• =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IE5vIGxhdW5jaCBhZ2FpbiEgTGVhaywgbGVhayEhISHwn5ix8J+YsfCfm

    From StarDust@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Sat Sep 3 14:50:38 2022
    On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 2:31:03 PM UTC-7, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 03/09/2022 20:48, StarDust wrote:
    BBC News - Nasa: Artemis Moon rocket second launch attempt called off https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62758482

    NASA needs to get it's s**** together!
    I have a lot of sympathy for NASA's problems here.

    Bulk fuel tanks for cryogenic LH2 fuel change their dimensions very significantly and hydrogen makes steel go brittle in short order. It can diffuse into the metal matrix.

    Sad news is if they miss this next launch window then it will have to go right back to the starting blocks and have various battery checks/swaps.

    Space flight is difficult and dangerous. It should be left to robotics
    unless and until we find something that our latest robots cannot handle.

    I am with Martin Rees the UK Astronomer Royal on this.

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/jul/26/martin-rees-space

    I would personally still like to see one tourist visit to one of the
    later Apollo sites just to rub conspiracy theorists noses in it.

    The Apollo 11 landing site should be left untouched though.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    How it's going to land on the Moon, if it can't even get off the ground, safely?
    NASA has too many idiots working !

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RichA@21:1/5 to StarDust on Sat Sep 3 16:05:22 2022
    On Saturday, 3 September 2022 at 15:48:07 UTC-4, StarDust wrote:
    BBC News - Nasa: Artemis Moon rocket second launch attempt called off https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62758482

    NASA needs to get it's s**** together!

    It's like someone trying to get back into professional tennis after a five-year hiatus.
    Virtually impossible.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From W@21:1/5 to StarDust on Sun Sep 4 03:39:58 2022
    On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 3:48:07 PM UTC-4, StarDust wrote:
    BBC News - Nasa: Artemis Moon rocket second launch attempt called off https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62758482

    NASA needs to get it's s**** together!

    NASA must not have ever heard of duck tape.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Quadibloc@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 4 06:09:43 2022
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 4:40:00 AM UTC-6, W wrote:

    NASA must not have ever heard of duck tape.

    Funny. They ought to have remembered it, from its use
    on Apollo 13.

    However, that it may not be applicable to dealing with
    the liquid hydrogen leaks the Artemis mission encountered
    is entirely possible, and I would not be inclined to second-guess
    NASA on this matter.

    John Savard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From W@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Sun Sep 4 06:38:42 2022
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 9:17:39 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 5:05:23 PM UTC-6, RichA wrote:

    It's like someone trying to get back into professional tennis after a five-year hiatus.
    Virtually impossible.
    I think your analogy is flawed. Neither the United States of America, nor
    the National Aeronautics and Space Administration... oh, wait a moment,
    they changed what NASA stood for a few years back; I think it's National Astronautics and Space Administration now... is one individual human
    being, subject to the inherent limitations of an individual human being.

    NASA becoming capable of feats that equal those of the years of the
    Apollo program... is just as possible now as it was originally. Even if
    you had to fire everyone there and hire all new people, keeping nothing
    but the sign on the door... and start all over from scratch. (However, I
    do _not_ think the rot has set in so far that anything so drastic is needed; if anything, it appears to me that a great deal of progress has already
    been made in overcoming the issues of the Shuttle and immediate
    post-Shuttle eras.)

    Organizations have possibilities of self-renewal that organisms lack.

    You sure have a knack for posting pointless answers and comments.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Quadibloc@21:1/5 to RichA on Sun Sep 4 06:17:38 2022
    On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 5:05:23 PM UTC-6, RichA wrote:

    It's like someone trying to get back into professional tennis after a five-year hiatus.
    Virtually impossible.

    I think your analogy is flawed. Neither the United States of America, nor
    the National Aeronautics and Space Administration... oh, wait a moment,
    they changed what NASA stood for a few years back; I think it's National Astronautics and Space Administration now... is one individual human
    being, subject to the inherent limitations of an individual human being.

    NASA becoming capable of feats that equal those of the years of the
    Apollo program... is just as possible now as it was originally. Even if
    you had to fire everyone there and hire all new people, keeping nothing
    but the sign on the door... and start all over from scratch. (However, I
    do _not_ think the rot has set in so far that anything so drastic is needed;
    if anything, it appears to me that a great deal of progress has already
    been made in overcoming the issues of the Shuttle and immediate
    post-Shuttle eras.)

    Organizations have possibilities of self-renewal that organisms lack.

