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.

(The Raw Story)   NASA reveals that it knew ahead of time that Columbia's re-entry was probably going to end badly   (rawstory.com) divider line 419
    More: Sad, NASA, Space Shuttle Columbia, re-entry, Columbia disaster, flight controls, TPS, Johnson Space Center  
•       •       •

27027 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2013 at 12:14 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



419 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-02 01:56:19 AM  
The next time Texas whines about not getting a Space Shuttle, remind them that they got the Columbia.
 
2013-02-02 01:56:40 AM  

GAT_00: There was nothing they could have done to fix it and telling them would have done nothing.  I don't blame them for that.


Usually, I appreciate your "defense of government" posts on this site, but in this case you need to go fark yourself raw.

There's the standard risk inherent in space travel, then there is "you will probably die shortly, would you like to wait it out, get yourself in order (spiritually) record any last words now that you know it's likely etc.

Even if there's nothing that can be done, you give the heroes the choice. They are trained to handle it. You don't make the choice for them. NASA farked up here, and none of the people who made this choice deserve to hold a government job ever again.
 
2013-02-02 02:00:35 AM  

evaned: Actually, interesting fact: What is the primary cause of the heat that the heat shield/thermal tiles are designed to protect against? Common wisdom says it is friction with the spacecraft, but this is not true.

Pbzcerffvba bs gur nve va sebag bs gur fcnprpensg .


That was covered almost an hour ago slowpoke.
 
2013-02-02 02:01:06 AM  

CmndrFish: Psh, don't give me that.  The Stratos jump got us closer to jumping out of LEO spaceships in nothing but a suit.  That was the scientific point of the whole ordeal.


Spaceship One type sub-orbital vehicles, maybe, but Stratos was to re-entering from LEO as stepping off a curb is to ejecting from a Mach 2 fighter.
 
2013-02-02 02:01:09 AM  

mr lawson: The might have been able to disassemble the thrusters from the shuttle, go outside, point them in the opposite direction they were going, light'em up and hang on for dear life. free fall to earth.


i46.tinypic.com
 
2013-02-02 02:03:37 AM  
Amos Quito: Yeah, that's sad, but I suppose that sometimes ignorance is bliss - comparitively.

Apparently their fate was sealed, and nothing could have been done to change the probable outcome. Why make them live their last few hours freaking out?


You'd think that NASA would select mentally sound people for their missions, who would be aware of the risks they're taking, wouldn't you?

If the article's true, it shows a distinct lack of balls all round. People going on the orbiter should understand the risk, and those putting them up there should be prepared to tell them they're dead.

So given their decision in this case, do you suppose NASA would bother to tell us if they spotted a huge, dark space rock on a collision course for Earth, or just let it be a "surprise"?

Well, if it's true, we should be thankful that NASA does not have a monopoly on space.

Even better than the fact that other nations and space agencies have big telescopes is the fact that amateur astronomy ensures that millions - at least - have their eyes on the sky every night. It's very likely that any asteroid, KBO or whatever, on a collision course with us would be detected by amateurs first.

/RIP Sir Patrick Moore.
 
2013-02-02 02:05:42 AM  

Jensaarai: GAT_00: There was nothing they could have done to fix it and telling them would have done nothing.  I don't blame them for that.

Usually, I appreciate your "defense of government" posts on this site, but in this case you need to go fark yourself raw.

There's the standard risk inherent in space travel, then there is "you will probably die shortly, would you like to wait it out, get yourself in order (spiritually) record any last words now that you know it's likely etc.

Even if there's nothing that can be done, you give the heroes the choice. They are trained to handle it. You don't make the choice for them. NASA farked up here, and none of the people who made this choice deserve to hold a government job ever again.



I agree (with the last 2/3 of your post, anyway).
 
2013-02-02 02:06:23 AM  
www.feoamante.com
Shoulda been standard issue...
 
2013-02-02 02:06:39 AM  

C18H27NO3: evaned: Actually, interesting fact: What is the primary cause of the heat that the heat shield/thermal tiles are designed to protect against? Common wisdom says it is friction with the spacecraft, but this is not true.

Pbzcerffvba bs gur nve va sebag bs gur fcnprpensg .

That was covered almost an hour ago slowpoke.


Well whaddya know. I was too busy trying to figure out what the story was behind the Apollo 13 heat shield and skipped those posts, but I recently learned that fact (or maybe relearned? I forget) so it was fresh on my mind.
 
2013-02-02 02:07:46 AM  

g4lt: relcec: Watubi: The choice wasn't how they were to die, it was whether or not NASA wanted to have a permanent grave floating in space.  The public would have demanded they retrieved the bodies and NASA, not being able to do it, would have to deal with two publicity disasters instead of one


except for the entire part about The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) saying the crew could have been saved by the shuttle Atlantis. nevermind that your idea that they couldn't retrieve bodies or anything similarly sized from orbit at a later date is incredibly asinine. if you aren't even cognizant of the fact that the shuttle can pick shiat up in space, really wtf are you doing in here? you know most nine year old boys are probably aware of that.


"The CAIB determined that a rescue mission, though risky, might have been possible provided NASA management had taken action soon enough.[48][49] They stated that had NASA management acted in time, two possible contingency procedures were available: a rescue mission by shuttle , and an emergency Normally a rescue mission is not possible, due to the time required to prepare a shuttle for launch, and the limited consumables (power, water, air) of an orbiting shuttle. However, Atlantis was well along in processing for a planned March 1 launch on Columbia carried an unusually large quantity of consumables due to an Columbia to stay in orbit until flight day 30 (February 15). NASA investigators determined that Atlantis processing could have been expedited with no skipped safety checks for a February 10 launch. Hence if nothing went wrong there was a five-day overlap for a possible rescue. As mission control could deorbit an empty shuttle but could not control the orbiter's reentry and landing, it would likely have sent Columbia into the Pacific Ocean;[48]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster#Possibl e_ emergency_procedures

You have AMAZING hindsight, almost 20/20


that's not hindsight.
it's not like there was a chance they could have survived reentry and nasa just happened to pick the worst of a set of equally bad options.
there was a clearly wrong answer, which was to assume if a problem was found that there was no hope, and therefore no point even checking.
it's like saying you know you are going to fail so why bother studying.
if you don't even attempt something it is impossible not to fail. criticizing mission control for letting an ignorance is bliss attitude develop is not second guessing, and to suggest otherwise is almost insane.
according to the accident investigation board if nasa control had checked the shuttle when they first became aware that there might been a problem the second orbiter would have had five days after lift off to get to the columbia.
 
2013-02-02 02:08:52 AM  
I think for future missions, it would be wise to take a crew vote beforehand. If NASA has information like this, would you prefer to be informed or not? Then go off of that.
 
2013-02-02 02:09:10 AM  

TV's Vinnie: mr lawson: The might have been able to disassemble the thrusters from the shuttle, go outside, point them in the opposite direction they were going, light'em up and hang on for dear life. free fall to earth.

[i46.tinypic.com image 263x200]


I literally lol'd at that picture.
 
2013-02-02 02:10:47 AM  

Jensaarai: GAT_00: There was nothing they could have done to fix it and telling them would have done nothing.  I don't blame them for that.

Usually, I appreciate your "defense of government" posts on this site, but in this case you need to go fark yourself raw.

There's the standard risk inherent in space travel, then there is "you will probably die shortly, would you like to wait it out, get yourself in order (spiritually) record any last words now that you know it's likely etc.

Even if there's nothing that can be done, you give the heroes the choice. They are trained to handle it. You don't make the choice for them. NASA farked up here, and none of the people who made this choice deserve to hold a government job ever again.


NASA farked up in 1981 on this point, when the rookie Crippen was the pilot and Young was the mission commander.  Ever since then, the Shuttle pilots have been considered less pilots and more truck drivers.  Eventually, it got to the point where the Mission Commander wasn't necessarily a trained astronaut.  At least with Apollo, Apollo 1 provided a HUGE wakeup call, that this shiat was still dangerous.  It took a bit longer for the Shuttles to try to teach that lesson, and then, it was easily blamed on an O-ring, so the lesson really never got learned as well as it should have.
 
2013-02-02 02:11:03 AM  
Don't astronauts have to undergo psychological screening?  So they might have been asked what they would want to happen in different scenarios - like someone with a DNR?  NASA wouldn't be able to reveal that information would they, because of privacy?

I wouldn't want to know & I wouldn't want my family to know.  If the re-entry option was quick and meant I wouldn't really have time to process what was happening, that would be my choice over the Major Tom deal.  My knowledge of space type stuff is virtually nil, so please don't bite [or at least make it enjoyable] if the uneducated guesses are wrong.
 
2013-02-02 02:11:11 AM  

zekeburger: Couldn't the shuttle dock at the ISS?


That particular shuttle never went to ISS or Mir. Being the first operational orbiter, Columbia was heavier due to an over-engineered airframe and extra monitoring equipment throughout. Columbia's inferior cargo lifting capacity put it at the bottom of the list for space station missions. If it had not been destroyed, it had one ISS mission planned for when one of the other orbiters had a months-long overhaul scheduled.
 
2013-02-02 02:11:29 AM  

Jensaarai: I think for future missions, it would be wise to take a crew vote beforehand. If NASA has information like this, would you prefer to be informed or not? Then go off of that.



obligatory "well, ok, but, the black guy's vote only counts for 3/5ths" joke.....
 
2013-02-02 02:12:00 AM  
As has been pointed out, heading to the ISS wasn't possible, despite what Spacecamp would tell us about being able to alter a shuttle's orbit.  The other thing was Columbia itself did not have the hardware for docking to the ISS, and even then was deemed too heavy to dock there anyhow.  Oh sure if they could've made it to the ISS they could've probably risked spacewalking into one of the airlocks, but both the shuttle and ISS only carried so many spacesuits.

One possibility I thought of (since I have Orbiter) was trying to set the shuttle to splashdown (pretty much kill all orbital speed and let it freefall from space) since I *think* the shuttle was a lifting body design.  Best I could do was slow it down to 7.05 KM/s from a higher orbit than what Columbia was at, since all it had to slow it down after launch was the OMS, and that had just enough thrust and fuel for standard re-entry.

Another, more realistic possibility I've read about over the years was crash-preparing Atlantis for launch since Columbia had enough supplies to make it to flight day 30, and Atlantis was being prepped for a March 1 launch, but there was only a five-day window to launch without knowing how to fix the problem that doomed Columbia; you'd probably have nine dead astronauts instead of seven (why not fourteen?  because a rescue mission would've consited of a pilot and commander), not to mention terminating the entire shuttle program because you lost half the fleet in one shot.

Had it been caught on launch instead of on replay, a TAL abort could've been called, but then again you're flying Mach 2+ at that point with a hole in your wing.  Cutting the main engines, jettisoning the SRBs but leaving the ET hooked up would probably slow you down to subsonic speeds a lot quicker than jettisoning the ET right away, good enough to bail out.  But again, that's assuming the hole in the wing didn't severely alter the aerodynamic profile, rendering it pointless to try.
 
2013-02-02 02:12:27 AM  
In seriousness, personally I would rather my family's last image of me be shooting off into space on a rocket, not a tearful and confused, maybe sortof good bye message because the whole shooting off into space on a rocket didn't work out as well as I'd hoped.
 
2013-02-02 02:12:51 AM  
Either some of you watch way too much TV, or you are epically trolling.

I'll just leave this here:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheColdEquations

// can't believe I'm the first.
 
2013-02-02 02:13:21 AM  

relcec: g4lt: relcec: Watubi: The choice wasn't how they were to die, it was whether or not NASA wanted to have a permanent grave floating in space.  The public would have demanded they retrieved the bodies and NASA, not being able to do it, would have to deal with two publicity disasters instead of one


except for the entire part about The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) saying the crew could have been saved by the shuttle Atlantis. nevermind that your idea that they couldn't retrieve bodies or anything similarly sized from orbit at a later date is incredibly asinine. if you aren't even cognizant of the fact that the shuttle can pick shiat up in space, really wtf are you doing in here? you know most nine year old boys are probably aware of that.


