A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

news flash.......mosley bleeds from O-ring.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #132  
Old June 15th 04, 07:43 PM
Ami Silberman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Stuf4" wrote in message
om...
You stated that AS-204 was not under military command or control. And
then you follow that up by acknowledging the fact that the flight crew
was military (I would note that it was not only "several", but *all*).

My point was that a military crew operating a vehicle *is* military
command and control. Gus was the military commander over his military
crew.

Not necessarily if they are operating that vehicle for a civilian agency.
They were military officers working for a civilian agency and following that
agencies rules.

Now back to the real world...

A subtle example of a military crew exerting military command and
control:

Gus: Hey Ed, pass me that flashlight.

Ed: Here you go, Gus.

What if Ed asked Gus for the flashlight? Would that be an example of
insubordination?


  #133  
Old June 15th 04, 07:46 PM
Ami Silberman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Doug..." wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Ami Silberman" wrote in message
...

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...

Hey, folks--I wasn't sure where to post this one because there's

been
so much blathering, but how about this for a question: You do

realize
the first three groups of astronauts were recruited from within the
military, and by that I mean they received orders to show up at
such-and-so place at such-and-so time with absolutely no clue why

they
were there?

I thought that they had to apply first, and then the candidates

received
the
orders.


Shhhh! It's LaToya's fantasy.


Which, once again, displays her lack of real knowledge about the
American space program of the 1950s and 1960s. The very first astronaut
selection was, indeed, a "blind" call worked through the military chain
of command. Each service was asked to select a certain number of
candidates, who met in a room and were told exactly what the program was
about. (They were even told that they did not *have* to volunteer, if
they didn't want to.) They weren't told the subject of the meeting
until they arrived.

However, beginning with the second astronaut class, NASA issued requests
for application, listing the requirements and asking for applications
from individuals, both military and civilian. There weren't all that
many civilians who were qualified for the second group, since test pilot
experience was still mandatory. But beginning with the third group,
test pilot experience was simply "preferred," and several non-test
pilots applied (and several were accepted). Beginning with the second
group, your entry into the selection process began with your individual
application -- if you were active military, your chain of command found
out about it if/when you were asked to come interview with Deke & Co.

Actually, LaDonna is probably conflating the first two or three (can't
remember how many there where, I think three, but the third wasn't actually
called in) "batches" of test pilots called for project Mercury (Astronaut
Group I), which was a blind call (although the second and third "batch"
heard what was going on through the grapevine), and the actual numbered
Astronaut Groups II and III.


  #134  
Old June 15th 04, 07:48 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Doug... wrote:
However, beginning with the second astronaut class, NASA issued requests
for application, listing the requirements and asking for applications
from individuals, both military and civilian.


I can't speak to the other services, or the 1960's; But throughout
the 1980's the USN published a monthly newsletter listing all of the
various school and billet opportunities.

I don't recall seeing the astronaut notices in it; but I didn't read
it very closely. (My rate was Crit 1, which basically meant I wasn't
going outside of the rate, and the opportunities to transfer early
were essentially non existent.) I had enough that I was required to
read that reading something that was a) not required and b)
essentially non-applicable wasn't happening.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #135  
Old June 15th 04, 08:10 PM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:39:59 -0400, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:

"LaDonna Wyss is a LIAR!!!" wrote in
message ...
LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR!


So, can you or can you not provide verifiable references that will state
whether or not her pants were on fire?


....Well, isn't that how you deal with highly contageous biopathogens?

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr
  #136  
Old June 15th 04, 08:40 PM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ami Silberman" wrote in message
...
Where in
http://www.defenselink.mil/odam/omp/...ok/Pdf/DoD.PDF, which is

the
organization of the DoD, is NASA?


How dare you use facts against Stuffie! NASA paychecks come from the same
place that military paychecks come from, the US Treasury. Since NASA
paychecks look just like military paychecks, it's obvious that NASA is part
of the military.


  #137  
Old June 15th 04, 08:41 PM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ami Silberman" wrote in message
...
That still doesn't make everything involved with the Cold War part of the
defense establishment, the military, or the DoD.


I was involved in the Cold War. I served as a target. That must mean I was
in the military! Where's my VA card?


  #138  
Old June 15th 04, 08:45 PM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
This started
when someone claimed these guys "applied" for their jobs as NASA. I
countered by saying they were summoned without knowing why.


The known, verifiable facts support "someone"'s claim and not yours. You are
welcome to provide verifiable evidence to the contrary.


  #139  
Old June 15th 04, 09:31 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(LaDonna Wyss) wrote:
Follow the conversation: This started
when someone claimed these guys "applied" for their jobs as NASA. I
countered by saying they were summoned without knowing why.


You countered by exposing your ignorance and confusing the summons to
a briefing with the subsequent application process. Thus you are a
fraud in having claimed to be familiar with the process.

I never said no one EVER filled out a piece of paper;


And here you expose yourself as a liar, because you plainly stated
that "there were no applications in the initial astronaut groups".
Here you also expose yourself as a fraud by confusing the initial
astronaut groups with the initial groups of pilots summoned to
Washington for a briefing.

but it is wrong to say they "applied" like the job was posted on a bulletin
board and everybody sent in their applications. They were selected
without knowing what they were selected to DO.


Another lie. They were selected to go to the briefings, but were
given a chance to turn the selection down. After the briefings they
were again offered the opportunity to proceed or quit.

Once they arrived, then obviously tests were conducted, screening was done,
etc;


Yet *another* lie. Because the tests etc. were only performed on
gentlemen who had already twice volunteered.

SO, not only am I NOT a liar, but where the he** did "cheat" come in?


You lied no less than four times in *this message alone*.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #140  
Old June 16th 04, 12:21 AM
LaDonna Wyss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message ...
"LaDonna Wyss is a LIAR!!!" wrote in
message ...
LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR!


So, can you or can you not provide verifiable references that will state
whether or not her pants were on fire?


Wow. How very adult of you.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sky & Telescope's News Bulletin - Mar 19 Stuart Goldman Amateur Astronomy 0 March 20th 04 03:20 AM
Good news and bad about Mars rover... Steven James Forsberg Policy 2 January 26th 04 11:12 AM
Sky & Telescope's News Bulletin - Jan 9 Stuart Goldman Amateur Astronomy 12 January 10th 04 02:34 AM
Sky & Telescope's News Bulletin - Sep 12 Stuart Goldman Astronomy Misc 0 September 13th 03 02:45 AM
news flash! Rutan drops the shapceship! Rand Simberg Policy 3 August 8th 03 11:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.