OT?: Goodbye to an era

=20

=46ind and read the reports before spouting again. 'Taint all that hard.

have

technology

multiple-use

and

be

at

was

at

Not quite the issue. Hunt down the reports; the problems that led to the second vehicle loss (disaster) were part of the solutions to the first failure. (How is that for management doublespeak.)

Your bigotry is well known.

That's

Your bigotry is noted.

the

yet.

down

Your bigotry is clear.

What was it the Einstein said when he quit the Patent Office? No that was somebody else.

other

This is correct. There is a massive difference in orbital life, see also Mir and Skylab which "fell down". They were way too damn expensive to put up only to have them fall down.

So that is why you are such a bigot. Your weren't watching in a kid in a schoolroom then were you? Did your kids questions defeat you?

Soyuz? Just a guess, but the system was used for a *long* time. Crude, but functional.

Not to mention greenie approved insulation foam.

That's

And this has changed since the 1950s when and how? Go Ralph Nader repeat-a-clone go. =20

Try putting the same standards you require of your employees to your elected representatives.

I'd answer that question if it made any sense at all.

John

No, that was the British Empire. It's blunders still cause problems for everyone.

That's

Hmmph. A whitewash paper.

See Roger Boujlais (SP??) in IEEE Spectrum.

That's

shot

new

of

billion

existing

of

=20

=20

constraints.

The real problem was some Proxmire droid "cost cutters" trying to make a name for their selves.

As gov'ment programs go it worked pretty well for over 20 years, lots of people productively employed over the years. Now compare the gub'ment bailouts of the last 20 months and the liberal inspired housing bubble and meltdown for a tab that is at least 10 times larger. Which do you prefer? Do you vote that way?

They funded two mirrors for Hubble, and they made one wrong and one right, and then launched the bad one. It was a cultural problem, not a money problem.

John

Productively employed? What did they produce? All those people could have been working in industries doing actual productive work. Instead, we spent hundreds of billions putting crews in smelly tin cans in harm's way, with no payback, and spent trillions more importing stuff we don't make any more.

That's the real payback when you pay tens of thousands of good scientists and engineers, in government and industry, to waste time.

John

On a sunny day (Sat, 05 Jun 2010 08:07:03 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

Future is here:

And what do you think my "bigotry" is?

All I am pointing out is that NASA's manned ISS orbital tin can has produced almost nothing of use whereas the unmanned interplanetery probes and orbital telescopes have produced hundreds of thousands of new images and terabytes of important scientific data. This is a view shared by most of the astronomical research community.

Did you have a point to make or are you just type word salad?

SkyLab and MIR were both at the end of their useful life when allowed to reenter. Basically they were to reeking and mouldy internally (a fate which the ISS is also beginning to fall foul of - pun intended).

NASA (and the Russians) were caught out a bit by a solar maximum fluffing up the Earth's atmosphere and making the drag and orbit decay more rapidly than they had expected. It wasn't worth the effort to boost them back up again so they let them fall in.

ISS by comparison will ultimately be abandonned because the future astronauts will need their sense of smell eliminated before they can enter without retching. I suppose the solar panels can be salvaged, but the habitation will have to be replaced on a regular basis.

Regards, Martin Brown