Slashdot Mirror
NASA Debates Second Discovery Repair
An anonymous reader writes "NASA is debating today whether or not they should attempt a second repair attempt of the Space Shuttle Discovery to repair a possible problem with the thermal blanket. On Wednesday, an astronaut removed two protruding cloth fillers from between the ceramic tiles on the space shuttle's heat shield. "I think in the old days we would not have worried about this so much," said shuttle programme deputy manager Wayne Hale The astronaut extended his gloved hand and quickly removed the first fiber strip, which was sticking up from Discovery's smooth, tiled underside. "It's coming out very easily," the astronaut said. Arm operator Jim Kelly then maneuvered the arm about three meters to the second protruding strip, known as a gap filler, and Robinson gently pulled that piece out as well. The concern now is whether or not a damaged thermal blanket under one of the cockpit windows would tear apart during re-entry and strike the orbiter."
What's the worst that could happen?
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
Isn't basically the only thing they're testing on this flight anyway the Shuttle's new self-repair capabilities? I say, go for it. Play with your new toy.
> BREAKING NEWS NASA determines droopy shuttle insulation blanket not a danger to Discovery, no fourth spacewalk required. Details soon.
Is this supposed to mean something comming from overclockersclub.com? Are the editors trying to say they run things a little hot anyway - and associating Jim with Jill Kelly? Yeah it is late in the week for karma burn Tuesday.
Tender Nubbins!
... better safe than sorry.
Plus its not like its costing us any extra money or anything. Safety first and all that.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Out of all places to link a news story like this we choose an overclocking webpage? Irregardless, they have decided not to repair the blanket per MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8826983/
NASA says they will NOT do this ...
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Is this truly the best source to quote for this type of story? I can think of several much better ones off the top of my head....
space.com
spaceflightnow.com
nasa.gov
flatoday.com
chron.com
L.L. Bean filed suit against NASA for using the term "Thermal Blanket" when discussing the potential repairs.
Joe Smith, lead counsel for L.L. Bean is quoted as saying "It's clear that NASA is attempting to make our consumers believe that L.L. Bean's thermal blankets are hazerdous. The fact is, there is no evidence to suggest that Thermal Blankets have ever caused damage, much less damage to a space shuttle."
Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.
"I think in the old days we would not have worried about this so much,"
should be immediately followed by,
"but of course in the old days we lost two shuttles because we didn't worry so much, and I'm not the one who has to ride the inside of a flaming torch across a couple thousand miles of sky, so who am I to say?"
Okay... this one's trickier to turn into the creation/evolution. How about:
I guess NASA scientists will weigh all their options until they make what seems like a natural selection.
Could be better, but I'll sign it anyway:
FLAMEBAIT!
Nasa should make all the necessary repairs despite what anyone else says. They're losing funding and they can't afford another accident. If an accident did happen they probably would never get the funding in order to go to the moon or send people to mars. Hopefully everything goes well and next time they can be better prepared
"extended his gloved hand and quickly removed the first fiber strip, which was sticking up from Discovery's smooth, tiled underside."
Is it me or am I the only person who when first glancing at that thought it was segment from erotic literature?
Hell yes, probably doesn't need fixing - but the astronauts need to have fun.
Das computermachinen ist nicht fur der fingerpoken und mittengraben. Keep das hans in poketz und vatch das blinken leitz
I'll leave it to the space buffs to argue about whether that's a good or a bad thing -- I just pay my taxes and enjoy the pretty pictures.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
How much actually useful work was done by this flight? Most of the work seems to be about testing whether $1bln upgrades are worth a damn. If the future flights would require that much work to be able to safely return, no wonder there is a debate on scrapping the shuttle program.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
It's still not too late to bring This Ol' Bird out of retirement...
as we slide into our long period of decline, like the UK did, and France did, and Belgium, and Poland did before us ...
...
now the mantle is being taken up by the EU, China, and Japan, who concentrate more on useful trips and less on wasteful space stations, and don't try to use 30 year old technology designed to last 10 years, just to finance silly foreign adventures that don't help their economy
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Treat me like a marketing stat, and I'll treat your movie like a series of ones and zeros
"The astronaut extended his gloved hand and quickly removed the first fiber strip, which was sticking up from Discovery's smooth, tiled underside."
