PDA

View Full Version : Russia proposed expansion for the ISS



selvaarchi
2014-Jun-01, 08:40 AM
The first segment of this extension is the node module. This will be attached to the Russian segment of the ISS. and all other new Russian extensions to the ISS, will be through this module. It will play an important role for Russia's future plan. The node module is conceived to serve as the only permanent element of the future Russian successor to the ISS. Equipped with six docking ports, the Node Module would serve as a single permanent core of the future station with all other modules coming and going as their life span and mission required. Thus, the orbital base could be maintained in space practically indefinitely. Current plans call for it to be delivered to the ISS in 2016.

The next segment to be attached to the node module is a habitable orbital laboratory, which could serve as the cornerstone of a future deep-space outpost. The new 20-ton module is scheduled to dock to the International Space Station, ISS, in 2017 or 2018.


http://www.russianspaceweb.com/iss_node.html

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/nem.html

Daggerstab
2014-Jun-01, 09:14 AM
That's "expansion", not "extension". For a second your title misled me into thinking that Russia somehow decided to reconsider its stance about extending the station's life as a single unit after 2020. The connector module is old news.

If you care about the Russian Segment or the future Russian station, the same website offers some fresher news (from month ago):
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/iss_fgb2.html#2014

Because of this delay, there's a chance that the new Russian station may be assembled from scratch in place, instead of being part of the ISS first.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-01, 09:56 AM
That's "expansion", not "extension". For a second your title misled me into thinking that Russia somehow decided to reconsider its stance about extending the station's life as a single unit after 2020. The connector module is old news.

If you care about the Russian Segment or the future Russian station, the same website offers some fresher news (from month ago):
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/iss_fgb2.html#2014

Because of this delay, there's a chance that the new Russian station may be assembled from scratch in place, instead of being part of the ISS first.

You are correct. The correct word is "expansion", not "extension". How does one edit the title?

Thanks for pointing to the latest updates. I did scan the forum to see if it had been discussed but did not find any.

If it is to be assembled from scratch, I wonder if they will do it at one of the Lagrange points. Then it will not compete directly with the ISS and we would get maned activity in BEO.

R.A.F.
2014-Jun-01, 12:48 PM
How does one edit the title?

Report the OP post to the mods, and they will change it.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-02, 01:07 PM
If it is to be assembled from scratch, I wonder if they will do it at one of the Lagrange points.
If they do, then they would need to add a trampoline to the Soyuz to be able to travel to/from it.


Then it will not compete directly with the ISS and we would get maned activity in BEO.
Why the concern for competition?

It would be nice to have something further out, but without an advantage to far outweigh the complexities, that probably won't happen. It's going to depend on what science goals they want to reach.

Also; you were doing good for a while after the last time I told you, but you slipped back... it's manned. Otherwise it's neck hair.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-02, 01:23 PM
If they do, then they would need to add a trampoline to the Soyuz to be able to travel to/from it.


Why the concern for competition?

It would be nice to have something further out, but without an advantage to far outweigh the complexities, that probably won't happen. It's going to depend on what science goals they want to reach.

Also; you were doing good for a while after the last time I told you, but you slipped back... it's manned. Otherwise it's neck hair.

When I talked about space stations I meant manned:D. The Russians are not looking at the Soyuz but the Angara 5 which will be tested later this year.

It was not competition I wanted but for the parties to do something new.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-02, 02:23 PM
The Russians are not looking at the Soyuz but the Angara 5 which will be tested later this year.
1) Yes; I made the point that Soyuz can't do it which means incorporation of new technology.
2) The Angara 5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_(rocket_family)) is only capable of an LEO launch. They'll have to wait for the 7.
3) The Angara 5 will not be tested later this year. It's the 1.2 that will be tested.
Basically, they need something they don't currently have, even if it is in the development stage. No worse than saying trampoline in the context of Orion, Dragon, CST-100, et al.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-02, 03:20 PM
1) Yes; I made the point that Soyuz can't do it which means incorporation of new technology.
2) The Angara 5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_(rocket_family)) is only capable of an LEO launch. They'll have to wait for the 7.
3) The Angara 5 will not be tested later this year. It's the 1.2 that will be tested.
Basically, they need something they don't currently have, even if it is in the development stage. No worse than saying trampoline in the context of Orion, Dragon, CST-100, et al.

Angara 1 will be tested end of this month or next month. Angara 5 is to be tested at the end of this year

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-02, 03:26 PM
1) Yes; I made the point that Soyuz can't do it which means incorporation of new technology.
2) The Angara 5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_(rocket_family)) is only capable of an LEO launch. They'll have to wait for the 7.
3) The Angara 5 will not be tested later this year. It's the 1.2 that will be tested.
Basically, they need something they don't currently have, even if it is in the development stage. No worse than saying trampoline in the context of Orion, Dragon, CST-100, et al.

The Angara 7 is the equivalent of the SLS and it is way in the future.

The Angara 5 on the other hand is down for a test flight at the end of this year. Angara 1 will be tested at the end of this month/July.

http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/angara.html


The NZh test vehicle was rolled out and erected at Plesetsk Area 35 Pad 1 on November 25, 2013. This first rollout was used to test the rail mobile erector and to perform basic mechanical fit checks. The rocket rolled out a second time on February 14, 2014 for a more substantial test series. At the time, plans called for the first Angara 1.2.PP to fly in mid-2014 with Angara A5 to follow at year's end.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-02, 05:15 PM
The Angara 7 is the equivalent of the SLS and it is way in the future.
Angara 7 is 36/40.5t to LEO, SLS is 70. Not equivalent. Maybe you mean equivalent to F9H (53t)?

L points have a higher delta V than GEO, and from my link above, Angara 7 will only achieve up to 9t for GEO. An unloaded Soyuz (Servce, Reentry, and orbital) module is already close to that at over 7t. So; I guess it would be possible but doesn't leave much leeway. (I'm sure they wouldn't use Soyuz, but I don't think the weight specifications would be drastically different)


The Angara 5 on the other hand is down for a test flight at the end of this year. Angara 1 will be tested at the end of this month/July.
Interesting. I knew of the 1.2 launch this year, but didn't think they would be all the way to 5 so soon. I guess it makes sense since this is all common core. But; even F9 to F9H is a much longer time, so that's were my expectations for Angara have been.

But; none of that invalidates my trampoline comment since none of it exists (as in being in service) ;)

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-02, 10:50 PM
Angara 7 is 36/40.5t to LEO, SLS is 70. Not equivalent. Maybe you mean equivalent to F9H (53t)?

L points have a higher delta V than GEO, and from my link above, Angara 7 will only achieve up to 9t for GEO. An unloaded Soyuz (Servce, Reentry, and orbital) module is already close to that at over 7t. So; I guess it would be possible but doesn't leave much leeway. (I'm sure they wouldn't use Soyuz, but I don't think the weight specifications would be drastically different)

Looks like we have different sources on Angara 7. Mine has "A super-heavy lift launch vehicle will be able to carry a payload of 80 tonnes to low-earth orbits. In the future, its capacity can be increased to 160 tonnes and more." See article below.

http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/717993



Interesting. I knew of the 1.2 launch this year, but didn't think they would be all the way to 5 so soon. I guess it makes sense since this is all common core. But; even F9 to F9H is a much longer time, so that's were my expectations for Angara have been.

But; none of that invalidates my trampoline comment since none of it exists (as in being in service) ;)

I read in one of the articles, their only customer is the Russian military and they are only interested in Angara 5 for their launches. The Angara 1 is there, only to test the engine before launching the 5 engines lashed together (my interpretation of the Angara 5) to meet their customers requirements.

docmordrid
2014-Jun-02, 10:58 PM
BFR should be flying sooner than most people think too. Ginormous - you wouldn't believe what the NSF L2 guys have calculated.

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk

publiusr
2014-Jun-02, 11:20 PM
Here is their old power tower concept
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/iss_nep.html

Replaced by this http://www.russianspaceweb.com/nem.html

The Russian Zarya type craft and similar lifeboats
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz_acrv.html


BFR---what the NSF L2 guys have calculated.



Who did this MCT art?
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--7r6ZvBqq--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/n30osqrdluwvzufnkibi.jpg

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-03, 11:54 AM
Looks like we have different sources on Angara 7. Mine has "A super-heavy lift launch vehicle will be able to carry a payload of 80 tonnes to low-earth orbits. In the future, its capacity can be increased to 160 tonnes and more." See article below.
We discussed this over on an another thread already. That article looks familiar.
The article does discuss Angara because it's a general article about Russia's new rockets. It does highlight the SHLV, but does not call it an Angara. I don't think it even has a name at this point since it's only a proposal. (I can't remember the other thread... I know we were talking about them being in a proposal stage)


To put this into context of this thread... if they do think they are going to go for a Lagrange station, then there's going to be a much larger effort to put it all together than a LEO station. While Russia has the technology, I don't think they would be willing at this point to allocate such resources to it. Russia is just trying to rebuild their space program at this point, and they have been limited on resources at around the same scale as the US. A BEO station would be a very costly endeavor for them.

