Angara launch: Russia returned to the club of heavy missile manufacturers


The day before, a significant event for the national cosmonautics took place. The launch vehicle (LV) of the heavy class "Angara-A5" was successfully launched into orbit for the second time, which caused genuine delight from the head of "Roscosmos" Dmitry Rogozin. What explains his such an emotional reaction?


In his Twitter account, Dmitry Olegovich, with clearly pleasant surprise, as if winning a box of expensive cognac on a bet, wrote the following:

She's flying, damn it !!!

The official's joy after a series of scandals and troubles around the state corporation he heads can be understood. I would very much like to hope that an ordinary, in general, event will complete the black line at Roscosmos and become the beginning of the white one. What opportunities are now opening up for the national cosmonautics?

At first, Russia is closing the hole that formed after the cessation of production of "Protons". The old Soviet launch vehicles were reliable workhorses, but their main problem was the use of toxic heptyl as fuel. Kazakh friends issued astronomical bills for any accident that polluted their territory. As a result, a fundamental decision was made to transfer the infrastructure to Russia, as well as to stop the production of engines for Protons. By 2025, our country could be left without heavy launch vehicles at all.

The Angara missile family was created to replace them. Instead of toxic fuel, they use the environmentally friendly oxygen-kerosene vapor. The launch vehicles themselves are modular and are designed to replace those previously created in all main classes: Angara-A5 - Proton-M, Angara-A3 - Ukrainian Zenit, Angara-1.2 - Cyclone-2/3 and "Cosmos-3M". At the same time "Angara-A5" surpasses its predecessor in terms of carrying capacity. Now she needs to start flying actively, two successful launches are clearly not enough. They must pass from six to ten in order to reliably provide the rocket with orders. The first client will be the RF Ministry of Defense, which needs to launch reconnaissance, navigation and surveillance satellites into geostationary orbit.

Secondly, a heavy launch vehicle can be used to create a national orbital station to replace the drowned Mir. The ISS was in many ways a political project that recorded the collapse of the bipolar system and the hegemony of the United States, and it has almost served its purpose. Currently, the Americans are promoting the project of a lunar station, the Chinese are promoting their own orbital station. Russia alone runs the risk of being left with nothing, or joining other people's projects in secondary or even third roles. Roscosmos simply cannot create Mir-2 without its own heavy-class launch vehicle.

Third, "Angara-A5" can theoretically be used in the exploration of the moon and deep space. The United States has heavy Falcon-9 and Delta-IV Heavy for these purposes, and a super-heavy carrier SLS is on the way, which will be able to deliver from 95 to 130 tons of payload to the reference orbit. China has a heavy launch vehicle Changzheng-5, which can launch up to 25 tons into orbit, and is also designing a super-heavy Changzheng-9, which will be capable of delivering 133 tons to the reference orbit and up to 50 tons to the geostationary one. The capabilities of "Angara-A5" to reach the Moon in comparison with competitors are still clearly not enough, the carrier rocket can put 24,5 tons into low-earth orbit.

First, it will be necessary to create a version of the Angara-A5V with a cryogenic booster, to bring the Orel spacecraft to mind, and also to prepare launch pads at the Vostochny cosmodrome. The Russian manned lunar mission itself, due to limitations on the power of the launch vehicle, will be four-launch. However, taking into account the sequestration of the Roscosmos budget, this is a completely distant story.

In conclusion, I would like to note that it is useless for the head of the state corporation to publicly marvel at the fact that something else is flying in the economy entrusted to him. This beats the reputation of Roscosmos, if Dmitry Olegovich himself does not understand this.
  • Author:
  • Photos used: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Ad
We are open to cooperation with authors in the news and analytical departments. A prerequisite is the ability to quickly analyze the text and check the facts, to write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. We offer flexible working hours and regular payments. Please send your responses with examples of work to [email protected]
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ODRAP Offline ODRAP
    ODRAP (Alexey) 15 December 2020 14: 01
    -5
    Well, Dmitry Olegovich didn’t believe it, so it escaped! winked
    Interestingly, the fraudster Elon Musk congratulated the competitor, or harbored fierce envy?
    1. margo Offline margo
      margo (margo) 15 December 2020 16: 44
      -3
      I wonder if the fraudster Elon Musk congratulated a competitor, or harbored fierce envy

