Enterprise OV-101 missing OMS pods

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:52:44 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:

She's an historic aircraft, and should be preserved in the form she made
history in- rather than say making her into a ice-cream stand in Gorky Park.

....Yeah, but if it were up to me, she'd fly again.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

Mike DiCenso wrote:

Actually, the markings that Enterprise has on her now are NOT the ones
she had during the ALT test flights. In the early 80's, OV-101 was
altered to more closely resemble the "production" OVs in TPS pattern,
and markings (Columbia's markings being excepted, of course).


Now that that has been mentioned, I remember when that was done... at
the time I didn't think much about it, but in retrospect it should have
been a warning. Columbia was basically being treated as a tourist
attraction and propaganda tool rather than a historic item. Which
reflected the way the whole Shuttle program was treated by NASA...not as
a operational "pick-up-truck-to-orbit", but rather as the "NEW!
EXCITING! EXOTIC! SPLENDIFEROUS! SUPER SPACE SHUTTLE!
EVERYMAN'S...EXCUSE US...EVERYPERSON'S SPACESHIP!!! AND NOW, MEMBERS OF
THE SPACE SHUTTLE SECRET SOCIETY, SET YOUR RINGS TO 'F-4'- REPEAT-
'F-4'- AND GET READY TO DECODE JOHN YOUNG'S SECRET SPACE SHUTTLE
MESSAGE TO YOU!!!"
Which was one of the big problems with the program. It was the perceived
snickering by the news media and embarrassment to NASA of Challenger's
multiple scrubbed launch attempts that led to the decision to launch on
that cold morning.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...
Which was one of the big problems with the program. It was the perceived
snickering by the news media and embarrassment to NASA of Challenger's
multiple scrubbed launch attempts that led to the decision to launch on
that cold morning.

It's b.s. like this that makes me seriously want to killfile you Pat.
You're dangerously close to joining Bob Haller in killfile hell.

You might want to do some reading on the decisions that lead up to the
launch of Challenger as it's nowhere near as simple as you say.

There are many, many reports and articles available. Some are even online:

http://www.chron.com/content/interac...cs/report.html
http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/challenger/challtoc.html
http://www.open2.net/forensic_engine...dvances_12.htm
http://onlineethics.org/edu/ncases/EE18.html
http://www.library.ubc.ca/scieng/eng...ngFailures.htm
http://www.fas.org/spp/51L.html
http://slp.icheme.org/incidents.html

Read a few of these, you might learn something.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:52:44 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:
She's an historic aircraft, and should be preserved in the form she made
history in- rather than say making her into a ice-cream stand in Gorky
Park.

...Yeah, but if it were up to me, she'd fly again.

That would be an incredible waste of money. Even NASA is finally accepting
that there will be an end to the shuttle program, very likely within the
next decade. Restarting the Russian copy of this program would be folly.
The design of these systems is about 30 years old. We can do better today
with new designs. By better, I mean cheaper cost per pound to LEO.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

"Jeff Findley" ) writes:
"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote in message ...
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:52:44 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:
She's an historic aircraft, and should be preserved in the form she made
history in- rather than say making her into a ice-cream stand in Gorky
Park.

...Yeah, but if it were up to me, she'd fly again.

That would be an incredible waste of money. Even NASA is finally accepting
that there will be an end to the shuttle program, very likely within the
next decade. Restarting the Russian copy of this program would be folly.
The design of these systems is about 30 years old. We can do better today
with new designs. By better, I mean cheaper cost per pound to LEO.

Um... I think that OM was referring to flying White Knight again...

Andre


--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Jeff Findley wrote:

Which was one of the big problems with the program. It was the perceived
snickering by the news media and embarrassment to NASA of Challenger's
multiple scrubbed launch attempts that led to the decision to launch on
that cold morning.



It's b.s. like this that makes me seriously want to killfile you Pat.
You're dangerously close to joining Bob Haller in killfile hell.

Jeeze, that would break my heart.
"Mini-P, get the spare Chrono-Inverter Grenade ready; after we use the
first one to convert Kid Rock into a fertilized egg cell, we use the
spare one to get this Findley guy...no...he's not blocking our path to
Pamela Anderson like Mr. Rock is...this is different. No, we have his
postings...we don't need his Mojo in this case..."

You might want to do some reading on the decisions that lead up to the
launch of Challenger as it's nowhere near as simple as you say.


