Thanks To Obama's Cuts The Russians Are Catching Up

[Navy1960]

BEIJING, June 02, 2005 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] today announced agreements with Chinese suppliers worth an estimated US$600 million for production of commercial airplane parts and components, including the first firm contract with such suppliers to build parts for the all-new Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Vice President and General Manager, Airplane Production Carolyn Corvi represented Boeing in Beijing to finalize contracts for the 787 composite rudder, the 737 forward entry door and the 737 automatic over-wing exit door with Chengdu Aircraft Industrial (Group) Co. Ltd. (CAC), a China Aviation Industry Corporation I (AVIC I)-affiliated company. Also completed were contracts for the 787 wing-to-body fairing panels between Boeing and Hafei Aviation Industry Co., Ltd. (Hafei), an AVIC II-affiliated company.
Boeing: Boeing 787 Highlights $600 Million in Contracts with Chinese Suppliers

Outsourcing is not limited to just items you buy at Wal-Mart.

CHINESE computer spies are suspected of having cracked the Pentagon's $500 billion Joint Strike Fighter program, accessing top-secret files containing details of the aircraft's stealth design and electronics.
Details of the brazen break-in were reported yesterday in The Wall Street Journal newspaper, citing current and former US government officials.

The Royal Australian Air Force has placed a tentative order for 100 of the F-35 JSFs for about $16 billion, easily making it Australia's biggest defence purchase.

Last night, Defence confirmed it was aware of the report and was seeking more information. "Defence has seen the US reports and will discuss the issues raised with the JSF Program office in due course," it said in a written response to questions from The Australian.
Chinese hackers steal JSF secrets | The Australian

There are a few things worth mentioning, first the Russian T-50 will not come into production and will do so in limited numbers several years from now around 2017. It's builder Sukhoi has already made a long term commitment to build the SU-35 for the forseeable future and this can be seen by the recent purchases of this aircraft by the Russian Air Force which continues to but and will for several years. India has expressed interest in in the T-50 and has made overtures to Sukhoi to invest in it's development. However there is a new player in the India aircraft needs and that the F-16IN which is a "super cruise" version of the F-16 purpose built for India based on the F-16XL technology and using the F-35 Radar system which is the feature of the F-35 JSF that makes it a worthy aircraft. Otherwise the F-35 is an average 4th generation performer. Nations like Russia,China, and the EU are at or approaching equality in technological terms with the US Military, with the exception of the F-22, which we cancelled at 187 aircraft.

2005??? I hope you will read the more updated contract awards that I posted from NASAWATCH.

NASA’s Commercial Crew and Cargo Program is applying Recovery Act funds to stimulate efforts within the private sector to develop and demonstrate human spaceflight capabilities. These efforts are intended to foster entrepreneurial activity leading to job growth in engineering, analysis, design, and research, and to economic growth as capabilities for new markets are created. By developing commercial crew service providers, NASA may be able to reduce the gap in U.S. human spaceflight capability. All ARRA funded activities must comply with its provisions and will conclude no later than September 30, 2010.
RECOVERY -- COMMERCIAL CREW DEVELOPMENT, SOL JSC-CCDev-1

Congress has now officially authorized and appropriated the $50M Commercial Crew Development program, which aligns with the Augustine Commission’s recommendation for a robust, multi-year commercial human spaceflight initiative. Click the link above for program details.
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation - SpaceX



Josh Byerly
Johnson Space Center, Houston
281-483-5111
[email protected]

NASA SELECTS COMMERCIAL FIRMS TO BEGIN DEVELOPMENT OF CREW TRANSPORTATION CONCEPTS AND TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS FOR HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT USING RECOVERY ACT FUNDS

CONTRACT RELEASE: C10-004
NASA - NASA Selects Commercial Firms for Commercial Crew Development Using Recovery Act Funds

As I said Maggie I'm fuily aware of this contract.

 

[MaggieMae]

Yet another thread on this topic, first lets get this straight the Presidents budget did not cut any MONEY, it CUT and re-tasked program(s) within NASA and the DoD. In fact the President raised the funding , so why then would Republicans be for any of that based on a fiscal level when it adds to the deficit and accomplishes NOTHING. Starting with the F-22 and ending it's production at 187 in favor of the F-35 which by the way is an average aircraft at best in terms of performance and the US Navy is calling into question operating costs on that aircraft and due to these factors Sec. Gates yesterday fired the program manager for the F-35 project and is holding back 614 million in funding until these issues are addressed. One of those issues is the F-35's failure to perform well against current Russian, American, and EU 4th generation fighters. The Cut in the Constellation program will result in the US after the shuttles last flight this year, having to rely on Russia to provide lifting and resupply needs to the ISS which is a several billion dollar US investment. Further the US will be unable for the forseeable future to service the HST ( Hubble Space Telescope) as well as communications, GPS, and it's own sat. networks without assistance. We will have launch only capability with the Delta series rockets but no manned capability . That is is a FACT. Now if those of you who think that "outsourcing" our space flight needs to other nations at the expense of American security, jobs, and science is a good thing, then by all means continue to celebrate mediocrity.

Go to NasaWatch home page. Seems there isn't a whole lot of disagreement with this decision after all. And this was of particular interest. (I thought conservatives WANTED private enterprise to do all the heavy lifting?)

NASA Unveils Commercial Human Spaceflight Development Agreements and Announces $50 Million in Seed Funding for Commercial Crew | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference

I'm aware of the 50 million given to Space-X for the CRV in fact I already posted the information on it in another thread. One other thing, the reason why most like me think private enterprise is the ONLY way to go now is because our Govt. does not have the vision or the courage to sustain a program like Apollo. If you work in the research part of NASA, Ames etc. I'm sure your overjoyed at this decision, however, I would suggest you see how well this decision is goping over at Johnson and Huntsville. Further, the former director of NASA might disagree with that assertion as well.

Doesn't have the vision to "sustain" Apollo? How old IS that program? The space program has advanced far beyond Apollo because it has been sustained. You really do need to read what other experts in the field are saying, my friend. I realize your take on this is strictly from a patriotic point of view, and that's noble, but really, the "moon" has become secondary to exploration of other realms within our galaxy. Here's a list of articles for you to peruse.

Press Releases | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

 

[MaggieMae]

Rasmussen??? What a shocker.

50% Favor Cutting Back on Space Exploration - Rasmussen Reports

 

[Navy1960]

BEIJING, June 02, 2005 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] today announced agreements with Chinese suppliers worth an estimated US$600 million for production of commercial airplane parts and components, including the first firm contract with such suppliers to build parts for the all-new Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Vice President and General Manager, Airplane Production Carolyn Corvi represented Boeing in Beijing to finalize contracts for the 787 composite rudder, the 737 forward entry door and the 737 automatic over-wing exit door with Chengdu Aircraft Industrial (Group) Co. Ltd. (CAC), a China Aviation Industry Corporation I (AVIC I)-affiliated company. Also completed were contracts for the 787 wing-to-body fairing panels between Boeing and Hafei Aviation Industry Co., Ltd. (Hafei), an AVIC II-affiliated company.
Boeing: Boeing 787 Highlights $600 Million in Contracts with Chinese Suppliers

Outsourcing is not limited to just items you buy at Wal-Mart.

CHINESE computer spies are suspected of having cracked the Pentagon's $500 billion Joint Strike Fighter program, accessing top-secret files containing details of the aircraft's stealth design and electronics.
Details of the brazen break-in were reported yesterday in The Wall Street Journal newspaper, citing current and former US government officials.

The Royal Australian Air Force has placed a tentative order for 100 of the F-35 JSFs for about $16 billion, easily making it Australia's biggest defence purchase.

Last night, Defence confirmed it was aware of the report and was seeking more information. "Defence has seen the US reports and will discuss the issues raised with the JSF Program office in due course," it said in a written response to questions from The Australian.
Chinese hackers steal JSF secrets | The Australian

There are a few things worth mentioning, first the Russian T-50 will not come into production and will do so in limited numbers several years from now around 2017. It's builder Sukhoi has already made a long term commitment to build the SU-35 for the forseeable future and this can be seen by the recent purchases of this aircraft by the Russian Air Force which continues to but and will for several years. India has expressed interest in in the T-50 and has made overtures to Sukhoi to invest in it's development. However there is a new player in the India aircraft needs and that the F-16IN which is a "super cruise" version of the F-16 purpose built for India based on the F-16XL technology and using the F-35 Radar system which is the feature of the F-35 JSF that makes it a worthy aircraft. Otherwise the F-35 is an average 4th generation performer. Nations like Russia,China, and the EU are at or approaching equality in technological terms with the US Military, with the exception of the F-22, which we cancelled at 187 aircraft.

2005??? I hope you will read the more updated contract awards that I posted from NASAWATCH.

The new jet will be able to take off and land on short runways, 300-400 meters long. The fifth generation aircraft will fly at large distances with multiple refueling in the air.

The PAK FA will use on its first flights 2 Saturn 117S engines (about 14.5 tons of thrust each). The 117S is an advanced version of the AL-31F, but built with the experience gained in the AL-41F program. The Saturn AL-41F powered the Mikoyan MFI fighter (Project/Article 1.44). Later versions of the PAK FA will use a completely new engine (17.5 tons of thrust each), developed by NPO Saturn or FGUP MMPP Salyut.

Russia’s Air Force will have the new fighter jet in 2015. India’s Defense Ministry already plans to purchase 250 such planes from Sukhoi.
Russia To Test Stealthy Fifth Generation Sukhoi T-50 Fighter Jet - Pravda.Ru

 

[Navy1960]

Go to NasaWatch home page. Seems there isn't a whole lot of disagreement with this decision after all. And this was of particular interest. (I thought conservatives WANTED private enterprise to do all the heavy lifting?)

NASA Unveils Commercial Human Spaceflight Development Agreements and Announces $50 Million in Seed Funding for Commercial Crew | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference

I'm aware of the 50 million given to Space-X for the CRV in fact I already posted the information on it in another thread. One other thing, the reason why most like me think private enterprise is the ONLY way to go now is because our Govt. does not have the vision or the courage to sustain a program like Apollo. If you work in the research part of NASA, Ames etc. I'm sure your overjoyed at this decision, however, I would suggest you see how well this decision is goping over at Johnson and Huntsville. Further, the former director of NASA might disagree with that assertion as well.

Doesn't have the vision to "sustain" Apollo? How old IS that program? The space program has advanced far beyond Apollo because it has been sustained. You really do need to read what other experts in the field are saying, my friend. I realize your take on this is strictly from a patriotic point of view, and that's noble, but really, the "moon" has become secondary to exploration of other realms within our galaxy. Here's a list of articles for you to peruse.

Press Releases | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

sustain a program like Apollo Good way to misread the posting Maggie, I have read other experts and my take on this is from several areas. In fact NASA has become an agency that is VERY much concerned with it's dotting the i's and crossing the t's rather than expanding knowledge through discovery. In fact it's major highlights have been from programs that have been very underfunded and done on the cheap and with little support, ( Mars Rovers). If you really want to know where I stand on the issue then read where Dr. Harrison Schmitt stands on the issue. Not only is this point a view a practical one, it is also a long term strategic one. While I am for using all assets in the study of space science, I am NOT for using the agency to further a political agenda ( i.e. climate change ) If you look at the vast majority of NASA's budget it is NOT spent on programs like Mars Rovers and deep space science but rather it is spent on the Shuttle and ISS support. Think of this for a moment, there was debate in NASA if they were going to let the HST die or fly one mroe service mission to it. However you don't hear that when it comes to flying a 25 year old space truck that has NEVER met it's mission objectives in terms of costs and performance and has been overused. Want to know what I really think? I think NASA has been mismanaged and underfunded for so long and to rely so much the shuttle for so long and NOT develop a follow -on and get caught with your pants down like they are now is a disgrace. The one program that has attempted to try and do something about this now has been cut, not that I'm surprised , in fact I knew this was going to happen last year. Frankly the assertion that these private companies will fill this gap in the near term is laughable to anyone that has ever been close to aviation development myself included. Want a good example of this, right off the top of my head I can think of the 20 plus years its taken to get the V-22 to anwhere near flying condition. The F-35, and on and on. So the mere suggestion that with this tiny fraction of money that suddenly these companies are going to rush in and do this immediatly is nonsense and a pipe dream. As I said before, I have little faith that the Govt. has the vision to take up projects like this in the first place and perhaps private enterprise is the best place for it, but your kidding yourself if you think this is going to fill the gap. I just happen to think that our nation should have manned space flight capabilites and NOT have to rely on other nations for that from a security standpoint. Of course your more than welcome to disagree with me.

