"July 2, 2005
Global American Series
Why is the Richest Nation of the World Risking Astronauts' Lives in
Global American Series
Why is the Richest Nation of the World Risking Astronauts' Lives in
25-year old Space Antiques?
America needs to think big again.
Today, in an article in the Houston Chronicle, an investigator for NASA stated
that the Shuttle is "too dangerous" to fly even with modifications -- and needs
to be replaced ASAP. The news article is at:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3249938
The investigator, Admiral Gehman, is certainly not a Chicken Little worried
about the sky falling. He is a sober professional who should be listened to
carefully. The lives of our men and women astronauts are on the line because the
next flight is scheduled a few days from now. A Shuttle hasn't flown since
Columbia crashed.
Although NASA has done what it can with what it has, based on Adm. Gehman’s
report I oppose sending our astronauts up in the old Shuttles again - until
there is a 21st century replacement for them to fly in. The Shuttle is 24-years
old! The remaining Shuttles aren't due for replacement until 2010 - when they
are 30 years old!
How many of you are driving a 24-30 year old car? My 15-year old Mercedes (now
deceased) developed a nasty habit of dying on the highway. Do you remember the
Hawaiian airline flying an old aircraft several years ago when the top of the
cabin peeled off above the passengers in flight?
The Shuttle is operating on 1970's technology (used when it first launched in
'81). Damage one of its delicate protective tiles and it is doomed. If one tiny
valve sticks in an engine designed 30 years ago, it blows up.
Can't the richest country in the world do better than to send its professionals
into space with three-decade-old technology?
Mr. Griffin, NASA’s new administrator, is an engineer and a major improvement
from having a “bean counter” in charge of a high tech enterprise. A Shuttle
replacement is his first priority after getting the old Shuttles flying again.
But Adm. Gehman says that even 1 more flight of these antiques (my term, not
his) is extremely dangerous. How could it hurt NASA to wait for a new generation
Shuttle before launching again?
What do we lose? The space station can wait. Everyone at NASA will get paid the
same regardless. The time and money that would go towards patching the old
Model T's could be better spent focused on preparing the new high tech "next
gen" crew vehicle instead. Focusing on the new vehicle could push up its launch
date from 2010 to maybe two or three years from now.
On the other hand, how much would it hurt NASA if they lose a third Shuttle? The
Shuttles should be treated like the Concorde, given a gold ribbon for service --
and parked at the Smithsonian (along with my Mercedes).
We have had a failure in Congressional leadership that should have made a "next
gen" Shuttle a priority over a decade ago. We don’t need a third Shuttle crash
to demoralize the American people, damage NASA and wake up Congress.
The next flight of American Astronauts should be in a Space vehicle designed
with 21st century technology --sooner rather than later.
Michael Fjetland
Global American Series
Email: GlobalAmerican2020@yahoo.com"
America needs to think big again.
Today, in an article in the Houston Chronicle, an investigator for NASA stated
that the Shuttle is "too dangerous" to fly even with modifications -- and needs
to be replaced ASAP. The news article is at:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3249938
The investigator, Admiral Gehman, is certainly not a Chicken Little worried
about the sky falling. He is a sober professional who should be listened to
carefully. The lives of our men and women astronauts are on the line because the
next flight is scheduled a few days from now. A Shuttle hasn't flown since
Columbia crashed.
Although NASA has done what it can with what it has, based on Adm. Gehman’s
report I oppose sending our astronauts up in the old Shuttles again - until
there is a 21st century replacement for them to fly in. The Shuttle is 24-years
old! The remaining Shuttles aren't due for replacement until 2010 - when they
are 30 years old!
How many of you are driving a 24-30 year old car? My 15-year old Mercedes (now
deceased) developed a nasty habit of dying on the highway. Do you remember the
Hawaiian airline flying an old aircraft several years ago when the top of the
cabin peeled off above the passengers in flight?
The Shuttle is operating on 1970's technology (used when it first launched in
'81). Damage one of its delicate protective tiles and it is doomed. If one tiny
valve sticks in an engine designed 30 years ago, it blows up.
Can't the richest country in the world do better than to send its professionals
into space with three-decade-old technology?
Mr. Griffin, NASA’s new administrator, is an engineer and a major improvement
from having a “bean counter” in charge of a high tech enterprise. A Shuttle
replacement is his first priority after getting the old Shuttles flying again.
But Adm. Gehman says that even 1 more flight of these antiques (my term, not
his) is extremely dangerous. How could it hurt NASA to wait for a new generation
Shuttle before launching again?
What do we lose? The space station can wait. Everyone at NASA will get paid the
same regardless. The time and money that would go towards patching the old
Model T's could be better spent focused on preparing the new high tech "next
gen" crew vehicle instead. Focusing on the new vehicle could push up its launch
date from 2010 to maybe two or three years from now.
On the other hand, how much would it hurt NASA if they lose a third Shuttle? The
Shuttles should be treated like the Concorde, given a gold ribbon for service --
and parked at the Smithsonian (along with my Mercedes).
We have had a failure in Congressional leadership that should have made a "next
gen" Shuttle a priority over a decade ago. We don’t need a third Shuttle crash
to demoralize the American people, damage NASA and wake up Congress.
The next flight of American Astronauts should be in a Space vehicle designed
with 21st century technology --sooner rather than later.
Michael Fjetland
Global American Series
Email: GlobalAmerican2020@yahoo.com"
Cost of each Shuttle Launch $1.5 billion. I'm glad we did not abandon the ISS and NASA was more careful, but the point is the same: No one planned ahead for the 'next gen' shuttle, and the costs of the Shuttle are too high and not sustainable. We can do it faster, better, cheaper via private space launch companies at this point...
ReplyDelete