Space Shuttle Columbia Breaks Up On Approach
	found on CNN.com written by 1fastdog, edited by Ajax (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Sat 1 Feb 10:45am
		"The space shuttle Columbia has apparently broken up during maneuvers to begin its approach for this morning's scheduled landing," writes 1fastdog. "NASA lost contact a little after 9:00 a.m. EST Saturday morning, when the shuttle was several hundred thousand feet up in the atmosphere and traveling about 12,500mph. Shortly thereafter videotaped footage was released which shows the apparent breakup of the shuttle. NASA is warning people not to handle any debris that may fall, as it could be hazardous." Continuous updates are promised at the NASA homepage, and many other sources.

	"A further wrinkle to the story: The U.S. government is attempting to quell any rumors of terrorist involvement by pointing out that the shuttle's altitude precludes being targeted by any weaponry available to terrorists. Shuttle security had taken on an even higher degree of seriousness than normal the past several days due to concerns over the fact that Columbia was carrying one Ilan Ramon, a colonel in the Israeli air force, which could make it a prime target for terrorists. (One wonders how this story is being covered on al-Jazeera.)"

[ more plastic... ]    

show almost all: 222 commentsmost: 32 commentsbest: 6 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

1.  Unlucky week   by Smallest       at Sat 1 Feb 11:01am score of 2 informative     The Challenger disaster and the Apollo launch fire both had their anniversaries last week. Terrible. .sig .sgi .gis .gsi .isg .igs   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

23.  Re: Unlucky week   by Minister of Inferior       at Sat 1 Feb 11:39am score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 1     And uncanny. The Apollo accident was on January 27. Challenger exploded on January 28. Now this, and it's February 1. It's terrible alright. But it's also bizarre. someone you trust is one of us   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   109.  Better break out the tinfoil hats   by andy p       at Sat 1 Feb 6:59pm score of 1   in reply to comment 23     Never mind the shuttle carrying the first Israeli in space started breaking up just before it passed over the city of Palestine, Texas... The conspiracy theorists are going to have a field day with this. Barrels are just crates with delusions of grandeur   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   142.  Re: Unlucky week   by Chasuk       at Sat 1 Feb 10:37pm score of 1.5 disingenuous   in reply to comment 23     Yes, how uncanny. Three unrelated missions separated over many years, all occurring within a few days of each other (if one ignores the decades, of course) is really fucking eerie, especially when you consider that most missions occur during these months due to favorable launch conditions. How odd. How unusual. Hey, did you know that Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, and Lyndon B. Johnson all died during the same century? And to think they were ALL PRESIDENTS! How coincidental is that?!? Neopets - the best free game on the Internet.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   148.  Re: Unlucky week   by MiceHead       at Sat 1 Feb 11:27pm score of 2.5 informative   in reply to comment 142     ...especially when you consider that most missions occur during these months due to favorable launch conditions. Amusing, but I don't think you're correct; Cape Canaveral launches year round, as does JFK. As for Truman, Nixon, and Johnson, you forgot to point out that they all had ear hair. That's what linked them; not the presidency. =MiceHead - The Stock Market for the Next 100 Years   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   161.  1.5 brilliant my syphilized fucking yarbles   by Minister of Inferior       at Sun 2 Feb 5:15am score of 1   in reply to comment 142     I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I don't believe this means anything. Maybe "most missions occur during these months" (my emphasis). So? What has happened here is still extremely unlikely, and people said that about Apollo and Challenger alone. But I don't remember ever having heard someone perplexed by Johnson, Truman and Nixon dying in the same century. And what's up with the attitude? Just because you don't have a grasp of 6th grade statistics there's no need to take it out on me. someone you trust is one of us   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   241.  Re: 1.5 brilliant my syphilized fucking yarbles   by WhosYerDaddy       at Mon 3 Feb 1:48pm score of 1   in reply to comment 161     Indeed, what are the odds?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

2.  He was also the first   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sat 1 Feb 11:06am score of 0.5 informative     Columbia was carrying one Ilan Ramon, a colonel in the Israeli air force, would make it a prime target for terrorists. He was the first Israeli astronaut. That does indeed have a symbolic value.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

110.  Some other info about Mr. Ramon:   by rough ashler       at Sat 1 Feb 7:12pm score of 1 informative   in reply to comment 2     From haaretz: Ilan Ramon, a former fighter pilot and weapons specialist, fought in the 1973 Yom Kippur War and in the 1982 war in Lebanon. In 1981, he was a member of the mission to bomb the Iraqi nuclear reactor before it became online. I'd say bombing the Iraqi nuclear reactor makes him more than 'symbolic', he's "part of the war machine against the Arabs", if you buy into that kind of 'symbolism'. Would 'a terrorist' like to have been responsible? Sure. Is it likely? Not really.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   128.  great.   by burntfriedman       at Sat 1 Feb 9:57pm score of 0.5 obnoxious   in reply to comment 2     Now, the U.S. and Israel can have a national day of mourning.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   234.  as if.   by burntfriedman       at Mon 3 Feb 10:49am score of 0.5 modappeal   in reply to comment 128     right. that post was obnoxious, but those who thought the shuttle was a victim to terrorism aren't.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   149.  Re: He was also the first   by shatov       at Sat 1 Feb 11:31pm score of 1   in reply to comment 2     Just to add fuel to conspiracy theorists: The first Jewish woman in space died in the Challenger accident. Judith Resnik was one of the astronauts on that mission. But, to douse the conspiracy theorists' hopes, it was not her first, but her second mission into space. And I don't happen to remember all the different achievements of various Jews. It just happens that recently a man hijacked a plane in Germany to draw attention to the exploits of Judith Resnik. Another terrorism link for the conspiracy theorists. A forged document can also be a weapon of mass destruction.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

3.  1 in 76   by mrjeff3000       at Sat 1 Feb 11:07am score of 3 interesting     That's NASA's own odds for a catastrophic shuttle accident, determined after Challenger. It appears, sadly, that we're pretty much on schedule. Time explores possible causes of the breakup.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

4.  another sad day   by timnet       at Sat 1 Feb 11:11am score of 2 compelling     Numb. That best sums up the way I felt this morning when, for the second time in my lifetime, I watched a space shuttle disintegrate before my eyes. The visual of the Challenger disaster, almost a generation earlier, remains burned in my retinas like few other images from my teenage years. It gives an ironic twist to a column (mentioned elsewhere on Plastic and now conspicuously missing from Reason's home page) that one of my favorite writers on the Web, Tim Cavanaugh, wrote just last week about the Challenger disaster and the attempts to mine humor from the earth-shaking event. No one likes a bit of levity more than I do, but there's certainly nothing funny about what happened some 200,000 feet over Texas as Columbia fell into pieces. The questions are out there, and the answers will come together in an agonizingly slow fashion. But so many of us who dreamed (however briefly) about being astronauts while growing up feel a special agony right about now. You think about those seven people, the best of the best at what they do, giving their all for scientific advancements. They knew the risks, sure, but there had been one disaster in some 113 previous shuttle missions. When something is more than 99 percent sure, you don't worry about it as much. But there's always that 1 percent. And today reminds us of that. Despite the certainty of science, the advancements of technology, and billions of dollars in research, even the most state-of-the-art human creations are, after all, just made by human hands. Hence, there is always a chance of failure. The astronauts we've lost today stared the chance of failure and death in the eye and braved any dangers to embark on a journey that, until this morning, would exceed any of our wildest dreams. Now, it's just another nightmare brought home in pictures and words, none of which could possibly do the event any justice. "I feel like I wouldn't like me if I met me." -- Tegan and Sara   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

