After Bush speech, Russia mulls missions to Moon and Mars (...yeah right)

AFP ^ | Thu, Jan 15, 2004

[presidio9]

In an echo of the Cold War space race, Russia said that it had the know-how to relaunch its space exploration programs, a day after Washington laid out ambitious plans to return to the Moon and press on to Mars.

"We have many initiatives from researchers on organizing expeditions to the Moon and Mars," said Nikolai Moiseyev, a deputy director of the Russian Rosaviakosmos space agency.

"Before the end of the year, we intend to develop a federal space program until 2015 and it is possible that such projects would be included," the ITAR-TASS news agency quoted him as saying Thursday.

On Wednesday, US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) unveiled ambitious plans for the United States to return to the Moon as early as 2015, saying a lunar base would serve as a jumping-off point for manned missions to Mars and "across our solar system."

During the Cold War, Washington and Moscow competed fiercely in space exploration, and many Russians are still intensely proud of Soviet achievements in that field.

The Soviet Union scored a major victory on April 12, 1961, when Yury Gagarin became the first man in space. The Americans struck back eight years later, when Neil Armstrong became the first man to step on the Moon on July 20, 1969.

Moscow's space programs had to be considerably scaled back in 1991, when the Soviet Union fell apart and state financing dried up.

But as Washington outlined its plans this week, officials here emphasized that though Russia may be short of financial resources for ambitious space programs, it could hold its own in the field of technology and skills.

An official with the institute that developed the Soviet "Lunokhod" (Moonwalker) robot said that scientists have maintained their research and development efforts and could quickly resume construction.

"If Russia decides to revive its lunar program, we would need a year to create a prototype of a new Lunokhod and two to three years to construct the apparatus," Roald Kremnyev, deputy director of the Lavochkin institute, told ITAR-TASS.

"Russia can overtake USA," an anchorwoman on state television said Thursday, echoing comments the previous day by a top Russian space official who said that Moscow is capable of placing a man on Mars within 10 years at one tenth of the cost of reported US plans.

"Technically, the first flight to Mars could be made in 2014. It would cost around 15 billion dollars (11.7 billion euros) to do it, compared with the American estimate for their project of 150 billion dollars," said Leonid Gorshkov, chief designer with Energia, the Russian space constructor.

And an unnamed official at Energia on Thursday suggested that the United States and Russia should join forces in Mars exploration.

"It would be much more profitable to pool efforts in a manned flight to Mars and the planetary development instead of holding the project independently," the Interfax news agency quoted him as saying.

Russia and the United States have been cooperating in work aboard the International Space Station (news - web sites) since it was launched in 1998.

After the US grounded its shuttle program following the 2003 Columbia disaster Russian rockets were left as the only way to ferry people and supplies to and from the ISS.

Following Bush's speech, NASA (news - web sites) chief Sean O'Keefe spoke by phone with his counterpart at Rosaviakosmos to assure him that the Americans had no intention of withdrawing from the ISS.

"O'Keefe said that there was no talk of NASA withdrawing from the ICC," the Russian agency's spokesman told RIA Novosti.

[ambrose]

It is amazing what the Soviets did with the technology they had available. They sent probes to the surface of Venus for crying out loud... I hope they do join us in another "space race"...

[VaBthang4]

With whose money?

They couldnt even afford to build their own part of the cheesy "We are the World" spacestation.

[VaBthang4]

Meanwhile we sent probes out past Pluto and put a good grip of American Men on the Moon.

[RightWhale]

Russia said that it had the know-how to relaunch its space exploration programs

It's a subtle point. China says they can do this. Russia says they can do this. Bush says this is what we're going to do.

[TBall]

Couldn't they just borrow the money? From what I've been reading Russia is on the path to economic prosperity.

[Salman]

Russians have reliable big boosters. As a sub-contractor, why not the Russians?

[ffusco]

"Russia can overtake USA," an anchorwoman on state television said Thursday, echoing comments the previous day by a top Russian space official who said that Moscow is capable of placing a man on Mars within 10 years at one tenth of the cost of reported US plans.

