US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

Bill White · 2004-04-14 10:48:44

This [http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/wo … 4russ.html]article is interesting, including this quote:

“They [the Americans] have not made a single step to meet our offers [of cooperative help] —neither do they give us any clues on their future intentions,” says Yuri Grigoriev, a deputy designer general at RKK Energia, Moscow, Russia’s prime contractor in the ISS project. “My impression is they are rather lost,” Grigoriev told IEEE Spectrum in a telephone interview.

What is the future of future US - Russian and US - ESA space cooperation? What should the future of such cooperation be?

Discuss. :;):

clark · 2004-04-14 11:30:43

ugh. Nice quote.

How can we "meet their offers" when we're in the middle of the process to define our future steps and how we will accomplish it?!

Punditry.

Let me see what the crystal ball shows... oowwwoo.

I see a defined space policy that directs NASA to develop an international approach to the future of space exploration, yet does not depend on any single entity to ensure it's success. The goals shall be defined, offers accepted to meet those goals from international partners, but there will be little room for the previous give-and-take that defined international space cooperation.

"We're going here, you can help, or not."

Sound familiar?

Reliance on international rockets will be at a minimum, yet collaboration will be a neccessity to ensure US space preeminence in future space endeavours. Even with all the other nations combined, NASA is the biggest game in town, they know it, and will look to bend to meet our goals if we hold the line.

I might add, that the US building nuclear propulsion ensures our dominance in space for another generation. No one else is researching these things, and becuase of that, NASA will be very important to the other national space agencies.

As for what the future of cooperation should be?

What's the cooperation you seek from a hitchhiker?

"Shut-up and sit down. I'll take you as far as I want."

bolbuyk · 2004-04-14 13:36:50

It seems NASA can set the goals and make the timeframe for space-exploration.

IMO ESA and RSA should more work together independent of NASA. The potentials of this kind of working together are big. NASA is not the type of institution to listen to others, especially not to listen to non-americans, to develop their plans. More than once they cancelled late in projects with ESA parts of their contribution (eg Ulysses). When I look at the very limited possibilities of Europeans to fly with the NASA and I compare it with what was possible with Russia, then I sometimes don't understand ESA's NASA-mindednes.
Western-Europe was first brought in space by the Sowjet-Union (France).

Russia's costs are lower, so one more reason for ESA to cooperate more with Russia.

NASA should keep this in mind! :laugh:

clark · 2004-04-14 13:54:14

I agree bolbuyk, ESA probably has more to gain by working with RSA. That said, more will get done by working with NASA simply becuase NASA has the resources.

ESA and RSA can do some wonderful science, but they will never have a space exploration program as robust as the US (especially after CEV development).

China will take what it can get, since anything will improve their space program (it is just starting and is several decades behind the game)- yet that relationship will probably not work both ways. I don't see Europeans hitching a ride with the Chinese.

NASA could have built the ISS alone, but this plan was compromised for politcal reasons- for national security reasons. The space program, of any country, primarily exsists to meet the economic, military, and cultural needs of the nation state. It is not an end unto itself... except for crazies like us.

Euler · 2004-04-14 16:36:17

China will take what it can get, since anything will improve their space program (it is just starting and is several decades behind the game)- yet that relationship will probably not work both ways. I don't see Europeans hitching a ride with the Chinese.

China is not as far behind as you think. China and the ESA are already working on several projects such as Double Star (satellites designed to study the Earth's magnetic field) and Galileo (a system designed to break the US monopoly on GPS). All indications are that China and the ESA will work together even closer in the future.

clark · 2004-04-14 21:27:44

Galileo is indeed an international effort to develop another option to US owned GPS... however, it's development has been adjusted to reduce US concerns, when the US isn't even a partner. What does that tell you?

I might add that the military is working on the next generation GPS that is designed to be more advanced than Galileo- and that's the little ol US on her own. No international partners in that one (unless you count a few junior partners that just follow orders).

The point though is that even with international cooperation, the US, NASA, can do far more than all the other combined.

SBird · 2004-04-14 22:04:07

Ah, the next gen GPS. I'm looking forward to that. The accuracy will be much better and much better signal strength so that you can get a decent elevation reading and pick up a signal through trees. In Washington state, with dense trees, a handheld GPS is next to useless. At any given point in time, you're lucky if you're picking up more than one sat. Of course, you can always go up a mountain and break out of the trees but then I can just look for freakin' landmarks the old fashined way...

As jingoistic as it sounds, I largely agree with the assesment that the US is still king of the hill for the time being. The ESA has had a history of abandoned projects that is at least as bad as NASA over the last two decades. The only serious competition is China which is demonstrating a very well-thought out program and will have access to lots of capital if their economy keeps racing along like it has been. Now if China teamed up with Russia and the ESA, I'd say we've got reason to be concerned. However, the Chinese are a lot like us Americans and will probably be loathe to share the glory. They're almost certainly going to go it alone like us.

bolbuyk · 2004-04-15 06:47:47

The point though is that even with international cooperation, the US, NASA, can do far more than all the other combined.

