AN ANALYSIS OF CONSTRUCTION AND CAPITAL INVESTMENT AT LIQUID FUELED ROCKET ENGI

Created: 5/1/1967

OCR scan of the original document, errors are possible

*

7

AN ANALYSIS OF CONSTRUCTION AND CAPITAL INVESTMENT AT LIQUID FUELED ROCKET ENGINE TEST FACILITIES IN THE USSR: PERM' ROCKET ENGINE TEST FACILITY

RR SP

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY Oliu' olarch and Rvporit

CONTENTS

Summary .

I. Description of the Facility anrl Chronology of

Support and Housing Areas

0 Features Indicating Possible Uses ol the Test

III. Methodology

A

and Soil Data

of Construction and Capital Investment

1. Cost of Construction

?. Capital

of Capital Investment over Time .

Tables

1 Derivation of TotaJ Capital Investment in the Perm'

Rocket Engine Test Facility. Totals .

l Annual and Cumulative Capital Investment in the

Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility, by Category.

- ni -

CRBT

following Page

Illustrations

Figure 1. Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility

(map)

Figure 2. Housing Capacity at thc Perm'Test Facility,(chart)

Figure 3. Layout ol the Perm' Rocket Engine

Test Facility (drawing)

Figure 4. Annual Capital Investment in theEngine Test Facility,chart)

IV.

AN

AT IA IN Tt!

IS QF CONSTRUCTION AND CAPITAL INVESTMENT 6 FUELEDCKET _ TEST FACILITIES ISSR: PERM' ROCKET ENGINE TEST FACILITY

Summary

i B

The total cost of construction of the Perm* Rocket Engine Test Facility estimated to be IS million rubles, orillion. * Total capital investment at this facility, for equipment as well as construction, isto beillion rubles,illion. "

The first static test stand probably became operational3 and appears to have been used for production acceptance testing of storable

liquid fueled rocket engines of moderate0he engines tested on this stand16 probably were used in the Soviet IRBM and/or ICBM programs. Modifications to the test stand and expansion of the facility, which were completed in6 or early

ossibly indicate that the original test scries has been completed and that the facility is being readied for use in one or more new programs.

The second static testa small standossible altitude simulation capabilitys probably designed for testing upper stage engines with upounds of thrust. The stand was structurally completed6 and probably is now operational.

Both test stands are designed for engine testing or cluster testing but are not capable of handling entire stages. On thc basis of itsstrength, thc larger test stand is estimated tohrust capacityillionillionut it is limited by its water supply lo testing engines inound class.

* Throughout this report, dollar values are given3 US dollars and ruble values are given in-new rubles expressed5 prices. The factor for converting new rubles5 prices3 US dollars isuble to

quipment and installation costs wi-re estimalcdesidual from the relationship of construction to other capital costs in varioushe Sovic't

economy.

The thrust capacity is the maximum capacityross structural standpoint and does not indicate tbe sixe ol the engines actually tested. In fact, the large stand at Perm' is one of three "standardized design" test stands which have been used toariety of mode rate-to-lar ge engines and engine clusters.

The initial facilities at Perm' were completed2 and the site probably became operational Thc site was expanded during

econd test stand was added. Houoing is currently available foriOO persons in family housing and (or about

men in barracks/dormitories. Even after expanuion. Perm' is the

smallest of the Soviet liquid rocket engine test facilities and also the

most heavily secured.

1

-TOP SP.Cftgp

I. DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITY AND CHRONOLOGY OF CONSTRUCTION

A. Operations Area

The operations area ol the Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility is in rolling, heavily wooded terrain aboutiles east of Perm', south of the Sylva River (see Jt is servedpur from thc Perm'-Chusuvoy railroad andaved road from Perm'. The first section of thearea and the first static test stand (hereafter referred to as Standere structurally complete when first observed in The access railroad, however, was still under construction at that time and thus the site was judged to be nonoperational. Based on the status of construction in2 and the pace of similar projects carried out elsewhere, it is estimated that construction of thc site began in0 and that the site became operational t Perm' appears to be identical tot the Kurumoch Rocket Engine Test Facility. Thc water supply of the Perm* stand, however, limits its present capabilityhrust ofounds.

A major expansion of thc operations area began4 and wascompleted in6 or During thismall test stand (hereafter referred to as Standossible altitudecapability was built, industrial support floorspace was more than doubled, andas modified by the addition arge-diameter duct. Standhich is estimated tohrust capacity of upounds, probably became operational early

B- Const ruction Support and,Housing Areas

The construction support area was probably constructed earlynd was used as thc base from which the rest of the facility was built. This area was complete and operational when first observed in

a't other test facilities, both barracks/dormitory housing for military troops and/or construction workers and family apartment housing

lor technical personnel and their families have been constructed. 0quare feet of family housing andquareof barracks/dormitories were constructed. Inwith Soviet norms for use of housing space, these quarters can accom modatcersons in family housing (of which about one-third would be technical personnel working at the site) anden in barracks. Perm1 has far fewer technical personnel than any other site but about the same number ol troops. (Kurumochn family housing andOO troops. Krasnoyarsk hasroops, and Omsk hasndroops.)

The growtli of housing, by type,s shown in Figurencluded in the category of family housing areingle family and duplex houses (builtrobably for top-level military and civilian personnel No new housing has been started indicating that thc currently planned staffing level for the test facility has been attained.

II. FEATURES INDICATING POSSIBLE USES OF THE TEST FACILITY

The operations area of the Perm' facility contains less industrial floorspace than any other Soviet liquid fueled rocket engine test facility. Initially buildings withquare feet of floor space were constructed. This area was expandedquare feet by new

constructionsee By comparison, the engine test facility at Omskquare Icci. that at Krasnoyarsk has

quare feet, and that at Kurumoch

j'crm is the only Soviel liquid rocke; engine test facility which was constructed without an air separation plant, and it operated without one5 or iov.**

Finally. Perm' is distinguished by much mure Stringent security measures than are observed at other Soviet test facilities.

The expansion program, which was completedncluded thc constructionmall test standossible altitude simulationarge assembly/checkout building, an air separation plant, and other buildings and structures, ln addition,as modified by the additionarge-diameter duct which connects itmall building near the air separation plant and to Stand I The expansion program probably indicates changes in the testing prog ram and/or the beginning of one or more new testinj* programs at Pern;'

III. METHODOLOGY

A General

Costs of construction have been estimated on the basis of costs for replacement of buildings and structures given in official Soviet handbooks AU costs have been adjusted for regional and climatic cost differentials prevailing in Perm' Oblast.

B Climate and Soil Data

The Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility is in the most severe climate zone (Climatiche regular winter differential is paida in Perm' Oblast. comparedays :or Moscow Inegional differential ofoercent of base cost is paid to the construction organization, depending on thc type of structure being built, to cover the additional costs of construction resulting from the severely cold climate and remote location.

Soil conditions at the test facility are similar to those prevailing in the city of Perm'. Loadbearing characteristics of the soil for test stands and for heavy industrial construction range (rom poor to good.

C. Cost of Construction and Capital Investment

1. Cost of Construction

The Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility consists of one large vertical test standmall vertical test stand, an operations area containing industrial supportodest-size housingonstruction support area, an access road,ailroad line. The minimum use of specialized buildings has kept costs relatively low forroject, and its close proximity to existing trunk road and railroad lines kept the cost of building access linesinimum. For example, the cost of these lines at Perm' wasercent of total construction costs, whereas at Omsk they accounted forercent.

Apart from the test stands, the buildings and structures areaccording to standard Soviet industrial and housing designs, which make il possible to use Sovietandbooks to determine costs of construction. Thc costs given in these handbooks arc average estimate costs per unit of construction (cubit, meter, linear meter, and the like) (or all types of buildings and structures. For each building or Structure inomplex, thc average estimate cost was determined and then adjusted (or regional and climaticifferentials appropriate to Perm' Oblast.

ands arc structures of unique design and the cost cannot be estimaiec directly from handbooks in lhe same manner as other buildings and structures ai the facility. To estimate thc cost of construction of the tesi sunds. it was first necessary lo divide the activity into ils major const ruction phasesxcavation, concrete work, steeland the like. The volume ol work loi each component was determined from dimensions obtameo

and supplemental consultations with Unit costs obtained from handbooks covering costs for the construction of hydroelectric installations, which were judged lo be most similar lo test siiinO construction, were ihcn applied to the volumes ol work in ihc various components.

2. Capilal Investment

To determine total capital investment from total cost of construction of thc test facility, the costs of construction for the six major sections of the facility were first calculated separately. The cost for each section was then divided by the percentage that construction costs represent in total capilnl investment for thc type of construction in that section. The difference between total capital investment and cost of construction consists mainly of Ihe cost of equipment and its installation The derivation of total capital investment for the Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility is shown in Table I.

D. Distribution of Capital Investment over Time

Costs of construction and of equipment were allocated over time for each section of the test facility

i tie status2 made.-stimate the date of initial work as

The coat of equipment and its installation was allocated in accordance with the construction schedule,ag of six months in all areas except housing (equipment and its installation are minor items in housing). The inclusionimelag is necessary because installation of equipment cannot begin unlil construction is at least partly completed. Theof capital investments shown innd Table 2

3

it-

2 5

5

n a

e ale8

o > <i

I. C

- 5:

'.

3.

s

i!

Vv|

U -f

II

3 ft

I i

9

m u

v.

if ;

"lis! I

K

liH;

H

V

:

E It >

19

fa -

f U

silijijji

ill

JfflPl

J

. .

||

ih

'Annual Capital Investment in the Perm' Rocket Engine Test Facility, by

Original document.

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA