![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() http://www.spacedaily.com/2005/05072....0w7fp0e2.html I find it odd that if damage had/has occurred that would warrant a rescue mission then how can you possibly even consider launching the Atlantis shuttle. Surely you are then running the risk of just compounding the problem by possibly having two damaged shuttles in orbit. And anyway, what would be the need to launch a second shuttle any way, they can stay on the ISS for quite some time and come back via Soyuz. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ray Vingnutte wrote: http://www.spacedaily.com/2005/05072....0w7fp0e2.html I find it odd that if damage had/has occurred that would warrant a rescue mission then how can you possibly even consider launching the Atlantis shuttle. Surely you are then running the risk of just compounding the problem by possibly having two damaged shuttles in orbit. And anyway, what would be the need to launch a second shuttle any way, they can stay on the ISS for quite some time and come back via Soyuz. I'm sure they don't want to launch the Antlantis now. But if the Discovery were severly damaged, and the Russians won't give the crew a ride for free, and the law says we can't pay them, then what other choice would there be? Double-A |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 29 Jul 2005 05:02:42 -0700
"Double-A" wrote: Ray Vingnutte wrote: http://www.spacedaily.com/2005/05072....0w7fp0e2.html I find it odd that if damage had/has occurred that would warrant a rescue mission then how can you possibly even consider launching the Atlantis shuttle. Surely you are then running the risk of just compounding the problem by possibly having two damaged shuttles in orbit. And anyway, what would be the need to launch a second shuttle any way, they can stay on the ISS for quite some time and come back via Soyuz. I'm sure they don't want to launch the Antlantis now. But if the Discovery were severly damaged, and the Russians won't give the crew a ride for free, and the law says we can't pay them, then what other choice would there be? Double-A Well the Russians would do it, if the question of cost comes into it they could argue about that after. I think what is becoming clear the shuttle should never have been launched in the first place, two and a half years and loads of money spent and what have they achieved?, nothing it look like. They are back to where they were two and a half years ago. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message ... On 29 Jul 2005 05:02:42 -0700 "Double-A" wrote: Ray Vingnutte wrote: http://www.spacedaily.com/2005/05072....0w7fp0e2.html I find it odd that if damage had/has occurred that would warrant a rescue mission then how can you possibly even consider launching the Atlantis shuttle. Surely you are then running the risk of just compounding the problem by possibly having two damaged shuttles in orbit. And anyway, what would be the need to launch a second shuttle any way, they can stay on the ISS for quite some time and come back via Soyuz. I'm sure they don't want to launch the Antlantis now. But if the Discovery were severly damaged, and the Russians won't give the crew a ride for free, and the law says we can't pay them, then what other choice would there be? Double-A Well the Russians would do it, if the question of cost comes into it they could argue about that after. I think what is becoming clear the shuttle should never have been launched in the first place, two and a half years and loads of money spent and what have they achieved?, nothing it look like. They are back to where they were two and a half years ago. it's where they have been for 20 years. It seems they have been flying the shuttles with foam falling off the fueltanks since day 1. Pure luck that it never went wrong until that one time..... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
MD, do your job.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Twittering One" wrote in message ups.com... MD, do your job. I struck a nerve? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Quntam foam airless poison if not wisely stewarded.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No need for miracles.
Just the truth, just the fatcs, M'am. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Twitty They showed the Discovery's underbelly on TV NASA said all
the tiles were still on. I see a problem the way they look. They look bumpy. They look like they all have to be taken off and glued to lay flat again. I hope I'm just seeing things. Your virtual friend Bert |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing - Associated Press | Rusty B | Space Shuttle | 29 | August 12th 03 03:30 AM |
NASA Team Believed Foam Could Not Damage Space Shuttle | Scott M. Kozel | Space Shuttle | 9 | July 25th 03 08:33 AM |
Columbia Investigators Fire Foam Insulation at Shuttle Wing, Blowing Open 2-Foot Hole; The crowd of about 100 gasped and cried, "Wow!" when the foam hit. | Jay | Space Shuttle | 32 | July 12th 03 02:41 AM |
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing - Associated Press | Rusty B | History | 8 | July 10th 03 12:05 AM |
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing - Associated Press | Rusty B | Policy | 3 | July 8th 03 12:36 AM |