33.  Humor is never inappropriate.   by DensityDuck!       at Sat 1 Feb 12:12pm score of 2.5 brilliant   in reply to comment 4     If you can't laugh at tragedy, how are you ever going to get past it? We laugh at things because we know that we're safe, that whatever terrible thing happened can't touch us. We laugh, because we know that for the moment we're safe from the terrible randomness of the world, the chaos that lurks below everything. We laugh because if we didn't laugh we'd cry. Eagles may suck, but weasels don't fly jet planes into...uh...how did that go, again?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   40.  Re: another sad day   by Eli1021       at Sat 1 Feb 12:37pm score of 1.5 informative   in reply to comment 4     even the most state-of-the-art human creations are, after all, just made by human hands. Hence, there is always a chance of failure. State-of-the-art human creations that happen to have been designed and built in the 1970s... *sigh*   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   95.  Re: another sad day   by gordie       at Sat 1 Feb 5:37pm score of 1   in reply to comment 40     So what if they were built in the 70's? The space shuttles are still the most complex machines ever built. Given unlimited time and money, we could certainly build better machines today, but it would take years and years for them to get to a point where they can match (let alone exceed) what the shuttles do today. Of course, by then you'll be snarking on that old crappy 2000's technology. Dead is the drunkest that you can get.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   111.  Complex doesn't mean state of the art...   by andy p       at Sat 1 Feb 7:13pm score of 1.5 helpful   in reply to comment 95     It seems they've violated one of the most basic rules, Keep It Simple, Stupid (hard to avoid doing). Barrels are just crates with delusions of grandeur   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   119.  Re: another sad day   by pyrrho       at Sat 1 Feb 9:03pm score of 1   in reply to comment 95     then again that's how it works. The next generation might hopefully be less complex? I'm thinking a new round of private competition to run shuttle missions. And I'm more socialist than Ayn Randile. -pyrrho   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   179.  Putting hope in the hands of corporations (whoah)   by JearBear16       at Sun 2 Feb 1:42pm score of 1   in reply to comment 119     I'd agree (and am myself fairly anti-corporate) - but in the case of blazing a way into a new frontier, lets face it, the only thing government blazes is more money into the pockets of those who can exploit the system. Space is one of the last frontiers out there where there is real money to be made by those willing to take physical (not financial) risks. It is dangerous enough that if you take your eye off the ball for even a moment, catastrophe can erupt, as we have seen. While post-colonization types of situations may be ideal breeding grounds for more corruption, graft, and the awful types of behaviour that we've come to expect from many modern corporations, the actual getting there in one piece safely and not loosing investment on money, manpower, and labor make the early colonization and exploitation ideal for corporate structure. I have a friend who works in aerospace, and the feeling up until now (as who knows how this will change things) has been that NASA has served its purpose, and has failed its mission. The hope is really in commercial ventures. Lets see how this turns out. man + hydrodynamic forces = me   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   201.  Re: Putting hope in the hands of corporations   by mudfoot       at Sun 2 Feb 9:44pm score of 1   in reply to comment 179     I have a friend who works in aerospace, and the feeling up until now (as who knows how this will change things) has been that NASA has served its purpose, and has failed its mission. yeah, nasa has failed. we haven't learned shit about space have we?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   224.  Corporations are history, Cults are the future   by empathogen       at Mon 3 Feb 7:05am score of 1.5 interesting   in reply to comment 179     The problem with commercial ventures is that I don't see much earthly profit in space colonization. Setting up habitats on mars or elsewhere doesn't really generate much value for the shareholders back home, except possibly for some scientific results, and there are plenty of (more) profitable scientific experiments which can be conducted on Earth. The only real benefit from having a space colony is that it's a new civilization where you can start things differently. So if governments have failed, and corps can't profit from it, then the next successor to the space program will be self absorbed cult leaders and their followers, so that they can set up a new civilization in their own (weird) image. Just like the american pilgrims did.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   246.  Re: Complex doesn't mean state of the art...   by hammurderer       at Mon 3 Feb 4:50pm score of 1   in reply to comment 111     My problem with that is that the phrase itself could be made simpler, by removing a word. And of course, the word is "simple".   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   254.  Re: Corporations are history, Cults are the future   by halfwit       at Tue 4 Feb 7:57am score of 1   in reply to comment 224     I don't think there's earthly profit in space colonization either. On the other hand, there could be hordes of earthly profit potential in space. Easy examples are raw materials, pollution free mining and manufacturing, and access to effectively infinite solar energy. It's not cost effective by a long shot...yet. It could be someday.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   159.  Re: another sad day   by deanoh       at Sun 2 Feb 3:01am score of 1.5 intriguing   in reply to comment 4     The telling quote of the day was from a former astronaut by phone (maybe to CBS around noon EST). I wish I could remember which one: he was a Challenger-era flyer with three pre-Challenger missions; the standdown that followed effectively ended his career in space. While many of the usual suspects (did all the "former NASA engineers come crawling out of the woodwork, or what??) had nothing original --or non-speculative-- to add, his comments were very telling. The same memory deficiency that won't reveal his name also forces me to paraphrase...but it was the best thing I heard anybody say all day: "Launch is terrifying. On-orbit is relaxing. Reentry gets your hear rate up a bit. But the People who want to work in space have such a passion for doing so, that the thing they fear the most is NOT being killed in an accident; what they fear most is that they won't get to go at all". While yesterday's tragedy can only be a Bad Thing (tm) in the face of an aging shuttle fleet and the expected expense of a next-generation capability, the spirit of that attitude --along with our 40-year history to keep working aloft-- is what will return us to space.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

6.  Some thoughts   by JC65       at Sat 1 Feb 11:12am score of 2 informative     This is, of course, a terrible tragedy for the families and friends of the Columbia crew and I don't know how to effectively express my empathy for them. On a different note, from the information I gathered by listening to NPR this morning, there is a crew onboard the International Space Station that is scheduled to be returned to earth by a shuttle mission in the near future. Back in 1986 when the Challenger exploded on take-off the shuttle fleet was grounded for an extended period of time while the causes of that disaster were investigated. This doesn't mean any sort of danger for the crew of the ISS as they can be retrieved and even replaced via Russian vehicles, however all of the construction of the ISS was facilitated by the US shuttle program. If the shuttles are grounded for an extended period of time, as I expect they will be, the ISS project will be greatly affected.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

12.  Re: Some thoughts   by MAYORBOB       at Sat 1 Feb 11:16am score of 1   in reply to comment 6     According to the report I heard in the car from someone at NASA, the ISS is well stocked so that the three people up there will have provisions to keep them for months after the scheduled end of their rotation. If the shuttle program is shut down for a long period of time, the three astronauts aboard the ISS can return on the Soyuz craft which is docked to the ISS. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   22.  Re: Some thoughts   by mrjeff3000       at Sat 1 Feb 11:38am score of 1   in reply to comment 12     The ISS is resupplied periodically by unmanned . (I think there was already one scheduled for this month.)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   26.  Re: Some thoughts   by Killjoy       at Sat 1 Feb 11:51am score of 1   in reply to comment 12     "According to the report I heard in the car from someone at NASA, the ISS is well stocked so that the three people up there will have provisions to keep them for months after the scheduled end of their rotation." It's true that supplies are most likely not a problem. However, NASA and related agencies try not to keep astronauts in space for longer than 6 months at a time. Certainly there have been longer stays logged in space, however beyond 6 months the muscle and bone-wasting effects of living in zero gee require increasingly long recovery periods back on Earth, and the danger during such readjustment begins to rise. Step 2. Smite enemies with burning pigs.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   167.  Re: Some thoughts   by chiaroscuro       at Sun 2 Feb 8:55am score of 1   in reply to comment 22     It's on its way... "An unmanned Russian cargo rocket, headed for the International Space Station (ISS), has been launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan as planned."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   44.  Re: Some thoughts   by mischief       at Sat 1 Feb 12:45pm score of 0.5 disingenuous   in reply to comment 6     If the shuttles are grounded for an extended period of time, as I expect they will be ... More likely, the Bush administration will seize this opportunity to commandeer the entire shuttle program for strictly military purposes. "And then... and then... and then...", and then the man who stuttered died, his last words an echo of his life   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   65.  Re: Some thoughts   by eduardo       at Sat 1 Feb 1:41pm score of 1 astute   in reply to comment 44     To shoot down Iraqi space cammels? J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

7.  Got up this morning.   by MAYORBOB       at Sat 1 Feb 11:12am score of 1.5 succinct     Got dressed and went about my business without listening to the news. When I got into the car to make a trip to the bank I finally had the radio on. The first word I heard were a few disjointed words: shuttle, breakup, observers on the ground. My initial reaction was that it was a bit odd to have some sort of tribute to the Challenger disaster, seeing as how the anniversary of that tragedy was a few days ago. It was only when I caught the words "Columbia" and "over Texas" that I realized that they weren't referring to the earlier disaster, but one of a bit more recent vintage. I don't know about anyone else, but I am just in shock. It's way too soon to put together the pieces of what actually happened here. The only thing I can possibly summon up is just an awful sadness at this latest loss of seven lives. Speechless, just speechless. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

69.  Re: Got up this morning.   by Genady       at Sat 1 Feb 1:58pm score of 1   in reply to comment 7     Isn't it odd that in this day of television and technology we share bad news like this over the Radio? My first clue about this story was NPR this morning after an early morning bit of work. People talk about rembering where and when they heard events, I know exactally where I was for this and 9/11. I in my car listening to Scott Simon and Noah Adams. So strange to me that radio is my window to the world. -- Yeah, well, that's like, just your opinion man.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   181.  Re: Got up this morning.   by NasalGoat       at Sun 2 Feb 1:52pm score of 1   in reply to comment 69     Yes, I also heard about it on the radio in the morning. I think the reason we all heard it on the radio is because it happened at 9am - most people don't turn on CNN or surf the 'net at 9am. They get in their cars and turn on the radio, which is exactly what I did. --- I like pinball, you should too.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   205.  Re: Got up this morning.   by mrjeff3000       at Sun 2 Feb 11:09pm score of 1   in reply to comment 181     I learned about it on the internet, and quickly went to go watch CNN. I didn't get in my car and turn on the radio because I, like many, don't go to work on Saturday.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   235.  Re: Got up this morning.   by NasalGoat       at Mon 3 Feb 10:55am score of 0.5 obnoxious   in reply to comment 205     Lots of people work on Saturday you know. What a condecending dick you are, with your whiny Gen-X tone and blindly assuming no one works on the weekend simply because YOU don't. What a prick. And even still, lots of people run errands on the weekend, which is what I was doing, and what many other people do as well. Maybe if you left the chatroom for five seconds you'd realize people are living their lives all around you and that not everything is on the internet. --- I like pinball, you should too.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   98.  Re: Got up this morning.   by musiquestar       at Sat 1 Feb 5:46pm score of 1   in reply to comment 7     A commentator on NPR accidentally said "Challenger" instead of "Columbia", and was kind of amazed that he did once the interviewee noted it. I heard it driving in my car en route to a open physics lecture. They announced it right before the lecture. I'm sure a far majority hadn't been listening to the news in the morning either, just from the audible gasp. Your fantasies are unlikely, but beautiful.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   163.  Re: Got up this morning.   by nyekulturniy       at Sun 2 Feb 6:14am score of 1   in reply to comment 98     I was at a Coast Guard Auxiliary conference. I had turned off the radio hearing that the people in California would be able to see the trail of the shuttle. Then, in the conference, our commodore announced that Columbia has been lost with all hands. We stood for a moment of silence, then resumed our training, including what to do with toxic debris. What else could we have done? Last night we went to Goddard and left a candle and a poem. Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

8.  This is bad.....   by jbou       at Sat 1 Feb 11:15am score of 1.5 astute     but the coverage of this tragedy is already too much. I swear the media will never learn that we don't need coverage on every network, for hours on end. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

24.  Re: This is bad.....   by rombuu       at Sat 1 Feb 11:44am score of 2.5 clever   in reply to comment 8     I swear the media will never learn that we don't need coverage on every network, for hours on end. If it really bugs you, most televisions have a large button on them for just such an occurance. Its marked 'On / Off' or 'Power'. I for one, am glad to see the coverage... http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   47.  Re: This is bad.....   by mischief       at Sat 1 Feb 12:48pm score of 1.5 brilliant   in reply to comment 8     for hours on end Such extended coverage is for the benefit of those people who could not see the coverage earlier. It's not for couch potatoes to stare at for hours on end (unless you want to, in which case the sponsors will gladly show you their commercials). "And then... and then... and then...", and then the man who stuttered died, his last words an echo of his life   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

9.  Al Jazeera   by Acefantastik       at Sat 1 Feb 11:15am score of 1.5 helpful     One wonders how this story is being covered on al-Jazeera   Silly rabbit, links are for linking ! iDanza y musica!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

15.  Re: Al Jazeera   by Ajax       at Sat 1 Feb 11:23am score of 1.5 clever   in reply to comment 9     OK, one also wonders why one didn't study Arabic in college. :) "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   29.  Re: Al Jazeera   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sat 1 Feb 12:06pm score of 1.5 helpful   in reply to comment 15     from what i could get translated, it seems to be stay in line with the other wire stories. (AP, BBC) it does note the israeli astronaut high up in the column. also, it appears that they have referred to Texas as "President Bush's homeland region". Cute.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   20.  Re: Al Jazeera   by liminal999       at Sat 1 Feb 11:34am score of 1.5 funny   in reply to comment 9     It was nice of them to write out the story in longhand though... ugly design for beautiful people   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   72.  Re: Al Jazeera   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sat 1 Feb 2:03pm score of 2 helpful   in reply to comment 9     AJ has eulogized Ilan Ramon, the Israeli spaceman lost in today's crash. Here you go:     Israeli spaceman among killed in American Colmbia Shuttle Crash   Israeli pilot Ilan Ramon was killed with 6 others in a crash over the United States today. Ramon was Israel's first spaceman selected in year 1997 and was sent to United States to study with NASA in 1998. Born in 1954 he was a fighter in the Zionist armies and saw combat in 1973 and was invading Lebanon in 1982. He is known for being the pilot who flew the airstrike against Iraq reactor, 1982. condolences have been expressed by emmisaries of several Arab states.   many arabic words i don't know, and my english is not so good. thanks. it is sad day for space lovers.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   156.  Re: Al Jazeera   by rrechowicz       at Sun 2 Feb 1:47am score of 1   in reply to comment 72     many arabic words i don't know, and my english is not so good. thanks. it is sad day for space lovers. Your English is good enough to get the translation, despite neither English nor Arabic being being your native language. Without you, we would have no idea what Al-Jazeera said. Thank you for taking the time to do this, and for your sympathy. -Rick   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   239.  isreal vs. palestine..   by box       at Mon 3 Feb 1:33pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     Just a weird twinge of irony in that an Israeli was killed over Palestine.... Texas. I noticed the news liked to emphasize "Palestine" in speech AND in graphics. Thought it was really bizarre the mental connections that are subtly created in that manner... And how convenient for Pro Isreal politics that the US now has a fallen Isreali comrade-hero. Just more paranoia-enabled trains of thought from box.. [50% more Democrats have died in mysterious plane crashes than Republicans..]   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

10.  Life in DFW (Dallas/Ft Worth)   by rbkida       at Sat 1 Feb 11:15am score of 1     I believe I was awakened by the sonic boom that occurred around 9am CST, my mom, living in a differant part of Dallas said it shook the house. Since then I've been glued to the video of vapor trails crossing the sky. On the local station there was a woman who reported that she was driving on the freeway out of Dallas toward East Texas and a piece of the space shuttle hit her car. the thought it was a piece of the plane and kept on going. Your inspiration to live.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

92.  We slept through it   by CaptainLiberal       at Sat 1 Feb 5:12pm score of 1   in reply to comment 10     Mrs. CaptainLiberal and myself slept late this morning, so I didn't see anything about it until I woke up and hit the net. Strangely, my first visit was to a Tecmo DOAX board, but they had the news and I then spent the rest of the morning watching local news for once. Every dream turns into something on a T-shirt -- Shriekback   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

11.  Out come the vultures   by mrjeff3000       at Sat 1 Feb 11:16am score of 1     As rcade over on MetaFilter points out, every cloud has a silver lining.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

28.  Re: Out come the vultures   by empathogen       at Sat 1 Feb 11:55am score of 1   in reply to comment 11     I guess it's nice to know there are some things one can depend on in this world.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   240.  really good link   by box       at Mon 3 Feb 1:41pm score of 1   in reply to comment 11     thanks for sharing. can't mod you, so thought I'd thank you. those bastards.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

13.  Tragedy Strikes...   by Goldmund       at Sat 1 Feb 11:17am score of 1.5 astute     First thoughts: My thoughts and my sorrows go out to the families of the astronauts. Your loved ones did not die in vain, they will be missed and they will be mourned as brave explorers. NASA may suffer some serious loss of Goodwill, but I think they will bounce back and the next shuttle launch will be very symbolic. The US news media are a bunch of blood-sucking parasites. Every 20 minutes I hear some talking head ask "Is there any possiblity of terrorism in this case, ya know, with the Israeli aboard?" Idiots. Thank god for BBC World Service and NPR. Again, a dark day in the Space Program's History.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

237.  Re: Tragedy Strikes...Media   by bigeyes       at Mon 3 Feb 12:12pm score of 1   in reply to comment 13     Indeed. I remember when the shuttle blew up and they showed the clip over, and over, and over... My brother commented this isn't a fucking football game! How many times are they going to replay this? That morning when I went to work, I was bummed because I didn't get to watch. That evening, I was bummed that the networks kept showing these people being killed. Then the World Trade Center thing happened, and it was played so many times my son wanted to know why everywhere we went in the next few days they were playing the same "movie." I haven't been watching the news, but I can only imagine it's more of the same. Why must this be shown so many times? As to the vultures, I just heard on the car radio that several people had debris from this shuttle pulled off ebay. One of the bids was over $1200, and one of the items was apparently a charred shoelace. Unfuckingbelievable. What a society we live in.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

17.  NASA and PR   by Minister of Inferior       at Sat 1 Feb 11:25am score of 2 nuanced     I think it goes without saying that this is horrible news for all involved - most notably the astronauts themselves and their friends and families. Accidental deaths of this kind are always tragedies. Unfortunately, this probably isn't all. The space program never really recovered after the Challenger incident, and much like it came to a grinding halt back then, these seven deaths may well serve to once again severely hamper it for years on end. The enormous bureaucratic machinery that is NASA already have trouble renewing funding. This could be the last nail in the coffin, if not space exploration in general, at least for manned such. I am one of these incurable romantics who honestly believe that the space program is important, and of real value, to humankind. For people like me, this is very sad news. someone you trust is one of us   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

