From stmx3:
Stuf4 wrote:
[snip]
Also, all events leading to the scheduling slip of 107 were directly
attributable to fleet grounding issues or ISS resupply/crew changeover
issues. You call that mismanagement? Again, I think that was driven by
schedule pressures.


Let's examine the notion of a "clear case of schedule pressure"...

Did Gehman bother to point out that STS-107 was an *unnecessary
mission*? It could have been cancelled outright with no impact to
Station. No sweat for the "line in the sand" (using the term out of
the report). NASA saves money and buys time to work the foam issue.
This was not done.


You're purposefully putting on blinders to support your argument. Do
you think 107 was a necessary mission? If not, then do you know why
NASA had to do the mission? If you really take this to the extreme, the
you can say that NONE of these missions are *necessary*. But I think
you know that Congress didn't want NASA to be all about the ISS.

If you prefer, Gehman's supposed "schedule pressure" could also have
been relieved by slipping STS-107 to *after* core complete. I mean,
what's one more year after all those other delays.

Other points regarding unwise management calls were hashed out last
summer and these threads can be found by searching the archives for
[flow liner slipped]. But the basic point is that NASA squandered
away months of schedule "slop" with management creating a problem that
hadn't previously existed.


~ CT

OK...I've not read that thread, so I won't comment further on
"mismanagement" in this context.

Thanks for the discussion. You obviously have strong personal feelings
regarding this.

Thank you too. (It seems that I need to tone down the way I voice my
opinions since I come across so strong. This has been a long time
criticism of mine.)


~ CT