Russians walking on the moon by 2012!

[nacnud]

No you are forgeting the orbital module, that has a toilet and extra space. Only accent, decent and docking are confined to the return capsule.

 

[space_dreamer]

They don’t need to use Energia!<br /><br />“The ISS Russian Segment is to be used as an assembly site for the orbital transfer space system before its flight to the Moon. The crew is to return from the Moon directly to Earth, re-entering the atmosphere with escape velocity. Such an approach allows early first landings on the Moon, and makes it possible to extensively test logistics and technology involved in the lunar missions, thus significantly reducing technical and economic risks.”<br /><br />What they need to go to the moon is; an up graded Soyuz spacecraft, mass-produced launch vehicles, and upper stages like Block DM, a space station and a Luna Lander.<br /><br />The only part they are missing is the Lander. But don’t for get the Russians did design a Lander for the first moon program (I have attached a pic of it), also they successfully landed two large rovers and performed several sample return missions. Designing a new Luna Lander should be much easier with the computer software we have now in 2006 as apposed to 1966!<br /><br />All they need is money! <br /><br />The American Greg Olsen has said he will pay the Russians $100 million for a trip around the moon proving there is a tourist market! <br /><br />Russian tax revenue increased by 40% last year! They now are the biggest supplier of gas for Europe. The Russian oil pipeline to Japan will start pumping in 2008. Making them a huge amount of money with oil at $70 a barrel!<br /><br />The Russians biggest company Gazprom is the third richest in the world (richer than Microsoft which is the forth richest) Gazprom is predicted to become the first company to worth 1 Trillion Dollars by 2015.<br /><br />I started this thread by saying-<br /><br />“Russians could be walking on the moon by 2012!” They “could” not would, be walking on the moon by 2012. Don’t underestimate the desirer to prove that they are back as a great power.<br />

 

[syndroma]

> <i>The Russians biggest company Gazprom is the third richest in the world (richer than Microsoft which is the forth richest) Gazprom is predicted to become the first company to worth 1 Trillion Dollars by 2015.</i><br /><br />One thought always comes to my mind - Sevastyanov, head of RKK Energia, has very tight connections with Gazprom. Before RKK Energia, he was CEO of Gazkom, Gazprom's child satellite operator. I wonder if he can attract more powerful investors than Roscosmos or ESA to the Kliper project...

 

[shoogerbrugge]

It would only be good if they would finally get more Yamal sattelites up, those are partly sponsored by Gazprom

 

[space_dreamer]

That’s very interesting Syndroma I didn’t know that!<br /><br />It would explain the Russian interest in Helium 3, Gazprom could be thinking long term, to use money from oil and gas to start developing technology to supply Helium 3 from the moon. <br /><br />

 

[lampblack]

<font color="yellow">Would it even be technically possible for them to design and build the necessary hardware by then even if money were no object?</font><br /><br />If money were no object, we AND the Russians each would have a Lagrange Point space station by now... well-established colonies on the moon... and entrenched bases on Mars.<br /><br />Money (along with the vagaries of political will) has always been the true impediment to accomplishments in space -- and not technology. If money is no object, we will develop whatever technology we need.<br /> <br />Of course, this is just one tired ol' boy's opinion. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>

 

[thinice]

It's political will in the first place. Russian goverment is sitting on a $50+ billion "stabilization fund" (this is in addition to some $250 billion reserves of Russian Central Bank), not willing to spend it on anything in fear of hyperinflation.

 

[airspaceus]

Given the fact that very little for the lunar project can actually be purchased abroad I would assume that most money will recycle back into the local economy. So, fear of hyperinflation is probably a little exaggerated. But it is still political, I believe: for Russia 2012 (which will then get extended to 2015 or beyond as with any large project ) is a very-very long shot, and it is in no interest of the current political elite there to embark on a journey that they are most likely not going to enjoy political benefits of.<br /><br />Don't want to finish it on a negative note though: NASA needs some healthy competition to function properly, so this may be a beneficial project for everybody.

 

[josh_simonson]

Russia makes a good portion of it's money from fossil fuels, but most of the world (especially their main market in europe) is trying to get away from them. The russians would be happy to provide all of europes electricity too as they switch to a non-co2 electric economy. <br /><br />Still, it'd probably be cheaper for them to build 100 fission plants in siberia and ship the energy to europe with a superconducting electricity 'pipeline'. That'd please the co2 worrywarts and the 'not in my backyard' anti-nuclear crowd.

 

[rrl2]

The russians have really nice rockets,but who cares well be back on the moon again before George W. Bush can say "Dubya" three times fast<br />

 

[space_dreamer]

I hope humans go back to the moon ASAP, I don't really care which nation is next to land on the moon. (Well, a British mission would be cool but that’s not going to happen!)

 

[john_316]

<b><font color="yellow">They don’t need to use Energia! </font>/b><br /><br /><br />I highly doubt they will use Soyuz with just upgraded uperstages whole way round. I can see them possibly using a modified Soyuz for crew but for a lander just as we did they will need a heavy lifter for the lander. Soyuz isnt gonna do that and I think they know that as well.<br /><br />They will need Energia or likewise another HLV just like we will need to go back as well. The Russians dont want a footprints and flag ceremony deal either so they will need a heavy lifter for the extended stay.<br /><br />Thats just my take on that and I don't see them doing that before 2012. Perhaps an orbit or two around the moon but not a landing.<br /><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br /></b>

 

[daniko]

Hi, I hope I'm not too late for the discussion and not everybody is gone <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Here is my contribution:<br /><br />As stated above most of the large scale space projects are money and politics. I follow with interest the development of Russia's space program and I think there is the politic will to develop strong profitable space industry.<br />They have much practicle experience and great amount of know-how gathered through the years.<br />They don't have the starting capital and the latest in technologies. You think the give up - no!<br /><br />What they do? The throw a bait.<br /><br />You look at the "Kliper" project and you think: "They are trying a new step to move on ahead." That's only 1/2 truth. Russian space industry is dancing around european industry.<br /><br />Here are the few last steps of this dance:<br /><br />At the end of 2005 when the european ministers gathered to discuss the space program of EU, they said to Russian Space Agecy:<br />We are interested in your "Kliper" project but don't like it's format.<br />Mr. Perminov didn't show any sign of disappointment. The answer was an internal competition for the right to produce the next Russian space transporter. If you analyze it - this sign of market thinkig is a little strange for the conservative russian space industry. But than it became clear that there are some new rules for the contest and Energia company had to redesign it's "Kliper" project.<br />Recently Mr. Sevastyanov (Energia head) anounced that his company has finished redesigning the project and that all of the new demants for the contest were met.<br />As a response Mr. Perminov (RSA head) put out that the contest experts are examining the contest documentation for the "Kliper" in paralel with "our european partners".<br />And also: "In case of it's approval (of "Kliper" project) it could be developed in cooperation with EU ..."<br />And also: "If Europe and Japan support us, we'll have a very good international

 

[pathfinder_01]

"So on the question - how Russia will get to the Moon, the answer is: cooperating Europe. "<br /><br /><br /> And sadly this is why the US adventure to the moon might fail. Unless some future U.S. administration is as open to international cooperation as Russia, I can very well see a future where NASA has a CEV that is able to deliver people to low earth orbit and not much else. With limited funds the U.S. might not be able to afford a moon program. Even the current projections of two flights to the moon a year don’t sound all that appealing. I just hope that we rethink the VSE to be more inclusive.

 

[daniko]

Here is a related item about How russians are going to make Moon - mining profitable:<br /><b>Article</b><br /><br />First deuterium and tritium - then He3 from the Moon.<br /><br />But that's after the russians establish steady transport lines to the chinese restaurants on the Moon <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[john_316]

