US to Pay to go to ISS 636
forgotten_my_nick writes "According to BBC News, Russia has announced that it will no longer ferry US astronauts to space for free (It has been doing so for two years). From 2006 the US will be expected to pay."
Repaid already? (Score:5, Interesting)
You were buying security, not spacecraft (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:You were buying security, not spacecraft (Score:5, Insightful)
It was pretty obvious the U.S. has since lost "the right stuff" to do a space station. First sign
I think the "keeping Russian space scientists" employed was little more than saving face. In reality I think the U.S. and Boeing came to the conclusion that using the experienced Russian engineers was the only way to get actually get a working space station off the ground. They in fact paid them to build a Mir2 and it became the heart of ISS. The U.S. sure did love to rant that the Russian modules were behind schedule and over budget. Well this convieniently glosses over the fact that those were two of the most complex and challenging modules in the station, and that the U.S. and Boeing had flailed for nearly 20 years, squandered billlions and billions of dollars, and hadn't managed to build ANYTHING. More than a little hypocrisy there.
I've seen more than a few people point out how the U.S. pays for everything on ISS. Well this is for damn sure if you count the nearly 100 billion the U.S. wasted in those awful years when they didn't building anything, and the billion dollar a pop Shuttle flights versus the tens of millions for a Soyuz or Progress flight, and it probably costs 20-50 times as much to employ Boeing engineers to build a component as it does Russian engineers. All in all I don't think the total dollars squandered really counts for much other than to prove that nobody squanders money like NASA and Boeing. The Russians have launched and run multiple successful long duration space stations for a tiny fraction of what NASA and Boeing have wasted on ISS. I think they deserve a lot more kudos for their frugality and their ability to get bang for the buck, versus the NASA/Boeing aptitude for wasting billions of dollars.
Re:You were buying security, not spacecraft (Score:3, Interesting)
A key reason the U.S. is the sole remaining superpower of the two is because the U.S.S.R got bogged down in a 10 year quagmire in Afghanistan fighting the people who later became the Taliban and Al Qaeda (who were liberally funded, armed and trained by Ronald Reagan and the CIA by the way). Fighting that bloody insurgency decimated the Soviet military and created an entire generation openly disillusioned with the Soviet Union's government. It had a
Re:You were buying security, not spacecraft (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You were buying security, not spacecraft (Score:3)
Which would you buy for your own country, the Eurofighter or the Su-37?
Re:Repaid already? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Repaid already? (Score:2)
Re:Repaid already? (Score:5, Insightful)
My country was fighting, winning and losing wars long before yourcontinent waseven discovered. For once in your life, please open a fucking historybook.
I spent a year and a half in your country, have you ever been in mine?
What happened to the USA? Please someone explain to me, what the fuckhappenedto your country?
Man, like hundreds of thousand of French citizens I was in the fuckingstreetswith a large panel saying "WE LOVE YOU AMERICANS" on September, 11th2001. Mycountry sent its best firemens to help yours trying to save lives out of the WTC ruins.
Your country saved mine during the second world war and many of us went in Normandie to put some flowers on your soldiers' tombs thinking of the great sacrifice that it was for you and your country. If you think that we canforget that then you don't know anything about us.
But then, everything changed, just like that. What went wrong?
In 2001, Rumsfeld, Condi Rice and even Bush repeated, on the TV, that Iraq and Saddam were not a threat and suddenly, in 2002, Saddam became the worstevilin the world? Give me a break.
France's position was that we should have given more time of the UNinspectorsto check for Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction". Your country decided not too. Today, we know that you were wrong. It happens and, please, get over it.
Then Bush came and said that Iraq needed this invasion and that iraqis would welcome Americans. Please, do it again, open a fucking history book printed outside of Israel to understand why this is just fucking ridiculously stupid. If you think that you can support Israel on one side and then invade an arab country and be welcomed, let me tell you that you are fucking nuts.
So France "surrenders" and is "afraid of war"? Hum, maybe it's because France has a 13-centuries long history and has been devastated many times,including twice in just the last century? You never have suffered like we didafter the 2 world wars, you *cannot* understand. I'm not surprised that Germany had the same point of view on the Iraq conflict, they suffered much more than wedid. Actually, even in the countries of "the coalition", most people were against the war.
War is fucking bad, it should always be avoided at all costs. If you don't understand that war is never necessary, unless if for self-defense when someone attacks you, then I would say that your country should get an history before trying to tamper with world affairs.
