Opportunity, the second Mars Explorer Rover is on the surface andtransmitting!

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


I am quite aware that they are unmanned. They are also second rate
vehicles which cost nearly a half-billion apiece and who useful
scientific yield is dubious. How will knowing whether bacteria ever
lived on Mars promote the General Welfare and Defend the Republic
against enemies foreign and domestic.


In more ways than you'll ever know Bob.

In article %pRQb.115802$sv6.604631@attbi_s52,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

On top of all this they claimed the odds of disaster were something like
one in ten thousand per orbiter.

Cite?


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article %pRQb.115802$sv6.604631@attbi_s52,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

On top of all this they claimed the odds of disaster were something like
one in ten thousand per orbiter.

Cite?


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article %pRQb.115802$sv6.604631@attbi_s52,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

On top of all this they claimed the odds of disaster were something like
one in ten thousand per orbiter.

Cite?


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Bob Kolker wrote:
On top of all this they claimed the odds of disaster were something like
one in ten thousand per orbiter.

Jeepers wrote:
Cite?

Assuming by "orbiter" he means the shuttle, a figure of about that
magnitude was mentioned in Feynman's book, What Do You Care What Other
People Think? It has a whole section devoted to his work on the
Challenger disaster, including NASA management's intransigence on the
matter of the shuttle's reliability.

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

Bob Kolker wrote:
On top of all this they claimed the odds of disaster were something like
one in ten thousand per orbiter.

Jeepers wrote:
Cite?

Assuming by "orbiter" he means the shuttle, a figure of about that
magnitude was mentioned in Feynman's book, What Do You Care What Other
People Think? It has a whole section devoted to his work on the
Challenger disaster, including NASA management's intransigence on the
matter of the shuttle's reliability.

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

Bob Kolker wrote:
On top of all this they claimed the odds of disaster were something like
one in ten thousand per orbiter.

Jeepers wrote:
Cite?

Assuming by "orbiter" he means the shuttle, a figure of about that
magnitude was mentioned in Feynman's book, What Do You Care What Other
People Think? It has a whole section devoted to his work on the
Challenger disaster, including NASA management's intransigence on the
matter of the shuttle's reliability.

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

In article _lIQb.117114$nt4.482280@attbi_s51,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

John D'Amico wrote:

Go baby...
NASA & JPL rocks.

NASA is an over the hill, corrupt decrepit organization whose management
constantly works in CYA mode. Their arrogance and stupidity has already
lead to the distriction of two vehicles with the death of the crews.
NASA does not rock. NASA sucks lemons.

The management of NASA somehow manages to silence any engineers who have
misgivings about the safety of missions. If this were a just world, the
management of NASA would be indicted for criminal negligence.

Bob Kolker



2 in 113.

I'd volunteer to go in a second.

From 1996:

"I remember when I joined the astronaut corps that I asked someone what
the probability risk assessment was for the loss of a shuttle,"recalled
O'Connor, the NASA shuttle program director. "I was told it was
1/10,000. There was no study. It was a gut feel by people. We obviously
underestimated the risk."

In 1988, SAIC evaluated the launch risk for NASA relying primarily on
factors applicable during the shuttle's pre-Challenger era, including
the flawed solid rocket booster. The assessment produced a range of risk
with a mean probability of a shuttle loss at one in every 78 launches.

The risk mean for a shuttle loss during the liftoff improved to one in
every 248 ascents when the assessment was repeated this year and the
shuttle's post-Challenger actual track record was factored into the
calculations.

When the risk of a mission from launch through landing was assessed for
the first time this year, the mean for the loss of a shuttle was one in
every 145 missions, O'Connor said. "


Yes, optimistic, but at least realistic, and life has risks.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article _lIQb.117114$nt4.482280@attbi_s51,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

John D'Amico wrote:

Go baby...
NASA & JPL rocks.

NASA is an over the hill, corrupt decrepit organization whose management
constantly works in CYA mode. Their arrogance and stupidity has already
lead to the distriction of two vehicles with the death of the crews.
NASA does not rock. NASA sucks lemons.

The management of NASA somehow manages to silence any engineers who have
misgivings about the safety of missions. If this were a just world, the
management of NASA would be indicted for criminal negligence.

Bob Kolker



2 in 113.

I'd volunteer to go in a second.

From 1996:

"I remember when I joined the astronaut corps that I asked someone what
the probability risk assessment was for the loss of a shuttle,"recalled
O'Connor, the NASA shuttle program director. "I was told it was
1/10,000. There was no study. It was a gut feel by people. We obviously
underestimated the risk."

In 1988, SAIC evaluated the launch risk for NASA relying primarily on
factors applicable during the shuttle's pre-Challenger era, including
the flawed solid rocket booster. The assessment produced a range of risk
with a mean probability of a shuttle loss at one in every 78 launches.

The risk mean for a shuttle loss during the liftoff improved to one in
every 248 ascents when the assessment was repeated this year and the
shuttle's post-Challenger actual track record was factored into the
calculations.

When the risk of a mission from launch through landing was assessed for
the first time this year, the mean for the loss of a shuttle was one in
every 145 missions, O'Connor said. "


Yes, optimistic, but at least realistic, and life has risks.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article _lIQb.117114$nt4.482280@attbi_s51,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:

John D'Amico wrote:

Go baby...
NASA & JPL rocks.

NASA is an over the hill, corrupt decrepit organization whose management
constantly works in CYA mode. Their arrogance and stupidity has already
lead to the distriction of two vehicles with the death of the crews.
NASA does not rock. NASA sucks lemons.

The management of NASA somehow manages to silence any engineers who have
misgivings about the safety of missions. If this were a just world, the
management of NASA would be indicted for criminal negligence.

Bob Kolker



2 in 113.

I'd volunteer to go in a second.

From 1996:

"I remember when I joined the astronaut corps that I asked someone what
the probability risk assessment was for the loss of a shuttle,"recalled
O'Connor, the NASA shuttle program director. "I was told it was
1/10,000. There was no study. It was a gut feel by people. We obviously
underestimated the risk."

In 1988, SAIC evaluated the launch risk for NASA relying primarily on
factors applicable during the shuttle's pre-Challenger era, including
the flawed solid rocket booster. The assessment produced a range of risk
with a mean probability of a shuttle loss at one in every 78 launches.

The risk mean for a shuttle loss during the liftoff improved to one in
every 248 ascents when the assessment was repeated this year and the
shuttle's post-Challenger actual track record was factored into the
calculations.

When the risk of a mission from launch through landing was assessed for
the first time this year, the mean for the loss of a shuttle was one in
every 145 missions, O'Connor said. "


Yes, optimistic, but at least realistic, and life has risks.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----