Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
Officers' Lounge
»
Space Shuttle Columbia Emergency
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by newark: [QB] I am opposed to the manned space program. Why? First, money. NASA is given $15 billion every year since 1992. This budget doesn't take into account differences in the value of the dollar. So, NASA is receiving less this year than in 1992. Second, safety. The Columbia astronauts were dead the minute they left their orbit and headed home. NASA had no backup plan. The shuttle couldn't dock at the station, the astronauts couldn't evacuate the shuttle for lack of space suits, and they couldn't wait for aid for the next mission isn't planned until March. Furthermore, NASA control managers were complacent. One sensor fails they figure no worries. Several go out they figure we worry. In 1962, when John Glenn did orbital flight above the Earth, a single sensor failed. NASA moved quickly to abort the flight and determine the best way to get Glenn home. Third, training and experience. Simply put, both are in short supply. They don't have the people to build a new shuttle. I figure if you don't have the means to build a new shuttle, you don't have the means to repair an older shuttle. Fourth, a pattern of escalating failures. There have been warnings of impending failure to the program over the past years. These have included wiring issues, a broken fuel line at the launch pad, delayed launches related to mechanical issues, and the like. Additionally, the facilities are not being maintained. I have also been reading of mechanical failues on aboard the ISS. This is a new facility and she is already showing signs of serious failures. In the last, the ISS's atmospherics failed and the station was heating up fast. The problem was fixed, but my question is, what will be the next issue and will the crew be able to fix it or will it cost them their lives? Fifth, no plans for a second generation shuttle or no money for the X-38. The space plane, designed by the USAF and with NASA assistance, is awaiting budget approval. Finally, there are only two real partners in the space station program-Russia and the US. Russia is very poor and is unable to afford to build more Soyuz craft. The Soyuz craft in operation are very old and not in the best of shape. There is a timeline for the end of construction for these vechicles which is approaching fast. (Europe is providing less, and Japan has stopped building a majority of her sections. The remaining sections were completed before the stop order.) Many of these problems and others have been raised in official government publications, including one released the day before the accident by the GAO. Unless more money is provided to NASA, I think it's best to cancel the manned programs and continue with the unmanned programs. The space program has never been a top priority, contrary to what our president has said, and has received only a small percentage of the total funds available. I know many of you wax poetically about the excitement of space travel and how we should continue in the names of those died. I agree we should go further, but only after a nation has committed its resources and people to the space program. A space program shouldn't be used to continue our presence in space. It should be used to advance mankind. At this time, I feel our space program is more for the former rather than the latter. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3