It's Official: Russia And The US Will Work Together on The First-Ever Moon Station


Recommended Posts

"While some may still debate whether the world is in the midst of another Cold War, the Space Race, at least, does not look set for a redux. In fact, Russia and the U.S. have just agreed to work together on building the moon's first space station."

 

"There are no borders in space." :D 

 

It's Official: Russia And The US Will Work Together on The First-Ever Moon Station

 

Russia and US will cooperate to build moon's first space station

 

NASA and Roscosmos to study Deep Space Gateway

 

NASA and Russia Partner Up for Crewed Deep-Space Missions

 

 

(Superb) Russian space writer Anatoly Zak of russianspaceweb.com publushed a good article on the Planetary Society site a few months ago. The preparation for this took quite some time, including meetings with the various ISS partners.

 

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/guest-blogs/2017/20170309-nasa-iss-partners-cislunar-station.html

 

RSW: http://www.russianspaceweb.com

  • Like 3
  • 4 months later...
Quote

 

This Was a Huge Week for the NASA-Russia Lunar Space Station and the Future of Spaceflight

 

Major discussions in Tokyo this past week could decide the future of space exploration for decades to come.

 

 

  • Like 3

There's much going on with the US side coming to terms with using commercial operators for habitats, cargo and personnel delivery.  Look for a Cislunar COTS program sooner than later, with SpaceX, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, OrbitalATK, Bigelow Aerospace and Sierra Nevada in the mix.

 

There have also been hints from VP Mike Pence's Chief of Staff that Falcon Heavy could figure prominently, the US VP also chairing the National Space Council.

 

SpaceX's BFR & BFS are also lunar-capable, needing only to fuel up in LEO to do a direct lunar landing and return to Earth. We now know the factories will be in San Pedro California and at KSC, and that NASA and the US Dept. of Transportation have taken notice of its broad capabilities.

 

The Russian side is also spinning up with the new Soyuz family in development, and the Federation spacecraft well along.

  • Like 1

There's much going on with the US side coming to terms with using commercial operators for habitats, cargo and personnel delivery.  Look for a Cislunar COTS program sooner than later, with SpaceX, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, OrbitalATK, Bigelow Aerospace and Sierra Nevada in the mix.

 

There have also been hints from VP Mike Pence's Chief of Staff that Falcon Heavy could figure prominently, the US VP also chairing the National Space Council.

 

SpaceX's BFR & BFS are also lunar-capable, needing only to fuel up in LEO to do a direct lunar landing and return to Earth. We now know the factories will be in San Pedro California and at KSC, and that NASA and the US Dept. of Transportation have taken notice of its broad capabilities.

 

The Russian side is also spinning up with the new Soyuz 5 family in development, which includes a heavy lifter, and the Federation spacecraft well along. Also some interesting new habitat modules.

 

Japan and ESA have many items to contribute, with JAXA, ESA, Thales, Ariane, etc. well along.

 

China could contribute heavy lift if their Long March 5 Y2 could be made to behave, very likely - they're good and getting better, and Ukraine is developing a commercial heavy lifter named Crypton.

 

That's a wealth of riches..

I agree completely with the article above. There needs to be commonality with all segments, components and parts. No mismatches, adapters, none of those things which will only complicate matters or reduce the efficiency of the systems or the components.

 

The power grid is a different matter entirely -- but by then we get into another barrel of fish that I'm just not in the mood to deal with right now. :laugh: Let's leave it at "I wouldn't use 120/240 on the main bus for any reason".

7 minutes ago, Unobscured Vision said:

The power grid is a different matter entirely -- but by then we get into another barrel of fish that I'm just not in the mood to deal with right now. :laugh: Let's leave it at "I wouldn't use 120/240 on the main bus for any reason".

Actually, that's an easy fix, the biggest investor into the program can dictate the power requirements. Plus most nations already have power blueprints for every other nation, that and switchable power supply units.

6 hours ago, Riva said:

Oh did the americans get over their "our new space station will be bigger" statements? :D

Actually, a single BFS Spaceship in Earth or lunar orbit will be configurable to have 40+ cabins, a command deck, cargo deck, public spaces deck   with a galley, a life support system good for about 100 people, etc.

 

A single Bigelow station module could be from 330 m3 to 2,200 m3, the latter more than 2x the size of ISS.  

  • Like 1
  • 2 months later...

 

The nuts and bolts of a US Cis-Lunar commercial services  program for the Gateway is already underway in NextSTEP 2,  Connercial Crew and Commercial Resupply Services 2 with more coming. SpaceX's ginormous BFS spaceship should also be there.

 

Russias new Soyuz 5 launcher and Federation crew vehicle should be ready by then, as should a Soyuz 5 based heavy lift launcher.

 

http://m.aviationweek.com/space-symposium/russia-wants-lunar-gateway-be-global-project

Quote

Russia Wants Lunar Gateway To Be Global Project

COLORADO SPRINGS—The International Space Station (ISS) partnership should take on the development and operation of NASA’s planned Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway as part of an expanded, multilateral approach to space exploration and development, Sergei Krikalev, director of human spaceflight for the Russian space agency Roscosmos, said April 18.


NASA intends to build the gateway beginning with the 2022 launch of a power and propulsion module. The outpost is intended to serve as a staging platform for human sorties to the lunar surface and a base to assemble spacecraft for eventual journeys to Mars.

Roscosmos proposes to add a research module to the gateway and fly crews there using a superheavy-lift rocket and manned spaceship.

"We see this new international initiative as a sequel of the International Space Station program to be built under the same principles ... as an international project without the primacy or the priority of one of the participating partners," Krikalev said at the 34th Space Symposium here.

>

  • Like 1

This Axiom Space  proposal from former ISS managers and tech people has evolved a bit in the last year or so, particularly the radiator/solar module and the use of a module based on Cygnus, and parts of it are being considered for the LOP-Gateway station.

 

(Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway)

 

It's possible something like this + a Bigelow module could make up much of the Gateway.

 

3D model for browsers

 

https://sketchfab.com/models/45cb595ccdd8406ebd040d97c58e354a/embed


5ae2a2b083487_AxiomSpace800-4.thumb.jpg.f74459666988f9101c5fb49514cec3a4.jpg

Edited by DocM

- The arrangement/design of the Solar Array is horrible. Completely over-complicated and impractical, lacking in redundancy and far too large of a footprint for too little gain;

- Not to mention that the Solar Array in the "sunflower" configuration renders the top attachment node permanently unuseable;

- And why is the long axis of the proposed Station covered in curved PV's? All this serves to do is introduce an inefficiency;

- Using Cygnus and Bigelow habs would be fine, but I'm not seeing anything here that really makes full use of Bigelow's advantages;

 

And that's just glancing at the above image.

 

I cannot believe for one moment that this configuration is in the running as-is. That SA section alone is terrible and too complicated. I'd hope they would seriously vet this and make changes. What's wrong with structural girders and 90-degree long panels? The efficiency is through the roof now, and they can mount the radiators (and lots of other external gear) to 'em. So what if girders are "dumb" -- they work.

I'm no fan of those turkey's tail segmented arrays either. 

 

ISTM,

 

conformal arrays can serve a dual purpose in that they generate power while minimizing solar heating by blocking the sun from the underlaying habitat. The trick is the insulation (aerogel?) or using a standoff mount.

 

In the case of Crew Dragon/Dragon 2 a conformal array is used to  eliminate a failure mode (failed deployment), and to eliminate orbital debris (the covers.) Any excess heat gets dumped by radiators on the other side of the Trunk, along heat from the capsule.

Edited by DocM
  • Like 1
  • 3 months later...

Anatoly Zak of RussianSpaceWeb is reporting the European Space Agency (ESA) and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) are considering SpaceX's Falcon Heavy for their large LOP-G payloads. Falcon Heavy can toss about 20,000kg to a trans-lunar injection (TLI) while still recovering the boosters.

  • Like 1

It's a running thread. :yes: Updates as they come in ... sometimes those updates are few and far between.

 

Unlike what seems to be happening on the Tesla Megathread, which has been hijacked by anarchist enablers who hate anyone with money or who display any kind of success acumen. Seems like those people would be fans of Elon like the rest of us are. Electric Cars, Reusable Rockets, trying to help the world go renewable, etc. etc. ....

 

But then again those folks don't really logic -- or care what reality is.

  • Like 2

"The economics of the future is somewhat different. You see, money doesn't exist in the 24th century. The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." -Picard

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!