Russia has recently had two unsuccessful satellite launches, the last two satellites they handled have been lost.

One launched on November 28 from the new Vostochny cosmodrome in Siberia but apparently had the incorrect launch coordinates programmed into it (it was set as if it launched from Baikonur) so it did not launch into the correct profile to be successful. The Meteor M satellite was lost shortly after launch.

The next launch, last week on December 26 from the Baikonur in Kazakhstan and appeared to be successful however upon achieving orbit all contact was lost with the satellite, Angola's first telecommunications satellite: Angosat-1.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/28/rus ... ad-mix-up/
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-launches ... 40993.html

The program appears to be under pressure to be successful while not having the support it needs or its leadership is not managing it as well as it could be. Does anyone have insight into what is going on with it, what changes are occurring or what (or if) there are issues that need to be or can be corrected?

Obviously Roscosmos is not the first or only space program to have issues like this, everyone is well aware of failures NASA and the ESA have also experienced, so I don't mean this as an attack. Just am curious for more information.

Tugg

I always admired the Russian space program, especially the hardship they have endured and given the small economy which supports it nowadays.

sharles wrote:

Angosat-1 communications restored after post-launch glitch

Wow, that is great news!

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

Russia has recently had two unsuccessful satellite launches, the last two satellites they handled have been lost.

One launched on November 28 from the new Vostochny cosmodrome in Siberia but apparently had the incorrect launch coordinates programmed into it (it was set as if it launched from Baikonur) so it did not launch into the correct profile to be successful. The Meteor M satellite was lost shortly after launch.

The next launch, last week on December 26 from the Baikonur in Kazakhstan and appeared to be successful however upon achieving orbit all contact was lost with the satellite, Angola's first telecommunications satellite: Angosat-1.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/28/rus ... ad-mix-up/
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-launches ... 40993.html

The program appears to be under pressure to be successful while not having the support it needs or its leadership is not managing it as well as it could be. Does anyone have insight into what is going on with it, what changes are occurring or what (or if) there are issues that need to be or can be corrected?

Obviously Roscosmos is not the first or only space program to have issues like this, everyone is well aware of failures NASA and the ESA have also experienced, so I don't mean this as an attack. Just am curious for more information.

Tugg

Don't worry so much: Angosat-1 is on a given orbit and with it the connection, so the launch is successful.
In the case of launch from Vostochny there was an error in the control algorithm of the upper stage "Fregat", and this error has been laid at the time of initial development of software, 10 or 20 years ago. Unfortunately, the developers did not think that this booster will be launched from the spaceport, which is still not even started to build. As a result of this accident. Now the control algorithms will be redesigned, and changes will be made in the method of preparation of start and verification of the fault.
In General, space program Russia is going through very difficult times, but it is a natural result of two decades of underfunding and chaos of the nineties. At the moment in the space industry of Russia conducted a reform, hopefully, it will have positive results. Although, frankly, I am very disappointed that the space we allocate so little money - almost ten times less than allocated for the needs of NASA in the United States.
The result of the permanent reductions of the budget of the space program be the transfer of unique missions, or even their abolition. So, for example, cancelled planned in 2030-2040 years research missions to Ganymede and Europe. A unique project "Venera-D" delayed for years, pending a series of unique multispectral space telescopes, of which only one is launched Spektr-R at the moment. Canceled the creation of experimental modules for the ISS, including a transformable module. Ah, actually take the experience of the Russian space Agency, but to combine with the NASA budget - and we would get an ideal space Agency.

Tugger wrote:

Obviously Roscosmos is not the first or only space program to have issues like this, everyone is well aware of failures NASA and the ESA have also experienced, so I don't mean this as an attack. Just am curious for more information.

The way the failures are rather selective and do not touch on ISS taxi missions my guess is that Roscosmos (rsp. the RF) have a sabotage problem.
Some time back Ariane had similarly strange problems.

WIederling wrote:

Tugger wrote:

Obviously Roscosmos is not the first or only space program to have issues like this, everyone is well aware of failures NASA and the ESA have also experienced, so I don't mean this as an attack. Just am curious for more information.

The way the failures are rather selective and do not touch on ISS taxi missions my guess is that Roscosmos (rsp. the RF) have a sabotage problem.
Some time back Ariane had similarly strange problems.

Another conspiracy against the great Russian Federation?

What is Roscosmos' attitude towards a manned mission to Mars?

TWA772LR wrote:

What is Roscosmos' attitude towards a manned mission to Mars?

If manned: Moon first.

TWA772LR wrote:

What is Roscosmos' attitude towards a manned mission to Mars?

At this moment, the mission to Mars is not planned earlier than in the years 2040-2050. According to the plans of Roscosmos in the years 2028-2035 should be manned flights to the moon base and a permanent base on the moon, and only then will solve the problems associated with flying in deep space. However, biomedical experiments to test the actions of the crew in conditions of prolonged isolation are now.

What the Russian space program achieves with its miniscule budget is a glaring indicator of the levels of incompetence and corruption in the American space effort led by NASA. Billions of dollars in return for NOTHING.

American space industry needs a radical shakeup.

^ The JWST team would like a word with you.

BawliBooch wrote:

What the Russian space program achieves with its miniscule budget is a glaring indicator of the levels of incompetence and corruption in the American space effort led by NASA. Billions of dollars in return for NOTHING.

American space industry needs a radical shakeup.

Roscosmos is essentially the world's first space airline, accepting payment for launches of crew and cargo. NASA has actually played golf on the Moon.