This "pre emptive war" thing is the biggest amount of crap I have ever seen. Right now, some corporations are making huge amounts of money out of this crap and if you think that they care about your children dying in Iraq, let me tell you that you are plain wrong, it's all about dividend and return on investment.
Oh, and yes, diplomacy WAS possible with Saddam. Did you look at his face in February 2003, when the war was imminent? He gave you all he had! All the missiles he had, everything. He was ready to accept next to anything.
Just because some people abused the "oil for food" program and didn'tfollowthe UN sanctions doesn't mean that Saddam wasn't ready to comply. These sanctions have never been really enforced, sometimes you just need toput some weight in the balance.
This war was, is and will always be unacceptable. The vast majority of the world tells you that since the beginning and still you elected the man that lied.
Oh, and about the "freedom fries" act (that one proved that these peoplein the Congress are not actual adults), I would say I feel very happythat my country is associated to the word Freedom because yes, that'swhat we stand for.
Re:Repaid already? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually a lot of the problems comes down to the trenches of WWI. The US entered particularly late into that one but it was a common and appalling experience for the rest of Europe.
Re:Repaid already? (Score:5, Interesting)
Basically, the U.S. is a brain, heart and soul dead shell with a lot of weapons. Even at our local metropolitan Mensa gathering we have to avoid the "Rush Limbaugh is God" table. This has all been analyzed and put on the bookshelves already. Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death. Berman's Twilight of American Culture.
Personally, I've decided I don't care. A purposeful Nazi or a pig-ignorant Nazi, they are both repugnant and I'm ashamed of my countrymen. But you have to realize that the American people are pig-ignorant. Forget quality public education, we don't even have free media. I gave up on so-called "liberal" public radio after the drumbeat to war in March of '03 when one of their shows headlined some guy from a military college on "Socrates, the soldiering years!" Talk about pseudo-intellectual target market warmongering taken to the ridiculous. If it weren't for the meager checks and balances of the internet, Clear Channel would probably be telling the U.S. heartland that most of the world has been taken over by aliens, so to speak.
And they'd believe it.
Re:Repaid already? (Score:5, Insightful)
It just happened to get invaded, and then various local terrorist forces (by the current definition) overthrew the "legitimate" goverment.
The supreme irony of course is that the only reason the revolution succeeded was assistance from the French whose new ideals were of a republic and not dissimilar to the US of the time.
And freedom.. Freedom to be persecuted by your own media industry ? Freedom to have your web site (ie your printing press) taken away without legal due process ?
"Freedom" in the USA and many other countries (the UK for example) is a marketing exercise used to control the people. Look beyond it, what matters is not being associated with a word but acting accordingly.
Alan
Re:Repaid already? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Repaid already? (Score:3, Insightful)
...we know that you were wrong...
Nationalist debates with "we" and "you" are crap. It reeks of a sports-team mentality torwards nationalism.
Think about this:
Re:Repaid already? (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't congratulate yourself on geography. You've got the Atlantic on the East and the Pacific on the west. No one is goiong to roll tanks over your borders.
Re:Repaid already? (Score:5, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 30, @01:45AM (#11216800)
Spit on you? SPIT ON YOU? You thin skinned little bitch. How is it that Americans get skewered (rightly so) when they reflexively interpret disagreement with US policy as anti-americanism, but Canadians and Europeans cry "The United States SPIT on us!" everytime Washington doesn't do things exactly the way you want? The Administration asked for help. They went to the UN to explain their reasons. You may disagree. That's certainly your right as a sovereign nation. But don't starting crying that you were spit on.
responding to AC is ussually a bad idea but:
I'd say a populace smear campaign against france would constitute spitting on them. You did try to rename french fries. I'm sure that was a mature and adult way of acknolowging opposing opinions. I was also in california shortly after canada declined to support you war. And I was literally spit upon. So yes a portion of your population are a little less emotionally mature then children and you are one of them AC.
They are doing a part exchange (Score:5, Informative)
White Elephant (Score:5, Interesting)
We all know the 'great' and 'international' part got scrapped (well, not entirely, but still)... what about the science? With a crew of 2 members and troubles with reapprovisionment, is there any (real) science getting done on the ISS? Or is it only kept up because we already invested too much in it?
