ESA says "Non/nein/nuncai" to Russia on Kliper partnership

I am very ambivalent, as a European, about it. On one hand it means the
end of human spaceflight in Europe for the medium term (when the ISS
stops its operations, being no longer supported by NASA beyond 2015),
which I find extremely disappointing, but on the other hand Kliper is
(was ?) a pure LEO vehicle, much too heavy and complex for exploration,
which would have stuck European human operations in LEO for some time.

wrote:

I am very ambivalent, as a European, about it. On one hand it means the
end of human spaceflight in Europe for the medium term (when the ISS
stops its operations, being no longer supported by NASA beyond 2015),
which I find extremely disappointing, but on the other hand Kliper is
(was ?) a pure LEO vehicle, much too heavy and complex for exploration,
which would have stuck European human operations in LEO for some time.

Actually, what is the case for Kliper at all? It is heavier and more
expensive than the Soyuz, and Soyuz already exists, has been tested many
times, and has the potential for lunar flights. While it is attractive to
have something new and different, the main justification seems to be NASA's
requirement to hold four people, and that requirement seems to be designed
to avoid using Soyuz.

Europe may be able to make a deal with the Russians without investing in
Kliper, and if NASA leaves ISS, they can have a space station to
themselves.


--

John Halpenny

John Halpenny wrote:

Actually, what is the case for Kliper at all? It is heavier and more
expensive than the Soyuz, and Soyuz already exists, has been tested many
times, and has the potential for lunar flights.
OTOH, Soyuz has a number of limitations that require a fresh spacecraft
to fix. It is very cramped even with 3 (requiring 2 spacecraft act as a
CRV for a full ISS crew), and has very limited cargo capacity, and
quite harsh re-entry/landing conditions. The latter matters both for
tourist flights and possible medical evacuations.

As far as cost goes, the Russians claim Kliper will have significantly
reduced ground processing requirements compared to Soyuz. This should
of course be taken with the usual dose of salt associated with
marketing statements, but if true, could actually lower the per flight
cost.