Russia - great bunch of lads!

ohnonotgmail

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So we now have two posters who can't spell the standard English transliteration of the name of the former Russian president whose first name was Boris.

Sloppy, Vlad. Sloppy.

i noticed that as well. combined with the grammar it is clear where they are from.

Hotblack Desiato

Fiery mutant wrote: »

There is no other country (as far as I’m aware) that has been able to get such combat experience in a system.

Well, yeah, cause like 'em or loathe 'em there's no other country in the world which has been attacked from so many directions for so long.

Hotblack Desiato

glen123 wrote: »

And what different does it make what he supports or says? Especially if we are to presume he has little support in his own country hence even less outside of it?

Idiots on social media fall for it and spread it.

Capt'n Midnight

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Do some research and come back to me.


The Russian Soyuz rockets transport EVERY American astronaut to the International Space Station. The Russian RD-180 engine also powers the Atlas III and Atlas V launch vehicles.

Where to begin ?

Shuttle and SpaceX have also carried US Astronauts to the ISS.

The US is spending huge sums of money on rocketry. Mostly pork barelling with billions going to Boeing and Bezos and their ilk with scant returns.

It's mostly spent on upgrading or re-inventing 1960's and 1970's kit, replacing Russian kit or buying in tech. SpaceX have new stuff though. Any other new stuff is small or hasn't made it to orbit.

The 1950's RL10 is still the goto US upper stage engine when you want performance.

ShatterAlan

Hangdogroad wrote: »

That guy is a "reporter" for RT and as you'd expect strongly pro Putin, hardly an impartial voice.

He's no more a reporter for RT than anyone else.


Is Robert Fisk a reporter for Al Jazeera? No


Is Finian Cunningham a reporter for the Guardian? No.


Is Seymour Hersch a reporter for NYT? No.




It doesn't matter who broadcasts what he says whether it be the Beano or the Bible.


Everyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that CNN, FOX, MSNBC and myriad others are controlled and their message is manipulated to fit a specific narrative. That being said if a kid comes on FOX and states that 1 plus 1 equals 2 that doesn't mean it's untrue just because the broadcaster is dubious.


Pilger is unflappable in his honesty and his diligence to the truth. Try find another with such a pedigree. In fact I challenge you to find a lie he has ever utterered.


You will have a long and lonely search should you take up that challenge.

ShatterAlan

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Sorry but spouting harebrained BS is not "debate".




Right. Pity he didn't keep Georgia's borders intact, isn't it. And Russia signed an international treaty guaranteeing Ukraine's borders, which Russia has chosen to violate.

Make war with weak neighbouring states, annex bits of them, foment ethnic strife, support Trump to weaken the US, support Brexit to weaken the EU, spout all sorts of BS to weaken democratic states. That's Putin's M.O. and it's straight out of the KGB playbook, which is not a surprise given his former career.




Tell us more about what this 'managing' entails, exactly. I doubt it's doling out balloons and lollipops.




If only there was some way to determine that - like a free and fair election perhaps?



:pac: he's not anti-oligarch, he's just anti-oligarchs who won't do his bidding. Anyone else gets imprisoned, asset-stripped and exiled but none of that happens to the lads onside with him.

Do you think it's important to respect borders? International law? Treaties?

ShatterAlan

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

It's bullsh!t because it's bullsh!t.

One series of American launcher - Atlas V - used surplus Russian engines, its replacement will not. That's after the first four Atlas series, which used American engines, and the many other American launchers which only ever used American engines.

No European launcher has ever used Russian engines

No Japanese launcher has ever used Russian engines

India has its own space programme too

China may or may not use Russian technology.

He's been caught out bullsh*tting and it's far from the first time on this thread.

Do you want to keep digging into that hole that's the size of both your mouth and your rectum?


https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/04/25/european-environmental-observer-launched-by-russian-rocket/

Ted_YNWA

Necro wrote: »

Mod:

ShatterAlan, if you cannot post in a civil manner do not post in this thread. This will be your only warning.

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Do you want to keep digging into that hole that's the size of both your mouth and your rectum?


https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/04/25/european-environmental-observer-launched-by-russian-rocket/

Mod

ShatterAlan - Do not post in this thread again.

everlast75

It looks like putin's main opposition has been poisoned.

Can we please drop the pass given to Putin as a "tough leader" by some wannabe alpha males on the Internet?

