While I love the return to space, I think they seriously need a replacment design.
Yesterday.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Yes, and more visionaries like John Q Poster.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by TSN: How is this Flameboard material?
I came up with a reason, but I'm also refraining from mentioning it. I'd rather just sit here and go to hell quietly.
Discovery was the first shuttle back in space following the loss of Challenger, so there's something fitting in having her also return us to space now. However, I thought the plan was to send Atlantis back into space first?
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
I was going to put this in the Officer's Lounge but I figured there would be some debate as to the sensibilities of still using the shuttle design after it's advanced age and the past twodisasters (as well as the aparant lack of sweeping procedural changes reccomended to NASA last year.
So, obvious burning-up-on-re-entry jokes aside, I was expecting heated, possibly flameworthy, debate.
Personally, I see little value in the ISS or wasting shuttle launches (besides this equipment-testing one) on it.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
"I figured there would be some debate as to the sensibilities of still using the shuttle design after it's advanced age and the past twodisasters..."
And maybe there would be, if said disasters had actually been related to the shuttle's age or its design (the O-ring flaw that did Challenger in notwithstanding), but, since they weren't, I'd say you figured wrong.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
And to add on to what Cartman said, both disasters were more due to management issues than with design. In Challenger's case, management ignored the people who raised concerns about how the booster O-rings reacted to freezing weather. In Columbia's case, management didn't analyze the foam strike carefully enough.
I'd be more worried about Discovery going up with the current NASA management structure than with the design of the space shuttles.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, in all fairness, they had something like a minute to make a call regarding the foam strike. Or such is my understanding.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
True, but I was referring more to management's action in evaluating the foam strike during Columbia's mission. Although, to be fair, I still hear differing and conflicting things about that, so it's also probably an unfair point to bring up.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, my point is that it wouldn't have made a difference. Even if they'd decided Columbia was too damaged to land, there was no other way to bring the astronauts home. Columbia couldn't dock with ISS, and nothing else could be launched in time.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I should qualify the below by telling you that I'm a big proponent of the space program. (No, but, like, big. I weigh in at 290.)
So NASA has a bunch of really talented engineers and specialists all working to make this really incredible thing happen. But the fact of the matter is manned spaceflight is A) profoundly complicated, B) very expensive and C) REALLY dangerous. It's incredible when it works even once. These engineers and specialists work very hard to ensure the safety of the astronauts and the vehicles, but you can't escape the fact that you are strapping these brave folks to gigantic canisters of explosives, hurling them through the sky into an incredibly toxic, hostile environment where they do their astronaut thing and then bringing them burning back down through miles of atmosphere to land on the ground again. There are going to be complications.
I'm not trying to make light of the tradgedy of the loses of Challenger and Columbia. But this is a comparatively new science and we're going to make some mistakes. It is unrealistic to expect this to be 100% safe yet. Two accidents in 107 flights is a pretty good record considering. We're going to learn from those accidents. We're going to adapt and get better. At some point that's going to mean a new shuttle design.
But not yet. It's true our shuttle fleet is much less efficient than we originally thought. As it is, a large portion of this re-usable vehicle is replaced and extensively inspected for each launch. All part of making future flights more safe. I don't think it's time to pitch it in the dumpster just yet. We've got a lot invested and we still have a lot more to learn.
posted
Well, since this is the Flameboard: What do we get out of the shuttle today that is worth the cost, both financially and otherwise?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I agree with the concerns about managment as NASA. NASA has made no public mention of new policies regarding safety (that I've seen anyway) and has highlighted some technical tweaking as safety improvments.
Even worse: after each disaster, it's thes ame story of workers bringing up concerns and being ignored (or being too afraid for their jobs to voice concerns at all) and then many disenchanted specialists leave (imagine the guilt of if you could've done more to prevent a tragedy) causing a vaccum in speciaists.
As to "what's come out of the space program lately: Neither the shuttle or ISS is geared to serious manufacturing experiments (which would yield the most practical advances I'd think).
What is ISS good for exactly?
Anyone know if all the new shuttles are capable of ISS docking?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
