Lets say... If there's a meteorite fall to a place near you.
Do you immediately come near it, touch it, and grab it?
No. You examine first, determine if it's safe to come near it, touch it, and grab it.
Not all people will use cautionary measure though, many will act like a kid who just found something interesting.
But overall, I think that common sense is needed. Other than that, it's relatively quite safe.
I think that the whole health hazard of nearing and touching those parts have been overblown.
Yes. There might some hazard from toxic materials. But... Most of them probably already being dispersed into the atmosphere. And to those that managed to fall. Well... You will know soon enough on whether or not it's toxic.
Anyway. The Space Shuttle is the property of the goverment of the United States of America. I think that it's quite reasoneable if they didn't want someone to move and touch parts of it, less alone take (a.k.a. steal) it. How do you feel if your property has been move, touch, and steal from you without your consent?
Of course, that's is if... what broke up above Texas is indeed the Space Shuttle Columbia, if it isn't. Well... Then you got your explanation there on why they didn't want anyone to inspect those parts.
>Buran 1.01 was sitting on it until it got >damaged/destroyed in the roof cave in at >Baikonur.
Well... It was said to be "damaged/destroyed", but to tell you the truth, we don't know what really happen to it, do we? There're no photos of it being broken. We only seen a photo of a broken Energia (either the real thing or just a mock up).
As for using Energia alone to build space station.
Check out Battle Station Polyus. It's a military space station.
Anyway. It's much more cheaper if the Energia itself used to build space station, much like those External Tank station designs that some people promote (www.spaceislandgroup.com).
Actually, the odds of successfuly crashing not just ONE, but TWO 767 to TWO towers is very very very VERY slim.
And I don't believe they were any real people aboard those jets piloting into those two towers. Veteran jetliner pilots probably couldn't it, what is the hope of an amateur/semi-amateur pilot of doing it. The odds of it happening is approaching zero.
Then go to the Moon, go to the Mars, etc. It's already established.
Don't know on how to get there?
Have you already try to apply for a Visa to your destination? I think that they will provide you with a free trip there along with a Visa. Though hopefully it's a round trip. LOL!
There's plenty of way to build a space station. Mir wasn't build using the space shuttle you know. Though they did planned to use the space shuttle build Mir-2.
Perharps the whole international manned space program is planned to be close down for an "undefined" amount of time.
As for Mir.
Actually, Mir outlived its planned age. They planned to replace it with Mir-2, but no fund was given.
Then there's the event of burning the Mir itself.
Well... We can ask the question, why did it was burned? Lack of fund? No. It's because that "they" wanted that the ISS to be the ONLY space station in orbit. Salyut 7 when it was decommisioned, they don't burn it, they move it into a higher orbit. Why didn't the same happen to Mir?
Why do I get the feeling that the ISS will share the same fate as the Mir?
"the Russian vehicles don't carry large payloads"
How quick are we to forget that the ISS was supposed to build not entirely using the Space Shuttle. The former Soviet space agencies have big rockets that will do the job quite fine indeed.
It's quite likely that neither the U.S.A. or the U.S.S.R. designed the Space Shuttle.
If you notice it, both NASA and Molniya engineers rejected the Space Shuttle design, they prefer a two stages take off or a horizontal launch system. But they're only given fund if they build the Space Shuttle design, if they decided to use other design, the fund is cut or even withdraw.
So... It's more likely correct to say that, "both" U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. "copied" the Space Shuttle design. The question is, from where?
As for the Soviet shuttle.
They did plan to build Mir-2 using the shuttle. But the shuttle is only used for specific mission, while some missions used other spacecrafts. They're quite wise in their selection of craft.
Though they do plan to shuttle the people using the shuttle. The Soyuz is reliable, but its landing is rough!
It could be hot, it could be radioactive, it could be anything.
Anyway. Like the usual advice would say, "becareful, you don't where it came from."
Just don't be affraid to investigate those objects further. After all, you too also want to know what it is. Just use a wise discretion when touching and examining the objects.
"Meanwhile countless 727, DC-9 and other jets make multiple flights a day in airframes built in the 60's and 70's. Like the manufacturers of those craft, NASA had the best materials, even the best of the best."
Quite true. We still need to ask a lot of questions.
While there's always chance that the Space Shuttle disintegrates during re-entry, that doesn't the Space Shuttle is not a fine build spacecraft. And we also need to ask, was it the Columbia that those people saw, or something else?
