Space Shuttle Columbia crashes

[xoclipse1]

   http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/01/shuttle.columbia/index.html

[BTs_Colin]

hmmm...well that what you get when you put 25 year old equipment into space.

An awful tragedy of course.

[Golo]

Props to the pilots and they're fam'z.  When i die i wanna die like that, going Mach 6 and on fire, with the possibility of landing on some cowboy in Texas.

[kami]

*tries to keep himself from laughing at golo in this sad moment*

It's a tragedy indeed, this will really hurt the space program, a Swede (first ever) was supposed to be launched into space this summer but that will be postponed now *sadness*

[Mr. Lothario]

     One of the Columbia astronauts was the first Indian-born woman in space. She was a hero in India. The space shuttle is just about the worst possible thing to fly into space. Better design is needed, but it will probably not happen for another few decades.

     On the other hand, I'm surprised that the Bush regime hasn't already killed NASA. It's taking valuable money which could be better used to pay for killing people who have oil.

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

I am ashamed of you Lothario. Political jokes are not necessary in a time like this...it is unwarranted and uncalled for. Along with your lack of taste, you also display a lack of knowledge in your post. There are several models being looked at to replace the shuttle in the future, and some have already been built (X-series craft). The Shuttle, unlike what you have said, is actually one of the safest vehicles to travel in space and is the most useful of any to be created thus far. This is the second incident involving a shuttle (first one was Challenger in 1988 when O-Ring failure led to the explosion of the Shuttle) and it is thought that this one might have been caused by a piece falling off and damaging the left wing of the shuttle during launch (look at the footage on CNN).

 The Space Shuttle Colombia technically broke up in re-entry, not crashed -  the first time it has ever happened to any space vehicle returning to earth. It is a tragedy these space pioneers had to die in such a fashion, and I hope that something good can come out of their deaths. Our Astronauts are paving the way for all humankind for the future, and I hope that at least some of you give them the respect that they all deserve.

[(SEALs) one]

:*(

I heard the sonicboom this morning at 8:05, 10minutes after I woke up, I thought it was thunder.

On another note,
There was an Israeli on the flight, a Colonel and national hero.

[Cossack]

OMG one, you guys heard it all the way in Dallas? I heard the boom in Austin, and there are reports of it in Houston! Anyhow it was around 8 in the morn when I heard it. My condolences to American, Indian, and Isreali pioneers. The Russians have had not as many such accidents also.

[Mr. Lothario]

I am ashamed of you Lothario.

     It was hardly a joke. I really am honestly surprised that NASA hasn't been killed off by our current leaders yet. I also made no assertions about the safety of the shuttle. I merely said that it was about the worst thing to fly into space. A craft which has a year-long turnaround time (I think that that figure is correct) between flights is hardly all that useful. Yeah, not many people have died on space shuttles, but not all that many people have gone into space on them, either. I'm aware of the existence of the space shuttle replacement prototypes, but I'm afraid that this event will put their development on hold indefinitely. This was a tragedy, but not solely because the astronauts died.

[cookie]

Actually, I think you'll be interested to know that Bush supports NASA (when last I checked.. I'm not COMPLETELY sure of the status as of now).  Even with the budget cuts, congress/the bush admin was planning on stepping up the program. feel my wrath, loth!

about the shuttle: I agree with all that it is an awful and tragic incident, however somehow I am not surprised at all this. There are too many things that can go wrong with space flight, and with the current situation over at NASA this was bound to happen. Plus, this may sound odd but when something hadn't gone wrong at NASA for so long, one day they were bound to slip up somehow.
     Anyhow, being as I live in "Space City" Houston, I've been seeing a tremendous amount of grief amongst the population and I'm sad to see such a promising day begin in tragedy. I'm affected on many levels by this, however I remain hopeful for the future and I wish you all the same.

[Mr. Lothario]

     Huh, that is interesting. I'm glad to know that I was wrong. : )

[GOD]

Well, NASA rocks, it got us to the moon, why would we cancel it out.  Tragedies like this only fuel engineers and its at times like these that america moves forward with great accomplishment and sucess.  truely a sad day though.  My condolences to the families.  
 