    John Savard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From W@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Sun Sep 4 06:37:11 2022
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 9:09:45 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 4:40:00 AM UTC-6, W wrote:

    NASA must not have ever heard of duck tape.
    Funny. They ought to have remembered it, from its use
    on Apollo 13.

    However, that it may not be applicable to dealing with
    the liquid hydrogen leaks the Artemis mission encountered
    is entirely possible, and I would not be inclined to second-guess
    NASA on this matter.

    The NASA of 2022 doesn't have the same personnel as the NASA of 1970.

    You seem to have some strange mental problem.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RichA@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Sun Sep 4 14:55:25 2022
    On Sunday, 4 September 2022 at 09:17:39 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 5:05:23 PM UTC-6, RichA wrote:

    It's like someone trying to get back into professional tennis after a five-year hiatus.
    Virtually impossible.
    I think your analogy is flawed. Neither the United States of America, nor
    the National Aeronautics and Space Administration... oh, wait a moment,
    they changed what NASA stood for a few years back; I think it's National Astronautics and Space Administration now... is one individual human
    being, subject to the inherent limitations of an individual human being.

    NASA becoming capable of feats that equal those of the years of the
    Apollo program... is just as possible now as it was originally. Even if
    you had to fire everyone there and hire all new people, keeping nothing
    but the sign on the door... and start all over from scratch. (However, I
    do _not_ think the rot has set in so far that anything so drastic is needed; if anything, it appears to me that a great deal of progress has already
    been made in overcoming the issues of the Shuttle and immediate
    post-Shuttle eras.)

    Organizations have possibilities of self-renewal that organisms lack.

    John Savard

    No explanation as to why this leak happened. No pressure tests done beforehand? Not possible, perhaps?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Quadibloc@21:1/5 to RichA on Mon Sep 5 04:41:10 2022
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 3:55:26 PM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
    No pressure tests done beforehand? Not possible, perhaps?

    Maybe they have become such idiots at NASA. I'd hesitate to
    draw that conclusion without a scrap of evidence, though.

    John Savard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Quadibloc@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 5 04:39:29 2022
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 7:38:44 AM UTC-6, W wrote:

    You sure have a knack for posting pointless answers and comments.

    RichA stated that NASA returning to a successful program of manned
    space launches is unlikely, and he cited the fact that it's very difficult
    for a tennis player to return to successful professional play after a long hiatus as evidence.

    There was a fallacy in that reasoning. Individual human beings are mortal,
    over time, they grow older, and thus they don't have the same ability to
    learn new skills at a later age than they did at an earlier age. So it's important
    to _maintain_ skills one has honed to a peak of perfection, as later one will no longer be able to develop them anew.

    An organization like NASA does _not_ have the constraint of mortality that human individuals have, and thus the reasoning "Humans can't do X, therefore NASA can't do X" is fallacious when the _reason_ "Humans can't do X" is specifically because of a characteristic of humans that NASA *does not share*.

    So that was my point. He was making an error in reasoning, which I pointed out.

    John Savard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From W@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Mon Sep 5 05:25:27 2022
    On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 7:39:31 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 7:38:44 AM UTC-6, W wrote:

    You sure have a knack for posting pointless answers and comments.
    RichA stated that NASA returning to a successful program of manned
    space launches is unlikely, and he cited the fact that it's very difficult for a tennis player to return to successful professional play after a long hiatus as evidence.

    There was a fallacy in that reasoning. Individual human beings are mortal, over time, they grow older, and thus they don't have the same ability to learn new skills at a later age than they did at an earlier age. So it's important
    to _maintain_ skills one has honed to a peak of perfection, as later one will no longer be able to develop them anew.

    An organization like NASA does _not_ have the constraint of mortality that human individuals have, and thus the reasoning "Humans can't do X, therefore NASA can't do X" is fallacious when the _reason_ "Humans can't do X" is specifically because of a characteristic of humans that NASA *does not share*.

    So that was my point. He was making an error in reasoning, which I pointed out.

    Yet another of your pointless (and incorrect) comments.

    You also demonstrate that you are bigoted against older people.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From W@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Mon Sep 5 05:28:19 2022
    On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 7:41:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 3:55:26 PM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
    No pressure tests done beforehand? Not possible, perhaps?
    Maybe they have become such idiots at NASA. I'd hesitate to
    draw that conclusion without a scrap of evidence, though.


    It could be mentioned that NASA did not build the equipment.

    I think that a serious investigation should be launched into the origin of the faulty parts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)