It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Discovery launch a Mistake?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Should the Discovery have been launched? NASA admits there maybe a problem with no real definitive outcome to it's solution.

Was there any real answer as to what would be done in case there was any damage during liftoff? Wasn't the high probability that something can and would occur again taken into consideration and a solution or repair for the problem already be a tried and true fix?

[edit on 31-7-2005 by sleepyhollow]




posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 11:09 PM
link   
NASA is calling it a mistake, so who's to argue?




Administrator Griffin said last week's Discovery launch showed that, more than two years after the Columbia disaster, the foam issue has not been solved. He indicated that errors had been made or,

"We goofed [made a mistake] on that one," as he put it. "Certainly we were lucky. If it [the foam section] had broken off earlier and if it had followed a different trajectory, it could have hit the orbiter, as any piece of foam could, and could have done some damage."

Mr. Griffin said he has no reason to believe that Discovery is unsafe to return to earth. Crewmembers aboard the space shuttle have expressed similar confidence that Discovery is in good shape. But, in an interview on ABC's This Week program, pilot James Kelly said he was surprised and disappointed to learn that foam had peeled off the external fuel tank.

"The area where to foam came off is an area that was not examined or decisions were made not to look at it and not to test the foam there. I think we do need to address why that decision was made," said Mr. Kelly.

www.voanews.com...




posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Yes it should have been launched, and no it wasn't a mistake to launch it.

Are there issues with the shuttle? Yes, it's an old program and needs replacement. This (possible final) launch of the shuttle has reinforced that information to the media, to the public, and hopefully to the Congress and to the White House. Best outcome, large boost in funding for NASA to develop and deliver a new program within the next 5 years. Worst outcome, turtle syndrome: people decide going into space is a waste of money and set humanity back another 50 years while we sit around on this rock hiding in our shell...

It wasn't a mistake to launch, the shuttle has the best safety record for any space program of any nation ever (1:57). Going into space is a dangerous business, it always has been. By launching, and being extra cautious, including examining tiles and insulation while in orbit, has shown that the old problem (which has occured on every previous STS mission) of damaged tiles and warped insulation spacers is still there. It's a safety risk, but it's no longer an acceptible risk -- again, this hopefully will mean Congress approves an initiative to replace the STS program with a new launch vehicle and funds the initiative properly (give NASA $15 billion extra each year for 5 years to specifically replace the shuttle and springboard Mars missions while doing so).

Now is the time to do it. President Bush is the first president in 5 administrations that does not lack the vision and understanding of the importance of space travel and exploration. If he decides that NASA needs the new funding, and needs a new directive to develop a new launch vehicle, it will be done (right now his party controls both the Senate and Congress). There will never be a better time to fix NASA.

That's why I feel this latest STS mission was not a mistake at all.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Tell me...did anyone see NASA do a test launch of a space shuttle to confirm the changes they made solved the foam issue? Unless they have a sophisticated simulator to mimic all of the variables invovled in a launch then how else could they reliably measure the efficacy of the modifications? It doesn't suprise me they didn't quite get it right.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:06 AM
link   
Launching a "poor" craft into space is kind of like driving to see your parents in a "poor" car.

Maybe they will feel sorry for you and give you some money.


Ok bad look at it, but it is a clever way of "asking for support"

If you get my drift.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 03:37 AM
link   
A little off-topic here :

When will the Discovery Land on earth ?

I heard they where going to be 12 days in space , is that right ?



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:02 AM
link   
If all goes well, Discovery should return to Kennedy at 9:46 GMT on 7 August.



My answer here
hehe



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
Launching a "poor" craft into space is kind of like driving to see your parents in a "poor" car.

Maybe they will feel sorry for you and give you some money.


Ok bad look at it, but it is a clever way of "asking for support"

If you get my drift.


Unfortunately, It's not likely to work that way. If this craft explodes on re-entry, Congress is more likely to pull the plug on manned missions before it will continue and NASA could face a huge shakeup from the top down.




top topics



 
0

log in

join