OV-102, Columbia

Feb. 3rd, 2003 at 3:50 PM

weather	:	mostly sunny
outside	:	7°C
mood	:	blah

With all due respect, I was sad but not that devastated when I heard about the OV-102. The crew knew there might be a chance they won't come back. They knew they might come back in pieces. Their families knew the risks full well too. It's nothing new.

51-L (Challenger '86) and STS-107 (Columbia '03) are two out of 113 missions. To dwell on the two that failed out of over a hundred that succeeded is incredibly shallow of us. Sorry. And I'm usually the "glass is half empty" type.

My heart has always belonged to the OV-105, the Endeavour. The Endeavour's next mission is STS-115 (no mission specs yet) and was scheduled to launch May 23, 2003 (not sure what's going to happen now that OV-102 has gone down). Its crew consists of Mission Specialist, Dr. Steven MacLean, from the Canadian Space Agency. [Only Buddy-Girl-K will understand the "Endeavour" and "Stevie Mac" references here =D]

I'm hoping that they learn from STS-107 so that future missions have a better chance of succeeding.

This also means that they'll build a new orbiter soon, which would make it OV-106. I wonder what they're going to christen the OV-106... I vote for "Excelsior". =)

Comments

( 9 comments — Leave a comment )

nightshift

Feb. 3rd, 2003 09:58 pm (UTC)

My favourite shuttles in active service are the Discovery and the Endeavour. I like their names. Incidentally, they're words I use every day. We have some mutual funds with the same names.

They're very Trek-sounding and evoke a sense of exploration and determination. I wouldn't mind the next one being named Odyssey.

Link | Reply | Thread

bride

Feb. 4th, 2003 10:08 am (UTC)

We have some mutual funds with the same names.

I think I saw them on the list my ex-FA showed me =D

I wouldn't mind the next one being named Odyssey.

That's a good one too...

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

bride

Nov. 2nd, 2004 02:31 pm (UTC)

Hey, just to let you know, OV-103 Discovery is scheduled for a mission in May/June 2005 =)

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

nickandsue

Feb. 4th, 2003 08:02 am (UTC)

thx for your honesty. i sorta feel the same way. haven't said it outloud - just thought it mostly. i understand its a great tragedy and shouldn't be ignored... but at the same time risking their lives is one of the fundamental facts that astronauts risk.

Link | Reply | Thread

bride

Feb. 4th, 2003 10:25 am (UTC)

Y'know, NASA's space missions are one of the few things about humanity that I'm optimistic about. I try to follow as many of the missions as I can and it steams me that nothing NASA does ever really makes the news until it goes wrong.

The general public never knows or cares one iota for anything that happens until something is broken or blows up. THEN everyone is plastering all over their journals where they were and what they were doing when Challenger/MIR/Columbia blew up, sprung a leak, or killed someone.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

green_paper

Feb. 4th, 2003 11:05 am (UTC)

I hate to say this, but humans have a morbid preference of reading about bad news over good news. How many news-reporting companies out there REALLY are there to report news? It's all about ratings and sales. And if explosions, violence, and disasters are gonna attract an audience, then that's what they'll write about.

Which scenario would you react more strongly to: if your loved one went to space, did some experiments, and came back, or went to space, did some experiments, and never came back?

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

bride

Feb. 4th, 2003 11:16 am (UTC)

Re:

I absolutely agree with you. And it says a lot about humans.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

nickandsue

Feb. 4th, 2003 11:25 am (UTC)

Re:

that's a really good pt!!!! what do people say - if its quiet it must be working correctly?? (i'm bad w/these american sayings...)

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

bride