Military Review

Mission to Mars will provide US space leadership

313
Mission to Mars will provide US space leadershipWhile the camera of the Russian-European spacecraft ExoMars sent the first image of the Red Planet to Earth, the United States is working on sending a full-fledged manned expedition to Mars. Why the Americans need it, how much such a project will cost and whether Russia plans to participate in it - questions that need to be answered.


The task of manned flyby of Mars was set by President Barack Obama back in 2010 year. Then he outlined the following plan of action for NASA: by 2025, to make a manned flight to an asteroid nearby to Earth, in the middle of 2030, to Mars, after which the landing mission will follow. For the time being, we can say that NASA as a whole fits within the target dates. At the same time, the agency plans not just to fly around the Red Planet, but to visit its natural satellite Phobos.

To date, the agency has identified six key elements required for a mission to Mars, including landing. These are the heavy SLS carrier, the Orion spacecraft, the Transheb residential module (for flight along the Earth-Mars-Earth route), the landing module, the take-off stage and the solar-electric propulsion system (SEP). According to one of the preliminary estimates, it will be necessary to deliver tons of cargo and equipment from 15 to 20 to the surface of the Red Planet to ensure the first landing of people on its surface. However, NASA representatives voiced the figure in 30 and more tons, taking into account the fact that the weight of one projected takeoff stage alone will be 18 tons, and the weight of the landing module will be at least 20 tons. To send these elements into space, you need at least 6 heavy / super heavy SLS media launches from 70 to 130 tons. In order to save time and money on the development and production of this "heavy truck", NASA used the technology and technology left over from the space shuttles, including the engines, fuel tank and solid fuel accelerators of the shuttles.

The elements of the Martian complex will be assembled in a bundle not in near-Earth orbit, but at the Lagrange point L-2. It is located one and a half million kilometers from Earth, behind the far side of the Moon, in 61 500. This point is considered an ideal place for the construction of space complexes, because it balances the forces of gravity of the Earth and the Sun, which provides a "construction site", which is practically not exposed to external gravitational effects. NASA calls the L-2 nothing more than a “test site”, emphasizing that not only the assembly will be carried out there, but also the testing of the Martian technology.

The American and international media have repeatedly, including with reference to some sources at NASA, mentioned the possibility of returning Americans to the moon as part of the preparation of the Martian expedition. But now the question is not worth it. As John Logsdon, one of the leading US experts in space policy, told the VIEW VIEW newspaper, the creation of a lunar landing module is not part of NASA’s plans. It is not excluded, however, the possibility that the European Space Agency (ESA) will decide on the implementation of the flight to the moon. And in the event that ESA builds a landing module, the US may participate in a European lunar project, possibly by providing SLS to deliver this module to a natural satellite of the Earth.

Three steps to Mars



Most powerful boosters in stories cosmonautics

NASA called its first step "leaning on Earth." It includes the development of the necessary operations and the accumulation of the required experience in Earth orbit using the ISS. In addition, as part of this step, the agency is developing ways and methods of using available Martian resources (ISRU) to obtain fuel and other necessary materials. The exercise is very useful if you consider that 18 tons of fuel will be required for the 33-ton take-off stage, and NASA intends to extract it from the carbon dioxide and water on the Red Planet.
The second step is called the “test site,” which, as already noted, is located at the L-2 point. With the help of an automatic vehicle, it is planned to capture a nearby asteroid, which will be transferred to this point, where it will be surveyed by the crew of the Orion spacecraft.

The third step was called "independent of the Earth." We are already talking about the direct study and development of the Red Planet. It includes life on Mars, the intensive use of Martian resources, as well as the regular transfer to Earth of scientific information obtained through advanced communication systems.

The role of "Orion" is worth more details. Despite the fact that it looks like an enlarged version of the classic Apollo-type disposable ship (sometimes Orion is jokingly called Apollo on steroids), the new taxi for NASA astronauts will be reusable - it is planned to use the same descent vehicle ship up to ten times. At the same time, the Orion will be distinguished by increased “passenger capacity” and will be able to take on board the crew up to 7.

But this is not the main feature of Orion. According to Charles Prekott, vice president of Orbital ATK, a company that develops five-segment solid fuel boosters for SLS, the ship will become part of the interplanetary Martian complex. Its systems, including the life support system (LCL) and radiation protection, will be integrated into this complex in order to increase its reliability.


Success statistics of space launches in different countries

The estimated resource of Orion is at least 1000 days. It is designed to enter the Earth’s atmosphere at elevated speeds, such as when returning from L-2 or from Mars. In addition, the ship will become an additional shelter for the crew in case something goes wrong. Precott gave an example with the Apollo-13, whose crew after the explosion of the oxygen tank in the command module during the flight to the Moon was saved largely thanks to the coolant and the propulsion system of the lunar landing module. This module, although it was not designed to work during the flight along the Earth-Moon-Earth route, in a critical situation successfully performed functions unusual for it.
The first test flight of the Orion took place automatically in December 2014, when it was launched using the Delta IV Heavy rocket. The next one is scheduled for September 2018 of the year, the Orion (for now without a crew) will fly in a circumlunar orbit with the help of the SLS carrier, for which this, by the way, will be the first launch. And the first manned flight of the ship - immediately to the Moon - is scheduled for 2021 – 2023 years.

Fears and reality

Flying in low earth orbit, the crews are protected from cosmic radiation by the magnetic field of the Earth. Astronauts heading toward the moon, and especially toward Mars, lose this protection. However, according to Scientific American, citing data from the Curiosity rover, the danger of deep space radiation is not so great as to become an obstacle to the implementation of the Martian expedition. So, astronauts who spend 180 days to get to Mars, just as many to return from it, and also spend 500 days on the surface of the Red Planet, will receive a total radiation dose in the 1,01 area of ​​the sievert. According to the ESA regulations, an astronaut should not receive more than one sievert during all his flights. This dose, according to doctors, increases the risk of cancer by 5%. NASA has stricter standards: the risk of astronaut cancer for the entire period of his professional activity should not exceed 3%. However, according to one of the members of the Curiosity scientific team, Don Hassler, 5% is “a perfectly valid figure.”

Speaking at the People to Mars conference (H2), held in Washington this May, Scott Hubbard, who was formerly responsible for NASA's Mars projects, and now a professor at Stanford University, quoted NASA head physician Richard Williams, who said that currently there are no such health hazards for the crew that would prevent a manned expedition to Mars. ” Williams acknowledges that there is still some risk to the health of astronauts, but NASA is ready to accept it, especially given the fact that the agency is constantly developing new ways to reduce it. For example, at present, NASA is experimenting with a material made from hydrogenated nitride hydrogen nanotubes (BNNT), which exhibits very promising anti-radiation properties.

However, in the opinion of Andy Weier, the author of the book The Martian, on the basis of which the eponymous film was made, his hero would certainly fall ill with cancer during his stay on the surface of the Red Planet. Who is closer to the truth - scientists or a science fiction writer, time will tell.

When, for how much and with whom


Currently, NASA adheres to the following schedule of manned exploration and exploration of Mars. From 2021 to 2025, the year is planned for at least five manned missions to the near-moon space, including “capture” and the study of an asteroid. In 2033, astronauts must reach Phobos, and in 2039, they set foot on the surface of Mars for the first time. In 2043, the second expedition will land on Mars.
To support the manned “assault” of the Red Planet from 2018 to 2046, you will have to launch at least 41 SLS-type media. It is possible that launches of already operated carriers such as “Delta-4” and “Atlas-5” will have to be added to this (if the latter receives American engines instead of Russian ones and is still in operation). They will be involved mainly for launching automatic vehicles to Mars and Mars, which will be entrusted with the function of “scavengers” of scientific information to assist manned expeditions.

Of course, the number of carriers and their types can vary depending on changes made to the configuration of the Martian manned missions. There is an option that requires all 32 carriers of the SLS type (not counting five for the mentioned circumlunar expeditions): ten to provide a manned mission to Phobos, twelve for the first landing of astronauts on Mars, and another ten for the second.

The question of questions is: how much will it all cost and will the United States “pull” such expenses alone? According to a group of experts consisting of NASA employees, as well as representatives of industry and US academics, only a small part of the amount spent on the development and production of the sixth-generation F-35 fighter will have to be paid for sending astronauts to Mars. management of the United States, in the end, the program F-35 can cost a trillion dollars) and will not exceed 100 billions of dollars. This is as much as the USA has so far spent on the ISS program. By 2024, the station’s flight will be completed, and NASA will stop spending almost 4 a billion dollars on its operation annually. Thus, for the ten years separating the end of the station circling around the Earth and the start of the mission to Phobos, the amount of savings will be about 40 billions of dollars and the United States will have to additionally find only 60 billions to implement its Martian designs.

Speaking about the cost of the Martian mission, experts emphasize that it can be reduced even more if you connect international participants to the project. The obvious question is: Is Russia among them, which is currently one of the largest partners of the United States in the space sector and has a serious space potential (especially in the field of manned flights)? But if the United States has similar plans for Russia, as long as they are kept secret.

At the end of May this year, Space News presented the views of the head of NASA, Charles Bolden, on the future of international cooperation in space. He spoke about the importance of interaction outside the atmosphere with Europe, Japan and China. With regards to the PRC, Bolden mentioned that he was going to visit it at the end of the summer, stressing that sooner or later the United States and China would surely start working closely in the field of space. The list of potential space partners even countries such as Israel, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates. But Bolden did not say a word about Russia. Maybe there was simply no reason for this, but another explanation is also possible: sharply aggravated relations between Moscow and Washington, as well as the lack of technology and technology for deep space in Russia (for gaining access to them, the United States could set aside general political differences) do not contribute to the interest of America to continue the partnership with our country after the end of the flight of the ISS.
It remains to add that, in addition to the US state Mars program, there is also a private one that SpaceX intends to implement. The head of this company, Ilon Mask, announced plans to land the Dragon ship on the surface of the Red Planet in 2018, and send people there in 2026.

Speaking at the People to Mars conference and talking about why America is aiming for the Red Planet, Charles Prekott said: “Jumping in space happens only when the strategic interests of the country are behind them. We are going to Mars because we want to show the world our ability to do what no one has ever done before, to demonstrate our space leadership and to guarantee our access to the world space market, whose annual income reaches 330 billion dollars. ” As you can see, the explanation is quite simple. And the question arises involuntarily: does Russia really have no such strategic interests, which can be realized with the help of a project worth two Sochi Olympics?
Author:
Originator:
http://www.vz.ru/world/2016/6/20/816611.html
313 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Combitor
    Combitor 25 June 2016 07: 08 New
    +1
    And on what rocket engines did they gather there?
    Maybe to cover a bench?
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 25 June 2016 07: 55 New
      29
      RS-25
      (http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/final_sls_rs25_fact_sheet_50

      8_07312015.pdf
      ).
      The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announced the successful testing of the upgraded RS-25 engine No. 2059, which will be used in the Space Launch System (SLS) - an ultra-heavy launch vehicle for manned expeditions beyond Earth orbit, including flights to Earth asteroids and mars.
      Testing was conducted at the John Stennis Space Center in Hancock County, Mississippi, NASA's largest rocket engine test center at booth A-1. The engine worked for 500 seconds, due to which NASA engineers received important data on the functioning of the control unit and the inlet pressure indicators. Four engines will be installed in the SLS rocket, including No. 2059. You can watch the test video by this "rel =" nofollow "> link.
      http://voen-news.ru/NASA-uspeshno-ispitalo-dvigatel-RS-25-dlya-poljotov-raketi-S
      LS-na-mars-i-asteroidi /

      It should be said to Rogozin that it turns out that there are centers and enterprises in the USA that can develop and produce a full cycle of rocket engines and high power systems.
      1. Pavel1
        Pavel1 25 June 2016 08: 44 New
        12
        Quote: Thunderbolt
        RS-25


        the whole joke is that the pc25 hydrogen engine is an EXPENSIVE engine and the point is not only in the engine itself, but in particular the process of using hydrogen. Hydrogen is expensive to obtain, expensive to store and expensive to use. In addition, hydrogen is unsafe. Hydrogen seeps through the walls of the tanks. Therefore, our RD191 and NK33 engines are BETTER, CHEAPER AND SAFETY of American hydrogen engines, in addition, the RD191 is more high-torque and weighs a TON LESS PC25.
        However, if pin_dosers want to fly to Mars, then a fair wind in the ass, as they flew to their moon, everyone already knows.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 08: 54 New
          20
          Let's compare
          RS-25
          Thrust: 222,6 tf in vacuum (104,5% thrust)
          181,4 tf at sea level
          Specific Impulse: 452,5 s in vacuum
          363 c at sea level
          RD-191
          Thrust: Vacuum: 212,6 tf
          Sea level: 196 tf
          Specific Impulse: Vacuum: 337,4 s
          Sea level: 311,5 s
          HK-33
          Thrust: 171 Tf in vacuum
          154 Tc at sea level
          Specific Impulse: 331 s in Vacuum
          297 with at sea level

          As you can see from the above, the American significantly exceeds the specific impulse, which easily covers the problem of high cost and complexity.
          A single pulse is an indicator of the efficiency of a jet engine. Sometimes the synonym “specific thrust” is used for jet engines (the term has other meanings), and specific thrust is usually used in internal ballistics, while specific impulse is used in external ballistics. The dimension of the specific impulse is the dimension of speed, in the SI system of units it is a meter per second.

          Therefore, let’s do it without a break.
          1. Pavel1
            Pavel1 25 June 2016 09: 27 New
            +5
            Quote: BlackMokona
            Therefore, let’s do it without a break.

            come on, the hydrogen direction, as it does not develop in space propulsion engineering, and probably the main thing here is SAFETY and COST of launches. However, pin_dosers and F1 do not develop either, but everyone uses ours, so you can quietly be sad in the corner, which pc25s are good, but they will whether these engines are in demand is still not known.
            And besides, ours also has a hydrogen engine, it is not audible that it would develop, I wonder why? Yes, all the same because of a dead end.
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 25 June 2016 09: 34 New
              13
              Write to KBHA, they didn’t know that hydrogen turns out to be bad, and made such an engine for Energy. Here are the pests
              RD-0120 is a liquid rocket engine running on liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The engine is made in a closed circuit with afterburning of the generator gas after the turbine. It was used as an engine in the second stage of the Energia launch vehicle. In total, four RD-0120 engines were installed in the second stage.
              1. Pavel1
                Pavel1 25 June 2016 09: 47 New
                +3
                it’s not the USSR for you now, when you didn’t count money, Voronezh residents and all the chain producers of hydrogen and equipment for it will take off your pants if you are interested in such an engine.
                Americans can use such an engine, but this is not heard and even in this article they do not talk about these engines.
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 25 June 2016 09: 53 New
                  +6
                  Right now, it’s not the USSR, and there is simply no money for space, the heaviest launch vehicle today, it’s Delta Heavy and it’s on hydrogen. Which flies on RS-68
                  And they fly to Mars on SLS which has RS-25 on the first stage and RL-10 on the second, and both of them are on hydrogen.
                  1. Pavel1
                    Pavel1 25 June 2016 10: 40 New
                    0
                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    Delta heavy


                    Yes, the most interesting is the most, as usual the truth is, but of course
                    that these rc68 hydrogen are not like hydrogen, the hydrogen stream is usually blue and then yellow, how do you understand this? And besides, the price of this delta4-400mil Tugrikof is not small.
                    1. Blackmokona
                      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 11: 25 New
                      +5
                      Color depends not only on fuel, but also on combustion temperature.
                      Taki, and the largest abandoned weight in the world at the moment.
                      1. Pavel1
                        Pavel1 25 June 2016 12: 18 New
                        +1
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Color depends not only on fuel, but also on combustion temperature.
                        Taki, and the largest abandoned weight in the world at the current



                        test rd0120
                        watch from 1min. 49sec blue flame at rated traction, and amers yellow is strange.
                      2. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 25 June 2016 12: 43 New
                        0
                        Amer’s have not rated thrust, but 104.5% of the planned maximum. wink
                      3. Papandopulo
                        Papandopulo 27 June 2016 11: 58 New
                        0
                        You have 104 (,) 5 many times worse than our minimum.

                        In addition to problems with their engines, even with all the borrowings of Soviet technology for habitability received on the ISS, the Americans are not able to overpower the expedition to Mars.
              2. Locksmith
                Locksmith 25 June 2016 13: 52 New
                10
                Quote: BlackMokona
                And they fly to Mars on SLS which has RS-25 on the first stage and RL-10 on the second, and both of them are on hydrogen.

                RS25 is a second stage engine !! It cuts right at the start and helps the first one, which is solid fuel like a shuttle for SLS. And for our Energy the second stage is cut at the start, and the first for energy is 4 four-chamber kerosene RD170. The amers had this (supposedly) F1, but floated wink . There are no hydrogen tugs for 800 tons of thrust. Therefore, sissy is crumpled with its powder accelerators. A flight to Mars piloted with chemical engines will be very hemorrhoid for them, they have already crap one’s hydrogen with hydrogen moons, they haven’t WORKED ONE HYDROGEN for more than several hours in orbit, not because it’s bad, but because there is no fuel, well, they couldn’t save hydrogen laughing , so xs what they will fly.
                Probably ours will be harnessed with nuclear engines, or again they will start making films.
                1. Vadim237
                  Vadim237 25 June 2016 14: 48 New
                  0
                  Just a few fuel tanks together with rocket engines will put into orbit, dock the ship, and then accelerate - RS 68 or RS 25 and fly by inertia. And most likely all this will be fulfilled on the delivery of everything necessary to Mars - automatic flights with a payload, and only then, after everyone has worked out and prepared, will there be a manned flight.
                  1. Pavel1
                    Pavel1 25 June 2016 14: 56 New
                    +3
                    Quote: Vadim237
                    then, as they work out and prepare everything, there will be a manned flight.


                    Well, maybe it can also go there, but back? And hydrogen will take and evaporate from the tanks back to what will fly, what will they drown?
                  2. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 25 June 2016 15: 27 New
                    -1
                    Do you think how much it will evaporate during a flight at the temperature of a space flight, engineers can’t calculate? laughing
                  3. Pavel1
                    Pavel1 25 June 2016 15: 35 New
                    +2
                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    space flight, engineers can’t count?


