Re: Waiting for controversy...?

George Evans (georgee3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) writes:
in article efca97$cji$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andre Lieven at
dg411@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 9/26/06 3:40 PM:

George Evans (georgee3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) emptily fictionalises:

in article efafdo$bvg$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andre Lieven at
dg411@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 9/25/06 10:56 PM:

George Evans (georgee3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) fanboi handwaves:

<snip>

And third, are you forgetting about Space Station FREEDOM? What do you
think inspired that name.

Who cares ? It is NOT " proof " of the Sovs " abandoning " a Shuttle after
Columbia first flew. Its not proof of pretty much anything outside of it's
name.

This sub-thread was regarding your premise that the space race was over by
1981.

Which it was. Each superpower was going and doing it's own thing. The USSR was
flying expendable space capsules to a series of small space stations, while
the US was bringing into service a large reusable space " plane " that had no
space station connection at the time.

I apologize for the delay in my response. This present claim of yours was so
far out that I had to take some time to read up on Space Station Freedom.

Fictional space stations. Got it.

The eighties were a time when I was not paying much attention to space
station development.

That makes one of you.

Apparently your dogged position on the end of the space race is due to happy
thoughts about Apollo-Soyuz. This was, in my opinion, nothing more than a
political stunt.

So ? It also marks a point from which both superpowers' space programs
greatly diverged away from each other.

Clearly, neither country put much credence in the dawn of
peace supposedly ushered in by this space "kiss". In the subsequent two
decades both countries developed multiple planes for permanent occupation of
space, including secret military bases.

Ah, you're an Area 51 loon.

In other words each side was keeping
a sharp eye on the other, and it is naive to think that there wasn't a race
going on.

Free Clue: NONE of this involves MANNED spaceflight.

And now to the really absurd notion that the space shuttle "had no space
station connection at the time" of it's launch. After I wiped down my
monitor, I began to think you might know something that I didn't. So I did
some reading. All *you* need to do is read up on the development of Freedom
and then you will at least see the connection NASA always saw between a
station and the shuttle.

NASA always *wanted* such a connection. But, for the first *17 years*
of the Shuttle's life, *there wasn't one*.

My recollection is that when Enterprise rolled out, it shape surprised me as
being more boxy than expected.

So ? In what way does that address my successful refutation of your empty
claim ?

In that it's shape, which is my basis for claim that Buran is a copy, was
not like any of the concepts up till then.

NO proof offered ? Fact free claim fails.

The mere fact that NO NASA concept involved having NO main engines in the
orbiter helps show that the Soviet version was *different*. And, it was
launced differently, as well as landed unmanned, a capability that NASA
didn't add to theirs.

<Laughs> The Space Race ended on July 1969. Note that the Sovs did NOT stop
flying space stations, after Skylab, for instance. And, the year before
1976, Apollo docked with... Soyuz.

The race to the *moon* ended in 1969. The "Sovs" continued their station
program because their's was better.

<laughs> Yes, thats the universe where the first Skylab crew landed DEAD. But,
thats not this universe.

Skylab was a Rube-Goldberg, let's duct tape some old parts together kind of
program.

Look up " Apollo Applications *Program* ".

When the wheels stopped on STS-1, out in the Mojave Desert, the death knell
of Mir began to sound.

<laughs> The core module of Mir was still five *years* away from being
launched on April 14, 1981. Get a calendar, idiot.

My mistake. The death knell of all Russian space station dreams began to
sound, including Salyut and plans for Mir.

Your mistake reamins. The Soviet program was quite busy and robust,
until their nation began to unravel in the latter 80s.

Buran didn't replace anything because it failed.

As others have pointed out, it was NOT meant to replace Soyuz. Ever.

The plan was to use Buran in the construction of a station but when it
failed the Soviets had to fly the beer cans up themselves and dock them
together to form "stations".

Cite ? Yeah, I didn't think so.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/buran.html

"From the beginning, uncertainty surrounded the issue of possible roles for
the Buran orbiter. The potential tasks concentrated around hypothetical
military roles and support for the manned space station program. One goal was
the delivery and assembly of the Mir-2 space station."

Operative word: " *potential*. ".

Because they were in it's future, Duh!

That also applies to Warp Drive.

And if that doesn't cut it for you, just ask yourself how the Soviets
could have been so stupid as to have missed that application.

Easy. The Proton launches were cheaper.

Duh !

Hey dufus. You just proved my point.

No, mine. Pay attention, oh ignorant net-k00k.

They *didn't* miss the application but found another method was cheaper.

Which method existed LONG BEFORE Buran. Idiot.

Andre

.

Relevant Pages
Loading