Quote:
Originally posted by FAKrogoth
To everyone: How is this a "blow to the entire scientific community?" Apparently, I was not aware that probability does not exist when humans are involved. Believe me, science as a whole will not curl up and die, just because seven people lost their lives. (There are a LOT more scientists out there) Did anyone think about how this might spur the development of other, cheaper, more reliable lifting devices? SSTO, baby!
|
Dood, how about you think before you open your mouth in the future.
First and foremost, especially on a FIRST messageboard, disrespectful is a mild word for what you're doing right now.
The space shuttle is one of the pinnacles of human achievement at this age. We've been all over the world (except possibly the depths of the oceans). The one place where we as a race have not been is Space. The Universe is so large is defies comprehension. For every star that is visible (even on a clear night in the middle of the countryside), there are
thousands, if not millions, of stars which are hidden. We are just taking baby steps into that world.
The Colombia tragedy isn't only about the lives lost. The space shuttle program represents the culmination of the most advanced space travel technology in existence today (even the Russian Soyuz crafts are nowhere as reusable as the space shuttle). It also represents the culmination of countless manhours and cooperation between humans - it's just a taste of what can happen if we try. The tragedy comes from the fact that all of these achievements have been just shown to be imperfect.
The Colombia disaster isn't only about the human deaths. It's about the psychological impacts. With your AIDs argument - yeah, people die of AIDs every day, but how many of those people represent the future of humanity, the future of exploration, the culmination of some of the most advanced technology available, and an example of what the human race is capable of if we just work together. How many people who die die representing those virtues?
---
However, if you don't care about the human race and just want a specific example of how this is a "blow to the entire scientific community," look no further than the IIS.
Currently, there are only two crafts capable of transporting humans to the International Space Station: the Russian Soyuz crafts (which aren't too reusable), and the American Space Shuttles. The Russians are in financial trouble and have implied they would be forced to withdraw from the IIS program if they can't secure funds to continue the production of their Soyez vehicles. That has put a lot of the responsibility of continuing the IIS program in American hands. When the Challenger blew up, the entire Space Shuttle fleet was grounded for over two years until the cause was determined and upgrades were made. If the Space Shuttle fleet becomes grounded now, what happens to the IIS?
You mentioned the SSTO and implicitly hinted to the Lockheed Martin X-10 (exact letters?). Honestly - how long does it take to fully design and construct a completely new, working spacecraft. You're not going to see a mission-ready model for at least five, six years - it'll probably be close to a decade. What happens to the IIS in that timeframe?
---
FAKrogoth, if you want to continue this, pm me or AIM me (PhyrosFire) - I'd be glad to debate this further - but please, just keep your opinions out of the wrong threads before you make them locked. Sometimes people need to express their sadness. You must respect that if you want people to treat you with respect.