Risk is part of being an Astronaut, but facing unnecessary risk is foolish and stupid.
NASA managers on Saturday picked July 1 to launch the first space shuttle in almost a year, despite recommendations against a liftoff attempt by the space agency’s chief engineer and safety offices.
The decision to launch Discovery on a trip to the international space station was made after two days of meetings by NASA’s top managers and engineers at the Kennedy Space Center. The flight would be only the second shuttle mission since the Columbia disaster in 2003.
Are NASA managers being idiots with lives again ?
Are NASA managers being idiots with lives again ?
Does a wld bear sh*t in the woods?
“Does a wld bear sh*t in the woods?”
I believe that it does.
Sad. Time that space exploration be left to private interests.
Not that NASA didn’t do great things in the past.
In three and a half years, why didn’t NASA completely redesign that external tank? Jeez, I’m no rocket scientist, but why couldn’t the tank be designed so that the insulation goes on the INSIDE of the skin of it? It’s like the kid who, when seeing a semi stuck underneath an overpass, suggested that they flatten the tires just as the welders were getting ready to cut up the truck.
YAH!!
We need to get rid of NASA, and re-direct that money to “National Defense”, ’cause Iraq and Iran are such a threat. Dick Cheney’s company needs some more business. Why explore the universe and continue looking for answers to the ultimate questions, when we can bomb people?!?!!
I’m sitting here right now, in the USA, my air-conditioned house, having a glass of imported wine, some imported cheese, and not really worrying about the “Middle East”. I’m worrying about the direction of the USA.
People love this at parties, when I overhear folks debating and others start to get visibly uneasy, “HEY, YOU OVER THERE: STOP MAKING SENSE, YOU’RE SCARING THE SHEEP!!!”
Gets a laugh from the Mensa kids every time!
Ivor – As for putting insulation on the inside of the tanks, it is likely that the foam would not withstand exposure to the liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen fuel. If not that, than the foam at the bottom of the tank would likely be crushed flat by the weight of the fuel.
On top of that, any foam that did come loose inside the tank would become FOD (foreign objects and debris) that could do horrid things to the fuel pumps and the engines during the critical liftoff phase.
It should be noted that the chemistry of the foam has been changed for environmental reasons. The foam used to contain freon and it worked quite well and did not peal off in giant chunks. It wasn’t perfect, but it was not a safety hazard like today’s foam.
However, due to regulations from the EPA, the shuttle maintainers were forced to change the foam to remove the *EVIL* freon. Since that time, the foam has been a constant problem and, as everyone now knows, caused the loss of Columbia and her crew.
The whole issue could be put to bed if the EPA would give NASA a waiver to use the original foam. I guess the precious ozone layer is of more importance than a $1billion+ shuttle orbiter, $40 million+ mission, $100 million+ payload, $10 billion+ shuttle program, and (most importantly) the lives of the crew.
NASA needs to be freed of bureacratic red tape to do what they do best.
this has absolutly NOTHING to do with NASA or this topic…..
The USA has scored it’s first point ever in World Cup and has a chance to go into round 2 next week.
You may return to your regularly schedualed programs!!!!
AN agency that takes the LOWESt bidder,
That is subsidized by the Gov??
AND dont listen to those that KNOW the problems???
NO wonder they want to PASS it onto the private industry…
8: AN agency that takes the LOWESt bidder,
Hmmm.. which of the original Seven was quoted along those lines when asked about how he felt before launch?
I think it was included in The Right Stuff, if my memory (neural) doesn’t fail me.
J/P=?
10, yes and its a direct quote.
Also to think about is HOW long the First few shuttles were USED for, before they STARTEd blowing up or coming apart.
One thing about being in SPACE, is we can TEST things, such as SUITS, to REALLy see what can be done to lighten them up, and make them LESS bulky.
They are going to have to start flying it soon or scrap the program. The only reason to keep the Shuttle flying now is the ISS. Many now believe that the ISS is a boondoggle that is in the wrong orbit and can never be finished, or even maintained with current LEO lift capacity. Many in NASA can’t stand the thought of being without manned space craft for 10 years while the next craft comes online. They also know that the next administration will be forced into being deficit hawks and will be out to slash budgets. That means it could be much longer before they have an operational spacecraft. As for private industry, there has to be a profit. Beyond launching communication satellites I don’t see a possible return in investment for decades.
Why are they they bothering with the space shuttle at all. We are spending about $5 BILLION on this individual launch, whose purpose is only to see if they can fly it safely. And the shuttle has become basically a bus to the the International Space Station ISS) which has no use at all, aside from helping contractors spend money. Zero science and technology research has come from the ISS… ZERO.
The whole space shuttle program is due of closing in ten years anyway.
In the mean time, real space projects that cost a fraction of this single $5 Billion dollar test run are going unfunded, reduced in scope or outright eliminated. New projects are being cancelled at inception.
Think about it… the Shuttle is a huge program that gives very little back… it carries 7 people aloft, when a more functional crew is 2-3.
For the price of this single launch they could finish developing and start launching a 2-3 person version of the Burt Rytan space ship.
Support for the Space Shuttle shows a lack of forward thinking capability and a lack of imagination,
A call to all Americans………go to the site http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com Under the articles there are many comments from people and links. It is really, really, really scary what is going on with our government. I strongly urge you to go to that site. I have spent hours on it recently. You’ll begin to understand the true madness that is going on right now with our government. You’ll go AH HA!
NASA is no longer the NASA of the Apollo days. It has become a complacent bureaucracy, where people are more interested with their careers, promotions, parking places and perks. It’s a means to an end. I’d guess more than 50% of people at NASA don’t care zilch for space exploration. It’s been like that since Apollo. That’s why Challenger happened. That’s why nothing changed and then Columbia happened… That’s why nothing is still changing… Not even Mike Griffin is able to confront those who put pressure upon NASA (while cutting the budget). He’s already said that if another accident happens, he’ll cancel the Shuttle program… Can you imagine anyone saying *that*? Man, why not cancel it NOW? I was a huge fan of the Shuttle, but it’s dangerous, it has no crew escape system, it’s killed 14 good astronauts!!! Do we really need to make that 21? Of course, deals have been made with other countries to build parts of the Space Station. Politicians in those countries (and the US) would look bad, and probably not be in line for the next BMW or Mercedes if their module doesn’t go up…
IS THAT WORTH THE LIVES OF 7 PEOPLE?
Let’s do space exploration the right way. Either fund the Shuttle appropriately – and that may mean billions – and make use of the vast know-how accumulated during the past 25 years – or go back to Apollo, and try to rebuild the know how of the 60s. I honestly doubt with the sort of idiotic mindset at NASA and the US government, men will EVER go back to the moon.