From: jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com   
      
   In article ,   
   jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca says...   
   >   
   > On 2021-07-21 17:29, Jeff Findley wrote:   
   >   
   > > US.  The Titan II missile, Titan II launch vehicle, Titan III launch   
   > > vehicle, and Titan IV launch vehicle all used hypergolic propellants in   
   > > their liquid fueled stages.  But the US doesn't use them anymore.   
   >   
   > Looking at how Soyuz had been certified for max 6 months, do the   
   > hypergolics have a "best before" sticker on the gallons that you buy at   
   > tye local hardware store?  If you're using them for missile that remain   
   > idle all their life, just curiious how they handle this.  De-fuel   
   > missile and put in new hypergolics every 6 months?   
      
   Soyuz doesn't use hypergolic propellants.  It uses nearly pure hydrogen   
   peroxide mono-propellant.  Nearly pure hydrogen peroxide will decompose   
   over time, which is why Soyuz is limited to about six months in space.   
      
   > > Hypergolic propellants are super reliable to start.   
   >   
   > I get the advantage once you've launched, especially for little   
   > thrusters.  But have ignitions failed often at the pad?  Just curious if   
   > ignition for Stage 1 have ever been an issue where hypergolics have an   
   > advantage.   
      
   For missiles, it was more about the room temperature storage (as opposed   
   to cryogenic LOX and kerosene used in Atlas).  But, reliable ignition   
   after sitting in a silo for years is definitely an advantage.   
      
   > > Proton is sure to keep flying.  Russia won't retire Proton until it   
   > > isn't "needed" anymore.  And only Russia knows what that means.   
   >   
   > What I read in Wikipedia is that it is being replaced by Angara, and not   
   > quirte sure on status of Angara (I think they've had a test flight or   
   > two, not sure if operational).   
      
   I don't think Angara is fully operational.   
      
   > I Russia still tring to avoid depending on Baikonour because it is a   
   > Russian island in Kazakhstan, or have they become mroe comfortable with it?   
   >   
   > With Putin working to rebuild the USSR, I have to wonder if he no longer   
   > puts strategic importance on moving stuff to Russian territory if he   
   > expects those counries to either return to USSR or remain loyal to   
   > Russia or face what happend to Ukraine.   
      
   Space funding gets little love in Russia.   
      
   Jeff   
   --   
   All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.   
   These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,   
   employer, or any organization that I am a member of.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)