                    They can count, but there’s no plugging the hole ...
                  4. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 25 June 2016 15: 46 New
                    +1
                    If the losses are acceptable, then everything is ok. wink
        2. sa-ag
          sa-ag 25 June 2016 17: 03 New
          0
          Quote: BlackMokona
          And they fly to Mars on SLS which has RS-25

          Sorry, but at SLS the first stage is solid fuel, here is the second as usual on hydrogen
          1. Simple
            Simple 26 June 2016 02: 46 New
            -1
            Quote: sa-ag
            Sorry, but at SLS the first stage is solid fuel, here is the second as usual on hydrogen

            sorry ...
            But what about the Soyuz SRN?
            or shuttles?

            core stage! and main engines

            and srb
            1. sa-ag
              sa-ag 26 June 2016 08: 09 New
              0
              Quote: Just
              But what about the Soyuz SRN?

              And what about the Soyuz? And the pictures show solid fuel boosters
            2. Simple
              Simple 27 June 2016 11: 26 New
              +1
              Union is an example of a packet scheme. Shuttle too.

              About SLS you already decide:
              First stage or TT accelerators (SRB).
              You screamed 5 minutes ago about the first step
  2. Anton Valerevich
    Anton Valerevich 27 June 2016 13: 06 New
    +4
    Hydrogen is better as a fuel, of course, but do not forget that the density of liquid hydrogen is much lower than that of kerosene! This means that to store the same mass of hydrogen in a rocket, a 3 times larger capacity is required, and therefore heavier, so everything is not so simple here!
  • Orionvit
    Orionvit 25 June 2016 12: 05 New
    +6
    Therefore, let’s do it without a break.
    Something I don’t see is that Americans would fly into space at all. The international station is served mainly by Russia, and the states represented by NASA are engaged only in self-PR, and for some reason the results are not visible. So, trepidation alone. By the way, let them report for their lunar "epic", or else wherever you throw, some questions and white spots.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 12: 45 New
      +1
      Read about supply missions on Shuttles, Dragons wink
    2. Simple
      Simple 26 June 2016 02: 54 New
      +3
      Quote: Orionvit
      Something I don’t see, Americans would fly into space

      Well, you probably know better ....
      only SL






      this is also a "mirage"
  • bastard
    bastard 25 June 2016 12: 32 New
    11
    Quote: BlackMokona
    Therefore, let’s do it without a break.

    Oh, yah, yah! Gut, Dafayte! But how and where will the American Katzmanauts write and poop? Before Mars, cut some kind of 8 -9 months, nada cheva-that gorges and pit, with all that it implies literally, so to speak. On the shuttle there was a toilet of their production, this is how it looked and acted, I quote:

    "NASA was concerned about future long-term space flights even when the Apollo crews were in need of pants and disdained packages (!?). The result of these worries was an automated control system (sanitation device) designed for Space Shuttle "which first went into space on the shuttle Columbia April 12 1981 years. Thus, NASA began to use ACS on spacecraft exactly 20 years after the start of manned space flights. NASA engineers tried to construct their original design: "The first American space toilets resembled a Waring blender spinning at a speed of 1200 rpm, about 15 cm below a known area of ​​the human body. The device crushed excrement and other tissues - say, paper, not scrotum - and threw it all into a container. The machine produced a kind of papier-mâché. "
    But instead of gratitude, the astronauts again began to complain and be capricious, because “there were problems when the container was exposed to a cold and dry vacuum of space (it was necessary to sterilize the contents of the container). Here, the mass was falling apart into“ paper ”and“ mache. ”When the next astronaut turned on the device, the blender blades began to grind small pieces of aspen the nests of feces that remained on the walls of the container, and those already in the form of dust flew into the cabin. "
    At the ISS, NASA no longer felt the fate and entrusted the toilet service to the Russian side - all the ISS stationary bathrooms are of Russian origin. Initially, the toilet was only in the Russian Zarya module, and in 2007 NASA ordered a toilet for the Calm module: "The US National Aerospace Agency (NASA) ordered a toilet in Russia for the US part of the ISS for $ 19 million." Thus, the history of the American ACS totals exactly 30 years, clouded by fecal popcorn. "


    Article with photos and diagrams here:
    http://andrew-vk.narod.ru/public/Apollo_FCS/fcs.html
    And here is a lot of interesting material:
    http://www.manonmoon.ru/
    But it’s not really worth it, but you need to think about it. What kind of mission to Mars can we talk about if neither the USA nor the ESA in the entire history of the space program were able to build a long-term orbital station. There are questions to Skylab, for example, unlike the Soviet orbiters, there was no one except the Americans themselves, and there are still unanswered questions.
    http://www.manonmoon.ru/book/25.htm
    hi
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 12: 45 New
      0
      Only the drawings have already gone to the United States. ISS is not just that they proposed winked
      1. bastard
        bastard 25 June 2016 14: 01 New
        18
        Quote: BlackMokona
        Only the drawings have already gone to the United States. ISS is not just that they proposed

        Stop! Wait a second, who offered the ISS and to whom? Do we need Americans?
        The long-term orbital station (DOS) Mir-2 was supposed to gradually replace module-by-module Mir-1 by the year 2000, but democracy and the rest of the world happened. In the context of a bacchanalia of friendship with partners, the USA and the West for nothing bought the already built Zarya and Zvezda modules, which have now become the basis of the ISS. Without these two modules, the entire station cannot function. Taperich is commanded there and, on a completely legitimate basis, are promoted as owners by the Americans. Like this!
        And the MIR station was taken off the orbit by Russian patsaki democrats on March 23, 2001, carefully licking their anus with a calloused rough tongue to the overseas owners. It was, of course, not Putin, not Rogozin, not Chubais, and many others, no less well-known Hari of the Russian establishment.
        All for now. Be sound (especially with your head), boyars!
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 15: 26 New
          0
          You forgot about the Frendom station, they also planned theirs. laughing But then democracy, friendship chewing gum all matters. And combined with the Mir-2 project
          1. bastard
            bastard 25 June 2016 16: 28 New
            +4
            Quote: BlackMokona
            You forgot about the Frendom station, they also planned theirs. But then democracy, friendship chewing gum all matters. And combined with the Mir-2 project

            Sorry, I knew, but forgot to mention. My comments are already quite large, I don’t know how to describe a thought in two or three words, such as “oh, how great” or “urya, with us (insert the right one)”.
            You are absolutely right, in the ISS layout it is easy to see the influence of unrealized American stations Freedom and Fred. hi
      2. B-15
        B-15 26 June 2016 17: 09 New
        +4
        I repeat again.
        We have not sold anyone a life support system.
        And without it, everything else is just glands with electronics. A person cannot live there.
        A toilet is part of this system.
        PS. The Japanese came with the purchase. But the price was high for them. :-)
        And a couple of years later, after their bouncing, they came again. They gave more. But we have not sold. Something like that. tongue
  • Homo
    Homo 25 June 2016 16: 13 New
    +3
    Quote: BlackMokona
    Therefore, let’s do it without a break.

    How beautiful everything is on paper and in theory. wink
    1. Come on
      Come on 26 June 2016 04: 03 New
      +2
      They flew to the moon several times, not only in theory, and sent their robots to Mars, I’m not talking about all kinds of Kepler hubs. An excellent article, it would seem that there is something to think about, for example, the role of Russia in missions to Mars .. But few people are interested in seeing this, again half of the comments (I exaggerate of course, but ..) about the fact that mattresses without Russian engines are generally nowhere fly, or about the "filmed in Hollywood" mission to the moon .. and in general about what stupid "s". With such an approach, it may turn out that when the time comes for flights to Mars, anyone will participate in such a mission as partners, China, the EU, India .. but not Russia. Even the USSR and the USA collaborated during the Cold War, since doing parallel projects of such a scale as a space station, for example, is expensive and idiocy. Russian space scientists, as well as NAZA employees, generally do not care about any political graters, they cooperated, are cooperating, and I hope they will cooperate in the future, since space exploration is a common thing for all earthlings.
      1. Zefr
        Zefr 26 June 2016 12: 50 New
        +3
        Russian space scientists, as well as NAZA staff, generally do not care about any political graters, they cooperated, are cooperating, and I hope they will continue to cooperate in the future
        Russian scientists transferred technology for long-range orbital flights to the Americans. And what technologies did the Americans transfer to Russian scientists?
  • askold
    askold 25 June 2016 09: 45 New
    +6
    The whole joke is that the USA on "hydrogen engines", in the period from 1981 to 2011 made 135 manned launches (over 30 years, on average MONTHLY !!!), as part of the Space Shuttle program! With one failure, which ended in disaster " Challenger ", - the shuttle" Columbia "was successfully put into orbit, there was a disaster upon returning to Earth.
    As for the Lunar mission, where "hydrogen engines" were also used, yes, EVERYONE knows from history textbooks that between 1969 and 1972, humanity (within one country) made 6 landings on the Earth’s natural satellite, the Moon. Maybe you know something more or you, directly, have irrefutable evidence that it is a SCAM, lay it out.
    But I dare to recall that during the expeditions to the Moon, no one, including the main rival enemy (at that time No. 1), the enemy, doubted the authenticity of this achievement. Speaking about the fact that the Americans have cheated ALL of you, you first of all cast a shadow over the generation of OUR people, which PROFESSIONALLY was engaged in precisely so that US and YOU would not be fooled.
    We can only talk about scams and prove something only when we ourselves set our flag on the moon. "We owe you a little step!"
    In the meantime ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 10: 15 New
      +3
      Quote: askold
      Maybe you know something more or you, directly, have irrefutable evidence that it is a SCAM, lay it out.



      you seemed to have fallen from the moon and about the fact that pin_day is deceiving the whole world, you have not even heard the type.
      //www.cneat.ru/luna.html
      Well, here you are from the last technical experts from Samara, including doctors of technical sciences make an unambiguous conclusion-pin_dosers on the moon did not lie.
      or here is an article by df n Popova A. from the last
      //bolshoyforum.com/forum/index.php?page=963
      [media = // osnovy1.narod.ru/1/2016/luna/image001.jpg]

      or here the moon turns out to be BROWN, NOT CEMENT.


      //www.kramola.info/blogs/kosmos/kakogo-cveta-luna

      or here is Eremenko S.M. says that all these mercury, gemini is one solid crap Amer
      //usa-moon.ru
      Enough for you or still pull up the calculation of F1 made by Velurov?
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 25 June 2016 17: 07 New
        +2
        Quote: Paul1
        or here is Eremenko S.M. says that all these mercury, gemini is one solid crap Amer

        "There is no Rio de Janeiro, and the waves of the Atlantic Ocean are breaking on the shore of Shepetovka" (C) "Golden Calf"
      2. vadimtt
        vadimtt 27 June 2016 09: 05 New
        -2
        You, this, tie flowers with photos. All colors are from evil - white balance is called.
    3. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 16: 30 New
      +2
      Quote: askold
      Maybe you know something more or you, directly, have irrefutable evidence that it is a SCAM, lay it out.


      the moon is brown, to Americans what has the ash color come up with?
      http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st78.htm
    4. Beefeater
      Beefeater 25 June 2016 21: 12 New
      -3
      It’s impossible to prove that this is a scam.
      The only thing - the Americans finished some scenes in the pavilion
  • askold
    askold 25 June 2016 09: 58 New
    +1
    And yes, by the way, recently the Americans discovered another 5th “quasi-satellite” of the Earth - some kind of tiny numbered asteroid with a diameter of about 100 meters. The truth is far, about 12 million kilometers, from the Earth. But what is not a promising task for Roskosmos - "stake out the New Moon"!
    1. sherp2015
      sherp2015 25 June 2016 10: 12 New
      +4
      Quote: askold
      And yes, by the way, recently the Americans discovered another 5th “quasi-satellite” of the Earth - some kind of tiny numbered asteroid with a diameter of about 100 meters. The truth is far, about 12 million kilometers, from the Earth. But what is not a promising task for Roskosmos - "stake out the New Moon"!

      let the omerikos fly there, they have nowhere to put money in, the debt of 17 trillion does not press his neck
      1. RedBaron
        RedBaron 25 June 2016 16: 05 New
        +2
        Quote: sherp2015
        Quote: askold
        And yes, by the way, recently the Americans discovered another 5th “quasi-satellite” of the Earth - some kind of tiny numbered asteroid with a diameter of about 100 meters. The truth is far, about 12 million kilometers, from the Earth. But what is not a promising task for Roskosmos - "stake out the New Moon"!

        let the omerikos fly there, they have nowhere to put money in, the debt of 17 trillion does not press his neck

        Well, yes, there is money for the Olympics, but space has already ended, let the Americans fly. Well, they will fly.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • Alex
    Alex 25 June 2016 10: 42 New
    +6
    Quote: Paul1
    Hydrogen is expensive to obtain, expensive to store and expensive to use. In addition, hydrogen is unsafe. Hydrogen seeps through the walls of the tanks.

    1. The cost of electrolytic production of hydrogen is quite acceptable, in any case, not higher than that of other types of fuel (or not by much). In addition, hydrogen in large quantities is formed as a by-product in a number of electrolytic industries. If you properly organize its collection and disposal, you can save healthy.

    2. Yes, hydrogen has a malicious ability to penetrate almost any wall. You can’t do anything, small size and weight ... But you can also fight this, for example, get it only immediately before use. Of course, this will not work for a long flight, but you can use it for launches from the Earth.

    3. What is "expensive to use", I do not quite understand.

    4. Yes, hydrogen is explosive. However, like any fuel. What can you do, fuel MUST burn. So security measures must be applied in any case.
    1. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 11: 48 New
      +3
      Quote: Alex
      The cost of electrolytic production of hydrogen is quite acceptable, in any case, not higher than that of other types of fuel (or not by much). In addition, hydrogen in large quantities is formed as a by-product in a number of electrolytic industries. If you properly organize its collection and disposal, you can save healthy.

      Quote: Alex
      . What is "expensive to use", I do not quite understand.

      Delta IV Heavy, as of 2016, has the largest output payload among all operational launch vehicles in the world. In 2015, the cost of launching the Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle was about $ 400 million [3].

      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%82%D0%B0-4
      fly to Amerof’s health a lot of money ...
      1. Alex
        Alex 25 June 2016 15: 04 New
        +3
        Well, I read the article about Delta 4 twice, thanks, repetition - the mother of learning. But what does the launch cost and the cost of hydrogen have to do with it. I’m not an economist and I didn’t do space flight economics (although I guess that it was a lot of money), but you could just bring the economic parameters to launch on different LVs: fuel costs, maintenance, equipment depreciation, insurance, payload weight, etc. . Then there will be a substantive conversation.
    2. Orionvit
      Orionvit 25 June 2016 12: 21 New
      +5
      4. Yes, hydrogen is explosive. However, like any fuel. What can you do, fuel MUST burn. So security measures must be applied in any case.
      It is clear that hydrogen is the most energy-intensive fuel, only a tank is needed for kerosene, when hydrogen requires a whole range of cryogenic plants, both for production and storage. Liquid oxygen also needs plants, but its temperature is almost a hundred degrees higher, which creates an order of magnitude less problems.
      1. Alex
        Alex 25 June 2016 15: 11 New
        +1
        Quote: Orionvit
        hydrogen requires a whole range of cryogenic plants, both for production and storage.
        Of course, liquefied gas and liquid are quite different things. But all these issues have long been resolved and technical methods and solutions worked out. Yes, this, of course, is money and unnecessary trouble, but if the benefits obtained prevail, then why not?

        At one time, they worked at a chemical department with liquefied gases. Yes, nitrogen did not cause much trouble, and with helium and hydrogen had to fool, but certainly not an order of magnitude.
  • Uralets
    Uralets 25 June 2016 15: 32 New
    +5
    Or maybe you should do without cheers-patriotism and hatred? It is worth recognizing that the United States has opportunities for this. And certainly more than ours, unfortunately. Rogozin can tongue-and-groove only with his tongue.
    1. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 15: 37 New
      -2
      Quote: Uralets
      Admittedly, the United States has opportunities for this.


      they don’t have their own brains, but they work well, where the Jews work ...
  • Beefeater
    Beefeater 25 June 2016 21: 07 New
    -2
    and how they flew to the moon, tell me, I do not know
  • tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 26 June 2016 12: 13 New
    0
    heptyl which on our engines is toxic worse than mustard gas.
  • Combitor
    Combitor 26 June 2016 08: 17 New
    +3
    We’ll talk to you when we see which taxiways the Americans fly to Mars. And will they fly?
    Do not count your chickens before they are hatched.
  • Finches
    Finches 25 June 2016 08: 25 New
    15
    The first lunar landing, when the aggregate created by human genius (Luna-2) reached the nearest space object to us, just think about it - in 1959, in the 65th we landed on Venus (Venus-3) for the first time, in 1971 - the first soft landing on Mars (Mars -3)! By the way, I am proud to note that the Soviet human genius did all this ... 50 years have passed, not we, not the Americans, have not made any significant breakthrough in the field of astronautics ... It is especially insulting for us - nothing special has been created yet - we still live in this industry on the basis of Korolev came to life! I think if he didn’t die suddenly - we would have already walked on Mars ... So it turns out that Russia needs only one thing to solve this problem, for the second Korolev to be born! But, unfortunately, even with the decree of GDP, it will not work...
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 11: 17 New
      +3
      Quote: Finches
      ), in 1971 - the first soft landing on Mars (Mars -3)! By the way, I am proud to note that the Soviet human genius did all this ...