61.  Re: NASA and PR   by Citizen Erectus       at Sat 1 Feb 1:33pm score of 1   in reply to comment 17     Unfortunately, this probably isn't all. The space program never really recovered after the Challenger incident, and much like it came to a grinding halt back then, these seven deaths may well serve to once again severely hamper it for years on end. Why should that be? Spaceflight is dangerous, but I would not hesitate to fly if I had to opportunity. You have to accept that dangerous pursuits lead to death occasionally. There was a train crash in Sydney on Friday which killed eight people, yet I was on the train the day after. By killing people.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   73.  No End For NASA   by KingDead       at Sat 1 Feb 2:20pm score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 17     The space program never really recovered after the Challenger incident, and much like it came to a grinding halt back then, these seven deaths may well serve to once again severely hamper it for years on end. The enormous bureaucratic machinery that is NASA already have trouble renewing funding. This could be the last nail in the coffin, if not space exploration in general, at least for manned such. I doubt this could put an end to the space program; as this person notes there are still people up in the International Space Station who need supplies. In fact, the Sunday Russian flight up to the ISS will still continue and the people up at the ISS will not be stranded. I imagine there can't be a delay in missions even now. Public opinion or not, the space agencies still have to turn their attention to the space station. Afterwards, I cannot say. From the NASA news briefing, they say there will be a moment of mourning and reflection but the best therapy in this case is to keep moving on. I may be stretching my example, but for all the commercial airline disasters there were, people still bought thier tickets and got on a plane. I count myself too among those space romantics for whom the space program serves as something exciting and to be proud of. This is a tragedy no doubt, but it would be a terrible and sad waste to halt our expeditions. Even if NASA is slowed to less than a crawl, there will be other ambitious countries to pick up the pace - after all, the crew on Columbia was an international one. Not just Ilan Ramon hailing from Israel, but Kalpana Chawla from India. To reach our frail hands from the crust of the earth out to the stars is a worthy goal. We stand on the shoulders of the many brave people, the Columbia crew included, who ventured and lived to further the nobel cause. a.k.a John (Plastic)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   82.  Re: NASA and PR   by TheMCP       at Sat 1 Feb 4:15pm score of 1   in reply to comment 17     The space program never really recovered after the Challenger incident, and much like it came to a grinding halt back then, these seven deaths may well serve to once again severely hamper it for years on end. The enormous bureaucratic machinery that is NASA already have trouble renewing funding. The enormous bureaucratic machinery may well be the problem. Perhaps if NASA was just a bunch of scientists and engineers getting their job done, with what support staff they really need, it would be worth funding. (And for the record, I believe we should be funding space exploration. I just don't necessarily believe NASA is the right organization for the job.) End of line.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   130.  Re: NASA and PR   by furryape       at Sat 1 Feb 10:04pm score of 1.5 compelling   in reply to comment 82     The enormous bureaucratic machinery may well be the problem. Of course it is. NASA has become a paper shop. They spend years and millions writing a ten thousand page plan to do X. They then scrap that plan, and start again. You can see his in their continuing Mars mission, or the whole Skylab II/Alpha/Freedom/ISS mess. I also have to note that today's accident happened approx 20 years after Challenger. Which happened approx 20 years after Apollo I. That's one new generation of managers each time. Obviously it's too early to know about this generation, but the ones in 1967 and the ones in 1986 had the same flaws, they became complacent about the risks, they'd ignored sound engineering practice and their own procedures, and they had filtered out the words coming from the people in the field before they got to the level of management who could listen.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

18.  Blue Morning, Blue Day   by stogie       at Sat 1 Feb 11:27am score of 3 intriguing     I woke up pretty early this morning. Having nothing else to do, I popped Kubrick's 2001 in the DVD at about 7:00am, to watch the last hour that I was too tired to last night. I hadn't watched this movie in years. Viewing it, I thought about how wrong its timetable of space exploration was, but how accurately it conveys the cold loneliness and danger of space. I thought about the courage of men and women who strap themselves onto a huge explosive device and hurl themselves high into the sky. I speculated on the myriad difficulties of adjusting oneself to free-fall. I marvelled at the ingenuity and fearlessness of those who go into the void for the rest of us. Then I turned off the DVD and turned on the radio. "I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy." -Tom Waits   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

25.  Video of the Control Center when conatct was lost   by JC65       at Sat 1 Feb 11:45am score of 2 informative     Can be found here.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

30.  Times of India coverage   by JC65       at Sat 1 Feb 12:08pm score of 1     The Times of India has some good coverage of the presumed death of Indian born astronaut Kalpana Chawla here and here. In what could be called happier times, Chawla was termed an 'Astro-babe'. (This morning, Hesiod has expressed his sympathies and said he feels badly in light of his earlier comments.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

31.  Truth beats fiction yet again   by sglover910       at Sat 1 Feb 12:10pm score of 2.5 compelling     According to the NY Times: In a twist of nomenclature that would seem implausible in fiction, a craft carrying Col. Ilan Ramon of the Israeli Air Force apparently broke up over an East Texas town called Palestine. An argument isn't merely nay-sayings and contradictions! M. Python   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

63.  Re: Truth beats fiction yet again   by eduardo       at Sat 1 Feb 1:36pm score of 0.5 obnoxious   in reply to comment 31     Not so ironic. Back in the day of Palestine being a British mandate, the term Palestinian was used to refer to those living under the said mandate: namely the zionists and other Jewish immigrants (the West bank arabs were called just that: West bank arabs) If Ilan's parents had lived in the land before Independence in the late 40's, they had probably been called Palestinians and saw no problem with the term. The notion of "Palestine" being something that's anti-Israeli emerged with the creation of the PLO and the (largely successful) attempts to convince the world that "Palestinian" is something of an ethnic or national origin - which replaced the earlier and more accurate meaning of the term. Not that this had anything to do with the crash except that as soon as I've heard Palestine, TX mentioned on TV (the first reporter to utter the word pronounced it differently than the usual pronunciation, not sure if that was an error or the accepted pronunciation of the town name) I knew there'd be some clever Palestician (wow) to find some deliciousness in the geography of the crash and the national origin of the crew. Who knows, may be the remains of Kalpana Chawla landed on an Indian Reservation (get it?) for a double dose or irony. J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   79.  Re: Truth beats fiction yet again   by ms_sue_collins       at Sat 1 Feb 3:38pm score of 1   in reply to comment 63     I don't know, cookie. You're right, of course, about the history of the word "Palestine," but even ignoring its more recent anti-Israeli connotation, I still think the connection here is, at the very least, noteworthy. It's a dog's life   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   93.  Re: Truth beats fiction yet again   by CaptainLiberal       at Sat 1 Feb 5:15pm score of 1   in reply to comment 63     the first reporter to utter the word pronounced it differently than the usual pronunciation, not sure if that was an error or the accepted pronunciation of the town name It's pronounced Pal-es-TEEN by the locals. Mrs. CaptainLiberal's father lives just down the road in Rusk. Every dream turns into something on a T-shirt -- Shriekback   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   96.  Re: Truth beats fiction yet again   by eduardo       at Sat 1 Feb 5:40pm score of 1   in reply to comment 93     Thanks. That's exactly the way the reporter pronounced it. I guess the locals don't want to be identified with Jihad in any sort of way. J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   103.  Re: Truth beats fiction yet again   by Kurtz       at Sat 1 Feb 6:28pm score of 1   in reply to comment 96     They pronounced it that way long before any of them knew what jihad meant. Apparently, the city was named after Palestine, Illinois. --What Would Azathoth Do?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

34.  I don't remember Challenger...   by Ben Bridenbaugh       at Sat 1 Feb 12:13pm score of 1     I was in 6th grade, and I had tried to get my teacher in the "Teacher in Space" program. I was really enthusiastic about it, and we had the TV on in class. Those are facts from information friends and relatives gave me later. I do not remember the Challenger explosion or anything about that day.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

