scrap the shuttle, now!

[grooble]

The shuttle is great in its own little bubble. Compared to Apollo, it is nothing. One moon landing means more than the entire shuttle era.

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">hmmmm, yes, but i thinks we need to really actively get this message acros cause that arugment has not worked for years.</font><br /> I am so disillusioned with this country's so called manned space program that I can't even get angry about it.<br />Besides, I think both the Shuttle and the VSE will be cancelled soon. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[gsuschrist]

"I am so disillusioned with this country's so called manned space program that I can't even get angry about it."<br /><br /> True, but I'm optimistic about space exploration. The Russians and the Chinese currently have manned space capability. And the USA 'sort of' has it if one looks at private initiatives. The Shuttle is a bust but there's a lot more to space exploration than an inept NASA.

 

[esas_is_a_lie]

Good point, the shuttle is bust. Another waste of our money.

 

[spaceiscool]

Gald you have the same opion.

 

[esas_is_a_lie]

How long till we are banned. Seems a poster is on a mission. Check your PM. No wonders theres many threads about people leaving this place.

 

[CalliArcale]

You won't get banned for disliking the Shuttle. If you take some time to really get to know people here, you'll find a lot of mixed feelings about STS -- even from some of the folks most gung-ho about it. Like me. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> I think the Space Shuttle is incredible cool. I mean, it's huge, it's powerful, it's beautiful, it does neat things....but it isn't what it could've been, and for that you can mostly thank politics. (I'll stop there before I disrupt this thread with a rant.)<br /><br />Seriously, if you actually want to get banned, you have to get pretty seriously disruptive. You'd get warnings before you were banned (unless you started spamming so much that the place became impossible to use), and most likely if you did get banned, it would only be a temporary ban; sometimes we ban people for a week so they can cool off. In my experience, most people who start flaming disruptively are only doing it because they lost their tempers and not because they're bad people. The only people we ban with no chance for return are ad-spammers and people who have demonstrated an unwillingness to behave. (That usually takes a lot of strikes. Somebody has to be pretty severely disruptive to get banned out of hand.)<br /><br />I think you're safe. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[tap_sa]

IslamIsEvil was forced to change his name despite his conduct being perfectly acceptable. <br /><br />Why are you now patting a troll on the head with a name that's similarily provocative in nature, especially when this one contributes only using unsubstantiated oneliner brainfarts?<br /><br />Smells like double standards to me.

 

[jatslo]

ESAS is not religion, whereas attacking religion is discriminating.

 

[spacefire]

yeah look at me I'm attacking ESAS and VSE every post I make, via my sigline <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[tap_sa]

I'm not against criticizing ESAS or VSE even if I disagree with you. But you could show better taste and 'attack' using more wits and sensible argumentation and less lame acronym play.

 

[spacefire]

I have exhausted my wits on the subject and it all fell on deaf ears. I'm at the mocking stage now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[tap_sa]

Please upgrade from the mocking state. Take orrery21 as your example, he grew from 'militant ISS opposition' (what ever that meant was beyond me) into doing sensible discussion. I almost thought he was some nut job who'd run to shuttle pad with explosive backpack to make sure ISS doesnt have a chance <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" />

 

[jatslo]

Mocking without premise is "troll".

 

[jatslo]

If you attacked religion logically, then that would be okay. <--- Assumption: You have to do it a way as to not offend someone, or something to that affect. A simple question mark would make things more palatable, I think. Right?

 

[esas_is_a_lie]

Thank you Calli.<br /><br />On your points. Yes, it looks cool, but the problem is we didn't need a space plane. We went to the moon for four years and then suddenly we stayed in LEO. Now we have this plan to go back and correct this mistake, yet where is the money going to come from. Already there are doubts that money is there to even build the CEV before 2016 according to NASAwatch and we all know timelines slip.<br /><br />I just get the impression it is a say exciting things now, but don't deliever.

 

[drwayne]

Actually, it may be worse than that. <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /><br /><br />I believe that the "real" use of space will require an infrastructure, composed of a number of technologies for space access driven by payload requirements. "The right tool of the right job" will mean more than one or two tools in our toolbelt.<br /><br />But to do that will require the political will and conviction to do things that are not cheap, will not happen tommorrow, and do not neccessarily have a gleaming goal, like the moon was when they are completed.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[juliemac]

Thomas Edision created the light bulb. It took him over 2000 tries to get it right. When asked about it? He replied he had found 2000 ways not to do it.<br /><br />The Shuttle is an incredible machine as is the ISS. Neither is perfect. But they work.<br /><br />Would I ride on the shuttle (even with minor foam loss?) Yes<br />Would I like to work on ISS (even with out pay?) Yes.<br /><br />I stand in awe of the techs and engineers that built these machines and of the machines them selves.<br />Are they perfect? No. No machine is. But they will get better.<br /><br />All forums get a bit "pissy" some times, but I have learned a lot from this form (Though the guys at work think its a bit strange for a woman to read it).<br /><br />I'm glad the forum is here!

 

[propforce]

<font color="yellow">"... I have learned a lot from this form (Though the guys at work think its a bit strange for a woman to read it). ..."</font><br /><br />Woman reads?<br /><br />OK, OK, just kididng. Now don't go and fly off your handle there, Calli <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Seriously though, at one time there were more factual discussion here on M & L but recently there seem more opinions than facts.....<br /><br />Welcome to M & L there, Juliemac <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spayss]

"Would I ride on the shuttle (even with minor foam loss?) Yes "<br /><br /> That's great! Just as long as you pay for the ticket....a couple hundred million/seat. In the meantime I want 'my' tax dollars getting results.<br /><br /> I really don't care how many times Edison took to make a practical ligtbulb...it was his dollar.

 

[spaceiscool]

you need to learn more after reading your post. the problem is this "incredible machine" and "engineers of awe" have killed 14 astronauts and sucked up 100s of billions of taxpayers money and for what? 200 miles up? how do you propose it gets better?? its likey not gonna fly again!

 

[propforce]

<i>"... you need to learn more after reading your post. the problem is this "incredible machine" and "engineers of awe" have killed 14 astronauts and sucked up 100s of billions of taxpayers money and for what? 200 miles up? how do you propose it gets better?? its likey not gonna fly again! ..."</i><br /><br />Do you have a safer and cheaper solution ???? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jatslo]

Material Disposition: Scrap, Upgrade, Repair, and/or Replace. Technological advances are cause for change, and resistance to change is instinctive responsive to environmental stimuli. Equilibrium is what we seek.<br /><br />Where is the middle ground, and what are the facts?

 

[jatslo]

artificial gravity

 

[esas_is_a_lie]

Your point is correct. There are very few fans of the shuttle in the corridors of NASA. They would love to lose it and now. Those that seem to support it are either fans of space planes or rely on a salary from this falicy of a program.