[net.space] NASA reliability flame

al@ames.UUCP (Al Globus) (07/19/84)

This is in response to Henry Spencer's flame.  I don't include the flame
since it was rather long.  I trust the paraphrases are accurate.

Henry Spencer asked:  'where are the shuttle test articles?'  Answer:
the Enterprise.  The Enterprise was the first orbiter built.  It was never
planned to go to space.  It was strictly a test article.

Henry doesn't appear to know much about how NASA actually works, although
he has lots of opinions.  NASA, contrary to Mr. Spencer's contention, does
not assume that everything will work properly.  Failures happen regularly
at both the subsystem (bad) and system (mission failure) level.  This is
taken into account and planned for.

Henry claims the astronauts should have had clippers to cut the pin off of
Solar Max.  For several reasons this would not have worked.

	1. Cutting the pin might have loosened the insulation it held down
	   leading to an over heated (failed) satellite.

	2.  A brief look at the the set up the astronaut was in makes it
	   clear that there is no way he could have reached the pin.

	3. Nobody knew that a pin was the problem for some time after the
	   attempt.

Henry seems to think there are no backup de-spin mechanism for Solar-Max.
This is untrue.  There are two systems that can de-spin the satellite.
One failed and was replaced by the shuttle crew.  The other was, in the
end, used to de-spin the satellite.  This operation was, however, full of
risk and was not attempted until all other approaches had failed.

People have a lot of fun thinking that NASA is a pack of overly cautious
turkeys.  These people, as far as I can tell, have never put anything
in space and frequently don't know much about real space operations.
Before you critisize the pros, I strongly suggest that you know A LOT about
what you're talking about.  At the least, read Aviation Week regularly.
That's not to say that things can't be improved.
I am saying that those who make the improvements will know where-of they
speak, usually via direct hands-on experiance.

Finnaly, aircraft are not spacecraft.  If a aircraft has a problem you land
it and look at it at your leasure on the ground with all the facilities of
a major industrial power at hand.  This is not the case for an orbiting
spacecraft.  Not only is access difficult in orbit, pre-launch testing is
difficult since the operational environment is radically different from
that found in ground facilities.