      - I think he laughed for a long time, Roskosmos is not a competitor to him for a long time.
  2. amateur Offline amateur
    amateur (Victor) 15 December 2020 14: 21
    -1
    It's good that Rogozin did not blur out: "That's how lucky!"
    On the first Energia, they were not afraid to launch the Polyus (Skif DM) laser platform, which was immediately thrown from orbit by Gorbachev's order. And here is the second run - and the blank as a load. They don't believe themselves.
  3. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 15 December 2020 14: 29
    0
    It is necessary to remember the catch phrase, otherwise it will disappear.

    If only she brought something useful, damn it !!!.
    And so much money flew into the pipe, damn it !!!
  4. Dan Offline Dan
    Dan (Daniel) 15 December 2020 14: 34
    +3
    I would very much like to hope that an ordinary event, in general, will complete the black line at Roscosmos

    This cleaning a clogged toilet is an ordinary event. And the launch, though successful, of new space technology worth billions of rubles (only the second test flight) is not even an ordinary event. And Dmitry Olegovich, together with everyone who took part in this launch, can be congratulated on his success. It really is an event ...
  5. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 15 December 2020 17: 21
    0
    First, Russia is closing the hole that formed after the production of Protons was discontinued.

    Firstly, the hole was formed only in your imagination, however, given the level of competence "an ordinary event in general" winked

    NPO Energomash has created engines for all ordered Proton-M launch vehicles and will no longer be engaged in their production. This was stated by the general director of the enterprise Igor Arbuzov, reports "RIA Novosti".
    Arbuzov clarified that the necessary groundwork exists to create the required number of missiles to complete the program. He added that production could resume if new contracts emerge.

    https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5d35a6149a79478e2a08a233

    Secondly, ........ Currently, the Americans are promoting the project of a lunar station, the Chinese are promoting their own orbital station. Russia alone runs the risk of being left with nothing, or joining other people's projects in secondary or even third roles.

    Secondly, this is an outright lie. Russia has its own project. Sula, according to the text, why Russia alone runs the risk of being left with nothing, could not justify even your "specific" imagination.

    https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4603402

    Roscosmos simply cannot create Mir-2 without its own heavy-class launch vehicle.

    You write this in an article dedicated to the launch of the very "heavy-class launch vehicle" repeat That is, in other words, it means that Russia is able to create an orbital station, but the "gnashing of teeth" prevented you from expressing it in other words? Or by the sixth paragraph, you forgot what you are writing an article about? I don't even know which of the options is funnier smile

    Thirdly, "Angara-A5" can theoretically be used in the exploration of the Moon and deep space. The United States has heavy Falcon-9 and Delta-IV Heavy for these purposes, and a super-heavy carrier SLS is on the way, which will be able to deliver from 95 to 130 tons of payload to the reference orbit. China has a heavy launch vehicle Changzheng-5, which can launch up to 25 tons into orbit, and is also designing a super-heavy Changzheng-9, which will be capable of delivering 133 tons to the reference orbit and up to 50 tons to the geostationary one. The capabilities of "Angara-A5" to reach the Moon in comparison with competitors are still clearly not enough, the carrier rocket can put 24,5 tons into low-earth orbit.

    So theoretically? sad
    Falcon-9 - Declared lifting capacity - 8,3 tons at 22,8 tons for low support.
    Delta-IV Heavy - Claimed lifting capacity - 28,8 t on low support.
    Changzheng-5 - Declared lifting capacity - 25,0 tons per low support.
    Angara-A5 - The declared lifting capacity is 24,5 tons for the low supporting one.
    On what grounds can Angara be classified as "theoretical" is a huge mystery. Why can Angara be used only theoretically, and Changzheng and Falcon practically? You just didn't like the title? smile 24,5 tons of the Angara is not enough, but 25 Chinese and 23 American are enough?
    How is the American "on the way" and the Chinese "being designed" better than the Russian "being developed"?
    In fact, no one has super-heavy carriers, SLS, Changzheng-9 and Yenisei do not exist in nature.
    Could you explain the mechanism of formation of such a rather strange, I would even say delusional conclusion?

