Space Shuttle Stage Show........

i was watching cnn last night, and they reported that NASA would begin plans to build a NEW vehicle that resembled, of all things, the old saturn rocket design.....wish i could find a pic....

anybody else see it?

Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Well, yeah, but that's how you make money - you convince the people with money that you deserve to get more.

You work as a server technician for a large company and you want to prove to your bosses that your department is understaffed and that you deserve a raise in pay. You crash the servers by uploading a virus so that you can convince the “money man” that the reason the servers crashed is because of a lack of funding and manpower. You swoop in later that day and get the servers back online thereby proving your worth and highlighting the “fact” that your department needs additional funding.

It’s the same thing with NASA. They planned this entire mission with all its problems to manipulate the people that can grant additional funding. They throw live feeds to every major news organization and air their new helmet cam and external tank camera footage to show the dire state of the shuttle.

This is the type of manipulation I’m talking about.

We are talking about completely different scenarios. You think NASA is capitalizing on some unplanned problems with the mission. I think NASA planned all the little problems in an attempt to manipulate the American public into supporting the funding they want.

forgive me if you see my challenges as aggressive, but this is unfounded to say the least. This si just like the hoax threads. NASA is to stupid to do anything right, but they can hoax anything they please.


cmmdr : ok captain, we need money. On the next mission we're going to put some material in the heat shield tiles that may jeopardize the mission just so you can fix it, and we'll get it all on TV. Then we won't have any problems getting money out of congeress. Understood ?

cpt : sure thing boss anything for NASA ....


huh ?

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
forgive me if you see my challenges as aggressive,

I only saw your “challenges” as aggressive because they were.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
but this is unfounded to say the least.

Unfounded? It’s founded on human greed and big business corruption. Don’t be naïve when it comes to a group bidding to get billions of dollars awarded to their program. There is nothing that’s out of the question when it comes to big money deals.

It’s founded on NASA knowing/thinking the American public won’t want to grant them billions of dollars considering the deficits the current administration is dumping on the country.

It’s founded on NASA wanting the money regardless of the will of the people.

It’s founded on the constant drama being fed to news agencies (on loop).

It’s founded on the new external camera footage (on loop).

It’s founded on the new helmet camera footage (on loop).

It’s founded on the footage (on loop) of more insulating foam being blown off the fuel tank.

It’s founded on the drama and fear they want to create with the tile spacers and the video (on loop) from the new helmet cameras.

It’s founded on the newly discovered problem with the thermal blanket issue below the cockpit windows.

It’s founded on NASA wanting to show the American people just how dangerous it is for them to be using their current equipment and to prove how much they need a new space vehicle.

el cid: It's actually taking a lot os stuff from the current Shuttle.

Check it!

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
el cid: It's actually taking a lot os stuff from the current Shuttle.

Check it!

sweet, thanks!

if you scroll down to the middle of the page, those are the sketches i saw on cnn (specifically the middle ones). i didn't know they were ripping off the booster portions as well!

*sigh* i guess those fuel costs will remain sky high (no pun intended).

I don't disagree that there is a lot at stake, what I say is unfounded is your theory that the repairs were set up.

What started the concern ? The video of the debris falling. That would be a tough thing to haox don't you think ? Thats all I'm saying. The debris lead to the idea of the shuttle showing its little underbelly for the cameras, then they did a space walk to fix it.

If it was a set-up, they could have thought of something really dramatic like an oxygen leak or tribbles.


I just thtink you are looking for something thats not there. The shuttle is a pretty complicated vehicle after all, and its old, and they can't afford another re-entry explosion or the whole program goes "poof". They are being extra-careful, and it makes for great internet video

Originally posted by kinglizard


Does anyone get the feeling NASA is attempting to dramatize this latest Space Shuttle launch/mission in order to convince the American public that they need additional funding for a new space vehicle? Every time I turn around CNN is showing live video directly from NASA and or the crew of the shuttle scrutinizing the mission and equipment with all the dramatics of a Hollywood movie.

The latest one is the live feed from a helmet camera of an astronaut removing some “gap fillers” from between a few ceramic tiles on the bottom of the shuttle. During the launch they also had an external camera that caught some insulating material falling from the external tank.

I realize this is an important launch/mission considering the tragic explosion and damage caused to the shuttle during liftoff but I get this feeling that they have alternative motives here.

I don’t know it just seems overly dramatic and blown out of proportion. Maybe this NASA coverage is supposed to be covering up some other news in the world. You know as a distraction from the real story. Maybe they want more R&D money. Maybe they want to build an entirely new space vehicle and they know the American public won’t want to fund it without this drama and worry. IMO something is going on.......

Actually Ithink they really need the money to convert their covert space system into a civilian one. Maybe we will get to see a modified version of the x-33 in action

Whether it's a ploy for more funding or not, does it really matter? I mean, in the long run, if more funding is given to NASA, and they are able to actually put a man on Mars, does it really matter at that point how they got the funding?

Fact of the matter is, the shuttle is obsolete, and has been for years. Fact is, landing a man on Mars (or even just getting back to the moon, for that matter) would renew interest in the space program.

Space (to be cliche'd for a moment) is the final frontier. There is only so much that we can learn from our own planet. To further our learning, we must travel to space. Honestly, with the current shuttle, we're not going to learn all that much more, besides how to re-attach tiles and thermal blankets in orbit. I know that, you know that, NASA knows that. The American public, however, doesn't really know that. Instead, they have become disinterested in the space program, because it's nothing more than commonplace, full of accidents, and very little new knowledge.

Remember, the reason NASA got the funding to put men on the moon was because there was a great public interest. I can't blame them for wanting to rekindle that public interest. If they gain the interest, the funding will come.

So, I ask again, if it furthers science and space exploration, is it really all that bad?

Originally posted by obsidian468
Whether it's a ploy for more funding or not, does it really matter? I mean, in the long run, if more funding is given to NASA, and they are able to actually put a man on Mars, does it really matter at that point how they got the funding?

Are you kidding me? Of course it matters. You assert that it makes no difference how American tax payer money is spent or how that decision is made? Personally I have a problem with any powerful group that cheats, manipulates and steals money from the American public to push forward their agenda and so should you. If NASA doesn’t have the support of the people based on the direction and interest of their program then that funding should be cut.....Period.

This question should be easy to answer......Should it be the will of the people or the will of NASA despite of the will of the people?

Why is putting a man on Mars so important? Who the hell in today’s American reality would want to spend hundreds of Billions of dollars in an attempt to send man to Mars? Your children’s children will be paying off the American deficit from the spending of money (to date) on the war on terror and homeland security. We have more pressing issues that require funding and the American public realizes that. But you think its ok for NASA to manipulate the public to gain billions of dollars if it results in a man on Mars. This is a terrible and dangerous attitude IMO.

KL, manipulation is the name of the game in all government politics. It happens, and it's often quite successful. There are times when one should fight it, and times where the fight simply isn't worth fighting. Picking one's battles wisely often allows one to fight another day.

I would far prefer to see more funding put into NASA, and a whole lot LESS funding put into the so called "War on Terror." Fact is, the war on terror is doing nothing to make anything any safer, is aiding the government in systematic removal of our rights, and is a sponge for funds that could be far better used with other projects. If we just pulled out of Iraq, the amount of money we'd save every day would allow NASA to develop and build an entire fleet of next-generation shuttles. As it is, NASA only recieves about 10% or less of the funding that the war effort recieves. The war is draining the country, and only serving to kill our youth. NASA's efforts in space exploration can serve to better the human race in unheard of manners. The necessity for alternative fuels and propulsion to make a spacecraft 100% reusable, and practical for interplanetary (and possibly interstellar) travel would provide invaluable new technology for the betterment of our own lives. Imagine a 100% clean burning fuel made from garbage (such as in fusion theory). Think about it. That gas-guzzling pollution belching car we all own would be a thing of the past. $40 to fill your tank? Nah, it's trash day, I'll just throw it in the tank.

In addition to the potential for alternative energy and propulsion systems, NASA can provide great improvements in agriculture (and extraterrestrial base would need to be able to provide its own food and air in an enviorment that doesn't naturally provide it), improvements in life support systems, medical technologies, and perhaps even a greater understanding of the physics of the cosmos, leading to true space exploration. The list of benefits goes on and on.

We are still in the infant stages of space exploration. We've put a man in orbit. We've put a man on the moon. We've sent an unmanned spacecraft to the edge of the solar system. The next logical step is to put a man on Mars. Once we can reliably do that, we can use that technology as the building blocks for new technology to allow us to explore further.

On the whole, space exploration has so much more potential positive impact on the human race than war could ever think to have. I see no point in learning how to better blow a man to bits. I see a great point in creation of new technologies for space travel, which will ultimately prove to have hundreds of practical applications in everyday life.

If NASA cannot glean the public support it needs to gain more funding, I feel the entire human race could suffer.

Whoa whoa whoa hey now CNN != NASA
CNN = Media
NASA = Space Men and nerds

Remember Iraq? Remember CNN blasting the same scenes of the battalions blazing across the desert over and over again? It's just the media! It's just CNN! NASA doesn't push their buttons.

These are our people up there! Our comrades! Our friends and neighbors! Of course the media is going to latch onto every drop they can muster! Have we forgotten what happened two years ago?! Don't you think there is a substantial amount of people who are honestly concerned about a repeat event? Are not these people going to watch every single bit of coverage they can get their eyes on? Would the media not in turn provide as much coverage as often as possible to ensure as large a viewing audience as possible? When it comes to the media -
more viewers:higher ratings::adspace:bigbudget
It's just media!!

This is our immediate future in Space we're looking at here.. if these people die, our astronauts get to develop an affinity for vodka. If we get them back safe and sound, NASA still gets to twiddle their thumbs for a little while until they figure out exactly how to proceed. This is already a lose-lose situation for NASA.

If we get these people back safe, we ALL benefit. If they die in another ball of fire, we ALL lose. The media knows this, and is just eating it up. What else could anyone expect?

[edit on 8-8-2005 by apc]