Nasa’s decision regarding Endeavor
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=169508
Printed Date: 02 February 2026 at 3:57am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Nasa’s decision regarding Endeavor
Posted By: WGP guy2
Subject: Nasa’s decision regarding Endeavor
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 11:31am
|
NASA announced that they will not be repairing the damaged tiles on the underbelly of the Shuttle Endeavor. I am not sure what to think, however I think this is an accurate statement regarding the issue:
I think what we need to keep in mind is that before the Columbia disaster, nearly ever trip the shuttle would return with some form of damage. Although I will add, if something does happen to the Endeavor, I think we can probably kiss the current orbiters goodbye forever, along with many NASA and Rockwell employees. EDIT: I'm going to go ahead and expand this topic. In my opinion, instead of using refurbishable (orbiter) and disposable (new spacecraft that will go to the moon and mars), it seems to me like a reusable spacecraft would be well worth the money. Instead of going into space and spending the whole time there figuring out how to repair the damage from lift off so you can get home, spend the extra $$ on something that is just a fuel up and go type craft. There is no doubt the technology exists. We even spent tons of money in the 80s to research better heat shields, but we still use the old ones. Kind of a waste of money. To sum up what I just said, stop spending a few million to go into low earth orbit for a week or two, instead stop that and go ahead and spend the billions of dollars it will take to make a reusable interplanetary craft. Its a waste to have to plan for months just for a few days of flight, while not really doing anything productive. |
On one of the space walks THIS MISSION one of the astronauts got a cut
in his glove. Cut through several layers but thankfully did not cause a
decompression. They immediately cancelled that space walk. They do not
know what caused the cut. They determined that the risks of doing the
spacewalk to repair the damage were greater than the risks of re-entry
with the damage.Replies:
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 11:35am
|
NASA has some of the smartest people in the world working on this one. I say trust them. ------------- |
Posted By: Nuclear
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 11:45am
|
Let them re-enter. Since the Columbia disaster every shuttle to leave has taken damage to those tiles, which means every one before it probably did as well, and they made it just fine. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Da Hui
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 11:46am
|
Thats why I stay here on earth.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 12:19pm
|
It seems this happens every time we launch a shuttle lately.
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Nuclear
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 12:27pm
I think it has always happened, but we didn't have a problem with it until the Columbia disaster. -------------
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 12:39pm
Exactly, which is why I think we should go ahead and spend the money to make something that this WONT happen to, rather then blow money on pointless missions in low earth orbit. |
Posted By: Jack Carver
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 1:32pm
|
I don't think the government wants to give them that kind of money. I agree, we should be researching and building new stuff, I think it's extremely important, but I was reading an article in Popular Mechanics and they said even the next moon lander is more like Apollo 2.0 instead of something new entirely. Kinda bogus is you ask me... |
Posted By: Kristofer
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 1:34pm
we need star wars tech developed. and we should make the moon the 52nd state after canada 
|
Posted By: bravecoward
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 1:41pm
|
whats exploration without danger
------------- 
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 1:44pm
Exploration without danger. |
Posted By: Evil Elvis
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 2:06pm
|
We need that new RAM jet space planes the Marine Corps is developing. The Space Shuttle is the most Overpriced obsiolete spacecraft we have IMHO. Even the Russian Boran is a better spacecraft. Maybee we should search Ebay.ru for one of those. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Ben Dover1
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 2:36pm
|
what exactly is the point of being in space besides for satellites? what was the point of going to the moon, it didn't help cure cancer for anything so why did they do it? ------------- 
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 2:54pm
RAM jet (would actually be SCRAM jet for most high altitude ops) are air breathing, so they will work fine in the atmosphere on earth, but nowhere else in our solar system. I personally see a nuclear powered engine as the best option. The only fuel that requires is a liquid to be converted to steam, which we can find or make on many celestial bodies (any ones of interest to us, anyway).
I'm sure many close minded people said the same thing in the late 1700s/early 1800s about exploring the North American continent. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 2:54pm
|
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9811/02/space.medical/index.html - Benefits of space exploration . That took 5 seconds to find on google, and it is just a few of the medical advances. BTW, the reason we developed the agency in the first place was to beat the commies in the space race that kicked off after sputnik scared the crap out of us. Back on topic though, if the rocket scientists say it is ok for re-entry, I can't really argue with them. ------------- 
|
Posted By: PAINTBALL1
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 3:27pm
|
It's like ADD or Autism. It's always been there, people only heard of a few cases or none at all. Now they are both HUGE concerns. Just like these freakin tiles. How easy can it be to launch a space shuttle without damaging anything at all? Either way they are rocket scientists and well, I'm just a corporate slave.
I agree that the shuttle itself is outdated. The Government however is stretched extremely thin on funds. I'm sure that a few billion dollars to build a space ship to venture to the unknown falls right under the war in Iraq on George Bushs list. ------------- USAF Special Weapons Technician. |
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 3:50pm
Wonder just how many centuries it will be until we are planets instead of nations... It only took us a little over a decade to go from being earth bound to venturing to another celestial body, so if we really want to it can't take that long to find ways to travel out of our solar system and inhabit other worlds. |
Posted By: Evil Elvis
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 3:59pm
|
If we freeze the people.or we have these huge 'colony' ships that would be like a small self sustained city. Since travel through space to another Galaxy or Solar System wouldtake Lifetimes. Probally by the time they reach Earth would had either been destroyed or found the technology to beat them there. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:03pm
Closest Galaxy: 2.2 million light years away. Moving toward us at: 670,000 MPH Collide with us in: Five Billion Years ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:05pm
Yea I'm definitely not talking about using existing technology, that would be impossible. Since we already have the ability to travel at velocitiess that slow down time (travel into the future basically), its probably only a matter of time until we can do it the other way around (slow down time in order to have a greater velocity), essentially a warp drive, but without stopping the time dilation.
Our sun is due to die in 4.2 Billion Years, so I guess by then we need to be out of our solar system, and in 5 Billion years we need to be on another galaxy...or wait out the billions of years until the new galaxy forms from the two that collided. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:08pm
|
The human race won't last that long...
-------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:11pm
My point was that we will never have the technology to travel 670,000 mph. Even at that speed it would take 5 billion years to get to the nearest galaxy. I am saying that human kind will be dead and gone before we could
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: FROG MAN
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:11pm
|
i doubt earth has enough resouraces or our brains have the capability to comprihend and excute the required science/construction of something that would allow us to travel to and inhabit other planets or solar systems (no spell check) ------------- <1 meg sig = bad> |
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:20pm
No? Theres already plenty of theories and models that would allow us to do that. Miguel Alcubierre made a theory that was the basis for the Star Trek Warp drive. Basically it causes an increase in relative velocity while the actual velocity still remains lower than the speed of light by causing expansion and contraction of space. Still a long way off and seems far fetched, but so did the airplane. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:26pm
Impossible. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: FROG MAN
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:26pm
|
there thousands of theorys of stuff we can never test, they dont mean anything ------------- <1 meg sig = bad> |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:29pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:35pm
|
Why are you guys so focused on traveling to a different galaxy? Our own galaxy is where we would focus first to find a suitable planet or system of planets to use in production of some craft capable of traveling to a new galaxy... As I have said previously, we won't last long enough to get there or even contemplate it. -------------
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:35pm
Thats what you would have said if you lived in the 1700s and was told that one day man would fly with the birds. Impossible? PROVE IT We already have PROVEN that time dilation causes what is essentially time travel (forward), so if we can figure out how to CAUSE time dilation, we have ourselves a means of traveling relatively faster than the speed of light, but locally slower than the speed of light. |
Posted By: FROG MAN
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:39pm
