- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Failure of Soyuz launch could leave ISS empty
Posted on 10/11/18 at 9:15 pm to DavidTheGnome
Posted on 10/11/18 at 9:15 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
doesn’t prove NASA made a poor decision.
Sure it did. It left the fate of our space program in the hands of a foreign country. One that has been producing less and less reliable launch vehicles.
2
Posted on 10/11/18 at 9:24 pm to TigerGman
The most noteworthy thing NASA has been in the news for in the past 15 years is having an astronaut drive across the country in a diaper to kill her side piece’s side piece. I think space travel is a bridge too far for those clowns right now.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 9:28 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
The most noteworthy thing NASA has been in the news for in the past 15 years is having an astronaut drive across the country in a diaper to kill her side piece’s side piece. I think space travel is a bridge too far for those clowns right now.
Currently active NASA missions LINK
Posted on 10/11/18 at 10:02 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
Yea, those mars rovers were shite
Posted on 10/11/18 at 10:23 pm to DavidTheGnome
The Soyuz rocket is the safest, most reliable rocket ever built.
What’s really interesting is to study the two countries’ differing approaches to space travel. It flies in the face of what you’d think. Russia in fact tends to be more cautious and focuses less on perfection and more in making sure there is a Plan B in case something inevitably goes wrong. We (USA) focus more on ensuring nothing goes wrong (and then not having a Plan B if something does).
The only reason we got to the moon before Russia is because they just weren’t willing to risk it yet (and we were).
What’s really interesting is to study the two countries’ differing approaches to space travel. It flies in the face of what you’d think. Russia in fact tends to be more cautious and focuses less on perfection and more in making sure there is a Plan B in case something inevitably goes wrong. We (USA) focus more on ensuring nothing goes wrong (and then not having a Plan B if something does).
The only reason we got to the moon before Russia is because they just weren’t willing to risk it yet (and we were).
Posted on 10/11/18 at 10:43 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Because the parts are made for the space shuttle and the space shuttle only. Spare parts for a 747 exist because there’s enough 747s to support it. Specialized parts and specialized machines to make specialized parts from a logistics chain from the 80s gets pricey.
I dont know.
I bought NOS, 316, milled block, 1.5" tee from NASA on ebay for $15 a few months ago. It replaced a plastic British piece of shite between my radiator hoses on my Land Rover.
This post was edited on 10/11/18 at 10:45 pm
Posted on 10/11/18 at 10:48 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Basically what Scruffy is saying is that there apparently was extremely poor planning on NASA’s part.
They should have either developed less costly and more productive methods to produce the needed parts or they should have stockpiled them.
What blows my mind is that a government agency with as big a budget as NASA operating in the most prosperous and resource rich country on the planet doesnt even operate their own machine shop. You make one of a kind machines and you contract out threaded pipe?!
This post was edited on 10/11/18 at 10:49 pm
Posted on 10/11/18 at 11:57 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Basically what Scruffy is saying is that there apparently was extremely poor planning on NASA’s part.
Nasa designed the shuttles for a operation life of 10 years, they were able to extended their life span by 20 years, operating the shuttle program for a total of 30 years, that was not the product of poor planning.
Posted on 10/12/18 at 12:01 am to nola000
quote:
What blows my mind is that a government agency with as big a budget as NASA operating in the most prosperous and resource rich country on the planet doesnt even operate their own machine shop. You make one of a kind machines and you contract out threaded pipe?!
They have machine shops used to make one off parts needed for prototypes and research, but every Nasa spacecraft was built by commercial vendors, and they are not one of a kind, there were five Shuttles built, the Apollo program required 18 capsules that would be flown, and several others for testing.
Posted on 10/12/18 at 8:50 am to EA6B
quote:
Nasa designed the shuttles for a operation life of 10 years, they were able to extended their life span by 20 years, operating the shuttle program for a total of 30 years, that was not the product of poor planning.
Posted on 10/12/18 at 8:53 am to Scruffy
quote:
This is a one of a kind machine
That’s his point. Not many people lining up to buy the parts other than NASA.
Posted on 10/12/18 at 9:28 am to Scruffy
quote:
s things age but remain in constant use, like our airlines, the ability to recreate parts and maintain them should become cheaper and easier.
I am not an aerospace engineer, but I would imagine that your thesis is correct when applied to fleets upon fleets of airplanes. This would not apply to a very small fleet, 3-4 i believe of highly specialized space vehicles that travel through almost impossible barriers and continue to be re-used. I mean just the tiles on the shuttle alone had to be individually installed by people. That is not even 1% of what went into those things ready to fly into space.
But I do agree, they should have had something ready. I don't see how they weren't re-developing the old school rocket travel that was used in the 60's.
Posted on 10/12/18 at 9:30 am to foshizzle
quote:
And that this is a niche article in the news cycle. Incredible.
The majority of people these days don’t give a frick about anything bigger than themselves and their twitter, snapchat and Instagram
Posted on 10/12/18 at 9:34 am to GeauxxxTigers23
Obama killed NASA and changed their focus to muslim outreach.
Posted on 10/13/18 at 1:32 am to The Boat
Thank yiou. The honest answer finally. Took them off of the mission.
Posted on 10/13/18 at 3:55 am to foshizzle
quote:
And that this is a niche article in the news cycle. Incredible.
Gotta know what's going on with the Kardashians first. We have priorities here in America.
Posted on 10/13/18 at 4:42 am to GeauxxxTigers23
The fanfare of Curiosity and New Horizons say hi.
Posted on 10/13/18 at 5:01 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
They are grounding the Soyuz out of safety concerns, I doubt they rush an untested system to replace it.
No one wants a repeat of the 1996/97 disaster
Posted on 10/13/18 at 6:30 am to The Boat
“Obama killed NASA and changed their focus to Muslim outreach.”
I saw the interview with the newly appointed head of NASA, when he appeared to let that slip out, that Obama wanted to make that a priority.
I was blown away then, and more so now. Thanks Obama.
I saw the interview with the newly appointed head of NASA, when he appeared to let that slip out, that Obama wanted to make that a priority.
I was blown away then, and more so now. Thanks Obama.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News