Russia is to deny the US future use of the International Space Station beyond 2020 and will also bar its rocket engines from launching US military satellites as it hits back at American sanctions imposed over Ukraine crisis.

Russia’s deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin announced a series of punitive measures on Tuesday against the US in response to sanctions imposed after Russia annexed Crimea.

The two countries have long cooperated closely on space exploration despite their clashes in foreign policy.

The Space Station is manned by both American and Russian crew, but the only way to reach it is by using Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft.

The US is keen to keep the $100 billion (£600) ISS flying until at least 2024, four years beyond its original target.

At a time when Moscow is struggling to reform its accident-plagued space programme, Mr Rogozin said US plans to deny export licences for some high-technology items were a blow to Russian industry. “These sanctions are out of place and inappropriate,” Mr Rogozin said. “We have enough of our own problems.”

Moscow’s response would affect NK-33 and RD-180 engines which Russia supplies to the US, Mr Rogozin said. “We are ready to deliver these engines but on one condition that they will not be used to launch military satellites,” he said.

RD-180 engines are used to boost Atlas 5 rockets manufactured by United Launch Alliance, a partnership of Lockheed Martin and Boeing that holds a virtual monopoly on launching U.S. military satellites.

Mr Rogozin said Moscow was planning "strategic changes" in its space industry after 2020 and aims to use money and "intellectual resources" that now go to the space station for a "a project with more prospects".

He suggested Russia could use the station without the United States, saying: "The Russian segment can exist independently from the American one. The U.S. one cannot."

The US space agency NASA is working with companies to develop space taxis with the goal of restoring US transport to the station by 2017, but the United States currently pays Russia more than $60 million per person to fly its astronauts up.

Mr Rogozin said Russia will suspend the operation of 11 GPS sites on its territory from June and seek talks with Washington on opening similar sites in the United States for Russia's own satellite navigation system, Glonass.

He threatened the permanent closure of the GPS sites in Russia if that is not agreed by September.

He said the suspension of the sites would not affect everyday operations of the GPS system in Russia, where it is used by millions of Russians for navigation on their smartphones and in their cars.

The upheaval in Ukraine - where the United States says Russia is backing separatists and the Kremlin accuses Washington of helping protesters to topple a Moscow-friendly president in February, has led to the worst East-West crisis since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union.

In addition to the hi-tech sector sanctions, the US has imposed visa bans and assets freezes on officials and lawmakers and targeted companies with links to President Vladimir Putin. The European Union has also imposed sanctions.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said earlier on Tuesday that the latest EU measures were an "exhausted, trite approach" that would only deepen discord and hamper efforts to defuse the crisis in Ukraine.

 dementedwombat wrote:
But as far as I can tell we won't have any epic USA vs Russian brawls in space over the life support handle at any time in the near future.

 Antario wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
In their defense thats the only reason we have them in the first place. You don't spend $500Bn because you're bored and have a budget surplus blowing a hole in your pocket.

Global spending on space programs doesn't even reach $75bn annually.

In March 1966, NASA told Congress the "run-out cost" of the Apollo program to put men on the moon would be an estimated $22.718 billion for the 13-year program which eventually accomplished six successful missions between July 1969 and December 1972.[citation needed] According to Steve Garber, the NASA History website curator, the final cost of project Apollo was between $20 and $25.4 billion in 1969 dollars[citation needed] (approximately $145 billion in 2008 dollars[citation needed]).

The costs associated with the Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rockets amounted to about $83 billion [Apollo spacecraft: $28 billion (Command/Service Module: $17 billion; Lunar Module: $11-billion), Saturn I, Saturn IB, Saturn V launch vehicles: about $46 billion] in 2005 dollars.[citation needed]

 Frazzled wrote:
ITS STILL $300BN.

 d-usa wrote:
Well, Elon Musk is probably happy now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
ITS STILL $300BN.

The entire world spend a little more than what we spend in 6 months on our military?

 Fafnir wrote:
Considering that we live in an era where a huge amount of technology we use every day is directly descended from the space race, I'd say it was money well spent.

 Antario wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Antario wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
ITS STILL $300BN.

In terms of public spending that is peanuts. Particularly given the massive spin off in terms of technological advances these projects triggered in the private sector and the associated employment created in new industries.

How much is the Netherlands spending on their space program?

Around $4bn on organizations like ESA, ESO and other multinational cooperative ventures. Per capita roughly similar to the US and other western nations.

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Well, Elon Musk is probably happy now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
ITS STILL $300BN.

The entire world spend a little more than what we spend in 6 months on our military?

And yet with the exception of Russia, the US, and a now expansionist China, how many nations have a space program?

What do you tell a Medicare patient - yea we'd rather blow billions studying how rats in space and make you pay more for your reimbursement.

New flash the US has a staggering annual deficit.

 Frazzled wrote:
How many of those are for nonmilitary applications?

Romania? Seriously, come on. You list OMania with anything, you just made it a joke.

Besides, we need that money to buy submachine guns for the USDA. Evidently the chickens are in rebellion.

 Frazzled wrote:

And yet with the exception of Russia, the US, and a now expansionist China, how many nations have a space program?

 d-usa wrote:
Austria, Belgium, Czech, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, Costa Rica, Mexico, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Singapore, Australia, Thailand, Hungary, Iran, Israel, Japan, Kazakhstan, North Korea, South Korea, India, Lithuania, Egypt, Argentina, Indonesia, Ukraine, Taiwan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Romania, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam.

I highlighted the relevant countries if you want to go ahead and move the goal post to "who can launch into space".

 Frazzled wrote:
How many of those are for nonmilitary applications?
Romania? Seriously, come on. You list OMania with anything, you just made it a joke.

dereksatkinson wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Cool, then the mighty astronautical juggernauts that are Lithuania and Romania can do it without us.

I think you are exaggerating our technological superiority. Our government can't even build a health insurance website for $700 million.