    In conclusion, I would like to note that it is useless for the head of the state corporation to publicly marvel at the fact that something else is flying in the economy entrusted to him. This beats the reputation of Roscosmos, if Dmitry Olegovich himself does not understand this.

    She's flying, damn it !!!

    Excuse my curiosity, but where did you see surprise in this phrase? Did you personally attend "this historic event"? or could you listen to the recording? How intonation can be determined from this text is a huge linguistic mystery. Did you define it by the word damn?

    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 16 December 2020 08: 11
      -1
      Quote: 123
      First, Russia is closing the hole that formed after the production of Protons was discontinued.

      Firstly, the hole was formed only in your imagination, however, given the level of competence "an ordinary event in general"

      Well, who would say tongue
      1. 123 Offline 123
        123 (123) 16 December 2020 14: 29
        0
        Well, who would say

        You do better with grimaces than facts. Maybe you should have gone to the theater?
    2. Cyril Offline Cyril
      Cyril (Kirill) 16 December 2020 19: 09
      -1
      however, given the level of competence "an ordinary event in general"

      Because the creation of such a rocket is really an ordinary event. Especially for a country that claims to be a leader in space exploration.

      Russia has its own project. Saying in the text why Russia alone runs the risk of being left with nothing could not justify even your "specific" imagination.

      "There is a project" is not at all the same as "a project is underway."

      On what grounds can Angara be classified as "theoretical" is a huge mystery.

      On the basis that Falcon-9 / Heavy, Delta-4, Changren-5 are already in operation, and Angara is only being tested.

      In fact, no one has super-heavy carriers, SLS, Changzheng-9 and Yenisei do not exist in nature.

      At least SLS is already at the stage of assembling and testing key elements. I have no information on the Chinese superheavy. But the Russian "Yenisei" is really an exclusively "paper" project so far.
      1. 123 Offline 123
        123 (123) 16 December 2020 20: 37
        +2
        Because the creation of such a rocket is really an ordinary event. Especially for a country that claims to be a leader in space exploration.

        This is not really a rocket creation, it was created and flew a while ago. Rather, we can talk about the resumption of production at the new site. This means that a new modern production has been created. The event is really not that outstanding, Angara will smoothly replace the Proton. Smooth replacement of one missile with another, more modern one. This is not the same as for some, where the degradation of the space industry forced them to fly into space on alien rockets and ships. To get rid of such a disgrace of a cosmic scale ... For them it really was an event, and of course local mattress covers laughing

        "There is a project" is not at all the same as "a project is underway."

        Are "shades" important to you as always? What is the use of "implementation"? The lunar project of some is already 15 years in the implementation, things are still there.

        On the basis that Falcon-9 / Heavy, Delta-4, Changren-5 are already in operation, and Angara is only being tested.

        A flying rocket is hardly a theoretical possibility. After all, she has confirmed her ability to fly in practice. What is the problem? The rocket is flying, as far as I remember, we are expecting a launch from Vostochny soon. Are you going to test it for decades? Even in case of detection and obsolescence of "childhood diseases" problems are not foreseen, Protons will hedge.

        At least SLS is already at the stage of assembling and testing key elements. I have no information on the Chinese superheavy. But the Russian "Yenisei" is really an exclusively "paper" project so far.

