Astronauts

[Cowboy Ronnie 78]

I just clicked on msnbc.com, a decent source for DL worthy deaths, and saw at the top of the page, in red background: "Breaking News - Space Shuttle...." and got all excited that the next word would be "explodes", but it instead read, "returns safely". Not a very solid endorsement of the space shuttle, that it's breaking news that they made it back. I really don't know why they keep bothering, at the moment everyone's holding their breath on every take-off, re-entry and landing.

 

I'm no statistician, but a job where your chances of being killed are nearly 2% (114 missions, two explosions) every time you undertake a particular activity sounds pretty bad. And for what, exactly?

[Star Crossed 33]

I'm no statistician, but a job where your chances of being killed are nearly 2% (114 missions, two explosions) every time you undertake a particular activity sounds pretty bad. And for what, exactly?

FFS, I'm posting a lot today, and most of it off-topic. I'll have to remind Mrs SC to burn a little bit more of me at the stake than usual tonight. Anyhoo, I proffer an answer to your question...

 

If you mean "and what for, exactly?" on a personal level, for the astronauts who take the risks, I think it boils down to a combination of personal and professional satisfaction. NASA's accepted risk factor for shuttle crew members is usually around 1%. It has, however, been higher e.g. in the wake of the Challenger incident, as documented well here. It's worth considering that fighter pilots, anyone in front-line military service, firefighters, in short people from many occupations work in environments greater in assumed inherent risk than space flight.

The shuttle flight crew (not the payload specialists or scientists, and especially not the bloody obligatory primary school teacher) all have military flight service under their belts; the risk during a space flight is minimal compared to situations they will have encountered (and demonstrated skill/resolve under) in their past careers.

The reward for having contemplated this stunner of a planet from space, and the sheer egotistical caché of having done so, must be worth a greater risk than a few percent, surely? I'd give my right nut to go into space (albeit that, as an environmentalist, I would commit hypocrisy of the most heinous order by travelling on such a polluting vehicle) and would accept far higher risk for the opportunity. I mean, I'd literally give my right testicle, if that were the price.

 

If you mean "and what for?" in the more functional sense, you have a point. As great a fan as I am of mankind's endeavour to reach beyond our earthly horizons, I can't help feeling that the idiots in charge of the world's space programmes have, as with so much in life, corrupted and transmuted the beauty and purity of the science for political and economic ends.

 

In short, we do it because we can, because we're curious and because we all have egos, but we often do it for the wrong reasons. I say "we", obviously I mean "them".

 

SC (no, it's not short for Space Cadet)

[Banshees Scream 110]

And for what, exactly?

 

If you mean "and what for, exactly?" on a personal level, for the astronauts who take the risks, I think it boils down to a combination of personal and professional satisfaction.

 

What for? Ronnie you are asking questions that I'm positive you already know. Remember when you went all out explaining the differences between a significant death and a great death? Well in this world you will collide with millions of different personality's and you will meet millions of ego's and you will see millions of faces and you will hear millions of stories and millions of accomplishments and millions of failures ...

 

But when two people meet on the street and one guy says 'I went to Atlantic City this weekend and I made some cash and got this big bang chick! Significance! But it's been done before. When the other man extends his hand and says 'Hi I work for NASA' I was almost 250,000 miles from earth in the outdoors of our existence, that is great.

 

It's worth considering that fighter pilots, anyone in front-line military service, firefighters, in short people from many occupations work in environments greater in assumed inherent risk than space flight.

 

Worth considering brother but is it worth believing?

 

In the military danger lurks at every direction but so many soldiers reach home.

 

Fire Fighters walk through hell on earth everyday but most of the time that fire goes out

 

But when you are on a man made space craft that takes decades to design (and if one wire should cease it's

 

Good Nite Audrey!

 

 

The reward for having contemplated this stunner of a planet from space, and the sheer egotistical caché of having done so, must be worth a greater risk than a few percent, surely? I'd give my right nut to go into space (albeit that, as an environmentalist, I would commit hypocrisy of the most heinous order by travelling on such a polluting vehicle) and would accept far higher risk for the opportunity. I mean, I'd literally give my right testicle, if that were the price.

 

The statistical number is in the shadows but with all the glory and as all the unspeakable could erupt and with that spot light - stepping inside the beauty and genius of science itself and traveling into a world outside of our own - is priceless.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

I'm no statistician, but a job where your chances of being killed are nearly 2% (114 missions, two explosions) every time you undertake a particular activity sounds pretty bad. And for what, exactly?

FFS, I'm posting a lot today, and most of it off-topic. I'll have to remind Mrs SC to burn a little bit more of me at the stake than usual tonight. Anyhoo, I proffer an answer to your question...

 

If you mean "and what for, exactly?" on a personal level, for the astronauts who take the risks, I think it boils down to a combination of personal and professional satisfaction. NASA's accepted risk factor for shuttle crew members is usually around 1%. It has, however, been higher e.g. in the wake of the Challenger incident, as documented well here. It's worth considering that fighter pilots, anyone in front-line military service, firefighters, in short people from many occupations work in environments greater in assumed inherent risk than space flight.

The shuttle flight crew (not the payload specialists or scientists, and especially not the bloody obligatory primary school teacher) all have military flight service under their belts; the risk during a space flight is minimal compared to situations they will have encountered (and demonstrated skill/resolve under) in their past careers.

The reward for having contemplated this stunner of a planet from space, and the sheer egotistical caché of having done so, must be worth a greater risk than a few percent, surely? I'd give my right nut to go into space (albeit that, as an environmentalist, I would commit hypocrisy of the most heinous order by travelling on such a polluting vehicle) and would accept far higher risk for the opportunity. I mean, I'd literally give my right testicle, if that were the price.

 

If you mean "and what for?" in the more functional sense, you have a point. As great a fan as I am of mankind's endeavour to reach beyond our earthly horizons, I can't help feeling that the idiots in charge of the world's space programmes have, as with so much in life, corrupted and transmuted the beauty and purity of the science for political and economic ends.

 

In short, we do it because we can, because we're curious and because we all have egos, but we often do it for the wrong reasons. I say "we", obviously I mean "them".

 

SC (no, it's not short for Space Cadet)

I think you will find that we already have one Space Cadet with us SC.

[maryportfuncity 10,662]

12 men walked on the Moon, Nine Moonwalkers are still alive from 72 year old Charles Duke to 78 year old Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin. We're fast running out of Great War vets and Titanic survivors, here's another bunch to keep an eye on. 'Buzz' has had his battles with alcohol, a couple of the others have found God, all worth watching IMHO.

 

Wiki page has a table halfway down with links to the page for each moonwalker.

[The Miser 18]

12 men walked on the Moon, Nine Moonwalkers are still alive from 72 year old Charles Duke to 78 year old Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin. We're fast running out of Great War vets and Titanic survivors, here's another bunch to keep an eye on. 'Buzz' has had his battles with alcohol, a couple of the others have found God, all worth watching IMHO.

 

Wiki page has a table halfway down with links to the page for each moonwalker.

 

 

Good idea for a thread!

[Star Crossed 33]

mpfc, I presume, given the thread title, that you've read "Moondust" by Andrew Smith?

 

If not, (and, anyone else interested in the Apollo missions) I highly recommend buying it, borrowing it (as I did) or taking it out of the local library. It's no exaggeration to say that it left me wondering, sitting outside in the middle of the night last summer, staring up at the moon through binoculars, just mind-blown, pondering life's Big Questions. This book really got me thinking...

 

In particular, I recommend the chapter on Edgar Mitchell; arguably the coolest, sanest, funniest man ever to get a chance to walk on the moon, whose lunar mission profoundly changed his views on life, the universe and everything.

Please, if you're at all interested, find this book and read it. Even if you think you already know every salient thing about the lunar missions, this book will give you more insight. And that's a Star Crossed guarantee you can take to the bank!

