Announcement

Collapse

Forum etiquette

Our mission ...

This forum is part of our mission to promote the preservation of vintage computers through education and outreach. (In real life we also run events and have a museum.) We encourage you to join us, participate, share your knowledge, and enjoy.

This forum has been around in this format for over 15 years. These rules and guidelines help us maintain a healthy and active community, and we moderate the forum to keep things on track. Please familiarize yourself with these rules and guidelines.


Remain civil and respectful

There are several hundred people who actively participate here. People come from all different backgrounds and will have different ways of seeing things. You will not agree with everything you read here. Back-and-forth discussions are fine but do not cross the line into rude or disrespectful behavior.

Conduct yourself as you would at any other place where people come together in person to discuss their hobby. If you wouldn't say something to somebody in person, then you probably should not be writing it here.

This should be obvious but, just in case: profanity, threats, slurs against any group (sexual, racial, gender, etc.) will not be tolerated.


Stay close to the original topic being discussed
  • If you are starting a new thread choose a reasonable sub-forum to start your thread. (If you choose incorrectly don't worry, we can fix that.)
  • If you are responding to a thread, stay on topic - the original poster was trying to achieve something. You can always start a new thread instead of potentially "hijacking" an existing thread.



Contribute something meaningful

To put things in engineering terms, we value a high signal to noise ratio. Coming here should not be a waste of time.
  • This is not a chat room. If you are taking less than 30 seconds to make a post then you are probably doing something wrong. A post should be on topic, clear, and contribute something meaningful to the discussion. If people read your posts and feel that their time as been wasted, they will stop reading your posts. Worse yet, they will stop visiting and we'll lose their experience and contributions.
  • Do not bump threads.
  • Do not "necro-post" unless you are following up to a specific person on a specific thread. And even then, that person may have moved on. Just start a new thread for your related topic.
  • Use the Private Message system for posts that are targeted at a specific person.


"PM Sent!" messages (or, how to use the Private Message system)

This forum has a private message feature that we want people to use for messages that are not of general interest to other members.

In short, if you are going to reply to a thread and that reply is targeted to a specific individual and not of interest to anybody else (either now or in the future) then send a private message instead.

Here are some obvious examples of when you should not reply to a thread and use the PM system instead:
  • "PM Sent!": Do not tell the rest of us that you sent a PM ... the forum software will tell the other person that they have a PM waiting.
  • "How much is shipping to ....": This is a very specific and directed question that is not of interest to anybody else.


Why do we have this policy? Sending a "PM Sent!" type message basically wastes everybody else's time by making them having to scroll past a post in a thread that looks to be updated, when the update is not meaningful. And the person you are sending the PM to will be notified by the forum software that they have a message waiting for them. Look up at the top near the right edge where it says 'Notifications' ... if you have a PM waiting, it will tell you there.

Copyright and other legal issues

We are here to discuss vintage computing, so discussing software, books, and other intellectual property that is on-topic is fine. We don't want people using these forums to discuss or enable copyright violations or other things that are against the law; whether you agree with the law or not is irrelevant. Do not use our resources for something that is legally or morally questionable.

Our discussions here generally fall under "fair use." Telling people how to pirate a software title is an example of something that is not allowable here.


Reporting problematic posts

If you see spam, a wildly off-topic post, or something abusive or illegal please report the thread by clicking on the "Report Post" icon. (It looks like an exclamation point in a triangle and it is available under every post.) This send a notification to all of the moderators, so somebody will see it and deal with it.

If you are unsure you may consider sending a private message to a moderator instead.


New user moderation

New users are directly moderated so that we can weed spammers out early. This means that for your first 10 posts you will have some delay before they are seen. We understand this can be disruptive to the flow of conversation and we try to keep up with our new user moderation duties to avoid undue inconvenience. Please do not make duplicate posts, extra posts to bump your post count, or ask the moderators to expedite this process; 10 moderated posts will go by quickly.

New users also have a smaller personal message inbox limit and are rate limited when sending PMs to other users.


Other suggestions
  • Use Google, books, or other definitive sources. There is a lot of information out there.
  • Don't make people guess at what you are trying to say; we are not mind readers. Be clear and concise.
  • Spelling and grammar are not rated, but they do make a post easier to read.
See more
See less

NASA accepting suggestions for increased shuttle safety

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CP/M User
    replied
    "vic user" wrote:

    > yet again, if nations could get their act together
    > and pool their space resources, things could
    > have been very different.

    Well we tried that, the problem came when someone
    forgot to convert Metric calculations into Imperial!

    Unfortunately, I think that was the problem, because
    Metric is very very hard to convert to Imperial, like
    try converting 1 metre into 1 Foot, you could be
    there all day trying to figure it out to the nearest
    Infinaty!! Which could have been so vital in Space
    & the Gravity of Mars!

    Cheers,
    CP/M User.

    P.S. It's great to see I've striked a lite with this
    thread, at one stage it looked like the total number
    of responces would have been 0!

    Leave a comment:


  • CP/M User
    replied
    "Vic user" wrote:

    > well, i think all we will see by 2010, is
    > a spacecraft that will do extensive
    > scans of the moon, and maybe a robot
    > probe to land on it, but no people i
    > think by 2010. maybe by 2015 or
    > 2020. supposedly all missions to the
    > moon will not be scientific in nature,
    > but geared towards using the moon as
    > a test ground for eventual manned
    > missions to mars. so don't get your
    > hopes up at all to see someone planting
    > a flag on the moon in 2010.

    The only thing I wonderning about with that
    Moonbase, is how are they going to protect
    it?

    To the naked eye, the Moon is a place
    where it has taken a beating from lots of
    meteors, sure they could build it in one of
    those crators, but there's still a good
    chance that another smaller Meteor
    (travelling at the speed of sound) could
    land in that!

    But anyway, I just let the genious behind
    all that to figure it out!

    Cheers,
    CP/M User.

    Leave a comment:


  • CP/M User
    replied
    "Unknown_K" wrote:

    > The whole point of the shuttle was a cheap
    > reusable method of sending satellites into
    > orbit. Ever since the beginning it hasnt
    > been cheap (costs alot more then a
    > standard rocket) and the shuttle design
    > makes it not very reusable without taking
    > most of it apart and rebuilt after each
    > launch.

    That's the other problem I see, cost. Back
    in the 1950s/1960s I would have imagined
    the technology in putting man into space
    (with large fuel rockets) would have
    bumbed up in price & getting them there
    (which is why I'm guess there were more
    flights to the moon back in the late 60s &
    70s because the cost wasn't as great).

    > The design also has the flaw having no
    > way of getting the crew out safely once
    > the launch has started. If anything
    > happens to the heat shield nothing can
    > be done. If a rocket malfunctions on
    > launch they are in big trouble.

    If they did the launch from Oz, the OH&S
    issues might suddendly kick in & no-one
    will be allowed to go anywhere!

    > Going into space is still dangerous (or
    > should I say low earth orbit since nobody
    > has ventrued into deep space since the
    > 70's), but we still had publicity stunts like
    > the teacher in space and the John Glenn
    > flight. Budget cuts and managers who
    > take unecessary risks because of
    > pressure from above along with the failure
    > of what the shuttle was desined for in the
    > first place tend to make the whole system
    > not worth the money expended.

    > The only real gem of the whole platform
    > was the fixing of the Hubble telescope, and
    > that system is now being left to rot.

    But they did fix it, & it has been used.
    Perhaps they haven't had much luck with it
    as what we thought it might of!

    > I say shut the shuttle program down and
    > look into normal rockets for payload
    > launches and a new type of smaller rocket
    > (or jet/rocket) for putting man on the
    > moon or delivering people to the space
    > station.

    40 years down the track, nothing much
    has changed in sending stuff with large
    rockets. They should at closing it down &
    start looking at better ways of sending
    people or things into space.

    Cheers,
    CP/M User.

    Leave a comment:


  • vic user
    replied
    The whole point of the shuttle was a cheap reusable method of sending satellites into orbit. Ever since the beginning it hasnt been cheap (costs alot more then a standard rocket) and the shuttle design makes it not very reusable without taking most of it apart and rebuilt after each launch.
    I agree with much of what you say. sadly NASA did not have enough money to have spacecraft for transport of people and the shuttle, so they used the shuttle for a workhorse.

    yet again, if nations could get their act together and pool their space resources, things could have been very different.

    The only real gem of the whole platform was the fixing of the Hubble telescope, and that system is now being left to rot.
    Don't forget that the shuttle is critical for the construction and success of the ISS. we will see the shuttle now being used solely for ISS missions.

    by the way, on many nights, people can get a good glimpse of the ISS, just with the naked eye. last year, over a couple of nights, i got to watch columbia slowly pull away from the ISS, as it prepared for re entry, and then they never made it as we all know.

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • vic user
    replied
    Trouble is there's nobody up there to
    energize!
    well, hopefully we will have space elevators soon

    How do you mean, by saying there are risks
    when it comes to this, sure you could say that
    about anything, even getting into your car on
    the way to a rocket lanch & being hit by a bus
    on the way down (I guess that's why they
    have that nice sturdy bus! But something
    could happen to the Bus, flat tires, ran out of
    gas, the bus falls down an enbankment, another
    driver hits the Bus (well that maybe unlikely!
    well with the shuttle program at the time before the Challenger disaster, many people had suspected that the 'o' ring seals were faulty, and it was only a matter of time before something happened, yet with the small amount of money they received and how they used, plus with the way recommendations were done within etc., NASA took forever to do anything right it seems. also, if we look at space flight from the beginning to now, we are very similar to the beginnings of powered aircraft. lots of people died, lots of accidents, etc.. risky times to be a pilot! so we are still very new to all this.

    the Russians have so much experience it's not funny. i wish all space programs around the world would unite and stop wasting money and resources through redundant programs.


    So all this travel to the moon by 2010 & setup a
    base there & then lanch a craft from there to Mars
    is all hocus pocus!
    well, i think all we will see by 2010, is a spacecraft that will do extensive scans of the moon, and maybe a robot probe to land on it, but no people i think by 2010. maybe by 2015 or 2020. supposedly all missions to the moon will not be scientific in nature, but geared towards using the moon as a test ground for eventual manned missions to mars. so don't get your hopes up at all to see someone planting a flag on the moon in 2010.

    the x-prize, well i will just quote from their website:

    The X PRIZE is a $10,000,000 prize to jumpstart the space tourism industry through competition between the most talented entrepreneurs and rocket experts in the world. The $10 Million cash prize will be awarded to the first team that:

    Privately finances, builds & launches a spaceship, able to carry three people to 100 kilometers (62.5 miles)
    Returns safely to Earth
    Repeats the launch with the same ship within 2 weeks
    many entrants right now, and some really interesting ideas. some are using planes to bring the spacecraft to a high altitude, and then the rocket takes off from there, etc..

    anyway, one of the reasons why i try to stay healthy, is to increase my odds of living long enough to see some amazing things we will be doing in space!

    chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Unknown_K
    replied
    The whole point of the shuttle was a cheap reusable method of sending satellites into orbit. Ever since the beginning it hasnt been cheap (costs alot more then a standard rocket) and the shuttle design makes it not very reusable without taking most of it apart and rebuilt after each launch.

    The design also has the flaw having no way of getting the crew out safely once the launch has started. If anything happens to the heat shield nothing can be done. If a rocket malfunctions on launch they are in big trouble.

    Going into space is still dangerous (or should I say low earth orbit since nobody has ventrued into deep space since the 70's), but we still had publicity stunts like the teacher in space and the John Glenn flight. Budget cuts and managers who take unecessary risks because of pressure from above along with the failure of what the shuttle was desined for in the first place tend to make the whole system not worth the money expended.

    The only real gem of the whole platform was the fixing of the Hubble telescope, and that system is now being left to rot.

    I say shut the shuttle program down and look into normal rockets for payload launches and a new type of smaller rocket (or jet/rocket) for putting man on the moon or delivering people to the space station.

    Leave a comment:


  • CP/M User
    replied
    "vic user" wrote:

    > They probably would look at your ideas
    > though, no matter how fare out you think
    > they are. they have received some
    > pretty interesting ideas!

    Trouble is there's nobody up there to
    energize!

    > Yep, it was a very dramatic way for people
    > to see how dangerous space travel can be
    > at present. McAuliffe was her name, and I
    > remember seeing news footage of her class,
    > with all their party hats on, in class, watching
    > the launch on TV. just brutal.

    She must have known something about the
    risks involved.

    > NASA supposedly learned a lot from the
    > Challenger accident, and besides making
    > many changes to the actual components, they
    > also tried to change the atmosphere in NASA
    > as well.

    How do you mean, by saying there are risks
    when it comes to this, sure you could say that
    about anything, even getting into your car on
    the way to a rocket lanch & being hit by a bus
    on the way down (I guess that's why they
    have that nice sturdy bus! But something
    could happen to the Bus, flat tires, ran out of
    gas, the bus falls down an enbankment, another
    driver hits the Bus (well that maybe unlikely!

    > You can see the change in how they responded
    > to the Columbia accident, etc..

    There are risks in space travel?

    > with the change in direction for American space
    > exploration, the shuttle program has been
    > affected something fierce. they are expected
    > to stop the program in 2010, and will no longer
    > service the hubble via shuttle, as well as
    > seriously considering only using Russian
    > vehicles to transport crew to the ISS, and use
    > the shuttles' remaining missions, devoted solely
    > to building the ISS.

    So all this travel to the moon by 2010 & setup a
    base there & then lanch a craft from there to Mars
    is all hocus pocus!

    > NASA seems to be headed towards a new
    > vehicle as well, which would re enter the Earth
    > like the old Apollo capsules, etc..

    Heh, what did they say originally when they got
    rid of it, if it works then don't fix it!

    > and there is still that X prize out there, and
    > many teams seem close to doing it!

    Sorry, I don't follow!

    > p.s. I will eventually respond to your/our
    > Dr. Who discussion, once i get more time

    Heh!

    Cheers,
    CP/M User.

    Leave a comment:


  • vic user
    replied
    They probably would look at your ideas though, no matter how fare out you think they are. they have received some pretty interesting ideas!

    Yep, it was a very dramatic way for people to see how dangerous space travel can be at present. McAuliffe was her name, and I remember seeing news footage of her class, with all their party hats on, in class, watching the launch on TV. just brutal.

    NASA supposedly learned a lot from the Challenger accident, and besides making many changes to the actual components, they also tried to change the atmosphere in NASA as well.

    You can see the change in how they responded to the Columbia accident, etc..

    with the change in direction for American space exploration, the shuttle program has been affected something fierce. they are expected to stop the program in 2010, and will no longer service the hubble via shuttle, as well as seriously considering only using Russian vehicles to transport crew to the ISS, and use the shuttles' remaining missions, devoted solely to building the ISS.

    NASA seems to be headed towards a new vehicle as well, which would re enter the Earth like the old Apollo capsules, etc..

    and there is still that X prize out there, and many teams seem close to doing it!

    Chris.

    p.s. I will eventually respond to your/our Dr. Who discussion, once i get more time

    Leave a comment:


  • CP/M User
    replied
    Re: NASA accepting suggestions for increased shuttle safety

    "vic user" wrote:

    > NASA has been accepting suggestions
    > from anyone (public included), about
    > how to increase the safety of future
    > shuttle flights, so that what happened
    > to the Columbia, will not happen again.

    No, don't worry, my suggestion was too
    futuristic!

    But seriously, what happened was a
    disaster, what they do in the movies
    goes way too far in terms of how such a
    small thing could mean the difference
    between life & death.

    In the matter of the launch, they should
    plan better days for launching, not when
    it's too cold, too hot, thunderstorms,
    whatever looks serious to postpone!

    Don't think I'll ever forget what happened
    to that School Teacher (I think it was)
    who won a spot on one of the space
    craft, only to be killed shortly after. Have
    NASA learned from that?

    Cheers,
    CP/M User.

    Leave a comment:


  • vic user
    started a topic NASA accepting suggestions for increased shuttle safety

    NASA accepting suggestions for increased shuttle safety

    NASA has been accepting suggestions from anyone (public included), about how to increase the safety of future shuttle flights, so that what happened to the Columbia, will not happen again.

    Here is a link to a page talking about it in far more detail:

    http://www.space.com/news/nasa_suggest_031124.html

    Here is the e-mail where you can send suggestions:

    rtfsuggestionsnasa.gov

    Chris
Working...
X