Much money can be saved by eliminating triple redundant back-up systems and other non-essentials. Just ask the crew of the Kursk.

[ffusco]

Because they are Russians and shouldn't be trusted.

[ffusco]

They can't race. They are done. Long gone are the vast resources of the evil empire. Good riddance.

[Prime Choice]

"Russia can overtake USA," an anchorwoman on state television said Thursday, echoing comments the previous day by a top Russian space official who said that Moscow is capable of placing a man on Mars within 10 years at one tenth of the cost of reported US plans.

This is an incredible claim considering that Russia never made it to the moon in the first place. The best they were able to do was send a probe to the moon...and that crashed.

On the other hand, the Russians did excel at keeping Mir in orbit well past its expected lifespan. That's no easy feat.

I wouldn't be suprised in the least if the Lunar mission and subsequent Mars mission wound up being a multi-national effort between NASA, ESA, the Russians and (don't laugh) the Chinese.

[Prime Choice]

Much money can be saved by eliminating triple redundant back-up systems and other non-essentials. Just ask the crew of the Kursk.

Yep. Also note that the Russian spokescritter only said that Russia could get a man to Mars. They conveniently left out any mention of bringing him back alive.

[John Will]

Time for the chest beating, who's next, China?

[Dead Dog]

They've NEVER landed a functioning probe on Mars...well at least one the functioned for more than a couple of seconds.

[Prime Choice]

Time for the chest beating, who's next, China?

Don't be surprised if China makes it to the moon on a NASA/ESA spacecraft.

[Neophyte]

With whose money?

Er... the KGB-man squatting in the Kremlin could expropriate cash of another couple of oligarchs (or OILgarchs).

[Neophyte]

Because they are Russians and shouldn't be trusted.

Ping!

[LibWhacker]

Just remember, everybody . . . It's PPP not GDP that'll put Russia on Mars. </sarcasm>

[boris]

"Russians have reliable big boosters. As a sub-contractor, why not the Russians?"

Because, for example, the native U.S. rocket and booster business--and aerospace industry in general--is slowly disintegrating.

The Russians are dumping hardware because they are desperate for hard currency. Much of the hardware was developed when they called themselves "Socialist", and basically had no price since there was no way to compute economically-valid prices.

"Thank you for helping win the Cold War," U.S. aerospace workers are told. "Now go stand in the unemployment line while we buy cheap hardware from the enemy you helped defeat."

Let's see: Shuttle grounded. No more Titans. Atlas-V dependent upon a potentially hostile foreign source of engines. Delta-IV limited to military payloads only. Delta II nearing obsolescence. But let's go ahead and let what is left of the U.S. aerospace industry (particularly the launcher part) vanish into rust, and put our trust in people who tried assiduously to kill and/or enslave us all for 70 years. That's the ticket.

--Boris

[RusIvan]

Because they are Russians and shouldn't be trusted.==

It is very stupid.

[RusIvan]

The Russians are dumping hardware because they are desperate for hard currency. ===

It is stupid remerk it doesn't explain anything. Russia sells millions of tonns of oil and gas. And you still tell she is desperate?

Russian engineers simply smart enough to do the job for fraction of cost. That is the source of problem for american space industry.

[RusIvan]

The best they were able to do was send a probe to the moon...and that crashed. ===

Crashed? Remember Lunohod the moving vehicle on Moon. BTW all later design including today Spirit of Mars resemble that Lunohod.

[Prime Choice]

I stand corrected and am in your debt for this enlightenment.

I looked up some images of Lunohod (circa 1970). It does bear some resemblance to the Mars rovers, but judging from its overall composition, the resemblance is rather limited in that both craft have wheels, an antenna and a solar panel.

Of course, about the time that probe was on Luna, the Apollo astronauts were cruising around their Lunar landing site on a Lunar dune buggy. ; )

[RusIvan]

I stand corrected and am in your debt for this enlightenment. ==

I understand:)). Let us agree that any car in the world resembles one another. So any outer space planetohods resembles one another either.

[Prime Choice]

Russian engineers simply smart enough to do the job for fraction of cost. That is the source of problem for american space industry.

With all due respect, perhaps you can regale us with the success of Phobos I, Phobos II and the Buran shuttle (which, if memory serves, went up for action in 2002 for a mere $6 million after making only one unmanned flight).

Yet you would have us believe that Russia is ready to make a journey to Mars? Even though Russia has never managed to get a cosmonaut to the moon?

[Consort]

Doveryai no proveryai.

[MrJingles]

New state-of-the-art russian booster.
(Hamster not included...)

[RusIvan]

Yet you would have us believe that Russia is ready to make a journey to Mars? ==

Who is ready today? I just said that russian space industry may do that for fraction of cost then american space industry.

[presidio9]

Photo taken on the surface of Venus by Soviet Venera probes in 1975.

[boris]

"With all due respect, perhaps you can regale us with the success of Phobos I, Phobos II and the Buran shuttle (which, if memory serves, went up for action in 2002 for a mere $6 million after making only one unmanned flight)."

And don't forget the Buran was virtually a carbon-copy of the Shuttle. Its engines--the RD-0120 (not to be confused with the RD-120) were copies of the SSME with a slightly larger nozzle and a slightly lower thrust. The Russians filed Freedom of Information Act requests (through their embassy) and were given the blueprints, reports, and other documents.

Sometime ago I did a survey of Mars mission success and discovered that well over half the failures were Russian ones.

--Boris

[Prime Choice]

Who is ready today?

Considering the successes of the space program of both nations, I would say the U.S. is far more prepared than Russia at this time.

I just said that russian space industry may do that for fraction of cost then american space industry.

Yet those savings would be penny-wise and pound-foolish. As another already pointed out, the failure:success ratio in Russian spacefaring is much larger than that of the United States. Bottom line: if given the choice between sending a manned mission to Mars in 10 years for X dollars and not having them return, I'd rather opt for a manned mission to Mars in 20 years for 10*X dollars and have them return safely.

It's never a good idea to cut corners on safety and redundancy. And from the looks of things, that appears to be precisely what the Russian space program does.

Yes, the U.S. space program has 17 casualties to its name. All losses were tragic, but considering how far we've gone, the casualty rate is exceedingly low. If we'd ignored safety and redundancy on the scale that the Russians have consistently done, the work-related mortality of our astronauts could easily have been three- or four-fold what it is.

[RusIvan]

Yes, the U.S. space program has 17 casualties to its name. ==

Russian rate is 0. Soviet rate was 5.
Consider that Soviets then Russia continuously stayed in space begginning from late 70th. There was almost constatnly space station with 2-3 cousmanauts on board. Each day of all this years.
Then Russia continued that tradition. During all this turbulent years of russian independence there were always space flights.
Russian SOUZ rocket is safest in the world. There was already about 1500 launches of it. Only few about 5 or 6 failures.

Recent air leak on ISS was due to american module not russian. No one report it in american press. But if it would russian leak then I would see lot of reporting.

It is press of cause. But investigative mind have to seek truth on its own.

Ask boris. His main reprimand that russians "dump" thier hardware for fraction of cost. But he told good about ussian launch vehicles or engines for example. Do you know that new american rocket Atlas-5 uses russian engines. American car with russian engine so to speak:)).

Beleive or not. Russia can do everything America can. And for fraction of cost. It is only the question of financing. There are no scientific or technological backwardness in Russia.

[Prime Choice]

Russian rate is 0. Soviet rate was 5.

Consider that Soviets then Russia continuously stayed in space begginning from late 70th. There was almost constatnly space station with 2-3 cousmanauts on board. Each day of all this years.

If the failures are to be framed within the post-Soviet years, then so must the successes in this discussion.

As for the Soviets/Russians having men in space, that is not entirely due to technological superiority; it's more due to the nature of Soviet government that could make such decisions without having to be concerned about public criticism. NASA's accomplishments have been limited not by technological issues, but by Congressional budget cuts due to lack of public support. By 1973, a man on the moon was no longer considered interesting by the average American, even though such a thing was considered the Impossible Dream a mere 5 years before.

The Soviet Union caught us flat-footed and had us beat in the space race with the first satellite, the first man & woman in space, the first space walk and all that. But it was our focus on redundancy and safety (with only nominal concern for the cost of such) that got us to the moon and back, thus effectively beating the Russians at a race in which they held a hefty lead.

This simple fact cannot be lightly dismissed.

Russian SOUZ rocket is safest in the world. There was already about 1500 launches of it. Only few about 5 or 6 failures.

We need more than a rocket to get to Mars. The rocket only gets us into Earth orbit. It's great that the rocket is so successful, but is it reusable? That is a linchpin of the future of space exploration, not disposable rockets.

Recent air leak on ISS was due to american module not russian. No one report it in american press.

On the contrary. That was indeed covered in the American press. I read about it in USA Today, the L.A. Times, Des Moines Register, et cetera.

I personally figured it was only a matter of time before an air leak occurred on the ISS. As I recall, Mir had its share of such things. It only stands to reason that every bug that visited Mir would eventually visit the ISS.

Ask boris. His main reprimand that russians "dump" thier hardware for fraction of cost.

The charge may be spurious, but what do you imagine the production cost of the Buran was? I find it hard to believe it was produced for less than $6 million...yet that's what the asking price was in 2002.

But he told good about ussian launch vehicles or engines for example. Do you know that new american rocket Atlas-5 uses russian engines. American car with russian engine so to speak:)).

Quite true. The engine was better for the purpose of launching commercial satellites. But once again, we need more than just a rocket to get to Mars.

Beleive or not. Russia can do everything America can. And for fraction of cost.

Cool. Then it should be no challenge for Russia to spend the next three years going to the moon 9 times, landing 6 times and safely returning all missions. Once that's done, we'll talk.

[boris]

"Russian rate is 0. Soviet rate was 5."

You are conveniently forgetting the (October 1960?) launch disaster that vaporized hundreds of souls...on the ground.

--Boris

[RusIvan]

This simple fact cannot be lightly dismissed. ==

I agree with those facts. I don't tell that Soviet Union somehow has superiority in space but USSR has competitive technology I say. It wasn't backwardness.
So my point about Russia today is in much better shape than USSR and can do much better. She doesn't have backwardness either. SO it is just matter of right money. Just fraction of those for NASA.

We need more than a rocket to get to Mars. ===

But idf you hav esafe rocket technology now you may expand it to needed vehicle. After all it will be just another rocket.

It only stands to reason that every bug that visited Mir would eventually visit the ISS. ==

Air leak was due to american lab module then nothing to do with Mir station. "On Monday, astronauts removed a hose in the window of a US onboard laboratory which was the likely source of the leak." http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1025114.htm .. It is from Google search.

Mir station was depressurised once due to accident: cargo ship rum it. But station was fixed right in space and served 5 more years. If it isn't show of good technology then what it is?

I find it hard to believe it was produced for less than $6 million... ==
I don't know where 6 mln number came from. I think the design and production of Buran costed more then that.

[RusIvan]

You are conveniently forgetting the (October 1960?) launch disaster that vaporized hundreds of souls...on the ground. ==

I didn't mention it because it wasn't in space.

[RusIvan]

Then it should be no challenge for Russia to spend the next three years going to the moon 9 times, landing 6 times and safely returning all missions. ==

Challenge is money. Nothing technological. Russia has heavy rocket with 100 tonn capacity the Energy rocket.

[RusIvan]

[boris]

As I said above:

"And don't forget the Buran was virtually a carbon-copy of the Shuttle. Its engines--the RD-0120 (not to be confused with the RD-120) were copies of the SSME with a slightly larger nozzle and a slightly lower thrust. The Russians filed Freedom of Information Act requests (through their embassy) and were given the blueprints, reports, and other documents."

This applies to the vehicle, tiles, tankage, and all other major components, not just the engines.

--Boris

[RusIvan]

Buran is carbon copy? Check this site: http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya.htm ..

I don't think that Buran is carbon copy. It looks a like but all the cars and airplanes of the world look alike. Inside they are different.

