Russian Super Rocket

In article , derekl1963
@nospamyahoo.com says...
Kevin Willoughby wrote:

In article , derekl1963
says...
I always find it odd when people insist the ISS should already have
accomplised great things.

ISS Expedition 1 was launched over three years ago. [...]

Accomplishing "something" and accomplishing "great things" are two
very different expectations.

uh, yes, I'm aware of that. I'd be happy if ISS accomplished
"something". If it had accomplished "great things" or even one great
thing, that would be more I asked for. Far more.


Why is it reasonable to expect *anything* to have been accomplished in
something that isn't even finished abuilding yet?

Well, let's see. Gemini 3 demonstrated orbital maneuvering. Gemini 4
demonstrated a controlled space walk. Gemini 5 demonstrated a longish
duration flight. Gemini 6 demonstrated rendezvous. All of this before
the first Gemini capable of its design-point endurance of 2 weeks in
space. Apollo 8 was a "great thing" despite not having an LM. Apollo 11
was a "great thing" despite a limited duration and lack of a lunar
rover.
--
Kevin Willoughby lid

Imagine that, a FROG ON-OFF switch, hardly the work
for test pilots. -- Mike Collins

I didn't think about it until the day of reentry, but it seemed like it
might have been well-worth sending up a last Progress flight and extended
the crew by a week in order to instrument Mir for the reentry. A whole lot
of useful information would have been generated about large reentering
structures that might have been applicable to Hubble and ISS as well as any
other large satellites that reenter.