For a cool $100 million, it doesn't sound so bad. I know it's apples and oranges, but it seems like a better deal than $20 million to visit the ISS. Trips will be made in a modified Soyuz, and the are to be the precursors to eventual lunar landings. I think I would like to join the 238,328 Miles High Club.
Lt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2731 times:
It will be interesting if the ISS visit part goes through or not. That would then involve training in Houston with NASA, something the Russians would have to lobby for. If it is just the Soyuz, they could do it all from Star City.
Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, I'll take Italian Opera for $500
Thorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2627 times:
Quoting BaylorAirBear (Thread starter): For a cool $100 million, it doesn't sound so bad. I know it's apples and oranges, but it seems like a better deal than $20 million to visit the ISS. Trips will be made in a modified Soyuz, and the are to be the precursors to eventual lunar landings. I think I would like to join the 238,328 Miles High Club.
This will be essentially a revival of the Zond flights that were the Soviet precursors to their planned lunar landing in the 1960s. The Soviets never debugged the system enough to trust it to cosmonauts, back then, and Soyuz now is a very different bird than the lunar-era Soyuz (aka Zond) was, so I don't think I'd want to be the first to take the $100 million trip...
I doubt this program will ever fly. The lunar Soyuz won't be useable as a Space Station lifeboat, so the Russians can't just bump a cosmonaut and sell his seat to a tourist. That means the lunar tour will have to pay pretty much the full cost of the mission. The Russians do things cheap, but $100 million even for them is too low for two launchers (remember, it will need a Proton-launched upper stage for the moon burn) and a heavily upgraded Soyuz.
In other words, I'll believe it when I see it.
It's good to see the space tourism industry really trying to expand, but this program is hopelessly unrealistic.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 77
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2608 times:
As Thorney says, a throw-back to the original Soyuz design goals, namely a multi-purpose spacecraft, including Lunar orbital missions, later as the 'Command Module' of the planned, ultimately abortive, Soviet Lunar landing effort.
This would be a very cramped flight to say the least.
The need for a booster for TLI adds complexity and cost to what should be the watchword for embryonic space tourism, keep it simple, keep it cheap.
So, I'd I had the money, I'd pass on this.
Ironic to consider that the US counterpart to Soyuz, the Apollo CSM, was more advanced, more versatile, more capable of further development.
But which one is still in use today?
Now if you do could do this trip in an Apollo......