MSNBC (JimO) Scoops more Inside-NASA Shuttle Documents

On 25 Sep 2003 20:52:33 -0700, (Stuf4) wrote:

From James Oberg:
Don't miss this 'insider document' report.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/970180.asp?0dm=C25AT

From crew photo caption:

"The core group for the next shuttle mission renames unchanged: from
left, Soichi Noguchi, commander Eileen Collins, Steve Robinson and Jim
Kelly. But the three other slots have been emptied to to make room for
those with specialized skills needed for the flight's new
responsibilities."


~ ~ ~ Rub text with lemon juice to reveal the non-PC caption ~ ...

"But the three other slots have been kept empty to minimize the number
of funerals in case NASA overlooked something else."

Man, you really had to work at being THIS big an asshole.

Of course, the other three slots were emptied because the Expedition 7 crew (or
at least 2/3 of them) are already on the Space Station and 114 won't be a crew
rotation mission, YOU STUPID ****!

Man, you really had to work at being THIS big an asshole.

Of course, the other three slots were emptied because the Expedition 7 crew
(or
at least 2/3 of them) are already o

Actually there was serious discussion about permanetely limiting the flight
crew to one or two to just fly the shuttle.

I believe if a affordable safe capsule system existed ala apollo or gemini like
today the shuttle would be converted to umanned remote operation.

I will go futher. If we loose another vehicle and crew this will be nasas plan
to continue flying the remaining two shuttles since it will keep most of the
jobs intact for the standing army.

(Hallerb) spewed:
I shudder at the effect of another generation watching more deaths of teachers
in space.

Are you stating that there are plans to afoot to ensure Ms. Morgan's death in
space? Have you contacted any authorities with these allegations?

Crew should be test pilots ONLY!

And just why do you value the lives of test pilots less than anyone
else you snivelling little sack of slug ****?

You do realize this isn't make believe don't you? It's not just words on a
page, or pictures on a website. And it sure isn't all about giving you what
you want to see.
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | This space is for rent
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | Inquire within if you
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | Would like your ad here

Dear Haller,

You were recently seen feeding a troll on this thread. If you continue to
do so, it will pollute this thread and it will quickly degrade to nothing
more than a insult shouting match. Please try to refrain yourself by not
responding to trolls who add nothing to the conversation, and by responding
to Jeff who makes a very valid point.

Here Jeff points out that Barbara is in the astronaut corps, she became one
in 1998. She has been waiting to fly for 17 years. She has paid dues, more
dues than most other astronauts. She has been used as a show piece for many
of those years by NASA to promote itself, and probably more effective than
the rest of the astronaut corps combined.

Talking politics, at some time NASA is going to have to pay the piper. Bad
politics would be if NASA puts Barbara Morgan back on the display shelf for
another 17 years, polishing and only taking her off the shelf to parade her
around this countries schools like some PR persons "wet dream" trophy.

For NASA, the decision should be easy, a win-win decision. By allowing
Barbara to fly, she will be a much more valuable spokeswoman, even if she
decides to quit and do her own thing. If she decides to stay and fly again,
she will be even more valuable, as NASA can continue to direct her
activities.

Barbara Morgan, of all people, probably understands the risk better than
anyone. She was selected and served as backup to Christa MaAuliffe, and
watched her die knowing full well she could easily been the one on that
flight instead of Christa. If Christa had caught a common cold she would
have been.

She chose to stay on, and continuing to work for NASA. Some years later,
NASA made it a requirement that she become an astronaut. She became an
astronaut. Finally, she gets assigned to a flight, and the Columbia
Disaster occurs. I haven't heard of her quiting yet.

Personally, I think the next flight of the Shuttle will be one of the
safest. It's the next flight after that, that NASA will move off the top of
the hill and back onto that slippery slope, business as usual. You can
almost see that in the words used to describe the "rapid fire" launches to
complete the space station. So, the sooner she flies the better, as the
slippery slope only gets steeper with time.

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.senate.gov/~craig/releases/pr051602b.htm

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff2002/ef.html

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/news/2003/news-edspace.asp

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.aacps.org/aacps/boe/admin...803archive.htm

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/calendar/summer03.html

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...te_030123.html

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://mynasa.nasa.gov/lb/home/hqnew...ia_awards.html

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.newstrolls.com/washpost.htm

"The next time Columbia flies will be in November, when it carries into
orbit educator-astronaut Barbara Morgan, who was the backup for Challenger
crew member Christa McAuliffe in 1986."

Barbara Morgan was scheduled on Columbia's next flight?

How about the next flight instead?

Craig Fink

jeff findley wrote:

(Hallerb) writes:

I shudder at the effect of another generation watching more deaths of
teachers in space.

Crew should be test pilots ONLY!

Barbara Morgan isn't an idiot. She's also a NASA astronaut, an actual
Mission Specialist. Unless you want to ban all Mission Specialists
from flying on the shuttle, you'd better re-think your statement.

Jeff

Dear Haller,

You were recently seen feeding a troll on this thread. If you continue to
do so, it will pollute this thread and it will quickly degrade to nothing

I stand by my statement. At this point shuttle is a research vehicle! A very
risky one at that. Barb, and I have met her should fly. But not at this time.

Its not about her. Its about nasa going back to PR flights. Barb is one of
those.

I dont want to see another teacher in space die. Thats what she really is.
Teacher in space, with a astronaut job in case she dies. Before Columbia many
felt flying was safe. I think we all got a wake up call that its very risky.

I will reduce my posting oin this. Although people call me a troll for my
safety concerns BEFORE cloumbia.

BTW I support fully Barb getting a seat on the soyuz. since it appears somewhat
safer and yhas launch boost escape.

Stuf4 wrote:

From Hallerb:
I shudder at the effect of another generation watching more deaths of
teachers in space.

Crew should be test pilots ONLY!

Strange to think of all of Christa's and Barbara's old students who
now have kids of their own. I wonder if these parents will have them
watch live TV to see the latest teacher-in-space blast off.



Hi CT,

We are all born into the world inocent and ignorant. Nothing is certain in
life execpt one thing. If we live long enough each and every one of us must
confront our own physical mortality. Usually, during the ages that a child
is in grades K-12. To each of us this reality come in a different form,
whether it is a relative or hero, every parent and every child must work
through this one certainty in life. It is how we work through these tragic
event that effects how the child will handle this event in the future, as
it will occur over and over again if the child has a long life.

To me, it seems that NASA has done exactly the wrong thing after the
Challenger Accident. Instead of explaining risks and rewards, and an
individual's right to accept these risk in life to do the things that they
believe are important, they pulled back from the frontier.

Barbara Morgan believe that what she is doing is important and is willing
to take the risk.

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.spacekids.com/astronauts/morgan_000714.html

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

Craig Fink

Hallerb wrote:


Dear Haller,

You were recently seen feeding a troll on this thread. If you continue to
do so, it will pollute this thread and it will quickly degrade to nothing

I stand by my statement. At this point shuttle is a research vehicle! A
very risky one at that. Barb, and I have met her should fly. But not at
this time.

Its not about her. Its about nasa going back to PR flights. Barb is one of
those.

I dont want to see another teacher in space die. Thats what she really is.
Teacher in space, with a astronaut job in case she dies. Before Columbia
many felt flying was safe. I think we all got a wake up call that its very
risky.

I will reduce my posting oin this. Although people call me a troll for my
safety concerns BEFORE cloumbia.

BTW I support fully Barb getting a seat on the soyuz. since it appears
somewhat safer and yhas launch boost escape.

But it is about her. She has made a choice and wishes to fly and teach in
space. It's a mutual arrangement with NASA where both parties should
receive something from the deal. NASA has already received much of their
end of the bargain, while she has not. They have already had 18+ years of
PR without paying for it. I can't see NASA receiving any PR by buying her a
ticket on a Soyuz, it's not going to happen.

Personally, I'd like to see the US return to Capitalism wrt to space, then
NASA could purchase her a ticket to the Space Station on a US built
commercial vehicle. That's not likely to happen either. NASA is a
government monopoly on human space travel in this country, and that is how
they like it. Funding depends on the "Disney World" (visitor's center)
generated "Buck Rogers" glorification of the astronaut corps. No Buck
Rogers, no Bucks. Allowing private enterprise and commercial space travel
endangers this gravy train.

But as far as Barbara Morgan is concerned, the choice to fly is hers and
hers alone, and I support her choice and her acceptance of the risk
involved, whatever it is, no matter how bad NASA management might have been
or continues to be. Or, no matter how bad or unsafe the Shuttle might be,
it's her choice to accept the risk if she wants to.

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

http://www.spaceandtech.com/digest/f...2002-036.shtml

Barbara Morgan in 2004!!!!

Craig Fink

20 million people were killed last year by drunk drivers. How was
simply being out on the street worth that? I just think way too much
is being made of seven people who died doing a job they volunteered
for. I doubt they would want us to pull back from space and quit. They
were not quitters.
--
Gene Seibel
http://pad39a.com - Who valued life more highly, the aviators who
spent it on the art they loved, or these misers who doled it out like
pennies through their antlike days? I decided that if I could fly for
ten years before I was killed in a crash, it would be a worthwhile
trade for an ordinary lifetime. Charles Lindbergh



Gene Seibel wrote:
I shudder at the effect on young minds, with no interest in space,
science, exploration, or anything else that challanges their mind, of
watching thousands of murders on TV during their lifetime. They need
to know that SOMETHING is worth dying for, and it's not a pair of
Nikes.

But is what NASA's doing now worth dying for?

--
Gene Seibel
http://pad39a.com/
Because I fly, I envy no one.


[snip all after]

From: (Hallerb)

Actually there was serious discussion about permanetely limiting the flight
crew to one or two to just fly the shuttle.

Ah, no there wasn't. Provide a cite for this, or withdraw the comment.

DF

"Buck Rogers" glorification of the astronaut corps. No Buck
Rogers, no Bucks.

"I Reach for the Stars" was pretty good also.





-----= 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! =-----