Comments on: The substance, or lack thereof, of NASA’s ban on Russian cooperation

By: Andrew Swallow

Andrew Swallow — Thu, 17 Apr 2014 04:00:09 +0000

In 1936/7 was World War 2 was a tension in Britain and the USA.

By: Hiram

Hiram — Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:56:06 +0000

“If sarcasm is your only counter evidence I can ignore it.”

My only sarcasm was with regard to newsgroups. If that’s your best evidence, about newsgroups, I can ignore it.

But I’m glad you’re now referring to these developments as “tensions”. That’s a lot different that a “new war/cold-war” starting which is how you referred to them earlier.

By: Andrew Swallow

Andrew Swallow — Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:46:25 +0000

If sarcasm is your only counter evidence I can ignore it.

The tensions have not been running for a year yet. Cold Wars can last for decades.

By: Hiram

Hiram — Tue, 15 Apr 2014 18:07:05 +0000

“NASA has been told to restrict access to the Russians.”

Yeah, except NASA largely didn’t. Sounds like the start of a Cold War, eh, when it’s hard to find what hasn’t been exempted from this directive?

“It has been asked about speeding up development of Commercial Crew.”

A long-term request which is a matter of national pride, and the dreaded “gap”. Old news. Congress still seems reluctant to do that speeding up.

“The military newsgroups are discussing what strategy to adopt.”

Oooh. The newsgroups are getting involved. Look out!

“Extra NATO aircraft have been sent to the Russian border.”

Like for Kosovo, Turkey, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, and Gibraltar. Don’t forget that the whole premise of NATO was to counter the onetime Soviet threat. So NATO is happy to see uber-Soviet threats wherever it can.

Sorry, but your “evidence” is hardly compelling. International diplomacy is regularly challenged with tensions and muscle flexing. It’s a much bigger step to achieve cold war status.

By: Andrew Swallow

Andrew Swallow — Tue, 15 Apr 2014 03:56:41 +0000

I too see absolutely no evidence for that switch.

That is far too strong. NASA has been told to restrict access to the Russians. It has been asked about speeding up development of Commercial Crew. The military newsgroups are discussing what strategy to adopt. Extra NATO aircraft have been sent to the Russian border.

There is a 3-point turn in progress but it is taking more than 3 points.

By: Andrew Swallow

Andrew Swallow — Tue, 15 Apr 2014 03:48:52 +0000

Close. We also have 2 ways of getting light cargo to the ISS.

By: Jim Nobles

Jim Nobles — Tue, 15 Apr 2014 00:54:09 +0000

James said, ” We still fear the Russian machine.”

Who fears the Russian machine? Besides windy?

(sorry)

By: Vladislaw

Vladislaw — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 16:10:50 +0000

Please provide a list of our allies that currently hold us in “contempt”

By: E.P. Grondine

E.P. Grondine — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 16:08:59 +0000

So having lost 10 years due to the ATK/Griffin Ares 1 fiasco, we now find ourselves where we were in 2003: a manned capsule, a manned flyback, and 2 launchers “in development” on “on the drawing boards”, along with a shuttle derived heavy.

By: Hiram

Hiram — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:20:33 +0000

“The West is switching over to a new war/cold-war is starting, increase defence spending.”

I too see absolutely no evidence for that switch. The Ukraine crisis is very new, and policy for what is really a very local crisis, involving territory that has strong links to the Russian people, is really just being considered. Escalation of Ukraine to a new Cold War would be policy insanity. Do you have any evidence for what you’re calling a “switch”? I guess one way to increase defense spending would be to pull funding from ISS and hand it to DoD. That’ll teach those Ruskies, eh?