Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At 9:42 PM + on 1/19/03, Malcolm Carlock wrote: I must admit it also seems very strange that the shuttle couldn't have been examined while docked to the ISS. It wasn't docked there. It was in a completely different orbit, and higher up to boot. That's why it came over the Western United States on landing, instead of over, I believe, places like Cancun and the Gulf of Mexico. It's also why people were saying they would have been SOL no matter what happened, and why, if you're conspiracy- -- and bloody- -- minded, it's easy to imagine that someone higher up in NASA figured that they were, heh, cooked, anyway, and decided to stand back and see if a miracle happened. Of course, that probably didn't happen (invoking Pournelle's Law), and, besides, if they *were* that bloody-minded, they would have left it *up* there for an eventual repair and body-recovery mission, sometime in the future. [If you don't think they wouldn't have, memorial or not, remember that two people *died* in the Columbia already, in the wrong place, the cargo bay, at the wrong time, while they were pressurizing it with nitrogen during a mock-launch rehearsal before its inaugural launch.] Flying another shuttle to them while people were still alive would have been impossible, of course, so much for a reusable space-truck on a rapid turnaround, and, even if it wasn't, I don't think they even have an airlock aboard, and, given the cost of the gold-plated one on the ISS, they probably can't afford one on the ground, either. In other words, when you fly on Uncle's Nickle, you pays the tax payer's money, and you takes your chances. Of course, if we'd actually *privatized* space (not had a single-payer HillarySpace program, which is the case now, even though most of the shuttle program is currently privatized -- in the same way that the California power market is privatized), like back in the Nixon administration sometime, when he drew a red-line through NASA's budget the first time because it was leftover Kennedy-cruft that was embarrassing him politically, and made stuff like liquid rocket fuel legal to own (wasn't it someone here, or elsewhere, who said maybe we should sue to make very-high-powered rocketry a constitutional right under second amendment? :-)), among other things, there probably would have been *50* re-entries, or maybe 100, today -- and just that many launches. Today's crash, if it had happened at all, would have been lost in the radar clutter, to be completely brutal about it, and it would have been buried in the place where articles about 7 dead marines at Quantico -- or, more likely 7 dead skiers in the Bugaboos -- go. Oh, well. Maybe China will finally collapse already and some entrepreneur in New Shanghai establish a colony in the Belt someday. Too bad I'll be too old to learn Chinese when it happens. Cheers, RAH Who gave up on any illusions of there ever being an American private space industry in his lifetime -- or any career plans in that regard - -- shortly after the Challenger blew up and a bunch of government employees cancelled *all* manned space flight indefinitely. Same shit, different decade... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com iQA/AwUBPj8insPxH8jf3ohaEQLODACcDofKm9BtBVOQdGq/lCK9Topwt/YAoOdk NDdomx/bnf0ALLWNuJc13b0p =JY// -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
Our messages crossed in the mail, but there's this bit here... At 7:18 PM -0800 on 2/3/03, Tim May wrote: Two crewmen were prepared to to an EVA to fix dislodged cargo/hatch doors, as on every flight to date. The other crew could have transferred in their pressure suits. Ah. Forgot about the pressure suits. Doh. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 06:17 PM, R. A. Hettinga wrote: Flying another shuttle to them while people were still alive would have been impossible, of course, so much for a reusable space-truck on a rapid turnaround, and, even if it wasn't, I don't think they even have an airlock aboard Incorrect. NASA estimates that Atlantis could have been rushed to launch in 10 days. So, had they initiated the inspection early enough, time enough for a rendezvous. As for there not being an airlock aboard, this is silly. Two crewmen were prepared to to an EVA to fix dislodged cargo/hatch doors, as on every flight to date. The other crew could have transferred in their pressure suits. --Tim May
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
From: Malcolm Carlock [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 16:42 I was shocked to learn Saturday that NASA had not a mechanism to adequately inspect the exterior of the shuttles for damage before the return to earth. The reasons given seem to imply that NASA's ability for EVAs was very limited and did not generally include on most flight the possibility of such examinations. Further there was no effective ground or ISS-based observation method either. Weird. I recall when the shuttles first began flying, reading about how the bottom of at least some the ships (certainly the first) were being examined for damage remotely, by telescope from the ground. Further, I distinctly recall reading an article that described, and I believe had one or more photos of, a tile repair kit for use in space. What happened to all of these things, I wonder? I must admit it also seems very strange that the shuttle couldn't have been examined while docked to the ISS. The reports I've read say that the shuttle couldn't dock with the ISS because it didn't have the appropriate docking mechanisms. Ever lovable and always scrappy, kawaii Julius Caesar extinguished himself on the battlefields of Gaul. The Ides of March murdered him because they thought he was going to be made king. Dying, he gasped out: Tee hee, Brutus.
