What happened? A lot of things, including the Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal, etc. But if you look at the root and get rid of everything temporary and insignificant, it turns out that there is actually one reason: money.

Sometimes we forget that space travel is very expensive. Putting just one pound of anything into Earth orbit costs $10,000. Imagine a life-size solid gold statue of John Glenn and you'll get some idea of ​​the cost of such projects. Going to the Moon would require about $100,000 per pound of payload. A flight to Mars would cost $1 million per pound (approximately the weight of diamonds).

Then, in the 1960s, the issue of price was practically not considered: everything was covered by the general enthusiasm and growth of the space race with the Russians. The spectacular achievements of the brave astronauts offset the cost of space flight, especially since both sides were willing to go to great lengths to maintain national honor. But even superpowers cannot bear such a load for many decades.

It's all sad! More than 300 years have passed since Sir Isaac Newton first wrote down the laws of motion, and we are still captivated by simple calculations. To throw an object into low-Earth orbit, it must be accelerated to a speed of 7.9 km/sec. To send an object on an interplanetary journey and move it beyond the Earth's gravitational field, we need to give it a speed of 11.2 km/s (And to achieve this magic figure - 11.2 km/s, we must use Newton's third law of dynamics: every action generates an equal reaction, which means that the rocket can accelerate, throwing hot gases in the opposite direction, in much the same way as a balloon flies around the room if you inflate it and release the valve.) So calculating the cost of space travel using Newton's laws is not at all difficult. There is not a single law of nature (neither physical nor engineering) that would prohibit us from exploring the solar system; it's all about cost.

But this is not enough. The rocket must carry fuel, which significantly increases its load. Airplanes can partially circumvent this problem by capturing oxygen from the atmosphere and feeding it into the engines. But there is no air in space, and the rocket must carry all its oxygen and hydrogen with it.

Besides the fact that this fact makes space travel a very expensive pleasure, it is the main reason that we do not have rocket packs or flying cars. Science fiction writers (but non-scientists) love to imagine the day when we'll all strap on rocket packs and fly to work - or go on a Sunday picnic in the family flying car. People are often disappointed in futurists because their predictions never come true. (That's why there are so many articles and books around with cynical titles like "Where's My Jetpack?") But to understand the reason, all you need to do is do a simple calculation. Rocket packs exist; in fact, the Nazis even tried to use them during World War II. But hydrogen peroxide, a common fuel in such cases, runs out quickly, so the average flight on a rocket pack lasts only a few minutes. Likewise, flying cars with helicopter rotors burn an awful lot of fuel, making them too expensive for the average person.

End of the lunar program

It is the sky-high prices for space travel that are to blame for the fact that the future of manned space exploration currently seems so uncertain. George W. Bush, as president, presented a clear but rather ambitious blueprint for the space program in 2004. First, the Space Shuttle was supposed to be retired in 2010, and replaced by a new rocket system called Constellation by 2015. Secondly, by 2020 it was planned to return to the Moon and eventually establish a permanent inhabited base on the satellite of our planet. Thirdly, all this was supposed to pave the way for a manned flight to Mars.

However, even since the Bush plan was put forward, the economics of space have changed significantly, largely because the Great Recession has emptied the purse strings of future space travel. The Augustine Commission's 2009 report to President Barack Obama found that the original program was unfeasible at available levels of funding. In 2010, President Obama took practical steps by simultaneously ending both the Space Shuttle program and the development of a space shuttle replacement that would pave the way for a return to the Moon. In the near future, NASA, without its own rockets to send our astronauts into space, will be forced to rely on the Russians. On the other hand, this situation stimulates the efforts of private companies to create the rockets necessary to continue the manned space program. NASA, having abandoned its glorious past, will never again build rockets for the manned program. Supporters of Obama's plan say it marks the beginning of a new era of space exploration in which private initiative will prevail. Critics say the plan would turn NASA into an "agency without a purpose."

Landing on an asteroid

The Augustine Commission's report proposed a so-called flexible path, including several fairly modest goals that do not require an insane amount of rocket fuel consumption: for example, a trip to a nearby asteroid that happens to fly past Earth, or a trip to the moons of Mars. The report indicated that the target asteroid may simply not be on our maps yet: perhaps it is an unknown wandering body that is to be discovered in the near future.

The problem, the Commission's report pointed out, is that rocket fuel for landing on the Moon, and especially Mars, as well as for takeoff and return, will be prohibitively expensive. But since the gravitational field on the asteroid and the satellites of Mars is very weak, many times less fuel will be required. Augustine's report also mentioned the possibility of visiting Lagrange points, i.e., places in outer space where the gravitational attraction of the Earth and the Moon are mutually compensated. (It is quite possible that these points serve as a cosmic dump, where all the debris collected by the solar system and found in the vicinity of the Earth has accumulated since ancient times; astronauts could find interesting stones there dating back to the formation of the Earth-Moon system.)

Indeed, landing on an asteroid is an inexpensive task, since asteroids have an extremely weak gravitational field. (This is also the reason that asteroids, as a rule, are not round, but have an irregular shape. All large objects in the Universe - stars, planets and satellites - are round, because the force of gravity evenly pulls them towards the center. Any irregularity in the shape of a planet gradually smoothes out. But the force of gravity on the asteroid is so weak that it cannot compress the asteroid into a ball.)

One of the possible targets of such a flight is the asteroid Apophis, which in 2029 should pass dangerously close to Earth. This rock, about 300m across and the size of a large football field, will pass so close to the planet that it will leave some of our artificial satellites outside. The interaction with our planet will change the asteroid’s orbit, and if you’re unlucky, it may return to Earth again in 2036; there is even a tiny chance (1 in 100,000) that it will end up on Earth upon return. If this actually happened, the impact would be equivalent to 100,000 Hiroshima bombs; At the same time, fire tornadoes, shock waves and hot debris could completely devastate an area the size of France. (For comparison: a much smaller object, probably the size of an apartment building, fell near the Siberian Podkamennaya Tunguska River in 1908 and, exploding with the force of one thousand Hiroshima bombs, felled 2,500 km 2 of forest. The shock wave from this explosion was felt at a distance of several thousand kilometers. In addition, the fall created an unusual glow in the sky over Asia and Europe, so that in London at night you could read a newspaper on the street.)

A visit to Apophis will not be too heavy a burden for NASA's budget, since the asteroid should fly very close anyway, but landing on it may be a problem. Due to the asteroid's weak gravitational field, the ship would not have to land on it in the traditional sense, but rather dock. In addition, it rotates unevenly, so before landing it will be necessary to take accurate measurements of all parameters. In general, it would be interesting to see how hard the asteroid is. Some scientists believe it may simply be a pile of rocks held together by a weak gravitational field; others find it solid. One day, knowledge of asteroid densities may prove vital to humanity; It is possible that someday we will have to crush an asteroid into pieces using nuclear weapons. If a block of stone flying in outer space, instead of crumbling into powder, splits into several large pieces, their fall to Earth may be even more dangerous than the fall of the entire asteroid. It might be better to nudge the asteroid to change its orbit slightly before it gets close to Earth.

Landing on a satellite of Mars

Although the Augustine Commission did not recommend a manned mission to Mars, another very interesting possibility remains - sending astronauts to the Martian moons Phobos and Deimos. These satellites are much smaller than Earth's Moon and therefore, like asteroids, have a very weak gravitational field. In addition to the relative cheapness, a visit to the satellite of Mars has several other advantages:

1. Firstly, these satellites could be used as temporary space stations. From them you can analyze the planet without much expense, without descending to its surface.

2. Secondly, someday they may be useful as an intermediate stage for an expedition to Mars. From Phobos to the center of the Red Planet is less than 10,000 km, so you can fly down from there in just a few hours.

3. There are probably caves in these satellites that could be used to organize a permanent habitable base and to protect it from meteorites and cosmic radiation. On Phobos, in particular, there is a huge crater called Stickney; This is probably a trace of the impact of a huge meteorite, which almost split the satellite. Gradually, however, gravity brought the pieces back together and restored the satellite. Perhaps, after this long-ago collision, many caves and cracks remained on Phobos.

Return to the Moon

Augustine's report also talks about a new expedition to the Moon, but only if funding for space programs is increased and if at least $30 billion more is allocated for this program over the next ten years. Since this is highly unlikely, the lunar program can essentially be considered closed, at least for the coming years.

The canceled lunar program, called Constellation, included several major components. First, there is the Ares V launch vehicle, the first US super-heavy launch vehicle since the retirement of Saturn in the early 1970s. Secondly, the Ares I heavy rocket and the Orion spacecraft, capable of carrying six astronauts to a near-Earth space station or four to the Moon. And finally, the Altair landing module, which, in fact, was supposed to descend to the surface of the Moon.

The shuttle's design, where the ship was mounted on its side, had several significant drawbacks, including the tendency of the carrier to lose pieces of insulating foam during flight. For the Columbia spacecraft, this turned out to be a disaster: it burned down upon returning to earth, taking with it seven brave astronauts - and all because during the launch, a piece of foam insulation, torn off from the external fuel tank, hit the edge of the wing and punched a hole in it . Upon re-entry, hot gases rushed into the Columbia's hull, killing everyone inside and causing the ship's destruction. In the Constellation project, where the habitable module was supposed to be placed directly on top of the rocket, such a problem would not have arisen.

The press dubbed the Constellation project “the Apollo program on steroids” - it was very reminiscent of the lunar program of the 1970s. The length of the Ares I rocket was supposed to be almost 100 m versus 112.5 m for the Saturn V. It was assumed that this rocket would launch the Orion manned spacecraft into space, thus replacing the outdated shuttles. To launch the Altair module and supply fuel for the flight to the Moon, NASA intended to use the Ares V rocket, 118 m high, capable of delivering 188 tons of cargo into low-Earth orbit. The Ares V rocket was to be the basis of any mission to the Moon or Mars. (Although development of Ares has ceased, it would be nice to save at least something from the program for future use; there is talk about this.)

Permanent lunar base

By ending the Constellation program, President Obama left several options open. The Orion spacecraft, which was supposed to once again take American astronauts to the Moon and back, began to be considered a life-saving vehicle for the International Space Station. Perhaps in the future, when the economy recovers from the crisis, some other administration will want to return to the lunar program, including the project to create a lunar base.

Establishing a permanent habitable base on the Moon will inevitably face many obstacles. The first of these is micrometeorites. Since there is no air on the Moon, stones from the sky fall onto its surface unhindered. This is easy to verify by simply looking at the surface of our satellite, completely dotted with traces of long-standing collisions with meteorites; some of them are billions of years old.

Many years ago, when I was a student at the University of California at Berkeley, I saw this danger with my own eyes. Brought by astronauts in the early 1970s. lunar soil created a real sensation in the scientific world. I was invited to the laboratory where they were analyzing lunar soil under a microscope. At first I saw a stone - as it seemed to me, a completely ordinary stone (lunar rocks are very similar to terrestrial ones), but as soon as I looked through the microscope... I was shocked! The entire rock was covered in tiny meteorite craters, within which even smaller craters could be seen. I've never seen anything like this before. I realized that in an atmosphereless world, even the smallest speck of dust, hitting at a speed of more than 60,000 km/h, can easily kill - and if not kill, then make a hole in a spacesuit. (Scientists imagine the enormous damage caused by micrometeorites because they can simulate collisions with them. Laboratories specifically designed to study the nature of such collisions have huge guns capable of shooting metal balls at enormous speeds.)

One possible solution is to build a lunar base below the surface. It is known that in ancient times the Moon was volcanically active, and astronauts may be able to find a lava tube that goes deep underground. (Lava tubes are traces of ancient lava flows that chewed out cave-like structures and tunnels in the depths.) In 2009, astronomers actually discovered a skyscraper-sized lava tube on the Moon that could serve as the basis for a permanent lunar base.

Such a natural cave could provide astronauts with cheap protection from cosmic rays and solar flares. Even when flying from one end of the continent to the other (from New York to Los Angeles, for example), we are exposed to radiation at levels of about one millibar per hour (the equivalent of an X-ray at the dentist). On the Moon, the radiation could be so strong that the base's living quarters would have to be located deep below the surface. In environments without an atmosphere, the deadly rain of solar flares and cosmic rays would put astronauts at direct risk of premature aging and even cancer.

Weightlessness is also a problem, especially for long periods. At NASA's training center in Cleveland, Ohio, various experiments are conducted on astronauts. I once saw a subject suspended in a horizontal position using a special harness run on a vertically installed treadmill. Scientists tried to determine the subject's endurance in zero gravity conditions.

After talking with doctors from NASA, I realized that weightlessness is much less harmless than it seems at first glance. One doctor explained to me that over several decades, long-term flights of American astronauts and Russian cosmonauts in conditions of weightlessness clearly showed: in zero gravity, significant changes occur in the human body, muscle tissue, bones and the cardiovascular system degrade. Our body is the result of millions of years of development in the Earth's gravitational field. Under conditions of prolonged exposure to a weaker gravitational field, biological processes fail.

Russian cosmonauts return to earth after about a year in zero gravity so weak they can barely crawl. In space, even with daily training, muscles atrophy, bones lose calcium, and the cardiovascular system weakens. After a flight, some require several months to recover, and some changes may be irreversible. The journey to Mars could take two years, and astronauts will arrive so weakened that they will be unable to work. (One solution to this problem is to spin the interplanetary ship, creating artificial gravity in it. The mechanism here is the same as when rotating a bucket on a rope, when water does not pour out of it even in an upside-down position. But this is very expensive, because for maintaining rotation will require heavy and bulky machinery, and every pound of additional weight means a $10,000 increase in project cost.)

Water on the Moon

One of the recent discoveries could seriously change the conditions of the lunar game: ancient ice was discovered on the Moon, likely remaining from long-ago collisions with comets. In 2009, NASA's lunar probe LCROSS and its Centaurus upper stage crashed into the Moon near its south pole. The collision speed was almost 2500 m/s; As a result, material from the surface was ejected to a height of more than a kilometer and a crater about 20 m in diameter appeared. TV viewers were probably a little disappointed that the collision did not produce the promised beautiful explosion, but scientists were pleased: the collision turned out to be very informative. Thus, about 100 liters of water were found in the substance ejected from the surface. And in 2010, a new shocking statement was made: in the lunar material, water makes up more than 5% by mass, so there is perhaps more moisture on the Moon than in some areas of the Sahara.

This discovery could have enormous implications: it is possible that future astronauts could use sublunar ice deposits to make rocket fuel (by extracting hydrogen from water), for breathing (by extracting oxygen), for protection (as water absorbs radiation) and for drinking ( naturally, in purified form). So this discovery will help reduce the cost of any lunar program several times.

The results obtained may also mean that during construction and in the future when supplying the base, astronauts will be able to use local resources - water and all kinds of minerals.

Mid century

(2030–2070)

Flight to Mars

In 2010, President Obama, visiting Florida, not only announced the closure of the lunar program, but also supported a mission to Mars instead and funding for an as-yet unspecified heavy-duty launch vehicle that could someday carry astronauts into deep space, beyond lunar orbit. He hinted that he hopes to wait for the day - perhaps sometime in the mid-2030s - when American astronauts set foot on the surface of Mars. Some astronauts, like Buzz Aldrin, warmly supported Obama's plan, precisely because it was proposed to miss the Moon. Aldrin once told me that since the Americans had already been to the Moon, now the only real achievement would be a flight to Mars.

Of all the planets in the solar system, only Mars seems similar enough to Earth that some form of life could have originated there. (Mercury, scorched by the Sun, is probably too hostile to support life as we know it. The gas giants Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are too cold to support life. Venus is in many ways Earth's twin, but wilder The greenhouse effect has made conditions there simply hellish: temperatures reach +500 ° C, an atmosphere consisting mainly of carbon dioxide is 100 times denser than Earth's, and sulfuric acid rains from the sky. Trying to walk on the Venusian surface will suffocate and be crushed to death, and your remains will be fried and dissolved in sulfuric acid.)

Mars, on the other hand, was once a fairly wet planet. There, like on Earth, there were oceans and rivers that disappeared long ago. Today it is a frozen, lifeless desert. It is possible, however, that once upon a time—billions of years ago—microlife flourished on Mars; It is even possible that bacteria still live somewhere in hot springs.

Once the United States firmly decides to carry out a manned expedition to Mars, it will take another 20–30 years to implement it. But it should be noted that it will be much more difficult for a person to get to Mars than to the Moon. Mars compared to the Moon is a qualitative leap in complexity. You can fly to the Moon in three days; getting to Mars will take from six months to a year.

In July 2009, NASA scientists estimated what a real Mars expedition might look like. The astronauts will fly to Mars for about six months, then spend 18 months on the Red Planet, then another six months to return.

In total, about 700 tons of equipment will have to be sent to Mars - this is more than the International Space Station at a cost of 100 billion dollars. To save on food and water, while traveling and working on Mars, astronauts will have to purify their own waste products and use them to fertilize plants. On Mars there is no oxygen, no soil, no water, no animals, no plants, so everything will have to be brought from Earth. It will not be possible to use local resources. The atmosphere of Mars consists almost entirely of carbon dioxide, and the atmospheric pressure is only 1% of Earth's. Any hole in the suit will mean a rapid drop in pressure and death.

The expedition will be so complex that it will have to be divided into several stages. Since it would be too expensive to carry fuel on the return trip from Earth, it is possible that a separate rocket with fuel will have to be sent to Mars to refuel the interplanetary vehicle. (Or, if enough oxygen and hydrogen can be extracted from Martian ice, that could be used as rocket fuel.)

Once they reach Mars, astronauts will likely have to spend several weeks adapting to life on another planet. The cycle of day and night there is approximately the same as on Earth (the Martian day is slightly longer and is 24.6 hours), but the year on Mars is twice as long as on Earth. The temperature almost never rises above freezing. Violent dust storms rage there. The sands on Mars are as fine as talc, and dust storms often cover the entire planet.

Terraform Mars?

Let's assume that by the middle of the century, astronauts will visit Mars and set up a primitive base there. But this is not enough. Generally speaking, humanity will probably seriously consider the project of terraforming Mars - turning it into a more pleasant planet for life. Work on this project will begin at best at the very end of the 21st century, most likely even at the beginning of the next.

Scientists have already considered several ways to make Mars a more hospitable place. Probably the simplest of these is to add methane or another greenhouse gas to the Red Planet's atmosphere. Methane is a more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so a methane atmosphere will trap sunlight and gradually warm the planet's surface. Temperatures will rise above freezing. In addition to methane, other greenhouse gases such as ammonia and freon are also being considered as options.

As temperatures rise, permafrost will begin to melt for the first time in billions of years, allowing river channels to fill with water again. Over time, as the atmosphere becomes denser, lakes and even oceans may form again on Mars. As a result, even more carbon dioxide will be released - a positive feedback loop will arise.

In 2009, it was discovered that methane was naturally released from the surface of Mars. The source of this gas is still a mystery. On Earth, methane arises mainly from the decay of organic materials, but on Mars it can be a byproduct of some geological processes. If scientists manage to establish the source of this gas, then perhaps they will be able to increase its output, and therefore change the atmosphere of the planet.

Another possibility is to send a comet into the Martian atmosphere. If it is possible to intercept a comet far enough from the Sun, even a small impact - a push from a special rocket engine, a collision at the right angle with a spacecraft, or even just the gravitational pull of this apparatus - may be enough to change the orbit of the space hulk as needed. Comets are composed primarily of water, and there are many of them in the solar system. (For example, the nucleus of Comet Halley is shaped like a peanut, about 30 km across, and consists mainly of ice and rock.) As the comet approaches Mars, it will begin to experience friction with the atmosphere and slowly break apart, releasing water in the form of steam into the planet's atmosphere .

If a suitable comet is not found, one of Jupiter's icy moons or, say, an ice-containing asteroid such as Ceres (scientists believe that it consists of 20% water) could be used instead. Of course, it will be more difficult to direct the moon or an asteroid in the direction we need, since, as a rule, such celestial bodies are in stable orbits. And then there are two options: it will be possible to leave the given comet, moon or asteroid in the orbit of Mars and allow it to slowly collapse, releasing water vapor into the atmosphere, or to bring this celestial body down onto one of the polar caps of Mars. The polar regions of the Red Planet are frozen carbon dioxide, which disappears in the summer months, and ice, which forms the basis and never melts. If a comet, moon or asteroid hits an ice cap, enormous amounts of energy will be released and the dry ice will evaporate. Greenhouse gas will enter the atmosphere and accelerate the process of global warming on Mars. In this option, positive feedback can also occur. The more carbon dioxide released from the planet's polar regions, the higher the temperature will rise and, therefore, even more carbon dioxide will be released.

Another proposal is to detonate several nuclear bombs on the polar ice caps. The disadvantage of this method is obvious: it is possible that the released water will be radioactive. Or you can try to build a thermonuclear reactor there that will melt the ice of the polar regions.

The main fuel for a fusion reactor is water, and there is plenty of frozen water on Mars.

When the temperature rises above freezing, shallow bodies of water will form on the surface, which can be colonized by some forms of algae that thrive in Antarctica on Earth. They'll probably like Mars' atmosphere, which is 95% carbon dioxide. It is also possible to genetically modify algae to ensure that it grows as quickly as possible. Algae ponds will speed up terraforming in several ways. First, the algae will convert carbon dioxide into oxygen. Secondly, they will change the color of the surface of Mars and, accordingly, its reflectivity. A darker surface will absorb more solar radiation. Thirdly, since algae will grow on their own, without any outside help, this method of changing the situation on the planet will be relatively cheap. Fourthly, algae can be used as food. Over time, these algae lakes will build up topsoil and nutrients; Plants can take advantage of this and further accelerate oxygen production.

Scientists are also considering the possibility of surrounding Mars with satellites that would collect sunlight and direct it to the planet's surface. It is possible that such satellites, even by themselves, will be able to raise the temperature on the surface of Mars to the freezing point and above. As soon as this happens and the permafrost begins to melt, the planet will then warm up on its own, naturally.

Economic benefit?

One should not be under any illusions and think that the colonization of the Moon and Mars will immediately bring countless economic benefits to humanity. When Columbus sailed to the New World in 1492, he opened up access to treasures unprecedented in history. Very soon, the conquistadors began to send gold, looted from local Indians, in huge quantities from newly discovered places to their homeland, and the settlers - valuable raw materials and agricultural products. The costs of expeditions to the New World were more than offset by the countless treasures that could be found there.

But colonies on the Moon and Mars are a different matter. There is no air, liquid water or fertile soil, so everything you need will have to be delivered from Earth by rockets, which is incredibly expensive. Moreover, there is no particular military sense in colonizing the Moon, at least in the short term. It takes an average of three days to get from Earth to the Moon or back, and a nuclear war can start and end in just an hour and a half - from the moment the first intercontinental ballistic missiles are launched to the last explosions. The space cavalry from the Moon simply will not have time to take any real part in the events on Earth. As a result, the Pentagon is not funding any major programs to militarize the Moon.

This means that any large-scale operations to explore other worlds will be aimed at the benefit not of Earth, but of new space colonies. Colonists will have to mine metals and other minerals for their own needs, since transporting them from Earth (and to Earth too) is too expensive. Mining in the asteroid belt will only become economically viable if there are self-sufficient colonies that can use the mined materials themselves, and this will happen at the very end of this century at best, or, more likely, later.

Space tourism

But when will an ordinary civilian be able to fly into space? Some scientists, such as the late Gerard O'Neill of Princeton University, dreamed of a space colony in the form of a giant wheel, which would house habitable compartments, water purification factories, air regeneration compartments, etc. The meaning of such stations - in solving the problem of overpopulation. However, in the 21st century, the idea that space colonies could solve or at least alleviate this problem will still remain a fantasy. For most of humanity, the Earth will be their only home for at least another 100–200 years.

However, there is still a way in which the average person can actually fly into space: as a tourist. There are entrepreneurs who criticize NASA for its terrible inefficiency and bureaucracy and are ready to invest money in space technology themselves, believing that market mechanisms will help private investors reduce the cost of space travel. Burt Rutan and his investors had already won the $10 million Ansari X Prize on October 4, 2004, by launching their SpaceShipOne twice within two weeks to just over 100 km above the earth's surface. SpaceShipOne is the first rocket ship to successfully travel into space using private funds. Its development cost approximately $25 million. The guarantor for the loans was Microsoft billionaire Paul Allen.

Currently, the SpaceShipTwo spacecraft is almost ready. Rutan believes that very soon it will be possible to begin testing, after which a commercial spacecraft will become a reality. Billionaire Richard Branson of Virgin Atlantic created Virgin Galactic, with a spaceport in New Mexico and a long list of people willing to spend $200,000 to realize his lifelong dream of going into space. Virgin Galactic, which will likely be the first major company to offer commercial flights to space, has already ordered five SpaceShipTwo ships. If everything goes as planned, the cost of space travel will drop by a factor of ten.

SpaceShipTwo offers several ways to save money. Instead of using huge launch vehicles designed to launch payloads into space directly from Earth, Rutan places his spacecraft on an airplane and propels it using conventional atmospheric jet engines. In this case, oxygen is used within the atmosphere. Then, at an altitude of about 16 km above the ground, the ship separates from the aircraft and turns on its own jet engines. The ship cannot enter low-Earth orbit, but the fuel reserve on it is enough to rise more than 100 kilometers above the surface of the earth - to where there is almost no atmosphere and where passengers can see the sky gradually turning black. The engines are capable of accelerating the ship to a speed corresponding to M=3, i.e. up to three times the speed of sound (about 3500 km/h). This, of course, is not enough to put it into orbit (here, as already mentioned, a speed of at least 28,500 km/h is needed, which corresponds to 7.9 km/s), but it will be enough to deliver passengers to the edge of the earth’s atmosphere and outer space . It is quite possible that in the very near future, a tourist flight into space will cost no more than a safari in Africa.

(To fly around the Earth, however, you'll have to pay a lot more and go aboard a space station. I once asked Microsoft billionaire Charles Simonyi how much a ticket to the ISS cost him. Press reports flipped the figure at $20 million. He replied, that he would not like to name the exact amount, but that the newspaper reports are not very wrong. He liked it so much in space that a little later he flew to the station again. So space tourism, even in the near future, will remain the privilege of very wealthy people.)

In September 2010, space tourism received an additional boost from the Boeing Corporation, which announced its entry into this market and planned the first flights for space tourists as early as 2015. This would be quite consistent with President Obama's plans to transfer manned spaceflight to private hands. Boeing's plan calls for launching a capsule with four crew members and three empty seats for space tourists to the International Space Station from Cape Canaveral. However, Boeing has been quite straightforward about financing private space projects: most of the money will have to be paid by taxpayers. "It's an uncertain market," says John Elbon, director of the commercial space launch program. “If we had to rely only on Boeing funds, given all the risk factors, we would not be able to successfully complete the case.”

Dark horses

The extremely high cost of space travel is holding back both commercial and scientific progress, so humanity is now in need of a completely new, revolutionary technology. By mid-century, scientists and engineers must perfect new launch vehicles to reduce launch costs.

Physicist Freeman Dyson identified among the many proposals several technologies that are currently at the experimental stage, but someday may make space accessible even to the average person. None of these proposals guarantee success, but if successful, the cost of delivering cargo into space would plummet. The first of these proposals is laser propulsion systems: a powerful laser beam from an external source (for example, from the Earth) is directed to the base of the rocket, where it causes a mini-explosion, the shock wave of which sets the rocket in motion. A steady stream of laser pulses evaporates the water, and the resulting steam propels the rocket into space. The main advantage of a laser jet engine is that the energy for it comes from an external source - from a stationary laser. A laser rocket essentially carries no fuel. (In contrast, chemical rockets spend a significant part of their energy on lifting and transporting fuel for their own engines.)

