With a New Soyuz Rocket, Russia Seeks to Break Its Ukrainian Dependency (arstechnica.com) 126
Russia's new Soyuz-5 rocket is set for a December debut as Moscow seeks to end reliance on Ukrainian technology and replace its aging Proton-M fleet. Ars Technica reports: According to the report, translated for Ars by Rob Mitchell, the debut launch of Soyuz-5 will mark the first of several demonstration flights, with full operational service not expected to begin until 2028. It will launch from the Baikonur spaceport in Kazakhstan. From an innovation standpoint, the Soyuz-5 vehicle does not stand out. It has been a decade in the making and is fully expendable, unlike a lot of newer medium-lift rockets coming online in the next several years. However, for Russia, this is an important advancement because it seeks to break some of the country's dependency on Ukraine for launch technology.
Isn't this admitting.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent up!
Re:Isn't this admitting.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Russia doesn't have any real technology of its own. For example, their space program was driven by Sergei Korolev and Yuri Kondratyuk plus their fellow Ukrainians, and when for propaganda purposes the first man in space had to be a Russian of a worker-peasant background, the spaceship was controlled remotely as Gagarin was deemed too unskilled to manage that. It's no surprise that when Ukraine regained independence, the space program stopped, with Russian efforts being about as successful as Luna 25 [wikipedia.org].
Same with nuclear power. It was made by Ukrainian engineers, then when the Party assigned Russian overseers like Dyatlov, they did a whole string of procedures wrong, with a well-known result.
The reason is cultural. For centuries, ethnic Russians had a deep hatred of science and culture, believing that nobles should never touch such endeavors (and serfs were outright slaves, with chattel slavery in core parts of the empire). Whenever there was some technology needed, the tsars instead invited foreigners, such as Dutchmen, Germans, etc. Their engineers were employed for every project such as railroads. Same with culture: even pieces made by ethnic Russians (like Tchaikovsky) were based on German folk tales and written in French, not Russian. By late 19th century there was ~6-8 million foreigners in Russia, a good part of them "Volga Germans", speaking German and following German customs. But whenever the tsar/chairman had a change of mind, there came expulsions: at the end of 19th century to America, in ~1920, in 1941, etc. The role of German engineers was taken by Ukrainians. Then, by 1990, the empire lost Ukraine, and results follow...
Re: (Score:2)
Racist at all?
Re: (Score:2)
ruzzkie are claiming they are of the same race, so no.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it's very racist. The poster may be hurting due to the war, but they are being racist.
By the poster's logic, one could claim the Russians had no decent tyrants either, with Stalin and Beria being Georgian imports. But Ukrainian propagandists happily paint Stalin.as Russian and talk about his Holodomor. Pointless now. There was and is evil in Russians just as there was and is evil in Ukrainians, and in other ethnicities .The sad fact is none of us are angels, and never have been.
People are by and.large
Re: (Score:2)
Different as they may be, that post is still racist
Re: (Score:2)
One of the tricky bits, potentially one that they've had trouble with of late, is that pulling it off effectively usually means pretending that that isn't what you are doing, for the legitimacy and prestige, while keeping
Re: (Score:2)
Look, I dislike Putin as much as the next guy, but that's a load of bullshit.
Re:Isn't this admitting.... (Score:5, Informative)
How come? The conclusion I draw might be slightly exaggerated, but the facts I listed are true:
* Korolev, Kondratyuk and the vast majority of early space engineers ('50s and '60s) were Ukrainians, I haven't checked later periods
* Gagarin was a peasant-born worker, an ethnic Russian; he wasn't very educated; internal controls had been installed in Vostok-1 but locked with a code that was to be told to Gagarin over radio only in the case of an emergency
* after the fall of Soviet Union (and independence of Ukraine) the Russian space program has been rife with failures
* especially prominent projects like Luna 25
* most of nuclear engineers were Ukrainians
* Dyatlov was an ethnic Russian
* chattel slavery was predominant in Russian parts of the Tsardom, despite current Russian propaganda saying otherwise (see eg. "Dead Souls" by Gogol for an example that's widely known to Western readers)
* railroads were made by German engineers
* there were millions of Volga Germans in Russia
* Germans suffered a number of expulsion events until almost all were gone from Russia
The bits I just listed are those that are trivial to verify. Remaining ones require digging deeper and might rely on sources' opinions. But, that's enough to disprove that I'm spewing bullshit.
Re: (Score:1)
Ah, but the first railroads in Russia were built by Southern Americans from the US.