you talk about things that scientist have studied the entire life and barley grasp and only guess at. also, if we cant control our own climate how are we going to not only create but maintain a climate on another planet, space travel besides reasearch to save our planet first is a joke. ------------- <1 meg sig = bad> |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:41pm
|
Yup. There's a whole range of our own galaxy we don't even have a clue about, let's take it one step at a time. -------------
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:51pm
So you're saying that every advance in engineering has come from years and years of research? I'm in no way saying we have the capacity to make things like that happen now, but that the possibility exists. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 4:57pm
I'm not gonna lie, I went retarded. I was using galaxy as Solar System. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 5:01pm
I think we should focus a lot on visiting HD209458b. But the technology used to get there would be the same to go to another galaxy so... |
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 17 August 2007 at 5:14pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: Nuclear
Date Posted: 18 August 2007 at 2:25am
Landing on the moon was more for politics. Although i would like to see it done again. -------------
|
Posted By: Ben Dover1
Date Posted: 19 August 2007 at 1:51pm
-------------
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 19 August 2007 at 2:31pm
For one learning more about planets. Sure, what we are learning right now may not benefit us...yet. The other big thing is the experience. While planets in our solar system may not provide us with too much, planets outside of it most likely will. The experience traveling within our solar system will give us the ability to go beyond it. You've gotta crawl before you can walk, right? |
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 19 August 2007 at 3:16pm
Do you realize how many times people had said that same exact thing in relation to technology that we now use? ------------- |
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 19 August 2007 at 3:20pm
|
Ben, You're thinking about the near future without regarding the distant future. This sort of exploration is crucial to keeping humanity alive. This world wont be inhabitable for us in the future because we're baby making machines that find it wrong to kill people for the "greater good." As a result, we will overpopulate. Now, you can't just think of it in terms of the amount of space required for a human to live. We need resources, we need a good standard of living, and we need peace. To keep all these necessities of life available to those living in the mosh pit that will be the future, we will need to further technology. Sure, we can develop that technology on land, but society is plagued by something called politics. Competition between countries either sends the money towards war, or towards things that no country has yet accomplished (Space Race). None of the highly intelligent and esteemed leaders of the world would ever care for petty things like keeping earth habitable, so scientists disguise such advances under programs like NASA and other more powerful forms of showing technological dominance. It turns out that such programs are not only great for covering up the fact that money is spent towards survivability, but they do a pretty damn good job of improving the techniques being tested. It's not like these scientists are purposely covering up these advances. Improving life-sustaining technology comes with the job of creating other technological marvels. How so? Governments like spending money on high prestige yet high risk endeavors. These endeavors require more extreme measures to keep the guinea pigs alive, and so the technology necessary to do so is born. A good example: I'm sure you've all seen this guy:  When this suit is fully developed, it will be able to perform a diagnostic on the soldier's health in the field to be remotely transmitted to field hospitals. Result, we're one step closer to having early warning systems installed on civilians, so ambulances can be deployed with no need to call 911. The suit will have fibers that help augment the strength of the soldiers inside. Result, we're one step closer to making clothing for the elderly or the sick, which will help even the most crippled get around with ease. The suit will have an air conditioning unit that can last for days on its fuel cell. Result, we improve on power usage, which will further remove us from our dependability on non-renewable resources. The soldier concept you see in the picture is only for earth, on land, in an environment that's already friendly for humans. Space is a cold, desolate place. The kind of place that our earth is destined to be one day. Countries would love being able to brag about conquering the area outside earth. It naturally follows that space programs will continue to be decently funded as long as competition still exists. Developing technology for space means developing tech for the worst possible of conditions, something that earth is destined to get to. If we make significant advances today, it will be cheaper, easier, and safer to implement them in the future. If all goes bad too soon, we will have Mars to go to. But if we wait until the moment that we're starving for oxygen to breathe, no amount of scientific progress without years of applied usage will make it possible for us to save ourselves. As we know, politicians like to deny all tragedy that's not shocking and obvious, so even at that moment it will be too late to get funding. Bottom line: Start now, save ourselves in the future. Start in the future, die in 3 weeks. I could post so much more about the benefits of space travel, but the politics are more important at the moment. -------------
|