Demise of Russian European manned space effort

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MarkStanaway

Guest
<p>It looks like the Russians and Europeans have decided not to co-operate on the development of the Advanced Crew Transport System (ACTS) according to this report from Anatoly Zak on the Russianspaceweb.</p><p>http://www.russianspaceweb.com/</p><p>The Europeans have decided to stick with the ATV which is already adapted for launch by Ariane 5 as a basis for any future manned space effort. I don't hold out much hope for this being approved at the next European ministers meeting which is scheduled for this month given the current financial uncertainty. These meetings are only held every three years so it may be 2011 before any decision is made on this matter.</p><p>A great disappointment! </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
B

Boris_Badenov

Guest
<p><font size="2">Maybe they'll just stay with this one.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><img src="http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40462000/jpg/_40462359_future_prex_eads.jpg" border="0" alt="Artist's impression of Pre-X (Image: Eads Space)" hspace="4" vspace="4" width="203" height="152" align="left" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>
 
A

alpha_centauri

Guest
<p>Can't say i'd be surprised really.&nbsp; Ever since EADS came forward with the new ATV Evolution proposals, working with Russia simply didn't make sense anymore.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Maybe they'll just stay with this one.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by boris1961</DIV></p><p>That is a technology demonstrator testbed, not a crew transport system by a long stretch.<br /> </p>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The Europeans are pansies and may never have their own Manned program, they would just rather ride everyone else's coat tails. The Europeans will be riding Chinese Shenzhou's before they create their own Manned program. <br /> Posted by elguapoguano</DIV></p><p>Well, it was close, actually.</p><p>The Ariane V had originally a dual purpose, of which the other was to act as a man-rated booster for the Hermes shuttle. The Hermes never materialized, but the German space office has a development program for a shuttle type craft at this moment, and they are already flying hardware in drop tests.</p><p>Also, Kourou is being equipped right now to host Russian rockets. This may include manned mission aswell, if a client shows up. &nbsp;</p><p>It's fantastic to see that a billion is a big money, when high technology and space exploration is concerned. However, a billion seems to be a pocket change, when throwing at various social problems already caused by poor managing.</p><p>Who knows, maybe ESA will get the job to send a man up there after all, now that the East is rising so rapidly.&nbsp;</p>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<p>"<span class="Forums_CurrentPageCrumb">Demise of Russian European manned space effort" is a gross exaggeration.&nbsp; ESA and Russia will continue to work on joined manned projects.&nbsp; Just one particular project will not be going ahead.</span></p><p><span class="Forums_CurrentPageCrumb">Mind you, this is just a story on a private web site.&nbsp; No fficial confirmation as yet.</span></p><p><span class="Forums_CurrentPageCrumb">I have mixed feelinsg about this.&nbsp; Onwe one hand I am sorry to see this project end.&nbsp; On the other hand ESA does need its own manned spacecraft and the developed ATV is the obvious way to go.&nbsp; Russia also needs to replace the Soyuz, which is too small for the future.</span></p><p><span class="Forums_CurrentPageCrumb">Jon</span></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>"Demise of Russian European manned space effort" is a gross exaggeration.&nbsp; ESA and Russia will continue to work on joined manned projects.&nbsp; Just one particular project will not be going ahead.Mind you, this is just a story on a private web site.&nbsp; No fficial confirmation as yet.I have mixed feelinsg about this.&nbsp; Onwe one hand I am sorry to see this project end.&nbsp; On the other hand ESA does need its own manned spacecraft and the developed ATV is the obvious way to go.&nbsp; Russia also needs to replace the Soyuz, which is too small for the future.Jon&nbsp; <br />Posted by jonclarke</DIV><br /><br />jon, any inside info as to when ATV 2 will launch? I've written to ESA several times and have never received a response. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
P

