MSNBC (JimO) Scoops more Inside-NASA Shuttle Documents

Capcom (guess they don't use that term anymore --anyway) needs to put the
astronauts (cosmonauts) beddie bye reading old fables beginning with
Chicken Little, Better than the wake up calls.

??????? ???????? ??????? ??? ? ????, ????? - ???????? - ?????? ???? ?? ??
??????
"? ??? ????????????! " ?????? ???????? ???????. "???? ??????! ? ?????? ?????
? ??????? ??????. " etc


"Hallerb" wrote in message
...

Congratulations, Bob (hallerb)... Stuf4 just took the lead in the
"Chicken
Little" title.

Buk... buk... buk-KAW.

Roger

If linda ham and ron dittmore had used a bit of chicken little columbias
astronauts might still be alive today.




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

From Roger Balettie:
"Stuf4" wrote:
Imagine a young child getting to watch mom or dad playing Russian
roulette on national television. Even if the empty chamber gets
clicked, it still has to be a traumatic experience.

Congratulations, Bob (hallerb)... Stuf4 just took the lead in the "Chicken
Little" title.

Buk... buk... buk-KAW.

I don't see anyone declaring that the sky is falling. On the
contrary, I expect STS-114 to go off without a hitch.

On top of that, I am of the opinion that NASA could push STS-114's
launch up to October (that's next month, Oct 2003) and they can still
fly with perfect safety ("Damn the CAIB...full speed ahead").

My post was not about any sky falling. My post was about bogus
excuses. And it was about underrecognized trauma that astronaut
families endure.

*

I'd like to emphasize the danger of distortions in justification.
Certainly it is of little consequence if one news article writes a
caption supporting the notion that crew size is limited to four due to
need for more "room".

Now consider this distortion...

The shuttle upgrade designed to strengthen the WLEs was couched under
the title "MMOD". This justification spells out to
"Micro-Meteoroid/Orbital Debris". I am of the opinion that the
accurate justification was well known by those involved with the
design:

"Look Pat, we need to design stronger Wing Leading Edges because
they've been getting dinged on every flight by that SOFI stuff that
keeps shedding."

"OK, but how bout we call it -MMOD-? That term really sounds high
tech, much better than -foamguard-."

This supposed interaction gets followed by confusion of those who
can't see through the distortion...

"Why are we spending all this money on MMOD protection? We can just
have the orbiter fly tail first. Problem solved!"

No, the problem wasn't solved. The problem was forgotten.

*

I don't know what potential consequences may arise from propagating a
bogus story that STS-114 "needs more room". But I'd rather not find
out.


~ CT

From stmx3:
snip
Jim Kelly:
"...four children."

(http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/kellyjm.html)

Soichi Noguchi:
"Three children..."

(http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/noguchi.html)


Steve Robinson appears to have no spousal or parenthood attachment.


If the actual reason behind scaling the crew back to just four is to
minimize the risk to human lives, NASA could do better in considering
the impact to family members left behind on the planet.

(Note that the current ISS crew had no such attachments as well when
they were selected and launched.)


Imagine a young child getting to watch mom or dad playing Russian
roulette on national television. Even if the empty chamber gets
clicked, it still has to be a traumatic experience.


~ CT

Are you talking about leaving home every morning and getting in your car
to go to work? Picture yourself in the poster holding your child, with
the caption "Are you ready for Daddy to go to work?"

You can't eliminate risk...but you can avoid unnecessary risk.

I would be interested to hear how astronauts convince their families
that doing laps around the planet is *necessary*.

If I were an astronaut and I were saying goodbye to my family just
before launch, I could think of lots of reasons why it will be fun.
Lots of reasons why it will be beneficial. Lots as to why it will be
important.

....but *zero* reasons as to why it would be _necessary_.

*

Tangentially...

I have a friend who is a Navy test pilot who made the Navy cut and is
preparing for his NASA interview for this next astronaut class. In my
last conversation with him, I chose not to ask him how his family
feels about the whole thing. If he gets selected, I will be very
happy for him. And I hope his family will be as well. And I hope he
has a safe and long career.


~ CT

"jeff findley" wrote in message
...
(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

Jeff, on these groups, most people spell "Hallerb" T. R. O. L. L. That's
what he's become.

--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au

"for 'aiming at the stars,' both literally
and figuratively, is a problem to occupy
generations, so that no matter how much
progress one makes, there is always the
thrill of just beginning."
- Robert H Goddard.

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

Jeff, on these groups, most people spell "Hallerb" T. R. O. L. L. That's
what he's become.

--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au


After the columia loss there were lots of discussion about just who should fly.
I remember few called for anyone but test pilots because of the danger.

Now we see barbs name popping up. True she knows the risk but its still teacher
in space and a exhibition at heart.

While astronauts call for limits on hubble flights because of the risks someone
advocates barb flying?

Typical nasa pom pomers wanting to show things are back to normal with the
shuttle.

They still havent learned there is no normal for the shuttle program and never
will be.

Just a slippery danger slope leading to another accident

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:05:10 -0400, "Lynndel Humphreys"
wrote:

Capcom (guess they don't use that term anymore --anyway) needs to put the
astronauts (cosmonauts) beddie bye reading old fables beginning with
Chicken Little, Better than the wake up calls.

The person in MCC who talks with the crew is still called "Capcom" based on
historical precedent, even if there's no capsule anymore.

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 ****!

(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

On or about 26 Sep 2003 04:02:30 GMT, Dave Fowler made the sensational claim that:
(Stuf4)

~ ~ ~ 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."

My non-PC response: You're the biggest asshole I've come across on usenet, bar
none.

Jeez Dave, don't be so narrow minded. He's the biggest asshole *period*. :-)

Oh, and the little ****'s on AOL now. C'mon stuffie...what's with the musical
ISP's? Afraid someone will track you down if you stick to one too long?
--
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