[SpaceRef] Keith Cowing busts astronaut's chops STS middeck hatchpadlock

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1195

One-sided? Contradictory? Self-serving? I won't complain about
editorializing -- hell, I do editorial cartoons, and it's all _about_
editorializing -- but perhaps this piece should've been clearly labeled
"commentary"...or perhaps published in The Space Review, which is _all_
commentary.

Now, if this reporter Cowing knew both of the PSs in question
personally, and they were, in fact, totally level-headed and
professional, that's fine.

The truth of the matter is, though, is that a) both of them could've
just as easily gotten a screw knocked loose in-flight and decided to
commit suicide via explosive decompression, and b) as O'Connor says,
they _weren't_ trained aviators/test pilots/astronauts, but (iirc)
trained specifically to babysit the experiments aboard, and so are cut
from entirely different stuff than the actual trained
aviators/astronauts aboard. Nothing personal, that's just the way it is.



....unless anyone has any accounts we don't know of, of Buzz Aldrin
(diagnosed depressive after Apollo?) having depressive/suicidal episodes
aboard A11 that elevated his crewmates' concern that he might commit
suicide and take them with him by throwing the CM vent lever open and
blowing the cabin atmosphere into space (the way Jim Lovell once
described it).

--

..

"Though I could not caution all, I yet may warn a few:
Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools!"

--grateful dead.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Mike Flugennock, flugennock at sinkers dot org
"Mikey'zine": dubya dubya dubya dot sinkers dot org

On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 09:07:19 -0500, mike flugennock
wrote:

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1195

One-sided? Contradictory? Self-serving?

....It's typical Cowing trying to get back at NASA for having been
fired. He's rapidly turning into a cross between Bart Sibrel and Wbua
Znkfba.

Q: Does anyone have the straight dope on why he was fired?

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

"mike flugennock" wrote in message
ervers.com...
Now, if this reporter Cowing knew both of the PSs in question personally,
and they were, in fact, totally level-headed and professional, that's
fine.

Keith Cowing is no reporter. Most of what he writes has an anti NASA
Management slant. His web site started out as NASA RIF Watch. He gradually
moved away from that towards something approaching a NASA news web site, but
his reporting is still very slanted.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

"mike flugennock" wrote in message
ervers.com...
The truth of the matter is, though, is that a) both of them could've just
as easily gotten a screw knocked loose in-flight and decided to commit
suicide via explosive decompression, and b) as O'Connor says, they
_weren't_ trained aviators/test pilots/astronauts, but (iirc) trained
specifically to babysit the experiments aboard, and so are cut from
entirely different stuff than the actual trained aviators/astronauts
aboard. Nothing personal, that's just the way it is.

I don't quite buy this. It depends a lot on the individual Payload
Specialist. I'm sure some were more NASA Astronaut like than others. No
they weren't career astronauts, but the fact is that if you're a NASA
Mission Specialist, you're likely vastly overqualified for what you're
trained to do. There are MS's that specialize in driving the shuttle RMS.
You really don't need a couple of Masters degrees or a PHD to do that.

On the earth, there are many people in very similar jobs who's actual job is
every bit as demanding as someone driving a shuttle RMS, but most of them
don't have the "qualifications" required to be a MS who specializes in the
shuttle RMS. I'm thinking of a job like a very large dock crane operator,
who's crane is so big they can't see a lot of what they are doing, so they
have to talk to other people on radios to do the fine positioning required
for a precision lift.

...unless anyone has any accounts we don't know of, of Buzz Aldrin
(diagnosed depressive after Apollo?) having depressive/suicidal episodes
aboard A11 that elevated his crewmates' concern that he might commit
suicide and take them with him by throwing the CM vent lever open and
blowing the cabin atmosphere into space (the way Jim Lovell once described
it).

This is true of pretty much every person in every job. The fact of the
matter is that very few people "go postal" on the job. A lot of what you
hear in the news in these cases is *former* employees coming to their former
workplace had causing harm. I doubt anyone at NASA is going to let a former
astronaut on a shuttle flight, unless you're John Glenn getting a political
payoff. ;-)

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:05:36 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Jeff
Findley" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:


"mike flugennock" wrote in message
servers.com...
Now, if this reporter Cowing knew both of the PSs in question personally,
and they were, in fact, totally level-headed and professional, that's
fine.

Keith Cowing is no reporter.

Well, he is a reporter. One can argue about the quality of his
reporting, but that applies to many, if not most reporters...

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:05:36 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:


"mike flugennock" wrote in message
servers.com...
Now, if this reporter Cowing knew both of the PSs in question personally,
and they were, in fact, totally level-headed and professional, that's
fine.

Keith Cowing is no reporter. Most of what he writes has an anti NASA
Management slant. His web site started out as NASA RIF Watch. He gradually
moved away from that towards something approaching a NASA news web site, but
his reporting is still very slanted.

....Correct. Cowing has a major hangup regarding his being terminated
by NASA. According to a couple of e-mails I got through OMBlog,
apparently it was due to some "misconduct" on Cowing's part, but both
commenters - both claiming to be NASA employees requesting anonymity -
declined to say exactly *what* he supposedly did wrong.

....Based on his blatherings and his attitude, I suspect he probably
had an issue with some mid-level manager over some technical aspect,
and when he bitched about it to someone above said mid-level manager,
he got written up and fast-tracked out the door. On the other hand, he
could have been fired for very valid reasons - i.e., misappropriation
of government funds/property, downloading kiddie porn on NASA
computers, badmouthing the PAO within earshot - so who knows?

Bottom Line: He's another anti-NASA jerkwad with a biased agenda who
has no business being referred to as a journalist. He's a muckraker at
best, and a schmuck by any definition. He needs to be given the Buzz
Nuckle Sandwich almost as bad as scum like Sibrel, Guth and this
latest bozo who's cluttering our group with his Moon Hoax Moron drivel
- Sobel, Sodomite, something like that.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

mike flugennock wrote:

The truth of the matter is, though, is that a) both of them could've
just as easily gotten a screw knocked loose in-flight and decided to
commit suicide via explosive decompression, and b) as O'Connor says,

So we've been through why NASA likes outwards-opening hatches, but how
hard would it be to make an interlock that would prevent the hatch
being opened when the outside world is a vacuum?


--
"Checking identity papers is a complete waste of time. If anyone can
be counted on to have valid papers, it will be the terrorists".

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:34:13 -0600, Mary Pegg wrote
(in article ):

mike flugennock wrote:

The truth of the matter is, though, is that a) both of them could've
just as easily gotten a screw knocked loose in-flight and decided to
commit suicide via explosive decompression, and b) as O'Connor says,

So we've been through why NASA likes outwards-opening hatches, but how
hard would it be to make an interlock that would prevent the hatch
being opened when the outside world is a vacuum?

Not hard at all. However, every complication to a design adds failure modes.
Adding a design feature because you're afraid your crew is going squirrelly
is, well, a little nuts. ;-)

Far better design practices are to plan on rational people doing rational
things in a rational way and design accordingly. I mean, there's a LOT of
stuff a nutty person could do on a spacecraft to cause damage or injure
him/herself. You CAN'T design around them all.

--
You can run on for a long time,
Sooner or later, God'll cut you down.
~Johnny Cash