Re: Not risking astronauts lives how about ascent abort?


Chris Bennetts wrote:
Bob Haller wrote:

Congress removed the law preventing paying russia for soyuz and other
ISS support....

That doesn't mean giving the Russians large sums of money is no longer a
bad idea.

It was a matter of manpower:( So you add some cameras vto assist
docking and extend your in orbit time, heck just cut back on what you
plan on doing, after all these are devlopment flights not oprerational
ones/

By doing that you're only going to increase the number of flights
required to complete the program.

I have noted that those posters who were GO GO SAFETY IS FINE pre
columbia have very little to say..... when we have another accident
will you disappear as well?

I don't know how safe the current tank is. I think it is as good as it
can be made under the circumstances. I'd be happier if the shuttle had a
genuine level of automation, so that it could be flown unmanned on a
short 1-2 orbit test flight.

But it doesn't, so we have to fly it with a crew. There's about a one or
two per cent chance of the crew being lost at some point on the mission.
The crew knows this well, as do their families, and they are more than
willing to accept the risk. So why don't you just shut up and leave the
decision to people that will actually be affected by it?

flying with so many negatives,,,,,,,,,,,,,, where theres smoke theres
fire.

I dont want to see any more deaths!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, Bob what are you doing about the road toll, or the prevention of
smoking-related diseases, or cancer, or any of thousands of preventable
causes of death that each kill many thousands of times more people each
year than space flight accidents?

I'm looking forward to your response.

--Chris

We all live with risk every day:( Personally I dont smoke, drink, or do
drugs, try to drive carefully, dont speed, avoid getting mad at other
drivers, that leads to accidents.

I must point out we are all effected by space accidents.... some more
than others.
our taxpayer money pays for nasa, and that gives each one of us the
right to a opinion.

bottom line when nasa overrides their engineers, if a accident occurs
the agency will most likely be gutted and downsized. ISS gets us no
where, heck it does little science and what it did has been changed.

If this level of risk were for a mars mission I wouldnt be posting,
going round and round its just a waste of money rescurces, reputation.
and our future in space.

kill the shuttle before it kills again

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: adding tolls to existing interstates
    ... Those are shorter hops than 500 miles. ... hop flights in the US it is much higher then Europe or Japan. ... money on and not enough money is reaching them. ... on time when the airlines sched them for hundreds of take offs at the ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: Space Exploitation
    ... Perhaps that's one way to help defray the cost of launches. ... asteroids then we don't have to spend money orbiting them from earth. ... > and such in orbit, but if electric power grows in price to justify the cost ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Fuel protesters plan M4 blockade
    ... One down/up side of money is it can be used in the sausage roll vending ... >>> ability to bring the entire country to a grinding halt? ... A single accident that needs both carriageways to be shut can *cripple* ... Do that in a few major junctions, and you'd have trouble (but not quite as ...
    (uk.rec.driving)
  • Re: Cost of slowing down?
    ... It regularly put men into orbit with plenty ... restartable hydrogen engines. ... regret that it's production was stopped. ... > money for far too long into a dead end. ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Highway revenue proposal - fine bad drivers
    ... Take an example where accident congestion causes ... And time is money. ... >>> to the government for use on transportation is a decent substitute. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
Quantcast