Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

atitarev · 2004-01-15 15:45:33

Hi,

Although, the news was marked as "official", there was nothing in offical Russian news regarding the matter, nothing in the major newspapers. Although, I found a Russian reprint of the news. The title was "Russian WILL be on Mars before Americans" (WILL wasn't highlighted) but the article said about looking for sponsorship. So it's not WILL but only MIGHT BE, IF. I sent my sarcastic comment to them.

Everybody knows that Russian economy is not as good as that of the USSR, Vir Stellae, you don't have to enlighten us on this. However, a lot of technology, hardware, years of experience is there, and importantly, the spirit is there.

I saw models of interpalnetary spacecrafts on Russian TV and an interview with scientists about their plans to go to Mars, but nothing was approved or sponsored.

I asked professor Lev Mukhin, a prominent scientist in the Russian Academy of Sciences a question about the participation of Russia in exploration of planets and this is waht he answered (it's a quick translation, hopefully it makes sense):

?As for the Russian participation in planet exploration, everything is determined by financing. With regret, I have to state the surprising short-sightedness of our [Russian] government, who don?t understand a simple fact that it is the development of science, and, thus its financing on a necessary level is the basis of the future potential of the country [Russia].

ecrasez_l_infame:

"And an unnamed official at Energia on Thursday suggested that the US 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."

I agree with that, Cindy.

wgc · 2004-01-16 18:54:40

Hi,
Although, the news was marked as "official", there was nothing in offical Russian news regarding the matter, nothing in the major newspapers. Although, I found a Russian reprint of the news. The title was "Russian WILL be on Mars before Americans" (WILL wasn't highlighted) but the article said about looking for sponsorship. So it's not WILL but only MIGHT BE, IF. I sent my sarcastic comment to them.
Everybody knows that Russian economy is not as good as that of the USSR, Vir Stellae, you don't have to enlighten us on this. However, a lot of technology, hardware, years of experience is there, and importantly, the spirit is there.
I saw models of interpalnetary spacecrafts on Russian TV and an interview with scientists about their plans to go to Mars, but nothing was approved or sponsored.
I asked professor Lev Mukhin, a prominent scientist in the Russian Academy of Sciences a question about the participation of Russia in exploration of planets and this is waht he answered (it's a quick translation, hopefully it makes sense):
?As for the Russian participation in planet exploration, everything is determined by financing. With regret, I have to state the surprising short-sightedness of our [Russian] government, who don?t understand a simple fact that it is the development of science, and, thus its financing on a necessary level is the basis of the future potential of the country [Russia].
ecrasez_l_infame:
"And an unnamed official at Energia on Thursday suggested that the US 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."
I agree with that, Cindy.

If the United States can't find the funds were do you think the Russians would? The've been doing these type of paper voyagers for the last 40 years.

Designing a mars mission may be the easy part, finding the backing thats the fun.

atitarev · 2004-01-18 04:26:01

The've been doing these type of paper voyagers for the last 40 years.

I wouldn't say so, wgc. Until recently Russia was one of the 2 space powers, even after all the collapses.

Designing a mars mission may be the easy part, finding the backing thats the fun.

If designing a Mars mission is easy, why don't NASA design it and do it earlier and cheaper? Maybe the answer is in cooperation. Russia has the know-how for the cheaper and faster mission, and if Bush said "it's not a race, it's a journey", then if NASA talks to Rosaviakosmos, then they manage to do something together. In fact, I don't know what is really happening as for the preparation to Mars exploration in Russia and what they say in the media only confuses. Let's just wait and see.

Michael Bloxham · 2004-01-18 22:07:49

I'm pretty sure that, if it weren't for the Chinese launcher and stated objective for it (and its follow-ons) to reach and occupy Moon, President Bush would have approved a Mars Direct plan for NASA to follow. But now, to skip Moon would be tantamount to "giving" it to China (who would certainly love to plant a few flags of her own). Not a good election-year ploy!

I find it hard to beleive that Bush was prompted to return to the moon in fear of the Chinese. If the Chinese were to get there before the US, we would just say, 'Haha, your 40 years too late.' We have already been to the moon. Its now more likely Russia or China will beat the US to Mars, if Bush's Space Plan is taken seriously.

Nirgal82 · 2004-01-18 23:53:37

I do think the US is doing this in response to foreign activity. The US doesn't do anything unless it is in its own interest. In the 60s it was in the US's interest to beat Russia to the moon to prove our superiority in rocket technology. (the moon race proved that we can do anything we want with our rockets within the earth moon system, and with that proven we burned the fleet of man-rated rockets and killed apollo to make room in the budget for the thousands of ICBMs needed to deliver nuclear payloads using all that nifty experience we gained shipping men here and there.)
Once again, and this is China's doing, the US finds it in its interest to send people to the moon, and not only to plant a flag and pick up rocks either. We are matching China in their bid to establish a settlement.
One thing you can count on is the paranoia and reactionary attitude of the USA...

-Matt

Palomar · 2004-01-19 08:58:03

Nirgal: "The US doesn't do anything unless it is in its own interest."

*The US is the -only- nation on Earth to do things on the basis of self-interest?

Nirgal: "In the 60s it was in the US's interest to beat Russia to the moon to prove our superiority in rocket technology."

*Russia didn't have a similar interest? They were purely altruistic and absolutely non-competitive about their space program?

Nirgal: "One thing you can count on is the paranoia and reactionary attitude of the USA..."

*I've seen plenty of paranoia and reactionary attitude to go around, global wise. I'd like to think most anyone who has gotten to know me since May 2002 could affirm that I try to be objective and fair not only about the US (positive or negative), but also regarding international events/incidents. I fully support the endeavors of ESA, CSA, etc.

Sorry, Nirgal, I don't understand the "need" some US folks here (your profile says you live in Texas, so I'll presume you are a US citizen) have to seemingly wish to disparage or grovel or go into mega-guilt-trip time about THIS nation...as if the US -only- does bad things or is selfish; yes, yes -- all other nations on Earth are pure and holy, absolutely selfless and altruistic (strike up the angelic choir)...give me a break.

Power and wealth tend to corrupt, and NO ONE is immune to its influence, who has it or could have it.

I'm not afraid to admit the US has done bad things, aggressive things, etc...but I'm not going to go into guilt-induced groveling, as though every other nation is pure and totally wonderful and we are big bad rotten meanies 24/7/365.

Frankly, I think you are being unfair to the US.

Sorry for the little "rant" and digression.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2004-01-29 19:36:13

[=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040129/sc_nm/space_russia_dc_2]Yuri Koptev slams Bush's plans

*Related to this established thread; didn't want to start a fresh thread.

"He was particularly critical of Bush's plan for designing a spacecraft capable of carrying astronauts to the space station, the moon and Mars, saying he did not understand how this could be done since each destination had different needs...'Yes, we can agree that certain elements could be used. However, there cannot be a universal spacecraft as is being suggested at the moment...'".

Koptev is calling for completion of ISS prior to manned Moon or Mars missions; he considers ISS as -the- priority of Russia. The article indicates Koptev's opinions are very different from Putin's. He also is not interested in cooperating with Bush on the recently-announced initiative; Koptev dismisses it as mere election-year politicking.

--Cindy

Michael Bloxham · 2004-01-29 22:58:53

Koptev: he seems like a pretty miserable fella to me... Let's hope he's hiding something.

Palomar · 2004-01-30 06:20:27

Koptev: he seems like a pretty miserable fella to me... Let's hope he's hiding something.

*Well, I was disappointed to read that Koptev considers the ISS as -the- Russian priority, especially considering last month's news from Russia (the reason for which this thread was established by Rik). Oh well.

--Cindy

Rxke · 2004-01-30 11:53:14

Well, the Russians have always seen a space station as a logical stepping-stone towards Mars and other places, so in a way his reaction is understandable.

His insistence on a 2 years timeframe to finish the station is erm... weird, to say the least. Maybe it's just a case of tit-for-tat: USA blamed the russians for delays, now it's their turn?

Kenshin · 2004-01-30 17:20:18

Sign me up!

now, to learn russian and join their air force and... aw, darn.

Mad Grad Student · 2004-01-31 19:47:26

C'mon, guys, no offnense here, but did you really think that Russia was serious about sending people to Mars? They've (Unfortunately) never even landed on Mars without people, which dosen't exactly put them in a good position to start! Call me a cynic, but we have to be realistic, so maybe well-measured cynicsim is a goo thing. A Russain Mars mission wouldn't work because one, they're in economic ruin, two, they don't exactly have the motive, and three, no one would go there without enough succesful precursor missions to determine that it's safe.

Please don't believe everything you read.

Rxke · 2004-02-18 03:37:04

Sorry to bring this thread up again, but initially i said i thought i had read about the zvezda plans before...

Now i found out what got me confused: it was reading about the [http://www.astronautix.com/craft/zarya.htm]Zarya , ages ago and mixing things up with Zvezda that made me make the initial assumptions.

(There's also a Zarya on the ISS... The recycling of names b the Russians makes my braing go haywire, sometimes...

Anyway, that 'old' (non-ISS) Zarya..., could the 6 man vehicle the Russians are talking about today have anything to do with this?

Algol · 2004-02-18 07:47:47

It could be - it says that it needed to be carried in the payload bay of the Buran shuttle though?

Rxke · 2004-02-18 10:17:11

I think the meant it should be able to *fit* into the Buran... I guess launching on a Soyuz is less restrictive cq size, because you can 'simply' adjust your shroud to accomodate for protrusions etc, with a Buran that would not've been an option... i Think.

atitarev · 2004-02-18 18:26:59

Sorry to disappoint you guys. The new spacecraft Zarya ("dawn") is meant only for LEO, not for Martian or even Lunar exploration, unless they change their minds. That's what Yuri Koptev, Director-General of Rosaviakosmos explicitly said. Source - Russian language media.

Rxke · 2004-02-18 23:58:56

I know, and it's not a disappointment, if the Russians suceed to build a low-cost personal carrier with these specs, manned spaceflight would get a lot cheaper: send the big hardware up on heavy launchers, and let the people follow on the "SoyuzII"...

Ok, so not a Mars Direct possible in this scenario, but still a huge improvement over a 3 man crew. Less launches, less headaches...
Today, out of a 3 man crew, 2 essentially have to be pilots, making for only one 'full-blooded' scientist/passenger... "SoyuzII" could change all that, like we had with the shuttle: 2 pilots, and a substantial number of mission specialists, instead of one...

atitarev · 2004-02-19 06:02:58

It is a disappointment for me, though, Rik. The efforts could be used for a Mars mission. I hope they may change their mind after elections in the US. I read that they are ready for cooperation with the US in Mars exploration but there was quote "no invitation" to cooperation.

Rxke · 2004-02-19 07:17:49

Yes, but Russia is coming back, step by little step. I'm certain they're still thinking about Mars, but maybe together with ESA or even China...
They have more plans in a fairly developed stage than Nasa has, today, but they don't have the money...
If Russia hadn't collapsed financially after the breaking up of the USSR, I'm fairly certain they'd be on Mars or at least en route to Mars today. Mir 2 was to be some kind of dress rehearsal for that, instead it ended up as the backbone of ISS... (Zarya and Zvezda were supposed to be part of MIR 2)

Russia has a long way to go, but they're stubborn and proud. And have years of experience.

atitarev · 2004-02-19 16:46:27

I agree, Rik. The Russian economy is growing again, not as fast as Chinese, though. The Russian Space Agency (Rosaviakosmos) has the capacity for a Martian mission now, if they have the money to build these spacecrafts. What is required is a lander, more tests, more fuel, etc. Do you think that Zarya could be used for a Martian mission? I don't know if the craft would be able to take a lander and enough equipment.
If they cooperated with NASA or another space agency, they would be able to pull it off, don't you think?
The real boom for the space industry may start, when there is a demand for Russian spacecrafts and launchers.

