jaiind
SENIOR MEMBER
![](/styles/default/xenforo/ranks/Major.jpg)
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,399
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Money is always a problem. I don't think a Soyuz mission has enough returns for investment.Congrats to ISRO, though by now after having launched so many satellites ISRO should have made the proposition of delivering cargo and scientific experiment modules to the International Space Station.
And I don't understand why ISRO hasn't been a passenger on the Soyuz trips to the ISS. Money should be no problem to ISRO, I imagine.
@KapitaanAli , your view ??
Money is always a problem. I don't think a Soyuz mission has enough returns for investment.
Whatever we've, we've invested in the basics with iterative improvements, while exploring new fields when the time comes. As the launch vehicles, satellites and engines got bigger and better, with AstroSat, Chandrayaan and MOM, we forayed into basic science in space. And as we extend that to Chandrayaan2, Venus and our Sun, we'll foray into having man-rated equipment.
For me, being man-rated (or sending a man) is still a luxury and there are a million better things to do in space. But surely it'll be another leap.
Our manrated spacecraft must result in a cargo variant to make economic sense.
Although ISS will be gone by then. Yes, it's something we should've invested in by now.
Congrats to ISRO, though by now after having launched so many satellites ISRO should have made the proposition of delivering cargo and scientific experiment modules to the International Space Station.
And I don't understand why ISRO hasn't been a passenger on the Soyuz trips to the ISS. Money should be no problem to ISRO, I imagine.
@KapitaanAli , your view ??
Soyuz remains the most cost effective way of delivery to the ISS. It is cheaper than an Indian launch
Elon musk's reusable rockets are now closing the gap in terms of cost effectiveness. They are the only ones that can replace Soyuz.
I didn't know that.
Also, Soyuz is safe. There was that recent launch failure yet all three cosmonauts were safely recovered.
I don't know how the SpaceX BFR will ensure human safety when there is a launchpad failure. Currently the Soyuz has a pull rocket tower at the top. The BFR is missing this.
I agree. Even though there is a competitor like NASA's SLS, SpaceX will lead the way.
Too large for an abort.
First Space shuttle had ejection seats for two pilots. Later Shuttles did not.
Another proposal was to convert the payload bay into a passenger area, with versions ranging from 30 to 74 seats, three days in orbit, and cost US$1.5 million per seat
So how does SpaceX work around this ??
So for two pilots/passengers out of generally max seven ??
And I didn't know about the below ( source - wikipedia entry for Space Shuttle ) :