Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster - VMS

This is a discussion on Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster - VMS ; In article , Neil Rieck writes: > NASA should have learned a few lessons from the 1986 Challenger > disaster (listen to the engineers) but they didn't (listen to the > engineers) and so the Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster

  1. Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster

    In article <04df5fe5-4eb0-4ed9-a64d-359ec8b937f8@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, Neil Rieck writes:

    > NASA should have learned a few lessons from the 1986 Challenger
    > disaster (listen to the engineers) but they didn't (listen to the
    > engineers) and so the Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed in 2003
    > because they didn't listen to the engineers. I'm a fan of the manned
    > space program but NASA has morphed from an organization of "Scientists
    > and Engineers" to an organization of "Politicians and Bureaucrats"
    > with Dilbert as their mascot.


    Back in the 1960's NASA was the world's premier engineering
    organisation, and did science on the side. Burned up 20% of the US
    federal budget in the process.

    Now NASA is a huge beauracracy that does science and engineering on
    the side. And manages to do it on 0.6 of 1% of the US federal
    budget, with a little help from ESA, CSA, and sometimes the Russians.

    But since they just analysed and restored the Hubble Space Telescope
    from broken hardware without being able to actually touch it, I think
    they're not so bad to work for.

    Try getting Field Service to do that.


  2. Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster

    In article , Bob Koehler wrote:
    [...]
    >
    > But since they just analysed and restored the Hubble Space Telescope
    > from broken hardware without being able to actually touch it, I think
    > they're not so bad to work for.
    >
    > Try getting Field Service to do that.


    How do you swap tires on the HST?

    :-)

  3. Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster

    Bob Koehler wrote:
    > In article <04df5fe5-4eb0-4ed9-a64d-359ec8b937f8@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, Neil Rieck writes:
    >
    >
    >>NASA should have learned a few lessons from the 1986 Challenger
    >>disaster (listen to the engineers) but they didn't (listen to the
    >>engineers) and so the Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed in 2003
    >>because they didn't listen to the engineers. I'm a fan of the manned
    >>space program but NASA has morphed from an organization of "Scientists
    >>and Engineers" to an organization of "Politicians and Bureaucrats"
    >>with Dilbert as their mascot.

    >
    >
    > Back in the 1960's NASA was the world's premier engineering
    > organisation, and did science on the side. Burned up 20% of the US
    > federal budget in the process.
    >


    NASA never came close to 20% of the Federal budget. 4% was the
    peak in 1966.

    > Now NASA is a huge beauracracy that does science and engineering on
    > the side. And manages to do it on 0.6 of 1% of the US federal
    > budget, with a little help from ESA, CSA, and sometimes the Russians.
    >


    I think this always happens with shrinking government programs. The
    bureaucrats keep their jobs but the people who actually do something
    get cut.

    > But since they just analysed and restored the Hubble Space Telescope
    > from broken hardware without being able to actually touch it, I think
    > they're not so bad to work for.
    >
    > Try getting Field Service to do that.
    >


    Have they fixed the DC Lo problem yet? Last I've seen was Monday,
    when one of the instruments shut itself down because of low voltage on
    a power supply (which apparently came up to full voltage shortly after
    the low-voltage timer went off), and then something caused the data
    handling computer to shut down.

    --
    John Santos
    Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
    781-861-0670 ext 539

  4. Re: OT: Shuttle Columbia Disaster

    In article , John Santos writes:
    >
    > Have they fixed the DC Lo problem yet? Last I've seen was Monday,
    > when one of the instruments shut itself down because of low voltage on
    > a power supply (which apparently came up to full voltage shortly after
    > the low-voltage timer went off), and then something caused the data
    > handling computer to shut down.


    They're working on it. It came up the evening after I posted, IIRC.


+ Reply to Thread