-
ISS without Russia
by
hop
on 30 Oct, 2011 19:27
-
So as not to further pollute the SpaceX thread, here's a dedicated one to continue the discussion starting with probers post
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=25597.msg823419#msg823419Here's what ISS would look like if the Russians pulled out:
Of course, given enough money, you could do almost anything, including shut down the Russian side, add components to the US side to takeover whatever everything the Russians provide, and even attach a stable and riding ground for the ponies everyone will receive. In reality, it's extremely unlikely money would be available. It should also be noted that the replacement hardware would take years to develop, so if the Russians decided to stop supporting ISS in 2015, it's extremely unlikely the rest of the partners could come up with replacements in that time. US crew *might* fly by 2015. An entirely new propulsion module ? Not going to happen.
-
#1
by
A_M_Swallow
on 30 Oct, 2011 19:54
-
When the ISS is de-orbited if the US wants a spacestation, or two, it would have to launch them. Possible a micro-gravity laboratory to replace the ISS and a LEO gateway station to assist in planetary exploration.
It may be cheaper to persuade the Russians to continue supporting the ISS.
-
#2
by
dragon44
on 30 Oct, 2011 20:00
-
What about US/Europe/Japan pay Russia to continue commanding the Russian segment. ATV for reboost/prop delivery. Soyuz/Progress paid by NASA until commercial comes along.
4 US crew, 1 European, 1 Japanese. Russia makes some money, the rest of the partners continue their research.
Given enough money the Russians would probably go for it. Question is, do the other partners consider it worth it?
-
#3
by
manboy
on 30 Oct, 2011 20:11
-
It should also be noted that the replacement hardware would take years to develop, so if the Russians decided to stop supporting ISS in 2015, it's extremely unlikely the rest of the partners could come up with replacements in that time. US crew *might* fly by 2015. An entirely new propulsion module ? Not going to happen.
Not to take a jab at Roscosmos but they don't really have much else going for them so why would Russia pull out in 2015?
-
#4
by
hop
on 30 Oct, 2011 20:15
-
What about US/Europe/Japan pay Russia to continue commanding the Russian segment. ATV for reboost/prop delivery. Soyuz/Progress paid by NASA until commercial comes along.
4 US crew, 1 European, 1 Japanese. Russia makes some money, the rest of the partners continue their research.
You still need someone to operate and maintain the RS, work with the RS visiting vehicles and so on. While you could certainly train other partner crews to do this, it would probably be more practical to contract some Russian crew for that too.
Given enough money the Russians would probably go for it. Question is, do the other partners consider it worth it?
That would depend on the price and the reaction of the the partner governments I suppose.
-
#5
by
apace
on 30 Oct, 2011 20:19
-
The ISS partners agreed to extend the use of the ISS at least until 2020. Of course, there are always ways to break some agreements, but in a connected world, where every country makes business (real business and political business) with each other, one country cannot simply quit such a project. Point.
-
#6
by
Space Pete
on 30 Oct, 2011 20:23
-
Despite recent comments that Russia is "abandoning" HSF, in fact all Roscosmos suggested doing is not focusing on HSF to the detriment of space science.
Of all the ISS partners, Russia is the only one right now that is actively planning to use ISS through 2028 (as a satellite assembly and BEO exploration platform), so I highly doubt that Russia will abandon the ISS.
Further evidence to support this is that last week, Roscosmos released a request for proposals to launch the new MLM, and they are also planning to launch a Node Module in 2015 and two science & power modules after that - certainly not the activities of a country looking to abandon the ISS.
-
#7
by
hop
on 30 Oct, 2011 20:29
-
Not to take a jab at Roscosmos but they don't really have much else going for them so why would Russia pull out in 2015?
To be clear, I don't see any signs of Russia pulling out of ISS or giving up on HSF. On the contrary, the head of their crewed programs recently stated they are committed to at least 2020 and are working toward 2028.
Some other people seem to think they are going to abandon HSF, based (I think) on some comments made by Roscosmos head Vladimir Popovkin (see
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26414.0 ) saying that HSF took too much of the budget and didn't give much in return. But even there Popovkin said something along the lines of "but of course we have our commitments to ISS."
There is also the suggestion that Russian HSF only exists to make money and so will go away once the US stops buying Soyuz seats, but this doesn't really add up. ISS plans have included US crew capability from the start, the fact that NASA has been buying Soyuz seats for so long is due to NASA decisions. If the pre-Columbia NASA plans had happened, the US would have had a CRV long ago.
-
#8
by
sdsds
on 31 Oct, 2011 06:58
-
There is also the suggestion that Russian HSF only exists to make money and so will go away once the US stops buying Soyuz seats, but this doesn't really add up.
In the recent House hearing Gerstenmaier mentioned a relevant bit of detail. It turns out if the US wants to continue ISS past 2016, even if commercial crew comes online Congress will have to provide an additional INKSNA exemption allowing NASA to continue purchasing Russian Segment operations services. This was an eye-opener for me; I hadn't realized the US was paying Russia to operate the RS!
-
#9
by
ChefPat
on 31 Oct, 2011 11:44
-
Are the Russians using their continued participation in the ISS as a bat to swing to make our corrupt Congress continue to buy rides from them into perpetuity?
Does Bigelow - Boeing - Space X, have the technological know how to save the ISS if NASA/Congress decide stop subsidizing the Russian Space Agency?
-
#10
by
manboy
on 31 Oct, 2011 15:08
-
Are the Russians using their continued participation in the ISS as a bat to swing to make our corrupt Congress continue to buy rides from them into perpetuity?
No, see above.
-
#11
by
PeterAlt
on 02 Nov, 2011 02:04
-
When the ISS is de-orbited if the US wants a spacestation, or two, it would have to launch them. Possible a micro-gravity laboratory to replace the ISS and a LEO gateway station to assist in planetary exploration.
It may be cheaper to persuade the Russians to continue supporting the ISS.
I'm starting to believe that after ISS, NASA will handover the role of space station to the private sector, much as it is doing today with the handover of LEO manned space flight.
-
#12
by
PeterAlt
on 02 Nov, 2011 02:08
-
Despite recent comments that Russia is "abandoning" HSF, in fact all Roscosmos suggested doing is not focusing on HSF to the detriment of space science.
Of all the ISS partners, Russia is the only one right now that is actively planning to use ISS through 2028 (as a satellite assembly and BEO exploration platform), so I highly doubt that Russia will abandon the ISS.
Further evidence to support this is that last week, Roscosmos released a request for proposals to launch the new MLM, and they are also planning to launch a Node Module in 2015 and two science & power modules after that - certainly not the activities of a country looking to abandon the ISS.
I missed that. What proposals for MLM were they soliciting for? Details, please, or supply a link. Thanks!
Edit: Nevermind. I just saw your post on the other thread.
But this makes no sense. What work is still needed to complete this? How long is that work expected to take? And I thought it already had a Proton LV?
-
#13
by
Nickolai
on 02 Nov, 2011 02:32
-
There is also the suggestion that Russian HSF only exists to make money and so will go away once the US stops buying Soyuz seats, but this doesn't really add up.
In the recent House hearing Gerstenmaier mentioned a relevant bit of detail. It turns out if the US wants to continue ISS past 2016, even if commercial crew comes online Congress will have to provide an additional INKSNA exemption allowing NASA to continue purchasing Russian Segment operations services. This was an eye-opener for me; I hadn't realized the US was paying Russia to operate the RS!
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that US owns Zarya module. They basically paid for its construction in the 90's (or for its transition from Mir-2 to ISS or something), but AFAIK it is still considered a part of the Russian Segment.
What proposals for MLM were they soliciting for? Details, please, or supply a link. Thanks!
I think it's just some official crap. They know they will select Proton, but due to some government rules or something like that they have to make it an open request. But I'm stretching the limits of my knowledge on this subject - someone please correct as necessary.
-
#14
by
Prober
on 19 Nov, 2011 00:16
-
A new wrinkle: How about ISS without Kazakhstan?
U.S. to pull Peace Corps volunteers from Kazakhstan
http://news.yahoo.com/u-pull-peace-corps-volunteers-kazakhstan-112655345.html 'Ex-Soviet Kazakhstan, four times the size of Texas, is a predominantly Muslim country of 16.6 million people. The oil-producing country, Central Asia's largest economy, has seen an unprecedented spate of militant attacks this year."
-
#15
by
Robotbeat
on 19 Nov, 2011 00:20
-
A new wrinkle: How about ISS without Kazakhstan?
U.S. to pull Peace Corps volunteers from Kazakhstan
http://news.yahoo.com/u-pull-peace-corps-volunteers-kazakhstan-112655345.html
'Ex-Soviet Kazakhstan, four times the size of Texas, is a predominantly Muslim country of 16.6 million people. The oil-producing country, Central Asia's largest economy, has seen an unprecedented spate of militant attacks this year."
No, Russia is not going to abandon Baikonur. It's a very important military asset for them; they would probably invade Kazakhstan before leaving Baikonur, at least on short notice. (They don't have to invade, though... they have quite a force there, I believe... Russian conscripts actually handle much of the launch operations, too, I think.)
-
#16
by
Patchouli
on 19 Nov, 2011 00:47
-
A new wrinkle: How about ISS without Kazakhstan?
U.S. to pull Peace Corps volunteers from Kazakhstan
http://news.yahoo.com/u-pull-peace-corps-volunteers-kazakhstan-112655345.html
'Ex-Soviet Kazakhstan, four times the size of Texas, is a predominantly Muslim country of 16.6 million people. The oil-producing country, Central Asia's largest economy, has seen an unprecedented spate of militant attacks this year."
No, Russia is not going to abandon Baikonur. It's a very important military asset for them; they would probably invade Kazakhstan before leaving Baikonur, at least on short notice. (They don't have to invade, though... they have quite a force there, I believe... Russian conscripts actually handle much of the launch operations, too, I think.)
There is way too much prestige at stake for Russia to pull out of ISS at lest not until there is a new fully Russian space station already on orbit.
They certainly will not cut their HSF program not with China ramping theirs up.
