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.
...$20 billion isn't even gonna be enough to buy the paint for the logos on the side of the spacecraft. We are SO overbudget on ISS it stopped being funny a decade ago. Every shuttle flight is $0.5 billion, so $20 billion will get 40 shuttle flights, which can carry if we're lucky 40*30,000 = 1,200,000 pounds or 600 tons to low Earth orbit. A Mars mission is 95%+ fuel so the $20 billion is just TRANSPORTATION COSTS for a 30 ton vehicle and the fuel for it. I don't think you can get 6 people to mars and back in a 30 ton ship; somebody prove me wrong - and then tell me how we build it for free!
Freeze dried vodka
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
> and then tell me how we build it for free!
Easy.
1. collect underpants
2. wait
3. travel to mars!!
Who's interested in the IPO?
Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
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.
the russians have a better chance at this project than the americans. why? because safety america wouldn't allow a NASA ship to go to mars without backup systems backing up other systems backing up other systems, which costs a LOT of money for all that redundancy.
the russians have a less altrusitic attitude towards their cosmonauts; perhaps a bit like their military personnel.
i mean, when the russians are ready to launch this mission, and it blows up on the pad, their attitude is like, 'whelp, that sucks. here, stick 6 more guys in that other rocket and lets try it again'.
There was some show on the history channel today, taped before Bush was elected, that talked about exploring mars. It said that a method to do it would be to send a lander with 2 boosters that would go to Mars without passengers and instead mix with the Martian atmosphere to create fuel for the returning trip. Then a similar flight would occur with people on board. The idea was that thus we could save from having a huge expensive mission that had to go both ways and have two relatively cheap flights. It could be done for by 2015 if Nasa was given the go-ahead.
They then went on to talking about instead teraphorming Mars making it suitable for man-kind. That might be the answer, though they readily admitted that our technology and patience are lacking for such a feat.
It ended there and if I missed anything earlier they may have talked about. It just seemed ironic since I turned on the news 5 minutes after and heard of Russia's purposal.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
Anybody interested in a Mars mission would do well to use as a starting point Zubrin's Mars Direct plan...
Maybe it could just be like taking that millionaire sponsorship thing to another level. Get Pepsi to chip in as well, to have their logo on everything.
I vote for Britney to go along as fuck toy / mascot.
The only tool you've got against psychosis is experience.
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.
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
As will undoubtedly be mentioned multiple times on this discussion, that's Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct plan, and the concept of making the fuel there for the return trip seems to be the only vaguely sane way to do things.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
First, the section of the flight from low earth orbit to mars most probably won't be on the same fuel as that used for launching from the ground, for the simple reason that it's not the most efficient way to do it.
Second, the most cost-effective method of hauling heavy equipment into low earth orbit from the ground is not the space shuttle. Even the ISS gets resupplies in soyuz pods.
If they launch to the ISS, then they don't always need to send a crew with it, becuase the ISS crew has a robotarm and can to spacewalks to assemble things in space.
this company already launches commercially in both ksc in florida and in baikonur in russia. With the Proton K rocket and also with the largest version of the Atlas V, they can launch over 45000 pounds into orbit, that's more than what the shuttle can, and I'm sure a protonk launch from baikonur is a lot cheaper than a shuttle launch from jfk. Maybe energia can make bigger rockets for this, but I don't speak russian to the website is all 'chinese to me'.
(of course this all assumes they're launching spaceship parts and fuel to the ISS and assemble there).
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
such as cancer or Aids. Before you mod me down, think about it. What BETTER gift could you give to a person who is going to die then to let them make history?
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
Together, Russia and NASA can come up with a good design for a Mars-mission vehicle. Unlike the Space Station (ISS), there are a huge number of unknowns which would have to be dealt with, and consequently, novel innovations for them cooked up (we got a huge amount of cool stuff out of the space program from the 60s, but nothing really interesting in the 80s and 90s). Here's a short list of totally new problems which would need to be solved:
NASA really needs a kick in the pants. Unfortunately, that requires some leadership and real vision from the President, and we haven't had that kind in awhile. They really should relegate the lift capability to private industry and just concentrate on making the Mars ship.
Oh well. Maybe someday...
-Erik
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
Oh, there was plenty of settlement in the Americas well before even Columbus got there. History did not begin in Europe.
Well, considering that "history" means a written record, then history began in the Middle East, and didn't include the Americas until the Europeans brought writing.
(At least for North America. The Aztecs had some written records, which the Spanish destroyed. In which case they no longer exist as "history", because they're now unknown.)
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
Actually, this is plausible.
:(
Look at lotteries here in America. They can give out 160 million (in a single state, a single time!) and still make a profit margin (which i'm sure is quite a good margin... at least several million. I can't imagine many people would care if the prize is 150 or 160 million... so that's 10 million right there)
So have a deal. Lottery ticket -- 10 bucks. Person chosen gets to have a trip to mars & training. have some other prizes as well. (just training. the next trip to the ISS, etc)
really. it won't raise 20 billion, but it would be a nice bit of money to buffer the over-budget woes.
I'd buy the ticket. Hell, I'd buy 100.
But then again, i guess they'd have to have some deal (if you're a 500 pound, illiterate ignoramus who can't even stand up on your own, we have the right to choose the next guy.)
sucks for me.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
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.