Hi,
from Flightglobal of 1987,the Russian old Energia heavy-lift launch
vehicle variants.
from Flightglobal of 1987,the Russian old Energia heavy-lift launch
vehicle variants.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
rickshaw said:Has development of Energia been completely abandoned now or is it still slowing bubbling away in the background somewhere?
http://www.ussr-airspace.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=24_53&products_id=131221.5 ` height metal custom made exclusive of Energia Corporation project rocket Herkules, designed on base of Energia booster and intended for flights to Mars.Contact for details.
Item 70/117
http://www.ussr-airspace.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=24_53&products_id=149715 Inches tall made from metal Energia Coirporation model of Energia-M launch rocket on wooden stand. Only one model available. *Availability and price check by e-mail or call.* + shipping.Details on this rocket carrier are below. Energia-M was competitor in a new Russian Heavy Launch Vehicle competion in 1993. The aim was to replace the Proton rocket. Energia-M lost the competion and as a result the Angara Launch System was choosen for development by the Russian Space Agency. Energia-M development has been abandonned. Perhaps in the future it could be revived. Energia-M was derived from the Energia Launch System used by the Buran. In comparison to Energia, Energia-M utilized 2 strap-ons instead of 4 and the core booster used 1 RD-0120 instead of Energia`s 4 engines.
http://www.ussr-airspace.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=24_53&products_id=1496Energia rocket with Mock-up of Spaceship
Same as listed above Energia corporation presentation model on wooden base with attached metal Soviet Crest emblem.About 11 inches tall. Entire model is made from metal. Heavy. Available only one.
Triton said:Are Herkules and Vulkain two names that refer to the same variant in the Energiya-family of launch vehicles?
Not going to happen.Already my favorite thread here.
I keep hoping SLS evolves to side-mount for this.
In terms of moving things around---what about an automated all-oxidizer orbiter?
Imagine a Columbia-type orbiter with a nitrogen tetroxide tank attached to an all hydrogen External Tank.
The payload and/or crew would be safely stop that...maybe an aft cargo carrier....but the unmanned orbiter flies back returning it's compact oxidizer tank and engines as part of the compact aircraft.
This the simple all-hydrogen tank remains in space as an even more easily converted wet workshop.
Or flip the script and have it all LOX and the orbiter a big winged kerosene tank instead?
I keep hoping SLS evolves to side-mount for this.
i have to confirm ByemanNot going to happen.
a Artemis 5 has a significant chance of flying in 2030, and that's locked in , so SLS will likely make it to 2030, won't survive the next decade however.a. SLS is not going to make it to the 2030's. Much less evolve.The payload and/or crew would be safely stop that...maybe an aft cargo carrier....but the unmanned orbiter
b. There is no reason for the US (or anybody) to have a large orbiter for cargo.
Buran program, as a job program made SLS looks cheap! It was an Apollo-program scale mobilisation for the USSR, in relative terms, all for arguably more dubious prospects than SLS has now.I keep hoping SLS evolves to side-mount for this.i have to confirm ByemanNot going to happen.
SLS is dead end, do political origin of program.
Energia was better, it use unique Modular system
were get launch rocket out booster (zenit) or upper stage with Booster (Energia M) up to superheavy (Energia Vulcan).
Sadly Energia died do Political meddling what let to downfall of USSR.
Now all our hope lies at SpaceX Starship
Starship is not a winged "orbiter"The thought of de-evolving SLS into a side mount launcher is quite funny.
a Artemis 5 has a significant chance of flying in 2030, and that's locked in , so SLS will likely make it to 2030, won't survive the next decade however.a. SLS is not going to make it to the 2030's. Much less evolve.The payload and/or crew would be safely stop that...maybe an aft cargo carrier....but the unmanned orbiter
b. There is no reason for the US (or anybody) to have a large orbiter for cargo.
b SpaceX doesn't see it that way!
Starship is not a winged "orbiter"The thought of de-evolving SLS into a side mount launcher is quite funny.
a Artemis 5 has a significant chance of flying in 2030, and that's locked in , so SLS will likely make it to 2030, won't survive the next decade however.a. SLS is not going to make it to the 2030's. Much less evolve.The payload and/or crew would be safely stop that...maybe an aft cargo carrier....but the unmanned orbiter
b. There is no reason for the US (or anybody) to have a large orbiter for cargo.
b SpaceX doesn't see it that way!
More of *real* Energiya follow-on rockets, including Vulcan, is here at Vadim's site