      The world's first soft landing of a descent vehicle on Mars and the only one in Soviet cosmonautics. Data transmission from the automatic Martian station began 1,5 minutes after its landing on the surface of Mars, but stopped after 14,5 seconds. hi
      1. Finches
        Finches 25 June 2016 12: 03 New
        +6
        This does not detract from the merits of our engineers, especially considering that it was the 71st year! hi
        1. Orionvit
          Orionvit 25 June 2016 12: 47 New
          +6
          For americophiles, who generously throw minuses to sober-minded people, I will say that flying to the moon, even with the current development of technology, is very problematic, especially in the late 60s. If the USSR, which was in space ahead of the rest of the planet, could not send a manned ship to the moon, then no one could. And please do not rub American bikes, or else tell us about the evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. All American evidence of flying to the moon is sewn with white thread, and besides questions nothing arises. NASA's answer is interesting, like go all the way away, there were all here. But they took and re-shot all the "moon clips". And where is 400kg. lunar soil, which supposedly was and suddenly disappeared somewhere?
          1. RedBaron
            RedBaron 25 June 2016 16: 12 New
            -4
            so it’s sewn that all the Soviet comonauts recognize - they were there, you want to say, they are liars? Yes, you're just an eccentric letter M.
            Quote: Orionvit
            For americophiles, who generously throw minuses to sober-minded people, I will say that flying to the moon, even with the current development of technology, is very problematic, especially in the late 60s. If the USSR, which was in space ahead of the rest of the planet, could not send a manned ship to the moon, then no one could. And please do not rub American bikes, or else tell us about the evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. All American evidence of flying to the moon is sewn with white thread, and besides questions nothing arises. NASA's answer is interesting, like go all the way away, there were all here. But they took and re-shot all the "moon clips". And where is 400kg. lunar soil, which supposedly was and suddenly disappeared somewhere?
            1. Orionvit
              Orionvit 25 June 2016 17: 36 New
              +2
              RedBaron you look at your epaulette, a commentator horseradish. Got it out.
            2. Orionvit
              Orionvit 25 June 2016 18: 23 New
              +4
              The astronauts are military and forced people, they gave the oath. What will be ordered. they will speak. But in the states, mortality among astronauts of the lunar program is many times higher than the usual statistics in this group. And this is without spaceflight, just on earth. There are many questions, no answers.
          2. Beefeater
            Beefeater 25 June 2016 21: 22 New
            -5
            Quote: Orionvit
            For americophiles, who generously throw minuses to sober-minded people, I will say that flying to the moon, even with the current development of technology, is very problematic, especially in the late 60s. If the USSR, which was in space ahead of the rest of the planet, could not send a manned ship to the moon, then no one could. And please do not rub American bikes, or else tell us about the evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. All American evidence of flying to the moon is sewn with white thread, and besides questions nothing arises. NASA's answer is interesting, like go all the way away, there were all here. But they took and re-shot all the "moon clips". And where is 400kg. lunar soil, which supposedly was and suddenly disappeared somewhere?

            Listen to the sober-minded, the USSR was 10 years behind America. Interestingly, the USSR can provide evidence of visits to the moon by automatic stations, soil, details of station blocks, everything must have been stolen and sold out for a long time.
            1. bastard
              bastard 26 June 2016 01: 25 New
              +4
              Quote: Beefeater
              Listen to sober, the USSR was 10 years behind America.

              Just blow in order. True, this must be read, these are not videos that are easier to watch for a modern young man.

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st103.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st104.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st105.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st106.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st107.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st108.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st9a.htm

              http://leonidkonovalov.ru/meeting/moon/?ELEMENT_ID=516

              http://andrew-vk.narod.ru/public/Apollo_FCS/fcs.html

              http://usa-moon.ru/

              http://ffke1975.narod.ru/s/s8/s84/moon_base-2.htm

              http://ffke1975.narod.ru/s/s8/s84/moon_base.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/book/3.htm

              http://www.manonmoon.ru/book/27.htm

              I’ll put a plus sign to attract your attention.
              Enough for now, although I'm more than sure that you will not read. There are still materials on radiation, but it’s quite complicated in places to set out, the site is occupied by biophysicists, biologists and physicians, radiologists and other astronomers and nuclear physicists, who will probably be uninteresting to you.
            2. Orionvit
              Orionvit 26 June 2016 22: 23 New
              +2
              When did the USSR lag behind the states in space? Wake up. As for the evidence, the USSR, unlike the states, before launching the lunar rovers, specifically asked the largest English observatory to track the devices and provided elements of the orbit. This is what no one would have questions. While the states did everything quietly, and everyone should take their word for it. Our lunar soil was brought by automatic stations, though not much, unlike the United States, which for some reason does not have the declared 400 kg. Where is he?
  • sherp2015
    sherp2015 25 June 2016 10: 07 New
    0
    Quote: Kombitor
    And on what rocket engines did they gather there?
    Maybe to cover a bench?

    What for?
    Let them spend money on this long-term event
    Engines to sell more expensive))
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 25 June 2016 11: 39 New
    +1
    And the question involuntarily arises: does Russia really have no such strategic interests that can be realized with the help of a project worth two Sochi Olympics?

    The question is provocative. The flight to Mars is certainly cool, but on our earth, in our country, there are many financial holes that need to be shut up as soon as possible. Such projects can be moved when the economy settles down, is protected from recessions and is not much affected by fluctuations in markets and hydrocarbon prices.
    And so, Americans rush about, and I want to cut it and for one distract public opinion.
    1. RedBaron
      RedBaron 25 June 2016 16: 14 New
      -5
      Quote: GSH-18
      And the question involuntarily arises: does Russia really have no such strategic interests that can be realized with the help of a project worth two Sochi Olympics?

      The question is provocative. The flight to Mars is certainly cool, but on our earth, in our country, there are many financial holes that need to be shut up as soon as possible. Such projects can be moved when the economy settles down, is protected from recessions and is not much affected by fluctuations in markets and hydrocarbon prices.
      And so, Americans rush about, and I want to cut it and for one distract public opinion.

      Yeah. Both the Olympics and the World Cup on hootball confirm this. Solid holes.
  • Pitot
    Pitot 25 June 2016 12: 39 New
    +4
    In-in, and then flew to the moon, but here on the ISS can not ..... liars-earplugs
  • atakan
    atakan 25 June 2016 14: 18 New
    +2
    And on what rocket engines did they gather there?

    This is definitely urapatriotism. And this is definitely not patriotism.
    How sad that this argument (about engines) is repeating and repeating;
    When they’ll do it, they’ll pay more, work longer and fly.
    Or imitate the flight.
    - a possible example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxVvtJnndAY
    Astronaut on Mars? Where is the rover actually?
  • Vadim237
    Vadim237 25 June 2016 15: 05 New
    +2
    This is our shop being prepared to be closed - Roscosmos rules.
  • Beefeater
    Beefeater 25 June 2016 21: 06 New
    0
    they have engines.
    After all, they flew on something delivering their rovers
    1. bastard
      bastard 26 June 2016 03: 13 New
      +1
      Quote: Beefeater
      After all, they flew on something delivering their rovers

      Are the rovers there? Or . . .
      I do not believe the world empire of lies, I am an unbeliever.
      1. Come on
        Come on 26 June 2016 04: 17 New
        +3
        Yes, yes, they were neither on the Moon, nor on Mars, they did not throw any rovers. And indeed the earth is flat, stands on three pillars ..
      2. askold
        askold 26 June 2016 05: 03 New
        +1
        Just the opposite, a BELIEVE in MISLEADINGS!
    2. Orionvit
      Orionvit 28 June 2016 08: 43 New
      0
      Mars rover, this is not a habitable module, with all the problems that must be solved for the survival of astronauts in an aggressive environment. There are fewer problems, and the mass is an order of magnitude smaller. for the gullible, link. https: //www.youtube.com/watch? v = iY2Dfx2pxu8
  • Simple
    Simple 25 June 2016 21: 31 New
    +2
    Definitely not ours.
    They are not intended for SLS.
    The booster from the shuttle, the rest are hydrogen. Mask on methane + O2
  • joopel
    joopel 26 June 2016 00: 41 New
    +1
    The language of pin.do.sa masters of space diving. Their dubious lunar epic causes painful distrust. They lied for good. The curiosity has nothing to do with batteries, just a perpetum mobile. Laughter, and nothing more. What the hell is Mars?
    1. askold
      askold 26 June 2016 05: 59 New
      +7
      Well, why the language? And the Big Tour project, executed in the 70s, using two Voyager spacecraft, and the Pioneer probes launched before it, the pursuit of the Messenger probe Mercury, the flight of the Cassini interplanetary station in the vicinity of Saturn, scanning the planet Venus with a probe “Magellan”, rigorous research of Mars with the landing of Mars rovers on the planet’s surface, research of the largest objects of the asteroid belt Ceres and Vesta by the probe “Dawn”, 9-year flight of the probe “New Horizons” to the dwarf planet Pluto.
      Deep space exploration generally astonishes the Hubble, Compton, Chandra, Spitzer, and Kepler space observatories. Where, according to the statement of the academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, doctor of physical and mathematical sciences, professor Lev Zeleny, we do not have it at all! There are NO achievements, it is the Americans and Europeans who work, this is the area of ​​search for the EXOPLANET, the planetary systems of other stars.
      And you say, in language ...
      1. askold
        askold 26 June 2016 06: 29 New
        +3
        ... And even while we are pressing the keys here, the American probe "Juno" flies in the system of Jupiter, which will begin the exploration of the planet on July 4.
    2. Tsoy
      Tsoy 27 June 2016 10: 37 New
      0
      Quote: joopel
      straight perpetum mobile.


      Oh my God, he also has no solar panels !!! Hollywood is one hundred percent. INFA checked.

      Energy does not end possible because the rover Riteg installed? Not? Total onboard 4,8 kg of plutonium 238, packed in 32 ceramic granules. From the produced 2 kW of heat it produces 125 W (0.16 hp). For the Martian day, the rover generates the 2,5 kWh.
  • tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 26 June 2016 12: 11 New
    +1
    Yeah, they already flew to the moon in the pavilion)))
  • Andrey Petrov47
    Andrey Petrov47 27 June 2016 01: 44 New
    +1
    On the same one that flew to the moon in a Hollywood studio!
  • volodya
    volodya 25 June 2016 07: 08 New
    0
    They now fly on our engines!
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 16 New
      0
      Atlas 5 and Antares missiles fly on ours.
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 25 June 2016 07: 12 New
    0
    Good review, especially recommend to fans of "trampolines" and "they were not there" hi
    1. 0255
      0255 25 June 2016 08: 21 New
      -4
      Quote: Bayonet
      Good review, especially recommend to fans of "trampolines" and "they were not there" hi

      Urya-patriots will still say that it’s all cut the dough, that nothing will work out for stupid pindosov, if the flight to Mars takes place, they will say that all photos and videos from Mars are Photoshop and Hollywood shooting lol
      1. Come on
        Come on 26 June 2016 04: 19 New
        -4
        Quote: 0255
        they’ll say that all photos and videos from Mars are Photoshop and Hollywood shoots


        So read the comments, they already say! They’re fools laughing
    2. Streich
      Streich 25 June 2016 09: 28 New
      +2
      As for the amers on the moon. The fact that they were not there is no longer a secret, if you have doubts about this account, then take a calculator and just calculate how much time is needed for one photo frame. According to NASA published 5771 photos - the time of stay on the moon 4834 minutes. I'm not talking about their pots and how they alive crossed the Van Alen belt.
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 25 June 2016 09: 30 New
        +1
        They flew 6 times! Total Stay Over 297 Hours! fellow
        How to overcome, calmly flew by. Well, how much dose in sievert does an astronaut in a Van Alen belt receive per day (Imagine they stopped smoking there, and didn’t fly quickly)
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 21 New
        -7
        They were there and it has already been proved - proof is present on all landing videos, namely the movement of the lunar soil from the shoes of astronauts - in terrestrial conditions this cannot be removed.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 10: 26 New
          -2
          Yes, let’s better argue with Putin.
          http://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/20110801190401.shtml
          01.08.2011/19/04, Moscow 01:11:2001 Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin considers the version that the USA organized explosions September 2011, 11 to be "complete nonsense". by the forces of their special services or falsified the landing on the moon. He made such a statement today during a conversation with participants in the Seliger 2001 youth forum. Answering a question about the possible falsification of the landing of American astronauts on the moon, V. Putin recalled that, according to some, the events of September XNUMX, XNUMX. also falsified and "the Americans themselves blew up the towers." "This is complete nonsense, this is impossible," he said, emphasizing that he considers this event a tragedy for the American people and the whole world. He also suggested that only people who are unfamiliar with the nature of the activities of special services can put forward such versions, and assured that “for technological reasons” it is impossible to hide such facts, since too many people are involved. Vladimir Putin noted that he could not suggest that any of the current or former leaders of the United States would "come to mind." The same applies to landing on the moon - it is impossible to fake an event of this magnitude, the prime minister noted.
      3. Bayonet
        Bayonet 25 June 2016 11: 29 New
        +3
        Quote: Streich
        The fact that they were not there is no longer a secret, if you have doubts about this account, then take a calculator and just count

        I will give you an arithmetic meter! Continue your noble work, expose the adversary! wassat laughing
      4. Beefeater
        Beefeater 25 June 2016 21: 25 New
        -2
        Quote: Streich
        As for the amers on the moon. The fact that they were not there is no longer a secret, if you have doubts about this account, then take a calculator and just calculate how much time is needed for one photo frame. According to NASA published 5771 photos - the time of stay on the moon 4834 minutes. I'm not talking about their pots and how they alive crossed the Van Alen belt.

        When mastering the engine, there were great doubts about overcoming the speed limit of 40 km per hour. Oddly enough, everything turned out fine
  • 1536
    1536 25 June 2016 08: 06 New
    0
    Flight of Americans to Mars, alas, will not be any step of all mankind to progress. In the 1933-1945 years, the Germans also dreamed of flying into space in order to establish their Reich there.
    1. 0255
      0255 25 June 2016 08: 23 New
      +2
      Quote: 1536
      Flight of Americans to Mars, alas, will not be any step of all mankind to progress. In the 1933-1945 years, the Germans also dreamed of flying into space in order to establish their Reich there.

      But is it nothing that technology has changed many times since 1933-1945? And how is Roskosmos doing with the flight to Mars?
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 25 June 2016 08: 38 New
        -2
        What is Mars? Roads and infrastructure need to be updated, but they dream of Mars.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 10: 10 New
          0
          Also say that roads in the USA are bad wassat
          1. RedBaron
            RedBaron 25 June 2016 16: 17 New
            -5
            Quote: BlackMokona
            Also say that roads in the USA are bad wassat

            In a city of healthy apples are just disgusting.
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 25 June 2016 10: 01 New
      +6
      Now everything rests on the economy, and earlier on politics. That is, before, there were lines, the first in orbit, the first docking, the first multi-seat ship, the first spacewalk, the first lunar landing, etc. The main thing is the first.

      Now, the main question is - Why? NASA's budgets were cut. From the frontiers space exploits left. The global goal for which you can knock something out is the second Earth. unattainable at the current and foreseeable level of technology, although second Earths themselves can already determine.

      The economy - even the Moon and nearby asteroids for another decades, but rather a century will be unprofitable in terms of economic component (that is, it is more expensive to transport than to mine / synthesize / manage on earth).


      On the other hand, a breakthrough in electronics, robotics and autonomous systems, allows you to explore the entire solar system, which is now actively engaged. The same Cassini-Huygens - gave science a huge amount of knowledge and made several coups in the concept of the Solar System. Again, New Horizons, just started its mission, and already gave a huge array of food for scientists and a little broke the recognized model of the formation of the Solar System.
  • Dim Bes
    Dim Bes 25 June 2016 08: 10 New
    +1
    Or maybe it's the new Star Wars? Of course, one must take into account the "exclusivity" of this country, and, as a consequence, the need to be an "eternal leader." But as an option at the same time and economically drive the "competitor", why not?
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 08: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: Dim Bes
      to be the "eternal leader."

      And what about this? Not striving, not striving and will not strive? wink As far as I remember, they always tried to be "ahead of the rest!" hi
  • anfil
    anfil 25 June 2016 08: 12 New
    -2
    Mission to Mars will provide US space leadership


    With two hands I am FOR, under one condition, to collect the whole 3,14ndosovskoy elite and let Martians be depicted on Mars. For the sake of this case, and engines can be allocated free of charge.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 25 June 2016 08: 28 New
      +2
      Quote: anfil
      For the sake of this case, and engines can be allocated free of charge.
      To select them, you must have them.
      And until 2025, the design of a superheavy topic was suspended (only scientific research).
    2. Sobol
      Sobol 25 June 2016 12: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: anfil

      With two hands I am FOR, under one condition, to collect the whole 3,14ndosovskoy elite and let Martians be depicted on Mars. For the sake of this case, and engines can be allocated free of charge.

      I think the Martians (real) will be strongly opposed! laughing
      1. bastard
        bastard 26 June 2016 02: 13 New
        +5
        Quote: anfil
        With two hands I am FOR, under one condition, to collect the whole 3,14ndosovskoy elite and let Martians be depicted on Mars. For the sake of this case, and engines can be allocated free of charge.

        Quote: SoboL
        I think the Martians (real) will be strongly opposed!
  • gg.na
    gg.na 25 June 2016 08: 13 New
    0
    Barack Obama back in 2010. Then he outlined to NASA the following plan of action: by 2025, make a manned flight to an asteroid nearby Earth, in the mid-2030s - to Mars, after which a landing mission will follow. For now, it can be said that NASA as a whole is meeting its schedule. At the same time, the agency does not plan to simply fly around the Red Planet, but to visit its natural satellite Phobos.

    wassat Oh well!!! laughing Gee-gee-gee laughing Oh well!!! Dreaming is not harmful, it is harmful not to dream! bully
    1. Come on
      Come on 26 June 2016 04: 27 New
      -1
      Dream? They actually work on this topic in full, and a lot of things have already been implemented. I don’t understand what your “gee-gee-well-to-dream” is based on?
  • ZU-23
    ZU-23 25 June 2016 08: 17 New
    +4
    Hollywood has not yet created such perfect graphics. laughing
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 24 New
      -2
      The flight will be online - you won’t be able to cheat.
  • B-15
    B-15 25 June 2016 08: 18 New
    18
    US engines can do in 5-10 years. And no one can say that they will not be able to launch rockets to assemble the Martian ship. Even at a tenfold price, but without us. They will print money.
    But, in VO, no one pays attention to a completely different, more critical element of the ship for flight. This is a commonplace life support system. Not a single country has repeated our Electron. And Electron-B is the only unit that has passed the FULL resource test cycle.
    Without our life support system, competitors will have to take more than one ship with them with water and air supplies. It turns out that all the indicated number of starts is required to be increased several times.
    Of course, the Americans jumped. And they even did something. But they could not do key filtering. Their module on the ISS is cleaned by our unit.
    Why is this so critical? Yes, very simple. Without us, not one earthly ship could last longer than 90 weeks in space in the 2s. Now the United States may be able to increase this period by two times. But not more.
    All the rest are far behind.
    It remains only to say thanks to the developer of the system - Vasily Nikitich. Bright memory to him.
    PS. And you are all engines, engines. repeat
    Pss. Although our future engine for interplanetary flights will also pose a headache to our first partners. And this is a sharp reduction in the path to Mars.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 08: 35 New
      -2
      Quote: B-15
      Although our future engine for interplanetary flights will also pose a headache to our first partners.

