Dropping back into the atmosphere at Mach 25 is never 'routine'....

Dropping back into the atmosphere at Mach 25 is never 'routine'....
as still-unexplained events on the LAST Soyuz descent remind us.

msnbc.com (Oberg): Space crew weathers a scare during re-entry

Air leaked out of Russian descent module as it flew from station to Earth

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9697668/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

Updated: 5:01 p.m. ET Oct. 14, 2005

Russia's Mission Control endured a brief but private scare during this
week's return of a Soyuz spacecraft from the international space station
with three riders aboard, those familiar with the flight now say.

As the Soyuz descent module headed back to Earth, instruments indicated
that air was leaking out - the same kind of failure that killed three
cosmonauts in June 1971 on their way home from the world's first space
station, Russia's Salyut 1.

Since that tragedy, all passengers aboard Soyuz spacecraft have worn
pressure suits during such mission-critical phases. Had Monday's air leak
been severe enough, the suits would have saved the men's lives.


Dangling strap to blame for scary space leak?

Russian space officials say 'rushed' crew failed to shut hatch properly

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9888881/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

Updated: 8:04 p.m. ET Nov. 1, 2005

Russian space officials are unofficially blaming the alarming pressure
drop during last month's landing of the Soyuz TMA-6 spacecraft on a dangling
strap and crew error, MSNBC.com has learned. The Russian space agency's
draft report on the matter remains unsigned, however, according to the NASA
safety official who provided MSNBC.com with a copy of the report.

The NASA official, who asked his name not be revealed, said that
"disagreements between the specialists and crew" still had to be resolved,
but that the Russians had shared the draft report in an e-mail to their NASA
counterparts.

The pressure drop during the Oct. 11 landing is not a secret - both Soyuz
commander Sergey Krikalev and passenger Gregory Olsen have publicly made
reference to the unusual event. But neither the U.S. or Russian space
agencies have offered any comment. The third man aboard the Soyuz as it
returned to Earth from the international space station, NASA astronaut John
Phillips, has not referred to the matter, either.

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...
Dropping back into the atmosphere at Mach 25 is never 'routine'....
as still-unexplained events on the LAST Soyuz descent remind us.

msnbc.com (Oberg): Space crew weathers a scare during re-entry

Air leaked out of Russian descent module as it flew from station to Earth



Haven't you heard? Nasa is a 'faith-based' organization now.
We no longer have any need to ask questions of them.
We only need to have faith in them.

Here's what I have faith in. When oil reaches oh about
$150 a barrell in the next five years or so, and America is strangled
into depression, the public will want to know why in the ****
did this crumbling, incompetent, arrogant and scandal-plagued
administration, that is falling apart with Nixon-like speed, trash
the space solar power research the minute they came into power
in favor of a fanciful trip 'To the Moon and Mars"?

And no one even noticed?
No one asked why?

Our Texas oil man knows better, the minute he walzed
into office SSP died without discussion or notice.
We should have faith in President Bush and his
technological and philosophical decisions concerning
our future and that of Nasa. No way his oil background
or any oil special interests skewed his judgement.
No way! It was done for our own good. Not his.

No one asked why they recently took down the
Space solar power home page that's been up
for years. I suppose Nasa is afraid of any competing
ideas. Has anyone asked them why? No, of course
not.

They don't have to explain why they do anything.
That is the central theme of this administration.
Have faith in them. They wouldn't lie to us.

No, they are complete examples of virtue, we
should have complete faith in them, and the
plans they have for us and our future.

With the space business, investigative journalism is a thing
of the past.


Jonathan

s






http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9697668/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

Updated: 5:01 p.m. ET Oct. 14, 2005

Russia's Mission Control endured a brief but private scare during this
week's return of a Soyuz spacecraft from the international space station
with three riders aboard, those familiar with the flight now say.

As the Soyuz descent module headed back to Earth, instruments indicated
that air was leaking out - the same kind of failure that killed three
cosmonauts in June 1971 on their way home from the world's first space
station, Russia's Salyut 1.

Since that tragedy, all passengers aboard Soyuz spacecraft have worn
pressure suits during such mission-critical phases. Had Monday's air leak
been severe enough, the suits would have saved the men's lives.


Dangling strap to blame for scary space leak?

Russian space officials say 'rushed' crew failed to shut hatch properly

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9888881/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

Updated: 8:04 p.m. ET Nov. 1, 2005

Russian space officials are unofficially blaming the alarming pressure
drop during last month's landing of the Soyuz TMA-6 spacecraft on a
dangling
strap and crew error, MSNBC.com has learned. The Russian space agency's
draft report on the matter remains unsigned, however, according to the
NASA
safety official who provided MSNBC.com with a copy of the report.

The NASA official, who asked his name not be revealed, said that
"disagreements between the specialists and crew" still had to be resolved,
but that the Russians had shared the draft report in an e-mail to their
NASA
counterparts.

The pressure drop during the Oct. 11 landing is not a secret - both
Soyuz
commander Sergey Krikalev and passenger Gregory Olsen have publicly made
reference to the unusual event. But neither the U.S. or Russian space
agencies have offered any comment. The third man aboard the Soyuz as it
returned to Earth from the international space station, NASA astronaut
John
Phillips, has not referred to the matter, either.

On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:31:37 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Air leaked out of Russian descent module as it flew from station to Earth

Haven't you heard? Nasa is a 'faith-based' organization now.
We no longer have any need to ask questions of them.
We only need to have faith in them.

Boy, you're just a non sequitur a minute now.

Here's what I have faith in. When oil reaches oh about
$150 a barrell in the next five years or so,

That will never happen. To think it even possible betrays a profound
ignorance of economics and the nature of current reserves.

On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 11:51:09 GMT, in a place far, far away,
h (Rand Simberg) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:31:37 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Air leaked out of Russian descent module as it flew from station to Earth

Haven't you heard? Nasa is a 'faith-based' organization now.
We no longer have any need to ask questions of them.
We only need to have faith in them.

Boy, you're just a non sequitur a minute now.

Here's what I have faith in. When oil reaches oh about
$150 a barrell in the next five years or so,

That will never happen. To think it even possible betrays a profound
ignorance of economics and the nature of current reserves.

Actually, I should amend that. It will never happen in nominal
dollars. It could occur as a result of general inflation, but then
everything will cost three times as much.

Oil could easily go to $150 a barrell

Just have the insurgency spread from Iraq to the surrounding countries
like saudia arabia, or have a war involving israel, sink some oil
tankers in the straight of hormuz. there are likely more. even that
dictator in venezula could effect oil peices

the trouble is out leaders ever since the early 70s had more interest
in keeping big business happy (oil) than taking care of the country. we
should of converted like brazil to other energy sources and have the
farm land to do it.

Bush is a complete failure, his nixon like actions are sad. at least
nixon had the sense to resign for the good of the country...

one thing for sure. The current bloodbath is iraq, the next bloodbath
will be in november when bush takes his party down the toilet. he is
giving congress to the tax and spend democrats

I think he is probably back on the bottle since he appears
disconnected from the reality of how bad things are.

I dont believe the rosey business reports and think we are on the edge
of a serious recession. Housing prices are dropping in many areas of
the country. GM is very ill, 10% of every DOLLAR exchanged in the US is
GM related. My friends with businesses, all are hurting.

This economy is about to tank

On 9 Apr 2006 05:08:39 -0700, in a place far, far away,
" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Oil could easily go to $150 a barrell

Just have the insurgency spread from Iraq to the surrounding countries
like saudia arabia, or have a war involving israel, sink some oil
tankers in the straight of hormuz. there are likely more. even that
dictator in venezula could effect oil peices

Not that much.

rest of hilarious nuttiness snipped

At minimum the mars program is already dead, its final nail in the
coffin will be the day Bush is replaced.

I dont think humans will return to the Moon on nasa vehicles.

NASA MAY get to keep a robotic moon program or buy space on a business
vehicle.

NASA will probably get a over priced CEV vehicle of some sort for LEO
only....

It will be quickly obsoleted by private industry.

The risk with private industry is the recession that I believe is
coming will dry up investment income in long term risky programs

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:31:37 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Air leaked out of Russian descent module as it flew from station to
Earth

Haven't you heard? Nasa is a 'faith-based' organization now.
We no longer have any need to ask questions of them.
We only need to have faith in them.

Boy, you're just a non sequitur a minute now.

Here's what I have faith in. When oil reaches oh about
$150 a barrell in the next five years or so,

That will never happen. To think it even possible betrays a profound
ignorance of economics and the nature of current reserves.


Oh my gosh, my second hobby is stock trading. And it's clear
you don't understand the market or politics. A bomb
in the right place could double oil prices in a day.
And this morning, just this morning, was another one
of those 'officially authorized leaks' that says we're
planning a war with Iran. The second largest oil
producer.

Look at the charts before speaking please.
What do you see? Why does it bahave
that way? Did the world oil reserves shrink
by to one fourth in a couple of years?

Dude, near the end of the Clinton administration oil
was under $10 a barrel. It closed yesterday just below
SEVENTY DOLLARS A BARREL

What will it be with a war with Iran? $150 a barrel is a
conservative figure.

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/i...ices_Chart.htm

On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 09:01:23 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On 9 Apr 2006 05:08:39 -0700, in a place far, far away,
" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Oil could easily go to $150 a barrell

Just have the insurgency spread from Iraq to the surrounding countries
like saudia arabia, or have a war involving israel, sink some oil
tankers in the straight of hormuz. there are likely more. even that
dictator in venezula could effect oil peices

Not that much.


Look at the chart. Not that much? It's best to read up on
a subject before commenting.
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/i...ices_Chart.htm

How does that chart show that they'll get to $150. Moreover, even if
they spiked there, it demonstrates that they wouldn't stay.

On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 08:58:50 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:31:37 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Air leaked out of Russian descent module as it flew from station to
Earth

Haven't you heard? Nasa is a 'faith-based' organization now.
We no longer have any need to ask questions of them.
We only need to have faith in them.

Boy, you're just a non sequitur a minute now.

Here's what I have faith in. When oil reaches oh about
$150 a barrell in the next five years or so,

That will never happen. To think it even possible betrays a profound
ignorance of economics and the nature of current reserves.


Oh my gosh, my second hobby is stock trading. And it's clear
you don't understand the market or politics. A bomb
in the right place could double oil prices in a day.

And then halve again a few days later.

And this morning, just this morning, was another one
of those 'officially authorized leaks' that says we're
planning a war with Iran. The second largest oil
producer.

Some investors would panic momentarily, but most are smart enough to
know that at current prices, let alone at the ones you fantasize,
there are more reserves available in the Rockies than in the Middle
East.