STS-114 Mission Update Thread (Part 6)

[najab]

Continued discussion of the mission of Discovery and her crew to the International Space Station - a continuation of this thread.

 

[telfrow]

<img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /><br /><br />http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/multimedia/fd7_gallery.html<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[rhodan]

Beautiful pic, telfrow, thanks for posting it.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

That was used by the biggest tabloid paper The Sun over here (3.5 million readers) a few days ago in an article that was POSITIVE about the Shuttle (Tabloids shaming so-called established media in the US).

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Hope he's not tarring us all with the same brush.<br /><br />Very happy he's spoken out - if it's on the web I'll link it up and send it around the media.

 

[mrmorris]

*edit* no longer relevant post made <b>just</b> as najaB was splitting the thread. Moving to the other thread...

 

[erauskydiver]

Ugh, these senators talking to the crew right now are annoying. Especially the women... why doesnt she just speak normally!? Just shut up and pump money into the space program already ya dumb politicians.

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">Just shut up and pump money into the program already ya dumb politicians.</font><br /><br />you got it right...continuing to pump money into the program IS a dumb political decision. <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Oh and there's Mr Scratched Record himself. It's getting boring, really it is.

 

[erauskydiver]

You think pumping money into the space program is dumb? What the hell are yo doing on space.com then?

 

[viper101]

I thought the George Bush call was worse - it's just awkward when the the politicians call. <br /><br />I remember Aldrin once saying he didn't really feel like taking Nixon's call on 7/20/69 beacuse they were so short on time. <br /><br />Amen.

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">You think pumping money into the space program is dumb? What the hell are yo doing on space.com then?</font>/i><br /><br />A person can be pro-space but not support manned spaceflight. There is a long history of this.<br /><br />A person can also be pro-manned space but not support the current or announced directions of NASA.<br /><br />A person can also be pro-manned space, support the general direction of NASA, but be against the spending of additional money (or even existing levels) into the program because of perceived government waste.<br /><br />A person can also be pro-manned space but not support the government (or government mandated monopoly) leading the charge.</i>

 

[erauskydiver]

Well, with no support from the government, you get none of the above. Well... for a long time at least.

 

[viper101]

Personally I wish that 10% of the money that was going to operations in Iraq were diverted to the Space Program. <br /><br />That's not to say I don't want the soldiers to be under-equipped or any crap like that - just that an enormous amount is being spent on the operations over there - and it would be nice to see some of that put towards space efforts instead.

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">I thought the George Bush call was worse - it's just awkward when the the politicians call.</font>/i><br /><br />But President Bush is such and eloquent and inspiring speaker. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> Here is a quote from a recent Q&A session about NASA's direction.<br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I know the -- at least the people I've talked to inside NASA are excited about the mission, the reinvigoration of the vision of exploration. And I appreciate the Administrator working on getting that strategy in place, so that when the decision is made <b><font color="yellow">to finally get rid of this phase of exploration</font>/b>, we'll be ready to take on the new phase. And that's important for the American people to understand, that, one, exploration is important; two, there will be some good coming out of exploration; and, three, that we've got a new vision embraced by NASA and its pioneers.<p><hr /></p></b></p></blockquote><br />http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=17560<br /><br />That should be inspiring to the people working on the "this phase".</i>

 

[erauskydiver]

I wish NASA TV would show more video footage from inside the ISS and Orbiter. It gets boring looking at MCC.

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">You think pumping money into the space program is dumb? What the hell are yo doing on space.com then? </font><br />pumping money into the Shuttle to finish the ISS seems like a bad decision to me. The ISS was crippled way back when the CRV was cancelled reducing the permanent crew to 3 astronauts. Once you realize this, the whole reason for keeping the Space Shuttle in the first place can be questioned.<br />Personally I think NASA, which was created as a response agency to the Soviet Union's space program, has ceased to function properly after we beat the Russians to the moon. The $huttle is a prime example of that lack of vision.<br /> President's Bush attempt to give NASA a goal seems laudable, but unfortunately-since he lacks the capacity to understand scientific and generally anything that is too complex to be taught in kindergarden-seems more like an attempt to gain popularity with a certain segment of the population and VSE will most likely not survive even his administration.<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[erauskydiver]

Well they are planning on retiring the shuttle. What more do you want? You want them to cancel the program right now? Ok... are you going to volunteer to personally go tell all of the STS workers that they are out of a job?

 

[spacefire]

with all due respect, to you and everybody at NASA,<br />a government space program shouldn't be run with the purpose of keeping people employed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[erauskydiver]

You are right, it shouldnt be designed like that. But I stand by my statement. However, I still ask you... would you be able to go and tell all of those employees and their families that they are no longer going to get a paycheck after...hmmm... after Discover lands. Could you do that? <br /><br />It's OK to decrease the staffing footprint for the next program through long term planning. That's much different, and OK. People have time to adjust. Natural attrition softens the blow. But you are crying for cutting the shuttle now and throwing people out on the street and that is just cold!

 

[spacefire]

and how will you 'gradually' reduce the workforce dedicated to maintaing the Shuttle if the Shuttle is still operating? In other words, won't you have the same problem 5 years from now?!?!?! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[erauskydiver]

Exactly the way we are doing it now. Design the next spacecraft while the current one is still in use. In the operations gap between the vehicles, you use the existing crew to reconfigure the infrastruture and to train them.<br /><br />If you killed the shuttle, and then waited for development, you'd have a bunch of people picking their noses until IOC. <br /><br />Also, I have a feeling we will be seeing the shuttle and ISS being used to help develop the next craft and test out ideas.

 

[spacefire]

that assumes that the CEV and/or SDHLV will be ready for production within 5-6 years at most. just how optimistic is that? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[erauskydiver]

We should at least have an SDD article by then. The general configuration would be known. Infrastructure modification and training should be able to start by then too. We might not be in full rate production or even LRIP by 2010, but it sure better than cutting the STS before an EMD/SDD contract is awarded.

 

[erauskydiver]

Let's move this convo back to the thread it belongs in. Sincere, apologies to everybody for letting it get out of hand in here again.