NASA Clamping Down On ISS Crew Reports? 107
TOTKChief writes: "After stories of air quality problems and other fun glitches on ISS, NASA Watch is reporting the following: 'NASA Seeks to Suppress ISS Crew Reports.' This is from a status message sent out to NASA and contractor ISS program office Staff: 'Notes from today's staff: The Ships Log, sent down almost daily from the ISS crew, will no longer be available on the web due to legal concerns with the freedom of information act. A process will be put in place to make them available to those who need it, IMC, Flt control team, etc.'" Considering the huge advances made in astronaut safety since the space program began, it would probably be comforting to hear about problems being solved in space rather than brushing them over with silence. And when there are problems, doesn't the public have the right to know? (Whose dollars put those folks up there in the first place?)
Red shirt? (Score:2)
Supplement: Redshirt Riley has received a head injury, apparently while exploring under a high rock shelf. He reports only hearing a loud sound and jumping before being struck. After examination by Dr. McCoy he has been judged capable of continuing duty.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
I worked at Ames RC in Moffett Field, and one of the biggest problems with getting actual work done was the 'consumer crowd'. It is exceptionally difficult to get work done, when you do have the tax paying citizens keeping track of you and some of them will actually be able to come into the lab and bug you.
A media silence on things would help this problem, and thus provide more efficient workplaces. I still don't think that silencing everything is a good move though.
Re:This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:2)
NASA is finally learning from the Russians (Score:2)
To quote the show...
"After fourteen minutes, the fire burned itself out. The next morning, Jerry's NASA support team arrived at Russian mission control near Moscow with no idea that there had been a fire on Mir. The Russians had never informed them."
The Russian space program has allways been extremely secritive, and with tight budgets on the line at NASA, I imagine that they are paraniod about a tarnished public image that could lead to even more budget slashing.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Paying taxes doesn't buy much (Score:4)
Re:This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:1)
- By the time anyone realises that there's a problem, it'd be so old news that nobody would pay attention.
Oh, come on, that's just ridiculous. Can you imagine them trying that at a press conference?- "So how are the astronauts on the Endeavor doing? We haven't heard from them in a while."
They may have their reasons, but that sure isn't one of them."Oh, they died months ago."
"What? And we're just hearing about this now?"
"Come on, it's old news. Next question."
More likely it's to limit public criticism during a catastrophe until it's finally resolved, one way or the other.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:5)
Fine by me. I want people to think about this. I'm not saying that I'm right--hell, I'm an engineer and I should be wrong some of the time, because otherwise peer review is useless to me...
MMQ's? Most people who would have such an attitude don't have enough technical knowledge to complain. Outside of the areas that I work in, I know that I sure as hell don't. Something could happen to the station bus, and I'd be like, "Ummm, okay." Now, fsck up EXPRESS Rack or the Vacuuem Exhaust System/Waste Gas System, and I'd know.
Actually, we do. The process of building space flight hardware demands it. You build something to spec and drawings. You test it. It fails--and let me tell you, no matter how well you design the thing in the beginning, it will fail. [I know, I design tests to break things. I usually piss off the design team.] You document how and why it failed for two reasons:
So yeah, that's why you open up everything. It's also why you document everything. The other thing to think about here is quantity. Ten of something is a lot in space stuff. We have four work STS orbiters. We've had five operational. Each is very different, although they were derived from the same initial design.
Tell that to the guys who worked on Apollo, eh? They had an unrealistic deadline and met it with four months and eleven days to spare.
Micromanagement can be a huge problem. NASA has cut management back too far in some areas and not enough in others. The communication pathways stink. Happens on the commercial side, too--our payload's commercial [the first commercial one, actually, so we're breaking new ground all the time...].
--
Legal problems? (Score:1)
---
Wrong. (Score:2)
There should be a mod of "-1, Just Plain Wrong".
Re:This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:2)
--
Food for thoughts... (Score:1)
I wonder what the legality of US law is up there in space.
As far as I know, they have not yet annexed "the universe" as a 5(x)th state now have they ?
