Interstellar and the Critics

Now that a few weeks have passed, it is easier to see what Christopher Nolan created in his film Interstellar.  Beware readers that I may release too many details here, so Spoiler Alert!

I watched Interstellar when it first came out and was somewhat underwhelmed. The underlying premise was a little hard to swallow - mankind had advanced to the point of secretly developing massive spacecraft to take humans to Saturn and beyond, but had completely failed to resolve a climate adjustment and crop development here on Earth. And more to the point, a secret government-funded space program existed side-by-side with a government denying the Apollo missions. This was more unbelievable than wormholes to another galaxy (and why another galaxy when we have hundreds of billions of potential planets in our galaxy? - even the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine wormhole only went to another quadrant of our galaxy). And why choose planets around a black hole?  Billions of potential planets and this is what they have to chose from?   It may make for great drama, but it is a dumb plot. 

Others agree.  David Corn in his Mother Jone's article "What's Wrong with the Science of Interstellar?" noted that he discussed the film with astrobiologist David Grinspoon, who said:

For instance, they describe this ecological disaster on Earth. I like the fact they are talking about that and raising consciousness. It's clear that it's climate change and we screwed up the Earth…That's a good theme. But the specific things they say about it—they say there's this blight [attacking all crops] that's building up the nitrogen [in the atmosphere] and that's going to draw down the oxygen. Anybody who knows about planetary atmosphere is going to sit there at that point and go, "That's a bunch of BS." It's not that that ruins the movie for most people. But why couldn't they have run that by somebody? It wouldn't change the plot…There are aspects to the planets they get to which also don't make sense from basic physics. There's a planet with ice clouds…That's BS…Something like that would fall. Because of gravity! Is that so crucial to the plot? There's a planet around a black hole…Some physicists might quibble whether that's even possible or stable. But one obvious problem is, when they landed there it was daylight. But there's no sun and a black hole doesn't put out light. So where is the light coming from?

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson tweeted incessantly about the film, but most were not very helpful and cited things such as the number of female scientists, as if he had not seen Jodie Foster in the earlier film Contact.  He made up for it later with this video on the film.

Bill Nye the Science Guy had his own view of things in this video, calling it "charming science fiction."  He also challenges us to go to Antarctica before worrying about living on Mars or other planets.  Maybe it makes more sense to fix they Earth than run away to another planet hoping it is better (or livable). 

My favorite review of the film was Ryan Gilbey's piece in The New Statesman where he called the robots "sentient filing cabinets" and noted:

It's hard to care about the future of civilization when we meet so few members of it worth saving...

Movie critic David Denby in The New Yorker probably had the best wrap-up:

...over all, “Interstellar,” a spectacular, redundant puzzle, a hundred and sixty-seven minutes long, makes you feel virtuous for having sat through it rather than happy that you saw it. 

So many times we hear the book was better than the movie. I hope this is the case with Kip Thorne's version of events. 

Great Image: Titan and Saturn's Rings

With other things happening around the solar system, we can forget about the ongoing mission of NASA's Cassini spacecraft as it orbits Saturn.  After 10 years, we are still getting valuable information and images from this distant aircraft.  Here is NASA's story for this image:

When orbiting Saturn, be sure to watch for breathtaking superpositions of moons and rings. One such picturesque vista was visible recently to the robot Cassini spacecraft now orbiting Saturn. In 2006 April, Cassini captured Saturn's A and F rings stretching in front of cloud-shrouded Titan. Near the rings and appearing just above Titan was Epimetheus, a moon which orbits just outside the F ring. The dark space in the A ring is called the Encke Gap, although several thin knotted ringlets and even the small moon Pan orbit there.

Cassini celebrated its 10th year in orbit back in June, when NASA highlighted some of its discoveries over this period:

-- The Huygens probe makes first landing on a moon in the outer solar system (Titan)
-- Discovery of active, icy plumes on the Saturnian moon Enceladus
-- Saturn's rings revealed as active and dynamic -- a laboratory for how planets form
-- Titan revealed as an Earth-like world with rain, rivers, lakes and seas
-- Studies of Saturn's great northern storm of 2010-2011
-- Studies reveal radio-wave patterns are not tied to Saturn's interior rotation, as previously thought
-- Vertical structures in the rings imaged for the first time
-- Study of prebiotic chemistry on Titan
-- Mystery of the dual, bright-dark surface of the moon Iapetus solved
-- First complete view of the north polar hexagon and discovery of giant hurricanes at both of Saturn's poles

Visit the Cassini mission site for more on the spacecraft as well as additional images.