While keeping their LEO to GEO capability alive with the new rockets, they would still need to develop the station, the SHLV and the BEO facilities. You can't just throw Mir technology up there with the radiation problems. Resupply will be much more expensive.



5 engines lashed together (my interpretation of the Angara 5)
Yes; The Angara series is basically a single rocket with various cluster configurations. The numbering is determined by the number of common cores that are clustered.
The 7 is the limit if you're going to cluster with only one ring of cores around the central one.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-03, 02:23 PM
We discussed this over on an another thread already. That article looks familiar.
The article does discuss Angara because it's a general article about Russia's new rockets. It does highlight the SHLV, but does not call it an Angara. I don't think it even has a name at this point since it's only a proposal. (I can't remember the other thread... I know we were talking about them being in a proposal stage)


To put this into context of this thread... if they do think they are going to go for a Lagrange station, then there's going to be a much larger effort to put it all together than a LEO station. While Russia has the technology, I don't think they would be willing at this point to allocate such resources to it. Russia is just trying to rebuild their space program at this point, and they have been limited on resources at around the same scale as the US. A BEO station would be a very costly endeavor for them.

While keeping their LEO to GEO capability alive with the new rockets, they would still need to develop the station, the SHLV and the BEO facilities. You can't just throw Mir technology up there with the radiation problems. Resupply will be much more expensive.


We discussed this in the Heavy-Lift boosters section

Your figures for Angara 5 are on the low side. If you look at my post #9 you will see details for Angara A5 and Angara A5/KVRB given in a table at the bottom of the report. It is 24.5 tons to LEO for both configuration (uses different 2nd stages). For GTO it is 5.4 tons and 6.6 tons respectively.

If they do build in BEO then a space tug could simplify their logistics. I have not see any in their plans but they could buy one or two from the Chinese:D

FarmMarsNow
2014-Jun-03, 03:03 PM
The next segment to be attached to the node module is a habitable orbital laboratory, which could serve as the cornerstone of a future deep-space outpost. The new 20-ton module is scheduled to dock to the International Space Station, ISS, in 2017 or 2018. That is a cool idea.

Do you think Russia is interested in funding a habitation that actually spins to simulate gravity? That would be another very impressive 1st.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-03, 03:07 PM
That is a cool idea.

Do you think Russia is interested in funding a habitation that actually spins to simulate gravity? That would be another very impressive 1st.

I have not seen such a proposal but I agree that would be something to aim for in BEO.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-03, 03:07 PM
Your figures for Angara 5 are on the low side.
I didnt state figures for the Angara 5 (at least not in this thread)
My wiki link corresponds with what you are saying with the exception of KVRB/GTO which wiki didn't have a number.



If they do build in BEO then a space tug could simplify their logistics. I have not see any in their plans but they could buy one or two from the Chinese:D
I suggest we don't go there. There is no information about that craft except sound bites and a statement saying it can operate for 6 and a half hours. We know nothing about payload and thrust. Only that it's a restartable upper stage.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-03, 03:34 PM
I didnt state figures for the Angara 5 (at least not in this thread)
My wiki link corresponds with what you are saying with the exception of KVRB/GTO which wiki didn't have a number.



I suggest we don't go there. There is no information about that craft except sound bites and a statement saying it can operate for 6 and a half hours. We know nothing about payload and thrust. Only that it's a restartable upper stage.

No you did not but did state it could only go to LEO.

I agree until we do get more information on their "space tug". As it is slated for end of this year I expect to see more details in the next few months.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-03, 05:53 PM
No you did not but did state it could only go to LEO.
That was in reference to getting a manned capsule there (I didn't say it explicitely, but I thought it was clear from context).
Further down, I showed why the 5 wouldn't be able to do it, and that the 7 would be at its limit using weight assumptions of a Soyuz capsule.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-03, 07:23 PM
That was in reference to getting a manned capsule there (I didn't say it explicitely, but I thought it was clear from context).
Further down, I showed why the 5 wouldn't be able to do it, and that the 7 would be at its limit using weight assumptions of a Soyuz capsule.


Sorry I did not pick that up. I thought you were talking about the rocket. If we followed the original Soyuz plan of multiple launches and docking to make a larger craft then it will still be possible to go to BEO.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-03, 07:32 PM
Sorry I did not pick that up. I thought you were talking about the rocket.
No problem. After you pointed it out, I re-read my post and saw it wasn't as clear as I thought.


If we followed the original Soyuz plan of multiple launches and docking to make a larger craft then it will still be possible to go to BEO.
Assuming we are limited to Angara... We would have to go all the way back to before the Mir/Almaz days when the original plan called for Soyuz sized modules (7.5t).
Mir was designed with 20t modules. Those would not make it BEO on an Angara.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-03, 11:40 PM
Assuming we are limited to Angara... We would have to go all the way back to before the Mir/Almaz days when the original plan called for Soyuz sized modules (7.5t).
Mir was designed with 20t modules. Those would not make it BEO on an Angara.

That is why I talked of multiple launches. One to take the 20t to LEO. Then another one with a booster, to attach to the 1st and take it to BEO or the moon. We already can do that with the ISS.

Garrison
2014-Jun-04, 09:18 PM
That is why I talked of multiple launches. One to take the 20t to LEO. Then another one with a booster, to attach to the 1st and take it to BEO or the moon. We already can do that with the ISS.

Neowatcher said going back to before Mir, so 7.5 tonnes not 20. And of course your plan misses out on the little detail of a lander. The ISS modules only had to be launched to LEO.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-04, 10:20 PM
Neowatcher said going back to before Mir, so 7.5 tonnes not 20. And of course your plan misses out on the little detail of a lander. The ISS modules only had to be launched to LEO.

We are talking of setting up a space station in BEO and not land on the moon. Specifically about the extension segment the Russian's are building for the present ISS. The 20t comes from Neowatcher - "Mir was designed with 20t modules. Those would not make it BEO on an Angara."

publiusr
2014-Jun-07, 04:59 PM
Thus their new HLV plans. Same module, bigger ride, perhaps.

Russia might be wise to develop a free-flyer for ISS, like Columbus was going to be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-Tended_Free_Flyer

With a station broken into two parts, the free flyer can grow crystals without human activity disturbing them--then re-dock once finished.

Garrison
2014-Jun-07, 06:48 PM
We are talking of setting up a space station in BEO and not land on the moon. Specifically about the extension segment the Russian's are building for the present ISS. The 20t comes from Neowatcher - "Mir was designed with 20t modules. Those would not make it BEO on an Angara."

And again he said you would have to go back to before MIR; so again 7.5 tonnes not 20. Besides which why do you think sending payloads to somewhere like the Lagrange points lets you send larger ones than landing on the Moon?

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-07, 08:43 PM
And again he said you would have to go back to before MIR; so again 7.5 tonnes not 20. Besides which why do you think sending payloads to somewhere like the Lagrange points lets you send larger ones than landing on the Moon?

If you had read the 1st post I started this thread with, the NEM module is 21 tons and the node module is 4 tons. So we are looking at moving a total of 25 tons.

Garrison
2014-Jun-07, 08:56 PM
If you had read the 1st post I started this thread with, the NEM module is 21 tons and the node module is 4 tons. So we are looking at moving a total of 25 tons.

and if you read what anyone else wrote you would realize that can't be done with the rocket you claimed it could, unless you are now claiming the purely speculative NEM module could be chopped into three pieces?

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-07, 09:40 PM
and if you read what anyone else wrote you would realize that can't be done with the rocket you claimed it could, unless you are now claiming the purely speculative NEM module could be chopped into three pieces?

When we are talking about linking to the ISS it is LEO and not GEO or BEO.

The Angara 1 can take the node module to LEO.

And the Angara 5 will be capable to take the NEM module to LEO.

After 2020/22 then how the Russians move the segments from the ISS to wherever is the discussion.

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-09, 11:58 AM
When we are talking about linking to the ISS it is LEO and not GEO or BEO.
Let me remind you of your quote that started this line of discussion.


Sorry I did not pick that up. I thought you were talking about the rocket. If we followed the original Soyuz plan of multiple launches and docking to make a larger craft then it will still be possible to go to BEO.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-09, 03:40 PM
So

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-09, 03:44 PM
The Russian were going to link it 1st to the ISS and later move it to BEO. That would be 2020/22. By that time their super heavy rocket might be available

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

NEOWatcher
2014-Jun-09, 05:12 PM
So
So I'm having trouble following what your points are. We talk about one thing then bring another item into the topic.

