Flightglobal:

Doubling the size of the crew aboard the International Space Station presents a number of logistical challenges....

Author: Rob Coppinger

Date: 03 June 2009

Read the full article

This is really kind of sad.  If they're not doing Science and not launching craft to the moon and planets, what is the point of having it at all? $100,000,000,000 just to keep a few men in space?! To think we thought the $1,000,000,000 per Shuttle launch was expensive...

I'm surprised that after 40+ years, the Proton launcher - with a similar payload capacity to the current emasculated Shuttle - hasn't been man rated, and a super-Progress spacecraft put into service supplying the ISS. Someone ought to talk to the Russians...

 I totally agree with kris! I wonder why what's happening with that....

-----------------------------------------
Science News and Reasearch

I suspect it has a lot to do with nationalism on the part of the U.S. While they were happy to plunder Soviet technology left-overs, there is a psychological need to do things with indeginious hardware.  Victims of this attitude being Kistler Aerospace and Lockmart/P&WR. The former, had they been given proper financial support, would have had a fully re-useable operational launcher already capable of ISS cargo missions and with a spot of upgrading, possibly manned as well.  As for Lockmart/P&WR, they lost out on lofting Orion for a similar reason.  'Course if they weren't so busy cancelling projects - as we used to do (remember) things would be a lot more promising IMHO!

The things mentioned are unanimous and needs to be appreciated by everyone. The above thought is smart and doesn’t require any further addition. It’s perfect thought from my side.

Adam