Key qualifier: If funded.
Jerry
Like the on and off funding of the Hubble repair mission? Or the Mars mission that has been looming since the 1960s? Or the Chandra X-Ray telescope that took nearly 30 years to become real? Or the shuttle replacement plans (that keep changing)? The Delta Clipper. The X-33.
Business or government actions are based on funding and can be cancelled or delayed if funding is not available. Where I work we had an expansion wait a year as the beancounters kept hoping for an improvement in the exchange rate between the U.S. and Canadian dollar, that didn't happen but the expansion was eventually funded anyhow.
The Russian system
appears to be moving to a more commerical basis and it may well be that this will not be seen as profitable and not be funded. But the level of profit rises with the use of the Kourou launch site. The closer to equatorial location boosts the amount of payload that they can reach orbit with, lowering the cost per pound substantially. That neutralizes the advantage that NASA currently has with the Cape Canaveral facility. You might have noted that the payload that they can reach geosynchronous orbit with (using current rockets) nearly doubles by using the Kourou site, that will cut the cost per pound by approximately 40%. Missions to lower orbits will also gain in payload mass or allow the use of smaller cheaper rockets, both cutting the cost per pound.
If this does come off and the Chinese and Indian efforts continue it might well spur NASA on to more efficient efforts as well. Not to mention the purely commercial efforts like the Spaceship Two project and the orbital $50 million prize that is currently being put forward.
So I
hope this project goes forward, as I hope that the Spaceship Two project continues and is successful and spawns a Spaceship Three and competitors. I hope that he orbital prize is won and future prizes are continued. The competition that these things bring can drive forward space efforts in a way that many of us have wanted from the beginning.