Laser propulsion technology has already been demonstrated in the laboratory, where a model was successfully tested in 1997. Leik Mirabo of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York created a working prototype of such a rocket and called it a demonstrator of lightship technology. One of his first flying models weighed 50 grams and was a “plate” with a diameter of about 15 cm. A 10 kW laser generated a series of laser explosions at the base of the rocket; air shock waves accelerated it with an acceleration of 2 g (which is twice the acceleration of free fall on Earth and is approximately 19.6 m/s 2) and sounds reminiscent of machine gun fire. Mirabeau's flares rose more than 30 m into the air (roughly equivalent to Robert Goddard's first liquid-propellant rockets in the 1930s).

Dyson dreams of the day when laser propulsion systems can launch heavy payloads into Earth orbit for as little as five dollars a pound, which would certainly revolutionize the space industry. He envisions a gigantic 1,000-megawatt (the power of a standard nuclear power unit) laser capable of propelling a two-ton rocket into orbit, consisting of a payload and a water tank at the base. Water slowly seeps through tiny pores in the bottom wall of the tank. Both the payload and the tank weigh a ton. When the laser beam hits the bottom of the rocket, the water instantly evaporates, creating a series of shock waves that propel the rocket into space. The rocket achieves an acceleration of 3 g and enters low-Earth orbit six minutes later.

Since the rocket itself does not carry fuel, there is no danger of a catastrophic explosion of the carrier. For chemical rockets, even today, 50 years after Sputnik 1, the probability of failure is about 1%. And these failures, as a rule, look very impressive - oxygen and hydrogen explode into giant fireballs, and debris rains down on the launch pad. The laser system, on the contrary, is simple, safe and can be used more than once with very short intervals; All you need for it to work is water and a laser.

Moreover, over time this system will pay for itself. If it is used to launch half a million spacecraft a year, the launch fee will easily cover both operating costs and the cost of development and construction. Dyson, however, understands that it will be another decade before this dream is realized. Fundamental research in the field of high-power lasers will require much more money than any university can allocate. Unless the government or some large corporation finances the development, laser propulsion systems will never be built.

This is where the Foundation Prize could come in very handy. I once spoke with Peter Diamandis, who founded it in 1996, and found that he was well aware of the limitations of chemical rockets. Even with SpaceShipTwo, he admitted to me, we were faced with the fact that chemical rockets are a very expensive way to escape from the effects of gravity. As a result, the next X Prize will go to the person who can create a rocket propelled by a beam of energy. (But instead of a laser beam, it is supposed to use another beam of electromagnetic energy similar to a laser - a microwave beam.)

The buzz around the prize and the multimillion-dollar award itself may be enough of a lure to spark interest in the problem of non-chemical rockets, such as the microwave rocket, among entrepreneurs and inventors.

There are other experimental rocket designs, but their development poses different risks. One of the options is a gas cannon that fires some kind of projectiles from a huge barrel, something like the projectile in Jules Verne’s novel “From the Earth to the Moon.” Verne's projectile, however, would not have reached the Moon, because gunpowder was not able to accelerate it to the speed of 11 km/s required to escape the Earth's gravitational field. In a gas gun, instead of gunpowder, projectiles will be pushed out at great speed by gas, compressed under high pressure in a long tube. The late Abraham Hertzberg of the University of Washington in Seattle built a prototype of such a gun, about 10 cm in diameter and about 10 m long. The gas inside the gun is a mixture of methane and air, compressed to 25 atmospheres. The gas is ignited and the projectile is accelerated in the barrel at 30,000 g, which flattens most metal objects.

Herzberg proved that a gas gun could work. But in order to throw a projectile into space, its barrel must be much longer, about 230 m; In addition, different gases must work along the acceleration trajectory in the gun barrel. In order for the payload to reach its first escape velocity, it is necessary to organize five sections in the barrel with different working gases.

The cost of launching from a gas gun may be even lower than using a laser system. However, it is too dangerous to launch manned vehicles into space in this way: only a solid load can withstand the intense acceleration in the barrel.

The third experimental design is a “slingatron”, which, like a sling, should spin a load and then throw it into the air.

The prototype of this device was built by Derek Tidman; its tabletop model is capable of spinning an object in a few seconds and throwing it at speeds of up to 100 m/s. The slingatron prototype is a donut-shaped tube with a diameter of about a meter. The tube itself is about 2.5 cm in diameter and contains a small steel ball. The ball rolls along a ring tube, and small motors push it and force it to accelerate.

A real slingatron, whose task will be to throw cargo into low-Earth orbit, should be much larger in size - about a hundred kilometers in diameter; in addition, he must pump energy into the ball until it accelerates to 11.2 km/s. The ball will fly out of the slingatron with an acceleration of 1000 g, which is also a lot. Not every load can withstand such acceleration. Many technical problems must be solved before a real slingatron can be built, the most important of which is to minimize friction between the ball and tube.

To finalize each of the three named projects, even in the best case scenario, it will take more than a dozen years, and then only if the government or private business takes over the financing. Otherwise, these prototypes will forever remain on the tables of their inventors.

Distant future

(2070–2100)

Space elevator

It is possible that by the end of this century the development of nanotechnology will make even the famous space elevator possible. Man, like Jack on the Beanstalk, can climb it to the clouds and beyond. We will enter the elevator, press the "up" button and climb up the fiber, which is a carbon nanotube thousands of kilometers long. It is clear that such a new product could revolutionize the economics of space travel and turn everything on its head.

In 1895, Russian physicist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, inspired by the construction of the Eiffel Tower, the tallest structure in the world at that time, asked himself a simple question: why can’t such a tower be built as tall as space? If it is high enough, he calculated, it will, according to the laws of physics, never fall. He called this structure a “heavenly palace.”

Imagine a ball. If you start spinning it on a string, the centrifugal force will be quite enough to keep the ball from falling. Likewise, if the cable is long enough, the centrifugal force will keep the weight attached to the end from falling to the ground. The rotation of the Earth will be enough to keep the cable in the sky. Once the space elevator cable stretches into the heavens, any vehicle capable of moving along it will be able to safely travel into space.

On paper, this trick seems to work. But, unfortunately, if you try to apply Newton's laws of motion and calculate the tension in the cable, it turns out that this tension exceeds the strength of steel: any cable will simply break, which makes the space elevator impossible.

Over the course of many years and even decades, the idea of ​​a space elevator was either forgotten or discussed again, only to be rejected once again for the same reason. In 1957, the Russian scientist Yuri Artsutanov proposed his own version of the project, according to which it was supposed to build an elevator not from the bottom up, but, on the contrary, from the top down. It was proposed to send a spacecraft into orbit, which would then lower a tether from there; All that remains is to fix it on the ground. Science fiction writers also had a hand in popularizing this project. Arthur C. Clarke envisioned a space elevator in his 1979 novel The Fountains of Heaven, and Robert Heinlein in his 1982 novel Frida.

Carbon nanotubes have revived this idea. As we have already seen, they have the greatest strength of all known materials. They are stronger than steel, and the potential strength of nanotubes could withstand the loads that arise in the design of a space elevator.

The problem, however, is to create a tether of pure carbon nanotubes 80,000 km long. This is an incredibly difficult task, because so far scientists have only been able to obtain a few centimeters of pure carbon nanotubes in the laboratory. You can, of course, twist together billions of nanofibers, but these fibers will not be solid. The goal is to create a long nanotube in which each carbon atom will be strictly in its place.

In 2009, scientists from Rice University announced an important discovery: the resulting fibers are not pure, but composite, but they have developed a technology that is flexible enough to create carbon nanotubes of any length. Through trial and error, the researchers discovered that carbon nanotubes could be dissolved in chlorosulfonic acid and then squeezed out of a nozzle like a syringe. Using this method, it is possible to produce fiber from carbon nanotubes of any length, and its thickness is 50 microns.

One of the commercial applications of carbon nanotube fiber is power lines, because nanotubes conduct electricity better than copper, they are lighter and stronger. Rice University engineering professor Matteo Pasquali says, “For power lines, you need tons of this fiber, and there's no way to make it yet. You only need to come up with one miracle.”

Although the resulting fibers are not pure enough to fit into a space elevator, these studies provide hope that one day we will be able to grow pure carbon nanotubes strong enough to lift us into the skies.

But even if we assume that the problem of producing long nanotubes is solved, scientists will face other practical problems. For example, a space elevator cable would have to rise well above the orbits of most satellites. This means that the orbit of some satellite will someday certainly intersect with the space elevator route and cause an accident. Since low satellites fly at speeds of 7–8 km/s, a collision could be catastrophic. It follows from this that the elevator will have to be equipped with special rocket engines, which will move the elevator cable out of the way of flying satellites and space debris.

Another problem is the weather, i.e. hurricanes, thunderstorms and strong winds. A space elevator must be anchored to the ground, perhaps on an aircraft carrier or an oil platform in the Pacific, but it must be flexible to survive the elements.

In addition, the cabin must have a panic button and an escape capsule in case the cable breaks. If anything happens to the cable, the elevator car must glide or parachute to the ground to save the passengers.

To speed up the start of space elevator research, NASA has announced several competitions. The Space Elevator Race, sponsored by NASA, offers prizes totaling $2 million. According to the rules, in order to win a competition for elevators operating using energy transmitted along a beam, one must build a device weighing no more than 50 kg, capable of climbing a cable to a height of 1 km at a speed of 2 m/s. The difficulty is that this device should not have fuel, batteries or electrical cable. The energy for its movement must be transmitted from the Earth along a beam.

I have seen with my own eyes the passion and energy of engineers working on the space elevator and dreaming of winning the prize. I even flew to Seattle to meet the young, enterprising engineers of a group called LaserMotive. Hearing the “song of the sirens” - the call of NASA, they set about developing prototypes of a device that, quite possibly, will become the heart of a space elevator.

I entered a large hangar rented by young people for testing. At one end of the hangar I saw a large laser capable of emitting a powerful energy beam. The other housed the space elevator itself. It was a box about a meter wide with a large mirror. The mirror reflected the laser beam that hit it onto a whole battery of solar cells, which converted its energy into electricity. Electricity was supplied to the engine, and the elevator car slowly crawled up a short cable. With this arrangement, the cabin with an electric motor does not need to drag an electrical cable along with it. It is enough to direct a laser beam at it from the ground, and the elevator will crawl along the cable by itself.

The laser in the hangar was so powerful that people had to protect their eyes with special glasses while it was working. After many attempts, the young people finally managed to make their car crawl up. One aspect of the space elevator problem has been solved, at least in theory.

Initially, the task was so difficult that none of the participants was able to complete it and win the promised prize. However, in 2009, LaserMotive did receive a prize. The competition took place at Edwards Air Force Base in California's Mojave Desert. A helicopter with a long cable hung over the desert, and the participants' devices tried to climb along this cable. The LaserMotive team's elevator managed to do this four times in two days; his best time was 228 seconds. So the work of the young engineers that I observed in that hangar bore fruit.

Starships

By the end of this century, research stations will most likely appear on Mars and perhaps somewhere in the asteroid belt, despite the current crisis in funding for manned space exploration. The next in line will be a real star. Today, an interstellar probe would be a completely hopeless endeavor, but in a hundred years the situation may change.

For the idea of ​​interstellar travel to become a reality, several fundamental problems must be solved. The first of them is the search for a new principle of movement. A traditional chemical rocket would take about 70,000 years to reach the nearest star. For example, two Voyagers launched in 1977 set a record for the greatest distance from Earth. Currently (May 2011), the first of them is 17.5 billion km away from the Sun, but the distance it has traveled is only a tiny fraction of the way to the stars.

Several designs and principles of motion for interstellar vehicles have been proposed. This:

Solar sail;

Nuclear rocket;

Rocket with ramjet thermonuclear engine;

Nanoships.

While at NASA's Plum Brook Station in Cleveland, Ohio, I met one of the visionaries and ardent supporters of the solar sail idea. The world's largest vacuum chamber for testing satellites was built at this site. The dimensions of this camera are amazing; this is a real cave about 30 m in diameter and 38 m in height, which could easily house several multi-story residential buildings. It is also large enough to test satellites and rocket parts in the vacuum of space. The scale of the project is amazing. I felt particularly privileged to be in the very place where many of America's most important satellites, interplanetary probes, and rockets were being tested.

So I met with one of the leading solar sail proponents, NASA scientist Les Johnson. He told me that since childhood, while reading science fiction, he dreamed of building rockets that could reach the stars. Johnson even wrote a basic course on how to build solar sails. He believes that this principle can be implemented in the next few decades, but he is prepared for the fact that the real starship will be built, most likely, many years after his death. Like the masons who built the great cathedrals of the Middle Ages, Johnson understands that it may take several human lives to build a vehicle to reach the stars.

The principle of operation of a solar sail is based on the fact that light, although it does not have rest mass, has momentum, which means it can exert pressure. The pressure that sunlight exerts on all objects encountered is extremely small, we simply do not feel it, but if the solar sail is large enough and we are willing to wait long enough, then this pressure can accelerate the interstellar ship (in space, the average intensity of sunlight is eight times higher than on Earth).

Johnson told me that his goal is to create a giant solar sail out of very thin, but flexible and resilient plastic. This sail should be several kilometers across, and it is supposed to be built in outer space. Once assembled, it will slowly revolve around the Sun, gradually gaining greater speed. Over several years of acceleration, the sail will spiral out of the solar system and rush to the stars. In general, a solar sail, as Johnson told me, is capable of accelerating an interstellar probe to 0.1% of the speed of light; Accordingly, under such conditions it will reach the nearest star in 400 years.

Johnson is trying to come up with something that would give the solar sail extra acceleration and reduce flight time. One possible way is to place a battery of powerful lasers on the Moon. Laser beams hitting the sail will transfer additional energy to it and, accordingly, additional speed when flying to the stars.

One of the problems with a starship under a solar sail is that it is extremely difficult to control, and it is almost impossible to stop and steer in the opposite direction, because sunlight travels only in one direction - away from the Sun. One solution to this problem is to deploy the sail and use light from the target star to slow it down. Another possibility is to perform a gravitational maneuver near this distant star and, using the sling effect, accelerate for the return trip. The third option is to land on some moon of that star system, build a battery of lasers on it and set off on the return journey, using the light of the star and laser beams.

