Why does the country not need a flying rocket and an empty spaceport

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

"Angara", Vostochny - why does Roscosmos not fly and do not let expensive toys.

Russia has invested a lot in the development of the Angara launch vehicle and in the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome. In recent years, the media have repeatedly recalled these projects, either in loud promises, or in victorious reports, or in the context of scandals. Unfortunately, there was much less news about real achievements than bravura and revealing hype. One "Angara" carried out an orbital launch two and a half years ago, one "Soyuz" flew from Vostochny a year ago. And that's all.

Fresh news: it seems that even the new manned spacecraft "Federation", which, according to very recent plans, was preparing to fly on it to the Moon, will not be trusted "Angara".

Even a person who is far from astronautics understands that the rocket must fly, and the launch site must be launched. If both do not happen, then the matter is wrong. The question of what the state billions were spent on is repeated many times in the media, in blogs, and in the comments. Let's try to figure out why Roskosmos needs flightless and non-letting expensive toys.

This East Angara theme should be considered as a whole, since they are now closely related, although they began as completely independent projects. It is important to understand that the current situation was the result of the unpredictable development of events over the past 20 years, to which Roscosmos reacted. And do not forget that Roskosmos is not a human being, but a complex evolving structure, that practically none of those who made the decision to develop the Angara or build Vostochny now occupy those posts and do not influence today's decisions.

Angara

It is enough to look at the line of missiles at different times designed under the name "Angara" to understand the long development time. The history of this rocket is reminiscent of the famous padley BMP production video.

First, it was prepared for the Zenit launch pad, which was already at Baikonur and Plesetsk. Then they began to design their own. Wings were attached to the side accelerators to make them reusable even when Elon Musk was learning to send dollars by email. The concept of universal rocket modules is a promising topic that reduces production costs, and was subsequently implemented by a young American startup SpaceX. In general, the story of "Angara" is an example of what can happen if you give developers an unlimited budget, unlimited time frames and say "Create!" And they created a rocket with universal modules for economy, but with three different launching tables for each modification A3, A5, A7, which raises the cost of the entire complex to the skies.

The only thing that accompanied "Angara" throughout its entire life path was its uselessness. As a rocket, the Angara is not needed. And it was always unnecessary. "Angara" has always been used for any other purpose, except for the launch of spacecraft. For normal rocket operation, the existing missiles continued to be used: the capabilities of A1 are Dnepr, Rokot, Soyuz-U, A3 is Soyuz-2 and Zenit, A5 is Proton, A7 is such no.

There are no commercial prospects either - the rocket is twice as expensive as the Proton.

The "Angara" began to gather cooperation, ie. of all component manufacturers after the collapse of the USSR. Then, in order to load designers with work, feed them in the 90s, and not lose, in principle, the ability to develop missiles. Along the way, we have worked out all sorts of exotic winged options, because we can and give money. By the end of the work, the rocket acquired a propaganda value - Russian, environmentally friendly, its own. At the moment of the start of the heavy modification of the Angara A5, a new role emerged, which ultimately became the main one, defining today's fate - a political one.

The first orbital heavy launch of "Angara" was unique in the history of Russian cosmonautics - it was launched two days ahead of schedule. After many years of postponements, but two days earlier than the announced date. Exactly on the day when the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, paid a state visit to Russia.

Oriental

The decisive factor in the construction of Vostochny was that Baikonur is not ours. By the beginning of the 2010s, the basis of the Roscosmos strategy appeared - the guaranteed access of the Russian Federation to space from its territory.

Russia and Kazakhstan signed an agreement on Baikonur in 1994. Under the terms, Russia pledged to pay $ 115 million annually. At the time of the conclusion of the contract for the young Kazakh republic, this compensation seemed acceptable, but then the country's economy grew and the contribution of Baikonur seemed more and more insignificant. At the same time, the cosmodrome is a restless neighbor. The spent first stages of rockets are constantly falling from the sky. From time to time something bangs over the spaceport, spreading suspicious brown clouds. And the Kazakh public is worried after reading the article "unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine" on Wikipedia. Rumors like "after the Russian launches the weather is deteriorating" are circulating around the country. In general, Kazakhstan has reason to get more from the cosmodrome. You can put pressure on the prohibition to drop the steps, a prohibition on starting after an accident, or simply by unambiguous hints to terminate the contract.

