Piloted cosmonautics in the 21st century

At the beginning of 2016 , whether humanity is needed by a manned cosmonautics , a scientific journalist , Moderator KNG Alexander Sergeyev and astronomer, Art. scientific. sore. GAISH MSU Vladimir Surdin .

Twisted to tablets
Space maps ,
And the navigator clarifies
The last time the route ...

Vladimir Voinovich (1957)

Alexander Sergeev:

Often it is believed that the manned cosmonautics is not needed, that it “has always been political phallometry between superpower” and all the tasks of space research can be performed by robots ( http://j.mp/1mbessi , http://j.mp/1tawlxv ). Although in certain aspects this judgment is not without reason, in the general case it is erroneous.

Naturally, political competition was the main engine of manned astronautics. As a result, these technologies were historically created several prematurely, which was due to which they were associated with excessive risks and costs. I think that they will become really in demand after another half a century. But since the technologies have been created, it is advisable to preserve and improve them, and not throw them, so that then to be recreated from scratch. This is the meaning of unhurried activity around the ISS.

The only key problem in the development of a person in space is the high cost of the withdrawal of cargo into orbit. Because of this, it is too expensive to create a full-fledged technological infrastructure outside the Earth. And without it, risks are very high, which, in turn, increases costs. It turns out a vicious circle. If in one way or another it is possible to significantly reduce the cost of delivery, the development of astronautics will accelerate sharply.

This is fundamentally possible. According to the Tsiolkovsky formula for overclocking 1 kg to the first cosmic speed using chemical engines, you need only about 20 kg of fuel, that is, about 10 dollars. The real cost of cargo delivery to the ISS is about 30 thousand dollars per kilogram.

The wrapping of 3.5 orders (!) Is associated with traditional technological solutions and organizational processes, as well as forced security requirements (due to the impossibility of providing technical assistance in flight). Almost certainly, this cost can be reduced ten times due to scaling space activities, creating technological infrastructure in orbit and implementing original ideas, such as launches from high -altitude platforms or electromagnetic catapults.

As for the need for manned cosmonautics, there are tasks that in the foreseeable future are not feasible for machine guns in space. A few years ago I read an American report on this topic. The main of these tasks was called geological drilling on the surface of other celestial bodies. It was not about modest experiments, as on the Moon-24 or on Kuriositi, but about a full-fledged reconnaissance drilling for tens and hundreds of meters.

I also propose to compare the speed of movement on the surface:

• Apollo 17 Lunar Rover-36 km in 3 days-12 km/day.
• Luno Road-2-42 km for 4 months-350 m/day.
• “Opporty” - 42 km in 11.5 years - 10 m/day.

How to make a space base profitable ?

It is believed that even with a decrease in the cost of bringing into orbit by an order of magnitude and the growth of orbital traffic by two orders of magnitude, the manned astronautics will not find a commercial excuse. I believe that this is not entirely true. Already now there are directions that are on the verge of profitability, and if the cost of excretion decreases by an order of magnitude and a half, then working business ideas will simply certainly appear.

Now six people live on the ISS. If we take an increase in orbital traffic by a hundred times, then the cosmic population should grow even more, since there will be significant savings in resources due to scaling and synergy. So, about a thousand people work in orbit. What can they do there?

It is more or less clear, which is not astronomical observations, since for this, even on earth observatories, the presence of a person is usually not required.

The unique trade proposal of the space base includes prolonged weightlessness, a high vacuum, an impressive type of earth from space, the possibility of assembly and maintenance of spacecraft without information from orbit. Perhaps I missed something, but these points are obvious.

First of all, a hotel is created there. Even now, when a tourist ticket for the ISS costs more than $ 20 million, there is a turn of those who wish. And on a miserable suborbital jump over 200 thousand - too. I think that many will want to spend a vacation in an orbital hotel at a huge space station with a population of hundreds of people for a couple of millions, try a bunch of attractions there (from sports games in zero gravity to output into outer space), get acquainted with the work of various commercial, technological and scientific teams.

Next, a film studio for filming in zero gravity is built. It is clear that even now in Hollywood they manage to create the impression of weightlessness in various space films. But for such effects there are many restrictions, and the accompanying computer support is expensive. When the budgets of the films are calculated by hundreds of millions, it may be justified for 20 million to send a film crew with actors to orbit.

Do not forget about the advertising potential of the City in Orbit. Companies will pay for the placement of their logos at the station, the supply of their products to it, shooting their commercials there, sending the winners of promo-loters. Surely there will be new unexpected ideas like a recent proposal to arrange artificial meteoric rains over cities, dropping special capsules from orbit.

Repair dock in space

The next natural direction is a repair dock for satellites. Now most satellites are built on full autonomy. This forces all systems to do supernight, which means expensive. The errors of excretion, as a rule, make satellites useless. Insurance covers the cost of devices, but not missed. Finally, many companions during operation become obsolete morally.

An example of a Hubble telescope shows that a satellite service can significantly extend his active life. A tugboat with an ion engine can bring satellites to the dock for servicing, which are out of order, which are out of order, in need of modernization or refueling. By the way, the work of many comic observatories is limited by the reserves of liquid helium on board. In the dock they could be replenished.

The development of the idea of ​​repairing dock will be a construction shipyard for large satellites and spaceships. Now the complexity of research satellites and interplanetary stations is limited to carrying capacity and dimensions of launch vehicles. As well as the fact that the spacecraft should work flawlessly immediately after the stressful conditions of the missile start.

With a decrease in the cost of excretion and the presence of an orbital assembly shipyard, many restrictions on the design of large spacecraft would be removed. Also, the issues of piloted flights to other planets would also cease to be so problematic. In particular, it would be possible to remove the most difficult problem of the radiation safety of the crew, since the mass of radiation protection would no longer be a restraining factor.

Research base in space

The next step is the creation of a space base for a systematic collection, delivery and study of samples from various bodies of the solar system. There is no need to first get out of the gravitational and atmospheric well of the Earth, and then return to it, when flying. Sunders with ion engines can start directly from the space station and return to it. It can also conduct the entire cycle of research, with the exception of the most exotic ones.

As for research, I believe that the main emphasis should be made on medicine and biology in conditions of zero or reduced gravity. The emergence of new materials that are justified to be produced in zero gravity is also not excluded.

Cosmic city

And finally, let's not forget that human settlements exist not only to supply something somewhere. They just live in them who are engaged in a variety of things. It is natural that as the space base grows, some people will become simply its inhabitants. Probably, at first it will be expensive to live there and only very wealthy people can afford it. But someone will have to serve them. And the prices of this service will take into account the "orbital margin". So all these people will form their market.

Finally, research on optimization of life at the orbital station itself will go. Let's say it may turn out that it is more profitable to supply the station with oxygen from the ground, but from the moon as part of the regolith. And aluminum can be extracted from it for its own structural needs.

In short, if the population becomes large enough, the station is not immediately at the station, but its own economy will gradually start, and the project will begin to look for earnings - tourism, advertising, exclusive apartments, service of space technology, experiments, shooting and entertainment in zero gravity and outdoor space. In general, normal human life. Only to start it, it is necessary that the cost of excretion into orbit decreases by an order of magnitude, and preferably by two. But what is needed for this is not yet clear.

It is necessary to change the strategy

Vladimir Surdin:

The birth of manned astronautics in the 1960s was a natural stage in technological progress. Everyone was interested in it - engineers, doctors, ideologists. The appearance of a person in a near -earth orbit and further on the moon greatly changed the worldview of the enlightened part of earthlings, stimulated the progress of science.

But in recent decades, stagnation in manned astronautics. Its development practically stopped in the mid-1980s. It became clear that in a near -earth orbit it was dangerous to remain more than a year, and far from the ground - for more than six months. That all defense and economic tasks (land monitoring, communication, navigation, etc.) are more efficiently solved by unmanned vehicles. A person in space remains an element of state prestige, but over the years the effectiveness and this role of his role are reduced.

Now astronauts are present only at the ISS and are mainly engaged in maintaining the station’s performance. The hopes for the development of new technologies in zero gravity (ideal crystals, pure medicines) are obviously not justified. Scientific experiments for the ISS are conducted. But if you do not take into account mercantile considerations (i.e. financing), then scientists do not burn with the desire to post their devices on the ISS, preferring unspial devices. When sending a scientific attitude to the ISS, it still has to be made as automated as possible and supply additional devices that neutralize the harmful effects (vibration, etc.) of astronauts and their life support systems.

As far as I know, the manned astronautics eats more than a third of the budget of civilian space agencies, without bringing any significant scientific and technical results, unlike unmanned orbital devices and interplanetary probes.

Nevertheless, according to the law of Parkinson, the staff of any department only increases over time. Officials from manned astronautics declare new ambitious goals for her (flights to asteroids, to Mars), not taking real steps in this direction. Even modeling long flights on Earth (for example, “Mars-500”), they do not create conditions, as close to cosmic-I mean radiation.

Of course, it would be short -sighted on the basis of the foregoing to prohibit manned flights and, as a result, lose the developed technologies. But it is necessary to change the strategy. Technologies for a person’s stay in space are already used by private firms developing space tourism, so they will not be lost. And it is advisable to spend state money on a solution to fundamental problems.

The previous generation of people went down in the history of civilization with the first steps into space. And what will the current generation answer? If you reorient the priorities of the large cosmonautics to create new interplanetary probes and space telescopes, then our generation could become the first life out of the ground. In my opinion, this is a worthy task, having solved which we will reveal new prospects for humanity.

Alexander Sergeev:

I completely agree that with the invariability of the technologies of bringing into orbit, the change of strategy indicated by Vladimir Georgievich is justified and even necessary. However, I was interested in the situation when the cost of withdrawing can be radically reduced. In this case, it can be ensured in space protection against radiation (this is only a matter of screens), riding the crews from the constant exposure of zero gravity (due to the twist of large stations) and significantly reduce psychological costs (by increasing the number of crews and the level of flight safety). Thus, only the high cost of the withdrawal into orbit prevents radical cosmic expansion. Technically feasible alternatives to missile technologies have already been invented. The one who implements them will belong to space. And until then, yes, only robots and astronauts of prestige.