Hence the 5 foot gauge still in use in Russia which was widely used south of the Mason Dixon line until 1887.
Re: (Score:3)
To argue that point effectively, you'd need to pretend people like Dmitri Mendeleev and Alexander Popov didn't exist. But they do, so you're wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Isn't this admitting.... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, not. The reliance of the US Space Program on german scientists has been quite exaggerated. In fact, they were still fiddling with the concept of vanes inside the exhaust nozzles while gimbaled engines were being developed by American engineers. Atlas and Titan were entirely American designs and the design of the spacecraft is mostly due to Max Faget. They had to overrule Von Braun a lot, he still believed fins were a fundamental part of a rocket stabilizazion system and left to his own device he's
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Isn't this admitting.... (Score:4, Informative)
I believe you are missing two major developments that were led by the russians: First, the contributions of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky [wikipedia.org], whose works on rocket design and fuel mix ("Exploration of Outer Space by Means of Rocket Device", parts 1 and 2) laid the foundations of what we use today. Second, Aleksandr Lyapunov [wikipedia.org] who develped and advanced theory of stability in his doctoral thesis in 1892.
According to my college professor, in the 1950's US engineers didn't bother to check russian publications on any subject, because they, just like you, thought that they were ignorant peasants that had nothing to contribute. Therefore they were completely ignorant about Lyapunov's developments. The thing is that Lyapunov's stability was a key advantage that allowed the soviets to beat the US in launching the first satellite into orbit. Only then, Kalman and others began to read their papers.
By the way, the first International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC) World Congress, was held in 1960 in Moscow.
PS: I have no preference for any country whatsoever. On the contrary, I believe that excellence in science and engineering can and do arise in many places around the world. In this context, there is no point in dismissing the russians or any other country/place.
PS2: The US response to the Sputnik crisis led to the creation of ARPA, which without any doubt has fueled the US hegemony for decades. Quite an achievement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Oh dear, Ruzz
Re: (Score:2)
Did you decide to mention Lyapunov because Tsiolkovski was not ethnic Russian? Oh well. Anyway, what Lyapunov did was in a generic math field, not specific to space. He got noticed and published abroad. Hardly "unknown".
Actually, as a control systems engineer, Lyapunov was the first one I thought of. You may not know this, but his works were not available in english at that time. Kalman had to read the french translation, as you can see in this 1960 paper titled Control system analysis and design via the “second method” of Lyapunov [byu.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, what a tremendous pile of propaganda (and upvoted by people who don't know better). If you had asked Korolev what country he belonged to he would have said the Soviet Union. His father was Russian, his mother Belorussian, his native language was Russian, I'm not sure he ever bothered to learn the Ukrainian dialect at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Ukrainian "dialect"??? Comrade, you're not exactly subtle about your allegiance.
Re: Isn't this admitting.... (Score:2)
Ukrainians and Russians can each speak their languages and understand each other. Can't say that about someone from Liverpool and natchitoches
Re: (Score:3)
And without boatloads of nazi scientists and engineers the US would never have gone to the moon.
I'm sorry but what has one got to do with the other? America using the help of Germans engineers to get to the moon has nothing to do with Russia's historical engineering and scientific endeavors.
You sound like the worst of the liar ukrainian propagandists
I don't know if the OP is 100% right or not, but your comment makes it sound like you have Putin's dick in your mouth. Your post would have been more convincing without a baseless insult. But unfortunately that's how you ended it, and now you look a bit hysterical.
Re: (Score:2)
At the beginning of WWII the ranking of rocketry development in the world was probably:
1) Germany
2) Soviet Union
3) Great Britain
4) United States
Very few westerners realize that, having been propagandized their whole lives to think of Slavs as barely literate drunkards.
I suspect that their comment was replying to this bit of garbage from the other poster:
The reason is cultural. For centuries, ethnic Russians had a deep hatred of science and culture
Re: (Score:2)
1) Germany
2) United States
3) Soviet Union
4) United Kingdom
Robert Goddard happened, I'm afraid.
Arguably, prior to WW2, the US would have been ahead of Germany- but their WW2 gains are undeniable.
Soviet theoretical gains even before that are also deniable, particularly the father of rocket science being Russian- but in terms of practical rocketry- 1/2 goes to the US/Germany depending on criteria.
The fact that your ranking is pure bullshit should not be taken to mea that yo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Goddard? Germany, the USSR and GB all had government-sponsored programs to develop rocketry for military use, as well as robust civilian hobbyist societies. Goddard worked essentially alone (with his team of students, of course) on drips and drabs of funding that he was able to scrounge from various millionaires. He bemoaned that one year he spent (IIRC) twice as much time fundraising as he did teaching and experimenting combined. The other three groups eagerly developed his liquid fueled rockets and b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I see. Just like the Chinese... and the Indians... and the Iranians... and the Arabs... and the Latin Americans...
Everyone, in fact, except the heterogeneous collection of random colonists who stole North American from its indigenous peoples.
How odd.
USA Not Stolen: Indians Were Wiped Out By Disease (Score:2)
The American Indians (both North and South) were doomed when the first European walked ashore and was greeted. The Indians and their ancestors had no exposure to European diseases and so, as soon as the European coughed, farted or offered his hand as a gesture of friendship, the match was lit.
The flame spread as Indians returned to their villages. It turned into a conflagration spreading in all directions slaying Indians before it. As the white man advanced, he sometimes found entire villages, sometimes en
Re: (Score:3)
..Ukraine isn't part of Russia?
Not yet! But I have it under good authority from he who shall not be questioned out of fear of polonium tainted tea that Ukraine just wants to be part of Russia and the only thing that's holding them back is that Russia hasn't liberated it from Nazis or something along those lines.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Ukraine was named "Rus'" (latin: "Russia") for most of its existence, this means it belongs to the country that stole their name in 1721, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you blathering propaganda all over this this thread? Look- I'm sorry about what the Russians are doing to you guys. Seriously, I am. But fuck your soviet-era propaganda game. That shit is actively making the world a worse place.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of the lands have been annexed by Muscovy over the years, but in 15th century when Muscovy was being formed, their possessions of Russian (as in: Rus') lands was limited to pretty much Novgorod -- which they promptly massacred.
There's a lot of late 19th century and soviet-era propaganda indeed. Like, concepts such as "Greater Rus" and "Lesser Rus". Or even "Muscovy Rus" which is an all-out nonsense. On the other hand, they keep denigrating Ukraine by a campaign to rename Rus to "Kievan Rus", trying
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of the lands have been annexed by Muscovy over the years, but in 15th century when Muscovy was being formed, their possessions of Russian (as in: Rus') lands was limited to pretty much Novgorod -- which they promptly massacred.
The Rus' people started in Novgorod. The Rurikids spread to Kyiv, and the conquest moved north from there.
You are weaving quite the alternative history, here.
There's a lot of late 19th century and soviet-era propaganda indeed. Like, concepts such as "Greater Rus" and "Lesser Rus". Or even "Muscovy Rus" which is an all-out nonsense. On the other hand, they keep denigrating Ukraine by a campaign to rename Rus to "Kievan Rus", trying to make people believe there were many countries that formed Rus. No entity of that name ever existed, it's a (greatly successful) propaganda campaign.
The name Kievan Rus comes from Russian. It was not a name ever used by the Principality of Kyiv.
And you should be sorry to Ukrainians, not us. But Poland, Finland, and pretty much half of Europe, have centuries of stuff to "thank" the bastards for.
I assumed you were Ukrainian due to the bullshit Ukrainian origin myth you're peddling, which is just as stupid as the Russian origin myth.
The Rus were Vikings that came over from Scandinavia and integrated with the Slavs.
Putin puts hundreds of millions of dollars worth into spewing propaganda over all kinds of media. Without people pointing out the lies, the propaganda works.
And the Ukrainians apparently hav
Re: (Score:2)
The facts fall on both sides of the propaganda divide, and I seek only to be correct- nothing more.
Your move.
Re: Isn't this admitting.... (Score:2)
Re:Isn't this admitting.... (Score:5, Informative)
During WW2, the USA traded on a fairly large scale with Germany, up till and after Germany declared war on the USA in December 1941 - 2 years and 3 months after fighting began in Europe.
Re: Isn't this admitting.... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Trading with Germany after the declaration of war, or even one of its designated strategically important neutral trading partners subjected you to seizure of all of your assets.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, "some companies" does not mean "The US".
The existence of people who have committed murder in the US does not mean that murder is legal in the US, or unprosecuted.
Re: (Score:2)
Good on you, AC.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand how two states (or regions, if you will) at war (or at "special military operations", if you will) with each other, would also trade with each other.
it's not that strange or uncommon, war is good business after all. you surely want to get the populace all riled up and ready to kill and die, but business is still business.
It seems to me the cognitive quality of /. posters has declined over the past say two decades.
there has been a steady and considerable exodus of the most interesting and notable contributors ... those anonymous cowards! today's /. has little to do with /. from 2 decades ago. tbh, the average signal to noise ratio has consistently diminished all over the internet. sadly but very conveniently, /. makes it quite cumbersome to brows
Re: (Score:2)
In reality, you're talking about large collections of individuals with their own agency, that points in all sorts of different directions. Patriots who think like you think they should, traitors who are with the adver
Re: (Score:2)
Frustrated by your own ignorance you blame others rather then trying to contribute in an interesting manner. Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand how two states (or regions, if you will) at war (or at "special military operations", if you will) with each other, would also trade with each other. Claims by one state regarding the other may be to motivate/excuse the former to the outside world, but have hardly any bearing on the latter.
Specifically in answer to that, I should point out that Ukraine kept honoring its contract with Russia to transit gas through a pipeline to Europe up until the contract term ended. This, despite the fact that Russia was using the money earned to kill Ukrainians. Of course, Ukraine also received transit fees, but the net was definitely in Russia's favor. Diplomatically though, it would have been difficult for Ukraine to stop because countries in Europe were using the gas and it could have caused diplomatic p
Russia... (Score:5, Interesting)
Russia has always been dependent on other for much of their technology. However, they have immense mineral wealth that - with clever leadership - could be leveraged to make them wealthy and to build up their industry and technology.
Unfortunately, the past 15 years or so, it has become apparent that there is some inner clique of geezers who dream of the glory days of the USSR. Rather than investing their wealth, they are trying to retake the territories that used to be part of the USSR. The attack on the Ukraine was completely, absolutely idiotic. They have wasted a generation and impoverished themselves. Sure, "quantity has a quality all its own", so they will eventually "win" with a Pyrrhic victory. In doing so, they will have set Russia back by decades.
The absolutely fascinating question will come in a few years: Russia's next obvious targets are the Baltic countries. They are tiny, and geographically easy to attack. They are also full NATO members. Will Russia attack? Will NATO really defend?
Re: (Score:2)
The absolutely fascinating question will come in a few years: Russia's next obvious targets are the Baltic countries. They are tiny, and geographically easy to attack. They are also full NATO members. Will Russia attack? Will NATO really defend?
NATO is planning war against Russia right now in Ukraine. They've been talking about it using "security guarantees" and "coalition of willing" as code words, but there's a high probability they will move soon.
Also, Ukraine has been putting the hurt on Russia recently, even pushing back in places. Russia seems to have culminated offensively. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Is it NATO or just Trump who is saying that? I think those words are clear cut example of how Trump and his team has no clue (and never did) of any idea how to "end" the war because as soon as your say "Security Guarantee" to Russia you are implying "we will go to war" so it's a silly thing to say. This isn't Kuwait after we trounced Iraw into dust in 1991, this is a nuclear armed nation still in an active ground war.
I swear they use that term because it sounds good and there is almost nothing else they c
Re: (Score:2)
Is it NATO or just Trump who is saying that?
Do a search for "security guarantee ukraine" or "coalition of the willing ukraine" and you will have your answer.
This isn't Kuwait after we trounced Iraw into dust in 1991, this is a nuclear armed nation still in an active ground war.
Russia will be trounced like Iraq, and nuclear weapons are something we will have to deal with.
The Trump strategy on this war now is...
Read a newspaper, stop saying ignorant things.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure,
https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]
"Russia's Foreign Ministry has ruled out the deployment of troops from NATO countries to help secure a peace deal."
Sounds a lot like Trump is saying what he feels like and poor Rutte is trying to balance this idea while keeping NATO afloat during Trump.
You can call me ignorant but the idea that a "security guarantee" is a workable solution is ignorant in itself. I guess we will see but if I am Russia why do I agree to this when I can keep pushing the clock back? It's o
Re: (Score:2)
The Trump strategy on this war now is "lay low and wait for the whole thing to blow over"
Add "Claim that the end of the war was your doing and all part of your brilliant plan when it does end. Then demand your Nobel Peace Prize and either throw a tantrum when you don't get one or use something that's plainly blackmail to, ugh, actually get one." to the end and I think you'll just about have it.
Re: (Score:2)
Did any of those people declare that they (and only they) could end the war with their negotiating skills alone? Did any of them trivialize it so such a degree? Big claims demand big scrutiny.
The idea the goal is "to be out of this mess already" is a false choice that Trump gave you and you swallowed whole without any consideration of what is actually happening. It also strips the Ukrainians of all agency.
Biden had the right idea and really in my opinion the most moral path and the one best for America's i
Re: (Score:2)
Biden had the right idea and really in my opinion the most moral path and the one best for America's interests; continue supporting Ukraine with weapons and support for as long as they are willing to fight.
Biden definitely had a better idea about this than Trump. However, I'm still not exactly ecstatic over Biden's handling or Obama's for that matter. Way too many red lines and not embarrassing Putin, slow walking everything, restricting Ukraine on fighting sensibly and restricting them to inside the borders of Ukraine, allowing Russia to just hammer them from outside the borders, etc., etc., etc. Biden even pulled the bit about Zelensky not being grateful enough before Trump did. I mean, not as loudly and dr
Re: (Score:2)
I agree but Biden believed in the system so was always asking Congress for more funds. It's rough when half the politicians don't care. This is kinda chiding Biden for not being authoritarian enough.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not for not being authoritarian. Among the President's Article II powers comes almost sole control (generally unless congress specifically passes new laws to override the President) over things like allowing foreign governments using US provided weapons to strike with them over their borders, etc. Also, as President, he had basically full authority to authorize haste in delivering all those weapons that took forever to arrive if they arrived at all. I mean, there's a very clear difference in how quickly
Re: (Score:2)
We're pretending to support them while we're waiting for them to run out of manpower and fail so we can wash our hands and say "oh well, we tried".
I mean that is the political reality we live in the USA. Half the politicians (the majority of today) don't care and would just as soon trade the Donbas so Trump can save a little face and would rather align with Putin than the EU (Republican Traitors).
If Biden wanted to be a dictator he could have sent more aid but some politicians still believe in this democracy thing. Up until election day Biden was asking Congress for more money and weapons to send them.
Re: (Score:2)
NATO is planning war against Russia right now in Ukraine. They've been talking about it using "security guarantees" and "coalition of willing" as code words, but there's a high probability they will move soon.
Don't get me wrong, I see the same things you are seeing, I just have zero idea how you're getting to your conclusion. The idea that Trump would go in on a war against Russia is absurd and Europe isn't going to go on its own with something like that. All this talk about security guarantees is about Trump's current diplomatic push and trying to prevent a third invasion of Ukraine if it's successful, it has nothing to do with prepping for a soon to happen NATO involvement in this current war. Notice all of th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, we're talking about the likelihood of NATO action against Ukraine. Maybe try to keep up better in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
The absolutely fascinating question will come in a few years: Russia's next obvious targets are the Baltic countries. They are tiny, and geographically easy to attack. They are also full NATO members. Will Russia attack? Will NATO really defend?
No and Yes. There was a reason they did not get invaded and Ukraine did; because they are in NATO.
Almost like the excuse of NATO expansion isn't true and countries clamoring to get into NATO knew they had good reason to do so.
Re:Russia... (Score:5, Insightful)
What exactly did they win? Donetsk is a broken town with 25% of her original population and no functional garbage disposal or water supply. The towns Russia occupied since 2022 are piles of rubble, and some of them will not even be rebuilt as long has Russia holds on to them. Most Russian propagandists and founders of the "DNR/LNR" are now utterly disappointed what a shithole their Donbass has turned into.
You must have a very depressed world view, if you declare this as "Russian victory".
Re: (Score:1)
> are now utterly disappointed what a shithole their Donbass has turned into.
A lot of the Russian controlled areas in Ukraine weren't exactly gleaming palaces of delight before the war. Most had intermittent power, crappy infrastructure and little to no public services. For the most part, they barely functioned. Now they're all that, minus a lot of the capability *to* function, and most of the buildings, bridges, roads etc are all rubble.
Whatever Russia has gained isn't nearly as much as it could have be
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, no. While Ukrainian infrastructure is nothing compared to western Europe, the power was reliable, infrastructure was functional, and at least the basics worked. The power was provided in a good part by nuclear power plants, transport relied on railroads (like in all ex-soviet countries) which is the only part of infrastructure that really used to work in the Soviet Union. Where the First World has highways and cars, the Second World has railroads. And they form the backbone of transport for both
Re: (Score:2)
Who the fuck moderates this dumb fucking drivel up?