 

Edit: It's either déja-vu, or I really have eulogized about this book elsewhere on this forum. In either case, I stand by my post(s).

[maryportfuncity 10,662]

this book will give you more insight. And that's a Star Crossed guarantee you can take to the bank!

 

Yeah, I've read it, great book. Re the quote above: does that mean reading the book makes people more like you SC?

 

Can't say I'd noticed this particular result when I read it.

[Cowboy Ronnie 78]

12 men walked on the Moon, Nine Moonwalkers are still alive from 72 year old Charles Duke to 78 year old Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin. We're fast running out of Great War vets and Titanic survivors, here's another bunch to keep an eye on. 'Buzz' has had his battles with alcohol, a couple of the others have found God, all worth watching IMHO.

 

Wiki page has a table halfway down with links to the page for each moonwalker.

 

c'mon MPFC, everyone knows the moon landings were faked. Think about it - nowadays NASA can barely get a space shuttle to take off and land without it being blown to smithereens, and they haven't even pretended getting anywhere near the moon in what, 35 years? Yet we're supposed to believe that 40 years ago they managed to get a spaceship to land on the moon, astronauts got out, jumped around, hit a few golf balls and planted a flag, then took off again, got back to the mother ship, flew back to Earth and landed safely, using a giant parachute?

 

Here's the photos that prove it's all made up.

 

that spaceship's making a strange clanging sound

[maryportfuncity 10,662]

Try telling that to Buzz:

 

On September 9, 2002, filmmaker Bart Sibrel, a proponent of the conspiracy allegations, confronted Aldrin outside a Beverly Hills, California hotel, demanding that Aldrin either swear an oath on the Bible that he had walked on the Moon or admit that it was all a hoax. When Aldrin tried to leave Sibrel put the Bible in front of him and called Aldrin "a coward, a liar, and a thief." Aldrin punched Sibrel in the face.[18] Beverly Hills police and the city's prosecutor declined to file charges. Sibrel suffered no permanent injuries.

[Anubis the Jackal 77]

Oh, that's lovely, Ronnie.

 

 

Here's the photos that prove it's all made up.

 

that spaceship's making a strange clanging sound

[Banshees Scream 110]

Let me just say that the people who seriously believe America never set foot on the moon are the same people who believe Elvis lives and they are the same people who believe Bush was fully responsible for bringing down the World Trade Center.

 

Now don't get me wrong because part of being intelligent in life is being skeptical.

 

But we must set a realistic perspective on our views instead of becoming a die hard believer of 'sources' which are neighbors to the magazines that make Jenifer Aniston in a bathing suit look like a 6 instead of a 8.

 

I once knew this Irishman who was most likely an illegal immigrant and he said 'being one step ahead of society is genius' 'being two steps ahead of society is insane'

 

There is a third step. It's believing the world is flat and it's believing the government releases cancerous chemicals in the air. It's means being one of those UFO denying researchers who can't just say 'Alright it's the government!

[The Miser 18]

Let me just say that the people who seriously believe America never set foot on the moon are the same people who believe Elvis lives and they are the same people who believe Bush was fully responsible for bringing down the World Trade Center.

 

Now don't get me wrong because part of being intelligent in life is being skeptical.

 

But we must set a realistic perspective on our views instead of becoming a die hard believer of 'sources' which are neighbors to the magazines that make Jenifer Aniston in a bathing suit look like a 6 instead of a 8.

 

I once knew this Irishman who was most likely an illegal immigrant and he said 'being one step ahead of society is genius' 'being two steps ahead of society is insane'

 

There is a third step. It's believing the world is flat and it's believing the government releases cancerous chemicals in the air. It's means being one of those UFO denying researchers who can't just say 'Alright it's the government!

 

I heard that Heath Ledger was going to out the US government's moon cover-up....

[Monoclinic 39]

Let me just say that the people who seriously believe America never set foot on the moon are the same people who believe Elvis lives and they are the same people who believe Bush was fully responsible for bringing down the World Trade Center.

 

 

Are they the same people who try to discredit Evolution and doubt that Mankind has a common ancestor with modern day apes?

[Banshees Scream 110]

Are they the same people who try to discredit Evolution and doubt that Mankind has a common ancestor with modern day apes?

 

Dear Monoclinic,

 

Assume that life is a (5 star film) which is three hours long. Evolution occurred for fifteen minutes during the second hour. My point was Darwin highlighted that scene 'which had never been done before' but it still doesn't provide how the film started or who if anything' directed it. Obviously you have either taken what I have said out of context or you have misunderstood my view entirely.

 

I say being skeptical is a method of defending your mind from believing what is not real. Monoclinic there is a way to have a skeptical mentality while being rational at the same time. The skeptical idiot might say 'Bush was behind the attacks on the World Trade Center' so he could invade Iraq.

 

We are all entitled to our own opinion and we are also entitled to criticize. Restraint is none. The entitlement of free speech makes all conversation valid.

[Anubis the Jackal 77]

blether...blether...

We are all entitled to our own opinion and we are also entitled to criticize. Restraint is none. The entitlement of free speech makes all most conversation valid.

[maryportfuncity 10,662]

S'cuse me for dragging the thread back on topic but one pleasing fact about our ex-moonwalkers is that some of them have an internet presence and allow us to study form. Age hasn't slowed Edwin Aldrin down a whole lot. By the looks of this he's still buzzin'.

[Madame Defarge 21]

12 men walked on the Moon, Nine Moonwalkers are still alive from 72 year old Charles Duke to 78 year old Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin. We're fast running out of Great War vets and Titanic survivors, here's another bunch to keep an eye on. 'Buzz' has had his battles with alcohol, a couple of the others have found God, all worth watching IMHO.

 

Wiki page has a table halfway down with links to the page for each moonwalker.

 

c'mon MPFC, everyone knows the moon landings were faked. Think about it - nowadays NASA can barely get a space shuttle to take off and land without it being blown to smithereens, and they haven't even pretended getting anywhere near the moon in what, 35 years? Yet we're supposed to believe that 40 years ago they managed to get a spaceship to land on the moon, astronauts got out, jumped around, hit a few golf balls and planted a flag, then took off again, got back to the mother ship, flew back to Earth and landed safely, using a giant parachute?

 

Here's the photos that prove it's all made up.

 

that spaceship's making a strange clanging sound

 

Right, but we did manage to hoist this contraption into space at some point. Actually it's all set to crash come back home sometime in February. Not to worry, it's only as big as a bus and the authorities are looking into the matter so I dont th acacccckkgjncmtlgkhu jub

[maryportfuncity 10,662]

Really interesting article in the latest Fortean Times about two Italian brothers who were able to listen in to communications between Earth and space in the early 60s. They - apparently - recorded sounds from some fatal incidents the Russians have never admitted to including at least two un-named comonauts (one of them female), in the early stages of burning up on re-entry and an SOS call from space that didn't alter position but became fainter. The latter is grim but highly interesting, suggesting a spacecraft off course and veering into deep space, if this is true the first human to leave the solar system has already managed the journey, not that the poor Russian involved knows much about it.

 

 

The Lost Cosmonauts.

[Canadian Paul 97]

Really interesting article in the latest Fortean Times about two Italian brothers who were able to listen in to communications between Earth and space in the early 60s. They - apparently - recorded sounds from some fatal incidents the Russians have never admitted to including at least two un-named comonauts (one of them female), in the early stages of burning up on re-entry and an SOS call from space that didn't alter position but became fainter. The latter is grim but highly interesting, suggesting a spacecraft off course and veering into deep space, if this is true the first human to leave the solar system has already managed the journey, not that the poor Russian involved knows much about it.

 

 

The Lost Cosmonauts.

 

And naturally, of course, the rebuttal. Not sure which side to believe, but interesting reading either way.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

Really interesting article in the latest Fortean Times about two Italian brothers who were able to listen in to communications between Earth and space in the early 60s. They - apparently - recorded sounds from some fatal incidents the Russians have never admitted to including at least two un-named comonauts (one of them female), in the early stages of burning up on re-entry and an SOS call from space that didn't alter position but became fainter. The latter is grim but highly interesting, suggesting a spacecraft off course and veering into deep space, if this is true the first human to leave the solar system has already managed the journey, not that the poor Russian involved knows much about it.

 

 

The Lost Cosmonauts.

 

If we assume that the Russians, in those early days, were merely figuring out the mechanics of Space flight, would it be fair to suggest that the first living being, from this planet to be thrust out beyond our solar system was actually the Dog Laika, gawd bless er.

A most upsetting end for a pioneering Pup.

[Monoclinic 39]

Really interesting article in the latest Fortean Times about two Italian brothers who were able to listen in to communications between Earth and space in the early 60s. They - apparently - recorded sounds from some fatal incidents the Russians have never admitted to including at least two un-named comonauts (one of them female), in the early stages of burning up on re-entry and an SOS call from space that didn't alter position but became fainter. The latter is grim but highly interesting, suggesting a spacecraft off course and veering into deep space, if this is true the first human to leave the solar system has already managed the journey, not that the poor Russian involved knows much about it.

 

 

The Lost Cosmonauts.

 

If we assume that the Russians, in those early days, were merely figuring out the mechanics of Space flight, would it be fair to suggest that the first living being, from this planet to be thrust out beyond our solar system was actually the Dog Laika, gawd bless er.

A most upsetting end for a pioneering Pup.

 

Calling all Astrophysicists. The geek in me would be quite interested to know, assuming the spacecraft is travelling along the longest axis of the solar system, how many years it would take to reach the furthest edges of the solar system using the average rocket speed equation (arse) and whether this is feesible within the timescale we have (first cosmonaut in space to 2008). I am aware that the Voygeur missions have reached the boundaries but did they take a short cut? Can a probe theoretically travel faster than a manned rocket (albeit one that has veered off course)?

 

If this could be relayed in a way Godper could comprehend, ping pong balls, satsumas and all I'd be most grateful. (I couldn't find the appropriate youtube so please enjoy these

soaked in a heavy syrup from the sun kissed shores of 'ona bleedin' lulu instead.)

 

By the way my question is a serious one, if anyone does know please confer your wisdom to me!

[maryportfuncity 10,662]

I'd like to call all astrophysicists as well, but in case they're not listening, we might run a crude mathematical model on this problem at work tomorrow. It's not exactly rocket science - heh heh - because in the unlikely event that an escaping spacecraft were the source of that SOS message the exact direction of escape would be a major factor in determining where it is now but, I'll got one of the more anal types in the office to compute the planets at the time and try and get a figure to the nearest billion miles or so.

 

It struck me as odd that a spacecraft back then would have an SOS beacon, I mean it isn't like they'd send a military helicopter up there to rescue it. Then again, mebbe the beacon was intended for touchdown emergencies. Or mebbe the whole thing is tosh.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

Im not too hopeful that the astrophysicists would be able to provide an answer.

The Pioneer 10 space probe, launched in 1972, is, apparently slowing down as it reaches the furthest corners of our Solar system, nobody understands why, however, it may mean a comprehensive rewrite of the laws of Physics.

The timescales we work to appear not to work in outer space.

PS: If somebody out there can correct me, I believe that the Voyger probe, launched later ( 1973?) has actually travelled further than Pioneer 10, I assume its travelled another route?

[CarolAnn 926]

Im not too hopeful that the astrophysicists would be able to provide an answer.

The Pioneer 10 space probe, launched in 1972, is, apparently slowing down as it reaches the furthest corners of our Solar system, nobody understands why, however, it may mean a comprehensive rewrite of the laws of Physics.

The timescales we work to appear not to work in outer space.

PS: If somebody out there can correct me, I believe that the Voyger probe, launched later ( 1973?) has actually travelled further than Pioneer 10, I assume its travelled another route?

 

The NASA Voyager website probably has the information you want.