Russia Ousts Boisterous Space Chief Dmitry Rogozin (theverge.com) 54
Dmitry Rogozin, the blustering head of Russia's state space corporation, Roscosmos, is out of the position following a big shake-up in the Russian government. From a report: He is being replaced by Yury Borisov, Russian deputy prime minister of space and defense, bringing an end to Rogozin's dynamic reign as general director of the country's space program. Rogozin has been in charge of Roscosmos since his appointment as director general in 2018, though prior to that, he was deputy prime minister since 2011, overseeing space and defense. He's been a controversial figure for most of that tenure, resulting in strained relations with NASA -- Russia's largest partner in space. Rogozin was sanctioned by the United States in 2014 and barred from entering the country due to his time as a deputy prime minister during Russia's annexation of Crimea.
As the head of Roscosmos, Rogozin became known for making wildly outlandish statements and threats, many of which put NASA in rather uncomfortable positions. His bombast got renewed focus when Russia began its invasion of Ukraine this year, prompting Rogozin to go into overdrive and make ludicrous claims that many interpreted as threats against NASA and the US / Russian space partnership. For instance, at the start of the war, Rogozin seemed to hint that Roscosmos might pull out of the International Space Station partnership and cause the ISS to come crashing down to Earth. And, after declaring that Russia would no longer supply rocket engines to the United States, Rogozin said NASA astronauts could use "broomsticks" to get to orbit.
As the head of Roscosmos, Rogozin became known for making wildly outlandish statements and threats, many of which put NASA in rather uncomfortable positions. His bombast got renewed focus when Russia began its invasion of Ukraine this year, prompting Rogozin to go into overdrive and make ludicrous claims that many interpreted as threats against NASA and the US / Russian space partnership. For instance, at the start of the war, Rogozin seemed to hint that Roscosmos might pull out of the International Space Station partnership and cause the ISS to come crashing down to Earth. And, after declaring that Russia would no longer supply rocket engines to the United States, Rogozin said NASA astronauts could use "broomsticks" to get to orbit.
Lucky for us... (Score:5, Insightful)
Boeing and SpaceX make some fantastic "Space broomsticks" nowadays.
Re: (Score:3)
Boeing and SpaceX make some fantastic "Space broomsticks" nowadays.
Also that we have the right to use the Russian rocket engine design as we want.
Proton (Score:3)
SpaceX Falcon Heavy rockets cost a fraction to launch compared to Roscosmos' Proton. Why would the US use their designs?
Re: (Score:2)
SpaceX Falcon Heavy rockets cost a fraction to launch compared to Roscosmos' Proton. Why would the US use their designs?
To incorporate into launch vehicles designed to use the RD-180. While cost is important, having a variety of different vehicles for different missions, as well as to ensure a technical issue does not eliminate your launch capacity until it is fixed.
Re:Proton (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
They might have the design, but they do not have the knowledge, which indeed makes it 'too expensive' to build them.
The 80% cost of middle management and recursive testing kills that whole idea for a US based production.
It's one of the side effects (downsides?) of the enormous difference in engineering between the CCCP at the time and the US .
Re: Proton (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s not us vs ussr, itâ(TM)s the worst of contractor chain waterfall going up against the ex ussr. SpaceX clearly itâ(TM)s perfectly capable of producing excellent engines on us labor.
Re: (Score:2)
...they tried to manufacture the RD-180 on US soil and then they "succesfully concluded" [nasaspaceflight.com] the program by basically saying that it would be too expensive to *actually* build those engines in the US and that they'd continue to buy them from the country with cheaper labor.
Made economic sense, at the time, based on the geopolitical idea that Russia was becoming more aligned with teh west and its ideals. Events shown otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Because the US government chose Blue Origin to replace the RD-180.
Re: Proton (Score:2)
Because we know how much it costs to purchase their services?
Re: (Score:2)
Because we know how much it costs to purchase their services?
What it costs to buy and what it cost to produce are related; but Musk may be losing money to gain a dominant market position and hope scale makes it up.
Re: (Score:3)
> The US government beholden to private companies.
NASA and Russia are still cooperating
"NASA, Russian space agency sign deal to share space station flights - Roscosmos" https://www.reuters.com/busine... [reuters.com]
I guess that's why Dmitry Rogozin was ousted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing Russia and NASA wanted to sign a contract and cooperate, the following was certainly one of the main reasons Space Chief Dmitry Rogozin was ousted:
"threats against NASA and the US / Russian space partnership ... might pull out of the International Space Station partnership and cause the ISS to come crashing down to Earth"
Re: Lucky for us... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
What percentage is that of the total number of people on the 737 MAX flights that crashed?
Challenger and Columbia were arguably mistakes.
Boeing is downright criminal. They were not mistakes. They were deliberate design decisions.
Re: Lucky for us... (Score:4, Interesting)
Challenger and Columbia were arguably mistakes.
Challenger, at least, was arguably criminal as well. Middle management had been told the O-rings were dangerous under the launch conditions that pertained. They elected to go ahead with the launch anyway, because it was a publicity launch. If that isn't reckless disregard for life I don't know what is.
Columbia was a mistake. It wasn't clear to anyone in advance that the heat shield tiles were taking as much damage from falling ice as they were.
Re: Lucky for us... (Score:2)
Re: Lucky for us... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hydraulic engineering is not aerospace/aeronautical engineering.
Percentages (Score:2)
How many people did Challenger and Columbia kill in total?
What percentage is that of the total number of people on the 737 MAX flights that crashed?
Challenger and Columbia killed about 1.7% of all crew and passengers who ever flew on a space shuttle. I suspect a smaller percentage of 737MAX occupants have died.
I don't disagree with you about Boeing, but playing number games to compare accidents/atrocities doesn't necessarily mean anything, or make public projects less culpable.
Re: (Score:2)
Boeing is downright criminal. They were not mistakes. They were deliberate design decisions.
Design mistakes largely through ignorance. Including:
1) a single point of failure, and 2) insufficient emphasis on the feature changes (and how to disable them).
It was the bluffing and the coverup attempt that was criminal.
Re: (Score:2)
Boeing doesn't, no. They have 50% ownership of the company that launches astronauts using Russian engines. They have plans to replace the Russian engines with Jeff Bezos' engines, but they're years behind schedule.
Dmitry is out, Yuri is in. (Score:2)
Dmitry is out, Yuri is in.
Sounds so obviously Russian.
Re: (Score:2)
Boris and Ivan will be reporting to him.
Musical chairs (Score:2)
Russian version.
The new guy (Score:2)
Ousts? (Score:5, Interesting)
I had read that Rogozin is being made Russia's administrator of the Russian occupied territories of Ukraine, so i don't think he's been ousted from much. maybe he's been put in a more troublesome permission because with any luck there will not be permanently occupied territories.
i guess what im saying is this news isnt exactly a celebration and the article makes it look like he's being ousted because of his bombast, when infact he's being moved and in some ways promoted to a more front line permission in russia's efforts against ukraine.
that said, rogozin may have to move offices to Mariupol, so putting him literally near the front lines, some may consider a russian disposal technique for people they want to get rid of/put in risk.
we'll see. he's a true bastard though.
Re:Ousts? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
friendly comment, its just "Ukraine", since it's a country, not a region. its a habit many people have, just one worth working on disposing to align with their statehood.
Re: (Score:1)
The problem with it is the word Ukraine is derived from ukraina, meaning border, or frontier, which it used to be, after the Tartar invasion in the13th century.
It has now come to mean the name of an independent country, so when you put "the" in front of it, you are basically demoting it back to merely being the border or frontier of Russia. Or so my Ukraine friend told me.
Re:Ousts? (Score:5, Interesting)
I had read that Rogozin is being made Russia's administrator of the Russian occupied territories of Ukraine, so i don't think he's been ousted from much. maybe he's been put in a more troublesome permission because with any luck there will not be permanently occupied territories.
It also sounds like this might be only part of a broader shakeup in the Russian government [rferl.org]. I wonder how much this is related to Ukraine and the sanctions and how much is motivated by Putin's health and manoeuvring for the succession.
Re: (Score:2)
I had read that Rogozin is being made Russia's administrator of the Russian occupied territories of Ukraine, so i don't think he's been ousted from much. maybe he's been put in a more troublesome [position [FTFY]] because with any luck there will not be permanently occupied territories.
It also sounds like this might be only part of a broader shakeup in the Russian government [rferl.org]. I wonder how much this is related to Ukraine and the sanctions and how much is motivated by Putin's health and [maneuvering [FTFY]] for the succession.
This is also the line of thinking I was following. I'm sure that support for the war in Ukraine has become a crucial job qualification for any government job in Russia now. A little loyalty on the Ukraine question will go a long way...
But I also think Zelenskyy made a huge major mistake by starting talks about the costs of rebuilding Ukraine. Seems pretty obvious that Putin's response is along the lines of "You ain't seen nothing yet."
Re: (Score:2)
This is also the line of thinking I was following. I'm sure that support for the war in Ukraine has become a crucial job qualification for any government job in Russia now. A little loyalty on the Ukraine question will go a long way...
I guess the question is whether he wanted this post or someone wanted him to have it.
But I also think Zelenskyy made a huge major mistake by starting talks about the costs of rebuilding Ukraine. Seems pretty obvious that Putin's response is along the lines of "You ain't seen nothing yet."
Short of nukes, a card he probably can't play, I'm not sure what else he has to show. They're already recruiting prisoners and old men, and using anti-aircraft missiles against ground targets. Maybe a general draft scares up more troops but again, that may not be an option and it's not clear how much that would help. I don't know how much longer it will go on, but the HIMARS seem to be making a serious dent and not many fol
Re: (Score:2)
Regarding mobilization, they seem to avoid pissing of the population of Moscow and St Petersburg. It is the minority people from poorer regions who die. If they mobilize, they may have a mass of armed and angry people who might revolt.
Re: (Score:3)
What else does he (presumably Putin) have to show? That he's willing to burn Ukraine to the ground. If he can't have it, why should Ukraine exist? At all? That's what Putin wants to show now. As if it wasn't sufficiently clear already, but evidently Putin thinks not.
We already know Putin doesn't care how many Ukrainians he kills. Nor does Putin care how many Russian soldiers die even if the "conquest" is just a smoking ruin. Zelenskyy should have said Ukraine will be free even if the Ukrainians have to live
Re: (Score:2)
What else does he (presumably Putin) have to show? That he's willing to burn Ukraine to the ground. If he can't have it, why should Ukraine exist? At all? That's what Putin wants to show now. As if it wasn't sufficiently clear already, but evidently Putin thinks not.
We already know Putin doesn't care how many Ukrainians he kills. Nor does Putin care how many Russian soldiers die even if the "conquest" is just a smoking ruin. Zelenskyy should have said Ukraine will be free even if the Ukrainians have to live in poverty while fighting the Russians for however long it takes.
Remember that Putin has completely delusional beliefs of what Stalin's USSR was like. He thinks those were the great old days. Now Putin is bringing back the Stalin-style concentration camps for suspicious people from Ukraine AND from Russia.
I agree with all that, but again, I think Putin is already showing that. And from the military side I don't see him having any new cards to play, just a hope that the Russian military somehow becomes motivated and effective, and their stockpiles somehow keep holding up.
And I'm not sure Putin won't play the nuclear card. Several ways to use them or nuclear material... Many of them to be blamed on the Ukrainians the way he blamed the Chechens for the apartment bombings back in 2000. Putin has been getting away with murder for a LONG time.
He could try a dirty bomb of some kind, but that makes Russia an international pariah without actually helping the military much. As for straight up nukes? I suspect Putin would be willing but there's enough not-terminally-ill people in the c
Re: (Score:2)
Insufficient time for a longer reply just now, but I believe that if Putin could have held onto Chornobyl he might have used it as the source of a dirty bomb to be blamed on Ukraine. Depends on what you think about the 1999 bombings? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] shows I got the date wrong in my earlier reference.
Re: (Score:2)
My read is that he's being set up to fail, thus justifying his removal (for which read: execution).
Re: (Score:2)
> is being made Russia's administrator of the Russian occupied territories of Ukraine
"We're not demoting you, we're just moving you to a more dynamic work environment. I'll be a blast, true me!"
Re: (Score:2)
"So crazy that Putin fires you" is a downright scary standard . . .
Sounds like... (Score:1)
War in Ukraine not going as well as Putin would like... and Putin realizes that this is the one area that he has to keep some international stability with. Get rid of the clown and put someone in there that Putin doesn't have to constantly drag on the carpet and tell them to shut the heck up.
As for space broomsticks... SpaceX's are working... Boeing - not so much. But they will get there - eventually.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
Yes. Yes he is. Your opinion in this case is irrelevant since he meets the dictionary definition of the word. This is why we have descriptive words instead of opinions.
in soviet russia (Score:5, Funny)
Broomsticks (Score:2)
Rogozin said NASA astronauts could use "broomsticks" to get to orbit.
Yer a wizard, Harry!
In boisterous space (Score:2)
What does this mean? (Score:1)
It could just be a simple shuffling of senior positions unrelated to Rogozin's bombast. Or perhaps he's being replaced by someone more strident and controversial?
However, manned spaceflight is a major source of pride for the Russians, and they know full well that without the ISS, they have no reason to launch people into space. They must know that the other members of the ISS consortium must be working on (or have already developed) contingency plans for an ISS without Russian participation. They have 2 yea
US support for ISS supports enemy military tech. (Score:2)
ISS will be replaced which means it is not irreplaceable. Russian genocide in Ukraine and the Russian threat to civilization is vastly more important than a space toy humanity has millions of years to replace with modern, cheaper more capable systems.
ISS should be scrapped to deny the Russian armed forces its benefits.