![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Since the accidental loss of Columbia, NASA has spent billions of
dollars trying to make the shuttle perfectly safe. This cannot be done. There is no such thing as a foam that can fly 17,000 miles an hour without some risk of breaking up. For the amount of money we spend on trying to make the shuttle perfectly safe, we ought to just build more of them and launch, as is. I propose that we basically offer the shuttle to fly, as is. Given the risks involved, we would pay the astronauts a couple million bucks a piece per flight. If the astronauts don't want to fly, there are plenty of pilots that can. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... Since the accidental loss of Columbia, NASA has spent billions of dollars trying to make the shuttle perfectly safe. This cannot be done. There is no such thing as a foam that can fly 17,000 miles an hour without some risk of breaking up. For the amount of money we spend on trying to make the shuttle perfectly safe, we ought to just build more of them and launch, as is. I propose that we basically offer the shuttle to fly, as is. Given the risks involved, we would pay the astronauts a couple million bucks a piece per flight. If the astronauts don't want to fly, there are plenty of pilots that can. Well, its a view. Its a bit like recruiting mercenaries for an illegal war, or call it market forces? :-) I think you miss the point here. its not just foam, its complexity, age of design and aging components etc, which is always going to be the problem. Space is a risky business, and as has been said here before, its trying toget the balance right. There are no safe ways to get to space, just less dangerous ones. Brian -- Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I can maybe see contiuning to fly as is BUT'
The CREW SIZE MUST BE CUT TO ONE THE STATION CAN EASILY MAINTAIN TILL RESCUE IS AVAILABLE! Obviously a rescue shuttle is a pipe dream, unless you just launched it with a single pilot or at most crew of 2 and loaded it with consumables. if the rescue shuttle was lucky you unload all the supplies and return the stranded crew. if the rescue shuttle gets damaged and cant return safely at least the now larger stranded crew has more eassential supplies. lets see worse case it will be crowded and boring. ISS crew of 2, rescue crew of 2, 7 shuttle crew. NASA REALLY SHOULD SLASH THE NUMBER OF CREW BEFORE FLYING SO STRANDING DOESNT MEAN DYING |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - April 24, 2006 | [email protected] | History | 0 | April 24th 06 04:24 PM |
Space Calendar - April 24, 2006 | [email protected] | News | 0 | April 24th 06 04:24 PM |
Space Calendar - March 23, 2006 | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 23rd 06 04:18 PM |
Space Calendar - November 23, 2005 | [email protected] | News | 0 | November 23rd 05 05:59 PM |
Space Calendar - March 25, 2005 | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 25th 05 03:46 PM |