Re:Just like Roswell, man! (Score:1)
* replaced a potentially malfunctioning comm unit outside the station
* checked the unit; it works and shows no signs that it will stop soon, decide to put it back in and see if it fails
* go EVA to replace unit again
* floating away in space
Re:The air system problem (Score:1)
FOIA or Not. (Score:1)
Many of us spend a great deal of time putting together sites and spreading information about the good things that NASA is doing now. Stopping the logs (which are very popular) is a step in a very wrong direction. Now that NASA has become semi-popular again they're feeling the pains of that popularity and IMHO dealing with it in the wrong way.
Anyone have information on how the General Public can complain about this directly?
TomlinXS
End-run around NASA? (Score:3)
If this is the International Space Station, shouldn't it be possible to end-run around Dan Goldin by getting these logs from one of the other space agencies? Russian, Canadian, ESA, etc?
Required reading before stepping on soapbox (Score:5)
(1)(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order;
(2) related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency;
(3) specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than section 552b of this title), provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld;
(4) trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential;
(5) inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency;
(6) personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;
(8) contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions; or
(9) geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.
When people say they are using the FOIA to refuse information, they may have meant to say that they are using the FOIA to show they are not required to give it to you. Give NASA a break. They give a lot of great info that they could easily justify not giving, but when it comes down to it, they are scientists who are excited and happy to talk to people about their work.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
Re:This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:1)
---
I'm not ashamed. It's the computer age, nerds are in.
They're still in, aren't they?
Re:Richard P. Feynman (Score:2)
James Gleick. Try here [amazon.com].
Re:What is this? (Score:2)
Re:This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:1)
Re:NASA's love-hate relationship with the public (Score:1)
Gee, we've lost a whole bunch more people to the automobile and liquor industries over the years, and hardly anyone has ever suggested "Let's stop it all!"
Despite my avowed disinterest in most television, I paid to rent "From the Earth to the Moon." I also rented Apollo 13 (the movie, not the left-over hardware). Both showed engineering as seat of the pants problem-solving, emphasis on the solving... geek heroes.
Why not publish the logs? What better way to get kids interested in problems worth solving? It's a short hop from learning about closed systems in space to realizing the whole planet is one, and solving our problems down here.
Remeber SkyLab? (Score:1)
Its not so much who puts the dam things up there its just that they all seem to come down in the ocean somewhere in central Australia.. Cheers.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
Re:What is this? (Score:2)
--
In space… (Score:3)
The irony is palpable (Score:1)
Yet another colossal NASA blunder. Stop worrying about how to prevent the public from seeing your mistakes -- worry more about preventing them in the first place.
Re:Red shirt? (Score:1)
Intercepting the signal? (Score:2)
I'd presume the transmission is encrypted, but if it's 40bit, let's get Distributed.net or EFF to set up a real-time cracking system.
One Upside (Score:1)
Are you sure this isn't a typo? (Score:1)
Semi-topical: Anyone else see this blurb [nasa.gov] about a webcast happening today. I'd be willing to donate money/food/mice/nubile virgins/etc. to anyone who can post an IP address of this webcast. Seems like double secret probation to me.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
They're not in a place that any of us can just go and visit to complain to
The efficiency issue is more of an issue the directors can take care of here on the planet. The people conducting the research and doing the work don't really have a direct means of being harassed by the consumers, AFAIK. I don't think this really effects efficiency that much, but it sure does raise the level of interest. It seems kind of odd NASA wouldn't want more people to know about it.
I've got somewhat mixed feelings about what the proper action is in this case also, but from a personal standpoint, I'd love to be able to read the logs freely. I don't think they necessarily 'owe' me the right to view the logs because I'm paying my tax dollars toward this. I'm paying taxes to benefit the society, whether or not that involves me looking at exactly what they are doing.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:5)
There is also a point about 'airing dirty laundry'. Now I DO NOT agree with just sealing all the logs in a vault and only those on a need to know can look at them. But at the same time the world isn't perfect. Glitches happen. You you want your neighbors to be able to know EVERY detail of your life? No - of course not. At some point freedom of information becomes an actual hinderance to getting the job done because of all the second guessing and 'monday morning quarterbacks' that are out there. For some jobs, it is important from getting from A->Z, not every last stupid little detail (and foulup) that took you to get there.
