I was born in 1973. I remember several key events from US history that have occurred during my lifetime. But there is only when memory that I share with most everyone my age. Challenger. It was my generation's Kennedy.
So when I saw the pictures of Columbia breaking apart on re-entry, I was immediately transported back to room 212 in the East Toledo Junior High School building. Disbelief. Shock. Sadness.
I'm anxious to read the reports. Columbia was old enough to buy beer. My knee is jerking in the direction of old age contributing to the shuttle not withstanding re-entry.
If nothing else, I'm having fun listening to the increasing redneck quotient from the eye-witness callers on CNN. In the heart of darkness, a kernel of light.
[edit] Quinn has some good comments up. Check em out.
Posted by danisaacs at February 01, 2003 10:22 AMOne thing people are quick to say is that the shuttles are again.. they're OLD. I read somewhere today (probably on a blog) that people don't drive cars that old - they replace them after a few years.
That's not a fair comparison. Indy 500 cars? They're retired aftr 500 kms of use. 500! The shuttles are like a big bus school you drive across the country once a year in the middle of coldest season and the hottest heat wave while towing a winebgo behind you. Except that they get tuned up afterwards by the best technicians on tyhe planet.
It's tough to compare shuttles and oranges. 20 years? The aircraft carier Enterprise CVN-65 is what, 40 years old? She'll last another 60 easy.
Posted by: Quinn on February 1, 2003 05:15 PMYeah, after listening to some of the engineers talk, this vessel was not yet half way through it's expected lifetime. I doubt very much that the age had anything to do with it after hearing what all goes into preparing one for a mission.
These leaves some real problems for the ISS. We are down to three shuttles. It makes things fairly inflexible in terms of being able to transport crew and cargo back and forth.
I'd rather we spent money re-building the fleet instead of wasting it on "missle defense". Of course, my spending priorities have rarely been in line with Congress'. :)
Posted by: Dan Isaacs on February 1, 2003 05:30 PMDan- apparently NASA was toying with retiring Columbia in 2001, but instead, they dumped 90 million in upgrades into it ('99, i think). It is a vehicle that withstands brutal forces and heat/cold cycles over and over again. Age may very well have been a contributing factor.
Posted by: dee see on February 2, 2003 04:30 PMI think they should of stuck with the program of building the new shuttle. They had already spent so much money on it already. I bet their kicking themselves about that one.
Posted by: Buck on March 28, 2003 08:54 AMi don't agree with you Buck i think they are right to spent money on it
Posted by: hentai on July 1, 2003 03:46 PM