Talk:Angara (rocket family)

message: This is not a single rocket but a rocket family, and the different versions vary enormously. I propose moving this to Angara rocket family. Offliner (talk) 07:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move 

message: Are the Russians contemplating the TKS spacecraft again?  The rocket farthest to the right in the photo appears to have one. If not, it could be an FGB, but why would it retain the launch escape system?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.162.77.10 (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  TKS 

message: I've tagged the Development history section for , as it is essentially a list of dated sentences right now. Ideally, this needs working into normal prose spacing, potentially with a timeline. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 10:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed Development history and replaced with History section with normal prose, including background A(Ch) 03:11, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spacing 

message: I've checked the article against 5 of the 6 criteria for B-class and passed it accordingly, but haven't marked it for accuracy, as I am not familiar enough with the field. Could someone knowledgeable in the field please check over the accuracy, and mark/amend the article as appropriate. I feel it is certainly beyond B-class standard in the other aspects, and has a strong case for being rated as GA-class or above. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-class rating 

message: Proposed versions states that the KVTK-A7 is the 2nd stage & gives the weight of the A7 as 1133 tonnes but Specifications lists the KVTK-A7 as the 3rd stage (but doesn't give a 2nd stage) and has a weight of 1125 for the A7P & 1184 for the A7V (and lists no other difference; how do they differ?).
69.72.92.125 (talk) 05:40, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Replaced the two A7 variants with data from the Khrunichev website. The A7P (for the Russian word for "piloted") was proposed as a crew vehicle launcher, while the A7V (for the Russian word for "hydrogen") was to use a LH2 upper stage. Khrunichev seems to have dropped the crew vehicle launcher and the V from the designation, while keeping the LH2 upper stage. A(Ch) 23:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A7 

message: Russians count their core stage as stage two and boosters as stage one, because the core is throttled down some time after liftoff and boosters run out of fuel and separate before the core stage runs out of fuel.
So most of the stage classifications in this page are incorrect. --Hkultala (talk) 14:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stage classification 

message: Will the spacecraft be reusable?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.120.174 (talk) 07:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reusability 

message: I am now submitting a proposal to split this article into different parts, including A5 and 1.2, as they were already launched for several times and should be considered as "mature" rockets. I don't understand why such a big(and active) rocket family does not have separate articles for its variants. Timothytyy (talk) 03:23, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting the article  

message: A5M - Is In future launches but not described or defined. Should it be under A5 (presuming development of A5M is funded) ? - Rod57 (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: According to russianspaceweb.com (from September 2018!) Angara-5M can transport 27.1 tons into LEO. So a new column in the tables under specifications is required, but I don't now where to find the data. --Kallichore (talk) 06:27, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A5M - In future launches but not described or defined