Comments on: No Fly Zone

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 00:22:15 +0000

Hey Jason, that's a “dire circumstance”. Or didn't you actually read my entire post?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 03 Feb 2003 03:31:29 +0000

We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say that we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours. . . .
We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
John F. Kennedy – September 12, 1962
“If we die, we want people to accept it. We're in a risky business, and we hope that if anything happens to us it will not delay the program. The conquest of space is worth the risk of life”.
Virgil I. “Gus” Grissom

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 22:50:13 +0000

How about when Earth can no longer sustain human life? It's not the stuff of science fiction. Space exploration is what will ensure our survival when we need to get off of the planet. Something wiped out the dinosaurs – did it not? Sure, we bent over backwards to feed the children our children are creating because they're horny and irresponsible – but it won't matter much when the sun fries everyone to ash in a few hundred thousand years, now will it? Hmmm?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 21:33:38 +0000

Hey Neil,
And the parents that cast their children aside? Should we help them or maybe just shoot them because their parents donÂ’t care.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 20:16:16 +0000

I made much the same point in my own blog: this was bound to happen sooner or later, and the astronauts knew it. That doesn't mean it doesn't suck for them, but it wasn't a huge surprise, either.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 17:01:37 +0000

Hey Jason, how about people taking responsibility towards bringing children into this world? I believe the government should be there in dire circumstances, but it's still the responsibility of parents to take care of their kids.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 14:33:36 +0000

I say we give enough money to the space program how about feeding a hungry child right here on earth.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 14:00:37 +0000

Amen and well said Chris!
To those that have a problem with the name calling or finger pointing… facts are facts. Might I remind all that according to Nasa reports ,revealed yesterday, that the original design for the solid rocket busters called for them to be contain only one compartment and not two which required the o ring that caused the Challenger explosion.
When all this shakes out, it is a good chance that it will be revealed that the cause could have been avoided or corrected with a new design and production of the next generation vehicle. ( Just think we could call the first next generation shuttle Â“WheatonÂ�? after our biddy Wil.) ( Sorry I wanted to relieve some stress)
Those who follow the space program very closely will attest to the effects of the budget clamp down. It is only those casual band wagon space enthusiast who donÂ’t understand the facts. Excuse me if I sound irritated and condescending. I do not mean to come off as condescending, but I am very pissed and dismayed since this could have been avoided. How? A new updated design or even something as simple as designing the ability to repair the shuttle while in space. (Oh did I mention all this cost money) LetÂ’s leave politics out of this My heart and my prayers go out to the remaining families. Thank you for the ultimate sacrifice of sharing those so dear to you with us

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 09:31:47 +0000

This will be my first post on this blog. Hello and thanks to Chris for airing his thoughts in a public arena. I usually hang out at MeganÂ’s blog and drop by here, now and then. Yes, it's no surprise that NASA has experienced severe budget cuts. At least when compared to what it once enjoyed back in the golden (money no object) age of space exploration. Expensive single probe expeditions are now more likely to be multiple and lower cost craft. These unmanned craft don't always complete their missions, either. So failure isn't a word foreign to the space community, be it manned or unmanned missions. Interestingly, budgetary appropriations for NASA have increased in the last few years (see link). http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/usbudget/blueprint/bud33.html It's not as if NASA would deliberately ignore safety considerations on the grounds they can't afford it. They aren't so ignorant and foolhardy. On the contrary, after Challenger exploded, more public attention was focused on that particular tragedy and on future space shuttle missions than ever before. NASA had to prove they could learn from their mistakes. They identified the problems and corrected them. Now that another disaster has occurred, the eyes of the world are gazing back at them. As was the case with Challenger, this will be another learning experience. Remember that the operation of the shuttles depend on numerous external contractors to provide parts and support. One or more of these might ultimately be related to the accident in some way. It's sad it took seven more amazing lives to prove that we still can't create perfect machines. The big secret is that we never will, we know accidents will continue to occur from time to time. IÂ’m not surprised this happened, but itÂ’s always shocking when it does. Was the Columbia disaster a direct result of budget cuts? It's premature to say at this point in time, but Columbia recently had a $90 million overhaul. They are certified for 100 missions, this was its 28th. It was the oldest in the fleet and was going to be retired until it was decided to be renovated. Did airframe age have anything to do with the tragedy? No one knows until further verifiable information surfaces. Until more information is released, it would be inappropriate to think so. The space shuttles are the most complex machines made by man. They contain more than a million parts each (see link). It's an orchestration of machinery tested to its limits every time it's flown in terrestrial and extraterrestrial environments. When they say it is pushing the envelope, it's an understatement. Yes, you could call space exploration a working experiment. Some of the best minds from humankind have assembled these intricate craft, facing immense technological and engineering obstacles to make it all work. Yet, our best efforts arenÂ’t always enough. Advances in space exploration come at a high cost, both in machine and man. Accidents absolutely will happen, and anyone thinking differently is not attune to how perilous these missions are. We do the best we can when confronted with adversity, we learn and push on. ItÂ’s the human way. http://ltp.arc.nasa.gov/space/ask/new/Total_number_of_moving_parts.txt How can anyone point blame so quickly when the possible scenarios have barely begun to be explored? Everyone is entitled to an opinion, IÂ’ll grant you that. This is an investigation that will take time, little different than what happens when an aircraft full of passengers unexplainably goes down. People are impatient, so they rush to judgment to alleviate the anxieties they feel. We want answers immediately, even if we have point an accusing finger where it doesnÂ’t belong. Again, it takes time to investigate and piece together what really went wrong. Patience and careful investigation is demanded to find the real reasons for this disaster. The seven astronauts who flew aboard Columbia knew full-well that death was a possibility. They accepted the risks before they began training to become astronauts. Were they scared of dying? Probably, but being intensely focused on their mission is what carried them through the fear. It's what separates them from us, they possessed the resolve to chase a dream and follow through to fly in space. I'm positive they loved it to the very end. Call them heroes or call them people willing to face incredible odds for the benefit of humanity, it all means the same to me. What we can do right now is to grieve the great loss of human potential and life, we owe the Columbia astronauts this degree of respect and honor.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 08:37:43 +0000

Exploration is never easy, and is never without sacrifice.
Apollo 1, Soyuz 1, the first Salyut mission, Challenger, and now Columbia.
Not the first, nor the last, but the sacrifice is never in vain.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 07:24:06 +0000

You're certainly entitled to your opinion – nothing wrong with that. I'm more of a reactor and less of a mourner.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 05:43:30 +0000

Mike, I think I can safely say we are all angry and outraged at this tragic loss, I just don't think it is appropriate to publicly express that anger, or more to the point, place blame, when this tragedy isn't even 24 hrs old. I think anger is a natural part of the mourning process, but this 23 yr old thinks that the most appropriate thing to do for the families and coworkers, at this time, is to hold our criticism for a few days until everyone involved has had a chance to recover from the initial shock of this tragedy. Maybe that is the naivetÃ© and idealism of youth speaking.
I agree that we must do whatever we can to ensure that this sacrifice was not in vain, and if that means focusing the collective energies of an angered country, then so be it. However, I would like to think that such focused anger would not be necessary to command the sweeping changes that are required to bring the space program properly into the 21st century. Again, this viewpoint is probably subject to the follies of youth.
At any rate, it was not my intention to condemn or offend Chris, or anyone else, for their feelings, and I apologize if I have committed any such offense. I just feel that for the next few days, our energies are best spent fostering a community wide environment of remembrance and healing. The castigation by fire can wait a few days.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 05:10:41 +0000

“…shame on you for focusing your energy into anger…” So, Chris – and the rest of the nation – can't mourn and be angry at the same time? That's not allowed? I didn't get the memo. While the loss is certainly upsetting, the astronauts knew the inherant risks and put their lives on the line for what they believed in – America's space program. If anger is what it takes to get the focus back on space exploration and ensure that their sacrifice was not in vain – at the same time ensuring our space program's successful future – so be it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 04:29:34 +0000

sorry no the fuel tanks are new every mission the booster rockets are overhauled every time

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 04:28:50 +0000

i am also surprised you are so quick to blam lack of funding leading to this disaster, the columbia just recived a complete overhaul a few years ago so it wasn't in disrepair from what i can tell somthing unforseable and unavoidable happend wether it was damage due to the piece of insulation that came off the fuel tank or a stabalization rocket failed on reentry. the fuel tanks are overhauled every mission