View Single Post
  #5  
Old October 6th 18, 12:53 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default Op-ed campaign smearing SpaceX uncovered

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...

"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote on Fri,
5 Oct 2018 15:18:58 -0400:


I'll admit the "load and go" gives me pause, but honestly, if you can't
trust the process in the first place, you've got a bigger issue. You
should
have a process that's safe to fuel rockets, regardless of whether there
are
astronauts on board or not.


NASA has looked at this and come to the conclusion that 'load and go'
is actually probably safer than fueling and then putting astronauts
in, given SpaceX procedures and hardware.



Which sounds like the right call. You have a procedure and hardware that
either works or doesn't.
If it's so dangerous you can't have astronauts on board, it's probably
dangerous enough you can't have other payloads aboard.

So you design so you can load and go.


--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
IT Disaster Response -
https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/