You develop payloads for the spacestation right? When you deliver your payload do you document every foulup, screw up, bad design decision, backtrack, and everything else that went wrong during the project? I doubt it. You produce the final thing, the specs, how it has passed the requirements, etc etc. Why doesn't NASA get the same treatment?
Saying this is 'tax dollars' or 'international' is just a cop out. People can't do their best work when the work under a magnifying glass.
(I personally do my BEST work when i have a boss i don't see for weeks at a time. It's the micromanagement types that want a status every 12 minutes that kill productivity).
j
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
>>>or 'international' is just a cop out. People
>>>can't do their best work when the work under a
>>>magnifying glass.
>Tell that to the guys who worked on Apollo, eh? >They had an unrealistic deadline and met it with
>four months and eleven days to spare.
I wouldn't put the Apollo gang even in the same ballpark as this. Part of it is the general media atmosphere now that loves a failure to get eyeballs. The Apollo team was given a TON of respect and their failures and screwups weren't trumpeted across the front page. A failure or a setback was 'par for the course' when you're doing something brand new that's never been done before. Nor for every little thing that went wrong were they hauled up in front of congres to justify themselves. They were allowed to do their job.
Re:What is this? (Score:2)
I know---I used to work for NASA. Everything we did was considered classified. When we asked why, we were told that it was to maintain NASA's image.
Public Servant (Score:2)
You forgot to add, "So get me a glass of water."
--
Re:Required reading before stepping on soapbox (Score:1)
I imagine some of you have worked for someone who said some uncomplimentary (and no doubt mistaken :) things about you... you don't want that on the web either. That may be much less likely to happen with astronauts, but they're governed by the same rules as geeks and the motor vehicles folks. Heck, even amongst the astronauts, if a crewmember needs to say something about another crewmember's performance, it needs to be said, in case it's important, and kept confidential, in case it's wrong.
That said, I think a depersonalized account should be made available, as even in NASA that sort of personnel information should be for management only.
engineering faults (Score:1)
What the ISS (or NASA) engineers need to work on is a quick way to get there. They need to figure out a way to launch a craft without months or weeks of preparation (i.e. at moments notice). That will be the only way that life in space will be probable.
Anyway, my props to all those who have made the ISS possible. They have tackled a major feat, and I hope that future missions to ISS are a success.
Nonetheless it's still a lie (Score:2)
"The Ships Log, sent down almost daily from the ISS crew, will no longer be available on the web due to legal concerns with the freedom of information act"
Which is basicly untrue, concerns with thge legalities of FIFA didn't CAUSE them to suppress. Rather political coernsn cqused them to suppress and FIFA **allowed** them to do so.
This kind of backwards politician weasal speak is pretty damn disappointing coming out of NASA'a official mouth.
I have an urge to write them and tell them so...
I'll tell you whose paying for it . . . (Score:1)
Not yours. You're paying for another Osprey VTOL experimental plane. Not mine. I'm paying for the S&L bailout. Still. And about 75% of the rest of the /. community is paying interest on the National Debt. The entire NASA busget is being supported by a small village in Ottumwa, Idaho.
Anyway, last I checked, the Voyager program is costing every man, woman and child about $1.87. So let's not start complaining about NASA's use of our money.
Re:NASA is finally learning from the Russians (Score:2)
It doesn't stop there either. I'm on the JSC mailing list for ISS mission reports and I was startled to read on day that the same Kurs docking system and Elektron systems that were causing many of the problems encountered on Mir are in use on ISS! In fact, I can recall reading a couple of weeks ago that one of the Kurs systems aboard the ISS was being returned to Earth for troubleshooting...I just shook my head. Maybe it's time we rethink the way NASA operates.
