It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What Happened To Russia’s Space Shuttle Program?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:36 PM

Originally posted by poet1b
What are the odds that we have our own secret space station under Navy command?

Well my odds say we do... It all started with Astrospies and the MOL program Richard Truly was one of the first secret astronauts and became Vice Admiral of the Navy, served as director of NASA (he was the one that killed NASA's ET law) and then became Naval Space Command's first Commander. But I covered all that in the Naval Space Command threasd

We are seeing triangle everywhere these days and we KNOW we have triagle planes and UAV's of all types. We also know we have advanced considerably in stealth programs. So either all those triangle UFO's are fleet of Aliens or they are ours. Maybe they decides they don't need the NASA cover story any longer.

The NRO is a good example... they are using Boeings Delta IV Heavy lifters and are launching huge secret missions from Vandenberg and Florida. And they are being more open about it. United Launch Alliance has a fabulous website

NRO says this on their site...

Our Mission: Innovative Overhead Intelligence Systems for National Security In recent years, the NRO has implemented a series of actions declassifying some of its operations. The organization was declassified in September 1992 followed by the location of its headquarters in Chantilly, VA, in 1994. In February 1995, CORONA, a photoreconnaissance program in operation from 1960 to 1972, was declassified and 800,000 CORONA images were transferred to the National Archives and Records Administration. In December 1996, the NRO announced for the first time, in advance, the launch of a reconnaissance satellite.

Can't wait till these guys show us the secret platforms that I know are up there... promise I won't say "I told ya so" well.... maybe

Wonder what x-37B brought back this time?

There are still some of the old Shuttle Missions that were DoD only and the return weight is still Classified You can check that on wikipedia even
edit on 2-3-2011 by zorgon because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:48 PM
reply to post by zorgon

And apparently we are not taxing our heavy payload capability, and there are plans to expand our heavy payload capability considerably. Obviously they are planning on sending a great deal more stuff into space.

This from page 20.

Worldwide demand for launches of payloads that weigh
between 11.4 mt and 25 mt, referred to as heavy-launch
demand by the FAA, is projected to be about 20 annually,
much less than the estimated capacity (see Box 1-1 on
page 4). Several current launch systems can accommodate
the lifting of payloads at the upper end of that range (or
beyond) into certain low earth orbits, including the space
shuttle and the heavy-lift version of Boeing’s Delta IV

And yet we are going to have to rely upon Russia for manned space flight in the foreseeable future, when we should already have for more economical means available?

Who do, who do they think they are fooling?

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:49 PM
The US should offer to take those old workhorse off the Soviets, er, Russians, that's a shame seeing all that hardware just going to waste. I remember seeing their shuttle debut and thinking, "damn, just how many spies do they have at NASA?", I know imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but give me a break!

Soviet rocket engineers always did outdo themselves, I still can't imagine what kept them from going to the moon, their rockets could out-lift ours any day (you really have to wonder if we didn't put nukes on the moon to keep them off it), comparing the numbers on their shuttle versus ours, it's like theirs is on steroids.

Great pics, Slayer and Zorgon, always interesting stuff.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:53 PM
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

I was wondering why hasn't China purchased some of that old Russian space shuttle hardware?

They buy everything else and copy it from them anyway...

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:07 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Well, having lived in Florida the majority of my life, Shuttle launches do not make me excited.

Must be like having too much of a good thing, it makes it meaningless, when it happens over and over.

Same goes for the beach.

I was 12 and watched Columbia blow up on a black and white television during school.

The Space Shuttle program has always been expensive as Hell no matter which country we're talking about.

$30 billion or more when we're not leaving Earth orbit to explore further out to me is a huge waste.

I realize that going into outerspace is a big deal and an even bigger deal to citizens.

I just hate seeing mismanagement of funds, malfeasance, and something being used like a political weapon.

Personally, when Russia collapsed,after the Cold War due to a C.I.A. Analyst figuring out how to beat "The Great Russian Bear", through outspending them through the Nuclear Arms Race, among many other venues, I just stopped caring about the Russian and American point/counterpoint of stupidity.

Not to mention through many books I figured out the bankers manipulated the Tsars out of power.

To create an ignorant bureaucracy just to give the United States a worthy enemy.

With the end goal to eventually beat them just through toppling the "enemy".

Great thread, SLAYER69, but I see the money wasted, more than Space Programs being utilized properly.

Not to mention people like Richard Branson planning vacations in space.

Which can be transitioned from vacations to evacuations in space and only for the trillionaire.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Mojave Air and Space Port

The Mojave Air and Space Port (IATA: MHV, ICAO: KMHV), also known as the Civilian Aerospace Test Center, is located in Mojave, California, at an elevation of 2,791 feet (851 m).

It is the first facility to be licensed in the United States for horizontal launches of reusable spacecraft, being certified as a spaceport by the Federal Aviation Administration on June 17, 2004.

Bolded and underlined by SKL

Interesting is it not, that the Mojave Air and Space Port, has a designation under the United Nations?

Which leads to this information.

Quote from : Wiipedia : International Air Transport Association airport code

An IATA airport code, also known an IATA location identifier, IATA station code or simply a location identifier, is a three-letter code designating many airports around the world, defined by the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

The characters prominently displayed on baggage tags attached at airport check-in desks are an example of a way these codes are used.

The assignment of these codes is governed by IATA Resolution 763, and it is administered by IATA headquarters in Montreal.

The codes are published biannually in the IATA Airline Coding Directory.

Most countries use ICAO codes, not IATA codes, in their official aeronautical publications.

IATA also provides codes for railway stations and for airport handling entities.

A list of airports sorted by IATA code is available. A list of railway stations codeshared in agreements between airlines and rail lines such as Amtrak, SNCF French Rail, Deutsche Bahn is available.

There is also a separate List of Amtrak station codes, three-character codes used by Amtrak for its railway stations in the United States and Canada.

Which leads to this information and the I.C.A.O. flag.


This goes into the purview of zorgon's thread on Navy Spacy Command.

Quote from : Wikipedia : International Civil Aviation Organization airport code

The ICAO (pronounced /ˌaɪˌkeɪˈoʊ/, as if "I-K-O") airport code or location indicator is a four-letter alphanumeric code designating each airport around the world.

These codes are defined by the International Civil Aviation Organization, and published in ICAO Document 7910: Location Indicators.

The ICAO codes are used by air traffic control and airline operations such as flight planning.

They are not the same as the IATA codes encountered by the general public, which are used for airline timetables, reservations, and baggage handling.

For example, travellers who use London's Heathrow Airport will most likely be familiar with its IATA code: LHR.

They are less likely, however, to be familiar with the ICAO code: EGLL.

ICAO codes are also used to identify other locations such as weather stations, International Flight Service Stations or Area Control Centers, whether or not they are located at airports.

It is my firm belief we have a game called the Shell Game going on hidden in plain sight.

Between America, China, and Russia, there is a lot more in depth information.

If you're paying close attention to the details.

And you use an investigative mind to dig deeply.
edit on 3/2/11 by SpartanKingLeonidas because: Adding Depth and Insight Into the Post.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:08 PM
america ended it

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:11 PM
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

Now that's a very interesting reply..

That does seem odd.
checking out the info now

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:11 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

I would say that the real answer is that the very first test run of the Russian Space Shuttle proved the whole program to be obsolete. Why use a manned space flight to launch heavy payloads when it can be done by computer automation.

Most likely the Russians already knew that the U.S. had reusable manned launch vehicles that were much more efficient, that they were keeping secret from the public.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:15 PM
Wow this is amazing, im studying about the cold war at uni, might just have to use some of these facts to stand out from the rest eh

brilliant thread guys!

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:16 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

Now that's a very interesting reply..

That does seem odd.
checking out the info now

I used to be into the Space Shuttle program, back when I was a teenager, but that stopped.

Once I figured out it was used as a political weapon by the White house to garner support it lost something.

The technical aspects of the Shuttle fascinated me but the underpinnings of an International Space cooperative are much more interesting.

Especially under the aegis of the United Nations purview and through more useless bureaucracy.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:22 PM
reply to post by poet1b

I read someplace that Reagan wanted to scrap the program in favor of more exotic hardware. Cant find a link or reference to it now.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:25 PM
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

I think anything including the moon landings and skylab etc could be described that way...

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:31 PM

Originally posted by daveyboy1991
Wow this is amazing, im studying about the cold war at uni, might just have to use some of these facts to stand out from the rest eh

brilliant thread guys!

Hey thanks...

We appreciate the feedback. Good-luck with the class

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:33 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Didnt the Energia rocket cost 1/10 per lb of payload compared to the US shuttle?
And didnt it use kerosene for fuel, which is much less destructive of the
environment then what the shuttle used?
Wasnt it another conspiracy to build the US shuttle instead of an Energia rocket?

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:37 PM
reply to post by RRokkyy

I hadn't heard that one yet..

Maybe Zorgon has a link on that subject up his sleeve. If not I'll look into it. That's a great idea. Compare launch to payload costs...

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:50 PM
reply to post by RRokkyy

In simplistic terms:

And didnt it...
[the Energia]

... use kerosene for fuel, which is much less destructive of the environment then what the shuttle used? did the Apollo-era Saturn V first stage too. Kerosene/LOX. Lot more "bang for the buck" in regards to energy release than (in the case of the Saturn stack) the H2/LOX fuels for the other stages. Which, BTW, is what the Space Shuttle's three Main engines use, in the launch phase.

