Russian Official Implies Foul Play In Mars Probe Failure 451
Back in November, Russia launched the Phobos-Grunt probe on a mission to return a soil sample from Mars' largest moon. Sadly, the probe malfunctioned, and never left orbit. It's due to crash into the Indian Ocean this weekend. An anonymous reader points out some interesting comments from a Russian official, Vladimir Popovkin, who obliquely suggested that interference from other countries was a possible cause of the failure. Quoting:
"Mr. Popovkin’s remarks to the newspaper Izvestia were the first high-level suggestion of nefarious interference. A retired commander of Russia’s missile warning system had speculated in November that strong radar signals from installations in Alaska might have damaged the spacecraft. 'We don’t want to accuse anybody, but there are very powerful devices that can influence spacecraft now,' Mr. Popovkin said in the interview. 'The possibility they were used cannot be ruled out.' ... Mr. Popovkin did not directly implicate the United States in the interview. But he said 'the frequent failure of our space launches, which occur at a time when they are flying over the part of Earth not visible from Russia, where we do not see the spacecraft and do not receive telemetric information, are not clear to us,' an apparent reference to the Americas."
Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Funny)
You want to fuck with us, fine. Build your own rocket, yankees.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course it would be remiss for anyone to rule out the US doing nasty things with technology, since they refuse to comment on anything but always turn up red-handed.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically the guy is blaming HAARP (it happened over Alaska when we couldn't see it).
Right. Now, how did we manage to get the satellite to point it's solar panels away from the sun [theregister.co.uk]? It's just the standard post Vodka blame game. I don't think anyone is really worried about it.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Insightful)
Wait, Alaska is pretty damn close to Russian territory. How would they not not be able to see their satellite while it was over HAARP? An honest question, adblock doesn't seem to be letting me get past the paywall like it usually does, so I can't read TFA.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Vladimir Putin (takes his shirt off and shakes fist at the sky): "DAMN YOU PALIN!!!"
Thats not the end of it either; Sarah Palin saw that from her house, and Todd got pretty upset at Putin's peacocking. Now Todd is eyeing Russia for a possible takeover by snowmobile. Their satellites don't stand a chance, they should just give them up now.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Interesting)
Worth noting there are almost two dozen HAARP-like, top secret and classified installations all over the world. All projecting massive eneergy levels into the atmosphere for "research". These are owned and operated by a handful of countries, including Russia.
What is know about these projects is that both the US DoD and USAF have been directly associated with all US installations and leaked + FOI documents indicate both the DoD and USAF histofically planned to use these facilities for climate/weather influence and/or control. Its also known since these early days they have branched out into various other types of "atmospheric research", which is currently classified. To put it bluntly, this in no way sounds like the typical Russian hot-air. Chances are reasonable, intentional or otherwise, one of these stations may have unduly influenced the operation of their rocket.
Now if we take very reasonable assumptions based on established facts and combine a little paranoia, we can come up with an interesting theory. NASA is basically defunct and there are powerful interests in the US who absolutely do not want to rely on Russia for space access. It wasn't until NASA' immediate space access was drawn into question that Russia's rockets suddenly started having problem; despite a long history of relatively high reliability. Worse yet, this easily falls well into the US' dirty tricks+plausable deniabilty combination it loves so much.
Tin foil hat? Maybe. But it doesn't mean its wrong either.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Insightful)
this in no way sounds like the typical Russian hot-air.
Why in fuck's sake would we (a) sabotage a scientific mission, and (b) piss off the people who carry us to the ISS?
Chances are reasonable, intentional or otherwise, one of these stations may have unduly influenced the operation of their rocket.
Do you have *any* rational evidence to support this hooch-addled paranoia?
Re: (Score:3)
Why in fuck's sake would we (a) sabotage a scientific mission, and (b) piss off the people who carry us to the ISS?
Indeed. It's quite obvious this is all the doing of SPECTRE; but government officials never listen!
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Insightful)
"Chances are reasonable, intentional or otherwise, one of these stations may have unduly influenced the operation of their rocket."
Actually that's insane. What is the (a) physics of doing so? (Heating the atmosphere over a wide patch is what they do to study ionosphere) What's the cross section of power applied directly on the satellite? Notice that when you want to aim something precisely (and hitting a satellite in orbit requires LOTS of precision) you need to use short wavelengths, like say an optical laser, and then you have to precisely compensate for atmospheric aberrations. The radio research facilities instead use wavelengths of a number of meters long, which of course diffracts and spreads out just a wee bit more.
And then what is (b) the motivation for doing so? In detail. Screwing with a scientific probe going to Mars? Dr Strangelove types aren't particularly impressed or care about some nerd spacecraft. What's in it for The Conspirators?
c) "there are powerful interests in the US who absolutely do not want to rely on Russia for space access" -- but are apparently insufficiently powerful to get the USA to spend the money to fund ongoing operations and develop the next generation simultaneously. Well, since in your conspiracy theory the US *is* in fact dependent on Russia, then why sabotage Russian rockets? Why not sabotage Russian rockets only after the US gets its space access back?
And besides, the US is is not dependent on Russia for space access overall: the military and intelligence communities happily continue to buy launches on expensive Boeing/Lockheed ULA rockets, it's just that NASA can't afford (isn't given funding for) these ones and will have to hitch rides on bargain basement SpaceX hardware in a few years.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Informative)
utter bullshit, the research at HAARP is open, scientists come from around the world to conduct experiments there with no security clearance, public tours are given, you can go tour the HAARP facilities.
Re: (Score:3)
My question was, for a civilian scientific launch of an object so close by, Russia couldn't obtain reasonably good visual and telemetric data either by simply politely requesting that the US not interfere with part of a purely scientific oper
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Insightful)
> It's just the standard post Vodka blame game. I don't think anyone is really worried about it.
The problem is, tossing blame like this is the first refuge of incompetent government. The next is constructing enemies, and then finally war. Redirect the rage of the people you ruined to someone else, and rather then remove you from power they will grant you even more.
Given how Russia has been behaving recently this is very worrying. If they have to blame America because their probe is backwards, then what about when something bigger fails? How long before the people have a (renewed) hate of the USA?
It's not a step to a new cold war, but it disconcertingly similar to the behavior we saw then.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is, tossing blame like this is the first refuge of incompetent government.
Except it's not the government, it's one politician. Surely whatever country you come from has a few politicians that make similarly ridiculous statements for domestic consumption. I know if you live in the US you will be under a constant barrage of such bullshit in the form of political attack ads. Similarly, what we have here is an obscure blow-hard trying to look appealing to Russian nationalists.
How long before the people have a (renewed) hate of the USA?
Any Russian who swallows this guy's story was already anti-US, just like the 'birthers' were anti-Obama long before they started denying his citizenship, or like 'truthers' were anti-Bush long before they started banging on about 'building 7'. In other words what we are looking at is common garden variety propaganda aimed directly at 'useful idiots', and Russia certainly doesn't have a monopoly on propaganda or idiots. None of this means I condone politicians spreading lies and half truths about anything, anywhere, but it's an unfortunate fact of life that propaganda has, and always will be, a primary tool of politics.
Now IF this was Putin making official speeches with this sort of crap in it, THEN your scenario might have legs. As it stands the GP's "post vodka blame game" is where I'd put my money.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Insightful)
Does the entire Iranian populace hate us? Do all the North Koreans hate us? Or is it just more convenient to believe that they do to make it easier when we start killing them...
No, you had it right the first time. The regime in those nations know that they can earn much more loyal support through (construction of) a common enemy than they can through any amount of good deeds (except perhaps the deed of constructing a free and democratic society, but i digress.) They do indeed cultivate hatred at every opportunity. You are correct that not everyone will fall for it, but enough of them will to generate the support the regime needs to do basically whatever they want. See Mccarthyism for an example, if you think construction of an enemy by any means necessary in order to garner supporters is a skill only dictatorial regimes posses. This is a tactic that nearly every government has used at some point, and as such it is very important not to downplay its presence or its effect.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't think that those places feature actual armed slave drivers who are holding hostage every single productive person in the country, do you? There will always be dissidents but by and large those nations have a stable base of people who genuinely agree with the regime about how they should feel regarding outside aggressors (like the US). Why do you think they take such pains to control all forms of media? A regime that requires as many armed guards as citizens is not going to last very long, they are very apt at using fear as inspiration. What better way to stave off rebellion than to convince the citizenry that the only thing worse than the current regime is the regime that wants to overthrow it?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, "hate" is perhaps a strong word, and rather uselessly unspecific anyways. There are all sorts of feelings like envy (as you point out), distrust, competitiveness / unrealized superiority, etc. How much these ever really develop into 'hate' depend on the individual... Some people hate their rivals, others just view them as, well, rivals (that they must beat). The idea is more the externalization their problems, establishment of a "them", and the the type of motivation it can lead to. Sometimes it's
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Interesting)
"Russians never had access to Levis"
Yes they did, at least a little. Foreigners were offered quite a bit of money/stuff to part with theirs. Burning them was *not* their subsequent use, btw.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Funny)
HAARP is the pet villain of practically every flavor of fun conspiracy lore there is. Weather control? Check. Mind Rays? Check. Communications with the Greys? Check. Interfering with Orgone flows to ensure the success of the fluoridation conspiracy? Check. Guiding black helicopters back to their spawning grounds to mate and reproduce? Check.
If he thinks that he can just waltz in and grab some time out of HAARP's very busy schedule to have it sabotaging his spacecraft, he has another thing coming. He'll have to fight for HAARP time with practically every conspiracy theorist out there...
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Interesting)
point it's solar panels away from the sun?
Well, theoretically, a very strong radar pulse could cause ionization around the star sensors, which would make the spacecraft unable to tell which way was up and which was down. That would screw up the solar cell deployment pretty badly.
That's a crazy scenario, about on par with believing that reptiloids control Switzerland, but like all crazy theories there's a tenuous path of logic behind it.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Informative)
Why is this so crazy? Now, I don't actually believe that HAARP has anything to do with this, but HAARP has 3.6 million watts at its disposal, and can concentrate that to achieve an ERP of 5.1 billion watts. If you concentrate enough RF on an electronic device you can screw it up in an almost infinite number of ways.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Informative)
HAARP is not a directional antenna that can point and "shoot down" a satellite. HAARP is an ionoshphere research program, that's why it only points straight up.
Secondly, if you can screw up a satellite with radar, then the said satellite will be completely fucked during the next major solar flare.
Thirdly, the OP idea is crazy because you can still see the sun and at least point the spacecraft in the right direction to the sun!!.
The bottom line is, there was major spacecraft malfunction. And it is not unique to this satellite. Russians have had malfunctions with Soyuz too, and that is something that is vital to ISS and US has contracted Russians to use Soyuz. Of course you could be for conspiracy theories that US destroyed its own space shuttles like Challenger.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:4, Informative)
The spacecraft's orbit [wikipedia.org] is too far south to pass over the HAARP site [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
...reptiloids control Switzerland
Silence John Smallberries! That's top sekrit!
Drag (Score:5, Informative)
Right. Now, how did we manage to get the satellite to point it's solar panels away from the sun?
I thought the theory as to why the spacecraft is in a stable, albeit backwards, orientation was simple: there are enough air molecules in that orbit to apply pressure to the large solar panels, which causes drag and thus rotates the craft so the panels are towards the back. Just like a shuttlecock in badminton.
Re:Simple solution...no more Russian taxis to ISS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
We are talking about Russia where a significant portion of the residents still believe the moon landing was a fake [huffingtonpost.com] 40 years later.
Because Russians know that a significant portion of US residents still believe that fossils are fake and can't imagine people like these landing on the Moon any time soon, not to mention minus fourty years from now. :).
Re: (Score:3)
You know, it will teach them to launch a probe when a SG team is incoming. we share with them the team schedule, they know when to hold launches.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, obviously... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia, Phobos Grunts you!
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget a little IDKFA.
Re: (Score:3)
Malice? (Score:5, Informative)
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Re:Malice? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Malice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Since HAARP has HF, VHF and UHF, and not satellite microwave systems, the stupidity is clearly on a Russian looking for a scapegoat, who has joined the ranks of scientifically ignorant wingnuts who blame HAARP for everything that was blamed on Satan and Witchcraft 400 years ago
Re:Malice? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have seen discussions on HARP on Slashdot before - and some interesting comments relating to it that have always stuck with me.
One story was about a grandfather who worked on HARP - said he told stories of having to be taken to the dentist by armed guard and watched while he went under gas in case he started to talk. Then about 3 posts down someone basically tells the same story and ends with his grandfather telling him: "I dont know exactly what we are building, but it ain't for watching the weather, thats for sure."
So before we all go "tin foil hat alert!" this may be more than a case of 'whipping up enemies' and 'passing the buck' - this might be a little glimpse into a world we are rarely told of...
Re:Malice? (Score:5, Funny)
So because HAARP is secret and isn't for watching the weather, that means it is the cause of a Russian Mars probe failure?
How does logic work in your world?
Re: (Score:3)
One of the applications listed in the patent upon which HAARP is based is attacking satellites through localized heating of the atmosphere. Whether it can actually do that or not is an exercise for the reader.
Re:Malice? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is one of the reasons why Russia is still best considered a second world nation. And will be for some time.
Re: (Score:3)
That's by choice. Saying that we couldn't is really disingenuous when we could have maintained the shuttles for a few more years or have had a replacement by now. There's a lack of motivation. Additionally, we could always buy space with the Russians or the Europeans, which wasn't the case when we created our shuttle program. Plus, I doubt very much that we couldn't build another rocket like the sorts we used to use. We too would have the ability to go into orbit conveniently if we had never progressed beyo
Re:Malice? (Score:4, Informative)
We too would have the ability to go into orbit conveniently if we had never progressed beyond rockets.
That about sums up your non-argument. Well I too could have grown the cow myself but I preferred to buy the steak at the butcher.
And if you think Russia is ruled by corruption and mafia control as you put it, you have no clue. Russia is ruled by chaos, real money and a government trying to be strong. It's true, you can bribe your way avoiding speeding tickets or into getting business contracts. But good luck bribing any politician that has any say in governing the country or one of it's regions. One of the richest persons on this planet rots not in a prison, but in a penal camp. He didn't even pose any real threat to Putin and the government, it was just to make a point and eating his companies and resources.
And still, carrying persons and stuff up to and down from the ISS without any fatal failure since the US stopped the shuttle. Even though you call them second world.
Re:Malice? (Score:4, Informative)
Yep, exactly. Going to Mars is really hard, heck even getting to orbit is tough. So many things have to work or else the whole thing fails. This spacecraft failure is most likely one particular item that was not thoroughly tested (my personal speculation). It does remind me of a mention in the book "Korolev" by James Harford where it describes when Soviets launched a satellite that could have been the first to detect Van Allen radiation belts. However the tape recorder onboard failed because engineer responsible said no more ground testing is needed (I may have forgot some of the details, don't have the book handy right now). My impression is some of the spacecraft people wanted to do some more tests or add some backup circuitry but the engineer insisted the tape recorder will work (I guess it records signal data for later transmission back to ground stations). Tape recorder failed or the data was out of calibration. But I'm thinking this was very ambitious as those early years was a steep learning curve for both US and USSR.
If you have not, read the book. It is very detailed, almost have to indulge yourself into "thinking Russian" (i.e. like reading Anna Karenina) since it is a different culture for engineers. http://www.amazon.com/Korolev-Masterminded-Soviet-Drive-America/dp/0471327212 [amazon.com]
Alrighty I see we have "In Soviet Russia" comments, how about a car analogy? This is /. afterall.
Failure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Putin is taking russia back soviet style paranoia (Score:5, Insightful)
And with that goes blaming everyone except yourself for your public failures.
Re:Putin is taking russia back soviet style parano (Score:4, Insightful)
I doubt Putin has much to do with it. Conspiracy theories have always been very popular in that part of the world. It's unusual to see a publich official spouting off in that manner, but it's not particularly surprising either.
Re:Failure... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
And getting people to LEO is great because... oh yeah...
Re:Failure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, you are probably right, but remember, the US is still reduced to renting a ride from the Russians to get a man into LEO now that we (stupidly) killed off the STS. Which one is the real failure?
The real failure would have been to keep flying the Shuttle. Even if you ignore that the NASA budget isn't increasing after inflation, you still have to explain why it's better to chuck billions on a few really expensive launches rather than spend that money on actual somewhat useful space activities. You'd also have to explain why we're relying on a vehicle that would be an accident away from ending the program.
Re: (Score:3)
You make it sound like there wasn't good science coming out of the space program. The real problem is that this shutdown is coming at the time when a significant number of astronauts are retiring and it means that we're dependent upon the Russians to provide us with access to space.
To some extent the same goes for NASA in general I'd wager, you've got this point where all the folks who were hired on in the 60s and 70s are either retired or in the process of retiring and you have nothing for the new hires to
Most likely sabotage from the future. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Most likely sabotage from the future. (Score:4, Funny)
I like your theory and would like to subscribe to your newsletter
Not even good lies (Score:2)
'the frequent failure of our space launches, which occur at a time when they are flying over the part of Earth not visible from Russia, where we do not see the spacecraft and do not receive telemetric information, are not clear to us,'
We are to believe that the Russians are completely blind when the spacecraft are on the other side of the Earth? They have no satellites relaying telemetry? Laughable. (Apparently, so is their space program).
Re:Not even good lies (Score:5, Insightful)
Laughable. (Apparently, so is their space program)
Well it's not like their joke of a space program put up the first satellite in orbit, the first man (and woman) in space, the first person to orbit the earth, the first moon probe, the first Mars probe, the first Venus probe, or the first space station--or are currently the only country in the world with the capability of launching humans into space. They're SUCH a joke! Let's all laugh at their weak-ass space program. Ha ha ha.
Re: (Score:3)
It is not their past achievements that are laughable but the depths of stupidity they are digging into now. Much like their subs, long the pride of their fleet that ended up rusting on the Kola peninsula & then sinking themselves, the Russian space program now has idiots in charge that look for scapegoats instead of seeking to correct their problems.
Re:Not even good lies (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's take a closer look at this list:
1) Sputnik 1 (first satellite): 1957
2) Yuri Gagarin (first man in space, first orbit): 1961
3) Valentina Tereshkova (first woman in space): 1963
4) Luna 2 (first [successful] moon probe): 1959
5) According to Wikipedia, every Soviet Mars mission prior to Mariner 4 (first Mars fly-by [US]) failed.
6) According to Wikipedia, every Soviet Venus mission prior to Mariner 2 (first Venus fly-by [US]) failed.
7) Salyut 1 (first space station): 1971
So other than their currently operating Soyuz craft, the most recent entry on your list is over 40 years old. I understand the point you were trying to make, but you have to keep in mind that things change, and the current Soviet space program is not nearly as noteworthy as the space program you described.
Re: (Score:3)
So other than their currently operating Soyuz craft, the most recent entry on your list is over 40 years old. I understand the point you were trying to make, but you have to keep in mind that things change, and the current Soviet space program is not nearly as noteworthy as the space program you described.
You actually hit on the real difference there, in the mistake you made.
The current Russian space program is not nearly as noteworthy as the Soviet space program.
They're operating in a vastly different world now, and a vastly different political and economic climate. Its not the same space program. There's a continuity of people and facilities, to some extent, but its a total fallacy to pretend the current Russian space program has ANYTHING in common in that regard with the Soviet one. Its just fading echoes
Re:Not even good lies (Score:5, Funny)
They share the glory of launching humans into space with China at the moment. On the other hand, Russians don't have a good track record of creating a brand new design for a while. Kliper is dead, their shuttle did one flight and they haven't managed to design a single human-rated spacecraft since Soyuz and that was in 1960s. Sad fact: Both Russia and Western countries have stagnated.
Well what do you expect? WWII ended 66 years ago; all of their Germans must be dead by now, so there's no one around to design new stuff.
No (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So if you think your rocket is crashing because the Eskimos are shooting HF beams at it, then don't fly rockets over Alaska.
Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)
Because it would be research which the US would not need to fund, and therefore free funds to invest in other projects, and which could be used to help plan what to research next.
For example.
Re: (Score:3)
" but there really isn't much value in science for science's sake." /., right there. *Golf Clap*
Ladies and gentle men, the most ignorant thing ever said on
Pretty much everything you do comes from doing science for science's sake.
Do you think Franklin wanted to see if lightning was the same thing as electricity so you could have a tablet computer?
Do you think Tesla made his discoveries so you could listen to the Radio?
Science for science sake shows how certain things work in nature. Sometimes that can be dev
HAARP (Score:4, Funny)
Re:HAARP (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe this also account for the 20 feet of snow Alaska is getting too.
Or maybe, just perhaps, it's winter time. In Alaska. You know, that cold, snowy place Up North. Tundra. Arctic Circle. Polar Bears.....
The Russians Always ignore the obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Whenever one is dealing with sending rockets to Mars, particularly Phobos, once has to take into account some pretty basic facts about Phobos:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leather_Goddesses_of_Phobos [wikipedia.org]
Once you deal with that, then you can start blaming Eskimos in North America for downing your rocket.
Or it could be math (Score:2)
What else is foul play? (Score:2)
That submarine? Pipelines? The military planes which crash and burn at every air show in the world?
Russia still can't get over the fact that, in terms of being some sort of global player they're about as important as Spain. They didn't have any problems when they were sealing dogs in rockets and bunging them into orbit - that's about their level.
One of my co-workers is Russian ... (Score:5, Interesting)
One of my co-workers is Russian, and he still keeps in touch with friends and family back home. We've been discussing the recent anti-government protests in Moscow, and he says that the government-controlled media (which includes all of TV and radio, and many of the newspapers) has gone into overdrive accusing the U.S. for being behind almost everything that's currently going wrong in Russia. In his words, "Blaming America is all they have left."
Implying that the U.S. is responsible for their spacecraft failure is just part of that game. Russia has been launching spacecraft for decades, and it is silly to think that they didn't learn how to deal with contingencies such as deliberate jamming long ago.
Re: (Score:3)
I too have some Russian friends, and by virtue of where I live, they are all part of or work for companies that support the space industry.
This is why I'm constantly bothered by all of the comments about Russian abilities, and how they are inept and somehow backwards when it comes to high technology.
Just because the Russians don't spend millions to develop some whiz-bang technology to do something in space a certain way that can already be accomplished by other means doesn't make them backwards. The whole a
Re: (Score:3)
Tanks during WW2 weren't reliable, no matter who made them. Still, the better reliability of the Sherman combined with the massive numbers in which they were manufactured them was probably a huge factor in why the US was so successful in wearing down the Wehrmacht. (obviously there were other factors, bombing of factories, fuel logistics issues, the German loss of mines producing metals vital for armor hardening, and etc.)
As for T-34 vs Sherman, it would really depend on which models of each tank you were
Re:and they are right ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Medvedev threatened prosecution (Score:5, Interesting)
Russian President Medvedev threatened to prosecute those responsible for the space failures [msn.com]. No surprise that the individuals in question are now looking to blame someone else.
Re:Medvedev threatened prosecution (Score:5, Interesting)
Russian President Medvedev threatened to prosecute those responsible for the space failures [msn.com]. No surprise that the individuals in question are now looking to blame someone else.
Yeah, THAT will sure attract new talent to their space program! Alex, I'll take Perverse Incentives for 500 rubles, please!
And never mind the equally important point that the current team at least learned something and won't repeat this particular mistake again. Can't say that for the new team.
Interference is probable, but on purpose? (Score:2)
Interference among the RF spectrum occurs all the time. I don't doubt that something some country or another has done could interfere with it. Now whether it was the US, China, or some other organization, it still might be accidental.
It's all my fault. (Score:3)
On Nov 9, 2011 I unintentionally pointed my new 5mw green laser pen into the sky.
Sorry Phobos-Grunt, I didn't see you there.
The Cold War mentality again (Score:5, Informative)
Regrettably, the russians have gone back to that silly Cold War mentality. Their own propaganda tells them constantly that they are unique, superior to the others, and surrounded by vile enemies that miss no chance to do harm to russia. Recall that when their submarine Kursk exploded and sank, the first instinctive reaction of the regime and its propaganda was to blame a US sub for colliding with, and thus sinking, Kursk.
aaaaaah, historically (Score:4, Informative)
Their own propaganda tells them constantly that they are unique, superior to the others, and surrounded by vile enemies that miss no chance to do harm to russia
that was exactly the case. the moment revolution happened in russia, the leader of the FREE world, great britain, landed with 18 other 'free' countries to suppress the 'rebellion' of the people and reinstate tzar and aristocracy in russia.
when they failed, they withdrew their military forces, and this time started to fund the white russians (Royalists) with arms and gold. to kill their own countrymen. when they were beaten too, they started to set up alliances and surround the country, leading to the cold war. the only intermediate pause was in between 2 world wars, and that was thanks to nazis.
Re:aaaaaah, historically (Score:4, Insightful)
The Western powers were quite right in the attempt to remove the madmen from power and restore civilization. Regrettably, they acted without firm determination and let the red monsters establish their empire of evil.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow. No one can deny madness that ruled Russia in 1917, but so overwhelmingly one side argument doesn't do history a justice. Sorry, but truth is much more complex.
First of all, let's get some facts straight - there were universal support for Soviets in nation. First of all, look up what that word means - there were committees of workers and peasants. In nutshell, that was good idea because Russia went trough serious existential and political crisis and these organizations where only things that kept societ
Re: (Score:3)
I don't care much about the U.S. government - it would be a subject of a different (and unrelated) discussion. As a Russian, however, I do care when you misrepresent the history of my own country.
Re: (Score:3)
Substitute "Capitalism" for "Communism" and the exact same thing can be said about the USA. They have a strong belief that the US system is superior to all other systems, and they have freely interfered with the politics of other countries via military and political intervention and of course lots of espionage. Now, the US system is superior to Communism as implemented by the USSR, but I am not really sure Corporatism as implemented in the west is all that superior in the long run. Both are vile systems IMH
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Regrettably, the russians have gone back to that silly Cold War mentality. Their own propaganda tells them constantly that they are unique, superior to the others, and surrounded by vile enemies that miss no chance to do harm to russia.
Don't speak for all russians. Hysterical propaganda is usually the sign that the population becomes difficult to control and has opinions that the propaganda is desperately trying to change.
Re: (Score:3)
This verses the USA, where we blame the 'internal enemy': The other political party.
Yeah... It works just as well for us as it works for Russia.
Re: (Score:3)
Usually the wording is along the lines of 'This just shows what a bondaggle $pet_NASA_program is! It should be canceled!' from one side and 'If $other_party had let the funding for the program go through, they would have fixed this!'
Re: (Score:3)
I am Russian. GP is spot on. Our government really is very keen on blaming everything and their mother on some mythical U.S. plan to subjugate Russia for its natural resources (or just because they hate us).
This isn't to say that all Russians actually believe those stories, but enough do.
The 21st century scapegoat. (Score:3)
Something not working out at home? Blame either the US, Israel, or Islam if you're one of the first two.
Typical Russian response... (Score:5, Funny)
Fail at anything = Blame America.
Offer up some kind of evidence or we'll just respond that actually it was your mother.
That's right... your mom. There's just as much evidence backing that... eg none.
Re: (Score:3)
But he said 'the frequent failure of our space launches, which occur at a time when they are flying over the part of Earth not visible from Russia, where we do not see the spacecraft and do not receive telemetric information, are not clear to us,' an apparent reference to the Americas.
It is thought inducing. Specifically:
1) Reference(s) please to 'frequent' failures without known explanation.
2) Most of the Earth is not visible from Russia. Are these 'frequent' failures all over the same part of the Earth, or is he playing with words?
3) Why do they not receive telemetric information there? They have other satellites to transmit to. A relay should not be difficult to establish. Are these things getting fried there, or could they download this data when the probe is back over Russia (o
Re: (Score:3)
3) ... The BBC article says it "went missing shortly after takeoff in November is due to crash land on Earth this weekend". I'm not sure how the BBC puts those conflicting details in the same sentence, but keep up the typical good work BBC.
Not exactly conflicting. By "went missing", they mean they weren't able to establish a communications link with it. It was then subsequently found both visually by amateur astronomers and by radar tracking stations. This allowed an orbital trajectory to be determined, and also indicated that it was tumbling. So while they aren't able to communicate with it, they know exactly where it is and where it is going.
yes (Score:3)
leaving that aside, any kind of we
Re: (Score:3)
Except we do manage to use ships when we launch from the Eastern Range of the US.
Re:yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
it's a great place to put high power HF, VHF and UHF for probing atmosphere and van allen radiation belts, which is what HAARP is for. Every dumb ignorant wingnut blames HAARP for hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes....nice to see Russian official sink to that level of brainlessness.