quote:Originally posted by Sol System: The Soyuz family of spacecraft probably have the single best success/failure ratio of any spacecraft, thanks to their age and how often they have been used. I'm having some problems digging up exact numbers, but I would not be surprised if there have been at least twice as many Soyuz launches as shuttle ones, and would be surprised if there had been twice as many capsule failures.
Perhaps we are comparing apples and oranges... IIRC, Soyuz capsules are not reusable.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
But, so what? They're a lot cheaper. And frankly, the space shuttle is only reusable for certain values of the word. It's almost necessary to rebuild the entire craft after each mission. If we can do the same jobs with a cheap and expendable craft, why not?
I don't think it is at all harmful to the memories of the Columbia crew, the craft itself, or even to the reputation of NASA (though I don't think we should be worried about the latter) to point out that the space shuttle program has not exactly been a raging success when we take into consideration the original design criteria. The shuttle is not the cheapest way to get payloads into space, not even human ones. It is not the safest. (Though, to be sure, as seats strapped to explosions go, it is very safe.)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I pointed the differences between the DOD and the NASA for I wanted to make a very important point.
Humans are moving to a stage in their development where they don't to expend lives wastefully. We are coming to value lives more.
Look at the abortion debate. We are redefining the moment when life begins in an unborn baby. Centuries ago, our ancestors believe that if a baby died before its first month, the baby was a piece of meat and not human. (Talmud) In the 21st century, we are defining life as beginning in the sixth month of gestation. This is a fundamental change in our thinking and our values.
I believe this change, which is being more reflected in the world as a whole, will play a major role in our explorations of space in the future. We are not as willing as our ancestors to see men as expendable commodities in our quest for riches and glory in the name of the nation.
I am disgusted with the hatred shown toward me on this board. This is a free nation still where a man or a woman or a child can express their views either in favor of the majority or in favor of the minority. You are so willing to expend American blood in the cause of freedom on another man's land, but you are not willing to support freedom of thought here in your own country. What hypocrites!
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Erm, we're entitled to not like your opinion just as much as you're entitled to state your opinion...
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I feel I should post a picture of me and Tom hugging. But someone forgot their camera. Bastard.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Perhaps we can steer this thread back to where it should be. The Columbia disaster is still less than a week ago. I don't want to be forgetting the accident that soon.
So, how about those guys who're arrested for allegedly stealing bits of Columbia wreckage?
posted
Well,there is new footage showing the underside of the shuttle. There is no damage to her left wing. This is proving to be more of a structural failure in the shuttle as she reentered the atmosphere.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Regarding the purpose of the shuttle in the first place, you can lay that one at Nixon's feet. He was presented with a proposal for an Earth-orbiting space station with an attendant service vehicle. He vetoed the station, but kept the service vehicle -- nifty way to put spy satellites in orbit. But, he didn't realize, an incredibly risky and expensive one.
I find the entire shuttle program to have been a very poor use of funds and expertise. Far better, for all past and present concerns (I think) to have a good, cheap, and reliable unmanned launch vehicle like the Ariane to get payloads into orbit, and then a smaller lifting body shuttle to get work crews into orbit when needed. More like an expansion of Gemini than the shuttle as built. This is why I had such high hopes for the Venture (I refuse to call it Venture*Star).
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
If the failue is structural, then NASA's maintenance program may become the focus of the probe. This is typical in airplane crashes when human error has been ruled out and there is evidence of structural failure.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Of course, if someone hadn't neglected to tell me he was coming to this country, because he was apparently afraid of me, I might have been there AND I'd have remembered a camera to capture his and Liam's happy moment.
quote: I am disgusted with the hatred shown toward me on this board. This is a free nation still where a man or a woman or a child can express their views either in favor of the majority or in favor of the minority. You are so willing to expend American blood in the cause of freedom on another man's land, but you are not willing to support freedom of thought here in your own country. What hypocrites!
I don't hate you, I disagree, that's different. I did say your opinion was B.S., that's Bachlor of Science material.
quote: The shuttle is not the cheapest way to get payloads into space, not even human ones. It is not the safest. (Though, to be sure, as seats strapped to explosions go, it is very safe.)
I think Vogan had the right idea, but maybe take it a little futher. Instead of giving the Russians money to build Energia, lets do the capitalist thing, and buy it from them, lock stock and engineers. I'd be just as happy with them building it in Russia. If there record is to be believed, Energia is a hell of a rocket, but I wouldn't mind seeing the work come to the USA. Maybe they would make some parts in West Virginia, maybe even in Coalwood.
quote: Of course, if someone hadn't neglected to tell me he was coming to this country, because he was apparently afraid of me, I might have been there AND I'd have remembered a camera to capture his and Liam's happy moment.
And that just needed to be repeated.
-------------------- Sparky:: Think! Question Authority, Authoritatively. “Believe nothing of what you hear, and only half of what you see.” EMSparks
Shalamar: To save face, keep lower half shut.
Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
