Roscosmos Official: U.S.-Russian Space Cooperation Deteriorating
by Douglas Messier
Managing Editor
Although Russian President Vladimir Putin is apparently U.S. President Donald Trump’s favorite autocratic ruler, cooperation between the two nations on future space projects are breaking down, a high-ranking Roscosmos official said.
The Russian space agency posted the following comments on its website.
Ambitious projects connected with Moon colonization could become a major factor of interaction between Russia and the US during these difficult times, says Roscosmos Deputy Director General for International Cooperation Sergey Saveliev.
“I regret that the recent years have seen direct communication channels between Roscosmos and NASA deteriorate significantly. Instead of discussing dozens of projects of mutual interest everything boils down to either launching astronauts to the International Space Station as part of the crewed program or supplying Russian RD-180/181 rocket engines to the US. Ambitious projects connected with Moon colonization could become a major factor for interaction between the two countries during difficult times.“
Sergey Saveliev added that Roscosmos delegation had been officially invited to the US to discuss a wide range of questions, “but in the long run NASA head Jim Bridenstine’s invitation was withdrawn under the pressure of the Senate.“
“We officially invited NASA management to Russia but didn’t receive any answer. I hope it will follow and will be a positive one,” Saveliev says.
The Trump Administration has NASA laser focused on returning U.S. astronauts to the lunar surface in 2024. Last year, the administration moved the target date up from 2028.
Roscosmos Director General Dmitry Rogozin is prohibited from entering the United States because he is one of a group of officials sanctioned over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of that nation’s Crimea region.
Rogozin formerly served as deputy prime minister. He was one of seven Russian officials sanctioned in March 2014 over their involvement in the invasion and annexation.
Rogozin had planned to visit the United States in February 2019 to confer with Bridenstine and other U.S. officials about space cooperation. That invitation was withdrawn after criticism from members of Congress over the decision to temporarily lift the sanctions to allow the visit.
Bridenstine has visited Russia to consult with Roscosmos officials over on-going operations of the space station and NASA’s Artemis lunar program.
In addition to the partnership on ISS, Russia remains crucial to U.S. space operations by supplying RD-180 and RD-181 rocket engines for American launch vehicles.
United Launch Alliance (ULA) uses the RD-180 engine in the first stage of its Atlas V booster. The RD-181 is used in the first stage of Northrop Grumman’s Antares booster.
ULA will use Atlas V to launch crews to the station aboard its Starliner spacecraft. Antares launches Cygnus resupply ships to ISS.
Both companies are developing new launch vehicles that will not use Russian engines. Several years ago, the U.S. government decided to eliminate its dependence on Russian rocket motors on national security grounds.
48 responses to “Roscosmos Official: U.S.-Russian Space Cooperation Deteriorating”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Oh, I doubt Putin is Trump’s favorite autocrat. Not when he’s had so many nice things to say about Piglet – oops, I mean Kim Jong Un.
I don’t doubt the Russians see space co-operation as deteriorating. And I’m equally sure they’re just freakin’ mystified about why that should be. It’s not like Obama ever held their feet to the fire for misbehavior. So what’s with this Trump guy?
A pretty straightforward read between the lines of Saveliev’s whinging shows the Russians to be seriously feeling the pinch of rapidly diminishing space-related revenue from the U.S. and the increasing likelihood the U.S. will simply cut the Russians out of Artemis and Gateway entirely.
I think doing that is actually an extra plus of the Artemis Accords initiative just launched. Russia has already dumped all over the Artemis Accords in official statements so they won’t be signing. And J.B. has already made it pretty clear that the U.S. position is now that accession to the Artemis Accords is a prerequisite for inclusion in Gateway and Artemis.
This is a typically Trumpian negotiating ploy – start by unexpectedly taking something away from your opposite numbers that they thought they already had locked up. Only in this case I don’t think it’s the opening gambit in a negotiation, I think it’s the means by which we start the process of scraping Russia off the soles of our Moon boots while we also establish a growing consensus anent the establishment of certain property rights in space and normative rules of behavior there.
The Russians may finally be figuring out that Trump is not like Obama, drawing “red lines” and then allowing them to be stepped over. I think they’re finally waking up to the fact that the U.S. is walking back its relationship in space with Russia to just ISS and that Russia’s own future manned presence in space will be completely on its own dime once ISS is decommissioned – a dime Russia will find increasingly difficult to produce. No more Uncle Sugar Daddy.
…scraping Russia off the soles of our Moon boots…
Good one.
Actually, I seem to remember a lot of Trumpian saber-rattling that has never amounted to anything. Flatter him and he goes away. Ignore him and he goes away. Rent a bunch of empty resort rooms from him and he goes away.
