Return stage methane rocket called Soyuz-LNG

15

The promising Russian "methane" middle-class rocket, which in the future should replace the Soyuz-2 carriers, received the working name Soyuz-LNG.

Why LNG? Yes, because this is liquefied natural gas - a new fuel for a methane engine

- explained the head of "Roskosmos" Dmitry Rogozin in an interview with the radio station "TVNZ".



The functionary also added that the new rocket will be reusable. The project “Wing-SV” is considered as a return stage.

The essence of the latter is that after the rocket reaches a predetermined height, the undocked first stage will be able to return to Earth due to the opening of the wing and the inclusion of jet engines. The first test flight of the Krylo-SV LV is due to take place by 2022.

According to Rogozin, if the “airplane” version is more effective than the return of the steps in the Falcon style, then it will be used on the promising Soyuz-LNG rocket.

It is worth noting that according to the presentation of Roskosmos, the launch of the future methane rocket will cost $ 5 million less than Soyuz-2.1b. In addition, the new medium carrier will have a lower launch weight, but it will be able to bring 10 tons more cargo to low Earth orbit than Soyuz-2.
15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Alien on this holiday of life
    Alien on this holiday of life
    -1
    April 20 2020 12: 06
    They would call it better Soyuz-OPG.
  2. boriz
    boriz
    0
    April 20 2020 13: 27
    In addition to new names and drop dead plans, can Rogozin tell anything really positive?
  3. Cyril
    Cyril
    +1
    April 20 2020 14: 04
    That is, Rogozin admits that reusable missiles are still more profitable than disposable? It will snow tomorrow.
    1. 123
      123
      +2
      April 20 2020 15: 32
      That is, Rogozin admits that reusable missiles are still more profitable than disposable?

      First, where?
      Secondly, he categorically denied this?
      Thirdly, the snow we have and so lies in the yard, Yes True, this is not the case. laughing Seriously, it’s not so easy to conclude the expediency of reusable missiles. A lot depends on the conditions, the number and mass of launched satellites, into which orbit. The conclusion is far from obvious, and the data for this is clearly not enough.
      1. Cyril
        Cyril
        -1
        April 20 2020 18: 40
        https://lenta.ru/news/2020/04/19/odnoraz/

        The conclusion is far from obvious, and the data for this is clearly not enough.

        That's enough, actually. Disposable transport (and a rocket is precisely transport) is, by definition, less profitable than reusable.
        1. 123
          123
          +1
          April 21 2020 19: 06
          That's enough, actually. Disposable transport (and a rocket is precisely transport) is, by definition, less profitable than reusable.

          These are such economic calculations?
          More beneficial is the fact that it delivers a specific cargo to the desired location with lower financial costs.
  4. Igor Pavlovich
    Igor Pavlovich
    0
    April 20 2020 14: 11
    The functionary also added that the new rocket will be reusable.

    - is Rogozin said ??? After his statements about trampolines, Americans with drills and Mask projects, he can be trusted 100% ...
  5. steelmaker
    steelmaker
    -1
    April 20 2020 14: 35
    Well, why copy the Mask? There were other projects.

    It is necessary to create your own. And let us copy!
    1. Cyril
      Cyril
      -1
      April 20 2020 15: 12
      Well, why copy the Mask?

      Development based on motivation "if only not like Musk" is doomed to failure from the very beginning.
    2. 123
      123
      +1
      April 20 2020 15: 56
      Well, why copy the Mask? There were other projects.

      It is necessary to create your own. And let us copy!

      They were not only there, they are, and not only with us.
      This is also a Soviet development:

      http://www.buran.ru/htm/41-3.htm
      "Baikal" has already been dealt with in Russia.

      https://russian.rt.com/russia/article/519583-rossiya-mnogorazovie-raketi

      There are other projects.

      https://up74.ru/articles/obshchestvo/114090/

      Americans are engaged in similar projects, except for Mask, there is a Rocket Lab and ULA, they are developing a parachute method of return, one company has an entire stage, the other only engines, they conducted tests with a prototype. The device, when descending by parachute, picked up a helicopter and landed. Boeing also dealt with the problem of reusable launches.
      In general, the matter is not only in the technical complexity of the task, the main thing is to make it economically viable. At first glance, everything is obvious, but in reality this is not entirely true. The implementation of the idea was repeatedly abandoned. Perhaps Mask succeeded, but I would like to see real data.
  6. mark1
    mark1
    0
    April 20 2020 15: 15
    10 tons more than Soyuz-2.

    Actually, not by 10, but by 10.
  7. shadow
    shadow
    0
    April 20 2020 19: 57
    Musk held several meetings in Moscow, including with representatives of the Lavochkin NGO and Cosmotras, the biography of businessman Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX and the search for a fantastic future, written by journalist Ashley Vance, excerpts from Bloomberg, is said. However, the negotiations ended to no avail, since the Russians did not take the businessman’s proposals seriously.
    In February 2002, Musk returned to Moscow with a briefcase full of dollars, intending to buy three missiles. At a meeting with Kosmotras representatives, he was named the price of $ 8 million per rocket. Musk offered the same amount for two. A refusal followed, and the entrepreneur left Moscow, confident that the Russians either did not want to deal with him, or they wanted to squeeze out of him as much as they could.
  8. shadow
    shadow
    +2
    April 20 2020 19: 58
    About the Mask.

  9. Alexander Semenov
    Alexander Semenov
    -2
    April 21 2020 15: 04
    It would be nice to recall the TU-154 on LNG, the development of the 80s. The guys, apparently, were very ill, began to look at the old archival drawings on tracing paper and saw another know-how from the USSR.
  10. monman
    monman
    -2
    April 21 2020 19: 12
    The project “Wing-SV” is considered as a return stage. The essence of the latter is that after a rocket reaches a predetermined height, the undocked first stage will be able to return to Earth due to the opening of the wing and the inclusion of jet engines.

    And now a little theory / fantasy. At Mask, the first steps return to:
    1) start place or
    2) landing in the ocean and then towing to the launch site.
    Rogozin - landing at the airport. Questions:
    - airfield in the launch area (very convenient);
    - the airfield is far from the launch site (after servicing / repair how to deliver to the assembly / launch site);
    - when landing on the airfield, landing gear and brake parachutes are needed (all of which complicates / increases the cost of construction and can offset the cheapness of re-launching. But on the other hand, the cheapness of labor can play a low launch cost).