If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   NASA now stronger, smarter, safer and more humble   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 52
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

5213 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Apr 2005 at 9:23 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



52 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-04-08 06:07:06 PM
Further evidence that NASA really has changed its mentality for the better.
 
2005-04-08 06:28:40 PM
Unlikely. Shoot the managers.

/my answer for most everything
 
2005-04-08 09:25:51 PM
penis.
 
2005-04-08 09:32:23 PM
submitter, thats bollocks.
/could have said load of old cobblers.
 
2005-04-08 09:35:45 PM
Y'know, the shuttles are kind of like my old '78 Mustang II with the v6 and a 4 speed...

Spent $1800 on it to acquire it. And every three weeks it would require another 500 to 1000 to fix.

By the time we finally figured out to get rid of it, we'd sunk another $5000 or so in it.

Time to stop the madness and go back to the old 'Saturn V's.
 
2005-04-08 09:35:56 PM
Put the farking managers aboard each spaceflight. The Chinese put thier airline manager aboard thier planes during the Y2K rollover. They had no problems whatsoever. Good model to follow.
 
2005-04-08 09:40:09 PM
Wouldn't it be safer to launch the shuttle by remote control, and then once in was safely in orbit, a crew could be sent up to it on a soyuz.

And when it was time to land the shuttle, the crew could re-enter using the soyuz, and the shuttle could be de-orbited and landed by remote control too.

/brilliant!
 
2005-04-08 09:42:30 PM
Better? Stronger? Faster? Duh, of course. They have the technology. It just cost a bit more than $6 million to do it...
 
2005-04-08 09:45:33 PM
Some NASA manager/higher up's actually are former astronauts. Personally I've always felt they should've take one mission and give the seven seats to former astronauts from the 60's. Granted there would've been one hell of a fight as to who got to actually fly the thing, but would've been cool. Total PR but nothing wrong with that. Sigh, thought of Gordo Cooper flyin the Shuttle.
 
2005-04-08 09:56:01 PM
saturn v's were vastly less safe than current rocket systems. They were designed to be used a few times, and the probability of catastrophic failure with them was quite high, relative to today. Fortunately, none of them were used enough for the probabilistic failure to occur.

Yes, they were amazing machines and still are. But modern rocket systems are much better. The SSME's are the safest, most powerful rockets (for their size) ever fielded.

Of course the safest propulsion system in the world does you no good if you can punch a hole in a wing with a piece of supersonic foam.

Getting to and from space is hard y'all. All the more reason to do it.
 
2005-04-08 09:57:48 PM
But are they keeping the Voyager probes?
 
2005-04-08 10:02:49 PM
cant do that mr. neutron, that would undermine confidence in Nasa.

/oh wait, could get that get any worse?
 
2005-04-08 10:13:19 PM
N A S A
need another seven astronauts
 
2005-04-08 10:17:58 PM


 
2005-04-08 10:24:07 PM
In my admittedly limited experience, most of the rank-and-file folks in NASA are dedicated, competent people, but there is undeniably what a corporate arrogance. They tend to view anyone or anything outside of NASA as unworthy of consideration. I'll believe they've changed their mentality when I see it.
 
2005-04-08 10:25:04 PM
"...the astronauts said they remained confident their managers wouldn't let them go into space or return home until every potential danger had been addressed.

what the hell? astronauts went into space not feeling confident about their equipment?

/obvious
 
2005-04-08 10:28:32 PM
Meh. Wake me up when NASA starts using those Six Million Dollar Man sound effects.

/Nuh-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na...
 
2005-04-08 10:34:59 PM
That's what they said after the last disaster pause.
 
2005-04-08 10:46:17 PM
Good.
 
2005-04-08 10:47:47 PM
NASA is largely a money-sucking hole whose best work is done by the few robotic devices the government hasn't let splash in the ocean. This Mars business? Stupid. There are no Soviets to impress anymore, and the price only goes up...
 
2005-04-08 10:50:04 PM
ATTENTION NASA: Stop flying people into space on "missions". I find it quite pointless, dangerous and a waste of money. Unless youre going to the moon or Mars, don't do it. It's too expensive. Instead use your bazillion budget and put as much as you can into the investment of solar power satellites. It's the best idea yet. There's a satellite in space with huge solar arrays that beam 24-hour solar power back down to Earth via microwave or laser beams. I don't know how safe the beaming is but we could solve sooo many problems with a bunch of those in space. Imagine... a world void of power stations, gas stations and other eyesores. Ohhh reality check... I have no say in what my government chooses to waste... I mean spend its money on. Let's go throw another few billion at the international space station.

Call me ignorant but could someone PLEASE tell me something good that has come out of the ISS? Let's invest our money into alternative fuels and ways of bettering the ones we have. But no one listens to me. I don't have a doctorate, millions of dollars for bribing or a genie. But if I did have a doctorate, millions of dollars for bribing and a genie I would buy/wish my way for a better tomorrow, naturally.

Ya I said it. You were thinking it too...
/rant off.
//Is our moon capitalized? Grammar Nazis? Anyone? Bueller?
 
2005-04-08 10:58:32 PM
Going into space is a bit like jumping out of an airplane:

Will my chute open? Will it open correctly so I can have a safe descent?

Will my o-rings hold out? Did my shuttle suffer critical damage on lift-off?

Granted, it's a bit like playing the lottery and hoping for the best. However, you don't have teams of genius's trying to pick your numbers. NASA's track record may not be perfect, but if I was going to blast myself out of the atmosphere, i'd surely appreciate NASA's input on the situation. Sure, there's a certain risk when one goes into space. I'm sure that every astronaut knows this.

It's just that the possible experience of going to space and seeing our world in a once-in-a-lifetime way is just too good (and rare) to pass up for these people. I wouldn't even hesitate to do it myself .. even knowing the possibe dangers!

Just because there was an accident a few years ago doesn't mean we should abandon the whole project. Accidents are what leads to improvement. We make a mistake, learn about it, and take steps in the future to make sure that they never happen again.

I'm just trying to emphasize the fact that even though our space program suffered from a catastrophic failure, it should not, without a doubt, be abandoned because of possible risks.

/way more than I intended to post.
//drunk and feeling like I HAVE to make my feelings heard.
 
2005-04-08 11:05:37 PM
While I'm glad a 15 year old is seriously interested in these issues, it's normally easier to get your views heard through intellectual discourse rather than rants. Last time I checked the good folks at NSF were more than happy to meet with anyone willing to take the time to schedule an appointment and travel to them. If you want to conduct research on solar arrays in space, alternative fuels, or genies, that could be a good place to start. It's one thing to complain about a problem and another to actively work to fix it. As far as I'm concerned, you shouldn't whine unless you're actively pursuing a solution.

Oh, and two good things that have come out of the ISS: some would say it was a major contributor to stabilizing (sort of) the Russian economy and keeping brilliant scientists there busy when they might otherwise go work for people we would prefer them not to. I've got a couple good friends who would be more than happy to discuss with you the plight of Russian scientists over the last few decades.
 
2005-04-08 11:09:17 PM
The Mad Cockatiel

Your correct. The Soviets arn't around anymore. Our space program really is a "black hole". But when we think of exploring space I think we might soon associating that with another communist country. China. Perhaps another space race?? Europe (European Space Agency, Brazil (Agncia Espacial Brasileira), Japan (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) and Canada (Canadian Space Agency) all have their own space programs too. I think we need to focus on Earth and it's problems instead of just trying to run away from them and blast off to outer space. I think they could do better things with their money then making sleep matresses
 
2005-04-08 11:12:28 PM

What would China or anyone else gain sinking the billions of dollars into a Mars trip?

Maybe they could train ants to sort tiny screws in space.

Finding people amidst the risk is not the problem... NASA's got loads of people that would give their right arm to go up. It's just that the Mars thing is designed so the next president has a hard decision: either "end" manned space exploration forever, or bite the billions in expenses.

 
2005-04-08 11:21:43 PM
NASA = money toilet. The greatest feats they've layed claim to since their inception are little more than colored bubbles. Fun to look at, but little benefit.
 
2005-04-08 11:31:28 PM
smellyrunningshoes

Thanks for making me look at my profile. I sound like an ass. But youre right. I am seriously interested in alternative fuel and power sources. I admit I haven't looked into the National Science Foundation. Being 16 now (old profile) I still have a few years to decide what I want to do in life. I'm naturally curious of everything. I always have been. I wasn't afraid to talk to strangers when I was a younger and now that I'm older I relate to adults more then I do kids my own age who are caught up in drugs, drinking, smoking and regular high school drama.

I write for my school newspaper where I write a column called "Have you ever wondered?" where I travel around to local businesses/ places of interest and figure out how they work. I went to the metal recycling plant a few months ago and two weeks ago I went to our waste water treatment plant (it didn't smell that bad actually)

I'm interested in new technology (especially the Japanese, what can't they do?) and the historical aspect of technology. I'm really into the progression of man kind through the ages and how different tools have been developed to better (or worsen) mankind. What career could this lead me to? I'm not sure exactly. I have plenty of time to decide. I'm thinking a doctorate in history at the moment. I'd like to move to England and study there. I always listen to possible careers to look into though. Any ideas are welcome.

I know I'm just a young guy in a forum full of older people who know much more then I do but thanks to Fark.com and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart I know more about the world I live in then every before.

I guess you don't have to rant do you?
 
2005-04-08 11:59:02 PM
My question is, why did the United States and the Soviet Union suddenly get into a pissing contest about going to the Moon in the middle of the Cold War?

"I'll blow y'all up!"
"Niet, I blow you up!"
"No-sir-ee, I've got nuculur wepins"
"Hey, I bet you cannot get to space!"
"Yes I can, dagnabbit!"
"We send dog to space, beat that!"
"Get got boys on the MOON! Beat that!"
"Niet!!!!"
 
2005-04-09 12:00:11 AM
Phew...

Good to know it's now going to be a well managed, highly efficient money pit, instead of the poorly managed, innefficient money pit it used to be!
 
2005-04-09 12:01:28 AM
Where do you people think money spent on a space program goes? It doesn't just vanish, it pays engineers, buys materials, and basically gets recycled through the tax system by improving the economy and increasing transactions. I'm sick of people calling things like this a waste of money. Individuals can waste money buying things they don't need, but when the government spends money domestically on something that isn't 'needed' then the money has gone to some use.
 
2005-04-09 12:44:50 AM
NASA is the grandest government boondoggle of all time.
A colossal waste of billions of dollars, the actual stated goal thereof: "shooting rockets into space."

It should be shut down and sold for scrap, and if a bunch of jet-jockeys want to fly to mars let them. Let them also pay for it, or they can solicit funds from a grateful public.
(and from kdubya, I'm sure he'll be chipping in big-time)
 
2005-04-09 01:07:29 AM
Ok, enough with the "money pit" comments. You want a money pit? Look at the Iraq "war".

At least NASA gives us spinoff technology like digital cameras and useful information about the universe.
 
2005-04-09 01:08:14 AM
kdubya:
Where do you people think money spent on a space program goes?


Into the pockets of obscenely fat-cat government contract "rocket makers" who make nothing nobody on the free-market would ever choose to buy with their own money.

It also stuffs the pockets of engineers and scientists who prefer not to have to compete for real jobs, since government work is so much easier. Their job is essentially "look busy and justify your job".

It doesn't just vanish, it pays engineers,
(Yeah- to shoot rockets into space with money stolen from you and me (if you have a job) thanks.

buys materials,
(see stuffing pockets of the already rich with stolen taxpayers money)

and basically gets recycled through the tax system
(here the lie gets bigger and wilder)

by improving the economy
(By stealing taxpayers money for absurd schemes and tower of babel nonsense?) If stealing wealth from the people for the benefit of the politically connected elite were so wonderful in "improving the economy", Cuba would be the economic powerhouse of the Western Hemisphere.

and increasing transactions. I'm sick of people calling things like this a waste of money. Individuals can waste money buying things they don't need, but when the government spends money domestically on something that isn't 'needed' then the money has gone to some use.

You have inverted reality on it's head- Made claims that went beyond nonsense to bold nonsense, Your post was an amazing product of the mind of either a state-worshipper, or simply a cheerleader. Of course if you are enriching yourself on the money stolen from others, then you win, and have a right to laugh at me.
 
2005-04-09 01:10:50 AM
 
2005-04-09 01:15:56 AM
Nice to know I can have Tang in the Middle East...I drink a quart of that a day. Bad teeth, but I havent had a cold in years.
 
2005-04-09 01:30:21 AM
113 missions.
2 catastrophic failures.
14 dead crew

17 Apollo missions
1 catastrophic failure (almost 2)
3 dead crew

I like the Shuttle odds.

STFU about the Shuttle. I hear two distinct camps (the ususal suspects of course) biatching about our space program. The Rightards call NASA a "boondoggle" (surely full of liberal apple -polisher intellectual elites blah blah blah), even though it landed men on the Moon, where nobody else has. The Vegetarian Lesbian crowd on the other hand, says that we should give all of that money to crack-mommas and Europe. FU both, that shiat's tired. Space is Man's last hope - where the smart may finally be able to escape the stupid (you).

The S3 (Space Shuttle Simulator) beta just came out, incredible Freeware Shuttle Sim. Hundreds and hundreds of switches, dials and displays - but the Checklist makes it fairly simple to get a launch off.

S3 Beta
 
2005-04-09 01:47:48 AM
CanSomeonePleaseKilltheChristmasShoes:

You have inverted reality on it's head- Made claims that went beyond nonsense to bold nonsense, Your post was an amazing product of the mind of either a state-worshipper, or simply a cheerleader. Of course if you are enriching yourself on the money stolen from others, then you win, and have a right to laugh at me.



And you have no sense of reality. NASA is part of the National Defense dipshiat. You wanna see waste, give them to the USAF. You wanna see Red, give up and let the Chinese own Space, where all of our satellites are. Or does your retardate Rush Limbaugh view actually go so far as to suggest that we let the Chicoms and the EU beat us out on turf WE earned and claimed long ago? Stupid crazy, crazy stupid.
 
2005-04-09 01:55:51 AM
majorhopper

The Rightards call NASA a "boondoggle" (surely full of liberal apple -polisher intellectual elites blah blah blah), even though it landed men on the Moon, where nobody else has.

Maybe because nobody else ever thought there was any reason to do so? Well we did get a couple snazzy photos and set the record for the longest drive in golf history.

Space exploration was originally about developing the technology for ICBMs, men on the moon was just more fun to sell to taxpayers, don't fool yourself.

But now we ALREADY got ICBMs and satellites too, which is about what space is useful for. Dump the money into straight R&D if you're convinced that the public sector spends it more efficiently than the private sector... (pause to let laughter subside)

Space is Man's last hope - where the smart may finally be able to escape the stupid (you).

You speak Klingon fluently, don't you?

kdubya

Individuals can waste money buying things they don't need, but when the government spends money domestically on something that isn't 'needed' then the money has gone to some use.

Your ECON 101 professor just called. Bad news... he's retroactively failing you.
 
2005-04-09 02:02:37 AM
The problems with the space program have nothing to do with safety, it's that its headed in the wrong direction. If NASA would just cut down the pork of big government contractors and administrators whose jobs hinge on the shuttles and who have kept them running just so they can keep their jobs, then maybe they can start doing real exploration and science again.

But no, NASA continues to waste money on a meaningless manned charade. If they had real plans to do manned stuff, okay, I could see the expense, but they don't. They have people sitting in space for what? You think they plan on colonizing it soon? It's PR. Oh, got to love the woman who's been floating in space for 100+ days costing $1000...s a day running experiments that are either worthless or a $20 machine could do better.

Furthermore, the manned projects are colossal wastes of money, not just because they are manned but because they are currently colossal money pits. You have the ISS, you have the Space Shuttles. Both programs have gone way beyond the orginal proposed budgets, both are never going to achieve what they were sold as. Worse, because they are such huge money sucking black holes (and yet are still producing very little for the money spent on them), the more effecient projects keep getting canned in exchange for this manned PR crap.

Rather than waste the trillions of dollars they flushed on the shuttles and are continuing to flush, they could have instead created a fleet of probes and done real science instead of blasting hugely expensive rockets into space just so they can do experiments on ants. If NASA was smart it would abandon both the shuttles and the ISS and start building Voyager 3, fix the Hubble, keep money in the Voyager 2 project, and finance new telescopes and new probes.

Feeling good about NASA now after it just blew another fortune on the shuttles is like feeling good about burning money.

I can see what they are probably thinking right now:
NASA probably does feel stronger (yeah, try to fire me now biatch after you blew all that cash), smarter (ha ha ha, we pissed on your leg again and you still think it's raining), safer (we'll all be able to retire before these ppl smarten up), and more humble (we must stand in awe of our own leetness).
 
2005-04-09 02:04:41 AM
I liked it better pre-1979 when NASA was arrogant, well-financed, and most importantly, just did things right.

(Pure oxygen-filled capsules notwithstanding.)
 
2005-04-09 02:04:42 AM
majorhopper

You wanna see Red, give up and let the Chinese own Space, where all of our satellites are.

And then... they'll probably launch all their own satellites and force us to watch Margaret Cho on every channel (sure she might be Korean, but they're commies too)!

Plus that will knock all our satellites down, because space is a small place and there are only room for a very few things there.

It's not like our military missile technology could ever provide any countermeasures or anti satellite weapons, everyone knows you need MANNED space flight for that and nobody does that but... yep... NASA!
 
2005-04-09 02:08:46 AM
BlindMan:

Space exploration was originally about developing the technology for ICBMs, men on the moon was just more fun to sell to taxpayers, don't fool yourself.

But now we ALREADY got ICBMs and satellites too, which is about what space is useful for.


You told us all where ICBMs came from (and told us too that they are "useful"), so, these satellites you speak of, where do they come from? The Apollo program gave us the ability to "work" in space - to dock craft (Apollo 9 was the first I think) and work with other vehicles.

You talk about what space is useful for, and you mention two of the biggest military advantages one can think of - ICBMS and satellites. Whatever military advantages we might find in Space, so might he Chicom Conspiracy, or the Euros or whomever the enemy of tomorrow may be - because there is always a new one, history proves that.
 
2005-04-09 02:16:02 AM
BlindMan:

It's not like our military missile technology could ever provide any countermeasures or anti satellite weapons, everyone knows you need MANNED space flight for that and nobody does that but... yep... NASA!


No, the Russians do it too. The Chinese, the EU and the Indians are about to. My goodness, the entire civilized world is working towards Space, are they all Liberals?
 
2005-04-09 02:24:55 AM
majorhopper

You told us all where ICBMs came from (and told us too that they are "useful"), so, these satellites you speak of, where do they come from? The Apollo program gave us the ability to "work" in space - to dock craft (Apollo 9 was the first I think) and work with other vehicles.

You talk about what space is useful for, and you mention two of the biggest military advantages one can think of - ICBMS and satellites.


That's why as soon as I invent a time machine, I will go back to the sixties before all the worthwhile space technology had been invented and strongly support more funding for NASA!

/must get... to 88... miles per... hour!
//I'll try to make sure I don't hook up with your mom, and keep you from being born, so don't worry.
///unless...
////son?!
 
2005-04-09 02:46:06 AM
BTW the government spends more money on farm subsidies than it does on NASA. And anyways, out of two trillion plus dollar budget, what's 50 billion? Or what would 50 billion be out of two trillion.

And for those complaining about NASA, ever heard of DARPA?
 
2005-04-09 02:56:59 AM
cargrrl82

BTW the government spends more money on farm subsidies than it does on NASA.

