Shuttle Columbia
Pages :
1 [2]
SuPeRcAr_MaN
02-02-2003, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by hondacivic4drlx
with all the missions we make to space, what are we really learning? what kind of experiments are doing up there why are we still goin up there. and the media has covered this story like CRAP! they bring in the most unqualyfied people to speack on this issue. i just think they should report it to death. but only when they have new information.
I have heard several other people make a comment similar to yours. I think some of the US space missions are unnecessary, but we can't stop space travel because of a couple accidents. I feel truly horrible about this one. NASA can't even figure out what happened. :crying:
with all the missions we make to space, what are we really learning? what kind of experiments are doing up there why are we still goin up there. and the media has covered this story like CRAP! they bring in the most unqualyfied people to speack on this issue. i just think they should report it to death. but only when they have new information.
I have heard several other people make a comment similar to yours. I think some of the US space missions are unnecessary, but we can't stop space travel because of a couple accidents. I feel truly horrible about this one. NASA can't even figure out what happened. :crying:
Damien
02-02-2003, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by SuPeRcAr_MaN
I have heard several other people make a comment similar to yours. I think some of the US space missions are unnecessary, but we can't stop space travel because of a couple accidents. I feel truly horrible about this one. NASA can't even figure out what happened. :crying:
Well, only the gov knows whether these space missions are worth anything. There are already so many stuff we don't know about going on and whether it's making progress or not. But hey, we're just tax payers and vote for people to do the right thing with our money. I'm sure there's something god coming out of these missions, at least I'd like to believe so. 7 people a mission knowingly endangering themselves for nothing, I doubt that.
The fact NASA doesn't know...well I can see how it can be tedious, especially for the family, but it would be awfully hard to know what happened considering that a million things can go wrong and they are still probably working on #100.....
I have heard several other people make a comment similar to yours. I think some of the US space missions are unnecessary, but we can't stop space travel because of a couple accidents. I feel truly horrible about this one. NASA can't even figure out what happened. :crying:
Well, only the gov knows whether these space missions are worth anything. There are already so many stuff we don't know about going on and whether it's making progress or not. But hey, we're just tax payers and vote for people to do the right thing with our money. I'm sure there's something god coming out of these missions, at least I'd like to believe so. 7 people a mission knowingly endangering themselves for nothing, I doubt that.
The fact NASA doesn't know...well I can see how it can be tedious, especially for the family, but it would be awfully hard to know what happened considering that a million things can go wrong and they are still probably working on #100.....
replicant_008
02-02-2003, 06:50 PM
NASA can't even figure out what happened
Well with all mode system failures there will be some time to understand what exactly went wrong. NASA based on the evidence to date will have some theories as to what went wrong but due to the nature of the accident and the three separate inquiries is unlikely to make a pronouncement until sufficient evidence is available.
Mode System failures (ie this describes when there is a total failure of the main, backup and auxilary systems) typically are catastrophic and even in air accidents there are several that as yet are unexplained.
For example, there is the Silk Air Crash where an aircraft appears to have been deliberately taken into an full power inverted dive into the ground (something a skilled pilot would have to have used considerable skill and force to induce and maintain), the apparent unexplained control mode system failures on a 737 in mild turbulence and the TWA crash off New York (who suspected causes include wiring shorts in fuel tanks to the suppressed accidental launch of a SAM).
Any answers are going to be the subject of a painstaking and timeconsuming process similar to the Challenger accident investigation. This investigation is likely to be even more difficult given the dispersion of the evidence over several states, the nature of the break up and the isolation of some of the debris area.
I mentioned before about what the shuttle does. The Hubble telescope (for all of its problems) has been a breakthrough in astronomy and there are a number of technological experiments involving materials research and the synthesis of compounds in zero-gravity that are going to have profound effects in our lifetime.
If the space programme hadn't existed it's unlikely that the dissemination of certain military based technologies to the civilian world would have happened. GPS, the internet amongst others...
Well with all mode system failures there will be some time to understand what exactly went wrong. NASA based on the evidence to date will have some theories as to what went wrong but due to the nature of the accident and the three separate inquiries is unlikely to make a pronouncement until sufficient evidence is available.
Mode System failures (ie this describes when there is a total failure of the main, backup and auxilary systems) typically are catastrophic and even in air accidents there are several that as yet are unexplained.
For example, there is the Silk Air Crash where an aircraft appears to have been deliberately taken into an full power inverted dive into the ground (something a skilled pilot would have to have used considerable skill and force to induce and maintain), the apparent unexplained control mode system failures on a 737 in mild turbulence and the TWA crash off New York (who suspected causes include wiring shorts in fuel tanks to the suppressed accidental launch of a SAM).
Any answers are going to be the subject of a painstaking and timeconsuming process similar to the Challenger accident investigation. This investigation is likely to be even more difficult given the dispersion of the evidence over several states, the nature of the break up and the isolation of some of the debris area.
I mentioned before about what the shuttle does. The Hubble telescope (for all of its problems) has been a breakthrough in astronomy and there are a number of technological experiments involving materials research and the synthesis of compounds in zero-gravity that are going to have profound effects in our lifetime.
If the space programme hadn't existed it's unlikely that the dissemination of certain military based technologies to the civilian world would have happened. GPS, the internet amongst others...
taranaki
02-02-2003, 11:43 PM
Originally posted by sparq
Anyone who knows ANYTHING about space can tell you that the Space Shuttle is the most expensive and worthless pile of crap to ever go into space.
Checkout the X-Prize, im sure alot of you dont have a clue whats going on in the space world...
http://www.xprize.org/
Anybody who knows ANYTHING about the internet can tell you that you don't get the full picture by just looking at one crummy website.By all means,read all of the information that you can find,but learn to seperate the truth from the wacky nonsense that some people insist on posting on the web.
Anyone who knows ANYTHING about space can tell you that the Space Shuttle is the most expensive and worthless pile of crap to ever go into space.
Checkout the X-Prize, im sure alot of you dont have a clue whats going on in the space world...
http://www.xprize.org/
Anybody who knows ANYTHING about the internet can tell you that you don't get the full picture by just looking at one crummy website.By all means,read all of the information that you can find,but learn to seperate the truth from the wacky nonsense that some people insist on posting on the web.
replicant_008
02-03-2003, 12:42 AM
And I someone when describing the recent 'celebrity' space rides once said something like this to me.
"Y'know (Rep), I hope these folk realise what they are doing. It isn't like catching a trans-atlantic flight on Concorde to London or something. That's little league to this stuff.
This is really dangerous stuff - you are strapped onto this barely controlled explosion with some of the most volatile chemicals known to man. You start perched on top of a large tank of the stuff next to two rockets that you can't turn off once they start.
The thing goes - once that touch paper is lit - from sitting on the launch pad to like 5 miles a second in like 8 minutes. The acceleration forces are like someone putting 400 pounds of lead weights on your chest and it's not like one of those Sci-Fi movies either - the thing rocks and rumbles and shakes the crap out of you.
And it's not like you can get out and walk if something goes wrong. If something does go wrong it will do it in the worst way.
And the risks... maybe walking down the road you'll be like 1-100 million of getting hurt, then maybe its riskier driving your car, more risk again flying in a commercial jet, possibly riskier again in those little Cessna's your mate trains in... but we are talking about a risk of 1-1000 or even 1-500 here. And that's why I can never see commercial passenger space flight in my lifetime ever being a commercially viable option no matter how fast it is."
"Y'know (Rep), I hope these folk realise what they are doing. It isn't like catching a trans-atlantic flight on Concorde to London or something. That's little league to this stuff.
This is really dangerous stuff - you are strapped onto this barely controlled explosion with some of the most volatile chemicals known to man. You start perched on top of a large tank of the stuff next to two rockets that you can't turn off once they start.
The thing goes - once that touch paper is lit - from sitting on the launch pad to like 5 miles a second in like 8 minutes. The acceleration forces are like someone putting 400 pounds of lead weights on your chest and it's not like one of those Sci-Fi movies either - the thing rocks and rumbles and shakes the crap out of you.
And it's not like you can get out and walk if something goes wrong. If something does go wrong it will do it in the worst way.
And the risks... maybe walking down the road you'll be like 1-100 million of getting hurt, then maybe its riskier driving your car, more risk again flying in a commercial jet, possibly riskier again in those little Cessna's your mate trains in... but we are talking about a risk of 1-1000 or even 1-500 here. And that's why I can never see commercial passenger space flight in my lifetime ever being a commercially viable option no matter how fast it is."