Top Image Credit: Cassini Imaging Team, ISS, JPL, ESA, NASA

You Can Contribute to a Lunar Mission

Lunar Mission Ltd. is looking for investors via Kickstarter for a lunar mission.  Once funded, in about 10 years time Lunar Mission One will conduct science on the surface of the Moon to learn more about this orbiting body:

The spacecraft platform will drill down to a depth of at least 20 metres – about 10 times further than drilled before – though potentially as deep as 100 metres. This will enable us to access and analyse lunar rock that is 4.5 billion years old. By studying this ancient lunar rock we hope to shine some light on the following: What are the origins of the Moon? How did the late heavy bombardment of the inner solar system shape the history of our planet? Might the Moon be suitable for a permanently manned base for space exploration?

In addition to the science, contributors can leave something behind on the moon as well.  Contributions at certain levels will provide the donor with a "Digital Memory Box" where they can upload message, photos, videos, and more.  This information will be buried into the Moon's surface.

The current Kickstarter campaign is designed to raise about £600,000 (or about $900,000) to support continued planning for the mission.  Later on the sales of memory boxes to the general public should generate additional revenues to fund the rest of the mission.

Lunar Mission One, like Mars One, is another way to stimulate public interest in space projects and give them a sense of investment.  It reminds me of The Planetary Society's efforts to put members names on as many Mars missions and other missions as possible, which have included:  OSIRIS-REx, MAVEN, Hayabusa 2, IKAROS,  Akatsuki, Glory, Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, Kaguya (SELENE), Phoenix, Dawn, New Horizons, Deep Impact. Cosmos 1, Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity, Hayabusa (MUSES-C), Stardust - Cassini-Huygens, Mars Pathfinder, and Mars '96. An impressive list. 

I wish the project team luck and will make my own Kickstarter contribution shortly.

Update:  Lunar Mission One's funding drive was a success. So what is the next step.  According to the mission site, now it is time to do some fine-tuning of the mission:

In January, Lunar Missions Ltd will assemble the initial project team to plan the fine details of the next six months – which will be project managed by RAL Space.  This is an incredibly complex programme involving at least four core project teams: Mission, Education, Science and Marketing.

Sputnik II - No Longer a Worthy Russian Venture

Russia's leader Vladimir Putin left the G-20 Summit in Australia earlier than expected last weekend after a number of world leaders made it clear they were not impressed with his foreign policy.  The recent Russian invasion (again) of Ukraine, bomber flyovers of European capitols, submarine missions into Scandinavian waters, threats to send bombers into the Gulf of Mexico, and related events are tiring the other nations.  One of the last straws for the Australians was the presence of Russian warships off the coast of Australia and Putin's claim that they were there measuring the climate.  If so, their measurements should have shown the climate has soured and Russia has few if any friends. 

And now the Russians have a new mission called Sputnik, but this one is not aimed at space but at other nations where the Russian version of the news will be sent around the world via radio and Internet in 30 languages.  This $140 million project will try to put a new spin on Russian invasions and bullying as we sink into a new Cold War.  The Russians claim the project is already broadcasting in English, Spanish, Arabic and Chinese and has offices in Washington, Cairo, Beijing and Montevideo.

At Sputniknews you can find stories such as "Moscow Concerned About US Not Informing on Plans to Close Guantanamo Prison," which is really rich coming from the country that invented gulags.  And you can also read about the "7th Russian Aid Convoy for Eastern Ukraine," which is a nice cover for tanks and missile carriers. 

It is a sad day when the term Sputnik now means Russia turning inward and chasing its tail rather than reaching out to the stars and demonstrating its scientific abilities.  If Russia wants to use a well-worn Russian word, how about "Perestroika"?  If the word means "restructuring," then at least it reflects what is happening, though in this case it is not Russia restructuring internally but instead restructuring the truth for its own benefit. 