So is Russia going to use Klipper to get to the moon?<br /><br />If so what is the lander going to be weight wise? How much will the lander weight in at? Is Araine V going to launch the Klipper and the lander on one shot or are they going to launch on seperate rockets?<br /><br />I have no doubts the Russian can build rockets and I wont even debate that they can build effective ones. However there is a weight issue by using a lander to goto the moon having a good crossrange and return to an orbit to dock with a Klipper or Soyuz capsule for return to earth.<br /><br />How long will the Russian lunar team stay on the lunar surface? 1 day? 2 days? a week? <br /><br />How large will the crew be? 1 man 2 men 3 men or more?<br /><br />What semi-permanate base will they establish? Modules that connect or seperate habs on landers?<br /><br />In what weight constraints will the Russian Lander operate? Will it be less than 19 tons or more than 19 tons with its crew, propellants, life support, and crossrange?<br /><br />These issues just dont get solved by reconfiguring a Soyuz capsule and or building a Klipper mini-shuttle. You still have to build a powerful enough rocket to launch all the components needed for a Lunar trajectory and return.<br /><br />I don't think Klipper with a Breeze/DM-2 upper Stages on the Soyuz is going to make the trip there and back without another rocket launching the lander also. I just dont see the Lander on another Soyuz. I believe that launcher will have to be larger if not twice as powerful as the Soyuz to get a comparable crew to the moon and back. <br /><br /><br />Has Russia produced a moon plan with Soyuz or Klipper and the Lander type recently? Do they have an effective plan in place or on the designing board ready to cut metal and place such a business venture in operation? <br /><br /><br />Again just my opinion but I don't believe they would have both the lander, rockets, and Soyuz/Klipper ready for a 2012 timeframe if they havent started on the program by

 

[qso1]

I agree with what your saying as far as the year. I glanced at the section describing how they plan to return to the moon and it appears doable from a tech standpoint. I saw no mention of the year 2012 or any graphic showing the Kliper going to the moon. The Kliper could go as the CSM equivalent but more than likely Soyuz would fill that role. The plan according to the part I read was to have Kliper operational by 2015.<br /><br />Some of your follow on questions were not addressed by the article as far as I was able to read.<br /><br />http://www.energia.ru/english/energia/news/news-2006/public_02-01.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[daniko]

And again - "Klipper" is not the means that will bring russians to the Moon !<br /><br />It is the meeting point at which Russia and Europe will meet and debate and finally COOPERATE.<br /><br />I dont think that date is important here.

 

[qso1]

I agree, Kliper is not intended to go to the moon even in the capacity of a CSM. I mention it only as a possibility. Kliper could be the way Russian lunarnauts would get to LEO for the first leg of their lunar journey.<br /><br />I don't think the date is important either. But since its mentioned as part of this thread, someone else figured it to be important. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[egom]

It is about the money - not about the politics. While EU has tons of money they do not spend them on space, they have some greater problems right now.<br /><br />ESA would like to invest some money in Russia - now that the communist project for Russia is done I think that they will integrate it in EU (whatever you think Russia IS and european country - at least as religion and education and culture).<br /><br />Once EU will have some spare money they will invest in russians because this is the fastest way to get ahead of the competition. And the russians know that - you can see this from the love dance they make each time they meet.<br /><br />Egomancer

 

[publiusr]

I would love to see Angara 100 fly.

 

[lbiderman]

You will have to wait til the end of the year for that. Not a long wait, though

 

[krrr]

<font color="yellow">You will have to wait til the end of the year for that.</font><br /><br />The end of which year? The Angara-100 is just a concept on paper. I doubt that any version of Angara will fly before 2008.

 

[slipstream]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I doubt that any version of Angara will fly before 2008. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Even 2010 at best, according to recent press statements from the Russian Space Forces.

 

[john_316]

To follow up...<br /><br />The post was Russians walking on moon before 2012 and I havent seen an article stating they will be definately be on the moon by the end of 2012. <br /><br />They would have to have a project in motion other than just Klipper to achieve this. I haven't seen any official sources anywhere that states Russia has proposed (actually approved funding) for a HLV for crews to the moon or HLV to send the require lunar habitants, landers etc. <br /><br />That tells me they dont have a concrete plan to do that yet! I think they have a plan to help lower LEO prices and make more money but not any lunar landings with people well until after we do it once again.<br /><br />Even with ESA's cooperation they still would need to start soon to build a HLV in order to claim that 2012 goal. But even with Soyuz launching in S. America, that doesnt make it a done deal. I think that launch sight will offer a Klipper alternative on Ariane 5 but not have the moon mission accept maybe with landers and satellites.<br /><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />