Roscosmos says: ISS until 2024, then go separate ways

[Kryten]

It's hardly their fault...

[Greenfire32]

WOW! And NASA is praised for trying to support international cooperation and yet they refuse to work with the Chinese space program! *rolls eyes*

NASA isn't refusing. The US Government is. And since the government controls the money NASA gets, they've forced NASA to take a "Pro-America" stance. Also, there's laws and stuff that forbid NASA to do more cooperative ventures.

[Kryten]

NASA isn't refusing. The US Government is. And since the government controls the money NASA gets, they've forced NASA to take a "Pro-America" stance. Also, there's laws and stuff that forbid NASA to do more cooperative ventures.

Well, it's not really 'the government' as a bloc either, leaving aside the fact NASA is part of 'the government'. It's a poison pill inserted into a funding bill by a septuagenarian McCarthyist nutcase.

[vger]

Hopefully, if the US takes part in the Chinese ISS venture, it will be a way for the US to start paying off its debt to China.

Yeah, by like 0.01%

[DaveofDefeat]

That's also not how the debt works.

[Mitchz95]

Aren't the Russian segments of the station pretty old? Might be safer to start from scratch.

[DECQ]

The station is in the Mir class, uses modules that have already been designed and in one case built, and uses rockets that've already been tested; it likely wouldn't even be in the same order of magnitude as a lunar expedition. The cutting of costs relative to the ISS does allow for development of lunar hardware, but only slowly; in the current plan, the required launcher wouldn't be ready until at least 2030, and there are no funds for a lander. As far as I can tell there's also no budget allocation as of yet for the actual launch hardware-which itself is to be built in a spaceport that doesn't yet exist.

Lunar program is not required for the landing of the expedition, do not need new Rocket ,need to learn its robots, I'm not talking about people on the moon. The landing men on the moon is meaningless, in the 60s was a different situation.The station not is meaningless...

[Vanamonde]

Looks like we had two threads on the same topic. They have been merged.

[K^2]

Aren't the Russian segments of the station pretty old? Might be safer to start from scratch.

They are. And Russia does not have the resources to retrofit them or get new modules they'd need in place for this. It's just loud words from politicians. Pay no attention to them. Russia might pull modules out of spite, but they'll end up being a dead weight.

[Whirligig Girl]

Spacecraft aren't Lego. You can't just swap modules in and out. Look at how the Orion SM was supposed to be derived from the ATV. The result, far from straightforward, has taken years to develop.

Yes they are. Have you even played the game that this forum is dedicated to?

I once watched a tour video of the ISS. It was rather neat. From the video I learned that the Russian modules are more self-sustained, almost like their own space stations. The American modules, however, are essentially irreducibly complex.

Source: An American astronaut touring the ISS.

[DECQ]

They are. And Russia does not have the resources to retrofit them or get new modules they'd need in place for this. It's just loud words from politicians. Pay no attention to them. Russia might pull modules out of spite, but they'll end up being a dead weight.

You mean to say that Russia can not build space stuff? It is sad that they have to get a kick from the top, it's annoying. And yet I hope that this is really just a rant.

[Mazon Del]

It isn't that Russia can't build space stuff. It's that right now their economy is not in a good position and actually spending the billions on refitting or constructing new modules probably just doesn't exist in their budget. The only arguments one could reasonably make with their technology is that even Roscosmos has admitted that they have had a fairly severe brain drain, where their experienced engineers have left over time and a lot of their current engineers are mostly experienced in keeping the current production lines running. The other issue is that modernization programs for their rockets and systems have been continuously pushed back due to funding reasons. Both of these issues are solvable for Russia but they WILL take significant funds which, to an outside observer, it does not look like Russia has.

[Pipcard]

Yes they are. Have you even played the game that this forum is dedicated to?

Kerbal isn't like real life. For example, in Kerbal, you can just stack fuel tanks, engines, decouplers, capsules, solar panels, etc. together in just a few minutes. In real life, however, the design and development process for a launch vehicle or spacecraft has its own costs (both in time and money) associated with it, and it may take years to research and develop all the systems.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Pipcard

[Bill Phil]

Spacecraft aren't Lego. You can't just swap modules in and out. Look at how the Orion SM was supposed to be derived from the ATV. The result, far from straightforward, has taken years to develop.

Barring the fact that it wasn't originally designed for that...

Yes.