wait...what??
Feb. 5th, 2003 12:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lapsedmodernistthis is an excerpt from today's NY Times front page story about the shuttle and advance warnings that it was gonna blow.
"The study by researchers at Stanford and Carnegie Mellon
was particularly significant because it determined that the
two wheel areas were especially vulnerable to damage. They
were often hit by flying debris, became unusually hot
during the shuttle's fiery re-entry through the atmosphere
and covered some of the most vital - and volatile -
sections of the orbiter. Its helium, oxygen and hydrogen
are stored there in pressurized tanks, any of which might
explode and rupture the winged spaceship.
If even a single tile were lost in this area, said an
update on the 1990 study, a "zipper effect" could occur,
stripping away other tiles. The study noted that once
several tiles were gone, the resulting heat "could cause a
burn through in the aluminum skin of the orbiter during
re-entry, exposing and possible crippling some of the
critical subsystems and leading to the loss of the vehicle
and crew."
Yesterday, one of the authors of the study, Dr. Elisabeth
Paté-Cornell, a researcher at Stanford, said NASA
headquarters called two days ago to get a copy of its
original 1990 study. "I don't blame them," she said of the
space agency's inability to find the study. "I'm the same
way."
But the research does not appear to be widely understood in
NASA. Yesterday afternoon, Maj. Gen. Michael C. Kostelnik,
the deputy associate administrator for the space station
and the shuttle - who oversees safety issues - was asked
whether the tiles around the wheel wells were considered a
particular safety issue."
Okay, first of all--what the fuck is wrong with Dr. Elisabeth Paté-Cornell of Stanford university? "I don't blame them for not finding the study because i am the same way"????? um, yeah. I don't blame someone misplacing the TV Guide because I am the same way. I don't blame someone for making one-sided copies of double-sided originals because I am the same way. BUT I DON'T WORK FOR NASA!!! AND IF I DID, AND IF I LOST A STUDY ABOUT HOW SPACE SHUTTLES IN USE HAVE A FLAW THAT CAUSES THEM TO OH, I DON'T KNOW, BLOW UP--THEN I GUESS I AM OFF THE HOOK BECAUSE SOME RETARD AT STANFORD, WILL VALIDATE ME BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE NASA-SCALE FUCK-UP IS EQUIVALENT TO HER LOSING A INTRADEPARTMENTAL MEMO, OR SOMETHING.
also, what the fuck does it mean that "the research does not appear to be widely understood in NASA."? No, really, what does that mean? I mean, did the NY Times just diss NASA? cuz I am okay with that, but I am not sure that's what they did. Because I DON'T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING about this article.
"The study by researchers at Stanford and Carnegie Mellon
was particularly significant because it determined that the
two wheel areas were especially vulnerable to damage. They
were often hit by flying debris, became unusually hot
during the shuttle's fiery re-entry through the atmosphere
and covered some of the most vital - and volatile -
sections of the orbiter. Its helium, oxygen and hydrogen
are stored there in pressurized tanks, any of which might
explode and rupture the winged spaceship.
If even a single tile were lost in this area, said an
update on the 1990 study, a "zipper effect" could occur,
stripping away other tiles. The study noted that once
several tiles were gone, the resulting heat "could cause a
burn through in the aluminum skin of the orbiter during
re-entry, exposing and possible crippling some of the
critical subsystems and leading to the loss of the vehicle
and crew."
Yesterday, one of the authors of the study, Dr. Elisabeth
Paté-Cornell, a researcher at Stanford, said NASA
headquarters called two days ago to get a copy of its
original 1990 study. "I don't blame them," she said of the
space agency's inability to find the study. "I'm the same
way."
But the research does not appear to be widely understood in
NASA. Yesterday afternoon, Maj. Gen. Michael C. Kostelnik,
the deputy associate administrator for the space station
and the shuttle - who oversees safety issues - was asked
whether the tiles around the wheel wells were considered a
particular safety issue."
Okay, first of all--what the fuck is wrong with Dr. Elisabeth Paté-Cornell of Stanford university? "I don't blame them for not finding the study because i am the same way"????? um, yeah. I don't blame someone misplacing the TV Guide because I am the same way. I don't blame someone for making one-sided copies of double-sided originals because I am the same way. BUT I DON'T WORK FOR NASA!!! AND IF I DID, AND IF I LOST A STUDY ABOUT HOW SPACE SHUTTLES IN USE HAVE A FLAW THAT CAUSES THEM TO OH, I DON'T KNOW, BLOW UP--THEN I GUESS I AM OFF THE HOOK BECAUSE SOME RETARD AT STANFORD, WILL VALIDATE ME BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE NASA-SCALE FUCK-UP IS EQUIVALENT TO HER LOSING A INTRADEPARTMENTAL MEMO, OR SOMETHING.
also, what the fuck does it mean that "the research does not appear to be widely understood in NASA."? No, really, what does that mean? I mean, did the NY Times just diss NASA? cuz I am okay with that, but I am not sure that's what they did. Because I DON'T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING about this article.
"the first rough draft of history"
Date: 2003-02-05 07:48 pm (UTC)for a few hours last week, the nytimes had an article about an explosion in a factory in north carolina. many people were killed (more than 7). i wonder if millions (in the end, billions) will be spent studying workplace safety and creating safer systems and inspections for factory workers. actually, i don't wonder. anyway, where is the saturation "news" coverage of this.
deaths due to handguns (not all guns, just handguns) in the u.s. each year is between 9,000 and 10,000 per year. maybe there will be saturation "news" coverage of this reality of american life real soon now.
when the iraqi children, women, and men who have no quarrel with the u.s. or britain die from the military's "shock and awe" policy (they plan on launching more cruise missles on the first day than during the entire 1990 gulf war, and then repeat it the following day), this "colateral damage" will unlikely get saturation "news" coverage. instead, you'll hear about "troops that are being put 'in harm's way'" 'in harm's way'? 'in harm's way'?
what's going on in the world now as you live in it? don't expect the "news" paper or other media to tell you. instead, you'll be distracted by whatever "story" they think will sell.
this just in
Date: 2003-02-05 09:16 pm (UTC)from
http://www.brook.edu/dybdocroot/views/papers/brainard/20030204.pdf
"Table 1 clarifies that for the combined total of the Global AIDs Initiative and the Child Survival and Health account (which includes the bulk of HIV/AIDs assistance in H.J.RES.2), the Administration’s request for fiscal 2004 shows no net increase relative to the fiscal 2003 funding in H.J.RES.2. This is because the Administration’s increase of $450 million for the Global AIDs initiative is offset by a $470 million shortfall in its Child Survival and Health request relative to the fiscal 2003 appropriations bill."