That's something I like to discuss. Maybe on this moment they're on the hill, but the potentials of Russia and ESA are at least comparable to that of NASA. Some aspects, like interplanatary exploration, NASA is leading, but in case of long duration human spaceflight, for example, Russia still holds the duration record, more than a year!! Where are the Americans?
American duration record is established at 194 days, that was broken by the Russians more than 20 years ago.

I think the potentials of the chinese are real. Mainly because of the enormous population, which includes a bigger potential of human capital.

It's a matter of choice, as the sixties have shown. The Sowjet-Uniun was leading, until Apollo landed. After that happening, Sowjet-Union went on leading with human space-flight. NASA was highly interested in Mir!! :laugh:

clark · 2004-04-15 08:41:27

That's something I like to discuss. Maybe on this moment they're on the hill, but the potentials of Russia and ESA are at least comparable to that of NASA.

Perhaps, yet Russia is little more than a space-tech clearing house. Other nations are simply cherry picking the science and technology they want/need from Russia for hard currency. But my question, where is Russia going from here?

They have to sell seats on their Soyuz to make ends meet. It would be like NASA having to sell seats on the Shuttle just to afford a launch. Russia had a great space program, and it can have a great space program again, but the resources simply are not there.

ESA, they're just getting started, and they have a long way to go. Sure, they can take some short cuts and get capabilities from the Russians, but they aren't developing their own. They aren't pushing their abilities if they simply buy what already exsists. Compare that with NASA's goal of developing an entire new class of space vehicles to go beyond LEO.

The Russian's and ESA can't do this. They never have had this ability. The only nation that has any experience is the US, NASA.

Russia may hold the long duration record, but so what? America holds the long distance record. So what. Records are made, then broken. Rah-rah the glory days, but at the end of the day, ask yourself who has the most capabilities. Who has the ability to go to the moon in ten years. It ain't anybuddy but our buddy, NASA.

China, they have a space capability thanks to Russia. That's the only reason they have orbited one person. What I found funny was that when China made this historic first step- there was a Chiense American, Ed Lieu, greeting them from the ISS.

We're having private companies gear up for sub-orbital flights, now. Meanwhile, China prepares to try for a second human launch. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great, but let's be honest, their program cannot compare to NASA, even with international cooperation.

Maybe in a generation things will change, but I doubt it.

dicktice · 2004-04-15 08:52:57

Clark: Know what this reminds me of? A speedway race, where the U.S. entry is doing a pitstop, while the entrys having started from behind, are still zoipping around the track. The trouble is--the other pitstops are fully manned and in readiness, while the U.S. guys are out to lunch. I could be wrong, but this might be a "tortoise and hare" situation. . . .

clark · 2004-04-15 09:06:18

Okay dicktice, perhaps, yet let's look at where NASA's focus is now- racing around the track, or going on a cross-country off-road race?

It's the latter, not the former.

No one else is putting together the required technology to go beyond LEO, except NASA. The only space agency to go beyond LEO (with people) is NASA.

Russia is "talking" about building a bigger version of Soyuz. That means they are talking about putting a few more people in LEO (just to sell some more seats). ESA is working on buying exsisting Soyuz, to go to LEO, and no further. China is still working on staying in LEO for longer and longer durations.

The only agency working towards moving beyond LEO, is NASA.

You watch the Indy 500, I'll watch the real race.

Palomar · 2004-04-15 09:28:27

Know what this reminds me of? A speedway race, where the U.S. entry is doing a pitstop, while the entrys having started from behind, are still zoipping around the track. The trouble is--the other pitstops are fully manned and in readiness, while the U.S. guys are out to lunch. I could be wrong, but this might be a "tortoise and hare" situation. . . .

*Wishful thinking, dicktice?

I recall a similar discussion in another forum a few years ago (not regarding space), wherein a fellow named Craig (smart guy, wish he'd post here) pointed out that the U.S. can seem rather laid back and perhaps even apathetic in some regards...until the flag (your analogy) is dropped and then look out. He pointed out historical examples to his observation. Wish I had those comments to copy and paste. (IIRC, one of his comments was, "We have MARVELOUS recuperative powers.")

I doubt the U.S. is anywhere near "out of the running" (despite my own frequent exasperation with NASA, etc.).

Anywho, SBird wrote: "Now if China teamed up with Russia and the ESA, I'd say we've got reason to be concerned."

*I have noticed quite a few references in the past week or two, at various internet space-related news agencies, regarding those two (cooperation). It's quite noticeable.

SBird: "However, the Chinese are a lot like us Americans and will probably be loathe to share the glory. They're almost certainly going to go it alone like us."

*That's an interesting point. Will be interesting as well to see how it pans out (or doesn't).

