664:. Finally, I should say, that development of Soyuz-FG began by Soviet Union in 1987, while Soyuz-2 project appeared in 2000, when it became clear that everything analog should become digital. Now about Soyuz-ST. LV with such name has not yet flown - it is a modification of Soyuz-2, which will be launched from Guiana Space Center, and now Starsem uses Soyuz-FG/Fregat LV at Baikonur. Therefore, I created a normal Soyuz-FG page and suggest that you should redo Soyuz-2 page, leaving information here only about Soyuz-2.1a, Soyuz-2.1b and future LV Soyuz-ST in order not to mislead people. Best regards!
1965:@JFG few references to it in non-public FLPP documents, they want to increase the launch cadence to reduce costs and the A62 will takeover the medium launch performance segment that Soyuz currently fills in their launcher lineup, particularly as the market is moving to GEO communication satellites heavier than Soyuz can launch. After the O3B constellation launches which Soyuz is ideal for (4x700kg to MEO) they only booked one more flight for Kourou last year (which has A62 as contracted backup), the bulk of the OneWeb launches (32-36 200kg LEO) will be from Baikonur. --
482:
464:
1373:
the first stage performed above expectations in a difficult situation. Strangely, NASA's ridiculous contracts actually consider it a mostly successful mission... except for the last bit with the exploding rocket. Same with
Orbital's recent Kerbaling of their rocket. If it lifts off, it's at least a partial success in their books, even if it fails in under 15 seconds like Antares did:P. But just because NASA has stuuuupid rules doesn't mean we should let SpaceX off the hook. The mission failed, period. Ditto with these failed Proton missions.
436:
240:
222:
347:
320:
492:
191:
250:
357:
1257:. We don't currently know if they will be usable or not - if they are then yes, it is a partial failure. If, however, they will never be usable for anything beyond testing then there is nothing partial about it. We need to wait and see whether they can be put into service or not but if the payload does prove unservicable then that is a complete failure. --
2038:
2000:
1529:
Which leaves the
Progress accident. I admit that this one was a marginal case and I put in the outcome before the investigation ended. I need some time to think about this one since "rocket injected payload into correct orbit but damaged the payload to unusable state" is a rare case in spaceflight
1372:
Think about it this way: the recent SpaceX launch that failed could be considered a partial success. After all, the Dragon was simply placed in an incorrect orbit. This is literally true. The orbit in question eventually intersected with the ground (ocean actually), but still:P. Engines fired, and
1357:
Ive never really understood the argument that if its up its successful even if its in the wrong place and unusable for its intended purpose as essentially the mission objective has failed and a replacement will have to be built and launched. You wouldn't call a cargo ship that crossed the
Atlantic
1310:
In other rocket articles, it's only considered a partial failure if the payload can be used for its original mission, or if it can be re-purposed in a significant way. Most of the "partial failures" listed here (like the
Progress failure, the failure of which was traced to the upper stage, not the
1386:
You can always come up with some paperwork excuse, "97% of the mission's objectives were met!" Technically true, but irrelevant. All that matters is payload delivery. If I order something from Amazon and they fail to deliver it to me, I don't consider the order a "partial success" or "partial
1238:
Define "recoverable" - satellites respond just fine, only are placed on an incorrect orbit. Returning them to the correct orbits won't be possible, satellites don't have enough fuel for that, however they still might be used for hardware testing (ESA/CNES/OHB teams are still studying possible
1286:
as originally designed to, however they might be used for a different purpose. Hence my doubt if this qualifies as a partial failure or not. We're still waiting for an official announcement, so it's pretty much impossible to determine anything until then anyway. I'll try to keep
882:
for example. Seeing as the article is in
British English, the title should not be in American English. There is no need to add additional disambiguation. The Soyuz article has pretty non-standard disambiguation anyway, and I am considering proposing that it be moved to
997:
I put back detailed description of variants. I understand that in present form it mostly duplicates information that is already in the intro, so this should be sorted out. Still, because the article uses 2.1a and 2.1b names, they must be described.
