Slashdot Mirror
Space Shuttle Columbia Breaks Up Over Texas
An anonymous reader writes "NASA lost communication with space shuttle Columbia shortly before its scheduled landing on Saturday. It was unclear whether there were any other problems." Various news programs have been showing debris falling from the sky, and NASA has declared an emergency.Update: 02/01 15:29 GMT by H : Confirmation has come - the shuttle has broken up over Texas while coming in for landing Florida.
God rest their souls...
mod parent poor taste
i can't believe slashdot sometimes
This is terrible. Obviously, it is terrible for the team members on board and their families.
But once we are done with the grief and morning for these great people, the space program will be severely hampered from further progress. We need this program to continue, and I'm afraid we've just killed it for twenty years.
Very sad all around.
Say a small prayer.
-- My Weblog.
Apparently it happened around 12,000 mph or thereabouts, at something like 200,000 feet. If something could be done, I pray that it was done.
This is terrible news; it feels like the Challenger all over. Just as senseless, just as disturbing. These people risked their lives to better mankind, and it's terrible that this could happen to such noble people.
I keep switching stations, and I'm tired of hearing about "6 Americans and 1 Israeli". 7 people were in that shuttle. It's frustrating that the media can't let go of war sensationalism even now, at a time like this.
Looks like we've witnessed the end of the American (and maybe International) space program. Although I was still really young when Challenger exploded I remember that they didn't launch another mission for a long while after that. I suspect now that with the age of the current orbiters that it's gonna be put on hold indefinately.
Anyways, there's already speculation that a piece of insulating foam from the fuel tank fell off on liftoff and hit the left wing and damaged the heat shield. NASA officially declared that the shuttle is lost.
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
God Dammit! We don't yet have a singe reason to think that there was anything but a technical failure. I was getting pissed with all the news stations immediatly jumping around speculationg about security and terrorism, making worse a terrible tragedy and playing into the current propaganda machine. I'm disgusted to see this same sort of non-rational fearmongering here on slashdot.
Wait. Watch. Pay attention. We don't need more noise in the signal.
With something made of metal and ceramic hitting the atmosphere at 12,000mph, things like this can *always* happen.
Space exploration is hard and it is dangerous, and there's always the chance of an accident. All the people on board new this, all their families and colleagues on the ground knew this, but *they did it anyway*.
I just hope the powers that be don't use their deaths as an excuse to write off what's left of the space programme.
at an altitude of 200,000 feet (61km) and velocity of 12,000 miles per hour (19,000 km/h)
That makes terrorism highly unlikely. That's too high and too fast for much of anything to hit it. It's more like a ballistic missile than an airplane at that point, and we all know how well the Star Wars project is faring.
But the damage has been done: the astronauts are dead, and the U.S. space program -- which never recovered from Challenger's loss -- may soon be dead as well.
-j.
Mark this day in your life. Oddly, I was reading slashdot when I heard then news.
I hear that
- Columbia is the oldest shuttle
- The crew compartment can re-enter by itself allowing the crew to jump out. I wonder if anyone has tested this!
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
Maybe now, the Government will give NASA the money to build a new earth to orbit reusable spacecraft. Why do people have to die to convince the American Government to do something?!?!?!?!
They are/were brave people who have created and flown in the Shuttle, but it is time to replace and retire the bird. Please presure your elected representatives to fund a new spacecraft so that we can have a safer vehicle to take us into space.
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
If you were taking a strong radioactive source into space, wouldn't you have to shield it in lead? Isn't weight *very* important when designing anything to be launched into space?
Would you want to put something very radioactive in a very confined space with 7 people?
Would you want to launch a strong radioactive source on top of a chemical rocket which always has a (slight) possiblitly of crashing?
Somehow I doubt it. People need to calm down. What happened is bad enough without trying to frighten yourself, and others, with wild speculation.
In his book "What do you care what other people think?" he talks about the Challenger thing, and talks about NASA in general.
Just a good book all around. Wish we still had Feynman around to see what happened this time.
This is sad. Very sad. But not for the astronauts.
I'll go out on a limb here and say that the astronauts themselves would trade their lives in a second to be in space, and to contribute whatever it was that they did on this mission. I know I would.
So I won't waste a tear mourning them. I'll save the tears for their families and friends. I have no business mourning sad. Only remembering them.
~D
Today, thousands of children died of poverty, yet their lives were not as valuable as those on board that shuttle because media coverage was 0 (zero)
Now act shocked
Come on, mod me down as a troll
The chances of STS108 launching on schedule are zero. It may not launch at all, this accident may ground the remaining shuttles permantently; they certainly won't fly again this year. The current station crew will have to use the Soyuz. That's what it's for.
Realize that some people make jokes about tragedies. It makes them feel better.
Just because YOU don't want to make jokes, you should not stop others from doing so.
The world is cruel enough, it is better to laugh at hardships than to cry because of them.
What makes me really sad, is that now ALL the US money they spent on the space shuttle will go out to the US military probably.
Moritz
I know a lot of you on Slashdot aren't old enough to remember when Challanger exploded at takeoff, and don't remember the uphoria and excitement that we all used to have when the Space Shuttle was new, or the excitement that a honest to God civilian was getting to go into space. In this era of any rich playboy with $20mil can get into space with enough effort, its hard to imagine what that was like for us, especially those of us who were young at the time.
You also may not remember the emptiness when it became clear that NASA with public and short-sighted government pressure was shying away from manned space flight, and there was so much fear that it may never recover. This was a tragedy of epic proportions -- the possibility that we in the US (and as one of the major players in manned space flight) might shy away from exploration and adventure because it was dangerous.
Things truely never recovered. The idiocy that is the Interational Space Station is a direct descendant of those events 17 years ago (almost to the day). The loss of our looking outward at greater feats, better manned spacecraft and the like are all descendant from that instant.
Now we stand at the cusp of it happening again. This depresses me. People today just don't understand that taking risks is important to advancement, and death is part of taking risks... something explorers have understood for centuries, and a lot of people have seemed to have forgotten today.
While part of me thinks NASA getting out of the manned space business, and dumping this massive waste of energy going into the ISS would be a good thing, because it may open up that exploration and adventure to those goverments or business who still have that sense of longing. I'm scared, though, that no one else will step up and take the reigns.
I hope we as a nation can recognize this for what it was -- an unfortunate event, but an outcome that can be expected when pushing the boundaries. We should feel pride in the people who lost their lives here, and rise up, and continue to do what they gave their lives for. I hope we as Americans don't shrink away even more in fear.
As potentially unpatriotic as it is to say, it makes me glad to know that the hope, energy and imagination of the billion people in China are there to step up, if we turn our backs on this important step in Humanity's future. It matters far more to me that we do this as a species then we do it as a nation. I hate the thought of what losing this would be a sign of for us as a country, though.
Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
Sunward I've climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
Of sun-split clouds...and done a hundred things
You have not dreamed of...wheeled and soared and swung
High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there,
I've chased the shouting wind along, and flung
My eager craft through footless halls of air.
Up, up the long, delirious, burning blue
I've topped the windswept heights with easy grace
Where never lark, or even eagle flew.
And, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod
The high untrespassed sanctity of space
Put out my hand, and touched the face of God.
'High Flight' by John Gillespie Magee, Jr.
I wept in 1986 as a child, now I do it again as a man. Goodbye and Godspeed...
- Necron69
Because when people die in the pursuit of peaceful international cooperation and science, it's always a tragedy. That's all there is to it.
I find it interesting, that others here are making claims against Bush and implying Bush has something to do with all of NASA's current money problems.
Columbia was built in 1978, first flown in 1981. thats 3 years. Now, scroll the time back to the beginning of the design process. Even if Bush handed NASA an unlimited budget the day he made it into office, we wouldn't have a new shuttle to use today.
Now, terrorism? Yeah, the terrorists have a missle that can hit a Mach20+ target. *sarcasm*
Seven explorers died today. Get off your political high horses, and think about that. Accidents do happen.
My thoughts are with the families of the crews.
----- LoboSoft specializes in Digital Language Lab
Not to play down this immence tragedy, but while you are praying for everyone aboard the shuttle, don't forget about the servicemen that have recently been lost in military operations abroad. Both of these professions are highly dangerous and come with great risks, but when a squad of US troops is lost it only makes the front page for a few minutes.
Life == Life.
01:36AM up 426 days, 2:46, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.11, 0.05
In a related note, I would venture a guess that this is the end of the Bush administration's attempt to revive nuclear tech in space with project prometheus.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Thousands die on the road every year, and we haven't closed down automobile travel, yet.
Thousands die from tobacco-related causes...
Thousands die essentially from poor eating habits...
We have a poor sense of risks in our society.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
I find it interesting that many people here are wringing hands and bemoaning the space program. I would simply say that this is to expected. Accidents happen. Life happens. NASA is engaged in some of the most dangerous endeavours humans have ever undertaken. The reality is vehicles will be lost, people will die. It is the nature of things.
All of us undertake serious risk in pushing forward our human lot every day. Just getting in a car and going to work places us in seroius danger of our lives. You could die tomorrow. NASA is launching people into space on the backs of rockets and plunging them back into the atmosphere at incredible speeds. All to improve the lot of our species, to push the envelope, to reach for greater achievements.
Does this mean we should stop the space program? No. We should honor the lives of those lost and continue in the path they lead.
Mark
"It's frustrating that the media can't let go of war sensationalism even now, at a time like this."
Yea, why would anyone want to kill an Israeli? Completely unprecedented. They are never kidnapped from Olympic games or blown up while worshipping on their holiest days.
Look, I'm not saying it is terrorism. I highly doubt it. Blowing up an American Space Shuttle with the first Israeli astronaut would be a Extreme-Muslim Terrorist's dream.
Brian Ellenberger
The shuttles are 30 year old technology with an immense amount of development time gone into it. Replacing the shuttles completely will take many, many years to develop systems and software. 30 year old technology is often still in use because it works.
Of course, the reason they want to kill you has nothing to do with their "tan colored skin" (and everything to do with their f*cked-up religion)
Oh, now I get it! We're supposed to be discriminating against Muslims, not just middle-eastern people! Do you even stop to consider the fact that not every Muslim is a terrorist? It's like saying that every Catholic has 47 kids and will kill a Protestant on sight (a few of them do it in Northern Ireland, that must make it true). Same for Protestants, right? Or what about the undeniable fact that every Hindu either works in a convenience store or lives on the top of a mountain? Les't not even mention the Jews. We all know what THEY're like.
Sir, you are a moron. The odds that terrorism is a factor in this tragedy are sitting at about 0.00000001% right now. They claim that some insulation fell from the shuttle when they launched. Well if my brief experience with thermodynamics is any lesson, it's that things (like space shuttles) get really hot when they have a lot of friction trying to stop their rapid movement (like when they're landing). If something did fall, then I'd be highly suspect that there was some sort of external problem with the shuttle which overheated and caused an explosion. Or maybe not. It's still a lot more likely than your "terrorism".
- Relativistic? That's barely Newtonian!
I just can't figure out how some people can be so pathetics.
"Your're the same group that is defending Sadam".
It reminds me of Bush saying: "You're with us or against us." There is no word to say how stupid, inconscious it is. In my first year of college, I learned in philosophy that saying such things is ridiculous. Some people would certainly needs more education.
I even heard that some US medias began to make speculations about terrorism ! It is unbeleivable. All I have to say is: Americans, watch out, medias want you to get affraid of everything !
" 20 or minutes or so " to hit the ground... i have to disagree. nowhere near that long. a minute or so, at most.
sorrow. remorse. anger at the u.s. for not building more modern designs and retiring that overdesigned piece of aerospace contractage.
NASA will get all the blame, but those astronauts today died of terminal cheapness on the U.S.'s part. The Shuttle is a late-60's design, bastardized by Air Force demands into a flying boxcar. the tiles were a good idea 32 years ago, but we should have built a new shuttle from newer alloys, based on what we learned from what is essentially a prototype space vehicle.
but all this for later. i fear the euopean and U.S. manned space program will be killed from this.
rest in peace, people.
30 year old tech has clearly failed twice.
echo 'Header append X-HD-DVD "0x09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0"' >>
Do whatever it is that you do when faced with a deeply important and tragic event that hits to the very heart of any person with the soul of a scientist and the heart of a free-thinking person, yet is still caring and considerate enough to put aside your overly politically-correct knee-jerk reactions and feel actual sympathy for another human.
A few ideas to consider before slamming me with your "Overrated" mods:
Prayer is not always to God.
People believe in many different gods. Or none. That's what makes us interesting.
Sometimes people just pray.
There is *nothing* wrong with praying, despite what "Anton LeVey" said.
Prayer is often a precursur to real action - it makes you consider things carefully.
You may be wrong about a great many things.
I am not religious and I rarely ever pray, but I did today for these lost scientists. If you can't deal with that, go fuck yourself.
I am rarely surprised by the shallowness and insensitivity of people.
I sure was today.
Ok, now feel free to mod this comment down and out of sight.
-- My Weblog.
I, for one, felt a deep heavy sadness when I saw the news this morning, far beyond the deaths of seven human beings. Space flight is dangerous, and astronauts are brave and dedicated --- I think it's reasonable to feel differently about a group of people that die trying to achieve a worthy and inspiring goal than about the same number of people, or even the exact same people, dying accidentally.
annmariabell.com
foldplay your photos won't know what hit them.
[Taken from here. Emphasis mine... --LP]
President Reagan's Speech on The Challenger Disaster
Oval Office of the White House
January 28, 1986
Ladies and Gentlemen, I'd planned to speak to you tonight to report on the state of the Union, but the events of earlier today have led me to change those plans. Today is a day for mourning and remembering. Nancy and I are pained to the core by the tragedy of the shuttle Challenger. We know we share this pain with all of the people of our country. This is truly a national loss.
Nineteen years ago, almost to the day, we lost three astronauts in a terrible accident on the ground. But, we've never lost an astronaut in flight; we've never had a tragedy like this. And perhaps we've forgotten the courage it took for the crew of the shuttle; but they, the Challenger Seven, were aware of the dangers, but overcame them and did their jobs brilliantly. We mourn seven heroes: Michael Smith, Dick Scobee, Judith Resnik, Ronald McNair, Ellison Onizuka, Gregory Jarvis, and Christa McAuliffe. We mourn their loss as a nation together.
For the families of the seven, we cannot bear, as you do, the full impact of this tragedy. But we feel the loss, and we're thinking about you so very much. Your loved ones were daring and brave, and they had that special grace, that special spirit that says, 'Give me a challenge and I'll meet it with joy.' They had a hunger to explore the universe and discover its truths. They wished to serve, and they did. They served all of us.
We've grown used to wonders in this century. It's hard to dazzle us. But for twenty-five years the United States space program has been doing just that. We've grown used to the idea of space, and perhaps we forget that we've only just begun. We're still pioneers. They, the members of the Challenger crew, were pioneers.
And I want to say something to the schoolchildren of America who were watching the live coverage of the shuttle's takeoff. I know it is hard to understand, but sometimes painful things like this happen. It's all part of the process of exploration and discovery. It's all part of taking a chance and expanding man's horizons. The future doesn't belong to the fainthearted; it belongs to the brave. The Challenger crew was pulling us into the future, and we'll continue to follow them...
I've always had great faith in and respect for our space program, and what happened today does nothing to diminish it. We don't hide our space program. We don't keep secrets and cover things up. We do it all up front and in public. That's the way freedom is, and we wouldn't change it for a minute. We'll continue our quest in space. There will be more shuttle flights and more shuttle crews and, yes, more volunteers, more civilians, more teachers in space. Nothing ends here; our hopes and our journeys continue. I want to add that I wish I could talk to every man and woman who works for NASA or who worked on this mission and tell them: "Your dedication and professionalism have moved and impressed us for decades. And we know of your anguish. We share it."
There's a coincidence today. On this day 390 years ago, the great explorer Sir Francis Drake died aboard ship off the coast of Panama. In his lifetime the great frontiers were the oceans, and a historian later said, 'He lived by the sea, died on it, and was buried in it.' Well, today we can say of the Challenger crew: Their dedication was, like Drake's, complete.
The crew of the space shuttle Challenger honoured us by the manner in which they lived their lives. We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for the journey and waved goodbye and 'slipped the surly bonds of earth' to 'touch the face of God.'
After we grieve, we have to search for answers. One of the things that I saw, going over the crew bios, was that this wasn't one of the more experienced crews. This was the pilot's first flight. It was only the mission commander's second flight.
I absolutely am not putting this at their feet. However, it obviously will be one of the questions raised during the search for answers.
MSNBC has the crew profiles embedded in their story.
sometimes people need a little humor to get through things like this. They're not poking fun, but just dealing with it in their own way.
Disaster magnitude? Hmm. Do you measure that in dollars, lives lost, or shaken public confidence? My first thought this morning was: why don't I get this upset over a downed twin-engine aircraft with seven passengers? Somehow this is bigger, but I hope it's not just because the plane they were flying was a lot more expensive..
So long, and thanks for all the Phish
It's called levity, in the face of horrible tragedy people need to laugh. This may be one of the worst disasters in space exploration ever. It's going to set space reaserch and exploration back YEARS when we're already decades behind where we should be. It's tragic that this happened, i'm sorry for the families and NASA who has tried so hard to maintain despite budget cuts and 30 year old technology. Now we're going to blame them and their lack of foresight. In short this was a tragic day, but people still need to laugh, there's no reason not to make a joke from time to time to lighten the mood when something this bad has happened.
The Green Hills of Earth
Let the sweet fresh breezes heal me
As they rove around the girth
Of our lovely mother planet
Of the cool, green hills of Earth.
We rot in the moulds of Venus,
We retch at her tainted breath.
Foul are her flooded jungles,
Crawling with unclean death.
[ --- the harsh bright soil of Luna ---
--- Saturn's rainbow rings ---
--- the frozen night of Titan --- ]
We've tried each spinning space mote
And reckoned its true worth:
Take us back again to the homes of men
On the cool, green hills of Earth.
The arching sky is calling
Spacemen back to their trade.
ALL HANDS! STAND BY! FREE FALLING!
And the lights below us fade.
Out ride the sons of Terra,
Far drives the thundering jet,
Up leaps a race of Earthmen,
Out, far, and onward yet ---
We pray for one last landing
On the globe that gave us birth;
Let us rest our eyes on the friendly skies
And the cool, green hills of Earth.
-- Robert A. Heinlein
The seven astronauts were explorers and would have understood, even though there was always a chance they wouldn't get their 'last landing' they did what they had to do. Others will take their place, the 'arching sky' will always be calling us, there's too much still unknown to give up now.
Oh, now I get it! We're supposed to be discriminating against Muslims, not just middle-eastern people!
Yes. Discriminate. Not prejudice, but discriminate. You clearly cannot understand the difference between the two words. Hindus, animists, and Lutherans don't have a history of using violence against US assets. Muslims do. Those middle-eastern people who are not muslim haven't attacked us, and therefore can be discounted as a threat.
Do you even stop to consider the fact that not every Muslim is a terrorist?
Do you stop to consider that just about every Muslim DOES advocate terrorism against Israel (whether they call it that or not; they do not recognize Israel's right to exist), and that an Israeli was aboard the shuttle?
Sir, you are a moron. The odds that terrorism is a factor in this tragedy are sitting at about 0.00000001% right now
You are clueless. To immediately discount terrorism is as idiotic as immediately assuming terrorism. The probability of the event being terrorism is low, but it is certainly not nonexistent (pre-launch sabotage of the tiles or aerodynamic systems could cause an event identical to what was observed), and you are a fool to suggest otherwise.
They claim that some insulation fell from the shuttle when they launched
Idiot. That was insulation off the external tank, and the probability of it damaging the shuttle to a sufficient extent to cause this incident is even lower than the probability that this was terrorism.
Leave the politics alone for a few days, right now you can't accomplish anything other than the creation of ill will towards you.
What would have happened if exploration had been written off as "too risky" after that? I guess those of us here in the New World (at least, those of European descent) are lucky that our ancestors were greedy enough to continue onwards despite those risks.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
What would have happened if exploration had been written off as "too risky" after that? I guess those of us here in the New World (at least, those of us of European descent) are lucky that our ancestors were greedy enough to continue onwards despite those risks.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
Three now. Four including the original Enterprise. I wonder if they'll retrofit her now, to replace Columbia?
Unlikely. The Enterprise was never meant to go into space and is only for training inside the atmosphere. Retrofitting it would probably be more work and money than building a whole new shuttle. Enterprise is also very old, and it is likely that Columbia's age played an indirect part in this accident. If I were an astronaut, I would not want to fly on a retrofitted Enterprise.
How about the whole ISS project anyway? Is this going to toast that for good, too?
I expect rocky times ahead for the ISS. The United States is the primary financial backer and provides basically all of the manned missions. Without our support, the ISS is toast. I expect not only NASA to investigate and put things on hold, but also Congress. They are the ones that apropriate funding to NASA. Expect a lot of Congressional debate about our space program in the near future. I would not be surprised if this accelerates plans to privative NASA, an idea that our government has been kicking around for a while. We already contract out a lot of work at NASA.
24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
Well, at 900 comments, probably nobody's going to see this, but if you do: this has the potential to destroy the space program. We live in a time when nobody considers space flight to be particularly important. The loss of the shuttle would be a perfect excuse to put NASA more on the back burner than it was before.
So talk to your friends, tell them why space flight is important, and even more importantly, tell your congressmen what you think. They are the ones that control the money going into the space program. If nobody lets them know that we want space flight to continue, we might lose it entirely.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
Just think of the amount of fuel you'd have to use to propel something from the Earth to the Space Shuttle at a velocity high enough to actually hit it-- probably the only thing fast enough on this planet that could carry that much fuel would be another Space Shuttle.
Look, even if you remove every terrorist from the planet, bad things are still going to happen-- even to Americans.
Height: 38U, Weight: 0 Newtons, Eyes: #0000FF, OS: Gray Matter 1.0 (Alpha)
The problem is that Western MEDIA doesn't show us this. Clearly you can understand that.
I keep switching stations, and I'm tired of hearing about "6 Americans and 1 Israeli". 7 people were in that shuttle. It's frustrating that the media can't let go of war sensationalism even now, at a time like this.
If this upsets you, get rid of your TV! I got rid of my TV in 1997 (and haven't owned one since). It's one of the smartest decisions I've ever made.
Even if you dont own a TV you will be exposed to the media, but TV pervays the worst prepared, most informal 'journalism'. In other words, its largely useless as a source of information. What information you do glean from the TV, you can find in more trustworthy print media sources and internet sources.
Maybe you like TV because of its shoddy presentation of facts and sensationalism. Some people enjoy getting angry at the TV. I often wonder what my dad would do if he couldn't yell at his omnidirectional sludge box.
The long term solution (circa five years)would be to completely replace the STS with a new, cheap and safe reusable launch system.
Expect the cancellation of "Prometheus" shortly, the billion will be needed to replace the Columbia instead.
Expect massive criticism and the selection of a NASA scapegoat by US congress, some of your congresscritters will want to destroy the entire space effort.
Expect speeches by Bush Jr and President Cheney about the necessity to beat the Red Chinese and the former Soviets from being the only ones with a space presence.
Space is too important to give up because of an old and slowly decaying STS. Replacements can be cheap and fast. If any of you have read "Encounter with Tiber" by Buzz Aldrin and Steven Barnes you know what Im talking about.
Now the world has gone to bed, Darkness won't engulf my head, I can see by infra-red, How I hate the night.
Yes... The report earlier this morning on NPR mentioned that a tile had dislodged on launch, and struck a wing. There was supposedly no serious damage at the time.
A piece of insulating foam broke off the external fuel tank and hit the left wing of the shuttle during liftoff. The chances of this causing problems is highly unlikely, given the titanium shielding along the leading edge of the wing and the super-strong construction of the airframe's wings.
But maybe it did cause a problem. Obviously something did. We will find out in due time.
24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
maybe if we supported nasa with money and REFORm we wouldn't have to fly an absurdly old space shuttle. The crew deserve better than that. Give them the equipment they need.
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
Common sense sense to implies that it is - after all, a few innocent people are dead in their prime. Let us look at the big picture though.
Space travel is a tricky business, for it involves physical extremes thoroughly hostile to human life. Accidents are bound to happen, every so often. Is this worth the while? I think so. Space travel is an exploration undertaking that will dwarf anything we humans have accomplished before in the exploration endeavors. The price in human life is therefore likely to be large.
As far as the deceased astronauts are concerned, I envy them. What a magnificent way to go! Just think about it: those guys were living what is very likely the most exciting exploratory activity nowadays. More likely than not, they loved what they were doing.
It is of course regrettable that the effort cost them their lives. But I can't think of a better way to go than doing something you really care for, you really enjoy. I am sure that they and their families were aware of the risks involved, and accepted them.
The bottom line is, I hope that this will not put the brakes on space traveling again. We must accept that deaths are going to happen, and just keep going. If we take no chances we won't get anywhere.
God help me, but I'm about to defend Fox News Channel... IMHO, they're using the ticker in exactly the right manner. The main story occupies the main window, but other news doesn't suddenly stop happening. I don't know if what they're running really counts as "news", but that would be an appropriate thing to run.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
tasteless? How so. Don't be rediculous. This is a very valid question. After the challenger we gave up on space. Of course he feels for the crew, and their familes. But he is obviously scared that NASA will become too scared to take risks, ever. The challenger did that for years. These pilots risked their lives to be space pilots. They knew of the risks. They went willingly into those risks. Yes we should mourn. But we should realize that these pilots loved space, and to honour them we must explore space.
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
I just had a thought that runs counter to pretty much everything I've read on here today. As horrible as it might be to say, this catastrophe might be actually end up being a good thing for the future of the space program. The general populus has forgotten about the space program for years now. This disaster puts them back in the news, along with the portrayal of astronauts as the brave adventurous scientists that seek to bring new advances to the people of their country and of the world. The folks who lost their lives today will be shown as heroes to Joe Sixpack once again, and might serve to rekindle a sense of adventure and pride in them. Also, it shows that this program has been forced to use old technology and scrape by on minimal budgets for far too long; and that with proper funding, this tragedy could have been avoided. Perhaps this will serve as a wake up call to Congress that we need to properly support this vital piece of the scientific advances that this country and this world needs. I just don't see us abandoning manned space flight, and more funding is the only viable alternative.
Fly
What about simple sabotage? Everyone is noting how complex a Space Shuttle is. Cut a line here or there. Change the adhesive used to attach the tiles.
One again, as I said highly unlikely to impossible. I believe it was a mechanical failure of some sort.
But flying 2 jumbo jets into the Twin Towers, destroying the towers and killing 1000s of people was unlikely too. So I retain some skeptism of "accidents" especially on such a large target.
Brian Ellenberger
As well as being a long time aviation buff, I'm also a racing fan. One thing that I know for a certainty is that no pilot, driver, or rider ever wants to stop in spite of tragedies or the loss of freinds and peers.
Same with engineers. Something doesn't work right, then get it right the next time!
That said, the people that put out the most effort in this kind of endeavour are the ones that should decided whether or not there is to be a cessation of exploration! Taking the time to ponder the reasons for the failure is one thing, and any good engineer would do so. But an outright halt to the space program isn't going to happen.
Good!
Nothing in politics is inevitable. People can always make the difference. In this case we have essentially a single individual, George W Bush who is the advocate of this war. Without him there would be no war. In a constitution of checks and balances individual power is seriously limited.
The numbers of casualties in the war are likely to dwarf this disaster. It is likely that the civilian casualties alone will be tens of thousands. The number of US troops killed is unlikely to be less than hundreds.
I don't agree that the war is inevitable though. Blair just got an extension of six weeks to try to convince other allies. In particular they really need permission from Turkey to use bases there. Blix has stated that the Bush administration deliberately misrepresented his report. The diplomatic initiative could well swing against Bush and his chickenhawks.
It is one thing to say you will start a war with no allies, no UN support and little domestic support. It is quite another to actually send the troops in for a land invasion.
What is very likely to happen is a prolonged bombing campaign launched from air craft carriers and Diego Garcia. The real issue will be whether Bush can keep the attacks going long enough to get Saddam before the news reports of hospitals, schools etc. being bombed take their toll. The British press don't think Blair will last more than a few weeks if there is a war, he does not have party support, even the Tory opposition, Thatcher's party is opposed.
The bulk of the US casualties would come from an actual land invasion. Bush may habe the theoretical ability to launch an invasion with no other support, in practice there are real limits to his authority. It is very unlikely he could launch an invasion if there was serious opposition to the war and people such as Schwatzkof and Powell went to Congress and said that there would likely be thousands of casualties if the land invasion went ahead.
The GOP has set a very dangerous precedent with their frivolous impeachment of Clinton. It would only take a small number of disaffected Republicans to bring an impeachment.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
I don't think I can say anything that hasnt been posted already. I just want to express my deepest condolences to the crew, their families, and to the American people. Being a canadian engineering student, I have always dreamed of working for NASA in the USA, a lifelong dream, that I one day hope to accomplish.. although working for the Canadian Space Agency would also suffice. This is a very sad day on so many levels. On the level of the loss of life, as well as on the engineering side... as the Challenger explosion in 1986 set back the American space program... I can only hope that NASA presses on, and that congress doesn't stifle funding even more. Also a sad day to the American people, as well as here in Canada... astronauts were my childhood heros, and still are. Godspeed STS-107 crew... Godspeed.
"If we die, we want people to accept it. We're in a risky business, and we hope that if anything happens to us it will not delay the program. The conquest of space is worth the risk of life."
- Gus Grissom, responding to a reporter, at a press conference for the first manned Apollo mission.
Take a moment to think of all the people that died while going west to the americas back in the day.
Sure, you might say we have more technology, but by no means do we have the technology to travel to and from the cosmos like we do to cross the oceans now.
Alot more lives will be lost, and there will be nothing we can do about it, except hope we learn from our mistakes.
Everyone knows there is a higher risk of death or injury to these brave people.
But that is just a chance you have to take.
I'm sorry, but is this really the time for petty squabling about the most politically correct wording for a sentiment that everybody is feeling right now?
He didn't squabble; he just used the term he was comfortable with. You're the one who seems to want to make an issue out if it, for reasons I can't imagine.
It's not about the fucking shuttle, dude. It's about the 7 people on board.
Calm down. It's called the freedom of speech. People can say insensitive things and they're allowed to do so, it's the great thing about the US.
And, please, what makes this any more sad than 7 people dying on the streets tonight? What makes this any more important than the prospect of hundreds of thousands of people dying in a forthcoming war?
This is a sad event, and will rock the nation, but still.. it's 7 people. If Bush has his way, thousands more will be dead soon, and I bet you won't be crying into your hankies then.
And because I believe in these rights to free speech, I'm not hiding behind the Anonymous Coward either.
mogorific carpentry experiments
During its history, 4 people died onboard Soyuz spacecraft during the 36 years of its service. Both accidents (1 and 3 cosmonauts dead, respectively) happened before the commencing of the Shuttle program. The bottom line is 25 years of service without fatal accidents. None of the last three major modifications of Soyuz were involved in any.
The Shuttle program has a shorter history of 22 years of spaceflight, killing 15 people in two fatal accidents (8 and 7 respectively). If I were an insurance company, I would recommend Soyuz.
That is extremely unlikely. Multiple redundant warning systems would have set off a warning in the cockpint of there was locking failure of the bay doors. If one did come off, I would speculate it was due to internal pressure from a different source than failure to lock.
Even the simplest private planes with folding landing gear have redundant systems to warn of gear lock failure.
The public reaction is based on the Shuttle Program itself. Seriuosly outdated hardware that is starting to fall apart at the seams. The program was fine for the 80's but it is 20 years later...
I feel deeply for the families and friends of all of those involved in this horrible tragedy.
It is time that we give up on the Shuttle Program and create/use something better.
We are a planet of one race... I think it is time we start acting like it.
Unity. Peace. Exploration. Knowledge.
In skydiving it's not uncommon for someone to get killed. Typically when that happens the people at the dropzone continue to skydive on that day, not out of any disrespect of the person that died, but because dying is just another part of life and it should not interrupt what people do.
Similairly when a person in skydiving has a near death event, it's also typical that they immediately go back up and do another skydive as soon as they're able to. It's kind of a cliche, but "getting back on the horse" is an important part of life. When people don't go back up, it's not uncommon for them to leave the sport entirely, ie. give in to their fears.
Space travel is dangerous, and shit's gonna happen. No matter what decisions are made, how safe you play the game, eventually somewhere somehow something bad will go wrong and with the dangers and forces involved with space travel that will usually mean people will die.
But that should not cause any interruptions in the space program. Just because a shuttle went down doesn't make them unsafe. In fact considering how often they go up, I'd say 1 shuttle down every 18 years is pretty damn good. NASA needs to get another shuttle up and get back on the horse ASAP.
Unfortunately what will probably happen is that the space program will be suspended while everyone plays the blame game. Fingers will be pointed, a lot of If's will be thrown around: If they hadn't dismissed the damage done to the wing at launch - If they had rehauled the shuttle more carefully in '99 - If more money was spent on the program - If we weren't using 20 year old technology - If, if, if...
If you skydive long enough, you'll see people die. The forces are extreme enough in the sport, that small mistakes can become lethal. Space travel involves forces even more extreme: here we had a craft screaming through re-entry into earth at 12,000 miles per hour. I can't begin to imagine the kind of stresses those forces put on a space craft.
Eventually the odds are going to catch up with those involved, something nobody thought of will happen and with such extreme forces involved, people will die.
But death doesn't mean you put all life on hold.
When you push the limits of human experience, the price is risk. But life without risk is meaningless.
"Is space worth the risk?"
No, it's not. More precisely, manned space travel isn't worth the risk. (Unmanned missions are risk-free by comparison)
Just look at the kinds of leading edge science this crew died to perform:
http://www.wff.nasa.gov/~sspp/sem/about.html
Manned space flight (both shuttle trips, and the International Space Station) are today worth neither the risk nor the money. I like what John Pike said about the ISS: "The value of the science that can be done on the Space Station is trivial compared to the cost of the Space Station. Piloted spaceflight is about politics."
Let's look specifically at the ISS, which is the destination for most of the recent shuttle flights. Keeping humans supplied in space takes many extra trips up and down: all the air, water, food, living space, and exercise equipement takes up valuable cubic meters. And all of the provisions for safety and gentle re-entry further reduce the fuel efficiency of the rockets.
The ISS program, and the supply flights to build & support it, will have a total price tag of at around $100,000,000,000.
Scientific-notation kinds of fundage ($1e11)!! You'd have to be a NASA researcher just to count it all.
Virtually all of the science and maintenannce done on Shuttles and the ISS could be accomplished by semi-autonomous robots. Sure, today maybe our robotics and AI technology isn't good enough to substitute for some of the tricky things where a dynamic, flexible human is needed. Well, try investing a fraction of the $1e11 budget into researching those systems, and then tell me how well they work!
Developing better robots to operate space equipment won't only make extra-planetary research safer and cheaper- it'll also produce technological advances that will benefit civilians around the world!
(Rocket-boosters are only needed by astronauts and admirals. But reliable robot manipulators could be useful to anyone)
I fear for the public reaction agenst NASA and space traval from this day forward.
I hope the public wises up that manned space flight is an expensive and dangerous form of esteem-boosting entertainment.
There are frequently posts about happenings in NASA posted on Slashdot - ie - Mars, asteroid sitings, etc. If this story isn't "stuff that matters", I don't know what is.
But manned flight is essential if we want to live in space long term.