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
At 8:27 PM -0800 2/2/03, Steve Schear wrote: As some friends in the U.S. space program had privately predicted, and the New York Times is today reporting, unless the problem with the Shuttle can be quickly identified and convincingly rectified to worried legislators, the International Space Station may have to be moth balled and the NASA manned space program put on hold. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/science/02cnd-stati.html I heard someone today suggesting that it was time to replace the shuttle. After all, it's 25 year old technology. I kind of expect a program to be proposed with all the usual reasons why it is good for the country. - Bill Frantz | Due process for all| Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the Ameican | 16345 Englewood Ave. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 08:27:06PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote: I can't imagine that it would be so difficult to construct a small, remotely-controlled, gyro stabilized, tethered probe that would be carried on all shuttle missions and could be deployed from the cargo bay to closely inspect the exterior of the craft for possible damage. Even if the shuttle could not be immediately repaired, it could be somehow moored at some part of the station and left there till a repair mission could be effected or perhaps sacrificed by a controlled burn re-entry over an unpopulated area of the earth as some satellites have already ended their days. In any case astronauts would then not need to live-test a possibly damaged shuttle as those on Columbia did Saturday. If they had thought there was damage, couldn't they have just done a tethered space walk to look at it? I thought space walks were a normal practice on both the shuttle and ISS. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
Yeah, I got the same thing. When I went to do a group reply, it had no CC:, just Steve. I've been noticing the same thing with Declan's messages. Weird. On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 11:15:19PM -0800, Tim May wrote: On Sunday, February 2, 2003, at 09:36 PM, Ralph Seberry wrote: On Sunday, 02 Feb 2003 at 20:57, Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (I am replying to the CP list, but suppressing the name of the poster. He/she sent his/her comments to a recipient list suppressed private distribution. If people send me comments, don't expect to me to just take them in silence. I will, however, suppress the author unless and until too many such private distributions occur.) Steve Schear sent the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] without any attempt to disguise the sender. The full headers below are how I received the message: From: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun Feb 2, 2003 8:27:06 PM US/Pacific To: (Recipient list suppressed) Subject: Say goodbye to the ISS Received: by sphinx (mbox tcmay) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Sun Feb 2 20:40:39 2003) Received: from psmtp.com (exprod5mx6.postini.com [64.75.1.146]) by sphinx.got.net (8.12.2/8.12.2/Debian -5) with SMTP id h134WVIk017383 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:32:31 -0800 Received: from source ([209.157.136.81]) by exprod5mx6.postini.com ([64.75.1.245]) with SMTP; Sun, 02 Feb 2003 23:32:32 EST Received: (from majordom@localhost) by gw.lne.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) id h134PUZq020838 for cypherpunks-goingout345; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:25:30 -0800 X-From_: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Feb 2 20:32:33 2003 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Authentication-Warning: slack.lne.com: majordom set sender to [EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: Say goodbye to the ISS
I was shocked to learn Saturday that NASA had not a mechanism to adequately inspect the exterior of the shuttles for damage before the return to earth. The reasons given seem to imply that NASA's ability for EVAs was very limited and did not generally include on most flight the possibility of such examinations. Further there was no effective ground or ISS-based observation method either. Weird. I recall when the shuttles first began flying, reading about how the bottom of at least some the ships (certainly the first) were being examined for damage remotely, by telescope from the ground. Further, I distinctly recall reading an article that described, and I believe had one or more photos of, a tile repair kit for use in space. What happened to all of these things, I wonder? I must admit it also seems very strange that the shuttle couldn't have been examined while docked to the ISS. By coincidence, a tube train in London (where I live) jumped the track last week and tore up a station, when one of its traction motors dropped onto the rails. Thanks to that, the major east-west tube line has been out of service for days, causing travel chaos. Apparent failure thanks to deferred maintenance, by way of ill-advised cost cuts -- twice in one week, seemingly.