Buran has few predessesors. Like Bor vehicle and Spiral. I think that russian designers used some information from Shuttle project if as you say there was blueprints available. But to copy Shuttle onbase of it is impossible.
If you are engineer then you agree. Can you copy RD -180 engine if you eevn have it in your warehouse? Not talking about blueprints of that engine.

BTW in what year those blueprints was gone into Soviet Embassy?

[ambrose]

Pretty damn cool that they were able to get photos of an 800 degree planet back in the 1970s... It is amazing what the Soviets pulled off with their crude technology.

[presidio9]

Pretty damn cool that they were able to get photos of an 800 degree planet back in the 1970s... It is amazing what the Soviets pulled off with their crude technology.

Well, the photo is enhanced, but it is still an impressive feat. To combat the crushing pressure of Venus's atmosphere (90 times that of Earth!) the cameras looked out through windows made of quartz that was 1cm thick! There is a BBC article about it here

[ambrose]

Thanks for the link - very interesting article. I don't think we'll be colonizing Venus any time soon.

What's even more amazing than the Soviet ship surviving the 800 degree temperatures or the 90x Earth atmospheric pressure is that they were able to return images of any kind to Earth... Venus is completely covered with thick layers of clouds.

One can only wonder where we might be today if the Soviets and Americans had "stayed the course" and continued space exploration with new accomplishments at the rate that were being made in the 60s and 70s. New innovations pretty much died out from the 80s onwards.

[presidio9]

I didn't mention it because it wasn't in space.

By that logic, the US Space Program has never had a casualty. All our deaths happened on the launch pad or en route to or from space. Russia still has dead cosmonauts floating around up there.

[boris]

"Buran has few predessesors. Like Bor vehicle and Spiral. I think that russian designers used some information from Shuttle project if as you say there was blueprints available. But to copy Shuttle onbase of it is impossible. If you are engineer then you agree. Can you copy RD -180 engine if you eevn have it in your warehouse? Not talking about blueprints of that engine."

In the 1980s the Foreign Technology department at Wright-Patterson AFB paid me to analyze and 'reverse engineer' Russian engines. So yes, we could copy the RD-180.

"BTW in what year those blueprints was gone into Soviet Embassy?"

It is my understanding that a flood of FOIA requests originating in Russia's Washington embassy began in the late 1970s and continued to about the mid-1980s.

--Boris

[muleskinner]

Hmmmm....the Russian one is bigger and has a reservoir tip.

[RusIvan]

So yes, we could copy the RD-180.===

I doubt it. Of cause it is possible to make metal model of it. But there have to be some small details which very difficult to know so to copy. You have to repass all the way of R&D to know it. Otherwise you ignite your copy and it just explodes:)).
If it would be easy to copy then the manufacturer won't sell them.

[untenured]

Bush says this is what we're going to do.

I'll go on record as saying that the U.S. government won't establish a permanent presence on the moon or go to Mars, because the welfare state already claims too much of our national income and emotional attention. And this problem will only get worse as the baby boomers age.

I have no idea what Russia or China's fiscal constraints are like, but ours will be fatal.

Unless some clever engineer comes up with a stroke of cost-saving genius, it won't IMHO happen.

[RightWhale]

Say what you want. You are anonymous, or as someone mentioned earlier, pseudonymous on FR. During the 5-year lifetime of this plan there will be an increase in human/robotic design, but otherwise there will be little difference that can be seen from outside. Real changes wouldn't kick in until sometime in the White House admin cycle beginning 2009.

[RusIvan]

By that logic, the US Space Program has never had a casualty. All our deaths happened on the launch pad or en route to or from space. Russia still has dead cosmonauts floating around up there.==

What dead cosmanaut floating?:)) What the crap?

Boris mentioned one incendent when rocket WITHOUT cosmanauts exploded on starting table and killed many people from service and preparing.
Those people wasn't on capsule even on rocket just incindent happened during preparation of test firing.
So it wasn't cosmanaut deaths. Concerning space flights USSR has 5. Russia has 0 casualties.