I for one want to see a Moon colony, Mars colony, etc.
We aren't going to get off this rock if we only send robots into space.
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
... flights by humans. Remember: the Hubble repairs and upgrades. Just as we can't perfectly send humans into space, we also can't perfectly send robots or equipment. And as probes get more sophisticated, their size will mandate their construction in orbit. Humans will be needed for that.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
Go build a plexiglass dome in Antartica and live there for a few years, to see how moon life would feel. Remember to keep it sealed, so you can't have any additional air, water, or food. Only sunlight gets in. If you survive, then we can talk about extraterrestrial colonies.
"Getting off this rock" is a good goal- for a 100+ year timeframe! This discussion is science-fiction terrirtory.
There's no need to start moving off-planet yet. Sure, it's arguably overpopulated already, and it'll get more crowded as the century goes on- but the most barren, desolate wasteland on earth is a paradise compared to what you'd find on the surface of Mars or Luna!
To live in space soonest, we should fork the research into 2 branches:
Once those 2 research branches have been followed through to independent success, true space colonization research can begin. But trying to develop both the spaceflight technology and the human sustainment skills at the same time- as the ISS program is doing- is an expensive, dangerous folly.
It's not unreasonable to quibble over exactly how we go into space, but it's absolutely imperative that we continue going there. If we were to stop entirely just because the current direction isn't optimal, it would be that much harder to get going again once we were able to agree what "optimal" might be.
and people seemed to just stop buying stuff
Sad commentary on society when that's what it takes to get people's attention. When was the last time that this happened??
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Venturestar looks great until you actually start running the numbers on it. Any single stage to orbit craft has to have an insanely low structural mass fraction. something like .05-.1 What those numbers mean is that for ever kilogram of payload, structure, engines, people etc, you need 10-20 kg of fuel. Things get better if youre dropping structure and fuel tanks off along the way, like the shuttle. Howevwer, if you had to carry the SRB's and the external tank all the way to orbit, the shuttle would be twice as big as it currently is and still have the same payload capacity. Venturestar tried to get around this with new efficient engine technology and carbon fiber fuel tanks. The Carbon fiber fuel tanks would have significantly reduced the tank weight. Unfortunately, fuel leakd throguh the carbon skin and into the honeycomb underneath. When the tanks emptied the fuel vaporized and popped a hole in the tank. Not very good for reusability. Engine performance can only be tweaked so far. The limits are the chemical energy that is released from a given reation. Ultimately all rockets get killed by the rocket equation. dV=g0*Isp*ln(mf/m0) g0=gravity=9.81 m/s^2 Isp= the specific impulse of the fuel (depends on the fuel) the best we can get is about 450-460 for liquid oxygen-liquid hydrogen ,mf=final mass of your vehicle m0=initial mass of your vehicle. dV= total change in velocity for the vehicle. Orbital velocity is about 7600 m/s plus you need to add on a bit more for drag as you go through the atmosphere, and the energy you need to actually reach altitude. A good number is 10000 m/s Run the numbers yourself and see how much mass you need in fuel to launch a certain mas of craft. Keep in mind that as you increase the amount of fuel you increase the amount of tank mass and other masses like wiring and computers.
In today's press conference a NASA official dismissed the importance of the debri that hit the left wing on launch. After all it happened in two of the previous three shuttle missions, and nothing happened.
This brought back memories of a paragraph from the Feynman report after the challenger disaster which warns precisely about this:
We have also found that certification criteria used in Flight Readiness Reviews often develop a gradually decreasing strictness. The argument that the same risk was flown before without failure is often accepted as an argument for the safety of accepting it again. Because of this, obvious weaknesses are accepted again and again, sometimes without a sufficiently serious attempt to remedy them, or to delay a flight because of their continued presence.
Lets just say the tiles caused it. That critical tiles where somehow displodged by the foam on take off.
There was nothing they could do about it. They could not repair any damage. They couldn't meet up with Station, They couldn't stay on orbit much longer, Certainly not long enough to mount a rescue. The only choice they had was attempting re-entry and landing. They couldn't launch the Soyuz on the pad for a rescue because soyuz is not capable of making shuttles normal orbit, not to mention that is a progres module and not one designed for re-entry and even if it were it could only hold 3 minus anyone needed for launch ( normally 2 )..Choices where
A) Stay in orbit and die when life support failed. B) Hope it held together on re-entry.
and thats if they discovered an issue before they went for de-orbit burn. If they found out after that there only choice was hoping it held together on re-entry.
The same applies to almost any problem which may have developed of a structural nature.
I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
No. Only one shuttle failed, not two. Challenger worked perfectly on January 28 of 1986. It was the solid fuel booster rocket *attached to it* that failed. Why is this relevant? Because the boosters don't get the same amount of re-use as the shuttles themselves, and the boosters are interchangable. The booster that failed on Jan 28, 1986 was not part of Challenger and may vary well have been used previously on Columbia, Discovery, or Atlantis or all of the above.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Today's New York Times calculates the risks: 2 failures in 113 flights, about 98 percent success rate, which is thought by NASA acceptable -- or at any rate realistic -- for space flight. Who would go on a business trip with a 1 and 56 chance of dying? We have come to take astronauts for granted. They are extraordinarily valiant, the bravest of the brave.