|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
James Oberg: The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure May 8 // The Space Review: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/619/1 Last month's failure of a test of a pair of rocket engines on the International Space Station has taught a whole series of unexpected lessons and has answered questions that the station's operators hadn't even intended to ask. Yet since nothing actually happened, a senior NASA spokesman said it was a "non-event". But that's nowhere near the truth. The incident and repercussions of it further underscore that operating a space facility as complex and poorly documented as the ISS is an irremediably non-deterministic process. That is, anything can happen, at any time-and blindside everybody involved |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
"Jim Oberg" wrote:
James Oberg: The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure May 8 // The Space Review: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/619/1 "Things will keep catching station operators by surprise. As long as their bag of tricks stays just one layer deeper than the demands placed upon it, things should work out. That’s the unrequested—but unavoidable—lesson of this highly informative “non-event”." Ayup. So long as the backup o-ring only gets scorched - we're OK. We've never suffered serious damage from foam inpingment - we're OK. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
yeah ISS can have bad day easily and kill not only the station but
shuttle too. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
Hey Bbo,
Space is dangerous. That's its nature. And when you do dangerous stuff, **** Happens. Even if you're talking airliners, sooner or later, if you fly long enough, you're going to crash. (In fact, every Martin M-130 (China Clipper Flying Boat) crashed in service, withan average loss of life of about 35. More than half of the original De Havilland Comet Is built crashed. (The fatigue problems wer not the only serious flaw that that airplane had)) As it stands right now, humanity has roughly a total of 100 hours of hypersonic flight time - the vast majority of which are Shuttle re-entries. Its dangerous stuff. You take risks. You learn that your understanding of the environment wasn't what it was when you started out. Despite all precautions, sooner or later, people are going to die. That's why it's called Space Exploration. It's also called progress, I'm so glad I don't live in your world. -- Pete Stickney |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
On 8 May 2006 20:59:46 -0700, "Peter Stickney"
wrote: Hey Bbo, Space is dangerous. That's its nature. And when you do dangerous stuff, **** Happens. Even if you're talking airliners, sooner or later, if you fly long enough, you're going to crash. (In fact, every Martin M-130 (China Clipper Flying Boat) crashed in service, withan average loss of life of about 35. More than half of the original De Havilland Comet Is built crashed. (The fatigue problems wer not the only serious flaw that that airplane had)) As it stands right now, humanity has roughly a total of 100 hours of hypersonic flight time - the vast majority of which are Shuttle re-entries. Its dangerous stuff. You take risks. You learn that your understanding of the environment wasn't what it was when you started out. Despite all precautions, sooner or later, people are going to die. That's why it's called Space Exploration. It's also called progress, I'm so glad I don't live in your world. Too bad the American public, which elects representatives who vote for appropriations to fund these dangerous programs doesn't share your view. Trust me, there will be no political support for crewed spaceflight if 1) the price of crude oil hits $100 a barrel, and/or 2) there's another fatal accident during a crewed spaceflight in the near future. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
wrote in Too bad the American public, which elects representatives who vote for appropriations to fund these dangerous programs doesn't share your view. Trust me, there will be no political support for crewed spaceflight if 1) the price of crude oil hits $100 a barrel, and/or 2) there's another fatal accident during a crewed spaceflight in the near future. So what happened last time oil hit that level -- yeah, I'm counting inflation, which the mainstream media dishonestly disregards. $97/barrel in 1979-1980. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
May 8 // The Space Review: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/619/1
Good article. It seems to be the combination of events, not just the one failure, which make this a safety issue. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
Jim Kingdon wrote:
May 8 // The Space Review: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/619/1 Good article. It seems to be the combination of events, not just the one failure, which make this a safety issue. It occurred to me after my original reply that the real issue is more subtle. Why exactly are the controllers at MCC-M testing things to 'see if they work'? Are they seeing if ISS will remain stable if they throttle the Soyuz/Progress pipeline for political advantage? Are they bored and lacking adequate adult supervision? Do they know something about the system that we don't? (Potential nightmare scenarios that end with the propellants must be jettisoned/used.) There's something here not adding up. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
Derek Lyons wrote:
Are they seeing if ISS will remain stable if they throttle the Soyuz/Progress pipeline for political advantage? Are they bored and lacking adequate adult supervision? Do they know something about the system that we don't? (Potential nightmare scenarios that end with the propellants must be jettisoned/used.) You are being paranoid. It is a valid experiment in itself to find out if the thrusters are going to work after 6 years of non use. D~ -- ##-----------------------------------------------## Delivered via http://www.air-space.us/ The News and Discussions Platform for the Airspace Community no-spam Web and RSS access to sci.space.station,sci.space.history - messages and counting! ##-----------------------------------------------## |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Oberg: "The real significance of the ISS thruster test failure"
DA wrote:
You are being paranoid. It is a valid experiment in itself to find out if the thrusters are going to work after 6 years of non use. Does this type of engine ever go ka-boom after six years of sitting unused? It seems like this test should be conducted on an earthbound test stand before being conducted in a space laboratory. Glen Overby |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA PDF - Apollo Experience Reports - 114 reports | Rusty | History | 1 | July 27th 05 03:52 AM |
Teleportation knowledge analizer of the internet matirx! IT's a | Roger wilco | History | 4 | July 8th 05 06:11 PM |
Test firing Saturn 5 listing | Capcom | History | 12 | December 17th 03 01:43 AM |