42.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by Jeffrey W. Baker       at Sat 1 Feb 12:41pm score of 3 compelling   in reply to comment 34     I do remember Challenger, and I was in the 5th grade in St. Petersburg, FL. My class went out to watch the launch, which you can see from all over the state. Of course when it exploded the teachers herded us back inside awkwardly, and there was a bitter argument between the two sides of children: those who thought it blew up, and those who said it was supposed to do that. I have a very strange feeling this morning, because I awoke early to watch the shuttle pass overhead, at about 5:45. Weather in San Francisco was cloudy, so I did not see it. The strange feeling is because the only two times I've ever taken the trouble to look at the space shuttle, it has exploded. To be perfectly frank, I feel much worse for the spacecraft, the family, and the people at NASA than I do for the crew. I cry when I imagine the scene at mission control, when the first person says he has lost telemetry, when the communications officer hopelessly but necessarily tries to raise the backup systems. A whole room full of people staring at their hands, biting their lips. Ground crews, relieved of duty, shuffling away to their cars in silence. Somewhere a mechanical engineers knows it can't be his fault. This is the real sadness.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   86.  I remember, I was in first grade   by Leviathant       at Sat 1 Feb 4:31pm score of 1   in reply to comment 42     There was a lot of hubub about the Challenger because of Christa Mcauliffe, the teacher whose name I recalled with little hesitation just a few weeks ago down at the Canberra Deep Space Communication Complex while I was visiting Australia. We watched the whole thing in our first grade classroom, and we had a minute of silence in the school, and we watched Ronald Reagan give his speech as well. I remember it all, though not necessarily clearly, but it's a moment that stuck in my mind, even as a six year old budding nerd. I wonder if they'll ever need a web designer on the space shuttle. Or a music engineer. I wonder (in a less silly fashion) if I will see space-level "tourism" or some other form of commercial opportunity to see the Earth from above the atmosphere without adjusting your entire lifestyle and being super dedicated NASA workers. I am Leviathant, and I approve this message.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   108.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by phong3d       at Sat 1 Feb 6:59pm score of 1   in reply to comment 42     To be perfectly frank, I feel much worse for the spacecraft, the family, and the people at NASA than I do for the crew. I feel the same way. My wife mentioned how horrible it must have been to be in the shuttle when it was disintegrating. I pointed out that they were flying at Mach 18 - and I hoped, I desperately hoped - that they didn't feel at thing. "Pretentious? Moi?" - Shortest Joke Ever   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   54.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by Acefantastik       at Sat 1 Feb 1:00pm score of 1   in reply to comment 34     You must have had a pretty amazing, full live overloaded with other memories to not remember that. I was 8 when the Challenger tragedy happened, and I will never, ever forget where i was, who was around me, the actual explosion, and the reactions of those around me. iDanza y musica!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   123.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by Ben Bridenbaugh       at Sat 1 Feb 9:23pm score of 1.5 interesting   in reply to comment 54     According to my family members I was really enthusiastic about every single shuttle flight. I eagerly volunteered my teacher for the "Teacher in Space" program. (No, he wasn't the one) I even had a cardboard + Duct tape + paint 'spacesuit' and was wearing it in class (yes it was shown on TV) when challenger exploded. However, though I remember clearly since age 5, I remember NOTHING related to that incident. I almost have a good enough memory to bacwards trace my steps for the better part of my life, EXCEPT THAT. People who knew me back then say I was super-traumatized and freaking out, but it's a block. Funny, I consider "Repressed memories" to be a modern fiction created to enrich corrupt psychotherapists and lawers. However, I very well might have one.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   91.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by SacredGroundChuck       at Sat 1 Feb 4:56pm score of 1   in reply to comment 34     Atlanta had been hit by a snowstorm the day Challenger was destroyed, and Georgia State University - where I was studying - was closed. I was at home getting caught up on classwork and had the tube on for background noise, and realized that the explosion they were talking about was the shuttle. My mother called me to ask about the news, and if there was any chance of survivors. I told her, "sorry, Mom, but they're gone. There's no way anyone could have survived." We both began to cry. This time, I also was listening to NPR. I had taken my dog to the vet for an ear problem (flea mites, he's doing well, thanks), got us in the car and turned on the radio. Those words came through the air, and I began to curse. It wasn't right, but I was too stunned to do anything else, and it was too early for a drink. Some almost twenty years after Challenger, the destruction of Columbia is harder for me to take - perhaps because there's no footage of the moment of destruction and thus no closure, perhaps that with all that's going on in the world this seems like the worst of timing... I dunno. Maybe it's the onset of stubborn old age. I do know that I want the fleet to be checked, the problem to be fixed, newer transport craft to be built and the old shuttles retired with dignity. Hell, I also want a space elevator, but I stopped holding my breath a while back. I just don't want this to be THE excuse that stops us from flying and dreaming. "Did you know that the human brain is the only computer in the universe made of meat?"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   112.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by jedrek       at Sat 1 Feb 7:19pm score of 1   in reply to comment 34     I actually remember the Challenger explosion. I was living and going to school (4th grade ) in Mountain View, CA. We came back from recess to find a TV in our classroom, our teacher told us what happened. I remember I wasn't too happy about my cartoons being pre-empted for news shows, though. I don't remember where I was when JFK Jr. died, I don't remember where I was when a lot of stuff happened... but this, this I remember. p.rawda   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   125.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by tdahnsn       at Sat 1 Feb 9:39pm score of 2.5 compelling   in reply to comment 34     I remember that I was in Ms Aragon's class. Ms Klein had the class next door. We weren't watching the launch because we had a spelling and vocabulary test. The classrooms were separated by sliding partitions. Ms Klein opened the door and called Ms Aragon over and we all overheard "It exploded." 3rd Period. English. The paragraphs in front of us have a combined 10 blanks. Those blanks are meant to be filled by 10 words from a list we were given a week before with 25 words. None of those words were tragedy, challenger, explosion, desolate, or upset. Ms Aragon switched on the TV and we saw the footage, the constantly repeated footage of that explosion. The bell rang, and our principal came on the PA and announced that teachers were to hold students in class. They hadn't yet decided if math would be allowed to commence that day for me. A remember the pained look on Ms Aragon's face after someone asked her how IT happened. Ms Aragon who never lost composure, even when someone asked if Shakespeare was obsessed with death and fucking. There was a pause. We all wanted some sort of answer. "I don't know much about this sort of thing." It wasn't until many years later that I understood that she had slipped there. She wasn't talking about not knowing a lot about rockets or why they can explode. She had slipped because she literally said she had no idea how to handle this, something like this, something of this magnitude. She had said that she was overwhelmed, that all of this was too much. She lost control, just for a moment. She needed, more than just about anything else in the world right then and there to leave, go to her car or out of our sight anyway, and cry. For just a moment. There was a quick discussion and a sad glance passing between her and Ms Klein. I have dozens of images of what it is to stand up in the face of everything begging you to flee and hold your ground. Ms Aragon is there somewhere. She stood up tall and asked us to talk about what we were watching. She stood at the head of a classroom and asked us to begin to talk, even though she didn't want to talk, or even be there. It takes an enormous amount of courage to strap yourself into a rocket and leave the safety of this planet for all the dangers of the unknown. It takes as much to resist the urge to run crying from a room and tend to those who have just been struck dumb by a tragedy. Somewhere out there is Ms Aragon, whose first name I don't recall, and who taught english and character in a Junior High School classroom. Why? What's the most callous thing you've said today?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   231.  Re: I don't remember Challenger...   by Saige       at Mon 3 Feb 9:57am score of 1   in reply to comment 34     I was the same age. I had been in the school gym after lunch, where many people went just to play around. Someone came in telling us the shuttle blew up, but we thought he was kidding. One of the 6th grade teachers in our middle school was a finalist to go up on the shuttle, and she had the launch on TV in her classroom. She was out the rest of the day, understandably. I heard she ran out of the classroom in tears. --'ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge' - Darwin   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

35.  Which way do we go now?   by Leviathant       at Sat 1 Feb 12:19pm score of 2.5 succinct     Doubtless, we will not have any decent information on what caused this disaster for months, but I wonder how this will effect NASA's budget. I don't believe NASA could handle another series of budget cuts as it's seen post-Challenger, but can this be turned around to bolster our space program? I woke up this morning and saw the headlines on Fark, and then got off the computer and was glued to the TV for a few hours. And it got pretty emotional at times. Flipping between CNN, MSNBC and FOX news, eventually settling at CNN, whose anchors and headline writers seemed to be the least inane. One fellow at MSNBC asked a former astronaut what you are supposed to do when you find out there's a problem at that point in the landing. The gentleman paused, and replied solemnly, "You just close your eyes." It was an extended quiet moment before anyone said anything after that. Condolances to all the family, friends and everyone who knew the seven aboard that flight. I am Leviathant, and I approve this message.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

39.  Re: Which way do we go now?   by rombuu       at Sat 1 Feb 12:34pm score of 1   in reply to comment 35     I don't believe NASA could handle another series of budget cuts as it's seen post-Challenger, but can this be turned around to bolster our space program? According to this on NASA's site, their budget increased considerably after the Challenger disaster, even taking into account the costs for the replacement shuttle. Granted, much of this was ramping up for the ISS project, but the idea that there was a massive cutback at NASA following that incident does not jive with reality. http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   85.  Well yes, but...   by Leviathant       at Sat 1 Feb 4:21pm score of 1   in reply to comment 39     I was over-simplifying, my bad. By post-Challenger, I don't necessarily mean 1987, but moreso the kind of decline in funding/gov't interest we've had in the last decade or so. Thanks for the link though, that makes things a bit more concrete ;) I am Leviathant, and I approve this message.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   133.  Re: Which way do we go now?   by furryape       at Sat 1 Feb 10:09pm score of 1   in reply to comment 39     NASA's budget was only part of their income pre-Challenger. They also got money from commerical satellite launches, and most importantly from the DOD's launches. The satellite launches largely went away post Challenger, and the DOD completed the missions which were already in the planning stages, and never started another one.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   107.  Maybe it's time to privatize   by Captain Howdy       at Sat 1 Feb 6:47pm score of 1.5 interesting   in reply to comment 35     As has been mentioned upthread, NASA's budget has actually increased over the years, but it seems (as has also been mentioned upthread) their space missions statistically haven't become any safer. Trying harder to make them safer would probably require an even bigger budget than they already have. Since America's finances are strained enough as it is, what with all these tax cuts (I agree these tax breaks are beyond dumb, but good luck getting any politician to undo them in the near future) and our sadly imminent Iraq war, something's gotta give. Why not give some private companies a chance to run the space program and see if they can't improve things? And with all the money the government saves, who knows, perhaps the Feds can actually spend it wisely. Just because a broken clock is always right twice a day doesn't mean it shouldn't get fixed.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

36.  Extended sonic boom?   by Conrad Bombora       at Sat 1 Feb 12:21pm score of 1.5     I have been hearing on TV reporters describing a long extended sonic boom... I do not think that this is possible for a single object. It is more likely due to hundreds of pieces creating sonic booms as they pass over creating what seems like one long extended sonic boom. "Must be nice to hope for the thing you wish to want... Sure beats doing it." Strangers with Candy   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

60.  Re: Extended sonic boom?   by eduardo       at Sat 1 Feb 1:24pm score of 1   in reply to comment 36     I didn't hear anyone mention a continuous sonic boom. Watching Dan Rather this morning, he spoke on the phone with a gentleman who a) witnessed and taped the event and b) happened to be a PHD in physics. Right off the bat, the gentleman mentioned hearing approximately 7 booms, and attributed them to separate chunks of the vehicle breaking the barrier individually. J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   120.  Re: Extended sonic boom?   by swalve       at Sat 1 Feb 9:05pm score of 1   in reply to comment 60     Doesn't a vehicle travelling above the speed of sound drop a continuous sonic boom behind it? So, if one observer heard the boom before the breakup, it would be one long boom, but if he were ahead of the breakup, he'd hear the booms of the different pieces? (by ahead and behind I mean in reference to the sound, not the visual) "If silence is golden, you couldn't raise a dime!"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   127.  Re: Extended sonic boom?   by eduardo       at Sat 1 Feb 9:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 120     I dunno. J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   144.  Re: Extended sonic boom?   by keenduck       at Sat 1 Feb 11:02pm score of 1.5 helpful   in reply to comment 120     I think sonic booms work like this: Say something breaks the sound barrier. It creates a sonic boom a certain distance behind it where the sound waves coincide to constructively reinforce each other. I believe (but am not sure) this sonic boom follows the object as moves. So if you stay in one place, you only hear the sonic boom once. If you're in one place and hear the sonic boom, and start moving along with the object, the sonic boom will be continuous. The sound waves will always constructively interfere where you are. Of course, I'm just a freshman physics major, what do I know? (i.e. Older wiser people should feel free to correct me.) - keenduck You missed a good part ... What? ... She was masturbating ... Where?!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   154.  Re: Extended sonic boom?   by bradleytank       at Sun 2 Feb 12:45am score of 1   in reply to comment 144     This is how the air force defines it. I was under the impression that as speed increases, the shockwave produced by the aircraft increases, until it reaches peak pressure just before the speed of sound, so that when the aircraft breaks the speed of sound, it ruptures its own shockwave, causing the change in pressure that is the sonic boom. Thing is, there's a shockwave on the other side of the sound-speed barrier, so objects (in this case, many chunks of debris) deccelerating from supersonic to subsonic also break their shockwaves. I'm no physics guy, but it seems to me that the multiple sonic booms were caused by the chunks of the shuttle slowed by the atmosphere to subsonic speeds -- it's because each object had its own boom as it became subsonic. ...you'll take what you're given.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   166.  Re: Extended sonic boom?   by zyxwvutsr       at Sun 2 Feb 8:47am score of 1   in reply to comment 144     Your explanation is fairly close, but I'll add a bit to try and make it clearer: Think of any moving object that makes a sound. A car driving down the street will suffice for this example. If you are a stationary observer standing on the side of the street, you see and hear the car approach, pass, and leave. During the entire time the sound of the car seems to match its location, because the car is moving much, much slower than the speed of sound. If the car began were moving faster, say 90% of the speed of sound (some car, eh?) you would still perceive the sound of the car to be coming from where you see it to be. (The sound made by the auto would be doppler-shifted, but that's a lecture for another thread.) If the car were approaching you travelling faster than the speed of sound, you would not hear anything as it approached. At some point after the car passed you all of the sound it had been making, from the time it was first within an audible range until the moment it passed you, would arrive at the same time. That blast of saved-up sound is the sonic boom. There is no "continuous" sonic boom. Not at ground level or otherwise. In the hypothetical situation you described where the observer is travelling at the save velocity as the other supersonic object would not produce the continuous boom that you surmise. If the observer were somehow travelling precisely along the wave front, there would not be any change in pressure and, therefore, no boom. People who report hearing a "continuous" sonic boom from a passing aircraft actually heard the single boom and lots of echoes that arrive at various times shortly after the boom.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   232.  OT: But neat looking...   by darknys       at Mon 3 Feb 10:04am score of 1   in reply to comment 166     Sonic Boom I am a victim of a series of accidents, as are we all. ---Sirens of Titan; Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   247.  Re: OT: But neat looking...   by SunflowerSeed       at Mon 3 Feb 5:27pm score of 1   in reply to comment 232     Yes, but this is also a Sonic Boom on a lighter note.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

37.  Ad Astra Per Aspera   by Conrad Bombora       at Sat 1 Feb 12:29pm score of 2.5 scholarly     the road to the stars is a rough one "Must be nice to hope for the thing you wish to want... Sure beats doing it." Strangers with Candy   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

38.  The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by MAYORBOB       at Sat 1 Feb 12:32pm score of 1.5 intriguing     ... being the work of a North Korean missile shoot were rightly discounted as so much overheated blather. I wonder if there might be the possibility that Columbia hit a satellite or a piece of space junk floating around up in near space. I seem to recall an article or something a few years ago in one magazine that mentioned the fact that decades into the space race that the skies above are getting dangerously crowded with manmade objects. How big an object would the shuttle have to hit to make it break apart into pieces if the shuttle was travelling at 12,000mph when it collided? Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

