<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Russian official announces ban on military use of RD-180 engines (updated)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines</link>
	<description>Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vladislaw</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484249</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vladislaw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 16:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I never saw mention of the K-33 before that is the reconditioned engines that Orbital use correct?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I never saw mention of the K-33 before that is the reconditioned engines that Orbital use correct?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vladislaw</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484248</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vladislaw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 16:40:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Translation:

Russia, in response to the efforts made by the U.S. sanctions may suspend the delivery rocket engines DR-180 and K-33 in the US, stated on tuesday vice-prime minister of Russia Dmitry Rogozin. Moscow, 13 May - RIA Novosti. Stop deliveries of Russian rocket engines in the U.S. strikes on the American space program, but at the same time does not affect the Russian enterprises, said RIA news editor-in-chief of the magazine News space&quot; Igor With solo performances appeared Alexei Yagudin.



&quot;We sell these engines to the Americans virtually at a loss. When was the treaty, the cost engine in the United States dollar was one, now it has remained the same, and the purchasing power dollar fell, at the same time, and their salaries, we have grown up, and costs&quot;, - said the expert&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Translation:</p>
<p>Russia, in response to the efforts made by the U.S. sanctions may suspend the delivery rocket engines DR-180 and K-33 in the US, stated on tuesday vice-prime minister of Russia Dmitry Rogozin. Moscow, 13 May &#8211; RIA Novosti. Stop deliveries of Russian rocket engines in the U.S. strikes on the American space program, but at the same time does not affect the Russian enterprises, said RIA news editor-in-chief of the magazine News space&#8221; Igor With solo performances appeared Alexei Yagudin.</p>
<p>&#8220;We sell these engines to the Americans virtually at a loss. When was the treaty, the cost engine in the United States dollar was one, now it has remained the same, and the purchasing power dollar fell, at the same time, and their salaries, we have grown up, and costs&#8221;, &#8211; said the expert&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Castro</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484213</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris Castro]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 12:36:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484213</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In reply to Marcel F. Williams,.....Sure, maybe a smaller &amp; intermittently occupied, Skylab-like station, that wouldn&#039;t monopolize all of NASA&#039;s focus &amp; attention might have its moments-----particularly if it REALLY WERE a refueling, way station for cis-lunar-bound spacecraft. If only the space mission wouldn&#039;t end at just LEO, but that the reached platform would instead be a true jumping off point, for trips to the Moon, as some 1970&#039;s &amp; 1980&#039;s space non-fiction writers used to envision! 

China might be contemplating some variation of the smaller-&amp;-flexible-&amp;-more efficient type of space station, that&#039;ll serve as a test platform, for the pre-launching &amp; parked-orbit placement of deep-space-going vehicles. I personally find the exercise mostly unnecessary, and time squandering, but if they can avoid copying the ISS to full detail-------AND avoid getting themselves bogged down into doing nothing but LEO activities for more than a decade, then there might still be hope, for humanity finally leaving the cradle.

 Still, I have my doubts about LEO stations actually leading to renewed Lunar exploration, perhaps a decade later: NASA will most likely just get so comfortable &amp; complacent about the safe-ness &amp; easiness of LEO, that it&#039;ll end up pushing no further. Getting trapped in LEO, without any viable exit strategy, is a pitfall that appears very difficult to avoid!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to Marcel F. Williams,&#8230;..Sure, maybe a smaller &amp; intermittently occupied, Skylab-like station, that wouldn&#8217;t monopolize all of NASA&#8217;s focus &amp; attention might have its moments&#8212;&#8211;particularly if it REALLY WERE a refueling, way station for cis-lunar-bound spacecraft. If only the space mission wouldn&#8217;t end at just LEO, but that the reached platform would instead be a true jumping off point, for trips to the Moon, as some 1970&#8217;s &amp; 1980&#8217;s space non-fiction writers used to envision! </p>
<p>China might be contemplating some variation of the smaller-&amp;-flexible-&amp;-more efficient type of space station, that&#8217;ll serve as a test platform, for the pre-launching &amp; parked-orbit placement of deep-space-going vehicles. I personally find the exercise mostly unnecessary, and time squandering, but if they can avoid copying the ISS to full detail&#8212;&#8212;-AND avoid getting themselves bogged down into doing nothing but LEO activities for more than a decade, then there might still be hope, for humanity finally leaving the cradle.</p>
<p> Still, I have my doubts about LEO stations actually leading to renewed Lunar exploration, perhaps a decade later: NASA will most likely just get so comfortable &amp; complacent about the safe-ness &amp; easiness of LEO, that it&#8217;ll end up pushing no further. Getting trapped in LEO, without any viable exit strategy, is a pitfall that appears very difficult to avoid!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484199</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 11:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484199</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey AA.  How about posting something accurate instead of blatant lies.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey AA.  How about posting something accurate instead of blatant lies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484169</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 04:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well you&#039;d hope so but knowing Congress I wouldn&#039;t count on it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well you&#8217;d hope so but knowing Congress I wouldn&#8217;t count on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Nobles</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484159</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim Nobles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 03:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m sorry but I believe you&#039;re backing a lame horse.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sorry but I believe you&#8217;re backing a lame horse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Nobles</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484158</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim Nobles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 03:48:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ULA has this problem because they are using foreign engines to launch DOD payloads. They have been given enough money over the years to develop a domestic alternative.  They made a bad business decision by not doing so.  This situation is their fault.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ULA has this problem because they are using foreign engines to launch DOD payloads. They have been given enough money over the years to develop a domestic alternative.  They made a bad business decision by not doing so.  This situation is their fault.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ad Astra</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484154</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ad Astra]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 03:42:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The money went into maintaining and upgrading two separate families of launch vehicles, each of which maintained 100% mission success. That&#039;s the definition of assured access. Meanwhile SpaceX blew up three rockets and burned up a secondary payload in the atmosphere... The opposite of assured access.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The money went into maintaining and upgrading two separate families of launch vehicles, each of which maintained 100% mission success. That&#8217;s the definition of assured access. Meanwhile SpaceX blew up three rockets and burned up a secondary payload in the atmosphere&#8230; The opposite of assured access.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ad Astra</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484152</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ad Astra]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 03:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484152</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Really? Because in the two decades since the decision was made there have been numerous geopolitical situations in which Russia and the US disagreed, and space industry sanctions were never on the table. 

Not until SpaceX started playing the  patriotism card, and a federal trade court judge decided to try her hand at international politics did Russia even mention sanctioning space.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really? Because in the two decades since the decision was made there have been numerous geopolitical situations in which Russia and the US disagreed, and space industry sanctions were never on the table. </p>
<p>Not until SpaceX started playing the  patriotism card, and a federal trade court judge decided to try her hand at international politics did Russia even mention sanctioning space.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hiram</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/05/13/russian-official-announces-ban-on-military-use-of-rd-180-engines/#comment-484143</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hiram]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2014 03:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=7110#comment-484143</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I think the idea of deciding on a destination is not a vision for space.&quot;

I agree completely. In fact, I spelled that out in some detail above. I certainly never said here that a destination was a vision for space. 

Learning how to crawl isn&#039;t a vision, nor is learning how to walk. Nor is learning how to fly, or travel through space. The vision is what you do when you can walk, or fly, or travel through space, and that&#039;s about a lot more than where you can go. Maybe it&#039;s about mining the cosmos (to the extent humans need to do that in situ), or about insuring the species, or about science, or about sticking it to the Chinese. But it&#039;s not about going to the Moon or Mars.

That&#039;s where the &quot;round-and-round&quot; ISS haters are misled. To them, it&#039;s precisely about where you go (or don&#039;t go).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think the idea of deciding on a destination is not a vision for space.&#8221;</p>
<p>I agree completely. In fact, I spelled that out in some detail above. I certainly never said here that a destination was a vision for space. </p>
<p>Learning how to crawl isn&#8217;t a vision, nor is learning how to walk. Nor is learning how to fly, or travel through space. The vision is what you do when you can walk, or fly, or travel through space, and that&#8217;s about a lot more than where you can go. Maybe it&#8217;s about mining the cosmos (to the extent humans need to do that in situ), or about insuring the species, or about science, or about sticking it to the Chinese. But it&#8217;s not about going to the Moon or Mars.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s where the &#8220;round-and-round&#8221; ISS haters are misled. To them, it&#8217;s precisely about where you go (or don&#8217;t go).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