        Well, let it be for itself, especially as it will be there is not known. We also need to see how the new residents of the White House will look at the Lunar Program. Maybe again for 15 years everything will be lost before the elections.
        In the absence of information on the Chinese program, do not you bother that it is called projected and do you think that this is very different from the state of affairs in our country?
        The link is the design stages.

        https://studref.com/385910/prochie/etapy_proektirovaniya_novoy_tehniki

        Each project until the moment of implementation "in metal" is paper, but are you sure that we are far from the Chinese? However, I'm not surprised, for people with hivi psychology this is normal yes I didn't expect anything else from you negative Be careful not to damage your tongue when polishing overseas boots. hi
        1. Cyril Offline Cyril
          Cyril (Kirill) 16 December 2020 21: 20
          -2
          This is not the same as for some, where the degradation of the space industry forced them to fly into space on alien rockets and ships. Get rid of such a shame on a cosmic scale ...

          The Americans, having ridden on Russian missiles and ships for 10 years, have developed a qualitatively new reusable ship during this time (even 2, if we take into account the Starliner, even if it is somewhat late in terms of testing). There is no degradation or "shame" in this.

          During this time, Russia has not developed a new ship. And the adage “we have a reliable“ Union ”is an excuse for the poor. It's like showing off an old horse while a neighbor is saving money for a new SUV. The neighbor will save his money, but you will stay with the old horse.

          Are "shades" important to you as always? What is the use of "implementation"? The lunar project of some is already 15 years in the implementation, things are still there.

          The difference is that a project that has already begun to be embodied in metal (and "Artemis" has already begun to be embodied in metal) has a much higher chance of being completed, unlike a project that exists only on paper.

          Even the closed program "Constellation" gave ground in the form of "Orion" and very specific developments for the future SLS.

          So no, it's not "now there".

          A flying rocket is hardly a theoretical possibility. After all, she has confirmed her ability to fly in practice. What is the problem?

          You will be surprised, but in reality it is not enough for a rocket to just fly. She needs to be able to fly according to customer requirements, and ideally also with acceptable costs and commercial benefits. Back in 2014, Angara confirmed its ability to fly - nevertheless, it took another 6 years for its main customers (military) to be satisfied and to perform a repeated test launch with its help (albeit, again with a dummy load).

          Then from a theoretical possibility into a practical flying rocket it turns. when it has completed at least one flight with a full payload.

          Are you going to test it for decades?

          The funny thing is that it is not me, but the Ministry of Defense and Roscosmos that have been testing it for "decades." Well, okay, not for decades, but for "six years."

          Well, let it be for itself, especially as it will be there is not known. We also need to see how the new residents of the White House will look at the Lunar Program. Maybe again for 15 years everything will be lost before the elections.

          The Biden administration has already confirmed that it is not going to abandon Artemis. It is possible to adjust the program in terms of timing, but they do not plan to cancel. There are 2 reasons for this:

          1. SLS and Orion are already in the final stages of readiness, which was not at the "Constellation" at the time of the closing of the program.

          2. As part of "Artemis" NASA has already signed agreements with the Japanese, Europeans, Canadians, Australians and a bunch of other countries. And these countries also allocate money for the program, which significantly complicates the closure of the program.

          In the absence of information on the Chinese program, do not you bother that it is called projected and do you think that this is very different from the state of affairs in our country?

          I have already said in Russian that I have no information about the Chinese, so I am not talking about them.

          Each project until the moment of implementation "in metal" is paper, but are you sure that we are far from the Chinese?

          Although I have no information about the implementation of the Chinese manned lunar program, I see the implementation of the Chinese unmanned lunar program. And I see — or rather, I don’t see — the implementation of the Russian unmanned lunar program. Based on this, albeit indirect, evidence, I can conclude that yes, we are lagging behind the Chinese in the manned lunar program.

          However, I am not surprised, for people with hivi psychology this is normal yes I did not expect anything else from you negative Be careful not to damage your tongue when polishing overseas shoes. hi

          If for you the recognition of the objective successes of competitors and the objective problems of your own country is the "psychology of hivi", then it is not surprising that Russia is lagging behind.
          1. 123 Offline 123
            123 (123) 17 December 2020 00: 01
            +1
            The funny thing is that it is not me, but the Ministry of Defense and Roscosmos that have been testing it for "decades." Well, okay, not for decades, but for "six years."

            Can you give an example of Angara test flights over these 6 years? You say this, right? I suppose you deign to lie. If there are facts, let's go, no, go through the forest, I don't intend to disassemble the lies of overseas lackeys wink
            1. Cyril Offline Cyril
              Cyril (Kirill) 17 December 2020 06: 40
              -1
              Can you give an example of Angara test flights over these 6 years? You say this, right?

              Have you forgotten how to count?) The first test flight is in 2014, the second test flight is in 2020. I hope you have at least 3 parish classes in order to subtract 2020 from 2014 and get 6 years, about which I spoke :)

              I suppose you deign to lie.

              I have no lies. But your attempts to wriggle out like in a frying pan - yes, once again there are.

              If there are facts, let's

              I stated above :)
              1. 123 Offline 123
                123 (123) 17 December 2020 07: 51
                +1
                Have you forgotten how to count?) The first test flight is in 2014, the second test flight is in 2020. I hope you have at least 3 parish classes in order to subtract 2020 from 2014 and get 6 years, about which I spoke :)

                Today you please to blunt a little more than usual. What makes you think that Angara experienced 6 years? Who beat this nonsense in your head?
                In total, these are your conjectures and outright lies negative
                1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                  Cyril (Kirill) 19 December 2020 14: 08
                  -1
                  What makes you think that Angara experienced 6 years? Who beat this nonsense in your head?

                  And, that is, you still were not able to subtract 2020 from 2014, right?)

                  Tests, my friend, are not only flights, but also ground testing of LV units and mechanisms :) Actually, a test flight is the final phase of LV testing.

                  In total, these are your conjectures and outright lies

                  No speculation and lies :)
                  1. 123 Offline 123
                    123 (123) 19 December 2020 22: 21
                    +1
                    And, that is, you still were not able to subtract 2020 from 2014, right?) Tests, my friend, are not only flights, but also ground testing of the launch vehicle units and mechanisms :) Actually, the test flight is the final phase of the launch vehicle testing.

                    Are you stupid again? I'm glad that you were able to do the calculations yourself, maybe even without a calculator, but ..... who told you that you tested the rocket for 6 years? It was being finalized, production was moved to a new site.
                    California coyote your friend winked

                    No speculation and lies :)

                    They are exactly yes speculation and lies negative
                    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                      Cyril (Kirill) 21 December 2020 02: 50
                      -1
                      who told you that you tested the rocket for 6 years? It was finalized, moved production to a new site.

                      In your pink universe, the revision process may be organized differently, but in reality, the process of revision of a technical product also includes testing it - both the product as a whole and its individual elements in particular.

                      Looking for facts? Yes please:

                      https://3dnews.ru/1023740/raketa-lyogkogo-klassa-angara12-uspeshno-proshla-vagniy-etap-ispitaniy

                      Quote:

                      State Corporation Roscosmos informs that 23 2020 October, the firing bench tests the second stage of the Angara-1.2 rocket. This is one of final stages of ground mining product.

                      https://www.roscosmos.ru/23872/

                      Quote (news 2017 years):

                      In August we start periodic confirmatory tests of the RD-191 engine... Compiled by test schedulewhich includes a total of up to six fire tests", - explained the head of NIK-751 Igor ZAINYATULOV.

                      https://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/2020126103-Yq9Ay.html

                      Quote (2020 news):

                      Roscosmos reported that the research and production organization (NPO) Energomash completed qualification tests development engine RD-191 for the Angara rocket.

                      Although I understand that your tests are exclusively flights of a ready-made and fully assembled product. But these are the problems of your incompetence.
                      1. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 21 December 2020 03: 53
                        +1
                        In your pink universe, the revision process may be organized differently, but in reality, the process of finalizing a technical product also includes testing it - both the product in general and its individual elements in particular.

                        And what do you dislike?

                        It was being finalized, production was moved to a new site.

                        My definition is more complete and more accurately reflects the essence of the process. You isolated a separate component (tests) from it and insist that this is exactly what you have been doing for 6 years.

                        Although I understand that your tests are exclusively flights of a ready-made and fully assembled product. But these are the problems of your incompetence.

                        Re-read the first paragraph, it's not for you to talk about competence, you again deign to be blunt winked

                        As for the facts ...



                        And where am I wrong? Do you also refer to the process of creating a new production site as testing?
                      2. Cyril Offline Cyril
                        Cyril (Kirill) 21 December 2020 05: 40
                        -1
                        And what do you dislike?

                        It’s just you who didn’t like my words that the military and Roskosmos were testing the Angara during these 6 years.

                        My definition is more complete and more accurately reflects the essence of the process. You isolated a separate component (tests) from it and insist that this is exactly what you have been doing for 6 years.

                        Your more complete and precise definition does not negate the fact that Angara (and its individual elements) continued to be experienced during these 6 years.

                        you please be blunt again

                        So far, only you are stupid.

                        not for you to talk about competence

                        Judging by your comments from another thread about the "degradation of Americans" about your competence (lack of it) to speak to me.

                        And where am I wrong? Do you also refer to the process of creating a new production site as testing?

                        Once again, for especially tight ones: the process of transferring the "Angara" to a new production site does not negate the fact that its tests will continue during these 6 years (from 2014 to 2020). These are two parallel processes. Is that clearer or do you need to chew like a little one?
                      3. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 21 December 2020 07: 42
                        +2
                        It’s just you who didn’t like my words that the military and Roskosmos were testing the Angara during these 6 years.

                        Quite right, because it was being finalized and a new production site was created.

                        Your more complete and precise definition does not negate the fact that Angara (and its individual elements) continued to be experienced during these 6 years.

                        Quite right, it doesn't. But, as you put it yourself, this is a small part of the work done. 6 years just to experience .... a rather strange impression is created about the excessive length of the process. Taking into account the transfer of production, everything looks a little different.
                        This is very similar to the overseas degradants who have been testing for a decade and a half as part of the Lunar program. smile

                        Judging by your comments from another thread about the "degradation of Americans" about your competence (lack of it) to speak to me.

                        Naturally yes Who else if not you to engage in sycophancy? winked
                        There is no more dedicated fan and fierce protector request
                        If for 15 years people have been diligently trying to repeat the creation of previous generations and nothing comes of it, this speaks precisely of the degradation of the engineering school. By the way, this also applies to a number of other industries, for example, nuclear.

                        Once again, for especially tight ones: the process of transferring the "Angara" to a new production site does not negate the fact that its tests will continue during these 6 years (from 2014 to 2020).

                        It does not cancel, but partly explains the period of 6 years. And the tests were carried out during the completion of the rocket.

                        These are two parallel processes.

                        Yes, but related. For individual blocks or, say, fragments, before testing, had to be made at a new site, and debugging the production process required more time.

                        Is that clearer or do you need to chew like a little one?

                        Why are you so nervous? belay For the third day I explain to you the common truths and nothing, I am calm, despite your close to suspended animation.
                      4. Cyril Offline Cyril
                        Cyril (Kirill) 21 December 2020 08: 15
                        -1
                        Quite right, because it was being finalized and a new production site was created.

                        Once it was finalized, it means. conducted additional tests. And the transfer of production to Omsk began only in 2019. therefore, it is incorrect to use it as an argument to justify the 6-year test flight interval.

                        But as you put it yourself, this is a small part of the work done.

                        I did not say that testing is "a small part of the work done". Do not try to wriggle out by attributing to me what I did not say.

                        6 years just to experience .... a rather strange impression is created about the excessive length of the process.

                        There is nothing strange in this, given the constant cuts in the space program, the constant financial problems of the head manufacturer (the Khrunichev Center), the constant throwing of the Roskosmos management between various LV projects, etc.

                        Taking into account the transfer of production, everything looks a little different.

                        Yeah, considering the transfer, which only started in 2019.