Re:White Elephant (Score:4, Informative)
I think in part the whole project was a mixture of diplomatic goodwill and make-work for a floundering industry sector, with a healthy helping of publicity banner thrown in. As far as I'm aware, the ISS has contributed nothing of note scientifically, and far less than it ought to have in terms of technological/engineering breakthroughs, though I'd welcome any infirmation that either confirms or denies this baseless accusation.
I suppose it's better than nothing, but there are (could be) far better science platforms than a manned space station. Look what the HST did, for instance.
Re:White Elephant (Score:5, Funny)
Re:White Elephant (Score:2)
Well, they already did some great research on the Effects Of Weightlessness On Mortal Terror [nau.edu], which is a pretty good result. Don't play them down so much!
Re:White Elephant (Score:3, Funny)
Dear god man! Where did you find that word?!!
I can understand how NASA pays several hundred dollars for a hammer, but 17 characters just to say "money" is insanity!* Did you read this from a
Re:White Elephant (Score:3, Funny)
Re:White Elephant (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, in the beginning it was supposed to be an American space station. Then when it was clear the taxpayers didn't want to pay for it the Russians were enticed to join the effort as a way to tap their supply systems and also to keep Russian engineers from moving to the Middle East and building guided missles. Then the Europeans were pushed into adding their tax dollars (for no reason I can see, from the European point of view).
And no they aren't doing any usefull science. But then they wouldn't have with a seven man crew. What usefull science would you expect to get out of a manned space project in LEO anyway? The Russians did all the usefull human biology stuff decades ago, so I think what we'll see is more of the same old worthless stuff they did on the shuttle: high-school science projects and more space crystals that could have been grown more cheaply on the ground.
ASS! (Score:3, Funny)
> Actually, in the beginning it was supposed to be an American space station.
Perhaps they didn't want to do it themselves after they figured out the acronymn for 'American Space Station'?
International relations (Score:5, Insightful)
Hint to the current and future US Presidents: you may be the elected leader of a technological powerhouse, but you can't go it alone.
(it'll also pay for them to keep an eye out on Japan's technology, that the EU is becoming a collected economic force to bruise egos, and China's locomative-esque economy with about a third of the world's population, too, but who knows if they pay any attention)
Re:International relations (Score:2)
Or it could simply be just the latter half of your post here.
I mean, seriously, you're going out on a limb here to make your point that you don't like what Bush did. Why not take it a step further and blame the hurricanes in Florida on the immorality on the war?
Frankly, I'm not the
Re:International relations (Score:5, Interesting)
A couple of days ago at a Collin Powell press conference Powell was talking about how important it was Ukraine get a democraticly elected government without outside interference. The reporter being especially smart, informed and ballsy pointed out the U.S. was funding Yuschenko's party through the National Endowment for Democracy and was in fact interfering in the election just as much as Moscow was. It wouldn't be suprising if the CIA was helping fuel the uprising after the previous election too, they do that sort of thing, all the time. You see "National Endowment for Democracy" is one of those big brotherisms. They don't actually promote democracy where people in a country pick the leader of their choice, they work to bend and twist countries so that only governments friendly to U.S. win, even if that outcome runs counter to the actual democratic will of the people that live there.
It will be interesting to see how deeply the relationship between the U.S. and Russia fractures. It appears poised for a really deep schism that could lead to a new cold war. I'm wondering what will happen to ISS if the U.S. and Russia return to a true adverserial relationship. I'm pretty sure the Russians could with some work, undock the pieces they built and have a functional space station core they could use to build a new MIR while the rest of ISS eventually ends up in cinders.
Can you blame them? I can't. (Score:4, Insightful)
They pretty much have us by the jubbles and they know it. You vant an astronaut in space, comrade? Ve're your only real solution right now. Ve're going to take advantage of that. Can't say that I blame them. Ah, the capitalist spirit hits the Russian space program!
Re:Can you blame them? I can't. (Score:2)
Get it over with... (Score:2, Insightful)
It'd make an awesome weapon platform. They could event rent it out to the Chinese to use as a stop-over on their way to the moon. Maybe even a step toward a Russian-Chinese joint-venture on an eventual moonbase.
The US no longer has any power in space, and Russia, true to its nature, is taking advantage of this.
Not surprising.
Re:Get it over with... (Score:2)
a) Would let the Russians take the space station the US paid for?
b) Would negotiate with the Russians for a resumption of normal relations?
c) Would simply blow up the ISS to end the argument over who owns it? (Hey, it cost less than Iraq!)
d) Would just blow up Moscow instead?
