Man, WTF is wrong with NASA

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: Sheepathon
Yeah, we should build super crazy submarines instead. Then we could explore the ocean depths, where we know for sure there is actual evidence of CRAZY life forms.
Instead, we go to space, searching for any evidence of life at all...

We need better Antarctic exploration gear, too. Then we would have a fighting chance against the penguins when they finally mobilize and come for our asses.

I thought we were going into space to test drugs, repair satelites, and other experiments so you can maintain your lifestyle.

The space shuttle isn't looking for ET's.

 

[junkerman123]

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
I Nominate the OP for Dumbass of the Week!

do I hear a second?

That's fine. At least this thread stimulated some sort of reasonable convo before the flaming started. Not like anyone will remember me as dumbass of the week in a few hours.

 

[alphatarget1]

NASA needs a real budget and fire the admins. With that said...

Why was the foam not an issue (at least not a major one that would halt the flights) during the last 20 years and being an issue now after columbia disintegrated? We got lucky on all those other launches?

 

[OritionX]

Just think of a vehicle that expensive build by the lowest bidder.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: junkerman123
ON A 143214543 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, plus the experience of having launched it before like 50 times? WTF is wrong here? Are people really that incompetent?

This is ridiculous.

/rant

So what's wrong now?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
NASA needs a real budget and fire the admins. With that said...

Why was the foam not an issue (at least not a major one that would halt the flights) during the last 20 years and being an issue now after columbia disintegrated? We got lucky on all those other launches?

The formula for the aereation of the foam changed as a result of EPA for the Floro-carbon compounds used. (Freon type)
The previous constituents were discontinued, the 'new' stuff doesn't work as well, and the labor method hasn't solved the application problem.

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
NASA needs a real budget and fire the admins. With that said...

Why was the foam not an issue (at least not a major one that would halt the flights) during the last 20 years and being an issue now after columbia disintegrated? We got lucky on all those other launches?

Yes

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
NASA needs a real budget and fire the admins. With that said...

Why was the foam not an issue (at least not a major one that would halt the flights) during the last 20 years and being an issue now after columbia disintegrated? We got lucky on all those other launches?

Yes

It seems to me that if the engineers had it their way the previous 2 accidents could've been prevented...

 

[TStep]

I don't know the correct figure, but if we spend the fiscal equivalent 1/2 of one month's funding of the Iraqi war on the entire space program, I would hesitate using the words "incompetent" and "ridiculous" as a generalization concerning the space program.

Those generalization may be better suited, not for the current Iraqi conflict (as I fully support our troops, families, mission statement, etc), but the management of such. 800+ days, at least $800 Billion, an arguably more unstable region than prior to March 2003, many lives lost on both sides, no global support, and on, and on, ..... I'll stop since the rest belongs in P&N.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
NASA needs a real budget and fire the admins. With that said...

Why was the foam not an issue (at least not a major one that would halt the flights) during the last 20 years and being an issue now after columbia disintegrated? We got lucky on all those other launches?

The formula for the aereation of the foam changed as a result of EPA for the Floro-carbon compounds used. (Freon type)
The previous constituents were discontinued, the 'new' stuff doesn't work as well, and the labor method hasn't solved the application problem.

hmm... that sucks.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

Originally posted by: junkerman123

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
I Nominate the OP for Dumbass of the Week!

do I hear a second?

That's fine. At least this thread stimulated some sort of reasonable convo before the flaming started. Not like anyone will remember me as dumbass of the week in a few hours.

Perhaps, but I always figured that if you want reasonable convo, then you ought to initiate with a reasonable statement.

cheers and beers

 

[RbSX]

Originally posted by: junkerman123
ON A 143214543 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, plus the experience of having launched it before like 50 times? WTF is wrong here? Are people really that incompetent?

This is ridiculous.

/rant

To quote Armagaeddon

'Doesn't it kinda concern you that we're being pushed by machine with over 100,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder?'

 

[Omegachi]

Originally posted by: Sheepathon
Yeah, we should build super crazy submarines instead. Then we could explore the ocean depths, where we know for sure there is actual evidence of CRAZY life forms.
Instead, we go to space, searching for any evidence of life at all...

We need better Antarctic exploration gear, too. Then we would have a fighting chance against the penguins when they finally mobilize and come for our asses.

dude, we are not in space looking for lifeforms right now and i believe they have a ocean exploration group similar to nasa... just not welly funded as them

 

[RbSX]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Toasthead

Originally posted by: werk
Their sh1t is OLD.

seriously. Those shuttles are freeaking liek 20 years old...damn lets build some new ones already

damn straight

25 years old using technology that was a decade old at that point, really

Powered by a 486 b!tches!

I seriously can't get over how old the processors are in the shuttles.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: junkerman123
ON A 143214543 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, plus the experience of having launched it before like 50 times? WTF is wrong here? Are people really that incompetent?

This is ridiculous.

/rant

The public is just becoming more risk-averse (pansy-like). Space exploration is inherently dangerous, and people used to be able to accept that. The failure rate of the Shuttle is right where they thought it was going to be when they designed it. Back then, the public could accept that. Now, they can't.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: CVSiN

Originally posted by: junkerman123
ON A 143214543 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, plus the experience of having launched it before like 50 times? WTF is wrong here? Are people really that incompetent?

This is ridiculous.

/rant

remeber these space shuttles are almost 25 years old now...
due to budget cutbacks a new one was never developed..

me.. i wouldnt fly a 25 year old aircraft into space...

challeneger blew up when I was in 8th grade... and they had been flying a number of years before that..

NASA is way behind they are sitting on thier asses trying to deal with having no budget.

Neither of the Shuttle disasters were related to vehicle age in any way whatsoever.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: RyanSengara

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Toasthead

Originally posted by: werk
Their sh1t is OLD.

seriously. Those shuttles are freeaking liek 20 years old...damn lets build some new ones already

damn straight

25 years old using technology that was a decade old at that point, really

Powered by a 486 b!tches!

I seriously can't get over how old the processors are in the shuttles.

Shuttles use old CPUs because their electrical traces are much wider compared to modern day CPUs and thus less suspectible to outer space EM interference.

And it's not like they play BF2 while in missions.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: junkerman123
ON A 143214543 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, plus the experience of having launched it before like 50 times? WTF is wrong here? Are people really that incompetent?

This is ridiculous.

/rant

The Shuttle works. They just launched one the other day.

 

[junkerman123]

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude

Originally posted by: junkerman123

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
I Nominate the OP for Dumbass of the Week!

do I hear a second?

That's fine. At least this thread stimulated some sort of reasonable convo before the flaming started. Not like anyone will remember me as dumbass of the week in a few hours.

Perhaps, but I always figured that if you want reasonable convo, then you ought to initiate with a reasonable statement.

cheers and beers

Haha, true. I figured the /rant would give it away that the post wasn't particularly well thought out.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: BDawg

Originally posted by: Ausm
The Space shuttle next to the Nuclear attack sub is the most complex machine man has ever made....


AUsm

I think the scary thing is that your cell phone has more processing power than at least the original space shuttle computers.

But when the Space shuttle was originally launched the average computer was stored in a 20 X 20 room

Ausm

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: BDawg

Originally posted by: Ausm
The Space shuttle next to the Nuclear attack sub is the most complex machine man has ever made....


AUsm

I think the scary thing is that your cell phone has more processing power than at least the original space shuttle computers.

But when the Space shuttle was originally launched the average computer was stored in a 20 X 20 room

Ausm

In the early 80's? I don't think so.

1
2

 

[eLiu]

Originally posted by: Savij

Originally posted by: junkerman123
Give me a 100 billion dollar budget and a pool of 100 experienced, well-trained genius scientists and yes, I believe I could.

They have a 16.5 Billion dollar budget including all current projects and work on the shuttle replacement

100 billion dollars? lol no their budget is <20B.

And the space shuttle is some OLD sh!t...designed in the 70s/80s. It's some incredible amts of engineering achievement for its time (>20 yrs ago)...making something go up isn't relatively hard...letting it come down is a bit harder...making it repeat this action is ass-hard.

Besides it's not like NASA is a bunch of wonder-geniuses. Lots of smart ppl there but when the equipment gets old, continual repairs & fixes doesn't prevent other problems from showing up.

I know cars < space shuttle, but just look at all the "my car died" threads here. If ppl have difficulty keeping their old vehicles running, you ought to have some feel for how hard it is to keep an old shuttle running.

 

[batmang]

Originally posted by: junkerman123
ON A 143214543 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, plus the experience of having launched it before like 50 times? WTF is wrong here? Are people really that incompetent?

This is ridiculous.

/rant

.....

dumb.

 

[IamElectro]

Originally posted by: RyanSengara

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Toasthead

Originally posted by: werk
Their sh1t is OLD.

seriously. Those shuttles are freeaking liek 20 years old...damn lets build some new ones already

damn straight

25 years old using technology that was a decade old at that point, really

Powered by a 486 b!tches!

I seriously can't get over how old the processors are in the shuttles.

486 are fine for thier application, the computers are not doing graphic intensive work. They are used to monitor systems and guidance they are basically just crunching numbers using some very well coded software. Plus they are used because the do not need a nuclear power plant to run them.

 

[blakeatwork]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
I think the biggest issue right now is the (remaining) shuttles are older than a good portion of the members here.

It's a 20+ year old craft based on even older technology.

People are expecting way too much of them.

Could we design & build better? Sure, but it'll take time & money.

Right now they're all we have.

Viper GTS

I don't think Space Exploration will really come of age until it becomes a global concern, and not just something the G8 fiddles around with. Combine the resources of NASA, the ESA, Russia, Japan, whoever, stick'em all in a room, and don't let'em out until they've come up with something that works the first time, every time...

Pipedream I know