Slashdot Mirror


Russia's Role in the ISS in Trouble

Uhh_Duh writes "cnn.com is reporting that the Russian space program has fallen on hard times and is no longer capable of launching independent missions due to budget problems. The article touches on the fact that their annual funding is about 309 million versus the U.S. budget of 15 billion. They've also announced that they will not be meeting most of their future deliverables for the international space station." (corrected, the title originally said "IIS" instead of "ISS)

7 of 360 comments (clear)

  1. Ah well by Torinaga-Sama · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Their money is probably better spent feeding their people and counting their nukes at this point anyway.

    --
    (/local/home/curiosity)-#who -u|grep thecat|cut -c 44-49|xargs kill -9
  2. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  3. Time to dump the space station anyway by Mothra+the+III · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The space program has become ridiculous, between failed attempts to launch boy bands into space and new projects like virtual planets http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=96&ncid =96&e=1&u=/space/20021210/sc_space/cyber_planets__ building_virtual_worlds_to_explore_signs_of_real_l ife it seems to have drifted far from actual space exploration. If they ever want public support for government dollars, they need to start looking at sending someone to Mars, or at least back to the moon,

    --
    Worst. Sig. Ever.
  4. The US now rules space by Nefrayu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So aside from all the typos and joking, does anyone else have an opinion on the fact that the US is now THE power in space? Although the article mentions India spending $500 mil on space, it doesn't come close to our spending or our expertise. Personally I think it's a good thing. Space is the next military battleground, or so it is said. So what are your thoughts?

    --
    Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
  5. Problems from the Beginning by WatertonMan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The whole way that NASA has run the Space Station program and the Mars program have been dismall. On the one hand the public doesn't really give a damn about science, so if NASA pursued fairly cheap science projects with a good return, they'd dry up quickly. At the same time though the space station is a solution in search of a problem - and one that is VERY expensive.

    To a degree all of this was just to help keep Soviet scientists around in Russia and not heading to the mid-east to develop nasty weapons. Further the military clearly had motives in keeping the Space Shuttle running. However now the Russians can't do much and haven't been able to move into commercial projects. Even in NASA the shuttles are wearing out with no replacements on the horizon.

    The big question is whether all of these problems are a good thing or a bad thing. When you consider the BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of dollars spent on all this, one can ask what the return has been. (Say it in a Carl Sagan voice) There are plenty of good scientific projects. Further R&D on making space flight cheaper is a big deal. But space research itself needs to be seriously rethought.

  6. The ISS is simply a WPA project by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a former NASA nut, used to research the Soviet space program, etc., and so was very forgiving...
    This ISS program is a turkey, though, and we should cut our losses.

    The problem is simply that the ONLY reason for the existence of the ISS is to KEEP PEOPLE EMPLOYED. First of all, NASA itself as a beaurocracy has pushed and pushed for the only mega-project that it could keep getting funding for because a beaurocracy wants to EAT. They couldn't get funding for more sensible programs like a shuttle replacement, or other more mundane but necessary things, so they push for funding for the incredibly wasteful ISS because $15 billion a year wasted is $15 billion a year they WANT, no matter what it's for.
    If they can't have $15 billion a year for sensible things, they'll take $15 billion for non-sensible things, just so long as no one loses their job.

    As far as the Russian's involvement, it was actually the PLAN to get them involved simply to keep them employed! The Clinton administration changed the ISS from a US program, space station Freedom, to the ISS, almost exclusively to keep former soviet rocket scientists at their jobs instead of following money to other, more threatening sources. That was almost the sole reason for it.
    That, actually, made a least a LITTLE bit of sense. Sort of.
    Anyway, you could argue that with the Russian's participation the ISS has been more successful that it would have been otherwise, even WITH them dragging the program down - because with billions thrown down a rathole in either case, at least this way it was a bit more interesting, and did at least give the US and Russia something to strengthen our ties.

    --
    This space available.
  7. Manned Space Exploration is not Science orResearch by parabyte · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ,..one can ask what the return has been. [...] ...scientific projects...space research

    The wrong idea that sending people into space is science and research goes all back to the Apollo program, when after the first landing on the moon NASA tried to sell subsequent missions as "scientific missions".

    IMHO, sending a man to the moon was the highest cultural achievement of mankind in history so far, but as a piece of art, there is no much value in repeating it, and as nobody had the balls to admit that hundred billion dollars were spent for art, it had to be science.

    There is plenty of important science that happens in space, but you don't need people hanging around for that.

    Manned Space Exploration is about beeing there, and to feel how it feels to be there. It is about living there. It is about building houses, planting trees and fathering children out there. And cruising around with a cool car, if you are american.

    After Apollo 17 all space programs world started to decline, and there is no end in sight. The Space Shuttle program started by crippling Wernherr von Braun's original design that had a piloted, horizontal landing reuasable first stage by using a cheap throw-away fuel tank and reusable solid fuel boosters, ending up with a Space Shuttle with more expensive payload than using throw-away rockets. The buerocrats way of wasting money by budget cutting. And every news I heard about the ISS the last twenty years was about budget cuts and delays. I heard you need 2.5 people just to operate it, and there are three guys up there. SNAFU.

    It is sad, and I hope I will be wrong, but within a decade we will see:

    • The ISS will be abandoned a finally reenter the atmosphere
    • The last Space Shuttle will go out of service
    • There will be no more capabilities to send humans into orbit any more
    I just hope mankind will regain manned space travel before we will have depleted our natural resources here down on earth.

    --
    Without order, nothing can exist. Without chaos, nothing can be created.