Getting the Most Out of the Space Station (Before It's Too Late)
bmahersciwriter writes: NASA administrators are strategizing a push to do more science on the International Space Station in the coming years. The pressure is on, given the rapidly cooling relations between the U.S. and Russia, whose deputy prime minister recently suggested that U.S. astronauts use a trampoline if they want to get into orbit. Aiding in the push for more research is the development of two-way cargo ships by SpaceX, which should allow for return of research materials (formerly a hurdle to doing useful experiments). NASA soon aims to send new earth-monitoring equipment to the station and expanded rodent facilities. And geneLAB will send a range of model organisms like fruit flies and nematodes into space for months at a time.
You do not know what you are talking about. They recently developed the RD-191 and RD-0124 staged combustion engines. They are developing the Angara rocket to replace Proton. Russia is one of the largest launch services providers in the world.
In other words, they upgraded the labels on rocket designs from the 1960s and 1970s. The RD-0110 was first flown in 1964 and the RD-170 was first developed for the Engergia rocket in the late 70s.
If instead, we're going to compare apples to apples. we'll also have to note that SpaceX has similarly upgraded its rocket engines during the same period. For example, there are three substantial upgrades of the original Merlin 1 rocket engine (the rocket used on the Falcon 9) and a second upgrade to the Draco rocket engine (a in-space rocket engine used for maneuvering). So
And while Russia claims to be developing Angara, as you already noted, they aren't due to the "delays" attributed to funding (which is actually the easiest part of the puzzle for Russia to fix - just add money).
So to summarize the current count: SpaceX has developed four rocket engine designs from scratch and upgraded these four times in the same sense that Russia has upgraded the RD-170 and the RD-0110. Then they developed two launch vehicles while Russia has experienced delays in its alleged development of the Angara. Finally, SpaceX developed a new spacecraft and vertical landing technology while Russia did neither. I think you see where I'm going with this.
You call replacing a gas generator engine (RD-0110) with a staged combustion engine (RD-0124) with over twice the chamber pressure an 'upgrade'? You don't know WTF you are talking about. The engine is completely new with no relation other than that it is used as a drop in replacement with compatible interfaces.
The RD-191 to a lot of people maybe be just an RD-170 with a quarter of the combustion chambers but things are a lot more complicated than that. Plus I only gave those two engines as examples. There are more.
Pump fed engines, Kestrel and Draco, are trivial to design in comparison. The Russians also designed some of those much later than what you mention such as the S5.98M engine used in the Briz-M upper stage used in Proton. They also designed a LOX/LH2 expander cycle engine called the RD-0146. No man. The Russians are the world leaders in liquid rocket engine design and anyone who thinks otherwise are deluding themselves.
SpaceX is doing a nice job so far but their engines are still not state of the art.