You guys collectively sound like the general public. Not a shred of proof yet and somehow you've already stated it was the guys flying and the public should take control. Sit back and think a little. If you fall into the media hype you're no better than the rest.

The astronaut that drank did so AFTER the flight had been canceled. That's like getting nailed for drinking when we get to a hotel. The second time the individual went on the Russian rocket and wasn't even part of the crew. Hang him up on the cross right guys?

 

Military aviators never drink the night before a flight There is that 12 hour bottle to brief rule and free from all the effects of alcohol...........of course it's adhered to. If true, not surprising but it certainly wouldn't mean an astronaut was loaded going on a mission, at least we hope.

 

Like any place there's some goofy people or policies but if you look into closely who's got all the work for the 2nd round of moon trips and the first human to Mars trips and you'll see that NASA has indeed "gone totally public". (Actually, if you think about it, its the other way around). In the new exploration NASA will be basically only be administering it. (Never mind we've already been to those places several times). This is one of the reasons I lurk on this list, its where I used to work before the new space exploration schemes (that "redirected other NASA funding") and why I'm having/wanting/trying to get back into flying.

 

Don't forget the pills that make you stay awake!

 

TD...There is a lot more to this whole affair. Its not going to be pretty when Congress starts asking questions and they will.

The pilot in question was drunk. He was going to fly into space drunk. The mission got cancelled. He then got into a T-38 and flew back to Houston from Florida. He flew - he didn't sit in the back of the T-38. The aeromedical board didn't press for more information because they wanted a 'total picture' of the culture of the astronaut corps as far as behaviour / drinking went. Thats why you have stories and not exact dates / times / names. Its the only way the guys / gals would open up about the program. No one wants to be a 'wet blanket' at NASA...

NASA is going to investigate. I don't know how that investigation will go. It may be different or it may follow the same rules as the independent board.

One thing you should know. The astronauts have access to drink during the whole time they are in quarantine. The facility where they stay has a well stocked bar and they can drink up to the launch if they wish.

-LAFF

 

Wait...I should say its presumed he flew back to Houston. The board didn't press the issue but its known that astronauts qualified to fly the T-38 use it for their travel to/from Houston to Florida.


-LAFF

 

As far as the drinking in Russia...Well...What happens when you're TDY stays TDY...

-LAFF

 

Being a naval aviator with 14+ years in, this just doesn't surprise me

 

No, companies need to make money. What money is there to be made in sending people to orbit or to the moon? What financial motivation would a private company have for space exploration?

What benefit is manned space flight other than a thrill for the people going? People are expensive. Remember that industry gains profit when excess need for people is eliminated. (Think robots on an assembly line, and no Flight Engineer in a 777). Are unmanned operations not quicker/cheaper/faster/as well as more capable due to being able to tolerate things humans can't? (remember that unmanned fighter aircraft that pull gs that humans can't take are coming)

The Space Shuttle was and still is the ultimate for it's purpose. Do you know of anything better that is currently operational?

No, space exploration is not profitable for a company, and it may be questionable for a government to divert much needed resources that are needed inside our atmosphere.

 

Companies can frequently make money any way they want. NASA has already sent multiple unmanned probes to Mars for a reasonable $700-$800 million, total cost. They collected much more data than a manned mission to Mars can ever hope to. The Moon/Mars initiative is a 30 year program, and is supposed to cost $400 billion. But some number crunchers at NASA, who are familiar with NASA cost overrun history, estimate it to be closer to $800 billion, or even more. (I've heard a trillion, and for what, exactly?) Let's see, it went to two primary contractors, with NASA essentially administering it. Those two contractors will be making some serious money. Even if it never flies (and there's a good chance it won't - I may not live long enough to find out), there's serious money in that program for "private companies". One of the sure fire mechanisms for the profit in that program will be the circular argument between everyone: "Oh, its those TCO's" (Technical change orders).