Slashdot Mirror
"Frickin' Fantastic" Launch of NASA's Ares I-X Rocket
coondoggie writes "With a hiss and roar, NASA's Ares I-X rocket blasted into the atmosphere this morning at about 11:33 am EST, taking with it a variety of test equipment and sensors but also high hopes for the future of the US space agency. The short test flight — about 2 minutes — will provide NASA an early opportunity to look at hardware, models, facilities and ground operations associated with the mostly new Ares I launch vehicle. The mission went off without a hitch — 'frickin' fantastic' was how one NASA executive classified it on NASA TV — as the upper stage simulator and first stage separated at approximately 130,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean. The unpowered simulator splashed down in the ocean."
They only planned to recover the first stage from what I had read. As the NASA official stated it the second stage and mock crew capsule would splash into the ocean like a giant lawn dart and sink to the bottom. I thought the analogy was funny because thanks to the government some large percentage of the population (those under say 25) have no idea what a lawn dart IS.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
This is also the NASA that is facing such intense political pressure to justify the continuation of its manned spaceflight program -- and the NASA that Feynman slammed for its veneer-over-veracity attitude surrounding the Challenger disaster.
Unfortunately that idiotic attitude advocated by Feynman-- "never take risks" -- is pervasive through NASA, and avoiding risk-taking is now NASA's standard operating procedure.
Unfortunately, "taking risks" is exactly what NASA should be doing. You cannot progress without taking some risks.
I don't know any way to get around this problem-- any program funded by Congress is going to be incredibly risk-averse, because the one thing that they cannot stand is bad publicity.
Yeager's comment was that when an Air Force test pilot is killed, they name a street at Edwards after him, and go on with the program. When an astronaut dies, they shut down the program for two years and congress holds hearings.
"Space is a frontier for our great-grandchildren to consider"
We will always have the poor.
If not now, when? If not us, who?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
$17B a year is not going to make a dent in the economy or in poverty or homelessness, or climate change or anything else. Those are the results of human nature and/or normal cycles, and fixing them is a matter of political will and good policy, not a few extra dollars.
Spending a small amount on space exploration is EXACTLY what the government exists to do -- do things that require large amounts of money (for an individual or group) with high risks and low immediate reward, but that have the potential for great reward for all of society.
And if you think $17B a year with increases less than inflation and ever new directives and goals are 'endless resources' I think you need to take a look at the scale of the federal budget.
Every risk, in hindsight, is a stupid risk. And there will always be someone there to say "I told you so, but you didn't listen!"
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what risk is. There are no risks in hindsight, but only outcomes. Second, not every risk can be anticipated (these risks are often called "uncertainty"). Nobody is going to say "I'd told you so!", if the Shuttle were to be zapped by aliens while on the pad.
Third, stupid risks have two characteristics: 1) they are easily anticipated or were anticipated (someone will be there to say "I told you so") and 2) the cost of mitigating the risk is far less than the benefit gained.