Comments on: Space shuttle stupidity http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/ Thoughts of a minor lunatic Wed, 21 Oct 2009 01:55:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Troy Brumley http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-2510 Troy Brumley Tue, 09 Aug 2005 23:54:36 +0000 http://blog.amber.org/?p=1748#comment-2510 Gizmodo points to a space lamp today here: http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home/rocket-lamp-and-i-think-its-gonna-be-a-long-long-time-116490.php with a description that I thought fit this thread so well: 'Instead, this "accent" lamp, priced at about $240, is shaped just right to suggest a space program blunted by fear and the effects of an extremely litigious society.' Gizmodo points to a space lamp today here: http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home/rocket-lamp-and-i-think-its-gonna-be-a-long-long-time-116490.php with a description that I thought fit this thread so well:

‘Instead, this “accent” lamp, priced at about $240, is shaped just right to suggest a space program blunted by fear and the effects of an extremely litigious society.’

]]> By: petrilli http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-2507 petrilli Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:27:47 +0000 http://blog.amber.org/?p=1748#comment-2507 I think "Bob Parks":http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN05/wn072905.html has the best takes on it. As he comments, most serious scientists don't think there's any real science going on on the ISS either. Lots of PR Science, but that's not really advancing the cause. Then again, ever since we killed the "SSC":http://www.hep.net/ssc/ over political ego, this country has had a hard time doing real science. The real science at NASA is being done by unmanned probes. The astronauts are just a PR stunt. I think Bob Parks has the best takes on it. As he comments, most serious scientists don’t think there’s any real science going on on the ISS either. Lots of PR Science, but that’s not really advancing the cause. Then again, ever since we killed the SSC over political ego, this country has had a hard time doing real science.

The real science at NASA is being done by unmanned probes. The astronauts are just a PR stunt.

]]> By: Randy http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-2506 Randy Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:07:40 +0000 http://blog.amber.org/?p=1748#comment-2506 The ISS is doing a bit m ore than flying in circles. The science of most missions has moved from the shuttle to the ISS. The shuttle's purpose was to be ferry the module (already built and in storage at Kennedy's huge clean room) to enable additional science. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/science/index.html Just because the shuttle is focusing mainly on construction doesn't mean that hard science is not being supported by these missions. Additionally, Americans are bored with space travel, and bored with science in general so the stuff that may be cool to some of us isn't even reported in science journals anymore. At the same time the shuttle is horribly outdated and needs to be replaced with a more efficient design. The ISS is doing a bit m ore than flying in circles. The science of most missions has moved from the shuttle to the ISS. The shuttle’s purpose was to be ferry the module (already built and in storage at Kennedy’s huge clean room) to enable additional science.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/science/index.html

Just because the shuttle is focusing mainly on construction doesn’t mean that hard science is not being supported by these missions. Additionally, Americans are bored with space travel, and bored with science in general so the stuff that may be cool to some of us isn’t even reported in science journals anymore.

At the same time the shuttle is horribly outdated and needs to be replaced with a more efficient design.

]]> By: petrilli http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-2504 petrilli Tue, 09 Aug 2005 00:24:08 +0000 http://blog.amber.org/?p=1748#comment-2504 Risk is a propensity for failure, not the loss of human life. What we have now is a situation where the potential loss of human life means we don't take any chances, and we end up with this absurdist theatre. Billions are spent to do nothing but fly in circles with zero real-science done as a result. Risk is a propensity for failure, not the loss of human life. What we have now is a situation where the potential loss of human life means we don’t take any chances, and we end up with this absurdist theatre. Billions are spent to do nothing but fly in circles with zero real-science done as a result.

]]> By: Troy Brumley http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-2503 Troy Brumley Tue, 09 Aug 2005 00:24:05 +0000 http://blog.amber.org/?p=1748#comment-2503 I couldn't find any pictures on the web, but an early concept design for the space shuttle was named the Dinosoar. I forget what the "dino" part stood for, but the basic design looked a lot like the modern space shuttle. Authors such as Jerry Pournelle have long said similar things about NASA. I can sum up my recollections of his comments as "insufficient testicular diameter" but he may have had other specific complaints. We over-engineer. I hope that private efforts will get the job done if NASA no longer can. I couldn’t find any pictures on the web, but an early concept design for the space shuttle was named the Dinosoar. I forget what the “dino” part stood for, but the basic design looked a lot like the modern space shuttle.

Authors such as Jerry Pournelle have long said similar things about NASA. I can sum up my recollections of his comments as “insufficient testicular diameter” but he may have had other specific complaints. We over-engineer. I hope that private efforts will get the job done if NASA no longer can.

]]> By: jenny http://blog.amber.org/2005/08/08/space-shuttle-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-2502 jenny Tue, 09 Aug 2005 00:18:17 +0000 http://blog.amber.org/?p=1748#comment-2502 History is not made with safe adventures, but with the riskiest and most daring. um... doesn't that argue for continuing "manned" flights? IMO, we should scrap the current space shuttle and build something with all the lovely new technology we have. History is not made with safe adventures, but with the riskiest and most daring.

um… doesn’t that argue for continuing “manned” flights?

IMO, we should scrap the current space shuttle and build something with all the lovely new technology we have.

]]>