Spring Break
Safer space flight needed
Michael Bertacchi
Issue date: 7/6/06 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
Independence Day celebrations have long been synonymous with firecrackers, smoke bombs and rockets. However, this past Fourth of July may have had more rockets than most of us would have liked.
While Tuesday's celebrations were rocked with the news that North Korea went ahead with missile testing plans by firing seven missiles, one of which being the long-range Taepodong-2 missile that has been in the news for the past few weeks, another equally important rocket story involving what could be another potential NASA shuttle disaster went seemingly unnoticed.
After being delayed due to weather, the launch of space shuttle Discovery seemed set. That was until it was discovered Monday that a piece of foam insulation had broken off the shuttle's external fuel tank.
Despite the news of this potentially dangerous crack, NASA went ahead and launched the Discovery anyway on Tuesday after engineers cleared the shuttle for launch, saying that there is nothing to be concerned about and that they were not worried about the additional chipping away of the same foam that doomed the shuttle Columbia during the Discovery's launch.
While it is hard to argue against NASA's judgment due to long list of safely-accomplished missions, the lingering thoughts of what happened to the Columbia and how similar the current problems facing the Discovery seem to be cannot help but fuel the concern that NASA might have sent seven more astronauts to their deaths.
The thing that really sticks out in the mind right now is knowing that NASA still hasn't come up with an alternative mode of transportation. In the years since the Columbia disaster, one would think that NASA's number one priority would be to design a safe and practical vehicle that would not pose such risky scenarios as the shuttle and its fragile ceramic tiles and insulationary foam. Instead, what we get is another dicey shuttle mission that finds those aboard the Discovery spending a good portion of their time trying to figure out whether or not the vessel can withstand reentry rather than focusing on their respective missions.
Space exploration is very important to the expansion and documentation of human knowledge, and quite possibly even the future survival of the human race. To say that the risks NASA willingly takes to further these important ideals are unnecessary would be unfair; the risks are worth the potential rewards. Taking unnecessary risks, however, is not only dangerous but downright stupid. There are better, safer ways to further explore the "final frontier."
While Tuesday's celebrations were rocked with the news that North Korea went ahead with missile testing plans by firing seven missiles, one of which being the long-range Taepodong-2 missile that has been in the news for the past few weeks, another equally important rocket story involving what could be another potential NASA shuttle disaster went seemingly unnoticed.
After being delayed due to weather, the launch of space shuttle Discovery seemed set. That was until it was discovered Monday that a piece of foam insulation had broken off the shuttle's external fuel tank.
Despite the news of this potentially dangerous crack, NASA went ahead and launched the Discovery anyway on Tuesday after engineers cleared the shuttle for launch, saying that there is nothing to be concerned about and that they were not worried about the additional chipping away of the same foam that doomed the shuttle Columbia during the Discovery's launch.
While it is hard to argue against NASA's judgment due to long list of safely-accomplished missions, the lingering thoughts of what happened to the Columbia and how similar the current problems facing the Discovery seem to be cannot help but fuel the concern that NASA might have sent seven more astronauts to their deaths.
The thing that really sticks out in the mind right now is knowing that NASA still hasn't come up with an alternative mode of transportation. In the years since the Columbia disaster, one would think that NASA's number one priority would be to design a safe and practical vehicle that would not pose such risky scenarios as the shuttle and its fragile ceramic tiles and insulationary foam. Instead, what we get is another dicey shuttle mission that finds those aboard the Discovery spending a good portion of their time trying to figure out whether or not the vessel can withstand reentry rather than focusing on their respective missions.
Space exploration is very important to the expansion and documentation of human knowledge, and quite possibly even the future survival of the human race. To say that the risks NASA willingly takes to further these important ideals are unnecessary would be unfair; the risks are worth the potential rewards. Taking unnecessary risks, however, is not only dangerous but downright stupid. There are better, safer ways to further explore the "final frontier."
Be the first to comment on this story