Re: Foam still a key concern for shuttle launch


Rand Simberg wrote:
On 14 Aug 2006 10:50:46 -0700, in a place far, far away, "Eric Chomko"
<pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:


Rand Simberg wrote:
On 14 Aug 2006 10:33:48 -0700, in a place far, far away, "Eric Chomko"
<pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:


columbiaaccidentinvestigation@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Wow that means you know something nasa does not, but you have not cited
it, or backed it up with facts. Please show the nasa sources, or at
least your own research, that demonstrates fixing the problem the caib
determined was the cause for the sts-107 tragedy is not worth the time
or money. Seriously if you know something nasa does not, than you
should contact them, but with more information than you non-correlated
non-validated opinion.

Don't you get it? Rand's opinion is all that is needed. No cost benefit
analysis or background research. Nothing, just Rand's opinion.

My opinion (unlike "columbiaaccidentloon"s is based on a cost-benefit
analysis and research.

Is that so? Can we see the analysis and research for ourselves? It
would go along way with understanding better than, "I'm and Rand and I
said so." Seriously, if you have actual numbers and research rationale,
please post it here or the links.

I might, if someone sensible asks. But it's really very simple. It
costs us ten million dollars a day to not fly, so it's crazy to
continue to shut down the fleet while waiting for a fix. The chances
of another accident are already so low that spending more on foam
reduction has less marginal benefit (the expected value of the loss of
another vehicle times the marginal reduction in the probability of
loss) than the cost, given that we're only going to fly another
sixteen missions or so.

16 missions by 2010. Does the one to HST change things, or is it just
like the others to ISS? What if they decide to extend the STS program
due to success and the lack of CEV or its equivalent being ready? Does
THAT have any bearing on your inductive analysis?


"columbiaaccidentloon" believes that astronauts' lives have infinite
value. That's one of the reasons he's a loon.

I won't go there. But you seem to fail to account for the cost in both
time and money of the foam fixes (i.e. provided no numbers). They seem
to be of real importance in space after the last launch and the shuttle
did its 360 degree flip and filmed be ISS cameras.

Eric

.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast