The seven astronauts aboard Discovery deserve more than pure luck to keep them alive. But that’s apparently the only reason the shuttle is now cleared for re-entry instead of facing the same problems that led to Columbia’s destruction.
Those astronauts deserve more, and so do the American people, considering that NASA spent more than $1 billion “fixing” the problem.
Posted by Melissa Cooley
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- writerdog on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
3 Comments
Yeah, those stupid rocket scientists. What they should’ve done was look at how other space shuttle programs are engineered and run to get it right. Oh yeah – there are no other space shuttle programs, or any resuable spacecraft in the world.
Most people do not know how unbeleievably complicated the space shuttle program is. If you had an idea of the detail these people go through, the hard work and sacrifice that thousands of people all over the country put in, you wouldn’t be so flippant.
Look a little deeper than the headlines before you spout.
Only spoiled Americans would echo Melissa’s comments of “Those astronauts deserve more.” They get the best engineers in minds backed by the largest manned space flight budget in the world behind them. The astronauts work as a team with the thousands of ground crew who take tremendous pride in their work.
Did you know Wichitans, including staff from Boeing’s military division here in town, worked on the problem to make the shuttle safer?
Way to insult them.
People who think the calculated risks of space travel are equivalent to “luck” should better spend their time playing the lottery (a tax on people who don’t understand math) than commenting on science.
I’m pretty sure that the astronauts are well aware of the risks involved. (Did you catch the sarcasm there?) And your well-intentioned (albeit simple-minded) comments are insulting to their education, training, dedication and valor. And, by the way, they choose to accept the risks involved.
Your comments are equally insulting to the engineers who make the space program possible (as noted in the previous post).
Unfortunately, the only time people like you even care to comment on the space program is when there is a “potential CNN moment” involved.
Most Americans are blissfully unaware of every single shuttle launch and successful return. These are the same people who make comments on the miniscule budget dedicated to advancing scientific research through space – and fail to compare it to the military and domestic spending budgets.
Well said Red Hot. I would add this.Shuttle was designed and constructed and maintained under the crippling constraints of the pitifully small NASA budget after the specatacular success (and yes high cost) of the Apollo Moon missions. It is ironic that popular funding could not be gained owing to the very success of the Moon missions. The needed investment and phenomenal return made space travel seem “routine”.This was further exacerbated in the 1980’s when the Reagan administration demanded increasing privitization of government operations. The Challenger tragedy of 1986 was not due to NASA, but rather to Morton- Thiokol, a commercial operation under contract with NASA.
The Challenger tragedy was responded to heroically. Another orbiter was ordered by public mandate. (It might have been better to mandate 20 more orbiters) but the spirit was still in pursuing the mission.
In the 90’s, the emphasis was put on streamlining. Smaller, faster, cheaper, became the motto under a tight fisted republican controlled budget. Shuttle flew again, and well. But even as funding was cut for the replacement for shuttle, talk was that the program was too old.After the loss of Columbia . The mood was even more gloomy. And the funding reflected this. With no clear replacement for shuttle, the program was declared to finish a short mission and be mothballed by 2010. Facing this lack of vision, Discovery is up there right now. NASA is choked for funding and choked by caution because of people like Melissa.Melissa? Those folks up there tonight aren’t counting on luck. They are confident in their vehicle and their program because they know it is made up of folks like themselves who do what they do not for wealth, but because it is right and important. Are they a little nervous? Probably they are. Nothing worth doing is easy. But they have the courage that comes from counting on others that share their vision. That is worth far more than hoping that those who count beans and worry about bottom lines have the count right.