However, NASA chief Mike Griffin has a one-word answer for those
asking if the agency would keep the shuttle flying after the deadline:
"No."

On 15 Mar 2007 15:52:21 -0700, "hallerb@aol.com" <hallerb@aol.com
wrote:

However, NASA chief Mike Griffin has a one-word answer for those
asking if the agency would keep the shuttle flying after the deadline:
"No."

Then the man is an idiot and should be moved to somewhere his talents
will be fully utilised. Shelf stacking in Walmart seems about right.


--

However, NASA chief Mike Griffin has a one-word answer for those
asking if the agency would keep the shuttle flying after the deadline:
"No."

Then the man is an idiot and should be moved to somewhere his talents
will be fully utilised. Shelf stacking in Walmart seems about right.

I don't think he actually said a one word answer. The last quote I heard was
something along the lines of we have 2010 as a hard date and it is our job
to deliver, or similar words. This of course is shorthand fudge for, Bush
will not be in office, and neither might I be when the new admin takes over.

On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:31:38 GMT, "Brian Gaff"

bria...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I don't think he actually said a one word answer. The last quote I heard was
something along the lines of we have 2010 as a hard date and it is our job
to deliver, or similar words. This of course is shorthand fudge for, Bush
will not be in office, and neither might I be when the new admin takes over.

"2010" didn't come originally from Bush. It came from the CAIB. Bush
and NASA both accepted CAIB's findings and recommendations.

Brian

Delays threaten station timetable

Future flights may be scrubbed

BY TODD HALVORSON
and JOHN KELLY ADVERTISEMENT

What impresses me Todd is that NASA always comes up with these
scehdules that look great on paper but dont have a chance of working.

Five a year...that was iffy pre Columbia...

The Columbia Accident Investigation Board said "recertify or retire by
2010".

The President of the United States said the Shuttle will be retired in
2010.

There is no money or time to recertify the remaining Shuttles by 2010.

You seriously expect the NASA Administrator to say anything else?

Your last couple of presidents, have both said some pretty silly things
that turned out to be complete and total bullshit - so I don't know
how that statement means much.

There is no money or time to recertify the remaining Shuttles by 2010.

... "By executive decree, I hearby declare the shuttle Endeavour
recertified until 2014". Next ...

Not that simple. Congress would hold hearings on how he intends to fly
the Shuttle beyond 2010 without the "system and subsystem level"
recertification that the CAIB clearly spelled out and both he and NASA
previously agreed to adhere to. If they don't like the answer, the
President doesn't get the funding, and no Endeavour until 2014.

Not that simple. Congress would hold hearings on how he intends to fly
the Shuttle beyond 2010 without the "system and subsystem level"
recertification that the CAIB clearly spelled out and both he and NASA
previously agreed to adhere to.

Not that simple. Congress would hold hearings on how he intends to fly
the Shuttle beyond 2010 without the "system and subsystem level"
recertification that the CAIB clearly spelled out and both he and NASA
previously agreed to adhere to. If they don't like the answer, the
President doesn't get the funding, and no Endeavour until 2014.

Hang on, do you really expect us to believe, that your president is
powerful enough to send 1000's of people to their deaths, year after
year, in some foreign wasteland, but doesn't have the power for a minor
administrative over-ride, that will only risk a handful of volunteers? Come
on ... pull the other one ...

Or it could simply argue that the 2010 deadline had been set based on a number
of flights. NASA isn't adding more flights, it simply had longer than expected
periods of downtime.

So, if you interpret the CAIB report as setting limits on number of flight each
orbiter could perform before recertification, it becomes easy to allow NASA to
operate beyond 2010 provided it doesn't add any more missions to each orbiter.

You cannot just keep a blind eye to the need of recertification after a certain
point has bene reached. But you can interpret the deadline in a way which does
not break the spirit/intents of the CAIB report.