Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground

(bob haller) wrote in
:

Lets discuss why you think a spacewalk is so unsafe shall we?

If they are that dangerous then perhaps we shouldnt be there?
Hey this is my opinion

I do not believe that EVAs are unsafe. If I did, I would agree that we
shouldn't do them at all.

I do believe that EVAs carry some risks; therefore, the risks must be
weighed carefully against the benefits. Which in this case means the
mitigation of risk from the unknown noise. With the current evidence in
hand, the odds of the noise having an external source are low and
continuing to drop. Therefore it is prudent to continue to gather evidence
of the source of the noise, but the risk of an additional dedicated EVA is
unwarranted at this time. If new evidence indicates an external source,
then of course an EVA should be considered.

Now, my turn: Do you believe that EVAs carry *no* risks?

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

(bob haller) wrote in
:

I'm having a lot more fun imagining you as an ISS flight director
sending the crew out on EVA, getting them killed as a result, and
getting your ass hauled before an investigation

You find the death of a crew member funny......?

No, I do not find the death of a crew member funny. What I find funny is
your stubborn insistence on increasing the risks to the crew by performing
an EVA as a cover-your-ass, PR exercise, all the while piously proclaiming
your dedication to crew safety. Though I confess the joke is getting rather
old, and I wish you'd find a new one.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

(bob haller) writes:

Noted that again you desire the appearance of safety, not actual safety.

Not at all, with a unknown noise you shouldnt ignore any possibilties,
including taking a look outside

NASA has not ignored the possibility of taking a look outside. They
appear to be prudently fitting it into the next scheduled EVA, because
that is the safest thing to do.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.

"Jorge R. Frank" writes:

No, I do not find the death of a crew member funny. What I find funny is
your stubborn insistence on increasing the risks to the crew by performing
an EVA as a cover-your-ass, PR exercise, all the while piously proclaiming
your dedication to crew safety. Though I confess the joke is getting rather
old, and I wish you'd find a new one.

Unfortunately, Bob Haller seems to be a one trick pony.

I wonder if he applies the same shotgun approach to any sort of
problem solving.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.

Unfortunately, Bob Haller seems to be a one trick pony.

I wonder if he applies the same shotgun approach to any sort of
problem solving.

Jeff

Actually shotgun repair can be useful when your not certain of the cause. Since
the noise is from a unknown source they should try to investigate as many
possible causes as they can...

Fan ventilators pumps outside disturbances etc.

If we are going to live in space permanetely then we have to be ready to take a
look outdoors occasionally

:
:
:
My opinion is right

NASA has not ignored the possibility of taking a look outside. They
appear to be prudently fitting it into the next scheduled EVA, because
that is the safest thing to do.

Jeff

Since it warranteed a look with the spacewalk that was cut short they shouldnt
wait till july, do the inspection and all other chores that werent completed or
need done.
:
:
:
My opinion is right

(bob haller) wrote:
Unfortunately, Bob Haller seems to be a one trick pony.

I wonder if he applies the same shotgun approach to any sort of
problem solving.


Actually shotgun repair can be useful when your not certain of the cause. Since
the noise is from a unknown source they should try to investigate as many
possible causes as they can...

Which is what they *have* been doing, and what you have been
previously whining about.

If we are going to live in space permanetely then we have to be ready to take a
look outdoors occasionally

At need and when such a thing would be useful, yes.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

"bob haller" wrote in message
...


Noted that again you desire the appearance of safety, not actual safety.


Not at all, with a unknown noise you shouldnt ignore any possibilties,
including taking a look outside

So, let me get this straight.

Let's say that the odds of it being an outside problem that could lead to
catastrophe are 1 in 100,000.
And the odds of a fatal space walk are 1 in 10,000.

You'd still go for the space walk?




:
:
:
My opinion is right

utside

So, let me get this straight.

Let's say that the odds of it being an outside problem that could lead to
catastrophe are 1 in 100,000.
And the odds of a fatal space walk are 1 in 10,000.


Just where did these numbers come from?

If a fatal space walk is 1 in 10,000 thatrs pretty bad. of course the shuttles
safety record is way worse.
:
:
:
My opinion is right

"bob haller" wrote in message
...
utside

So, let me get this straight.

Let's say that the odds of it being an outside problem that could lead to
catastrophe are 1 in 100,000.
And the odds of a fatal space walk are 1 in 10,000.


Just where did these numbers come from?

My butt.

They are purely hypothetical. But you've basically said that we MUST
immediately perform an EVA to investigate the sounds. But you're not
willing to actually justify it. I'm asking you, if those were the numbers,
would you still be so singlemindedly insisting on an immediate EVA?



If a fatal space walk is 1 in 10,000 thatrs pretty bad. of course the
shuttles
safety record is way worse.

True. But the powers that be have determined that risk is worth the
rewards. Is the risk of an EVA worth the reward? What are the odds of them
finding anything?


:
:
:
My opinion is right