Print 32 comment(s) - last by delphinus100.. on Mar 20 at 10:57 PM

Roscosmos is also looking to replace its current Soyuz and Proton rockets with a new rocket called Angara by 2020

Russia has laid out some lofty space-related goals in a strategy document issued by Russia's Federal Space Agency, known as Roscosmos.

By 2030, Russia plans to send cosmonauts to the moon as well as unmanned spacecraft to Jupiter, Mars and Venus. Also, Roscosmos is looking to replace its current Soyuz and Proton rockets with a new rocket called Angara by 2020.

Roscosmos' moon-related efforts not only include a manned lunar landing by 2030, but also the development of a space station in orbit around the moon. The idea behind this plan is to replace the International Space Station, which is only expected to stick around until 2020.

In addition to a trip to the moon, Roscosmos wants to send unmanned robotic probes to Jupiter, Mars and Venus by 2030.

Instead of using the Soyuz and Proton launch vehicles that Russia has used to carry loads since the 1960's, it wants to use the Angara rocket to complete such missions by 2020. Angara will be a six-seat spaceship that will launch from a new spaceport called Vostochny in eastern Russia.

Russia's ambitious space goals are a bit surprising considering the troubles the country has had lately. Last year alone, Russia had a Rockot launch vehicle fail to place a satellite in order correctly, a Proton rocket send a communications satellite to the wrong orbit, an unmanned Progress 44 supply ship crash on its way to the ISS, and a Soyuz 2 rocket crashed after launch in December.

Earlier this year, the Mars probe Phobos-Grunt finally made its way back to Earth after getting stuck in Earth's orbit two months previous.

Russia isn't the only one trying to get its space affairs in order. The U.S. is currently working on sending its own spacecraft to the ISS after NASA retired its space shuttle fleet last year. Since the retirement, the U.S. has been stuck having to depend on Russia to get to the ISS, which has proved to be a costly investment. American space transport company SpaceX was expected to be the first commercial company in history to dock at the ISS in February, but the flight was delayed for further improvements to its Dragon spacecraft.

In addition, the U.S. hopes to send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025 and Mars by 2030.

Source: MSNBC

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Say what you want
By TSS on 3/16/2012 7:55:28 PM , Rating: 5
But if there's any leader of any country on this earth that still has some goddamn balls, it's Vladimir Putin.

Don't be suprised about the failures either. The sovjet space program was rife with failures, many more so then the US program. But they aren't afraid to accept losses and move on.

Most the west didn't hear about until after the fall of the wall. Today russia's a bit more open, politically nothing has changed though.

In any case, it's sad but at this point, i'm trusting the ruskies more if they say they'll go to the moon then the americans.

RE: Say what you want
By TerranMagistrate on 3/17/2012 11:02:27 AM , Rating: 2
I totally agree. NASA has been almost completely emasculated and not just financially.

RE: Say what you want
By MrBlastman on 3/19/2012 1:30:39 PM , Rating: 2
It is sad but it heralds what America has become. America used to be known for ingenuity, hard work, drive to accomplish the impossible. People were tenacious and, at the same time, valued what was important, beyond the jade tinted paper. We valued scientific achievement, engineering prowess and hard, educational drive.

That's all gone now, replaced with stupid standardized tests. Tests that measure not what children can think, no, that is naught to say the least, but instead, how much they can cram into their skulls as dictated by heir fuherer the teacher (who is self-absorbed with meeting rating goals to keep their job as prescribed by the State and Federal governments).

The wonder is all gone. The need to dream has taken a back seat. From the radical fundamental religious to the stout, foolishly proud atheist know-it-alls, Americans are hailed to dream not but instead place their minds in the hands of the few that dictate what we should "know" or believe.

The great art of science, as I see it in America, is dying. Why be an engineer when you can rule with a clenched, iron fist squeezing the life out of your peers for every cent in their pockets in pursuit of the guilded currency bearing the all seeing eye? Why cast out a supple palm to latch onto the pursuit of scientific discovery when instead you can slaughter your neighbor in envy with your latest, shiniest car or fry their retinas with your gigantic big-screen television?

What's the point, or so our kids are told these days. You don't have to be smart, no, you instead just have to pass the tests in whatever way possible to fill your pockets from the public coffers--be it through Government handouts or Corporate greed. It doesn't matter, really, they are told, as it all comes from the same place eventually.

No, our values are screwed up. We used to dream in America. We used to value the sciences as well as the arts--food for the mind that gave our brightest that drive to clench new heights of technology and humanity.

It is shameful I say. NASA captured that imagination--the same that has been stomped out in modern times.

RE: Say what you want
By V-Money on 3/17/12, Rating: -1
RE: Say what you want
By TSS on 3/18/2012 3:29:09 AM , Rating: 5
Gingrich, as well as all the republican canditates, are complete and utter idiots. If he where to be elected there's no, NO way that moonbase will get built. He'll do the same as his predecessors, set lofty goals, then fail to allocate the funding to do so.

For god sakes there isn't a republican campaigning without tax cuts now. You're running $1.5 TRILLION deficits. Not only that, but the first moment interest rates go up that current ~$500 billion in interest on national debt becomes ~$750 billion. Every year. If the crisis hadn't happened, you'd already be paying that. Every year.

The printing presses are running SO hard, that by 2018, you'll have had just as much inflation from 2003 as the entire inflation from 1665 to 2003! that's CENTURIES.

Obama's just as bad. Any other democratic replacement would be just as bad. Hillary, had she won, would've done *just* as bad. Why? Because of Math, damnit. That and shear, shear stupidity that seems to get worse every election (WOW never thought i'd say that post-bush).

The most tragic thing is nobody will do anything to stop it. I'm coining a new word today: Dociety. A combination of Society, and Docile. A perfect description of modern day america.

RE: Say what you want
By Reclaimer77 on 3/18/12, Rating: -1
RE: Say what you want
By TSS on 3/18/12, Rating: 0
RE: Say what you want
By Reclaimer77 on 3/18/12, Rating: 0
RE: Say what you want
By TSS on 3/19/2012 7:40:37 AM , Rating: 2
Once again you show your ignorance. That's why i rant. However way i put it, you refuse to pop out of your own plastic bubble to smell the ashes. Might as well freak out, atleast one of us will feel better.

First off, $1,78 trillion in 2003 was $2 trillion by 2007 thanks to inflation. So it's more like a 20% increase.

Which can easily be explained by the biggest credit orgy mankind has ever seen. Here's the consumer debt during that same period (in millions):

Sep 2003 2057090.79
Sep 2007 2490286.90

Funny now it hasn't increased since then, and your tax revenues haven't either. Infact, those have decreased. Maybe because the american people are about as fiscally responsible as their elected representatives? Which is why those representatives get elected in the first place?

Not to worry though! consumer debt has been on the rise again since what? late 2010?

Also, how about not linking a blog and linking *official* sites? I will take wikipedia however. With a grain of salt, but that's still better then the mountain you're presenting.

The tax base is massively shrunk

coming from a guy advocating tax breaks. Had to point that out. You still haven't looked up those historical tax brackets, have you?

The logic lol. Assuming this 80% number is legitimate, how is this a roadmap for a healthy country and economy

The logic is sound. That money doesn't simply vanish into thin air. Social security money goes to benifits payouts which then the benificiaries use to buy stuff, which is called "consuming".

And secondly, i never said it was healthy. In fact, if you look through my post history, you can see various posts about how the USA is systematically insolvent. All the way back to 2008. And even then i was already 4 years behind the curve.

And once again, i never said no cuts should be made. But, being the republican as you are, when i finally got through that when i said no tax breaks didn't mean tax increases, you took "no cuts" as "no spending cuts should be made". For a third time, your indoctrination sickens me.

Of course spending cuts need to be made. A good start would be all those militairy bases in germany. If anything, they are going to conquer europe through economics, not war, so i don't know what the hell those are still doing there.

Unemployment benifits also need to be dialed back. That'll be painfull yes but they've been ratcheted up too far to cover up the fact that your economy still sucks balls.

Here's a link you should check out. I don't think you have this word in your vocabulary yet:

RE: Say what you want
By TSS on 3/19/2012 9:01:29 AM , Rating: 1
OMG just realised, why am i asking for official figures.

I should know better then anybody that just about all the numbers out there are grossly manipulated. Ironically, the fed's numbers are the only "official" numbers reasonably close to the truth. next closest are shadowstats, and he's constantly bitching lately about how seasonal adjustments are even affecting his data.

How silly of me.

RE: Say what you want
By JediJeb on 3/19/2012 1:42:01 PM , Rating: 3
I gave a really long explanation on the tax/spending situation last week somewhere on here, and to be honest there are a lot of things that need to be changed but they will never happen because nobody has the guts to implement them. It would be political suicide for any politician and it would make most Americans tighten up so much they thought they were wearing pants 4 sizes too small, but you know what, sometimes it just has to be done.

One thing that has to go away is the fact that 50% of Americans pay no income taxes. It is simply impossible for the rich to carry all the burden of supporting the country unless you consider rich to be making more than about $35K per year and you are taxing them at a rate of about 35% of their income, every single person making above that amount at that rate! Those not making that much and who are also bringing in most of their income from government assistance will always accept that the government is right to do such things until they have to begin to contribute money, then maybe they will also begin to be concerned. Make all people pay at least some income tax, even have it taken out of their assistance checks. If everyone doesn't see it then it isn't on their minds, and stop handing it all back when they file taxes.

The second thing is to drastically cut the federal government's workforce. There are so many things that are duplicated or triplicated and unorganized it isn't even funny. Make pay and raises for government jobs performance based just as it is in the private sector and have them paying into retirement the same as private sector workers do, heck many if not most private sector workers now only have 401K retirement plans, why not the same for government workers.

We have become a society of grasshoppers when we need to be a society of ants. (for anyone too young to know that story just search "The Grasshopper and the Ant") The sad thing is that before long we are going to have to face up to how we have lived for so long now whether or not we want to. People like to talk about "The Great Recession" but that was nothing compared to "The Great Depression", we were not stagnated as a nation or economy for 10+ years like we were back then, and I hope we wise up before it happens again.

RE: Say what you want
By BillyBatson on 3/18/2012 8:31:31 PM , Rating: 3
With all your cursing and name calling nothing in that post is of any consequence. How about you mature a little before taking on a mature subject.

Who needs space
By SpartanJet on 3/16/12, Rating: 0
RE: Who needs space
By Slappi on 3/16/2012 6:01:15 PM , Rating: 2
Well if you need that much contraceptive than you are indeed a slut. No one should have to pay for someone elses crap like that.

You wanna raise the taxes on the 1% go ahead. Wow that extra few billion will sure help pay down the budget deficit.

People need to take care of themselves and quit relying on others to be forced to take care of them. Lazy, slackers. If you can't have contraceptives because you are broke than stop getting laid.

RE: Who needs space
By Reclaimer77 on 3/16/2012 6:46:21 PM , Rating: 2
Meah, don't feed the troll.

RE: Who needs space
By bupkus on 3/17/2012 3:04:01 AM , Rating: 1
People need to take care of themselves and quit relying on others to be forced to take care of them. Lazy, slackers.
Corporate heads steal billions, shred the evidence and get away with it but some poor asshole gets food stamps or needs contraception and those sluts and slackers have their hands in your pockets.

RE: Who needs space
By V-Money on 3/17/2012 1:09:04 PM , Rating: 4
Just throwing this out there...but if we had supported and pushed the use of contraceptives during the baby boom we would have a lot less problems today. I will say I agree that social programs are out of hand, and taxing the 1% won't solve anything, but I fully support planned parenthood and providing contraceptives to everyone. To put it simply, I feel the country is going in the direction of 'atlas shrugged', and providing birth control will at least slow the onslaught of worthless...sorry...'underprivileged' people.

RE: Who needs space
By kattanna on 3/19/2012 1:02:38 PM , Rating: 2
but if we had supported and pushed the use of contraceptives during the baby boom we would have a lot less problems today

LOL! oh man.. now thats funny. you do understand WHAT caused the baby boom.. dont you?

RE: Who needs space
By SoCalBoomer on 3/16/2012 7:50:12 PM , Rating: 2

No, you're not "rite" . . . nor are you right . . . back to your cave.

RE: Who needs space
By Paj on 3/19/2012 9:01:51 AM , Rating: 2
The replies that follow this post provide the greatest evidence yet that the DT audience doesn't have a grasp on irony yet.

By Avatar28 on 3/16/2012 4:47:05 PM , Rating: 2
Seems like it would be rather inefficient to replace a station in low earth orbit with one in a low lunar orbit. It would require a significant increase in delta-v to get there and a lot more fuel. Think about how large the Saturn-V rockets had to be to get to the moon compared to the ones that just needed to get into earth orbit.

Honestly, if you're going to go to all the trouble of getting to lunar orbit for a station you might as well build on the surface. At least you could make use of local building materials and build underground for protection from micro-meteorites and solar flares and you wouldn't have to bring as much with you.

By JediJeb on 3/16/2012 5:10:58 PM , Rating: 2
It might be a good idea in the future to build on the Moon as you mentioned, but currently we have no portable smelting units or boring machines that we can send up there to do that. If we had a small orbital station there to use as a base camp or maybe something like the Bigelow inflatable units we could deploy on the surface that might help.

Come to think of it, since you wouldn't want to expend the fuel landing and launching large craft on and off the surface, maybe starting with an orbital Lunar station would be best. Then you could use smaller transport shuttles to ferry supplies and personnel to and from the surface.

By wordsworm on 3/17/2012 12:34:19 AM , Rating: 2
From the moon you could use solar energy to launch craft. If we're ever able to make use of Helium 3 deposits on it, the real race will be on. Could be that SpaceX will be the guys to beat the rest... hard to say.

By PrinceGaz on 3/17/2012 12:42:52 PM , Rating: 2
The Saturn V rockets were large primarily because of the amount of fuel needed to launch a fairly large payload in one go into Earth-orbit. Going from Earth orbit to the Moon is fairly trivial in comparison, as is landing and taking-off from the Moon (~1/6 gravity and no atmospheric drag).

Once we've finished building the first Earth-based space-elevator, it won't really matter whether the space-station is in orbit around Earth or the Moon in terms of launch costs.

By JediJeb on 3/19/2012 1:48:59 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if a space elevator on the moon would be something to try. It could be made with a heavier tether I think and without the atmospheric drag it might be an easier place to test out the technology.

By BillyBatson on 3/17/2012 6:48:28 PM , Rating: 2
Another plus that comes to mind for having a lunar orbiting station is because of the increasing"space junk" and orbiting satellites around earth. It could be much safer for sensitive equipment, spacewalks, etc around the fairy trash free moon. Also if they plan on building a base of some sort on the moon it might be cheaper to keep the station close to it or at least offer faster response to any emergency on the moon?

By Jeremy87 on 3/18/2012 12:21:25 PM , Rating: 2
I wish space was more profitable, so that there would be some kind of Moore's law pushing things forward.
Why couldn't the moon be full of rare and expensive minerals...

RE: Profitable
By PrinceGaz on 3/18/2012 12:48:23 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps not the Moon, but there are an awful lot of asteroids out there which might potentially be mined for valuable metals, crystals, and eonium.

RE: Profitable
By Paj on 3/19/2012 9:04:55 AM , Rating: 2
Helium 3 could be pretty important one day. It's believed there is a lot of it on the moon.

RE: Profitable
By delphinus100 on 3/20/2012 10:57:15 PM , Rating: 2
It won't be worth going after, until and unless we have commercial fusion reactors that can use it.

With modestly lower space transportation costs (and starting with low Earth orbit, cost of access is the real bottleneck to everything), it may be profitable to pursue platinum-group metals there, however...

Talking Space Logo
By genejm29 on 3/18/2012 3:21:14 PM , Rating: 3
Thank you for the advertising for our Internet Radio Show Talking Space, and using our logo, but it would have been nice to ask our permission before using it in association with this article. Flattered that you think enough of us to use it, but sort of wish that you had asked us first..

RE: Talking Space Logo
By johnsonx on 3/19/2012 4:41:05 AM , Rating: 2
that seems VERY not cool of dailytech. however, I am pleased to discover your program, and might just give it a listen.

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins

Latest Headlines

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki