[Kool_ZX3]

Doesn't fackin surpirse me one bit, nasa over the last ten years has been about as smart as paint. The screwed everything up and still can't get s**t right.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/07/27/s...ttle/index.html

I guess the russian's are going to have to go get them if the shuttle is not safe to fly home :lol: Atlleast russia can do it right

Nasa needs a major overall b/c thier going nowhere fast

[Bort]

I'm not suprised in the least. Friggen NASA shouldn't even be using these behemoths that were all made in the late 60's. Their last project for a new shuttle, I think it was X-11 or something was scrapped after a few years of dev and billions of dollars invested when the test machine failed all tests.

Its sad that a small group of people with 10 million dollars can put a man into space for pennies compared to NASA...

Their new shuttle program wasn't even going to start again until 2009 and then not be ready until 2015-2020 to produce. With the state they are in now, they better do something or some other company will first.

[Raine]

Thing about NASA is that it's not a "company" per se but a gov't agency. Until commercial/privatized space flight is regulated, no one is going to be up there except them. The competition for having the first privately funded project fly a man into space was the only exception.. NASA's in a bad boat right now...

[Kool_ZX3]

Raine,Jul 28 2005, 02:18 AM Wrote:Thing about NASA is that it's not a "company" per se but a gov't agency. Until commercial/privatized space flight is regulated, no one is going to be up there except them. The competition for having the first privately funded project fly a man into space was the only exception.. NASA's in a bad boat right now...
[right][snapback]125920[/snapback][/right]

I think bill gates needs to fund nasa with his endless amounts of money, they could probably get it all back on track but the shuttles would then get a BSOD and explode :rolleyes:

They need new vehicles before we start launchin s**t to mars and going back to the fackin moon, been there done that,

[ANTHONYD]

Way to go!

Can the U.S. make themselves look ANY more stupid to the rest of the world?

[P-51]

A *little* perspective here guys:

- The foam has obviously been falling off the shuttle since flight #1. There have been 100's of flights, with no issues, and one that had a problem. This flight is no different than any of the other 100's of successful flights, the foam fell off... except this time people were LOOKING for it.

-Now lets see... which other countries have reusable orbital vehicles? Oh... nobody. Everybody else uses completely disposable rockets, complete with foam that falls off, the only difference is it doesn't hit the orbiter because... they don't HAVE an orbiter.

-10 million dollars to put 1 man into LOW EARTH ORBIT for one hour. How much does it cost to send 6 men up into HIGH orbit, for a few weeks at a time, complete with however many tonne payload and a robotic arm? I bet it costs about as much as NASA's budget.

I'm pretty critical about many American things... but this isn't one of them.

I mean come on guys, let's see how smart you are:

Problem: The fuel storage tanks are minus 200-dam-something degrees. They need to be insulated. The insulation can't weight very much because it takes 100 lbs of fuel to get 1 pound of payload into space. The insulation must be able to withstand 100G's of vibration and shaking.

How do YOU solve the problem if you're so smart?

[NOS2Go4Me]

Do like the rest of the world and launch an orbiter after "piggy-backing" it to 50,000 feet on a large freight airplane. It doesn't need stupid amounts of fuel to break away from the Earth's surface, at least not as much as they do now. LEO is easily obtainable by current methods (X-Prize), there's no reason not to expound upon that and launch something that can reach the ISS.

[paolo]

Kool_ZX3,Jul 28 2005, 02:21 AM Wrote:I think bill gates needs to fund nasa with his endless amounts of money[right][snapback]125921[/snapback][/right]

Considering Microsoft cant even make a decent copy of Windows, Who wants them behind the NASA name? The Microsoft Columbia Shuttle will be delayed... Again, this time due to a windows security error.

[darkpuppet]

NOS2Go4Me,Jul 28 2005, 09:42 AM Wrote:Do like the rest of the world and launch an orbiter after "piggy-backing" it to 50,000 feet on a large freight airplane. It doesn't need stupid amounts of fuel to break away from the Earth's surface, at least not as much as they do now. LEO is easily obtainable by current methods (X-Prize), there's no reason not to expound upon that and launch something that can reach the ISS.
[right][snapback]125954[/snapback][/right]

the x-prize... hmmm... a single person craft strapped to the wing of a bigger craft that is then shot into the boundaries of space via a rocket.. not even really in orbit!

and you think that they can expound on that to lift 15tonnes of cargo into space in regular intervals?

they had a good start, they still have a long ways to go...

I think people have lost perspective... this shuttle mission is an amazing success...it's unfortunate that people read the headlines so literally and are so quick to jump to conclusions.

But then again, it wouldn't make good news if people thought a scratch in a tile wasn't a disasterous incident. (it's not... the shuttle has lost dozens of tiles in the past.. some from the underside even).

you people DO know that the lunar missions were basically done by slide rule, right?

[edit]this thread sounds like a bunch of gossipping old ladies. [/edit]

[meford4u]

It's all about the headlines. They are going to worry about this for the next 24 hours and then miraculously come up with a plan that can save the day and make them all look like the great American hereos.
It's a governement agency. They need the headlines to get the money.

[NOS2Go4Me]

Actually, I think Meford's dead on with this one. Good call, OLD chap. :P

[Kool_ZX3]

NOS2Go4Me,Jul 28 2005, 11:26 AM Wrote:Actually, I think Meford's dead on with this one. Good call, OLD chap. :P
[right][snapback]125976[/snapback][/right]

They have been working with foam insulation with the tanks for about 25 years now and they still havn't got it right, not saying i can do any better but come on 25 years dealing with foam and it's still falling off. I still think it could be tweaked so get your ass in gear and do it before they knock the shuttle mission back another year and stuck using these old out of date behomoth's for another year.

Their reusable yes but thier out of date and we will only see more problems arise ars the year's tick by

[NefCanuck]

Personally I always thought the idea of a "re-usuable" craft for getting into space and back was a bit of a dodgy idea given the state of our technology. Sure it'll work if everything goes the right way, but even so, how much money (if any) has NASA "saved" by using this fleet of craft, which has show itself to age about as well as a Ford Edsel? <_<

I still think space exploration is necessary, but NASA has to start thinking "outside the box" at this point otherwise they risk being left behind by other nations willing to do different things (Even if that means things that are "old fashioned")

NefCanuck

[Kool_ZX3]

NefCanuck,Jul 28 2005, 11:48 AM Wrote:Personally I always thought the idea of a "re-usuable" craft for getting into space and back was a bit of a dodgy idea given the state of our technology.  Sure it'll work if everything goes the right way, but even so, how much money (if any) has NASA "saved" by using this fleet of craft, which has show itself to age about as well as a Ford Edsel?  <_<

I still think space exploration is necessary, but NASA has to start thinking "outside the box" at this point otherwise they risk being left behind by other nations willing to do different things (Even if that means things that are "old fashioned")

NefCanuck
[right][snapback]125979[/snapback][/right]

I know reusable craft is kinda of a good idea but russia's has great success with thier old ass rockets, but they work and weve had to rely on them the whole time to support the iss and never had one bum mission with them yet so why not use rockets :huh: America just likes to look good even though thier reusable craft are fallin apart, jesus they havn't even redone the tiles on the bottom. They replace as needed, jesus just redo them all and be done with it for awhile :rolleyes: