Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kattracks
I've no doubt NASA could put 6 months worth of food and oxygen on each shuttle. NASA could also load up a complete set of replacement tiles. NASA could do all the things people think should be done to plan for these contingencies.

One thing, though. It would add millions if not billions to the cost when the chances are at the worst 1/120 of something like this happening. Is that worth it? I don't think so.
24 posted on 02/03/2003 10:06:25 PM PST by DaGman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DaGman
One thing, though. It would add millions if not billions to the cost when the chances are at the worst 1/120 of something like this happening. Is that worth it? I don't think so.

The fundamental problem, and actually the crux of THOUSANDS of debates, is the fairly silly but almost universally-held belief that human life is priceless.

Of course, you mention that you believe that human life ISN'T priceless, and you're immediately subjected to a torrent of flames.

But even a cursory examination of how society spends its money, makes decisions, reveals there's a price on human life...I've seen various studies that actually attempt to calculate it....but problems come in when people try to pretend there ISN'T a price.

How does this relate to the Space Shuttle program? If we really believed human life was priceless, we'd put 7 people in the thing and never launch it and play movies of space outside the windows.

Obviously, that's one (unrealistic) extreme. But to accomodate the various fixes recommended in this thread (All flights being able to reach the ISS, having a shuttle always ready to make a rescue flight, etc.) SERIOUSLY degrade the ability of the Shuttle to do useful things, and also likely cost vastly more money. There's a balance point you try to reach but there's no obvious guidlines to find where it is.

35 posted on 02/03/2003 10:12:35 PM PST by John H K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: DaGman
The shuttle is already cost ineffective at putting things into orbit. Adding the kinds of emergency supplies you suggest would only make the problem worse. For example, with the same money we used with the shuttle to get the Hubble space telescope functional, we could have built and launched (unmanned) three new ones.
105 posted on 02/03/2003 10:53:37 PM PST by altair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson