Russia Reignites Its Rocket Industry with New Angara Booster

Space ^ | Leonard David

[wetphoenix]

Russia's recent maiden launch of its new Angara rocket is a harbinger of bigger boosters to come. The successful test flight also marked the country's first new launch vehicle to be built from scratch since the fall of the Soviet Union.

The July 9 suborbital flight of the light-lift Angara 1.2ML rocket lifted off from Russia's Plesetsk Cosmodrome in the country's northern Arkhangelsk region. (The "ML" stands for "maiden launch.")

The test flight, which lasted roughly 21 minutes and was not intended to reach orbit, launched the Angara rocket over Russian territory on a ballistic trajectory. A "mass/dimensional payload simulator" topped the Angara, attached to the rocket's second stage. [Russia's New Angara Rocket in Photos]

That booster ultimately fell back to Earth over a targeted impact area of the Kura Range on the Kamchatka Peninsula over 3,500 miles (5,700 kilometers) from the launch site.

Russian rocket's modular buildup

Russia's Angara rockets are being developed by the Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center in Moscow. The two-stage Angara-1.2ML runs on "ecologically clean components," oxygen and kerosene, according to Khrunichev representatives.

[MichaelCorleone]

If memory serves, the second state used the also powerful J-1 engines.

You may remember Apollo 13 2nd stage inboard engine cut out before they reached orbit. The other four finished the job quite nicely.

[Secret Agent Man]

hey, 9 out of 10 of them work.

just don’t be on the one that doesn’t. won’t feel it for long if you are.

[Secret Agent Man]

with german scientists designing them.

[MichaelCorleone]

I think the main man was a German - Wernher von Braun. I know after we ‘stole’ him from the Germans (WWII), Mr. von Braun trained American scientists to build rockets and rocket engines.

Memory is sketchy, but von Braun complained quite a bit that American engineers were lazy and insufficiently motivated. Of course von Braun was a breed all his own. Nobody could match the smarts and discipline he had at that time. The U.S. was extremely lucky to get him on our side.

As far as I know the only German scientists were in Germany that he worked with up until the end of WWII. I could be wrong on that.

If not for him, we probably would not have had a space program, or at least it would have taken us much longer to do what we did (Mercury-Gemini-Apollo missions).

[Secret Agent Man]

yup, that’s who i was implying. von Braun.

[GeronL]

35 tons sounds like a lot

[wetphoenix]

Well, Saturn-5 could lift 141 tons to low orbit and older Soviet Energya - 200 tons. All back to decades ago.

[Mount Athos]

Since 2010... hope I didn’t make mistakes

FAIL/LAUNCH rocketname

USA had great record lately
0/23 atlas 5 **
0/13 delta
1/7 falcon (secondary payload too low on 1)
0/7 minotaur
0/4 Thor(XLT) Delta II
0/2 antares **
0/2 pegasus
** The main engine on the Atlas 5 is Russian, 2 years of supplies left. Antares also has Russian engine.

Europe has been flawless 11 years running with Arianne 5.
0/22 arianne
0/2 vega

Russia had a whole bunch of failures on proton rocket.
5/42 proton,
2/62 r-7 soyuz
1/9 rs-18
0/6 r-36m dnepr
0/1 r-14

Ukraine
1/10 zenit 2

China
2/67 CZ

Japan
0/9 H-2
0/1 epsilon

India
2/11

Iran
2/4

[Mount Athos]

I failed to include this
0/6 STS (M)for USA

and stats omit all launches done in 2014

[G Larry]

Success rate As of Dec. 2013

Proton = 65 of 71

Atlas V = 41* of 42

Delta 4 = 17 of 17

*The Atlas LV performed perfectly, and it was the 2nd firing of the Centaur Upper Stage which did not complete.
However, the Satellites were able to correct the orbit insertion error and reach their destination.

[McGruff]

Wasn’t there a recent thread about us being dependent on Russia for satellite launches or something like that.

[Rca2000]

That was a cutoff from the AGC computer—it detected POGO oscillation in the feeds to the center engine and shut it down to save the rest of the engines, vehicle and crew.

[MichaelCorleone]

I wonder if anyone really knows for sure.

My understanding was that although the inboard was oscillating at an incredible rate, it was a low thrust sensor that was triggered somehow and shut the engine down. Strangely, all indications were that the thrust level was adequate.

If this was truly the cause of the shutdown, either the sensor malfunctioned or the data was incorrect.

But I may not have the most current information either. But you might. Just the last I knew it was unclear exactly what happened.

[Rca2000]

I only know what I have read and watched. The said it was POGO—but perhaps the computer only THOUGHT POGO was occurring, due to bad sensors.

Then—and now—computers only can go by the info they get from their sensors—and if they screw up—often so will the computer. Today—if a sensor reading is WAY out of spec, in such a way not really possible given a normally operating rest of system—a computer will then IGNORE that sensor and inform of it’s failure.

Either way—the other engines burned longer and made up for the lack of thrust, and successfully placed the upper stages into orbit. Nice redundancy. As we all talked about before..this country USED to know how to do BIG things and do them RIGHT. Not too mention back then the “greenisms” did NOT have as much sway on things- as they do today.

Of course—LATER—the REAL malfunction on 13 occurred—to be remembered by everyone—forever. The movie did NOT leave out the POGO problem, or it’s solution (though Apollo 13 movie did NOT say WHY the center engine shut down, it just showed that it did ) and that is a good thing.

An earlier saturn launch, the 4th one I thimk, unmanned—had TWO engines shut down from POGO oscillation.