<vkarlamov@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1178325410.601795.63870@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On May 4, 2:24 am, "Your Uncle Larry" <Lar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> <vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1178259327.634091.231170@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> > On May 3, 9:27 am, "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" <urj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Very good, even if not satire. :)
>>
>> >> vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> >> > On Apr 29, 4:30 am, "Your Uncle Larry" <Lar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>> >> >> Actually didn't Russia just become the world's number 1 arms
>> >> >> ex****ter?
>>
>> >> > Not according to you. You have been bragging for years that
Russian
>> >> > arms ex****ts are useless and worthless; and India and all other
>> >> > Russian customers are switching to US-made weapons.
>>
>> >> > But in reality, yes, Russian ars ex****ts are soaring, because
>> >> > Russian
>> >> > arms, just like Russian space ****ps, are much more relaible and
less
>> >> > expensive than American ex****ts.
>>
>> >> One undiscussed yet very basic problem is that weapons reliability
>> >> can only be determined from their use. So bragging about reliability
>> >> means bragging about the results of their use. And the use of
weapons
>> >> is to kill, maim, destroy.
>>
>> > Well, if your point is that modern American bomber planes, misiles,
>> > and guns have been extensively tested and proved reliable in the
>> > killing, maiming, and destroying of Yugoslavs, Panmanians,
Haitians,
>> > Afghanis, and Iraqis (twice) - OK. Indeed, USA managed to conquer
>> > all these countries, suffering probably 1000 times fewer casualties
>> > than did their victim countries.
>>
>> > On the other hand, if we speak of space crafts, Russian crafts dont't
>> > kill, maim, destroy. The American crafts do kill, maim, destroy.
>> > Sadly, they do that to their own astronaut passengers... That's why
>> > Russian space craft are much more reliable than American ones.
>>
>> MMMmmm...how so? Wasn't it the Russian R4 that blew up on the launch
pad
>> and
>> killed 200 people?
>>
>
> Definitely not Russian. I have never heard of a Russian space****p
> callede "R4" nor of any space****p explosions anywhere in the World
> that killed 200, at least not in the last 40 years.
>
You should stick to doing what you do best, pu****ng your shopping cart
full
of empty cans and bottles along the PCH.
I like how you always leave the kiddie seat open on Friday nights so your
date has a place to sit.
The actual number was 165 dead and the rocket was the R-16.
Clear the wax out of your ears and maybe you will hear something?
> What are you talking about? A bad nightmare of yours? Or a wet dream?
> Or yet another homo***ual mirage in your own "fart bubbles"?
>
>>
> Then of course there was the very spectacular N-1 moon
>> rocket explosions. Russia has deadastronautstoo.
>>
>
> No. It doesn't. The last time Russian cosmonauts died in a mission was
> in 1971, 36 years ago.
>
> ///////////////////////////////////////////////
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_disaster
>
> In-flight accidents
>
> 1971 June 30: crew exposed to vacuum of space : The crew of Soyuz 11,
> Georgi Dobrovolski, Viktor Patsayev and Vladislav Volkov, were killed
> after undocking from space station Salyut 1 after a three-week stay.
>
> 1986 January 28: spacecraft broke apart on takeoff: The first U.S.
> multiple in-flight fatalities. The Space Shuttle Challenger was
> destroyed 73 seconds after launch on STS-51-L. Challenger was thrown
> sideways into the Mach 1.8 windstream causing it to break up in midair
> with the loss of all seven crew members aboard: Greg Jarvis, Christa
> McAuliffe, Ronald McNair, Ellison Onizuka, Judith Resnik, Michael J.
> Smith, and Dick Scobee.
>
> 2003 February 1: spacecraft broke apart on re-entry: The space shuttle
> Columbia was lost as it reentered after a two-week mission, STS-107.
> Damage to the shuttle's thermal protection system (TPS) led to
> structural failure in the shuttle's left wing and, ultimately, the
> spacecraft breaking apart. Rick D. Husband, William McCool, Michael
> P. Anderson, David M. Brown, Kalpana Chawla, Laurel B. Clark, and Ilan
> Ramon were killed. See Space Shuttle Columbia disaster.
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> In Russia, nationalists of all sorts, scolded the Russian space
> industry for becoming a "chauffeur" of the US space agency and
> sacrificing Russia's Mir space station for the benefit of the US-
> controlled program.
>
> In the US, columnists and politicians criticized NASA for allowing
> Russians "into the critical path in the program,"
>
> The US Congress essentially made Russian space industry a scapegoat of
> the Kremlin's nuclear flirt with Iran, prohibiting NASA to purchase
> hardware and services from Moscow. Finally, European-Russian
> opposition to the US invasion of Iraq probably drove the last nail in
> the ISS coffin.
> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy87546.000/hsy87546_0.HTM
> as
>
> U.S.-RUSSIAN COOPERATION IN SPACE
>
> HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND AERONAUTICS COMMITTEE ON
> SCIENCE
>
> HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
>
> Reliance on Russian Sup****t to the Space Station. The Space Shuttle
> Columbia tragedy and subsequent grounding of the Shuttle fleet has
> made the U.S. human spaceflight program completely reliant on the
> Russian Soyuz and Progress space vehicles for all crew trans****t and
> rescue as well as cargo delivery to the International Space Station
> while the Space Shuttle fleet is grounded.
>
> NASA is dependent upon Russia's spacecraft to keep the Space Station
> operational until the Shuttle flights resume. Since the Administration
> canceled the U.S. Space Station Crew Return Vehicle in 2001, NASA is
> totally dependent on the Russian Soyuz CRV until the end of this
> decade.
>
> Reliance on the Russians to Sup****t the Space Station. U.S. human
> spaceflight is completely reliant on the Russian Soyuz and Progress
> space vehicles for all crew trans****t and rescue as well as cargo
> delivery to the Space Station while the Space Shuttle fleet is
> grounded. Even when the Space Shuttle fleet returns to flight, U.S.
> human spaceflight will still rely on the Russian Soyuz vehicle for
> Space Station crew rescue.
> \/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> http://www.daviddarling.info/archive/2004/archiveApr04_1.html
>
> Soyuz docks with space station (Apr 21, 2004)
>
> A Russian spacecraft carrying a Russian-American-Dutch crew has docked
> smoothly with the international space station two days after blasting
> off on a rocket from Russia's Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.
> Carrying three astronauts, it was the third Russian spacecraft to fill
> in for the U.S. space shuttle, which has been suspended since the
> Columbia disaster.
> ///////////////////////////////
>
>
|
