From Russia, Without Love

Am Sun, 16 Nov 2003 19:19:46 -0800 (PST) schrieb "Rand Simberg":

There's no problem with my English. The problem is, that I can only
see pseudo-arguments in your article.

Until you actually respond to them specifically, I don't know how to
argue with you. You simply say it's "not useful" to decrease
radiation dose, make it easier to get to station (for everyone but
Russia currently), make it more practical for deep space mission
support, etc. You don't offer any arguments as to why that's the
case--you simply say that I haven't offered any benefits, when I
clearly have.

ok, let's try to 'enlighten' you a bit. Step by step; one 'argument'
after the other.

- Radiation: The lesser the inclination, the lesser is the cosmic
radiation impact to the station and its inhabitants. That is true. But
what purpose HAS the station in reality - and what CAN it have? In MY
very personal opinion the only real one I can see is to gain more
experience, how longer duration missions can be accomplished - under
realistic circumstances - the nearer to interplanetary environment,
the better. So one has to learn how to handle radiation, too, if it is
ever considered somewhen to go manned to mars or another target
outside the Earth-Lunar system. Most other scientific targets haven't
been hit until now, and a station's plane change would not impact
their chance of success in any way.

- Easier reachability: For whom? Who is in REALITY able to reach the
station NOW? Russia. And, in a while, the Americans again. The
Russians NEED that inclination to achieve a usable payload mass on
their launches - they would have around 65 degrees inclination, if
they had had enough money to build MIR-2. And at the moment they do
not have enough money to adopt another launcher and/or orbital vehicle
for manned launch with increased payload. The Americans, otoh, HAVE
reserves in payload capability, when they are able to launch again.
They have already proved, that they CAN work with that inclination.
Otherwise they would have never agreed to that decision in the very
first beginnings of the ISS project. Other nations: They have
launchers, but no manned capability. So they simply don't count (for
the moment). And I do not have to swallow my pride to be an European
when writing that.

- Staging point for extraorbital missions? ISS simply isn't designed
for that. It would be of not much use for that purpose - independent
of its inclination. Another, purpose specialized station would fulfill
that goal - much better and cheaper.

There is not any "killer
argument" - that WOULD change everything.

There doesn't need to be a "killer" argument. There only need to be
sufficient benefits to make it worth the money.

I cannot see the real benefits besides of some minor ones for THAT
station. So only a killer argument would count. And there isn't any to
be seen. Maybe it would be faster, better and cheaper to bring it down
(or up to a graveyard orbit), or simply make it a gift for Russia and
the rest of the world - and build a new one All-American 53rd (?) US
state, star-sprangled and striped in shiny colors, that fulfills the
American needs including burger restaurant, pool, shooting range and a
'wally's world'. scnr Then you never more have to complain about
other countries and their participation - and be isolated as much as
you want or need...

But there are some countries besides US, that paid and
continue to pay considerable amounts of money for ISS. Their interests
CANNOT be unconsidered.

Why would the Europeans and Japanese be upset about making the station
cheaper to get to for them? They've got no love for 51.6 degrees.

I miss the proof (in reality I am in serious doubt), that it is really
cheaper to depend on American ressources than on Russian ones or that
ones able to be provided by Japan and European countries, somewhen.
Give the Russians some cash (some hundred Millions US$ or Euros;
barely enough to launch the Shuttle for ONE SINGLE mission), and ISS'
survival and usability could be safe for years...

[...]
I suppose You don't see the point...
I certainly don't see yours.
I would say, that is the point of view. Inability to view things from
"outside" occurs. But sometimes one simply has to learn, that such a
view _exists_. IMHO you have a significant deficit in your viewpoint
options. Sorry for the obvious necessity to write that to you -
normally I enjoy your comments and very often can agree with them
without any pita - but this time I simply have to disagree.
Yes, I know that you disagree, but you haven't offered any actual
arguments.

'nuff'4'now? I'll add on request.