TWA772LR wrote:

BawliBooch wrote:

What the Russian space program achieves with its miniscule budget is a glaring indicator of the levels of incompetence and corruption in the American space effort led by NASA. Billions of dollars in return for NOTHING.

American space industry needs a radical shakeup.

Roscosmos is essentially the world's first space airline, accepting payment for launches of crew and cargo. NASA has actually played golf on the Moon.

Signs of things to come.
decades later: Trump on the Moon. golfing. no return

NASA's problem was in a way home made. Kennedy advised by von Braun set their task as "Go to the Moon, return alive"
to get a handle on the arms race and his mad hatter set of generals.
Under some monomanic guidance they achieved that. And with nobody on this globe not wishing them along.
Sporty event. US won for once. and in a constructive environment at that.

But bringing the Apollo program further already shew some loss of vision.
Later the war clowns came back up and the Space program lingered.

it is interesting to read the double biography of Leonov, Scott ( ghostwr. Toomey ) Two sides of the Moon.

The Russian space programme has of course been invaluable over the last XXyears as it's been the only way too and from the ISS.
However ... Depending on how Spacex goes this year this monopoly may be over.But still an important asset.
But beyond that?I have no idea.We know what The Europeans are doing and obviously the US.
Perhaps just perhaps they could link up with NASA -again and work with them on developing missions and hardware for the SLS rocket.Because right now they have a rocket and return capsule but frankly nothing else.Could they help with a moon base perhaps?

WIederling wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

BawliBooch wrote:

What the Russian space program achieves with its miniscule budget is a glaring indicator of the levels of incompetence and corruption in the American space effort led by NASA. Billions of dollars in return for NOTHING.

American space industry needs a radical shakeup.

Roscosmos is essentially the world's first space airline, accepting payment for launches of crew and cargo. NASA has actually played golf on the Moon.

Signs of things to come.
decades later: Trump on the Moon. golfing. no return

NASA's problem was in a way home made. Kennedy advised by von Braun set their task as "Go to the Moon, return alive"
to get a handle on the arms race and his mad hatter set of generals.
Under some monomanic guidance they achieved that. And with nobody on this globe not wishing them along.
Sporty event. US won for once. and in a constructive environment at that.

But bringing the Apollo program further already shew some loss of vision.
Later the war clowns came back up and the Space program lingered.

it is interesting to read the double biography of Leonov, Scott ( ghostwr. Toomey ) Two sides of the Moon.

Apollo also had a Congress that kept a huge money pipeline open for many years to accomplish the project - in retrospect an amazing feat for a Western government. But note that in the end it was Congress cutting back the $$ that ended up bringing the program to a close. But then they came back with a vengeance for the even more expensive Space Shuttle, although recall that the promises for Space Shuttle were very generous and many did not end up coming true.

You need a lot of money for a great space program - money that most governments are loathe to provide for extended periods of time. I think that is why we watch SpaceX and Roscosmos - a chance to do it far cheaper and break the paradigm.

smithbs wrote:

WIederling wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Roscosmos is essentially the world's first space airline, accepting payment for launches of crew and cargo. NASA has actually played golf on the Moon.

Signs of things to come.
decades later: Trump on the Moon. golfing. no return

NASA's problem was in a way home made. Kennedy advised by von Braun set their task as "Go to the Moon, return alive"
to get a handle on the arms race and his mad hatter set of generals.
Under some monomanic guidance they achieved that. And with nobody on this globe not wishing them along.
Sporty event. US won for once. and in a constructive environment at that.

But bringing the Apollo program further already shew some loss of vision.
Later the war clowns came back up and the Space program lingered.

it is interesting to read the double biography of Leonov, Scott ( ghostwr. Toomey ) Two sides of the Moon.

Apollo also had a Congress that kept a huge money pipeline open for many years to accomplish the project - in retrospect an amazing feat for a Western government. But note that in the end it was Congress cutting back the $$ that ended up bringing the program to a close. But then they came back with a vengeance for the even more expensive Space Shuttle, although recall that the promises for Space Shuttle were very generous and many did not end up coming true.

You need a lot of money for a great space program - money that most governments are loathe to provide for extended periods of time. I think that is why we watch SpaceX and Roscosmos - a chance to do it far cheaper and break the paradigm.

As I mentioned - if you give "Roscosmos" the same funding, which have NASA, we will soon get about these things:
1. Interorbital tug with a nuclear reactor power of 1 MW. This will reduce the cost of delivery of cargo to the moon by 50-75%.
2. Long-lived lander "Venus-D", which on the surface of Venus to work out at least two weeks.
3. Probe for solar research (the program "Interheliozond").
4. Lander for Ganymede.
5. Modernization of the Soyuz spacecraft to flyby trajectory one tourist missions around the Мoon.
6. Transformable module of the ISS in a volume of at least 120 cubic metres.
7. Experimental module of the ISS centrifuge to explore artificial gravity in orbit.
8. Three multispectral telescope: millimeter, x-ray and ultraviolet ranges.
9. Returned the lander to Phobos.
10. Permanent manned base on the Moon in twenty years.

All these and many more projects are cancelled or severely shifted in time because of lack of funding.

In the meantime, Roscosmos decided to cash in on real estate in Moscow, selling for redevelopment most (more than 200) buildings of Khrunichev center; three to four are to be retained.
https://lenta.ru/news/2018/06/01/proton/
Three or four buildings, to be retained, include the main assembly hall for Proton launchers, and Angara assembly building.

In other news, Proton launcher is to be retired, upon completion of current manifest:
https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5b2ca9f49a794770c0332d5d

Angara is supposed to become the mainstay of Roscosmos launchers.