The Russians aren't dumb, and hijacking the ISS would be an act of war.
Frequent flyer miles? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Frequent flyer miles? (Score:2)
That depends how long they're up there. ISS is not geostationary.
Reminds me of that Texas/Bush-ite Bumper Sticker (Score:4, Funny)
"Gas, Grass, or Ass, Nobody Rides for Free!"
Astronaut Training Class (Score:3, Funny)
Topic: Manouver to effectivly gain ridership from an unknown source.
Step 1: Extend arm.
Step 2: Make fist, then extend thumb to full open position.
Step 3: Bend elbow to move hand from starting position to the side of the head. Count to two, return hand to starting position, count to two, and repeat.
Step 4: Optional step for female austronauts - pull up right leg covering to expose skin.
With any luck, you will attract the attention of passing space craft who will give you a ride to your destination of choice, preferably the International Space Station.
How unbiased (Score:2, Insightful)
Like they own the world, Actulay they own nothing they have big debts which only grow.
I wonder how long it will take before the rest of the world start realizing this sceme.
I am hoping i will see that day.
And americans become again sane people.
Re:How unbiased (Score:3, Insightful)
I blame television. If you watch the major stations, you have to be insane. In the morning, you have Matt Lauer and Katie Couric pretending to be happy and nice to each other. Then the daytime television starts and it basically consists of people fighting with or cheating on each
Hollow, empty shell (Score:4, Interesting)
The USSR has ceased to be a "superpower", and the USA has established clear, military dominance. What's the point of NASA today?
What's really interesting is the kickoff of the private/commercial space age begun with SpaceShipOne. The Ansari X-Prize wasn't the goal - it was the starting line.
Within the next 1-2 decades, we'll see the old-style national space agencies dwarfed as pure economics brings scale to the space industry.
Space today is basically a high-dollar, cottage industry. Everything is hand/custom made at high expense, and in painfully small volumes.
It'll start with the obvious - people paying $25,000/seat to fly into space for an hour. Technology will be refined, prices will drop, and by the time I'm an old guy (I'm 32 now) I expect to be able to spend a week in space at a price I could actually afford.
But that's not so big, as the reality that new uses for the reduced-cost space travel will be discovered - uses we have no way of predicting.
Just like Edison could never have predicted micro-electronics, the future holds possibilities we can only begin to imagine!
Ticket price for the Rus Kosmos (Score:3, Interesting)
1 seat on the Russian taxi sells commercially for $25 M US dollars, however that included several weeks of training, as the story goes.
I believe that the Soyuz is a 3-seater. Assuming all passengers are capable astronauts, It isn't unreasonable to still expect the astronauts can travel for the same price as a civilian tourist.
At that price, let's round up and say the seven-person Space Shuttle ride equivalent is $200 M US dollars. I believe that the cargo volume in the Soyuz is much smaller, so tack on $50-100 M US dollars for an additional supply-only launch.
It sure seems to me like no matter how you jiggle the numbers, there really isn't much fiscal sense to fire up the Space Shuttle, for routine, non-assembly missions. A billion-dollar Shuttle launch means 1/3rd to 1/4th the investment value.
It's part of the R-36M decommissioning prog. (Score:2)
So the Russians seem to have found a good use for the Dnepr system. But the remaining problem for them is that the Russians want to stop using Baikonur cosmodrom
show them the money (Score:2, Insightful)
I am in favor of paying them off for the lift. Heck, I'm surprised that we hadn't been so far.
It's about time. (Score:2)
I'm not convinced that Russian boosters are any safer than US Shuttles. But whatever.
In other news... (Score:2, Insightful)
Things are often offered with the understanding that they will only be lightly used. Once they become more heavily used, a different arrangement must be worked out. There is no clear division between the two, so the decision of transition is somewhat arbitrary.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. If every decision involving other countries is interp
_International_ Space Station (Score:2, Insightful)
We deserve all the humiliation and more (Score:2, Insightful)
As a society that favors athletes and entertainers over people that contribute to society in real ways (other than mental masterbation) we deserve to have to pay a formerly communist country to condescend to take us to space. We have a country full of universties where teaching is for foriegners by foreigners, where we've dumbed down the curiculum so that anyone can go and keep going for as long as possible to enrich the university rather than the student. We encourage immoral, unproductive behavior and aro
Interesting how this coincides with the new tanks (Score:3, Insightful)
Now the pressure will start for resuming shuttle flights. At the same time the Russians say they'll charge money to ferry the astronauts.