916:- per your post, this is clearly part of a much larger issue. I am withdrawing the RM nomination in order to persue a wider discussion of the whole issue of disambiguation in rocketry articles. I have made a standardisation proposal
1330:
I'm not sure if that is the common denotation that people who count these statistics follows - the system that I followed assumes that any launch that does put something into an Earth orbit is at most a "partial failure", just like
445:
330:
1311:
Progress itself) are in fact total failures. Saying anything else is just an attempt at PR, and doesn't belong on
Knowledge. (Note that if the payload fails, not the rocket, then it is, of course, still a successful launch.)—
566:
The article leaves me confused about the optional Ikar stage. The infobox currently reads in part: "Third Stage (Optional) - Ikar ... Thrust 2.94 kN (66,093 LBf)" Maybe the kN or the LBf is off by a factor of 10. But which?
647:
Hello,GW_Simulations! I work for RSC Energia, and I think that I know better what our partners in TsSKB-Progress (ЦСКБ-Прогресс) produce. Yes, Soyuz-FG is not completely Soyuz-U, but its only difference is more powerful
1453:
Hmm.....this is strange, as I am pretty sure that I and others use the same standard as on other pages (and if you have checked the edit histories of the pages of other rockets, you should see my name multiple
601:
It most certainly shouldn't be 294kN, that's more thrust than a
Centaur. The sneaky f'ing russian forum that I googled suggests 2943N / 662 lbf. But perhaps someone could find a more reliable official source.--
2195:
2190:
153:
618:
The Soyuz FG is a version of the Soyuz-2 rocket (they are all derived from the Soyuz-U). There is not really enough difference to have a seperate article for it, so I am suggesting that the
1046:
Looking at the source on the launch that is listed as a failure, it seems that it was the satellite that failed, *not* the launcher, thus it should be listed as a success for Soyuz-2.
1435:
Well that's just it. I've read many of the rocketry related articles on
Knowledge, and this is the only one I've seen that doesn't conform to the definition of failure I used above. —
2020:
Lol, I think its a mark of respect to editors that when asked about Ariane 6 performance in that interview the assistant director of CNES says you can look it up on
Knowledge.
1097:
The link to the BLITS satellite payload is incorrect, it takes you to an unrelated page about sound. A page containing information on the BLITS payload doesn't seem to exist.
836:
2185:
1593:
I was mostly concerned with the
Progress one, because I know almost nothing about the Meridian 2 sat, and I agree that the Galileo one should be a partial failure/success. —
1479:- The Galileo one is evidently only a partial failure even by your standards since ESA should be putting the satellites into operation soon, though not in the original place.
2165:
2137:
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not.
296:
1157:) over the number of failures and partial failures the Soyuz-2 has had. I'm not sure which launch is at issue, but the three anomalous launches I am aware of are:
1887:
1883:
1869:
147:
2210:
538:
2065:
302:
1154:
917:
79:
2170:
2160:
544:
2069:
1161:
Meridian 2: Failure - Underperformed, initially declared as a partial failure as Russia hoped to recover satellite; this was subsequently abandoned.
2180:
426:
416:
2215:
2205:
1418:
272:
2096:
85:
2200:
2175:
1083:
1027:
1795:
1680:
1053:
955:
683:, not by a Soyuz 2. Assuming these are different types of rockets, can we safely remove the reference to RADARSAT-2 from this article? (
514:
1810:
Thanks, I have removed it from the list of scheduled launches (and also updated that list); it was probably an error in the source. —
861:
656:, which they develop in partnership with us - we are developing a digitally-controlled version of Soyuz-TMA. Besides, Soyuz-2 has new
1358:
then sank in port before its cargo could be unloaded a partial success as the cargo has not been delivered where its supposed to go.
1865:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1140:
392:
263:
227:
1988:. Perhaps we should cite this even if it's not a high-quality source, better than nothing. Should be attributed and conditional. —
1746:... I don't think this counts as a "partial failure" for the launch, but it's definitely worth adding a note in the launch table.
1020:
It would be nice to have some information about what caused the partial failure of the one launch. What was the result, as well.
1504:- I have not seen any evidence that Meridian 2 was abandoned, and given its outcome orbit.....it could only be a partial failure.
99:
44:
30:
1560:
1426:
1348:
1283:
1270:
1224:
1202:
1184:
1148:
505:
469:
104:
20:
1639:
I am boldly marking the Progress launch as a total failure. The rocket shook the payload to death and the mission failed.
1113:
74:
1167:
Galileo: TBD - Wrong orbit, remains to be seen whether the satellites are recoverable (partial failure) or not (failure).
1930:
1739:
840:
388:
370:
325:
202:
1387:
failure" due to the fact that the ordering process went down without a hitch. Failure to deliver == mission failure. —
986:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
739:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
1979:
Thanks, this is very informative. There are some hints about this policy change in the interview of two CNES officials
168:
65:
1855:
1845:
1762:
1743:
135:
1282:
What I'm trying to say here is that satellites will not return to their intended orbit, so they won't be used in a
857:
2080:
article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
1556:
1422:
1344:
1198:
1144:
1886:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
782:— Seems to be more common to include the hyphen than not to do so. The hyphen also provides disambiguation from
2076:'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for
1076:
1031:
932:
899:
798:
760:
712:
634:
589:
481:
463:
190:
1799:
1684:
1057:
959:
1921:
1837:
865:
109:
1983:
1833:
1770:
1751:
1721:
1644:
748:
to allow discussion on the issue of rocket article disambiguation in general, not just specific cases. --
129:
2025:
1970:
1905:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1893:
1363:
1296:
1244:
1134:
602:
375:
208:
1836:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1211:
Yes, it was reported around the time of the Meridian 3 launch. I'll try and dig up a source tonight. --
1109:
2021:
1966:
1947:
1359:
1130:
817:
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
1791:
1676:
1101:
1049:
1023:
853:
874:
Are IPs allowed to vote? Regardless, why should it? The majority of Soyuz rocket articles are not -
125:
2141:
2112:
1980:
1071:
926:
893:
792:
786:, eliminating the need for a further disambiguator. Target currently redirects to source article. —
754:
706:
628:
583:
161:
55:
1421:
page, since any changes in this definition would affect every single rocket related page on Wiki.
1105:
513:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
271:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1599:
1441:
1393:
1317:
1265:
1219:
1179:
255:
70:
1890:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1002:
951:
1906:
1703:
175:
1766:
1747:
1717:
1640:
1288:
954:
page indicates no 14A, but a similar 11A designation. Shouldn't it be something like 11A14? --
51:
1742:
and an earlier article indicated that at least 2 cubesats were delivered to the wrong orbit
1292:
1240:
1913:
1006:
689:
497:
1785:
There is already a GLONASS-M 755 satellite in space. It was launched on 14 June 2014. -
1239:
scenarios). From what I seen so far consensus seems to be that it is a partial failure.
2138:
1872:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1707:
1695:
774:
239:
221:
1912:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
435:
2154:
1740:
http://spacenews.com/astro-digital-announces-first-cubesats-launched-on-soyuz-failed/
1594:
1436:
1388:
1332:
1312:
1260:
1214:
1174:
362:
141:
1197:
Are you sure about Meridian 2? I'm unaware of a source that it has been abandoned.
884:
1856:
https://www.webcitation.org/5mqiUXlX2?url=http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/soyuz.htm
1846:
https://www.webcitation.org/5mqiUXlX2?url=http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/soyuz.htm
1555:
So, is there anything else that you think I deviated from other pages' standards?