You're probably thinking of the two SRBs ... using the solid rocket fuel, as more environmentally "nasty". Of course, the only "emission" from the H2/LOX combination is pure water....But, the STS SRBs only burn for about two minutes. Let's see, there IS a lot of mass, of course being utilized....the propellant weight, per rocket, is about 500,000 kg.

Of course, solid fuel is used in many, many other rocket designs too....and the environmental concerns aren't ignored:

Just not sure, on a macro scale, how much they really contribute, overall....compared to many, many other sources of pollution. The Earth is very large -- as is the atmosphere....and rocket launches relatively infrequent.

edit on 2 March 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 07:45 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Wow, amazing thread. I was wondering if the shuttles have been canceled why the space station needed extra storage? And will US Astronauts be going up with say China or Japan, even Russia? I have to say it all really confuses me for the first time in my life and kind of makes me feel sad for my nostalgic side.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:03 PM
Interesting reading here, the comparison is something i had never looked into before and like others have mentioned it would lead some one to believe they are twins!

With the US shuttle program drawing to an end(?) should be very interesting to see what they roll out next, after all with the total investment in space tech over the last few decades it would stand to reason they would continue in some form.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:10 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69.
Maybe Zorgon has a link on that subject up his sleeve. If not I'll look into it. That's a great idea. Compare launch to payload costs...

Not sure about cost... never looked... but in your OP it shows the payload on their shuttle is 4 times ours

But speaking of odd secrets... and non existant Cold Wars... this is from Energia's website

Energia 2 heavy lifter Mars rocket

Oh gee with a NASA emblem

Another shocking point... the joint project between Boeing and Energia called SEA LAUNCH has been bought out by Energia

U.S. Regulators Approve Energia’s Purchase of Sea Launch

First Obama cuts NASA's throat, now we sell that awesome mobile launch facility to Russia's biggest space concern. Dang politicians are SELLING US OUT

It is true what Robert Bigelow says...

NASA = No Access to Space for Americans

Why do you think NASA has been reluctant to allow tourists in space, like Dennis Tito, for example?

Well, it's the mentality that "we own space." NASA stands for "No Access to Space for Americans" -- that's what it stands for to me and to most Americans. NASA has exclusive control and a lock on everything having to do with space, except for the Russian side. And they were just beyond belief in being rude and obnoxious [in response to Dennis Tito's trip]. It was just embarrassing to this country.

My own private space station
Robert Bigelow has his funding priorities straight: Orbiting cruise ships and paranormal research.

That is why he bought into an old Launch site in Russia... because NASA refused to launch his modules

The really STUPID thing is that space tourists are willing to pay MILLIONS to go up and Advertizers are also wanting to spend a fortune. NASA told them all to take a HIKE... so they went to Russia instead... Seems they picked up real well on CAPITALISM

Pizza Hut Delivers in Space

A Pizza Hut logo appeared on the side of the Proton rocket
that launched the Zvezda service module; part of Russia's
commercialization of its cash strapped space program

Station captain Yuri Usachev proudly displays the first chain pizza out of the gravity well. (HO/WirePix)

Popular Mechanics

Cosmonaut Yuri Baturin, the flight engineer on space tourist Dennis Tito's Soyuz trip to the ISS,
took Popular Mechanics to new heights - as it were - on his recent visit to the station.

Lego Creates New Toy

Its actually a functioning Robot.. those kids on Mars get all the cool toys

Cosmonaut Talgat Musabayev plays with the LEGO Mars Planet Protector toy while aboard the ISS. (HO/WirePix)

"The Lego Company, being active in the non space area, in co-operation with Intospace, a space industry service provider, developed a space education project aimed at developing, launching and operating a Lego Robot on the Space Station. This series is a highly sophisticated assembly set with programmable microchips and advanced reaction systems such as light-, touch or rotational sensors. The space environment of the ISS was perceived as the right scenario for this hi-tech project."
Source - Smithsonian

This Lego Robot does not sound like a toy! In fact the Smithsonian Report above states - "Therefore a public competition was announced to create attention offering interested people to participate in developing a robot that will be in the condition to support the ISS crew during their daily routine work."

What sucks is I need to get my news from Russia
They have more info than we do. In fact I once wrote a NASA historian looking for an old document. He wrote back and said they had a poor copy, but sent me to a Russian site that had a better one

Sold out I tell ya NO ACCESS to SPACE for AMERICANS ====> NASA

In typical Vegas Hotel style Robert Bigelow has projection advertizement on his space station...

I just have to ask...
Just EXACTLY WHO are they advertising to?

edit on 2-3-2011 by zorgon because: ArMaP didn't do it this time

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:15 PM
reply to post by zorgon

Just EXACTLY WHO are they advertising to?, for starters!

And now, every ATS member and lurker who reads that post....and also, everyone who has a chance to see that same image in other venues....I'd say, it gets attention, simply because of its strangeness (and location, location, location....)

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in