Missouri Mule
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,406
- Reaction score
- 48
- Location
- Hot Springs, Arkansas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Missouri Mule said:They are currently succeeding unless real Americans stand on their own two hind legs and take back the reins of power from these mindless nincompoops and fanatics.
Zebulon said:Two HIND legs? As opposed to a real American's two FRONT legs?
Seriously, dude... I think the problem lies MUCH more with NASA's incompetence rather than Freon or non-Freon based foam. Are there REALLY only TWO kinds of foam? Is Freon now the wonder chemical, which will keep the foam on, regrow hair, and make our penises longer, and the Left is secretly conspiring to keep it from us all? Gimme a break.
They should scrap ALL the shuttles and get Burt Rattan to build them a nice new fleet of spacecraft that are MUCH cheaper and don't have to worry about reentry heat OR tiles OR falling foam.
I must congradulate you. I didn't think anyone would have the balls to use phrasing like that since George Tenet. I applaud your effort to stand up for what you believe in, with such tenacity.Missouri Mule said:This is a slam-dunk. Case closed.
ncallaway's imagination said:Me: So...NASA...How's that moon colony going?
NASA: Yea...about that...
Me: Nevermind. I've brought you here today to discuss foam.
NASA: uh...huh...
Me: Yea, you know that stuff that's in the foam you use now? Freon.
NASA: Yea.
Me: Yea, that stuff is pretty bad for the-
NASA [under breath]: Boy, I sure hate this ncallaway guy. He's a real ass.
Me: -environment. Is it feasible to use different foam at all?
NASA: Yea, I think we can work something out.
Me: Thanks, NASA. You guys are pretty cool.
NASA [under breath]: Dammit. He didn't even ask us about our Sun Base. We've already completed that. Now we look bad.
ShamMol said:Can you say design flaw? A better question to ask imo. But another one is why wasn't there a crash before the one that killed those seven if the problem started in 97? It just doesn't make sense. Frankly, I think that this has always happened in some degree, but we are just recognizing it.
I have been saying for the past three years or so that we shoudl replace the shuttles with a new design that takes off much easier and doesn't cause damage, but hey, don't listen to me (like last time) because I am a member of the left.
ShamMol said:I think the guy in post number seven pointed out where you have gone wrong quite nicely. This isn't about liberalness, or political correctness...hell, it has nothing to do with either. As he put it, it has to do with environmentalists who feel that freon destroys (which it does by the way) the ozone.
If it doesn't work, then design a new shuttle where this won't happen entering space. I am sure taht there are actually much better ideas out there that could be adopted for a large scale space shuttle. I am just saying that it isn't just one things fault, it isn't just, etc, etc. It is a nice healthy shade of gray.
Missouri Mule said:Actually it IS black and white; not gray. There was no need to change that foam composition. The possible decomposing of that foam would be like a drop of water in the ocean if that much. And I've already made the argument that the next system may be even more trouble prone. We do know that the shuttle was highly reliable previous to the needless foam problem. Am I wrong? Can anyone cite even one example of pre environmentally correct foam was used that any of it came off the shuttle? If anyone can, I'd like to know about it.
debate_junkie said:http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/shuttle_laser_030221.html
oh and Missouri... I'd check my facts again if I were you. and I quote from the above article
Laser shearography promised to address a concern since the earliest days of the shuttle program -- insulation peeling off and striking the tiles. Recent changes in the composition of the spray-on foam and adhesives have made it more susceptible to flaking off, experts said.
note the words... from the earliest days of the shuttle program. They've always believed it possible.... recent changes have made it more susceptible to flaking. To say it's never flaked from the shuttle before the changes... show me concrete proof to refute that argument. Because I've looked.. and I cannot find one shred to say it's NEVER fallen from the shuttle since the Shuttle program began.
Time out... nevermind don't answer that. I found the contrary... on the FIRST shuttle flight.. they found a bubble in the insulation before takeoff that was fixed without delaying.
The problem dates back to the first shuttle launch, when Daech and others were called to the launch pad because a large bubble appeared in the external tank insulation. They were able to fix that problem without delaying the launch.
http://tech.tbo.com/tech/MGA62MKJGCD.html
There ya go.. there's the proof that there's been problems with the insulation from the get go. Flaking or no flaking... a bubble eventually becomes a flaking piece of foam if left unattended. So to now borrow a phrase.
SLAM DUNK
Not a science major in college?Missouri Mule said:I hold the left responsible and always will.
26 X World Champs said:Not a science major in college?
IMHO blaming politics for a scientific tragedy is completely and utterly wrong, incorrect and I must say it, dumb, dumb, dumb.
When I read crappy posts like these it really saddens me that anyone can be so prejudiced in their views of the world that they will believe anything anyone says that puts down their opposition.
This is one stupid thread....
debate_junkie said:So political correctness did NOT kill Columbia's astronauts. A freak accident did. Did political correctness scrub future missions? NO.. NASA's rush back to space did. They should have tirelessly worked to have this problem corrected before ANY..I repeat ANY shuttle took flight. and THAT is case closed.
quietrage said:As stated above the problem exists with both types of foam and this has happened on over 100 flights. The freak accident only happened now because the odds finally caught up the NASA and its aging shuttle.
debate_junkie said:http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/shuttle_laser_030221.html
oh and Missouri... I'd check my facts again if I were you. and I quote from the above article
Laser shearography promised to address a concern since the earliest days of the shuttle program -- insulation peeling off and striking the tiles. Recent changes in the composition of the spray-on foam and adhesives have made it more susceptible to flaking off, experts said.
note the words... from the earliest days of the shuttle program. They've always believed it possible.... recent changes have made it more susceptible to flaking. To say it's never flaked from the shuttle before the changes... show me concrete proof to refute that argument. Because I've looked.. and I cannot find one shred to say it's NEVER fallen from the shuttle since the Shuttle program began.
Time out... nevermind don't answer that. I found the contrary... on the FIRST shuttle flight.. they found a bubble in the insulation before takeoff that was fixed without delaying.
The problem dates back to the first shuttle launch, when Daech and others were called to the launch pad because a large bubble appeared in the external tank insulation. They were able to fix that problem without delaying the launch.
http://tech.tbo.com/tech/MGA62MKJGCD.html
There ya go.. there's the proof that there's been problems with the insulation from the get go. Flaking or no flaking... a bubble eventually becomes a flaking piece of foam if left unattended. So to now borrow a phrase.
SLAM DUNK
quietrage said:As stated above the problem exists with both types of foam and this has happened on over 100 flights. The freak accident only happened now because the odds finally caught up the NASA and its aging shuttle.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?