      Does it make sense to talk about the consequences of what is not yet? fellow Funny, really!
      1. B-15
        B-15 25 June 2016 08: 38 New
        +4
        Electric motors were always on top. And Sarov has enough resources to make it.
        Therefore, my statements are no less weighty than the US statements about the creation of their engines.
        Do you disagree? Then the arguments, please.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 25 June 2016 13: 41 New
          +1
          Quote: B-15
          Do you disagree? Then the arguments, please.

          That's when I read or hear in the media the TASS message - "A Russian spacecraft with fundamentally new engines launched to the planet Mars!" Then I will rejoice good fellow In the meantime, wait modestly. hi
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 25 June 2016 16: 04 New
            -5
            Quote: Bayonet
            That's when I read or hear in the media the TASS message - "A Russian spacecraft with fundamentally new engines launched to the planet Mars!" Then I will rejoice

            Russophobes minus! They do not want to hear about our successes in space exploration!laughing
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 08: 59 New
      0
      Do they have life support systems, or do you think they worked on Skylab and flew to the moon? laughing
      1. Forever so
        Forever so 25 June 2016 10: 19 New
        +4
        Are you talking about the last case when they pissed the ISS ??
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 10: 23 New
          0
          Aw, Skylab, where does the ISS? On the ISS Russian toilets are wink
          1. Forever so
            Forever so 25 June 2016 22: 26 New
            +2
            So they broke the Russian and in their compartment, ran to ours, right there a whole opera about this was recently))
            1. Come on
              Come on 26 June 2016 04: 38 New
              +1
              So what? Maybe enough already how envious women react? It’s bl .. they supposedly didn’t fly to the Moon, it turns out that they didn’t send anything to Mars, but they probably shot pictures from Mars in one of the Hollywood pavilions, where they’ve already shot a flight to the Moon, then according to some they’re not able to do rocket engines, but what engines, cosmic toilets! It would seem that, well, there cannot be many such d. & 53e6§ + .., but judging by the number of minuses that are closer to reality, comments and pluses for outright nonsense, apparently everything is very sad ..
        2. bastard
          bastard 26 June 2016 03: 16 New
          +1
          Quote: Forever so
          Are you talking about the last case when they pissed the ISS ??

          It was necessary for the yaranga, to the tundra. (there is such a joke)
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 26 New
      0
      "US engines can do in 5-10 years" - The engines they have already been created and in serial production.
    4. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 15: 45 New
      +1
      Quote: B-15
      US engines can do in 5-10 years.


      and where do you think? from today? why don’t the Americans take care of this minor problem yesterday, that is. They didn’t need an engine before, but now they need it? What happened? and WHERE F1?
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 25 June 2016 15: 48 New
        0
        F-1 in the museum

        Now there are better engines. wink
      2. bastard
        bastard 26 June 2016 03: 19 New
        +2
        Quote: Paul1
        and WHERE F1?

        So, in theory, a modernized F1-B or -D, or even -Zh, should already be.
      3. Come on
        Come on 26 June 2016 04: 41 New
        +2
        You so sincerely believe that the Americans do not know how to do the engines themselves? It never occurred to you that these Soviet engines are simply cheaper for any commercial cargo?
        1. Tsoy
          Tsoy 27 June 2016 10: 48 New
          0
          Quote: Yeah, well.
          Soviet engines are just cheaper for all sorts of commercial goods?


          OAO NPO Energomash sold Russian RD-180 rocket engines in the United States for half of their production costs. Sergei Ryabukhin, an auditor of the Accounts Chamber (SP) of the Russian Federation, told reporters, the joint venture came to this conclusion as a result of an audit of the research and production association.

          http://forums.airbase.ru/2011/05/t82074--sp-energomash-prodaval-raketnye-dvigate
          li-rd-180-v-ssha-za-p.html
  • vetor
    vetor 25 June 2016 08: 21 New
    0
    Yes, let the whole country fly there!
  • sabakina
    sabakina 25 June 2016 08: 26 New
    +4
    The moon was "painted", now Mars will be "painted", the painters are their mother.
  • BOB044
    BOB044 25 June 2016 08: 38 New
    +1
    Well, they flew to the moon. Then everything froze. So it will be with Mars. Yes, and this flight is problematic. So far they have no orbital stations and ships for remote flights, everything is somehow unclear. Speaking is easy, but realizing.
    1. Nekarmadlen
      Nekarmadlen 25 June 2016 22: 02 New
      +1
      But someone analyzed what significant growth of various promising industries (electronics, aerospace, chemical, and many others) caused the American lunar program? Americans think very well of money)))) I am for an international (including Russia and possibly China) expedition to Mars !!!!
      1. bastard
        bastard 26 June 2016 02: 24 New
        0
        Quote: Nekarmadlen
        But someone analyzed what significant growth of various promising sectors (electronics, aerospace, chemical, and many others) caused the American lunar program? Americans consider money very well

        here:
        http://www.manonmoon.ru/book/17.htm
        As for radio electronics and computer technology - a separate conversation. Raised this topic and in. Search through the archive.
        1. Come on
          Come on 26 June 2016 04: 47 New
          +2
          Yes, do not disgrace yourself you are already similar links! I don’t understand the motives for such shameful nonsense. For what? There are a lot of authoritative people, or rather the majority, somewhere around 99,99%, the majority, also from the space industry, who will only twist such nonsense at the temple. But some for some reason are more likely to believe all rogues and charlotans.
          1. bastard
            bastard 26 June 2016 11: 59 New
            +1
            Quote: Yeah, well.
            Yes, do not disgrace yourself you are already similar links!

            I see no reason for shame. But to you, dear, you should not be dishonored by making two spelling errors in a simple text. I think you were just in a hurry and accidentally pressed the wrong keys.
            Quote: Yeah, well.
            There are a lot of authoritative people, or rather the majority, somewhere around 99,99%, the majority, also from the space industry, who will only twist such nonsense at the temple.

            A community of people living according to tradition and reasoning according to authority qualifies as a crowd.
            Millions of flies cannot be wrong. This is about 99%.
            Quote: Yeah, well.
            some for some reason are more willing to believe all rogues and charlotans.

            Some people believe. Is there a god? Do telepathy or clairvoyance exist? Are there psychics? But is Chumak and Kashpirovsky all this true? And the “Battle of psychics” is a demonstration of the real capabilities of a person or just a show of crooks, swindlers and charlatans, which include the channel’s employees, a highly profitable watch, in which stupidly cut loot for advertising? Once again, millions of flies. . .
            Answering you, including one of your previous posts about a flat Earth, I’ll say that once the ideas about a flat Earth were considered quite scientific and beyond doubt.
            Aristotle, who lived 200 years after Pythagoras, having created his doctrine (with crystal heaven), thrown out of the system of the universe of the gods, immediately received a run over from the priests and was persecuted by them and the authorities. He died in a foreign land. Before the Renaissance, the authority of Aristotle was unquestioned.
            There were Aristarchus of Samos and Eratosthenes, Timocharis and Aristillus, Hipparchus, Ptolemy. . .
            And after the theologian Tertullian (c. 150-222gg .. BC. E.) writes, "After Christ, we do not need any curiosity, we do not need any research."
            Lucius Celius Firmian Lactantius (c. 250-330gg), who preached the imminent end of the world and the onset of the kingdom of God. He wrote about the creation of the world by God in 6 days and that the world is allowed to exist for 6000 years. In the courtyard was 5800, according to that chronology, according to Lactantius, the end of the world was to come in 200 years.
            Byzantine merchant Kozma Indikoplov, gave up trade and became a learned monk. His "Christian Topography" describes the Earth as a chest without a lid, etc.
            These historical figures were once indisputable and indisputable authorities. Be sure, I have something to tell you, but there is no way. But there is traced the transformation of the consciousness of mankind. hi
            Sorry for the tedious and incomplete presentation of thoughts.
    2. sabakina
      sabakina 25 June 2016 22: 14 New
      +4
      Quote: BOB044
      Well, they flew to the moon. Then everything froze. So it will be with Mars. Yes, and this flight is problematic. So far they have no orbital stations and ships for remote flights, everything is somehow unclear. Speaking is easy, but realizing.

      With Hollywood, you can fly at least to Alpha Centauri ...
  • Private27
    Private27 25 June 2016 08: 45 New
    +2
    Quote: Bayonet
    Quote: B-15
    Although our future engine for interplanetary flights will also pose a headache to our first partners.

    Does it make sense to talk about the consequences of what is not yet? fellow Funny, really!

    Do Americans really have a ready engine for flying to Mars? belay
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 08: 56 New
      -6
      Yes, they have an almost heavy carrier, and in addition, SpaceX is working on another project.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 30 New
        +1
        SpaceX is working on a variety of missile projects, including superheavy rockets with a payload of 400 tons.
      2. Alex
        Alex 25 June 2016 10: 54 New
        10
        Quote: BlackMokona
        Yes, they have an almost heavy carrier, and in addition, SpaceX is working on another project.

        So “IS”, or “almost ready” and “still working”? And then, you know, there is often an abyss between these concepts. And often, irresistible.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 12: 46 New
          0
          They are now in serial operation of the heaviest LV in the world. The first SLS launch is scheduled for 2018.
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 25 June 2016 10: 08 New
      +5
      SLS are warming up (PC-25 and Boosters), will fly soon (2018).

      On them they in space in L2 will collect the Martian ship from the modules and fly. So far, such a plan.

    3. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 13: 46 New
      +3
      Quote: Private27
      Do Americans really have a ready engine for flying to Mars?

      And on what the hell are they launching probes there on "trampolines"? A new ship and engines will be created for the manned mission, the process is ongoing. Soon SLS will fly, do not hesitate hi
  • Blackmokona
    Blackmokona 25 June 2016 08: 47 New
    0
    1. Laughs at the announcement of the F-35 aircraft of the 6th generation.
    only a small part of the amount spent on the development and production of the sixth generation fighter F-35
    2. The data on Falcon-9 are also very outdated.
    PS: They have Delta, Falcon-9, Taurus, Minotaur, on their engines, plus the development of SLS, Falcon Heavy, MCT on their engines.
  • Tsoy
    Tsoy 25 June 2016 09: 33 New
    +3
    good article without juggling. The main question was to protect against hard cosmic radiation, well, if they say that you can fly, then you can. There are still many problems, for example, the landing system has failed for the second time, but sooner or later it will be brought to mind, especially since 20 has years of work ahead. Orion has already flown once, the SLS engines have already passed the hot tests. The only thing that is not clear how the residential module for a flight to Mars will look like. For the United States, this is really a matter of prestige, and if anyone can fly to the red neighbor, then this is NASA, if not to regret it.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 09: 37 New
      0
      By 2018, the first prototype should be done.
      http://interes-news.ru/nasa-stroit-zhiloj-modul-dlya-glubokogo-kosmosa/
      1. Tsoy
        Tsoy 25 June 2016 10: 32 New
        0
        I think they will use the developments according to the technology of the BEAM module. On the ISS, this module has already been inflated. Although this is a private project, the prospects are very large.
  • 56_br
    56_br 25 June 2016 09: 44 New
    +5
    The American flight to Mars will be carried out exactly according to the SCENARIO of flight to the MOON.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 33 New
      0
      There will be a completely different flight scenario.
  • Forever so
    Forever so 25 June 2016 10: 17 New
    +5
    The United States is working on sending a full-fledged manned expedition to Mars.

    Translating into Russian, another polygon is being built in the Mojave Desert, now Martian, from where the Most Real photographs of Mars will be broadcast around the world.

    The elements of the Martian complex will be assembled in a bundle not in near-Earth orbit, but at the Lagrange point L-2. It is located one and a half million kilometers from Earth, behind the far side of the Moon, in 61 500. This point is considered an ideal place for the construction of space complexes, because it balances the forces of gravity of the Earth and the Sun, which provides a "construction site", which is practically not exposed to external gravitational effects. NASA calls the L-2 nothing more than a “test site”, emphasizing that not only the assembly will be carried out there, but also the testing of the Martian technology.

    And most importantly, you will not see from Earth in any telescope. But Hollywood will assure everyone by showing how brave guys in diapers first assemble their rocket, and then play golf on the Red Planet.
    yeah, America didn’t know such a grandiose drink from the Moon epic. And the engines they will probably do Ukrainians)) In principle, we are witnessing an attempt to identify the United States as full of energy and enthusiasm. But knowing the current situation both in the USA and in the world, we will be able to observe the process of self-determination.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 10: 45 New
      0
      But there are plenty of smartphones, webcams and everything else that all this art will be shot on and uploaded to the Internet for everyone to see, so creating a platform for filming on Earth is already a deliberate failure.
    2. Come on
      Come on 26 June 2016 04: 56 New
      +2
      Probably photos from the Hubla, as well as almost daily identifications of various "super Jupiters and super Earths" for hundreds and thousands of light years from the earth, it's just stupid risk-takers, a fiction .. And indeed NAZA is one of the Hollywood pavilions ..
  • Blackmokona
    Blackmokona 25 June 2016 10: 18 New
    0
    Quote: Forever so
    The United States is working on sending a full-fledged manned expedition to Mars.

    Translating into Russian, another polygon is being built in the Mojave Desert, now Martian, from where the Most Real photographs of Mars will be broadcast around the world.

    The elements of the Martian complex will be assembled in a bundle not in near-Earth orbit, but at the Lagrange point L-2. It is located one and a half million kilometers from Earth, behind the far side of the Moon, in 61 500. This point is considered an ideal place for the construction of space complexes, because it balances the forces of gravity of the Earth and the Sun, which provides a "construction site", which is practically not exposed to external gravitational effects. NASA calls the L-2 nothing more than a “test site”, emphasizing that not only the assembly will be carried out there, but also the testing of the Martian technology.

    And most importantly, you will not see from Earth in any telescope. But Hollywood will assure everyone by showing how brave guys in diapers first assemble their rocket, and then play golf on the Red Planet.
    yeah, America didn’t know such a grandiose drink from the Moon epic. And the engines they will probably do Ukrainians)) In principle, we are witnessing an attempt to identify the United States as full of energy and enthusiasm. But knowing the current situation both in the USA and in the world, we will be able to observe the process of self-determination.

    What a bad opinion of you about the Soviet and Russian space control means.
    1. Forever so
      Forever so 25 June 2016 22: 34 New
      +1
      Do you know how the leadership of the USSR believed in the flight of Americans to the moon ?? The Americans showed Mr. Leonov SCAFANDER, and on the basis of this, he concluded that if there is a spacesuit, then the Americans flew to the moon. As reported by the Central Committee of the CPSU. And today's lickers of the American anus from the Russian leadership will confirm that Obama personally flew to Mars in 15 minutes and ate a hamburger there. Here is the photo on Twitter. Maybe the instrument control itself is at altitude, but the lickers are at even greater altitude.
      1. Come on
        Come on 26 June 2016 04: 58 New
        +4
        Quote: Forever so
        The Americans showed Mr. Leonov SCAFANDER, and on the basis of this, he concluded that if there is a spacesuit, then the Americans flew to the moon. As reported by the Central Committee of the CPSU. And today's lickers of the American anus from the Russian leadership will confirm ...


        Leonov, in your opinion a stupid ram and anus lick of the USA? And who exactly are you to make such statements?
        1. askold
          askold 26 June 2016 09: 50 New
          0
          Thank you very much, I also wanted this freak, to remind about this!
        2. fzr1000
          fzr1000 26 June 2016 18: 23 New
          +2
          Leonov is engaged in banking advertisements and with Russian pseudo-emperors. So he’s stupid, and then draw your own conclusions.
  • avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 25 June 2016 10: 25 New
    +6
    Quote: Paul1
    you seemed to have fallen from the moon and about the fact that pin_day is deceiving the whole world, you have not even heard the type.

    Dear, if you follow your logic, then on the basis of one or two statements, we can conclude that Gagarin was not in space, by the way every American schoolchild knows this. No need to play down other people's successes and exaggerate their own. And so you can hell to agree.
  • Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 25 June 2016 11: 02 New
    -2
    In vain the penguins are in a hurry. There Dart Vader is sitting. And he is sent by Russia, Mordor. Suddenly he will start to drive the light forces of penguins all over Mars? May the force be with you.
  • Alex
    Alex 25 June 2016 11: 18 New
    +9
    the following plan of action: by 2025, make a manned flight to an asteroid close to Earth, in the middle of the 2030-s - to Mars, after which a landing mission will follow.
    Dream, dream ...

    18 tons of fuel will be required for the 33-ton take-off stage, and NASA intends to extract it from the carbon dioxide and water available on the Red Planet.
    This passage in general touched in full.
    First, on what equipment are they going to get this fuel? Will the chemical plant be dragged along? You can’t meet the tons in 20-30.
    Secondly, despite the fact that the atmosphere of Mars is almost pure carbon dioxide (95%), there is practically no water in it. There are no rivers on Mars either, so there will be a complete strain on the water. And given the pressure on the Mars, you will have to sweat with carbon dioxide.
    Thirdly, what kind of fuel can I get from CO2 and N2O - two OXIDATION products? The synthesis process is possible from a mixture of CO and H2 - a mixture of a reducing agent and unoxidized carbon. In principle, it is possible from carbon dioxide, but the costs are an order of magnitude higher, and the product yield lower. But where to get hydrogen? Of water? See secondly. And How? By electrolysis? Where is the energy? From the ship? Oh well...

    In general, the entire program is a very good example of blowing a soap bubble on the theme of "let's dream and expand cosmic perspectives in front of the wide-open eyes of the American layman." And if, through incredible tension and MANDATORY international cooperation, it will be possible to carry out a manned "round-trip" flight, then we can talk about landing, getting something out of "improvised Martian materials" and returning it back to speak infinitely early. However, Americans need to constantly create the appearance that they are now “ahead of the rest.”
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 11: 27 New
      -5
      You probably did not notice the news that liquid water was found on Mars. smile
      1. Days
        Days 25 June 2016 14: 39 New
        +6
        You probably read the news inattentively. There is no liquid water there, there is ice that melts in the warm season, and water from a crystalline state immediately boils and turns into steam at such a low pressure as in the atmosphere of Mars.