 

[beowolfe]

Actually, what would be the point in going back to the moon. Now a manned landing on mars, I can get behind that! We've been to the moon several times. We didn't build anything permanent, so I don't see the point in going back if we're not going to build anything permanent there.

 

[Navy1960]

Actually, what would be the point in going back to the moon. Now a manned landing on mars, I can get behind that! We've been to the moon several times. We didn't build anything permanent, so I don't see the point in going back if we're not going to build anything permanent there.

You may be surprised beowolfe but I agree there is no sense in returning to the moon if your just going there to plant the flag. Then "been there done that" argument holds sway if that were the case. However, if the program was a long term program meant to establish a presence there and exploit the moons resources for our benefit, science, as well as to be used for training for long term space flight missions to Mars then its well worth it. I know I have posted this before. but here is a little info on the subject beowolfe.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2xChmfLlMo]YouTube - Helium 3 mining the moon 2024 Part 1 of 2[/ame]

 

[beowolfe]

Actually, what would be the point in going back to the moon. Now a manned landing on mars, I can get behind that! We've been to the moon several times. We didn't build anything permanent, so I don't see the point in going back if we're not going to build anything permanent there.

You may be surprised beowolfe but I agree there is no sense in returning to the moon if your just going there to plant the flag. Then "been there done that" argument holds sway if that were the case. However, if the program was a long term program meant to establish a presence there and exploit the moons resources for our benefit, science, as well as to be used for training for long term space flight missions to Mars then its well worth it. I know I have posted this before. but here is a little info on the subject beowolfe.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2xChmfLlMo]YouTube - Helium 3 mining the moon 2024 Part 1 of 2[/ame]

Cool!! I'm all for doing anything that inches us along the road of one day being able to leave Earth. We know that one day our son will go supernova and that Earth will be destroyed. I'd hate to think that we didn't persue this and humanity dies with the Earth. And who knows, we may need to leave here sooner than when the sun goes supernova. That is not the only way our planet could be destroyed.

Good to see you again Navy. I remember you from MSNBC.

 

[Navy1960]

Actually, what would be the point in going back to the moon. Now a manned landing on mars, I can get behind that! We've been to the moon several times. We didn't build anything permanent, so I don't see the point in going back if we're not going to build anything permanent there.

You may be surprised beowolfe but I agree there is no sense in returning to the moon if your just going there to plant the flag. Then "been there done that" argument holds sway if that were the case. However, if the program was a long term program meant to establish a presence there and exploit the moons resources for our benefit, science, as well as to be used for training for long term space flight missions to Mars then its well worth it. I know I have posted this before. but here is a little info on the subject beowolfe.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2xChmfLlMo]YouTube - Helium 3 mining the moon 2024 Part 1 of 2[/ame]

Cool!! I'm all for doing anything that inches us along the road of one day being able to leave Earth. We know that one day our son will go supernova and that Earth will be destroyed. I'd hate to think that we didn't persue this and humanity dies with the Earth. And who knows, we may need to leave here sooner than when the sun goes supernova. That is not the only way our planet could be destroyed.

Good to see you again Navy. I remember you from MSNBC.

Yes it can be agrued that this is a long way off in terms of development, but then again are we not all discussing the topic of clean energy these days if you agree or disagree on the origins of climate change or not. To me it's prudent to explore resources that hold promise. Maggie and I disagree from time to time on the issues thats true and while yes,, being an old aviator I tend to look at this from a patriotic eye I suppose, but would rather our nation be at the front of it's own energy independence rather than having to go from one foreign source to another.

 

[Yukon]

You are quite insane:

After cutting the F24 program last year and now canceling the moon program...not to mention allowing to let the Shuttle program to expire without funding a replacement...President Obama has allowed the Russians not only to catch up military-wise but he is also making us dependent on them to be able to fix our satellites. We have to rely on Russian spacecraft from now on to get us into space. We are essentially grounded by the middle of this year.

Do you think the Russians can be trusted to let us hitch a ride to the Space Station or allow us to fix our communications satellites.

Does it make you feel good that our national security will be in the hands of our enemies?

Well...the cuts this dumb-ass President has put in place has done exactly that.

Strange how this simple fact isn't being reported by anyone....even FNC.

We're in deep trouble folks.

 

[Hugidwyn]

In Russia, 56% positively evaluate the work of Obama. We look forward to what he would do for the United States that Gorbachev in Russia.

 

[Meister]

In Russia, 56% positively evaluate the work of Obama. We look forward to what he would do for the United States that Gorbachev in Russia.

Obama has high marks for likablity in the polls. His agenda is getting ripped in the polls.

 

[mudwhistle]

Go to NasaWatch home page. Seems there isn't a whole lot of disagreement with this decision after all. And this was of particular interest. (I thought conservatives WANTED private enterprise to do all the heavy lifting?)

NASA Unveils Commercial Human Spaceflight Development Agreements and Announces $50 Million in Seed Funding for Commercial Crew | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference

I'm aware of the 50 million given to Space-X for the CRV in fact I already posted the information on it in another thread. One other thing, the reason why most like me think private enterprise is the ONLY way to go now is because our Govt. does not have the vision or the courage to sustain a program like Apollo. If you work in the research part of NASA, Ames etc. I'm sure your overjoyed at this decision, however, I would suggest you see how well this decision is goping over at Johnson and Huntsville. Further, the former director of NASA might disagree with that assertion as well.

Doesn't have the vision to "sustain" Apollo? How old IS that program? The space program has advanced far beyond Apollo because it has been sustained. You really do need to read what other experts in the field are saying, my friend. I realize your take on this is strictly from a patriotic point of view, and that's noble, but really, the "moon" has become secondary to exploration of other realms within our galaxy. Here's a list of articles for you to peruse.

Press Releases | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

The moon is the only thing close enough to explore. We need to practice on the Moon before we can land and takeoff on Mars. The advances that building a base on the Moon would helpful when it comes to exploring the rest of space...if we ever do. Thanks to Obama's cuts all of this is lost.

Now the Space-shuttle program is going tits up thanks to him so we're pretty much out of the space business. I guess this his way of sucking up to other countries like China and Russia. Putting our programs in mothballs.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm aware of the 50 million given to Space-X for the CRV in fact I already posted the information on it in another thread. One other thing, the reason why most like me think private enterprise is the ONLY way to go now is because our Govt. does not have the vision or the courage to sustain a program like Apollo. If you work in the research part of NASA, Ames etc. I'm sure your overjoyed at this decision, however, I would suggest you see how well this decision is goping over at Johnson and Huntsville. Further, the former director of NASA might disagree with that assertion as well.

Doesn't have the vision to "sustain" Apollo? How old IS that program? The space program has advanced far beyond Apollo because it has been sustained. You really do need to read what other experts in the field are saying, my friend. I realize your take on this is strictly from a patriotic point of view, and that's noble, but really, the "moon" has become secondary to exploration of other realms within our galaxy. Here's a list of articles for you to peruse.

Press Releases | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

sustain a program like Apollo Good way to misread the posting Maggie, I have read other experts and my take on this is from several areas. In fact NASA has become an agency that is VERY much concerned with it's dotting the i's and crossing the t's rather than expanding knowledge through discovery. In fact it's major highlights have been from programs that have been very underfunded and done on the cheap and with little support, ( Mars Rovers). If you really want to know where I stand on the issue then read where Dr. Harrison Schmitt stands on the issue. Not only is this point a view a practical one, it is also a long term strategic one. While I am for using all assets in the study of space science, I am NOT for using the agency to further a political agenda ( i.e. climate change ) If you look at the vast majority of NASA's budget it is NOT spent on programs like Mars Rovers and deep space science but rather it is spent on the Shuttle and ISS support. Think of this for a moment, there was debate in NASA if they were going to let the HST die or fly one mroe service mission to it. However you don't hear that when it comes to flying a 25 year old space truck that has NEVER met it's mission objectives in terms of costs and performance and has been overused. Want to know what I really think? I think NASA has been mismanaged and underfunded for so long and to rely so much the shuttle for so long and NOT develop a follow -on and get caught with your pants down like they are now is a disgrace. The one program that has attempted to try and do something about this now has been cut, not that I'm surprised , in fact I knew this was going to happen last year. Frankly the assertion that these private companies will fill this gap in the near term is laughable to anyone that has ever been close to aviation development myself included. Want a good example of this, right off the top of my head I can think of the 20 plus years its taken to get the V-22 to anwhere near flying condition. The F-35, and on and on. So the mere suggestion that with this tiny fraction of money that suddenly these companies are going to rush in and do this immediatly is nonsense and a pipe dream. As I said before, I have little faith that the Govt. has the vision to take up projects like this in the first place and perhaps private enterprise is the best place for it, but your kidding yourself if you think this is going to fill the gap. I just happen to think that our nation should have manned space flight capabilites and NOT have to rely on other nations for that from a security standpoint. Of course your more than welcome to disagree with me.

Then why are some making the argument all about the energy sources of the moon? If not for that purpose, why go there again?

I believe that given the incentive, private enterprise WILL eventually fill the gap. I also don't believe for one moment that just because Russia and China are advancing their own space programs that that poses a "threat" to our own security. They are after the same type of new technology that can be gained from space projects, just as we are (I hope). It is a race to be the first to market that technology (there's that capitalist mindset again, now shared by countries which once never would have dreamed of being capitalistic).

The fear that others have expressed that Russia is up to something is also unfounded. Russia already has two Soyuz spacecraft permanently docked at the space station to serve in case of emergency, and two cosmonauts on board the space lab don't they? If they were going to try something, they probably could have done so by now.

 

[MaggieMae]

Actually, what would be the point in going back to the moon. Now a manned landing on mars, I can get behind that! We've been to the moon several times. We didn't build anything permanent, so I don't see the point in going back if we're not going to build anything permanent there.

You may be surprised beowolfe but I agree there is no sense in returning to the moon if your just going there to plant the flag. Then "been there done that" argument holds sway if that were the case. However, if the program was a long term program meant to establish a presence there and exploit the moons resources for our benefit, science, as well as to be used for training for long term space flight missions to Mars then its well worth it. I know I have posted this before. but here is a little info on the subject beowolfe.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2xChmfLlMo]YouTube - Helium 3 mining the moon 2024 Part 1 of 2[/ame]

New energy sources and climate change go hand in hand, yet you dismiss the latter and don't agree it's worth pursuing using NASA appropriations. I don't get it.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm aware of the 50 million given to Space-X for the CRV in fact I already posted the information on it in another thread. One other thing, the reason why most like me think private enterprise is the ONLY way to go now is because our Govt. does not have the vision or the courage to sustain a program like Apollo. If you work in the research part of NASA, Ames etc. I'm sure your overjoyed at this decision, however, I would suggest you see how well this decision is goping over at Johnson and Huntsville. Further, the former director of NASA might disagree with that assertion as well.

Doesn't have the vision to "sustain" Apollo? How old IS that program? The space program has advanced far beyond Apollo because it has been sustained. You really do need to read what other experts in the field are saying, my friend. I realize your take on this is strictly from a patriotic point of view, and that's noble, but really, the "moon" has become secondary to exploration of other realms within our galaxy. Here's a list of articles for you to peruse.

Press Releases | SpaceRef - Space News as it Happens

The moon is the only thing close enough to explore. We need to practice on the Moon before we can land and takeoff on Mars. The advances that building a base on the Moon would helpful when it comes to exploring the rest of space...if we ever do. Thanks to Obama's cuts all of this is lost.

Now the Space-shuttle program is going tits up thanks to him so we're pretty much out of the space business. I guess this his way of sucking up to other countries like China and Russia. Putting our programs in mothballs.

Pretty expensive "practice" jaunts, I'd say. The moon is deader than a doornail as far as sustaining life. If we're going to be sending humans to another planet, we should be preparing to send them where we know that planet at least sustains some form of life as we know it.

 

[MaggieMae]

In Russia, 56% positively evaluate the work of Obama. We look forward to what he would do for the United States that Gorbachev in Russia.

Obama has high marks for likablity in the polls. His agenda is getting ripped in the polls.

That decision on halting the Constellation program and moving appropriations elsewhere within the NASA budget resulted from the evaluation by an independent panel of experts on the subject. Obama didn't just wake up one morning and say "Hey, I know where I can save a coupla billion more! Let's piss off some more folks!"

 

[Carlo87]

For the first time four Russian space vehicles have been attached to ISS at one time.

A Russian cargo freighter flying on autopilot performed a successful rendezvous and docking with the space station Thursday night, delivering two-and-a-half tons of supplies and equipment for the international outpost and its resident crew. While flying 212 miles over the extreme southwestern Atlantic, the Progress M-04M spacecraft linked up to the aft docking port of the station's Zvezda service module at 11:26 p.m. EST. "Docking confirmed. Contact and capture," NASA commentator Rob Navias announced from Houston's Mission Control Center. "Docking occurring almost to the second as had been planned by Russian flight controllers." Hooks and latches were engaged a few minutes later to firmly secure the 24-foot-long craft to the station. The Expedition 22 crew of commander Jeff Williams, fellow NASA astronaut T.J. Creamer, Russian cosmonauts Maxim Suraev and Oleg Kotov and Japanese astronaut Soichi Noguchi plan to open hatches and enter the Progress around 3 a.m. EST Friday. The cargo includes 2,683 pounds of equipment, food, clothing, life support system gear, 1,940 pounds of propellant to replenish reservoirs that feed the Russian maneuvering thrusters, 926 pounds of water and some 106 pounds of oxygen and air for the station's atmosphere. The Progress was launched Tuesday atop a Soyuz rocket from Baikonur Cosmodrome, reaching a preliminary orbit of 144 by 119 miles. A series of precise engine firings over the past few days guided the freighter to the rendezvous. After arriving in range of the space station, the vessel began a flyaround maneuver to get lined up with the docking port and then executed a roll maneuver to properly orient its forward docking probe with Zvezda. A brief stationkeeping hold with about 530 feet between the freighter and station allowed Russian flight controllers to assess systems before giving approval to commence the 10-minute final approach. The ship's automated docking system did its job and drove the craft to the linkup just after an orbital sunset. A headlight on the craft's nose was turned on, providing suitable conditions for the nighttime docking. "Progress just docked to ISS! We felt the impact!!!" Noguchi tweeted live from the space station on his Twitter account. It is the 36th Progress to dock with the station over its decade-long life and the first of six scheduled this year. The craft joins the previous resupply ship that arrived last October and remains affixed to the outpost, plus two Soyuz crew transport capsules currently residing at the space station.
This is the first time that four Russian visiting vehicles have been attached to the ISS at one time.

After US Space Shuttle program retirement, Space belongs Russia.

 

[Hugidwyn]

Russia's space agency announced that it intends to soon begin developing a new space station, enabling to make the expedition to Mars and the Moon. According to the agency director Anatoly Pimenov, its establishment will be completed by 2020, but already in 2025 Russia plans to make its first flight to the moon with it.

ISS (International Space Station) will be withdrawn from the orbit in the interval until 2025, therefore, by this time and replace its Russian development.

 

[mudwhistle]

In Russia, 56% positively evaluate the work of Obama. We look forward to what he would do for the United States that Gorbachev in Russia.

Obama has high marks for likablity in the polls. His agenda is getting ripped in the polls.

That decision on halting the Constellation program and moving appropriations elsewhere within the NASA budget resulted from the evaluation by an independent panel of experts on the subject. Obama didn't just wake up one morning and say "Hey, I know where I can save a coupla billion more! Let's piss off some more folks!"

You give him too much credit.

He doesn't like this country and thus doesn't see the importance of our space program to this nation.

Anything that makes this country exceptional is systematically being removed.