Johnson dreams of the stars, but understands that the reality at the moment looks much more modest than his dreams. In 1993, the Russians deployed a 25-point reflector made of lavsan on a ship undocked from the Mir station, but the purpose of the experiment was only to demonstrate the deployment system. The second attempt ended in failure. In 2004, the Japanese successfully launched two solar sail prototypes, but again, the goal was to test the deployment system, not propulsion. In 2005, there was an ambitious attempt to deploy a real solar sail called Cosmos 1, organized by the Planetary Society, the public organization Cosmos Studios and the Russian Academy of Sciences. The sail was launched from a Russian submarine, but the launch of the Volna rocket was unsuccessful, and the solar sail did not reach orbit.

And in 2008, when a team from NASA tried to launch the NanoSail-D solar sail, the same thing happened with the Falcon 1 rocket.

Finally, in May 2010, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency successfully launched IKAROS, the first spacecraft to use solar sail technology in interplanetary space. The device was placed on a flight path to Venus, successfully deployed a square sail with a diagonal of 20 m and demonstrated the ability to control its orientation and change its flight speed. In the future, the Japanese plan to launch another interplanetary probe with a solar sail to Jupiter.

Nuclear rocket

Scientists are also considering the possibility of using nuclear energy for interstellar travel. Back in 1953, the US Atomic Energy Commission began serious development of rockets with nuclear reactors, which began with the Rover project. In the 1950s and 1960s. experiments with nuclear missiles ended mostly unsuccessfully. Nuclear engines behaved unstablely and generally turned out to be too complex for the control systems of that time. Moreover, it is easy to show that the energy output of a conventional atomic fission reactor is completely insufficient for an interstellar spacecraft. The average industrial nuclear reactor produces approximately 1,000 megawatts of energy, which is not enough to reach the stars.

However, back in the 1950s. scientists proposed using atomic and hydrogen bombs, rather than reactors, for interstellar spacecraft. The Orion project, for example, was supposed to accelerate a rocket with blast waves from atomic bombs. The starship was supposed to drop a series of atomic bombs behind itself, the explosions of which would generate powerful bursts of X-ray radiation. The shock wave from these explosions was supposed to accelerate the starship.

In 1959, physicists from General Atomics estimated that an advanced version of Orion, with a diameter of 400 m, would weigh 8 million tons and be powered by 1,000 hydrogen bombs.

Physicist Freeman Dyson was an ardent supporter of the Orion project. “For me, Orion meant the accessibility of the entire solar system for the spread of life. He could change the course of history, says Dyson. Besides, it would be a convenient way to get rid of atomic bombs. “In one flight we would get rid of 2,000 bombs.”

The end of the Orion project, however, was the Nuclear Test Limitation Treaty concluded in 1963, which banned ground explosions. Without testing, it was impossible to bring the Orion design to fruition and the project was closed.

Direct-flow fusion engine

Another nuclear missile project was put forward in 1960 by Robert W. Bussard; he proposed equipping the rocket with a thermonuclear engine, similar to a conventional aircraft jet engine. In general, a ramjet engine captures air during flight and mixes it with fuel inside. The fuel/air mixture is then ignited, creating a chemical explosion that creates propulsion. Bussard proposed applying the same principle to a fusion engine. Instead of drawing air from the atmosphere, as an aircraft engine does, a ramjet fusion engine will collect hydrogen from interstellar space. The collected gas is supposed to be compressed and heated using electric and magnetic fields before the thermonuclear fusion reaction of helium begins, which will release enormous amounts of energy. An explosion will occur and the rocket will receive a boost. And since the reserves of hydrogen in interstellar space are inexhaustible, a ramjet nuclear engine could presumably operate forever.

The design of the ship with a ramjet fusion engine resembles an ice cream cone. The funnel captures hydrogen gas, which then enters the engine, heats up, and undergoes a fusion reaction with other hydrogen atoms. Bussard calculated that a ramjet nuclear engine weighing about 1000 tons is capable of maintaining a constant acceleration of about 10 m/s 2 (i.e., approximately equal to the acceleration of gravity on Earth); in this case, within a year the spacecraft will accelerate to approximately 77% of the speed of light. Since a ramjet nuclear engine is not limited by fuel reserves, a starship with such an engine could theoretically go beyond the boundaries of our Galaxy and in just 23 years, according to the ship's clock, reach the Andromeda Nebula, located at a distance of 2 million light years from us. (According to Einstein's theory of relativity, time slows down in an accelerating ship, so that astronauts in a starship will age only 23 years, even if millions of years have passed on Earth during this time.)

However, there are serious problems here too. First, the interstellar medium contains mostly individual protons, so a fusion engine would have to burn pure hydrogen, although this reaction does not produce much energy. (Hydrogen fusion can go in different ways. Currently, on Earth, scientists prefer the option of the influence of deuterium and tritium, which releases significantly more energy. However, in the interstellar medium, hydrogen is in the form of individual protons, so in ramjet nuclear engines only proton-proton fusion can be used a fusion reaction that releases much less energy than the deuterium-tritium reaction.) However, Bussard showed that if you modify the fuel mixture by adding some carbon, then the carbon, working as a catalyst, will produce a huge amount of energy, quite sufficient for a starship .

Secondly, the funnel in front of the spaceship, in order to collect enough hydrogen, must be huge - about 160 km in diameter, so it will have to be collected in space.

There is another unresolved problem. In 1985, engineers Robert Zubrin and Dana Andrews showed that environmental drag would prevent a ramjet-powered starship from accelerating to near-light speeds. This resistance is due to the movement of the ship and the funnel in the field of hydrogen atoms. However, their calculations are based on some assumptions that in the future may not be applicable to ships with ramjet engines.

At present, while we do not have clear ideas about the process of proton-proton fusion (as well as about the resistance of hydrogen ions in the interstellar medium), the prospects for a ramjet nuclear engine remain uncertain. But if these engineering problems can be solved, this design will likely be one of the best.

Antimatter rockets

Another option is to use antimatter, the greatest source of energy in the Universe, for the starship. Antimatter is the opposite of matter in the sense that all the constituent parts of an atom there have opposite charges. For example, an electron has a negative charge, but an antielectron (positron) has a positive charge. Upon contact with matter, antimatter annihilates. This releases so much energy that a teaspoon of antimatter would be enough to destroy all of New York.

Antimatter is so powerful that the villains in Dan Brown's Angels and Demons use it to build a bomb and plan to blow up the Vatican; In the story, they steal antimatter from the largest European nuclear research center CERN, located in Switzerland near Geneva. Unlike a hydrogen bomb, which is only 1% effective, an antimatter bomb would be 100% effective. During the annihilation of matter and antimatter, energy is released in full accordance with Einstein's equation: E=mc 2.

In principle, antimatter is an ideal rocket fuel. According to Gerald Smith of Pennsylvania State University, 4 milligrams of antimatter would be enough to fly to Mars, and a hundred grams would carry the ship to the nearest stars. The annihilation of antimatter releases a billion times more energy than can be obtained from the same amount of modern rocket fuel. An antimatter engine would look pretty simple. You can simply inject antimatter particles, one after another, into a special rocket chamber. There they annihilate with ordinary matter, causing a titanic explosion. The heated gases are then expelled from one end of the chamber, creating jet thrust.

We are still very far from realizing this dream. Scientists were able to obtain antielectrons and antiprotons, as well as antihydrogen atoms, in which the antielectron circulates around the antiproton. This was done at both CERN and the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (more commonly called Fermilab) near Chicago at the Tevatron, the world's second largest particle accelerator (only larger than the Large Hadron Collider at CERN). In both laboratories, physicists directed a stream of high-energy particles at a target and obtained a stream of fragments, including antiprotons. Using powerful magnets, antimatter was separated from ordinary matter. The resulting antiprotons were then slowed down and allowed to mix with antielectrons, resulting in antihydrogen atoms.

Dave McGinnis, one of the Fermilab physicists, has thought long and hard about the practical use of antimatter. He and I stood next to the Tevatron, and Dave explained to me the disconcerting economics of antimatter. The only known way to obtain any significant amount of antimatter, he said, was to use a powerful collider like the Tevatron; but these machines are extremely expensive and can produce antimatter only in very small quantities. For example, in 2004, a collider at CERN gave scientists several trillionths of a gram of antimatter, and this pleasure cost scientists $20 million. At that price, the world economy would go bankrupt before enough antimatter could be produced for one stellar expedition. Antimatter engines themselves, McGinnis emphasized, are not particularly complicated and certainly do not contradict the laws of nature. But the cost of such an engine will not allow it to be actually built in the near future.

One of the reasons why antimatter is so incredibly expensive is the enormous sums that have to be spent on the construction of accelerators and colliders. However, accelerators themselves are universal machines and are used mainly not for the production of antimatter, but for the production of all sorts of exotic elementary particles. This is a physical research tool, not an industrial apparatus.

It can be assumed that the development of a new type of collider, designed specifically for the production of antimatter, could greatly reduce its cost. Mass production of such machines would then produce significant amounts of antimatter. NASA's Harold Gerrish is confident that the price of antimatter could eventually drop to $5,000 per microgram.

Another possibility for using antimatter as rocket fuel is to find an antimatter meteorite in outer space. If such an object were found, its energy would most likely be enough to power more than one spaceship. It must be said that in 2006, as part of the Russian Resurs-DK satellite, the European PAMELA instrument was launched, the purpose of which is to search for natural antimatter in outer space.

If antimatter is discovered in space, then humanity will have to come up with something like an electromagnetic network to collect it.

So, although interstellar antimatter spacecraft are a very real idea and do not contradict the laws of nature, they most likely will not appear in the 21st century, unless at the very end of the century scientists will be able to reduce the cost of antimatter to some reasonable amount. But if this can be done, the antimatter starship project will certainly be one of the first to be considered.

Nanoships

We've long been accustomed to special effects in films like Star Wars and Star Trek; When thinking about starships, images of huge futuristic machines arise, bristling on all sides with the latest inventions in the field of high-tech devices. Meanwhile, there is another possibility: using nanotechnology to create tiny starships, no larger than a thimble or a needle, or even smaller. We are already sure that starships will have to be huge, like the Enterprise, and carry a whole crew of astronauts. But with the help of nanotechnology, the main functions of a starship can be contained in a minimum volume, and then not one huge ship, in which the crew will have to live for many years, will go to the stars, but millions of tiny nanoships. Perhaps only a small part of them will reach their destination, but the main thing will be done: having reached one of the satellites of the destination system, these ships will build a factory and ensure the production of an unlimited number of their own copies.

Vint Cerf believes that nanoships can be used both to study the solar system and, over time, for flights to the stars. He says: “If we can design small but powerful nanodevices that can be easily transported and delivered to the surface, below the surface and into the atmosphere of our neighboring planets and moons, exploration of the solar system will become much more efficient... These same capabilities can be extended to interstellar exploration "

It is known that in nature, mammals give birth to only a few offspring and make sure that they all survive. Insects, on the other hand, produce a huge number of young, but only a small number of them survive. Both strategies are successful enough to allow species to exist on the planet for many millions of years. In the same way, we can send one very expensive starship into space - or millions of tiny starships, each of which will cost a penny and consume very little fuel.

The very concept of nanoships is based on a very successful strategy that is widely used in nature: the swarm strategy. Birds, bees and the like often fly in flocks or swarms. It's not just that a large number of kin guarantees safety; In addition, the flock acts as an early warning system. If something dangerous happens at one end of the flock - for example, an attack by a predator, the entire flock instantly receives information about it. The flock is very efficient and energetic. Birds, flying in a characteristic V-shaped figure - a wedge, use turbulent flows from the wing of a neighbor in front and thereby make their flight easier.

Scientists speak of a swarm, swarm or family of ants as a “superorganism”, which in some cases has its own intelligence, independent of the abilities of the individual individuals that make it up. The nervous system of an ant, for example, is very simple, and the brain is very small, but together an ant family is able to build a very complex structure - an anthill. Scientists hope to take advantage of nature's lessons when developing "swarm" robots that may one day go on long journeys to other planets and stars.

In some ways, all this is reminiscent of the concept of “intelligent dust”, which is being developed by the Pentagon: billions of particles equipped with tiny sensors are scattered in the air and carry out reconnaissance. Each sensor itself has no intelligence and provides only a tiny grain of information, but together they can provide their owners with mountains of all kinds of data. DARPA has sponsored research in this area with an eye to future military applications - for example, using smart dust to monitor enemy positions on the battlefield. In 2007 and 2009 The US Air Force has released detailed weapons plans for the next few decades; there's everything from advanced versions of the Predator drone plane (costing $4.5 million today) to huge swarms of tiny, cheap sensors the size of a pinhead.

Scientists are also interested in this concept. Swarms of intelligent dust would be useful for real-time monitoring of a hurricane from thousands of different locations; in the same way one could observe thunderstorms, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, floods, forest fires and other natural phenomena. In the movie Twister, for example, we follow a team of brave hurricane hunters who risk life and limb by placing sensors around tornadoes. Not only is this very risky, but it is also not very effective. Instead of risking your life by placing several sensors around a volcanic crater during an eruption or around a tornado walking across the steppe and receiving information from them about temperature, humidity and wind speed, it would be much more effective to scatter intelligent dust in the air and obtain data simultaneously thousands of different points scattered over an area of ​​hundreds of square kilometers. In a computer, this data will be compiled into a three-dimensional picture that will show you in real time the development of a hurricane or the different phases of an eruption. Commercial enterprises are already working on examples of these tiny sensors, and some of them are actually smaller than the head of a pin.

Another advantage of nanoships is that they require very little fuel to reach outer space. While huge launch vehicles can only accelerate to speeds of 11 km/s, tiny objects like nanoships are relatively easy to launch into space at incredibly high speeds. For example, elementary particles can be accelerated to sublight speeds using a conventional electric field. If you give nanoparticles a small electric charge, they can also be easily accelerated by an electric field.

Instead of spending huge amounts of money on sending interplanetary probes, it is possible to give each nanoship the ability to replicate itself; thus, even one nanobot could build a nanobot factory or even a lunar base. After this, new self-replicating probes will set off to explore other worlds. (The problem is to create the first nanobot capable of self-copying, and this is still a matter of the very distant future.)

In 1980, NASA took the idea of ​​a self-replicating robot seriously enough that it commissioned a special study from Santa Clara University called “Advanced Automation for Space Tasks” and examined several possible options in detail. One of the scenarios considered by NASA scientists involved sending small self-replicating robots to the Moon. There, robots had to organize the production of their own kind from scrap materials.

The report on this program was devoted mainly to the creation of a chemical plant for processing lunar soil (regolith). It was assumed, for example, that the robot would land on the moon, split into its constituent parts, and then assemble a new configuration from them - exactly like a transforming toy robot. So, the robot could assemble large parabolic mirrors to focus sunlight and begin to melt the regolith. He would then use hydrofluoric acid to extract usable metals and other substances from the regolith melt. Metals could be used to build a lunar base. Over time, the robot would also build a small lunar factory to produce its own copies.

Based on the data from this report, NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts launched a series of projects based on the use of self-replicating robots. Mason Peck of Cornell University was one of those who took the idea of ​​tiny starships seriously.

I visited Peck's laboratory and saw with my own eyes a workbench littered with all sorts of components that may one day be destined to go into space. Next to the workbench there was also a small clean room with plastic walls, where thin components of future satellites were assembled.

Peck's vision of space exploration is very different from anything we see in Hollywood films. It suggests the possibility of creating a chip measuring one centimeter by centimeter and weighing one gram, which can be accelerated to 1% of the speed of light. For example, he can take advantage of the sling effect, with which NASA accelerates its interplanetary stations to enormous speeds. This gravity maneuver involves circling the planet; in much the same way, a stone in a sling, held by a gravity belt, accelerates, flying in a circle, and is fired in the desired direction. Here the planet's gravity helps give the spacecraft additional speed.

But Peck wants to use magnetic forces instead of gravity. He hopes to force the microstarship to describe a loop in Jupiter's magnetic field, which is 20,000 times more intense than the Earth's magnetic field and quite comparable to the fields in Earth accelerators capable of accelerating elementary particles to energies of trillions of electron volts.

He showed me a sample - a microcircuit that, according to his plan, could one day go on a long journey around Jupiter. It was a tiny square, smaller than the tip of a finger, literally filled with all sorts of scientific stuff. In general, Peck's interstellar apparatus will be very simple. On one side, the chip has a solar battery, which should provide it with energy for communication, and on the other, a radio transmitter, video camera and other sensors. This device does not have an engine, and Jupiter’s magnetic field will have to accelerate it. (Unfortunately, in 2007, NASA's Advanced Concepts Institute, which had funded this and other innovative projects for the space program since 1998, was closed due to budget cuts.)

We see that Peck's idea of ​​starships is very different from that accepted in science fiction, where huge starships roam the vastness of the Universe under the control of a team of brave astronauts. For example, if a scientific base appeared on one of Jupiter’s moons, dozens of such small ships could be launched into orbit around the gas giant. If, among other things, a battery of laser cannons appeared on this moon, the tiny ships could be accelerated to a noticeable fraction of the speed of light, giving them acceleration using a laser beam.

A little later, I asked Peck a simple question: could he shrink his chip down to the size of a molecule using nanotechnology? Then even the magnetic field of Jupiter will not be needed - they can be accelerated to sublight speeds in a conventional accelerator built on the Moon. He said it was possible, but he hadn't worked out the details yet.

So we took a piece of paper and together we began to write equations on it and figure out what would come of it. (This is how we scientists communicate with each other - we go with a chalk to a blackboard or take a piece of paper and try to solve a problem using various formulas.) We wrote an equation for the Lorentz force, which Peck proposes to use to accelerate his ships near Jupiter. Then we mentally reduced the ships to the size of molecules and mentally placed them in a hypothetical accelerator like the Large Hadron Collider. We quickly realized that with the help of a conventional accelerator placed on the Moon, our nanostarships could be accelerated to speeds close to the speed of light without any problems. By reducing the size of the starship from a centimeter plate to a molecule, we were able to reduce the accelerator required to accelerate them; Now, instead of Jupiter, we could use a traditional particle accelerator. The idea seemed quite realistic to us.

However, after analyzing the equations again, we came to a general conclusion: the only problem here is the stability and strength of nanostarships. Will the accelerator tear our molecules apart? Like a ball on a string, these nanoships will experience centrifugal forces when accelerating to near-light speeds. In addition, they will be electrically charged, so that even electrical forces will threaten their integrity. The overall conclusion: yes, nanoships are a real possibility, but it will take decades of research before Peck's chip can be shrunk down to molecular size and amplified enough that going near light speed won't harm it in any way.

In the meantime, Mason Peck dreams of sending a swarm of nanostarships to the nearest star in the hope that at least some of them will overcome the interstellar space separating us. But what will they do when they arrive at their destination?

This is where Pei Zhang's project from Carnegie Mellon University in Silicon Valley comes into play. He created a whole flotilla of mini-helicopters, which someday may be destined to fly into the atmosphere of an alien planet. He proudly showed me his swarm of minibots that resembled toy helicopters. However, external simplicity is deceptive. I clearly saw that each of them had a chip filled with the most complex electronics. With one press of a button, Zhang lifted four minibots into the air, which immediately scattered in different directions and began transmitting information to us. Very soon I was surrounded by minibots on all sides.

Such helicopters, Zhang told me, are supposed to provide assistance in critical circumstances such as a fire or explosion; their task is information collection and reconnaissance. Over time, minibots can be equipped with television cameras and sensors for temperature, pressure, wind direction, etc.; In the event of a natural or man-made disaster, such information may be vital. Thousands of minibots could be launched over a battlefield, a forest fire, or (why not?) over an unexplored alien landscape. They all constantly communicate with each other. If one minibot encounters an obstacle, the others will immediately know about it.

So, one scenario for interstellar travel is to shoot thousands of cheap disposable chips, similar to Mason Peck's chip, towards the nearest star, flying at near the speed of light. If even a small part of them reaches their destination, the mini-starships will release their wings or propellers and, like Pei Zhang's mechanical swarm, will fly over an unprecedented alien landscape. They will send information via radio directly to Earth. Once promising planets are discovered, the second generation of ministarships will set off; their task will be to build factories near a distant star to produce the same mini-starships, which will then go to the next star. The process will develop endlessly.

Exodus from Earth?

By 2100, we will likely be sending astronauts to Mars and the asteroid belt, exploring the moons of Jupiter, and getting serious about sending probes to the stars.

But what about humanity? Will we have space colonies and will they be able to solve the problem of overpopulation? Will we find a new home in space? Will the human race begin to leave the Earth by 2100?

No. Given the cost of space travel, most people will not board a spacecraft and see distant planets in 2100, or even much later. Perhaps a handful of astronauts will have managed to create a few tiny outposts of humanity on other planets and satellites by this time, but humanity as a whole will remain confined to Earth.

Since the Earth will be the home of humanity for many more centuries, let us ask ourselves: how will human civilization develop? What impact will science have on lifestyle, work and society? Science is the engine of prosperity, so it is worth thinking about how it will change human civilization and our well-being in the future.

Notes:

The basis for determining the user’s coordinates is not measuring frequency shifts, but only the travel time of signals from several satellites located at different (but known at each moment) distances from him. To determine three spatial coordinates, in principle, it is enough to process signals from four satellites, although usually the receiver “takes into account” all the working satellites that it hears at the moment. There is also a more accurate (but also more difficult to implement) method based on measuring the phase of the received signal. - Approx. lane

Or in another earthly language, depending on where the film was shot. - Approx. lane

The TPF project has indeed been included in NASA’s long-term plans for a long time, but it has always remained a “paper project”, far from the stage of practical implementation. Neither it nor a second project from the same thematic area, the Terrestrial Planet Photographer (TPI), is included in the fiscal year 2012 budget proposal. Perhaps their successor will be the New Worlds mission for imaging and spectroscopy of Earth-like planets, but nothing can be said about the timing of its launch. - Approx. lane

In reality, it was not about sensitivity, but about the quality of the mirror surface. - Approx. lane

This project was selected in February 2009 for joint implementation by NASA and the European Space Agency. At the beginning of 2011, the Americans withdrew from the project due to lack of funds, and Europe postponed its decision to participate in it until February 2012. The Ice Clipper project mentioned below was proposed for a NASA competition back in 1997 and was not accepted. - Approx. lane

Alas, the text is outdated in this too. Like EJSM, this joint project lost US support in early 2011 and is under review, claiming the same funds in the EKA budget as EJSM and the International X-ray Observatory IXO. Only one of these three projects, in a reduced form, can be approved for implementation in 2012, and the launch can take place after 2020 - Note. lane

And some of them are being questioned. - Approx. lane

Strictly speaking, this was the name of the NASA program designed to fulfill Bush’s requirements, the main provisions of which are described by the author below. - Approx. lane

The USA has rockets and they don’t need to be invented from scratch: the Orion spacecraft can be launched by a heavy version - the Delta IV carrier, and lighter private ships - on Atlas V or Falcon-9 rockets. But there is not a single ready-made manned spacecraft and there won’t be in the next three to four years. - Approx. lane

The point, of course, is not the distance, but the increase and decrease in speed required for flights. It is also advisable to limit the duration of the expedition to minimize radiation exposure to the crew. In total, these restrictions can result in a flight pattern with a very high fuel consumption and, accordingly, a high mass of the expeditionary complex and its cost. - Approx. lane

This is not true. Hot gases penetrated inside the left wing of the Columbia and, after prolonged heating, deprived it of its strength. The wing was deformed, the ship lost its only correct orientation when braking in the upper atmosphere and was destroyed by aerodynamic forces. The astronauts were killed by depressurization and unbearable shock overloads. - Approx. lane

In February 2010, the Obama administration announced the complete closure of the Constellation program, including the Orion spacecraft, but already in April agreed to maintain it as a rescue vehicle for the ISS. In 2011, a consensus was reached regarding the immediate start of funding for the super-heavy launch vehicle SLS based on the shuttle elements and the continuation of work on Orion without a formal announcement of the goals of the promising manned program. - Approx. lane

Nothing like this! Firstly, the Russians and Americans who are now flying together for six months at a time land in good health and are able to walk, albeit with caution, on the day of landing. Secondly, the condition of Soviet and Russian cosmonauts was the same after record flights lasting 366 and 438 days, since the means we have developed to combat the effects of space flight factors are sufficient for such periods. Thirdly, Andriyan Nikolaev and Vitaly Sevastyanov could barely crawl after a record-breaking 18-day flight on Soyuz-9 in 1970, when practically no preventive measures had yet been applied. - Approx. lane

Spinning a ship or part of it around its axis is quite simple and requires almost no additional fuel consumption. Another thing is that it may not be very convenient for the crew to work in such conditions. However, there is virtually no experimental data on this matter. - Approx. lane

This popular estimate of the cost of the ISS is incorrect because it artificially includes the costs of all shuttle flights during its construction and operation. The design and manufacture of station components, scientific instrumentation, and mission control are now valued at approximately $58 billion over nearly 30 years (1984–2011). - Approx. lane

The space elevator cannot end at the altitude of geostationary orbit - in order for it to hang motionless and be able to serve as a support for the movement of transport cabins, the system must be equipped with a counterweight at an altitude of up to 100,000 km. - Approx. lane

The second copy of this spacecraft, NanoSail-D2, was launched on November 20, 2010 together with the Fastsat satellite, separated from it on January 17, 2011 and successfully deployed a space sail with an area of ​​10 m2. - Approx. lane

In May 2011, three experimental “chip satellites” of Peck’s team were delivered to the ISS for endurance testing in outer space conditions. - Approx. lane

Such a transfer in itself is a daunting task. - Approx. lane

Planetary scientists have set priorities in studying the Solar System.

For people born during the era of space exploration, books about the solar system published before 1957 often lead to a state of shock. How little the older generation knew, not even having an idea about the huge volcanoes and canyons of Mars, in comparison with which Mount Everest seems like a forest anthill, and the Grand Canyon looks like a ditch by the side of the road. Perhaps it was previously believed that under the clouds of Venus there could be a luxurious humid jungle, or an endless dry desert, or a seething ocean, or huge tar swamps - anything, but not what actually turned out to be: huge volcanic fields - scenes Noah's flood of frozen magma. The appearance of Saturn previously seemed dull: two vague rings, while today we can admire hundreds and thousands of elegant rings. The satellites of the giant planets were spots, not fantastic landscapes with methane lakes and dust geysers.

In those years, all the planets looked like small islands of light, and the Earth seemed much larger than it does today. No one has ever seen our planet from the outside: blue marble on black velvet, covered with a thin layer of water and air. No one knew that the Moon owed its birth to the impact, or that the death of the dinosaurs occurred at the same time. No one fully understood how humanity could completely change the environment of the entire planet. In addition, the space age has enriched us with knowledge about nature and opened up new perspectives.

Since Sputnik's launch, planetary exploration has had several ups and downs. For example, in the 1980s. work has almost come to a standstill. Today, dozens of probes from different countries are roaming the solar system - from Mercury to Pluto. But the budget is being cut, expenses are rising and do not always lead to the desired result, which casts a shadow on NASA. The agency is currently going through a difficult period in its history since Nixon ended the Apollo program 35 years ago.

“NASA specialists continue to search for priority areas for research,” says Anthony Janetos ( Anthony Janetos) from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, a member of the National Research Council (NRC), which oversees NASA's Earth observation program. -Are they exploring space? Are they studying man or doing pure science? Are they rushing towards galaxies or are they limited to the solar system? Are they interested in shuttles and space stations or just the nature of our planet?”