Hmmm. I wonder when that phone call took place?
US cannot pay - by law (Score:4, Informative)
This announcement by the RSA is nothing more than a rehash of an old argument - and one that will not be solved any time soon as it would require an Act of Congress.
The only way it can be resolved realistically is through a barter arrangement (which is what RSA is suggesting in some reports). Hence, not a lot of immediate use to the "cash-strapped Russian space program".
Re:US cannot pay - by law (Score:5, Insightful)
It didnt seem to bother His holiness Ronald Reagan
when he sold aircraft and missile parts to Iran
to finance an illegal war in Nicaragua.
Sure the Democrats squeaked a little, but in the end
they did nothing about it.
Kick in a bit of the cost, US. (Score:5, Insightful)
RTFA (Score:5, Interesting)
As usual we get the slew of high moderated posts about how the americans built everything, and how the russians are now gouging them.
Some people blame the americans, others the russians. All didn't read the article.
Fact: The russians are currently ferrying everything to the station.
Fact: NASA is grounded.
Fact: The russians are very low on funds, and can't afford to keep doing this.
They've stated that they'll wait to see if NASA meets its May deadline to get their shuttles going again.
They've stated that they want to negotiate something to ease the burden (such as bartering for the man hours they currently owe for other work).
America's response hasn't been made clear yet.
Is this gouging? No. They haven't even entered negotiations yet.
Should they gouge? Some of you "capitalist or die" affictionados may think so, but that kind of thinking is what drives the CEOs who only look to the next quarter's earnings, and what they can get out of it before the thing collapses.
This doesn't work in world politics, as can be seen from the fallout of Iraq.
There's nothing wrong with this. (Score:3, Insightful)
2. It's realistic. The Russian space program is extremely strapped for cash, yet we are RELYING on it to keep the ISS in space. Yes, the U.S. has probably paid more in this venture. At the same time, the U.S. has a great deal more funding avaliable. Not even the U.S. government at large, but NASA it self. NASA's budget is many, many times the size of the Russia space program.
Instead of thinking of Russia as some kind of nebulous partner, think about it this way: For launches, we are 'contracting' out to the Russian space program.
Doesn't sound so bad in that context, eh? Who would you rather pay? American contractors, to work on the shuttle, literally spending BILLIONS of dollars, 70% of which is pork? Or the Russian space program, which incidentially helps (slightly) our relationship with Russia, and who can do the job better, faster, and cheaper.
Screw the shuttle. They do it better, and we should learn from them. We American's need to pull our head's out of our collective anuses.
The Russians attempted to build a space shuttle in the 70s, and failed because of the cost (not techincal reasons). We should learn from that. It's just TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE.
3. There's no way around it. Russia doesn't have the money any more. That's a combination of our fault and their fault, by the way. Yes, communism was failing, because it was rotten. Their new economic system, shock-therapy capitalism, has so far been a disaster, as well. We planned it for them, eh? We set Russia up for this economic nightmare. They are, however, a competent people, with immense natural resources, so they will recover. At some point. But right now, there simply is no money in the Russian Space Agencies coffers.
For all you idiotic nae-sayers: THEY AREN'T TRYING TO GOUGE US! WHAT THEY ASK FOR IS NOTHING COMPARED TO WHAT BOEING WOULD ASK FOR! WE NEED THEM TO KEEP LAUNCHING SOYUEZ UNITS! THEY CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT FINANCIAL HELP!
Btw: I believe the number of Soyuez missions has stepped up because us, the U.S., can't get to space!
In comparison to our domestic contractors, or the ESA (European), or the JSA (Japanese), the Russians do a fine, cheap job.
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:2, Informative)
Then the ran out of money, so they scrapped the program!
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:3, Insightful)
Why spend money taking wings up there? Why waste weight to make something "reusable"? Either make it so that it's useful up there, leave it up there for the solar smelter, or if it's necessary for the trip down for the astronaughts. Albative shielding is relativly cheap and easy to replace. It's
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:3, Informative)
#1 the computer you're using now -- space exploration pushed the microelectoronics revolution
#2 that fancy koolatron cooler that you bought last summer to keep your beer cold, again thank space exploration
#3 teflon, plastics, most modern alloys, etc.
ok, I'm done feeding the trolls, next!
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:5, Informative)
Just because something is labeled "space age" doesn't make it actually related to space research. (But then, space research has given us the Space Age Ant Habitat [thinkgeek.com] for our desktops, of course.)
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:5, Informative)
Here are some examples from the list
Air Quality Monitor
Virtual Reality
Municiple Water prurification (So your tap water doesn't kill you.)
Solar Energy
Fire resistant material
Digital Imagry Breast Biopsy
Voice controlled wheel chair
And here are a bunch from the above link that were easy to cut and paste:
Advanced keyboards, Customer Service Software, Database Management System, Laser Surveying, Aircraft controls, Lightweight Compact Disc, Expert System Software, Microcomputers, and Design Graphics. Dustbuster, shock-absorbing helmets, home security systems, smoke detectors, flat panel televisions, high-density batteries, trash compactors, food packaging and freeze-dried technology, cool sportswear, sports bras, hair styling appliances, fogless ski goggles, self-adjusting sunglasses, composite golf clubs, hang gliders, art preservation, and quartz crystal timing equipment. Whale identification method, environmental analysis, noise abatement, pollution measuring devices, pollution control devices, smokestack monitor, radioactive leak detector, earthquake prediction system, sewage treatment, energy saving air conditioning, and air purification. Arteriosclerosis detection, ultrasound scanners, automatic insulin pump, portable x-ray device, invisible braces, dental arch wire, palate surgery technology, clean room apparel, implantable heart aid, MRI, bone analyzer, and cataract surgery tools. Gasoline vapor recovery, self-locking fasteners, machine tool software, laser wire stripper, lubricant coating process, wireless communications, engine coatings, and engine design. Storm warning services (Doppler radar), firefighters' radios, lead poison detection, fire detector, flame detector, corrosion protection coating, protective clothing, and robotic hands. So yeah, I'd say mankind has gained something from going to space. And to think all of this would have been developed in the timeframe without NASA and its goals is laughable.
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:5, Funny)
Well, according to TV, most of the stuff I bought was a direct result of space travel.
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:2)
You mean the invention of Tang and Space Food Sticks aren't good enough for you?
http://www.retrofuture.com/spacefood.html [retrofuture.com]
One technology stand above all the others (Score:3, Insightful)
This technology enables: storm tracking and weather prediction, remote sensing and satellite photography for land use management and environmental monitoring, GPS for naviation and surveying, and global telecommunications.
There is little doubt in my mind that the economic values of these applications easily justify the entire effort mankind has put into space exploration.
There is also to my mind a difference in perspective in being able to see the Earth for what it is: a big blu
Re:WTG Russia. (Score:3, Informative)
I wonder how many people involved with law enforcement are frowning at that example.
Helping people live longer: Benefit to mankind.
Advancing medicine and the technology that is used to advance medicine: Benefit to mankind.
Making it possible to leave this planet in search of more resources: Benefit to mankind.
Turning off your imagination to discredit the space programs: No benefit to mankind.
..."all that money..." (Score:3, Interesting)
In percentages, it's about 0.12% of our GDP at its peak. [slashdot.org]
Although I can't find substantiation online, I know that Robert Heinlein asserted that the DoD spends NASA's YEARLY budget every single day of the year.
All that money. *snort*
Agriculture without space?! (Score:3, Interesting)
Right. Social welfare programmes like the ones we've spent trillions on in the US -- and yet, we've got tons of poor folks at home and abroad.
Right. Agricultural development. Because crop yields would be so much higher without infrared imaging to spot diseased areas (or brush fires) in nearby areas, GPS to send him (or f
Re:Russia seems different since the school inciden (Score:3, Informative)
It appears to be a case of charge for it, or do not do it at all. The Russian Space Agency is facing financial difficulties and needs all the extra funds it can get.
Chris
Re:Russia seems different since the school inciden (Score:3, Interesting)
The conspiracy theorists have always thought that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a sham to get the west (Regan, Thatcher, JPII, et. al) off their backs and cut their economic losses. The recent business with Yukos makes it seem more likely. After all, a KGB man is running the country.
Re:Russia seems different since the school inciden (Score:2, Insightful)
The US lessened democracy right after 9/11 - VISITUS + PATRIOT Act anyone?
