After Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Western market for satellite launches dried up.
See full article...
See full article...
After a decade Russia’s native-built Soyuz 5 rocket finally reaches the launch site
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Just from a purely business and professional standpoint - that just aren't that many willing to take the risk.
There are always going to be questions as to reliability and accountability and, if something should go wrong, the ability of the customer to be made whole.
Then there is the optics of purchasing flights and otherwise supporting a country which is an international pariah.
I'm sure there will be customers here and there if they make it so cheap that the calculus is worth it, but I don't believe it will be many.
There are always going to be questions as to reliability and accountability and, if something should go wrong, the ability of the customer to be made whole.
Then there is the optics of purchasing flights and otherwise supporting a country which is an international pariah.
I'm sure there will be customers here and there if they make it so cheap that the calculus is worth it, but I don't believe it will be many.
Upvote
103
(105
/
-2)
Wasn't there the Angara rocket family supposed to include an Angara 3 design at some point? That would've fit the gap between Soyuz 2 and Angara 5 as well, no? Anyone know the reasons to drop that already existing, all-Russian hardware design for a new build, all-Russian rocket? Angara cost per launch? Assured access via two launch families?
Upvote
57
(58
/
-1)
Upvote
34
(35
/
-1)
I love when the publically released images have blatant safety issues...
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Hot-staging-640x427.jpg
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Hot-staging-640x427.jpg
Upvote
46
(49
/
-3)
Upvote
59
(59
/
0)
Risk management, maintaining competition in the launch industry, and cost.
The Angara rocket family has had a difficult development history that started all the way back in the 90s and suffered many setbacks. Soyuz 5, being a reshored copy of the Ukrainian Zenit, was developed in parallel as the safe Plan B. They are developed by Russia's two main rocket makers: Khrunichev and Energia, respectively. If Russia adopted the Angara family for all launches after all of the investment into Soyuz 5 has already been made, it would have devastated Energia. Adopting Soyuz 5 as the main workhorse helps to keep both companies afloat.
Soyuz 5 is also cheaper than Angara-3 and can use all the launch infrastructure already in place for Zenit.
Upvote
61
(61
/
0)
I genuinely do not understand the Angara strategy at all. Clearly some senior government officials are making serious bank from graft along the way. Beyond that, it's not clear.Wasn't there the Angara rocket family supposed to include an Angara 3 design at some point? That would've fit the gap between Soyuz 2 and Angara 5 as well, no? Anyone know the reasons to drop that already existing, all-Russian hardware design for a new build, all-Russian rocket? Angara cost per launch? Assured access via two launch families?
Upvote
77
(77
/
0)
Leaning forward away from the angle of the ladder was my immediate concern with half of your foot on the rung. Normally the point of a ladder like that is to be on the platform and have the handrails to keep you from falling and being able to use both hands to work. This platform isn't even really large enough to do that, even if he was at that level.
The shoes don't look great to me as well but it's hard to say what the risks/concerns are for that site. Could be they wear those for some other reason?
/Not a safety professional but if he was on my site I'd be looking for a better way to do that job
Upvote
28
(29
/
-1)
There's always the risk that Russia will simply seize your company's property too.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/16/business/russia-aircraft-seizure
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-seized-its-satellites?embedded-checkout=true
Those were just a couple top-search-result examples. I'm sure there is much more.
Upvote
67
(69
/
-2)
I look at those Angara models and think of the old phrase "Cluster's last stand"
The one thing about the RD-171 on this vehicle: that engine is just a monster... 1.6M lb of thrust...
Imagine what they could do with that engine technology if they weren't constrained by either communism or kleptocracy Sigh.
Upvote
32
(37
/
-5)
They were baselessly attacking their neighbours a decade ago (Donbas, Crimea), and a decade before that (Georgia), and a decade before that (Moldova, Chechnya). And don't even get me started on the Soviet era that preceded that decade.
What makes you think, short of Russia collapsing (in which case the question of who would buy its rockets becomes moot), that the next decade will bring anything different?
Upvote
151
(154
/
-3)
This, accountability, is the biggest reason IMHO.
Off the top of my head:
• Soyuz MS-09 Drilled hole incident
They claimed a US astronaut on board, the only U.S. woman on station, drilled the hole to “get home early."
• That one time Nauka went crazy and caused the station to tumble.
I actually think this was an intentional way to save money, by getting rid of ISS.
• Soyuz MS-22 and Progress MS-21 leaks
"Guys it was an impact, not manufacturing, even though it is the same issue, twice in a row. Roscosmos manufacturing a-ok" -Roscosmos
Of course I'm being sloppy and a little sarcastic, but if I were looking for a cheap ride, I'd pass.
Upvote
80
(83
/
-3)
It's 4m across and masses ten tons. It's big and powerful, but it's also big and heavy. Nine Merlins or three Raptors could each produce the same thrust in a smaller footprint and half the mass.
Upvote
95
(95
/
0)
What makes anyone think that even collapsing would do anything but temporarily suspend their attacks on their neighbors?
Upvote
49
(50
/
-1)
Everyday Astronaut's vid on Russian engines was stellar, now I know too much about the NK-33.
But, even if he did a vid on Russian rockets, I don't think anyone would get it the point of their strategy: "Let's keep making new old rockets, or something"
Upvote
17
(18
/
-1)
you missed the MS-10 staging failure that resulted in the in-flight abort...
Upvote
34
(35
/
-1)
Forgot about that one. What did they blame for that failure on , whales?you missed the MS-10 staging failure that resulted in the in-flight abort...
Upvote
14
(17
/
-3)
Odds are the factory guys do things the right way, but the PR hack was like, “Nyet nyet nyet! The ladder is blocking the rocket! Turn it around and just lean over with the screwdriver! Nobody will notice!”
Some things really are universal.
I can’t explain the crocs. (Or is that kpokc?)
Upvote
33
(35
/
-2)
Upvote
9
(11
/
-2)
Upvote
26
(27
/
-1)
At least it's the only rocket (I think) that does a super cool Korolev cross. That counts for something, right?
Upvote
3
(7
/
-4)
Long March 2F has 4 strap-on boosters that are jettisoned in a similar manner to Soyuz-2.
Upvote
30
(30
/
0)
Remember when Russia stole hundreds of millions of dollars worth of satellites from OneWeb? Why would anyone trust them for a launch?
Upvote
71
(72
/
-1)
Upvote
15
(18
/
-3)
I can hear Boris saying that, Russian accent and all, in my head. Thanks for the chuckle guys!
Upvote
7
(9
/
-2)
A long succession of "short victorious" wars to distract the comrades from the lack of everything.
Upvote
22
(24
/
-2)
Propaganda.
It's what drove the Soviet space program. Once America beat them to the moon, they never tried to get back to it. Today, their space program is barely a ghost of what it once was. They put a hell of a lot of Soviet nationalist pride into their space program, and with it in tatters, disgraced in a lot of ways, they want the propaganda value.
The Soviets were NEVER as strong a they proclaimed themselves to be. It was all global propaganda to make sure no one invaded them. Their nuclear weapons were a real threat, but the whole "who's best?" bullshit from the space race would have been instantly rendered moot had they been used. They have a national paranoia about invasions - not unjustified given the history of the region.
But this is a government of thugs. The old-school quasi-capitalist Russian mob, who took HUGE pride in Soviet superiority, mixing in and nurturing that Soviet nationalist bullshit into their rhetoric. And their space agency was arguably their crown jewel back then, so they're thinking they need to prove to the world that they're not a nation lead by thugs anymore.
As if a rocket is going to do that...
Upvote
31
(34
/
-3)
YetAnotherAnonymousAppellation
Ars Praefectus
Here's hoping every single one of their boosters RUDs. The Russians deserve nothing less.
Upvote
3
(13
/
-10)
You fundamentally misunderstand what Russia is.
Russia has no neighbor. It only has an ever expanding border.
Russia is not a country, it's a tumor.
Upvote
43
(47
/
-4)
That was my thought, and I'm surprised the OneWeb case wasn't in the article. It will surely be decades before anyone trusts Russia with their satellites again.
Upvote
32
(32
/
0)
So the Russian made Zenit is finally about to fly again. Old is new when it's made in Russia. It is an improvement in that it carries 80 tons more fuel in the first stage and has a more efficient second stage giving it about 30 percent more payload than Zenit had, but I still don't see anyone besides Russia using it.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
Any knowledge as why this isn’t using Vostochny as launch pad? I can understand Baikonur for launches to the ISS but this isn’t intended for that and is no more a Soyuz family rocket than any other random rocket.
Unless it’s part of a strategy of keeping diversity, in launch site as well as launcher families.
Edit; I can answer my own question. It’s using the old Zenit launchpad 45 at Baikonur, which is presumably cheaper than building a new one and needs little modification.
Unless it’s part of a strategy of keeping diversity, in launch site as well as launcher families.
Edit; I can answer my own question. It’s using the old Zenit launchpad 45 at Baikonur, which is presumably cheaper than building a new one and needs little modification.
Upvote
21
(21
/
0)