Russian cosmonautics will not fly away on one Plesetsk without Baikonur. Key capabilities of Baikonur: Proton launch pads and Soyuz manned tables. But while the United States depends on the "Union" on this rocket, Kazakhstan did not dare to encroach, but "Proton" - like a thorn:

Poisonous - and no one cares about ecologists' reports that toxic fuel does not affect nature - it does not have time to reach the ground.

Commercial - in the 90-2000s "Proton" pulled from a third to a half of all commercial cosmonautics in the world, and each launch - for a little less money than Kazakhstan receives per cosmodrome per year.

Military - the independent achievement of a geostationary orbit opens up the possibility of constant radar and optical control of the territory of the whole world or selected regions.

In general, many would support Kazakhstan in its desire to shrink the Russian Proton.

And in this situation, Russia undertook to solve the problem. The solution may seem controversial, the classic flooding with money, but now it is already clear - it works. Carrot and stick tactics.

"The whip" and became "Angara" with Vostochny. By launching a heavy rocket from its territory and building a Far Eastern cosmodrome, Russia made it clear to Kazakhstan and the rest of the world that it has its own "amusement park", and it no longer hurts to put pressure on Proton.

The flight of the only Kazakh cosmonaut Aydin Aimbetov, and the development of the joint project of the Baiterek cosmodrome, became "gingerbread" in 2015. The project itself is more than ten years old, but it became more active after the Angara flight and launch from Vostochny, although the profitable Sunkar project became the decisive factor.

Now "Angara" has only one launch pad in Plesetsk. Created with funds from the Ministry of Defense in order to ensure Russia's access to space from its territory. But Plesetsk is the worst cosmodrome for launches into geostationary orbit - too much fuel is spent on changing the inclination of the orbit. On Vostochny, it was planned for a long time to build two launch sites for the "Angara A5" - one "cargo", the second - manned. In this configuration and with the modification to Angara A5B, it became possible to deliver the Russians to the Federation to the lunar orbit with two launches. Roscosmos held on to this potential opportunity at the moments of the toughest sequestration of the space budget. For the media, the formula was repeated about "ensuring the possibility of reaching the moon until 2030."

I wanted to believe. Just a couple of months ago, despite the chaos with defective engines, garbage in fuel lines and slamming doors by astronauts, the prospect of joint operation of the American lunar station by the end of the 1920s still seemed realistic. Orion and Federation docked at the station overlooking the moon. I would like to see this …

But the Ministry of Finance has arrived - there is no money for two tables under the "Angara", which means there is no flight to the Moon, and there are no manned launches.

Phoenix / Sunkar

The Soviet, and later Ukrainian, Zenit missile was quite successful for its time, and retained high indicators of economic and energy efficiency in the 21st century. In fact, it was the cheapest rocket for launching into geostationary orbit, although it was inferior in power and reliability to the Proton. She flew in the 90-2000s on commercial and government orders from Baikonur and from the SeaLaunch floating cosmodrome.

The Ukrainian rocket flew on the Russian RD-170 engine. The political conflict between Russia and Ukraine practically buried this project. But the success of Zenit and the revival of SeaLaunch under the auspices of the commercial company S7 prompted Roscosmos to work on the Russian rocket on the RD-170. RSC Energia's work on the Rus rocket was taken as a basis. This is how the Phoenix project was born. Kazakhstan gave money for this work, and a variant called "Sunkar" (Sokol) is being worked out for it. This rocket can be launched from the Zenit launch pads, i.e. significant capital costs are saved.

Quite recently, the head of Energia spoke about the possibility of placing the Federation spacecraft on the Phoenix, and today this is the only possible option. "Phoenix" is weaker than "Angara" therefore no Moon shines for our cosmonauts yet. But in the future, the Pyatiphenix can be assembled from five rockets, and this will already be a superheavy lunar rocket. Those. here the modular concept of the "Angara" is repeated, with the difference that each module is an independent rocket with a wide range of tasks, in contrast to the defective Angarsk URM. The American Falcon-9 rocket is developing with the same ideology. Whether it is easy to assemble three or five from one rocket is clearly seen on the example of the triple Falcon Heavy - the launch was promised in 2014, in the yard in 2017 and is promised by the fall. Let's see.

How sensible is the creation of a new rocket from scratch, when a similar "Angara" is practically ready? Is it possible to believe that "Phoenix" will not turn into an endless useless long-term construction, like "Angara"?

Believing is not worth anything, but you can hope, and here's why:

1) If Phoenix succeeds at the price of Zenit, then it will be three times cheaper than Angara A5, with comparable launch capabilities, if you start from the equator at SeaLaunch.

2) "Phoenix" is not developed by GKNPTs them. Khrunichev, and RSC Energia, which has established itself as a quality manufacturer of Soyuz spacecraft and other equipment. "Energia" was much less likely to be included in reports of corruption scandals; the salaries of workers at the enterprise were always practically the highest in the industry. Roscosmos simply does not have anything better than RSC Energia.

3) Launching tables for Zenit at Baikonur are already ready. SeaLaunch is ready to go to sea. By giving up the two launch pads of the Angara, one can save money for the development of the Phoenix, and there will still be a surrender for the lunar microsatellite.

4) There are private customers on "Phoenix". The same S7 is already ready to buy and start up.

5) Kazakhstan's participation is encouraging. Now Russian space projects are being successfully developed practically only in international programs. Much that is being done for oneself is infinitely long and with an unclear perspective. Much that is international - of high quality and on time, at least recently it was still so.

6) The project of the Kazakh-Russian cosmodrome "Baiterek" got off the ground only after Russia stopped trying to foist "Angara" on Kazakhstan and started talking about "Phoenix".

Well, and simple: "Phoenix" is needed. Provided that it will be cheaper than "Proton". Russia and the world market need it. In fact, this is a Russian Falcon-9, only without reusability, but with wings.

According to the latest news, for the next 10 years, the picture is as follows:

1) The outlined move of Baikonur to Vostochny is suspended.

2) Vostochny is a really good modern cosmodrome, its only problem is that as long as there is Baikonur, it is not needed. Therefore, from the Far East, only to maintain the potential, they will launch rare "Soyuz" with commercial or scientific loads of 5-6 launches in the best years.

3) On Vostochny, they build one launch pad under the "Angara" and launch some military satellite from there every two years, purely in order not to forget how to make a rocket and the table does not rust.

4) "Federation" flies in the mid-20s on "Phoenix" / "Sunkar" from Baikonur, and only around the Earth. Maybe he will still have time to drop by the ISS once.

5) Phoenix / Sunkar takes over most of Proton's potential commercial orders, and flies from Baikonur and SeaLaunch, there is no toxic missile or very little, part of the profit goes to the local treasury and Kazakhstan is happy.

6) Proton continues to fly from Baikonur to the stop, but rarely, while (and if) there is a government order and some heavy commercial satellites.

7) "Angara" is still not needed, and "stands on the side track", and if "Phoenix" shows itself well, then it will be closed altogether.

8) The production of "Proton" is moved from Moscow to Omsk, the rare "Angara" is made in the same place, on the site of the plant in the bend of the Moskva River in Fili a residential complex "Kosmos" appears.

In this whole picture, the most sad role of "TsiKh" - the Khrunichev State Scientific and Practical Research Center. The once powerful production and scientific and technical center in the center of Moscow, which built satellites, rockets and space stations, is going through a long crisis, reorganization and scandals, is losing all opportunities to lobby for its interests, so all the changes that are taking place in Roscosmos are in the hands of a direct competitor - RKK " Energy".

It is important to understand that there are no good or bad in this story, everyone is trying to resist the coincidence of circumstances with the maximum benefit for themselves. Everything that has happened to Roscosmos since 1991 is the result of the Soviet legacy. I have already paid attention to the fact that Roskosmos received a colossal industrial potential from the USSR, which is now working well if at 30% capacity. And all that the department has been doing for 25 years is not to lose the “bag, picture, basket, cardboard box, and a little dog,” and we want Roscosmos to sprint with all this stuff. In difficult years, the work was on commercial orders and the Americans helped with their "international" station, but now they have lost both commercial orders and the prospects for international cooperation with former partners, and their own money is not enough.

The only hope for the industry to return to the “golden age”, as in the 80s, is oil at $ 150. No other factors will help. It was with this understanding that the reform began a couple of years ago. Therefore, all that Roscosmos is doing in a state of reform and budget cuts is reorganization, optimization, mergers and acquisitions, shrinkage and shrinkage, so that little will seem to anyone.

In general, I have a feeling that the super-heavy rocket and the Russians on the Moon will be awarded Roscosmos a prize for the successful reform. If it turns out to create an efficient and compact industry that meets the needs of the state in near-Earth space and competes in the world market, then it will receive an appetizing order for the moon. And if not, well, it means she didn’t.

And do not cry for "Angara", it came and went for good reason.