        This was recorded using spectral analysis and destabilization of hillsides, when evaporating water pushed sand and changed the slopes much more than liquid water could.
      2. Alex
        Alex 25 June 2016 15: 20 New
        +4
        Quote: BlackMokona
        You probably did not notice the news that liquid water was found on Mars.
        I don’t even want to discuss what you wrote nonsense: water cannot exist in a liquid state under the conditions of Mars (learn thermodynamics).

        But suppose it is there in abundance. Which is longer? For the rest, what do you say? Give the reaction equations for which fuel is obtained from carbon dioxide and water. I warn you right away - the process of Fischer-Tropsch and Bergius-Pyrrhus from the wrong opera.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 25 June 2016 15: 23 New
          -3
          There may even exist water vapor, you forgot about the pressure. laughing
        2. bastard
          bastard 26 June 2016 02: 44 New
          +3
          Quote: Alex
          I warn you right away - the process of Fischer-Tropsch and Bergius-Pyrrhus from the wrong opera.

          You’re breaking the guy’s brain now. Be careful, please. wassat
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 12: 56 New
      -4
      NASA is not the only one who puts skis on Mars - SpaceX also joined this race and most likely their ships will be there first - this company will launch its heavy rocket with a carrying capacity of 54 tons at the end of this year.
      1. Tsoy
        Tsoy 25 June 2016 14: 11 New
        0
        It will be fun. Americans will lose to Americans. At this, after all, dough is not sickly can be raised. Instead of the flag of the country, a flagpole with a Pepsi or Chanel banner will stand proudly on Mars. Gee. )
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 25 June 2016 14: 54 New
          0
          If Mask succeeds in landing his “Dragon” on Mars in 2018, then all the financing doors will open front and numerous investors from all over the world - interested in space exploration, will also be pulled.
          1. Pavel1
            Pavel1 25 June 2016 14: 58 New
            +3
            Quote: Vadim237
            If Mask succeeds in landing his Dragon on Mars in 2018,


            this prokhorov mask has already turned tesla, a new car ...
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 25 June 2016 15: 39 New
              -1
              As well as a high-speed train - Russia already decided to invest in it when submitting the Russian Railways, I have little doubt that Mask will manage to send and put the ship to Mars, in automatic mode - everything is almost ready for this.
              1. Pavel1
                Pavel1 25 June 2016 15: 47 New
                -1
                Quote: Vadim237
                I have little doubt that Mask will manage to send and


                Well, if you have no doubt about the mask, then of course ...
            2. Tsoy
              Tsoy 25 June 2016 17: 09 New
              0
              you have a strange timekeeping. Tesla appeared much earlier and, in contrast to Prokhorov, Musk brings his start-ups not only to one half-working sample, but also to mass production and commercial success. There is a difference between a balabol and a PR man on the one hand and a person who is really engaged in innovation.
              1. Pavel1
                Pavel1 25 June 2016 17: 43 New
                -1
                Quote: Choi
                Moa Musk brings her startups to more than just one half-worker


                he will be satisfied with startups, the criteria for a new car or electric car are the best performance and competitiveness, and his Tesla is expensive to buy and operate and is inferior to a car in operation, so people don’t take such cars.
                1. Tsoy
                  Tsoy 25 June 2016 18: 00 New
                  +5
                  do not take say ...

                  In the first quarter of the year, the 2013 sold copies of the Tesla Model S in the United States to the 4750. Thus, the model became the best-selling luxury sedan, outperforming, in particular, the Mercedes-Benz S-Class and BMW 7 series.

                  In total, 2014 31 cars were sold for 655. In 2015, there was an explosive surge of interest in the S model. Sales increased by 55% due to the support of European countries for electric cars. The entry of models X and 3 with a price of less than 36 for thousands of cars will allow entering the mass market.

                  And how many built E mobiles? One joke.
                  1. Pavel1
                    Pavel1 25 June 2016 18: 04 New
                    -6
                    Quote: Choi
                    In the first quarter of the year, the 2013 sold copies of the Tesla Model S in the United States to the 4750. Thus, the model became the best-selling luxury sedan, outperforming, in particular, the Mercedes-Benz S-Class and BMW 7 series.


                    Why Tesla will fail: Opinions of the former top manager of Chrysler, Ford and BMW and other experts

                    At the beginning of November 2015, electric car manufacturer Tesla published its next financial report for the third quarter of the year. According to this document, the company's net loss for the reporting period amounted to more than $ 229 million.

                    Inability to travel long distances without recharging, cheapening fuel and low demand for electric cars

                    According to an expert in the automotive industry, Tesla electric cars have many problems. They are not able to travel long distances without stopping to recharge

                    https://vc.ru/p/tesla-is-doomed
                    1. Tsoy
                      Tsoy 25 June 2016 18: 14 New
                      +2
                      power reserve 400 km. In countries with a developed infrastructure for electric vehicles, this is enough with a head. You can’t go out of town, but the S model is a luxury sedan. From the very announcement, all predict the death of the company, only every year sales are growing. With regards to losses, the fact is that the cars were sold at a loss. But initially, Tesla occupied a niche part of the market. With the advent of the crossover model, things will get better. The cost of charging the battery is approximately equal to a full tank of fuel, that's just zero exhaust. In Norway, for this extra pay even, so to speak for environmental friendliness.
                      1. Nekarmadlen
                        Nekarmadlen 25 June 2016 22: 31 New
                        +2
                        There were economic calculations that it’s cheaper to drive on electricity than on liquid fuel (gasoline or diesel fuel) plus the driver gets recharged during braking (recovery) ... So far the problem is that an electric car is much more expensive than a car with an internal combustion engine, it is difficult to operate in cold weather there isn’t enough infrastructure ... Although in Moscow there are sometimes Tesla roads (most likely they are bought by very wealthy people who have a country house and can arrange recharging at night and as an additional car - sp orthcar))) .... Prokhorov participated in the creation of the hybrid (e-mobile) and could not meet the stated prices (hybrid at the price of a regular car), plus the lack of experience in car production (Toyota produces quite competitive hybrids !!!) Friends ride on Prius and Hybrid Hybrid and terribly satisfied)))
                      2. Tsoy
                        Tsoy 26 June 2016 09: 40 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Nekarmadlen
                        Although in Moscow on the road Tesla sometimes found


                        In 2014, according to traffic police in Moscow, 80 auto tesla is registered.

                        With regards to operating temperatures. In Novosibirsk rides, you can find a video of how to start up after a night of parking on the street at strongly negative temperatures. In the same Norway, too, is not the equator.
                    2. bastard
                      bastard 26 June 2016 02: 55 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Choi
                      The cost of charging the battery is approximately equal to a full tank of fuel, only the exhaust is zero. In Norway, they pay extra for this, so to speak, for environmental friendliness.

                      Skoka Nuna burned in a furnace of firewood, oil, gas, fuel oil, oil shale, coal, etc. to get the amount of electricity needed to charge hundreds of thousands of batteries of these mobile phones (in the future)? About 80% email. The world's energy is generated at thermal power plants. In addition, converters, inverters and other stabilizer-rectifiers work with losses. What the hell is ecology?
                      Why don't ekolokhi ring the bell?
                    3. Come on
                      Come on 26 June 2016 05: 33 New
                      +3
                      First look at how Germany copes with shutting down nuclear power plants and how much% of all electricity is generated today by environmental energy sources like solar panels and windmills. When this started, many also laughed, saying that nothing will replace the nuclear power plant, but time has shown the opposite. In addition, there are such projects as, for example, the ability to supply energy extracted from sunlight at night, that is, without interruptions for day and night, for which the Germans received the Nobel Prize. Mass production of electric cars will reduce their cost to the level of cars with conventional engines, but operating costs will be less, since electric motors are more durable and simple mechanisms than internal combustion engines, very many side costs disappear. And the energy itself is being mined more and more in an ecological way. This is actually all in full swing, and not someone else's dreams. Those countries that overslept "green technology" in the future will be in a great span.
                    4. Tsoy
                      Tsoy 26 June 2016 09: 59 New
                      +2
                      Quote: villain
                      Order 80% email Energy in the world is produced at thermal power plants.


                      Year by year, this figure falls. In recent years, no nuclear power plant construction project has been approved in the USA. The share of green energy is growing. In Germany, 30% of all energy is produced by windmills and panels. After 10 years, this figure should be brought to 50. Texas has already reached this indicator.

                      Countries leading in the extraction of alternative energy.
                      Brazil 5%
                      China 7.6%
                      Spain 7.8%
                      Germany 11.7%
                      United States 24.7%

                      Of course, green energy has minuses. Like any solution. These include cost, payback, dependence on state subsidies, the requirement to alienate large areas of land, inconstancy and dependence on natural conditions. No wonder the largest operator of solar and wind power plants SunEdison announced its bankruptcy with a debt of 11 billion.
                    5. Pavel1
                      Pavel1 26 June 2016 12: 48 New
                      0
                      Russia continues to move in the direction of nuclear energy and there are reasons for it, namely, a new technology for the closed fuel cycle has been developed and is being implemented, spent uranium will serve as fuel for a new nuclear reactor
                      Brest ”is that revolutionary project. Work on it began back in the late 1980s. They are led by the famous developer of nuclear submarine systems at the Research Institute of Power Engineering (NIIET).

                      Advantages of the reactor:

                      - natural radiation safety in case of any possible accidents for internal and external reasons, including sabotage, which does not require evacuation of the population;
                      - long-term (almost unlimited in time) provision of fuel resources due to the efficient use of natural uranium;
                      - non-proliferation of nuclear weapons due to the exclusion of the production of weapons-grade plutonium and the substation implementation of dry fuel processing technology without separation of uranium and plutonium;
                      - environmental friendliness of energy production and waste disposal due to closure of the fuel cycle with transmutation and burning of actinides in the reactor, transmutation of long-lived fission products, purification of radioactive waste from actinides, aging and disposal of radioactive waste without disturbing the natural radiation balance;
                      - economic competitiveness due to the natural safety of nuclear power plants and fuel cycle technologies, the rejection of complex engineering safety systems, only 238U reactor replenishment, high lead parameters providing supercritical parameters of the steam-turbine circuit and high thermodynamic cycle efficiency, and cheaper construction.
                    6. Come on
                      Come on 26 June 2016 15: 14 New
                      -3
                      Nuclear energy is a dead end. This is not only dangerous, as disasters at nuclear power plants have shown, but there are also big problems with waste, or rather its storage. If everything is calculated, then nuclear energy comes out even more expensive than others. Siemens were leaders in nuclear technology, but decided to get out of this gesheft.
                    7. Days
                      Days 26 June 2016 17: 03 New
                      +2
                      Not developing nuclear energy is a dead end.

                      The fact that the FRG / GDR were occupied (and in fact this continues to this day) is the only reason why the development of nuclear energy is stalled in Germany. Nothing prevents the victorious countries in the Second World War from generating nuclear energy: France is 5 times larger than Germany, the United States 10 times larger than Germany.

                      The waste problem is perfectly solved by closed loop reactors, as already noted in the comments.

                      And finally, you can compare prices for the population: in Denmark and Germany they are the highest: http://www.riarating.ru/infografika/20151119/610681297.html. And all this happiness is subject to large subsidies for renewable energy producers.
                    8. Come on
                      Come on 26 June 2016 17: 35 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Dagen
                      The fact that the FRG / GDR were occupied (and in fact it still continues) is the only reason why the development of nuclear energy is stalling in Germany.


                      C'mon, and before the "Atomausstieg" adopted in the late 90s in your opinion there was no "occupation"? What does the "occupation" by the "victorious countries" have to do with this, the West has long since dealt with this topic. The reason for the rejection of nuclear weapons is the red-green government of Schroeder-Fischer, the Social Democrats and the greens. And of course, energy prices have risen, since it is necessary to somehow finance regenerative environmental energy. The problem of nuclear energy is accident rate, consequences of emergency and waste, which no one has decided. And when they talk about the supposedly lowest cost of nuclear power plants, for some reason they forget that the cost of storing waste is not included there and it is completely sub-compensated.

                      Quote: Dagen
                      The waste problem is perfectly solved by closed loop reactors, as already noted in the comments.


                      This is still a theory and has not been implemented anywhere. So what is the conversation about?

                      They cling, as they say, in the fall, so when the German government launched a program of regenerative, ecological electricity, there were a lot of skeptics. But now Germany is a leader in green technology, and with a wide margin, this is a huge market.

                      Why does France have a nuclear power plant? One of the reasons is the presence of nuclear weapons. Countries with nuclear weapons need reactors that, at least in the form of electricity, bring some kind of exhaust in financing.

                      And if you take Russia, then it is all the more incomprehensible to me why new NPPs are needed? All of Russia is dissected by rivers, in addition, there is a lot of free space that is needed for the construction of a hydroelectric power station. A hydroelectric power station, if done intelligently with modern and efficient generators, brings not only stable and a lot of energy, but also absolutely environmentally friendly. So why then need nuclear power plants in Russia?
                    9. Days
                      Days 27 June 2016 00: 40 New
                      +1
                      As Germany will be added to the permanent members of the UN Security Council, then they will sort it out.

                      Energy prices have risen due to renewable energy just. Let us turn again to the list of countries at the price of electricity for the population? Great Britain (with its almost complete generation of coal energy) and France (with its nuclear power plant) have lower prices. And this is considering that Germany produces 15 times more coal than Great Britain and France combined. And given Germany’s subsidization of its renewable energy producers. Leadership in green technologies cost Germany dearly; I would not like this for other countries. I mean an unjustified bias in the structure of power generation, and not a rejection of technology.

                      Seriously, not implemented anywhere? BN-600 of the eightieth year (in 1980 it reached full capacity) from parallel reality, apparently. And the BN-800, in April 2016, reached full capacity.

                      There is much more natural gas in Russia; it is cheaper to build thermal power plants than hydroelectric power stations, therefore in Russia gas thermal power plants make up the bulk of the generation. And renewable energy sources are also developing, but in those regions where it makes sense according to natural conditions, for example, in Crimea (and in), where a lot has been done over the past two years: after connecting the already built solar power station, the percentage of renewable energy will reach 50%.

                      I would call your rave reviews cheers-patriotism, but then you must be German ...
                  2. Tsoy
                    Tsoy 28 June 2016 07: 46 New
                    0
                    Quote: Dagen
                    The fact that the FRG / GDR were occupied (and in fact it still continues) is the only reason why the development of nuclear energy is stalling in Germany.


                    After Fukushima development will be gone. At least in Germany. Adopted a strategy of transition to clean energy. Year by year, the proportion of wind turbines increases. K 2025 want 50% needs to transfer to renewable.
            3. bastard
              bastard 27 June 2016 19: 38 New
              -1
              Quote: villain
              Order 80% email Energy in the world is produced at thermal power plants.

              Quote: Yeah, well.
              First look at how Germany copes with shutting down nuclear power plants and how much% of all electricity is generated today by environmental energy sources like solar panels and windmills.

              Quote: Choi
              From year to year, this figure is falling. In recent years, not a single nuclear power plant construction project has been approved in the United States. The share of green energy is growing.

              Guys! Can you read or what? I shaved you, but you shaved me. Where have I even halfheartedly hinted about the nuclear power plant, or are you holding me by and / dio? Put yourself in a bad position.
              Maybe you do not distinguish between the main types of power plants? Let's close this gap.
              HPP - hydroelectric power station
              PSPP - hydroaccumulating
              PES - tidal
              TPP - thermal
              Thermal Power Plants - Electricity Plants Generating Electricity + Heat
              State District Power Station - state district power plants. Or, as an option - a condensation power plant (IES) - a thermal power plant that produces only electrical energy
              NPP - nuclear
              AEC - atomic power station (heat + energy).
              There are varieties, but this is Google to help and do not mess up anymore.
            4. Tsoy
              Tsoy 28 June 2016 07: 43 New
              0
              I do not know how you read, but read the entire thread from the very beginning. You talked about "how much coal should be burned," no need to burn coal. You cited the example of CHP as an environmental pollutant for charging clean cars, you were given numbers for the amount of green energy, which seems to be better for ecology. What is not clear?
  • Come on
    Come on 26 June 2016 05: 18 New
    +2
    Quote: Paul1
    and his Tesla is expensive when buying and operating and is inferior to a car in the operation itself, so people don’t take such cars.


    Actually, there are so many orders for Tesla that they can’t cope with the products, it takes a very long time to wait. And according to their operational characteristics, the latest models have long caught up with conventional cars with internal combustion engines, as an example, the range of 600 km. But Tesla can at least be charged from the outlet, that is, in his garage ..
    1. Nekarmadlen
      Nekarmadlen 26 June 2016 08: 53 New
      +2
      Elon Musk is a kind of genius in innovative business ... Starting from scratch to produce an innovative product (electric cars) and achieve what much more experienced car manufacturers cannot provide is very powerful !!! Tesla model C is practically an analogue of the Porsche Panamera or BMW 6 series (close sizes, characteristics and image) and, moreover, an electric car !!!! Comparative tests and reviews were very flattering in the auto magazines .... Of course, the claimed power reserve (400-600), which seems to be close to the performance of a conventional car, is difficult to reach and it is much more difficult and longer to refuel, but there is a rather large niche of buyers which the car is suitable for they’re ready to buy))))) Let's see what Tesla does with a luxury crossover .... If you can create something close to the Audi Q7 or BMW X5, this will be a great achievement ...
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 25 June 2016 17: 11 New
    +1
    Quote: Vadim237
    If Musk succeeds in landing his Dragon on Mars in 2018, then all financing doors will open front and numerous investors from around the world will also be pulled

    And the local idiots will yell that Rogozin had to be hung for a long time! laughing
  • sa-ag
    sa-ag 25 June 2016 17: 16 New
    0
    Quote: Alex
    And How? By electrolysis? Where is the energy?

    Yes, by electrolysis, an RTG, an electrolyzer, a turboexpander, is brought with it, as a separate technical ship
    1. Alex
      Alex 25 June 2016 17: 39 New
      +4
      Quote: sa-ag
      Yes, by electrolysis, an RTG, an electrolyzer, a turboexpander, is brought with it, as a separate technical ship

      And to them a couple of dozen units of construction equipment and Rovshan with Dzhamshutom. And another ship with provisions for the whole horde in space and on Mars. In short, an entire expedition from a couple or two space caravels sets off for Mars.

