УДК 338

СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ КОСМИЧЕСКИХ ПРОГРАММ РОССИИ, США И КИТАЯ

Данилина Марина Викторовна1, Литвинов Алексей Николавевич2, Крупенков Виктор Владимирович3
1Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации
2Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации
3Российский экономический университет имени Г. В. Плеханова

Аннотация
Статья проводит сравнительный анализ и перспектив развития основных космических программ РФ, Китая и США. При этом учитывается влияние кризиса на формирование плановых показателей космических программ.

Ключевые слова: Китай, космическая программа, Космос, Россия, США


COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE SPACE PROGRAMMES OF RUSSIA, USA AND CHINA

Danilina Marina Viktorovna1, Litvinov Alexei Nikolaevich2, Krupenkov Viktor Vladimirovich3
1Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
2Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
3Plekhanov Russian University of Economics

Abstract
The article provides a comparative analysis and prospects of development of major space programs of Russia, China and the United States. This takes into account the impact of the crisis on the formation of the targets of space programs.

Рубрика: Экономика

Библиографическая ссылка на статью:
Данилина М.В., Литвинов А.Н., Крупенков В.В. Comparative analysis of the space programmes of Russia, USA and China // Гуманитарные научные исследования. 2016. № 4 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://human.snauka.ru/2016/04/14875 (дата обращения: 27.05.2017).

Important participants of the space programs are Russia, the US, China and the EU. The US fears that the space programs of Russia and China can stop US’s role of “the king of the hill” in the Earth orbit, and thus block the efforts of the two countries to ban the use of space weapons as an alternative. US is trying to promote the idea of ​​the adoption of the International Code of Conduct for outer space, developed in the EU. However, the conditions of such a code were considered unacceptable not only by the representatives of Russia and China, but also Brazil, India, South Africa and Iran.

By 2020, China plans to create its first space station in the moon. It is necessary for the delivery of the human to the satellite of the Earth. Only in 2030 the Chinese are going to send a probe to Mars, where it is supposed to collect samples of soil of the Red Planet. In order to implement its plans, the Celestial Empire to the end of 2014 is going to launch to the Moon a Probe test to Xichang spaceport – its first orbiter returned.
Unlike the Chinese, Roskosmos plans to begin preparation for the flight to the moon. Thus, it is proposed to start the creation of super-heavy launch vehicle class to fly to the natural satellite of the Earth in 2016, and the missile system is planned to be developped in 2030.

In the first stage Roskosmos requested to allocate more than 200 billion rubles, while the total cost of the creation of rocket complex under construction of the superheavy class cosmodrome Vostochny is approaching up to $ 500 billion. The complex is planned to be created in two phases. In 2028-2030 it is expected to create a rocket that will provide an opportunity to send a crew in a new manned transport spacecraft (PTC) to the Moon without landing on the moon.

Next step of Roskosmos does not preclude the construction of a lunar base on the lunar surface, in 2030-ies. when the Americans, according to their plans. may already be on Mars. To do this, you need to send to the moon lunar runway complex takeoff weight which is roughly the same as that of the PTC – about 20-25 tons. To send them to the moon in a bundle, you need a rocket carrying capacity of 160-180 tons, experts from Roscosmos claim. Spacecraft of such a duty mankind has not yet created.

Such large-scale Russian plans cause suspicion. The main question  is the ability to implement them in the stated period. Reason for concern – low rates start work on the creation of devices, ineffective management of the sector, especially in the context of the recent reshuffle of managers, as well as the absence of long-term space exploration program strategy. Also puzzling are the contradictory and ambiguous statements of some Russian officials and leaders of the space industry on human missions to the Moon and Mars.

The Federal Space Program (FSP) in 2016-2025 has undergone very important changes because of the crisis. For example, the first manned flight of the Russian super-heavy carrier rocket from the Baikonur East moved to the moon because of this in the period from 2030 to 2035. According to an earlier version of FSP which is calculated from the budget about $ 2 trillion rubles, the creation of the “key elements and super-heavy class carrier rocket technology” was to ensure the possibility of manned flights to the moon by 2030. The new draft of the PCF with a budget of 1.4 trillion rubles of foundation for a manned flight to the Earth’s satellite will be created only after 2035.

The costs for the modernization of the Mission Control Center in Korolev near Moscow (MCC) in the current version of FSP are reduced almost twice, reports TASS. Roskosmos ready to allocate for this purpose 917 million rubles for the period from 2016 to 2025., although the previous draft provided in sum of 1.754 billion rubles. Lunar program became, if not the main, one of the most notable victims of sequestration. The initial version of software intended to manned flight to the moon as early as 2030, which meant the need to create within the PSF 2016-2025 superheavy carrier rocket class. An abbreviated version provides for the transfer of manned flight for an indefinite period – after 2035.