In principle, this development of events should bear fruit. Not only must robotic probe programs be revived, but manned spaceflight must also be revived. President George W. Bush set the goal in 2004 to set foot on the Moon and Mars. Despite the controversy of this idea, NASA seized on it. But the difficulty was that it quickly became an unfunded mandate and forced the agency to break through the wall that traditionally “protects” science and manned programs from cost overruns. "I think everyone knows that the agency doesn't have enough money to do all the work that needs to be done," says Bill Claybaugh ( Bill Claybaugh), Director of NASA Research and Analysis. “Money doesn’t rain like gold on the space agencies of other countries either.”

The NRC sometimes takes a step back and wonders how planetary science is faring around the world. Therefore, we present a list of priority goals.

1. Monitoring the Earth's climate

In 2005, a National Research Council panel concluded: “there is a risk that the environmental satellite system will fail.” Since then the situation has changed. NASA has transferred $600 million over five years from Earth exploration projects to support programs for the shuttle and space station. At the same time, development of a new national system of polar-orbiting Earth observation satellites has gone over budget and must be cut. This applies to instruments that study global warming, measuring solar radiation incident on the Earth and infrared rays reflected from the Earth's surface.

As a result, more than 20 Earth Observing System satellites will cease to function even before new devices come to replace them. Scientists and engineers hope that they will be able to keep them in working order for some time. “We are ready to work, but now we need a plan,” says Robert Cahalan ( Robert Cahalan), head of the Climate and Radiation Division at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. “You can’t wait for them to break.”

If satellites stop functioning before replacements arrive, there will be a data gap that makes it difficult to track changes. For example, if the next generation of devices notice that the Sun has become brighter, it will be difficult to understand whether this is really so, or whether the instruments are incorrectly calibrated. Unless continuous satellite observations are carried out, this issue cannot be resolved. Observations of the Earth's surface from satellites Landsat, conducted since 1972, have been discontinued for several years, and the US Department of Agriculture is forced to buy data from Indian satellites to monitor the crop.

The NRC is calling for restoration of funding and the launch of 17 new spacecraft monitoring ice cover and carbon dioxide over the next decade to study how such factors influence weather and improve forecasting methods. Unfortunately, climate research is caught between routine weather observation (NOAA's job) and science (NASA's job). “The main problem is that no one is tasked with monitoring the climate,” says climate scientist Drew Schindel ( Drew Shindell) from NASA's Goddard Space Research Center. Like many other scientists, he believes that government climate programs, distributed among different departments, should be brought together and transferred to one department that will deal only with this topic.

Action plan

• Fund 17 new satellites proposed by NASA in the next decade (cost: about $500 million per year).
• Establish a climate research office.

2. Preparing protection from asteroids

Asteroid threat

Asteroids with a diameter of 10 km (dinosaur killers) fall to the earth on average once every 100 million years. Asteroids with a diameter of about 1 km (global destroyers) - once every half a million years. Asteroids 50 m in size capable of destroying a city occur once every millennium.

The Space Defense Survey identified more than 700 kilometer-sized bodies, but all of them are not dangerous to us in the coming centuries. However, this survey will be able to detect no more than 75% of such asteroids.

The chance that among the undetected 25% there will be an asteroid that will fall to earth is small. The average risk is up to 1 thousand deaths per year. The risk from smaller asteroids is on average up to 100 people per year.

The asteroid is so huge, and the space probe is so small... but give it time, and even a weak rocket can deflect the giant rock from its dangerous orbit

Like climate monitoring, protecting the planet from asteroids appears to be caught between two stools. Neither NASA nor the European Space Agency ( European Space Agency, ESA) do not have a mandate to save humanity. The best thing they did was the Survey for Space Defense program ( Spaceguard Survey, NASA) with a budget of $4 million per year to search in near-Earth space for bodies with a diameter of more than 1 km, which can cause harm not only to any region of the planet, but also to the Earth as a whole. However, so far no one is engaged in a systematic search for smaller “regional destroyers”, of which there should be about 20 thousand in the vicinity of the Earth. There is also no Space Threats Directorate that would sound the alarm if necessary. If security technology existed, it would take at least 15 years to provide protection against a dangerous intrusion. "There is no comprehensive plan in the US right now," says Larry Lemke ( Larry Lemke), engineer at NASA's Aimson Center.

In response to a request from Congress in March 2007, NASA published a report stating that the detection of bodies ranging in size from 100 to 1000 m could be entrusted to the Large Survey Telescope ( Large Sinoptic Survey Telescope, LSST), developed to survey the sky and search for new objects. The developers of this project believe that in the form in which the telescope was conceived, it will be able to detect 80% of these bodies within 10 years of operation (2014-2024). With an additional $100 million invested in the project, efficiency could increase to 90%.

Like all ground-based instruments, the LSST telescope's capabilities are limited. Firstly, it has a blind spot: it can observe the most dangerous objects moving near the Earth’s orbit slightly ahead or behind our planet only in the rays of morning or evening dawn, when the sun’s rays make it difficult to detect them. Secondly, this telescope can determine the mass of an asteroid only indirectly - by its brightness. In this case, the mass estimate can differ by half: a large dark asteroid can be confused with a small but light one. “And this distinction can be very important if we need protection,” says Claybaugh.

To solve these problems, NASA decided to build a $500 million infrared space telescope and place it in orbit around the Sun. It will be able to detect any threat to the Earth and, observing celestial bodies at different wavelengths, determine their mass with an error of no more than 20%. “If you want to do it right, you need to observe infrared from space,” says Donald Yeomans ( Donald Yeomans) from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, co-author of the report.

What to do if the asteroid is already moving towards our planet? The rule of thumb is that to deflect an asteroid by the radius of the Earth, you need to change its speed ten years before impact by a millimeter per second, pushing it with a nuclear explosion or pulling it back with gravitational attraction.

In 2004, the NASA Commission on Expeditions to Near-Earth Objects recommended testing. According to the $400 million Don Quixote project, it is supposed to change its trajectory by hitting a four-hundred-kilogram obstacle. The release of material after the collision as a result of the reaction effect will shift the direction of the asteroid, but no one knows how strong this effect will be. Determining this is the main task of the project. Scientists must find a body in such a distant orbit that the impact does not accidentally put it on a collision course with the Earth.

In the spring of 2008, ESA completed the preliminary draft and immediately put it on the shelf due to lack of money. To implement its plans, it will try to join forces with NASA and/or the Japanese Space Agency ( Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA).

Action plan

• Advanced search for asteroids, including small bodies, possibly using a dedicated space infrared telescope.
• Experiment on controlled deflection of an asteroid.
• Development of a formal system for assessing potential hazards.

3. Search for a new life

Before the launch of the satellite, scientists considered the solar system to be a real paradise. Then optimism diminished. It turned out that Earth's sister is a living hell. Having approached dusty Mars, the Mariners discovered that its cratered landscape was similar to that of the Moon; Having sat on its surface, the Vikings could not find a single organic molecule. But later, places suitable for life were discovered. Mars still shows promise. The planetary moons, especially Europa and Enceladus, appear to have large subsurface seas and enormous amounts of raw material for the formation of life. Even Venus may have once been covered by an ocean. On Mars, NASA is not looking for the organisms themselves, but for traces of their existence in the past or present, focusing on the presence of water. The latest Phoenix probe, launched in August, is due to land in the unexplored north polar region in 2008. This is not a rover, but a stationary device with a manipulator capable of digging into the soil several centimeters deep to search for ice deposits. The Mars Science Laboratory is also preparing for flight ( Mars Science Laboratory, MSL) is a $1.5 billion, car-sized Mars rover due to launch in late 2009 and land a year later.

But gradually scientists will return to the direct search for living organisms or their remains. ESA plans to launch the ExoMars probe in 2013 ( ExoMars), equipped with the same laboratory as the Vikings, and a drill capable of going 2 m deep into the soil - enough to reach layers where organic compounds are not destroyed.

Many planetary scientists consider it a priority to study the rocks brought from Mars to Earth. Analyzing even a small amount of it will provide an opportunity to penetrate deeply into the history of the planet, as the Apollo program did for the Moon. NASA budget problems have pushed back the multibillion-dollar project to 2024, but the agency has already begun upgrading MSL so it can preserve samples from the collection.

For Jupiter's moon Europa, scientists would also like to have an orbiter to measure how the moon's shape and gravitational field respond to tidal influences from Jupiter. If there is liquid inside the satellite, its surface will rise and fall by 30 m, and if not, only 1 m. A magnetometer and radar will help you look under the surface and possibly feel the ocean, and cameras will help you map the surface in preparation for landing and drilling .

A natural extension of Cassini's work near Titan would be an orbiter and lander. Titan's atmosphere is similar to Earth's, allowing for the use of a hot air balloon that can occasionally descend to the surface and take samples. The purpose of all this, says Jonathan Lunin ( Jonathan Lunine) from the University of Arizona would “analyze surface organics to test whether there is progress in the self-organization of the substance that many experts believe began the origin of life on Earth.”

In January 2007, NASA began reviewing these projects. The agency plans to make a choice between Europe and Titan in 2008. The $2 billion probe may be launched within the next ten years. The second celestial body will have to wait another ten years.

In the end, it may turn out that earthly life is unique. This would be sad, but it would not mean that all efforts were wasted. According to Bruce Jakoski ( Bruce Jacosky), director of the Astrobiology Center at the University of Colorado, astrobiology allows us to understand how diverse life can be, what its prerequisites are, and how it began on our planet 4 billion years ago.

Action plan

• Obtaining samples of Martian soil.
• Preparing for the exploration of Europa and Titan.

4. The clue to the origin of the planets

Like the origin of life, the formation of planets was a complex, multi-step process. Jupiter was the first and then ruled the others. How long did this education take? Or did it originate in a single gravitational compression, like a small star? Did it form far from the Sun and then move closer to it, as evidenced by its anomalously high content of heavy elements? And could he at the same time push small planets along his path? Jupiter's Juno satellite, which NASA plans to launch in 2011, should help answer these questions.

The development of the idea of ​​the Stardust probe, which in 2006 delivered samples of dust from the coma surrounding the solid nucleus of the comet, would also help to understand the formation of planets. According to project leader Donald Brownlee ( Donald Brownlee) from the University of Washington, Stardust showed that comets were colossal collectors of protosolar nebula material early in the solar system's formation, which was frozen into ice and preserved to this day. "Stardust has brought back remarkable dust grains from the inner solar system, from extrasolar sources, and, apparently, even from destroyed objects like Pluto, but they are very few." JAXA plans to obtain samples from comet nuclei.

The Moon can also become a platform for astroarchaeological research. It was a kind of Rosetta Stone for understanding the history of impacts in the young solar system, because it helped link the relative age of the surface, determined by counting craters, with the absolute dating of samples returned by Apollo and the Russian Luna. But in the 1960s. the landers visited only a few places. They didn't make it to Aitken Crater, a continent-sized basin on the far side whose age may indicate when planet formation ended. NASA is now considering sending a robot there to take samples and bring them back to Earth.

Another mystery of the solar system is that the Main Belt asteroids appear to have formed before Mars, which in turn formed before Earth. It appears that a wave of planet formation was going inward, probably triggered by Jupiter. But does Venus fit into this pattern? After all, this planet, with its acidic clouds, enormous pressure and hellish temperatures, is not the most pleasant place to land. In 2004, the NRC recommended deploying a balloon that could briefly descend to the surface, take samples, and then gain the necessary altitude to analyze them or send them back to Earth. In the mid-1980s. The Soviet Union has already sent spacecraft to Venus, and now the Russian Space Agency is planning to launch a new lander.

The study of planet formation is in some ways similar to studies of the origin of life. Venus is located on the inner edge of the life zone, Mars is on the outer edge, and Earth is in the middle. Understanding the differences between these planets means advancing the search for life outside the solar system.

Action plan

• Obtain samples of matter from the nuclei of comets, the Moon and Venus.

5. Beyond the solar system

Two years ago, the legendary Voyagers overcame the financial crisis. When NASA announced that they were going to shut down the project, public outcry forced them to continue working. Nothing man-made has ever been as far away from us as Voyager 1: 103 astronomical units (AU), i.e. 103 times further than the Earth from the Sun, and adding another 3.6 a.u. In 2002 or 2004 (according to various estimates), it reached the mysterious multilayer boundary of the Solar System, where solar wind particles collide with a flow of interstellar gas.

But Voyagers were designed to explore the outer planets, not interstellar space. Their plutonium power sources are drying up. NASA has long been thinking about creating a special probe, and the NRC report on solar physics from 2004 advises the agency to begin work in this direction.

External boundaries

The interstellar probe should explore the border region of the solar system, where gas ejected from the Sun meets interstellar gas. It must have speed, durability and equipment that Voyagers and Pioneers do not have.

The probe must measure the amino acid content of interstellar particles to determine how much complex organic matter entered the solar system from outside. He also needs to find antimatter particles that could be born in miniature black holes or dark matter. It must determine how the edge of the solar system reflects matter, including cosmic rays that can influence Earth's climate. He also needs to find out whether there is a magnetic field in the interstellar space around us, which can play an important role in the formation of stars. This probe can be used as a miniature space telescope to conduct cosmological observations free from the influence of interplanetary dust. It would help study the so-called Pioneer Anomaly, an unexplained force acting on the two distant space probes Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11, and also test Einstein's theory of general relativity by indicating where the sun's gravity collects rays of light from distant sources into focus. It could be used to study in detail one of the nearby stars, such as Epsilon Eridani, although it would take tens of thousands of years to get there.

To reach a celestial body at a distance of hundreds of astronomical units during the lifetime of the scientist (and the plutonium energy source), one must accelerate to a speed of 15 AU. in year. To do this, you can use one of three options - heavy, medium or light, respectively, with an ion engine powered by a nuclear reactor, or a solar sail.

The heavy (36 t) and medium (1 t) probes were developed in 2005 by teams led by Thomas Zurbuchen ( Thomas Zurbuchen) from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor and Ralph McNutt ( Ralph McNutt) from the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. But the easiest option looks more acceptable for launching. ESA is now considering a proposal from an international team of scientists led by Robert Wimmer-Schweingruber ( Robert Wimmer-Schweingruber) from the University of Kiel, Germany. NASA may also join this project.

A solar sail with a diameter of 200 m will be able to accelerate a five hundred kilogram probe. After launching from Earth, it must rush towards the Sun and pass as close to it as possible (inside the orbit of Mercury) in order to catch a powerful surge of sunlight. Like a windsurfer, the spacecraft will tack. Before the orbit of Jupiter, it must drop the sail and fly freely. But first, engineers must develop a sail that is light enough and tests it in a simplified version.

“Such a mission under the auspices of ESA or NASA would be the next logical step in space exploration,” says Wimmer-Schweingruber. Over the next 30 years, the cost of this project is estimated at $2 billion. Studying the planets will help us understand how Earth fits into the overall scheme, and studying our interstellar neighborhood will help us find out the same for the entire solar system.

Having broken through the firmament with his “Vostok 1”, he fell straight into space. The world was conquered. The ladies squealed, dropping flowers at the hero's feet, and the leaders of all countries, the prim Queen of England and the good-natured revolutionary Fidel hugged the most charming man who ever lived as their brother. Then there was cosmonaut Leonov, who went into outer space, Tereshkova, a flight to the Moon, the deprivation of Pluto’s right to be called a planet, and no visible cosmic progress. Okay, science fiction writer Bradbury came to terms with this, but Sergei Pavlovich Korolev would be very dissatisfied. How can we explain to him that humanity has not even been to the Moon?

It's a shame, comrades. But recent years have seen a major shift, and if all goes according to plan, the decade between 2020 and 2030 promises to be our new 60s. Let's see what Roscosmos, NASA and the European Space Agency are working on now.

1. Escape from the asteroid. Version #1

The holy ideas of the film “Armageddon”, more fantastic than scientific, are alive in the hearts of space explorers. Only everything will be without human casualties. A drone will simply land on the rough surface of the asteroid and redirect the mindlessly wandering body into a stable orbit around the Moon or Earth.

This is not needed to save the Earth, and this is not some kind of whim, the asteroid will simply be used for training purposes. First of all, on this asteroid you can rehearse landing on the Moon, Mars and other cosmic bodies, so that the astronauts know how to behave in this situation. In addition, it will be possible to take soil analysis from the asteroid, which will help obtain new information about the origin of the Solar System. How exactly the capture of a celestial body will take place has not yet been decided. Options being considered include using a giant inflatable container to hold the asteroid.

2. Escape from the asteroid. Version #2

The European Space Agency has its own view of fighting asteroids, which is more like the canonical method from the film. The AIDA (Asteroid Impact & Deflection Assessment) project is humanity’s first mission to the double asteroid Didim, which will approach our planet by 11 million kilometers in 2022. The diameter of the main body is about 800 meters, its satellite - 150 meters. Both asteroids orbit around a common center of mass at a distance of about one kilometer.

Back in 2014, the project was called , but then, as always, the money ran out and NASA came to the rescue. Now, in case of a successful outcome, the laurels will have to be divided.

The DART impactor probe developed by NASA will crash into the asteroid’s satellite at a speed of about 6.5 kilometers per second, and the AIM apparatus of the European Space Agency (ESA) will engage in orbital exploration of the two celestial bodies, as well as the consequences of the collision of the “suicide probe.” The impact experiment should help experts understand whether it is possible to push an asteroid out of orbit.

3. Moon base

According to unconfirmed reports, this will happen in the early 2030s, almost 70-odd years after the namesake of the brilliant bluesman supposedly set foot there. But this time it is planned not just a courtesy visit, but a full-fledged rooting on the satellite. The base will be designed for 2-3 people and will be not only a kind of pit stop for crews setting off to explore more distant planets, but also a kind of mine. Who didn’t know, they plan to extract hydrogen on the Moon and then turn it into rocket fuel.

4. "Luna-Glob"

However, our brave astronauts are also looking towards the Moon. In fact, this is the only independent project of this scale that Russia has not yet abandoned.

True, the creation of a space base on the Moon is still a distant prospect, but projects of interplanetary automatic stations for the study of an artificial Earth satellite are quite feasible right now, and for several years now the main one in Russia has been the Luna-Glob program - in fact, the first a necessary step towards a potential lunar settlement.

The probe will work out the landing mechanism on the lunar surface and will study the lunar soil - drilling to take soil samples and further analyze it for the presence of ice (water is necessary both for the life of astronauts and potentially as hydrogen fuel for rockets).

The launch of the device was postponed many times for various reasons, and so far we have stopped at 2015. In the future, before the manned flight planned for the 2030s, it is planned to launch several more heavier probes, including Luna-Resurs, which will also study the Moon and other necessary preparatory measures for the future landing of astronauts.

But don’t rush to criticize our cosmic dignity. Russia, for example, is steadily sending American, European, Canadian and Japanese astronauts into space. Seats on domestic Soyuzs are sold out for years to come. Other countries are adopting Russian experience in preparing for space flights. In France, a Russian cosmonaut training program that simulates weightlessness was recently launched.

Don't forget that for a long time we were the only ones in the business of sending millionaires as space tourists.

We first need to resolve issues with the Plesetsk cosmodrome, develop GLONASS, work out servicing systems for individual spacecraft in orbit, and do other little things without which space exploration is impossible. So everything is ahead, Yura will still be proud of us.

5. Forward to Jupiter

Jupiter looks too promising a planet for future space exploration. And he didn’t have time to set his teeth on edge like Mars or the Moon. Researchers are especially interested in the satellite of the planet Europa with its icy expanses. Due to its great distance from the Sun, Europa receives very little heat, but it is possible that under the ice there is liquid water, heated by tectonic activity in the bowels of the planet. To get to it, you will need a cryobot - a device capable of making its way through ice several kilometers thick using thermal influence. NASA is already working on such a device, which they call Valkyrie. The device heats water using an on-board nuclear energy source and directs the jet onto the ice, melting it. The Valkyrie then collects the melt water and repeats the procedure, gradually moving forward. During testing in Alaska, the sample overcame eight kilometers of ice over the course of a year. As a result, if the expedition takes place, scientists hope for the first time to discover conditions suitable for the origin of life.

However, Europeans, greedy for glory, are trying with all their might to take the laurels of Jupiter explorers for themselves. In 2022, they will send the interplanetary automatic station Jupiter Icy Moon Explorer to Jupiter. The satellite will immediately explore the three closest and largest satellites of Jupiter from the so-called Galilean group: Europa, Ganymede and Callisto. If launched successfully at the scheduled time, the device will reach the Jupiter system in 2030.

6. Flight to Alpha Centauri

Expeditions within the solar system are not impressive for everyone, some like Alpha Centauri. All hope lies only in the “Centenary Spaceship” - a joint project of NASA and the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. If everything is in order, then humanity will go to the star closest to us outside the solar system during the lifetime of the current newborns. At the very least, project leaders expect to create the technologies necessary for interstellar travel within the next 100 years, such as an antimatter engine. It will also be necessary to think about measures to prevent the consequences of a long stay in space for the human body. Given the current state of science, the chances of the mission's success appear negligible. However, the project is increasingly being funded, so there are chances.

7. James Webb Space Telescope

The Hubble telescope has a successor that has been in development for 20 years. But this long wait is worth it - humanity will finally be able to look at the most distant objects of the universe, located billions of light years away from us. For example, it will be possible to glimpse some of the first stars and galaxies to form after the Big Bang. However, not everything is so rosy - many astrophysicists are not confident in the effectiveness of this eyepiece, especially after numerous failures during testing and endless budget surpluses. But wait and see, there’s not much time left, just a year.

8. Journey to Mars

They say so much that for some reason it seems that we have already flown there. Moreover, not only NASA, but also upstarts SpaceX and Blue Origin are vying for the flight. On the other hand, NASA is in no hurry and believes that it is better to calculate all the risks on Earth before you are blue in the face, do a series of tests (an asteroid to help), and only then send people into the interstellar mass. They plan to do this in 2030, but, most likely, the flight will be postponed, because for these few years the guys from the space agency have only been complaining about the lack of budget. The Dutch company Mars One plans to send an expedition in 2026, but this project is periodically compromised by the fact that it is simply untenable. Some candidates for the flight say that the organizers of this whole movement have not raised the necessary money, but continue to hope for sponsorship.

The European Space Agency also has its own plan for a Mars mission. These comrades want to land a man on Mars closer to 2033. The agency's management says that due to low funding, they will be forced to resort to international cooperation. For example, Russia is involved in one of the stages of the program called ExoMars. But this stage is not associated with, but with the study of the possibility of life on it.

Today, leading space agencies recognize the SpaceX program as the most promising in terms of Mars exploration. This is largely thanks to their Falcon 9 shuttle rocket, which today delivers cargo to the ISS. A special feature of the rocket is the ability to land the first stage for reuse. This technology is perfect for Mars missions.

The proposed Startram space launch system, which would cost an estimated $20 billion to begin construction and implementation, promises the ability to deliver cargo weighing up to 300,000 tons into orbit at a very affordable price of $40 per kilogram of payload. Considering that the current cost of delivering 1 kg of payload into space is, at best, $11,000, the project looks very interesting.

The Startram project will not require rockets, fuel or ion engines. Instead of all this, magnetic repulsion technology will be used here. It is worth noting that the concept of a magnetic levitation train is far from new. There are already operating trains on Earth that move along a magnetic surface at a speed of about 600 kilometers per hour. However, all of these maglevs (used primarily in Japan) have one major obstacle that limits their top speed. In order for these trains to reach their full potential and achieve the highest possible speeds, we need to get rid of the weathering that slows them down.

The Startram project proposes a solution to this issue by constructing a long suspended vacuum tunnel at an altitude of about 20 kilometers. At this altitude, air resistance becomes less pronounced, which will allow space launches to be carried out at much higher speeds and with much less drag. Spacecraft will literally be shot into space, without the need to overcome the atmosphere. Such a system would require about 20 years of work and investments totaling $60 billion.

Asteroid catcher

Among science fiction fans, there was once a heated debate about the anti-scientific method and the clearly underestimated complexity of landing on an asteroid, shown in the famous American science fiction thriller “Armageddon”. Even NASA once noted that they would have found a better (and more realistic) option to try to save the Earth from imminent destruction. Moreover, the Aerospace Agency recently awarded a grant for the development and construction of a “comet and asteroid catcher.” The spacecraft will cling to a selected space object with a special powerful harpoon and, using the power of its engines, pull these objects away from a dangerous trajectory of approach to the Earth.

In addition, the device can be used to catch asteroids with a view to further extracting minerals from them. The space object will be attracted by the harpoon and taken to the desired location, for example, into the orbit of Mars or the Moon, where orbital or ground bases will be located. After which mining groups will be sent to the asteroid.

Solar probe

Just like on Earth, the Sun also has its own winds and storms. However, unlike those on Earth, solar winds can not only ruin your hair, they can literally evaporate you. According to the NASA aerospace agency, many questions about the Sun that still have no answers will be answered by the Solar Probe, which will be sent to our luminary in 2018.

The spacecraft will have to approach the Sun at a distance of about 6 million kilometers. This will lead to the fact that the probe will have to experience the effects of radiation energy of such power that no man-made spacecraft has ever experienced. According to engineers and scientists, a carbon-composite heat shield 12 centimeters thick will help protect the probe from the effects of harmful radiation.

However, NASA can't just send the probe straight to the Sun. The spacecraft will have to make at least seven orbital passes around Venus. And this will take him about seven years. Each rotation will speed up the probe and adjust the trajectory to the correct course. After the last flyby, the probe will head towards the orbit of the Sun, at a distance of 5.8 million kilometers from its surface. Thus, it will become the closest man-made space object to the Sun. The current record belongs to the Helios 2 space probe, which is located at a distance of approximately 43.5 million kilometers from the Sun.

Martian outpost

The emerging prospects for future flights to Mars and Europa are enormous. NASA believes that if they are not prevented by any global cataclysms and the fall of killer asteroids, the agency will send a person to the Martian surface within the next two decades. NASA has even already presented the concept of a future Martian outpost, the construction of which is planned to begin sometime in the late 2030s.

The radius of the planned research area will be about 100 kilometers. There will be residential modules, scientific complexes, parking for Martian rovers, as well as mining equipment for a team of four people. The energy for the complex will be partially produced by several compact nuclear reactors. In addition, electricity will be produced by solar panels, which, of course, will become ineffective in the event of Martian sandstorms (hence the need for compact reactors).

Over time, many scientific teams will settle in this area, which will have to grow their own food, collect Martian water, and even create rocket fuel on site for flights back to Earth. Fortunately, many useful and necessary materials for the construction of a Martian base are contained directly in the Martian soil, so you will not have to carry some things to establish the first Martian colony.

NASA ATHLETE rover

The spider-like ATHLETE (All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extraterrestrial Explorer) rover will one day colonize the Moon. Thanks to its special suspension, consisting of six independent legs capable of turning in all directions, the rover can move on the ground of any complexity. At the same time, the presence of wheels allows it to move faster on a more level surface.

This hexopod can be equipped with a wide variety of scientific and work equipment and, if necessary, can easily cope with the role of a mobile crane. In the photo above, for example, ATHLETE has a habitation module installed. In other words, the rover can also be used as a mobile home. The height of ATHLETE is about 4 meters. At the same time, it is capable of lifting and transporting objects weighing up to 400 kilograms. And this is in Earth's gravity!

ATHLETE's biggest advantage lies in its suspension, which gives it incredible mobility and the ability to do the challenging job of delivering heavy objects, unlike the stationary landers used in the past and used today. One of the options for using ATHLETE is 3D printing. Installing a 3D printer on it will allow the rover to be used as mobile printing equipment for lunar dwellings.

3D printed Martian houses

To help usher in preparations for a human mission to Mars, NASA has organized an architecture competition to develop and sponsor 3D printing technologies that will allow 3D printing to build Martian houses.

The only requirement for the competition was to use materials that are widely available for mining on Mars. The winners were two design companies from New York, Team Space Exploration Architecture and Clouds Architecture Office, who proposed their concept of the Martian house ICE HOUSE. The concept uses ice as a basis (hence the name). The construction of buildings will be carried out in the icy zones of Mars, where lander modules will be sent, loaded with many compact robots that will collect dirt and ice to build structures around these modules.

The walls of the structures will be made of a mixture of water, gel and silica. Once the material freezes thanks to the low temperatures on the surface of Mars, the result is a very suitable double-walled room for living. The first wall will consist of an ice mixture and provide additional protection from radiation; the role of the second wall will be performed by the module itself.

Advanced coronagraph

A deep study of the solar corona (the outer layer of the star's atmosphere, consisting of charged particles) is hampered by one circumstance. And this circumstance, no matter how ironic it may sound, is the Sun itself. The solution to the problem may be a so-called volumetric solar dimmer, a ball slightly larger than a tennis ball made of a super-dark titanium alloy. The essence of the dimmer is as follows: it is installed in front of a spectrograph aimed at the Sun, thereby creating a miniature solar eclipse, leaving only the solar corona.

NASA currently uses flat solar shading on its SOHO and STEREO spacecraft, but the flat design of such devices creates some blurriness and unnecessary distortion. The solution to this problem was suggested by space itself. The Earth is known to have its own solar obscurant located about 400,000 kilometers away. This obscurant, of course, is the Moon, thanks to which we occasionally witness a solar eclipse.

NASA's volumetric dimmer will have to reproduce the effect of a lunar eclipse, of course, only for the spacecraft that will explore the Sun, but being located at a distance of two meters from its spectrograph, the dimmer will help study the solar corona without any problems, interference or distortion.

Honeybee Robotics Technologies

Honeybee Robotics, a small Western private company engaged in the development and production of various space technologies, recently received an order from the aerospace agency NASA to carry out two new technological developments for the Asteroid Redirect System space program. The main goal of the program is to study asteroids and find ways to combat possible threats of their collision with Earth in the future. In addition, the company is developing other equally interesting things.

For example, one of these developments is a space gun, which will fire special projectiles at asteroids and shoot pieces from the space object. Having shot a piece of the asteroid in this way, a special spacecraft will catch it with its robotic claws and transport it to lunar orbit, where scientists can study its structure in more detail. NASA plans to test this device on one of three asteroids: Itokawa, Bennu or 2008 EV5.

The second development is the so-called space nanodrill for collecting soil samples from asteroids. The weight of the drill is only 1 kilogram, and in size it is slightly larger than the average smartphone. The drill will be used either by robots or astronauts. It will be used to collect the required amount of soil for further analysis.

Solar satellite SPS-ALPHA

SPS-ALPHA is a solar-powered orbital spacecraft consisting of tens of thousands of thin mirrors. The accumulated energy will be converted into microwaves and sent back to special earth stations, where from there it will be transmitted to power lines to power entire cities.

This project is perhaps one of the most difficult to implement among those presented in today’s selection. Firstly, the described SPS-ALPHA platform will be much larger in size than the International Space Station. Its construction will require a lot of time, an entire army of astronaut-engineers and the investment of colossal funds. Due to its gigantic size, the platform will have to be built directly in orbit. On the other hand, the platform elements will be made from relatively cheap and uncomplicated materials from the point of view of mass production, which means the project automatically moves from “impossible” to “very complex”, which, in turn, opens up the hope that one day its implementation will really do it.

Project "Objective Europe"

The Objective Europa project is the craziest space exploration idea ever proposed. Its main goal is to send a person to Europa, one of the moons of Jupiter, on board a special submarine, thanks to which a search for possible life in the subglacial ocean of the satellite will be carried out.

What adds to the madness of this project is the fact that this is a one-way mission. Any astronaut who decides to go to Europa will actually have to agree to sacrifice his life for the good of science, while having the opportunity to answer the most secret question of modern astronomy: is there life in space in addition to that on Earth?

The idea of ​​the Objective Europa project belongs to Christin von Bengston. Bengston is currently running a crowdsourcing campaign to raise funds for this project. The submarine itself will be equipped with the most modern technologies. There will be a super-powerful drill, multi-dimensional traction engines, powerful searchlights, and, possibly, a pair of multifunctional robotic arms. The submarine, like the spacecraft that will take it to Europa, will need powerful radiation protection.

The choice of landing site will be critical. The thickness of Europa's ice over almost its entire surface is several kilometers, so it would be best to land the device next to faults and cracks, where the ice crust is not so strong and thick. The project, of course, raises many questions, including moral ones.

In 2011, the United States stopped operating the Space Transportation System complex with the reusable Space Shuttle, as a result of which Russian Soyuz family ships became the only means of delivering astronauts to the International Space Station. Over the next few years, this situation will continue, and after that, new ships are expected to appear that can compete with the Soyuz. New developments in the field of manned space flight are being created both in our country and abroad.

Russian Federation"

Over the past decades, the Russian space industry has made several attempts to create a promising manned spacecraft suitable to replace the Soyuz. However, these projects have not yet led to the expected results. The newest and most promising attempt to replace the Soyuz is the Federation project, which proposes the construction of a reusable system in manned and cargo versions.

Models of the ship "Federation". Photo: Wikimedia Commons

In 2009, the Energia rocket and space corporation received an order to design a spacecraft designated as the “Advanced Manned Transport System.” The name "Federation" appeared only a few years later. Until recently, RSC Energia was developing the required documentation. Construction of the first ship of the new type began in March last year. Soon the finished sample will begin testing at stands and testing grounds.

According to the latest announced plans, the first space flight of the Federation will take place in 2022, and the ship will send cargo into orbit. The first flight with a crew on board is planned for 2024. After carrying out the required checks, the ship will be able to carry out more daring missions. So, in the second half of the next decade, unmanned and manned flights of the Moon may take place.

The ship, consisting of a reusable returnable cargo-passenger cabin and a disposable engine compartment, will be able to have a mass of up to 17-19 tons. Depending on its goals and payload, it will be able to take on board up to six astronauts or 2 tons of cargo. When returning, the descent module can contain up to 500 kg of cargo. It is known that several versions of the ship are being developed to solve different problems. Having the appropriate configuration, the Federation will be able to send people or cargo to the ISS, or operate in orbit independently. The ship is also expected to be used in future flights to the Moon.

The American space industry, which was left without the Shuttle several years ago, has high hopes for the promising Orion project, which is a development of the ideas of the closed Constellation program. Several leading organizations, both American and foreign, have been involved in the development of this project. Thus, the European Space Agency is responsible for creating the assembly compartment, and Airbus will build such products. American science and industry are represented by NASA and Lockheed Martin.

Model of the Orion ship. Photo by NASA

Project Orion in its current form was launched in 2011. By this time, NASA had completed some of the work on the Constellation program, but it had to be abandoned. Certain developments were transferred from this project to the new one. Already on December 5, 2014, American specialists managed to conduct the first test launch of a promising ship in an unmanned configuration. There have been no new launches yet. In accordance with the established plans, the authors of the project must complete the necessary work, and only after that it will be possible to begin a new stage of testing.

According to current plans, a new flight of the Orion spacecraft in the space truck configuration will take place only in 2019, after the appearance of the Space Launch System launch vehicle. The unmanned version of the ship will have to work with the ISS and also fly around the Moon. From 2023, astronauts will be present on board the Orions. Long-duration manned flights, including flybys of the Moon, are planned for the second half of the next decade. In the future, the possibility of using the Orion system in the Mars program is not excluded.

The ship with a maximum launch weight of 25.85 tons will have a sealed compartment with a volume of just under 9 cubic meters, which will allow it to transport fairly large cargo or people. It will be possible to transport up to six people into Earth orbit. The “lunar” crew will be limited to four astronauts. The cargo modification of the ship will lift up to 2-2.5 tons with the possibility of safely returning a smaller mass.

CST-100 Starliner

As an alternative for the Orion spacecraft, the CST-100 Starliner, developed by Boeing as part of the NASA Commercial Crew Transportation Capability program, can be considered. The project involves the creation of a manned spacecraft capable of delivering several people into orbit and returning to earth. Due to a number of design features, including those related to the one-time use of equipment, it is planned to equip the ship with seven seats for astronauts at once.

CST-100 in orbit, so far only in the artist's imagination. NASA drawing

Starliner has been created since 2010 by Boeing and Bigelow Aerospace. The design took several years, and the first launch of the new ship was expected in the middle of this decade. However, due to some difficulties, the test launch was postponed several times. According to a recent NASA decision, the first launch of the CST-100 spacecraft with cargo on board should take place in August of this year. In addition, Boeing received permission to conduct a manned flight in November. Apparently, the promising ship will be ready for testing in the very near future, and new schedule changes will no longer be needed.

The Starliner differs from other projects of promising manned spacecraft of American and foreign design in its more modest goals. As conceived by the creators, this ship will have to deliver people to the ISS or to other promising stations currently being developed. Flights beyond the Earth's orbit are not planned. All this reduces the requirements for the ship and, as a result, makes it possible to achieve noticeable savings. Lower project costs and reduced costs for transporting astronauts can be a good competitive advantage.

A characteristic feature of the CST-100 ship is its fairly large size. The habitable capsule will have a diameter of just over 4.5 m, and the total length of the ship will exceed 5 m. The total mass will be 13 tons. It should be noted that large dimensions will be used to obtain maximum internal volume. A sealed compartment with a volume of 11 cubic meters has been developed to accommodate equipment and people. It will be possible to install seven seats for astronauts. In this regard, the Starliner ship - if it manages to reach operation - could become one of the leaders.

Dragon V2

A few days ago, NASA also determined the timing of new test flights of spacecraft from SpaceX. Thus, the first test launch of a manned spacecraft of the Dragon V2 type is scheduled for December 2018. This product is a redesigned version of the already used Dragon “truck”, capable of transporting people. The development of the project began quite a long time ago, but only now is it approaching testing.

Dragon V2 ship layout dj presentation time. Photo by NASA

The Dragon V2 project involves the use of a redesigned cargo compartment, adapted for the transport of people. Depending on the customer’s requirements, such a ship is said to be able to lift up to seven people into orbit. Like its predecessor, the new Dragon will be reusable and capable of new flights after minor repairs. The project has been in development for the past few years, but testing has not yet begun. It won't be until August 2018 that SpaceX will launch the Dragon V2 into space for the first time; this flight will take place without astronauts on board. A full-fledged manned flight, in accordance with NASA instructions, is planned for December.

SpaceX is known for its bold plans for any promising project, and the manned spacecraft is no exception. At first, Dragon V2 is intended to be used only to send people to the ISS. It is also possible to use such a ship in independent orbital missions lasting up to several days. In the distant future, it is planned to send a ship to the Moon. Moreover, with its help they want to organize a new “route” of space tourism: vehicles with passengers on a commercial basis will fly around the Moon. However, all this is still a matter of the distant future, and the ship itself has not even had time to pass all the necessary tests.

With a medium size, the Dragon V2 ship has a pressurized compartment with a volume of 10 cubic meters and a 14 cubic meter compartment without pressurization. According to the development company, it will be able to deliver a little more than 3.3 tons of cargo to the ISS and return 2.5 tons to Earth. In a manned configuration, it is proposed to install seven seats in the cabin. Thus, the new “Dragon” will be able, at a minimum, not to be inferior to its competitors in terms of carrying capacity. It is proposed to obtain economic advantages through reusable use.

Indian spaceship

Together with the leading countries in the space industry, other states are also trying to create their own versions of manned spacecraft. Thus, in the near future the first flight of a promising Indian spacecraft with astronauts on board may take place. The Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) has been working on its own spacecraft project since 2006, and has already completed some of the required work. For some reason, this project has not yet received a full designation and is still known as the “spacecraft from ISRO.”

A promising Indian ship and its carrier. Picture Timesofindia.indiatimes.com

According to known data, ISRO's new project involves the construction of a relatively simple, compact and lightweight manned vehicle, similar to the first ships of foreign countries. In particular, there is a certain similarity with the American technology of the Mercury family. Some of the design work was completed several years ago, and on December 18, 2014, the first launch of the ship with ballast cargo took place. It is unknown when the new spacecraft will deliver the first cosmonauts into orbit. The timing of this event has been shifted several times, and so far there is no data on this matter.

The ISRO project proposes the construction of a capsule weighing no more than 3.7 tons with an internal volume of several cubic meters. With its help, it is planned to deliver three astronauts into orbit. Declared autonomy at the level of a week. The ship's first missions will involve being in orbit, maneuvering, etc. In the future, Indian scientists are planning paired launches with the meeting and docking of ships. However, this is still a long way off.

After mastering flights to near-Earth orbit, the Indian Space Research Organization plans to create several new projects. Plans include the creation of a new generation of reusable spacecraft, as well as manned flights to the Moon, which will likely be carried out in collaboration with foreign colleagues.

Projects and prospects

Promising manned spacecraft are now being created in several countries. At the same time, we are talking about different prerequisites for the appearance of new ships. Thus, India intends to develop its first own project, Russia is going to replace the existing Soyuz, and the United States needs domestic ships with the ability to transport people. In the latter case, the problem manifests itself so clearly that NASA is forced to develop or support several projects of promising space technology at once.

Despite the different prerequisites for creation, promising projects almost always have similar goals. All space powers are going to put into operation their own new manned spacecraft, suitable, at a minimum, for orbital flights. At the same time, most of the current projects are created taking into account the achievement of new goals. After certain modifications, some of the new ships will have to go beyond orbit and go, at a minimum, to the Moon.

It is curious that most of the first launches of new technology are planned for the same period. From the end of the current decade until the mid-twenties, several countries intend to test their latest developments in practice. If the desired results are achieved, the space industry will change significantly by the end of the next decade. In addition, thanks to the foresight of the developers of new technology, astronautics will have the opportunity not only to work in Earth orbit, but also to fly to the Moon or even prepare for more daring missions.

Promising projects of manned spacecraft created in different countries have not yet reached the stage of full testing and flights with a crew on board. However, several such launches will take place this year, and such flights will continue in the future. The development of the space industry continues and is producing the desired results.

Based on materials from sites:
http://tass.ru/
http://ria.ru/
https://energia.ru/
http://space.com/
https://roscosmos.ru/
https://nasa.gov/
http://boeing.com/
http://spacex.com/
http://hindustantimes.com/