11 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

Russia to set up manned lunar base
2 Sep 2007, 0451 hrs IST,AGENCIE

MOSCOW: Russia plans to send cosmonauts to the Moon by 2025 and establish a permanent manned base there in 2027-2032, the head of the space agency said on Friday.

The head of Russia's Federal Space Agency (Roskosmos), Anatoly Perminov, said that in accordance with Russia's space programme through 2040, a manned flight to Mars will be carried out after 2035. He said that toward the end of this year, Russia will have 103 satellites in orbit, up from the current 95.

There are plans for a new space centre in the country, but a site has not yet been selected, he said. Russia currently launches all manned flights from the Baikonur space center in Kazakhstan. Perminov said previously that construction of a new launch facility would only begin after a new type of spacecraft was built.

Source: The Times of India

[Alex01]

This are very good news indeed. It would be good if the two moon bases ( NASA's and Russia's) would cooperate on the moon.

That would also help other countries to get to the moon, one example is China.

[AztecInca]

Well considering Russia's increasing aggression, massive increase in spending on defence and renewal of national pride, I wouldn`t rule out another space-race between them and the US.

Edited by AztecInca, 02 September 2007 - 10:20 AM.

[ships-cat]

A moon base ?

Why, are the Siberian Gulag's full again ?

Meow Purr.

[Cradle of Fish]

I get a feeling, judging by the responses in this thread, that humans will never make it back to the moon because we're too obsessed with the other guy killing us.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Quote

This are very good news indeed. It would be good if the two moon bases ( NASA's and Russia's) would cooperate on the moon.

The reason the Russians have made this announcement is because NASA rejected their approaches to return to the Moon in a joint project. It is likely that the European Space Agency will be partners with the Russians. Russia is currently looking at a replacement for it's Soyuz manned spacecraft. This will almost certainly be the spacecraft Russia use to get to Lunar orbit. ESA is a partner in this project.

I can't help feeling that there are political motives in NASA rejecting the Russian offer. Russia has not always been a reliable partner in the International Space Station programme. A lack of funding has often lead to delays in the delivery of Russian components and in the Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) going cap in hand to NASA for more money. (To be fair a large amount of the delays and cost over runs have been due to problems with the shuttle so I can be argued that NASA has not been a 100% reliable partner either).

I still harbour a suspicion that the exploration of the Moon will be an international affair. If the Russians/Europeans can demonstrate that they have the funding and the technology to explore the Moon then it would make sense to pool resources. Whether this becomes a single international Moon base or sharing resources between two bases I wouldn't want to guess. A joint treaty to rescue each others Astronauts in the event of an accident would be a sensible first step.

[Alex01]

Quote

The reason the Russians have made this announcement is because NASA rejected their approaches to return to the Moon in a joint project. It is likely that the European Space Agency will be partners with the Russians. Russia is currently looking at a replacement for it's Soyuz manned spacecraft. This will almost certainly be the spacecraft Russia use to get to Lunar orbit. ESA is a partner in this project.

I can't help feeling that there are political motives in NASA rejecting the Russian offer. Russia has not always been a reliable partner in the International Space Station programme. A lack of funding has often lead to delays in the delivery of Russian components and in the Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) going cap in hand to NASA for more money. (To be fair a large amount of the delays and cost over runs have been due to problems with the shuttle so I can be argued that NASA has not been a 100% reliable partner either).

I still harbour a suspicion that the exploration of the Moon will be an international affair. If the Russians/Europeans can demonstrate that they have the funding and the technology to explore the Moon then it would make sense to pool resources. Whether this becomes a single international Moon base or sharing resources between two bases I wouldn't want to guess. A joint treaty to rescue each others Astronauts in the event of an accident would be a sensible first step.

This is the most foolish thing NASA might have done to date, you don't know the anger I have right now. Why not cooperate on getting to the moon just like in the ISS construction program? Anyways..... I think the russians will come benefited from this, they did a good thing teaming up with ESA and leaving NASA out of it.

If we are going to put boundaries in space then we are never going nowhere, the space program has to be a worldwide team effort, or we won't go pass the moon.  I think NASA has to leave the poititians aside, and behave intelligently. NASA has to recognize that it is not the best space agency, it lost 2 shuttles and more astronauts in the Apollo Program.

I do think that the Russians/Europeans will do better. But again in space we are not Americans, or Russians or Europeans anymore, in space all those boundaries dissapear, in space we are from Earth , simply from Earth, and if NASA won't recognize that then it is not going to go any further.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Quote

This is the most foolish thing NASA might have done to date, you don't know the anger I have right now. Why not cooperate on getting to the moon just like in the ISS construction program?

There are all sorts of reasons. I would love to see this being a collaborative effort but we live in the real world where politicians hold the purse strings. Many within the USA have (with good reason) been a little upset with the way that the Russian Federal Space Agency has behaved at times. They are a cash strapped organisation and have taken every opportunity to get every last Ruble they can from NASA. During the period after the loss of Columbia they effectively blackmailed NASA by saying that they would not carry US astronauts to the ISS if there were any further delays to the shuttle returning to flight.

Given the actions of the Russian Space Agency and the current less than friendly posturing between the two nations it would be doubtful that NASA could get the budget for a Moon base approved by Congress if it was to be a co-operative venture with the Russians. It is better that the USA goes it alone than not at all.

Things are not set in stone. There is nothing to stop the US and the Russians co-operating later on. The fact that ESA has a good working relationship with both NASA and Roscosmos could be beneficial in this respect. If the Russians and the Europeans are to go to the Moon together then at some stage it will become clear whether the budget (and just as importantly the political support) is really there. If it isn't NASA will have been shown to be correct in going alone. If it is there then it will not be too late for co-operation.

I do not think that NASA's rejection of Roscosmos's offer is short sighted, I think it is a sad reflection of political realism.

[leadbelly]

Just to play devil's advocate, do we plan to get the same bang for our buck, that we got last time we went to the Moon?

The computer bang has sounded.

The rocket bang has sounded.

The lunar science has practically sounded, between the accomplishments of Apollo and remote sensing satellites.

Or, is this merely an exercise in maintaining a certain level of scientific "leadership" (who makes the most money from use of rockets, today- China? Russia?). Leadership could mean getting a new generation of rocketeers to replace the now retiring ones (cost more to train them in the future than it does now).

Is this a Boeing solution to one aspect of its bottom line, as well?

So, if we go to the moon again, and assuming it is not for strategic reasons, what practical (financial) benefit will it have?

Edited by leadbelly, 03 September 2007 - 12:53 PM.

[AztecInca]

^Well the purpose of returning to the moon is to set-up a permanent base, from which we could launch ourselves to mars and beyond. The scientific and technological discoveries and advances should be well worth it. Also we can`t expect to only ever inhabit the one planet, so its only logical to begin an expansion into the cosmos.

[bpiscean]

Quote

Russia to set up manned lunar base
2 Sep 2007, 0451 hrs IST,AGENCIE

MOSCOW: Russia plans to send cosmonauts to the Moon by 2025 and establish a permanent manned base there in 2027-2032, the head of the space agency said on Friday.

The head of Russia's Federal Space Agency (Roskosmos), Anatoly Perminov, said that in accordance with Russia's space programme through 2040, a manned flight to Mars will be carried out after 2035. He said that toward the end of this year, Russia will have 103 satellites in orbit, up from the current 95.

There are plans for a new space centre in the country, but a site has not yet been selected, he said. Russia currently launches all manned flights from the Baikonur space center in Kazakhstan. Perminov said previously that construction of a new launch facility would only begin after a new type of spacecraft was built.

Source: The Times of India

its really an exciting one.
imagine life on the moon like on our Earth is really Men's great achievement.

[Star_girl]

You got to love that they are ambitious enough to want to put a lunar base on the moon when they are still debating the effects of radiation on astronauts... Why can we not for once just work together? Would it not enable the whole thing to be quicker? Instead we let our pride get before us and refuse... That is a sad state of affairs...