Russia successfully tests new generation of 1st stage launch vehicle and other news

Posted: July 10, 2014 by tchannon in Uncategorized

Image

Image from RIA RT web site [belatedly I spotted this serious misattribution, my mistake entirely, sorry. 11th July –Tim]

This story is notable because up until now all the Russian designs originate with a deceased veteran designer. Few technical details seem available. Surprisingly it looks like a single nozzle. Mention of the use of boosters for heavier launch.

RIA RT news site, with youtube video (seen one seen them all).

http://rt.com/news/171520-angara-space-rocket-russia/

You bet it worked, Putin was not happy when there was an abort last time.

As a second story I note that India are now significant players in rent a launch into polar orbit, trusted enough to loft a Spot satellite.

“India’s PSLV Rocket Lofts Airbus Spot 7 Satellite”

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/41070india’s-pslv-rocket-lofts-airbus-spot-7-satellite

Third story, remember the amateur reboot and old satellite?

Sadly they discovered the propulsions system failed to work.
http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/41197curtain-falls-on-isee-3-reboot-project-as-propulsion-system-fails

Fourth story!

Remember the bridging instrument for TSI SORCE, news silence?

Image

From SORCE web page, note the gap and now data shown to current, no mention of two instruments. Do they match?

This is on a military satellite, perhaps why there seems a news blackout. Satellite tracking indicates it is up there.

Information on the ORS3 vehicle is here
https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/o/ors-3

Post by Tim

Comments
  1. Tenuc says:

    There is an interesting graph on the CU LASP site showing a TSI reconstruction from 1600…

    The modern solar maximum shows up clearly – the peak occurring in the 1960’s, then downhill all the way. The variation across the whole period is only ~2w/m^2, a much lower figure than I would have expected to see, although in the pre-satellite period proxies for TSI would have had to be used, so accuracy of measurement is poor.

  2. Anto says:

    Single nozzle design looks risky. Wonder who decided that would be a good idea?

  3. tallbloke says:

    The accountant. 😉

  4. Anto says:

    LOL!

  5. RoswellJohn says:

    Maybe risky, but the Russians have a pretty good record of late. But it makes for a lighter rocket overall. Multiple rocket engines require a base heat shield to keep the multiple plume interactions from coming back towards the rocket and frying all the control systems and electronics. It’s just a small percentage of the gases flowing out, but it’s enough to get things pretty hot. I worked on that back on the Saturn V second stage at Douglas Aircraft in the 1960s.

  6. tchannon says:

    RoswellJohn,
    A technical man. A lot of small systems usually shed more heat and especially combustion stuff. Great big I think poses metallurgical thermal stress problems but computers have moved a lot of goalposts on design.

    I assume vectoring thrust is only done on a few nozzles on a multi but with one great big one is the whole thing gimballed? I’ve read about lots of hair brain methods over the years.

    The idea of balancing a long pole pushed from the bottom and steering it exactly is err… don’t want to think about it. Even detecting deviation under heavy acceleration must be fun.

  7. RoswellJohn says:

    Tim,
    Not sure about whether all were gimballed or just some. That would be the propulsion guys. I was in Thermodynamics.

    It’s not intuitive, but when two high speed streams of gas hit each other and interact in the chaos that goes on a small percentage of the gases goes back up toward the source. Hence the need for a base heat shield. BTW when I was handed this project (13 feet in diameter and withstand 2000 degrees for 10 minutes with less than 200 degrees on the back face) my first statement was “Piece of cake. Fire brick should work just fine. That’s when they told me the next parameter: “Less than 120 pounds”. It took awhile, but we did it. Four inches of phenolic honeycomb in two slabs of two inches with the honeycomb cells filled with micro silica balloons to stop the radiation. And we found this by accident. We were using two inches of plain phenolic honeycomb as the support for the pieces of insulation we were testing. All the insulation materials we tested lasted less than one minute, but the honeycomb did a better job; like 2-3 minutes (we had thermocouples everywhere). So we ditched the insulation and filled up the cells with the silica balloons on a two inch slab and got 5 minutes. Another slab and we got past 10 minutes. Serendipity!

    There are neural networks and genetic algorithms and genetic programs that can balance poles. Just a few equations!

    John

  8. tchannon says:

    Always do that. Easy.
    Oh bye the way.

    Next is can you halve it. Engineering everywhere.

    Silica balloons, new one on me.