Well, I don't now where you were but I lived through those days, and
after all the hype about the President's "teacher-in-space" mission, the
news media was noting the continued launch scrubs with some bemusement.
Remember a certain pair of comments related to the loss?
"My God, Thiokol, when do you want me to launch, next April?"
"It's time to take off your engineering hat and put on your management hat."
Challenger was supposed to get airborne before the President's State Of
The Union Address on the the evening of the 28th (which NASA wrote a
paragraph of, by the way), so that the Old Coot would have something to
talk about in the best Soviet propaganda-space-launch-on-historic-date
tradition.
Of course, when the actual launch occurred, the O.C. was too busy to be
watching it, and his remark "That's tragic...was that the one with the
teacher on board?" rings down through the ages in regards to his insight
and interest into the outcome of things that he initiated (remember when
he was helping to strengthen the Islamic fundamentalist rebels in
Afghanistan? That also worked out well in the long run, didn't it?).
He ended up having to talk about that nice teacher he had sacrificed on
the Moloch's altar of political gain with a few well-stolen words from
the prayer "High Flight" (which used to run on a lot of TV at sign-off
around here....just before the static engulfed everything, rather like
the O.C.'s addled brainwaves)...proving a master politician- like a
corrupt TV evangelist- can turn most anything to their advantage with a
disarming look and a well-placed mention of the Almighty.


There are many, many reports and articles available. Some are even online:

http://www.chron.com/content/interac...cs/report.html
http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/challenger/challtoc.html
http://www.open2.net/forensic_engine...dvances_12.htm
http://onlineethics.org/edu/ncases/EE18.html
http://www.library.ubc.ca/scieng/eng...ngFailures.htm
http://www.fas.org/spp/51L.html
http://slp.icheme.org/incidents.html

Read a few of these, you might learn something.



I've read most of that stuff years ago; I'm just saying that media and
political pressure regarding the launch played a part in the decision to
launch on that morning despite the cold weather.
Why don't you read this article:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/shuttle-04zl.html
We did it once; we did it twice; and now we're getting ready to do it a
third time.
The Shuttle is our very own little Voskhod program.

Pat

We did it once; we did it twice; and now we're getting ready to do it a
third time.
The Shuttle is our very own little Voskhod program.

Pat

Sadly RTF means more will die

Meanwhile most poster here care more about jobs than science
..
..
End the dangerous wasteful shuttle now before it kills any more astronauts....

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Jeff Findley wrote:

Which was one of the big problems with the program. It was the perceived
snickering by the news media and embarrassment to NASA of Challenger's
multiple scrubbed launch attempts that led to the decision to launch on
that cold morning.



It's b.s. like this that makes me seriously want to killfile you Pat.
You're dangerously close to joining Bob Haller in killfile hell.

snip

I've read most of that stuff years ago; I'm just saying that media and
political pressure regarding the launch played a part in the decision to
launch on that morning despite the cold weather.

That's not what you said.


Why don't you read this article:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/shuttle-04zl.html
We did it once; we did it twice; and now we're getting ready to do it a
third time.
The Shuttle is our very own little Voskhod program.

I read the article. It's clear that the shuttle will never be 100% safe.

However, NASA is doing many reasonable things to reduce and mitigate the
risk. The foam risk dates back to the very beginnings of the program with
foam consistently shedding from the ET during flight.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

On 9 Nov 2004 18:01:33 GMT, (Andre Lieven)
wrote:


"Jeff Findley" ) writes:
"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote in message ...
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:52:44 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:
She's an historic aircraft, and should be preserved in the form she made
history in- rather than say making her into a ice-cream stand in Gorky
Park.

...Yeah, but if it were up to me, she'd fly again.

That would be an incredible waste of money. Even NASA is finally accepting
that there will be an end to the shuttle program, very likely within the
next decade. Restarting the Russian copy of this program would be folly.
The design of these systems is about 30 years old. We can do better today
with new designs. By better, I mean cheaper cost per pound to LEO.

Um... I think that OM was referring to flying White Knight again...

I actually think he was referring to Enterprise.

Dante

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 15:17:30 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:

It's b.s. like this that makes me seriously want to killfile you Pat.
You're dangerously close to joining Bob Haller in killfile hell.

Jeeze, that would break my heart.

....Methinks Jeff needs to take a chill pill, Pat. Either that, or at
least 1600mg of Midol and a Vodka chaser.

thinks Hey, wasn't he one of those who got sent samples of Vegemite?

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr