blzrul Posted July 28, 2005 Posted July 28, 2005 So the shuttle takes off, and more foam falls off. This, after the launch was postponed for a faulty sensor, the cause of which couldn't be determined and led NASA to "waive" the safety process as relates to the sensor. Then NASA, in its infinite genius, with astronauts still in space who presumably have family and friends on the ground who can't help but worry, announces that it's going to suspect future launches until they can figure out the foam thing. (It has not yet been determined whether the foam actually caused any damage to the shuttle - it's thought not, but the crew has yet to inspect.) I agree with NASA's move to suspend, but given what happened last time couldn't they have waited to make the announcement until this crew is, God willing, safely landed on Earth? The astronauts are pros who accept the risks, but for the families who can only wait and worry, why cause them more angst? I suspect it was a move to head off bad press, but I thought it was pretty damned insensitive of them.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 28, 2005 Posted July 28, 2005 So the shuttle takes off, and more foam falls off. This, after the launch was postponed for a faulty sensor, the cause of which couldn't be determined and led NASA to "waive" the safety process as relates to the sensor. Then NASA, in its infinite genius, with astronauts still in space who presumably have family and friends on the ground who can't help but worry, announces that it's going to suspect future launches until they can figure out the foam thing. (It has not yet been determined whether the foam actually caused any damage to the shuttle - it's thought not, but the crew has yet to inspect.) I agree with NASA's move to suspend, but given what happened last time couldn't they have waited to make the announcement until this crew is, God willing, safely landed on Earth? The astronauts are pros who accept the risks, but for the families who can only wait and worry, why cause them more angst? I suspect it was a move to head off bad press, but I thought it was pretty damned insensitive of them. 392337[/snapback] Sensitivity training? No. Management training? Yes, considering they've broken their safety rules twice in three days (the fuel gauge waiver, now grounding the shuttles despite the requirement that they maintain one in a "ready to launch state" for rescue purposes when one is in orbit). And that after all the "It's not a problem, it's just a piece of paper...well, okay maybe it is a problem...yeah, let's ground the fleet." And all THAT with most of their data on shuttle performance inaccessible to them, embodied as it is in the vehicle that's currently in orbit. So basically, they're flailing about randomly with incomplete data and violating their own rules consistently in doing so. But I'm sure the "risk" has been "mitigated" because the paperwork has been filed properly. Stupid !@#$ing way to run a shop.
Wacka Posted July 28, 2005 Posted July 28, 2005 So the shuttle takes off, and more foam falls off. This, after the launch was postponed for a faulty sensor, the cause of which couldn't be determined and led NASA to "waive" the safety process as relates to the sensor. Then NASA, in its infinite genius, with astronauts still in space who presumably have family and friends on the ground who can't help but worry, announces that it's going to suspect future launches until they can figure out the foam thing. (It has not yet been determined whether the foam actually caused any damage to the shuttle - it's thought not, but the crew has yet to inspect.) I agree with NASA's move to suspend, but given what happened last time couldn't they have waited to make the announcement until this crew is, God willing, safely landed on Earth? The astronauts are pros who accept the risks, but for the families who can only wait and worry, why cause them more angst? I suspect it was a move to head off bad press, but I thought it was pretty damned insensitive of them. 392337[/snapback] Check the news, the shuttle is fine. Heard it last night. They have to replace about a dozen tiles after EVERY flight. A large reason for the foam problem is giving in to environmentalists and stopping the use of freon in production/application of the foam. The families know a lot more than the general public and have heard the news before you. Grounding the fleet has no effect on the current mission. Listening to the MSM, which reports scientific information at the level of a 6th grader will keep you scared all the time.How many times have the press reported that a cure for this or that is around the corner, when if one reads the actual information, the drug has worked on mice, nbut not tested in humans yet (which takes years) or the gene has just been cloned.
UConn James Posted July 28, 2005 Posted July 28, 2005 Check the news, the shuttle is fine. Heard it last night. They have to replace about a dozen tiles after EVERY flight. 392559[/snapback] And I heard this afternoon from the spokesman's mouth that it's not fine. Must have hired John Kerry.
