Military Review

Russia refuses the ISS

42
The statement of Dmitry Rogozin at the very beginning of December on the planned withdrawal from the ISS project almost coincided with the statement of the Russian President on the termination of the South Stream project, therefore it was much less noticeable. Although in fairness it should be noted that Rogozin’s rhetoric on this issue has remained unchanged since May 2014: the vice-premier of the Russian government has previously stated that Russia intends to withdraw from the project of the International Space Station. And the first prerequisites for such a development of events appeared even before the new period of confrontation between Russia and the West and mutual sanctions. For the first time, the possible withdrawal of the Russian Federation from the ISS project was started in 2012 year.


For the first time, such statements were made at the Farnborough International Exhibition in 2012. The then head of Roscosmos, Vladimir Popovkin hinted at Russia's withdrawal from the ISS project. According to him, the Russian Federation is not only ready to build its own orbital station at the technical level, but is also developing a number of new modules for the ISS, which in the future can be used as basic units for the future generation of manned orbital stations.

“The question of the prospects of manned space flight is no longer a question of the industry, but of political decisions,” the TV channel Zvezda cites Dmitry Rogozin. The Russian Deputy Prime Minister, who oversees the military-industrial complex, noted that Russia is not going to extend its participation in the ISS project in the period from 2020 to 2024, as the American side had previously suggested. Currently, the Federal Space Agency is already instructed to submit its justification for the deployment of the Russian space station and submit them to the Russian government for consideration. If all goes well, work on the deployment of the station can begin in 2017.

Photo of MKS 30 May 2011 of the year


In this decision, there is more politics, which was stated by Rogozin, who considers the ISS as a “past stage”. In many ways, this was facilitated by the aggravation of relations between Moscow and the West, the introduction of mutual political and trade sanctions. It was politics that became one of the weighty reasons for the isolation of Russian manned cosmonautics. Roscosmos noted that in cooperation with countries that are currently operating the ISS, a special working group was set up according to the recommendations of Russia. This group is faced with the task of determining the future fate of the ISS and establishing a timeline for decommissioning this station. Roscosmos has already agreed with NASA that it will present its position on this issue by the end of 2014. In particular, the project of creating several small orbital stations, which will solve specific tasks in near-earth orbit, as well as international stations that can be placed at equilibrium points between the Moon and the Earth or from the back of our natural satellite, is being considered.

In the MKS program, our country has been participating since 1998. Today, Roskosmos spends 6 times less on maintenance of the station than NASA (only in 2013, America spent about 3 billion dollars to the station), although the Russian Federation has the right to half of the orbital station crew. At the same time, in May 2014, Rogozin said that Roskosmos spends about 30% of its budget funds to participate in this international project. These funds could be used for other purposes.

Currently, there are 5 Russian modules in the ISS, which form the Russian segment of the station. We are talking about the Zarya module - this is a functional cargo block (the first 20 of November 1998 of the year, 20,26 tons) was put into orbit, the Zvezda life support module (26 of July 2000 of the year, 20,3 tons of modules) 15 September 2001 of the year, 3,58 tons were launched, the Small Search Search module (12 of November 2010 of the year, 3,67 tons) and Rassvet docking cargo module (18 of May 2010 of the year, 8,0 tons). According to the plans of the Federal Space Agency for 2013-2018, by the end of 2017, the Russian segment of the station was to consist of 6 modules, and by the end of 2018 of the year - from 7 modules.

Russia refuses the ISS
3D-graphics of the approximate appearance of the Russian station to 2030 year, TC "Zvezda"


It has already been suggested that the Russian station could include modules from the Russian segment of the ISS. At the same time, experts noted that the original configuration of the new station could be built on the basis of a multipurpose laboratory and node modules, the Oka-T spacecraft and the Progress-SM and Soyuz-SM spacecraft. As representatives of the industry told the Russian TV channel Zvezda, Oka-T is a fully autonomous technology module. Its development is carried out by RSC Energia specialists. According to the terms of reference, this module will consist of a scientific laboratory, an airtight compartment, a lock chamber, a docking station, as well as an unpressurized compartment in which it will be possible to carry out experiments in open space.

