RRS-1980 said:
I would say like 15 years and I wouldn't be far from the truth. But this is not what I meant to say.
I would say like 15 years and I wouldn't be far from the truth. But this is not what I meant to say.
The shuttle has changed very little since the 70's (when it was developed). So by that logic, Soviet safety is SAFER. NASA hasn't changed much since the 70's.
RRS-1980 said:
Let me tell you a story - aviation technology is fairly close to space technology, right?
Let me tell you a story - aviation technology is fairly close to space technology, right?
Um, no. In space, temperatures can range from -400 degrees in the shade to +400 degrees in the sun. Space tech needs to protect from that and from radiation. Aviation tech doesn't have any of those worries. Space tech also uses extremely explosive fuels in order to get into space. Again, jet fuel, for aviation tech, isn't nearly powerful enough.
RRS-1980 said:
After the World War 2 we were overrun by Soviets and all choices were limited to "made in USSR" ("sdielano v CCCP"). I'm not going to remind you about Chernobyl, but I'll give a more adequate example, to compare with the above:
After the World War 2 we were overrun by Soviets and all choices were limited to "made in USSR" ("sdielano v CCCP"). I'm not going to remind you about Chernobyl, but I'll give a more adequate example, to compare with the above:
What about Chernobyl? Are you going to remind us that it melted down because ALL the safety systems were disabled and a short quick electrical spike sent everything into overload in less than a second? Are you going to remind us that if they hadn't disabled ALL their safety systems that NOTHING would have happened? Chernobyl was caused by INTENTIONAL human error, not bad tech.