are great examples of fuckups by contractors (read: private enterprise), not NASA.
Perkin-Elmer was contracted to make that mirror, and it was one of their employees who improperly assembled the inspection gage leading to the grinding error:
It was a Lockheed-Martin employee who took the bolts out of the satellite holddown cart, and some more private employees who then moved the thing without following the checklist, dropping the satellite onto the floor:
Both incidents point to the need for greater NASA oversight of outside contractors. Of course, any such action would be portrayed by the "privatize everything" crowd as needless red-tape and protectionism by NASA bureaucrats.
If you don't want to piss in a cup to get a job, don't... work somewhere else, or work for yourself, or become a hermit. But don't claim it has anything to do with the law.
As I stated in a reply above, the only reason that employers adopted drug testing is just that--A LAW.
Specifically, a Reagan-era law called the "Drug-Free Workplace Act", which required every private company doing ANY amount of business with the federal government (down to the smallest sub-sub-sub contractor) to implement piss tests for their employees.
Without the prospect of losing the ability to get federal $$$, why would companies take on the expense and hassle of drug testing?
Where in the Constitution does it say that the 4th Amendment applies to private companies?
Nowhere.
But the thing that made workplace drug testing ubiquitous was the "Drug-Free Workplace Act", a law passed by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, which required private businesses to implement drug testing programs in order to do any business with the federal government.
How many businesses would have taken on the expense and bother of drug testing if they weren't forced to do so?
Because the shuttle replacement can't fly until all the required ground support facilities (launchpads, assembly/checkout areas, etc.) are ready, and they are currently being used FOR THE SHUTTLE.
The shuttle needs to be retired so the infrastructure can be rebuilt/refitted for the Constellation program. Either that, or give NASA an Apollo-era budget to build all new facilities from the ground up.
Perchlorate and rust (iron oxide) are 2 of the 4 ingredients needed to make solid rocket fuel. Add some powdered aluminum and an synthetic rubber binder, and you have the same stuff that the shuttle SRBs are filled with....
Why should we expect the "private" space industry to work any differently than the "private" pharmaceutical industry, the "private" energy industry, or any of the other industries that reap the benefits of public sector research and resources.
"Privatize the profits, Socialize the costs" seems to be the way of the "free market", no?
There were 2 "near misses" on Gemini VIII, when an attitude thruster stuck on and sent the spacecraft into a violent roil, while the spacecraft was out of radio contact between tracking stations. It is only because of the skill of the command pilot (a rookie named Neil Armstrong) that he and his crewmate Dave Scott weren't thrown off into deep space never to return.
Scott Carpenter's Mercury flight could easily have gone horribly wrong, as well. Due to a malfunctioning autopilot, he depleted his maneuvering fuel, and had to line up for re-entry manually, nearly missing the narrow entry corridor and burning up.
, when the technologies behind rocket propulsion were still in their infancy.
Nowadays, there is a half-century of experience with which types of designs work and which don't, freely available to the private industry groups. Despite all this, a private group has yet to even equal the abilities of the X-15 rocketplane, much less reach orbit or land on the moon.
and outside pressures were allowed to override sound engineering decisions.
Apollo 1 happened because of a combination of "Go Fever" (the pressure to beat the Soviets to the moon) and poor workmanship by a PRIVATE INDUSTRY contractor (North American Aviation).
Challenger happened because Reagan wanted to use the "Teacher in Space" as a talking point at the next night's State of the Union address, and political pressure caused NASA to override the recommendations of the booster engineers who knew about the behavior of the SRB joint O-rings in cold weather, and launch despite their objections.
While Columbia was damaged because of lingering unresolved problems with ET foam shedding, her crew could possibly have been saved if NASA listened to their own engineers, and took high-resolution images of the shuttle while on-orbit. The extent of the damage would have been made clear long before reentry was attempted, and a rescue mission could have been launched.
DSCOVR was a victim of ideology, not budgets...
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The current administration has zero interest in funding anything to do with studying climate change, particularly a satellite first proposed by Al Gore.
It was built, but never launched. It now sits in storage (at a cost of $1M/year), awaiting a less hostile administration.
, but just as its physical properties change through alloying (allowing it to become a liquid at STP), so do its CHEMICAL properties. The alloy is a good bit more chemically reactive than the constituent elements are separately.
Then you need to consider the possibiility of the material being exposed to air or water at ELEVATED TEMPERATURES, if for example the circulating pump stops working, and the coolant tubes rupture...
Slashdot Mirror
BUY political power.
his way to a third term!
Yeah, but Ballmer might throw it through a window, letting fresh air in....
are great examples of fuckups by contractors (read: private enterprise), not NASA.
Perkin-Elmer was contracted to make that mirror, and it was one of their employees who improperly assembled the inspection gage leading to the grinding error:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12717301.000-the-testing-error-that-led-to-hubble-mirror-fiasco-.html
It was a Lockheed-Martin employee who took the bolts out of the satellite holddown cart, and some more private employees who then moved the thing without following the checklist, dropping the satellite onto the floor:
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0410/04noaanreport/
Both incidents point to the need for greater NASA oversight of outside contractors. Of course, any such action would be portrayed by the "privatize everything" crowd as needless red-tape and protectionism by NASA bureaucrats.
If you don't want to piss in a cup to get a job, don't... work somewhere else, or work for yourself, or become a hermit. But don't claim it has anything to do with the law.
As I stated in a reply above, the only reason that employers adopted drug testing is just that--A LAW.
Specifically, a Reagan-era law called the "Drug-Free Workplace Act", which required every private company doing ANY amount of business with the federal government (down to the smallest sub-sub-sub contractor) to implement piss tests for their employees.
Without the prospect of losing the ability to get federal $$$, why would companies take on the expense and hassle of drug testing?
From the perspective of a business owner, a 10th amendment violation is certainly arguable.
From the employee's perspective, the 4th amendment seems more applicable. As does the 5th amendment protection against self-incrimination.
Where in the Constitution does it say that the 4th Amendment applies to private companies?
Nowhere.
But the thing that made workplace drug testing ubiquitous was the "Drug-Free Workplace Act", a law passed by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, which required private businesses to implement drug testing programs in order to do any business with the federal government.
How many businesses would have taken on the expense and bother of drug testing if they weren't forced to do so?
, which was being used for root access to the constitution long before "terrorism" or "pedophilia".
For example, the 4th amendment pretty much ceased to exist once people needed to piss in a cup to get a job.
The one in Hunstville, Alabama is Marshall Space Flight Center:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/home/index.html
Because the shuttle replacement can't fly until all the required ground support facilities (launchpads, assembly/checkout areas, etc.) are ready, and they are currently being used FOR THE SHUTTLE.
The shuttle needs to be retired so the infrastructure can be rebuilt/refitted for the Constellation program. Either that, or give NASA an Apollo-era budget to build all new facilities from the ground up.
If your home has a DOORBELL, you most likely have a small transformer somewhere that powers it....
Yes, and notice the intentionally vague items list. A "flask heater"? An "adapter tube"? A "transformer"?!?!
The whole idea here is apparently to make EVERYONE in TX a criminal, so that they can be charged with *something* any time the pigs want to....
On the other hand, you aren't allowed to own laboratory glassware in TX without a permit from the state and inspections from the cops....
But being China, we can still count on plenty of lead paint, melamine, 1,4 butanediol, and oversulfated chondroitin sulfate, right?
Or will they only put those in the cities they build for export?
So by sending this equipment to Africa, we are destroying their nonexistent computer manufacturing industry?
Have had good luck using this stuff, a piece of chamois, and some elbow grease. Good on all kinds of plastics, not just CDs/DVDs.
http://www.amazon.com/Novus-Polish-Plastic-Scratch-Remover/dp/B000B4Q9Y6
Perchlorate and rust (iron oxide) are 2 of the 4 ingredients needed to make solid rocket fuel. Add some powdered aluminum and an synthetic rubber binder, and you have the same stuff that the shuttle SRBs are filled with....
Like they have been doing to rocket hobbyists who use perchlorates down here on earth?
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/25/159239
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/20/1318259&tid=159
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/03/11/1817203&tid=167
Why should we expect the "private" space industry to work any differently than the "private" pharmaceutical industry, the "private" energy industry, or any of the other industries that reap the benefits of public sector research and resources.
"Privatize the profits, Socialize the costs" seems to be the way of the "free market", no?
There were 2 "near misses" on Gemini VIII, when an attitude thruster stuck on and sent the spacecraft into a violent roil, while the spacecraft was out of radio contact between tracking stations. It is only because of the skill of the command pilot (a rookie named Neil Armstrong) that he and his crewmate Dave Scott weren't thrown off into deep space never to return.
Scott Carpenter's Mercury flight could easily have gone horribly wrong, as well. Due to a malfunctioning autopilot, he depleted his maneuvering fuel, and had to line up for re-entry manually, nearly missing the narrow entry corridor and burning up.
, when the technologies behind rocket propulsion were still in their infancy.
Nowadays, there is a half-century of experience with which types of designs work and which don't, freely available to the private industry groups. Despite all this, a private group has yet to even equal the abilities of the X-15 rocketplane, much less reach orbit or land on the moon.
and outside pressures were allowed to override sound engineering decisions.
Apollo 1 happened because of a combination of "Go Fever" (the pressure to beat the Soviets to the moon) and poor workmanship by a PRIVATE INDUSTRY contractor (North American Aviation).
Challenger happened because Reagan wanted to use the "Teacher in Space" as a talking point at the next night's State of the Union address, and political pressure caused NASA to override the recommendations of the booster engineers who knew about the behavior of the SRB joint O-rings in cold weather, and launch despite their objections.
While Columbia was damaged because of lingering unresolved problems with ET foam shedding, her crew could possibly have been saved if NASA listened to their own engineers, and took high-resolution images of the shuttle while on-orbit. The extent of the damage would have been made clear long before reentry was attempted, and a rescue mission could have been launched.
The current administration has zero interest in funding anything to do with studying climate change, particularly a satellite first proposed by Al Gore.
It was built, but never launched. It now sits in storage (at a cost of $1M/year), awaiting a less hostile administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triana_(satellite)
Calcium carbonate (CaCO3) is chalk, not lime.
"Lime" is calcium oxide, CaO. "Slaked lime" is calcium hydroxide, Ca(OH)2
, but just as its physical properties change through alloying (allowing it to become a liquid at STP), so do its CHEMICAL properties. The alloy is a good bit more chemically reactive than the constituent elements are separately.
Then you need to consider the possibiility of the material being exposed to air or water at ELEVATED TEMPERATURES, if for example the circulating pump stops working, and the coolant tubes rupture...