346:
319:
1763:
http://spacenews.com/mysteries-surrounding-july-14-soyuz-flight-solved-not-quite/
1744:
http://spacenews.com/soyuz-launch-customers-search-for-cause-of-cubesat-failures/
2090:
1879:
268:
2068:
to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for
1336:
1878:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
684:
676:
568:
487:
352:
245:
2118:
1859:
1849:
1761:
And now it's definitely a partial failure, Glavcosmos agrees. Another ref.
2097:"Replenishment satellite launched into Russia's Glonass navigation fleet"
2043:
2034:
Yeah, that was nuts, as Wikipedians would tell him "go back to sources"!
2010:
1989:
1956:
1811:
875:
680:
619:
2073:
2058:
1829:
1699:
879:
783:
778:
652:. Soyuz-2 is almost totally a new project. Its principal difference is
24:
1738:
Flight 68 appeared to succeed but at least 9 of 72 cubesats were DOA
510:
379:
733:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal.
387:
Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the
980:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.
2146:
2046:
2029:
2013:
1992:
1974:
1959:
1935:
1814:
1803:
1774:
1755:
1725:
1711:
1688:
1648:
1606:
1564:
1448:
1430:
1400:
1367:
1352:
1324:
1300:
1277:
1248:
1231:
1206:
1191:
1117:
1086:
1061:
1035:
1010:
963:
939:
906:
869:
805:
767:
719:
694:
641:
605:
596:
571:
184:
15:
1786:
1340:
434:
1417:
I suggest that this discussion should be moved to the main
1840:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
2072:
in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of
2196:
Technology and engineering in Russia task force articles
2191:
Start-Class Russia (technology and engineering) articles
1068:
That's Meridian 1. The launch failure was Meridian 2. --
2007:
1986:
1953:
160:
509:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
267:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1882:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
839:, please explain your reasons, taking into account
446:
the technology and engineering in Russia task force
543:This article has not yet received a rating on the
301:This article has not yet received a rating on the
950:Is the GRAU Index of 14A14 actually correct? The
1765:someone updated the article before I got there.
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1868:This message was posted before February 2018.
1343:source does (with some variations). So.......
174:
8:
2066:Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting
188:
2186:Mid-importance Start-Class Russia articles
1789:
1674:
837:polling is not a substitute for discussion
458:
314:
216:
1941:Tropical Soyuz cancelled after Ariane 6??
1828:I have just modified 2 external links on
1716:that dont belongs here in this article.--
1860:http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/soyuz.htm
1850:http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/soyuz.htm
1001:Also, fairing types should be described.
577:It should be 294 kN. I've changed it. --
2166:Unknown-importance spaceflight articles
1673:Progress MS-3 is missing in the list!
460:
316:
218:
1419:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Spaceflight
1164:Meridian 5: Failure - Failed to orbit
7:
2211:Unknown-importance Rocketry articles
2095:Stephen Clark (September 22, 2017).
2035:
1787:https://en.wikipedia.org/Kosmos_2500
1129:I've noticed a disagreement between
503:This article is within the scope of
368:This article is within the scope of
261:This article is within the scope of
2117:Clark, Stephen (14 December 2017).
622:article is merged into this one. --
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
856:. This should be named to match -
14:
1832:. Please take a moment to review
281:Knowledge:WikiProject Spaceflight
2171:WikiProject Spaceflight articles
2161:Start-Class spaceflight articles
2036:
1998:
490:
480:
462:
355:
345:
318:
284:Template:WikiProject Spaceflight
248:
238:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
744:The result of the proposal was
421:This article has been rated as
2181:Mid-importance Russia articles
1952:Where did you read about this?
1804:07:35, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
1756:17:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
841:Knowledge's naming conventions
523:Knowledge:WikiProject Rocketry
1:
2216:WikiProject Rocketry articles
2206:Start-Class Rocketry articles
1936:08:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
1702:, so it doesn't belong here.
1301:07:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
1278:23:22, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
1249:22:22, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
1232:05:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
1207:22:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
1192:18:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
1171:I hope this helps matters. --
858:Soyuz-2 launch vehicle family
829:, then sign your comment with
720:17:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
695:08:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
526:Template:WikiProject Rocketry
517:and see a list of open tasks.
443:This article is supported by
275:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1712:20:52, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
1689:08:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
964:09:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
401:Knowledge:WikiProject Russia
331:Technology & engineering
2201:WikiProject Russia articles
2176:Start-Class Russia articles
1726:15:44, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
1087:22:34, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
1062:21:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
404:Template:WikiProject Russia
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
2232:
1899:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1825:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1815:11:48, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
1775:18:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
1649:18:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
1607:03:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
1565:14:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
1449:13:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
1431:04:54, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
1401:03:27, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
1368:19:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
1353:15:24, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
1325:14:48, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
1118:15:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
940:17:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
907:07:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
870:04:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
806:23:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
768:17:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
642:13:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
597:11:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
572:04:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
545:project's importance scale
427:project's importance scale
303:project's importance scale
606:12:16, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
542:
475:
442:
420:
378:dedicated to coverage of
340:
300:
233:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
2147:04:09, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
2064:I check pages listed in
2047:09:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
2030:09:17, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
2014:07:39, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
1993:07:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
1975:07:19, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
1960:21:33, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
1036:02:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
1011:03:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
983:Please do not modify it.
975:Any additional comments:
736:Please do not modify it.
2057:Orphaned references in
1821:External links modified
852:the Soyuz rocket is at
675:Media reports indicate
391:, or contribute to the
264:WikiProject Spaceflight
2084:Reference named "sfn":
1984:Adeline (rocket stage)
1253:The key word there is
654:DIGITAL CONTROL SYSTEM
439:
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
1955:Never heard of it. —
860:(or without family).
438:
100:Neutral point of view
1880:regular verification
1557:Galactic Penguin SST
1423:Galactic Penguin SST
