About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 4:30pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
If you want to see some amazing video, go here...
 
http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/main/index.html
 
and watch the Space Shuttle pitch maneuver video.  Hopefully the analysis won't reveal anything major and they can get home safe.
 
Hayden


Post 1

Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 7:03pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Those videos are awesome. Man, I love science!

Sarah

Post 2

Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 9:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I wasn't able to watch it because it was saved in a MS format, darn.

Post 3

Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 9:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Odd, the title of the article seems to have changed since I posted it. Hmm. Clearly we have a conspiracy on our hands.

Sarah

Post 4

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 3:03amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It just moved to the side of the page ;)

Clearly amazing shots, but the shuttle still looks a bit clumsy for my taste, so there is a lot of things to do in the future :D


Post 5

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 3:53amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
This is the dark side coming out of me but what if they were to find that the Shuttle has no chance at re-entry? How terrible an experience it would be to know...yikes.

What pisses me off about that is that the foam is environmentalist bull-shit foam. Knowing I'm gonna die is one thing but if I'm dying for a cause I believe in then I'm good with that. But dying because some numb-nuts decides it's ok to skimp on the fucking foam?!  


Post 6

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 7:02amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I hope those astronauts come safely back to earth -- and then promptly and publicly rip NASA management a new asshole for putting their lives at risk by using defective, environmentalist-friendly foam instead of the old, safe foam.

Post 7

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 7:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
And ruin their chances of ever going back up again? Yeah right.

Post 8

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 8:05amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Does anyone have any independent evidence on this environmental foam issue?  I have seen it indicated, but since no one in the mainstream media reports it at all, I wanted to find some sources for it, perhaps with some scientific evidence or explanation of what the actual effect is.

Post 9

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 8:20amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I just read a novel by Dan Brown called, "Deception Point".

Although, he comes down in favour of NASA, he has in the story a supposedly "corrupt" politician that wants to stop NASA funding and allow free-market competition in space exploration.

The arguments for withdrawing NASA tax funding are very compelling.
This later incident just goes to highlight NASA incompetence and waste of tax payers money.

Really, it is a scandal!

Meanwhile, experts have criticised Nasa's continuing reliance on the shuttle's ageing technology rather than diverting resources to developing its long-awaited successor, which is provisionally called the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). The replacement craft remains on the drawing board.   "The shuttle is costing a hell of a lot of money and we've got to get on to the CEV," said Sherwood Boehlert, chairman of the committee on science in the US House of Representatives. Nasa is asking Congress for $34.7bn over the next two years, a quarter of which would be earmarked for manned space exploration.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1538485,00.html

Time to let in the free market rule! What happened to NASA's plan to get private companies to build the next shuttle? I thought Mcdonnell Douglas won the bid? That was about ten years ago now!

How much better would it have been to have shown the commies up with a private company first putting man in space or on the moon?


Post 10

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 8:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

As much as I despise the stifling that modern NASA has done to the space program and how much the government's cost + 10 program has completely killed innovation, this is still an absolutely beautiful and amazing video.  What is LEO velocity, 10, 11 km/s  ?  To see a vessel that must weigh what, 50 tons?  do a precise and controlled smooth flip like that... stunning.  Far better than any symphony or sculpture.  It is sad to think what we *could* be doing and seeing right now.

Michael F Dickey

(Edited by Michael F Dickey on 7/29, 8:40am)


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 11

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 9:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Clarence Hardy wrote:

> And ruin their chances of ever going back up again? Yeah
right.

Like the private sector wouldn't just love to have some experienced astronauts leading the way to safe, inexpensive private spaceflight? Those shuttles, along with NASA's management have gotten people killed before and will do so again. And we don't have Richard Feynman to point out the frozen O-ring anymore.


Post 12

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 11:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yeah - Richard really popped the cork on that one, didn't he - right out in front of everyone... loved it...

Post 13

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 12:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here in Germany, the mainstream  media does indicate that the foam is the capital problem, but they are not talking about its environmental-friendly application. (but this is standard reporting without much insight, so nothing solid there).

There are several safety plans to bring by the astronauts. First would be to sent another shuttle to bring them home (very dangerous, because of the second in a row problem with the heat shield). Secondly and only temporary, would be the refuge at the ISS. However, this would also jeopardize the international astronauts, because the amount of air and food is tightly administered and calculated and it would rush european space programs to tend to the increased needs at the ISS.
The last option would be a specially designed Sojus-capsule by the Russian Space Program. However, they would need the actual body-sizes to design the Sojus-capsule and to prevent any injuries due to the re-entry into Earth atmosphere.
It would also require time and this is something, those men don't have.

The best solution would be, if the damage were assessed as within limits and they could try the re-entry without further help.


Post 14

Sunday, July 31, 2005 - 8:18amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Matthew Graybosch wrote:
Like the private sector wouldn't just love to have some experienced astronauts leading the way to safe, inexpensive private spaceflight? Those shuttles, along with NASA's management have gotten people killed before and will do so again.

I'm pretty confident that whoever died in the NASA program did so knowing that they were taking a big risk. I haven't been convinced that the private sector's space programs are more "safe" then NASA, but from free market pressures I'd say they have a higher potential to be safe.

-- Hurray for a minimum government! Hurray for private space flight!
(Edited by Dean Michael Gores
on 7/31, 8:20am)


Post 15

Sunday, July 31, 2005 - 4:08pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Lance Moore wrote...
 
"This is the dark side coming out of me but what if they were to find that the Shuttle has no chance at re-entry? How terrible an experience it would be to know...yikes. "
 
I think in that case the Russians send up some soyuz rockets to get everyone down.  The shuttle is 70's technology so I think it's about time they looked at redoing it.
 
The following sentence is easily misinterpreted but I'll try anyway.  I'm not quite sure why debris is now such a problem.  Sure, Columbia happened, but I would presume that bits have been falling off since the shuttle has been flying.  I think I've even read somewhere that the shuttle could handle losing one or two tiles and the point about Columbia was that the tile damage was on a more sensitive/fragile part of the shuttle.


Post 16

Sunday, July 31, 2005 - 8:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hayden,

I think you're right about the tiles. As I understand it, the first shuttles left several tiles on the launch pad because of adhesive problems. The important thing is where the missing tiles came from. Presumably, the leading edge of the wing or tail would be most dangerous. The damage suffered by Columbia at launch resulted in more than missing tiles. There was a break in the skin at the leading edge of the wing. The open hole was the cause of the break up on re-entry.

Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.