Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:37 pm
Important MessageYou are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login. |
lets go save HUBBLE!
This is where you can discuss your homework, family, just about anything, make strange sounds and otherwise discuss things which are really not related to the Lancer-series. Yes that means you can discuss other games.
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:30 am
>>>>>>>RANT WARNING<<<<<<<<
That Sean O'Keefe is a real piece of work though, isn't he? Anyone remember who said it wasn't worth it to keep it aloft in the first place?
Yeah yeah. I know. You're going to say that this was all part of his plan to save Hubble in the first place. I say that's a load of cr*p. He's much more of a political tool than anything else.
Were it anyone else with more concern over the success of missions for the sake of the mission as opposed to making NASA look good, O'Keefe and his current cadre of colleagues would not have let the Columbia mission end up the way it did. Those engineers who questioned the safety of re-entry would have been listened to and they would have been trying to work out a way to get the crew back safely instead of just "run the mission as if nothing were wrong."
>>>>>>> /RANT WARNING <<<<<<<<
That Sean O'Keefe is a real piece of work though, isn't he? Anyone remember who said it wasn't worth it to keep it aloft in the first place?
Yeah yeah. I know. You're going to say that this was all part of his plan to save Hubble in the first place. I say that's a load of cr*p. He's much more of a political tool than anything else.
Were it anyone else with more concern over the success of missions for the sake of the mission as opposed to making NASA look good, O'Keefe and his current cadre of colleagues would not have let the Columbia mission end up the way it did. Those engineers who questioned the safety of re-entry would have been listened to and they would have been trying to work out a way to get the crew back safely instead of just "run the mission as if nothing were wrong."
>>>>>>> /RANT WARNING <<<<<<<<
Thu Aug 12, 2004 7:08 am
warnings are usually short one-liners indy. 
oh and for hothead's question, i do believe they had another telescope planned for launch. but not as a replacement i believe. something about trailing behind earth, out of the electromagnetic shield that earth provides i believe, something about having a clear view.
and no, hubble isn't the only telescope floating around, im pretty sure, but ill have to dig a bit more to find out names of other space bound telescopes.
oh and for hothead's question, i do believe they had another telescope planned for launch. but not as a replacement i believe. something about trailing behind earth, out of the electromagnetic shield that earth provides i believe, something about having a clear view.
and no, hubble isn't the only telescope floating around, im pretty sure, but ill have to dig a bit more to find out names of other space bound telescopes.
Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:41 pm
oh and for hothead's question, i do believe they had another telescope planned for launch. but not as a replacement i believe. something about trailing behind earth, out of the electromagnetic shield that earth provides i believe, something about having a clear view.
If i believe right that is planned and also some new telescope that is actually two telescopes mounted side by side to neglect interference. I can't remember if that one is spacebased or if its based out in some mountain range.
Thu Aug 12, 2004 10:22 pm
i also remember hearing something bout an another telescope, but cant remember for sure since i came in on the last little bit of it on tv. i sorta belive nasa will fix it just so they look good. but at the same time i think thell say they did everything they could to help it and just let it stay on its degradeing orbit and burn up.
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2