Russia to charge NASA $51 million per space flight

Source

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russia will charge U.S. astronauts $51 million per return trip to the International Space Station (ISS) from 2012 and will resume selling seats to space tourists, Russian news agencies reported on Wednesday.

"We've agreed with our American partners the sum of $51m, starting in 2012," Perminov was quoted as saying by Itar-Tass news agency. He did not specify how much astronauts will be charged between 2010 and 2012, but in 2006 Russia charged the United States $21.8 million per return flight to the ISS. Since then the price for of a space tourist ticket to the ISS has climbed to $35 million from $20 million.

As if the deficit wasn't high enough as it is. How you can you justify spending that much money? I love NASA as much as the next person, but come on. Does anyone else find this outrageous?

The mission to Hubble which is going on now cost over a billion. 51 million is an absolute bargain. Hell lets scrap NASA and just start hitching rides with the Soviets.

reply to post by mrwupy


I agree $51 million is a bargain. There is a lot of expense and risk inherint in a trip to space. You have allocate for that risk and maintenance of equipment, etc.

What is a shame is that our shuttle fleet is 30 years old, and we don't have a replacement ready.

What is even more pathetic is that instead of coming out with a new, more advanced space craft, we are going backwards to 1960ties style Apollo craft.

Repub dominance of the presidency over the last forty years has not only left our nations needlessy, hopelessly in debt over 10TRILLION dollars, their pursuit of wealth for the elites has also resulted in our losing our technological edge. We should have a colony on the moon by now, looking for resources around the solar system.

We should have a shuttle that launches like an airplane, or launches off of an airplane by now. The race to the moon advanced us a nation greatly, and advanced our nations technological development massively. Had we continued on with the advance of technology that the space race launched, we could all be living better lives, commuting in personal rail systems that automatically pilot us to our destinations, while we do other things, rather than deal with road rage. We should be working less hours, and spending more time with our families.

Instead we are teetering on the edge of national bankruptcy due to the de-regulation policies that have turned our country over to the crooks.

We went from being Ameri Cans, to Ameri CAN'Ts.



[edit on 13-5-2009 by poet1b]

I guess im lost, but I thought that it was an international project with the space station, does Russia own it? How can we just allow Russia to tell us to pay them everytime we go there unless they own it?

reply to post by denynothing


We pay for the ride. Not the rent.

It is not all bad , think if the scientific progression of the USA had occured like you envisage , there would be instant pod travel devices for american citizens to traverse the globe in a flash . At least at the moment they can be controlled with travel visas and passports , and usually the airport taxi driver will avoid the loud shirt and american flag badge apparel to make the dubious wearer walk to his destination.

Originally posted by denynothing
I guess im lost, but I thought that it was an international project with the space station, does Russia own it? How can we just allow Russia to tell us to pay them everytime we go there unless they own it?

Well, I read somewhere that the American astronauts in the International Space Station weren't letting the Russians use the toilet (or something like that). Now THAT would BURN!

Originally posted by poet1b
What is even more pathetic is that instead of coming out with a new, more advanced space craft, we are going backwards to 1960ties style Apollo craft.

Advanced is kind of a bogus word with a fleeting definition. You want a good laugh, pick up an old copy of Popular Mechanics and see how they use the word high tech and advanced, ha.

If the shuttle technology was fine 30 years ago, why would that technology not be fine today? If that technology was deemed sufficient 30 years ago, what has changed today that would deem it to be otherwise? Space hasn't changed. Gravity hasn't changed. Just make some more shuttles, and upgrade those things which you can reasonably and cheaply do.

Personally, I think at this point in time, sending humons into space is crazy and wasteful. To have to build in all those environmental and safety factors into a spacecraft to tote humons into space is so expensive. Imagine how many more probes could be sent into space with that money if you didn't have to send a camper with toilets into space. Imagine if we spent that money on the development of robotics. Imagine if we spent our space exploration dollars wisely instead of using it to go space camping. Instead of the ISS (the point of which I still can't figure out, what the hell are they doing up there anyhow?), wouldn't it have been cooler to have a few Hubble telescopes in orbit? And a dozen or more rovers on the moon and other solar bodies? So dang much more bang could be had if NASA had its head screwed on wisely.

I would like to see NASA scrapped and all those space dollars offered as grants for private businesses and educational institutions to build and launch unmanned missions into space! The government is SO DAMN wasteful!

Originally posted by Divinorumus
Personally, I think at this point in time, sending humons into space is crazy and wasteful

It certainly is here in the USA.

NASA has ruined space for you I see, don't let them!

There is a great deal of money to be made from Private Space Access Systems - it doesn't always have to be accessed via the control of a wasteful bureaucratic entity.

There is a good deal of Real capital to be got in the Private space industry - which is not a drain on your tax dollars and is always much more cost-effective than NASA.

*Of course, NASA can sometimes underbid for certain contracts, especially here in the USA; where they receive the subsidies from the American taxpayer that they require to 'compete'...

$51 million is a damn good deal compared to what NASA would charge.


P.S.,

With regards to the words 'advanced' and 'high-tech'... Remember, All things are relative

[edit on 14-5-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by Divinorumus


How about advanced stage of Alzheimers? Does that make sense to you?

Do you drive a thirty year old car? Is your computer you use to serf the internet 30 years old? Do you have your bicycle from 30 years ago? Do they race thirty year old cars in Nascar?

Do you think we could repair the Hubble telescope with a Apollo style capsule? What if we find a large asteroid that is going to crash into the Earth and kill all life on Earth? Do ya think the Apollo style capsules are going to work in a mission to change the course of the asteroid?

Why explore space? Because that is what we are, otherwise we might as well still be squirrels, content with a hole in the ground. Getting physically out there in space is a big part of the learning system. In addition, there are many things that humans can do that machines can not, which is why humans still work in mines, and go into dangerous areas in nuclear plants.

Also, if we don't continue to expand our technology, some day invaders might arrive on our shore to colonize our planet. Maybe they are already here, but don't quite have the capability to launch an interstellar war, but they are working on it. As long as we keep twiddling our thumbs while idiots compete about who has the mos toys, or the most money, we go nowhere, and they get closer everyday to their goals.

reply to post by Exuberant1


I have to wonder how much we spent to going to the moon, and developing the F-14, F-15, and F-16 forty plus years ago, verses how much similar projects cost us today.

What would you be willing to bet that the NASA programs in the sixties were a lot more efficient, and a lot less costly than similar plans today, or more exactly, since the eighties?

It isn't government, it is the crooks that fools keep voting for that set up this corrupt system at the bidding of the crooks who get them into office. People who voted for GW didn't learn a thing in the last 8 years, and that is so pathetic it stinks.

This lack of technological leap forwardness post moon walking and such , makes you think maybe they never got there in the first place , doesn't it ?

Originally posted by denynothing
I guess im lost, but I thought that it was an international project with the space station, does Russia own it? How can we just allow Russia to tell us to pay them everytime we go there unless they own it?

That's America paying for some of the costs to get there. Nothing wrong with it, imo.

I do however have a problem with the ISS .. it's pointless, a waste of money, and nothing good has come from it.

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Originally posted by denynothing
I guess im lost, but I thought that it was an international project with the space station, does Russia own it? How can we just allow Russia to tell us to pay them everytime we go there unless they own it?

That's America paying for some of the costs to get there. Nothing wrong with it, imo.

I do however have a problem with the ISS .. it's pointless, a waste of money, and nothing good has come from it.

Yes, NASA basically spends $8-$10 Billion dollars a year to fly to the space station and do nothing and now we can't even get our own ride back because our ship is busted. Rather sad.

And I don't even want to discuss the tourism aspect. If I had $35 million, I could find a lot of other ways to spend it. The amount of money that gets wasted is just absolutely disgusting.

Its ironic, the American space program now has to take lessons on capitalism from the former Soviet Union.

NASA is a part of the military, it's goals were never truly oriented to a civilian style program or advancing science. Had the NASA budget been used for the development of an actual space program instead of disappearing into a "black budget" and the constant launching of military and intelligence spy satellites, we might have actually achieved something worthy of being called a "space program" by now.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


It will be a very, very long time before space exploration starts to become profitable for private enterprise.

I notice no one bothered to consider how cost effective NASA was in the Apollo era.

www.fas.org...

In 2008 dollars, the cumulative cost of the Manhattan project over 5 fiscal years was approximately $22 billion; of the Apollo program over 14 fiscal years, approximately $98 billion; of post-oil shock energy R&D efforts over 35 fiscal years, $118 billion. A measure of the nation’s commitments to the programs is their relative shares of the federal outlays during the years of peak funding: for the Manhattan program, the peak year funding was 1% of federal outlays; for the Apollo program, 2.2%; and for energy technology R&D programs, 0.5%. Another measure of the commitment is their relative shares of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) during the peak years of funding: for the Manhattan project and the Apollo program, the peak year funding reached 0.4% of GDP, and for the energy technology R&D programs, 0.1%.

Now, what does a F-22 hornet cost?

www.fas.org...

I believe this is in 98 dollars.

This chart that we have up now shows the total estimated cost for all three of these planes--the F-22, the Super Hornet, and the JSF. That total figure is an astonishing $397 billion.