1345:Galactic Penguin SST
1199:Galactic Penguin SST
1145:Galactic Penguin SST
854:Soyuz launch vehicle
700:Yes, that can go. --
506:WikiProject Rocketry
287:spaceflight articles
105:No original research
2113:2017 in spaceflight
2070:orphaned references
1870:After February 2018
1734:Flight 68 aftermath
614:Soyuz-FG vs Soyuz 2
1982:that you added at
1924:InternetArchiveBot
1875:InternetArchiveBot
1698:was launched on a
679:was launched by a
440:
393:project discussion
371:WikiProject Russia
256:Spaceflight portal
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
2119:"Launch schedule"
2099:. Spaceflight Now
1900:
1806:
1794:comment added by
1691:
1679:comment added by
1604:
1446:
1398:
1322:
1289:Soyuz flight VS09
1121:
1104:comment added by
1052:comment added by
1026:comment added by
559:
558:
555:
554:
551:
550:
529:Rocketry articles
457:
456:
453:
452:
313:
312:
309:
308:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
2223:
2144:
2133:
2131:
2129:
2108:
2106:
2104:
2041:
2040:
2039:
2006:
2002:
2001:
1951:
1934:
1925:
1898:
1897:
1876:
1602:
1598:
1444:
1440:
1396:
1392:
1320:
1316:
1273:
1268:
1263:
1227:
1222:
1217:
1187:
1182:
1177:
1120:
1098:
1079:
1074:
1064:
1042:Meridian Failure
1038:
985:
938:
935:
929:
905:
902:
896:
833:
827:
821:
804:
801:
795:
766:
763:
757:
738:
718:
715:
709:
640:
637:
631:
595:
592:
586:
531:
530:
527:
524:
521:
500:
495:
494:
493:
484:
477:
476:
466:
459:
409:
408:
405:
402:
399:
365:
360:
359:
358:
349:
342:
341:
336:
333:
322:
315:
289:
288:
285:
282:
279:
258:
253:
252:
251:
242:
235:
234:
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
2231:
2230:
2226:
2225:
2224:
2222:
2221:
2220:
2151:
2150:
2142:
2127:
2125:
2123:Spaceflight Now
2116:
2102:
2100:
2094:
2062:
2037:
1999:
1997:
1945:
1943:
1928:
1923:
1891:
1884:have permission
1874:
1838:this simple FaQ
1823:
1783:
1736:
1671:
1605:
1600:
1447:
1442:
1399:
1394:
1323:
1318:
1271:
1266:
1261:
1225:
1220:
1215:
1185:
1180:
1175:
1127:
1099:
1095:
1077:
1072:
1047:
1044:
1021:
1018:
1016:Partial Failure
995:
990:
981:
971:
948:
937:
933:
927:
921:
904:
900:
894:
888:
831:
825:
819:
813:
803:
799:
793:
787:
765:
761:
755:
749:
734:
728:
717:
713:
707:
701:
673:
639:
635:
629:
623:
616:
594:
590:
584:
578:
564:
528:
525:
522:
519:
518:
498:Rocketry portal
496:
491:
489:
407:Russia articles
406:
403:
400:
397:
396:
385:To participate:
361:
356:
354:
334:
328:
286:
283:
280:
277:
276:
254:
249:
247:
201:on Knowledge's
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
2229:
2227:
2219:
2218:
2213:
2208:
2203:
2198:
2193:
2188:
2183:
2178:
2173:
2168:
2163:
2153:
2152:
2135:
2134:
2109:
2061:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2052:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2018:
2017:
2016:
1942:
1939:
1918:
1917:
1910:
1863:
1862:
1854:Added archive
1852:
1844:Added archive
1822:
1819:
1818:
1817:
1782:
1779:
1778:
1777:
1735:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1696:Progress MS-03
1670:
1669:Missing flight
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1661:
1660:
1659:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1597:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1439:
1408:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1391:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1315:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1284:Galileo system
1236:
1235:
1234:
1169:
1168:
1165:
1162:
1126:
1123:
1094:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1043:
1040:
1028:71.214.221.153
1017:
1014:
994:
991:
989:
988:
977:
970:
967:
947:
944:
943:
942:
925:
923:GW_Simulations
911:
910:
909:
892:
890:GW_Simulations
846:
845:
820:*'''Support'''
812:
809:
791:
789:GW_Simulations
775:Soyuz 2 rocket
772:
753:
751:GW_Simulations
742:
741:
729:
727:
726:Requested move
724:
723:
722:
705:
703:GW_Simulations
672:
669:
646:
627:
625:GW_Simulations
615:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
582:
580:GW_Simulations
563:
562:Ikar confusion
560:
557:
556:
553:
552:
549:
548:
541:
535:
534:
532:
515:the discussion
502:
501:
485:
473:
472:
467:
455:
454:
451:
450:
441:
431:
430:
423:Mid-importance
419:
413:
412:
410:
383:
382:on Knowledge.
367:
366:
350:
338:
337:
335:Mid‑importance
323:
311:
310:
307:
306:
299:
293:
292:
290:
273:the discussion
260:
259:
243:
231:
230:
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2228:
2217:
2214:
2212:
2209:
2207:
2204:
2202:
2199:
2197:
2194:
2192:
2189:
2187:
2184:
2182:
2179:
2177:
2174:
2172:
2169:
2167:
2164:
2162:
2159:
2158:
2156:
2149:
2148:
2145:
2140:
2124:
2120:
2114:
2110:
2098:
2092:
2088:
2087:
2086:
2085:
2081:
2079:
2075:
2071:
2067:
2060:
2056:
2048:
2045:
2033:
2032:
2031:
2027:
2023:
2019:
2015:
2012:
2008:
2005:
1996:
1995:
1994:
1991:
1987:
1985:
1981:
1978:
1977:
1976:
1972:
1968:
1964:
1963:
1962:
1961:
1958:
1954:
1949:
1940:
1938:
1937:
1932:
1927:
1926:
1915:
1911:
1908:
1904:
1903:
1902:
1895:
1889:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1871:
1866:
1861:
1857:
1853:
1851:
1847:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1826:
1820:
1816:
1813:
1809:
1808:
1807:
1805:
1801:
1797:
1796:178.9.125.100
1793:
1788:
1781:GLONASS-M 755
1780:
1776:
1772:
1768:
1764:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1733:
1727:
1723:
1719:
1715:
1714:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1690:
1686:
1682:
1681:178.9.127.219
1678:
1668:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1638:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1634:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1608:
1603:
1596:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1566:
1562:
1558:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1445:
1438:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1428:
1424:
1420:
1416:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1402:
1397:
1390:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1333:User:WDGraham
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1321:
1314:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1290:
1285:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1269:
1264:
1256:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1237:
1233:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1223:
1218:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1204:
1200:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1183:
1178:
1166:
1163:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1156:
1153:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1139:
1136:
1132:
1124:
1122:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1092:
1088:
1085:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1075:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1054:145.118.88.25
1051:
1041:
1039:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1015:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1004:
999:
992:
987:
984:
978:
976:
973:
972:
968:
966:
965:
961:
957:
956:62.224.255.77
953:
945:
941:
936:
930:
924:
919:
915:
912:
908:
903:
897:
891:
886:
881:
877:
873:
872:
871:
867:
863:
859:
855:
851:
848:
847:
844:
842:
838:
830:
826:*'''Oppose'''
824:
818:
815:
814:
810:
808:
807:
802:
796:
790:
785:
781:
780:
776:
770:
769:
764:
758:
752:
747:
740:
737:
731:
730:
725:
721:
716:
710:
704:
699:
698:
697:
696:
692:
691:
686:
682:
678:
670:
668:
667:
663:
659:
655:
651:
644:
643:
638:
632:
626:
621:
613:
607:
604:
603:211.30.213.51
600:
599:
598:
593:
587:
581:
576:
575:
574:
573:
570:
561:
546:
540:
537:
536:
533:
516:
512:
508:
507:
499:
488:
486:
483:
479:
478:
474:
471:
468:
465:
461:
448:
447:
437:
433:
432:
428:
424:
418:
415:
414:
411:
394:
390:
386:
381:
377:
373:
372:
364:
363:Russia portal
353:
351:
348:
344:
343:
339:
332:
327:
324:
321:
317:
304:
298:
295:
294:
291:
274:
270:
266:
265:
257:
246:
244:
241:
237:
236:
232:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
2136:
2126:. Retrieved
2122:
2101:. Retrieved
2083:
2082:
2077:
2063:
2003:
1944:
1922:
1919:
1894:source check
1873:
1867:
1864:
1827:
1824:
1790:— Preceding
1784:
1737:
1718:Bolzanobozen
1675:— Preceding
1672:
1309:
1291:up to date.
1259:
1258:
1254:
1213:
1212:
1173:
1172:
1170:
1151:
1137:
1128:
1100:— Preceding
1096:
1093:Broken Links
1070:
1069:
1048:— Preceding
1045:
1019:
1000:
996:
982:
979:
974:
949:
922:
913:
889:
885:Soyuz rocket
862:70.55.85.225
849:
834:
828:
822:
816:
788:
773:
771:
750:
745:
743:
735:
732:
702:
688:
674:
665:
661:
657:
653:
649:
645:
624:
617:
579:
565:
504:
444:
422:
389:project page
384:
369:
262:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
2128:18 December
2091:Kosmos 2522
2022:WatcherZero
1967:WatcherZero
1948:WatcherZero
1454:times. ;)).
1360:WatcherZero
1293:SkywalkerPL
1241:SkywalkerPL
1131:WatcherZero
1022:—Preceding
376:WikiProject
278:Spaceflight
269:spaceflight
228:Spaceflight
199:Start-class
148:free images
31:not a forum
2155:Categories
1931:Report bug
969:Discussion
952:GRAU Index
946:GRAU Index
677:RADARSAT-2
671:RADARSAT-2
666:Darussalam
2139:AnomieBOT
2103:March 31,
1914:this tool
1907:this tool
928:User Page
914:Withdrawn
895:User Page
794:User Page
756:User Page
746:withdrawn
708:User Page
658:2ND STAGE
650:1ST STAGE
630:User Page
585:User Page
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1920:Cheers.—
1792:unsigned
1677:unsigned
1595:Gopher65
1530:history.
1437:Gopher65
1389:Gopher65
1313:Gopher65
1155:contribs
1141:contribs
1125:Failures
1114:contribs
1102:unsigned
1050:unsigned
1024:unsigned
993:Variants
876:Soyuz-FG
835:. Since
681:Soyuz FG
662:BOOSTERS
660:and new
620:Soyuz FG
520:Rocketry
511:rocketry
470:Rocketry
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
2074:Soyuz-2
2059:Soyuz-2
1834:my edit
1830:Soyuz-2
1700:Soyuz-U
1106:G.k.dub
880:Soyuz-U
784:Soyuz 2
779:Soyuz-2
425:on the
154:WP refs
142:scholar
25:Soyuz-2
1272:Graham
1226:Graham
1186:Graham
1143:) and
850:Oppose
811:Survey
398:Russia
380:Russia
326:Russia
205:scale.
126:Google
2111:From
2089:From
1255:might
1003:Mikus
685:sdsds
569:Sdsds
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
2130:2017
2105:2018
2078:this
2026:talk
2004:Done
1971:talk
1800:talk
1771:talk
1767:Greg
1752:talk
1748:Greg
1722:talk
1708:talk
1704:Oefe
1685:talk
1645:talk
1641:Greg
1601:talk
1561:talk
1443:talk
1427:talk
1395:talk
1364:talk
1349:talk
1341:this
1339:and
1337:this
1335:and
1319:talk
1297:talk
1245:talk
1203:talk
1149:talk
1135:talk
1110:talk
1058:talk
1032:talk
1007:talk
960:talk
934:Talk
918:here
901:Talk
866:talk
832:~~~~
800:Talk
762:Talk
714:Talk
690:talk
636:Talk
591:Talk
374:, a
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
2044:JFG
2011:JFG
1990:JFG
1957:JFG
1888:RfC
1858:to
1848:to
1812:JFG
539:???
417:Mid
297:???
176:TWL
2157::
2121:.
2115::
2093::
2042:—
2028:)
2009:—
1973:)
1901:.
1896:}}
1892:{{
1802:)
1773:)
1754:)
1724:)
1710:)
1687:)
1647:)
1563:)
1429:)
1366:)
1351:)
1299:)
1267:D.
1262:W.
1247:)
1221:D.
1216:W.
1205:)
1181:D.
1176:W.
1116:)
1112:•
1060:)
1034:)
1009:)
962:)
931:|
920:--
898:|
887:.
878:,
868:)
823:or
797:|
777:→
759:|
711:|
693:)
687:-
633:|
588:|
329::
156:)
54:;
2143:⚡
2132:.
2107:.
2024:(
1969:(
1950::
1946:@
1933:)
1929:(
1916:.
1909:.
1798:(
1769:(
1750:(
1720:(
1706:(
1683:(
1643:(
1559:(
1425:(
1362:(
1347:(
1295:(
1243:(
1201:(
1152:·
1147:(
1138:·
1133:(
1108:(
1084:…
1078:W
1073:G
1056:(
1030:(
1005:(
958:(
864:(
843:.
547:.
449:.
429:.
395:.
305:.
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