The well-known saying “the crisis means new opportunities” is  not always true, but in this situation it is. More than two-time devaluation of the ruble sharply added competitiveness of Russian proposals on the launch market: the cost of running tested ” Proton -M” which exceeded one hundred million dollars before the crisis, in the spring of 2015 has dropped to 69-70 million and has scoped for further reduction, which allows maintains optimism about the industry’s capacity utilization.

The national launcher program should not be reduced as well – in any case, for the military, which remains the main customer of launch services in Russia after the Roskosmos. Capacity constellation remains a priority even in the face of budget cuts.
Unlikely to undergo changes the GLONASS navigation system, which has proved its effectiveness, which can be called one of the most if not the most successful of the Russian space program in the last twenty years. Apart from its military importance (and it is difficult to overestimate), it is one of the real ways to fit into a very lucrative market for space services sector and related activities in the field of navigation.
The ruble devaluation had a positive impact on competitiveness and other Russian space projects, including the problem area spacecraft national development. The grouping of remote sensing satellites in the next ten years is expected to grow three times, including increased revenues from the provision of specialized services to commercial customers.
This has become conventional wisdom in recent years comparing the current situation with the 1990s is not quite correct, while Russia gas built in the commercial sector of space services at virtually collapse in the Soviet scientific and industrial potential. Today, there’s nowhere to fall. However, the inevitable growth no one can guarantee as well.

The US has more resources for the implementation of space programs. Today, NASA’s annual budget is $ 18 billion. It’s enough to stay afloat, but not enough for serious projects in the space field. If we compare the volumes of financing of civil space programs of Russia, China, India and the United States, then this list is leading the United States, in second place – Russia, followed by China and India. Russia leads in the number of emergency starts. It is followed by the United States, then by a wide margin – Europe, China and Japan. Plans for US space exploration are fundamentally different from Russian, in many respects similar to the Chinese. Europeans appear also cooperate on the lunar program with Russia and China, but it does not prevent them from further expand its cooperation with NASA. Most likely, the branched infrastructure of western space agencies, the high scientific level of academic research, as well as large amounts of cash injections, especially in the NASA program, will allow the Americans in time to perform the announced plans for a journey to Mars. A successful development of private companies, for example, SpaceX, introduce competition and display space exploration to self-sufficiency.

The US accounts, according to various estimates, more than half of the world’s spending on space exploration. For comparison, NASA budget for 2014 exceeds $ 17 billion, while the total budget for the RAS and the Russian Space Agency – the main production and research organizations involved in space programs in Russia – at the same time are almost three to four times less. In addition, much of the researches are carried out in the West at universities and corporations, which further increases the gap. Prospects for the Russian space program in this sense, remain vague.


References
  1. СМИ: в США боятся новой космической программы России и Китая, 23:0911.08.2015, http://ria.ru/world/20150811/1178682591.html (дата обращения: 11.04.2016).
  2. Россия отказывается от ряда космических программ, 20 января 2016 , http://www.vz.ru/society/2016/1/20/789565.html
  3. Илья Крамник Орбитальный прагматизм 24 января 2016, https://lenta.ru/articles/2016/01/24/moon/
  4. https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/NASA_FY_2016_Budget_Estimates.pdf
  5. А.Крылов Сравнительный анализ космической деятельности России, Китая и Индии, http://mosspaceclub.ru/3part/akd_rki.pdf
  6. Данилина М.В. АНАЛИЗ ПОСЛЕДСТВИЙ ВВЕДЕНИЯ САНКЦИЙ В ОТНОШЕНИИ РОССИИ, Компетентность. 2015. № 2 (123). С. 24-30.
  7. Данилина М.В. ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОЕ И ПОЛИТИЧЕСКОЕ ВЗАИМОДЕЙСТВИЕ РОССИИ И ЕВРОСОЮЗА, Национальные интересы: приоритеты и безопасность. 2011. № 23. С. 59-69.
  8. Данилина М.В. ФИНАНСИРОВАНИЕ СОВМЕСТНЫХ ПРОГРАММ СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВА ЕВРОПЕЙСКОГО СОЮЗА, СОВЕТА ЕВРОПЫ И РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ, Национальные интересы: приоритеты и безопасность. 2011. № 5. С. 48-57.
  9. Данилина М.В. НЕФТЕГАЗОВЫЙ КОМПЛЕКС РОССИИ – ВЕДУЩИЙ ИСТОЧНИК ФОРМИРОВАНИЯ ДОХОДОВ ФЕДЕРАЛЬНОГО БЮДЖЕТА // Региональная экономика: теория и практика. 2007. № 17. С. 30-41.


Все статьи автора «Данилина Марина Викторовна»


© Если вы обнаружили нарушение авторских или смежных прав, пожалуйста, незамедлительно сообщите нам об этом по электронной почте или через форму обратной связи.

Связь с автором (комментарии/рецензии к статье)

Оставить комментарий

Вы должны авторизоваться, чтобы оставить комментарий.

Если Вы еще не зарегистрированы на сайте, то Вам необходимо зарегистрироваться: