PAK-FA FIRST FLIGHT!!!!

Bad wishes are a show of envy.:cool:

MOSCOW, October 13 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s federal space agency has started work to design a new carrier rocket to orbit manned flights from a new space center in the country’s Far East, the head of the agency said on Tuesday.

Roscosmos’s Anatoly Perminov said priority would be given to the rocket’s reliability and safety, including crew evacuation at any stage of the flight.

He said the new rocket would be used as a platform for heavier carriers with payloads of 50-60 tons and super-heavy carriers with payloads of 130-150 tons.

The construction of the new space center, Vostochny, will start in 2011 and should be completed in 2018.

Russia currently uses the Baikonur space center in the Central Asian Republic of Kazakhstan, which it has leased since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Seven launch pads are to be built at the space center, including two for manned flights and two for space freighters.

A government official said in September that an inter-agency working group had been created, and that work to design elements of the station’s infrastructure was in progress.

I think this is illogical. It is better to exploit the yet to test Angara family rather than start with a new rocket.

Roughly speaking, …yes.

Anyway, for a 2000 km launch you can neglect the Earth curvature. So, you should use the ballistic laws to simulate the trajectory in order to obtain more accurate data. I.e, you can assume a burnout time around 120 secs, a launch angle of 45°, constant acceleration and a final speed of 4 km/s. The rest of the path will be a parabola very close to the real path, until, of course the re-entry stage, around 100 km height. Varying the launch angle you can simulate depressed or lofted trajectories.

Scaled down? Yes.
Scaled up? No; because of the Earth curvature. That’s cause the path to be like an ellipse rather than a parabola.

Let me some time, I will up-load a better resolution graphs of the same figures.

I think I can provide you a qualitative but a little inaccurate answer. By the sake of simplicity we can divide the ballistic path in (1) an exo-atmospheric phase. (2) An endo-atmospheric phase in the upper layer of the atmosphere (100-40 km altitude) and (3) an endo-atmospheric phase in the thick lower layer of the atmosphere (less than 40 km). In (1) you can accurately compute the vehicle position, speed and azimuth from Keplerian motion laws. In (2) these laws begin to be interfered by drag forces and in (3) drag “rules”. Speed in steps (2) and (3) ends to depend on motion parameters and depends mainly on the ballistic coefficient of warheads (that are unsurprisingly classified information). So let us assume that we have a “heavy” RV and a “light” RV, both descending from 100 km to the ground. The heavy one can descend at around 4 km/s (from a ballistic speed of 7 km/s) for most of the last 100 km while the light one at an average speed around 2 km/s. Below, let say 10 km, both travel around 2 km/s but on the average the heavy one descended much faster. Numbers are guesses.
I don’t know the values for ballistic coefficient of sub-munitions but we can safely assume they are “light”. Sub-munitions being small light RV will have low descending speed in steps (2) and (3). We can’t predict much without data on ballistic coefficients. In addition depressed trajectories increase the travel time on steps (2)-(3), so more drag, and so less final speed.

Off- course this is a very simplified picture of the reality.

Interesting questions. There are some equations that can predict the drag for a reentry-vehicle as function on the altitude, the vehicle speed and its ballistic coefficient. The problem is “a classical one” on the nonlinear tracking literature. Let me some time to google for internet sources on the issue.

“System C-500, which is in development, will be able to eliminate intermediate-range missiles, tactical missiles, and shoot down missiles in the near space and thus will be elements of a strategic missile defense,” – he said.

If it can intercept IRBM still is not an ABM by its own parameters. Although it will deal with SS-20 type missiles, it still will need data from the Don-2NP and the LPAR network to work as an ABM.