46.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by rdww       at Sat 1 Feb 12:47pm score of 1 incoherent   in reply to comment 38     Alternatively, it would be possible to secret a small, fairly crude and insensitive explosive device among the heat tiles on the underside of the shuttle, something that wouldn't go off until the hottest point of reentry. Even a small blast disrupting the surface integrity at that point would lead to instant destruction.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   48.  Alternatively....   by jbou       at Sat 1 Feb 12:51pm score of 1 obnoxious   in reply to comment 46     you're a clown. Speculation about tragedies is dumb, wait till the facts come in. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   55.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sat 1 Feb 1:01pm score of 0.5 interesting   in reply to comment 46     Wouldn't it be easier to have it go off during liftoff when the shuttle is surrounded by tons of liquid oxygen, hydrogen, and solid fuels? Sabotage or missile attacks aren't likely, the sheer speed and friction the shuttle encounters coupled with a small error in one of its systems is more than enough to cause a tragedy of this sort.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   66.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by Goldmund       at Sat 1 Feb 1:44pm score of 1   in reply to comment 46     Please, be reasonable. There's a better chance of getting a bomb on Air Force One that the Space Shuttle. NASA's crews go over than puppy with a fine tooth comb up to the hour before launch. Speculation like this without evidence is just plain foolish.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   49.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by rombuu       at Sat 1 Feb 12:52pm score of 2 informative   in reply to comment 38     Well, the problem with that is where the shuttle was reported to be, around 40 miles up, you are actually in the upper portions of Earth's atmosphere. Objects can't really hang around up there, since the drag on them would cause them to come tumbing back to Earth. This isn't to say that you can completely discount collision with something.. a meteorite could have struck the shuttle, although the sheer odds of that happeneing are slim. But its not impossible. There are certainly not any man made objects hanging around at that attitude though. If we want to engage is some wild ass speculation.. as people have noted there was some insulation that came off the shuttle external fuel tank during launch and struck the wing of the orbiter. NASA says they looked into it and cleared the shuttle to return. If I had to guess, I'd suggest that most likely the shuttle was at in incorrect angle for decent. There is a fairly small range of angles that the shuttle must be in during re-entry in order to minimize the stress on the craft and the heat build up. The shuttle more or less glides back to earth once its in the atmosphere, so if there were either a loss of a control surface due to structural weakness or loss of heat tiles the craft would tumble, probably overheat, and disintegrate. Not much you can do about it on the way down either, unfortunately. I'd imagine they'll go through the software that controls the shuttle during decent with the proverbial fine toothed comb as well. Oh.. this is charming, for those of you who didn't see it. Way to shape world opinion on your side, morons. http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   56.  The Mother of All Stupid Reactions.   by MAYORBOB       at Sat 1 Feb 1:02pm score of 1   in reply to comment 49     That fairly well describes the reflections among those Iraqis quoted in that article. Oddly enough, or appropriately enough, plastic variations of stupid shit like this are roundly criticized and treated with the disdain they deserve while the major media reports every breathless syllable if it comes out of Iraq. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   189.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by snarkism       at Sun 2 Feb 6:28pm score of 1   in reply to comment 49     Oh.. this is charming, for those of you who didn't see it. Way to shape world opinion on your side, morons. Interesting that you don't link to any American morons claiming this to be an act of terrorism, but only Iraqi morons. So why does "one side" get a pass on their moronicity, but not the other? You should not really use the comments of a few fringe crazies as a representation of other, broader issues. snarkism That's using your ass.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   191.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by rombuu       at Sun 2 Feb 6:40pm score of 1   in reply to comment 189     There weren't any news stories with people claiming this to be an act of terrorism, or I would have. All I found were articles saying that there was no way it was terrorism. If you find such an article, I'll be more than happy to link to them and give them the moron-calling they so rightly deserve. You should not really use the comments of a few fringe crazies as a representation of other, broader issues. Morons was direct at the quoted, not an slur against the Iraqi people as a whole, whom I'm sure on the whole a) don't really believe that crap in the first place and b) will be glad to be rid of a government that spouts such nonsense... http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   208.  Re: The Mother of All Stupid Reactions.   by A. H. Cretin       at Mon 3 Feb 1:08am score of 1   in reply to comment 56     while the major media reports every breathless syllable if it comes out of Iraq I don't know, but my cynicism tells me there'd be nary a peep from the press if Iraqis offered sympathy. No doubt some have, but I doubt we'll ever hear of it. -A Humorless Cretin   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   213.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by anomolos       at Mon 3 Feb 3:08am score of 1   in reply to comment 191     Morons was direct at the quoted, not an slur against the Iraqi people as a whole, whom I'm sure on the whole a) don't really believe that crap in the first place and b) will be glad to be rid of a government that spouts such nonsense... Read the article closer - the persons who made the statements are not government officials, but a cab driver and a "government employee" (i.e. postal worker). And I would imagine they would be more glad to be rid of the ongoing threat of sudden incineration by the American government than any untoward remarks made by their own.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   50.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by marduk_kur       at Sat 1 Feb 12:53pm score of 1   in reply to comment 38     Without doing the thorough research I probably should- I believe the shuttle was below any possible earth orbit when the accident occurred. The likelyhood of hitting a piece of debris during the brief time it is dropping through the atmosphere and burning up is surpassingly small. The crewmembers almost definitely would have noticed and reported any collision if it had happened pre-breakup when the shuttle was high enough to hit some sort of space junk. Sad lad, he really couldn't handle starting from scratch on the very first level. But he died the death of a warrior.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   51.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by Adipic Acid       at Sat 1 Feb 12:54pm score of 1.5 interesting   in reply to comment 38     Not very. The collision wouldn't even have to damage the Shuttle, only affect it's re-entry attitude. The thing handles like a brick, and you don't have engines to compensate for a bad attitude adjustment. If you get off by more than a few degrees, you'll tumble, and then it's all over. The original Shuttle design had jet engines to help steer a landing, but they were removed to increase payload and reduce cost. I doubt very much that they would have helped, however. I don't think the jets were supposed to kick in until the Shuttle had reached 60,000 feet or so, and slowed substantially. Columbia was the oldest of the fleet, and I can't help but wonder if that had something to do with this. It was refurbed a few years ago, but it's possible that the frame just couldn't handle the stresses anymore and failed. It will be interesting to find out how much telemetry we have from right before the point of breakup. As for the idiots who believe that it was caused by a missile strike -- that would have been obvious from the radar track. So would the launch point, which would probably already be a cloud of expanding radioactive gas by this point in time, along with every major city in the country of origin. That kind of missile can't be launched from someone's backyard. No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Churchill   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   140.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by furryape       at Sat 1 Feb 10:32pm score of 1   in reply to comment 51     Discovery was built lighter and less strong overall than Columbia, the original three orbiters' airframes were completed in the late 1970's. After flight testing of Enterprise, the frame stresses were known, and it was redesigned to reduce weight, and the last 3 orbiters were built on this redesign. Discovery has also landed more times - 30 missions rather than 28. If Discovery's airframe can handle it, then so can Columbia's. NASA for all the details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   164.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by Adipic Acid       at Sun 2 Feb 8:02am score of 1   in reply to comment 140     Heavy does not necessarily equal more durable. Discovery and the later Shuttles used a slightly different mix of alloys in the frames as well, if I recall. What I don't recall is anyone doing a test to destruction on a completed airframe, only simulations. Simulations are only as good as the data fed into them. The Shuttle is an experimental spacecraft to this day. No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Churchill   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   68.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by zyxwvutsr       at Sat 1 Feb 1:55pm score of 1.5 compelling   in reply to comment 38     The following is sheer speculation, but more likely, it seems to me, than most of the other theories I've heard today: The underside of a Space Shuttle is covered with hundreds of small ceramic tiles designed to protect the body of the shuttle from the heat of reentry. Some of these tiles are knocked off the shuttle during each and every reentry. Part of the maintenance needed to ready a shuttle for reuse is replacing missing or damaged tiles. There has been speculation since the Space Shuttle was first designed that the loss of too many of these tiles too early during atmospheric reentry (or the loss of just a few tiles over a particularly critical area, such as near a hydraulic line) would be a castastrophic event. Breaching of a reentry heat shield would expose the far more delicate (to heat) materials underneath and could easily lead to loss of structural integrity of the fuselage.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   80.  How big an object?   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sat 1 Feb 3:57pm score of 1 interesting   in reply to comment 38     About the size of a pea. KE = 1/2*m*v2 (Ie the square of the velocity. In this case velocity = fuckloads.) An impact with an object travelling at a relative speed of 12,000 kph will tear a hole the size of a car in most objects. Good thinking - I hadn't though of that possibility....Even shuttles aren't designed to cope with hitting things like that. In fact, if you want to fuck with somebody on re-enty probably the single cheapest way would be to throw a whole bunch of ball bearings in their path. Shotgun, bang.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   122.  Re: How big an object?   by swalve       at Sat 1 Feb 9:14pm score of 1   in reply to comment 80     A shotgun that can shoot 200,000 feet straight up, of course. [obligatory] Of course, I've heard you can get those in Texas. "If silence is golden, you couldn't raise a dime!"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   134.  Re: How big an object?   by Jeffrey W. Baker       at Sat 1 Feb 10:13pm score of 1   in reply to comment 80     This is slightly misleading. For those peas to be in the path of reentry, they would also need to be in an orbit lower than that of the shuttle, which implies they would be going at least as fast as the shuttle itself. The relative velocity would be near zero, not near the airspeed of the shuttle.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   151.  Re: How big an object?   by DanDanDanDan       at Sat 1 Feb 11:38pm score of 1   in reply to comment 122     A shotgun that can shoot 200,000 feet straight up, of course. How about a peashooter?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   165.  Re: How big an object?   by zyxwvutsr       at Sun 2 Feb 8:03am score of 1   in reply to comment 134     The relative velocity would be near zero... No. Your hypothetical pea could have been orbiting in any plane about the earth: The relative velocity would have dependent on the incident angle. The reason why being hit by some sort of stray space debris is unlikely is because of the shuttle's altitude when it was destroyed. The vehicle had begun to enter a fairly dense portion of the atmosphere. No debris, pea-sized or otherwise, can be in a stable orbit at that altitude because air drag would cause it to vaporize.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   160.  Re: The rumors upthread about this possibly...   by Mimolette       at Sun 2 Feb 3:08am score of 1   in reply to comment 38     During the launch of the Columbia, a piece of insulation on one of the external fuel tanks was seen breaking off and striking one of the shuttle’s wings. NASA did an analysis of the video and concluded that no significant damage had been done. NASA officials warn however, that it is still quite possible that this was an unrelated event.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

43.  Another National Tragedy   by evilhenchdyke       at Sat 1 Feb 12:44pm score of 2.5 informative     I am, uncharacteristically, speechless. What I really want to know is where is Richard Feynman now that we need him again? Mr. Feynman attracted widespread attention during the Rogers Commission hearings on the Challenger space shuttle accident in 1986. Frustrated by witnesses' vague answers and by slow bureaucratic procedures, he conducted an impromptu experiment that proved a key point in the investigation: He dunked a piece of the rocket booster's O-ring material into a cup of ice water and quickly showed that it lost all resiliency at low temperatures. Monday, February 15, 1988 OBITUARY Richard P. Feynman, a Nobel laureate in physics, best-selling author and former member of the presidential commission that investigated the Challenger disaster, died Monday night in Los Angeles. He was 69.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

45.  Bitter Irony   by Standeck       at Sat 1 Feb 12:46pm score of 1 irrelevant     That the first Israeli astronaut should end up in Palestine. Palestine, Texas is one of the first towns in the debris footprint. We're getting video of shuttle parts in driveways, fields and in people's houses where the pieces have crashed through the roof. A sad day.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

137.  Re: Bitter Irony   by burntfriedman       at Sat 1 Feb 10:19pm score of 1   in reply to comment 45     too bad some asshole modded you down as irrelevant, because that is true irony. I highly doubt terrorist intervention.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

52.  At least   by newkindakick       at Sat 1 Feb 12:56pm score of 5 brilliant     My first reaction was a weird gratitude that the shuttle had crashed on the way down, rather than on the way up - all of these folks had probably spent their entire lives hoping for a chance to go into space, and so it's wonderful in a way that they at least got to do that before they died. How much more awful it would have been were it the other way around. I wouldn't normally do this kinda thing   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

135.  Re: At least   by burntfriedman       at Sat 1 Feb 10:14pm score of 1   in reply to comment 52     a wonderful point. I'ld mod you up but i already posted.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

53.  Insoluble Problem?   by wrestler       at Sat 1 Feb 12:57pm score of 2.5 astute     Unfortunately, we don't have Richard Feynman around anymore to help us figure out what happened. But as a starting point, it's worth reading his 'Personal Observations On The Reliability Of The Space Shuttle.' My fear is that they'll find the problem, but it will be one that simply has no medium term technical solution, such as a chance collision with space debris. It may be that earth orbital space travel will always be a crap shoot, at least for the rest of our lives. The Columbia astronauts new this, of course, and went anyway. I don't know if it counts coming from an atheist, but God bless them.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

158.  Re: Insoluble Problem?   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sun 2 Feb 2:20am score of 0.5   in reply to comment 53     I don't know if it counts coming from an atheist, but God bless them. It counts, atheist or not.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

58.  The things we take for granted   by 1fastdog       at Sat 1 Feb 1:10pm score of 1     I wasn't too long out of bed when my mom called this morning and implored me to turn on the TV because of the space shuttle. Not really being fully awake yet, I told her I'd seen the shuttle land before and would catch the news later - - "No" she shouted at me. "They've lost contact with it and they think it broke up!" - - suffice to say, I felt about 2 inches tall after my earlier dismissal where I had taken for granted that this was "just another ho-hum shuttle landing". Advances in technology happen with such speed and so often these days that the truly remarkable often seems commonplace...this has been a sadly stark and brutal reminder that the things we put out of our minds as being dangerous because we've seemingly conquered them, can easily come back to remind us that we're only too human... I'm deeply saddened by these events - my thoughts are with the families whose loss is a loss for us all... Tipping The Bottle & Biting The Lime   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

64.  There may have been damage on liftoff   by Long Tall Wally       at Sat 1 Feb 1:37pm score of 1     There was a little-reported story (NASA didn't even mention it until several days later) that during Columbia's liftoff at the beginning of this mission, something (insulation, most likely) fell off and possibly did a small amount of damage to the left wing of the shuttle. This has been mentioned once or twice in the news coverage today, and it'll be interesting to see how that plays out, especially if someone on the ground made the decision that the damage was "likely" not serious enough to require a spacewalk to repair it. "You can never go fast enough." --The Driver, 'Two-Lane Blacktop'   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

106.  Re: There may have been damage on liftoff   by Pengie       at Sat 1 Feb 6:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 64     From what I've been reading from the space fans over at space.com's message boards, there wasn't going to be a lot they could do about damage to tiles underneath the shuttle in any case. Maybe if they'd had the Canadarm along they could have taken a look for damage, but in the end they would have had to try to land anyway. Maybe if they had detected damage, a couple Soyuz missions could have gone up to evacuate the crew, but that seems like a long shot.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   145.  Re: There may have been damage on liftoff   by keenduck       at Sat 1 Feb 11:07pm score of 2 informative   in reply to comment 106     Also, they couldn't go check outside using their suits and tethers. There aren't any tether points underneath (the bottom) of the shuttle, and like Pengie pointed out, they didn't have a robotic arm in the cargo hold. In any case, even if they found something, there wasn't much they could do about it. The heat ceramic tiles are rather individual in size, and so one would need to specifically make a new tile for the the affected region. - keenduck You missed a good part ... What? ... She was masturbating ... Where?!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

67.  Tragic Results   by BadMatthew       at Sat 1 Feb 1:47pm score of 1 succinct     The results of starving NASA's budget for years. The results of half-assed operations. Every component of our shuttle fleet was built by the lowest bidder.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

71.  Re: Tragic Results   by dave78981       at Sat 1 Feb 2:02pm score of 1   in reply to comment 67     I think it's a little too early to tell at this point what the cause of the crash was. It could just as easliy have been pilot error or some other problem. But I do think that starving NASA's budget is not the answer. Hopefully, the public won't lose its faith in the space program becasue of this. I was really looking forward to seeing people walk on Mars in my lifetime. btw I wonder how this will affect the nuclear propellant program? Doubt that's gonna happen now. Well, as I always say, a family of freaks is better than no family at all.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   192.  Re: Tragic Results   by telepanda       at Sun 2 Feb 7:00pm score of 1   in reply to comment 71     Couldn't be pilot error because at that point in the landing, the crew has absolutely no control over the shuttle - it's completely unpowered. It glides in to landing, basically a big paper airplane. The only adjustment to the landing that can be made after the final burn is just enough to hit the runway straight. I think we've shown that faith-based flood control doesn't work.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   210.  Re: Tragic Results   by TheMCP       at Mon 3 Feb 1:40am score of 1   in reply to comment 192     Couldn't be pilot error because at that point in the landing, the crew has absolutely no control over the shuttle - it's completely unpowered. I beg to differ. End of line.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   244.  Re: Tragic Results   by telepanda       at Mon 3 Feb 3:54pm score of 1   in reply to comment 210     Maybe I misunderstood the article but it sounds to me like the "sharp corrective maneuver" was done by the automatic flight control system, not the pilots. I think we've shown that faith-based flood control doesn't work.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   252.  Re: Tragic Results   by TheMCP       at Tue 4 Feb 2:46am score of 1   in reply to comment 244     Maybe I misunderstood the article but it sounds to me like the "sharp corrective maneuver" was done by the automatic flight control system, not the pilots. You're quite right, although I was disagreeing with the "completely unpowered" part of the statement, rather than the bit about whether or not the crew has control. That said, if the computer has control, I feel convinced that the pilot would have an override for emergency purposes. Under the circumstances he may even have used it. Although from what I read in the news today, it doesn't sound like it would have helped. End of line.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

74.  Beautiful words   by kiwiana       at Sat 1 Feb 2:26pm score of 1     Well, I don't know who to credit for this, but GWB's statement on the tragedy was just about perfectly pitched (full text here: a www.cnn.com link). Notwithstanding that for the most part it was delivered with the grace and inflection of a wooden puppet, there was genuine feeling and for once I found myself saying complimentary things to the TV. I'm not religious, but you can bet many who are will take comfort in the biblical words, and even this hardened atheist can appreciate their beauty and appropriateness at this moment. open up your chi, maaan   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

89.  Re: Beautiful words   by Ajax       at Sat 1 Feb 4:52pm score of 1   in reply to comment 74     I suppose that's one way of looking at it, but sadly I found that the words were detracted from by their tiresome familiarity. It's not that biblical references are inappropriate (quite the opposite in this case) or generally offensive to me, it's just that every time Bush gets in front of a podium, we get to hear about his favorite Big Guy In The Sky. Maybe a True Believer (and/or a Die-Hard Bushie) thinks that this makes his every pronouncement reek with timeless, soulful gravity, but to me it sounds fatuous and sententious. In his urge to make every public address sound like a combination of the New Hope Life Baptist Christian Church Revival Sunday and True Grit, he undercuts the eloquence, elegance, and sincerity of the biblical passages he's referencing. Personally, I'd have been happier if he'd dusted off that bubble-head Peggy Noonan's "surly bonds of earth" speech instead. They didn't call Ronald Reagan "The Great Communicator" for nothing. "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   101.  Well put Ajax   by suckerpunch       at Sat 1 Feb 6:05pm score of 0.5 obnoxious   in reply to comment 89     I get sick of Dubya's clear nods to the xtian right (which will always mean wrong) and his supposed fervent disingenuous righteous lip quivering. I can't imagine it sits well with anyone in the globe who listens to his tripe in the 75% of the world who ISN'T xtian. I'm sure we look as bad as, well, Dubya has been making us look (which ain't pretty). It's unnerving that we're supposed to be a secular country open to all, under Bushie it feels more like living in one of the supposedly LESS accepting countries he's playing global cop to. Cleary if Dubya and his conservative, narrow minded cronies had their way, they'd round up those who weren't xtians they'd round them all up and/or kick them out of the country, oh, that's right, they sorta are. dislectics off tha wrold untie!!!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   182.  Re: Beautiful words   by kiwiana       at Sun 2 Feb 2:40pm score of