Image:  Director General of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise Rossiya Segodnya International Information Agency Dmitry Kiselеv at the presentation of a major international news brand "Sputnik"
Image Credit:  RIA Novosti / Alexey Filippov

More Reading on Mars

The Planetary Society's website has a helpful recommended reading list on Mars.  Here are some of the books recommended under fiction if you are looking for a good yarn:

• Across the Zodiac (1880)
• Melbourne and Mars: My Mysterious Life on Two Planets (1889)
• Unveiling a Parallel (1893)
• Journey to Mars (1894)
• A Prophetic Romance (1896)
• The War of the Worlds (1898)
• Edison’s Conquest of Mars (1898)
• A Honeymoon in Space (1900)
• Gullivar of Mars (1905)
• Doctor Omega (1906)
• Le prisonnier de la planète Mars [Vampires of Mars] (1908) and its sequel La guerre des vampires [War of the Vampires] (1909)
• Red Star (1908)

For instance, here is how Edison's Conquest of Mars is described on Amazon:

Following in the footsteps of one of the greatest science fiction masterpieces ever written, this long-forgotten sequel to The War of the Worlds boasts Thomas Edison as its hero. Originally published in the late 1800s, this is one of the rarest and most important cornerstones of the science fiction genre. Turning the original Wells tale on its head, this novel weaves a distinct and astonishing story of humans invading Mars, marking the invention of the space techno-thriller. Presenting a cornucopia of technical ingenuity, this edition marks a variety of firsts in the genre: the first space battle ever to appear in print, the original fictional example of alien abduction, the introduction of the theory that the pyramids were constructed by extraterrestrials, and the first truly functional spacesuits. Complete and unabridged for the first time ever—including the original illustrations—this narrative also features an introductory essay by acclaimed author Robert Godwin.

If you need a break from current events, reading one of these book may be a fun way to spend an evening.  

More on the Orbital Sciences Mishap

To date most of the stories on the Orbital Sciences' explosion last month placed blame on the Soviet-era engines in the Antares rocket.  CEO David Thompson recently noted, "Current evidence strongly suggest that one of the two AJ26 main engines that powered Antares' first stage failed about 15 seconds after ignition."   

Forbes magazine provided more information on these Russian rockets:

The rocket’s two engines were modified Soviet-era hardware initially acquired from Russia in the late 1990s by the now defunct Kirkland, Wa.-based Kistler Aerospace Corporation. At the time, prior to its merger with Rocketdyne, the Sacramento, Ca.-based Aerojet Corporation had been subcontracted by Kistler to modernize the engines. However, Aerojet subsequently gained title to the engines as part of Kistler’s bankruptcy settlement.  “They were originally developed by the Soviet Union for their N-1 manned lunar rocket which experienced several failures resulting in the Soviet cancellation of their manned lunar landing program,” said Bill Ketchum, a retired General Dynamics Corporation aerospace engineer, familiar with such systems.

So Orbital Sciences used engines from the 1970s, which were associated with a failed Soviet lunar mission, as the foundation for their work with NASA?  Was anyone watching the hen house?  I prefer SpaceX's approach of building everything in-house.  I would prefer NASA and the Air Force would do the same rather than also relying on Russian rockets.  

On November 5th, Orbital Sciences restated it intentions to fulfill the International Space Station (ISS) commitment:

Under the new approach and in line with Orbital’s existing CRS contract, all remaining cargo will be delivered to the International Space Station (ISS) by the end of 2016. There will be no cost increase to NASA and only minor adjustments will be needed to the cargo manifest in the near term...To maintain the CRS program’s critical ISS supply line, Orbital plans an early introduction of its previously selected Antares propulsion system upgrade in 2016. This will be preceded by one or two non-Antares launches of the company’s Cygnus cargo spacecraft to the ISS in 2015-2016, employing the spacecraft’s compatibility with various launch vehicles and its flexibility to accommodate heavier cargo loads as launcher capacity permits. In addition, the company expects repairs to the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) launch complex at NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility to be undertaken quickly, allowing launch operations to continue at Wallops Island with the upgraded Antares beginning in 2016.

In other words, the program will continue, but the Cygnus cargo capsule will be carried on third-party rockets for now.  Maybe SpaceX Falcons?  This is not a very encouraging sign, but hopefully a short-term solution for one of the only two private sector suppliers for the ISS.

Philae: The Little Ship that Could

The European Space Agency's (ESA) little Philae has gone to sleep for the moment on the surface of Comet 67p, but the very fact it is on the back of this monster rock 300 million mile away as it careens towards the sun is nothing but amazing.  After a bumpy landing and bad placement on the comet's surface, the lander's batteries slowed died due to a lack of solar energy.  Luckily, the lander had already sent back the data it was supposed to measure for ESA scientists to analyze.  ESA's mission website stated:

From now on, no contact will be possible unless sufficient sunlight falls on the solar panels to generate enough power to wake it up. The possibility that this may happen later in the mission was boosted when mission controllers sent commands to rotate the lander’s main body with its fixed solar panels. This should have exposed more panel area to sunlight.

In the meantime, Rosetta will continue to continue to orbit the comet and send back more data on the comet for continued analysis. The adventure continues.

Top Image:  Panoramic shot from Philae from the surface of Comet 67p. The three feet of Philae’s landing gear can be seen in some of the frames.
Bottom Image:  Philae's scientific instruments.
Image Credit:  ESA

Great Image: Cat's Eye Nebula

With all the fascinating images in the movie Interstellar, we could forget that nature itself it stunningly beautiful all by itself, as demonstrated by this Hubble Space Telescope image of the Cat's Eye nebula (or NGC 6543).  Here is NASA's tale of this amazing picture:

The alluring Cat's Eye nebula, however, lies three thousand light-years from Earth across interstellar space. A classic planetary nebula, the Cat's Eye (NGC 6543) represents a final, brief yet glorious phase in the life of a sun-like star. This nebula's dying central star may have produced the simple, outer pattern of dusty concentric shells by shrugging off outer layers in a series of regular convulsions. But the formation of the beautiful, more complex inner structures is not well understood. Seen so clearly in this digitally sharpened Hubble Space Telescope image, the truly cosmic eye is over half a light-year across. Of course, gazing into this Cat's Eye, astronomers may well be seeing the fate of our sun, destined to enter its own planetary nebula phase of evolution ... in about 5 billion years.

Image Credit: NASA, ESA, HEIC, and The Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)

Philae Attempts a Comet Landing Later Today

After a 10 year trip, the European Space Agency's (ESA) Rosetta spacecraft will deploy its probe called Philae to the surface of Comet 67p, which is the size of Mont Blanc (see the ESA image of the comet over Paris below).  With all the plans for manned missions to more local destinations, this is a fascinating pursuit that could only entail robotics to be accomplished with a reasonable amount of funds.  And the landing, involving harpoons, will be a risky operation.

In an interview, Rosetta mission manager Fred Jansen stated:

If there are problems – for example with the lander’s battery power levels – on 12 November we will halt its release, though that will mean a delay of two or three weeks before we can manoeuvre Rosetta back to the right point above the landing zone.

Once it lands, Philae's scientific probing should tell us more about the contents of this ancient object and whether they were the source of the oceans on Earth.  For more on the mission you can visit this mission site. 

Update:  Philae successfully landed on the comet at 11:05am ET.  A great accomplishment for the Europeans.

Good News From Last Week

While the private space industry is still focused on the two failures last week, the Chinese government has plenty to celebrate after a successful flyby moon mission last week. The image above, taken by the Chang'e 5-T1 spacecraft, offered a fascinating reverse image of the Moon and its master. 

The Chang'e 5-T1 is part of a series of missions to the Moon. It started in 2007 with the Chang'e 1 mapping the moon, the Chang'e 2 orbiting the moon, the Chang'e 3 moon rover (Yutu), and eventually the Chang'e 5, planned for 2017, which will land on the Moon, extract samples, and return them to Earth.  The graphic below puts it all into perspective.

The Science of Interstellar

This week on the Discovery Channel you can learn more about the ideas that went into making the current film Interstellar. The program, The Science of Interstellar, is narrated by Matthew McConaughey, one of the film actors (famous as well his other space-related role in the Carl Sagan-inspired movie Contact).  

As with Contact and other movies about the mysteries of our universe, let's hope the new film inspires a new generation of seekers and scientists. After last week's disasters, we need to keep the big picture in mind.

Noteworthy Quote: Leaving Humans on Other Planets

"These people have been trained and given the great historical value of being the first human beings in history to occupy another planet and people want to bring them back?...Let me ask those people who want to bring them back, what are you going to do with them back here on Earth that will in any way [justify] the billions and billions of dollars that have been invested in those human beings to put them on Mars?"

- Statement by former astronaut Buzz Aldrin discussing flying people to Mars (see London's Daily Mail) 

Footnote:  Maybe we should have left Buzz on the moon.  It was pretty expensive bringing him back.  

Second Space Disaster in a Week: One Dead

This has not been a good week for the private sector space industry.  Earlier today, Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo crashed in the California desert during a test flight, killing one pilot and injuring a second pilot.  The spacecraft, built for space tourists, was using a new rocket fuel, which may have contributed to the accident. 

On its website, Virgin Galactic stated:

Virgin Galactic's partner Scaled Composites conducted a powered test flight of SpaceShipTwo earlier today. During the test, the vehicle suffered a serious anomaly resulting in the loss of the vehicle. The WhiteKnightTwo carrier aircraft landed safely. Our first concern is with crew and their families. We will work closely with relevant authorities to determine the cause of this accident and provide updates as soon as we are able to do so.

It has been 10 years since SpaceShipOne opened the door to space tourism, and this crash can only increase the wait for the hundreds who put down money to be part of the project. 

At a press conference earlier today, Stuart Witt, responsible for the Mojave Air and Space Port, said: 

We are doing this for you and your generation. It is a cause far greater than any one of us singularly. I compare it to the Magellan expedition [the first circumnavigation of the Earth].’

I don't think Magellan was running a tourist outfit back then, but I understand the sentiment.

Image Credit:  KABC-TV/AP Photo

Disaster Strikes Orbital Sciences' Rocket

Orbital Sciences' third resupply mission to the International Space Station ended in disaster earlier today as the rocket exploded shortly after liftoff in Virginia. Fortunately, the mission was only carrying cargo and not astronauts. Expect an extensive inquiry.  Stay tuned.

Update: I corrected my posting to note this was Orbital Science's third planned mission to the ISS. In terms of the accident, the company's website stated:

Orbital Sciences Corporation confirms that today’s Antares rocket launch from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility was not successful. Shortly after lift-off from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Pad 0A at 6:22 p.m. (EDT), the vehicle suffered a catastrophic failure. According to NASA’s emergency operations officials, there were no casualties and property damage was limited to the south end of Wallops Island. Orbital has formed an anomaly investigation board, which will work in close coordination with all appropriate government agencies, to determine the cause of today’s mishap.

This may mean more work for SpaceX to pick up the slack.

All is Well in the Martian Skies

I was glad to read that the various man-made Martian satellites survived the recent comet flyby (it helps that NASA had plenty of warning and placed the spacecraft at a safe distance to observe the event). With MAVEN having just arrived (Mars Odyssey and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter have been orbiting for a while), as well as it's Indian peer, this could have been a problem. Given the numerous national failures to reach Mars, the last thing we need is a monster snow ball sweeping the survivors from the sky.  Comet C/2013 A1 Siding Spring  can now go back to rattling around the solar system. 

Great Image: Life Cycle in a Nebula

This Hubble Space Telescope image of a nebula shows emerging stars, fast-burning stars exhausting their fuel, and even planets trying to form from a disk of gas and dust.  We see a full spectrum of life to death in one image.  NASA explains:

From beginning to end, different stages of a star's life appear in this exciting Hubble Space Telescope picture of the environs of galactic emission nebula NGC 3603. For the beginning, eye-catching "pillars" of glowing hydrogen at the right signal newborn stars emerging from their dense, gaseous, nurseries. Less noticeable, dark clouds or "Bok globules" at the top right corner are likely part of a still earlier stage, prior to their collapse to form stars. At picture center lies a cluster of bright hot blue stars whose strong winds and ultraviolet radiation have cleared away nearby material. Massive and young, they will soon exhaust their nuclear fuel. Nearing the end of its life, the bright supergiant star Sher 25 is seen above and left of the cluster, surrounded by a glowing ring and flanked by ejected blobs of gas. The ring structure is reminiscent of Supernova 1987a and Sher 25 itself may be only a few thousand years from its own devastating finale. But what about planets? Check out the two teardrop-shaped objects below the cluster toward the bottom of the picture. Although larger, these emission nebulae are similar to suspected proto-planetary disks (proplyds) encompassing stars in the Orion Nebula.

Credit: Wolfgang Brandner (JPL/IPAC), Eva K. Grebel (U. Wash.), You-Hua Chu (UIUC), NASA

Bookmark: The Copernicus Complex

Caleb Scharf, British-born astronomer and director of the Columbia Astrobiology Center at Columbia University, has written a story about our place in this expanding universe of ours.  His book, The Copernicus Complex: Our Cosmic Significance in a Universe of Planets and Probabilities, highlights how man's idea of himself and "life" itself has changed over time as sciences peels back more of the mysteries around us.

