A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Shuttle program extension?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 3rd 08, 09:36 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,999
Default Shuttle program extension?

Pat Flannery wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:
Given that neither Apollo 1 or Challenger was caused by programs being
rushed, I fail to see your point. Doubly so since by any rational
measurement Orion isn't being rushed either.


Apollo 1 was certainly caused by the program being rushed (or "Go Fever"
as the astronauts referred to it). Challenger was due to trying to
maintain a unrealistic flight rate.


Schedule pressure on a single flight, or series of flights, is not the
same thing as a program being rushed.

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

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
  #22  
Old September 4th 08, 01:26 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Brian Thorn[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,266
Default Shuttle program extension?

On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:36:28 GMT, (Derek Lyons)
wrote:


Schedule pressure on a single flight, or series of flights, is not the
same thing as a program being rushed.


How many flights does it take until the program is, in fact, rushed?

Brian
  #23  
Old September 4th 08, 02:40 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,134
Default Shuttle program extension?

Fred J. McCall wrote:

They're called 'fixed costs' because they're FIXED. They don't change
no matter what your flight rate is.



I think this is an over-simplification. If your ground infrastructure
is setup to handle X flights per year and this requires that one shuttle
enter maintenance phase before another one is finished, it means that
you need 2 maintenance bases, and enough employees to process 2 shuttles
concurrently (or even more if a 3rd shuttle is in a heavy maintenance
phase monopolising a maintenance bay and employees for months/year)

Lower the launch rate to a point where shuttle #1 has fully exited the
maiintenance facility by the time shuttle #2 lands, and it means that
shuttle#2 can use the same facility and staff that have worked on
shuttle #1 just before.

In other words, once NASA is given the order to plan for no more than
say 3 launches per year for Shuttle, it could then scale its ground
infrastucture down. But as long as it has dreams of 12 launches per
year, NASA will keep ground infrastructure scaled up to handle the
remote possibility of 12 launches per year, even if in reality, it may
never do more than 6.

So I think there is room to significantly reduce ground costs after
assembly complete if NASA is told to not plan for more than 2 or 3
shuttle launches per year allowing it to scale down its ground
infrastructure.

  #24  
Old September 4th 08, 06:20 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Shuttle program extension?

John Doe wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
: They're called 'fixed costs' because they're FIXED. They don't change
: no matter what your flight rate is.
:
:
:I think this is an over-simplification. If your ground infrastructure
:is setup to handle X flights per year and this requires that one shuttle
:enter maintenance phase before another one is finished, it means that
:you need 2 maintenance bases, and enough employees to process 2 shuttles
:concurrently (or even more if a 3rd shuttle is in a heavy maintenance
hase monopolising a maintenance bay and employees for months/year)
:

If they scale with flight rates then they are not fixed costs. That's
not "over-simplification". That's the bloody definition of fixed
costs.

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
  #25  
Old September 4th 08, 06:44 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,134
Default Shuttle program extension?

Fred J. McCall wrote:

If they scale with flight rates then they are not fixed costs. That's
not "over-simplification". That's the bloody definition of fixed
costs.


If they have facilities to support say 12 flights per year, you have
fixed costs whether you operate 1 or 12 flights that year.

But if you know you won't need more than 3 flights per year, you might
be able to scale down those facilities and staffing levels and reduce
your fixed costs. (at which point, your costs would be fixed whether you
operate 1 or 3 flights per year).

Think of it in terms of a factory. If you operate 2 production lines in
3 shifts, your factory will have equipment and employee costs that are
fixed whether the factory runs at capacity or below capacity.

But if you are only using 1/6th of the maximum capacity, you could
shutdown one production line and only hire one shift of employees to
produce what is needed and your fixed costs would be much lower.
  #26  
Old September 4th 08, 11:17 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Martha Adams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 371
Default Shuttle program extension?

"John Doe" wrote in message
...
Fred J. McCall wrote:

If they scale with flight rates then they are not fixed costs.
That's
not "over-simplification". That's the bloody definition of fixed
costs.


If they have facilities to support say 12 flights per year, you have
fixed costs whether you operate 1 or 12 flights that year.

But if you know you won't need more than 3 flights per year, you might
be able to scale down those facilities and staffing levels and reduce
your fixed costs. (at which point, your costs would be fixed whether
you
operate 1 or 3 flights per year).

Think of it in terms of a factory. If you operate 2 production lines
in
3 shifts, your factory will have equipment and employee costs that are
fixed whether the factory runs at capacity or below capacity.

But if you are only using 1/6th of the maximum capacity, you could
shutdown one production line and only hire one shift of employees to
produce what is needed and your fixed costs would be much lower.


==========================================

From my point of view of being aboard one of those
Shuttles when launched, what is happening to the skills
and knowhow level of the remaining work crew while this
is going on? ?? I recognize great advances in manuals
and literature accessibility as computer technology
comes in, but I really don't want someone working on my
hardwares who hasn't had one of the things apart and
reassembled personally at least two or three times, and
then tested severely? Someone who hasn't spent *days*
looking at fault trees and thinking about what if this
or that which isn't there (yet) happens anyway? These
staff and physical plant reduction schemes may work ok
in a candy factory, but are they really such a safe
idea for extremely dynamic machinery such as Shuttles
and the like? ??

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Sep 04]




  #28  
Old September 4th 08, 01:16 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Shuttle program extension?

John Doe wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
: If they scale with flight rates then they are not fixed costs. That's
: not "over-simplification". That's the bloody definition of fixed
: costs.
:
:If they have facilities to support say 12 flights per year, you have
:fixed costs whether you operate 1 or 12 flights that year.
:
:But if you know you won't need more than 3 flights per year, you might
:be able to scale down those facilities and staffing levels and reduce
:your fixed costs. (at which point, your costs would be fixed whether you
perate 1 or 3 flights per year).
:
:Think of it in terms of a factory. If you operate 2 production lines in
:3 shifts, your factory will have equipment and employee costs that are
:fixed whether the factory runs at capacity or below capacity.
:
:But if you are only using 1/6th of the maximum capacity, you could
:shutdown one production line and only hire one shift of employees to
roduce what is needed and your fixed costs would be much lower.
:

Go look up the definition of 'fixed cost'.

If it varies with level of activity, it is a VARIABLE cost.

Let me help you out:

Fixed Cost: Fixed costs are operating expenses that are incurred when
providing necessities for doing business and have no relation to the
volume of production and sales (as opposed to "variable costs").
Examples are rent, property taxes, and interest expense.

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
  #29  
Old September 4th 08, 02:19 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Alexander DeClama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Shuttle program extension?

Perhaps a better way to put it is: the facilities themselves are fixed
costs. They are there whether you use them for 12 flights or 2. The
maintenance personnel, replacement parts, etc are all variable costs
because you use them only when needed. It's a mix of both.
  #30  
Old September 4th 08, 02:30 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default Shuttle program extension?


"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Jeff Findley" wrote:

So, just how was the Challenger disaster the fault of the engineers?


Have you ever actually studied the Challenger accident as opposed to
quoting soundbites?


Since when is the official accident report published by an independent team
of experts a soundbite? Just what have you been smoking lately?

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein


 




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
Shuttle program extension? Flyguy Space Shuttle 175 September 22nd 08 04:18 PM
No Shuttle launch, Shuttle program mothballed? Widget Policy 1 July 4th 06 03:51 PM
The shuttle program needs some comedy!!! Steve W. Space Shuttle 0 August 9th 05 09:59 PM
More Evidence The Shuttle Program Should Be Scrapped John Slade Space Shuttle 7 August 2nd 05 04:35 AM
Question regarding the end of the Shuttle program JazzMan Space Shuttle 23 February 19th 04 03:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:24 AM.


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.