Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Despite Lean Space Budgets Russia Is Headed For the Moon (blastingnews.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the robots-first dept.

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."

44 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. Room? by Schmorgluck · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm feeling too lazy to look it up, but is there enough room on the moon to fit the whole of Russia?

    --
    There's nothing like $HOME
    1. Re:Room? by Iamthecheese · · Score: 1

      Wolfram Alpha is the place to ask that sort of thing.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    2. Re:Room? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Russia: 17 million sq km

      Moon: 38 million sq km

  2. Re:Oh my ... by aliquis · · Score: 1

    Now what sanctions are we going to impose for this one? Putin must be stopped!

    Freeze his assets in Siberia! (and in the Arctic and on the Moon and in the future on Mars and ..)

  3. Reversal by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1

    In America, spacecraft land on moon. In Russia, moon land on spacecraft. *crunch*

  4. Re: Sad to see how the Republicans... by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 2

    Actually, they are backing the Europa mission, which is far more useful than landing on the moon in my opinion. http://arstechnica.com/science...

  5. A statement of intent is not an actual plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Russia has big problems right now and the expense of going to the moon has nothing to do with it. Their military is getting old, their Navy needs an upgrade, and there is a battle between Russia and the West over Ukraine. Considering the Russians just announced a budget cut to their military for the first time in decades, and with no end in sight to low oil prices, this will all just remain a statement of intent but will not likely come to anything concrete.

    1. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    2. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 2

      PS: Oh yeah, and forget Ukraine. The Ukraine conflict is basically over. The ball is mostly on the Ukrainian side, where they have yet to confirm whether they will conform to the "Minsk" peace agreement protocols that their president already signed.

    3. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1, Interesting

      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).

    4. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by dj245 · · Score: 1

      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.

      Russia has made great strides in modernization, but the money is running out and they were getting all of their ship turbines from Ukraine. Ukraine really isn't in the mood to sell them any more so they have some setbacks there. The economy is still very poor so that is another big problem. It will continue to be poor as long as oil prices are low (Russia's pre-2015 budget was ~40% funded by oil or something like that). Now that most of the gulf states are fighting each other, secretly and not-so-secretly, oil is going to stay low for some time. The navy was the last service scheduled to modernized and things aren't looking so great now.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    5. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 1

      Not all of new Russian ships rely on the Ukrainian turbines. Among the most notable ships that need Ukrainian engines are 11356Ð Admiral Grigorievich frigates. Only six were meant to be built, but Russians already got the turbine engines for three of them, and the ships will be heading to Black Sea soon. The other three do not have engines, and there was a rumor that they would be sold to India, since Ukraine may sell the turbines to their navy.

    6. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 2

      When I read comments like yours, I always start wonder if you're on the payroll of Lockheed Martin. I mean seriously, what exactly does an armchair expert like you know about the Russian T-50 fighter jet or the Russian T-14 tank or what exactly does anyone know about T-14 armor? Both of these projects are still in testing stages (the Indian FGFA will be based on T-50). India just agreed to continue investing in the FGFA project development to the tune of 4 billion USD.

      As for the T-14 tank, you can't really argue that it's behind the western tanks. It has a crewless fully autonomous turret, an armored crew cell, a very extensive electronic counter measures suite, and a design that's meant to accept a higher caliber gun in the future, all of which make it, at least on paper, a step or two ahead of all of western tanks.

      Here are a couple of link with beautiful images of the T-50 and T-14 just from days ago:

      http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1841727.html

      http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1834857.html?thread=180674921

    7. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 2

      I don't know where you get the idea about the under funding of Russian military. First of all, no military will have enough money for all it wants, ever. Look, Pentagon is getting $600 billion USD a year, which in my opinion still an absurdly big figure, and yet lots of people in the military, and a certain party are already screaming bloody murder. Russian military budget had doubled in the past 3-4 years, and now they will be getting something like a 10% cut this and the following years. No major procurement programs will be stopped.

      As for Syrian involvement, it shouldn't really matter how much that operation cost. Some political opposition figures argue that the cost was actually pretty high, while the official line is that the cost was low, and the military did not even need additional funds for Syria. But that's not the point. The point is that when called in, the Russian military went into Syria and has done its job. They changed the course of war. Assad is now advancing, while a year ago everyone was predicting he was losing.

      I am really puzzled at the armchair experts who are fuming angrily that Russia used dumb bombs (not always). And what should Russia use when bombing basically what's already a bunch of stone age ruble? Russians have plenty of precision weapons, but unlike Americans they will not use a 150K USD missile to take out every ZU-23-2 gunner or a technical.

    8. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1, Interesting

      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.

    9. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1, Interesting

      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).

    10. Re: A statement of intent is not an actual plan by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2

      In Syria we have seen that even the T-90 reactive armour holds well against a TOW

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    11. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      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.

      Against an enemy with no airforce and very little air defence, that's hardly an achievement.

      Belgium could have probably managed it, and without hitting quite as many hospitals.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by dbIII · · Score: 1

      This is pretty outdated. Their 5th generation fighter?

      How does it compare to the Joint Strike Fighter?

      Yes I know that isn't funny at all - it's a tragedy because we are paying for the thing.

    13. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by aliquis · · Score: 2

      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).

      So why haven't superior USA spent much more and solved the issue?

      Yeah, that's right, because democracy, human rights, self-rule and dictatorships doesn't necessarily matter all that much as long as the relationship of those in rule and the US is a good one.

    14. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 1

      First of all, T-14 is certainly _NOT_ under series production. A bunch of T-14 were made for testing purposes. That's it. Nobody outside of Russian military knows much about T-14, besides its basic architecture. You have no basis to argue that T-14 was offered for sale, because so far T-14 has not been taken to any international weapons shows. And in fact, nobody wants to buy a product that hasn't been adopted yet by the motherland's military. So basically, Russians will test and adopt the T-14 first, fix its child diseases, and then maybe start offering it for export. We're looking at 10-15 year long window because this does not happen very fast.

      You also have no basis to mock the T-50 yet. The T-50 is not the final product. The Indian FGFA will be based on T-50, so we're still many years away from the FGFA. Indians may have criticized the FGFA progress, but they continue investing into it billions. The western archair FGFA "experts" are really blowing things out of proportion, specially considering that no fifth-generation fighter jet project has attracted more criticism than the American F-35. There have been incidents of US pilots giving interviews and arguing that canning the F-35 program even at this point, and restarting F-22 would be a lot more preferable.

    15. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 2

      Yes, exactly that one. I don't see a reason why Russia wouldn't agree to it. As far as the implementation is concerned, the party that delaying it is Ukraine, and that's not according me but according to the western diplomats who keep the Ukrainian state under a constant pressure to implement the constitutional reforms and other political they promised.

    16. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by guacamole · · Score: 1

      Belgium could have probably managed it, and without hitting quite as many hospitals.

      Please don't make people laugh by bringing Belgium into the discussion. A few weeks ago, after the horrific terrorist attacks in Europe, Belgium suddenly was compelled to send a grand total of ONE F16 fighter jets in support of the western coalition against ISIS. Now, that's some serious firepower. Moreover, not even US allies have the smart weapon's munitions to drop on ISIS:

      U.S. Allies 'Borrowing' Munitions To Drop On ISIS As U.S. Stockpiles Are Also In Question

      Against an enemy with no airforce and very little air defence, that's hardly an achievement.

      Strangely, the fact that ISIS does not have either air force or air defense hasn't prevented the Iraq and the USA-led coalition from being bogged down for YEARS with no real progress against ISIS. At least Assad has already started advancing to the east onto ISIS, and liberating significant towns.

    17. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      For one the US did not have the support of the UN recognized govt. That makes all the difference in international law. I agree, US is just serving their own interests, just like Russia is, I wouldnt expect either of them to do otherwise.

    18. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      For the T-50, you dont iron out stealth issues over time. That is not how radar signature or stealth signature work. They are design time decisions. The US criticism is of cost and range. Stealth is generally considered part of the definition of 5th gen. No one has questioned if the F-35 is really 5th gen. I agree the Indian are going to continue to invest in it, mostly because the deal includes tech transfer, which they badly need. It is funny they are still threatening to drop it.

      T-14 were part of Russian arms expo. Here is one of those http://sputniknews.com/militar...
      It is also certainly in production, though not widely acknowledged. http://nationalinterest.org/bl...

    19. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by aliquis · · Score: 1

      US is just serving their own interests, just like Russia is, I wouldnt expect either of them to do otherwise

      I'm from Sweden.

      http://www.viewsoftheworld.net...
      http://www.viewsoftheworld.net...

      2005-2013: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpb... 2013: https://warewhulf.files.wordpr...
      Beginning of 2014: http://gatesofvienna.net/wp-co...
      Beginning of 2015: http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/6...

      Can't find a similar image for 2015 (that's what I'm googling for but yeah.. it didn't become prettier.)

      Our "elected" "leaders" and "representatives" of "the people" and the "nation" currently focus mostly on trying to get Sweden into the UN security council or whatever it is and then I guess they focus on trying to make it into EU or UN politics. Fuck the Swedes for all they care, it's all about what they can force the Swedes to do for the citizens of any other country.

    20. Re:A statement of intent is not an actual plan by aliquis · · Score: 1

      .. as such the expectations may be that US act in the interest of the world / act like world-police and trying to fix the world and not in its own interest.

      It's what the Swedish government would had done if they ruled USA (be happy they don't.)

  6. Re:There was no "Race to the Moon"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Russia is also the country American astronauts must beg for rides into space. The American manned space program was a short term unsustainable, while the Russians went there for the long haul. They have better reliability of their manned launchers and most importantly, they can still go and they have never been without the ability to.

    Say what you will about the Russian space program they get thigns done and are very practically oriented.

  7. The found 2 billion hidden in a cello. by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 2

    Nobody knows how it got there but it should buy a lot of rocket fuel.

  8. A large grain of SALT by Dorianny · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh sure and they are also building the Russia Alaska Superhighway, A fleet of Supercarriers. In the Real World Russia shrank the defense budget by %10 in 2015 and still Russian Reserve Fund running empty

    1. Re:A large grain of SALT by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Ten percent of a lot that was unsustainable unless the oil price stayed high.

  9. Re:Sad to see how the Republicans... by jrmcferren · · Score: 2

    BULLSHIT! Donald Trump wants to expand the space program. Trump 2016.

    --
    sudo mod me up
  10. Re:You Have No Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So in conclusion Russian space agency is going to contract a lean, mean Moon machine, with texts written in traditional Chinese script all over the space vehicle.

  11. Muhaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I suggest you look at one of the Topol-M and S-400 launch videos on youtube.

    They have top notch technology in both solid and liquid fueled rockets. Their thrust-vectoring technology probably is still leading edge, second to none. America currently depends on Russian technology from the 70s to launch heavy satellites. And Russia currently develops a new liquid fuel rocket.

  12. Re:There was no "Race to the Moon"... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Russian reliability is based on the launcher that is almost 60 years old (first two stages of Soyuz launcher is the R7 that put the first Sputnik into orbit in 1957).

    Not blowing Russia's trumpet here - I'll leave that to guacamole(24270) - but so what? If it works, it works.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  13. Promises...Promises...Promises... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

    We've heard these noises from Russia before. I can't help but think at this point the Russians are just shouting whatever they think might sound the most appealing into the microphone. In the near (~5 years) the US is going to stop relying on Russia to get Astronauts to the ISS. Once that happens hundreds of millions of dollars are suddenly going to stop going into Russian coffers.

    This combined with a much more robust and inexpensive launch options (Space X, ULA, Blue Origin, Skylon?, etc) is going to further squeeze the already cash strapped Russia Space Agency/Industry.

    I'll be happy to see them do it, but at this point it's just talk. Once I get past my budgetary issues, I'm going to be setting up a colony on Ganymede. All I need is to develop a launch vehicle, a survivable transit vehicle and a viable habitat...

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    1. Re:Promises...Promises...Promises... by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Most of those use rocket motors that are purchased from Russia.

      Besides ULA's ATLAS V rocket, who uses Russian engines ?

    2. Re:Promises...Promises...Promises... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      More to the point, to show you are paying attention, who doesn't :)
      What ULA and a couple of the others are doing is enough to make my point isn't it?

  14. Re:hey by superwiz · · Score: 1

    I'd like to thank whoever modded me as a troll. I should have known better. Not only can Russia not go to the moon in 4 years. I should have known better than to say that they can stage a moon landing in 4 years. They don't have the technology.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  15. Re:Just Check American Officer's Statements by jafiwam · · Score: 1

    Yes. Russian corruption is incompatible with Western corruption. The Western style isn't based on donkey carts and village idiots.

  16. Russia didn't exactly lose the race to the moon by billmarrs · · Score: 2

    Russia's Luna 2 probe got to the moon first in 1959. Luna 3 (also 1959) was the first to photograph the far side of the moon. Luna 9 soft landed on the moon and sent the first pictures from the surface back in 1966. Yes, the Apollo program put a man on the moon first (1968), but I think Russia deserves credit for many previous firsts (beyond Sputnik and Gagarin).

    1. Re:Russia didn't exactly lose the race to the moon by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Their Venus landings were the most impressive achievement, even with some of the craft failing. Operating equipment in 864 degree F (462 C) environment and 90 earth atmospheres of pressure is amazing.

  17. Re:There was no "Race to the Moon"... by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

    So what if it's old? It still works!

    The Dragon capsule is the most likely next american manned device. I expect that the ULA effort will fizzle or turn into such a blatant porkbarrel that it'll be killed.

  18. Won't happen by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

    The more countries that have space programs the LESS likely anyone will land on the moon or anywhere else.

    The 1960's US was a rare place where people cared about contributing at work and not just haranging Congress for more funds.

    This is just bragging about a (dubious) future accomplishment.