In reviewing the book, The Wall Street Journal writes: 

Nicolaus Copernicus is credited with the realization, in the 15th century, that the Earth does not sit at the center of the universe but orbits around the sun. This was a key step in the development of the idea that we do not occupy a special place in the universe and that, by implication, there may be nothing special about us, cosmically speaking. In the late 20th century, this led to the “principle of terrestrial mediocrity,” which says that our place in the universe is so ordinary as to be typical—that we live on an ordinary planet, orbiting an ordinary star, in an ordinary galaxy. Caleb Scharf argues that this approach, which he calls the “Copernicus complex,” has gone too far. The Earth, he says, is a rather unusual planet, situated in a rather unusual location.

London's The Guardian writes:

Forget the tricksy parenthesis in the subtitle. Skip past an early tendency to label scientists as budding, and science as cutting-edge. This book expands, like spacetime itself, from a very small point. It begins with the microscope pioneer Antony van Leeuwenhoek's famous discovery in Delft in 1674 of a microcosm in a drop of lake water, and it ends with speculation about a lonely civilisation, 100bn years on, in a freezing vacuum that no longer contains information about anything. Books such as these remind us that we are lucky to be here at all, and even luckier to be here now.

"New Martians Killed by Oxygen"

Let's hope we never read this headline, and it may be thanks to MIT students who identified a short-coming in the Dutch Mars One mission plans. Mars One represents the first effort of a private company to place humans on the surface of Mars. What the students found should be seen as helpful to the planners and one might wonder why it was not considered earlier.

MIT students Sydney Do, Koki Ho, Samuel Schreiner, Andrew Owens and Olivier de Weck conducted their own assessment of the Mars project, funded by NASA and others, and issued their results in a paper titled “An Independent Assessment of the Technical Feasibility of the Mars One Mission Plan.”  Among other things, they reported: 

Our assessment revealed a number of insights into architecture decisions for establishing a colony on the Martian surface. If crops are used as the sole food source, they will produce unsafe oxygen levels in the habitat.

Unfortunately, Mars One was not too receptive to the paper.  MarsOne co-founder and CEO Bas Lansdorp, in an email to SpacePolicyOnline, said he did not have time to respond to the comments and:

the lack of time for support from us combined with their limited experience results in incorrect conclusions.

Mr. Lansdrop may not have time, but if I was one of the volunteers hoping to win a one-way ticket to the Red Planet, I would be reading this report very carefully.

 Source:  Table taken from the MIT students' report.

Should Pluto Be Returned to the Family of Planets?

Should we still be having this argument about whether or not Pluto is a planet? Is this a scientific duel, or more the earlier generation complaining that they still want to use the mislabeled name brontosaurus rather than Apatosaurus? I am fine with the 2006 decision to make Pluto a dwarf planet, but some at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics are still debating the topic. Last month, after hearing a debate among three leading experts in planetary science, the audience voted and decided that Pluto is still a Planet.  While this settles nothing, it was still a good debate (you can see it on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/user/ObsNights).

I am more interested in labeling exoplanets rather than relabeling our neighbors, but I do not expect this issue to die anytime soon.  So while the local debate continues, I hope the telescopes will be trained on much more distant matters as we ponder the wild and strange universe. 

Will Putin Go to the Moon, Please?

Russia is talking about a manned mission to the moon by 2030, and I like the idea if Putin goes on the spacecraft. Why settle for the Crimea when virgin lunar locations await? He can take possession of the Sea of Moscow on the far side of the moon. 

According to media sources, Russia's Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos)  chief Oleg Ostapenko said:

Implementing the guidelines of the Basic Principles of Russia’s space policy till the year 2030 and for a longer perspective, we have begun design works of a new manned spaceship, which will be the first element of a future manned system along with new launch vehicles — carrier rockets of the heavy and super-heavy classes.

Of course, as I noted in my last post, there is the small issue of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activites of States inthe Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, which states in Article II:

Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. 

And Article IV states:

The moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military manoeuvres on celestial bodies shall be forbidden.

Then again, Russia does not seem to worry about treaties and promises.  Hence, strap on a suit, Vlad. The dark side of the moon awaits you.