Slashdot Mirror
Russia Wants to Launch Manned Mission to Mars
Raul654 writes "The Maimi Herald, via the Associated Press, is reporting that Russia wants to launch a manned mission to mars. The article says that the Russians are hoping to work closely with the European Space Agency and/or NASA. The 6 person, 440 day trip would cost around $20 billion. Should be interesting to see how this shapes up. See also here for mirror article."
This could be the boost to get NASA off its duff and on to Mars. The "space race" got us to the Moon, because we wanted to beat the Russians. I think this is just what we need.. some "friendly" competition.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
does anyone actually believe the Russian promise to fund 30% (6 billion +) of the mission? Given their record with the ISS and the sorry state of their economy, I highly doubt it.
Columbus did his thing in 1492, yet colonization didn't really get going until the 1600s. Even then, there wasn't much settlement in North America outside of a strip about 100 miles from the ocean until after 1800.
...for an agency that can't afford to even built COMPONENTS of the International Space Station without resorting to selling seats to tourists.
Talk is cheap. This isn't going to happen.
Maybe they'll finally consider nuclear power or something similar for this sort of trip -- it seems to be the only feasable way to make a large trip. Switch to nuclear, and you suddenly cut your fuel mass by a whole lot!
Or, maybe use those spiffy ion propulsion engines they've been using on some sattelites lately.
Either way, this is something that should definitely be done no matter what the cost. You can't eye space travel as a direct commercial gain, but the social, technological, and fringe benefits of such a trip are great. Let's not forget the thousands of useful inventions that came out of the NASA Space program. It's nice to get a nation, or in this case, a group of nations together for a cause other than fighting an enemy.
Exploring another planet in our solar system is just what the space programs need to generate newfound interest. Nobody really cares about the ISS. It barely makes a 50 word story in the paper when they send up another branch of it. Sad but true. OTOH, Mars is a much more interesting topic. It's our nearest neighbor and will generate tons of info maybe even regarding our origins. The research could take decades to complete, thereby leading to advances in space travel, which naturally leads us to explore other planets. I think Mars is the ideal stepping stone and probably the most important goal in the near future.
It may even actually get done if America steps up and announces plans of their own.
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
The Moon is magnitudes closer... why not send up a proposal that outlines a semi-permanent base on our satellite? Perhaps cheaper, as well. It would also get alot of press coverage, seeing as the media could hark back to "RETURN TO THE MOON" on the front page.
Lordfly
hookers and grits.
Why is it that whenever there's a story mentioning Russia on /. that every patronising, xenophobic AC thinks that it's his patriotic duty to post some negative "reds-under-the-bed, they're-still-commie-bastards, huh-they're-all-drunk-on-vodka" comment?
Some simple facts for the uneducated:
1. Russia has the know-how.
Russia still has more experience of manned space flight than everyone else put together, in terms of both man hours and missions. During the 80's and 90's, when NASA shuttle launches were red letter days, the Russian space agency was putting up cosmonauts as often as they wanted to.
2. Mir, the Russian space station, was the best permenant orbiting platform ever built.
Laugh all you want, but it was a damn sight more sucessful than Skylab, NASA's 70's project. Yes, Mir's final few years were dogged by near-disasters but virtually all of those could be traced back to some bean counter cutting back the budget here and there - the technology, engineering and science wasn't to blame.
Mir was in use way past it's planned retirement date, and was the first true permenantly manned space station. A great deal of the ISS's design is based on the lessons (good and bad) learnt from Mir.
3. Going to the moon was a competitive race. Going to Mars will be a collective journey.
This isn't a road trip we're talking about. It's a voyage.
NASA can't afford to go to Mars single-handed. Neither can ESA. And neither can the Russians. The only way this is going to get done soon is through cooperation.
Yeah, cooperation. That dirty "c" word. Sometimes, you can't do everything yourself so you call in someone else, pooling resources and talent to get the job done as best as possible.
Politically, economically and scientifically, there are many reasons why such an endeavour will be one of cooperation rather than competition. As much as anything else, a Mars mission will be used to foster closer relationships between the US, Europe and Russia.
(And, before you mod this down as a troll, re-read what I've written. It makes sense. Which is more than can be said about many of the posts so far.)
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Now, look. Your premise seems true, in that interest sparks funding. But that is a "fad investment" paradigm and it can and will be pulled back with the same irrational set of desires that pushed it. It will be pulled back when the going gets rough ... and space is rough -- there will be deaths, accidents and cost overruns.
... they are now mostly part of our atmosphere, and the damned things cost about US$10K per pound to put them up.
After that big space fad in the US and USSR in the 1960s, Humanity ended up with tons in orbit that slowly rained back down, occasionally lighting up the sky to illuminate rusting gantries. Of greatest note are Skylab and Mir
It is very foolish to send a mission to Mars without sufficient infrastructure around the Earth-Moon system to push it. The mission will be terribly expensive and all things involved in it will be viewed as temporary and will eventually crumble back to the Earth in one form or another.
People need to live and work in space permanently before we can say there is actual infrastructure. That is why we absolutely need a base or two on Luna, with monthly ferries making the Earth-Moon trip. It may not be sexy and interesting, but mining the regolith for material to build system missions is essential for sensible space investment -- it takes 22 times less energy to get material from Luna to LEO, than from Earth to LEO.
Please, please, please don't encourage people to repeat the Apollo Project boondoggle. Apollo left no Moonbase behind it; Mission Mars will also leave no Marsbase behind it; and $60 billion will vanish once again into the military-industrial complex. Then we'll have to go through at least 2 more generations of putzes again trying to make a buck over trying to honestly improve the Human condition.
[also misbehaves on Kuro5hin as Peahippo]
How can Russia afford to spend $20 billion on a stupid trip to mars, when at the moment most western societies are funding poor Russia with billions of dollars to demantle their nuclear warheads, clear up all the mess surrounding all that scary biotech-shit they created in the 70s and 80s which is now easily falling in the hands of terrorists, etc., etc.?
Let's face it, the Russians have a major advantage over the Americans in this.
They have the best expertise on not just the physical effects of long-term space flight, but they're also experts on the psychological effects of being cooped up in a big space can for a long time. You need to know all that for this trip.
They're also the only nation with the big dumb boosters you need for a trip like this. Their hardware is pretty bulletproof as they use tried and trusted hardware rather than going for the most high-tech option.
And at the moment Russia is the only nation on earth with manned spaceflight capability. All Shuttles are grounded, and who knows whether they'll ever fly again?
"Information wants to be paid"
If, on the other hand, the goal is public relations and media coverage, then let the entertainment and media businesses pay for it.
Tell you what, Russia... You guys get to the point when you can pay your cops, doctors, nurses, and soldiers, and let countries with viable economies send people to Mars.
I'm not saying Russia couldn't do it-- I am saying that a country shouldn't spend that kind of money in the situation Russia is in.
Russia suffers from massive corruption, rampant crime, ecological disasters of the first order, and a miniscule GNP (per capita equivalent of Guatemala or Algeria). The poverty of its people keeps the nation in constant danger of its citizen's re-instating Communism. Now that's desperate. They can't pay their military or their nuclear weapons researchers what even a Costa Rican shoemaker earns. Because of this their nuclear arsenal is disappearing to God-knows-where and their nuclear weapons scientists are more bribable than a Chicago city official. There's so much testosterone at the upper levels of Russian management that they can't even allow help on a submarine rescue to save their own men. And now their bruised Stalinist egos want a trip to Mars? Fucking brilliant!