                        This is very similar to the overseas degradants who have been testing for a decade and a half as part of the Lunar program.

                        Comparing the development of a launch vehicle for orbital flights with the development of an entire program for lunar flights, which includes the development of a super-heavy launch vehicle and a manned spacecraft, is the best illustration of your "competence" in this matter.

                        If for 15 years people have been diligently trying to repeat the creation of previous generations and nothing comes of it, this speaks precisely of the degradation of the engineering school.

                        In fact, everything works out for them, albeit with delays and creaks - given the purpose and scale of the Lunar program, such delays are more or less justified.

                        And if their skidding repetition manned the lunar program is a degradation, then what then is the skidding repetition of the Soviet unmanned programs? Well, where are your words about degradation?

                        It does not cancel, but partly explains the period of 6 years.

                        In a very small fraction, equal to 1 in 6 years

                        Why are you so nervous?

                        Your deafness makes me nervous.

                        For the third day I explain to you common truths

                        ... which are smashed to smithereens about the facts.
                      5. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 21 December 2020 08: 35
                        +1
                        And the transfer of production to Omsk began only in 2019. therefore, it is incorrect to use it as an argument to justify the 6-year test flight interval.

                        2015 news:

                        As a result of the reform of the Khrunichev Center, the assembly of the Angara rocket is being transferred to Omsk, the regional government told REGNUM.

                        It is specified that in the center of them. Khrunichev, large-scale transformations are underway. Part of the production is transferred to the site of the Omsk branch - PO Polet.

                        https://regnum.ru/news/economy/2035904.html

                        I think such news can be found without difficulty.
                        I do not know what it is on your part, the desire to lie in order to justify the previously said stupidity or incompetence, but honestly, I'm tired of reading your stupidity. After that, your "pearls" like the ones below are difficult to comment on without using non-normative vocabulary, for this, let me take my leave hi

                        Yeah, considering the transfer, which only started in 2019.
                        In a very small fraction, equal to 1 in 6 years
                        Your deafness makes me nervous.
                        ..that crumble to smithereens about the facts.
                      6. Cyril Offline Cyril
                        Cyril (Kirill) 21 December 2020 09: 28
                        -1
                        https://tass.ru/kosmos/5380021 - новость за 2018-й год. Читаем внимательно:

                        Serial production of Angara launch vehicles will begin at the Omsk PO Polet in 2023. There movet all production, in Moscow on the territory of the Khrunichev Center only the design bureau will remain, Dmitry Rogozin, the general director of Roscosmos, told reporters on Tuesday.

                        According to him, the Moscow plant will transformed into an engineering center, and all production will be transferred to Omsk. "A design bureau and technologists will remain in Moscow. We [Moscow Mayor] Sergei Semenovich Sobyanin and I agreed that all the engineering and design potential should remain in Moscow," Rogozin said.

                        As you can see (I hope you seem to be able to read), in 2018 Rogozin only announced plans to transfer Angara's production to Omsk.

                        And your news for 2015 also speaks about the plans (by the way, they were later postponed more than once due to problems). And this one:

                        It is specified that in the center of them. Khrunichev, large-scale transformations are underway.

                        It concerned the reorganization of the Khrunichev center and the restructuring of its financial problems, not the transfer of the Angara.

                        Read carefully what you refer to. And double-check this several times - maybe someday you will learn to work with sources.
                      7. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 21 December 2020 10: 38
                        +2
                        Your problem is the lack of critical understanding of information. You find something that seems to support your point of view and rush about with your eyes widening.

                        Firstly, you claim that Rogozin accomplished a feat of labor and not hefty organizational skills. For a year, practically rebuilding a new plant and launching the production of missiles on it, you know, is reminiscent of 1941 and the evacuation of factories beyond the Urals. Somehow it does not fit with your past assessments of his activities laughing

                        Secondly, according to your link, there is not a word that the activities for the transfer of production began in 2019. request

                        Expressions like "will move all production" and "the plant will be transformed into an engineering center, and all production will be transferred to Omsk" describe the course of the process and plans for its completion.

                        Thirdly, I gave you a hint "such news is easy to find", but you didn't bother to check the information ..

                        In 2017, the second stage of the VFD implementation began - the modernization of the existing production. The most ambitious transformations are taking place at two main sites - in Moscow and Omsk. In Moscow at RKZ production is being modernized LV family "Proton", upper stages "Briz-M", head fairings and transition systems. A new high-tech production of the "Angara" launch vehicle is being created in Omsk at PO "Polet".

                        http://www.khrunichev.ru/main.php?id=1&nid=3504

                        Note that it will not start and will be created, but started and created. And it's not 2019 on the calendar. In addition, the "second stage" is described.

                        In 2014 at the Khrunichev Center in accordance with the Financial Recovery Program large-scale transformations began, the purpose of which is to modernize the existing and create new high-tech industries for the manufacture of LV "Proton-M" and families RN "Angara", transition systems and upper stages.

                        This is from the Roscosmos website (long link).

                        The fact that at the first stage there was no "physical transfer" of production does not cancel out its negative impact on the timing of the release of missiles. A decision has been made to transfer production, which means that no one will establish production in Moscow. And in Omsk there is still nothing.

                        Read carefully what you refer to. And double-check this several times - maybe someday you will learn to work with sources.

                        I would like to redirect this advice to your address. Be a little more serious and don't write nonsense. hi
                      8. Cyril Offline Cyril
                        Cyril (Kirill) 22 December 2020 18: 53
                        -2
                        Firstly, you claim that Rogozin accomplished a feat of labor and not hefty organizational skills. In a year, practically rebuild a new plant and establish missile production on it

                        Firstly, I never wrote that Rogozin built a new plant in a year and organized the production of missiles. Stop passing off your speculations as mine.

                        I wrote that out of 6 years between the tests of 2014 and 2020, only 1 year was spent on the "transfer of production". I have not written anywhere that this transfer is complete. Moreover, officially (again, according to Rogozin himself) this process will end only in 2023, when the mass production of missiles will be launched.

                        Do you know it reminds of 1941 and the evacuation of factories beyond the Urals

                        If it comes to that, it was much more difficult to evacuate factories during the Second World War. considering the number of these same factories, much less developed transport and transport routes, the general disastrous state of the country caused by the war, as well as the regular bombing and shelling of transport by the Germans, the factories themselves, etc.

                        So the transfer of production of "Angara" in 2015, when transport is much better developed, and there is no war - the task in comparison with the above is much less ambitious and difficult.

                        Secondly, according to your link, there is not a word that the activities for the transfer of production began in 2019

                        My link contains the publication date and Rogozin's words that the transfer process will just start.

                        Expressions like "will move all production" and "the plant will be transformed into an engineering center, and all production will be transferred to Omsk" describe the course of the process and plans for its completion.

                        I have no doubt that in your parallel universe, the future tense verb describes the process taking place in the present.

                        In Omsk, PA Polet is creating a new high-tech production of the Angara launch vehicle.

                        This is a general formulation that does not contain any specifics. It can mean everything. anything - up to the banal clearing of the area for construction.

                        In 2014, in the Khrunichev Center, in accordance with the Financial Recovery Program, large-scale transformations began, the purpose of which is to modernize existing and create new high-tech production facilities for manufacturing

                        In this excerpt, the creation of production "Angara" is called to transformations in the center. Khrunichev. The target can be as far away in time as desired.

                        And in Omsk there is still nothing.

                        In fact, Polet is located in Omsk, which has specialized in the production of rocket and space technology since the 70s. So production is not being transferred to an empty place.
  • steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 15 December 2020 20: 54
    +2
    Have we increased funding for the space industry? No!? So the next launch is in six years! To dream of a bright future, you need good reason in the form of American denomination notes.
  • Praskovya Offline Praskovya
    Praskovya (Praskovya) 16 December 2020 00: 15
    +1
    Second launch in 6 years !!!!! Heroes.