      I’m reading all this and asking myself: maybe for a start one of the enthusiasts of this adventure - it doesn’t matter in which country and at what level they are - tried to organize all this here, somewhere on the islands or in the tundra? To deliver all this nonsense there, put people in spacesuits and forget about them for half a year - a year? Once Korolev suggested checking one of the biological blocks right in the field. The result was discouraging: judging by his testimony, there is no life on Earth. This means that everything is beautiful on paper and in the cinema, but in life, much more modest achievements turn out to be obtained through much more substantial efforts.
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 25 June 2016 17: 44 New
        -2
        Quote: Alex
        And to them a couple of dozen units of construction equipment and Rovshan with Dzhamshutom.

        Robotics and no ships with provisions for LSS and other toilets of the toilet type
        1. Alex
          Alex 25 June 2016 18: 16 New
          +4
          Quote: sa-ag
          Robotics and no ships with provisions for LSS and other toilets of the toilet type

          Are you kidding? Then it is clear. We are talking about a manned flight.
          1. bastard
            bastard 26 June 2016 03: 00 New
            +1
            Quote: Alex
            Quote: sa-ag
            Robotics and no ships with provisions for LSS and other toilets of the toilet type
            Are you kidding? Then it is clear. We are talking about a manned flight.

            Who gives raw materials a second time, he eats excellent! (with)

            And the piano there too. What is this life without a piano! (also (s))
          2. sa-ag
            sa-ag 26 June 2016 08: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: Alex
            Are you kidding? Then it is clear. We are talking about a manned flight.

            And why not to launch the equipment ship in parallel or forward of the manned ship? It would be strange to fly without such tools
            1. Alex
              Alex 26 June 2016 12: 39 New
              +2
              Quote: sa-ag
              And why not to launch the equipment ship in parallel or forward of the manned ship? It would be strange to fly without such tools

              Of course you can, one way or another. But this is no longer an attack on Mars a la John F. Kennedy, but a difficult and painstaking work for more than a dozen years. And before you start it, you need to clearly answer one question: what are we expecting from Mars and is it worth the effort? So far, an intelligible answer to this question has not been received even with respect to the Moon, and here a couple of difficulties are fewer orders of magnitude. In all this Obama's chatter, only the political context is clearly captured: we were the first on the Moon and will be the first on Mars. But doesn’t he wishful thinking?

              In matters of space exploration, I am both a pessimist and an optimist at the same time. I believe in the prophecies of Tsiolkovsky and Korolev that humanity must come out and come out of the cradle. But I know that this will take more than a dozen years, and even then, subject to close international cooperation. Currently, I see only new versions of smartphones and fabulous fees for football players against the background of ongoing conflicts and the burning of life of the oligarchs.
      2. Tsoy
        Tsoy 25 June 2016 18: 27 New
        +2
        Something similar has already happened. Mars series projects, most recent 500 Mars. 520 days in a confined space in the crew of 6 people.

        General view of the complex experiment.
      3. bastard
        bastard 26 June 2016 02: 58 New
        0
        Quote: Alex
        Quote: sa-ag
        Yes, by electrolysis, an RTG, an electrolyzer, a turboexpander, is brought with it, as a separate technical ship
        And to them a couple of dozen units of construction equipment and Rovshan with Dzhamshutom. And another ship with provisions for the whole horde in space and on Mars. In short, an entire expedition from a couple or two space caravels sets off for Mars.

        M-yes, one outhouse toilets here is not enough. The challenge! what
  • bastard
    bastard 26 June 2016 02: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: Alex
    Secondly, despite the fact that the atmosphere of Mars is almost pure carbon dioxide (95%)

    In addition, very discharged. The atmospheric pressure at the surface of Mars corresponds to the pressure of the Earth’s atmosphere at an altitude of about 35-40 km. They are looking for something and a multi-stage compressor to drag somehow Nuna, a fair amount of power and performance. And the power plant, and specialists, is needed to serve it in the mild, resort climate of Mars. What are smokers at NASA? To obtain fuel components in industrial volumes in those conditions at the moment is Vesnukhin’s fantasies. Where to store the extracted raw fuel, how to process it? Where will it be stored and under what pressure? I even have a lot of questions, a turner by profession. I will not write out all, for a couple of articles will pull. What do NASA consume, which mushrooms or cacti, where are they harvested, in Mexico or at home?
    1. Alex
      Alex 26 June 2016 12: 43 New
      +3
      Quote: villain
      What do NASA consume, which mushrooms or cacti, where are they harvested, in Mexico or at home?

      Well, they have developed biotechnology at the level, so I think that the grassy grass of its own production for NASA is unlimited. Maybe you yourself get a kilogram or two? In real life, I won’t fly to Mars (age, and I have problems with my eyes since school), so even in old age I’ll go there in chamur. And then Bradbury and Tolstoy had already learned from memory.
  • Old26
    Old26 25 June 2016 11: 21 New
    0
    Quote: Kombitor
    And on what rocket engines did they gather there?
    Maybe to cover a bench?

    Give it a try. It would be interesting to see how you cover the production of American engines in the USA

    Quote: Paul1
    the whole joke is that the pc25 hydrogen engine is an EXPENSIVE engine and the point is not only in the engine itself, but in particular the process of using hydrogen. Hydrogen is expensive to obtain, expensive to store and expensive to use. In addition, hydrogen is unsafe.

    Do you really think that if the question arises about such a flight, then someone will bother at a price if it comes to prestige?

    Quote: Paul1
    Therefore, our RD191 and NK33 engines are BETTER, CHEAPER AND SAFETY of American hydrogen engines, in addition, the RD191 is more high-torque and weighs a TON LESS PC25.
    However, if pin_dosers want to fly to Mars, then a fair wind in the ass, as they flew to their moon, everyone already knows.

    It is impossible to cheer-patriotic statements, and without relying on the performance characteristics of the same engines. The main hatred is that we have everything "the best." And when it suddenly turns out that the United States itself did something with better characteristics than we should have two reactions:
    1. "But we didn’t want to. We wanted to, would do better"
    2. The search for the culprit begins. Like: "where is that ... ka that was supposed to track and control all this. Why didn’t he beat all the bells, knowing that we ..."

    Quote: Paul1
    come on, the hydrogen direction, as it does not develop in space propulsion engineering, and probably the main thing here is SAFETY and COST of launches.

    Actually the main demand. If hydrogen engines are "packed" in the carrier characteristics, then they will be used, as was used on our Energia and almost one and a half hundred flights on the Shuttles. Of these flights, only one catastrophe, and even then not through the fault of the engine itself, but from related factors
  • Old26
    Old26 25 June 2016 11: 34 New
    +1
    Quote: Paul1
    here is the article by df n Popova A.

    You also remember Mukhin am . Another conspiracy therapist. But for some reason Shuneiko with his almost 800-page monograph, none of the supporters of the lunar conspiracy recalls. Do you know why? They have THE WORDS, and he has tables, graphs, calculations.

    Again, supporters of the lunar conspiracy are trying to circumvent the issue of soil. Or indistinctly begin to mumble something like, "why did the Americans give us only a few grams if they brought us half a ton?" Forgetting that the exchange was by weight. We give them 3 or 4 grams, they give us the same amount, and not in proportion to how much we brought. They (Popov, Mukhin and others) completely forget that there are dozens, or even hundreds of thousands of photos, kilometers of film in the archives of NASA. And all this is freely available. That's just paid. But we have how - if not a "freebie", that is, free, then these facts, as it were, are not.
    Say "I can’t see them.". Yes, without paying a certain amount - do not look. Moreover, they so, with a stroke of the pen, they write to the traitors the collectives of scientific institutes, in particular the Vernadsky Institute. Do you know why? Because those after research said that the soil is genuine, from the moon. And this does not fit into their theory. And if the facts do not fit into their theory, then all the worse for the facts.

    Okay, let's go back to our rams, that is, to flight to Mars. The only thing that is not entirely clear to me, maybe there was a mistake in the translation - this was the time of the first expedition to Mars. Both in them and in our materials (a few years ago such work was published and with us, pages of 600, with a schedule of everything and everything) it was said that the time of the stay of the first expedition on the surface of Mars will be in the region 45-50 days, and in the article they mention something 500
    1. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 11: 44 New
      +1
      at exactly around conspiracy theorists ...
    2. Tsoy
      Tsoy 25 June 2016 11: 50 New
      -1
      About Mukhin and other guests renn tv, without a sensation about the Chupacabra and Lenin, the messenger of Reptiloids, nobody needs their waste paper. And so on the high-profile headlines they are talked about and invited to the programs as experts.
      The timing is either a typo (most likely), or they want to act on the old scenario. Mars and Earth are closest to each other once every two years. Perhaps the astronauts will be left to wait for the launch window for a year and a half, but this is hard to believe.
    3. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 11: 54 New
      -3
      Quote: Old26
      they forget that there are tens, or even hundreds of thousands of photos, kilometers of film in the archives of NASA. And all this is freely available.



      Vladimir Markin proposed to investigate the circumstances of the flight of Americans to the moon


      An official representative of the Investigative Committee of Russia proposed an international investigation, during which to establish the location of the famous lunar film and 400 kilograms of lunar soil brought by astronauts. "And you can help conduct an international investigation into where the film shot by astronauts on the moon disappeared, or where 400 kg of lunar soil were hidden and no longer shown to anyone. No, we don’t say at all that they didn’t fly, but only shot a movie. But that’s all these scientific or, perhaps, cultural artifacts are the property of mankind, and their traceless loss is our common loss. And the investigation will show, "Markin is sure, listing a number of potential investigations that could be carried out by analogy with the FBI football investigation." Still exists a number of conspiracy theories, according to which the flight to the moon is a secret operation of the US special services, during which no one flew anywhere, and the shooting of the US flag on the moon was staged.
      http://rtvi.com/video/26159
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 25 June 2016 12: 47 New
        -1
        Ie he is not able to google. Sad Internet literacy, an official representative.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 13: 08 New
        -5
        "Where did the film go" - They can help everyone with a well-known resource, with a full video of all the expeditions and landings on the Moon - pay attention to the movement of the lunar soil from the shoes of the astronauts - all doubts that this is supposedly shot on the ground will go right away -https: // www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GtCvZlXeVk
      3. Tsoy
        Tsoy 25 June 2016 14: 06 New
        0
        Quote: Paul1
        The official representative of the Investigative Committee of Russia proposed an international investigation, during which the location of the famous lunar film and 400 kilograms of lunar soil brought by astronauts should be established.


        Well, of course, the SC has nothing more to do ... if it's not a duck, then Markin has set himself an idiot.
        1. Pavel1
          Pavel1 25 June 2016 14: 53 New
          0
          Quote: Choi
          Well, of course, the SC has nothing more to do ... if it's not a duck, then Markin has set himself an idiot.


          Well, of course, everyone who does not believe in the Hollywood performance is just fools ...
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 25 June 2016 15: 25 New
            +2
            He simply could not go to the space museum in Moscow. Probably poor. And so I would see the American lunar soil. Or didn’t they give him a visa in the USA to see hundreds of kilograms? winked
            1. Pavel1
              Pavel1 25 June 2016 15: 34 New
              0
              Quote: BlackMokona
              And so I would see the American lunar soil

              Does our space museum store American lunar soil? Link to the studio.

              Quote: BlackMokona
              didn’t they give him a visa in the USA to see hundreds of kilograms? winked

              And in recent years, the Americans’s lunar soil (more precisely, what they pass off as lunar soil) has begun to disappear altogether. In the summer of 2002, a huge number of samples of lunar matter - a safe weighing almost 3 centners - disappeared from the storerooms of the NASA them. Johnson in Houston. Have you ever tried to steal a 300-pound safe from the space center? And do not try: too hard and dangerous work. But the thieves, on the trail of which the police marveled marvelously quickly, succeeded easily.

              Read more: http://www.km.ru/front-projects/amerikanzi-nikogda-ne-letali-na-lunu/pochemu-nas
              a-pryachet-lunnyi-grunt-ot-vsego-mira
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 25 June 2016 15: 51 New
                -3
                I would be at the place of these guys the same quietly I lugged the lunar soil from the safe - it's the exotic that you will not find on Earth.
              2. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 25 June 2016 16: 10 New
                0
                Link on request
                http://selena-luna.ru/russkie-na-lune/flag-sssr-na-lune
                The flag of the USSR, which visited the Moon aboard the Eagle, and a little higher, is a container with lunar soil brought by Apollo 11 and donated by the Americans to the Soviet Union. Exhibited at the Memorial Museum of Cosmonautics at the VDNH metro station in Moscow.

                And the address
                Moscow, Russia
                +7 (495) 683 79 68, ave. Mira, 111
                m. VDNH
                Opening hours: Tue-Wed, Fri-Sun 10.00–19.00, Thu 10.00–21.00, the ticket office closes half an hour earlier
                Entrance 50–200 p., For children under 6 years old admission is free. Admission is free on the third Sunday of the month. Accessible to people with reduced mobility


                And storage in the USA
                http://zelenyikot.livejournal.com/83598.html
                1. Pavel1
                  Pavel1 25 June 2016 17: 58 New
                  -1
                  Quote: BlackMokona
                  Link on request
                  //selena-luna.ru/russkie-na-lune/flag-sssr-na-lune


                  and what is it? like a container with a type of soil, this is definitely called crap, mixed with bastards of the USSR flag, nasty ...
              3. Bayonet
                Bayonet 25 June 2016 20: 55 New
                -1
                Quote: Paul1
                Link to the studio.

                Take a look here http://zelenyikot.livejournal.com/83598.html
                This is not with us, but in the USA. hi
                1. Bayonet
                  Bayonet 26 June 2016 06: 11 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Bayonet
                  Take a look here //zelenyikot.livejournal.com/83598.html

                  Lunar Samples Laboratory - the place where the lunar soil mined during the Apollo program is stored. The topic of lunar soil often pops up in discussions of the lunar program. Some people have the misconception that all the soil has disappeared or that all samples are classified and are not shown to anyone. The photo story demonstrates that this is precisely a delusion.
                  “Today, Oleg Skrypochka (Oleg Ivanovich Skripochka, Russian cosmonaut, member of the cosmonaut RSC Energia. Flight engineer of the Soyuz TMA-M spacecraft and the 25th main expedition to the ISS) and I had an amazing opportunity to get into the lunar storage soil located on the territory of the Johnson Space Center. "...
                  Who cares, follow the link and read on. By the way, there are links with a mass of photos of lunar expeditions and not only.
                  Some kind of evil ferrets didn’t even manage to get acquainted, but they stuck minuses! request fool
            2. bastard
              bastard 26 June 2016 03: 32 New
              -1
              Quote: BlackMokona
              He simply could not go to the space museum in Moscow. Probably poor. And so I would see the American lunar soil.

              And how will he determine that this soil is lunar, according to the plate?
              Quote: BlackMokona
              Or didn’t they give him a visa in the USA to see hundreds of kilograms?

              Hundreds of kilos? So, they disappeared without a trace along with the safe in an unknown direction. It can be seen that the launch of the collider at CERN (CERN) provoked a black hole in NASA. I do not want to go there, scary! lol
          2. Bayonet
            Bayonet 25 June 2016 17: 06 New
            0
            Quote: Paul1
            Well, of course, everyone who does not believe in the Hollywood performance is just fools ...

            Well, no ??? smileWe have 100 more of them in stock! laughing
            1. Pavel1
              Pavel1 25 June 2016 18: 00 New
              -3
              Quote: Bayonet
              Well, no ??? smileWe have 100 more of them in stock!


              who do you have it? which side are you from? with Russophobian?
              1. Bayonet
                Bayonet 25 June 2016 19: 28 New
                0
                Quote: Paul1
                who do you have it? which side are you from? with Russophobian?

                I'm smart smile You will read a lot, speech will develop, stop speaking with foolish cliches, the volume of knowledge will increase, many problems will disappear. And God forbid, do not read the "yellow press" and do not watch REN TV before dinner - you will earn an ulcer. hi
        2. Come on
          Come on 26 June 2016 05: 43 New
          -4
          Quote: Choi
          if it’s not a duck, then Markin exposed himself as an idiot.


          And to him for the first time? :) In general, Markin himself is a creative person, it seems he plays a role in the theater, and another well-known “creative person”, Ms. Vasilyeva painted his portrait ...
      4. Pavel1
        Pavel1 25 June 2016 17: 47 New
        0
        Quote: Paul1
        Vladimir Markin proposed to investigate the circumstances of the flight of Americans to the moon


        joke, as Russophobes do not like the official refutation of the munsky ruling ...
        1. zombirusrev
          zombirusrev 25 June 2016 19: 18 New
          0
          In the published scheme of returning from the moon, overload when landing on a 10-13 g machine gun and in manual mode as type Apollo13 20-30 landed, so let your evidence of the presence of amers on the moon putt into your room. Let look at the materials on the flight of the probe-6 to the moon. And about Mukhin Yui, let them not understand the simple things that he says about topics and other things.
  • Bulrumeb
    Bulrumeb 25 June 2016 12: 06 New
    +1
    The mission of a manned flyby of Mars was set by President Barack Obama back in 2010

    Like Mars will fly to Mars, in the Hollywood pavilion?
    1. Alex
      Alex 25 June 2016 15: 24 New
      +1
      Quote: Bulrumeb
      Like Mars will fly to Mars, in the Hollywood pavilion?

