The Evil Man Is Back...

.... and I don't think that Spirit is going to wake up again. I told you
that NASA was nothing more than a ponderous bureaucracy intended to create
jobs at taxpayer expense. They couldn't care less about good science or
good engineering work. These guys had better clean up their act or a smart
president will eliminate the whole agency.

Let's get the GAO to write a report naming specific names of people to
eliminate.

Evil Man ) wrote:

: ... and I don't think that Spirit is going to wake up again. I told you
: that NASA was nothing more than a ponderous bureaucracy intended to create
: jobs at taxpayer expense. They couldn't care less about good science or
: good engineering work. These guys had better clean up their act or a smart
: president will eliminate the whole agency.

Seems like you are wrong (again?). Before you start tapdancing on Spirit's
grave take a look at this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3855168&p1=0

: Let's get the GAO to write a report naming specific names of people to
: eliminate.

Right, that will fix everything...

Eric

Here's what I saw in your article -

Spirit rover ... in critical condition ... coughing up ... gasps of data
.... nearly mute ... wreaked havoc ... engineers struggled ... reboot ...
more than 60 times ... partial functionality ... prognosis ... uncertain
.... can't be fully repaired ... its condition ... “critical” ... not ...
back to normal ... days or ... couple of weeks ... other spacecraft blew
up, crashed or disappeared ... Spirit began malfunctioning ... transmitting
.... random strings ... never completed ... sequence of tasks ... software
.... not worked properly ... confounding ... engineers ... staying up
through the night ... should be asleep ... draw down ... batteries ...
trigger further problems ... data came to an abrupt halt."

Here's what you saw -

chances ... will not work again ... low ... stay focused on Opportunity
.... not dwell ... on Spirit ... can stay in ... current condition for some
time ... not a fatal problem

I don't like bounce and roll. First they crash the $400 million
electronics, and then they try to do science with it. How much more can a
smooth lading cost?

If there's a flaw on one of the vehicles, that increases the chances of a
flaw on the second one. They are not independent statistics!

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 11:38:48 GMT, Evil Man wrote:



I don't like bounce and roll. First they crash the $400 million
electronics, and then they try to do science with it. How much more can a
smooth lading cost?



It really doesn't matter what "you" like... Your statement above shows
that you Sir, have no idea what you are talking about and are not
qualified to make such a judgement...

Learn Something before you rant...

http://spaceprojects.tk

Make 'em sweat, Joann.

The things you know that they don't have a clue about
would scare them polite.

--Damon

Damon Hill wrote in
32:

Make 'em sweat, Joann.
The things you know that they don't have a clue about
would scare them polite.

Don't be so sure that the rest of us can't make the same assertion.

(Eric Chomko) wrote in
:

Yes, I get your point, but "Joanne" (no offense) could very well be a
huge hairy man with a bad case of BO...

Mind your own business.

Evil Man ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: Yes, I get your point, but "Joanne" (no offense) could very well be a
: huge hairy man with a bad case of BO...

: Mind your own business.

When it's on USENET and not backchannel email (I noticed that she rejected
your advances), then it is fair game. Trust me, I had nothing to do with
you being rejected. That said, I'll go back to my own business now...

Eric