Re:What is this? (Score:1)
If this were the reason, I would be the first to defend the position; however, why continue to withhold the info after the next of kin has been notified and they have been given a few hours to notify other family and friends.
I would hope that in the case of death or injury to one of the astronauts, the press would be informed and there would be no reason that I can see, why the relavent log couldn't be posted at the same time the press conference was going on.
No it is definately something other then death or injury. But then it is nothing new for the US Govt. to hide info from it's citizens.
f.o.i.a. applied? (Score:1)
it troubles me that n.a.s.a is more concerned about the shine on their shoes than project results. peoples lives up there are at stake here; not some precieved public opinion.
What is this? (Score:5)
The Ships Log, sent down almost daily from the ISS crew, will no longer be available on the web due to legal concerns with the freedom of information act.
"concerns with the freedom of information act". What kind of bullcrap is this? How can you use the FOIA to block information?
They better have a good reason behind this. Whether it be for the crew's safety, or whatnot. I can see the concern if the logs include confidential information, but even in that case you can censor it.
Quick, send the crew a book on Morse code (Score:5)
short flash, short flash, short flash
long flash, long flash, long flash
short flash, short flash, short flash
Quick, to the space shuttle!
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
I meant something along the lines of controlled media release.. definitely not media silence. Let the flogging commence.
Re:Legal problems? (Score:2)
My guess is that they are squeamish about the medical stuff in exception #6...
(find the text of the FOIA here [usdoj.gov])
(b) This section does not apply to matters that are--
(1)(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order;
(2) related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency;
(3) specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than section 552b of this title), provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld;
(4) trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential;
(5) inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency;
(6) personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;
(8) contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions; or
(9) geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.
Any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be provided to any person requesting such record after deletion of the portions which are exempt under this subsection. The amount of information deleted shall be indicated on the released portion of the record, unless including that indication would harm an interest protected by the exemption in this subsection under which the deletion is made. If technically feasible, the amount of the information deleted shall be indicated at the place in the record where such deletion is made.
I'm not sure I get it. (Score:2)
Just my US$2e-2.
OK,
- B
--
Gee theres something New. (Score:1)
They downloaded a ships log to my backyard (Score:1)
Invasion from MarS (Score:1)
Borg.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
The air system problem (Score:2)
They need to stop using dirty socks instead of air filters. See what happens when the management decides to cut corners?
nahtanoj
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
I think I will opt for a wet noodle, if it's all the same to you.
P.S. - nice site
Just like Roswell, man! (Score:5)
Captain's Log - 1/10/2001 - 10 A.M.
* Checked air intake regulators - all normal.
* Checked heat regulation unit - replaced regulator.
* Visited by spaceship full of martians - played chess with them.
FOIA (Score:2)
Lawyers never cease to amaze me.
Right to Know? (Score:2)
While I agree with you in this particular case, in that I think we'd all be better off if NASA released this information, this argument never works. Try telling a police officer that "I pay your salary" if you want to see what I mean.
The US government keeps plenty of private information which is not publicly available. AFAIK, the only thing you're truly entitled to is the information it has about _you_. There are plenty of cases where the government justifies keeping information private on the grounds that releasing it can do harm (case panics, etc.) or be a threat to national security. Whether or not these arguments are valid are up to you -- but they certainly are legally effective.
-Puk
Think of their side (Score:2)
Yes, it's our money and they probably want to see more of that in the future. The public's perception of government run facilities is critical. What's worse is the fact that the press and even places like
Personally, I'd like to see what's going on just because I know that I'm not going to put on my tunnel vision glasses when I read the information. However, things like "oxygen leak" can be very minor depending on size, location and several other factors. But we all know that just those two words are enough to have a 15 minutes story on every news station in the country.
Why I submitted this... (Score:5)
I want to let you all know why I submitted this. It's important, and I think you'll agree if you think about it.