      Already flown - see "Capricorn-1".
  • srha
    srha 25 June 2016 12: 10 New
    -4
    Missile technology on chemical engines is a dead end in space exploration! Like a wooden boat for exploring the ocean. You can swim, but mastering is not possible.
    Ion engines (and the like) need to be developed in space, and electromagnetic catapults and other so far exotic technologies are required for the output from Earth.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 13: 17 New
      -3
      Ionic engines have too little thrust except for NRE, but Gravitsapa is just beginning to create it - NASA is exploring its phenomenon, but it’s still far from mass introduction and production.
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 25 June 2016 17: 21 New
        -2
        Quote: Vadim237
        but they only begin to create it

        nuclear RD-0410 in the 70s tested
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 25 June 2016 18: 04 New
          -3
          RD-0410 - he has been successfully stolen for a long time, now Rosatom is riveting another.
          .
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 25 June 2016 19: 36 New
          +3
          Quote: sa-ag
          nuclear RD-0410 in the 70s tested

          RD-0410 (GRAU Index - 11B91, also known as Irgit and IR-100) is the first and only Soviet nuclear rocket engine. It was developed in the design office "Himavtomatika", Voronezh. . Deadlift: 3,59 tf (35,2 kN)
          Thermal power of the reactor: 196 MW
          The specific impulse of thrust in the void: 910 kgf · s / kg (8927 m / s)
          Number of Inclusions: 10
          Work resource: 1 hour
          Fuel components: working fluid - liquid hydrogen, excipient - heptane
          Weight with radiation protection: 2 tons
          Dimensions of the engine: height 3,5 m, diameter 1,6 m
          Years of development: 1965-1985
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 26 June 2016 05: 54 New
            -2
            Quote: Bayonet
            RD-0410 (GRAU Index - 11B91, also known as Irgit and IR-100) - the first and only Soviet nuclear rocket engine

            What's wrong here? Justify, anonymous minusator! request
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 14: 03 New
      +2
      Quote: srha
      Missile technology on chemical engines is a dead end in space exploration!

      This is not a dead end branch, but a stage on the path of development! On them, man went into space, then there will be others.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 25 June 2016 17: 03 New
        0
        Quote: Bayonet
        This is not a dead end branch, but a stage on the path of development!

        You look! Is it a holiday in Durkee today? And the "dead end" is a minus, and not a dead end minus! request laughing
        1. srha
          srha 26 June 2016 12: 23 New
          0
          Quote: Bayonet
          Is it a holiday in Durkee today?
          This is actually a VO policy. It would be more correct to allow minus only with a comment.

          I agree with the "stage", And with the "dead end" I got excited - it's a shame that I froze at this stage.
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 26 June 2016 18: 58 New
            0
            Quote: srha
            It's a shame that they froze at this stage.

            I agree, but work is ongoing. Matter of time, maybe we will find something new hi
  • Valery Valery
    Valery Valery 25 June 2016 12: 10 New
    -2
    Nothing the US can do with a flight to Mars - Stanley Kubrick died in 1999 !!!
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 13: 20 New
      -4
      This will not work for our Roscosmos, but in the USA they are already preparing to conquer Mars in full steam.
  • behemot
    behemot 25 June 2016 12: 53 New
    +1
    we will have teleportation by 2035. just right under the nose of the Americans we materialize and that’s all.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 13: 32 New
      -1
      That is, if 2026 Musk is not there first.
    2. Tsoy
      Tsoy 25 June 2016 14: 08 New
      +1
      It has been said more than once that this is not a physical teleportation in the classical sense of the word. It was about a communication system in which it would be impossible to intercept messages and the coding system. Too lazy to search, but he said about this Peskov. Just again the journalists perverted everything.
    3. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 14: 10 New
      -2
      Quote: behemot
      we will have teleportation by 2035.

      And by 2035, I will become terribly rich and I will send each of you a mailbox "House Perignon" or "Henri 4, Cognac Grande Champagne", choose! Even those who put cons! How is such a forecast? smile hi
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 28 June 2016 06: 20 New
        0
        Quote: Bayonet
        Even those who put cons!

        No, I will not give minusrators - and so stupid, and still drink ... lol
  • Valkh
    Valkh 25 June 2016 13: 38 New
    0
    Quote: 56_br
    The American flight to Mars will be carried out exactly according to the SCENARIO of flight to the MOON.

    Who is ready to star in the new movie ???
    1. Alex
      Alex 25 June 2016 15: 30 New
      +2
      Quote: Valkh
      Who is ready to star in the new movie ???

      What is Bruce Willis not suitable for? He had already flown once, in Armageddon.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 25 June 2016 14: 05 New
    +3
    I would still begin by creating a permanent station on the moon.
    It seems that there is ice near the poles - people don’t need to carry water.
    And when the technology works, you can poke on Mars.
    1. Tsoy
      Tsoy 25 June 2016 14: 58 New
      -4
      To date, it is planned to create a permanent base on the satellite Mars Marsharon. Work out the landing, lifting system, life support systems and so on. By the way, the idea of ​​capturing an asteroid was abandoned. Too much money is needed and the results are not that impressive. The upcoming Nas Five-Year Plan. The telescope of the James Web is ready for 50%, the assembly continues. Unnamed rover which will launch to mars in 2020. And Orion's manned flight on SLS at 2022.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 25 June 2016 15: 32 New
        +1
        Quote: Choi
        At present, it is planned to create a permanent base on the satellite of Mars Charon.

        Eco respected you! wassat
        Charon is a satellite of Pluto! A satellite of Mars - Phobos and Deimos! drinks
        1. Tsoy
          Tsoy 25 June 2016 16: 53 New
          -1
          sorry there is a bit) of course on Phobos.
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 28 June 2016 06: 02 New
          0
          Quote: Bayonet
          Charon is a satellite of Pluto!

          But two "wise men", believe that this is not so! laughing
          1. Tsoy
            Tsoy 30 June 2016 13: 32 New
            0
            yes there are not two of them ...
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 15: 53 New
        0
        You still forgot to mention that in 2017 the largest and heaviest air launch aircraft will take off in the USA.
        1. Tsoy
          Tsoy 25 June 2016 16: 59 New
          -1
          and white knight two do not private traders do? and is it it?
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 25 June 2016 20: 29 New
            +2
            Quote: Choi
            and white knight two do not private traders do? and is it it?

            No, it's not him.
            White knight two
            A two-body carrier aircraft specially designed by the American aircraft manufacturer Scaled Composites for the launch of the SpaceShipTwo tourist spacecraft.
            And in the picture, Roc is the brainchild of Stratolaunch Systems.
            The wingspan of this monster with two fuselages will reach 117 meters, and the weight will be as much as 544 tons. And all in order to raise a rocket to a huge height, weighing 222 tons.
            Having reached a predetermined height and having accelerated to a speed of 850 kilometers per hour, the aircraft launches a rocket that turns on its own engine and goes on its own. The Roc plane returns to the surface and lands on a strip of a special airfield, landing on a chassis of 12 wheels and a front strut with two wheels located at the bottom of each fuselage. According to the plans of the company's founder Paul Allen (Paul Allen), the first test flight of the Roc aircraft should be made in 2016. And if everything goes without any complications, an attempt to launch the rocket into space for the first time will be made in 2018.
            1. Tsoy
              Tsoy 26 June 2016 13: 52 New
              0
              Mdaa ... I remember reading about him for a long time, I already forgot it.

              According to the characteristics, I found it.
              Length - 72 meter
              6 747 class engines (originally written so) that by this the author does not mean I do not know. On the 747 engines were from Rolls Royce and pratt and whitney and general electric.
              The payload is satellites weighing up to 6.124 kg at altitudes from 180 to 2000 km.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 14: 59 New
      -5
      The first attempt to go to Mars is promised in two years.
    3. zombirusrev
      zombirusrev 25 June 2016 19: 34 New
      -3
      On chemical engines into deep space, this is ideotism.
      1. Tsoy
        Tsoy 30 June 2016 13: 30 New
        +2
        Idiocy from the word idiot, not an idea.
  • Old26
    Old26 25 June 2016 14: 08 New
    +3
    Quote: Orionvit
    If the USSR, which was in space ahead of the rest of the planet, could not send a manned ship to the moon, then no one could.

    The question is very controversial. What does it mean ahead of the rest? More manned launches? More astronauts? And in what period to consider all this. For example, in just one decade, we were ahead of the Americans in the number of manned launches and astronauts. And even then, this time fell precisely at the time when the Apollos completed their mission and the shuttles had not yet begun. In all other decades, the Americans were ahead in terms of the number of manned launches and the number of astronauts. We always had a good “priority”. And then the Americans came forward. And this is practically all that concerns manned flights. An exception - as it should be for an exception - is only one. Our orbital stations. We were the first to start, the Americans launched only one, there were three expeditions. But according to the duration of the expeditions, ours caught up with the Americans only at Salute-3.

    Quote: Alex
    So “IS”, or “almost ready” and “still working”? And then, you know, there is often an abyss between these concepts. And often, irresistible.

    EssEli already experiencing engines, then there is no longer a chasm. But when they say, and the fact that we will have a 37-ton A-7 Angara, which we will then upgrade to raise 50 tons, this is already very far from reality. Americans have very bad trait - They DO WHAT PROMISE.

    Quote: srha
    Missile technology on chemical engines is a dead end in space exploration! Like a wooden boat for exploring the ocean. You can swim, but mastering is not possible.

    They are absolutely right. So after all, Americans do not talk about the exploration of Mars. Only fly, land and go back ...

    Quote: Choi
    The timing is either a typo (most likely), or they want to act on the old scenario. Mars and Earth are closest to each other once every two years. Perhaps the astronauts will be left to wait for the launch window for a year and a half, but this is hard to believe.

    You know, at one time, by the nature of my work, I had to get acquainted with many military-technical journals, including and english "Space Flights". Unfortunately in those years there were no photocopiers to copy articles. So what about the "window". as far as I remember, a slightly different return scheme was proposed. Not MARS EARTH, MARS-VENUS-EARTH. That is, they did not return directly to Earth, but flew to Venus, then the gravitational maneuver in its orbit and from there to Earth. This allowed us not to wait for almost 2 years of the launch window. Especially in the first flights, such a delay was fraught ...
    1. Tsoy
      Tsoy 25 June 2016 14: 52 New
      -1
      Quote: Old26
      Not MARS-EARTH, but MARS-VENUS-EARTH. That is, they did not return directly to Earth, but flew to Venus, then a gravitational maneuver in its orbit and from there to the Earth. This made it possible not to wait almost 2-x years of the starting window.


      This is a very long time, and therefore dangerous. In which case, ala hive goodbye crew. Although so and so ala hive. If they begin to use such a scheme, then this will make the people on spacecraft real cosmic wanderers. For one and Venus look.
    2. zombirusrev
      zombirusrev 25 June 2016 19: 37 New
      -4
      References, my friend, please be kind about the statistics of our flight cameras!
  • Old26
    Old26 25 June 2016 14: 26 New
    +2
    Quote: B-15
    This is a commonplace life support system. Not a single country has repeated our Electron. And Electron-B is the only unit that has passed the FULL resource test cycle.
    Without our life support system, competitors will have to take more than one ship with them with water and air supplies. It turns out that all the indicated number of starts is required to be increased several times.
    Of course, the Americans jumped. And they even did something. But they could not do key filtering. Their module on the ISS is cleaned by our unit.
    Why is this so critical? Yes, very simple. Without us, not one earthly ship could last longer than 90 weeks in space in the 2s. Now the United States may be able to increase this period by two times. But not more.

    Let me disagree with you. The autonomy of the ship is often determined not only by the maximum operating time of the LSS, but also by tasks. Our "Union" has autonomy in autonomous flight of about 30 days. Shuttle with a crew of 7 people - EMNIP - 15 days. But these figures are only for ships, after all. At the stations they were much higher. At the same “SKYLEB” she had something for about six months, at the “WORLD” - much more.
    Nobody is going to fly to Mars on the same ship. It will be a whole complex consisting of several modules. "Orion" is just a "taxi" from the Earth to the Lagrange point before the start and exactly the same "taxi" from the complex to the Earth. The rest of the time the expedition will be located outside the ship.
    The fact that our module is listed as American - so what's the problem? Let's redeem it, because it was built on American money.
    1. Pavel1
      Pavel1 25 June 2016 15: 02 New
      -3
      Quote: Old26
      At the same “SKYLEB” she had something for about six months, at the “WORLD” - much more.


      You cannot invite to a house that is not


      http://historylib.org/historybooks/Aleksandr-Popov_CHelovek-na-Lune--Kakie-dokaz
      atelstva - / 32
    2. Orionvit
      Orionvit 25 June 2016 17: 24 New
      0
      The same "SKYLEB" she had something for about six months
      If I am not mistaken, only two expeditions lasting a week visited SKYLEB, then for unknown reasons they closed the station until they drowned in the ocean. In general, the story is dark.
      1. Orionvit
        Orionvit 26 June 2016 22: 04 New
        0
        I didn’t understand what a wise guy minus came in. Who cares, let him even look at Wikipedia. Well, I made a mistake, not two but three expeditions in half a year, but then for five years I dangled in orbit orphaned until I left. NASA is silent. What is it for?
    3. B-15
      B-15 26 June 2016 18: 43 New
      +1
      If you understand so well, then specify how the Americans lived at their station for more than a month? What was the consumption of water and oxygen per day per person?
      And what happened to the shuttle, in which they tried to stay in orbit a record time? How many crew members were fully conscious when they landed?
      And if the Americans are so brilliant, tell me, will they launch equipment that has not passed the resource tests to Mars?
      And what are resource tests? What is their duration for flying to Mars?
      And when you answer these questions and write out, temporarily, for all components of the ship, the time parameters of the passed life tests, then we can return to the question of whether our first colleagues can fly to Mars without us.
  • Deniosf
    Deniosf 25 June 2016 15: 06 New
    -5
    Butet just like landing on the moon - take a picture in the studio and announce to the whole world that the expedition was successful! That's all they can do.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 25 June 2016 16: 55 New
      -2
      Do you want to be funny? Be! laughing
    2. zombirusrev
      zombirusrev 25 June 2016 19: 30 New
      -3
      In this way, the fly also flew. Yu.I. Mukhin and anti-apolone described everything point by point.
  • Atlant-1164
    Atlant-1164 25 June 2016 15: 23 New
    +2
    and where will the filming take place ?? in which Hollywood pavilion. otherwise it didn’t work like ice on the moon .. not everyone believed it.)
  • Alex
    Alex 25 June 2016 16: 04 New
    +1
    Quote: BlackMokona
    There may even exist water vapor, you forgot about the pressure. laughing
    And what is this nonsense?

    In general, personally, it’s enough with me: the holidays have just begun and I have not yet managed to miss the flood of nonsense. Good luck in learning the basics of thermodynamics and chemistry. When you master at least a high school course, then perhaps you will become interesting to me.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 25 June 2016 16: 12 New
      -1
      I hope you still go to university and take a course in thermodynamics, otherwise you will remember the school curriculum that at different heights the water boils at different temperatures you are no longer given smile
      1. Alex
        Alex 25 June 2016 17: 11 New
        +3
        Usually saying goodbye to an opponent, I do not pay attention to his further vibrations, even if all his arguments are rudeness and cons. However, you are so original that you not only did not read the profile, but also condescended to the wishes of my person.
        Quote: BlackMokona
        I hope you still go to university

        Thank you so much for your unlimited faith in my humble talents, but I already finished it at 1983 and in 1987 I defended my Ph.D. thesis in quantum chemistry. So I don’t need to learn thermodynamics: the physical chemistry exam I passed in 1981 was excellent. By the way, in physics, too.

        And there is no need to recall the school curriculum either: I teach chemistry and physics at school. Moreover, in 2007 received a degree of candidate of pedagogical sciences. So both the barometric formula and the Clausius-Clapeyron equation, Raoul’s laws are well known to me.
  • tiaman.76
    tiaman.76 25 June 2016 16: 14 New
    -2
    yes let them fly .. some losses from their Mars and lunar programs, the benefit is not a penny .. only under this guise they launch a new military space program, this is not gut
  • haenx
    haenx 25 June 2016 17: 15 New
    -1
    I read the first paragraph and did not continue to read the article. I will assume the following, the so-called nuclear missile engine has not yet been developed, the problem of protection against cosmic radiation has not been solved. The Americans still can not dispose of military plutonium, and here they somehow hastily declare a flight to Mars. Without Russian experience in nuclear energy and plasma work can not do.
  • Orionvit
    Orionvit 25 June 2016 17: 18 New
    -3
    Quote: Bayonet
    Quote: B-15
    Although our future engine for interplanetary flights will also pose a headache to our first partners.

    Does it make sense to talk about the consequences of what is not yet? fellow Funny, really!

    But why. Here mattress covers in full chatter about what is not, and nothing. Or can they? Already on Mars seriously gathered on what is not. And do not steam. It feels like NASA gets paid for fantasies. I watched the "Martian", neighing further than I saw. I understand that Hollywood, but there were consultants from NASA.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 18: 09 New
      -1
      And you compare how much they have done in the space industry and we are from 2000 to 2016 and you will see who gets the money for fantasies.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 20: 37 New
        -4
        The fact remains that Russia is currently on the sidelines in the development of cosmonautics - what did they create in the USA between 2000 and 2016 -
        Rocket atlas
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 20: 39 New
        -1
        Rocket Antares
      3. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 20: 45 New
        0
        Rocket Falcon 9
      4. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 20: 49 New
        -1
        Rocket Delta 4
      5. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 20: 55 New
        0
        Dragon spacecraft
      6. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 20: 58 New
        +1
        Spaceship Dragon V2
      7. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 21: 00 New
        -1
        Orion manned spacecraft
        1. Poplar505
          Poplar505 26 June 2016 13: 12 New
          0
          Here you will inevitably believe that reptilian dragons in ancient times flew to our planet from the constellation Orion. And they created slaves for themselves and began to rule them. The names "inspire" ...
          Interesting - "where is the dog rummaged here ???"
      8. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 21: 03 New
        -1
        Starliner manned spacecraft
      9. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 21: 05 New
        0
        Orbital spaceship "Dream Chaser" - an analogue of our Bor 4
      10. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 21: 14 New
        -1
        Orbital experimental aircraft Boeing X-37
      11. Vadim237
        Vadim237 25 June 2016 21: 17 New
        -2
        Russia can only boast of the A5 Hangar - the rest is all just a modernization of the old.
      12. Orionvit
        Orionvit 27 June 2016 21: 39 New
        0
        They first ruined the greatest country, then lured a huge number of our specialists, and did not do anything new early. Well on satellites, I agree. But on manned flights, I'm sorry, they are in opera
    2. askold
      askold 25 June 2016 20: 43 New
      -2
      Why did you SHOULD how it is necessary to HORSE A HORSE, -helped to save Robinson-CHINESE !!!? About us, as about a space power, they did not even mention at least in a small episode. And consultants from NASA helped to recreate the Martian landscapes, and they are in the film, perfect.
  • Oprychnik
    Oprychnik 25 June 2016 17: 29 New
    -1
    Huge plans! Do not be alarmed! Until the end of the year, they would survive, and then electricity and gas and cellular communications would be disconnected everywhere. What kind of missile defense or GPS or GLONASS are there, the technologies there are high. Remember, while there is an opportunity on the Internet, how to make a bow and arrow, make a plague of slaughtered animals. Walk, while there is an opportunity, a video course on cutting slaughtered animals and birds, and the simplest ways to cook them. And, keep in mind that insects and worms also contain fats, proteins and carbohydrates, and some have vitamins. It would also be nice to make independent reserves of salt and a match. They gathered on Mars ... Here, some people planned communism by 1980 and each with a whole apartment, and some with each woman a peasant !, and also, "and Mars will bloom apple trees! "
    1. Oprychnik
      Oprychnik 25 June 2016 17: 55 New
      -3
      I also send greetings to the experienced moderator Sank Romanov with a quote from a popular song:
      "There he is, the serpent, looming in the window, hiding the plug behind his back.
      He gave a sign to someone, so the paramedic, tear out the wires.
      And we remained pricked and fell to the bottom of the well,
      And there is an abyss at the bottom of the well, as in Bermuda, forever.

      Well, tomorrow the children will ask, visiting us in the morning:
      "Dad, what did these doctor candidates say?"
      We will answer our children the truth, they do not care:
      Amazing nearby, but it's forbidden! "
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 18: 15 New
      0
      No, it’s better you yourself do such research in the field of survival, especially with worms and bugs - in this regard, it is better to consult with the Chinese - they have rich experience in using such "products"
      1. Oprychnik
        Oprychnik 25 June 2016 18: 21 New
        -2
        I want to answer you directly, without any crookedness, as the saying goes, I’m not doing such research. Everything has been studied long before us. I would like to hope that no hard knowledge gained will be lost in vain.
  • zombirusrev
    zombirusrev 25 June 2016 19: 25 New
    -2
    It is possible to fly to Mars but not with the current control system in our country and in the USA. We used to be helped, now I'm sorry. Remember the project of TMK Korolev. He was supposed to use H-1 but Glushko strangled Misha. Then there was the Glushko project with a lunar base, but then Gorbachev threw shit.
  • avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 25 June 2016 19: 49 New
    -3

    Quote: zombirusrev
    It is possible to fly to Mars but not with the current control system in our country and in the USA. We used to be helped, now I'm sorry. Remember the project of TMK Korolev. He was supposed to use H-1 but Glushko strangled Misha. Then there was the Glushko project with a lunar base, but then Gorbachev threw shit.

    I propose a different alignment: We are the first .... And from this the World became richer, happier ??? Controversial and not in favor of the EARTH.
  • fa2998
    fa2998 25 June 2016 19: 49 New
    -2
    Quote: Kombitor
    And on what rocket engines did they gather there?
    Maybe to cover a bench?

    And their engines will be driven, and they will fly to Mars, to asteroids, and robots will send weightless. And our "sawflies" will launch the royal seven into the Earth orbit-Drosophila for another 50 years, or else that "strategic work." Of course, money is allocated , the rocket is working, there are no failures, heroes and orders are being hung up — why else is it striving for! Well, it’s necessary to think, and it may even fail. Yes, we are a clear leader in manned space exploration, and no one flies over us. Maybe enough? There are a lot of interesting things around . hi
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 June 2016 21: 32 New
      -2
      That's just what Drosophila flies will be planted and other experiments will be carried out if after a few years the ISS will be closed and lowered from orbit.
  • Old26
    Old26 25 June 2016 20: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Choi
    Quote: Old26
    Not MARS-EARTH, but MARS-VENUS-EARTH. That is, they did not return directly to Earth, but flew to Venus, then a gravitational maneuver in its orbit and from there to the Earth. This made it possible not to wait almost 2-x years of the starting window.


    This is a very long time, and therefore dangerous. In which case, ala hive goodbye crew. Although so and so ala hive. If they begin to use such a scheme, then this will make the people on spacecraft real cosmic wanderers. For one and Venus look.

    Long. But no longer than waiting 500 days for the launch window on the planet. The path of MARS-VENUS-EARTH was lengthened, but not several times, if my sclerosis does not change me, by 1,5-1,8 times

    Quote: zombirusrev
    References, my friend, please be kind about the statistics of our flight cameras!

    In what form do you provide? Already finished numbers indicating only the year, the number of flights and astronauts / astronauts? With the year and ship names or links to resources? In any case, I’m waiting for your answer and I’ll provide these numbers until 22 Moscow time. If the links - you have to double-check. Decide for yourself. I can offer option 1 and links. Learn the amount from me, double-check yourself

    Quote: Orionvit
    The same "SKYLEB" she had something for about six months
    If I am not mistaken, only two expeditions lasting a week visited SKYLEB, then for unknown reasons they closed the station until they drowned in the ocean. In general, the story is dark.

    You are mistaken. Three. Moreover, the third was lasting more than 80 days. We broke this record only at Salute-3 EMNIP
  • Yak28
    Yak28 25 June 2016 23: 03 New
    -2
    The United States has long secured space leadership for itself, the United States sends satellites to other planets, the United States sends rovers, and not Russia. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia pulled away from everything, fell to its knees to the delight of the winner
    1. Orionvit
      Orionvit 27 June 2016 23: 55 New
      +1
      The captured Germans ended, the US space program ended. But it’s nothing that the United States aerospace industry is half of our specialists who were lured in the 90s. Well, Americans do not fly into space. Who does not see this yet? It is a fact. And they don’t want to flood that they simply don’t. develop your eyes, gentlemen, minuscule people, Americanophiles. Blown away your America, and in front of your eyes.
  • ded_mityai
    ded_mityai 25 June 2016 23: 12 New
    -5
    These missiles are simply technology from the 50s — no practical benefit in terms of technology development. Just follow the rocket and the engines are bigger and more expensive. Just sticking a flag is too expensive.

    It is another matter to build a military cruiser with a nuclear engine, and already as part of the tests, fly to the Moon and Mars. Then bring an asteroid in the vicinity of the Earth, cut it into blocks and use them to destroy the rebel cities. Moreover, kinetic weapons are not nuclear and no treaties apply to them.
  • Old26
    Old26 26 June 2016 00: 22 New
    +1
    For zombirusrev

    1961-1970
    USSR - 16 ships and 26 astronauts (1 of them died)
    USA - 23 ships and 47 astronauts

    1971-1980
    USSR - 30 ships and 63 astronauts (3 of them died)
    USA - 8 ships and 24 astronauts

    1981-1990
    USSR - 25 ships and 53 astronauts
    USA - 43 ships and 159 astronauts (7 of them died)

    1991-2000
    USSR-RF - 20 ships and 55 astronauts
    USA - 65 ships and 399 astronauts

    TOTAL for the above period, i.e. 40 years
    USSR-Russia - 89 ships and 197 astronauts
    USA - 139 ships and 669 astronauts

    The decade 1971-1980 was the only one when we got ahead of the Americans. The reasons I have already indicated.
    Links - in the afternoon

    For Orionvit.
    the duration of the expeditions on SKYLEB in days were respectively:
    1st = 28
    2st = 53
    3st = 84

    Quote: ded_mityai
    Just sticking a flag is too expensive.

    It is another matter to build a military cruiser with a nuclear engine, and already as part of the tests, fly to the Moon and Mars.

    Is building a nuclear-powered cruiser cheap? I think that then with a flight to Mars will have to wait. About 70 years old. Fiction is certainly good, but these cruisers will not appear very soon. Even if there are any breakthroughs in the next 20-30 years
    1. askold
      askold 26 June 2016 09: 37 New
      +3
      In 1989, at school, I first heard from a physics teacher, part-time she taught astronomy, which turns out that the number of American astronauts significantly exceeds the number of Soviet cosmonauts. It was like a tub of cold water, we were sure of the opposite at that time! She received this information at the All-Union Congress of Teachers of the USSR, the times of perestroika, openness ...
      So, reading the comments here, you need to shake the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. Do you even understand what you have DONE by abandoning such a subject as ASTRONOMY in the compulsory program. A whole generation of people has grown up believing that spaceflight is a fiction, a bluff, dust in the eyes of a hated enemy, in order to force it, is spent on a deliberately unrealizable idea.
      And alarming notes in the subject HISTORY already sound. And the enthusiasm for the so-called alternative should be equated with pseudoscience and charlatanism. We have the whole channels of ZOMPHOZHATIKA for days and hours full of things that have NO practical significance, a complete TERRITORY OF MISTRACTIONS !!!
      And I want to shout directly to some individuals - "People" Game of Thrones ", this is not a historical series!" :)
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 26 June 2016 10: 41 New
        0
        Russia is already 19 years behind the United States in space research, new missiles and manned spacecraft, and private companies that have appeared in the United States have begun to make a significant contribution to widening this gap. Many promising projects have been closed in Russia in recent years: the Clipper Spacecraft, the Rus M rocket, the MAKS, the air launch program, the program of the first return stage, lost the opportunity to create the TRN Energy ship Buran, RD 0120, the superheavy rocket program was postponed to 2030, and The 5V hangar on which Roscosmos has all its hopes will fly only in 2026 - but most likely this event will be indifferent to the whole world, since the whole world will observe the preparation of the first manned expedition to the Red Planet, realizing owned by SpaceX.
  • RedBaron
    RedBaron 26 June 2016 00: 34 New
    +2
    Five orbital stations are engaged in the study of Mars. Directly on the surface of the planet are two American Mars rovers - Opportunity and Curiosity. So NASA’s preparatory work was excellent. I have no doubt who will be the first on Mars.
    1. Tsoy
      Tsoy 26 June 2016 10: 47 New
      0
      Quote: RedBaron
      So NASA did the preparatory work perfectly well.


      Moreover, they are constantly conducting new experiments and research to prepare for the expedition to Mars. The annual mission on the ISS of the astronaut Scott Kelly and the Russian Mikhail Kornienko set the task to find out if the people who had flown by in weightlessness could get out of the module after landing.

      Project installation for the extraction of water from urine. Experiments with 3d printers, new materials, new PH and SC, in general, work is going in many directions.
    2. Mikhail Krapivin
      Mikhail Krapivin 27 June 2016 21: 28 New
      0
      Quote: RedBaron
      Jay no doubt who will be the first on Mars.


      It will be ridiculous if a quiet and modest China takes, and even surpasses the United States.
  • guzik007
    guzik007 26 June 2016 09: 59 New
    -3
    Russia does not have such strategic interests that can be realized with the help of a project worth two Sochi Olympics?
    -----------------------------------
    Author! for such questions in WO, they kick their feet! : =)
  • Babalaykin
    Babalaykin 26 June 2016 10: 43 New
    -1
    I’m interested in one question: why develop a lunar lander, if half a century ago they wound there like on gazelles?
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 26 June 2016 15: 24 New
      -3
      Quote: Babalaykin
      I’m interested in one question: why develop a lunar lander, if half a century ago they wound there like on gazelles?

      And why was the Gazelle developed if half a century before it was wound on the "one and a half"? what
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 26 June 2016 11: 33 New
    -1
    If by some miracle we finish the megawatt-class nuclear power generating plant in the stated time frame (the chances are still in place), then Russia can be completely “invited” to the Amer project, or stir up its own, or better, joint project with the same Indians or Chinese.

    The mass of our block fits into the capacity of the Angara-5 (even the tail remains); so we don’t need any monstrous SLS (expensive it is strong).

    Orion is also not necessary for us; because the Union will cope with the task of returning astronauts to Earth at the final stage of the flight; the speed exceeding the second cosmic one is not an obstacle for him. Of course, they won’t be able to make a federation (if they do anything at all except layouts).

    We do not need a transhub at all; any of the commercially mastered modules of the World or the ISS (as well as any Salute) is a ready-made residential unit for the flight period.

    The only thing we are in equal relation with the amers (at the level of full zero) is the landing block (to Mars).

    In general, I consider the "solar-electric installation" utter nonsense; Do not fly on it to the outer regions of the solar system; and it will weigh more than any conceivable reactor (we will leave the possibilities of nano-films in the design of solar cells off-screen, since their "survival" remains a big question).

    Who is technically closer to Mars? Financial - it’s clear that the United States, and technically? The dominance of all green and other downs, stopping technological progress, will not allow Amers to use the power of nuclear energy. Our situation is different - we have a peaceful (and military) atom in high esteem; the nuclear industry is developed like no one else in the world.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 June 2016 13: 57 New
      -2
      They will fly on a solar sail - in 15 years it will be more than realistic to create it, as well as to actually create a NRE - everything else will follow.
    2. Tsoy
      Tsoy 26 June 2016 16: 11 New
      +2
      Quote: Gormengast
      Who is closer to Mars technically?


      Here is the whole and zakovyka. In the United States experience a soft landing of one ton (rover curiosity) on the surface of Mars. Before him, information about the atmosphere, the ground, the composition of the air, and other environments was collected by several more vehicles. Both orbital and ground. In fact, they have almost all the technologies to reach the surface of the neighbor. Once at the beginning of the 2000th zero, the mission to Mars was seen only as an international operation. But in today's realities, it’s hard to hope for steps towards cooperation on their part.
      1. Come on
        Come on 26 June 2016 17: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: Choi
        But in modern realities vryatli it is worth hoping for steps towards cooperation on their part.


        Which is very bad and wrong. Science must not be confused with politics. If the Kremlin and the State Department have fallen asleep, then this is their problem, but what does the scientists have to do with it, what does Russian science have to do with it? Given the Soviet-Russian experience, the Americans would of course first of all organize a mission to Mars with Russia. But I am afraid that China and India may take the place of Russia, which will give them a powerful impetus for the development of their own space industry. Many commentators do not seem to understand this.
        1. Tsoy
          Tsoy 26 June 2016 18: 20 New
          -2
          For all their successes, China and India are not in a position to “buy out” a place on the ship that will fly to Mars. They basically have nothing to offer NASA for bargaining. But the Russian Federation has the experience of long-term stay in space and developments of a nuclear installation. Of course, in a better world where science and universal human aspirations are above the policy, the two countries would be able to come to terms and land in 10 years. But now Mars is becoming the second moon for the United States. Recently, their authority as the best country in the world has been greatly shaken, largely due to the actions of the first and last black president. Landing and the flag on the red planet will be a huge success of the state. propaganda usa.
          1. Come on
            Come on 27 June 2016 00: 46 New
            -2
            There are no such statements between China, India and the USA as we can erase into radioactive ashes, the Chinese and Indians do not conflict with the USA. And what can they not? They will give money and can. The authority of the United States has nothing to do with the work of NAZA and scientists. And by the way, authority ... When the trial mission took place, the experience of finding a group of people in a tight, enclosed space in Russia, something happened that, unfortunately, happens too often in the Russian Federation and that does not contribute to the growth of reputation. The fact is that all the necessary materials for the experience, from devices to things and even rations, it came from Germany. But at customs, customs officers requested a bribe, for which they were refused by German scientists, since their budget was not designed for bribes and kickbacks. So the container stuck out half a year at customs until they connected Merkel, who called Medvedev and only then let the container go. Today, the majority in the west sees the aggressor in Russia, and not only in the west. This is in the mid-2000s, with the Bush administration and its idiotic war in Iraq, the United States suffered strong reputation losses, but today, in this role, Russia is unfortunately. In my opinion, Russian scientists should make a statement that they, scientists and science are not connected in any way with Kremlin policy and are ready to cooperate with their American colleagues. If the mission to Mars starts to be organized without Russian scientists, then in my opinion this is a meaningless and powerful blow to Russian space exploration. It is necessary to separate flies and cutlets, the State Department from NAZA and the Kremlin from Roscosmos and other specialized design bureaus, although for obvious reasons, they should only give money, and as many independent observers as possible should make sure that they do not go a penny to the side. The first manned flight to Mars, this is generally the ultimate hellish technique, in simple terms, well, nothing is more complicated and cooler. Russia just has to be on board, regardless, it will be a dozen, seven countries, or only with the United States together, a matter of prestige and a chance for a firm place in the future of Russian space.
            1. Tsoy
              Tsoy 27 June 2016 07: 05 New
              +1
              It is not clear that for mimocrocodiles you are minus, however, as well as everyone who writes something in the branch except slogans and ridicule ...

              As for prestige, the fact is that the USA has a fad about being the best and the first in everything. About money is not so simple. Exomarz which all ears were originally buried was originally planned in the NASA and ESA coalition, but the United States refused because of budget constraints. Didn’t Germany and the whole European Union think up to invite India and pay one RN? Instead, despite the war of sanctions, I had to bow to Roscosmos. The budget of ESA is certainly modest and their strategy in cooperation with other countries in the matter of conquering Mars.

              China, if you look at the new Doctrine of the United States of America, is now in first place in terms of threat. Recent events in the controversial areas of the APR are proof of this. If anyone has a chance of cooperation, it is the Russian Federation. We and the plane once the long-haul fly, joint. And there is no tension in the relationship. True, in the Celestial Empire, they don’t look towards Mars at all, and there is simply no long-term strategy.

              India is a longtime opponent of China. Hoping that the astronaut 2 will be in the same boat ... the chance is very small. Lovers of elephants and songs with dancing in space, only one person was. Epta in 1984 year. At the union. There should be a maximum convergence in politics for the Hindu to take with them. Although again in 2004, the person in charge of the space program suggested that the United States send a joint crew by 2050. But in that year, close cooperation between space agencies was started, but here is a little exhaust.

              The ESA cosmonauts and their closest allies have the most chances to get into the crew. Although there will be more Americans, again to emphasize who the boss is. Although I saw a statement by an employee of NASA in which he does not categorically deny the participation of Roskosmos.

              P.S. Nasa has announced candidates for sending to Mars. Among them are a military pilot with a physical education, a test pilot from the Navy, a test pilot with sapper skills, a female test pilot, a marine, an oceanologist, a doctor of medical sciences specializing in emergency situations and sports medicine, and another physician from Harvard. 4 men and 4 women. They are already behind 30, so the question is where will they fly to 60?
          2. Come on
            Come on 27 June 2016 02: 09 New
            0
            I apologize in advance for grammatical errors, etc. .. wrote 2 words, was distracted.