Those need to go too. They take money out of consumers pockets and put in the pockets of agribusiness. And help starve people in the third world too.

And anyways, out of two trillion plus dollar budget, what's 50 billion? Or what would 50 billion be out of two trillion.

It's 50 billion dollars. In other words, enough money to give 50,000 people a million dollars each.

And for those complaining about NASA, ever heard of DARPA?

Sure, I played Metal Gear Solid!
 
2005-04-09 04:56:20 AM
DARPA Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. All they do is research, a lot of which has never done anything but provide data, just do a search on the F-16XL. And a lot of what they do is classified so no way to even know just what they're doing. So there's no way to know just how much of their work never amounts to anything but a collection of data.

One thing DARPA could do is basic research for NASA. Part of what makes things so pricey with rockets is there's so little research done. And so few rocket motors built there's no work done to figure out how to do it cheaper. The Shuttle is 30 years old as far as a design, it's systems aren't much younger. Problem is, in those 30 years there's been next to zero research done to create the required knowledgebase to build a replacement. There's no in place design team, no lead designer or anything. Worst thing NASA did was not replace Werner von Braun.

As for the people who work at NASA, which does a lot more than space launches, have nowhere else to work. NASA is the only employer in the nation where they can work. Academia isn't an option for many since the work done in their fields at universities is done in conjunction with NASA and NASA funding. And some of the work gets into flight safety research. Like heads up displays for zero vis bad weather landings.

And no one starves in the third world because of US agricultural subsidies. They starve because of a lack of roads, lack of storage and bad governments.

As for that 50 billion, well it could go to rebuilding interestates so that they don't have to be rebuilt every 25 to 30 years. Or do some other infrastructure work. There's more than 50 billion bucks worth of it to be done. But then could spend 50 billion on that and still fund NASA to the tune of 50 billion a year easy.
 
2005-04-09 05:07:40 AM
The Mad Cockateil

What did Edmund Hillary by climbing to the top of Mt Everest? Other than getting to say he did it? Steve Fossett got nothing out of spending 80 hours in the a plane flying around the world without refueling except an experience no other human has. Flying to Mars is like a mountain, for some people there's no need for a purpose, they climb it just because the mountain is there. Yeah it's dangerous and all, but some people actually like that, it's what they crave. Test pilots don't fly test because they want something safe, if they wanted that they'd fly C-130's. And some pilots don't even bother with claims of doing test work, they just try to do stuff to do it. There's a lot that if you try to put a purpose or practical worth to you devalue it. If NASA said they were looking for new astronauts to go to the moon, I'd be signing up yesterday. For the trip, the danger is a small risk for one heck of a reward.
 
2005-04-09 08:57:18 AM
If flying to Mars is "one heck of a reward" (in your opinion) you are welcome to it. I only object when you stick guns in my face, steal my money, steal money from every other non-parasitical American, and then use that money to enrich yourself, enrich your friends and also fly to Mars or Shangri-La etc.

You want to fly to Mars do it on your own dime.
 
2005-04-09 09:16:24 AM
cargrrl82:
As for the people who work at NASA, which does a lot more than space launches, have nowhere else to work. NASA is the only employer in the nation where they can work. Academia isn't an option for many since the work done in their fields at universities is done in conjunction with NASA and NASA funding. And some of the work gets into flight safety research. Like heads up displays for zero vis bad weather landings.

The point about NASA droids have no place else to work has got to be the silliest point made on this thread, or maybe any thread. Assuming that NASA gets highly educated, and highly skilled egg-head scientists. (Lazy, but smart) These uber-qualified aviation and space engineer/scientists would be highly-sought after workers on this little thing we call the "job-market", government employees are not familiar with this zany outfit the "free market" except for the fact that that's were they go to steal all their money.

NASA is not only a gigantic waste of money, it also wastes the time and talent of the engineers it poaches from real companies (Capitalistic enterprises that have to make stuff people actually want to buy). While they could have been inventing airplanes for everyman working for Cessna, instead they are making silly space-ships for the government.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report