[kami]

So GOD, I take it you don't believe in the ?moon-landing scam conspiracy? then?

Well I can only agree with cookie about the risks involved and all that. Btw cookie, did you hear the blast as well?

[Mr. Lothario]

     That reminds me. I read the following somewhere or other about NASA (I'm paraphrasing, 'cause I don't remember the original wording): "It takes a special kind of genius to take all the wonderment and awe out of going into space and turn it into something boring and routine." Somehow, NASA did manage to do that.

[kos.viper]

(first one was Challenger in 1988 when O-Ring failure led to the explosion of the Shuttle)

You're a couple years off there, it was 1986.

[cookie]

nope, didn't hear any blast here. then again i was in a car at the time.

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

Yeah yeah Viper, I knew that...must have made some stupid typing error like I always do. ANyway, that isn't the point of this thread.

As for Lothario, what exactly is "The space shuttle is just about the worst possible thing to fly into space." supposed to mean if it doesn't relate to safety concerns? In a thread concerning the break up of a shuttle, that is hardly how you should word a statement if you, like you claim, intended for it to mean turn around times, etc.

Where your statement goes fatally wrong is that the Shuttle is by far the most useful thing to launch into space. It has far superior capabilities, and is cheaper to fly in the long run. It is necessary to have long delays between flights to maintain the shuttle, and to think of new and innovative experiments. NASA has to have a full slate of things to do on missions before they launch a shuttle, that is why they dont get launched too often, although each shuttle makes up to three flights per year, not the one that you were thinking. In addition, a shuttle carries 15x the cargo of its Russian counterpart, making it the most efficient craft to launch into orbit.

Anyway, that doesn't excuse you from trying to bring politics into such a matter.

As for Cookie, plenty of things have gone wrong with NASA because of Clinton slashing funding to key programs (Mars landers, planetary orbiters, etc.)

Back to Lothario, as for Space Shuttle flights seeming ordinary, whose fault is that? It sure as hell isn't NASA's. NASA only has so much money and doesn't waste it placing advertisments to hype space launches - it counts on the media to give it coverage (although it has pulled some stunts like John Glenn, etc.) On another note, NASA doesn't have to make all the experiments they carry out be exciting or captivating to be very useful...I mean, since when is testing the affects of aging in mammals in space something that would excite you?

[Mr. Lothario]

     The Shuttle costs far too much for far too little--tens of thousands of dollars to lift one pound of mass into orbit. Space is important for many more reasons than simply doing scientific experiments, but as long as the cost is prohibitive, that is about all that space will be used for. The Shuttle may be the best craft available now, but that does not mean that it it good, any more than the Red Baron's biplane was good from a modern viewpoint. By the standards of the day, the space shuttle (or the Red Baron's plane) is perfectly workable, and even good. I feel that today's standards are pitifully low compared to what needs to be in use. Thus, I say that the shuttle is about the worst thing to send into space.

[cookie]

As for Lothario, what exactly is "The space shuttle is just about the worst possible thing to fly into space." supposed to mean if it doesn't relate to safety concerns?  In a thread concerning the break up of a shuttle, that is hardly how you should word a statement if you, like you claim, intended for it to mean turn around times, etc.

First of all, this thread isn't principally about the safety concerns involved with the shuttle break-up, it's also to express opinion on the matter, as I understand it. Lothario was simply expressing his thoughts on the subject of space flight, as others before him had. No reason to act hostile... I'd rather this thread remain amiable, especially in regards to the topic.

Anyhow, in general, I agree with Loth that the Shuttle we have now is good, even excelllent, by current standards, but by no means the most effective and safe way to carry out our current missions. NASA does need improvements, it's just sad we can't give them the aid to do so at this moment in time.

On a side note, my physics teacher showed me some first-hand original photos of columbia in 1978, when it was strapped atop a giant airplane. I was confused... also in awe that we continued to use the shuttle after so many years.

[kami]

I bet most parts of the space shuttles have been repaired or replaced hundreds of times, they're probably a whole lot different now from how they were in the start.