When I originally commented on your BEO statement, I spoke about the Soyuz capsule reaching a BEO station and that no Angara rocket will be able to make a direct trip with the capsule or any individual module.

You disputed that, then you start bringing up other methods.
Yes; multiple rendezvous can do it, but that seems like a lot of overhead before they get a SHLV in place (and yes, A7 is not SHLV in this context)



That would be 2020/22. By that time their super heavy rocket might be available
6 years to go from proposal, through design, construction and testing. With the Russian space budget, I find that difficult to believe that it would be achievable f they are going to continue with all the other things you claim they are going to do in the next decade or so.

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-09, 10:18 PM
I just realised I might be mixing up the discussion we are having here and in the space race thread on the Chinese human space capsule. Both relate to getting to BEO. Let me clerify my own thoughts and come back to you.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-10, 05:33 AM
We were discussing the Shenzhou and you convinced me that the Long March 5 will not be able to launch it to the moon. That will require the Long March 9.
In the case of the new Russian extension to the ISS I agree that the Angara 5 will only be able to take it to the ISS. Moving it from the ISS to BEO can be done 2 ways that I can think of.
1) if the supper heavy is ready by then, to use that.

2) To launch another Angara 5 with a 3rd stage to be used as a tug to move the Russian ISS segment.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

selvaarchi
2014-Jun-10, 05:48 AM
If they then want to send a manned capsule to it, in the short term they will need a space tug. As you said the Angara 5 will not be able to launch it directly to BEO

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

selvaarchi
2014-Sep-03, 12:29 PM
Russia's extension is planned for 2018, but will be a stand alone and dock with the ISS only when needed. It is an automated space lab named the Oka-T module.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/oka_t.html


Then, during Vladimir Putin's visit to Vostochny on Sept. 2, 2014, an official TV report caught a glimpse of a presentation handed out at a meeting chaired by the Russian president. The document revealed drawings of the Oka-T module and the Soyuz-2 rocket under a title "Achieving the first launch within manned space program in 2018."

Given the enormous political weight of the 2018 deadline, there is little doubt that a long-delayed Oka-T mission will finally get proper funding and attention. Moreover, given a possible multi-year gap between the introduction of the Oka-T and the arrival of the manned spacecraft at Vostochny, multiple Oka-T missions could be undertaken. However developers will likely be hard-pressed to provide the new platforms with adequate scientific payloads...

selvaarchi
2014-Nov-21, 11:36 AM
Russia still has plans to have its own spacean time station. In the mean time they will be adding another segment to the ISS.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Russia_studies_construction_of_its_own_orbital_sta tion_999.html


"Media reports on Russia's plan to build and put on orbit a new space station in 2017-19 are false," the source said, adding that the new orbital modules currently under construction are intended to be docked with the ISS by 2017, not to comprise Russia's own orbital station.

Russia plans to stay in the ISS program until at least 2020, according to the source.

In May, Roscosmos said Russia has been developing a national program of manned space explorations which will replace the ISS program after 2020.

NEOWatcher
2014-Nov-21, 04:19 PM
Russia still has plans to have its own spacean time station. In the mean time they will be adding another segment to the ISS.
A bit of conflicting information there, but mostly because of the famous "un-named source". At first it sounded like they may be getting a head start on their station by attaching modules to ISS for later detachment as a base for the new station. For sure; it sounds like funding isn't there yet for an early station.
Then I ran across this article (http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/17-11-2014/129053-russia_space_station-0/).
They are planning a completely different orbit for the new station. (much higher inclination I assume)
This would make it difficult (although not impossible) to maneuver the modules to the new orbit.

selvaarchi
2014-Nov-22, 01:51 PM
A bit of conflicting information there, but mostly because of the famous "un-named source". At first it sounded like they may be getting a head start on their station by attaching modules to ISS for later detachment as a base for the new station. For sure; it sounds like funding isn't there yet for an early station.
Then I ran across this article (http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/17-11-2014/129053-russia_space_station-0/).
They are planning a completely different orbit for the new station. (much higher inclination I assume)
This would make it difficult (although not impossible) to maneuver the modules to the new orbit.
One of the options on the Russian table to consider is attaching their new segment to the Chinese space station.

They are in talks on jointly doing some space missions and the Chinese space station looks favourable from a costing angle.

NEOWatcher
2014-Nov-23, 03:44 PM
One of the options on the Russian table to consider is attaching their new segment to the Chinese space station.

They are in talks on jointly doing some space missions and the Chinese space station looks favourable from a costing angle.
For their purposes, they will have to convince the Chinese to put the station in a very high inclination. Possible, but could be an issue.

selvaarchi
2014-Dec-19, 09:38 AM
Going back to what I started this thread with. Russia's proposal for expansion to the ISS. There is now a bit more information on Russian plans from two articles from the same interview with Roscosmos head Oleg Ostapenko. The one from spacedaily also has information on the New Super-Heavy Rocket Design.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/vshos.html


As often happens in human space flight, the projects are driven forward by reasons other than those officially announced. Industry sources familiar with the situation explained that the decade-old concept to follow the ISS with a small Russian station had received a new impetus in the past few months due to a combination of technical, political and financial problems.

At the heart of the latest plan is the botched construction of the Multi-purpose Laboratory Module, MLM, the Russia's next big piece of the International Space Station, ISS. After many years of delays, the price tag for the MLM project ballooned to one billion rubles, however the all-but-completed module had to be grounded until at least 2017 due to severe quality control problems during its manufacturing at GKNPTs Khrunichev in Moscow. Repairs of the module were estimated at another billion rubles and GKNPTs Khrunichev was expected to cover this cost from its own reserves. However, the nearly bankrupt company came back with an announcement that it already owed around a billion Euro and would not be able to pay for the future work. Even if repaired and successfully launched, the MLM module, which would have taken more than two decades to build, could arrive at the ISS on the eve of its retirement.

As an alternative, Russian space officials came up with a new scheme to build a whole new station around the MLM, instead of launching it to the ISS. The project with an estimated price tag from four to five billion rubles would cover a five-year delay in the construction of the ISS. The new Russian station would also utilize all future Russian modules, which were expected to follow MLM to the ISS, such as the Node Module, UM; the Science and Power Module, NEM; an Inflatable Habitat, and the OKA-T laboratory.


http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Plans_to_Create_Russian_National_Orbital_Station_C onfirmed_999.html


Russia's space agency Roscosmos will decide on the design of the country's new super-heavy rocket in January 2015, Roscosmos chief Oleg Ostapenko said Monday.

"We have already received blueprints from three leading space rocket enterprises. A panel of experts has already started considering them, and we will select the winner <...> in January," he told reporters.

Roscosmos is looking to develop a super-heavy carrier rocket to be used in Russia's lunar program. Andrei Mazurin, who heads one of the space agency's departments, told RIA Novosti in October the launch vehicle would be able to lift up to 80 tons of cargo into space. In the long term, a rocket capable of carrying 130 to 160 tons could be developed, he added.

Russia's largest existing rocket, the Proton, can launch payloads of up to 20 tons. The modular Angara rocket is also under development and comes in several versions, the largest of which is planned to send up to 35 tons into orbit.

selvaarchi
2015-Feb-06, 08:39 AM
The article is from July 2013, but find the contents interesting. The Russians are working on inflatable space station modules. Not only that, the USSR pioneered inflatable structures in space with a flexible air lock that was launched aboard the Voskhod-2 spacecraft in 1965. Wow, that is a long, long time ago, like 50 years.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a9270/russia-is-building-an-inflatable-space-module-of-its-own-15706708/


Although inflatable structures had never been widely used in space, they have attracted the attention of space architects since the dawn of the space era, as the most effective and economical way of creating a large pressurized habitat.

The USSR pioneered inflatable structures in space with a flexible air lock that was launched aboard the Voskhod-2 spacecraft in 1965. During that historic mission, the inflatable design enabled the world's first space walk, by Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov. Soviet engineers also used inflatable airbags to soften landings of its early lunar probes. More recently, a Russian firm tried (with mixed results) to return cargo from orbit using an inflatable heat shield. (One small experimental cargo did return to Earth successfully in 2000, but a larger inflatable device was lost during the reentry, and several further reentry attempts were aborted due to launch failures.)

It was NASA's Johnson Space Center, though, that has come closest to launching a manned inflatable module, to be called Transhab. Conceived as living quarters of a Mars-bound spacecraft, Transhab was intended to ride on the shuttle to the ISS to demonstrate the feasibility of inflatable technology. But because of financial and political problems, Congress killed the maverick project in 2000.

Nicolas
2015-Feb-06, 11:12 AM
If you're talking about pioneering inflatable structures in early spaceflight, you cannot ignore the balloon satellites such as the Echo's (USA). Which had no airlock, but were HUGE (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Echo_II.jpg). 1960 & 1964 fo Echo 1 & 2. It total, the US had launched 5 of these balloon satellites before Voskhod-2.

selvaarchi
2015-Feb-06, 01:51 PM
If you're talking about pioneering inflatable structures in early spaceflight, you cannot ignore the balloon satellites such as the Echo's (USA). Which had no airlock, but were HUGE (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Echo_II.jpg). 1960 & 1964 fo Echo 1 & 2. It total, the US had launched 5 of these balloon satellites before Voskhod-2.

The comments section covers just this point. Anatoly Zak reply was "Lawrence, good point. I do remember very well the iconic photo of Echo inflated inside a hangar. However, from the stand point of manned space flight, Voskhod-2 still qualifies as pioneering in inflatable modules."

NEOWatcher
2015-Feb-06, 02:14 PM
I'm surprised the Russian program didn't start developing one long ago.

Although not flown or fully developed, NASA already had constructed a prototype inflatable habitat in 1961.

Voskhod-2 was interesting, but it only needed to survive for less than an hour. So; micrometeorite damage and longevity were not an issue. That was the issue that NASA was concerned about with their habitat. It never flew again, but at least it was an effort. Unfortunately, the push for the moon put NASA's program on the back burner.


It was NASA's Johnson Space Center, though, that has come closest to launching a manned inflatable module, to be called Transhab.
I don't understand how they can say "closest" when it never went past the prototype tests and more importantly, Bigelow actually flew 2 of them.

publiusr
2015-Feb-07, 08:39 PM
Im interested in the very large radar antennas that the Russians are working on.
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/ska.html

I think Ares V was to have launched a massive dish for in space research.

selvaarchi
2015-Feb-11, 09:52 AM
Russia is designing a new air lock module. With present difficulties with the US it will most probably be attached to the proposed new Russian Space Station or even the Russian proposal to have a BRICS Space Station.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/shm.html


Unlike the one-room SO module, serving as an airlock onboard the Russian segment of the ISS since 2001, the new module would feature an expanded two-section design. The main ball-shaped compartment, derived from the Node Module, UM, would feature egress and ingress hatches and would be depressurized during spacewalks. In the meantime a newly developed cylindrical section would contain all the support systems and would remain pressurized.

The initial concept of the module featured a single docking port on the cylindrical section, making it a "dead end" for the Russian segment in terms of access for incoming ships. However, the later incarnation of the design appearing around 2014, showed a second docking port on its outer end, which would open the module for arriving Soyuz and Progress vehicles.

As of 2011, the long-term plan for the development of the Russian segment called for the launch of the Airlock Module after the delivery of one or two Science and Power Modules, NEMs. The Airlock Module would be launched on the Soyuz-2 rocket along with the modified propulsion section of a Progress cargo ship, which would boost the vehicle to the station and dock it to the Node Module, UM. The Progress space tug would then be jettisoned from the airlock and sent on a controlled reentry over the Pacific to burn-up in the atmosphere.

By 2014, with the retirement of the ISS on the horizon, the launch of the new airlock to the ISS was no longer considered likely, leaving the role of exit point for Russian spacewalks to the Docking Compartments, as long as their safe operation could be certified during the entire lifetime of the outpost. However, the Airlock Module soon re-emerged in the plans for a new station.

selvaarchi
2015-Feb-25, 05:32 AM
A bit of conflicting information there, but mostly because of the famous "un-named source". At first it sounded like they may be getting a head start on their station by attaching modules to ISS for later detachment as a base for the new station. For sure; it sounds like funding isn't there yet for an early station.
Then I ran across this article (http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/17-11-2014/129053-russia_space_station-0/).
They are planning a completely different orbit for the new station. (much higher inclination I assume)
This would make it difficult (although not impossible) to maneuver the modules to the new orbit.

Looks like you were spot on when you stated "they may be getting a head start on their station by attaching modules to ISS for later detachment as a base for the new station."

But I never expected in a million years, they would be the first country to endorse the US suggestion to extend the life of the ISS by 4 years to 2024.

http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/02/24/russian-space-agency-endorses-iss-until-2024/


Russia plans to stay part of the International Space Station partnership until 2024, then undock its modules to create a standalone base in orbit, the Russian space agency announced Tuesday.

A statement posted to the Russian space agency’s website said a meeting of the Roscosmos science and technical council considered Russia’s future human spaceflight plans, favoring the continued use of the International Space Station until 2024.

Then Russia plans to remove its modules from the International Space Station to form an all-Russian complex in orbit.

The statement said “a configuration of a multi-purpose laboratory module, a (docking) node module, and a scientific power module creates a promising Russian space station to meet the challenges of providing secure access to space (for Russia).”

NEOWatcher
2015-Feb-25, 06:38 PM
But I never expected in a million years, they would be the first country to endorse the US suggestion to extend the life of the ISS by 4 years to 2024.
In many ways, I'm not that surprised. Eliminating the wildcard of Ukraine tensions, it seems logical. Russia has been struggling in the funding of their space program, while at the same time increasing their infrastructure and building new rockets.

It's going to take time to get the heavier Angara rockets up and running. On the Angara thread, it was left off as 2020 for the A5 entering service. On wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_(rocket_family)), they are saying 2021 for that rocket with the Vostochny launch center.
So; that already puts any hopes for building a new station past the 2020 time frame.

Couple the activity of the new rocket and facilities with possible funding issues, it will take time to develop extra modules for their own station. So 2024 or so sounds like it would be a good fit for them to concentrate on their station.

selvaarchi
2015-Feb-27, 01:36 PM
Next segment for the ISS, being built by the Russians will be ready in 2016.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Russias_New_ISS_Module_to_Be_Ready_in_Early_2016_9 99.html


Russia's Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center will finish assembling the new module for the International Space Station (ISS) in February 2016, the center's acting chief said Wednesday.

"We will finish equipping the module in February 2016. Then the module will be transferred to [Russian rocket and space corporation] RSC Energia for final adjustments. After that, it will be ready to be launched and subsequently integrated into the international space station," Andrey Kalinovsky said.

The launch of module Nauka ("Science" in Russian) initially planned for 2007, has been repeatedly delayed.

selvaarchi
2015-Mar-05, 02:10 PM
NASA making plans for Russia’s secession from ISS, but my only concern with that is, where is the money to do it coming from. To replace the Zvezda propulsion module by 2024 (the stated year, Russia plans to undock its modules from the ISS), NASA needs to start the project soon. With NASA already battling to get $1.2 billion it requested in 2016 for its commercial crew program I do not see more money for NASA to undertake new projects.

Also by 2024 the maintenance cost of the ISS will be getting pretty high. An option will be to replace it with commercial modules from American companies but again it comes down to $$$.


http://spacenews.com/nasa-making-plans-for-russian-secession-from-iss/


NASA is mulling plans to replace the International Space Station’s Zvezda propulsion module in case the Russian government makes good on its recently announced plan to abandon the orbital outpost after 2024, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said March 5.

“We are responsible for the day-to-day operations and control of the international space station [but] they [Russia] provide propulsion,” Bolden said during a House Appropriations commerce, justice, science subcommittee hearing. “[W]e are planning right now for them to at some point to take away the propulsion module.”

Bolden did not elaborate on the agency’s plans, and NASA spokesman Allard Beutel, reached by email March 5, had no immediate comment.

Glom
2015-Mar-05, 03:01 PM
So are they expanding it or abandoning it?

NEOWatcher
2015-Mar-05, 04:07 PM
NASA making plans for Russia’s secession from ISS, but my only concern with that is, where is the money to do it coming from. To replace the Zvezda propulsion module by 2024 (the stated year, Russia plans to undock its modules from the ISS), NASA needs to start the project soon. With NASA already battling to get $1.2 billion it requested in 2016 for its commercial crew program I do not see more money for NASA to undertake new projects.
It looks like spacenews has taken down the article. I did googling, and the google links also failed, and I can't find any references from spacenews main page.

Anyway, according to Docmordrid (http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?151208-Russia-to-deny-US-space-station-access&p=2213271#post2213271), the US does have a backup for Zvezda.
Also; since the Progress vehicles have also served for boosting, I would think that ATV or Dragon might be able to do it (maybe with some modification).

Besides, with earlier news about Russia possibly going on with an extension, there might not be a problem.


Also by 2024 the maintenance cost of the ISS will be getting pretty high. An option will be to replace it with commercial modules from American companies but again it comes down to $$$.
Yep; that's why they only extended it to 2024. If it comes down to a commercial venture not being able to take over, then the splash it. That would be a shame, but it has been the plan.