They regarded the Ukraine as problematic, and instead went to have military operations with China.
The US regarded Iraq as problematic and went into military operations with total disregard to international conventions and treatires.
Russia, the west isn't your enemy.
USA - The world is NOT your enemy!
Re:Most Uninsightful Comment Ever (Score:2)
There may be other lines of defense, but they are complicated and might confuse people - mudslinging is easy and appeals to people without the authors or readers having to do any work or actual thinking.
Of course appeal to emotion and mudsling are not the sole providence of lefties, many times I've seen criticisms of the US answered with criticisms o
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Russia seems different since the school inciden (Score:2)
Hey you're probably right (Score:2)
Re:Just maybe .... (Score:2)
Re:In related news... (Score:2)
I say we tell the Russians to go screw off and not let them use the 90%+ of the space station that we funded. See, we can be just as childish. Thats, right. Any nation that wants to get "technical" about what they have given to the ISS, we can just remind them of _our_ contributions of the majority of th
That is a myth (Score:2, Interesting)
US space scientists are better paid in private industry these days.
Re:In related news... (Score:5, Informative)
As a matter of fact, the Europeans are expecting the US to hold up its end of the bargain. They spent millions of dollars on the ESA lab module for the ISS, and due to the grounding of the Shuttle fleet, it is on the ground gathering cobwebs. What is really angering the ESA is NASA toying with the idea of breaking their contract [adastragames.com] by permanently grounding the Shuttle fleet and never lofting the lab.
Without the Russian's heavy lift capacity for re-supply, the ISS would have to be abandoned, which entails a large risk that the station would undergo a catastrophic failure. NASA would actually like to pay the Russians and have the funds to do so. Unfortunately, there is a slight obstacle in the form of the Iran non-Proliferation Agreement of 2000 [adastragames.com].
Re:In related news... (Score:5, Informative)
I assure you the Russians built the heart of the station that is there now, the Zarya [zarya.info] Control Module and the Zvezda crew quarters. Zarya is called a U.S. component only because the U.S. paid for it through Boeing but it was built in Russia.
The U.S. was supposed to build the Crew Return Vehicle which would have allowed it to be fully manned but that was long ago cancelled. When it was the U.S. killed any prospect of the seven man crew which pretty much killed the ISS as ever being useful. The current crew can barely maintain it and don't do much research, not like its any good for any zero G research anyway.
The U.S. is building a lot of solar panels many of which are probably never going to fly and aren't the most challenging part of the station.
Russia had a full functional space station for like a decade called Mir. Most of their expertise is at the heart of the current ISS core. Not sure NASA could have successfully flown anything without them. If you recall during the years Russia was in Mir, NASA and Boeing was churning out one failed ISS design after another, none of which flew and all of which just filled Boeing's pork filled belly.
I imagine Russia is regretting they deorbited Mir as a condition of joining ISS. It was past its prime and on its last legs but at least it was all theirs. ISS is all shiny and new and flush with squandered U.S. tax dollars but its probably going to end being pathetic and doing anything useful. Russia was getting a whole lot more done with a whole lot less with Mir. I think the modules now forming the core of ISS would have gone in to Mir2 if they could have scraped together the cash for it. I imagine they have been a lot happier and got more done if they weren't bogged down in the political morasse that is ISS.
Maybe the shuttle will fly again and the ISS will get kind of on track again but I really doubt it. Its probably never going to get much beyond where it is today, and Russia will most probably have to keep it alive while NASA's manned space program finishes cratering. Maybe thing will improve at NASA with O'Keefe gone but I doubt it. Its pretty obvious his head was completely bent by the Columbia disaster and he was totally paralyzed at the prospect of
Re:In related news... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm scared of transporters also... but that won't stop me. Coz Ive got faith of the heart. Im going where my heart will take me. Ive got faith to believe. I can do anything. Yes siree.
Re:In related news... (Score:2)
You see, on the Internet there is this site called "google". Maybe you've heard of it? Try searching for "ISS russia funding lack" and pick a hit. Any hit.
The Russian gov't seriously ran low on funds and the choice was between the U.S. picking up the tab and abandoning the whole project. Since it *is* up in space, I suspect the former option was chosen.
Of course, there is nothing wro
Re:In related news... (Score:2, Insightful)
Hit #1 [space.com]: 25 April 2002
Hit #2 [ucar.edu]: January 25, 2000
Hit #3 [rense.com]: September 27, 2002
Hit #4 [rednova.com]: November 24, 2003
I'm not even going to go further... Last time I checked, it was Deceber 2004...
Re:In related news... (Score:3, Informative)
Name (Built-Funded)
Zarya (R-U)
Unity (U-U)
Zvezda (R-R)
Z1 Truss (U-U)
PMA1 (U-U)
PMA2 (U-U)
PMA3 (U-U)
Destiny (U-U)
Pirs (Russian Docking Compartment) (R-R)
S0 Truss (U-U) (includes Mobile Transporter)
S1 Truss (U-U)
Canadarm2 (C-C)
Mobile Base System (C-C)
P1 Truss (U-U)
P6 Truss (U-U)
Quest (U-U)
Node 1 (U-U)
My count gives me: 3 Russian-built, one of which was American funded, and 12 American built, all of which were American funded. And unlike the Euro-built Node
Re:Implications (Score:3, Insightful)
For starters, the Russian boosters don't have to drag multi-ton wings into space. Wings that are useless in space.
BTM
Re:Well then. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well then. (Score:3, Funny)
Next time we fly Soyuz there, we would get some red paint with us and paint big letters MIR-2 there
Re:Well then. (Score:3, Funny)
High Observation Laboratory Environment (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Well then. (Score:4, Interesting)
One Russian flight - $20M
If the shuttle fleet weren't grounded, each US flight would cost as much as, what, 60 Russian launches. Forgive me if I got the numbers wrong; they should be in the ballpark, at least. It's way more cost effective for NASA to pay the Russians for the lift. Russian space tech is crappier than NASA's, but it's also way cheaper than it's crappier:-). Of course, it would be even cheaper to pay these guys, or even these guys, but they are not quite up to the task yet.
missing links (Score:3, Insightful)
these guys [scaled.com]
Re:missing links (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Well then. (Score:3, Interesting)
Hell, if they're that broke, let's buy some of theirs.
How did we end up with such an expensive system, and how did Communists build such a cheap one? Wasn't their society supposed to be extremely wasteful, and ours the efficient one? What the hell happened?
I something think James P. Hogan was right in 'Leapfrog'.
Re:Well then. (Score:5, Interesting)
They couldn't afford an expensive system. They tried [wikipedia.org], too, but had to stop for lack of funds. Then they had no choice but to keep updating their old Soyuz system. In the meanwhile we abandoned ours, because we had the shuttle.
The whole story shows that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket, even if you have a lot of eggs, which is a well known fact outside of the context of space programs:-).
Besides, the shuttle is a much bigger ship than Soyuz, and it can do a lot more than just take people in and out of orbit, so they are not really comparable. Just try to imagine a Soyuz-based mission to fix the Hubble.
Re:Well then. (Score:5, Funny)
One Russian flight - $20M
If the shuttle fleet weren't grounded, each US flight would cost as much as, what, 60 Russian launches.
PLEASE tell me you don't work at NASA. 300 / 20 = 15... or maybe you're using metric?
Re:Well then. (Score:3, Interesting)
To my knowledge, Russia now has another space port, Plesetsk, and is actively developing i
Re:in... (Score:2)
Re:detiorate (Score:2)
Re:detiorate (Score:3, Funny)
> NASA tries to change it.
> Talk to congress.
4. ???
5. Profit!!
Re:Ukraine (Score:2, Insightful)
While Mr. Yanukovich accused his pro-Western opponent of being an American stooge [smh.com.au], he himself is quite blatantly a Russian stooge. [telegraph.co.uk]
As for the impending bankruptcy of the US, you obviously don't understand how the trade deficit, the budget deficit, and the exchange rate work. Things won't be pretty, though it'll take longer than ten years for the situation to come to a head, but the US won't declare bankruptcy like Russia did in '98. Read this [economist.com] for a current analysis.
Re:Ukraine (Score:3, Insightful)
You know how you go bankrupt when you're in lots of debt? That's because you can't find the money to pay it off. You know what the difference between you and a state is? Taxes.
If the US is finding itself having difficulty paying off its debts, it
Re:What we need (Score:3, Funny)
some sort of bioship, I take it.
"easy to manuever,"
that is small and complex
"and doesn't blow up in space."
and magic.
Re:A quinessential example of american "journalism (Score:3, Informative)
Quit your pathetic whining about the evils of US journalism and learn to read the articl