Slashdot Mirror
Despite Lean Space Budgets Russia Is Headed For the Moon (blastingnews.com)
MarkWhittington writes: Thanks to the collapse of oil prices that has ravaged the Russian economy, dependent as it is on fossil fuel exports, Russia's space program is facing draconian budget cuts... Still, the country that lost the race to the moon still has ambitious plans for Earth's closest neighbor... The Russians even have hopes of landing cosmonauts on the lunar surface by the end of the 2020s.
New evidence of subsurface ice helped fuel their interest in human moon landings, according to Science magazine, which reports that Russia is first planning five robotic missions to the moon over the next nine years. Three of these will be conducted with the European Space Agency, including one which will drill for underground samples in the new areas of the lunar surface, and the director of Russia's space agency says "the next decade will be quite busy for us."
New evidence of subsurface ice helped fuel their interest in human moon landings, according to Science magazine, which reports that Russia is first planning five robotic missions to the moon over the next nine years. Three of these will be conducted with the European Space Agency, including one which will drill for underground samples in the new areas of the lunar surface, and the director of Russia's space agency says "the next decade will be quite busy for us."
Sounds like you have been out of touch with the Russian military, as the description you give corresponds to the 1990s or early 00s. Russian military has been undergoing a massive structural reform during the past 10 years, and it has been acquiring and renewing its weapons systems at a very fast pace. Just to give you an idea of the scale of the upgrades, like last year Russian air force received about 200 new 4+ or 4++ generation fighter jets. Currently they're testing, a 5th generation fighter jet and a next generation tank and IFV platform. Yes, Russian navy is the most neglected of all Russian military branches. Russia being more of a land power, has historically spent less money on its ships. But even in the Navy, there is quite a bit of new things happening. For example, the Black Sea Fleet is in the middle of receiving six new diesel submarines, three frigates, a number of corvettes and other ships. It's not a lot, but once you compare this progress to the fact that Black Sea fleet has not received any ships in the previous 20 years, this progress is obvious.
Also observe Syria. Before Russian military got involved there, Assad's government was basically on its last ropes. After Russians came, Assad's forces with Russian help reconquered much of Aleppo, Hops, and Palmyra. The "moderate" rebels begged for cease fire, and Assad is now advancing west onto ISIS held territory.
This is pretty outdated. Their 5th generation fighter? It is so under performing with respect to stealth and various things, that their only major purchaser, India, is pretty much dropping the contract (even when they dont have a choice of another 5th gen fighter, other than their home made one which is atleast a decade or two away). If India drops it, it will not go to production; it will be suspended, until oil prices improve and Russia can hold their own weight. The T14 is a great tank (Russia in general makes great tanks), but it is hardly current generation compared to the west. The reactive armor is pretty weak. Thermal signature is not well reduced. No export potential at all, everyone has these type of tanks. Ditto for the IFV, not modern.
Russian military has been under funded for sometime now, had to take a serious cut this year. And about Syria, Russia pretty much wanted to get rid of their old arsenal, old missiles, old non-smart bombs. Nothing Russia used in Syria was modern and they did not have spend any significant money on the expedition (with Assad pitching in when required).
India has been flip flopping on T-50 based 5th gen. It is public knowledge that they are not at all satisfied with the radar and thermal signature. The fact that they have been even considered dropping the contract, when they have no other option for decades should tell you enough about them.
T-14 has been in production for a while now, and Russia has been trying to find a market for it. Number of countries have tested, none went for it, because it did not live up to its hype. It is not unusual for the Russians to underdeliver. May be the Russians will prove them wrong and deploy them in battle against a well equipped adversary. I doubt the perception is going to change, until then.
That 10% cut and the budget was proposed with an expected average oil price of $60. Guess what, so far the average has been in the 30s, and it is expected to continue for the near term.
Operation costs shouldnt matter of course, I agree with you on that. They came in help of an ally and they succeeded in getting their ally a very good seat in the negotiation table. But it should be not used as an example of abundance of russian military funding, because it it not.
I find it funny that you find it puzzling that amrchair experts are fuming that Russia used dumb bombs, when none of the arm chair experts including you have said anything remotely close. You must be projecting your own views on dumb bombs in this discussion. My point was again, this should not be considered an example of abundance of russian funding. It just russians getting rid an aging end-of-life stockpile (of both smart and dumb bombs).