It is reported that the pledged mass of scientific equipment on board will be approximately 850 kg, it will be located both inside the module and on its surface. The battery life of Oki-T is estimated in the period from 90 to 180 days. After the expiration of this period, the module will have to dock with the main station or spacecraft for refueling, maintenance of scientific equipment and other operations. The first flight will have to be completed at the end of 2018. In general, Russia will be able to get a full-fledged analogue of the ISS, the whole question is whether it needs it. So earlier it was announced about a very expensive lunar program of Russia, the estimated cost of which is about 2,46 trillion rubles. Experts disagree about the need for an own space station.

Expert Opinions

Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine, in an interview with the Free Press, noted that he had no doubts about the need to deploy a Russian station in orbit. However, he gave some clarifications about the characteristics of the station. Russian media reported that the inclination angle of the station’s orbit would increase the visibility of the territory of Russia to 90%. “Frankly speaking, it is not quite clear what exactly is meant. The ISS also rotates around our planet at a speed of 8 km / s, flying through the territory of Russia and the entire globe. From the fully Russian station there will be the same review, ”noted Igor Korotchenko.



At the same time, he is convinced that it is necessary to recreate the entire Russian segment in orbit. Partnership in the framework of an international project is more unpromising. At the ISS, Russia is not the host, but rather the guest (the station has US jurisdiction). Thus, Russia partly works on the space potential of our direct competitors. Therefore, it is important for Russia to develop its own orbital project, especially since the country has the necessary technical background for this.

The current academic adviser to the Academy of Engineering Sciences of the Russian Federation, Yuri Zaitsev, refers to the intentions to create a Russian orbital station much more skeptical. In an interview with "SP", he noted that, most likely, we can talk about the image response to the West. It is true that we will prove to the West by opening our analogue of the ISS, it is not entirely clear. According to Zaitsev, the European Space Agency (ESA) landed a robot on a comet, and we are going to circle around the Earth again. According to him, this decision on the creation of its own orbital station can still be revised.

Roscosmos has already spoken about the inexpediency of the orbital station for Earth sounding tasks. You can watch Russia from space from ordinary satellites, without taking modules for a total mass of hundreds of tons into space. According to Zaitsev, it would be more logical to invest in the development of the Russian satellite constellation. Even India has dozens of them now, but there’s nothing to say about the PRC. At the same time, 129 domestic spacecraft is present in space, but not all of them are in active state.

The current academic adviser believes that maximum attention should now be paid to automation. Manned projects and programs are needed, but one cannot do without machine guns. Without their use it is not possible to solve fundamental problems in space and carry out various applied research. The main focus for Russia is now becoming the moon. At the same time, this is not about “tourist” flights, but about the establishment of a lunar base in the region of the poles. At the initial stage this can be a visited (watch) object, and in the future it can be converted into permanently operating ones.

Russian modules in the ISS


Oleg Mukhin, a member of the presidium of the Federation of Cosmonautics of the Russian Federation, believes that the resumption of the Russian orbital program is justified. According to him, Russia has gained tremendous experience with the Mir station, in addition to it we also had the first Salyut orbital station. That is why when developing the ISS, the Americans turned to us for help. They had experience with their Skylab station, but it was short. At the same time, the base units of the ISS were manufactured by the Russian aerospace industry.

Of course, at the present time, “drones” and space guns can solve many issues that relate to the monitoring of the earth's surface. But there are a number of problems that can only be solved with the presence of a person. The last word in this matter should remain with the Academy of Sciences. Russian scientists must clearly define the range of experimental problems that will need to be solved in conditions of weightlessness. Therefore, it is obvious that investing in a project will not make sense if we do not know what it is possible to download.

If the decision on the Russian orbital station is positive, it will be created on the basis of the modules and technologies that were used in the ISS. But, according to Mukhin, this is a second-order question. In Russia, there are necessary developments in the construction of modules for the new station. Back in the middle of the 80 of the last century, the USSR thought about the construction of a station of the 4 generation, which would be named “World-2”. The basis of the station was supposed to be a module weighing more than 100 tons. But, unfortunately, the political processes in the country and the collapse of the USSR did not allow this project to be brought to its logical conclusion. Russia would have needed a large and powerful station. The launch vehicle "Energy", which was created specifically for the space shuttle "Buran", could take into space cargo weighing more than 100 tons. The larger the orbital station, the more scientific equipment and experiments can be carried out on board and more researchers can accept.

Oleg Mukhin also noted that Moscow could offer cooperation to Beijing, who could not pull alone to create its own orbital station. Thus, international competition in space will only grow. He also noted that at the new Russian station one could rely on space tourism, so that it would bring real money. According to Mukhin, it is impossible to give this direction to the Americans, who have private companies that can send people into space. Currently, Sierra Nevada, Blue Origin, SpaceX and Boeing are competing with each other in providing space "taxi" services for the delivery of people to near-Earth orbit.

Information sources:
http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201411290951-mn7j.htm
http://svpressa.ru/politic/article/105195/?rss=1
http://mir24.tv/news/Science/11689857
http://www.znak.com/urfo/news/17-11-11-16/1031535.html
Author:
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 4 December 2014 07: 18 New
    19
    As I understand it, everyone will get to his station, or orbit, on his own transport.
    And if Russia and China can fly in a tandem racket, then the mericatos are only from a trampoline.
    1. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 4 December 2014 07: 25 New
      +5
      It was from a trampoline :) I hope Rogozin is already an ambassador for this plain object as a gift to us)))
    2. CALL.
      CALL. 4 December 2014 12: 55 New
      +5
      noted that Russia is not going to extend its participation in the ISS project from 2020 to 2024, as the American side had previously suggested.

      America uses Russian space potential for its interests. Russia is building, Russia is delivering cargo and astronauts there, and the ISS is controlled from Cape Canaveral.
      1. kazakoviv
        kazakoviv 12 December 2014 00: 07 New
        0
        ISS flight control is carried out from two Centers: the Russian segment - from MCC-M (MCC-Moscow, Korolev, Russia), the American segment - from MCC-X (MCC-Houston, Houston, USA). (Http: / /www.mcc.rsa.ru/mks_polet.htm)
        1. wolf7
          wolf7 2 January 2015 16: 57 New
          0
          Yeah, and US jurisdiction throughout the station. Who slammed! am
          1. Kassandra
            Kassandra 4 January 2015 18: 14 New
            +1
            What is the jurisdiction of the United States for the entire station? get out of this "contract" and that's it ...
            ISS Russian segment is MiR-2
            the American segment is the essence of empty cans of Italian production all of whose systems are concentrated in a dedicated module of Russian production.
    3. TURAR
      TURAR 4 December 2014 16: 08 New
      +2
      But what about "ORION"? Nice trampoline to Mars.
    4. siberalt
      siberalt 4 December 2014 18: 10 New
      +2
      Politics and business got involved in science. What good is that. Let scientists decide. And for tourists let them make a space hotel, if anyone needs it.
  2. lwxx
    lwxx 4 December 2014 07: 31 New
    +5
    Two things strained: the US jurisdiction is acting on the ISS !! ???? and expert Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine, in an interview with the Free Press, noted that he had no doubt about the need to deploy the Russian station in orbit. However, he gave some clarification about the characteristics of the station. The Russian media reported that the inclination angle of the station’s orbit will increase the overview of the territory of Russia up to 90%. “Honestly, it’s not entirely clear what exactly is meant. The ISS also revolves around our planet at a speed of 8 km / s, flying through the territory of Russia and the entire globe. The full Russian station will have the same review, ”said Igor Korotchenko. OH Fool? And if with the second it is more or less clear (it remains to find out whose mill is pouring water) then about the first, from which coils on our segments is someone else's right?
    1. invisibility
      invisibility 4 December 2014 08: 51 New
      +2
      What surprises you? There is even an official English language.
    2. region58
      region58 4 December 2014 10: 42 New
      +1
      Quote: lwxx
      The Russian media reported that the inclination angle of the station’s orbit will increase the overview of the territory of Russia up to 90%. “Honestly, it’s not entirely clear what exactly is meant.

      Is it that it turns out that the expert does not understand what is the inclination of the orbit? To the expert ???
      1. predator.3
        predator.3 4 December 2014 15: 22 New
        +2
        to make such a station! wassat and good bye America!
    3. sub307
      sub307 4 December 2014 11: 26 New
      0
      “The first tier of partnership forms the basis of a second tier called Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs). These memoranda are agreements between NASA and the four national space agencies: FKA, ESA, KKA and JAXA. Memoranda are used for a more detailed description of the roles and responsibilities of partners. NASA is the appointed managing director of the ISS, there are no separate agreements directly between these organizations, only with NASA. "
      1. sub307
        sub307 4 December 2014 11: 29 New
        +1
        "The ownership structure of the project does not provide for its members with a clearly established percentage of the use of the space station as a whole. According to Article 5 (IGA), the jurisdiction of each partner extends only to the component of the station that is registered for it, and violations of legal norms by personnel inside or outside the station, are subject to proceedings in accordance with the laws of the country of which they are citizens.
        ISS resource use agreements are more complex. The Russian modules Zvezda, Pirs, Search and Dawn are manufactured and belong to Russia, which retains the right to use them. The planned Science module will also be manufactured in Russia and will be included in the Russian segment of the station. The Zarya module was built and delivered into orbit by the Russian side, but this was done at the expense of the United States, therefore today the owner of this module is officially NASA... To use Russian modules and other components of the station, partner countries use additional bilateral agreements ... "
    4. The comment was deleted.
  3. karal
    karal 4 December 2014 07: 46 New
    0
    Americans go through the woods or fly like plywood, as you like!
  4. parusnik
    parusnik 4 December 2014 08: 00 New
    0
    Quote: karal
    Americans go through the woods or fly like plywood, as you like!

    More precisely, they fly plywood through the forest ..
  5. parusnik
    parusnik 4 December 2014 08: 01 New
    +2
    A large and powerful station would be useful to Russia....And how...
    1. Green
      Green 4 December 2014 09: 15 New
      0
      Now we have the main task, to equip ourselves, not in vain after all, for the 2014 3rd trillion. allowed and the next year we plan to allocate the same amount, but about the station we will see)
    2. timer
      timer 15 December 2014 21: 49 New
      0
      I don’t agree with you. Russia does not need a station. As correctly noted in the article, sounding and other not complicated operations can be easily transferred to automatic machines. I am for creating a base on the moon. The moon will give us what we ourselves do not know. for space tourists, Russia can create an orbit hotel. Here you have the commerce.
  6. Nayhas
    Nayhas 4 December 2014 08: 08 New
    +4
    This zhzhzhzh on the part of Rogozin is not casual ... Especially against the background of the news that followed literally after Rogozin's statement:
    Roscosmos submitted to the Russian Academy of Sciences expertise for proposals from Chinese organizations on the joint use of the Russian segment of the International Space Station

    I can assume the following, Russia sells its segment to the ISS to China... To do this, a hype is created about the alleged creation of their own orbital station "with blackjack and hookers" and the exit from the ISS project. And their modules will be "temporarily" transferred to friendly China, the good will not be lost ...
  7. Hairy Siberian
    Hairy Siberian 4 December 2014 08: 12 New
    +4
    International Space Station, abbr. The ISS is a manned orbital station used as a multipurpose space research complex. The ISS is a joint international project in which 15 countries participate (in alphabetical order): Belgium, Brazil, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia, the USA, France, Switzerland, Sweden, Japan.

    The ISS is managed by: the Russian segment - from the Space Flight Control Center in Korolyov, the American segment - from the Lyndon Johnson Flight Control Center in Houston. Laboratory modules — the European Columbus and the Japanese Kibo — are controlled by the Control Centers of the European Space Agency (Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany) and the Japan Aerospace Research Agency (Tsukuba, Japan). Between the Centers there is a daily exchange of information.

    School criticismА

    Criticism of the American side is mainly aimed at the cost of the project, which already exceeds $ 100 billion. This money, according to critics, could be more profitably spent on automatic (unmanned) flights to explore the near space or on scientific projects conducted on Earth. In response to some of these criticisms, defenders of manned spaceflight say that criticism of the ISS project is short-sighted and that the return on manned space exploration and space exploration is materially expressed in billions of dollars. Jerome Schnee estimated the indirect economic component of the additional revenues associated with space exploration as many times higher than the initial state investment.

    Criticism in Russia

    In Russia, criticism of the ISS project is mainly aimed at the inactive position of the leadership of the Federal Space Agency (FKA) in upholding Russian interests compared with the American side, which always clearly monitors compliance with its national priorities.
    For example, journalists are asking questions about why Russia does not have its own orbital station project, and why money is being spent on a project owned by the United States, while these funds could be spent on completely Russian development. According to the head of RSC Energia Vitaly Lopota, the reason for this is contractual obligations and lack of funding.
    According to critics, international cooperation, which is one of the main arguments in favor of the station, is also controversial. As you know, under the terms of an international agreement, countries are not required to share their scientific developments at the station. For 2006-2007 in the space sphere between Russia and the USA there were no new large initiatives and large projects. In addition, many believe that a country that invests 75% of its funds in its project is unlikely to want to have a full partner, which is also its main competitor in the struggle for a leading position in outer space.

    It is also criticized that significant funds were allocated for manned programs, and a number of satellite development programs have failed. In 2003, Yuri Koptev, in an interview with Izvestia, said that in order to please the ISS, space science again remained on Earth.

    I would very much like the Scientific Cosmos to be away from politics.
  8. corn
    corn 4 December 2014 09: 07 New
    0
    From "The larger the orbital station, the more scientific equipment and experiments can be carried out on board and the more researchers can be accepted." It does not follow that the rockets should be more and more. The article tied to this 100 ton conveyors.
  9. Bykov.
    Bykov. 4 December 2014 09: 11 New
    +1
    Well, at the end, they did live.
    It's high time to throw off all these "partners / friends" from your neck!
    We ourselves will fly to our station, on our own rockets .... and no pins-vrotpeytsy. Let them look at us from the Earth, and not parasitize on the achievements of our scientists.
  10. demon184
    demon184 4 December 2014 09: 16 New
    0
    Still, oil and gas for rubles would have begun to be sold, and not for green candy wrappers provided by the US army.
  11. tchoni
    tchoni 4 December 2014 09: 22 New
    +2
    The new station should be, first of all, a plant (for the production of especially clean, etc., requiring special conditions, materials). And, ideally, make a profit. Otherwise, the project is worthless - costs alone. The tasks of observation, sounding and communication can be solved by unmanned vehicles.
  12. jayich
    jayich 4 December 2014 09: 54 New
    -1
    Everything is much simpler, it would be time to let the military go into space and let them turn around, get out of the agreement on the demilitarization of space, first small warships will be withdrawn, and then large ones will go, but space exploration will already be collateral.
    1. Koloradovatnik
      Koloradovatnik 4 December 2014 20: 39 New
      +1
      Do you want to go to the website of the Space Strategy Games Online? Wrong address.
      1. jayich
        jayich 5 December 2014 10: 46 New
        +1
        No, why do these ships seem fantastic right now, but as soon as a suitable propulsion system appears capable of developing at least 0,2 speeds of light in a short period of time (a week or a month), the development of the solar system will begin at a very fast pace, remember how poor the first steamboats seemed and it seemed that they were not competitors to the sail, but reality showed that this was not so.
        Even now, in the near future (10-20 years), it is possible to create a launch vehicle capable of launching 200 tons into orbit.
        It’s worth three times to think about whether it’s worth building the ocean navy or maybe it’s time to build the All-Russian Navy, starting with small orbital bombers and interceptors (100-200 tons), and then going off, the military will go and want to base on the Moon, if they want to fly to Mars and Saturn .
        Unfortunately, technical progress is actively moving the war or about a military confrontation, for example, like the "Cold War", so, in principle, an arms race will turn out, but already in space and it is not yet known what technologies will come of this, and it is quite possible to get such a ship in 100-150 years.
        And then it turns out they saw a picture from the game and immediately put a minus, but it's hard to make a brain of it.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  13. SEK
    SEK 4 December 2014 10: 10 New
    +1
    Mir station provided one third of all intelligence information. Replacing it with the ISS was initially unprofitable for us. Everything returns to normal.
  14. Vtel
    Vtel 4 December 2014 10: 34 New
    0
    Alexander III: “In the whole world we have only two faithful allies, our army and navy. All the others, at the first opportunity, will gang themselves up against us. ”


    Our friends, our American friends - the Tambov wolf are friends and comrade to them. How quickly they sucked from us both material benefits for themselves, and intellectual. Enough to feed the wolves, anyway they will run away into the forest. It's time to put your own business.
  15. Teberii
    Teberii 4 December 2014 11: 32 New
    +1
    Why rush to chop off your shoulder. Think about how much money gets up. There is an economic crisis, we are collecting our own bike. The article was correct that the EU and the whole world are looking a lot wider while developing space research. We already forgot when we launched our research apparatus.
  16. lotar
    lotar 4 December 2014 13: 44 New
    +1
    In my opinion, it is necessary to focus on the future. For example, consider an orbital station not in the framework in which modern stations are used, but in others. Let's use it as a platform for creating long-distance expeditions, or as one of the stages of creating further bases on the moon, Mars and other celestial bodies.
  17. Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 4 December 2014 15: 37 New
    +1
    Serious scientists not affiliated with Roskosmos doubt the very necessity of orbital stations. All that astronauts can do there, satellites will do better and much cheaper. And the idea about his station is being pushed for the next cut of budget funds.
  18. itr
    itr 4 December 2014 15: 38 New
    -1
    Before you refuse, you need to build
  19. turanchox
    turanchox 4 December 2014 15: 40 New
    0
    “Honestly, it’s not entirely clear what exactly is meant. The ISS also revolves around our planet at a speed of 8 km / s, flying through the territory of Russia and the entire globe. The full Russian station will have the same review, ”said Igor Korotchenko.

    all experts expert))
  20. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 4 December 2014 17: 57 New
    0
    Quote: invisible
    What surprises you? There is even an official English language.


    But it’s interesting, when the shuttles flew to Mir, what was the language of communication and whose jurisdiction?
  21. Byaka
    Byaka 4 December 2014 18: 48 New
    +1
    This is not only a political decision. Although Dmitry Rogozin speaks about him.
    There is also a purely rational solution. For example, Russia needs to test a nuclear reactor for spacecraft and engines, moreover, these spacecraft must be assembled in orbit. And it’s better to do it without unnecessary eyes and on your territory (even if it will be small, but its own space station).
  22. Byaka
    Byaka 4 December 2014 18: 51 New
    +3
    What surprises you? There is even an official English language.

    The ISS has long been the main language of the Russian language. Even in NASA, when recruiting astronauts to the ISS, the first requirement is knowledge of the Russian language.
  23. 19671812
    19671812 4 December 2014 20: 22 New
    0
    you need to have your own station in orbit so that it isn’t as good as a snowstorm and factories will be involved
  24. Asan Ata
    Asan Ata 4 December 2014 23: 01 New
    0
    Space tourism is a good income. For example, the glass hemisphere, in which a tourist in his pants is covered up with delight, a separate section for space sex is also a trend. And if you combine them - wanting billionaires to have sex in full view of the entire planet - the crowd. One problem - the launch of tourists should be on the most tested vessel, otherwise the seams. drinks
  25. Vladimir 23rus
    Vladimir 23rus 5 December 2014 00: 07 New
    0
    For such statements, the political leadership needs to FIND! Why should actual ENEMIES be warned in 6 years? To prepare something? Well, for a year well, for two. This can be understood, one HER do not have time, but now? Or FSU. anyway war?
  26. Hitmaster
    Hitmaster 5 December 2014 04: 11 New
    0
    if we recall the scientific groundwork of S.P. Korolyov, then he proposed to assemble a manned spacecraft for a flight to Mars from blocks assembled in the Earth's orbit. and for this, its own orbital station does not even hurt. and to colonize the moon, too. for the volume of cargo transportation will be much greater than a normal manned flight. it will be like a kind of orbital "jump cosmodrome". collect modules in orbit, refuel the ship, bring in the crew, and go! and the American "partners" on the ISS will only get in the way and poke their noses into our developments. so we need our own orbital station if we still want not to lose the status of a space power, which is not a leader yet, but at least in step with modern developments and projects.
  27. attuda
    attuda 5 December 2014 13: 51 New
    0
    First, the fields would be plowed, but the oceans to master ...
    No, they found themselves insurmountable cosmic difficulties for centuries
  28. I think so
    I think so 5 December 2014 18: 04 New
    0
    I am simply amazed at the stupidity of the Russian authorities ... The main burden for the creation and operation of the ISS lies with Russia, the JURISDICTION of the station itself is AMERICAN, THE MANDATORY LANGUAGE OF COMMUNICATION IS ENGLISH! It is FORBIDDEN to communicate in Russian there! Disgraceful, who in general DID THIS agree, and why go there at all "to visit the psi.n.dosam"?
  29. Hanter_121
    Hanter_121 12 December 2014 17: 16 New
    0
    The Loch Ness Monster was a FACT !!!!
  30. The comment was deleted.
  31. Logos
    Logos 17 December 2014 23: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: I think so
    In Russian there is FORBIDDEN TO COMMUNICATE!