PJay_A

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It looks like the Russians and Europeans have decided not to co-operate on the development of the Advanced Crew Transport System (ACTS) according to this report from Anatoly Zak on the Russianspaceweb.http://www.russianspaceweb.com/The Europeans have decided to stick with the ATV which is already adapted for launch by Ariane 5 as a basis for any future manned space effort. I don't hold out much hope for this being approved at the next European ministers meeting which is scheduled for this month given the current financial uncertainty. These meetings are only held every three years so it may be 2011 before any decision is made on this matter.A great disappointment! <br />Posted by MarkStanaway</DIV><br /><br />You know what? I agree with ESA on this. The ATV is proven technology and it really isn't too much of a stretch to modify the design in order for it to be man-rated. That's within ESA means and far less risky.</p><p>Had they stayed with the Russian partnership, they would have had to depend on Russia for a major portion of its design and technology. New, risky, untested technology and designs I may add, while footing much of the bill and less say over details of its development.</p><p>The Russians have a good design, but they are looking for someone else to pay for it. If the Russians want to&nbsp;remain a major player in manned space flight and they want to fly a new vehicle then they should find their own internal funding. They would need to make a better case for additional funds to their parliment and not ask ESA (or any other non-nationals)&nbsp;for those funds.</p><p>If they want help from Europe, then maybe they should consider asking the EU for membership.... But that's a whole other subject altogether that Russia viciously opposes.</p>
 
A

aphh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>jon, any inside info as to when ATV 2 will launch? I've written to ESA several times and have never received a response. <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>ESA is generally not very good at replying to inquiries, so you might get better response asking directly from Astrium, the main contractor for ATV program.&nbsp;</p>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>If they want help from Europe, then maybe they should consider asking the EU for membership.... But that's a whole other subject altogether that Russia viciously opposes. <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>"Viciously opposes"?&nbsp; Just because they do not intend to ask for membership at this time does not mean to say that they are "viciously opposed" to the idea.</p><p>Jon<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>ESA is generally not very good at replying to inquiries, so you might get better response asking directly from Astrium, the main contractor for ATV program.&nbsp; <br />Posted by aphh</DIV><br /><br />Thanx for the suggestion. MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
S

shuttle_guy

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>jon, any inside info as to when ATV 2 will launch? I've written to ESA several times and have never received a response. <br />Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The latest NASA working group&nbsp;launch plan shows ATV2 launch in June 2010.<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;The latest NASA working group&nbsp;launch plan shows ATV2 launch in June 2010. <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV><br /><br />Thanx for the info!!!</p><p>Wow, that's a long time from now :(</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Thanx for the info!!!Wow, that's a long time from now :( <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>Well MW, remember the shuttle will still fly in 2010 and possibly even further.&nbsp; If you want a loooong time look at NASA's Ares I, first manned flight in 2015!&nbsp; And NASA's budget is probably some 5 times that of ESA.&nbsp; I would say they are doing pretty good at this time. &nbsp;</p><p>Then there are the Chinese, and spacex with its dragon capsule (if spacex can get the Falcon 9 up and running in time). It just seems to me that just about everybody in the world is going to have some kind of manned spacecraft up before we even see the first launch of Ares I.&nbsp; Further, nobody else in the world is going to take a chance on launching people into space using large solid rocket motors.&nbsp; I am sorry, but neither I, nor evidently anybody else in the world, considers that as safe as using already individually tested liquid engines! </p><p>On top of that, when you consider that ATK wanted some $5 billion just to go to a new motor, which is roughly twice the estimated $2.5 billion that the Air Force put into developing the entire EELV rockets (including an entirely new engine in the RS68), I sometimes wonder how NASA can get away with such costs!&nbsp; And, as you know I have always been an extreme supporter of NASA, and even with that I still wonder!!! </p>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<p>People should also remember that Russia is a partner in the ATV program anyway, supplying the endezvous and docking system.&nbsp; Without evidence to the contrary I would assume this will continue for any ATV-derived manned spacecraft, although it is possible that they may be the wider US&nbsp; docking ports.</p><p>Jon</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
P

PJay_A

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>"Viciously opposes"?&nbsp; Just because they do not intend to ask for membership at this time does not mean to say that they are "viciously opposed" to the idea.Jon <br />Posted by jonclarke</DIV><br /><br />As I said, this is a whole different subject altogether. But, since you mentioned it...<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" />&nbsp;The Russians, unfortunately, for the most part see NATA as threat to their security. Yes, the EU and especially ESA aren't NATO, but the proposed EU constitition (that's already been ratified by all member states but two) calls for each EU member that's on NATO to hand their NATO seats over to the EU, effectively creating a unified EU military.
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>As I said, this is a whole different subject altogether. But, since you mentioned it...&nbsp;The Russians, unfortunately, for the most part see NATA as threat to their security. Yes, the EU and especially ESA aren't NATO, but the proposed EU constitition (that's already been ratified by all member states but two) calls for each EU member that's on NATO to hand their NATO seats over to the EU, effectively creating a unified EU military. <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>They do have a point, you know.&nbsp; NATO was set up as an anti-Russian organisation and its expansion eastweard in recent years have done nothing to indicate it is anything else.&nbsp; The Russians are entirely within their rights to express concern and lobby against this.&nbsp; There is nothing vicious about this.</p><p>This does not mean that they do not enjoy good relationships with the EU or ESA or other European countries.&nbsp;AsRusssia does, &nbsp;Nor does it mean that they may not become more closely affiliated with the EU in some way in the future.&nbsp; especially if NATO dissolves, becomes a broader focused security agency, is is replaced by something less pointed in its focus.</p><p>Jon<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
V

vattas

Guest
<p>I would strongly oppose any European manned space effort that is dependant on Russians. Some cooperation, yes, but not dependancy.</p><p>And, BTW, the day Russia joins EU, Europe is doomed... </p>
 
P

PJay_A

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>They do have a point, you know.&nbsp; NATO was set up as an anti-Russian organisation and its expansion eastweard in recent years have done nothing to indicate it is anything else.&nbsp; The Russians are entirely within their rights to express concern and lobby against this.&nbsp; There is nothing vicious about this.This does not mean that they do not enjoy good relationships with the EU or ESA or other European countries.&nbsp;AsRusssia does, &nbsp;Nor does it mean that they may not become more closely affiliated with the EU in some way in the future.&nbsp; especially if NATO dissolves, becomes a broader focused security agency, is is replaced by something less pointed in its focus.Jon <br />Posted by jonclarke</DIV><br /><br />Focusing back to my original point: If Russia wants a new manned spacecraft, especially one with an&nbsp;unproven design, they should pay for it, not ESA. It's in their national interest to develop it on their own, if their development efforts are successful. Bottom line is that the RSK is underfunded and instead of making a case for better funding to its government, they attempted to get funding out of ESA, which just isn't right. It would be right if they were seeking European membership, but they're not and that's not their government to ask funds out of.</p><p>Russia is no longer the cash-strapped country it was in the 90's. Today's Russia is an oil-rich powerhouse and it's time that the Russian government quit funding RSK at 90's funding levels. As long as foriegn space agencies continue to give money to RSK, it will feel less compelled to make the case for better funding with its own government.</p>
 
J

js117

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;The latest NASA working group&nbsp;launch plan shows ATV2 launch in June 2010. <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV><br /><br /><p style="margin:0in0in10pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Shuttle_guy</font></p><p style="margin:0in0in10pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Isn&rsquo;t <span>&nbsp;</span>Japan going to lunch its own ATV in 2009?</font></p><p style="margin:0in0in10pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" size="3">Is that why ESA ATV2 <span>&nbsp;</span>isn&rsquo;t needed until 2010?</font></p>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Focusing back to my original point: If Russia wants a new manned spacecraft, especially one with an&nbsp;unproven design, they should pay for it, not ESA. It's in their national interest to develop it on their own, if their development efforts are successful. Bottom line is that the RSK is underfunded and instead of making a case for better funding to its government, they attempted to get funding out of ESA, which just isn't right. It would be right if they were seeking European membership, but they're not and that's not their government to ask funds out of.Russia is no longer the cash-strapped country it was in the 90's. Today's Russia is an oil-rich powerhouse and it's time that the Russian government quit funding RSK at 90's funding levels. As long as foriegn space agencies continue to give money to RSK, it will feel less compelled to make the case for better funding with its own government. <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>I agree.&nbsp; Sexy though Kliper is,&nbsp;I do wonder if they would not be better served by a revived TKS.</p><p>Jon<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts