Originally posted by: RRS-1980

Originally posted by: Arnie.d
But I'd rather have someone else fly people and equipment to the station for a few years if it's safer.

Sovi... err... Russia? Safer? ROTFLMAO! Ever seen dead astronauts being given CPR? Then watch documentaries about Soviet space program.

Cheaper? Yes.

Yes because of course the Russian space program hasn't moved in 30 years. Yeah, they're still using the same "safety" mechanisms they used from the 70's. Stop with the sky is falling bs.

I don't like it much either, but it's either that or continue to use unsafe craft to get there. Maybe, just maybe, if NASA had started working on a more advanced space system sooner, they wouldn't be in this predicament. Scientists were telling NASA for years (back in the 90's) that the shuttle needed to be upgraded or replaced. It wasn't until sometime in the past few years that NASA finally got off their butt and decided that yes, it's time for a new type of spacecraft. Having Columbia disintegrate on reentry probably helped them move along with that decision. And, adding to that, when they put the new sensors on the shuttle and realized that they were getting little cracks on every mission, lots and lots of people suddenly realized that the shuttle wasn't as safe as they had long thought.

So if we need to buy rides on the Russian system for 5 years, so be it. By the time it's finished, the new NASA craft will hopefully be far better than the shuttle or anything the Russian's have.