Breaking News! NASA Astronaut Marsha Ivins ****ting Her Diapers!

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/for...d=8071&start=1

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/for...ts=367&start=1

Better get some more depends, Marsha.

--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

Like I say, nobody wants to get too far into this project before Bush is
replaced?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"kT" wrote in message
...
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/for...d=8071&start=1

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/for...ts=367&start=1

Better get some more depends, Marsha.

--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

Brian Gaff wrote:
Like I say, nobody wants to get too far into this project before Bush is
replaced?


I assume that's the case, yes.
I think this whole program has the life expectancy on a mayfly come
November 7, 2008, if not sooner.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Brian Gaff wrote:
Like I say, nobody wants to get too far into this project before Bush is
replaced?


I assume that's the case, yes.
I think this whole program has the life expectancy on a mayfly come
November 7, 2008, if not sooner.

Although a replacement for the shuttle doesn't have to wait.
I bet they make the CEV work somehow. By reducing the
crew maybe, which might be a clue it's not meant for
the moon anymore. Although I defer to all of you on
the rocket science stuff.

It's just what we do with the new hardware, George W
shouldn't be allowed to decide. He's just not qualified.
I bet our President hasn't spent more than half a day /in total/
discussing/reading/meeting about the future of NASA.






Pat

In article ,
Jonathan wrote:
It's just what we do with the new hardware, George W
shouldn't be allowed to decide. He's just not qualified.

Almost certainly he is blessing -- perhaps reluctantly, given how feeble
his support has been at budget time -- decisions reached by others.

I bet our President hasn't spent more than half a day /in total/
discussing/reading/meeting about the future of NASA.

You are being unrealistic if you expect very much more. Even an alert,
attentive President is a really, really, really, really busy guy, with a
thousand issues vying for his time. NASA scores poorly on almost every
measure of political importance, nowadays; it cannot reasonably expect
much of his attention.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

Henry Spencer wrote:

... NASA scores poorly on almost every measure of political
importance, nowadays; it cannot reasonably expect much of his
attention.

Moreover, it always has, if Murray & Cox are to be believed. Eisenhower
and, initially, Kennedy, were quite disinterested in NASA. JFK was even
ready to dissolve the National Space Council had Johnson not stepped in
and taken it over.

--
Dave Michelson

"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jonathan wrote:
It's just what we do with the new hardware, George W
shouldn't be allowed to decide. He's just not qualified.

Almost certainly he is blessing -- perhaps reluctantly, given how feeble
his support has been at budget time -- decisions reached by others.


By who though? I spent some time trying to figure that out.
The Vision was started by some junior White House staffers.
And Nasa wasn't even consulted at first, they were brought
in later and told what the plan would be. And when you
combine that with the fact it mirrors so closely his fathers
initiative, it's hard not to place the responsibility on the
President. I think he provided the overall goal, and the details
are left to others.


I bet our President hasn't spent more than half a day /in total/
discussing/reading/meeting about the future of NASA.

You are being unrealistic if you expect very much more. Even an alert,
attentive President is a really, really, really, really busy guy, with a
thousand issues vying for his time. NASA scores poorly on almost every
measure of political importance, nowadays; it cannot reasonably expect
much of his attention.


NASA doesn't deserve more than a passing interest by our
political leadership! Why is that? And how can this sad situation
be changed? It's because NASA doesn't get many votes.
To the moon and mars has had its shot to inspire the public and
failed.

We can change that by using some common sense to design
a goal. And ask ourselves the following questions.

What are the greatest concerns of the voters?
Out of that list, what concerns could NASA provide
a realistic answer for? And like any max/min
equation you try to solve the maximum amount
of problems with the fewest or one program.


CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll.
"How important is it to you that the President and Congress
deal with each of the following issues in the next year?
Is it extremely important, . . ."
http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm

The situation in Iraq 59%
Terrorism 54
Health care policy44
The economy 38
The federal budget deficit 37
Energy policies 34
Illegal immigration 32
Taxes 31
Global warming 29
Stem cell research 18

How many of those national priorities would
the moon and mars connect to? Answer zero.

But space solar power?

Future energy costs, global warming, wars over oil.
Our meddling in the Middle East is a big source
of terrorism, in fact 911 was a direct result of our
military presense in Saudi Arabia. A brighter energy
future effects our future budgets and ability to afford
other societal needs such as health care, pure
research and so on.

Why I'll be damned. Space solar power can be a potential
solution to ALL of our national priorities to one extent
or another. And a primary solution to some of our
greatest ones. And that's not even mentioning the effect
on jump starting commercial space flight or all the other
space projects and colonies SSP could enable.

Why isn't this obvious?

SSP could do more than just get votes, it could
do more than just make NASA relevant again.
It could make NASA the focus of our national
aspirations.

Just as it was not all that long ago.

You can't recapture the glory days with a simple do-over.
As the times have changed. A simple repitition won't
have the same effect. You have to figure out the qualities
that made it work before in the ...abstract. So you can
redesign a new goal that will work as well for todays
problems.

I dare anyone to find a different goal that could rival SSP
in potential votes/support...importance to society
and our future.


--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

Brian Gaff wrote:

Like I say, nobody wants to get too far into this project before Bush is
replaced?

Most of us would prefer it to die immediately.

Ares I and the VSE will go down as the *WORST* engineering debacle in
modern history, that it was fraudulently perpetrated makes it worse.

What did Marsha Ivins know, and when did she know it?

--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

"kT" wrote in message
...
Brian Gaff wrote:

Like I say, nobody wants to get too far into this project before Bush is
replaced?

Most of us would prefer it to die immediately.

Ares I and the VSE will go down as the *WORST* engineering debacle in
modern history, that it was fraudulently perpetrated makes it worse.


Isn't the six crew on the CEV a requirement for moon shots?
If they downsized it to four, would the stick be enough of
a booster then? I haven't been trying to follow the technical
side of this story.





What did Marsha Ivins know, and when did she know it?

--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

Jonathan wrote:
"kT" wrote in message
...
Brian Gaff wrote:

Like I say, nobody wants to get too far into this project before Bush is
replaced?
Most of us would prefer it to die immediately.

Ares I and the VSE will go down as the *WORST* engineering debacle in
modern history, that it was fraudulently perpetrated makes it worse.


Isn't the six crew on the CEV a requirement for moon shots?

No, it's always been a crew of four, with all four going to the surface.

One has to begin wondering some some bible college graduate just made
this **** up, the entire mission from beginning to end is like some kind
of elementary school child's class project. We used to do things like
this all the time back in the post sputnik /Apollo educational era.

If they downsized it to four, would the stick be enough of
a booster then? I haven't been trying to follow the technical
side of this story.

There is no technical side of the story, except as an analytic
description of how major engineering projects can go horribly awry.

What did Marsha Ivins know, and when did she know it?

Really, the whole VSE and ESAS story has now become almost obscene.

And just think, these people will have to live with this damn rocket.

I would hate to have that thing strung around my neck all the time.

Think it through, people, this is what you will be remembered for.

--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html