MaximusGTR
02-03-2003, 04:02 AM
My main thing is I hope the 7 people didn't suffer, that would be pretty fucked up if they did. I mean being 35 miles up going 3 times the speed of light, w/ fire around you knowing you are going to burn to death. That thought alone could give someone a heart attack :(
My prayers go out to the families.
My prayers go out to the families.
darkness
02-03-2003, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by MaximusGTR
going 3 times the speed of light, w/ fire around you knowing you are going to burn to death.
not quite that fast but I know what you mean.
The most idiotic comment about this came from someone I was talking to.
They said "why don't they have an ejection system".
I said "I'm not dignifying that with an answer until you learn what you are talking about".
49 miles up and doing around 20,000 mph and ejection system isn't going to do much for you.
going 3 times the speed of light, w/ fire around you knowing you are going to burn to death.
not quite that fast but I know what you mean.
The most idiotic comment about this came from someone I was talking to.
They said "why don't they have an ejection system".
I said "I'm not dignifying that with an answer until you learn what you are talking about".
49 miles up and doing around 20,000 mph and ejection system isn't going to do much for you.
taranaki
02-03-2003, 05:44 AM
Originally posted by darkness
not quite that fast but I know what you mean.
The most idiotic comment about this came from someone I was talking to.
They said "why don't they have an ejection system".
I said "I'm not dignifying that with an answer until you learn what you are talking about".
49 miles up and doing around 20,000 mph and ejection system isn't going to do much for you.
Actually,the same question was raised earlier in the thread.I rather think that science fiction has overstretched our perception of science fact.The reality is that re-entry is probably just as hazardous as the launch procedure,but thanks to the magic of television,we have all become accustomed to seeing this beautiful piece of hardware gliding in gently on its final approach for a three point landing ,as ordinary as any commercial jet.The reality in the upper atmosphere is altogether different,the crew being reduced to mere passengers as the shuttle hurtles back into the Earth's atmosphere at speeds that the layman cannot comprehend.The outer shell of the craft reaches enormous temperature,and is battered by turbulent layers of gas.With no power other than gravity ,this small and elderly craft is sucked back down to ground level,gliding under computer guidance until the very last few seconds of the flight.the astronauts had no control over the descent,and absolutely no way of resolving any emergency that occurred during the re-entry.
not quite that fast but I know what you mean.
The most idiotic comment about this came from someone I was talking to.
They said "why don't they have an ejection system".
I said "I'm not dignifying that with an answer until you learn what you are talking about".
49 miles up and doing around 20,000 mph and ejection system isn't going to do much for you.
Actually,the same question was raised earlier in the thread.I rather think that science fiction has overstretched our perception of science fact.The reality is that re-entry is probably just as hazardous as the launch procedure,but thanks to the magic of television,we have all become accustomed to seeing this beautiful piece of hardware gliding in gently on its final approach for a three point landing ,as ordinary as any commercial jet.The reality in the upper atmosphere is altogether different,the crew being reduced to mere passengers as the shuttle hurtles back into the Earth's atmosphere at speeds that the layman cannot comprehend.The outer shell of the craft reaches enormous temperature,and is battered by turbulent layers of gas.With no power other than gravity ,this small and elderly craft is sucked back down to ground level,gliding under computer guidance until the very last few seconds of the flight.the astronauts had no control over the descent,and absolutely no way of resolving any emergency that occurred during the re-entry.
sparq
02-03-2003, 06:27 AM
Lets just throw this out in the open shall we?
The space shuttle program sucks, end of discussion :finger:
The space shuttle program sucks, end of discussion :finger:
MaximusGTR
02-03-2003, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by darkness
"why don't they have an ejection system".
.
http://www.ok-speed.com/forums/images/smilies/slap.gif
"why don't they have an ejection system".
.
http://www.ok-speed.com/forums/images/smilies/slap.gif
Toksin
02-04-2003, 03:21 AM
I think, at the speeds they were going, they wouldn't even have realised anything went wrong before they died.
My prayers go out to their loved ones.
God rest their souls.
My prayers go out to their loved ones.
God rest their souls.
bowtiebandit
02-05-2003, 11:26 PM
Scott 02
02-07-2003, 08:47 AM
Thats nice bowtiebandit, thaks for sharing it with us.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026