Re: Borrowed time?

Wow,

What a useful post that was. It points out a long standing problem "Almost
30 years and untold billions of tax dollars and
they didn't comprehend what damage a piece of foam striking the wing at
nearly the speed of sound could do. They didn't have any particular method
in place to examine the wings or any way to make repairs even if they found
the damage. They didn't have effective methods in place to observe the
Shuttle in flight", it gives opinions on those that have done the work so
far "In the case of Challenger it was more of a matter of intentional
negligence." and it casts aspersions on those that support the shuttle
program "The Shuttle-o-philes in here can't *stand it* that he's been proven
absolutely, positively correct on all points. They piss and moan about
anyone who intrudes on their precious little fantasy world with reality.".

There's only one simple little thing this post lacks. A realistic plan on
what should have been to fix this problem. But, that's asking a bit much,
isn't it. Why shouldn't people be allowed to just give shitty proclamations
of how bad others have f'd up and point out that people who take pride in
our countries attempts to explore the space in our solar system are
dumb-asses.

You know what I call this type of post. Puking on shoes. It's like someone
coming up to you, puking on your shoes , and walking away leaving you to
clean up there mess. Here, let me scream out how something is so messed up
and how it's everyone else's fault and I have no useful suggestion on how to
fix what I see is wrong. Shut-up!

BH






"Thermateer" <thermate@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:RYVFe.6118$6f.1775@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Me" <Pkevinf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:811ht0la117u0adkohcerpm7pbghlf8fl1@xxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> First post here and I'm curious... If this foam thing was such an
>> issue why is it SO important now? They had to have known things over
>> the dozens and dozens of flights.... I have to think crap was falling
>> off all along...
>
> Bingo.
>
> They just happened to dodge the bullet on the flights that didn't end up
> in
> a ball of fire. Same thing with Challenger. In the case of Challenger it
> was
> more of a matter of intentional negligence. With Columbia it was more
> incompetence. They *saw* the goddam foam strike and declared it
> inconsequential.
>
> That's right folks. Almost 30 years and untold billions of tax dollars and
> they didn't comprehend what damage a piece of foam striking the wing at
> nearly the speed of sound could do. They didn't have any particular method
> in place to examine the wings or any way to make repairs even if they
> found
> the damage. They didn't have effective methods in place to observe the
> Shuttle in flight. This was of course after they had declared that "things
> were different". The Columbia crew was doomed the moment they strapped in.
>
> And after 2 years and more fortunes paid, they still don't have the
> problems
> fixed. This forum is full of knuckleheads who fall all over themselves to
> make excuses because they've got some kind of Shuttle fetish.
>
> Don't let anyone tell you about how much of an "unavoidable tragedy" it's
> been. All of this was predicted long ago by a writer named Gregg
> Easterbrook. In short, he said it was an ill-conceived, underfunded
> albatrosss that was being directed by a half-assed, typical bureaucracy,
> that it wasn't going to live up to the sales pitch and further it was
> going
> to kill people. The Shuttle-o-philes in here can't *stand it* that he's
> been
> proven absolutely, positively correct on all points. They piss and moan
> about anyone who intrudes on their precious little fantasy world with
> reality.
>
> Here's a link to Easterbrook's article:
>
> http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/8004.easterbrook-fulltext.html
>
>


.

Quantcast