I read the article and thought it was straight.Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
"Russian scientists have announced plans to build a nuclear power station on Mars."
I think you're applying to many U.S. concepts onto Russia.Originally posted by russ_watters
So the tiny issue of cost isn't striking anyone as important? It would probably take a sizeable portion of the Russian GDP for the next 30 years. Tens of trillions of dollars. Money they don't have. They can't even put much of their tiny portion of the ISS in space (we paid for most of their parts).
Beyond that, "almost ready to be built" is crap. You can get a rough outline in a couple of months, but the actual design of the pieces of such an enormous undertaking takes a decade and tens of billions of dollars.
The ISS for example has been under development in one form or another for the past 20 years. I walked around in a mockup of it in Huntsville Alabama in 1991.
It took a decade and a couple of trillion dollars to put a man on the moon. This project would be orders of magnitude larger.
Heh - and I don't think you are applying enough US concepts to Russia. Russia isn't communist anymore. They can no longer spend money they don't have. They really truly do not have the money for this. If they did, they would not need us to pay for their parts of the ISS. Hell, if they did, they'd be able to pay their army or put a ship out to sea every now and then. A year and a half ago, I spent three months at the mouth of the Baltic Sea on a ship and saw precisely TWO Russian ships. Incredible.Originally posted by BiologyForums
I think you're applying to many U.S. concepts onto Russia.
Russia can easily have the funds required for this, the Russian government has a high income from taxes, and remember that they are not presured to spend it on anything in particular beyond the essentials.
The U.S. spends an incredibly low amount of money on space research, but Russia has alot more focus on it.
Russia could most certainly fund this, there methods stem far beyond the reach of the U.S.
Heh. Cearly you are not an engineer. Before you build something you have to design it. And that takes about as long (or longer, depending on the project) than building it. And when you are building new technology, its even worse - you have to TEST prototypes before you can build the real thing.I think it's far to say it's "almost ready to be built".
But that's utterly meaningless; preparing to build something takes nearly no time or money - building it is 99% of the task.