I wonder if I might hope that the outrage from us amchair cosmonauts will abate by tomorrow.
Let's take a look at what we need and what we've got: as an organization, we need cheap rides to space; but we have some pretty find satellite-building expertise. The relationship with ISS will, if we are reasonable, give us cheap rides. The NASA-TV announcer repeatedly said that ARISSAT-1 was the prototype of a series of satellites! Already, we've had the opportunity to fly our first SDX.The cost of making more along the lines of ARISSAT-1 is minimal compared to the cost of the ride, so this is a crucial relationship.
What does ISS want from our relationship? Probably, an increased sense of purpose: we get a ride, they get recognition, and perhaps a bit more TV time for the EVA, and a connection with student research. Here's where it counts for us to be polite in a difficult situation. Focusing on errors, nationalistic name-calling, and the rest, just diminish what they get out the bargain, and make things more difficult for those who work with us who have negotiated these waters.
Besides, I think the criticisms underestimate the technical difficulty and novelty of what we've been part of. I've watched many EVAs, and the feeling that things are not exactly going by plan is pretty common (even when Americans are running the show :-) How do you most reliably ship and store a small satellite to an orbiting space station? How do you most safely jettison it during EVA? As a species we have very little experience with this, and didn't get it 100% this time. Surely, kudos is due to AMSAT for being part of the group that is trying to answer these questions.
Anyway, I have more fun thinking of it that way. And I'm looking forward to downloading as much telemetry for Kursk as I can.
73, Bruce VE9QRP