Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

    Communication With Progress 44 Lost After Launch

    Source: NASA HQ Posted Wednesday, August 24, 2011

    Mission Control Moscow reported that communication with the Progress 44 cargo craft was lost 5 minutes, 20 seconds after its launch at 9 a.m. EDT today. Preliminary data from the Russian Federal Space Agency indicate there was a problem with the propulsion system, and that the vehicle did not reach its desired orbit.

    International Space Station Program Manager Michael Suffredini will hold a news conference on NASA Television at noon EDT.

    Just after 11 a.m., Mission Control Moscow radioed a report to the crew on board the station:

    "At 1300 (GMT), we lifted off, following 320 seconds of flight there was a failure in the upper stage of the launch vehicle. We lost comm(unications) after a while with the launch vehicle and we did not report stage separation," said Maxim Matuchen, the head of the Russian Mission Control Center.

    "In the previous comm(unications) pass we attempted to contact the vehicle through every possible channel. Orbital monitoring telemetry and we have just finished our second comm(unications) pass where we invoked all of the communications facilities. We sent commands to activate the comm(unications) pass on board, unfortunately it failed."

    "Understood," replied Expedition 28 Commander Andrey Borisenko.

    "This is it for the moment, we'll try to figure out what has happened and what the cause was. I just wanted to keep you informed."

    "Thank you for letting us know so quickly," Borisenko added. "Thank you from the entire crew."

    Progress 44 launched from the Baikonur Cosmodrome into a cloudless sky at 7 p.m. Kazakhstan time bound for the International Space Station and a docking on Friday. At the time of launch, the space station was flying 230 miles over Equatorial Guinea on the west coast of Africa. The spacecraft is carrying 2.9 tons of food, fuel and supplies for the space station.
    Well isn't that just peachy. No sooner do we retire the Shuttle, one of only two operational manned spacecraft in the world (I'm not counting the Chinese Shenzhou as operational), the 3rd stage of the launch vehicle of the other wets the bed on launch. The Soyuz-U that launched the Progress-M cargo craft is closely related to the manned Soyuz-FG that launches the manned Soyuz capsule, the only means of getting people to the $100 billion International Space Station.

    Now, the crew is in no danger. Atlantis left over a years worth of supplies and spare parts. There are 2 Soyuz capsules currently docked to the station, capable of returning three crew members a piece. There is also a steady stream of resupply craft en route. The Commercial US Dragon C2 test flight from SpaceX is due to approach and dock early December. Though technically a test flight, it could, if allowed, replace the expendables lost today. It's first operational flight flies in April. The other commercial US cargo provider, Orbital Sciences is doing a test flight of its Cygnus vehicle in December, though that particular flight is a maiden test flight. It first operational flight is expected in February. Also in February, the Japanese White Stork 3 H-II Transfer vehicle is expected, and in March, the European Edoardo Amandi Automated Transfer Vehicle is expected.

    What none of those vehicles can deliver however, is gravity. The longer these guys spend up there, the harder it's going to be for them when they come back down. And as the Solar cycle heats up the odds of the crew having to evacuate back to Earth in the event of a geomagnetic storm go up, and with the Soyuz-U rocket grounded for the investigation that will follow, as of right now we may not be able to get a crew back of there to repair and restore our investment. Now there isn't much we can do about the latter, other than get our ass in gear and accelerate the Commercial Crew Development Program, so that we have an independent and backup means of getting to the station. And yes, it is the government taking its sweet time on it. For the former, there is an intriguing proposal to add a inflatable centrifuge module to the ISS, providing up to .7g, both for research, and to extend the amount of time crew could safely stay in orbit. And for relative peanuts. It would also be an excellent testbed for future BEO expeditions.



    In all fairness, the Russians are pretty quick on their feet about these things, and the rocket in question has a 97% success rate with 724 successful launches dating back to 1973. Odds are they find the problem, and they have two more Progress and Soyuz launches scheduled this year.

    But this exposes the danger in putting all our eggs in one basket.
    Last edited by Commodore; 08-24-2011, 01:53 PM.

  • #2
    Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

    The end of US manned spaceflight will be a significant part of the Obama legacy.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

      Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
      The end of US manned spaceflight will be a significant part of the Obama legacy.
      (not defending Obama's inaction on this). I've read articles 10 years ago talking about how outdated the spaceshuttle had become, how they then already lacked the resources to build a replacement and that one day this moment would come.

      This goes back to the end of the cold war I think.

      I'm still waiting for Bush to lauch that manned mission to Mars.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

        Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
        The end of US manned spaceflight will be a significant part of the Obama legacy.
        Well, in all fairness, Bush ordered the retirement of the Shuttle when the ISS was complete, which was the right thing to do, the Shuttle was far too expensive to fly, particularly when painted UPS brown, and Obama simply followed through. Bush, or his NASA administrator Mike Griffen, also completely botched the Shuttles replacement, Orion. They tried to skip a step and make it a cis-lunar/BEO ship right out of the gate, which exceeded the lifting capacity, timeline, and budget of the Ares I launch vehicle, while simultaneously dragging their feet on COTS and CCDev. Given what Obama had when he was sworn in he should have kept the Shuttles flying until CCDev could have produced two separate ships on two separate launchers, and transitioned smoothly from the Shuttle to a Sidemount HLV, because those assets could have facilitated the Constellation program.



        But he and is administrator have provided absolutely no leadership, canceling Constellation with no clear replacement, leaving the bureaucrats in charge of CCDev, only keeping the ISS up there to give the Russians, Europeans, and Japanese something to play with, and dragging its feet on the congressionally mandated Space Launch System so that enough of the workforce is gone to make it impossible to implement, and privately drawing up plans that would have it flown, reedesigned, and retest flown over and over to inflate costs and drag out development till the 2030s!

        If that doesn't fit the narrative that he is trying to wipe out manned space flight, I don't know what does. Which ever Republican takes over in 2013, they are essentially going to have to start from scratch, and take very hard, very fast action to implement something that bear fruit in their first term. Thank God for Elon Musk and SpaceX, who makes space exploration his personal mission. Thanks to him and inflatable modules from Bigelow Aerospace we can at the very least repeat Apollo before the 50th Anniversary with multiple launches of his Falcon Heavy rocket. Hopefully NASA can manage to add some meat to those bones.

        Anyway, if it makes anyone feel any better, here is the karma inducing Russian propaganda from last month after the Atlantis touchdown.

        "Mankind acknowledges the role of American space ships in exploring the cosmos," it added. But Roskosmos also used the occasion to tout the virtues of the Soyuz (Union) spacecraft, which unlike the shuttle lands on Earth vertically with the aid of parachutes after leaving orbit. It said that there was a simple answer to why the Soyuz was still flying after the shuttles retired -- "reliability and not to mention cost efficiency."
        I for one hope they are enjoying their humble pieski today.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

          Originally posted by erikvv View Post
          (not defending Obama's inaction on this). I've read articles 10 years ago talking about how outdated the spaceshuttle had become,
          It was the budget shuttle from the beginning, it's amazing they got as much done with it as they did and as few people were killed. No one planning the original shuttle program imagined the program would have been in place flying the same vehicles decades later.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

            Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post
            It was the budget shuttle from the beginning, it's amazing they got as much done with it as they did and as few people were killed. No one planning the original shuttle program imagined the program would have been in place flying the same vehicles decades later.
            Yeah, the plan was to split the cargo and crew, using the HL-20 manned space plane, and Shuttle-C for cargo.