    From which fence did you read this news? They communicate in the ISS in both Russian and English, the etiquette there requires that American cosmonauts contact their Russian colleagues in Russian, and Russians address their Americans in English, and therefore, among Americans, one of the requirements for candidates for a flight to the ISS is basic knowledge of Russian language
  32. Old26
    Old26 29 June 2015 21: 59 New
    +1
    Quote: Z.O.V.
    America uses Russian space potential for its interests. Russia is building, Russia is delivering cargo and astronauts there, and the ISS is controlled from Cape Canaveral.

    Sorry, but what kind of nonsense are you talking about ??? Not only Russia is carrying goods there. This is the first. Cosmonauts yes, so far only we are. Managed by the ISS from the DVH MCC. American and ours ... At least we learned the materiel before writing

    Quote: wolf7
    Yeah, and US jurisdiction throughout the station

    Well, did you decide so ???

    Quote: timer
    I don’t agree with you. Russia does not need a station. As correctly noted in the article, sounding and other not complicated operations can be easily transferred to automatic machines. I am for creating a base on the moon. The moon will give us what we ourselves do not know. for space tourists, Russia can create an orbit hotel. Here you have the commerce.

    And you decided to "crank" the creation of a base on the moon without having your station in orbit? Very fresh and creative. Just in the spirit of modern successful managers. And one more question. Hotel in orbit, is that not a station ???

    Quote: corn
    From "The larger the orbital station, the more scientific equipment and experiments can be carried out on board and the more researchers can be accepted." It does not follow that the rockets should be more and more. The article tied to this 100 ton conveyors.

    And they bind correctly. Is it possible to place a lot of equipment in a 9-ton module, like the Chinese, or in a 16-20-ton module, like ours? If you have at least once seen the "insides" of the same "Mir" and "Salut", their central blocks, you would be surprised at the tightness. You can of course solve this problem by running 5 or 10 modules, but only partially. A 100-ton class module would really make it possible to have enough research equipment

    Quote: lotar
    In my opinion, it is necessary to focus on the future. For example, consider the orbital station not in the framework in which modern stations are used, but in others. Let's use it as a platform for creating long-distance expeditions, or as one of the stages of creating bases on the moon, Mars in the future and other celestial bodies

    In principle, the Union had not collapsed, we would already have our own station "MIR-2", which would include orbital assembly complexes (shipyards)
  33. Old26
    Old26 29 June 2015 22: 14 New
    +1
    Quote: 16112014nk
    But it’s interesting, when the shuttles flew to Mir, what was the language of communication and whose jurisdiction?

    The Americans were on a visit to Mir. The language of communication is most often double - Russian and English. Whose jurisdiction? Mir is the jurisdiction of Russia, the Shuttle is the jurisdiction of the United States. That is, on the territory of these segments, the laws of the country to which they belong are valid.

    Quote: Byaka
    The ISS has long been the main language of the Russian language. Even in NASA, when recruiting astronauts to the ISS, the first requirement is knowledge of the Russian language.

    On the ISS, the language of communication (official) is English. Yes, they select astronauts with knowledge of Russian, but the crews sometimes consist of one Russian, one Canadian, one American, or one Russian, one Japanese, one American. Russian is in the minority, if we proceed from this logic. The commanders are also either Russians or Americans. And if we talk about internal "etiquette", then communication is bilingual

    Quote: HitMaster
    and the American "partners" on the ISS will only get in the way and poke their noses into our developments. so you need your own orbital station

    And no one argues what is needed. But do not forget that the ISS is a product that has grown from the development of the Cold War. And it was created in principle due to the fact that pulling alone SUCH the station is problematic even for such a rich country as America