We bitch here all the time about open source, free as in [speech|love|beer|money from a wrecked Brinks truck], etc., but we do this with the computing industry for the most part. When it's not about computing, it's about us as consumers.
Guess what: we are all consumers of the U.S. space program, whether or not we're Americans. I work on an international payload for ISS, one that has potential benefits that will help us all in medicine, optics, etc. Countless medical and science advances have come from space-related endeavors.
We want freedom of information. We want knowledge. We crave knowledge. Getting access to the ship's log is cool three ways:
I find that, all too often, people my age [early 20's] are going into aerospace for money and for a desire to keep things like STS 51-L [Challenger] from happening again. These aren't socially positive things, really. We should be in this to innovate, not maintain the status quo. NASA is doing a great job of the latter at this point, as humans remain parked in LEO except for those nice little day trips to the moon.
Keith Cowing is going to file FOIA's to get access to the logs. I think we here on /. should do something similar. Write your Congresscritter--they just got elected, remember? Write Bush, whether you voted for him or not, and tell him to get off his duff, select a NASA Administrator, and make damned sure that it's someone that will believe in opening up information to the public. And, if you're not an American, pester your local politicos--remember, this is the International Space Station.
End of rant. I am highly pissed at NASA PAO, but like that's new or somethin'. It's not like it's a national security interest anymore, boys...
--
Re:Right to Know? (Score:2)
That's a pretty fine line to be treading. The real reason why the public has a right to know isn't that we pay NASA's salary, but that our representatives oversee NASA and tell them what to do. The purpose of democracy is to force accountability on the government, and if mistakes can be kept secret, there's no accountability.
Obviously, there are certain types of information that we don't want the government putting on the Web right away (e.g., troop movements). But it's pretty dangerous to give the government a blank check to keep damning and/or embarrassing material secret forever under the pretext that it would "cause panics" if it were released. If there's no regular declassification procedure and if no one can review their decision without seeing the documents, then merely upsetting information could be labeled as panic-causing, and even the narrowest exceptions for national security would be abused.
During the Vietnam War, the U.S. kept all kinds of things secret, and tried to prevent the New York Times from publishing diplomatically embarrassing documents from the Pentagon Papers [mtholyoke.edu] under the pretext of national security; luckily, the Supreme Court [findlaw.com] saw through it. Even though the release may have hurt us by showing all the nasty stuff we did in pre-war Vietnam, it was the kind of information the public had the greatest need to know -- so that we could hold accountable the people who had acted in our name.
FOIA (WAS: What is this?) (Score:2)
They better have a good reason behind this. Whether it be for the crew's safety, or whatnot. I can see the concern if the logs include confidential information, but even in that case you can censor it.
It seems to me that there are two possibilities:
1) The logs contain what might be considered personal information about astronauts (Al Shepard needs to use the bathroom type stuff), and they don't want a "reverse FOIA" action against them to enjoin publication of sensitive material. They also don't want to hire people to censor the logs before publication, because this takes money and time (this sort of review cannot be achieved to legal standards using grep).
2) They're concerned that the publication of the logs sets precendent for a wider interpretation of FOIA.
At any rate, it seems that you can't escape lawyers, even in orbit. And I was hoping that the Vicious Knids would have eaten the lawyers by now....
It's because of Shep (Score:5)
What they DON'T realize is that Shep can just start transmitting using the Ham radio setup, so they can't keeo him down.
Go Shep!
Paying taxes doesn't buy much (Score:2)
Just because our tax dollars are spent on a federal program doesn't mean we have a "right" to know everything about the program that those dollars may have been spent on. Do we get to know the troop locations of our military because we paid our taxes? Do you have the codes to launch nuclear weapons because your accountant couldn't quite keep you from paying the government something this year?
Richard P. Feynman (Score:4)
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
In any event, I think cutting people off from things like this is never a good thing. If NASA wants to keep people interested in the space program, or even get them excited with it again, there is going to have to be some information dispersal. Telling people, "There's a thing up there." and 'cutting off' all coverage will not exactly get people excited about the possibilities.
But, that's just my opinion.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
Sig:
Actually, they use both (Score:2)
Linux Journal has an article [linuxjournal.com] about two programs developed and run for the ISS on Linux.
Check Linux-Equipped Astronauts Project [cantrip.org] for more info and a way to help.
Your information is simply incorrect. (Score:1)
The article also states that astronauts "run the station" using thinkpads running solaris. "Run the station" is something of a vague term.. I imagine the truly critical systems such as lifesupport are mostly autonomous. And certainly not being ran on windows, nor I imagine would they entirely depend on the two thinkpads (which probably arent space-certified)
what this is really about... (Score:2)
is sex
Yes - NASA doesn't want to lose their funding due to broadcasting pornographic ship's logs. They can cover this up just long enough to conduct the necessary experiments, then when the FOIA kicks in to open the door, they have the whole thing wrapped up and in video stores.
Re:NASA's love-hate relationship with the public (Score:2)
Yep. Personally, I've given up on watching STS launches. Why? If it blows up while I watch, I'll freak. I figure the next time we lose astronauts will be our last, because we're too namby-pamby these days to realize that it will eventually hit the fan, folks.
I wish some of the old, dead test pilots from the Edwards days were around now to blather to Congress. They walked uphill both ways to work in the snow, barefoot, AND THEY LIKED IT! =)
--
Re:FOIA (WAS: What is this?) (Score:2)
So, how could a transcript that includes the words, "Ugh! Who died in there?" qualify?
Re:NASA's love-hate relationship with the public (Score:1)
Space exploration is complex and dangerous, right from step one. That's what it seems much of the political and public structure fails to realize.
The loss of American and Russian astronauts over the years, the loss of satellites, the loss of space exploration craft. All continue to generate the "Let's stop it all! The price is too high!"
I agree with you, in that the price isn't too high. The gains are significant, whether for our curiosity or exploitation.
I'm amazed that the few space agencies have the low loss ratio that they do. The loss of the Mars Exploration craft...so what? Where does it say they must be 100% successful? Why not look at the craft that should have stopped working 20 years ago, yet continue to work, on the outer reaches of our solar system? Or those that finish their primary mission(s), only to find another (sometimes unusual) use for them? Like when they crashed the orbiter into the moon some months back to see if there was water?
When the Challenger blew up, it was bound to happen, politics, bureaucracy, and expenditure took over the system. Yet, each astronaut, and their families, on board the craft knew the risks, knew what they were getting in to. It still didn't stop them. I like to think that perhaps they knew what could be acheived and understood the big picture.
NASA and the Russians (forgive me, I don't know the name of their space agency) have a history littered with successes and failures. If all you can do is follow the failures, and not see the amazing successes in between, then you fall into the "politics, bureaucracy, and expenditure" category. Should the managers and politicians running NASA fall in that category, expect more disasters. But don't overlook what they have, and are going to, accomplish.
Vip
People who approve funding as fickle as /. flamers (Score:1)
No. I would say that people in congress are as fickle and unruly as slashdot flame authors. Therefore lots of negative data about a space project leaking to the public makes congress men and women want to do something, which ultamately results in decreased funding for space research projects, and control of projects taken out of the hands of scientests.
It is amusing however that the Freedom of Information act has been used to suppress disemenation of info over the web.
"Shit" (Score:2)
-russ
Re:What is this? (Score:1)
Um.. I DO work for NASA (Well, JPL anyway) and the reason we don't have unfettered public information dissemination is for ITAR regulations for the most part. The stuff we do is too high-tech to be exported. For most things, it just takes a blessing from the Public Information Office. But some things the PIO can't do. I've jumped through hoops before to get an expidited DoD paper clearance for a conference I was presenting at.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
Ever read Tom Wolfe's The Right Stuff? If I had a dollar for every time I've re-read Our rockets always blow up--which they did some of the time--I'd have paid for school by now.