"Bush and his administration have made the '00's the decade of fear. Rather than "we have nothing to fear, but fear itself", we have the fear of terrorists hiding under every rock, behind every tree, lurking in every shadow. Now this disaster and the fear is already being considered on national TV, where it should be completely absurd and beyond any scrutiny, the fear brings it up."
A little bit correction here. The President of the U.S.A. doesn't have any power at all these days.
Note: If it was up to the President. The U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. would already have a joint moon program, since that's what the Kennedy want, even the Soviet want it too.
Anyway, I think that these days the President of the U.S.A. is nothing more than a spokeman who delivers speech or so on.
So... I don't think that George W. Bush wanted any Space Shuttle to be destroyed.
And from my point of view, he doesn't seem to be a bad person at all. I even think that he doesn't even want a war toward Iraq.
However, that doesn't mean that there isn't any people in the goverment of the U.S.A. (and also other goverments, try the whole "official" goverments in the world) that want to do harm.
And these "people" regulary pressure the Presidents (whether it's the U.S.A. or othe countries) to make them said what they don't want to say.
Incase people forgotten.
Mir was supplied, resupplied, build, populated, repopulated, and so on without any space shuttle at all.
Though the Soviet did planned to build Mir-2 using their own Space Shuttle.
...on what did the eye witness saw breaking up into pieces.
Is it the Columbia?
Or is it something else? If it isn't the Columbia, where's the Columbia? And why did the news said that it was the Columbia.
Remember. Just because the news says that it was the Columbia, that doesn't mean that it's the Columbia. Of course it also doesn't meant that it isn't the Columbia.
As for what to tell kids about this recent event.
Maybe the best way is to tell them the truth.
Just say, "I don't know. There are a lot of inputs, some of them are quite confusing and contradictary. We need to examine these inputs first if we want to know what happened."
Anyway. What I like about kids are that, they're quite open minded, willing to accept and believe any other alternative possibility.
While for "adults", they're usually already programmed into believing certain things, and usually discounted stuff that they consider "impossible".
Slashdot Mirror
Lets say... If there's a meteorite fall to a place near you.
Do you immediately come near it, touch it, and grab it?
No. You examine first, determine if it's safe to come near it, touch it, and grab it.
Not all people will use cautionary measure though, many will act like a kid who just found something interesting.
But overall, I think that common sense is needed. Other than that, it's relatively quite safe.
I think that the whole health hazard of nearing and touching those parts have been overblown.
Yes. There might some hazard from toxic materials. But... Most of them probably already being dispersed into the atmosphere. And to those that managed to fall. Well... You will know soon enough on whether or not it's toxic.
Anyway. The Space Shuttle is the property of the goverment of the United States of America. I think that it's quite reasoneable if they didn't want someone to move and touch parts of it, less alone take (a.k.a. steal) it. How do you feel if your property has been move, touch, and steal from you without your consent?
Of course, that's is if... what broke up above Texas is indeed the Space Shuttle Columbia, if it isn't. Well... Then you got your explanation there on why they didn't want anyone to inspect those parts.
>Buran 1.01 was sitting on it until it got
>damaged/destroyed in the roof cave in at >Baikonur.
Well... It was said to be "damaged/destroyed", but to tell you the truth, we don't know what really happen to it, do we? There're no photos of it being broken. We only seen a photo of a broken Energia (either the real thing or just a mock up).
As for using Energia alone to build space station.
Check out Battle Station Polyus. It's a military space station.
Anyway. It's much more cheaper if the Energia itself used to build space station, much like those External Tank station designs that some people promote (www.spaceislandgroup.com).
I agree. There should be two type of crafts. - Cargo craft - Manned craft
True! Payload is better serve with unmanned rockets. While the astronauts is better serve with much comfortable way of travelling.
"flying 2 jumbo jets into the Twin Towers"
Actually, the odds of successfuly crashing not just ONE, but TWO 767 to TWO towers is very very very VERY slim.
And I don't believe they were any real people aboard those jets piloting into those two towers. Veteran jetliner pilots probably couldn't it, what is the hope of an amateur/semi-amateur pilot of doing it. The odds of it happening is approaching zero.
Then go to the Moon, go to the Mars, etc. It's already established.
Don't know on how to get there?
Have you already try to apply for a Visa to your destination? I think that they will provide you with a free trip there along with a Visa. Though hopefully it's a round trip. LOL!
It can only be done using inside job.
The question is, was it really the Columbia that exploded?
There's plenty of way to build a space station. Mir wasn't build using the space shuttle you know. Though they did planned to use the space shuttle build Mir-2.
Perharps the whole international manned space program is planned to be close down for an "undefined" amount of time. As for Mir. Actually, Mir outlived its planned age. They planned to replace it with Mir-2, but no fund was given. Then there's the event of burning the Mir itself. Well... We can ask the question, why did it was burned? Lack of fund? No. It's because that "they" wanted that the ISS to be the ONLY space station in orbit. Salyut 7 when it was decommisioned, they don't burn it, they move it into a higher orbit. Why didn't the same happen to Mir? Why do I get the feeling that the ISS will share the same fate as the Mir?
"the Russian vehicles don't carry large payloads" How quick are we to forget that the ISS was supposed to build not entirely using the Space Shuttle. The former Soviet space agencies have big rockets that will do the job quite fine indeed.
It's quite likely that neither the U.S.A. or the U.S.S.R. designed the Space Shuttle.
If you notice it, both NASA and Molniya engineers rejected the Space Shuttle design, they prefer a two stages take off or a horizontal launch system. But they're only given fund if they build the Space Shuttle design, if they decided to use other design, the fund is cut or even withdraw.
So... It's more likely correct to say that, "both" U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. "copied" the Space Shuttle design. The question is, from where?
As for the Soviet shuttle.
They did plan to build Mir-2 using the shuttle. But the shuttle is only used for specific mission, while some missions used other spacecrafts. They're quite wise in their selection of craft.
Though they do plan to shuttle the people using the shuttle. The Soyuz is reliable, but its landing is rough!
STS-113 was launched last year by the way.
Of course, we also need to find out if Challenger's accident is also "natural".
http://mission51l.com/challenger.htm
It could be hot, it could be radioactive, it could be anything.
Anyway. Like the usual advice would say, "becareful, you don't where it came from."
Just don't be affraid to investigate those objects further. After all, you too also want to know what it is. Just use a wise discretion when touching and examining the objects.
"Meanwhile countless 727, DC-9 and other jets make multiple flights a day in airframes built in the 60's and 70's. Like the manufacturers of those craft, NASA had the best materials, even the best of the best." Quite true. We still need to ask a lot of questions. While there's always chance that the Space Shuttle disintegrates during re-entry, that doesn't the Space Shuttle is not a fine build spacecraft. And we also need to ask, was it the Columbia that those people saw, or something else? "Bush and his administration have made the '00's the decade of fear. Rather than "we have nothing to fear, but fear itself", we have the fear of terrorists hiding under every rock, behind every tree, lurking in every shadow. Now this disaster and the fear is already being considered on national TV, where it should be completely absurd and beyond any scrutiny, the fear brings it up." A little bit correction here. The President of the U.S.A. doesn't have any power at all these days. Note: If it was up to the President. The U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. would already have a joint moon program, since that's what the Kennedy want, even the Soviet want it too. Anyway, I think that these days the President of the U.S.A. is nothing more than a spokeman who delivers speech or so on. So... I don't think that George W. Bush wanted any Space Shuttle to be destroyed. And from my point of view, he doesn't seem to be a bad person at all. I even think that he doesn't even want a war toward Iraq. However, that doesn't mean that there isn't any people in the goverment of the U.S.A. (and also other goverments, try the whole "official" goverments in the world) that want to do harm. And these "people" regulary pressure the Presidents (whether it's the U.S.A. or othe countries) to make them said what they don't want to say.
Just remember on how it ended. Same M.O., same result.
Incase people forgotten. Mir was supplied, resupplied, build, populated, repopulated, and so on without any space shuttle at all. Though the Soviet did planned to build Mir-2 using their own Space Shuttle.
...on what did the eye witness saw breaking up into pieces. Is it the Columbia? Or is it something else? If it isn't the Columbia, where's the Columbia? And why did the news said that it was the Columbia. Remember. Just because the news says that it was the Columbia, that doesn't mean that it's the Columbia. Of course it also doesn't meant that it isn't the Columbia. As for what to tell kids about this recent event. Maybe the best way is to tell them the truth. Just say, "I don't know. There are a lot of inputs, some of them are quite confusing and contradictary. We need to examine these inputs first if we want to know what happened." Anyway. What I like about kids are that, they're quite open minded, willing to accept and believe any other alternative possibility. While for "adults", they're usually already programmed into believing certain things, and usually discounted stuff that they consider "impossible".