It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian president backs nuclear spaceship

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Quote:

"Russia laid out its ambition to gain an edge in the space race by building a nuclear-powered spaceship.

But the plan outlined to a government meeting Wednesday left key questions unanswered, U.S. engineers were skeptical, and a Russian Greenpeace activist voiced concern.

Federal Space Agency chief Anatoly Perminov told the meeting that the preliminary design could be ready by 2012. He said it would then take nine years and 17 billion rubles ($600 million) to build the ship."


www.msnbc.msn.com...


I always thought nuke power in space was banned but ...

"The U.N. outer space treaty, in force since 1967 and ratified by 105 countries including Russia and the U.S., was designed to keep outer space free of nuclear weapons. It makes no mention of using nuclear energy for nonmilitary purposes."

So that's how they get round it.

Anyway it will be interesting to see how this develops given the current economic climate




posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   
$600 million? That don't buy you much in terms of space ship development I wouldn't of thought...

2nd line.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 07:43 AM
link   
I'll wager a large sum that nuclear engines have been developed quite extensively. I'm only speculating but I have been looking for evidence for some weeks now. Let you know if I find any.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Okey, help me out here. Russia's back in the space race, but I thought they were supposed to be broke? Wasn't that the excuse they gave when the US had to foot the bigger part of the bill for the space station.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Chance321
 


This could be part of the reason they were broke. They may have been spending what did not have on this idea. Just a passing thought.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
$600 million? That don't buy you much in terms of space ship development I wouldn't of thought...

2nd line.


Well, wages and prices in Russia are lower so with that amount of money, you can do alot, especialy if the tech is available and if you work efficient enough.

Heck! for 20 million dollars you can buy a seat onboard the Soyuz if you want to.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrwiffler
I'll wager a large sum that nuclear engines have been developed quite extensively. I'm only speculating but I have been looking for evidence for some weeks now. Let you know if I find any.


Yep, i would say they must be plenty of generations down the road. Stanton friedman talked about he worked on these sorts of projects, though we only have his word for it, i would suggest that there must be plenty of those types of things going on.



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chance321Okey, help me out here. Russia's back in the space race, but I thought they were supposed to be broke?


Who is broke? Russia or Roskosmos? Either way, those 2 are anything but broke Chance321.

Russia itself hasnt got any big debpt at all and Roskosmos its budget is growing steadily every year and is so busy at the moment that with the retirement of the Shuttles, space tourism has been put on hold just to accomodate all of the Cosmonauts in the Soyuz capsules.


Wasn't that the excuse they gave when the US had to foot the bigger part of the bill for the space station.


Source please?



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by James R. Hawkwood
 


Just something I remembered hearing on the news quite a few years back when they first started building the station.


jra

posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chance321
Okey, help me out here. Russia's back in the space race, but I thought they were supposed to be broke? Wasn't that the excuse they gave when the US had to foot the bigger part of the bill for the space station.


Back during the 90's after the collapse of the Soviet Union and a financial crisis in '98. Russia was doing pretty poorly, but they've recovered since then and there economy has been growing fairly well it seems.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
here is more information;

I think NASA and Russia shouldve been using more advanced technology for spacecrafts 60 years ago




posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 12:24 AM
link   
They probably mean something like a radioisotope thermoelectric generator, which has been used in multiple NASA missions.

And as for the Russians not having the money, the only reason they've been able to keep their space program running is space tourism. They've been doing it for years; crazy New Russians (i.e. shady Russian super-rich businessmen since the collapse of the Soviet Union) will pay to do some crazy stuff.



posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Did you see them
 




I always thought nuke power in space was banned but ...


many sattalites are powered by radioactive /nuclear meterials.

many many sattalites!



posted on Mar, 5 2010 @ 12:04 AM
link   
They need to go beyond nuclear.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join