I think examining the failures is good. NASA isn't a bunch of rocket gods. They foul up. We all do. No need to deify it. I think we've gotten very complacent about spaceflight--I had a friend on alt.books.tom-clancy once tell me that rocket science shouldn't be that hard, since we've done all the work before. Mmmmhmmmm.
Guess what: no one has built a space station like this before. Yeah, Mir is modular, but ISS will be bigger and have more end-users than Mir ever did. This is new stuff. It's an engineering marvel alone to get it built and working, much less any of the science that will come out of it. We're going to all learn a lot of lessons about space-based construction techniques--techniques that should help us build future spacecraft in LEO so that they can be modularly built.
--
Re:Richard P. Feynman (Score:1)
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
Re:NASA's love-hate relationship with the public (Score:2)
FWIW, the original predicted "major failure" rate for STS was 2% at design finalization. We've had slightly less than 1%, depending on how you define "major failure". [I haven't seen any of the other big things as "major", but worrisome, yeah.]
Oh, and the Russian space agency is the Russian Space Agency. =)
--
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
Me thinks it be time to shut down for the night.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
It has an odd tendency to grow some sort of algae. I've never had it really well-explained to me, but I'll ask around the office. The silver-plating apparently spurs on the growth. [Be happy to bow to someone on /. with much better knowledge than I--I'm just a poor dumb aero. =)]
U.S. President John F. Kennedy spoke before Congress on May 25, 1961, saying:
-- President John F. Kennedy, speech to U.S. Congress [hsc.edu], May 25, 1961.
NASA PAO has a nice history [nasa.gov] on Apollo. [Yeah, the same PAO I'm still hacked with. =)] As most folks should know, Apollo 11 landed on the moon 07/20/1969--about six weeks after my parents were married. =)
--
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:1)
Maybe a longer delay (Score:2)
Exactly! (Score:2)
I find it curiously odd that NASA emplores our gov't to give them more/stop cutting funding because as they say, space exploration leads to technology that trickles down into the commercial markets and it's our destiny to explore space and yadda yadda yadda. Now they are turning around and saying, we know best and it's best you not know, but let us continue our work.
What this really sounds like is that they don't want to catch shit for botched missions so people don't question their abilities and in turn lose funding. Buncha F-tards.
"Me Ted"
Someone should update their website (Score:2)
Re:What is this? (Score:4)
I don't know it, but it appears that they may have concerns over the possible embelishment, oversimplification, and ridicule that might be heaped on them by a media that knows little more than how to ridicule, oversimplify, and embelish.
Not that I think this will solve the problem, but it looks like they are worried that popular opinion will go negative and their budget will be cut again.
This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:1)
Given the mission-critical nature of things like oxygen supplies, to be seen as having KNOWINGLY made a dangerous choice of system would be catastrophic for NASA.
Secondly, if the astronauts die in space, they can always pretend that they're OK and fake the reports. Much better PR, and it's not like anyone can easily go up there and check. By the time anyone realises that there's a problem, it'd be so old news that nobody would pay attention.
IMHO, NASA is covering their backs to scupper the horrible PR disaster they're suffering, and to shield themselves from anything catastrophic.
Re:Mozilla (Score:1)
ISS = International Space Station? (Score:2)
Hmm, I think its about time we send up that open, Linux based, communications satellite so that the truth doesn't get silenced by our dear USA government.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
You have a point here, but I gotta tell you, folks, the crew is way too damned busy to worry about what us Earthbound types are thinking. If you don't have a radio link to them and you aren't a good friend of family, they could really just not care. =)
The CT's will exist whether the logs are open or not. Delaying it could hurt us in the end, although most people with the knowledge to help out if they've seen the logs are still in the business or are retired and know that they'll be called if the need arises.
--
Why assumptions are stupid (Score:2)
You seem to be sure that they wanted to supress this information. Perhaps, rather than assume that it is "backwards politician weasal speak" we could assume that they wanted the information available to the public (after all, it's good press and they did place it there to begin with).
Maybe there was an employee who was upset that information about himself was being distributed without his consent. The "legal concerns" could have been that the FOIA was supposed to protect that employees personal records and NASA was concerned that the employee would sue.
