>>1268793Without space programmes of the various states, there would have not been the inspiration for many people to get into the space industry and actually do something for it.
Also, Mir didn't "smell bad", it had an unusual smell caused by the fact that a lot of circuitry caused ozone to be created, and also the stale air left when the station was unmanned also didn't help things. Salyut had the same issues, and the current ISS also has similar issues, although the air circulation has been much improved.
Also, Mir and the Salyut stations were mostly during the time of Détente, so there was no real Cold War basis to them, except for Almaz which was the Soviet programme as a response to the US' Strategic Defence Initiative (which, BTW lead to the development of the DC-X, the first verticle landing rocket).
I'm no fan of the IRSO, but their launch systems are pretty reliable, though the lack of popular launch inclinations as well as the poor performance in their DeltaV, means that they can only carry relatively light payloads. It's one of the reasons why the IRSO often goes to ArianneSpace for their launches from Korou, since the Arianne 5 can not only lift one of the heaviest payloads, but it can also reach a vast variety of launch inclinations thanks to the location of Korou.
I'm not going to talk about BFR/Starship/whatever they rename it to, but the Falcon 9's main advantage is lost with a number of different payloads. First thing, SpaceX only just horizontal integration. There are a number of payloads which for whatever reason, requires vertical integration. The Delta IV and the Arianne 5 can both do vertical integration. Next thing is that the Falcon's payload fairing is about in the middle of the range in sizes. And finally, Falcon 9's and Falcon Heavy's performance for payloads going beyond LEO starts losing out to other launch platforms. Among the reasons why, includes the reusability, which reduces the launch weight and the number of desired orbits
