A little bit about yourself
It so happened that after school I went to study at the Moscow Aviation Institute (MAI), 601 department, aerospace faculty. I studied the design of spacecraft and booster blocks. Since 2004, I went to work in the design department of the Salyut design bureau (FSUE GKNPTs named after MV Khrunichev). I got into the sector that was engaged in the design of the Hangara and the modernization of the Proton. Since 2008, I have worked as a deputy head of the Design and Research Center of FSUE “GKNPTs im. MV Khrunichev ”, and in 2014 I founded my own private company“ CosmoCourse ”, where I went to work with my head. This article is a summary of my experience in the field of creating launch vehicles and the formation of the team that should create these missiles.
The article itself
I am often asked the question - why are you skeptical about the statements of collectives about the creation of missiles? I usually answer with a couple of phrases or words in the style of the law of conservation of standard hours in nature. But in response to me "flies" that this is all unfounded. Well, in order not to be unfounded, let's consider a conventionally classic example of a liquid ultra-light rocket for launching satellites. Let's assume that its design is quite classic and standard, without reusability and other fashionable gizmos. And the number of steps can be from two to three.
I'll try to tell you what the minimum team is needed to create your own rocket, who is needed in order to design this rocket. The very first secret is that it is not a rocket that needs to be designed, but a complex that, in addition to the rocket, includes issues of ground infrastructure (cosmodrome + MCC), as well as issues of organizing production and testing. Let's start.
- General design specialists. Which link the entire complex as a whole. On the rocket, they set the basic concept, supervise the weight report and parameters of all systems, track the correspondence of all systems of the rocket and the complex to each other. At least 3 specialists should work here.
- . , () . , - . . 4 .
- . - . , . ( , ..) . , , . , , . 1 .
- . , , , . , , . – , , . , . 3 .
- . . , . 2 , .
- . , , , . , , . 1 .
- . , , . . , , . 2 .
- . . . . . 2 .
- . . , . , . 1 .
- . . , . , . 1 . , 5 .
- . , . , . , .. 1 . , 8 .
- . , . , , . 4 .
- . . , , , 2 . , 5 , — 7 , — 8 .
In total, we see that if you go to focus on a team of highly qualified specialists who have significant experience, excellent performance and know how to work with each other, then you need at least 27 specialists just to design a rocket (complex). And if we consider that we live in the real world, then we need at least 35 specialists who know what to do. If you focus on your strength, like SpaceX, then in an ideal world you need at least 47 specialists, and in a real world at least 55-60 specialists. Many will notice that I did not take into account a bunch of auxiliary specialists, workers, and in general there are not enough designers for the release of CD. But my goal was to show straight minimum-minimum.
Now about the statements and desires. Dreams that it is possible to work remotely and on a half-time basis, as well as to outsource the workers I listed, remain dreams. I do not know of such successful examples. Yes, and the work of these specialists in the course of the project is carried out without respite and with great strain, there are constant refinements, alterations and improvements. An exception is the organization of our own project office with up to 10 specialists. And all work on the complex is outsourced, for example, to Roscosmos. S7 Space seems to be running according to this scheme. The next problem is that presentations with 20 or as many as 100 leaves are often called a project. Indeed, 2-3 "trained" specialists are enough to form a preliminary appearance of the rocket. And they will form the appearance of the rocket within a week and in another week or two they will draw up all this in a beautiful document.So this is not a project, but indicative proposals. Then all this should be rechecked and recalculated for at least three years (iterations + design stages). Sometimes it is suggested, after such a "rough" work, to immediately proceed to the manufacture of a prototype. All this is offered because the specialists I have listed are not visible on the horizon or it seems that they are not needed. So, it’s easy to release a CD on a prototype rocket, if the study and refinement are not carried out. But the whole result can be immediately thrown into the trash, well, or put on a shelf.that the specialists I have listed are not visible on the horizon, or it seems that they are not needed. So, it’s easy to release a CD on a prototype rocket, if the study and refinement are not carried out. But the whole result can be immediately thrown into the trash, well, or put on a shelf.that the specialists I have listed are not visible on the horizon, or it seems that they are not needed. So it’s as easy as shelling pears to release a CD on a prototype rocket, if no elaboration and refinement is carried out. But the whole result can be immediately thrown into the trash, well, or put on a shelf.
Here is such a good reminder of how many specialists are needed and why. I hope this will help many to more correctly assess their ideas and proposals in the field of missile development. I have not shown how the hiring of these specialists is distributed over time. But I can tell you that if you choose the right number of these particular specialists, then in three years your rocket will fly. True, for this you will also need to organize production and build all the necessary ground infrastructure. But that's a completely different story.