I don't doubt that there are some dirty politicians and corrupt lawmakers, but to assume that anything questionable is a result of those people is ridiculous. Act on your urge and write to them... maybe they'll tell you or it can be your undeniable proof of the giant X-Files-type conspiracy.
Also, as a FIFA-certified soccer referee, I can tell you that Fédération Internationale de Football Association [fifa.com] probably had very little to do with the suppresion of the NASA space logs.
Re:Why I submitted this... (Score:2)
Hell, even the ground crew are too busy to care. I want in on ops when our payload is up, but that's because I live off of stress. Actually, the ops panel for our payload should be pretty calm, but those five seconds of panic will be great...=)
As far as a buffer, I see your point. I think information overload--see Katz's feature on "The Regulon" from yesterday--will keep the panic level down some. We're too time-constrained to get too badly off about it. =)
What is this? People replying to threads with intelligent comments? What's wrong here? =)
--
NASA's love-hate relationship with the public (Score:5)
1) The semi-technically literate people who are interested enough to want to hear the gory details also appreciate that any project NASA takes on is by nature very complex and will have some problems. By withholding information NASA alienates those who are likely to be it's staunchest supporters.
2) There have been in the past and probably still are some real project management shortcomings at NASA. With the Hubble project (at least according to the text mentioned above) the central problem was lack of coordination between development teams. Finding out about successes and failures as they happen allows the paying public to react properly to applaud the successes and require improvements. Which brings us to the next point...
3) The federal legislative bodies tend to be punitive in reacting to NASA shortcomings. The attitude seems to be "You cost us a lot of money, we don't get a lot of immediately practical returns, so if you screw up you're history". Instead, the attitude could be "You're very expensive, but we value the eventual returns. Due to the complexity of your work, we will tolerate some mistakes. But if we see the same mistakes a second or (heaven forbid) a third time, then expect a management shakedown".
Personally, I am fascinated by all things technology and therefore am pro-space exploration, etc. The curiosity of the great ones and the hurculean efforts put forth by the minority are what has put at least part of the world into a new standard of living. Quashing the curiosity and freedom of the most daring hurts everyone.
It's obvious what they're hiding! (Score:4)
IT keeps the astronauts fit and entertained, adds nutrients to their bland space food, fights off robot monsters, detects and removes tumors, replenishes thinning hair and freshens the air.
Lady astronauts appreciate IT's ability to reduce painful monthly bloating and erase microgravity cellulite eruptions.
IT is the ISS crew's silent confident, biomechanical jack of all trades, and Tickle-Me-Elmo all in one.
Soon, we'll all know about IT, and will feel gratitude toward NASA for preserving the surprise.
Stefan
I am taking a deep breath now... (Score:2)
"NASA is deeply committed to spreading the unique knowledge that flows from its aeronautics and space research...."
NASA has some pretty cool stuff on their site. They don't have to show me the latest pictures or movies of space, but they do. Last I checked, there was no reason that I had to know the daily reports of what is going on during a space mission. I enjoy reading about it, but there is no reason they should feel responsible to give it to me. I pay taxes to get police officers around my neighborhood, but it doesn't mean I get to tell them what to do.
Maybe there is a completely justifiable reason to suddenly suppress the information. I know there are reasons that some information gets denied despite the Freedom of Information Act that many people cry about (but probably haven't taken the time or initiative to actually read and comprehend). I don't think my tax-paying, but mentally-deficient neighbor needs the info to build a nuclear bomb, so I'm willing to let it go that I can't obtain it myself.
NASA has made some pretty huge strides in its lifetime and I'm happy to see them able to continue. They give a ton of information and some of us are happy to see that. I would contest that the large number of people bitching about the requested denial of info weren't even aware that it was being given in the first place (and probably wouldn't have even thought about it if it wasn't originally). Now it's a conspiracy.
Status Reports Thus Far (Score:5)
Re:This is more than a trivial concern. (Score:2)