BTW: The paragraph about partnership and subcontractors is simply not
true. Without Russian expertise America would not have real long time
orbit access up to today. And: Not the whole station is paid by
America's tax payers. Thre ARE all-Russian segments, and there ARE
made some major payments by other countries. And: How many cash
intended for ISS use has been sunk into American bank accounts never
to be seen again? I assume, way much more than in Russian ones...

just a last comment: If America decided to do a plane change without
asking for its partners permission - it would prove to have become a
nation of thiefs - there are signs enough (seen from outside US), that
this could be already a fact.

You cannot say 'hip' without saying 'hop'. Or: Who says 'A', should be
able to pay the 'liments'...

cu, ZiLi aka HKZL (Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker)
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
\ /
http://zili.de X No HTML in
/ \ email & news

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:38:13 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

ok, let's try to 'enlighten' you a bit. Step by step; one 'argument'
after the other.

- Radiation: The lesser the inclination, the lesser is the cosmic
radiation impact to the station and its inhabitants. That is true. But
what purpose HAS the station in reality - and what CAN it have? In MY
very personal opinion the only real one I can see is to gain more
experience, how longer duration missions can be accomplished - under
realistic circumstances - the nearer to interplanetary environment,
the better. So one has to learn how to handle radiation, too, if it is
ever considered somewhen to go manned to mars or another target
outside the Earth-Lunar system.

One doesn't "learn" how to handle radiation by unnecessarily exposing
astronauts to more radiation than necessary. It's done by building
test articles and exposing them to radiation.

Most other scientific targets haven't
been hit until now, and a station's plane change would not impact
their chance of success in any way.

I don't know what "scientific targets" you're talking about.

- Easier reachability: For whom?

For everyone except Russia, and for them as well if they start
operating out of Kourou.

Who is in REALITY able to reach the
station NOW? Russia.

And ESA. And Japan.

And, in a while, the Americans again.

Yes, with minimal payload.

The Russians NEED that inclination to achieve a usable payload mass on
their launches

That's their problem. As I pointed out, they're owed no consideration
after the way they siphoned off all the funds that were supposed to go
toward hardware to dachas and yachts instead.

- they would have around 65 degrees inclination, if
they had had enough money to build MIR-2. And at the moment they do
not have enough money to adopt another launcher and/or orbital vehicle
for manned launch with increased payload. The Americans, otoh, HAVE
reserves in payload capability, when they are able to launch again.
They have already proved, that they CAN work with that inclination.

But it takes more flights than necessary to get there. Face it. The
only reason that it's at that inclination is that the Clinton
administration decided to convert the program from a pork for Houston
and Huntsville program into a midnight basketball for Russian
engineers program. Sadly, that part failed.

Otherwise they would have never agreed to that decision in the very
first beginnings of the ISS project.

Just because we *can* do something expensively doesn't mean that we
should turn down the opportunity to do it more cost effectively.

Other nations: They have
launchers, but no manned capability. So they simply don't count (for
the moment). And I do not have to swallow my pride to be an European
when writing that.

Of course they count. The station needs logistic resupply. That's a
very narrow view.

- Staging point for extraorbital missions? ISS simply isn't designed
for that.

It could be modified.

It would be of not much use for that purpose - independent
of its inclination. Another, purpose specialized station would fulfill
that goal - much better and cheaper.

Better, but not necessarily cheaper.

There is not any "killer
argument" - that WOULD change everything.

There doesn't need to be a "killer" argument. There only need to be
sufficient benefits to make it worth the money.

I cannot see the real benefits besides of some minor ones for THAT
station.

We disagree on what constitutes minor and major.

But there are some countries besides US, that paid and
continue to pay considerable amounts of money for ISS. Their interests
CANNOT be unconsidered.

Why would the Europeans and Japanese be upset about making the station
cheaper to get to for them? They've got no love for 51.6 degrees.

I miss the proof (in reality I am in serious doubt), that it is really
cheaper to depend on American ressources than on Russian ones or that
ones able to be provided by Japan and European countries, somewhen.