Man, I didn't know spaceship repair could be so HOT... I need a moment alone...
no comment
In the current climate of "safety at all costs", it's a wonder any of us leave the house. How many product commercials and local newscasts contain that dreaded solemnly intoned phrase "How you can keep your fmily safe". My god, the last presidential election was all about safety at all costs, and little else. We've lost fewer men in Iraq than an average day during World War II. Cars are marketed about safety, efficiency be damned. Does anybody remember when being blasted into space on the tip of a rocket was a brave and noble thing to do because it was fucking dangerous? Remember Gordo Cooper? Chuck Yeager? Anybody rember White, Grissom and Chaffee? How about the Russians who died? Can we please stop obsessing about Crista damn McAuliffe and go back to exploring space? Jesus Christ, America TAKE A CHANCE!
</RANT>
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
mmmm.... space shuttle slashfiction. I do believe that you've actually come up with a niche of sexual depravity that the interweb hasn't filled yet. Fascinating...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Why should we even bother going to space if we are going to spend the entire flight fixing issues that have probably always been there, but only recently have been declared safety hazards. All these little repairs don't leave any time for science. Remember science, the reason that we go to space?
Surely you can't be serious?
They know there's no real risk from any of these things... the whole point is to get experience in fixing things when it doesn't matter if it works or not, so when it does matter, you know you can do it.
the parent link to the later story on the AP wire is way more informative and contradicts the overclock.com attempt to get slashdot hitrates.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Maybe we should send the shuttles up and make them permanent space craft instead of trying to bring them back all the time. Then just send up rockets to them man them and bring people back. I'm sure the shuttle get more wear and tear with the re-entries and launches more than anything else.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
NASA should stop trying to polish a turd (Space Shuttle) and move on to building the next generation space vehicles. The design is decades old and is obviously failing in many areas.
"Simplify, simplify, simplify!" Thoreau
I don't like this, and I can't imagine how this makes the astronauts feel! I think I'd be jumping ship to the international space station and wait for the next ride home... I'm sure this is just a case of NASA being over cautious, cause you know if this has happened now, it's happened countless times to past missions with nary an issue (save for that foamy thing)
bad_outlook
--
Is this vague enough for you?
I am serious.
And don't call me Shirley.
Man's in the vacuum of space. Isn't it sort of implied that he's got gloves on? I always wanted the story to go, "He reached out his hand and thought, 'Oh shit I've forgotten my gloves.'"
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
Hahahah, that's a good one. Apparently that link logs you out of Slashdot. Fucking clever.
Sleep is futile.
At this point in time, Discovery reminds me of the very 1st car I owned. I always had to park it on a hill so that I could run it down the hill to start it. Parking on a hill doesn't help much in zero G. If I were orbiting earth in Discovery right now, I'd be worried, very worried.
Free Firefox news reader.
Have we lost a shuttle due to issues with it during reentry? Yes? Ok so then weighing the risk of s spacewalk (where we have never lost a life) vs. fixing a possible problem that could prove fatal in a situation that has proven fatal before...seems like a no brainer to me...seems like spacewalking is safer that doing the unknown aka. reentering without knowing WHAT will happen for sure....at what point can we start treating spacewalks as a necessary thing? What I mean is, yes it's dangerous, and they must treat it as such..but if you compare the problems with spacewalking issues that have occured with reentry issues that JUST occured, the answer is obvious.
Thank you for copying the article verbatim, afterall, a summary should include every word, phrase, and sentence of the original.
...that suspended safety rules to allow the mission?
I think the astronauts should, upon safe return, go through mission control and give each one of those assholes a louisville surprise. Lacking that safe return, their families should do the same, then burn the building to the ground.
We need to get serious about other options, to bring the amount of stuff up as they are today, a Space Elevator would be far more appropriate: Space Elevator - can I get a witness?
bad_outlook
--
Is this vague enough for you?
We were at work all evening to figure out how to remove the insulation fibers from the outside of the suits so they don't contaminate the air system. Those fibers are sticky little bastards.