Or not. It doesn’t matter anyway, because whatever threat he’s making this week will fade in the public consciousness by tomorrow, obliterated by a dozen other attention-grabbing outrageous tweets thrown out like Soviet agitprop to keep everybody confused and distrustful.
The Russians will be buying seats on Dragons while they get their manned efforts in order. Space X could make good money selling rides on used Dragon 2s with Russian only crews at a fraction of the price the Russians pay for in house work. They could even have a Russian mission control running Kerbal Space Program to make them feel useful.
Or rather than sell them Dragon seats, the U.S. can offer them trampolines at a very good price. 🙂
Well the trampolines go without saying. 🙂
The STS (Space Trampoline System) is something NASA could generate PDR on in less than a decade. (Not including cost over runs and schedule slippage)
Sadly – There’s a lot of truth in that….
Heh.
Hah.
hahaha, it would be funny to see Cosmonauts using American rockets as the only means for access to space. Gotta love irony.
About as funny as it is now with us. And about as ironic. But, those are the times we live in.
That would be some sweet irony for sure, but I imagine they’ll just keep using that Soyuz rocket/spacecraft combo indefinitely, much like we keep on keeping on with our B-52s, operational costs and modern capabilities be damned
It’s far from obvious the Russian manned space program will ever be gotten “in order” before it simply ends of terminal penury and enfeeblement. It seems increasingly clear that Federatsiya/Orel is never going to fly or perhaps even be produced in notionally flyable form rather than merely in mockup form.
Meanwhile, the Russians actually have an interesting decision point coming up anent Dragon and, eventually, Starliner – do they seat swap or do they not?
The Russians have already bought themselves some breathing room on this question by stating that they are not yet willing to risk their cosmonauts on “unproven” new vehicles. That policy is plausible for awhile yet, perhaps for up to an additional year or so anent Crew D2 and for even longer in the case of Starliner. But that rationale is also a depreciating asset. By the time Crew D2 has made its third round trip to ISS, which may happen barely a year hence, it will have worn paper-thin.
I think the Russian decision to “temporarily” reduce their normative ISS crew complement from three to two is really the new normal and will obtain until ISS’s inevitable decommissioning renders the whole subject moot.
But to maintain even two crew on ISS, and still make up at least a bit of the now-ended Soyuz seat money and nearly-ended RD-180 money, the Russians will have to carry what space tourists/”Islamonauts” they can find in the third seats of their Soyuzes. That way, the tourist/Islamonaut can have a short week-or-two visit to ISS while the Russians do handoff from one pair of crew to another, then the tourist/Islamonaut can go home on the Soyuz that carries the departing Russian duo back to the ground.
All very neat. But it leaves no seats free to swap with the “Westernauts.”
The Russians could try to have their cake and eat it too by going along with ride swapping while also carrying up tourists/Islamonauts, but that would mean each Soyuz mission would carry only one Russian cosmonaut along with a paying tourist/Islamonaut and a ride-swapping Westernaut.
But the scheduling would become much more complicated in that case. The Russians might well choose to just eschew ride swapping entirely or to do it only when no tourist/Islamonaut has been found to fill a third Soyuz seat on a particular rotation. As eager as the UAE seems to be to get time on orbit for its people, that might well never happen.
And, in the end, when, as you say, the only manned space program the Russians have left is Kerbal, it all stops anyway.
More to the point is how will the pandemic hit the quality controls for the Soyuz and Progress. If I was NASA that would be the number one worry, not finding ways to bring Russia into the critical path for Artemis.
If the Russians elect never to seat swap with us, that becomes a matter of no further concern.
As for Artemis, the Russians should never be given any part in that.
If I could think of a Russian component that would be useful, I would want to include them for the same reason we did Apollo-Soyuz (and with Putin in power, Apollo-Soyuz is the correct analogy).
But why not tell them that we’re leaving a docking port ready for a Russian module in a new moon base? All they have to do is get one there…
The one thing they would be able to provide that would be useful would be a nuclear reactor for the base since American’s and Europeans are so frighten by nuclear energy in space.
Actually, the US will likely continue to fly astronauts on Soyuz and Russia cosmonauts on Dragon and Starliner. But, this will be an exchange of goods and services, so no cash will change hands as it has in the past when US astronauts flew on Soyuz and US cargo flew on Progress.
I had heard that being discussed. That’s till a good deal for the Russians. And it can be a good wait and see option before they make the call to finally replace or vastly upgrade Soyuz.
As I noted above, ride swapping is not so obviously as good a deal for Russia as just continuing to sell the extra seats for cash to non-NASA customers.
And, even if that’s what they decide to do, it’s far from obvious that Russia will ever have enough money to make any significant upgrades to Soyuz never mind rolling out their Real Soon Now next-gen manned craft.
…They could even have a Russian mission control running Kerbal Space Program to make them feel useful…
Brutal…but funny.