--Cindy

P.S.: I'd like to see active cooperation between the U.S. and Russia in getting to Mars. And anyone else who'd like to join the party.

bolbuyk · 2004-04-15 16:15:04

They have to sell seats on their Soyuz to make ends meet. It would be like NASA having to sell seats on the Shuttle just to afford a launch. Russia had a great space program, and it can have a great space program again, but the resources simply are not there.
ESA, they're just getting started, and they have a long way to go. Sure, they can take some short cuts and get capabilities from the Russians, but they aren't developing their own. They aren't pushing their abilities if they simply buy what already exsists. Compare that with NASA's goal of developing an entire new class of space vehicles to go beyond LEO.

That's that typical American way of putting things forward. The Shuttle is grounded, only the Soyuz can fly 'thanks to us', NASA says. America had no long duration in space program. They put some astronauts in Mir. 'Thanks to our fee Mir is more succesfull'.

Do not understand me wrong: ESA and Russia are sleeping.They hold their hand to America by asking guidance, technology and other kinds of support. America is fond of this and sets it's points. Europe will launch a Spacelab? OK. The shuttle that takes it up will contain 5 NASA-astronauts and just one ESA. Agree or not.

You can state there are some records broken, some not, but this exactly is the point. America has not broken all records, so they're not solely on top. Energia, duration record, that are no futilities. Even the ISS is yet crewed by Russian Soyuzes, NASA-funded, maybe, but still reliable Russian technology. Russia talking about a new Soyuz? So what does NASA do for years and years? About new crewed space vehicles, not? Is this really the time a change will happen? We'll watch.

About ESA's technology: Europe has technically the same potentials as America, no doubt. But ESA's program is very slight in comparison with NASA, something I consider as a pity. But this is a matter of choice, yet the wrong choice is still made by ESA, IMO. The positions can change within 10 years, if ESA goes for it.

SBird · 2004-04-16 11:54:33

Ah, but that's the whole point. Russia has plenty of expertise, at least fairly comparable to NASA, but has no money. Without our help, Russian space science would be half dead right now. The rockets and launch facilities would largely be rusting away and most of the technical expertise that they had would have evaporated into other jobs and other countries. It's very easy to lose technical expertise.

Take the Saturn 5 for example. We still (urban legends not withstanding) have the blueprints and certainly don't lack technical expertise to makea Saturn 5. However, it would be cheaper to simply start over from scratch since most of the engineers that worked on it have retired and the companies that manufactured it have vanished or been mergered out of business. Russia could have had their entire space expertise evaporate if it hadn't been for our help.

The EU has promise but don't forget that they have never launched an astronaut on their own. Budgetary limitations and a simple lack of strong leadership in Europe keep the ESA from reaching anything even remotely resembling it's true potential.

20 years from now, things could be very different but in the context of getting to Mars, the US doesn't have any competitors. Colonizing Mars could be very different, though.

Algol · 2004-04-16 12:53:34

Some of us view ESAs step back from completing the Hermes project as a good thing and NASAs inability to let go of the shuttle and see it for what it is/was could be seen as a lack of leadership.

SBird · 2004-04-16 13:12:35

Although I'd argue that the reasons for the Hermes cancellation were more complex than that, I largely agree. However, the simple fact that NASA could run the Shuttle for so long is a sign of the sheer amount of manpower and material it can field. Now that the Shuttle is being phased out, those resources can be directed towards more productive endeavors.

bolbuyk · 2004-04-16 16:16:39

Ah, but that's the whole point. Russia has plenty of expertise, at least fairly comparable to NASA, but has no money.
The EU has promise but don't forget that they have never launched an astronaut on their own. Budgetary limitations and a simple lack of strong leadership in Europe keep the ESA from reaching anything even remotely resembling it's true potential.

I think I agree with that. That's my frustration: WHY DOESN'T ESA GO FOR IT!!! I think combination of Russian technology and experience and European science and economy is very fruitfull. This could come to some mild kind of space-race, stimulating the ambitions on both sides of the Atlantic. Getting better both.....

Just one hope this time: Andre Kuipers will fly monday, if everything goes well. Will I become the third flying dutchman?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-04-14 10:48:44

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#2 2004-04-14 11:30:43

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#3 2004-04-14 13:36:50

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#4 2004-04-14 13:54:14

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#5 2004-04-14 16:36:17

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#6 2004-04-14 21:27:44

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#7 2004-04-14 22:04:07

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#8 2004-04-15 06:47:47

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#9 2004-04-15 08:41:27

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#10 2004-04-15 08:52:57

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#11 2004-04-15 09:06:18

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#12 2004-04-15 09:28:27

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#13 2004-04-15 16:15:04

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#14 2004-04-16 11:54:33

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#15 2004-04-16 12:53:34

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#16 2004-04-16 13:12:35

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

#17 2004-04-16 16:16:39

Re: US- Russian space cooperation - Whats the plan?

Board footer