            Efforts to explore beyond Earth orbit where deemed to expensive by Congress, so without the need for heavy lift, cargo and crew were recombined in various space planes like the X-30 and X-33 and single stage to orbit pieces like the Delta Clipper. None ever got out of prototype stage.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

              Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
              The end of US manned spaceflight will be a significant part of the Obama legacy.
              Really?
              That's where your absolutely blind partisanship is taking you?
              Way to derail an interesting, fact filled post with a purely partisan and uninformative hackneyed jab.
              I really expect better from the admins and moderators on these boards.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                It is unfortunate that the Russians are having issues with this but at the same time also unfortunate that there is not all that much we can do about it. Perhaps having the alternative, or a replacement, to the retired Shittle program was a better idea than the path our government went with. Then again, this is just one of many issues with NASA.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                  Originally posted by rocheteau View Post
                  Really?
                  That's where your absolutely blind partisanship is taking you?
                  Way to derail an interesting, fact filled post with a purely partisan and uninformative hackneyed jab.
                  I really expect better from the admins and moderators on these boards.
                  Sorry the truth hurts. The Obama administration killed the Constellation program. Under Obama's watch, we've lost the ability to send man into space, and instead must rent space from the Russians for our Astronauts to travel to the ISS.

                  It's a sad legacy. I understand your inability to understand this, given France's lack of any meaningful space program. You can't really understand the loss of something you've never had.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                    Originally posted by erikvv View Post
                    (not defending Obama's inaction on this). I've read articles 10 years ago talking about how outdated the spaceshuttle had become, how they then already lacked the resources to build a replacement and that one day this moment would come.

                    This goes back to the end of the cold war I think.

                    I'm still waiting for Bush to lauch that manned mission to Mars.
                    Most of the shuttle fleet has completed their design lifespan of launches / landings / time in service.

                    Endeavor still had significant lifespan left, but the administration decided to end the program and leave us with no manned or heavy lift launch capability.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                      Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                      Sorry the truth hurts. The Obama administration killed the Constellation program. Under Obama's watch, we've lost the ability to send man into space, and instead must rent space from the Russians for our Astronauts to travel to the ISS.

                      It's a sad legacy. I understand your inability to understand this, given France's lack of any meaningful space program. You can't really understand the loss of something you've never had.
                      What truth?
                      The truth is that you are so intent, ironically, on blaming absolutely everything on Obama (and I don't even have to do a search, I am willing to bet my left testicle that you have posted on this board decrying the fact that the Obama administration blames bad things on Bush) that even the sunsetting of a program that everyone had agreed had run its course, in which the present administration is just a very small part is TOTALLY Obama's fault.
                      I have no problem with you thinking that, but you should try to actually argue your point rather than Beavis and Buttheadly saying "Obama's fault, Obama's fault".
                      Commodore made a compelling argument for why he thought Obama should shoulder a lot of the blame (though even his blame on the present admin, relied on a serious dose of blame on the previous one).
                      I do find it strange that a fiscal conservative like yourself all of a sudden wants to hang his hat on a money sinkhole that is purely about symbolism. There is no shame in subcontracting out our needs to others (Heck, the French just won a major bid to feed the US army). And I just refuse to beleive that if the Obama admin had extended the Shuttle program that you wouldn't have been on these very boards decrying that big government was 1) stifling competition, by unfairly competing with private enterprise
                      2) throwing good money after bad as the shuttle is too costly to be competitive in today's satelite launch competition. Typical government!
                      3) once again spending tax payers money like drunken sailors while the economy was going to hell.
                      But those are just assumptions.
                      Lastly in regards to your dig at the french:
                      1) I am a dual national so I do understand these things (and even if I werent, you dont think that foreigners understand national pride and symbolism?)
                      2) France will never have the place that the US has had and has in the history of space exploration, but in terms of commercial exploitation I think the mostly french Arianespace is doing pretty darn well for itself these days. In fact exactly the sort of program that should appeal to a conservative like yourself

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                        Originally posted by rocheteau View Post
                        What truth?
                        The truth is that you are so intent, ironically, on blaming absolutely everything on Obama (and I don't even have to do a search, I am willing to bet my left testicle that you have posted on this board decrying the fact that the Obama administration blames bad things on Bush) that even the sunsetting of a program that everyone had agreed had run its course, in which the present administration is just a very small part is TOTALLY Obama's fault.
                        I have no problem with you thinking that, but you should try to actually argue your point rather than Beavis and Buttheadly saying "Obama's fault, Obama's fault".
                        Commodore made a compelling argument for why he thought Obama should shoulder a lot of the blame (though even his blame on the present admin, relied on a serious dose of blame on the previous one).
                        I do find it strange that a fiscal conservative like yourself all of a sudden wants to hang his hat on a money sinkhole that is purely about symbolism. There is no shame in subcontracting out our needs to others (Heck, the French just won a major bid to feed the US army). And I just refuse to beleive that if the Obama admin had extended the Shuttle program that you wouldn't have been on these very boards decrying that big government was 1) stifling competition, by unfairly competing with private enterprise
                        2) throwing good money after bad as the shuttle is too costly to be competitive in today's satelite launch competition. Typical government!
                        3) once again spending tax payers money like drunken sailors while the economy was going to hell.
                        But those are just assumptions.
                        Lastly in regards to your dig at the french:
                        1) I am a dual national so I do understand these things (and even if I werent, you dont think that foreigners understand national pride and symbolism?)
                        2) France will never have the place that the US has had and has in the history of space exploration, but in terms of commercial exploitation I think the mostly french Arianespace is doing pretty darn well for itself these days. In fact exactly the sort of program that should appeal to a conservative like yourself
                        ROFLMFAO

                        You clearly think you know quite a lot about me, with no actual basis to sustain your assumptions.

                        Anyway, now that you've shared your baseless personal assumptions, perhaps we could return to the topic of the thread (if you wouldn't mind)?

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                          Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                          The end of US manned spaceflight will be a significant part of the Obama legacy.
                          too funny, Nixon destroyed the manned space flight program by going with the boondoggle called the shuttle. A massive failure designed primarily to reward his campaign contributors. It sucked most of the money out of the space program to fund a project where 40% of the fleet failed with loss of crew. By killing "Grand Tour" Nixon also got revenge on Massachusetts, as the cutting edge R+D that would be required to build a spacecraft that would visit the outer planets could only be done in Massachusetts, whereas building the shuttle would use off the shelf technology and could be done in California at North American Rockwell.

                          Tell me, mister uber partisan, if Obama had dedicated a significant portion of the federal budget to develop a spacecraft, beginning in january 2009, would it be ready now?

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                            Originally posted by goober View Post
                            too funny, Nixon destroyed the manned space flight program by going with the boondoggle called the shuttle. A massive failure designed primarily to reward his campaign contributors. It sucked most of the money out of the space program to fund a project where 40% of the fleet failed with loss of crew. By killing "Grand Tour" Nixon also got revenge on Massachusetts, as the cutting edge R+D that would be required to build a spacecraft that would visit the outer planets could only be done in Massachusetts, whereas building the shuttle would use off the shelf technology and could be done in California at North American Rockwell.

                            Tell me, mister uber partisan, if Obama had dedicated a significant portion of the federal budget to develop a spacecraft, beginning in january 2009, would it be ready now?
                            There would still be a gap, but not the de facto abandonment we have today.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: First Russian supply flight to ISS since Shuttle retirement fails

                              Originally posted by goober View Post
                              too funny, Nixon destroyed the manned space flight program by going with the boondoggle called the shuttle. A massive failure designed primarily to reward his campaign contributors. It sucked most of the money out of the space program to fund a project where 40% of the fleet failed with loss of crew. By killing "Grand Tour" Nixon also got revenge on Massachusetts, as the cutting edge R+D that would be required to build a spacecraft that would visit the outer planets could only be done in Massachusetts, whereas building the shuttle would use off the shelf technology and could be done in California at North American Rockwell.

                              ARROOOOOO!
                              EXPLETIVE DELETED!

                              And Apollo Applications wouldn't have been anymore affordable flying on the Saturn family of rockets than the Shuttle Orbiter.

                              The Shuttle-C program would have turned the corner.

                              Originally posted by goober View Post
                              Tell me, mister uber partisan, if Obama had dedicated a significant portion of the federal budget to develop a spacecraft, beginning in january 2009, would it be ready now?
                              The Dragon Launch Abort System could have been ready in 2-3 years for a about a billion dollars.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X