Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
Re: virus: Sorry to hear about Columbia
« Reply #1 on: 2003-02-01 17:22:10 »
Amen, Jonathan.
Walter
Jonathan Davis wrote:
> Dear American Virians, > > Sorry to hear about Columbia. A loss to science and humanity. > > Regards > > Jonathan > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
--
Walter Watts Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
"No one gets to see the Wizard! Not nobody! Not no how!"
Re: virus: Sorry to hear about Columbia
« Reply #3 on: 2003-02-02 01:46:11 »
...i am a bit pleased however to hear the positive pro-risk rhetoric. last time, it was like a small death to the space program (the worlds space program for all intents and purposes). now, after 20 years and 130 odd missions without a problem, people seem to realize that this sort of exploration and advanced technology development is the most risky and challenging thing mankind has facing him. i give a fond farewell, a non-military salute and a thankyou to the astronaughts lost. and shortly after, i say, "lets get goin'...who's next?" finally we have a healthy outlook on such things...i just thank Dog that we had all those successful missions in the past 20 yrs as goodluck would have it, so that people arent totally freaked out again. i'd love to hear the stats on 17th century sailors and their life expectancies. so far we have about a 1.7% casualty rate on something that is pretty fucking amazing. if i could be an astronaught, fly 20 missions and have a death risk of .6% i'd be pretty fucking pleased at that life:)
DrSebby.
. DrSebby. "Courage...and shuffle the cards".
...
----Original Message Follows---- From: Walter Watts <wlwatts@cox.net> Reply-To: virus@lucifer.com To: virus@lucifer.com Subject: Re: virus: Sorry to hear about Columbia Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 16:22:10 -0600
Amen, Jonathan.
Walter
Jonathan Davis wrote:
> Dear American Virians, > > Sorry to hear about Columbia. A loss to science and humanity. > > Regards > > Jonathan > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
--
Walter Watts Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
"No one gets to see the Wizard! Not nobody! Not no how!"
Baghdad - Immediate popular reaction in Baghdad on Saturday to the loss of the US space shuttle Columbia and its seven-member crew - including the first Israeli in space - was that its was God's retribution on Americans.
"We are happy that it broke up," government employee Abdul Jabbar al-Quraishi said.
"God wants to show that his might is greater than the Americans. They have encroached on our country. God is avenging us," he said.
Car mechanic Mohammed Jaber al-Tamini noted Israeli air force Colonel Ilan Ramon was among the dead when the shuttle broke up shortly before its return to earth.
"Israel launched an aggression on us when it raided our nuclear reactor without any reason (in 1981), now time has come and God has retaliated to their aggression," Tamini said. Hermit Comments:
Not everybody loves a hero. Perhaps we should ask the "JingoUSA" supporters in our midst why, in this particular case, why? Then again, maybe we need not. The US has decided - "Officially" - that if they can't be loved, that they might as well be feared. The 84% of the world's population which considers that the US is the greatest threat to world peace in 2003 validates the success of the smirking chimp's program - and many of this vast pool of concerned and frightened people might well resonate with feelings like those reflected above. I would imagine that the presence of a "Hindu" and an "Israeli" only makes the event even more suited to purposes of the authors of the preceding sentiments.
Naturally, those more invested in "Amerika, Right or More Right" will scream how wrong they are, how the "magnificent" programs have achieved so much and will achieve so much more. Flag waving to the chorus of trumpets will drown out voices such as the above, and many other objections and comments, no matter the source. And yet, are those suggesting the above entirely wrong? There are no "gods" - so no godly vengeance is possible. Even so, I'd suggest it was, if not vengeance, then still an entirely predictable consequence of choices made - with a vengeance. But by whom, for whom and how?
All the head-burying, sobs, tears, breast-beating, adulation and jingoism du jour, cannot, even for a moment, disguise the fact that we deliberately put astronaut's lives on the line every time we fly one of the 20 year old shuttles - in order to save money and faces. The shuttles were supposedly designed for 100 flights - and a lifespan of around 10 years. In reality, plans go wrong, and Challenger was on her 28th flight in twenty years. Or an average of just over 1 flight a year. The estimated odds of a catastrophic anomaly during any take-off is put at a little over 400:1. In other words, for each 400 or so take-offs, we expect to lose a shuttle and crew.
The reason is simple, the space program is dramatically underfunded - and the amount it receives is continuously reducing in real world terms. Research and development on advanced programs takes decades. Unfortunately funding happens in 4 yearly cycles - and usually comes with strings attached. Strings which tend to be pulled by different puppet masters every few years - destroyng many programs that have taken thousands of man hours and hundreds of millions of dollars to satisfy political whimsey. The result. NASA is as much a political football as a research organization - hobbled by antediluvian mindsets and interdepartment rivalry reminiscent of the cold war, lacking enthusiasm, lacking visionaries - and placing astronauts at far greater risk than should be necessary.
The shuttles were the Airforce's way of shutting down the (Navy's) Saturn program. In order to get the funding they wanted, the Airforce cut up the irreplaceable (no funding to replace them) assembly gantry (Vertical Assembly Building) for the safe, cheap, reliable, heavy lift Saturn which, in the Saturn V successors was intended to launch 140,000kg into LEO at a cost (in 1997 $) of around $4,300/kg. Compare this to the Shuttle, which manages to launch only 23,000kg - at an average cost (for all missions flown to date - in 1997 $) of $22,000/kg. Or a cost 5 times higher than the Saturn for a payload 4 times smaller. Today, 20 years later, we still don't even have a draft for a high volume heavy lift program offering us a similar capacity to the Saturn* - at any price. Due to short-sighted budgetary in-fighting, and with around 70% of NASA's budget going to keeping the shuttles limping back and forth into LEO (and some of that cost attributable to the international space station) there isn't a lot of money left for anything else. Like shuttle replacements. In any form. Which is why we don't have any replacement for the insanely expensive, horribly complex, completely unreliable and very dangerous shuttles. Due to the reluctance to pour good money after bad, or to admit that the shuttles are expensive white elephants (and have been since the first buget overruns in the 1970s), we are left with only three shuttles in flying condition - whenever, if ever, they are allowed back into the air again. So all American non-military space programs - and some military programs - will be impacted for at least the next 15 years (given that it took a decade longer than expected to bring the shuttle online, this is probably a realistic timeframe to bring the STS or other replacement technologies off the drawing board and into use and the air - even if budget appropriations were made on Monday - and they won't be)... Which means that the future of civilian programs is bleak, as military needs take priority - and in any case, huge sums that could be better spent on replacements will now be spent attempting to figure out what went wrong and who is liable - or not.
So, to answer my questions above, I'd suggest that the vengeance was statistical reality, acting to remind all of us - and particularly the congresscritters and Shitehouse - that we can't expect to fly historic artefacts forever without cost. And perhaps to highlight the fact that if we won't pay for development with money, we can to an extent pay for it in lives. A lesson which the next war is likely to attempt to teach us about transport aircraft too.
Unfortunately, no matter how willing astronauts are to die, it seems to me that the only way to lubricate the hinges on the now rusty gate to space, at least sufficiently to stop it from seizing up completely, and maintaining a pretense that we are interested in space-access, will be to pump money at the problem. Much as was done during the programs in the 1960s which culminated in the relics which we are flying today. And which, if we were to continue to fly missions - and fund replaceements - at the same glacial rate as we have to date, will probably still be flying with years of life in them in 2080 or so. That is, if they haven't all crashed from old age or as yet undiagnosed problems. After all, when you only fly one and a bit missions per year, it is very difficult to develop good statistics on failure modalities.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Re:virus: Sorry to hear about Columbia
« Reply #5 on: 2003-02-02 10:34:44 »
My thoughts go out to the families of these 7 brave men and women.
But, we must remember that this is only 1 of many obstacles that will inevitably be found on the road of space exploration; a road that must be traversed in order for space exploration to thrive.
I only hope for one thing to come from all of this--the notion that space exploration is a necessity for humanity. Exploration and discovering has played a pivotal role in the development of mankind...indeed, it has played a vital role in the development of civilizations. May we continue to grab at the reins of our steeds and ride into the unknown.
Re:virus: Sorry to hear about Columbia
« Reply #6 on: 2003-02-04 10:30:13 »
To Jonathan and others that expressed their sympathy.
I think I can speak for many Americans when I say "thanks". Saturday was like waking up to a punch in the gut. It's been a difficult couple of days, but it will pass and perhaps the situation that led to the deaths of our best and brightest will be avoided in the future.
For once I actually think that tragedy will lead to an improved program. The general attitutide I have come across is one of optimistic defiance. People seems willing to say "Spend more on NASA" for the first time in a long time.
Anyways, thanks Jonathan. And to the rest of you American's feeling like I am, we all grieve together.
> > To Jonathan and others that expressed their sympathy. > > I think I can speak for many Americans when I say "thanks". Saturday > was like waking up to a punch in the gut. It's been a difficult couple > of days, but it will pass and perhaps the situation that led to the > deaths of our best and brightest will be avoided in the future. > > For once I actually think that tragedy will lead to an improved > program. The general attitutide I have come across is one of > optimistic defiance. People seems willing to say "Spend more on NASA" > for the first time in a long time. > > Anyways, thanks Jonathan. And to the rest of you American's feeling > like I am, we all grieve together. > I think that the basic problem is one of design; having external fuel tanks that are subsequently jettisoned but which first are subjected to extremes of cold (from the liquid fuel), heat and vibration multiplies the chances that something (such as ice or a component) will break off one of them and strike the shuttle body, dislodging heat-resistant tiles (as seems to have happened). Ideally, we need a single-cylinder design. However, for the time being, they could try affixing the tiles more securely, or affixing multiple layers of them for redundancy and backup. --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
Author
Logged
Perhaps we should ask the "JingoUSA" supporters in our midst why, in this particular case, why? Then again, maybe we need not. The US has decided - "Officially" - that if they can't be loved, that they might as well be feared. The 84% of the world's population which considers that the US is the greatest threat to world peace in 2003 validates the success of the smirking chimp's program - and many of this vast pool of concerned and frightened people might well resonate with feelings like those reflected above. I would imagine that the presence of a "Hindu" and an "Israeli" only makes the event even more suited to purposes of the authors of the preceding sentiments.
