Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Current Events and General Interest Bits & Pieces -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Win Smith who wrote (411)	2/2/2003 8:47:03 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 603

Re: Media coverage of Israel's first astronaut -- Two mentions of the Holocaust and no mentions that Ilon Ramon was formerly the head of weapons development of the Israeli air force. To say that the U.S. public is being disinformed and molded by a propaganda machine would be the only obvious conclusion. What the hell was this guy really doing up there? And don't tell me he was really interested in dust storms as a meteorological event. <gg>

To: Win Smith who wrote (411)	2/3/2003 11:31:34 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 603

Hi Win Smith; Re: " My newspaper database shows the coverage tended to be greater where there was a local angle, e.g. Israel, India, and Milwaukee." This is my point over on the FADG thread. The shuttle program is so boring that it only makes the news with it biffs one. We should replace it with a Mars program that will at least be on the front page before the (inevitable) disaster. My guess is that NASA management is responsible for the tragedy, by insisting that the Shuttle fly even when not safe. I'll bet that we end up with the same situation as the previous shuttle disaster, where there are engineers who spoke out constantly against flying the thing. Oh, and I wouldn't be surprised if the cold weather at launch also is flagged as a problem. I'd love to see the statistics on how many tiles were lost per flight, according to the month of launch. -- Carl

To: Win Smith who wrote (411)	2/4/2003 11:55:26 AM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 603

Now, the Space Station: Grieving, Imperiled nytimes.com [ What a mess. The space station was actually the first thing I looked up on Saturday, but I couldn't easily find any reference to whether it was even currently manned. Which of course it is. I've never been a fan myself, way too expensive. ] The grounding of the three remaining space shuttles after the destruction of Columbia poses enormous, and potentially calamitous, challenges for the International Space Station and the 16 countries trying to maintain it as a permanent foothold in space. All of the shuttle launchings scheduled for this year and early 2004 were missions to ferry crews or components to the station, which has been under construction since 1998. Now this schedule is in total disarray. If delays persist for a year or more, some experts says it may even become difficult to prevent the station from falling into Earth's atmosphere. Until now, occasional nudges from the shuttle have helped keep it from sinking under the tug of friction as it skims the outermost ether. . . . Perhaps the biggest question, if the delays persist, is how to keep the 200-ton device — as capacious as a three-bedroom house — from sinking out of orbit altogether and incinerating as Columbia did. It has been routine for each shuttle that delivers a fresh crew or the latest truss or module to boost the expanding assemblage about eight miles upward, countering the steady sinking caused as the station's broad surfaces encounter drag exerted by diffuse molecules of air. The Russian Progress spacecraft can haul fuel to boost the station, as well, but they will not be visiting nearly enough this year to compensate for the absence of space shuttles, five of which were to have docked before 2004, including one in November that would carried a teacher, Barbara Morgan. The station has its own store of propellant to keep properly positioned, but even those supplies could be depleted eventually, space experts said. This leads to the troubling calculus about keeping the station in space, said John E. Pike, a space technology expert and director of globalsecurity.org, a Washington research group. "Everybody's going to be looking closely at the inventory of Progresses and Soyuz boosters to put them up, and running that against the need to reboost the station," Mr. Pike said. "Maybe the answer is that there's more than enough, or just enough, or more than enough for this year, but after that there's a real problem." He said that if the Russian craft could not fill the bill, NASA might have to try to cobble together a tanker of some sort. If the station is not continually boosted higher into space, though, he said, trouble will be inevitable, and will intensify the lower the station drifts. "The lower you go, the less time you've got," he said.

To: Win Smith who wrote (411)	2/4/2003 2:02:16 PM
From: Win Smith	Respond to of 603

Delay Likely for Shuttle Mission With Israel nytimes.com [ one more historic link I stumbled on. Clip: ] July 19 — NASA officials said today that it was highly likely that the first shuttle mission to include an Israeli astronaut would have to be delayed until at least the end of the year. The mission, which had been scheduled for liftoff today, was delayed after engineers found cracks in a fuel line, a problem that has grounded the shuttle fleet. The mission has drawn considerable interest because of the inclusion of the Israeli Air Force pilot, Col. Ilan Ramon, and the tight security that entailed. Because of the cracks, the shuttle program manager, Ron Dittemore, said, NASA is growing concerned about fitting in the three shuttle flights that it had planned for the rest of the year. The earliest date for a liftoff is Sept. 26, Mr. Dittemore said, but the mission with the Israeli, STS-107, may have to be pushed to December or later. . . .