"The CAIB determined that a rescue mission, though risky, might have been possible provided NASA management had taken action soon enough.[48][49] They stated that had NASA management acted in time, two possible contingency procedures were available: a rescue mission by shuttle , and an emergency Normally a rescue mission is not possible, due to the time required to prepare a shuttle for launch, and the limited consumables (power, water, air) of an orbiting shuttle. However, Atlantis was well along in processing for a planned March 1 launch on Columbia carried an unusually large quantity of consumables due to an Columbia to stay in orbit until flight day 30 (February 15). NASA investigators determined that Atlantis processing could have been expedited with no skipped safety checks for a February 10 launch. Hence if nothing went wrong there was a five-day overlap for a possible rescue. As mission control could deorbit an empty shuttle but could not control the orbiter's reentry and landing, it would likely have sent Columbia into the Pacific Ocean;[48]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster#Possibl e_ emergency_procedures

You have AMAZING hindsight, almost 20/20

that's not hindsight.
it's not ...


And how in FARK were you going to get off the SPACEHAB module without a VAB so they could dock?
 
2013-02-02 02:14:14 AM  

Jensaarai: GAT_00: There was nothing they could have done to fix it and telling them would have done nothing.  I don't blame them for that.

Usually, I appreciate your "defense of government" posts on this site, but in this case you need to go fark yourself raw.

There's the standard risk inherent in space travel, then there is "you will probably die shortly, would you like to wait it out, get yourself in order (spiritually) record any last words now that you know it's likely etc.

Even if there's nothing that can be done, you give the heroes the choice. They are trained to handle it. You don't make the choice for them. NASA farked up here, and none of the people who made this choice deserve to hold a government job ever again.


mission control did not KNOW THE SHUTTLE HAD A F*CKING PROBLEM.
they knew there was the potential for one, but they never knew god damit.
they refused an engineer request to get a NSA satellite to take photos of the shuttle because a fatalistic momentum with regard to serious problems developed, BUT STILL THEY DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING WAS WRONG. they knew it was but a possibility.
I'm gonna stay here all night until you f*ckwits get that basic fact into your brains.
 
2013-02-02 02:15:21 AM  

bluorangefyre: As has been pointed out, heading to the ISS wasn't possible, despite what Spacecamp would tell us about being able to alter a shuttle's orbit.  The other thing was Columbia itself did not have the hardware for docking to the ISS, and even then was deemed too heavy to dock there anyhow.  Oh sure if they could've made it to the ISS they could've probably risked spacewalking into one of the airlocks, but both the shuttle and ISS only carried so many spacesuits.

One possibility I thought of (since I have Orbiter) was trying to set the shuttle to splashdown (pretty much kill all orbital speed and let it freefall from space) since I *think* the shuttle was a lifting body design.  Best I could do was slow it down to 7.05 KM/s from a higher orbit than what Columbia was at, since all it had to slow it down after launch was the OMS, and that had just enough thrust and fuel for standard re-entry.

Another, more realistic possibility I've read about over the years was crash-preparing Atlantis for launch since Columbia had enough supplies to make it to flight day 30, and Atlantis was being prepped for a March 1 launch, but there was only a five-day window to launch without knowing how to fix the problem that doomed Columbia; you'd probably have nine dead astronauts instead of seven (why not fourteen?  because a rescue mission would've consited of a pilot and commander), not to mention terminating the entire shuttle program because you lost half the fleet in one shot.

Had it been caught on launch instead of on replay, a TAL abort could've been called, but then again you're flying Mach 2+ at that point with a hole in your wing.  Cutting the main engines, jettisoning the SRBs but leaving the ET hooked up would probably slow you down to subsonic speeds a lot quicker than jettisoning the ET right away, good enough to bail out.  But again, that's assuming the hole in the wing didn't severely alter the aerodynamic profile, rendering it pointless to try.


I still think they should have at least tried to make it to the ISS.
 
2013-02-02 02:15:22 AM  

Amos Quito: So given their decision in this case, do you suppose NASA would bother to tell us if they spotted a huge, dark space rock on a collision course for Earth, or just let it be a "surprise"?


Should NASA and other worthies do the right thing, keeping their chins up and their terror to themselves to spare all of us the chaos and mayhem, or should they do the right thing and tell us about our impending doom?
 
2013-02-02 02:16:12 AM  

g4lt: Ever since then, the Shuttle pilots have been considered less pilots and more truck drivers.


reminds me a thread where I posted this:

http://www.fark.com/comments/4521923/Astronauts-perform-spacewalk-on -A pollo-11-anniversary-since-moonwalk-would-have-been-tacky-too-soon#new

Contrabulous Flabtraption: At least the moonwalk was part of a useful mission and not to unclog the crapper on an orbiting piece of shiat.


gotta love getting through postgrad school, usually getting a Ph.D., logging thousands of hours of flight time, then being the 1 in 400 or whatever people that apply for and complete NASA training, then of that pool of people, become one of the maybe 35-40 that get into outer space per year, all to become the functional equivalent of Uncle Eddie shouting, "shiatTER'S FULL!" 85 miles above the earth.
 
2013-02-02 02:17:50 AM  

CmndrFish: Psh, don't give me that. The Stratos jump got us closer to jumping out of LEO spaceships in nothing but a suit. That was the scientific point of the whole ordeal.


1. He jumped from about 25 miles, not the 200+ miles that an actual astronaut would be.

2. If Baumgardner could have reached the same height as a real spacecraft like Columbia, the spacecraft would have shot by Felix at more than 17,000 miles per hour.  It's that velocity that makes it hard to bring a spacecraft (or person) to the ground safely.  You somehow need to decelerate by tens of thousands of miles per hour.
 
2013-02-02 02:18:01 AM  

Mad_Season: Either some of you watch way too much TV, or you are epically trolling.

I'll just leave this here:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheColdEquations

// can't believe I'm the first.


Way to Godwin the thread, dude.
 
2013-02-02 02:18:09 AM  
Though I'm past one hundred thousand miles
I'm feeling very still
And I think my spaceship knows which way to go
Tell my wife I love her very much she knows"

Ground Control to Major Tom
Your circuit's dead, there's something wrong
Can you hear me, Major Tom?
Can you hear me, Major Tom?
Can you hear me, Major Tom?
Can you....

"Here am I floating round my tin can
Far above the Moon
Planet Earth is blue
And there's nothing I can do."
 
2013-02-02 02:19:13 AM  

rickythepenguin: dude was apparently The Real Motherfarking Deal.


With a name like McCool, you'd pretty much have to be.
 
2013-02-02 02:19:26 AM  
Sad story is sad.
 
2013-02-02 02:19:33 AM  

EngineerAU: Sure, if true, NASA couldn't save the astronauts so why inform them. Well there's a good reason... to not have flaming debris rain down over a populated area. Luckily no one on the ground was killed but it certainly was a possibility. If the shuttle had to come back in, it would be better to let them break up over the Pacific. It'd make recovery of the debris much more difficult but would eliminate most of the possibility of someone elementary school getting creamed by a flaming toilet seat.


Which is why this story is Bull:

"Hey Ted, should we tell them they're doomed?"

"Nah, let's just let it break up and rain flaming debris and human remains over a populated area."

"Yeah, you're right, Good Call!"
 
2013-02-02 02:20:12 AM  

Jensaarai: I think for future missions, it would be wise to take a crew vote beforehand. If NASA has information like this, would you prefer to be informed or not? Then go off of that.


I'm more of the "Okay people, take the blue pill. That feeling you're feeling now is scopalomine. You'll do anything I say and farking love it because you're tripping too many balls. Now let's record a farewell message and start the landing sequence."
 
2013-02-02 02:21:46 AM  

rickythepenguin: gotta love getting through postgrad school, usually getting a Ph.D., logging thousands of hours of flight time, then being the 1 in 400 or whatever people that apply for and complete NASA training, then of that pool of people, become one of the maybe 35-40 that get into outer space per year, all to become the functional equivalent of Uncle Eddie shouting, "shiatTER'S FULL!" 85 miles above the earth.


Blurb from NASA Astronaut Selection Office:

Applications were accepted for two months with the deadline expiring on January 27, 2012. This year the response to the announcement was tremendous with NASA receiving 6,372 applications. This is the largest number of applications since 1978 which had more than 8,000 submissions.

I just saw the word apply and thought I'd throw that in here.
 
2013-02-02 02:21:53 AM  
Geez, NASA didn't send up seven monkeys who pushed buttons to receive peanuts... they put seven highly intelligent and clever problem-solving humans up there who should not have had information withheld from them by bureaucrats.
 
2013-02-02 02:23:15 AM  

g4lt: "The CAIB determined that a rescue mission, though risky, might have been possible provided NASA management had taken action soon enough.[48][49] They stated that had NASA management acted in time, two possible contingency procedures were available: a rescue mission by shuttle , and an emergency Normally a rescue mission is not possible, due to the time required to prepare a shuttle for launch, and the limited consumables (power, water, air) of an orbiting shuttle. However, Atlantis was well along in processing for a planned March 1 launch on Columbia carried an unusually large quantity of consumables due to an Columbia to stay in orbit until flight day 30 (February 15). NASA investigators determined that Atlantis processing could have been expedited with no skipped safety checks for a February 10 launch. Hence if nothing went wrong there was a five-day overlap for a possible rescue. As mission control could deorbit an empty shuttle but could not control the orbiter's reentry and landing, it would likely have sent Columbia into the Pacific Ocean;[48]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster#Possibl e_ emergency_procedures

You have AMAZING hindsight, almost 20/20

that's not hindsight.
it's not ...

And how in FARK were you going to get off the SPACEHAB module without a VAB so they could dock?


how about they go out the f*cking door like normal people you nitwit!

http://mfwright.com/shuttlejump.html

www.aero-news.net
 
2013-02-02 02:24:13 AM  

Gyrfalcon: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Wasn't most, if not all, of this known soon after the disaster?

/because I know I read about it somewhere

Yes.

Old news is really really old.


Like, the day of.  Hell even the astronauts had a pretty damn good idea.

They're flying old tech in shiat conditions because you can only get funding for shiat when you can make it jingoistic.
 
2013-02-02 02:24:49 AM  

Alleyoop: bureaucrats


This is the real problem.
 
2013-02-02 02:24:55 AM  

Sum Dum Gai: impaler: Yeah, the most painless death versus the most painful, I would go with the most painful too.

'Running out of air' - or, more accurately, dying of carbon dioxide poisoning as the scrubbers slowly fail and toxic CO2 levels build up slowly - would be long and excruciatingly agonizing.  An explosion would be relatively painless - you'd rapidly lose consciousness.


Where is this belief that CO2 poisoning is painful coming from?  They'd lose consciousness and die.  They still wouldn't know they were going to die - they'd just pass out.  Death would come later.
 
2013-02-02 02:26:17 AM  
Cowboy Bebop (one episode at least) is hard to watch now...

yayreallifeison.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-02 02:26:54 AM  

C18H27NO3: rickythepenguin: gotta love getting through postgrad school, usually getting a Ph.D., logging thousands of hours of flight time, then being the 1 in 400 or whatever people that apply for and complete NASA training, then of that pool of people, become one of the maybe 35-40 that get into outer space per year, all to become the functional equivalent of Uncle Eddie shouting, "shiatTER'S FULL!" 85 miles above the earth.

Blurb from NASA Astronaut Selection Office:

Applications were accepted for two months with the deadline expiring on January 27, 2012. This year the response to the announcement was tremendous with NASA receiving 6,372 applications. This is the largest number of applications since 1978 which had more than 8,000 submissions.

I just saw the word apply and thought I'd throw that in here.


Interesting. 1978 was also during a long hiatus in U.S. launch capability (post-Apollo, pre-shuttle).
 
2013-02-02 02:29:03 AM  
placing myself in the role of commander of the mission, I'd rather have known. "There's certain, slow death in orbit, there's probable painful death in re-entry. The situation sucks, but let's attempt re-entry. Make your peace with your various deities now, and maybe call home, say your goodbyes, because we meet back on the flight deck (which i would imagine they had, fark you, it's my fantasy) in twenty minutes. Good luck, and godspeed."

Phrozen
 
2013-02-02 02:29:45 AM  

MissFeasance: costermonger: MissFeasance: Yeah, but what I said was have a pod to bring them back, not something to launch.  Still crazy expensive, yeah, but why is there no bailout procedure?  It still wouldn't be a guarantee, but geez.  Given the choice of being in a craft that is probably going to fail and taking my chances with parachutes and possibly landing in the middle of nowhere, I'd take the latter.

All that heat that is generated during re-entry is due to compressive heating - because things in orbit have to go almost nonsensically fast (to us on the ground) to stay in orbit. If you want to jump out an re-enter, your body is going to generate the exact same compression heating as you work your way down. So it's not really 'taking your chances' as much as 'human meteorite'.

Yeah, but if it was a pod sort of thing with the same exterior protection, just... smaller, and that had been protected inside the larger craft?  I'm not saying "hey, jump out with your parachute"


But what about that red bull guy, the one who supposedly jumped from space this summer...
/he lived?
 
2013-02-02 02:30:10 AM  

johnperkins: Cowboy Bebop (one episode at least) is hard to watch now...

[yayreallifeison.files.wordpress.com image 850x660]


I like to think he pieced it back together.
 
2013-02-02 02:31:00 AM  
If they drifted off into space instead of attempting reentry it would have been ok because 500 years from now Princess Ardala would have found the ship and sent them to Earth to hang out with Erin Gray.
 
2013-02-02 02:32:09 AM  

PhrozenStar: placing myself in the role of commander of the mission, I'd rather have known. "There's certain, slow death in orbit, there's probable painful death in re-entry. The situation sucks, but let's attempt re-entry. Make your peace with your various deities now, and maybe call home, say your goodbyes, because we meet back on the flight deck (which i would imagine they had, fark you, it's my fantasy) in twenty minutes. Good luck, and godspeed."

Phrozen


or they could have been picked up by atlantis and come home an lived happily ever after, and in all event mission control did not know there was problem so it is in a sense moot.
 
2013-02-02 02:32:35 AM  

faeriefay: But what about that red bull guy, the one who supposedly jumped from space this summer...
/he lived?


He jumped from 1/8th the distance above Earth than that of the Space Shuttle.
 
2013-02-02 02:33:26 AM  

ng2810: GAT_00: There was nothing they could have done to fix it and telling them would have done nothing.  I don't blame them for that.

Bullshiat

[content.answcdn.com image 500x456]

Don't you farking tell me that they would not have at least tried SOMETHING if they knew people were gonna die.


 This.

/Heading out of this thread. It's more of a clusterfark of ignorance than usual.
 
2013-02-02 02:34:13 AM  
This is what happens when NASA hires engineers at GS-7/9/11 pay grade. They get the C grade students, and then things like this and Discovery happen. NASA could get by with low wages in the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo days because they had the cool factor going for them, but post-Skylab that had worn off. And if NASA, i.e. the ground crew, was really that concerned about getting the astronauts back safely they could have always sent up a Soyuz to retrieve them.
 
2013-02-02 02:36:59 AM  

faeriefay: But what about that red bull guy, the one who supposedly jumped from space this summer...
/he lived?


He was in a special suit and not in orbit.

Orbiting bodies are going so fast iron catches on fire.
 
2013-02-02 02:40:07 AM  

zekeburger: ISS


That's not now orbital flight paths work!
 
2013-02-02 02:40:40 AM  
they could have always sent up a Soyuz to retrieve them.

Soyuz only holds three. You wanted them to draw straws for the two empty seats?
 
Displayed 50 of 419 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report