Artemis Accords are basically a way to say to Russia, “You can come circle around the Moon in LOP-G and enjoy watching us do the real work down on the surface — if you pay for your own ticket/airlock. But if you want your own Moon landing, you’re gonna have to play by our standards” and a way to say to China, ‘And you’re still not invited!”
Of course, China won’t need us for a Moon landing this decade, and Russia will have the option of joining them. Probably a more natural partnership anyway, but I sure wish one or both of these two powerful countries would come around to playing by the rules and join us
We should cut Russia entirely out of Artemis/Gateway. We’re stuck with them on ISS for the duration, but when that is over, so should be any further space-related involvement with Russia. The same needs to stay true for China so long as the CCP is in charge there.
I don’t see much likelihood of the Chinese getting to the Moon with people in this decade. And if they eventually do show up – hardly an inevitability – they’re certainly welcome to bring the Russkies along but I doubt they will. There just seems to be no upside to doing that. The Russians don’t have any more space tech to sell or barter and they certainly aren’t going to be able to pay their way in cash. So what would be the point?
I actually can conceive of China surprising everybody with a Moon shot in the next 3-5 years. They seem to be quietly putting the pieces in place, without announcing to anybody that a race is on.
I could even see them taking a whack at it ahead of 2024, if it looked like the US might actually get there, as a propaganda play.
China currently has a cumulative debt of 300% to its GDP, while its inflated GDP figures have just gone negative for the first time since 1976. It’s exports are falling and foreign manufacturers who were leaving China even before the virus hit are starting to bail out even faster. The cracks are appearing and what might happen there could be even uglier than what might happen in Russia as the Chinese have made many enemies through out history, enemies who are sharping their knives and starting to smile…
we will run out of money first…both of us are finished as superpowers for a bit
This needs to be put into a geopolitical perspective. The collapse of oil has hit Russia hard since it accounts for 60% of their exports Russia needs foreign money badly and NASA has been a good source of it in the past. The relationship is only deteriorating because the money flow from NASA is declining. All it takes is for NASA to start sending money again for Soyuz and modules for a future lunar settlement and the relationship will be fine again.?
The only problem is this not the Clinton or Obama Administration that worries about keeping the Russian space industry afloat. The Trump Administration would have no problem pushing it off the cliff instead of giving it a handout.
Don’t forget that cooperation during the Clinton Administration was intended to prevent their “rocket engineers” from finding employment creating and selling missiles to other countries. In other words, it was a foreign jobs program.
Fast forward to today, and it’s obvious their space program is deteriorating badly, mostly due to lack of funding. So, the risk of them helping other countries develop missiles is arguably less today than it was back then. So, I have no problem with cutting off the cash flow today.
Yes, it suppose to prevent Iran from having rockets able to put satellites in orbit. It doesn’t appear to have worked.
No. And there is quite credible evidence the Russkies have slipped a fair amount of rocket tech to the Norks in recent years. We owe them no favors. We need to keep our ISS commitments until it is decommissioned. But we should keep the Russians entirely out of anything new – especially anything Moon-related.
I agree, but there are possible downsides. If the oil market remains depressed and Russia’s economy worsens, we get to find out what happens when we put Putin in the corner.
One outcome might be an abrupt Russian exit from the ISS, with might render the ISS untenable. At the moment, the ISS may have more value to us than it ever had been previously.
We’re currently using ISS to stand up two crew capsules. We’re on track to use it to stand up Axiom’s commercial module, which is intended to endure past the space station’s demise as a standalone unit. Both these projects move the ball downfield and set the stage for the participants to build upon their progress in the future.
Arguably, this is not the best time to rid ourselves of the ISS. I say this despite having believed for years that the ISS was an utter waste of resources, a place for our hero astronauts to hang out and look busy. Columbus did not park his ships off the coast of Spain and study the effects of scurvy for 20 years.
I still believe that this was true, but in recent years we’ve seen some improbably useful developments, despite the worst efforts of Congress. It would be unfortunate to lose ISS just when it was finally bearing fruit.
If the oil shock and the virus shock continue Putin is going to have bigger worries than space. The masses in Russia only like their strong dictators when they keep things stable and unemployment low. If they don’t do that they are seen as weak and the masses turn ugly really fast when they see their leader being weak as the Czar and Communists learned respectively.
https://time.com/5827078/ru…
Where’s Putin? Russia’s President Stays Out of Sight as Coronavirus Hits Economy
By Madeline Roache
April 24, 2020 1:40 PM EDT
“The looming economic collapse spells bad news for Russia’s leader. “His approval ratings have been largely tied to Russia’s economic fortunes,” says Noble, noting that his numbers fell significantly in 2018 after he hiked the pension age. “
“The government “thinks they can ignore” small and medium businesses – which make up an estimated 42% of the economy – because it does not consider them a “political force”, says Stanovaya. “But the majority of people with decent salaries in the middle class have supported Putin because they want stability. They are the social base of Putin’s regime in some way. After this lockdown, the Kremlin could face a lot of resentment,” she adds.”
According to that Time article, Russia is looking at 15% unemployment. We’re looking at worse. I imagine there are a lot of strongmen in the world worrying about keeping their jobs and their nest eggs right about now.
Lucky for Putin, Russia has a lot of windows and little in the way of independent media. They also have a migrant labor force to demonize. Muslims no less. Brown people, don’t you know. Russia also has an assortment of former satellite countries in Eastern Europe that, in a pinch, can be pressed into distraction duty. Mauling the neighbors has proved to be quite popular in the past.
We can expect Putin to try something to save his skin. Trump too. Like America, Russia has the leader it deserves.
Except that Russians are used to a government that provides employment for everyone. Plus that figure is probably conservative in terms of the real number.
In the long term, no it didn’t prevent Iran from developing launch vehicles which can double as ICBMs. But I’d argue it slowed them down if the alternative was Russia working directly with them starting during the Clinton Administration.
The difference from the Obama era is that, thanks to Obama, now we have a [pending[ alternative, and that’s all the difference in the world.
The difference from the Clinton era is that it was then hoped to prevent an impoverished Russian rocket industry from selling itself to the highest bidder. Basically, we made ourselves the highest bidder.
The difference from Bush Jr. era is that he looked Putin in the eye, saw his soul and knew he could trust him
Yes, but we would have had that alternative years ago if President Obama hadn’t killed Ares I and the original Orion. His dislike of President Bush’s space program lengthen the gap by years.
Ares I was a technological cul de sac. Cancelling it was a good move.
Except that the USAF is paying NG to build Ares I as the Omega Launcher.
But President Obama had other options, for example using the Atlas V and an Orion Lite that would have been done faster. But all he wanted was his Kennedy photo shoot and then he abandoned NASA not even fighting to prevent funding cuts to Commercial Crew or Planetary Science.
But the real mistake was made when NASA Administrator Mike Griffin killed the OSP program in favor of his Ares I/Orion.
That was an option, and indeed that’s exactly what we’re getting, finally, after Congress underfunded Commercial Crew for several years. You’ve forgotten most of what has happened for the past 10 years, but you described Commercial Crew.
To say that some other “Orion Lite”/Atlas 5 combo could have been funded as a separate program outside of CC is also incorrect, and in fact CST-100 was originally an “Orion Lite”. (Early on, ATK also had a composite capsule that they termed an “Orion Lite”.)
Regarding the funding cuts, Shelby, KBH et al reneged on the original 2010 deal when they realized that they could transfer money from Commercial Crew and Commercial Cargo to SLS and Orion with impunity. There was nothing the Administration could do about it.
It’s weirdly partisan to take the GOP’s machinations and call them Obama’s fault for allowing them to happen. I remember Bolden repeatedly getting called to testify on why things Congress had cut weren’t going faster – they’ve long known they could mess with NASA’s budget and blame delays on NASA. They’ve taken a similar approach with SLS, forcing the overfunded program on NASA and publicly shaming them for mismanagement.
It happened on his watch. As another Democrat, President Truman, stated “The Buck Stops Here.”
That’s pretty inaccurate, Tom. Ares I would have made orbit in 2017, according to Sally Ride’s estimate, two years after ISS had been de-orbited.
Except the ISS would still be there. The only thing bringing it to Earth would be a failure that causes it go out of control. So basically you are saying we could have sent astronauts to it from American soil three years ago with Ares 1/Orion.
The Clinton-era decision to keep Russian rocket tech away from rogue nations was a good one. It was also a good idea to try keeping a then-friendly post-Soviet Russia friendly.
But it seems the Russkies have slipped rocket tech to the Norks anyway and Russia has certainly not remained friendly. So, what was once a reasonable policy, is now long since not.
The Russians, frankly, need to be screwed into the ground and a rock put on top to keep them there. Cutting them out of Artemis/Gateway is a good first step and may even be one of the reasons the Artemis Accords initiative was undertaken. Beyond that, we should keep our prior commitments for as long as ISS lasts, but terminate them when ISS is no more.
Resuming its former Soviet stance as an enemy of the U.S. was a deliberate choice on Putin’s part. For our part, U.S. policy toward Russia should now be, as closely as possible, no mercy, no quarter and no prisoners. And especially no more money.
pretty good analysis its all rhetoric
(off topic) – Hey, Bob, I noticed that SpaceX is stacking their sixth Starship prototype and they have parts laid out for a seventh, building a new one roughly every 2-3 weeks. SN5 is about to enter parallel testing with SN4. I bring this up because every time I see them stacking another rocket I think of Bob Oler’s pessimistic Starship predictions… 😉
why? nothing has moved forward yet