• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Nasa to shoot new Teacher Astronaut into space

L

LordRaiden

Banned
http://www.msnbc.com/news/862313.asp?0cv=CB20

MSNBC has an article about Nasa restarting the Astronaut teacher program again. Uh, I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not. Didn't we blow up one last time around in 1986 because of beurocratic ignorance and managerial incompetence at Nasa? I'm holding my opinion of this till I see what happens. It scares me because I'm afraid we'll end up seeing a repeat of Challenger if we're not careful.
 
lol the way the education system is going, I think they should send the teachers in to space, but not send them back.
 
Um, the Challenger blew up because of a fuel leak, not because there was a teacher on board
rolleye.gif
 
Originally posted by: LordRaiden
http://www.msnbc.com/news/862313.asp?0cv=CB20

MSNBC has an article about Nasa restarting the Astronaut teacher program again. Uh, I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not. Didn't we blow up one last time around in 1986 because of beurocratic ignorance and managerial incompetence at Nasa? I'm holding my opinion of this till I see what happens. It scares me because I'm afraid we'll end up seeing a repeat of Challenger if we're not careful.
Click to expand...

How many shuttle missions have gone without incident since Challenger? Be sure to show all your math.
 
Originally posted by: notfred
Um, the Challenger blew up because of a fuel leak, not because there was a teacher on board
rolleye.gif
Click to expand...


Exactly, what the hell do you mean by saying "after challenger, not on your life" ?

Im interested to see what your point is there.......

 
The Challenger explosion was due to the solid rocket boosters temperature limitations, and NASA going against Morton Thoikol (who built the SRB's) recomendations not to launch because the temperature that day was below the rated safety level. It had nothing to do with anything the astronauts did on board.

Also, they are not formally restarting the teacher in space program. In that program, civilian teachers would go into space.

Barbara Morgan, the teacher who will be going into space now (and was the backup for Christa McAullife back in 86), has completed all required astronaut training and is now considered a full fledged astronaut.
 
On a related note, there's this place near here called "Challenge Learning Center". I don't know exactly what they do, but their logo has a space shuttle on it, looks like it's supposed to be steaking towards the stars or something. I find it humorous.
 
How many shuttle missions have gone without incident since Challenger? Be sure to show all your math.
Click to expand...
Call me overly cautious. I know what caused the disaster. The idiot beurocrats and managers were told specifically by the company who built the boosters that caused the main fuel tank to explode that it was dangerous and unsafe to launch below 45f because of noticable damage caused by those lower temperatures. Yet the management and beurocrats chose to turn a deaf ear to the company and launch anyways, because if they didn't, it would be bad politically. Well, it ended up a lot worse politically. The ended up short one shuttle, 7 astronauts were dead, and their carrers ruined. And all because they wanted to look good.

Do your research. A gasket on the booster, not designed for temps below 45f breached and burned a hole in the liquid fuel tank of the shuttle causing it to explode. The temperature that morning was 32f! 13 degrees below minimum safe operating temprature!! And the managers and beurocrats knew it! They were repeatedly told by the company not to launch. Yet they ignored them. This whole flight may go off perfectly fine. Heck, John Glen went up and back fine. I may be over reacting, but history tends to repeat itself.
 
Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw
Originally posted by: LordRaiden
http://www.msnbc.com/news/862313.asp?0cv=CB20

MSNBC has an article about Nasa restarting the Astronaut teacher program again. Uh, I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not. Didn't we blow up one last time around in 1986 because of beurocratic ignorance and managerial incompetence at Nasa? I'm holding my opinion of this till I see what happens. It scares me because I'm afraid we'll end up seeing a repeat of Challenger if we're not careful.
Click to expand...

How many shuttle missions have gone without incident since Challenger? Be sure to show all your math.
Click to expand...

There have been a total of 100 missions, in America, and the only failure was the callenger (not including Apollo 1, wasn't a take off).

 
Originally posted by: notfred
Um, the Challenger blew up because of a fuel leak, not because there was a teacher on board
rolleye.gif
Click to expand...



Yeah, exactly.

Why soo much hate towards sending a teacher again?





KeyserSoze
 
Originally posted by: Aceshigh
The Challenger explosion was due to the solid rocket boosters temperature limitations, and NASA going against Morton Thoikol (who built the SRB's) recomendations not to launch because the temperature that day was below the rated safety level. It had nothing to do with anything the astronauts did on board.

Also, they are not formally restarting the teacher in space program. In that program, civilian teachers would go into space.

Barbara Morgan, the teacher who will be going into space now (and was the backup for Christa McAullife back in 86), has completed all required astronaut training and is now considered a full fledged astronaut.
Click to expand...
It was a seal problem, but yes, nothing to do with the astronauts themselves.

 
Originally posted by: VBboy
I always wanted to be spanked by a teacher in space! 🙂
Click to expand...

i can think of a teacher or two i wouldn't mind spanking me and it wouldn't even have to be in space
 
Originally posted by: LordRaiden
How many shuttle missions have gone without incident since Challenger? Be sure to show all your math.
Click to expand...
Call me overly cautious. I know what caused the disaster. The idiot beurocrats and managers were told specifically by the company who built the boosters that caused the main fuel tank to explode that it was dangerous and unsafe to launch below 45f because of noticable damage caused by those lower temperatures. Yet the management and beurocrats chose to turn a deaf ear to the company and launch anyways, because if they didn't, it would be bad politically. Well, it ended up a lot worse politically. The ended up short one shuttle, 7 astronauts were dead, and their carrers ruined. And all because they wanted to look good.

Do your research. A gasket on the booster, not designed for temps below 45f breached and burned a hole in the liquid fuel tank of the shuttle causing it to explode. The temperature that morning was 32f! 13 degrees below minimum safe operating temprature!! And the managers and beurocrats knew it! They were repeatedly told by the company not to launch. Yet they ignored them. This whole flight may go off perfectly fine. Heck, John Glen went up and back fine. I may be over reacting, but history tends to repeat itself.
Click to expand...
Well said. You do have one tiny thing incorrect though. It's not that 45 degrees F was the design minimum temperature, it's that 45 degrees F was the minimum tested and certified temperature. The gaskets had not been tested below 45 degrees F and the Thiokol (sp?) engineers were against the launch because they didn't have the data to determine if the gaskets were safe below that temperature. Also, Thiokol management went against the engineers and told NASA that things were OK for launch. NASA wasn't innocent, but Thiokol management was a willing accomplice. There was another flaw with the way the SRB sections sealed that was known to both NASA and Thiokol prior to the Challenger fiasco too, it seems that the primary O-ring had never been the one providing the seal, rather the secondary O-ring was always the one that ended up sealing off the sections.

ZV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top