"Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

Palomar · 2005-08-10 06:24:36

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=17592]Give me a break

*Mr. Pulham, that's what we've become. The Shuttle, whoop-de-do. A step down from Apollo.

Frankly, I think this pep talk is in the vein of "methinks he doth protest too much." Don't know Mr. Pulham's age, but I have to say this: I can understand -- to a point -- folks of the younger generation being excited about the Shuttle. Sure, they either were born after the Apollo era or were too young to remember it (I remember Apollo, even though I was a little kid at the time). Shuttle launches are the only manned launches they've actually seen in real time (still no comparison to the Saturn V launches of course), etc...

But for older generations to be excited? About what? Being stuck in LEO all these decades? This latest mission was sad; a counterpart to the Russian mini-sub crisis.

I don't understand older generations selling out. Particularly not after Apollo!

We can do better than this, good grief.

Mr. Pulham writes: "NASA is back. Get over it."

Yeah...as manned missions go, by the skin of its teeth.

--Cindy

GCNRevenger · 2005-08-10 09:29:10

Actually no, NASA is NOT back...

...right now, we do not have a manned launch vehicle that we could fly with a risk of death that is within ethical limits given what the mission would accomplish to show for it.

"STS-114 has been a fabulous success"

Wrong, 114 has been a spectacular failure, because it proved that NASA has not yet fixed a flaw with the design that introduces an unacceptable risk.

"the new launch observation and monitoring measures performed brilliantly"

Pictures! Pictures! Nothing but pictures! Look genius, you can have all the pictures you want in the whole world, but pictures do not stop foam from falling off the tank.

"Spectacular Success No. 3 - The NASA culture"

Wrong again, even publicly available documents published by the External Tank Office and interviews published in various news outlets (predominantly local papers) PROVE that the "culture" in the External Tank Office is still solidly in pre-Columbia mode, even though Columbia was their fault! And while the culture at KSC/JSC and the NASA managers in Florida and Texas may have become much improved, they failed to supervise the External Tank Office sufficently, and given the political situation they will probobly choose the path of expediency and congressional appeasment rather then fixing this problem right.

SpaceNut · 2005-08-10 10:51:00

Then on the other hand it is the Media's Hype, Distorts NASA's Reality to the general public in regards to failure or of success. Then you get all the PR spins on what a great job we have all done for the shuttle...

Shuttle still has its last days still ahead of it for its construction role of the ISS. But the problem of foam debri must be solved.

It also looks at this time if the shuttle Atlantis does not make the september window that the next available one is in november.

Palomar · 2005-08-10 11:09:07

"the new launch observation and monitoring measures performed brilliantly"
Pictures! Pictures! Nothing but pictures! Look genius, you can have all the pictures you want in the whole world, but pictures do not stop foam from falling off the tank.

*LOL! Great post, GCN. Teehee.

What are the Russians saying now? Immediately after the latest mission's launch (and prior to knowing about that big chunk of foam), Russia sent out a message that they were elated because of Soyuz, ISS, etc.; America was back on its feet (of course that rosy outlook quickly changed).

I've not seen any written or otherwise communicated statements from the Russians since the landing. I can just about imagine what they are saying/reaction...but I'm looking for some official (or otherwise) comments from them.

--Cindy

el scorcho · 2005-08-10 17:00:30

STS-114 was a success in terms of the fact that it didn't blow up. That's about it. This flight was as exciting as a dump truck getting a flat tire and fixing it on the way to the landfill, because that's essentially what they did.

I can understand -- to a point -- folks of the younger generation being excited about the Shuttle. Sure, they either were born after the Apollo era or were too young to remember it (I remember Apollo, even though I was a little kid at the time).

I am a member of the younger generation of which you speak (I was born about 6 months after the Challenger accident). Even at the age of 6, I can't remember any of my classmates being excited about the shuttle. We talked about the Moon and wondered why people weren't living and working there. We wanted to know when we were going to Mars.

So even in my elementary years during the 90-Day Report era, kids were not impressed by the shuttle. It just seemed stupid to us that NASA could send people to the moon 25 years before we were born, but could not during the 90s.

Stormrage · 2005-08-11 03:58:05

I find watching Paint dry more fun then watching the shuttle. It's always the same. Why don't they paint it pink? Pimp it out. I'm sure Xzibit is willing to do a "Pimp my Shuttle up" special.

idiom · 2005-08-11 14:02:38

Some tiles would have to be a deep purple to re-radiadiate heat most effectively.

srmeaney · 2005-08-14 02:26:27

There will always be critics with any leap forward. Apollo was little more than an oversized beer can. The shuttle was a hell of a step up from that.

Points at Mayflower washing on to the rocks.

"Lets go and meet the Pansies!"

GCNRevenger · 2005-08-14 10:52:24

As far as technology, Shuttle was a big improvement over Apollo, but as far as capability Shuttle was a huge step backwards. Shuttle stole from NASA any hope of heavy lift capability, took from them a vehicle which could reliably reenter from trans-Lunar velocity, and rockets that had the ability to save the crew if there were a problem.

Palomar · 2005-08-15 07:48:44

*Guess there's more 'lily-livered pansies' about:

Calls for ending Shuttle program gain momentum

Mentions rethinking retiring the Shuttles in 2010 and possibly "mothballing" all three immediately.

"When your design stinks, Engineering 101 says admit your mistakes and go back to the drawing board," said retired NASA engineer Homer Hicham. "The space shuttle is ... never going to be reliable no matter how much money, time and engineering careers your throw at it. Let's put the shuttle on the shelf right away and give engineers the gift of designing new ships to carry humans into space," he said.

Yeah.

Roger Pielke, director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder agrees.
"NASA is rolling the dice with the future of the US space program by continuing to hold unrealistic expectations for shuttle performance.

I wonder if Mr. Pulham would call these two guys 'lily-livered pansies'?

--Cindy

GCNRevenger · 2005-08-15 08:13:42

Its really kind of amazing that even members of Congress are openly talking about doing it: getting rid of the Shuttle right now...

...I mean, what a shift! They aren't singing the praises of Shuttle's "marvelous capabilities" nor are they talking about taking it out on NASA with their failure to fix the foam problem given how poor Shuttle's design is. Heck, even I am not willing to go that far, and let them off the hook because they can't get chunks of foam to stop falling off.

And what about the ISS? Did they say anything about what happens to it? ...Heck, if Shuttle were to go away tomorrow, NASA could afford to build Shuttle-C and the massive in-line Magnum/Longfellow SDV instead of one or the other, so Shuttle-C could bring up ISS payloads. Or, perhaps the SRB launcher with an SSME upper stage and a tug could do the same.

SpaceNut · 2005-08-15 10:26:05

And if Nasa does delay the Atlantis flight until March following a redesign of the ET. Then lets get it done so as to use the new design for the SDV unit of the future. Why spend money twice if we will be remodifying the tanks again for the future.

And talk about wishy washy, Tiger team can not still find a root cause for foam debri.

Was this tank also put though a preflight test a few weeks before that. In order to test out some of the other changes that were made after the fisrt tank was changed out?

GCNRevenger · 2005-08-15 10:53:51

I am thinking that the "Tiger Team" is getting a little bit of course...

Their purpose is not to understand why foam falls off the tank, nor is their job to prevent the current design from failing which is shedding foam: their job is simple, to stop the foam from seperating by any means nessesarry. It is not nessesarry to keep the current foam from breaking if you simply apply a netting or sealant over the foam to keep it from falling off.

John Creighton · 2005-08-15 11:07:49

Its really kind of amazing that even members of Congress are openly talking about doing it: getting rid of the Shuttle right now...
...I mean, what a shift! They aren't singing the praises of Shuttle's "marvelous capabilities" nor are they talking about taking it out on NASA with their failure to fix the foam problem given how poor Shuttle's design is. Heck, even I am not willing to go that far, and let them off the hook because they can't get chunks of foam to stop falling off.
And what about the ISS? Did they say anything about what happens to it? ...Heck, if Shuttle were to go away tomorrow, NASA could afford to build Shuttle-C and the massive in-line Magnum/Longfellow SDV instead of one or the other, so Shuttle-C could bring up ISS payloads. Or, perhaps the SRB launcher with an SSME upper stage and a tug could do the same.

I just got to say wow! What a paradigm shift that would be. I am sure it would be for the better but it would be so different then what was expected. Is it reasonable for NASA to build both. Can they justify that to congress? And how would it work anyway, can both vehicles be launched from the same launch pad and can both tanks be made in the same factory or does it cost to much to switch the tooling.

Palomar · 2005-08-18 06:14:06

*New article from spaceflightnow.com. Here's a portion of it:

Task group panelists blast space shuttle management
Seven members of an independent review panel Wednesday blasted NASA's management of the post-Columbia shuttle program, blaming poor leadership for ongoing, pervasive "cultural" problems and an erosion of engineering rigor that raise questions about the agency's willingness to fly without a thorough understanding of the risks involved.

Pervasive "cultural" problems. Hmmmmm, I wonder what those could be. Let me take a wild guess at one likely element: Jerks and incompetents getting preferential treatment and all sorts of excuses made for them while sincere and hard-working folk get the shaft/are told to shut up and put up.

An erosion of engineering rigor. Would a resident NM engineer care to chime in on that particular?

Article

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2005-08-18 09:49:01

yup many more articles are listed on the spacetoday.net site
Putting it as the Nasa culture that did not change.

Also read more on the final report here at spaceref.com

C M Edwards · 2005-08-18 13:49:28

yup many more articles are listed on the spacetoday.net site
Putting it as the Nasa culture that did not change.
Also read more on the final report here at spaceref.com

Who're the lily livered pansies now?

Palomar · 2005-08-19 11:41:03

*Discovery hitches a ride:

Space Shuttle Discovery Heads to Florida
AP - Thu Aug 11, 5:16 PM ET
EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. - Space shuttle Discovery took off Friday atop a jumbo jet for a cross-country trip to Florida, more than a week after it landed in the Mojave Desert. The modified Boeing 747 carrying the shuttle piggyback took off just after 8:30 a.m. to return to Cape Canaveral. It will make several stops to refuel during the 2,232-mile trip, which was expected to cost NASA at least $1 million.

Article

--Cindy

srmeaney · 2005-08-21 00:16:56

I like the picture of the shuttle Cindy, That funny stain the full length of the cargo bay looks like a hydraulic fluid coating from opening and closing of the cargo bay.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-08-10 06:24:36

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#2 2005-08-10 09:29:10

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#3 2005-08-10 10:51:00

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#4 2005-08-10 11:09:07

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#5 2005-08-10 17:00:30

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#6 2005-08-11 03:58:05

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#7 2005-08-11 14:02:38

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#8 2005-08-14 02:26:27

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#9 2005-08-14 10:52:24

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#10 2005-08-15 07:48:44

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#11 2005-08-15 08:13:42

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#12 2005-08-15 10:26:05

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#13 2005-08-15 10:53:51

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#14 2005-08-15 11:07:49

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#15 2005-08-18 06:14:06

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#16 2005-08-18 09:49:01

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#17 2005-08-18 13:49:28

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#18 2005-08-19 11:41:03

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

#19 2005-08-21 00:16:56

Re: "Lily-Livered Pansies," huh?

Board footer