Rxke · 2004-02-20 09:55:28

The only thing lacking in their portfolio of 'already tested and proved' designs is a large lander, i think... They put 2 lunochods on the Moon, and several landers on Venus, but they have virtually or no experience with manned landers...

If they had, I'd think they'd be 'crazy' enough to do a two manned mission, launch an automated cargo lander, and send a mir 2 in pursuit. Their original plan was something like going to Mars, spend 2 weeks on the ground and leave again, but that sounds absurd... Still, you'd find volunteers for that, i think.

Ok, i might sound a bit too optimistic about their capabilities, but ever since i was 12, when i saw a full sized salyut on an international exhibit from closeby... i'm deeply impressed by their can-do approach. The thing looked like... a tank, not a flashy spaceship, and i think that is their secret: build it rugged and simple, leave the frail expensive hi tech frivolities at home... If your launcher is heavy enough, you can get away with a heavier ship.
Mir outlasted it's projected lifecycle exceptionally well if you take into account they didn't have the money anymore to service it adequately. In the end it was breakin down, but it was supposed to be decommisioned *years* before that, it was never built to last that long. But it did. Hats off for the engineers. Privately, American astronauts admit they feel safer in a Soyuz to go up and down than in a Shuttle. A 60's era ship, built by a severely underfunded organisation... That says a lot about the quality of their designs.

(No disrespect to the American engineers, the shuttle Colombia was fantastic, but it should've been flown as a *prototype*, not as a regular launcher. They should've tested Colombia and improved upon the design, instead of building a fleet... They did that in some ways after Challenger, the Atlantis and Endeavour sported some minor upgrades, like insulation blankets on the sides instead of tiles, etc., but the upgrade was far from adequate...
Again, mone money money...

Again rant rant rant...

atitarev · 2004-02-21 05:56:36

Very interesting Rik, thank you. I must have impressed you really, if you remember well what you saw when you were 12...

Ad Astra · 2004-02-21 10:07:16

I wish I could share your optimism about Russia's future, but it is difficult in light of Russia's poor military readiness and Vladimir Putin's consoildation of authority. The once-mighty manned space program (due in part to US stifling of Mir and ISS) is just a shell of its former self. I appreciate the creativity that Russian designers are showing with their "vaporware" Mars missions and the like, but paper studies aren't really helping their manned space program pull out of its rut. I will say that the US space program is in a similar crisis; the difference is that American projects get killed after they fabricate some hardware while Russian projects are axed before they get to that point.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-01-15 15:45:33

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#27 2004-01-16 18:54:40

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#28 2004-01-18 04:26:01

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#29 2004-01-18 22:07:49

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#30 2004-01-18 23:53:37

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#31 2004-01-19 08:58:03

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#32 2004-01-29 19:36:13

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#33 2004-01-29 22:58:53

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#34 2004-01-30 06:20:27

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#35 2004-01-30 11:53:14

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#36 2004-01-30 17:20:18

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#37 2004-01-31 19:47:26

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#38 2004-02-18 03:37:04

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#39 2004-02-18 07:47:47

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#40 2004-02-18 10:17:11

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#41 2004-02-18 18:26:59

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#42 2004-02-18 23:58:56

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#43 2004-02-19 06:02:58

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#44 2004-02-19 07:17:49

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#45 2004-02-19 16:46:27

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#46 2004-02-20 09:55:28

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#47 2004-02-21 05:56:36

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

#48 2004-02-21 10:07:16

Re: Russia can send Man to Mars by 2014:official - at one-tenth the NASA budget

Board footer