Slashdot Mirror
Politics Without Geopolitical Boundaries?
ParticleGirl asks: "Dennis Tito's flight to the ISS is scheduled for the same time that the Canadian Space Agency (CSA)'s robotic arm is supposed to be installed. Speaking for the CSA, Marc Garneau did an interview with Space.com. Now that Canada has come out against Tito going into space, it'll be interesting to see what kind of a compromise will be reached. Until now, this has been a sort-of
standoff between Russia and the United States, but now other countries are entering the fray. Should this dude have access to the space station just because he's got the cash? He did work for NASA, and he seems to be intelligent and capable. On the other hand, he's not a trained astronaut and could plausibly be a liability if there is some sort of emergency. Will this be our first extra-orbital international incident?" While the article at Space.Com downplays any possibility of such an occurence, I can see reasons for both sides, here: Russia should be able to run their own space program, without any interference from the US, however Tito's presence on the ISS affects more than Russian interests. If the issue is a matter of training, however, I'm sure that Tito will need to pass some form of certification for space travel. Another thing to remember: the Russians have been at this space-travel thing longer than the US has. As always, feel free to share your thoughts on this issue.
But he is going up instead of someone else (they bumped some scientist) and if he is allowed to go up more will follow suit and create a growing headache for nasa
Tito is going up on a Soyuz, the Canada arm goes up on STS. They're not going up together. My understanding is that the shuttle crew will be mostly responsible for installing the arm and the ISS crew for check out and such.
Oh well. International partnerships bring interesting problems to the table. At some point the problem will be solved. Though probably not to everyone's liking
During the bad old days during the moon race, they lost an entire rocket on the ground including the cosmonauts and ground crew. They have also had fatalities on landing (parachute failures, oxygen leaks). After the Soviet Union fell alot of documentation became available. Small details like Yuri Gragarin not being the first Cosmonaut in space, just the first one in good enough shape to parade. Overall, the Soviet space program had many more fatalities than US program.
According to this cnn article NASA isn't opposed to him going... they just don't want him to go now. What I want to know is, why does he insist on going -now-? The reasoning NASA gives seems pretty solid. They know he has had Russian training, but does that mean he knows about the U.S. modules? Nope. They are willing to train him, and want him to postpone until october, but yet he insists he wishes to go now.
How many NATO soldiers died in Balkans? Very little, right? Does that make big and balky NATO superior to small fighter groups? I'd say no, it makes it more vulnerable.
The USA sends up more manned missions than Russia.
The space station became politically viable after the Russians joined on, not technically or financially viable. In truth we have paid them for most of their hardware, which does not live up to the standards NASA has. Beyond the initial stages of the space station, Russia really does not participate at all in the construction of the station... most of the launches are shuttle launches. Safety and reliability should be put in terms of total number of missions, and total number of human occupants lofted to orbit. The statement that their safety record is better than ours is simply not true.
Nasa sure had no qualms about sending up a school teacher or a 70year old senator. Suddenly, they are worried about someone without NASA approved training.
Just because you do something first doesn't make you better at it.
and because you have bigger missiles, you can do anything?
Let's see...
The US can
* cancel a treaty it signed because daddy's oil boy owes his buddies some old favors.
* execute a Canadian after promising not to do so (under a treaty).
* bomb countries whenever it feels like it, without UN approval.
* have the world's largest inventory of chemical and biological weapons while prohibiting others from doing the same.
* manipulate the UN without paying its fees for years
and...it's complaining about the Russians wanting to carry aboard someone who paid them for it and who is willing to undergo training?
Let me tell you something, buddy. When it comes to having a smug attitude, the rest of the world can't even hold a candle to the US.
And you wonder why we think the US is a bully. Give the guy a ride.
If this was a mission on a Russian rocket, then the Russians could launch whomever they wanted.
It's not. It's an American launch system, funded by Americans. The mission is a joint US/Canadian/Russian mission. Two of the three partners are against this payload, one of the partners owns the launch system and then other partner has one billion dollars worth of hardware going up.
Two to one vote...the payload should not go. This should not even be an arguement. If the Russians are so fired up to get this man in space, they should have contacted all the partners involved in the ISS long ago and figured out a plan. But they didn't. Too bad.
The reports that I have read said that NASA didn't want to completely ground him, they wanted to make sure he had the proper training on NASA's side of the station. Unfortunately, that training wasn't available until October.
This didn't fit with Tito's schedule. He wanted to go NOW and didn't want to wait since he wanted to get back to his business.
When he showed up at NASA last week for training, he brough 5 bodyguards a long with "in case there was trouble". How money do you have to have that warps your mind so much it makes you concerned that Barney working the gate at the Houston Space Center is going to rough you up for not being on the list.
I think he's being given way too much slack for being a "self-made-man". I think he's one of those people that get a little money and thinks that should grease all of the wheels to get what he wants.
Standard English
African American English
British English
Australian English
West Indian English
And all the accents of recent immigrants to the US.
In total, I'd say that gives the average American command of enough different words, phones, and grammatical structures to consider him at least bilingual.
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
Seems to be some non-Americans are of the opinion that they are better than Americans because they think Americans don't learn other languages.
The reality is Americans do learn other languages, but are not normally in a position to use them frequently enough to stay fluent. I could travel for days and still be where English is the predominate language.
Sure monetary contribution from Russia is lower then US, but things look very different if you consider amount of hardware. So whose fault it is if Russian aerospace workers are more productive? And no, lower salaries do not explain everything. They indeed spend much less hours for the same job. Compare time needed to prepare Zenit (Sea Launch) and Titan-IV, for example. Would you count Titan launch equivalent to launch of 8 Protons because it costs that much or equivalent to launch of 1 Proton because payload to LEO is pretty close?
About delays. Russia is going through crisis much worse then US in thirties. Still delays for Russian hardware were just couple of months longer then for US hardware while US was going through one of the highest economical booms in its history. At some point Boeing started to
worry that if Russian modules are not delayed any longer the software delays for Node 1 will become evident for public, because US would have to ask Russia to postpone its launch.
Looks like the least reliable partner at this point is US who was recently planning to significantly cut its contribution.
Tito, BTW, had more training then John Glenn unless you count 40 years old experience.
Tell me why I have to defend american in front of other americans who call him incompetent moron?
Yeah, sure. You guys built the stuff we could not (find out how much FGB replacement would cost and why US still can not build crew return vehicle) and now please step aside and let serious folks stay in control. And we will tell you which crew to send to ISS, who should run Russian Space Agency and which president you should elect.
If this is US attitude, I'd say --- screw it. I hope russians will have guts just undock russian modules (propulsion and life support) and watch remainder of ISS slowly drift into Pacific. And if US wants to send some astronaut to the Russian half make them pay $20 millions/person.
A joke, of course. You can not really undock it easily.
But even if Russia is not a superpower anymore (what a relief actually --- no need to care about rights of Mumba-Yumba religious minorities in South Pacific, for example), it does not mean it should not be treated as a partner.
Please remember --- there would not be ISS without Russia --- it almost got killed on Capitol Hill in 1993 and Russian contribution was the only reason to save it. Which can not be said about Canada, Japan, Italy or any other country (with all due respect to Canadian robot arm designers, unsurpassed by anyone and other fine folks from other countries). While without USA, ESA and Japan Russia could build Mir-2 (after all, Russian modules for ISS were designed for Mir-2) and have its own space station not so capable as ISS but where they would be able to send anyone without NASA being able to say anything.
He has something far more important than cash: a contract. Specifically (well, semi-specific), he has a contract with NPO Energia, one of Russia's largest aerospace corps, for a flight into orbit, a stay in a station, and a return flight. The contract was originally for a flight to Mir, but when Energia and Rosaviacosmos deorbitted her, the contract fell back to ISS.
On top of a legal contract with Energia, he also has 6 or 7 months of training in Star City, already completed. He knows how to use a Soyuz, climb into and use an Orlan spacesuit, and operate the basic systems in the Russian modules of ISS.
NASA is simply allergic to the idea that anyone but a gold-plated, square-jawed, government-employed Astronaut (tm) can fly in space, because "Space is hard!" They are in for one bad PR thrashing over this, it is time, has been time, for citizen tourists in space. And citizen explorers. The hue and cry over Tito's flight shows exactly how scared the NASA bureaucrats are of anyone but their annointed few going into orbit.
Space is a place, not a program.
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
EILLE ASTIE DE TETE CARRÉE
What you are saying here is completely stupid. People from Québec can understand people from France, Belgium, Africa or Haiti without any problem.
"People from texas cannot understand people from new york". that's stupid hey? same thing.
Take your Sheila Copps Flags and choke yourself with it please.
VIVE LA LIBERTÉ, VIVE L'INDÉPENDANCE!
That's a stereotype.
Girls from Québec shave.
In fact, it's in Québec that you'll find the cutest girls.
That's the only thing from Québec that interests ROC (rest of Canada), that and hockey player.
Travel in Ontario and you'll see nude dancers bar advertising "Québec Girls".
Two russian missions have ended in the death of the crew. One American mission has ended in the death of the crew.
The Soviet Union/Russia has a worse safety record than the US. Get over it.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Want to count the number of dead?
OK, HERE WE GO:
Russians:
Soyuz 1: 1 guy. His parachute failed to open, and in the time between the failure and the splat, he loudly cursed the people who rushed that spacecraft into production. Hey! Take a look at the splat. Poor Komarov, may he RIP.
Soyuz 11: oops! no air! 3 guys dead.
Total: 4 in the air.
Americans:
Challenger: kaboom, 7 killed.
Total: 7 in the air.
--- on the ground---
Russians:
1960: Nedelin disaster. General Nedelin and 200 other rocket experts killed on the ground when the rocket blew up.
Total: 201 on the ground
Americans:
Apollo 1: Test goes bad when fire kills three astronauts inside the capsule.
Total: 3 on the ground.
---
So there you go. The Russian space program is STILL worse when you consider the safety record.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
And what? We just recently saw a few civilians playing with a BIG NUKE SUBMARINE for a miserble amount of money... The result was seen all over the world.
And note, Tito is a ex-NASA man. Maybe he is quite far from piloting ships. But he is an insider anyway...
What is happening with Denis Tito is, from my point of view "unthinkable". And American citizen, who worked for years in America's Space Program. A man who managed to become a "self-made-man", one of those so publicized values of America. A man who wanted to fulfill a dream and tries, as a typical son of his country to achieve it. He doesn't find a chance in his country to do it so he comes here and pays big money for it. And then NASA starts a weird campaign. First it issues worries all over about Mir's state. Ok, Russians agree with them, sunk Mir and transfer Tito into one of their missions on ISS. And what we get here? Suddenly Russia is a bad partner, it takes unilateral decisions, it blows up the Space Program and puts in cause the security of ISS...
No Russian Agency as ever asked about the competency of the American astronauts sent to Mir. No one has ever asked anyone else about the competency of scientists or even military personel that was sent on Shuttles, Soyuz, Salyuts, or Mirs, ISSs and similars. Russia has even sent politicians to Space (there was one Mr. Baturin, an ex-minister btw). Not counting that it had to deal with biologists, doctors and several other people who barely know anything about a spaceship.
And suddenly it comes one Mr. Tito and everything blows up... In face of NASA's past this is an afrontation to everyone who remembers the Challenger. Who is NASA to value to dangers and chances for civilians? Who is NASA to question Russia's experience.
Intersting to see NASA acting as a typical soviet ministry...
Russia deorbited Mir at the request of NASA. And this is the Russian space program, they're the ones running the launch. I fail to see why anyone but Russia would have any say in this, the only money he's using is Russia's. It's not like the ISS is crowded or anything. Russia can stick someone up there if they feel like, and they knows how to operate the equipment enough not to blow up the station or open the airlocks or something. Which this guy does.
-David T. C.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
And don't start mentioning training, he tried to get training and was turned away by NASA.
The people in charge of the launch are supposed to decide the payload, hamans and otherwise. That's how it works. This is shown by the fact the only lame excuse NASA can come up with is the training they didn't give him. Countries can't just decide who gets put on the ISS by other countries' space programs.
Obviously there is some sort of limit here, implied or explict. If Russia wanted to send up fifty people, they are issues of supplies and crowding, and no one would fault anyone else in the program for complaining. But not one guy who, by all accounts has actually designed some of the stuff up there. It's not like he's going to eject the warp core or run into a fishing satellite.
-David T. C.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Actually I read he was training with the crew in both Russia and in Texas. That was part of the deal.
It's not like he's completely unaware of the functions of the space station. I have a feeling he probably is going to have some responsibilities up there, too. Even though he's paying, the Russians need to get productive work from the guy.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
That this will be a major breakthrough in space travel. For the first time, a Civilian will go into space for commercial purpouses. I feel that this could possibly open doors do a larger civilian presence in space in the future if he goes through with it. As far as the money, well I disagree with the principle of buying a ride to space, but I feel it is a precedent that needs to made.
You say you want a revolution....
Launch costs per pound are available here. Assuming Tito (plus accessories) is under 200 pounds, his direct launch costs to near earth orbit in a Soyuz are at most $0.5 million. Maybe $1 million counting food etc. The full cost of a Soyuz launch is $35-40 million, so he's paying the Russians for about 1/2 of one launch. Now, granted, he's not paying NASA anything, but it seems to me the fee is more than enough to cover his costs. And NASA has been subsidizing the Russian Space program for a while, why not let somebody else help subsidize it?
There doesn't seem to be any good rational explanation for the NASA (and ESA) opposition - so in one sense or another this must boil down to some kind of politics. Is it because Tito, a Republican, helped raise funds for "W" to get elected, and NASA's Goldin can't stand him for that? Or is it just typical inter-organizational squabbling?
Energy: time to change the picture.
The American's are really throwing up a false smokescreen on the safety issue. None of the Russians has been through the training for the American stuff, they all started at the same point, nothing to prevent Tito following along. Then the rediculousness about being reimbursed for training costs. After $20 million don't they think Tito will be happy to pay a couple of G's? I think this actually is an indicator of just how tenuous the American position is.
The third seat is free on the progress, so this impacts little scientific research, and unfortunatly I suspect tourism is really the future for space, which NASA seems unwilling to accept.
Tito is rich as hell (not many will pay $20 million), has trained for months with the Russians who consider him equal to the task.
Looking of the research they will be doing on the now slimmed down ISS (which removes much of the research components) for the amount of money they are spending practically screams for another business model to get and keep space development and efforts going.
I find some of the remarks to this as, well, interesting given the fervor of discussions on /. on Freedom. Freedom to write code, freedom to write code from other's code, freedom to download music, freedom to do what-ever you want basically.
I'm not saying Tito should or should not be allowed to go into space. I'm just noting how easy it is for this group to want to restrict another's freedom while at the same time requiring everyone else to grant them theirs.
Imagine being the team leader up on the space station. You live in a tiny space with people you've been training with for over 6 months.
You know who get's testy on a lack of sleep, who panics in an emergancy, who snores, etc.
Now imagine that someone you've never met before is going to come up and live with you in your tiny (I've had closets bigger) space station. You have no idea what he's like, you have no idea how he would act in any given situation.
It's not that he can't do the job, it's just that he's an unknown. And when you're stuck in space, you want as few unknowns as possible.
So from what I read in the article, his skills aren't the problem. The crews familiarity with him is the problem. Hell have him hang out with the next crew going up for 6 months. Then he can go.
Nonsense. How much tax money comes from the telecommunications industry, whose overwhelming growth is a direct consequence of space exploration and technology? Compare that to NASA's annual budget, and stop whining. If you think you'd get money back from the gov't. if NASA went away, think again.
As poorly run as NASA is these days (not surprising considering their pathetic budget), they still accomplish some amazing feats. It's one of the few parts of the government that actually works as designed.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Oh damn...more people might go into space as tourists...and someone might realize there's a MARKET for space tourism...and it'll get more popular...and it'll get cheaper...and OH MY GOD people will be able to go into space for $1M, then $500K, then $100K, then...one day...you'll be able to go to space for only a few thousand, including a couple day's accomodation in an orbital hotel!
Yeah, we've got to put a stop to this now.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
Just because the path to reasonably affordable space tourism could be long implies that we shouldn't take the first step?
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
How much training did they give to a gradeschool teacher that they couldn't give to this guy?
Make no mistake about it, NASA's problem with this is all about PR. They want/need to be the heroes/heroines. Putting civilians in space was cast as 'NASA defeating space'. Letting a civilian buy his way into the same program robs NASA administrators of the pleasure of being the high priest that hands down the word of God.
The problem is that the executives of NASA have spent too much time reading their own press. They are on a great mission to keep space pristine and pure. But as happens in all religious movements, they get their own goals confused with those of God.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Just because the guy has a lot of money doesn't mean that he should get a ride to the ISS. Russia's space program has a lot of problems right now but think about how many problems they would have if one of their rockets blew up and killed an American millionare.
As far as I'm concerned though, so long as he doesn't float foot into the ISS it shouldn't matter if he's along for the ride.
Beware the wood elf!!!
I've got over 100 hours in a Cessna as Pilot In Command, an engineering degree and I read "Aviation Week & Space Technology" cover to cover every week. I could swing $20K (as well as the cost of flying a fighter for an hour) to learn how to safely eject and I'm a quick study and should be able to remember what buttons not to push.
By Tito's and the Russian's arguments, I would be "Practically a Fighter Pilot". Yet, if I were to seriously suggest this I would get chucked out on my ass.
I feel badly for Dennis Tito, he paid for a shot and the world changed on him. I would hope that once the station has been built and guidelines for tourists have been established that he be given the first seat going up. But until then, he should just look up like the rest of us.
If what I wrote above isn't true, maybe somebody could give me the URL where I can sign up to fly a Tomcat. Off the Reagan would be preferred.
myke
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
As for the US astronauts not getting special training before going up on Mir... do you not know that our astronauts are trained for YEARS before ever being assigned a mission? Though I'm not sure about this, I think most (if not all) of the US astronauts sent to Mir had already been on a Shuttle mission. That sounds like relevant training to me. The Mir is also one country's station and not twelve country's. Canada doesn't want this guy going when we install the arm. The US doesn't want him going when we install our stuff. I'm sure none of the other countries really want this guy up there when their stuff is being installed and tested.
About the guy who was on Mir during the fire: yeah, he stayed out of the way while the trained guys fixed things. Wouldn't it have been nice to actually have another trained and helpful person up there fixing problems instead of just "staying out of the way?"
NASA does have to pay to train this guy and that is where we are putting our foot down. He is part of a Russian crew and we have to train that crew to do certain tasks. If we have all of our procedures based around three members and now it is only two, can we really successfully accomplish a safe mission without redesigning the mission? Even if we didn't have to train him and didn't have to worry about his safety and didn't have to worry about the safety of the mission, we would still be paying an opportunity cost for not having a trained scientist or engineer up there (though he is an engineer, he would need training to help with science experiments).
IANAL, but I play one on
I thought not.
Actually, no, none of this happens. Most spy satellites are in orbits the shuttle can't reach, either polar orbits, which have too high an inclination, or geosynchronous orbits, which are far too high for the shuttle to reach. The Hubble is the only satellite which is serviced with any sort of regularity, and there's a substantial proportion of the community that regards that as a waste - it would quite possibly have been cheaper to plan on a series of telescopes, a new one every five years or so, since the costs of a shuttle mission to do repairs are, well, astronomical. The shuttle has been used to launch military satellites, but not repair them, and the launch market since Challenger has largely gone to unmanned lift vehicles like the Titan and Atlas.
There were plans originally for a shuttle launch facility in Vandenburg, CA, which would have allowed the shuttle to reach retrograde polar orbits for spy sat launches, but the air force was already losing its interest in the shuttle by '86 and used the Challenger disaster as an excuse to drop the whole program. It's a shame, too, because several major design decisions were made in the shuttle to allow it to meet the requirements for these military missions - the wing design in particular could have been simplified substantially without the cross-range requirement for once-around landings.
And as for shooting down spy sats, this only happens in James Bond movies. Oh, the US is working on developing the capabilities to do so, and we've done target practice on one of our *own* sats, but don't for a minute think that anyone could actually do this without starting a major international incident.
No, you can't say that it goes on our there anyway, just in secret and we don't know about it. This is all happening up in the sky, after all, and it's quite visible. Amateur satellite hunters have identified the orbital parameters for pretty much all the classified hardware up there. There's just no good way to hide something when it's sitting up in the sky glowing like a star.
A few relevant facts:
- When the shuttle-Mir dockings were going on in the mid 90s, shuttle astronauts did not receive any special training on visiting Mir. They got a briefing or two on the ground, and then when they got there in orbit, the cosmonauts gave them a 2 hour tour and safety lesson. And that's all that was needed.
- The Russians have been flying non-professional cosmonauts to Mir for years, including various members of the media and government officials. They certainly have the experience to know how much training is necessary. Tito has taken all of their training and passed with flying colors.
- One of NASA's big objections has been that Tito poses a danger to the crew in the event of an emergency. There was in fact a guest aboard Mir in '97 when one of the fires broke out. His duties in the event of an emergency were "put your oxygen mask on and stay out of the way of the cosmonauts fixing stuff." He succeeded in carrying out these orders quite well, thankyouverymuch. And NASA thinks that Tito, who is widely acknowledged to be an extremely smart and capable man, couldn't do likewise?
- $20 million bucks is approximately 10% of the Russian Space Agency's entire annual budget. Tito's flight is going to have a major effect on their bottom line, and in their ability to continue developing their half of the space station.
One of NASA's biggest problems is their desire to be the space agency, rather than just a space agency. They're control freaks, and this has hurt the private launch market, and now it's hurting the start of the space tourism market. Trying to block Tito's flight is one of the dumbest things they've done lately. (Well, except for Dan Goldin's mad quest to eradicate all the old worm-style logos...) The ability for private citizens to fly into space would, I think, get people a lot more excited about space travel in general, would generate public support for NASA and ISS, and would pump a lot of money into the system.Two passengers a year, on the every-six-month Soyuz changeout missions which are scheduled anyway, would bring in $40M/year to the Russian Space Agency, which desperately needs the cash, at practically no cost to NASA or any of the other international partners. It's a win-win-win situation, and it's a damn shame that NASA's being so stubborn about it. If there really was a substantial risk to the station, then they'd have a point, but the Russians have proven before that they can safely fly non-professionals, and they can do it again.
I'd say that you had a good idea, except my whole message was completely tongue-in-cheek and I figured that everyone would pick up on the sarcasm... especially with the last line... but of course, this is Slashdot, and since no humor stories have been posted in the last 24 hours, no one is in that frame of mind at all...
No, I don't think everyone should be shot into space, put behind the wheel of a submarine, etc... although if such things would deter kids from seeking the lesser thrill of shooting up their high school and planning a military takeover, I'll support them...
Yes I did. Now where's my space ride?
:-P
I've seen a lot of good arguments for him going into space, and a couple of highly convincing ones for him not to go...
But my point is, you argue that this guy paid to go into space, so he should go? That his monetary contribution to the International Space Station (or the Russian space program in general) entitles him to a ride sooner or later?
I mean, at that rate, we all pay taxes. We should ALL go into space. For that matter, we should all get a couple of minutes to drive around in a tank, fly an Army Helicopter, sit in the copilot seat of the Stealth Bomber, and command a nuclear submarine...
No, wait, civillians aren't apparently too good at doing a couple of those things.
is going to happen eventually, and opportunities like this one are irrestible to the cash-strapped Russian space program. I think NASA is opposed because they're desperately trying to protect their position that the space station is a purely scientific resource worth all the money we've spent on it. Quite frankly, I rather doubt it; the spin-offs will almost certainly be more valuable, like they were for the Apollo program, and commercial travel to space will be one of them.
-_Quinn
Reality Maintenance Group, Silver City Construction Co., Ltd.
should have a destination built for that. The group which is involved in creating the ISS didn't create it so that tourists can come up and dork around, no matter how much money they have.
... unless of course, it's some sort of wierd money-making venture by the government ... but that's bad.
I would assume that the proper way to handle this situation is to either demand that whichever country desires to put people in space for money also builds their own property in space to place them or to create another international endeavour for that purpose, without using taxpayer money
Don't go crapping all over your roommates quarters seems like a pretty simple philosophy.
As my father lik@(munch munch)...
This is not the first troublesome thing to come out of Canada, let us not forget Bryan Adams.
So the Russians want to get funding for their space agency by sending some goob on a joy ride. How is this different from what NASA did in sending a senator into space? Oh, except that in Glenn's case, the US public paid the bill.
Andrew Semprebon EQ Systems Inc.
How much difference can there be between a passenger who is paying cash and a customer who is being rewarded for political loyalty. It is widely acknowledged that the only reason Glenn was on a shuttle mission was as a payoff for his defending Clinton. At least Tito's cash is actually going to help the Russian space agency, and not just another example of political corruption.
If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for money.
I understand that the main reason Tito is unacceptable to NASA is because he's affiliated with the WRONG political party, i.e. the one opposite to the current head of NASA. This is the latest from an Artemis Society mailing list. If you're interested in finding out more, goto http://www.moonsociety.org/.
d4,...,Nf3, or maybe I should use a Ratfaced Mcdougal?
Yah I can just see it now, the Russians have their marked off side of the station and the USA theirs.
The bathroom will of course be on the Russian side and they will charge a tax for the Americans to use it. That's good, it will help them pay for their part of the ISS costs.
Hopefully we will all be able to setup an UN peacekeeping force to keep the quite...
The world isn't run by weapons anymore, or energy, or money. It's run by little ones and zeroes, little bits of data.
Wealthy people are traditionally early adopters. They subsidize development and research costs so that the rest of us can hopefully one day enjoy the benefits of new technology.
If this guys wants to pay for a space vacation, excellent. Just make he gets trained, covers his expenses. Maybe it'll catch on.
If we can make space vacations a trendy get away for the rich we get several benefits:
1) The coolness factor of space will increase. Can you imagine People magazine introducing the concept? I suspect that most Americans only know space as the thing between their ears. More exposure can only help space exploration
2) It will create a definite justification for commercial space exploration. Hilton in space has been proposed before, but this could make it real.
Just my $.02
My cat can eat a whole watermelon
If Russia contributes an equal amount of time, money, and supplies, then they should get an equal share in it. Russia should actually have less of a share than America, because we've had to save its ass a few times just to get a decent living space for the crews up there.
---------------
Yes! That guy!
My understanding was that he wanted to get up there soon and move on with his life. I can't remember where, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that he didn't want to push his visit back so that he could go through several additional months of training.
Well, NASA is a different place than it was in the 1980's, but still, they themselves wanted to send up a "regular person" -- schoolteacher Christa McAuliffe. Arguably, it's safer now than it was then. Tito is arguably as fit for a space mission as she was. Especially since he worked for NASA.
Zorn
/ is the root of
Does anyone here REALLY want to compare Tito, who has been training practically non-stop for 4 years with a select crew to Glenn, who got fast-tracked through the shuttle training, and was basically a back-seat driver the entire time?
Please. Tito is INFINITELY more qualified to fly than Glenn ever was, and this stonewalling by NASA is more of a kick in the head to Russia saying simply, we don't want tourists up there yet. We're not even sure we can keep the damn thing flying yet!!! Oh, and since we are practically PAYING for your parts of the station, you have no say.
Sometimes I'm ashamed to be an American.
Glenn was lucky he could walk off the shuttle when it landed.
of what it's like.
Now if we all did that and then threw names into a hat then more cvilians could see space.
Hmm...
Send a hungry child into space give your Christian Children's Fund money to NASA.
At least that will result in CCF building fewer exercise gyms for employees. If CCF bothered to at least fix some of the POLITICS that are causing hunger, I'd feel different.
Oh no I went offtopic. Oh who cares... Bottom line: let's get off this rock already.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Tito is already trained.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
So the US has changed the laws of physics?
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
4 Cosmonauts have died in flight. 7 US astronauts have died in flight.
The US has a safety record worse then the Soviet Union/Russia. Get over it.
Geopolitics is a doulb edged sword. If everything is done right, it can be a great an wonderful thing, but if anything goes wrong... well I'm preaching to the choir here. I just think we should be careful what we wish for.
let him on! everybody knows that people with money are better than everybody else! money makes you, among other things, a fully qualified astronuat with viable epxreiments to perform on a very expensive research staion! we are a capitolist society so that people with money can be exclued from activities that are usually reserved for "professionals", or "people who are trained to perform tsks in outerspace and have any reason to be up there besideds having a bunch of cash"! of course we do have to have standards, sochange the next ISS module to him, and put him on the next rocket up there! what do you mean he can't afford a module? IMHO, anybody who isn't a contributing country should be able to designate who goes on. so he should buy a module, or shut the fuck up and deal with the fact that most people don't go in to outerspace. this opinion will naturally be repealed if he wants me to go up there too, so, well, we'll see...
We've been sending non-satronauts into space for quite awhile ourselves. We call them "mission specialists."
The most famous beign the school techer we sent up in the ill fated challenger flight.
Frankly if we can risk lives and send up non-astronauts for political purposes I don't see why the russians should be prevented from doing the same for economic reasons.
At least this gent soudsn liek hes has soem kind of background in the field...
----
I hereby inform you that I have NOT been required to provide any decryption keys.
While $20 million for a ticket hardly makes a dent in the costs to launch the shuttle, the PR is worth much more.
They could even do a nationwide lottery...$5 per ticket and the winner goes to the space station! I'm sure there are laws against it --- but this is the natural evolution of space travel.
I also find it hard to believe that this guy would be getting in the way. With all the space available there now, I'm sure he can find a quiet corner.
What would be humorous would be if there WAS some kind of mishap while he was onboard and he managed to save the whole station from destruction by using a burst of thaleon particles from the main deflect...Oh wait, this is serious space flight business! No room for fun or trying new things, says NASA.
I can think of one billionaire I'd love to see shot into space.
Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I'll never know.
C'mon, all this talk of training is just so much bollocks. All you have to do is sit atop the damn rocket and put your seat belt on. This whole "astronaut training" thing is just so much hogwash. Astronauts are gerbils for all intents and purposes on a mission. Anyone with a little common sense can be one.
Also, let us not forget that NASA was sending up non establishment people when Challenger blew up. Remember the teacher? Challenger also showed how important all that "training" is in a real emergency.
AFAIK (IIRC, IANAL, etc) he's passed the medical tests (by the Russian doctors, American doctors are to examine later) "I already passed the medical checks for Mir flights, and I have no doubt about qualifying for the ISS flight." (http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/tito_intervi ew_010201.html)
I also recall NASA and the ESA drafting some kind of regulations for commercial passengers. It's taken a very rich man for then to finally get themselves sorted out.
--- "When you're strange"
The best solution is to let whoever can afford to go into space do it, so long as it does not pose a threat to those back on Earth. This will speed technological development, which will open space to those aforementioned underdeveloped countries.
"Some things are best left under state control" my ass.
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Just because you do something first doesn't make you better at it. The russians built a space station. The US went to the moon several times. That is like saying that because my grandparents have been driving longer than me, I should take there advice when I buy a new car. This is a new space station, an INTERNATIONAL one. Russia stepped out of their boundaries by promising this schmuck a ride in exchange for money.
The selling of a ride to and on the Space station is a mockery of the system. And it truly offends me. The reason is all about money. $20,000,000 is not nearly enough. The space station cost how many billions of dollars? I can't find any real numbers, but I'm sure if you took total costs and the projected lifespan of the station we'd figure out this guy is getting the deal of the century. Russia's pawning off their prized space possesion for pocket change because they're broke, but the end result is this multi-millionare is getting a tax-payer subsidized trip into space. It's a load of crap and should never be allowed.
So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
It's just like everything else -- money will let people buy their way into just about anything. If you can buy your way into politics, why shouldn't you be able to buy your way into the space program? Both should require special training, but.. Not that I'm a proponent of using money like this, just making an observation.
Given the cost-per-pound, etc, is he paying a reasonable fee?
Didn't we send a aging congressman on a shuttle ride at some point? Joh Glenn certainly had the training and experience, but paid nothing and was older.
Will the precedent of letting one rich primate bribe his way into space lead to russian rockets full of ex-dot-com yuppies?
The taxpayers/insurers/investors want people up there who are best fit for the task at hand. Turning the ISS into a space ride for yuppies is not a good thing at all.
Maybe if the space tourists are restrained to the russian side, and there is no impact on the mission, then there can be little argument.
Then there is the social issue -- every kid in the world learns that it's not how good you are at your job, but how rich you are that counts. Bad, bad lesson.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
If i remember correctly. (i don't recall where i saw this) but the guy has had enormous amounts of training. He's been in the program for years and working hard to achieve all he's done. I for one say let him go. What's wrong with having a qualified person in there station. Shit if something goes wrong whether he's there or not won't make too much of a difference will it? My guess would be that he would be asked to 'stand aside' while the real players get busy. Let space travel be attainable if you are up to the challenge; physically, mentally and in the bank account!
He is not just some rube with money, he is a trained rube with some money.
He's not just a trained rube with some money, Is everyone ignoring the fact that this guy is a former rocket scientist, who actually designed a lot of the equipment up in space, and used to train Astronauts himself? The guy is as qualified to be in space, if not more so, than a lot of people NASA themselves have sent up.
The problem is not a lack of skills, the problem is because he is a civilian, and not military personnel, NASA won't be able to hold his country accountable for any mistakes he might make. They're being total wankers, of course, but what do you expect from guvvies?
I read the CSA interview, and I think Tito should be filing papers for restraint of trade.
These arguments are groundless and irrelevant.
When air travel started to become a commercial enterprise, people worried about the same things. Experience shows that the worries were empty.
How many of us know how to operate the oven of a 747? How many of us can land one? The plane, not the oven.
In order for manned spaceflight to become popular, we need pioneers like Mr. Tito. Spaceflight will become a different experience. We will see spacecraft designed to take paying passengers. As such, concerns like 'how do I pee in zero gee,' will be designed out of the way.
Even worse is that crap about the need to 'bond' before launching. Does a submarine crew do bonding exercises before departing on a mission for every new crew member? Does that hurt the performance of the boat? Give me a break.
As for training Mr. Tito, NASA found what they consider a silver bullet in their attempt to permanently ground him. If they delay and excuse and otherwise worm their way out of training him, they can argue he isn't ready for the trip. Mark my words - NASA has plans to never train him. If this delay gambit works, Tito will never see orbit.
NASA needs to disappear completely - they are now working against the best interest of humanity's expansion into space.
IMHO, of course,
SatelliteBoy
4.
Soyuz 1 entered an uncontrollable spin. The spin lasted through reentry, and tangled the parachute shrouds when they deployed. The single occupant died on impact.
Souyz TM-1 (Soyuz 11) vented the internal atmosphere in orbit. This happened due to a bad valve setting when separating from the service section just prior to reentry. All three occupants suffocated.
Oh, and those rumors of earlier Soviet deaths are total B.S. I talked this over with a coworker whose job was watching the Soviet space program during the cold war. His work is now declassified. We know of all the fatalities during spaceflight - USSR 4, US 7.
Nasa and the rest of the ISS partners besides Russia do not appear to be against visitors to the station in principle. But they do object to visitors right now, because the station is under construction, and they don't yet know everything about running it. Having a visitor on board right now is going to increase risk. In a year or two, the station will be in better shape to receive visitors. But not right now.
Space is not ready for tourism. Yet.
A well-crafted lie appears unquestionable - Dama Mahaleo
We pressured the Russians, hard, to de-orbit Mir.
They basically did it to please us so they could devote more resources to the ISS.
They could have told the ISS to screw itself and maintained Mir - they went from be a leader to a partner.
Let the Russians send the guy up. It's the least we can do for them.
It's a mistake to treat the Russians with disrespect - we can a learn a lot from them if we get rid of our arrogant attitudes.
This space tourism is different though. The ocean is aready commercialized. Up in space there arent many trawlers to crash into. And this guy is gonig to be essentially a passenger- not a pilot.
So the sub incident has no bearing.
NASA thinks its OK for them to send school teachers into space and get them killed, but not for a civilian to sign a disclaimer and finance his own trip?
This could even be a good thing- leading to more space tourism. If there isnt enough room for a civilian or two on every trip- then we could simply make more stations.
Can anyone think of a good reason not to commercialize space? I'm perplexed.
-
Pt 1. Submarines show us what happens when civilians go on military bases. Not sure what they show us, the Navy has resumed taking VIPs on board subs. The Navy does it because they want to keep folks interested in supporting submarines. Seems to me the same strategy just might pay off for the ISS.
-
Pt 2. Not a tourist destination. No, but it may as well be one. There isn't a hell of lot of science taking place up there and if you look at Nasa's web site, not much of anything else except keeping the thing aloft.
-
Pt 3. The Russians should get out of the project. Why? If they chose to fund it by selling seats, who are you to tell them to get out of the project? Will you replace the hundreds of millions they're kicking in if they follow your advice and get out?
-
Pt 4. Bad and dangerous. Bad? Not sure why. Dangerous. Probably but that's Tito's call, not yours.
Nasa looks like a bunch of "my way or the highway" freaks trying to control who, and when, they let people on board. The fundamentals are they don't want Americans to hear the equivalent of the Japanese journalist saying he hates the ride. They've had astronauts puke in space and you didn't hear about it because Nasa made sure you didn't. Now they can't control what Tito says so they're damned if they'll let him go. They don't see an upside and they're scared he'll make Nasa look like fools. Only problem is, given the way they're handling Tito, they're doing a good job of looking foolish all by themselves.Either way Nasa has lost this fight - they either cave in and let him on board or they hold their ground and look like idiots who are wasting $20 million. Maybe a letter to my congressman asking why we spend so much on Nasa when they turn down paying customers is in order. I'm sure there are more Mr. Titos would much rather ride the shuttle to the ISS.
I think it is extremely wrong of them to assume just because they built a portion of the station they can put whoever they want on it. The ISS is an international effort, after all. But I don't think they're doing this out of any sort of ego trip.
They're just cash poor, and really, it's more like a survival tatic. If they can't do this sort of thing, sending tourists, they won't be able to keep their space exploration efforts going and will have to join the ESA or something. Talk about a morale blow for a one-time superpower.
They are really going to push the commercial side of space exploration in the comming years. It might be a good thing for everyone...
...or maybe not.
What do you mean any of our Skylabs...while there were multiple skylab missions, there was just one actualy skylab....plus skylab wasn't a space station. It was a room in space constructed from apollo module parts.
NASA has only had 2 fatal accidents, the Apollo 1 in a training exercise, _not_ in flight, and the Challenger explotion. How many Russian cosmonauts have died in accidents?
"Nobody writes jokes in base 13." - Douglas Adams
If he has 700 hours and is practically a professional cosmonaut, russia should make him one and assign him to a mission on Mir. I mean it is not like NASA can tell Russia what cosmonauts they can use!
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Your cessna is an f-18?
I see what you are saying... that having some training makes a guy dangerous. However, I think that if the head of cosmonaut training thinks he's ready, who am I to say otherwise?
The other thing is that you having 100hrs in a cessna, which is a fair amount, is NOT the same as having 100 hrs in a Flight Safety simulator of an f-18. I would change the "Practically a Fighter Pilot" to "Practically ready for IFR training", or perhaps, "Practiacally ready for twin prop training".
I've tried my darndest, but have yet to make apples out of oranges. Lastly, I think you can get training in a russian military jet trainer for around $20,000 US... If you want I'll get you the link... bcarlson@idiotusers.com
"If voting could really change things, it would be illegal. " - Revolution Books, NY
Read This article at cnn.com, and you will see that Dennis Tito has over 700 HOURS of training, and is "practically a professional cosmonaut" in the words of Pyotr Klimuk, head of the cosmonaut-training base.
"If voting could really change things, it would be illegal. " - Revolution Books, NY
--Don't mind me, I just spent the last 2 hours in alt.beer
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
If the user just went through 700+ hours of training and was certified and one of the major partners of the company wanted him to have this access, I probably would not have too much of an issue, as long as assurances were made that the role would be limited. Tito probably will just be told to stay in a corner and don't touch. But if part of his training was to assist in activities and if Russia felt he was properly trained, who are we to say he is not qualified?
--Don't mind me, I just spent the last 2 hours in alt.beer
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
a) NASA is really scared of losing another civilian after last time. Really, really scared. Last time there was a significant risk of closing them down entirely. If NASA screws up and kill Tito in the ISS they are in big, big trouble. And its not all that unlikely; space stations are much more fragile than you might suppose. Fire in space is BAD news for example.
b) Canada doesn't or shouldn't care about whether there is a civilian aboard or not. It doesn't materially affect the chances of a successful mission. Did NASA put them up to this? Does a fish swim? Does a British Prime Minister support every American president at every turn? You betcha.
c) the only reason that Tito isn't trained is because NASA refused to let him be trained. To turn around and state that he hasn't been trained and therefore can't launch is tantamount to NASA saying: "we decide who goes up and who doesn't, don't bother arguing". Yeah right. International, Space Station. Real international. Under the rules team member is chosen exclusively by the country of origin.
d) NASA can't actually physically stop him going up. The Russians have the launch vehicle and he is to launch from Russia. If he gets to the ISS NASA has ackowledged that he will NOT be stopped from going anywhere in the ISS.
e) if NASA actually succeed in forcing Tito to step down or whatever they will NEVER live it down. What kind of example of a supposedly capitalistic country does this make? Aren't NASA supposed to represent the aspirations of America at all? Sorry, you can't go because you've worked hard and you're rich.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"...how about bathroom attendant?
John Glen is/was in much better shape than one might think. He flew an F-15 solo in 1997 and pulled 8 or 9 g's. I also remember reading about him running 2-3 miles per day at age 80.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
I'm not an actor, but I play one on tv.
It is sort of similar to the Problem of the US Navy submarine submarine hitting the tourist boat, because of the civilians on board.
but in a more ordinary context, the sysadmins can relate to this. Under what conditions would you allow a user into the server/router closet to twiddle with the knobs and watch the flashing lights? Even if it was a paying customer of the company, and the system also doubled as a kick ass gaming lan.
How long before things like this are treated only as somebodies toy to ride? I grant some PR value, but ...
Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
...let them run their own space station! They still haven't learned to be part of an International Community where you don't just say "well, I'm Russia, so there". Sorry, but that just doesn't hold water anymore. If everyone else involved in ISS says he doesn't go, then they're looking at a hefty refund. Maybe they should have tried harder to keep Mir up there.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Tough crap for the Russians. They are an equal partner...not just with the US, but all the countries involved in ISS. Canada said no, too, so tough luckski! It's sad to see Russia too poor to keep their station aloft and then pandering to the quickest $20million in their purse when they have a magnitude more experience in space than the US. Shame, shame, Putin.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
No. The Soyuz launch is the Russian space program. The ISS is an international effort. The guy can stay in the Soyuz and enjoy his stay there.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Ugh. God knows how they trained him...
Now, if space craft go too fast, comrade, use station for cushioning. Worked good last time. We fix the leaks later.
And yes, I would say that if the other countries told Russia to dump their guy, they should forget about it. Everyone keeps making it a U.S. vs Russia issue when there are other countries that have said NO.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Ahem. I'm going to recycle a (very bad) joke from the Challenger disaster.
Q: What were Christa McAuliffe's last words before the space shuttle blew up?
A: "What's this red button?"
Q: What were the pilot's last words before the space shuttle blew up?
A: "Don't touch that!"
Simply put - an inanimate piece of hardware doesn't have anything close to the trouble-making potential of a walking (well floating, I guess) breathing, living human being up in space.
Apparently Tito's trained for 700 hours or so in Russia. That's around four months of 8/hour a day training, five days a week. U.S. astronauts and, I would imagine, Russian cosmonauts, train for YEARS to go up in the space shuttle after being filtered through some extremely difficult training programs. They know what to do in an emergency because they've been trained ad nauseum on procedures and because they have the physical and mental aptitude to handle crisis situations.
There's just too many things that Tito could possibly screw up on or just not know about in an emergency. Just because he's been successful in making money doesn't mean he's qualified to go to the ISS.
I can see space tourism working. Just not space tourism to a functioning scientific facility.
Tigris
They sold a trip to Mir, that was the agreement. They owned Mir. They don't own the ISS. It is being planned, manufactured, and financed by several different countries. The truth is, Russia isn't shouldering an equal share of the cost.
I'm sure this situation was never planned for during the initial discussions with other countries before they committed to building the station. Since it was never planned for, it should not be allowed. All countries involved should remain in full compliance with their initial plans for construction, in the name of cooperation. To me this is Russia's problem to deal with. They sold something they could not provide in the end. They should refund the money.
But then again .. we never invented McDonalds .. so I think that actually puts us ahead ..
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
John Glenn was trained as a NASA astronaut. He was trained for emergency situations on the shuttle and was also there as a mission specialist performing experiments as any other astronaut who's not a pilot or involved in some other specialized task might be. Tito, on the other hand, is not NASA trained to be of assistance if there is an emergency situation. If there is an emergency situation in orbit, there are very few people and there is very little space to maneuver. It's very important that everyone who is able knows exactly how to deal with that situation. Astronauts and cosmonauts alike are trained exhaustively for all sorts of bizarre possible scenarios. Tito was trained to visit MIR. He wasn't even given full cosmonaut training. If he is given the kind of extensive training that Glen had for the shuttle, or (more appropriately) the kind of training that the Alpha team has had before visiting the station, then more power to him. I think it's a tremendous breakthrough for a civillian to go to the ISS-- but I think it's a terrible risk to take unless he's properly prepared. He's paying for an incredible vacation, but this vacation necessarily comes with responsibilities. Lives are at stake, even if we discount the time, energy, and money that have gone into getting the ISS this far.
Do something about world hunger. Click here
Tit-for-tat international politics never ceases to amaze me. Nations quibble like toddlers on the playground.
With that in mind, I think your synopsis of Russian-American politics is somewhat one-sided. I'll link this CNN article just so you can get some perspective.
On a less emotional note, John Glen was sent up on a relatively routine shuttle mission. We understand the problems, we have lost only one craft, and we have been training these folks for many years. OTOH, Tito is going to be sent up to a new station, with unknown problems. To make matters worse, he is going to be in the Professionals hair for two weeks. Again, anyone who has worked in a lab, or even a production environment, knows the worst thing is visitors or the boss interrupting the project.
I wish Mir could have stayed up for another year or two. It was a known quantity with known problems. Russia could have sent up a couple tourists a month. If I had the money, I would pay to go. The fact that they crashed Mir shows their real commitment to tourism and the real value of this venture.
Yes, Tito did pay the Russians, maybe thats why NASA is against it in the first place. Its their space station too, where's their cut?
Jimmy
People here (slashdot) say that the Russian's should have consulted with NASA on this project, this is true, it is the International Space Station after all, But Russia are part of the International effort to build the International Space Station and their fiancial situation is rather important to the completion of the ISS.
There has been an awful lot of critism of the Russian space program and what they can offer the ISS. Shall I remind you that Russia, whilst having 1/18th of the funding that NASA has have managed to succesfully maintain a space station for 15 years. 15 years is a lot of experience, and whilst the ISS is shiny and new it may not be an issue, but what will happen in 10, 15 years. it is that sort of experience that will pull it through.
The point that I am trying to make is that this IS NOT a cut and dry, black and white issue. Russia have the right to facilitate their own space program, just as NASA has the right to question the validity of a tourist on the ISS. Once we start saying that one faction is more Right than the other we are putting them in charge of the ISS and then it is no longer the ISS but the ASS, RSS or the CSS etc... and then there will be ownership over space, by a nation, and that scares the Crap out of me.
In three words,
Miliatrisation
Of
Space
and THAT is as scary as all fuck.
Trav
Leg Godt!
Getting things into space for profit has been standard practice for quite some time. This is just a slightly different angle.
---
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
I don't think you understand the situation. This is just a manifestation of simmering resentment from the Russians, over many issues.
The US has claimed the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty is no longer valid and is violating it, which seriously pisses off the Russians.
Americans have also been meeting rebels from Chechnya, which has upset the Russian administration. Add to it their conflicting views in Eastern Europe and the expelling of spies by the sack load, and you have plenty of trouble.
From the Russian point of view, there's the wounded pride of a fallen superpower and resentment at a right-wing US president trying to revive the cold war. So naturally, they try to fight back in every way they can.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has called the ABM treaty ``ancient history.''
Surely you can't casually dismiss a ballistic missile treaty and expect them to hold on to their end of the bargain in carrying a tourist abroad?
w/m
Is it 20 million, like Tito paid? Is it the whatever the market will bear? Is it actual expenses + a 10% profit margin?
The space programs are the culmination of years of research, expenditures, and a few deaths. It trivializes it when Tito, John Glenn, or anybody else who doesn't belong up there gets to go for a ride.
It also pisses me off, because Tito's 20 million ride has been heavily subsidized by the pre-existing space problems of several nations. If Tito needs to get into space that badly, let him fund his own friggin space program.
Should we really be burning off hundreds of thousands of gallons of propellant (with unknown environmental cost) for the sake of tourism? Visiting space is a little different than a field trip to New York City.
Please show some form of proof.. a link.. at least a statistic.. At bare minimum why don't you tell us how many Russians vs how Many Americans have died in flight? Last I've heard it's 4 Russians vs 7 Americans have died in flight.
I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!
They should just treat Tito the same as any other russian astronaut. They shouldn't care how russia picks their people to go into space, either through some testing program, or large amounts of cash or by seeing who can run furthest through siberia naked. It's russian's space program and they should be able to do what they want. The ISS is a joint venture but the US isn't liable for who russia brings into space. I personally think it's about damn time to bring commericialism into space, this is exactly what NASA needs, to sparc up some interest amongst the civilians again.
I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!
If Tito does go to the ISS I hope they pay atention and don't run into a Japanese Fishing Satellite.
Probably the CAF is just branching out.
No relation to Happy Monkey
Not very long after Garn's flight, they sent up Christa McAuliffe, a schoolteacher, who 9 minutes after takeoff got blown up into a million little smithereens along with the other astronauts and the Shuttle she was launched on.
Yes I must have confused the 9 minute figure with some other disaster. After 9 minutes the shuttle would be most of the way to orbit. The Challenger accident is discussed in detail in Richard Feymnan's memoir "What do you care what other people think?". Sorry for the error.
The real question was whether russia would send up its own new space station. It wouldn't do that, neither would the Europeans, and whether NASA would have been able to receive stable funding is up in the stars.
Tito pays for the trip, and is even willing to accept tasks and training, it seems. If you challenge the assumption that if he got the money, he deserves going - you are a communist(TM by McCarthy).
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Tito paid the Russians, they okayed him, he should be allowed to go up.
It's sad to see NASA throw their wait around when Russia has a magnitude more experience in space than the US. Check duration records, Russia, 430+ days, US, 84.
I thought Russian fatality rates were about par for the course, astronauting is dangerous.
Though I've never heard of them losing 7 at once.
Perhaps it represents a change in status for NASA that they don't want. With the advent of what is essentially chartered service, perhaps NASA views themselves as less worthy. After all, for years they were at the forefront of what was popularly known as science (yes, I know that a large part of it was actually engineering...) and maybe they fear that in allowing passengers they will eventually be regarded as "airline pilots" and "support crew" rather than an august scientific body.
I think it is about time to separate the truly scientific parts of NASA away from the engineering pieces, commercialise the latter and get on with life. I think that the good folks in NASA management ought to realise that throughout the course of history, it was never the groundbreakers and explorers who wound up owning the resources, but those who commercialised the resources and transport.
If you don't believe me, look around at all the bank and university admin. buildings, and see who's names are on them.
*whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"
I think they should send Tito Jackson into space just to piss this guy off.
Tito paid for his trip when, in 1997? Has NASA made any moves to give Tito the training he needs? No, they dragged their feet and waited until it's too late, and now they're putting up a stink about him being untrained. As Government agencies worried about funding go, NASA has to be about the dumbest... they seem to shy away from any sort of publicity.
Go Lakers!
At least when you go to Russia to take a joy ride in a Mig the taxpayer doesn't pay for it.
In the US whenever the Blue Angel's takes a VIP or a media personality (who gets the same "training" as the Mig joy riders) up for a joy ride the taxpayer pays for the ride. I believe the Blue Angels provides about 100 "joy rides" a year. Sadly though, in light of the submarine incident, the new rules for civilians on such a flight no longer allow them to take the stick for a few minutes...bummer!
Yes the essential items, Health care, Education, Transit, Defense, Law enforcement & Welfare. In that order of importance :-) That way we could reduce taxes and get a higher return on the money the goverment steals from us.
Space is not a fundemental need, yes we go because it's fun but we still haven't explored or colonised the oceans, to me this is far more of a challenge than space.
Space was/is political rehoteric, something like the olympics. See we have a better system of goverment than you because we went to the moon or we won more medals. In truth it's just another stupid little endeavour. The trouble is it's a very expensive endeavour.
Russia isn't an equal partner in the International Space station. The United States bears the brunt of the cost of building the station. Also, the russians have been behind schedule on their modules the entire time. NASA guys had to prepare contingency plans because the early russian FGB power module almost didn't launch. Furthermore, the primary reason the russians are in this is political. Its really a symbol of post-cold war cooperation. We have the engineers and tech to do this ourselves, but we want to make it an international effort.
I'm sure there's a waiting list a mile long to get onto that station, and we shouldn't bump up a rich tourist to the top of the list simply because he paid off the russians.
1. the NASA mentality is that there is no margin for error. my dad works for NASA, and i can attest to atleast his crazy triple-backup contingency plan ways.
2. sending people up in the space shuttle is different than the ISS, they've flown over a hundred shuttle flights... the ISS is a newer technology and initially we've got to prioritize science and engineering goals over tourism, if even just for the safety concerns... (that's why sending up john glenn is different from this guy)
i wonder just how much hype there is in going into space. this is bascially a technology that has been around for fifty years. its not exactly a state secret. the engineers have been paid, but access to the knowledge is fundamentally barred.
which set of cowardly meglamaniacs are guiding us into stagnation?
As long as Tito goes through the proper training regimen, and is certified by NASA, he can't be much more of a liability than John Glenn was when he went up a few years ago. Glenn, though trained as an astronaut, was way past his prime, physically, and might have been a liability in a crisis situation. Tito is younger and (I would guess) stronger, and would have less physical limitations. When Glenn's last flight returned to earth, the astronauts were not allowed to leave the shuttle right away, because Glenn had become sick in the cockpit and they didn't want to embarrass him.
I can understand the Canadian's reticence to send Tito up with their robotic arm, as he wouldn't be able to help unless he was specifically trained on that mission, but he should be able to go at some point, having made the deal with Russia long ago.
The point of the ISS is international cooperation in space. I don't have a problem with a civvie visiting the ISS so soon - I have a problem with the Russians working a deal with Tito when it should have been a decision made and agreed upon by all ISS partners. I think it's ludicrous that the Russians are selling seats on the ISS and they just expect everyone else to just live with it. That's rather like owning a one-room apartment with a few friends, then someone invites their mother over to live in the one-room apartment for a couple weeks, just for fun, without asking anyone else.
I think that trained turists should be allowed on the ISS. First of all the amount of revenue that the Russian space program can bring in by flying tourists will help their cash starved space program and perhaps even the country to some degree. This is far better than having the Russians selling weapons to unfriendly countries to keep their fragile economy running. Secondly NASA should support this by setting training guide lines and making sure that if the candidate 'washes out' of the training he can't go. Let's face it going into space is not like booking a flight to San Francisco.
We are all arguing over whether its alright for Tito to pay the Russians to take him up there. But here's a bigger question: as people come closer to winning the x-prize, what happens if one of those entries winds up on the docking port of the ISS one afternoon? It is an international space station, and you'd think anyone would be allowed to come and goas they please...
-MR
-Michael Roy Some people are like Slinkies. Not really useful, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down
They didn't just do it first... they have done it the longest. The Russians are better than EVERYONE ELSE at long duration space flight, and not because they did it first. Their technology may be antiquated, but their experience with that aspect of space exploration dwarfs every other country that has undertaken the endeavor.
As an example, Mir may have been a junk heap, but the damned thing lasted 15 years. That's 10 years longer than its design specifications. We couldn't even make any of our Skylabs last their full stated duration. Also, the Russians hold every record for long duration space exposure... EVERY ONE OF THEM!
Think before you open you anus to speak.
How do I set a laser printer for stun?
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.
... you pays your money, you get your dreams. It's the american way. This guy has shown real determination to get into space, and if the russians are willing to allow him honorary cosmonaut status and train him up, that's their business.
I heard he cried when the Mir crashed, and he obviously has a contract with Baikonur. Let the guy up there, set the precedant. As long as he is demonstrably not a risk to his fellow shipmates, what's the big deal?
Ben^3 (saving those pennies, dreaming the dream)
The Slashdot Paradox: "100% Overrated"
If Tito paid these Russkies back in 97.. why the hell didn't he go up to Mir in the 4 years since?
We've already got that.
As soon as we semi-privatized space developemtn we opened the door to this sort of thing.
Space is not a military project though it does have national security aspects to it; astronauts and cosmonauts adjust and repair classified satellites, and both space agencies shoot up spy satellites in unmanned missions on behalf of national security.
However, after the Cold War the priority of space went lower again. The the commercial cachet of space was one of the things that many space agencies around the world, but especially the Russians, used to raise funds for their ailing program.
So, is space for war, or science, or money? Now that we have multiple agencies with different reasoning on this issue conributing to a single space station, we had better get a treaty together settling these issues as a matter of international law. And quick.
I wouild think that the US, with its great plans for weapons in space (DUMB!!!), is probably the least likely to go for a more commercialized space program. Of course it's the best funded, too. Probably the best solution is to give more aid to developing countries so they can enjoy the benefits of space without having to sell them off to the highest bidder.
Some things are better left under state control.
Goat sex free since 2001
Hey all, my opinion is that this is a great opertunity. Say he doe go up, then he becomes a pionear for comersical space travel Correct. Will all i hear is that the average man will beable to go into space some day. Will if its anything like the air planes of the 20's and 30's, then the rith have to go up first. Then the market becomes big enough to drop prices. So realy let him go up. Now here is the BUT, how do yu make NASA shut up and leave the guy alown. Will i know this is not a new idea but lets present it again Train the guy, set it up so he has a few eperements of somthing to run or somthing like that. He did work for nasa, so he has to be a smart man. Give him a little training in how to live in soace. No one said he had to learn how to fly the shuttle, just ride in it. So give him a few hours work per day and let him just relax and enjoy the view the rst of his time up there. My 2 cents plus 2 more
It's not like NASA would even be going out of their way to accomodate Russia; NASA would just be being polite and civil. You've really hit it on the nose, it's the least we can do.
It's good to be polite and civil to anyone with that many nukes, wouldn't you say?
Remember, this is the same country where you can fly in a MiG-29 jet fighter. Sure, there is talk about screening to make sure you don't croak but from reviews of the experience its more of a formality. I'm not against people paying there way into space, but I don't know that the ISS is the right place for it. It's a scientific mission, and as we've seen with the recent U.S. submarine disaster civilians and expensive military or other hardware don't necessarily mix well.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
Look at this picture http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station /crew-1/hires/iss01e5127.jpg. The cool part is that they are also using WinAmp on board the station... I wonder what the RIAA thinks...
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
The recent submarine accident in Japan does, one would think, showcase the impact that civilians observers can have on safety in a comparable situation. It also illustrates that it takes bad planning and handling on the part of people who should know better to turn that potential impact into a tragic accident. The bottom line is, in any mission where safety is critical, all partners need to have the right to establish appropriate boundaries on non-mission critical personnel. On the other hand, Russia has every right to shoot anyone they want into space - on their own time, their own dime (and whatever they can get from adventurous richies) and on their own mission.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
Anyway, I'm confident that this will be worked out in a perfectly fair manner. Cobbled-together governmental alliances have proven to be rock solid. At least we're not forced to resolve this issue by less assured means, like private contracts.
Robert Hutchinson
Robert Hutchinson
Smash it. Smash it good.
Sell him tickets to Venus!
No, no, no -- you've got to take Dubya, and Detroit too... ;)
...he takes me with him.
So if the USA, and Russia, and Canada, and everyone else would open this arena up to corp's, everyday Joe's/Jane's, and promote free form space tourism/exploration/whatever, they will only help their own economies.
The US in it's colonial days gave away land in the then western frontier states to encourage expansion and settlement. It was chaos at times, and people lost their lives, but that's what exploration is all about. If anyone thinks their life can be kept in balance and peaceful by an all-knowing government, then they should pull their head out from between their legs. A lot more learning has been done by free-wheeling pioneers than by bloated governments.
Let the man go to space for $20 mil. Encourage it while you're at it.
I've been following the ISS story in the popular media for the past few years. Here are some points I'd like to highlight for folks. Sue CNN if some of this data is wrong : ) 1. The Russians held up ISS for 2 years since it took them so long to get their module completed. When it finally was, it didn't meet specs, so future missions will be needed to clean up after them. 2. The Russians used boosters the ISS nations supplied for ISS-related missions to extend the life of Mir. 3. The deal to put Tito into space was originally for a trip to Mir, not to ISS. He's Russia's problem. Let them take him up in Soyuz capsule for a few days. 4. The Russians have been in space longer, but they've been doing it far less safely and their technology is inferior. Historically, they've scored some major firsts, but their space program has only been quantitatively successful. 5. Other nations have been bankrolling the Russian contribution to ISS. I'm really surprised that so many people are sympathetic to Tito. Sure, I'd love to hit the lottery and buy a ticket into space. But, that's not a realistic dream for now.
All the other international partners have been opposed to Tito in lockstep with NASA since the beginning. The ESA, in particular, is opposed to it... There's an german astronaut currently in training; if this situation is amicably resolved, it will likely involve ESA paying for this guy to go up instead of Tito.
No one is challenging that Tito should be able to go up at some point. The issues, however, are that (a) he needs 6-8 weeks of training on the non-Russian side of the station, which he can't get before the flight, and (b) he doesn't have any sort of insurance for this sort of thing (and no one really knows what's required there).
However, there's no arguing that Russia really needs the money... the RSA's apparently been allocated by the Russian government about $150 million, so the $20 million that Tito is paying is not inconsequencial (like it would be for NASA).
Tito himself says he's unavailable for the next flight (in October) when the training and insurance issues could be resolved. How someone who's got $20 million to throw around can't make himself available any time he wants, I don't get, but anywayz...
--
Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
- Nietzsche
The ISS was not sent up there to cater to the whims of rich folk. What about the real astronauts that are on in the queue to go up? Is it fair to them to be possibly bumbed because someone has paid a huge amount of money?
When was the last time you saw the Los Alamos labs offering businessmen the opportunity to play with their equipment for a week if the price is right? Sensitive research ventures can't be the playpen of Wall Street, whether or not Wall Street has the cash to make it so.
Seems to me like the super-rich folks of the world can certianly come together and finance their own space station. Everybody throws in a couple hundred million, bam, you've got several billion dollars right there. Contract with the Russians for launching and ground control (those Mir controllers need _something_ to do). Then, charge the slightly-less-rich folks a couple million to visit. Wham bam space tourism.
-- "Flying is the art of falling and missing the ground"
I've a lot of comments suggesting that Tito's trip would promote shhoting civilians into space. Sort of a "trickle-down" effect. So what happens when something bad happens while he is up there? I know what will happen, civilians won't be allowed into space for a long time. 50 years? 100 years? I don't want to risk it. Tito should piss off. I'm writing my Senators to make sure that they know I don't like my taxes being used for his joyride.
__________________ Hey Moderators!! Fuck Off! Thanks.
Maybe what's really going on here is that the big government space agencies are fighting to protect their privileges to control access to space. If a private individual can buy their way into orbit, NASA loses its monopoly power. The whole politics- and privilege-based astronaut system starts to crumble. NASA is blind to the potential of space tourism; they're just looking to preserve their budget and the status quo.
What is so dangerous or difficult about being present on the ISS? Is NASA worried that Tito will open the airlock or get sucked into the toilet? Maybe they should consider designing a space station which doesn't require months of training to visit.
LOL!!!
It looks like a case of undecided authority here. Who's actually in charge of the space station? The russians? Americans? Or whoever's up there at the moment? Isn't there already policy in place, guidelines to help in making these decisions? Sounds really strange that there can be conflict over this issue. And the russians have picked a really terrible time to send him up. When there's things to do and the station's half constructed. Space is at a premium there.. sorry i meant pressurized space. He could just get in everyone's way.
see subject
The real point that seems to be missing is the great realization that the people from different countries aren't capable of getting along. It's one of the great truths from God that we fail to recognize. We want to think that eventually we will come together and all live as one, it will never happen. The French have proven themselves unable to get along with anybody for Christs sake, that should be a big clue for us right out of the gate.
I hope that at the very least we can agree to disagree, I hope and I pray that maybe we can all learn a lesson from the Canadians and be a little more civil to our neighbours.
Peace be with you
Oh that's mature. How very grown up of you. Hows about I take your testicle and smear honey all over them then throw you naked into a pit of starving Doberman Pinchers? You smarmy little ratard.
Yours,
Rabbi Schek
Peace be with you
I'm from the UK... here we call them ratards. But since you seem so well aquanted with the term I'm sure you know all about retards you pathetic incestuous little freak.
Yours,
Rabbi Schek
Peace be with you
This is another perfect example of why governments shouldn't be given the job of expanding humanity into space. I'd like to see more people actually trying to forge ahead into space, like Brian Walker, Rocketguy. Let the government do their little space station and satellite experiments while hundreds or thousands of individuals launch themselves towards the moon or the stars. Let Tito go. The Russians should tell the U.S. to shove it. If this was a commercial contract, and a supplier (as Russia is in this case) didn't follow through after being paid US$20 million, they'd be sued and any court on the planet would make them pay damages. If I were Tito, and they shafted me, even if they gave me my money back, I'd sue them over this just to prove a point.
It's the Canadian Space Agency, silly.
Sure the Russians have been sending satellites, people, and dogs into space for longer than the United States, but that really has no bearing on anything really.Just take a look at the track records of the two countries. I don't mean to brag, but Americans are pretty much top of the line with all this outer space stuff. Sure, we've lost some satellites, lost some lives, and made some mistakes, but everyone makes mistakes. Compare this to Russia... Oh wait, you can't seem to get a straight story from the Russian's about their manned space programs during the "space race". I've heard of several reports of cosmonauts perishing, rockets exploding, and Ministry Of Truth tactics concerning the goals of their missions. Even though this is the *International* Space Station I think it only makes sense that country that is best at the space biz (and has sunk the most cash into it) should have the most control over what goes on.
-Brandon
It's worth noting that though Russia and the US both payed for components of the space station, many of the US components were actually built in Russia. Sure, it's rediculous that this guy is going into space, just because he's got money, but frankly, that's Russia's problem. If we are to maintain any sort of pretense of this being an "International" space station, we should let Russia make it's own (bad) decisions. If he posed a serious risk the station itself, or to the lives of Americans we would have a right to intervene. But he does not. We'd do better to shut our collective mouth and be glad Russia does the same when we select who we want to send into space.
I do not have any arms or legs.