Putin is a ****ing cowardly dictator who would vanish your skinny ass in a heartbeat. Get ****ing real.

Wibbs

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So we now have two posters who can't spell the standard English transliteration of the name of the former Russian president whose first name was Boris.

Sloppy, Vlad. Sloppy.

Indeed H, though you have to look at things from a native Russian perspective and adjust accordingly. Just like Americans, if you talk with Russians they have a different take on things compared to Irish perspectives. Sometimes a very different take. They're very different worlds in many ways. It's noticeable enough with Americans, even though we're heavily influenced by their culture and so many here ape even their most extreme guff, but it's even more noticeable chatting with Russians, because it's more "alien" to us. Of the ones I know and those I've chatted to down the years the majority seemed to like, even love oul Putin and feel he's given some respect and self confidence back to Russia and its people. Something that was certainly lacking in the 1990's. I suppose we're all swallowing propaganda and the propaganda we swallow depends on the flavours we're used to.

Fritzbox

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

+1

The US space program was moon soonest. The Russians and earlier US plans were space station first and then assemble moon rocket and then go there and back to the station. NASA have finally come back to that, or are making noises that way.


The Russians are a space faring race. The Americans aren't.

Russians keep what works even if it's agricultural , in America "if it works it's obsolete". Space-X buck that trend to some degree. Boeing / ULA and other US companies use Russian technology and kit when they can get away with it. Change the badge and leave the red, white and blue stripes. This is why the SLS uses an Italian/ESA Service module based on the flight proven ATV that's flown to the ISS before.

Look at the history of space stations, look at the problems of ammonia (toxic but lighter) on the US part of the ISS vs. the non-issues of ethylene glycol (anti freeze like you use in your car).


At the end of the day it's down to economics. The US can waste more money on pork barrelling than the Europeans, Indians, Japanese and Russians spend on space. ESA use Russian rockets. But they don't pretend it's not a Soyuz.

So much wrong in this post I don't know where to begin. You've got the propeller on my beanie cap spinning off its bearing.

The US space program was moon soonest. The Russians and earlier US plans were space station first and then assemble moon rocket and then go there and back to the station. NASA have finally come back to that, or are making noises that way.

The Soviet Union's entire space effort was over 90% military - any kind of space exploration just wasn't really a priority for the USSR - 99% of all you know about the moon, the planets and the rest of the universe was first revealed by the USA, as well as Europe and Japan.

Russians keep what works even if it's agricultural , in America "if it works it's obsolete". Space-X buck that trend to some degree. Boeing / ULA and other US companies use Russian technology and kit when they can get away with it. Change the badge and leave the red, white and blue stripes. This is why the SLS uses an Italian/ESA Service module based on the flight proven ATV that's flown to the ISS before.

What on earth (no pun!) does that mean - the Hubble telescope isn't and could never be agricultural engineering - agricultural engineering has no place in outer space. BTW, Russian companies also use US and European components in their satellites as well as in other areas of aerospace. Using bought-in tried and tested components in your own space vehicles rather than going through the heartache and expense of developing your own tech "reinventing the wheel" is surely smart thinking on the Americans part?

The Russians are a space faring race. The Americans aren't.

When did you invent this nonsense - more Americans have gone into space than Russians - certainly a lot more US women Russian women. Which is the only nationality to walk on the moon?

look at the problems of ammonia (toxic but lighter) on the US part of the ISS vs. the non-issues of ethylene glycol

What were these problems with the ammonia coolant - I wasn't aware of any?

At the end of the day it's down to economics. The US can waste more money on pork barrelling than the Europeans, Indians, Japanese and Russians spend on space.

Well, as the Americans used to say 'no bucks, no Buck Rodgers'. As it happens I'm pretty sure the Soviet squandered the most money on their space programme - far more than the US ever did.

ESA use Russian rockets. But they don't pretend it's not a Soyuz.

Good for the ESA, one way or another. The USA doesn't use a Russian rocket.

Capt'n Midnight

Fritzbox wrote: »

The Soviet Union's entire space effort was over 90% military - any kind of space exploration just wasn't really a priority for the USSR - 99% of all you know about the moon, the planets and the rest of the universe was first revealed by the USA, as well as Europe and Japan.

True.

But the far side of the moon. And the first soft landing on another planet, just don't mention lens caps.

What on earth (no pun!) does that mean - the Hubble telescope isn't and could never be agricultural engineering - agricultural engineering has no place in outer space. BTW, Russian companies also use US and European components in their satellites as well as in other areas of aerospace. Using bought-in tried and tested components in your own space vehicles rather than going through the heartache and expense of developing your own tech "reinventing the wheel" is surely smart thinking on the Americans part?

Hubble isn't a rocket. I'm not suggesting that Russians are supplying them. (Don't get me started on comparing it's size to the KH spy satellites the didn't use the shuttle. Costs of servicing Hubble were more than replacement cost.)

My beef is not the reuse of old kit. It's getting billions and PR by pretending it's new. The goals are only to replicate the capabilities they had in the 1960's.

When did you invent this nonsense - more Americans have gone into space than Russians - certainly a lot more US women Russian women. Which is the only nationality to walk on the moon?

Look at the duration records. Keep scrolling down to see how many US astronauts didn't need Soyuz to get on the list. You'd have to scroll very far down to find ones that didn't rely on Soyuz as a lifeboat.

1976 was the last time the Russians went to space without visiting a space station.

In comparison the US are tourists in taxies. Apart from the shuttle era when they filled up the seats because they had loads to spare. US held duration records with Gemini and Skylab. And the work done to get Skylab repaired beats the box swapping on Hubble. Back in the day.

But like the moon landings they were just a flash in the pan. Done and scrapped.

What were these problems with the ammonia coolant - I wasn't aware of any?

Leaks , pumps. It's toxic if it managed to leak inside. Very difficult to burn though. But guess what the X-15 rocketplane used as fuel ?

Well, as the Americans used to say 'no bucks, no Buck Rodgers'. As it happens I'm pretty sure the Soviet squandered the most money on their space programme - far more than the US ever did.

As a % of GDP yes. Copying SDI / Star Wars and the shuttle didn't help. But it was all part of the arms race.

Real terms nowhere near. I've seen a figure of $4.2Bn for Mir which would get you three shuttle launches. Sounds too low but they were only charging NASA $35m a trip and that was rip off the tourist prices.

Good for the ESA, one way or another. The USA doesn't use a Russian rocket.

How about a version of a Soviet Zenit made in an ex-Soviet republic using Russian engines ?
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/antares.html

Sea Launch were using actual Zenits off the coast of California too.

JasonStatham

In Russia they're hardcore, in Ireland they're like sheep.

JohnnyFlash

There's something deeply intellectually inadequate about Irish neckbeards and oddballs who admire Putin.

1o059k7ewrqj3n

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

There's something deeply intellectually inadequate about Irish neckbeards and oddballs who admire Putin.

I can see why Irish people might support Putin, it’s just a strange one because on one hand Putin is supposedly for a multi-polar world, against American hegemony/regime change and looks after his country’s interests - but on the other hand Ireland was in a similar position to Ukraine once and we are not much bigger than one of the Baltic states.

Elmer Blooker

JasonStatham wrote: »

In Russia they're hardcore, in Ireland they're like sheep.

You have a point there. They survived the poverty of the post Soviet Yeltsin era and have weathered the storm of economic sanctions.
They will be able to handle the coming economic carnage better than us.

1990sman

russia only wants balance.

1990sman

and balance, that delicate arena in which life in the universe itself is possible, must be maintained.

Tea drinker

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

You have a point there. They survived the poverty of the post Soviet Yeltsin era and have weathered the storm of economic sanctions.
They will be able to handle the coming economic carnage better than us.

Yeah we were literally dirt poor in Ireland a few decades back. I don't doubt we'd struggle if / when economic circumstances change, young people especially so.
But I think plenty of people know what poor is.
On the other hand, we are a nation of cap doffers, worried what the Brits / our betters in EU will think of us. Thinking we are waaay better than Russia when several of our state agencies conspired to smear a whistle blower as a child molester.

Cordell

1990sman wrote: »

and balance, that delicate arena in which life in the universe itself is possible, must be maintained.

That balance you're speaking of was the mutually assured destruction doctrine, which assured that life were not to be destroyed only on one side, but on both.
We had this balance in the past, it caused proxy wars and almost started a nuclear one, so let's leave in the past. If Russia were to descend even more into irrelevancy nothing of value will be lost.