But we heard this morning that there is not going to be a 4th EVA this trip. Oh well, we're ready for it next time.
It's clear that they are in a very deep way, Nasa and its vendors are quickly learning from mistakes.
Some people have a knack for making the worst of bad situations. I'm pleased that those who nearly wrecked the program are either gone or sidelined.
I find this new found ability to be humble about "things" to be excellent.
Nasa has a long and fruitful future ahead if they continue to learn from mistakes / not repeat them.
This fundamental shift from "hide head in clouds" to realistic optimism is just what the doctor order.
I wish people would recognize this as constructive and stop with the whining about it like its a problem which needs re-fixing.
Compared to other highly polished vehicle transport systems (like Airbus, or any car), the shuttle buss is new and way under funded for the risks they accept.
All these little repairs don't leave any time for science. Remember science, the reason that we go to space?
... or at least that's what they think. It's not like Japan and China are in a race to build a moon station while we fiddle around - oh, wait they are.
...
You mean like fixing the Hubble Space Telescope that most of the public is overwhelmingly behind, instead of the Big Boondoggle Space Station that only the DC beltway insiders care about?
But that would be logical - and useful.
Weaponizing space is more important than science
Where's the darn [sarcasm] key when you need it
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Thermal blanket... is that the same as the thermal curtain? I thought the odds of a thermal curtain failure were so high that Jinx had to fool the computer into thinking it was happening. Even if it does fail, it's easy, you just ignite the other booster and send Max into space! Jinx and Max...friends...for...ever.
Is it just me or is this a bit of a coincidence? The space shuttle has been running fine for decades (minus challenger which was unrelated) then suddenly, something hits it and damages the tiles causing it to break up later. Then, the very first shuttle launched after this suffers the exact same fate. Out of 100's of shuttle missions, 2 have had this problem right after each other, what are the odds? Why have we never heard of shuttles having tiles repaired in space before or having damage caused by something hitting it?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
a flaming ball of shit descending on us everytime they go up into space. They cram them with refuse and unneeded parts before they undock and are deorbitted to burn up on rentry.
We have already built new space delivery vehicles!
Didn't you see "Armageddon"??!
Nah, noone in that movie I wanted to see.
But seriously, other than the military space shuttle, and a couple of testbed heavy lift vehicles the military has reserved, we have no real investments in building new space delivery vehicles, which is why Japan and China are going to colonize the moon decades before we wake up.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
After all, who's there? Who's butt'll end up a cloud of rapidly expanding superhot gas if the wrong decision gets made?
I wholeheartedly support the space mission.
But, I feel that NASA needs to do a better job of communicating the actual shuttle mission tasks and how it's useful to the program. Honestly...what was this mission about? Just to test to see if the Shuttle would fly and come back safely? (I hope I hope I hope it comes back safely!!!) If that's the case...how come people aren't getting fired for not getting it right again this time? Shuttle used for this mission is a lemon~ Single flight...and 2 big "if"'s already. One more...and it's definitely a lmon. Can I ask for my tax money back?
It'd be nice if NASA showed more of how the entire program benefits from each of these flights. Same with the Space Station. What the hell are they doing over there? I just don't see the point and can't connect with the typical..."it's for scientific experiments" reasoning. I'm sure it is...and I'm sure it's good. But I haven't heard anything come out from either of these projects and how it has advanced science. At least have a Discovery Channel special or something~!
I really do love the space program...it expands our imaginations and our reach. Nothing makes us dream bigger. But I wish NASA would bring itself down to earth a bit and connect with the tax payers a bit.
Also, I still do not understand why public opinion is so important to congressmen. When was the last time public opinion effectively forced the federal government to step back on investment decisions?
Finally, the current state of IP laws restricted the beneficiaries of the space exploration. I suspect that at the beginning of space exploration, America as a whole gained a lot in terms of advancement in technology. People, in general, got to have some by products of that research improving their daily life. What stuff the research has brought to the average Joe in the last 10 years that actually improved his life?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050804/ts_nm/space_sh uttle_dc
NASA already decided no further spacewalks are needed.
The View from Here: Lily-Livered Pansies
Elliot G. Pulham
President & Chief Executive Officer
No country ever built an airplane by running for the hills and abandoning the program the first time a bolt sheared or a rivet popped during test flight. Our effort to conquer the seas was not cast on the trash heap of history the first time some ship sprung a leak.
These points seem to be lost on our current generation of lily-livered commentators and pundits, and even a few faint-hearted friends in Congress. In the wake of the successful launch of Discovery, a chorus of these "timid souls" seem willing to abandon human space flight at the first sign of evidence confirming that which we all know - putting humans in space is a tricky, difficult, unforgiving and risky business that is nonetheless worth it all.
I shudder to think where our country would be if this "do nothing, risk nothing" attitude had prevailed throughout our history. Our territories west of the Mississippi would likely fly the French and Mexican flags, railways would never have crossed the continent, and heaven knows the defense department never would have been allowed to fund the Wright Brothers and that risky, dangerous, flying machine contraption.
A test flight is a test flight. It is designed to ferret out problems and flaws. If you understand this, then you understand that, thus far, mission STS-114 has been a fabulous success that has generated a treasure trove of knowledge that will make future human space flights - not only of the space shuttle but of any spacecraft - better.
I normally balk at over reacting to anything that happens at NASA. In speeches around the country, I usually start by debunking the notion that NASA "is" space - pointing out that the largest space agency in the world is the U.S. Air Force, that NASA accounts for less than 10 percent of space activity world wide, and that, since 1996, commercial space activities have comprised the largest sector of the market.
But it matters what NASA does. The fact that hundreds of millions of people watched the launch of Discovery on television, a half-million showed up in person in Florida for the launch, and another half-million more had it streamed to their desktops should tell us all we need to know. Human space flight and space exploration is what captivates the minds and hearts of our people, especially our youth, and propels us forward.
Warts and all, foam shedding and all, the fact that virtually every newspaper in America (and most around the globe) has had space exploration on its front page for nearly every day of the past week should tell us something. We know it is dangerous. We know it will probably always be dangerous. And still we want to go, for in going lies all our hopes, dreams and aspirations.
For all those cranks, sots, killjoys and ignoramuses who think the launch of Discovery was a failure - sit down, shut up, and listen:
Spectacular Success No. 1 - Discovery is safely on orbit, docked to the International Space Station, and all indications are that she has suffered far less launch damage than any shuttle launched before. Human space exploration is proceeding. It is only the schedule of this exploration that will vary.
Spectacular Success No. 2 - Thanks to the efforts of thousands of NASA, contractor, and Dept. of Defense personnel (let's not forget that the Air Force plays numerous critical roles in every shuttle launch, and that U.S. Strategic Command is also heavily involved), the new launch observation and monitoring measures performed brilliantly. We've collected more data and imagery on this shuttle launch than on any human space flight in history. The systems worked. Because of that, we know we still have things to fix on the external tank.
Spectacular Success No. 3 - The NASA culture. Within moments of understanding that foam shedding is still a problem, NASA managers immediately and unequivocally decided th
i am a soviet space shuttle
The rather large hole in Columbia's wing did doom the mission and should have prompted an abort to land, or at least a repair attempt of some sort if no rescue could be attempted, even if it was just stuffing pieces of a spacesuit in the hole.
My point is, we didn't image the huge damage, but now we are being way to cautious with every nick and ding we are seeing in exquisite detail that were probably there in similar degrees on every previous mission. Am I the only one worried they are going to break something critical trying to fix these minor problems? It wasn't some minor airflow problem over Columbia that doomed the mission, but a gapping hole.
On a related note, it does seem that more debris is falling of the external tank than ever before. One reason for the increase shedding was explained as a change in fabrication techniques for the foam using ozone safe chemicals. This being speculated in the wake of loosing Columbia. Have we gone back to the older fab technique, or are the few shuttle launches a year just too much of a strain on the environment? Seriously, I support the replacement of dangerous CFCs, but only in situations where they don't endanger life. What percent of ozone depletion could the foam on the Shuttle possible represent?
Seems like NASA should concentrate on first causes, not this piddling after the fact stuff.
Letter To Iran
Or do these shuttle 'repairs' seem like its just a bunch of PR to show off the new safer NASA?
because, you know, a blanket can damage the space shuttle so much... this explains everything.
There's an old saying that says pretty much whatever you want it to.
Let's rename NASA to stand for
NITSEA
The Navel Introspection and Tile Space Exploration Agency.
I know this is very important, but can we PLEASE quit with the "Discovery Crew Sneezed: Was a Tile Knocked Out of Place?" threads!? We got damage on EVERY SINGLE ORBITER FLIGHT. Only Columbia's was signficant and severe and should have been looked into when engineers suspected it, but bureaucrats stopped them as they quashed Thiokol's warnings not to fly Challenger in January 1986.
But this, this is navel lint study at its finest. These people have gone through the wringer--again--and they do know the stakes. Getting to LEO back and forth with the Orbiter should never have been this complicated, but hey, thank the US Congress for cutting funds that forced NASA into a "pay now, or pay later" approach to vehicle design.
The result of not spending more cash back in Shuttle development to create a fully reusable design with fewer safety flaws or compromises has resulted in a system that astronauts now pay for on behalf of the Congress with their lives, and by people like us with extra tax dollars, our disinterest and distrust as NASA is forced to ponder their virtual belly button for damage.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I say when they're decommissioned, they launch all the space shuttles one last time and leave them up there, as space stations.
If my auto machanic can charge me 100$ an hour to work on my car...
If I was them, and I made it back ok, I think I might send them a little bill for services rendered.
The best part is, you could probably charge whatever you like, its not like there are a lot of examples of "Shuttle Repair in Space".
Heh, that would also sound good on a resume eh?
"So what makes you think you are suited to work here?"
"Well Sir, I did repair a space shuttle while in outer space, and then decend in it. I stand by my work!"
Extra time had to be put in to do the underwater simulations on the ground to make sure the whole exercise wasn't pointless.
Why fly these old crappy pinto wagons into space anyhow? Should the "intelligent" people at nasa be redirecting all their resources to building a new vehicle instead of recycling these old crappy shuttles? I guess they can keep flying them until they all blow up. Then, they have nothing left but to build a new re-designed one.
I'd like to remind them that as a trusted slashdot poster, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground karma caves.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
In the old days, the Shuttle didn't come apart so much. Even the thermal ribbon they "repaired" (by yanking it out and hoping it wasn't necessary after all) has only stuck out a fraction of it's latest malfunction. But it's nice to see NASA at least sensitive enough to public support that they're quick to spin any bad news into public confidence. Let's just hope the engineers don't believe all that management bullshit, and make spacecraft that safely put humans into space and back. Lying government PR is cheap enough to make lots more of it. But science isn't cheap, and grounded space programs cost billions.
--
make install -not war
the Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) was cancelled. Since the CRV would've enabled 7 station astronauts to return to earth in the event of emergency, lack of it is the limiting factor on the number of astronauts on the station. A common figure bandied about is that maintenance of station requires about 2.5 astronauts on average throughout their stay. That leaves .5 astronauts on average to work on "science" assuming the full 3 that can be returned on a soyuz capsule are present. (there are often only 2 present however...) So the only time there are actually enough people to make any progress is when a shuttle is actively docked with the station during crew-swap.
BTW, just because a preliminary design requires materials that don't yet exist does not mean the project should be scrapped. All preliminary designs have physical problems that much be addressed. These are called engineering problems because they are solved through the engineering process. Either materials would've been developed that met the requirements of the vessel or the project would've been refined to the point that they were not necessary. At which point you have a prototype and eventually a production model.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
X-33 was certainly more grounded than NASP, but both far overstepped in their requirements. NASP outright called for the craft to be propelled by scramjets back before we had done much of any work on scramjets at all. Even X-33 called for propellant tanks far lighter than anything ever produced.
In short, they were calling for basic research in the critical path (not applied research).
I wish people would stop comparing JÃnsi to God. He's good, but he's no JÃnsi.
Put Rutan in charge of NASA, like really in charge.
