isnt it wonderful that our cooperation with Russian means nobody gets stranded. And
they still have a soyuz capsule up there to get back home. Ingrid

I kept thinking about that all day.

The alternative would have made a
good Bruce Willis movie...


k30a

wrote in message
...
isnt it wonderful that our cooperation with Russian means nobody gets
stranded. And
they still have a soyuz capsule up there to get back home. Ingrid

Hey, we still have three shuttles...no one is stranded yet!

BV.

Just for grins and giggles, the Russian supply ship was scheduled months
ago: they don't have the ability to put one up at the drop of a hat any more
than we do. It was just good timing that it went up when it did. I
(personally speaking) feel that the space program is something that we need.
I understand the necessity to find out the "whys" of an accident so that
(hopefully) it can be avoided in the future, but we need to continue as
rapidly as possible, no more 3 year delays (like they did with Challenger).
I was standing on the roof at work to watch the Challenger launch, and was
horrified to see it blow up like it did. But those people died doing what
they loved, and that has to be better than a lot of other ways to die.

Lee


wrote in message
...
isnt it wonderful that our cooperation with Russian means nobody gets
stranded. And
they still have a soyuz capsule up there to get back home. Ingrid

you would make the decision to send somebody up there with one before they knew what
happened to Columbia and bring em back? really? INgrid

"BenignVanilla" wrote:

wrote in message
...
isnt it wonderful that our cooperation with Russian means nobody gets
stranded. And
they still have a soyuz capsule up there to get back home. Ingrid

Hey, we still have three shuttles...no one is stranded yet!

BV.

wrote in message
...
you would make the decision to send somebody up there with one before they
knew what
happened to Columbia and bring em back? really? INgrid
snip

Well, my point was one more of patriotic pride, with a touch of sparkle in
the eye of a shuttle fan. I was not taking issue with you. Hope it didn't
come across as such.

But sure, I would make that decision. Before I let a crew die in space, I
would take every possible action I could including launching another
shuttle. The space program has been highly successful, when you consider all
of the factors. I would not want to risk the lives of the people on board
the ISS while we figure out what happened down here. Columbia was a tragedy,
don't get me wrong. It chokes me up to think about it, but I think it would
be worse to tell the people in space, "sorry we're not coming to get you."

On a side note, some of the reports I have been hearing are beginning to
point more and more to the insulation that impacted the port wing on take
off. From what I have heard a temperature increase of 60 degrees over 5
minutes occured in that are of the vehicle. Moments later the sensors in
that area stopped sending telemetry. My gut tells me, NASA is now quite
aware of the cause, but are taking the appropriate steps before making an
announcement. Pure conjecture, I admit.

Either way, these vehicles have a long record of safety, and reliability. To
not launch again, would be mistake. I'd also add, that to launch again and
NOT expect another disaster would also be ignorant. Anytime, you are putting
people on a rocket and lighting a match under it, you are playing with
danger, and will eventually lose. It's part of the space game.

NASA built the shuttles to be a "shuttle" into space, a quick turn around. A
look at what we can do. Space is no longer the final frontier. *chuckle*
Unfortunately, their marketing has worked too well. We now consider space
travel, at least to low earth orbit, to be as simple as an airplane ride. We
take it for granted, IMHO. The fact that this vehicle could enter the
atmosphere again and again without a problem and land without power. THAT is
amazing. The fact that we have only lost 2...even more amazing to me.

My heart goes out to the families and all involved. Nothing I said above is
meant to be provacative, and I apologize now if it seems to be ore offends
anyone in anyway. That was not my intent.

BV.

you do know they were alive when they hit the water and sank, died trapped in the
debris, right? Ingrid

"Lee Brouillet" wrote:
no more 3 year delays (like they did with Challenger).
I was standing on the roof at work to watch the Challenger launch, and was
horrified to see it blow up like it did. But those people died doing what
they loved, and that has to be better than a lot of other ways to die.
Lee

today I watched the entire briefing to the press by the head of NASA. He said the
insulation could not have damaged anything to that extent. they have run scenarios
where quite a few of the tiles were damaged or gone and none lead to catastrophic
breakup. size x density x velocity = momentum hitting the tiles just wont do that
kind of damage.
He said the leading edge of the wing was 2000 degrees and the 30-60o increase didnt
amount to anything that would lead to catastrophic breakup.
He is saying they still dont have the "missing link".
Ingrid

"BenignVanilla" wrote:
On a side note, some of the reports I have been hearing are beginning to
point more and more to the insulation that impacted the port wing on take
off. From what I have heard a temperature increase of 60 degrees over 5
minutes occured in that are of the vehicle. Moments later the sensors in
that area stopped sending telemetry. My gut tells me, NASA is now quite
aware of the cause, but are taking the appropriate steps before making an
announcement.

wrote in message
...
today I watched the entire briefing to the press by the head of NASA. He
said the
insulation could not have damaged anything to that extent. they have run
scenarios
where quite a few of the tiles were damaged or gone and none lead to
catastrophic
breakup. size x density x velocity = momentum hitting the tiles just wont
do that
kind of damage.
He said the leading edge of the wing was 2000 degrees and the 30-60o
increase didnt
amount to anything that would lead to catastrophic breakup.
He is saying they still dont have the "missing link".
Ingrid

"BenignVanilla" wrote:
On a side note, some of the reports I have been hearing are beginning to
point more and more to the insulation that impacted the port wing on take
off. From what I have heard a temperature increase of 60 degrees over 5
minutes occured in that are of the vehicle. Moments later the sensors in
that area stopped sending telemetry. My gut tells me, NASA is now quite
aware of the cause, but are taking the appropriate steps before making an
announcement.

You are correct. I heard the same report which was 180 degrees from the
report I had heard around lunch time. So much for conjecture. I stand
corrected.

BV.

Ingrid, everyone has to die of something: you don't get out of life alive.

Personally, I hope I die doing (or because of) something I enjoyed, not
violently at the hands of some villian, microscopic or otherwise. I said
then - and repeat now - that if I could, I'd go up on the shuttle this
afternoon: what a GLORIOUS adventure!

Lee

wrote in message
...
you do know they were alive when they hit the water and sank, died trapped
in the
debris, right? Ingrid

"Lee Brouillet" wrote:
no more 3 year delays (like they did with Challenger).
I was standing on the roof at work to watch the Challenger launch, and
was
horrified to see it blow up like it did. But those people died doing what
they loved, and that has to be better than a lot of other ways to die.
Lee

wrote in message
...
you do know they were alive when they hit the water and sank, died trapped
in the
debris, right? Ingrid

"Lee Brouillet" wrote:
no more 3 year delays (like they did with Challenger).
I was standing on the roof at work to watch the Challenger launch, and
was
horrified to see it blow up like it did. But those people died doing what
they loved, and that has to be better than a lot of other ways to die.
Lee

Alive...but more then likely unconscious. The cabin was not intact when they
found it, and the commissions that studied the accident and the bodies
concluded that 1 or more of the crew members were alive upon impact, but
there was no evidence that they were conscious. At the altitude and speed at
which the Challenger was traveling a person would have passed out within a
few seconds of decompression. Thankfully...none of them knew they drowned.

BV.

"Lee Brouillet" wrote in message
...
Ingrid, everyone has to die of something: you don't get out of life alive.

Personally, I hope I die doing (or because of) something I enjoyed, not
violently at the hands of some villian, microscopic or otherwise. I said
then - and repeat now - that if I could, I'd go up on the shuttle this
afternoon: what a GLORIOUS adventure!

I'd sit right next to you.

BV.

"Lee Brouillet" wrote in message
...
Ingrid, everyone has to die of something: you don't get out of life alive.

Personally, I hope I die doing (or because of) something I enjoyed, not
violently at the hands of some villian, microscopic or otherwise. I said
then - and repeat now - that if I could, I'd go up on the shuttle this
afternoon: what a GLORIOUS adventure!

I'd sit right next to you.

BV.