Slashdot Mirror


US to Pay to go to ISS

forgotten_my_nick writes "According to BBC News, Russia has announced that it will no longer ferry US astronauts to space for free (It has been doing so for two years). From 2006 the US will be expected to pay."

11 of 636 comments (clear)

  1. They are doing a part exchange by thegraham · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the article at first the US will pay in work already done on the ISS that the Russians didn't do.

  2. Re:Russia seems different since the school inciden by Talrias · · Score: 3, Informative

    Now they want to charge for something that should be bridging for international good will.

    It appears to be a case of charge for it, or do not do it at all. The Russian Space Agency is facing financial difficulties and needs all the extra funds it can get.

    Chris

    --
    aterr - an open source threaded discussion board.
  3. Re:Repaid already? by bckrispi · · Score: 4, Informative

    From TFA, the Russians will be paying off this debt by putting in free man-hours in the next couple of years. Prior to the Columbia tragedy, the Russians & Americans shared the burden of transport. The Americans moved passengers, the Russians moved supplies. So yes, for the past two years, Russia has had to shoulder 100% of the transportation costs. It sounds to me like they are open to negotiation on these terms.

    --
    Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
  4. Re:White Elephant by Atrax · · Score: 3, Informative

    I recall reading recently (New Scientist?) that the current crewing levels are barely enough for ongoing maintenance, never mind space science, which for the most part doesn't require a big-ass expensive clunky space station anyway. A lot of zero-g work can be done far more easily, aside from long-term studies, of course.

    I think in part the whole project was a mixture of diplomatic goodwill and make-work for a floundering industry sector, with a healthy helping of publicity banner thrown in. As far as I'm aware, the ISS has contributed nothing of note scientifically, and far less than it ought to have in terms of technological/engineering breakthroughs, though I'd welcome any infirmation that either confirms or denies this baseless accusation.

    I suppose it's better than nothing, but there are (could be) far better science platforms than a manned space station. Look what the HST did, for instance.

    --
    Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
  5. Re:WTG Russia. by juniorkindergarten · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ok Troll, I'll bite
    #1 the computer you're using now -- space exploration pushed the microelectoronics revolution
    #2 that fancy koolatron cooler that you bought last summer to keep your beer cold, again thank space exploration
    #3 teflon, plastics, most modern alloys, etc.
    ok, I'm done feeding the trolls, next!

    --
    "Every security scheme that is based on secrets eventually fails." - Steve Jobs
  6. Re:WTG Russia. by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 5, Informative
    Spinoffs from NASA research. The list at the link above is about 10 pages. And I would have to say that yes, you personally and mankind have both benefitted from the work NASA has done.

    Here are some examples from the list

    Air Quality Monitor

    Virtual Reality

    Municiple Water prurification (So your tap water doesn't kill you.)

    Solar Energy

    Fire resistant material

    Digital Imagry Breast Biopsy

    Voice controlled wheel chair

    And here are a bunch from the above link that were easy to cut and paste:
    Advanced keyboards, Customer Service Software, Database Management System, Laser Surveying, Aircraft controls, Lightweight Compact Disc, Expert System Software, Microcomputers, and Design Graphics. Dustbuster, shock-absorbing helmets, home security systems, smoke detectors, flat panel televisions, high-density batteries, trash compactors, food packaging and freeze-dried technology, cool sportswear, sports bras, hair styling appliances, fogless ski goggles, self-adjusting sunglasses, composite golf clubs, hang gliders, art preservation, and quartz crystal timing equipment. Whale identification method, environmental analysis, noise abatement, pollution measuring devices, pollution control devices, smokestack monitor, radioactive leak detector, earthquake prediction system, sewage treatment, energy saving air conditioning, and air purification. Arteriosclerosis detection, ultrasound scanners, automatic insulin pump, portable x-ray device, invisible braces, dental arch wire, palate surgery technology, clean room apparel, implantable heart aid, MRI, bone analyzer, and cataract surgery tools. Gasoline vapor recovery, self-locking fasteners, machine tool software, laser wire stripper, lubricant coating process, wireless communications, engine coatings, and engine design. Storm warning services (Doppler radar), firefighters' radios, lead poison detection, fire detector, flame detector, corrosion protection coating, protective clothing, and robotic hands. So yeah, I'd say mankind has gained something from going to space. And to think all of this would have been developed in the timeframe without NASA and its goals is laughable.

  7. Re:In related news... by Nyrath+the+nearly+wi · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a matter of fact, the Europeans are expecting the US to hold up its end of the bargain. They spent millions of dollars on the ESA lab module for the ISS, and due to the grounding of the Shuttle fleet, it is on the ground gathering cobwebs. What is really angering the ESA is NASA toying with the idea of breaking their contract by permanently grounding the Shuttle fleet and never lofting the lab.

    Without the Russian's heavy lift capacity for re-supply, the ISS would have to be abandoned, which entails a large risk that the station would undergo a catastrophic failure. NASA would actually like to pay the Russians and have the funds to do so. Unfortunately, there is a slight obstacle in the form of the Iran non-Proliferation Agreement of 2000.

  8. Re:In related news... by demachina · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is a picture of which countries were supposed to supply what though many pieces on this picture will probably never make it in to space. Most of the important Russians parts did.

    I assure you the Russians built the heart of the station that is there now, the Zarya Control Module and the Zvezda crew quarters. Zarya is called a U.S. component only because the U.S. paid for it through Boeing but it was built in Russia.

    The U.S. was supposed to build the Crew Return Vehicle which would have allowed it to be fully manned but that was long ago cancelled. When it was the U.S. killed any prospect of the seven man crew which pretty much killed the ISS as ever being useful. The current crew can barely maintain it and don't do much research, not like its any good for any zero G research anyway.

    The U.S. is building a lot of solar panels many of which are probably never going to fly and aren't the most challenging part of the station.

    Russia had a full functional space station for like a decade called Mir. Most of their expertise is at the heart of the current ISS core. Not sure NASA could have successfully flown anything without them. If you recall during the years Russia was in Mir, NASA and Boeing was churning out one failed ISS design after another, none of which flew and all of which just filled Boeing's pork filled belly.

    I imagine Russia is regretting they deorbited Mir as a condition of joining ISS. It was past its prime and on its last legs but at least it was all theirs. ISS is all shiny and new and flush with squandered U.S. tax dollars but its probably going to end being pathetic and doing anything useful. Russia was getting a whole lot more done with a whole lot less with Mir. I think the modules now forming the core of ISS would have gone in to Mir2 if they could have scraped together the cash for it. I imagine they have been a lot happier and got more done if they weren't bogged down in the political morasse that is ISS.

    Maybe the shuttle will fly again and the ISS will get kind of on track again but I really doubt it. Its probably never going to get much beyond where it is today, and Russia will most probably have to keep it alive while NASA's manned space program finishes cratering. Maybe thing will improve at NASA with O'Keefe gone but I doubt it. Its pretty obvious his head was completely bent by the Columbia disaster and he was totally paralyzed at the prospect of ... gasp ... risking anyone's left on space exploration. He clearly should have been booted years ago. Fact is space exploration is dangerous, do your best to make it less so but don't give up just because you can't make it 100% safe. Astronauts aren't astronauts if they can't accept the risk they might get killed.

    --
    @de_machina
  9. US cannot pay - by law by candiman · · Score: 4, Informative

    The US Government cannot pay money to Russia for launch services due to an Act of Congress. This was passed to prevent any monies going to Russia (or the Soviet Union) after they supplied weapons to Iran.

    This announcement by the RSA is nothing more than a rehash of an old argument - and one that will not be solved any time soon as it would require an Act of Congress.

    The only way it can be resolved realistically is through a barter arrangement (which is what RSA is suggesting in some reports). Hence, not a lot of immediate use to the "cash-strapped Russian space program".

  10. Re:White Elephant by tsotha · · Score: 3, Informative
    In the beginning, the ISS was supposed to be a great international effort to promote science in orbit, among other things.

    Actually, in the beginning it was supposed to be an American space station. Then when it was clear the taxpayers didn't want to pay for it the Russians were enticed to join the effort as a way to tap their supply systems and also to keep Russian engineers from moving to the Middle East and building guided missles. Then the Europeans were pushed into adding their tax dollars (for no reason I can see, from the European point of view).

    And no they aren't doing any usefull science. But then they wouldn't have with a seven man crew. What usefull science would you expect to get out of a manned space project in LEO anyway? The Russians did all the usefull human biology stuff decades ago, so I think what we'll see is more of the same old worthless stuff they did on the shuttle: high-school science projects and more space crystals that could have been grown more cheaply on the ground.

  11. Re:WTG Russia. by rxmd · · Score: 4, Informative
    #3 teflon, plastics
    Teflon was invented in 1938 by Roy Plunkett at DuPont Laboratories and commercialized in the 1950's. I don't know why this myth connecting teflon and space keeps coming up. Same situation for plastics, if you don't narrow it down specifically.
    #1 the computer you're using now -- space exploration pushed the microelectoronics revolution
    Microelectronics isn't all that related to space, too. Transistors and ICs were well in use in the 1950's and early sixties. The microelectronics on spacecraft tend to be specifically less complicated than their counterparts on Earth, simply because of radiation resistance. For example, Intel introduced the Pentium in 1993, yet it took them until 2002 (IIRC) to put one on a spacecraft. The contract to develop a space-hardened version of the chip wasn't even awarded until 1998/9. Attributing people's PCs to space research is stretching it, too.

    Just because something is labeled "space age" doesn't make it actually related to space research. (But then, space research has given us the Space Age Ant Habitat for our desktops, of course.)
    --
    As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)