A bit nervous about the space shuttle

Post by **Dale** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:52 pm

Just heard that NASA is grounding the shuttle program until they get a hard look at the falling debris problem. I'm shocked that they'd take this action now, with a shuttle in orbit. It makes me a bit nervous.

Walden · Post by **Walden** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:04 pm

It does seem a bit odd. I wonder why they didn't wait to make the announcement.

Post by **Nanohedron** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:14 pm

Walden wrote:It does seem a bit odd. I wonder why they didn't wait to make the announcement.

If ever I hear "It ain't rocket science" again, I'll probably reply, "That can't be a bad thing".

Lambchop · Post by **Lambchop** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:28 pm

Walden wrote:It does seem a bit odd. I wonder why they didn't wait to make the announcement.

My suspicion is that in the event of something unfortunate happening, they can say that they already took the appropriate action. Pre-emptive damage control, if you will.

From what I've read, they were not aware of how much debris fell until they watched with the cameras this time. Now that they know about it, they need to take action. They've done that now.

Doug_Tipple · Post by **Doug_Tipple** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 6:18 pm

The odds for a catastrophic failure of the shuttle is one in a hundred, according to NASA. Those odds sound a bit like Russian roulette to me. I don't think that General Motors could sell many cars with the odds that every one in a hundred cars would have a catastrophic failure.

djm · Post by **djm** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 6:23 pm

DougT wrote:Those odds sound a bit like Russian roulette to me

That's where the bravery (foolhardiness?) of the astronauts comes in. Those who appreciate it will laud them. Those who don't will shake their heads and say it was, "Regrettable".

djm

peeplj · Post by **peeplj** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 6:30 pm

I hold the astronauts in highest respect and honor.

I would ride the shuttle. If they asked tomorrow, I'd ride tomorrow. But that's just me.

Urban Tapestry said it best:

"If I should die in a bright burning flare,
Just take what you find and throw it in the air,
Don't grieve for my death, don't ask why for ten years,
Just build one more ship and call for volunteers."

"Show me the gantry, build me the ship,
Give me the fuel and I'll go on that trip,
If I return you may say I was bold, but
My place is in space as the heavens unfold."

They got it right.

--James

Brian Lee · Post by **Brian Lee** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 7:23 pm

Doug_Tipple wrote:The odds for a catastrophic failure of the shuttle is one in a hundred, according to NASA. Those odds sound a bit like Russian roulette to me. I don't think that General Motors could sell many cars with the odds that every one in a hundred cars would have a catastrophic failure.

Uh, I can guarantee that many MANY more than one in one hundred cars are involved in a "major"accident in their lifetime. And the ratio of fatalities to drivers is pretty alarming when one looks at it. But of course, anytime an airplane or spacecraft goes down, it's *BIG news* as it doesn't happen everyday. Frankly I am loathe to recount how many times I've seen body parts lying in the road after yet another incident on our highways. It's a matter of perspective.

You also must keep in mind what the space shuttle does, and how it goes about it. To date, it is still hands down the safest vehicle ever to travel to space - and it does it repeatedly. The magnetude of the task is lost on many who don't understand the complexity of what goes on, I imagine, to make it all happen. It's amazing to me that there aren't more issues with geting up there.

We know things about space, our planet and indeed ourselves as a species that we never would without the space program and people , ahem, -foolhardy- enough to want to continue to venture there. Up Discovery!

FJohnSharp · Post by **FJohnSharp** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:06 pm

[quote="Brian Lee

Uh, I can guarantee that many MANY more than one in one hundred cars are involved in a "major"accident in their lifetime. ![/quote]

Yes, but it's almost always operator error. If one in every hundred cars would have all four wheels fall off at 70 mph that would be comparable to the shuttle thing.

Brian Lee · Post by **Brian Lee** » Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:24 pm

FJohnSharp wrote:Yes, but it's almost always operator error. If one in every hundred cars would have all four wheels fall off at 70 mph that would be comparable to the shuttle thing.

Uh what? All four wheels falling off? Hardly. Try a rock at your windshield (straight at your face to boot) as you fly down the freeway at 110 mph. That's more the analogy. Hardly any operator error on the shuttle or ground crews part. If you look at the safety record of the space agencies of the world, even the most poorly funded have very good stats regarding eliminating as many possible errors as are conceiveable.

How many auto recalls are made in the US alone every year for various mechanical issues? I know on my vehicle alone, a 1996 model, and supposedly very safe, I've recieved notice for no fewer than four *MAJOR* issues that could have caused anything from a fire in the passenger compartment, to sudden loss of steering control or even total brake system failure. Needless to say, any of these situations could have been fatal not only to me but to anyone I may have hit as a result.

People make mistakes, and no matter how many times we review a system or work to perfect it, we, being human, are never going to be infailable. Astronauts, and their space agencies know this. So do most of the rest of us. Caution is always warranted when undertaking a journey like theirs. There is no way to eliminate some falling debris on a rocket launch - but there are many things that can be done to minimize it - and that is precisely what NASA engineers have done. Obviously with loss of Columbia, they're going to be edgy about anything coming off now, and monitor it very closely. And of course, the media will have a field day with the smallest fleck of anything seen floating past a camera.

Tyler · Post by **Tyler** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 5:47 am

Doug_Tipple wrote:The odds for a catastrophic failure of the shuttle is one in a hundred, according to NASA. Those odds sound a bit like Russian roulette to me. I don't think that General Motors could sell many cars with the odds that every one in a hundred cars would have a catastrophic failure.

I thought GM already had a 1/100 chatastrophic falure record....

Dazzle1 · Post by **Dazzle1** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:24 am

Grounding the fleet is surely a "cover my ..." just in case. Crew safety is more important than penny-pinching.

I'd hoped that some progress would have been made on a replacement for the shuttle, I know the "Skunkworks " put forward some ideas. Maybe if more nations chipped in rather than going their own way things would improve.
Probably Bert Rutan , Paul Allen and Richard Branson will have a commercial service(Virgin Galatic?) running before you know it

D

Walden · Post by **Walden** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:54 am

Tyler Morris wrote:I thought GM already had a 1/100 chatastrophic falure record....

The Chevy Cavalier I had certainly didn't do anywhere near that well.

TomB · Post by **TomB** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:55 am

Walden wrote:
Tyler Morris wrote:I thought GM already had a 1/100 chatastrophic falure record....
The Chevy Cavalier I had certainly didn't do anywhere near that well.

What year?

Walden · Post by **Walden** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:57 am

TomB wrote:What year?

Every year, after it got to be about ten years old.