A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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

Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 10th 04, 04:27 AM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


Why should they be looking outside? They have no idea what caused the
sound.


Because they have no idea what cauased it. unknowns can be symptoms of killers
Hey this is my opinion
Ads
  #23  
Old April 10th 04, 10:16 AM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


In other words, they should look outside for utterly no reason
whatsoever.

D.


Ahh you dont get it, and I am wasting my time. The unknown noise is the reason.

If something really bad occurs the post mortem investigation will be asking why
didnt we take a look.

Your line of reasoning sounds remarkably like columbias managers and in orbit
imaging.

Both you and columbias were mistakes.

Dont get me wrong I hope its the ventilating fan. Buit what if its a outer skin
panel being heated by a reflection and the next time that noise is heard is the
last we ever hear from the station and crew.

Just WHAT is nasa going to be left with?

First the co dependency of the station and shuttle means both programs are
certinally over. Meanwhile we have the death watch for the station pieces
deorbiting.

Imagine the outrage if people get killed.

So Mr O Keefe you were in charge of nasa at the time? Yes mr congressman...

The noise which later was found to be the buckling of a outer skin panel, that
noise was heard repeatedly was it not?

Yes sir it was. Why didnt the crew take a look? We didnt believe it important
enough...

It was part of a managenment error between the US and Russia. There was no
clear chain of command.

Well how about the lives lost in various countries as the pieces deorboted?
Here we have the photo of NY city. This one rivals the destruction of 9-11

Yes sir I am well familiar with that.

===============================
Derek, if such the unthinkable occured do you believe nasa as a agency would
survive?

Would manned space survive?

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

Nasa and russia has a responsiblity to everyone on earth to operate that
station as safely as possible. Since it could do damage to anyone in its ground
track.


Yeah call me chicken little, many did BEFORE coulumbia



Hey this is my opinion
  #25  
Old April 10th 04, 02:05 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


So, your strategy is pretty much to predict disaster- then, on the rare
occasion that it occurs, you can milk it for years with "I told you so"?


NO, its to point out that prudent cautionary steps are not being taken.

The spacewalk was cut short for good reason so in careless fashion we will wait
till july for another attempt.


Maybe explain how it is that NASA and the ISS have come to be managed
by such reckless incompetents or something.


The partnership and division of responsibilties with no clear leader is going
to bite us. Take a look at the last spacewalk russia failed to inform the US of
the suit trouble untill till the russian astronaut mentioned it on the comm
system.

thats a bad way to manage things, both sides should share everything. systemic
management failure, if anything bad happens to ISS the investigation wioll be
pointing that out
Hey this is my opinion
  #26  
Old April 10th 04, 02:06 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground

Who knows- maybe I could learn how to get a high-level job there

Dale


I guess your nothing bad has occured all is well would it right in
Hey this is my opinion
  #27  
Old April 10th 04, 02:13 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


So, your strategy is pretty much to predict disaster- then, on the rare
occasion that it occurs, you can milk it for years with "I told you so"?


I didnt predict columbia will disengrate on return.

I said clearly that management had gotten sloppy with too many reports after
flights of nearly lost vehicles and crew.

This was a sure sign of a systemic trouble.

As I said at the time if nearly every time you use a tool you come close to
killing or hurting yourself the tool isnt the triouble its a operator error.

In columbias case go fever became more important than safe flying. keeping too
the budget more important than safe flying.

Did you know NASA is running behind creating that new safety oversite board?
If they were here now the noise might be a bigger concern
Hey this is my opinion
  #30  
Old April 10th 04, 10:54 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground

bob haller wrote:
to bite us. Take a look at the last spacewalk russia failed to inform the US of
the suit trouble untill till the russian astronaut mentioned it on the comm
system.


You know, this is really tiresome. The USA has access to the same voice comms
and would have heard the same conversations between the crew and moscow.
Moscow even provides constant translation. And there is supposed to be a USA
person in Moscow to provide even more interface between USA and Russia.

This was a russian EVA, and russia managed the EVA allowing the USA to look
into it. If the heating problem was stable, and the crewmember was aware of it
and still felt comfortable and within the limits of EVA ops, I see no reason
for worries by the USA.

Now, had the crewmember started to complain about heat and Moscow put pressure
on him to continue with EVA, then yes, there would have been many reasons to complain.

But as it stands, I think that that EVA was conducted very professionally and
without much paranoya.

When Foale was aboard Mir, he complained that he was treated like a weak
guest, while the russians were very tough and able to rought it up. This was
an image the russians had of the USA space program.

And while NASA didn't blow this problem out of proportions, people like
hallerB seem to want to blow it out of proportions. So it seems to me that
NASA is learning to allow crewmembers to "rought it up" but some people here
don't seem to be able to do risk analysis and judge if a problem is truly life
threathening, or threathens only comfort.

This EVA was a perfect example of the russians (including crewmember)
accepting that a suit might not provide full air conditioning and that the
crew member may have to sweat a bit. And when the conditions became too
unfortable, decision was made to cancel rest of EVA and go back inside.

I think that the EVA is a VERY good example of the russians not panicking and
not being worried about what the press might say and looking at the situation
and doing a good risk analysis.
 




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
System to monitor heat panels could safeguard future spacecraft (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Space Shuttle 0 July 15th 04 06:14 PM
ISS On-Orbit Status, 20-02-2004 Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 February 21st 04 03:59 PM
ISS On-Orbit Status, 11-01-2004 Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 January 12th 04 11:35 AM
Pressure monitoring in station BigSkier Space Station 2 December 1st 03 05:19 PM
WashPost: “Space Station Mission Opposed” James Oberg Space Station 3 October 23rd 03 01:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.