Russia upping the price of Soyuz flights in 2012?

David Spain wrote:
Pat Flannery writes:

That would imply that we could come up with a rocket/capsule combo that could
launch astronauts at a price of under 51 million per head, which is pretty
doubtful, particularly given the far lower labor costs in Russia and the fact
that R&D costs for the US rocket and capsule would have to amortized over the
time scale between entry into service and the end of the ISS in 2020

At a price of $290 USD per share and only 1.12 million shares outstanding
NASA could offer a 20% premium over current share price at $350 per share
($50 above Energia all time share price peak) and BUY Energia for an outlay
of only $392 million!

All kidding aside, the Russian (or Chinese) price is irrelevant once a
US commercial provider becomes available. There are "buy American"
provisions in the law. SpaceX and the others don't have to match
Russia's price. Once Dragon (or any other US commercial vehicle) is
available and meets NASA's requirements, NASA will buy it and stop
buying Soyuz/Progress. Period.

All kidding aside, the Russian (or Chinese) price is irrelevant once a
US commercial provider becomes available. There are "buy American"
provisions in the law. SpaceX and the others don't have to match
Russia's price. Once Dragon (or any other US commercial vehicle) is
available and meets NASA's requirements, NASA will buy it and stop
buying Soyuz/Progress. Period.

isnt buy american illegal? given things like NAFTA and all the other
free trade laws?

Bottom line why should america produce ANYTHING, food, machinery,
customer support, manufactuiring, ANYTHING

I ask this serious question because thats certinally the way we are
headed.

Heck china has started building tract homes to be shipped to the US
and assembled on site. Theres talk they may even send the workers to
put the homes together.........

Like mexico sends mexican trucks and drivers to deliver stuff all thru
our country.

wrote in message
...

All kidding aside, the Russian (or Chinese) price is irrelevant once a
US commercial provider becomes available. There are "buy American"
provisions in the law. SpaceX and the others don't have to match
Russia's price. Once Dragon (or any other US commercial vehicle) is
available and meets NASA's requirements, NASA will buy it and stop
buying Soyuz/Progress. Period.

isnt buy american illegal? given things like NAFTA and all the other
free trade laws?


No, not for government items.

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Feb 12, 9:17�am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
wrote in message

...



All kidding aside, the Russian (or Chinese) price is irrelevant once a
US commercial provider becomes available. There are "buy American"
provisions in the law. SpaceX and the others don't have to match
Russia's price. Once Dragon (or any other US commercial vehicle) is
available and meets NASA's requirements, NASA will buy it and stop
buying Soyuz/Progress. Period.

isnt buy american illegal? given things like NAFTA and all the other
free trade laws?

No, not for government items.

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

Now why should that be?

Not that I think the flood of foreign products into our country
decimating entire industries is good.. really its bad.

We are losing the ability to feed clothe and supply our own needs, to
save a buck and putting a large number out of work

On Feb 12, 9:45�pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
" wrote:

:
: All kidding aside, the Russian (or Chinese) price is irrelevant once a
: US commercial provider becomes available. There are "buy American"
: provisions in the law. SpaceX and the others don't have to match
: Russia's price. Once Dragon (or any other US commercial vehicle) is
: available and meets NASA's requirements, NASA will buy it and stop
: buying Soyuz/Progress. Period.
:
:isnt buy american illegal? given things like NAFTA and all the other
:free trade laws?
:

Not when the purchaser is spending government money.

Hidiotic Hallerisms Helided

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
�only stupid."
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � -- Heinrich Heine

so its fine to essentially rip off the taxpayer?

because ultimately all taxayers pay for overpriced government work

This leads to bloated budgets and our country headed towards
bankruptcy...

Yes, because taxpayers also love it when their hard earned tax dollars are
used by the government to pay foreign nations.

They're damned if they do, damned if they don't.


wrote in message
...

so its fine to essentially rip off the taxpayer?

because ultimately all taxayers pay for overpriced government work

This leads to bloated budgets and our country headed towards
bankruptcy...

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" writes:

Yes, because taxpayers also love it when their hard earned tax dollars are
used by the government to pay foreign nations.

They're damned if they do, damned if they don't.


See, my plan is looking *better* all the time!

Think of it as an 'investment', we have precendents; AIG, GM, Chrysler,

so why not,

S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation, Mattel, The Lego Group, ...

;-)

Dave

On Feb 13, 12:36�am, David Spain wrote:
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" writes:

Yes, because taxpayers also love it when their hard earned tax dollars are
used by the government to pay foreign nations.

They're damned if they do, damned if they don't.

See, my plan is looking *better* all the time!

Think of it as an 'investment', we have precendents; AIG, GM, Chrysler,

so why not,

S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation, Mattel, The Lego Group, ...

;-)

Dave

Well NASA took their shot, with ARES I think most here knew it was a
bad idea from the day the program was announced!

Most myself included thought using a existing expendable would be
better.

So in tyoical nasa fashion, politics ruled and the bad program was
selected

But with shuttle cost of over 5 billion a year, russia will be a
bargain at twice the price