Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Space Operations Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Angara To The Rescue
SYSOP    7/23/2014 6:06:16 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
keffler25       7/23/2014 8:41:05 AM
Cross your fingers, Moscow. RD 170 type engines series (RD -191s are direct engineered off the RD 170) are known to melt and explode in flight if the intercooler jacket fails. And despite the RD -191 fix of a single turbine per nozzle? Loss of rocket in first stage ascent is still likely as happened to the RD-170 design off which the 191 is based. I mean we are talking not even clearing the unbilical pole before the loud BOOM! One launch is no guarantee. Look at the Topol M program. And that joke is a solid fueled missile! Simple compared to a liquid fueled monster like Angara.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       7/23/2014 3:52:45 PM
Large solid fuel motors are simple in concept but very tricky in construction.  Any large voids in fabrication, failure at the joints between sections, or in the interface to the missile casing are likely to lead to spectacular failures.  The USA made the investment in experience to climb the learning curve early in the missile program with a history of failures.  Now the construction of solid fuel engines seems routine, until you have another Challenger disaster.
 
Quote    Reply

RH       7/23/2014 4:44:56 PM
Russian service seems to be no longer least expensive -- SpaceX is now holds the prize, and if their R&D program to develop reusable 1 and second stage succeed their prices will drop by the order of magnitude.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics