 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / July 2008Russian plans - A New space race?
Since the decision for reasons not announced but known to anyone with a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile and anti-American, anti-NATO stance adopted by the Putin controlled Junta that now rules Russia, are we to understand that Russia may be planning to either build their own station again ala Mir style or could even revive and improved their long dead Moon program since being "cut out" of the new Nasa initiative. I've heard many Russians comment that the anti-Russian moon move has rekindled some competition and may have resulted in the "coolness" on station. That being very little if any interaction with the Russian segment, curtailing of Russian participation of silly and numberless press conferences which I don't disagree with at all. Energia seems a logical alternative to the Ares V rocket which is the obvious heavy lift alternative vehicle hidden in the LM booster and TLI dual use. Any chance the Russians and Chinese may partner to beat us back to the Moon? All these are intended as hypothetical and will depend a lot on the Putin controlled govt. But with the newer investments in the Russian military can space be far behind? Me thinks not Comrades.. > a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile > and anti-American, anti-NATO stance adopted by the Putin controlled > Junta that now rules Russia, Just because a country doesn't agree to being the USA's poodle does make it "hostile" to the USA, except for naive people who believe the white propaganda machine (CNN/FOX and the others). If Russia were to announce it was to place missile defense system in Cuba in order to defend itself from missiles launched from Mexico, how would the USA react ? The USA did the equivalent by wanting put put its missiles next to Russia, claiming it was to defent against Iran. > rekindled some competition and may have resulted in the "coolness" on > station. That being very little if any interaction with the Russian > segment, curtailing of Russian participation of silly and numberless > press conferences which I don't disagree with at all. The USA segment has finally grown to a point where it is gaining importance. It theoretically has O2 production capability and thoeretically has CO2 removal capability (I use theoretically because reliability has not yet been proven), and through Shuttle, has O2 and N2 refilling of quest tanks that could also be used for ECLSS. In the past, the USA was totally dependant on the russian segment for life support. Right now, they depend on it for the toilet and kitchen. Once the shuttle is retired, you will find a shift back to russian importance since the russians will be supplying everything via progress or ATV (which is a russian ship for the purposes of docking to the station). > Energia seems a logical alternative to the Ares V rocket which is the > obvious heavy lift alternative vehicle hidden in the LM booster and > TLI dual use. I think that the russians are smart enough to read through the political hot air in washington. There is no such thing as a moon programme. If CEV flies, it will be as a people mover to/from the station. The real project will be a trip to Mars, and that will require massive launch capability, as well as in-space assembly capabilities. Going to the moon will be a task long forgotten when/if CEV flies. > All these are intended as hypothetical and will depend a lot on the > Putin controlled govt. But with the newer investments in the Russian > military can space be far behind? Me thinks not Comrades.. In case you didn't know, Putin was replaced by Medvedev. While Putin has positioned himself to continue to be pulling strings, this will not last for very long and Medvedev will assert his power and have his own policies before long. You are forgetting Klipper. Will this be forgotten, or will they forge ahead with it ? Will it become a "buran and after having flown once, go to a museum, or will it go into production ? We don't know. First ofall NATO is the only thing that has kept Western Europe free, the last time I heard no NATO tanks invaded Poland lately. And I didn't see the Russians exercising much restraint over their "friends" in Serbia in the last few months with the riots in Kosovo. Not to mention continually threatening Ukraine's independence and the freedom of Georgia. How about opening your eyes? Putin has every intention of reassuming the presidency after one term of Mededev. And comparing the bm defense in Poland to the Cuban missile crisis is apples and oranges. You didn't answer the obvious exclusion from the Constellation program of the Russians... ? Are the Russians offering to buy in? no, because Congress made it clear that was a non-starter , if we had built our own heavy lift program instead of relying on the Russians the damn thing would have been built much sooner. CNN sure isn't a friend of the Bush Administration by the way. No such thing a moon program, that will come as quite a surprise to all the people at MSFC working on it. Damn guys you've been layed off! Forget that Ares 5 prototypes, and all that Pad 39B mods, we don't need them, Mr. Doe says its all a fairy tale. Oh yes, the congress will be mighty surprised when the GAO delivers the news.!!! >> a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile >> and anti-American, anti-NATO stance adopted by the Putin controlled [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >ahead with it ? Will it become a "buran and after having flown once, go >to a museum, or will it go into production ? We don't know. I think you are mixing up posturing for political reasons and the reality of the world situation actually. Of course Russia wants its people and all who have been or are thinking of being its friends to have confidence in it, so not being a lapdog of the US is a great stance considering the bungles the US makes of foreign policy these days. Brian  SignatureBrian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Since the decision for reasons not announced but known to anyone with > a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Putin controlled govt. But with the newer investments in the Russian > military can space be far behind? Me thinks not Comrades.. >I think you are mixing up posturing for political reasons and the reality of >the world situation actually. ...Actually, I think he's just trolling. OM Signature]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ >Since the decision for reasons not announced but known to anyone with >a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >could even revive and improved their long dead Moon program since >being "cut out" of the new Nasa initiative. Russia has been 'planning' to build their own (new) station MIR style and to revive their Lunar program since about 1x10-9 seconds after the USSR ceased to exist. The only tangible results to come out of the last seventeen odd years is heaps of press releases, viewgraphs, and power points explaining how any day now Russia is going to leap to the forefront of space stunts. Only the impressionable have been impressed. >Energia seems a logical alternative to the Ares V rocket which is the >obvious heavy lift alternative vehicle hidden in the LM booster and >TLI dual use. Other than the fact that there is no such booster as the Energia, sure. Whatever. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL >Russia has been 'planning' to build their own (new) station MIR style >and to revive their Lunar program since about 1x10-9 seconds after the >USSR ceased to exist. The only tangible results to come out of the >last seventeen odd years is heaps of press releases, viewgraphs, and >power points explaining how any day now Russia is going to leap to the >forefront of space stunts. ...You forgot the mockups. They made some nice mockups. OM Signature]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ An I'm proud to be an american where at least I oppose tyranny. Repeal the patriot act, how partriotic. :) The Mockup yes. last time I looked the Buran was launched on top of something. >>Russia has been 'planning' to build their own (new) station MIR style >>and to revive their Lunar program since about 1x10-9 seconds after the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > OM >The Mockup yes. last time I looked the Buran was launched on top of >something. When you sober up, look up the current status of that something. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL >The Mockup yes. last time I looked the Buran was launched on top of >something. It was, the last Energia. That was 1988. Both are now dead and gone. Brian >>Russia has been 'planning' to build their own (new) station MIR style >>and to revive their Lunar program since about 1x10-9 seconds after the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >...You forgot the mockups. They made some nice mockups. Ah yes - the lovely mockups. The best use of that blizzard of paper would have been to laminate it and build lovely mockups. Then we could stack the mockups up and bloody well walk to the moon. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL >...You forgot the mockups. They made some nice mockups. Yep, I can't wait to hop on the next Boeing Sonic Cruiser to go catch my flight on a Angara/Kliper... Brian >Since the decision for reasons not announced but known to anyone with >a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile >and anti-American, anti-NATO stance adopted by the Putin controlled >Junta that now rules Russia, are we to understand that Russia may be >planning to either build their own station again Doesn't look likely. Despite their booming economy, funding for space is still pathetically low. For now, they're still dreaming about major expansion of their side of ISS. >ala Mir style or >could even revive and improved their long dead Moon program since >being "cut out" of the new Nasa initiative. They're not cut out, they're just not going to be allowed in the critical path again. This isn't anti-Russian... the Europeans and Japanese are in the same boat. >That being very little if any interaction with the Russian >segment, curtailing of Russian participation of silly and numberless >press conferences which I don't disagree with at all. The Russians don't have a lab on ISS yet, so there's not a lot for them to do besides the nuts and bolts jobs, like fixing toilets, and the ocassional Soyuz and Progress flights. And that's entirely their fault, no one else's. Their lab (the only one of three originally planned that is still in the works) is scheduled to fly in 2010, by last schedule. Don't hold your breath. >Energia seems a logical alternative to the Ares V rocket which is the >obvious heavy lift alternative vehicle hidden in the LM booster and >TLI dual use. Any chance the Russians and Chinese may partner to >beat us back to the Moon? Nope. The Chinese don't like the Russians any more than the rest of the world does. America has a black eye for now because of Iraq (time will tell if that remains the case) but the world still wants to do business with America, and despite the angry shouts and protests, there is no shortage of partners for American space missions, i.e., Jason 2/OSTM or Phoenix. Russia is generally only a partner because they provide cheap launches and have a few niche markets to themselves. >All these are intended as hypothetical and will depend a lot on the >Putin controlled govt. But with the newer investments in the Russian >military can space be far behind? Me thinks not Comrades.. The new investments are nowhere in sight. Sure, we have lots of pretty pictures of the next vehicle that's gonna be "the greatest thing since sliced bread", but we've been seeing this for 20 years at least (the most recent was Kliper, which the Russia fans were telling us was going to be wonderful and would show up Orion. They get real quiet when asked about Kliper these days.) I'll believe it when I see it. Brian > Since the decision for reasons not announced but known to anyone with > a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > TLI dual use. Any chance the Russians and Chinese may partner to > beat us back to the Moon? Energia is likely as dead as Saturn V. It only flew twice, and was scrapped long ago when the Russian economy collapsed upon itself. Still, it's extremely unlikely that the US would rely on the Russians to launch (nearly) everything needed for a lunar mission on Energia. > All these are intended as hypothetical and will depend a lot on the > Putin controlled govt. But with the newer investments in the Russian > military can space be far behind? Me thinks not Comrades.. I don't think the US can count on the Russians for much of anything. We'll be lucky if they can ramp up the production of Soyuz and Progress capsules to support the full ISS crew size of six. Jeff SignatureA clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein Jeff Findley formuleerde de vraag : >> Since the decision for reasons not announced but known to anyone with >> a slight political science inclination, i.e., and increasingly hostile [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Jeff Looking at your comments, I think the European Ariane 