Russian Monopoly on Manned Space Activities?
4 Comments Published by Dr. Beyster July 13th, 2011 in Technology.I am concerned that the Russians now have a monopoly on manned space activities with the end of NASA’s space shuttle program. The Russians have not been shy to take commercial advantage of this turn of events. They will charge U.S. astronauts $43.4 million for a seat on a Soyuz crew capsule for the remainder of this year, with the price rising to $63 million a seat by 2016.
At this time, NASA has committed to purchase 46 seats on upcoming Soyuz flights, and the agency is considering the purchase of even more seats. It is my understanding that NASA plans to have a new shuttle replacement on line by 2016, assuming there are no delays, and in April awarded contracts totaling $269.3 million to five different companies to design the new spacecraft.
According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, Space Exploration Technologies Corporation of Hawthorne, CA has made the greatest progress in this task. The company claims that it will be able to build a reusable spacecraft that will transport up to seven astronauts at a price of $20 million each, significantly less than what we will be paying the Russians. This would also be quite a savings over our own space shuttle, which in recent years cost about $1.5 billion per launch.
In the meantime, Space Exploration Technologies plans to begin transporting supplies to the space station next year under a $1.6 billion NASA contract. Doing so will require the cooperation of the Russians, which to date has not been forthcoming.
I will continue to follow the U.S. space program with interest. It seems to me that NASA is currently an agency in search of a mission, and there is no telling where that mission will eventually take our nation — or how long it will take to get there.
– Bob
Bob;
Have you read Mark Albrecht’s book “Falling Back To Earth: A First Hand Account Of The Great Space Race And The End Of The Cold War”?
It does not paint a pretty picture of what appears to an over politicized agency and leads to the question of the possibility of finding a viable mission for NASA in the current political environment.
Allen
Allen: I have not yet read the book you mentioned, but I will put it on my list. It appears to me that a major portion of the NASA mission will be taken over by private industry in the near future. I believe this is a good thing. There is no reason for NASA to be in the business of simply transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station. This is a tremendous waste of both talent and taxpayer funds, and it is a mission that the private sector can and will do much more cost effectively. The military will, of course, continue its own space missions — mostly the placement of surveillance satellites into orbit — independent of NASA. This, too, is a task that the private sector may very well take over one day. — Bob
Bob,
You ar so right about NASA losing its position and lead in space. I am amazed at the benefits we have gained from the space race from freeze dried foods and preservation to ceramics and plastics.
The US needs something like this in the next 10 years to unify our spirit and create innovations that will keep us on top of the world economies. Not sure what the “race” will be, but something like the space race is needed to get us out of the recession we are in.
Regards,
David
David: I agree with you, but I think it’s going to take a concerted effort on the part of the manufacturing sector to really get our economy churning again. I don’t know if another “race” will have enough punch to get us where we want to go, especially considering the current mood in Washington. We’ll be lucky to maintain our present commitments much less add any new ones. I personally believe we won’t get out of our current economic doldrums until consumer demand begins to increase significantly, and it does not appear that this will happen anytime in the foreseeable future. — Bob