Das computermachinen ist nicht fur der fingerpoken und mittengraben. Keep das hans in poketz und vatch das blinken leitz
Forward Light Escort Armored-cancelled right at the last second due to politics, not engineering
I think after korea, nam and gulf disaster 1, grunts should realise it's a different military service now. Hummvees are big go karts, never designed to be armored, and as such, will never be an adequate vehicle.
Ever since we stopped actually declaring righteous war,after WW2, it's gone downill fast. Anyone going in now should realise that they are encountering the same corporate boss mindset that drives civilian workplaces,ie, it sucks, there is no loyalty or thought for the "workers", the push is to make maximum profits for the few big corporations who are really running the show, and that's it. the rest is political razzle dazzle smoke and mirrors huckstering. Snake oil politics.
Of course its coming out easily, you're using a hydraulic arm designed to manipulate objects with alot of mass. Its very strong.
If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
. . . tell him to fuck off until he build a real space-plane.
Would it be so bad to leeve these jelopies in orbit? Or to direct congress to spend 2.7b dollers in making 3 decent ships ? or make the damn thing out of the same aloy they use in blackboxes?
As I understand it, the CRV would cost something like 3 billion dollars to develop. I would imagine that, for less money, we could redesign the docking adapters to support two Soyuz capsules. Let's say that costs a billion dollars. Two Soyuz will hold six people, so that's what we limit the space station crew to.
Buy six Soyuz capsules at 100 million dollars each. Send them up and attach them to the new docking capsules. Presto! Lifeboats for half the cost. You also have more redundancy, which is always good in lifeboats. For that matter, you have some advantages. Suppose one of your crew gets injured. Toss him in a Soyuz capsule with a buddy and send them down. You still have 5 capsules left for everybody else.
Another idea is to do a competitive bid. The "space lifeboat" must have the following capabilities:
- It must be able to survive exposure to space for 1 year -- For budgeting purposes, it must be at least one year (so "replacing lifeboats" can be conveniently budgeted). Obviously, more years is better.
- It must be able to support a crew of 7 for 6 hours -- Again, the number of hours is arbitrary.
- It must be able to land anywhere -- Water or ground, it shouldn't matter. When you're trying to get away from a dangerous situation, the last thing you want to do is to have to wait for a "return window." If it lands in water, it should be able to float for at least ten minutes. Ideally, longer, but if one person can't open a self-inflating lifeboat and dump 6 unconscious colleagues into the raft in under ten minutes, they've got bigger problems.
There are somewhat more mundane things (strength of chairs etc.) that would have to be specced. But, again, it's a freaking lifeboat! It should cost nowhere near 3 billion dollars. Put it out to a world-wide competitive bid (after all, it is the International Space Station) and see what people come back with. Sit down with a calculator and figure out which bid will be cheapest over five years (Cost of each lifeboat times number of lifeboats times years). Give bonus points to craft which exceed specifications (eg, can support a crew of 7 for 12 hours, can float for two hours, etc.). Pick the best one. Give them the contract for five years. In four years, start the process all over again.I mean, this isn't rocket science...
It makes sense. I mean, they keep their food in tubes and their toilets have full suction capabilities.
Indeed. Instead of finishing the CRV or going with your plan, we're going to do nothing at all. It's much cheaper that way (unless you consider the cost of "complete space shuttle revamps" every 18 months as som'a'kind'a disaster befalls unfortunate, but brave crews.)
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
But, again, it's a freaking lifeboat! It should cost nowhere near 3 billion dollars.
It's a freaking lifeboat that has to survive re-entry, land without splattering on the ground or plummeting into the sea - and has to do it without killing the occupants.
Not quite as easy as you make it sound.
Erotic literature? When I saw "gloved hand" I thought it was the transcript from the Michael Jackson trial.
We all know NASA has those shiny new x-something-or-other orbiters hidden at Kennedy anyway. It has to be true. Jerry Bruckheimer told us so.
xsetroot -solid darkgrey
.twmrc
xterm -bg darkblue -fg white
make sure "notitle" is in your
Now where do I get the real-time ISS mission control software?
P.S. Out of curiosity, does anyone know what data is provided from their giant left-most monitor?