# Space shuttle



## RAXL (Jul 9, 2004)

So, after all this hubbub about how unsafe the shuttle is NASA now plans to go ahead with the launch even if the fuel gauge is still screwed up.  

What is wrong with these people?


----------



## SuFiKitten77 (Jul 19, 2005)

_Guess they see nothing wrong with taking chances with peoples lives .. hey, they will get a TV show rememberance if something goes wrong .. they just arent right  _


----------



## lipstikgrl (May 14, 2005)

i saw the take off today and thought it was awesome!!


----------



## Pete (Apr 13, 2004)

If they're not going to make a serious effort to launch the human race into outer space, then the Imperial Federal Government has no business spending tax dollars on this frivolous bull****.


----------



## Sinister (Apr 18, 2004)

Pete said:


> If they're not going to make a serious effort to launch the human race into outer space, then the Imperial Federal Government has no business spending tax dollars on this frivolous bull****.


I am in 100% agreement with you, Pete! I mean, it's great and all that we have the actual technology to even send something into space, but after so many launches where absolute zilch is going on to further advance the human colonizing of space, the novelty wears off quick. The fact that lives have been lost doing it makes despicable as well as absurd.


----------



## RAXL (Jul 9, 2004)

Imperials? 
Do we get Star Destroyers? 
Super Star Destroyers?
Maybe at least a Victory Star Destroyer?
Death Star?
Interdictor Cruiser?
C'mon, at the very least a friggin' TIE fighter?


----------



## RAXL (Jul 9, 2004)

HOUSTON, United States (AFP) - NASA said it was grounding the US space shuttle fleet after a large piece of foam insulation broke off from the fuel tank of the Discovery shuttle on liftoff. 

While the US space agency said the foam did not damage the shuttle on Tuesday's launch, a spokesman said that future flights are on hold until the problem is corrected.

"Until we're ready we won't fly again," said Bill Parsons, space shuttle program manager.




Didn't they say that 2 and a half years ago, after Columbia broke up?


----------



## Zombie-F (Apr 12, 2004)

If I were the astronauts, I'd be scared ****less of the re-entry on this one since the shuttle broke up a little on liftoff.


----------



## uncle willie (Apr 13, 2004)

look i watched the moon landing when i was a kid,i love the space program, bu do you think we are rushing try to get a man to mars in what 10 year or some **** like that? god knows i would love to see it,but do you relly think is worth the bucks?


----------



## mikeq91 (Jul 19, 2005)

I mean, I'm not an astronaut, but I guess they probably just feel like its such a once in a lifetime, and a few times in a lifetime opertunity, that its worth the risk. But i'm with you guys, no expirience is good enough to risk my life for. I have to guess though that the astranauts were clueless about the risk they were taking. As for them using tax dollars to keep launching, I don't think they're completely doing nothing. I believe the point of this launch was to repair the space station. But easy for me to say... i don't pay taxes.

mike


----------



## dougspaulding (May 22, 2004)

feldjager said:


> ...do you think we are rushing try to get a man to mars in what 10 year or some **** like that? god knows i would love to see it,but do you really think is worth the bucks?


More than worth it! We should have never come home after the moon - we should have gone on from there to Mars. NASA is really dragging their feet. Our future is there. We must go! To still be hanging around our back yard after all this time is so twentieth century!

See:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,139393,00.html
and click on video.


----------



## RAXL (Jul 9, 2004)

I agree we dropped the ball after the moon landings. 
But, at the same time I want us to go further into space, I also want to know what's at the bottom of our own oceans. 
Either way we go, there's plenty left out there that we don't know ANYTHING about.


----------



## uncle willie (Apr 13, 2004)

dont get me wrong i wil not be bitchen if we do. also if someone would say "hry you want to go on the next shuttle?"

hell yea i woudl jump on it! but thats me!


----------



## RAXL (Jul 9, 2004)

The space shuttles need to be retired. It's way past time for something new.
And safer.


----------



## SuFiKitten77 (Jul 19, 2005)

RAXL said:


> The space shuttles need to be retired. It's way past time for something new.
> And safer.


I agree, with all the money they have .. thats the best they can give us?


----------



## mikeq91 (Jul 19, 2005)

Well actually, I bet it is. I'm sure if they could make a faster, safer, better space shuttle, they would. Its like people coming out of a haunted house and saying the same thing "Thats as scary as they could make it?". And 9 times out of 10, the answer is yes, under the circumstances, it is. 

Mike


----------



## RAXL (Jul 9, 2004)

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — NASA (search) hopes to return astronauts to the moon by 2018, nearly a half-century after men last walked the lunar surface, by using a distinctly retro combination of space shuttle and Apollo rocket parts. 

The space agency presented its lunar exploration plan to the White House on Wednesday and on Capitol Hill on Friday. An announcement is set for Monday at NASA headquarters in Washington.

The fact that this successor to the soon-to-be-retired shuttle relies so heavily on old-time equipment, rather than sporting fancy futuristic designs, "makes good technological and management sense," said John Logsdon, director of George Washington University's space policy institute.

"The emphasis is on achieving goals rather than elegance," said Logsdon, who along with other members of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (search) urged NASA to move beyond the risky, aging shuttles as soon as possible.

"It has several elements to it. One is to say that the people who did Apollo were pretty smart," Logsdon said Friday. Depending on advanced, unproven technology would slow everything down and raise the costs, which will be high anyway, he noted.

The crew exploration vehicle's first manned trip will be to low-Earth orbit, probably no earlier than 2012, leaving up to a two-year gap between the last shuttle flight and the debut of its successor.


----------

