Let's hear it for double-triple-quadruple checking!
To quote CNN's article: Shuttle rollout to launch pad on hold - Apr 6, 2005:
Why is it they're always finding major things - like a CRACK IN THE FUEL TANK - right before conducting something major? Like moving the shuttle to the launch pad? Or, you know, launching it? How is it that for the weeks and months preceeding these major events, these things go unnoticed?
I ask you.
Also, I'm sure it wasn't intended thusly, but it seems to me that this comment and the statement that follows are in poor taste:
Last flight of a "developmental" shuttle, because its final mission includes blowing up?!? Can we please exit from the "development" stage before launch? Thank you.
286 modifications that I'm sure they fully investigated, tested, documented, and proofed before implementing.
Also causing concern is this:
Brr. Really, they should never, ever use the words "last resort" and "rescue mission" when talking about the shuttle program. Yeah, I'm sure they have everyone's safety and security in mind as their first priority:
Excellent. I mean, I'm a big fan of the space program and think that it has benefited the world in many ways, not the least of which are really, really cool pictures of galaxies. But this article does not resound with confidence and reassurance.
But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
"A crack in the space shuttle Discovery's external fuel tank could delay today's scheduled rollout of the shuttle to the launch pad. Mission managers are trying to decide whether to fix the crack before moving the shuttle to the pad. Discovery is scheduled for launch no earlier than May 15."
Why is it they're always finding major things - like a CRACK IN THE FUEL TANK - right before conducting something major? Like moving the shuttle to the launch pad? Or, you know, launching it? How is it that for the weeks and months preceeding these major events, these things go unnoticed?
I ask you.
Also, I'm sure it wasn't intended thusly, but it seems to me that this comment and the statement that follows are in poor taste:
"Discovery's launch will be NASA's first manned space flight since Columbia.
"We understand from an engineer's standpoint that [the shuttle] is a developmental vehicle and will be until the last flight," said LeRoy Cain, the NASA flight director who oversaw Columbia's abortive re-entry."
Last flight of a "developmental" shuttle, because its final mission includes blowing up?!? Can we please exit from the "development" stage before launch? Thank you.
"Since then, Discovery has had 286 modifications, including 41 recommended by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board..."
286 modifications that I'm sure they fully investigated, tested, documented, and proofed before implementing.
Also causing concern is this:
"Discovery will even perform a pirouette in view of the international space station to inspect its delicate underbelly. As a last resort, a second shuttle will stand by on the ground in a rescue mission is needed."
Brr. Really, they should never, ever use the words "last resort" and "rescue mission" when talking about the shuttle program. Yeah, I'm sure they have everyone's safety and security in mind as their first priority:
"The CAIB said NASA's intolerance for dissent, relaxed safety standards, tightened budget and slipshod management all contributed to the [Columbia] disaster."
Excellent. I mean, I'm a big fan of the space program and think that it has benefited the world in many ways, not the least of which are really, really cool pictures of galaxies. But this article does not resound with confidence and reassurance.
But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
Post a Comment