Re: (Score:2)
Berlin was the capital city though
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good example. If the allies had fire bombed Dresden and moved in to occupy the area, no one would say that they had "Won the war"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then moved to Berlin and won the war. Would be a bit premature to declare victory just in Dresden
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess they've scaled it back quite a bit since they botched the "3 day special operation" at the start.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure they realize that taking Kiev isn't remotely possible for them militarily.
As far as I understand, their attempts at negotiation have been for Luhansk and Donetsk.
My point was, taking land often turns it into rubble. That's how it works.
Re: (Score:1)
Berlin... was not annexed. WTF are you even on about....
Re: (Score:2)
Technically half of it was by the Soviets, who were technically part of the Allies at that point. Of course, one can also argue that obviously they did win something since they held onto it for close to half a century.
Re: (Score:2)
"What did the Allies win? Berlin was a rubble pile with no running water or electricity".
The main aim of the Allies was to stop Germany from being a menace to the world and its own population, and they succeeded at this big time. They also succeeded in getting Germans ready and financed to rebuild their country.
Donetsk has been occupied for over ten years now and has turned from a barely working society into a complete shithole of epic proportions - by their own admittance! Nobody asked the Russians to f*ck up the drinking water supply, nobody asked them to drown their garbage collection in cor
Re: (Score:2)
"What did the Allies win? Berlin was a rubble pile with no running water or electricity".
Who the fuck moderates this dumb fucking drivel up?
That's a bizarre perspective. The problem with it is the lack of symmetry. The Allies (except for the Soviets) were not invading Germany for conquest, just to stop the country that was invading them for conquest. The Russians are invading Ukraine for conquest... Huh, well I guess there actually is some symmetry there.
Re: (Score:2)
They're not only not rebuilding Donbass, but even pillaging what was left of the industry there. This is the usual Soviet playbook, but quite stands in opposition to claims that Russia is sure it's going to keep their territorial gains.
Re: (Score:1)
LOL Russia's economy is falling apart before our eyes. A Mafia country pretending to be a gas station. But now it doesn't have the gas. Rationing and bans even with 100% increases in prices. So funny to watch.
Even with Biden appeasing and protecting Russia they still couldn't win. And now Trump is finally waking up to the fact he's been played by Putin. It's only going to get worse from here for Russia. Good luck. Save your potatoes until you really need them.
I wouldn't bother... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Fun for shooting at people with no air defenses. Not particularly useful for shooting at even crumbling Soviet states with shit tons of AA all over the place.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be stupid.
Re: (Score:1)
I see Ukrainian ... (Score:2)
... long distance drones incoming to Bajconur.
Re: (Score:2)
The last time Russia tried to replace Uke hardware (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Calling Kurs Ukrainian is like calling BMW South Carolinian.
Re: (Score:2)
It was manufactured in the Ukrainian SSR
Post-breakup, Russia continued to make the Kurs antenna array while - VERY reluctantly - buying the rest of the system from Ukraine. The fact that they couldn't just grab the blueprints, tool up and make the guts in the Russian Federation makes Kurs as Ukrainian as it needs to be to deserve the name. In any case, a significant slice of Russia's scientists and engineers originated in Ukraine.
Re: (Score:2)
The Ukraine Radio Factory certainly had the tooling, but the same could be said of the US if it were to break up.
Our space program is split between California, Alabama, Texas, and Florida.
If Texas were to secede, would we rebuild a new Johnson Space Center, or continue to lease mission control functionality from it.
Ukraine Radio Factory exists in Ukraine because that's where it was prudent to send the manufacturing work. It could have just as easily been
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone claiming that "Ukrainians are Peasants, and Russians aren't", or the reverse is just being a racist
There is nothing remotely racist about saying "If you cut off your left arm, you cannot expect your right foot to take over its functions".
Re: (Score:2)
You see, Ukraine and Russia are composed of people. If you're trying to say that Ukrainians are a left arm, and Russians are a right foot- then ya, that actually is pretty fucking racist.
Beyond that, it's also stupid, since any narrative you can concoct regarding Russian or Ukrainian scientific supremacy, I can challenge.
There is only one real truth- and that's that scie
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm well aware they were chosen at random.
The problem was not in the 2 you chose, but that you chose any at all.
Ukraine keeps sending rockets (Score:5, Funny)
I don't see the problem here. AFAIK Ukraine keeps sending rockets to Russia. Every day lots of different kinds of rockets.
Russia doesn't seem to be able to catch these rockets and they just explode.
Russia just needs a better way to capture these rockets.
Why Baikonur? (Score:2)