If we're unwilling to purchase Russian resources (and we currently
are, due to the Iran Non-Proliferation Act), then that's a moot point.

Give the Russians some cash (some hundred Millions US$ or Euros;
barely enough to launch the Shuttle for ONE SINGLE mission), and ISS'
survival and usability could be safe for years...

And give them some more cash and they could launch out of Kourou.

BTW: The paragraph about partnership and subcontractors is simply not
true. Without Russian expertise America would not have real long time
orbit access up to today.

There's no way to know that.

And: Not the whole station is paid by
America's tax payers. Thre ARE all-Russian segments, and there ARE
made some major payments by other countries. And: How many cash
intended for ISS use has been sunk into American bank accounts never
to be seen again? I assume, way much more than in Russian ones...

Again, I ask why Europe or Japan would be upset about a more practical
inclination. You've never answered that.

just a last comment: If America decided to do a plane change without
asking for its partners permission - it would prove to have become a
nation of thiefs - there are signs enough (seen from outside US), that
this could be already a fact.

Nonsense.

And I said nothing about not asking for its "partners" permission, but
Russia isn't a partner, since it's reneged on its agreements
repeatedly. It's at best a subcontractor, and a crooked one.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 20:03:42 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
: Chris Jones made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
: such a way as to indicate that:

: Stealing something means taking contrary to law.
:
: No, it means taking something that doesn't belong to you without
: consent. There are many forms of legalized theft.
:
: Ahem. Sez you. Sez the dictionary, "without right or permission",
: which means permission isn't needed if you have the right.

: Ever hear of "inalienable rights"?

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or what Big Oil feels it is
allowed to do wherever it can pump oil in the name of "national security?"

Eric

: --
: simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
: interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

: "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
: Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
: Here's my email address for autospammers:

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:04:49 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: Ever hear of "inalienable rights"?

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or what Big Oil feels it is
allowed to do wherever it can pump oil in the name of "national security?"

Don't be an idiot.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

Rand Simberg wrote:

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or what Big Oil feels it is
allowed to do wherever it can pump oil in the name of "national security?"



Don't be an idiot.




You know, you're giving Derek Lyons serious competition as to brevity of
critical responses.

Pat

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:57:42 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
Pat Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Rand Simberg wrote:

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or what Big Oil feels it is
allowed to do wherever it can pump oil in the name of "national security?"


Don't be an idiot.

You know, you're giving Derek Lyons serious competition as to brevity of
critical responses.

How much more of a response did that bit of stupidity merit?

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

Rand Simberg wrote:



You know, you're giving Derek Lyons serious competition as to brevity of
critical responses.



How much more of a response did that bit of stupidity merit?



One man's "stupidity" is another man's opinion and political viewpoint.
You fit in very well with the monolithic "we" of Fox's America.

Pat

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 03:03:43 -0800 (PST), Pat Flannery
wrote:

One man's "stupidity" is another man's opinion and political viewpoint.
You fit in very well with the monolithic "we" of Fox's America.

Well put.

Dale

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:04:49 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
: (Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my monitor
: glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: : Ever hear of "inalienable rights"?
:
: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or what Big Oil feels it is
: allowed to do wherever it can pump oil in the name of "national security?"

: Don't be an idiot.

You don't respond Mr. Disinfo? Ad Hominem instead? I love the pompous ones
that feel they can win arguments with the appeal to authority approach.

Eric

: --
: simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
: interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

: "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
: Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
: Here's my email address for autospammers:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 03:03:43 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
Pat Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

One man's "stupidity" is another man's opinion and political viewpoint.

No one of any sense believes that "Big Oil feels it is
allowed to do wherever it can pump oil in the name of "national
security?" has anything to do with inalienable rights. Such a
comments betrays a tragic ignorance of what the phrase means.

You fit in very well with the monolithic "we" of Fox's America.

I'll take that as a compliment.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers: