Quote from: woods170 on 02/17/2019 06:31 pmQuote from: daedalus1 on 02/17/2019 06:30 amA roundup of manned spaceflight,The most powerful and richest nation on earth after landing people on the moon and launching the most sophisticated and largest spacecraft (shuttle), cannot on launch people into low earth orbit on a capsule.Russia having put the first human into orbit more than half a century ago is still using 1960's design.China, the second largest economy on earth has flown crew a handful of times in more than a decade. Using a copy of the old Soviet design.The EU (ESA), doesn't have any manned spacecraft.It is dismal.Emphasis mine.That's by ESA's own choice.How is that different than the others? Were China and Russia forced into their current situations? ALL countries situation regarding manned spaceflight is by their own choices and priorities.
Quote from: daedalus1 on 02/17/2019 06:30 amA roundup of manned spaceflight,The most powerful and richest nation on earth after landing people on the moon and launching the most sophisticated and largest spacecraft (shuttle), cannot on launch people into low earth orbit on a capsule.Russia having put the first human into orbit more than half a century ago is still using 1960's design.China, the second largest economy on earth has flown crew a handful of times in more than a decade. Using a copy of the old Soviet design.The EU (ESA), doesn't have any manned spacecraft.It is dismal.Emphasis mine.That's by ESA's own choice.
A roundup of manned spaceflight,The most powerful and richest nation on earth after landing people on the moon and launching the most sophisticated and largest spacecraft (shuttle), cannot on launch people into low earth orbit on a capsule.Russia having put the first human into orbit more than half a century ago is still using 1960's design.China, the second largest economy on earth has flown crew a handful of times in more than a decade. Using a copy of the old Soviet design.The EU (ESA), doesn't have any manned spacecraft.It is dismal.
Quote from: Lars-J on 02/17/2019 07:28 pmQuote from: woods170 on 02/17/2019 06:31 pmQuote from: daedalus1 on 02/17/2019 06:30 amA roundup of manned spaceflight,The most powerful and richest nation on earth after landing people on the moon and launching the most sophisticated and largest spacecraft (shuttle), cannot on launch people into low earth orbit on a capsule.Russia having put the first human into orbit more than half a century ago is still using 1960's design.China, the second largest economy on earth has flown crew a handful of times in more than a decade. Using a copy of the old Soviet design.The EU (ESA), doesn't have any manned spacecraft.It is dismal.Emphasis mine.That's by ESA's own choice.How is that different than the others? Were China and Russia forced into their current situations? ALL countries situation regarding manned spaceflight is by their own choices and priorities.My emphasis must be reflected upon within the frame of the original post. Particularly the "It's dismal" part of the original post.
Quote from: woods170 on 02/18/2019 06:17 amQuote from: Lars-J on 02/17/2019 07:28 pmQuote from: woods170 on 02/17/2019 06:31 pmQuote from: daedalus1 on 02/17/2019 06:30 amA roundup of manned spaceflight,The most powerful and richest nation on earth after landing people on the moon and launching the most sophisticated and largest spacecraft (shuttle), cannot on launch people into low earth orbit on a capsule.Russia having put the first human into orbit more than half a century ago is still using 1960's design.China, the second largest economy on earth has flown crew a handful of times in more than a decade. Using a copy of the old Soviet design.The EU (ESA), doesn't have any manned spacecraft.It is dismal.Emphasis mine.That's by ESA's own choice.How is that different than the others? Were China and Russia forced into their current situations? ALL countries situation regarding manned spaceflight is by their own choices and priorities.My emphasis must be reflected upon within the frame of the original post. Particularly the "It's dismal" part of the original post.The dismal comment was there obviously to reflect the current state of human spaceflight regardless of the individual reasons.
Quote from: daedalus1 on 02/18/2019 06:22 amQuote from: woods170 on 02/18/2019 06:17 amQuote from: Lars-J on 02/17/2019 07:28 pmQuote from: woods170 on 02/17/2019 06:31 pmQuote from: daedalus1 on 02/17/2019 06:30 amA roundup of manned spaceflight,The most powerful and richest nation on earth after landing people on the moon and launching the most sophisticated and largest spacecraft (shuttle), cannot on launch people into low earth orbit on a capsule.Russia having put the first human into orbit more than half a century ago is still using 1960's design.China, the second largest economy on earth has flown crew a handful of times in more than a decade. Using a copy of the old Soviet design.The EU (ESA), doesn't have any manned spacecraft.It is dismal.Emphasis mine.That's by ESA's own choice.How is that different than the others? Were China and Russia forced into their current situations? ALL countries situation regarding manned spaceflight is by their own choices and priorities.My emphasis must be reflected upon within the frame of the original post. Particularly the "It's dismal" part of the original post.The dismal comment was there obviously to reflect the current state of human spaceflight regardless of the individual reasons.If that is so than there was no reason to list the individual manned spaceflight programs (or lack thereof).
NASA has zero - absolutely none - interesting in having people pay them for seats for spaceflights to the ISS. And since NASA is paying SpaceX and Boeing for the seats on Dragon and Starliner, a spaceflight participant is not going to happen.
Boeing Co’s (BA.N) proposal to develop a so-called space taxi for NASA astronauts includes a seat for paying tourists to fly to the International Space Station, the company’s program manager said on Wednesday, a first for a U.S. space program. The $4.2 billion, five-year contract allows Boeing to sell rides to tourists, Boeing Commercial Crew Program Manager John Mulholland told Reuters, adding that the price would be competitive with what the Russian space agency now charges to fly tourists to the orbital outpost. “Part of our proposal into NASA would be flying a Space Adventures spaceflight participant up to the ISS,” Mulholland said, referring to a Virginia-based space tourism company that brokers travel aboard Russian Soyuz capsules.
Roscosmos decided to to provide NASA with 2 seats on Soyuz-MS ships: one on #SoyuzMS17 (October 2020) and one on SoyuzMS18 (April 2021), said Rogozin just a few hours ago. Given today's Starliner problems, NASA may need more than 2 seats... ria.ru/20191220/15626…
The report isn't wrong, just... stale. Much of the "significant work" remaining has already been completed.
It is interesting to see what progress has been made since that timeframe, obviously there is still plenty of work to be done before operational flights (and even before the crewed demo flights).
Quote from: abaddon on 01/29/2020 09:30 pmThe report isn't wrong, just... stale. Much of the "significant work" remaining has already been completed.Reports are always snapshots in time, and NEVER up to date on the day you are reading them. Let's set realistic expectations here.QuoteIt is interesting to see what progress has been made since that timeframe, obviously there is still plenty of work to be done before operational flights (and even before the crewed demo flights).Which is why it's good to have a stake in the ground from when they did the study. Now we can see if what everyone THOUGHT would happen actually did.And unfortunately as of today it seems more likely that we'll need to buy more Soyuz seats in order to back up the Boeing Starliner - unless SpaceX can get approved and prove to NASA that they can be the backup to Boeing. I know which future I'd want...
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 02/07/2020 11:42 pmQuote from: abaddon on 01/29/2020 09:30 pmThe report isn't wrong, just... stale. Much of the "significant work" remaining has already been completed.Reports are always snapshots in time, and NEVER up to date on the day you are reading them. Let's set realistic expectations here.Quote from: abaddon on 01/29/2020 09:30 pmIt is interesting to see what progress has been made since that timeframe, obviously there is still plenty of work to be done before operational flights (and even before the crewed demo flights).Which is why it's good to have a stake in the ground from when they did the study. Now we can see if what everyone THOUGHT would happen actually did.And unfortunately as of today it seems more likely that we'll need to buy more Soyuz seats in order to back up the Boeing Starliner - unless SpaceX can get approved and prove to NASA that they can be the backup to Boeing. I know which future I'd want... Shocker for you: SpaceX already was under increased NASA oversight due to CRS-7, AMOS kaboom and DM-1 pre-IFA kaboom. Boeing is being put under even more intrusive NASA oversight as we speak. Courtesy of their OFT screw-ups.And guess what: because both CCP contractors are to be treated equally, the increased oversight regime is ALSO going to be applied to SpaceX. Yeah, you read that correctly.I wouldn't be surprised one d*mn bit if THAT is going to delay DM-2 as well.Therefore I fully expect that NASA will scramble to buy additional seats on Soyuz.
Quote from: abaddon on 01/29/2020 09:30 pmThe report isn't wrong, just... stale. Much of the "significant work" remaining has already been completed.Reports are always snapshots in time, and NEVER up to date on the day you are reading them. Let's set realistic expectations here.Quote from: abaddon on 01/29/2020 09:30 pmIt is interesting to see what progress has been made since that timeframe, obviously there is still plenty of work to be done before operational flights (and even before the crewed demo flights).Which is why it's good to have a stake in the ground from when they did the study. Now we can see if what everyone THOUGHT would happen actually did.And unfortunately as of today it seems more likely that we'll need to buy more Soyuz seats in order to back up the Boeing Starliner - unless SpaceX can get approved and prove to NASA that they can be the backup to Boeing. I know which future I'd want...
With the working date of May 7 for DM-2, and plans to run the ISS with a single US astronaut, are Soyuz seats really necessary?
The new contract between @NASA and @Roscosmos to buy additional seats in #Soyuz spaceships can be signed in April, when NASA delegation will come to Baikonur for the Soyuz MS-16 launch. The number of seats in contract has not been announced yet. https://ria.ru/20200213/1564676346.html…
The source says, that the new contract between @Roscosmos and @NASA includes buying of two seats in #SoyuzMS17 and #SoyuzMS18 and NASA will pay $170 million for it. The contract can be signed in April.
As @nasa and @spacex prepare to restart US human orbital launch, nasa inks deal with @roscosmos for Soyuz seat this fall. Will cost +$90M, inc training, etc. US also will comp Roscosmos by flying Russian cargo aboard US supply runs
$90M plus bonuses? We got Dennis Tito on ISS via Soyuz for around $16M for a week round trip including board (it was inflated in PR to $20M) so if time/money added in, I still feel the costs have been going the wrong way...lol. Time for this to change.
The deal signed today is for NASA to pay Roscosmos $90,252,905.69. That covers the cost of training and preparation for flight, launch, flight operations, landing, crew rescue (the ability to evacuate the crew if an emergency arises on ISS), and limited cargo delivery. Since putting a U.S. astronaut on the flight means a Russian crew member will have to step aside, NASA also agreed to transport 800 kilograms of Russian cargo to ISS over the next 2.5 years on U.S. commercial cargo flights.