5 can make a good chance.... You all seem to think that Putin is somehow a leader for peace or something. Once China gets their program going in a big way I look to see Russian cooperation on a lunar mission in the next decade. The Europeans maybe able to come up with an Orion type craft, but I haven't seen anything concrete either. Hopefully the decision to end shuttle will be reversed by the next administration. It could happen. Probably won't. but could. >Jeff Findley formuleerde de vraag : >>> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >Looking at your comments, I think the European Ariane 5 can make a good >chance.... > Looking at your comments, I think the European Ariane 5 can make a good > chance.... Technically, yes, politically, no. The US would use Delta IV Heavies and Atlas V Heavies before they'd launch US payloads on a foreign launcher. The reason that NASA is pushing Ares I and Ares V is because politically, it's good to preserve some shuttle jobs. Well, that and Griffin is wearing blinders and won't listen to any other alternatives. Jeff SignatureA clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein >> Looking at your comments, I think the European Ariane 5 can make a good >> chance.... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >it's good to preserve some shuttle jobs. Well, that and Griffin is wearing >blinders and won't listen to any other alternatives. Well, that and Congress requires NASA to push those boosters and preserve those jobs. By law Griffin isn't allowed to entertain alternatives. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL >Well, that and Congress requires NASA to push those boosters and >preserve those jobs. By law Griffin isn't allowed to entertain >alternatives. That doesn't rule out a DIRECT type system, though, and DIRECT is looking more and more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of the Ares family. Brian >>Well, that and Congress requires NASA to push those boosters and >>preserve those jobs. By law Griffin isn't allowed to entertain [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >looking more and more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of >the Ares family. And what will look more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of DIRECT? D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL >>That doesn't rule out a DIRECT type system, though, and DIRECT is >>looking more and more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of >>the Ares family. > >And what will look more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of >DIRECT? Three launches, propellant depots, or L2 rendezvous, probably. Options also available to Ares, but Ares V will cost enormously more to field and Ares I is right at the razor's edge of being able to do its mission at all. Not so Direct. At least we'd be starting from a lot lower development and infrastructure costs, so we'd have a lot more options... no new engine needed for the next 8-10 years, no new SRB, no retooling the ET factory. Ares-class improvements can be made later at a slow, progressive, affordable rate based on flight experience instead of trying to squeeze every last pound of performance out of the vehicle just to achieve first flight. Ares V is already maxed out (they can't make it any taller/wider or add more engines to the first stage) and hugely expensive, ten years before it is supposed to fly, and Ares I is no improvement at all over EELV despite roughly the same cost. Time to try a different architecture. Brian >>>That doesn't rule out a DIRECT type system, though, and DIRECT is >>>looking more and more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >and Ares I is right at the razor's edge of being able to do its >mission at all. Not so Direct. On paper at least. But then Ares worked on paper too. >Ares V is already maxed out (they can't make it any taller/wider or >add more engines to the first stage) and hugely expensive, ten years >before it is supposed to fly, and Ares I is no improvement at all over >EELV despite roughly the same cost. Time to try a different >architecture. One can chase ever more optimal architectures for years on end... It's a wonderful way to keep engineers and bureaucrats employed and the internet (or at least the space fan corner of it) a buzzin'. It sucks however for actually getting anything accomplished. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL >>>>That doesn't rule out a DIRECT type system, though, and DIRECT is >>>>looking more and more attractive with every redesign and upsizing of [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > It sucks however for actually getting anything accomplished. The problem with Ares I and Ares V is that they're both at the limits of what they can do without ever more radical changes to the design. Ares I has a distinct possibility of not being big enough to do the job of lifting a fully fueled lunar Orion with all of its safety systems intact. Ares V is nearing things like height limits for the VAB. So we're getting a launch vehicle that's too small to support Orion upgrades in the future and another launch vehicle which is too big to be upgraded itself. The "shuttle derived" SRB's are the real culprit here. They can only be stretched so far. Some of the solutions to the Ares I vibration problem are pretty scary. The active control system using reverse firing thrusters to dampen the vibrations is something that needs to be *at least* two fault tolerant so you would still have a chance of firing the Orion launch escape system if you had a failure. You'd want it to be three fault tolerant if you want it to be able to continue the mission with a failure. The more fault tolerant you make it the more complex it becomes which increases the chances that something will fail. Solutions like this are called a HACK in my line of work. They're put there because someone else won't allow you to put the RIGHT fix. Hacks are ugly and almost always cause you continuous pain in the future because once they go in, they're always considered too expensive, time consuming, or risky to fix. Jeff SignatureA clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein >>> Looking at your comments, I think the European Ariane 5 can make a good >>> chance.... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > preserve those jobs. By law Griffin isn't allowed to entertain > alternatives. They required it because that's what Griffin proposed and they rubber stamped it. Congress isn't in the business of actually designing launch architectures. Jeff SignatureA clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.