edward ohare
July 15th 03, 01:58 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 00:09:17 -0500, toto >
wrote:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/15/national/nationalspecial/15SHUT.html
>
>WASHINGTON, July 14 — Even if NASA corrects the problem that
>doomed the Columbia, the agency is likely to lose more shuttles
>before the fleet reaches its planned retirement date of 2020,
>according to the draft of a study done for the Columbia Accident
>Investigation Board.
>
>"Given uncertainties about the full set of causes for the loss of
>Columbia and given unforeseen and unplanned aging issues, it is
>not obvious that the shuttle system will reach even a 30-year life of
>useful service," says the draft, written by the RAND Corporation.
>NASA hopes to fly the shuttles for 40 years.
They're on schedule, in a fashion, having lost two of four in about
twenty years.
> Other studies have concluded that the shuttle fleet is at risk of a
>high rate of catastrophic accidents. But this examination focuses
>much more closely on potential safety problems related to the
>shuttle fleet's age and is implicitly critical of NASA for not doing
>everything possible to monitor problems like rust and metal
>fatigue.
I disagree with "at risk of a high rate of catastropic accidents".
There's no "risk": the high rate has happened.
wrote:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/15/national/nationalspecial/15SHUT.html
>
>WASHINGTON, July 14 — Even if NASA corrects the problem that
>doomed the Columbia, the agency is likely to lose more shuttles
>before the fleet reaches its planned retirement date of 2020,
>according to the draft of a study done for the Columbia Accident
>Investigation Board.
>
>"Given uncertainties about the full set of causes for the loss of
>Columbia and given unforeseen and unplanned aging issues, it is
>not obvious that the shuttle system will reach even a 30-year life of
>useful service," says the draft, written by the RAND Corporation.
>NASA hopes to fly the shuttles for 40 years.
They're on schedule, in a fashion, having lost two of four in about
twenty years.
> Other studies have concluded that the shuttle fleet is at risk of a
>high rate of catastrophic accidents. But this examination focuses
>much more closely on potential safety problems related to the
>shuttle fleet's age and is implicitly critical of NASA for not doing
>everything possible to monitor problems like rust and metal
>fatigue.
I disagree with "at risk of a high rate of catastropic accidents".
There's no "risk": the high rate has happened.