Reply With Quote
The Launch:
The Ship:
The Astronauts:
The Launch:
Last edited by Nbadan; 07-04-2006 at 02:05 PM.
You can watch LIVE coverage of the Shuttle Here
Scary that they lauched with compromised/broken foam.
"long-range missile failed"
3 Scud-type short rangers, not ICBMs.
There was a lot of anti-launch sentiment way up in NASA, saying the Shuttle wasn't safe enough, yet.
If this Shuttle doesn't land successfully, it will be yet another PR disaster for dubya, since I bet Rove was behind the pressure to launch now to try to generate good news that would distract attention from the Repug Iraq disaster. Rove will tell any lie, slime/slander any opponent, waste anybody's lives for the sake of the Repugs.
If this Shuttle doesn't land successfully, it will be yet another PR disaster for dubya, since I bet Rove was behind the pressure to launch now to try to generate good news that would distract attention from the Repug Iraq disaster.
Greatness.
Dude, the shuttle is now on Bush too? Holy ...I hate the guy but you're amazing.
If this Shuttle doesn't land successfully, it will be yet another PR disaster for dubya, since I bet Rove was behind the pressure to launch now to try to generate good news that would distract attention from the Repug Iraq disaster. Rove will tell any lie, slime/slander any opponent, waste anybody's lives for the sake of the Repugs.
Of course! The Repugs started the Iraq war as an 2003 campagin/re-election tactic, and that has cost us 2500 US military lives wasted, while getting dubya re-elected since just enough people didn't want to change Pres in the middle of a "war".
If you remember after the last shuttle disaster, the Repugs wanted to save money by stopping the shuttle program entirely, which would have made it easier to finance more tax cuts for the rich + corps.
If Rove's tactic with this shuttle works, the Repugs get good bounce from a shuttle success and distraction from Iraq war. If the shuttle crashes, the Repugs can save $Bs by cancelling the shuttle program to finance more tax cuts.
Compared to 2500 US military wasted, what's a few astronaut deaths, as long as the Repub+rich+corps cause is advanced?
With the Repugs, assume the most venal, most cynical, most malicious, most callous, most basely political motives for their every move, and you'll be damn close to the truth.
Dude you are ed up in the head. You need help. Seriously. Methinks you've been staring at that naked spread of Cindy Sheehan in Democratic Monthly a bit too long.
of course, attack the messenger, typical right-wing bull , but you can't refute the message. you, less twerp.
You are a wacko, you know that?
I think Extra Stout summed boutons up perfectly here.
boutons just overtook nbadan!!!
What is there to refute about the message? It's complete and utter bull . There is nothing to respond to, just to try and bring attention to the fact that you're really ed up in the head and need help.
, you make NBADan look sane.
The best part is people like Boutons run for election and win.
Why do they continue to launch the shuttle when they can't seem to remedy the problem of the foam insulation falling off?
Scary times to be an astronaut!
Up to six pieces of debris fell off Discovery: NASA
Jul 04 5:04 PM US/Eastern
Up to six pieces of debris that could be foam insulation fell off Discovery's troublesome external fuel tank minutes after liftoff Tuesday, a top NASA official said.
Officials cautioned, however, that it was too soon to know whether the debris struck Discovery and that the pieces came off later than would normally endanger the shuttle.
Columbia's demise in February 2003 was caused by foam insulation that peeled off 70 seconds after liftoff and struck its heat shield.
"About two minutes and 47 seconds give or take (after the Discovery launch), we saw three perhaps four pieces come off (the fuel tank)," said shuttle program manager Wayne Hale, adding that it was unclear whether it was foam or "something else."
"We also saw another piece or two come off at about four minutes 50 seconds," he told reporters at the Kennedy Space Center.
He cautioned, however, that it was "very raw, preliminary data" and would have another report later Tuesday.
But Hale said the debris came off the fuel tank later than officials fear it could damage the shuttle's heat shield.
"Both of those (losses of debris) are interesting because they are after the time we're concerned about aerodynamic transport causing damage to the shuttle tiles," he said in Cape Canaveral, Florida.
He did not say what size the debris was.
NASA officials had expected some foam to come off during liftoff, but that it would not be of a size that would endanger the shuttle.
A small piece of foam fell off Discovery's fuel tank a day before the launch, but officials decided the shuttle could fly safely without repairing the gap.
Columbia disintegrated as it returned to Earth on February 1, 2003, killing the seven astronauts aboard.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/0....1hey9sif.html
The shuttle design is over 30 years old, and urgently needs replacing. I am glad it made it into orbit safely, and pray for the safe return of her and her crew.
It is about time we moved beyond the shuttle and really start to get into our solar system. The shuttle has actually hindered our development, as it has sucked up resources that could have been better spent elsewhere in the space program.
Oddly enough it will be the price of oil driving up the cost of energy that will spur profitable space exploration. All the energy we could conceivably need is waiting for us in the form of our nearest star, it simply will take the first nation with real vision to get it, and the US has a massive lead over every other nation on the planet.
Photovoltaics (solar power cells) aren't particularly effective on the surface of the planet, but when you stick them in orbit and point them directly at the sun 24 hours a day, and can build a collector that is 110 MILES on each side, you are talking about some serious energy output. Doing some very basic reading, this one station could conceivedly supply 1% of the annual US electricity consumption.
These figures were derived from a very cursory analysis.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/10atab.html (US electricity consumption)
15% efficiency per meter squared (seems to be a general figure from a variety of sources) means 150 watts power per m2.
The rest is just math.
1.6km*1.6Km=2.56 Km2 per Mile2
2.56*1000*1000=2,560,000 M2 per Mile2
2,560,000*150 watts*24hours*365 days= 3,363,840,000,000 watts per year per square mile or 3,363,840 Mw/hrs
Multiply that by 110 squared, and (oops gotta go)
Again from the table from the US dept of Energy, US usage
Roughly 4.6 GW/hour, over 365 days divided by total 2005 consumption of 3.8 Billion Kw/hours
FYI. A pretty good animation, from a Wikipedia link, showing why missiles can fail in their boost-phase.in other news
koreas long-range missile failed
As if there's ever been a time when manned space flight was safe.
any missle with the word (dong) attached to it is bound to fail...
The daily show ran the "type-o'-dong" joke for all it was worth.(Taepodong)
I don't know what we are worried about. They haven't launched a fully successful long range missle yet.
I actually doubt that North Korea could ever successfully fire a long range missle capable of hitting the US mainland, and even so actually hit anywhere near what they were aiming at. The things are made in North Korea, after all.
The ICBM delivery missile is totally doubtful, leaving aside the more important question of whether they can build a reliable nuclear warhead small enough to fit in a missle.
Rove must be ecstatic. More distraction from the Repug Iraq disaster.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
