Russia is planning to land on the moon, in 2030.? (Interesting)

a reply to: Daalder

That doesn't make it compatible with Russian equipment that they'll be taking to the moon. The problem with A is that if they build it for US systems, it probably won't be compatible with Russian landers, unless they design them to match US systems, which isn't going to happen.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: Zaphod58
....

Russia has the most consistent and successful space exploration track record, the US has the most...

What is your source for this claim?

Here is the Moon Agreement which may work as a baseline for future commercialisation of the Moon. Just because you bought a square foot of the Moon from some internet con-man does not mean you own a bit of the Moon.

UN Moon Agreement

To the OP. Can the Russians afford to go to the Moon? The Russian space budget is dwarfed by NASA, ESA and individual countries.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: BStoltman Wait a second, you never realized that the Russians never landed on the moon?

The question is: Did anyone ever go to the moon?

That video was the worst. I think the guy only wanted to slip the penis thing in. Couldn't finish.

originally posted by: toysforadults
why is going to take so long??

didn't anyone learn anything from our first moon mission which we can't recreate?>

You mean the one where NASA lost ALL of the Telemetry data ! The president could even call the astronauts on a phone from the White House back then.

originally posted by: pointessa
The president could even call the astronauts on a phone from the White House back then.

Nothing remarkable about that. They used the S-Band System for the phone call.

Unified S Band

You can download the Unified S Band Book at the following link.

Unified S Band System Book Download

From

Unified S Band System

originally posted by: pointessa
why is going to take so long??

didn't anyone learn anything from our first moon mission which we can't recreate?>

We can, for ~$120 billion dollars. It'll take ~10 years. Sure technology has advanced in 50 years, but the technology to build manned lunar landers and Saturn V-class rockets has not advanced at all. We'd need to re-invent those technologies, as will the Russians, who developed both and then abandoned them just like we did.

LK Lander
N1 rocket

You mean the one where NASA lost ALL of the Telemetry data

They recorded over the original tape. I recorded over my wedding tape, and all of the holiday and family photos and videos I've taken in the last 11 years. I lost nothing and neither did NASA because we both made copies of everything before we recorded over anything.

The videos, of course have been available ever since they were broadcast live. Many of the telemetry graphs can be found here (13MB 230-page pdf).

It's amazing what you can find when you stop assuming it doesn't exist.

originally posted by: toysforadults
why is going to take so long??

They're going from this:



To this:



The first is the Apollo capsule, the second is the Orion capsule. Not Russian, but the comparison is the same. They have to fly several flights in earth orbit to see how the radiation affects the electronics, if they're staying longer than a few days, how the shielding does against the radiation, etc.

a reply to: hiddenNZ


The Russians had a lander during the 60's as well.

Russian Lander

The other thing is it only had room for one Cosmonaut that would be dangerous on the Moon with no help if anything happened.

They gave up when Apollo landed as you know 2nd place is 1st loser

originally posted by: paraphi
Here is the Moon Agreement which may work as a baseline for future commercialisation of the Moon. Just because you bought a square foot of the Moon from some internet con-man does not mean you own a bit of the Moon.

UN Moon Agreement

To the OP. Can the Russians afford to go to the Moon? The Russian space budget is dwarfed by NASA, ESA and individual countries.

Thanks for posting that UN moon agreement.

Here is the control caveat. This will become very important if certain "things" are found:

Article 7.3 :

States Parties shall report to other States Parties and to the Secretary-General concerning areas of the moon having special scientific interest in order that, without prejudice to the rights of other States Parties, consideration may be given to the designation of such areas as international scientific preserves for which special protective arrangements are to be agreed upon in consultation with the competent bodies of the United Nations.

The Great Hoax War..

The original moon landing was an amazing feat. They didn't even have CGI back then.

a reply to: BStoltman

The Russians, Soviets at the time, landed landers all over the Moon. I want to say they were called Lunokhod (sp?), and it was a rover.

They had several test flights of a manned vehicle, but never made it to the Moon with it.

If they're contemplating trying again? More power to 'em. Maybe it'll spur other nations into getting off their duffs and joining in.

I doubt there's any spurious dark plan in mind. National prestige, bragging rights, etc...

a reply to: eriktheawful

...and Congress.

Idiots, every one of them, where the Space Program was/is concerned.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: BStoltman

The Russians, Soviets at the time, landed landers all over the Moon. I want to say they were called Lunokhod (sp?), and it was a rover.

The Soviet "Luna" program, running between between 1959 and 1976, was very extensive, with 15 of its missions being successfull (as either orbital or landing).

Luna 17 (November 1970) and Luna 21 (January 1973) carried the Lunokhod vehicles, which roamed around on the Moon's terrain.

Three of the Luna missions were sample return missions, the first ones in the world performed robotically.

en.wikipedia.org...

Curious fact: Luna 15 craft, which was to be a sample return mission, failed and crashed into the lunar mountains at the time when Apollo 11 astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin were on the Moon.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Knowing how to do it and having the technology readily available are two totally different things.

I'm sorry, but that statement is BS.

Russia is one of the most technologically capable nations on Earth, and if Elon Musk can whip up multiple rocket launches within the space of a few years, the entire Russian military-industrial complex could compartmentalise all the necessary technological processes in a parallel-track design/develop system (as opposed to end-to-end, one-at-a-time development system) within the space of two years, if the will was in effect to do so. Perhaps even quicker.

Anyone stating that it will take them twelve years to get ready for the mission is either a liar, or seriously misinformed about the capabilities of the Great Bear.

a reply to: wildespace

Trivia: Luna 15 crashed while trying to land in Mare Crisium. I always like the quote by our Jim Oberg:

"The Soviet failure on the Sea of Crisis, and the subsequent American success on the Sea of Tranquility, seemed almost too metaphorical to be real." -- Red Star in Orbit

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Bull. The standard Falcon 9 would require multiple launches to be able to get anything to the moon. The Falcon 9 Heavy took 14 years from the initial announcement to first flight.

Even if they could build a rocket in two years, what are you going to land on the moon? How do you get there? Build an Apollo era capsule with vacuum tubes and essentially no computer? Or something new, that will require multiple launches and testing? They might be able to beat 12 years if they really want to, but no way could anyone do it in two.

a reply to: BStoltman

2030? (same year Noah supposedly came from)

Unbelievable that Russia has chosen that year. It could mean that this year might hold some special significance, being the temporal junction point for the entire space-time continuum! Other than that it could just be an amazing coincidence.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Falcon Heavy payload to lunar trajectory is 18 metric ton, Saturn V payload to moon was (in later mods ) 55 MT

That is 3 times the Falcon

Moon landing using Falcon would require minimum OF 2 launches - one for crew module, second for lander
Increases the cost and complexity of the mission

Also as aside - Russians had to space walk to get from modified Soyuz to lander vehicle. Apollo had a tunnel between
Command module and LEM . LEM was docked to nose of Apollo

a reply to: firerescue

And using a Proton they'd need at least 4 launches. A Falcon 9 would probably need something closer to 8 or more. Even two launches drastically reduces the complexity over anything else currently flying.