forget. And then the money of NASA and the Pentagon will go to the American economy, to more expensive, but their engines, and to develop new ones. Now, they go into the Russian economy, support and develop our industry.
Moreover, the termination of the export of engines for ULA and Orbital Sciences will play into the hands of their competitor - the company SpaceX, which recently broke into the market of space launches, and intends to reduce Roscosmos’s share on it. That is, having stopped supplying engines, Russia manages to kick itself twice.
In general, cooperation in space over the past two decades is perhaps one of the best and effective examples of the joint work of the United States and Russia, since the days of the Anti-Hitler Coalition. They pay for engines, for flights of their astronauts into orbit, install our scientific instruments for their research facilities on Mars and the Moon for free, study the Universe together in the Radioastron project ... Therefore, to destroy such interaction for the sake of the political situation would be a big mistake Whatever kvass, nesting dolls and balalaika lovers want.
Everything is clear enough with the “last”: if you don’t be interested in astronautics, and form a superficial glance from viewing popular media, then you will see pictures of exploding rockets and corruption scandals. For example, last year's fall of “Proton” eclipsed, in the information field, the remaining three dozen successful launches. The same goes for inflating the news of corruption in Roscosmos. Of course, it exists, but, despite it, the industry works and develops, although not as quickly as we would like.
')
Today I wanted to talk about "we are ahead of the rest." Quite objective indicators: the leading position in the world market of space launches, the consistently reliable provision of the manned ISS program, the export of rocket engines, rockets and upper stages, allow Russia to be on the list of the world's leading space powers. But those who are aware of these facts, hit the opposite extreme - they believe that Roskosmos occupies the top step of the space pedestal.
For those who are so mistaken, I will provide simple facts that do not fit in with the title of leader:
First: Russia does not have a single spacecraft operating outside the Earth orbit. Secondly: for all the time of its existence, the Russian Federation made only two attempts to conquer the interplanetary space, and both ended in the Pacific Ocean. According to the interplanetary program, even China and India bypass Russia. Thirdly: Russia occupies 2-3% of the total global market for space services (if you count it with launches). Fourthly: 75% of electronic components in Russian spacecraft are of foreign manufacture (mainly the USA and Europe). Fifthly, one of the longest-lived domestic devices - Resource-DK - exchanged only for the eighth year, which, compared to Voyager, is just a mockery.
For clarity, you can take a look at this infographic compiled in Vostaktet space community:
Large size .
It is obsolete for a year, but for 2013, the devices of the USA (LADEE, MAVEN), India (Mars Orbiter mission), Europe ( Gaia ) and two China (Chang'e-3 and Yutu) were added. In drawing up the scheme, it was necessary to add rockets in the sidebar to the right so that Russia could recall the occasion — some European vehicles were being output by our rockets. The “Fregat” overclocking units next to Venus and Mars are now Russia 's most distant products in space. Of course they are not active and in fact are man-made asteroids.
But today I want to talk in more detail about one favorite topic of Urapatriots - about Russian engines, without which American missiles are supposedly not flying. In the current political situation, contradictions between the countries have again become aggravated, the word “sanctions” has become fashionable, and the curtailment of Russian-American space cooperation has been talked about not only on the Internet, but also on the US Senate and the Security Council of the Russian Federation.
A new wave of noise rose when the Americans announced that they had stopped supplying their electronic components to the Russian military satellites. Immediately in the minds of the “patriots”, thoughts of a “symmetrical response” arose, which turned into chatter: “we will stop supplying our rocket engines, we will not carry the Americans to the ISS, and NASA will immediately bend”.
Let us deal with the validity of such arguments.
Today, two Russian enterprises supply engines for the American space program. These are the Khimki NPO "Energomash" with the RD-180 , and the Samara STC. N.D. Kuznetsova with NK-33 . The first engine is the RD-170, which was created for the Energiya-Buran program, the most powerful rocket engine in history. The second - the engine created for the Soviet lunar manned rocket “H1” - is still the best, in the ratio of weight / thrust.
To check how much the US space program depends on Russian engines, it is enough to compare the main workhorses of the American space. For this, I prepared a visual scheme with medium and heavy rockets, which are now serving NASA and the Pentagon. Scale of images is not met, listing in ascending order, from light to heavy.
As you can see, only the lightest (of the medium ones) and the heaviest rocket depend on Russian engines. Therefore, the termination of their deliveries will not cause significant harm to overseas cosmonautics, but will deprive Russian enterprises of substantial income. For example, 1 NK-33 is worth 1-1.5 million dollars. For each start Antares they need two pieces. Largely due to the American space program, Samara is resuming the production of these engines, although Orbital Sciences initially counted only on those units that have been stored “in oil” since the lunar race.
RD-180 is ten times more expensive, and in general now fully loads the power of “Energomash”. These engines are so good that because of them Orbital Sciences sued the United Launch Alliance, accusing the latter of monopolism. The reason for such a passion for Khimki products was best expressed by the Chief Executive Officer of the United Launch Alliance, Michael Gass: “ In Russia, they did what our textbooks say:“ This is impossible ”.” But here we are talking about the price / quality / efficiency ratio, and not about the fact that there are no rocket engines left in the USA.
Suppose Russia stops supplying engines, well, our “patriots” will be happy for fifteen minutes, and will forget. And then the money of NASA and the Pentagon will go to the American economy, to more expensive, but their engines, and to develop new ones. Now, they go into the Russian economy, support and develop our industry.
Moreover, the termination of the export of engines for ULA and Orbital Sciences will play into the hands of their competitor - the company SpaceX, which recently broke into the market of space launches, and intends to reduce Roscosmos’s share on it. That is, having stopped supplying engines, Russia manages to kick itself twice.
In general, cooperation in space over the past two decades is perhaps one of the best and effective examples of the joint work of the United States and Russia, since the days of the Anti-Hitler Coalition. They pay for engines, for flights of their astronauts into orbit, install our scientific instruments for their research facilities on Mars and the Moon for free, study the Universe together in the Radioastron project ... Therefore, to destroy such interaction for the sake of the political situation would be a big mistake Whatever kvass, nesting dolls and balalaika lovers want.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/216695/
All Articles