Wacka Posted July 28, 2005 Posted July 28, 2005 The shuttle Discovery, which is in space, is fine. The problem is with the tanks. None of the foam hit Discovery. He is a quote: One tile near the doors for Discovery's landing gear - a particularly vulnerable spot - lost a 1 1/2-inch piece that was repaired before the flight. "Deputy shuttle program manager Wayne Hale said none of the tile damage looked serious and likely wouldn't require the use of untested repair techniques in orbit designed after Columbia. "We don't really have a mechanism for knowing why a part of that tile came off," Hale said. A planned inspection of Discovery's wings and nose using a new 50-foot, laser-tipped extension to the shuttle's robotic arm turned up nothing alarming, he said." As I said before, they replace nicked/cracked tiles after EVERY flight. I've held one at a NASA exhibit. They feel like styrofoam.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 The shuttle Discovery, which is in space, is fine. The problem is with the tanks. None of the foam hit Discovery. He is a quote: One tile near the doors for Discovery's landing gear - a particularly vulnerable spot - lost a 1 1/2-inch piece that was repaired before the flight. "Deputy shuttle program manager Wayne Hale said none of the tile damage looked serious and likely wouldn't require the use of untested repair techniques in orbit designed after Columbia. "We don't really have a mechanism for knowing why a part of that tile came off," Hale said. A planned inspection of Discovery's wings and nose using a new 50-foot, laser-tipped extension to the shuttle's robotic arm turned up nothing alarming, he said." As I said before, they replace nicked/cracked tiles after EVERY flight. I've held one at a NASA exhibit. They feel like styrofoam. 392738[/snapback] Uh...that's not quite the point. The point is that, the technical aspects of that white elephant aside, the management of the shuttle program is tremendously poor. Probably as bad as any government program out there...with the key difference being that when HUD whitewashes some project that's over schedule and budget and ultimately doesn't meet the specifications, people aren't killed by it.
KD in CA Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 Probably as bad as any government program out there...with the key difference being that when HUD whitewashes some project that's over schedule and budget and ultimately doesn't meet the specifications, people aren't killed by it. 392860[/snapback] Unless they eat the lead paint chips.
TheMadCap Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 The shuttle Discovery, which is in space, is fine. The problem is with the tanks. None of the foam hit Discovery. He is a quote: One tile near the doors for Discovery's landing gear - a particularly vulnerable spot - lost a 1 1/2-inch piece that was repaired before the flight. "Deputy shuttle program manager Wayne Hale said none of the tile damage looked serious and likely wouldn't require the use of untested repair techniques in orbit designed after Columbia. "We don't really have a mechanism for knowing why a part of that tile came off," Hale said. A planned inspection of Discovery's wings and nose using a new 50-foot, laser-tipped extension to the shuttle's robotic arm turned up nothing alarming, he said." As I said before, they replace nicked/cracked tiles after EVERY flight. I've held one at a NASA exhibit. They feel like styrofoam. 392738[/snapback] Until Discovery is on the ground in one piece with all hands accounted for, I'm not taking anything N-ASS-A says to heart. They said that with Columbia last time too, remember? "Oh yeah, a piece of foam hit the shuttle. No big deal, it's just foam, I'm sure it will be fine".
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 Until Discovery is on the ground in one piece with all hands accounted for, I'm not taking anything N-ASS-A says to heart. They said that with Columbia last time too, remember? "Oh yeah, a piece of foam hit the shuttle. No big deal, it's just foam, I'm sure it will be fine". 392965[/snapback] At least this time they've looked it over twice. With Columbia they just said "Oh, it'll be fine...thanks, NRO, but you don't have to retask a recon satellite to examine it." Even so...given they've broken their own safety rules twice in three days...well, sure Discovery's probably okay, but I wouldn't take the Ringling Brothers Barnum & Bailey Space Program's word for it.
TheMadCap Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 At least this time they've looked it over twice. With Columbia they just said "Oh, it'll be fine...thanks, NRO, but you don't have to retask a recon satellite to examine it." Even so...given they've broken their own safety rules twice in three days...well, sure Discovery's probably okay, but I wouldn't take the Ringling Brothers Barnum & Bailey Space Program's word for it. 392975[/snapback] According to NPR this morning, Discovery was hit by 26 pieces of debris larger than 1.5". The astronauts will be asked to take about three hours this morning evaluating the orbiter for damage...
UConn James Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 According to NPR this morning, Discovery was hit by 26 pieces of debris larger than 1.5". The astronauts will be asked to take about three hours this morning evaluating the orbiter for damage... 393108[/snapback] A third of their waking day spent looking at their craft, and even then they won't be able to say anything more than, "We think everything should be OK." This is like taking a trip across country and leaning out the door every half hour to make sure the tires are still inflated. Newsflash: Reaching speeds at launch that generate ~ 5 Gs will make some debris fall off. We learn far more and get more done on unmanned missions while there's zero risk of fatalities; 'course 12 people at NASA don't get to see their friends toss around M&Ms in zero grazity.
Alaska Darin Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 We learn far more and get more done on unmanned missions while there's zero risk of fatalities; 'course 12 people at NASA don't get to see their friends toss around M&Ms in zero grazity. 393134[/snapback] Sorry, I don't buy that at all. With great risk comes great reward. The wussification of this country continues unabated with the bureaucrats so many on the left love leading the way. The reality is, NASA is a microcosm of everything that is wrong with the federal government, with those who accomplish the most being used as pawns by those who do the least.
boomerjamhead Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 How many Americans even cared about the space program prior to Columbia's destruction? My guess - not many. So why are we making such a big deal about this?
stuckincincy Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 I agree with NASA's move to suspend, but given what happened last time couldn't they have waited to make the announcement until this crew is, God willing, safely landed on Earth? The astronauts are pros who accept the risks, but for the families who can only wait and worry, why cause them more angst? 392337[/snapback] Soooo...here, you would like the government to withold information. Nice.
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 Sorry, I don't buy that at all. With great risk comes great reward. The wussification of this country continues unabated with the bureaucrats so many on the left love leading the way. The reality is, NASA is a microcosm of everything that is wrong with the federal government, with those who accomplish the most being used as pawns by those who do the least. 393289[/snapback] Completely agree. NASA has long been fertile ground for Dilbert cartoon ideas. I'm very impressed that NASA pulled off what they did Tuesday when you consider that the guys bossing around the engineers are mostly second-tier MBA grads, ex-lawyers, beneficiaries from past administrations' nepotism, and any other non-technical egocentrist fat cat they could find.
UConn James Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 Sorry, I don't buy that at all. With great risk comes great reward. The wussification of this country continues unabated with the bureaucrats so many on the left love leading the way. The reality is, NASA is a microcosm of everything that is wrong with the federal government, with those who accomplish the most being used as pawns by those who do the least. 393289[/snapback] So you're saying that the Mars Rovers, Hubble, Voyager, etc. are less efficient than sending a small group of people to float around, eat liquid balls of applesauce and bring Tang to the ISS? I'm impressed by what NASA itself has done and contributed to our society w/ technological innovation. But most manned missions' purposes at this point in time are moot. You're suggesting that we continue send people into space just to show our bravado and that we can do it for the 115th time, too?
Alaska Darin Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 So you're saying that the Mars Rovers, Hubble, Voyager, etc. are less efficient than sending a small group of people to float around, eat liquid balls of applesauce and bring Tang to the ISS? I'm impressed by what NASA itself has done and contributed to our society w/ technological innovation. But most manned missions' purposes at this point in time are moot. You're suggesting that we continue send people into space just to show our bravado and that we can do it for the 115th time, too? 393403[/snapback] That's an awfully simplistic way of looking at it. There's no way Chewbacca ever makes the Kessle Run in under 12 Parsecs without all these manned missions.*** ***I know Star Wars supposedly happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far, away.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 So you're saying that the Mars Rovers, Hubble, Voyager, etc. are less efficient than sending a small group of people to float around, eat liquid balls of applesauce and bring Tang to the ISS? I'm impressed by what NASA itself has done and contributed to our society w/ technological innovation. But most manned missions' purposes at this point in time are moot. You're suggesting that we continue send people into space just to show our bravado and that we can do it for the 115th time, too? 393403[/snapback] Conversely, if we have absolutely no intention of sending people into space eventually, what the hell's the point in exploring it anyway?
TheMadCap Posted July 29, 2005 Posted July 29, 2005 Conversely, if we have absolutely no intention of sending people into space eventually, what the hell's the point in exploring it anyway? 393610[/snapback] and further, if we have no goal to achieve, what 's the point????
Recommended Posts