**Warning**, ignorant media jackels ahead...

So earlier today I posted a link to a series of links to a story with which some people are trying to invent news they hope will prey on the gloom-n-doom fears about launching human beings into space. Yup, you guessed it: My dander is up yet again!!!

If you haven't, at least peruse the 4 links to aquiant yourself with the subject matter, namely the initial acceptance testing of the next shuttle flight's External Tank (ET). Apparently, during one of the last tests at the facility where they are made, one of the sensors that postponed last summer Return to Flight launch had an errant reading. These ECO sensors essentially act like part of the fuel gage in your car. When they indicate the fuel tank is empty (or very near it), they send a signal to a computer. In your car, it turns on a little light and sometimes makes a dinging noise. In the Shuttle, it says that its time to shut down the Main Engines if they are still running. The are necessary for safety in case the engines use too much fuel and the shuttle runs out of gas early (which could cause the engines to go bang). Or if the sensors tell the shuttle to turn the engines off too early, they may not be able to get to the orbit they want to (for the next mission that would mean not making it to the Space Station which is the whole point of this next trip).

So we've established they're necessary. When NASA couldn't nail down the problem last summer, they switched out the entire ET for another one and had a good launch. Cool. What blows my mind is that even though the tank hasn't been at the launch center for very long, people have already posted news updates about how there is a bad sensor and they are going to have to take the tank apart to fix or replace it and it's going to mess with the planned launch schedule. You can read more from the articles if you like; that's the gist.

Okay, Aviation Week & Space Technology is a well-respected publication and seems to give this story the right amount of attention, which is not very much at this point. They go on to describe some other concerns that the shuttle managers are trying to address right now that are a little more critical. Great; unbiased, factual reporting using facts gathered from interviewees with names.

The other 3 stories? Are you serious?!?!?! Granted, one of them is a blog from a newspaper writer in Orlando, but the other two are "news outlets". The one that surprises me is the MSNBC story. This putz, who according to the little bio at the bottom of the page spent over 2 decades AT NASA, is using a BRITISH BLOG AS HIS SOURCE OF INFORMATION!!!! Read here:
On Tuesday morning, the independent British-based NASASpaceFlight.com Weblog quoted sources as saying that there was a "99 percent chance" that the sensors would need replacing, and that the operation would set back the launch until July at the earliest.

WTF!? Does this guy not have a former co-worker or at least a name to call and get info? Maybe it's better he's not still at NASA (speaking of his little bio, I have no idea what an "Orbital Designer" is). Plus, he uses the WRONG EXPLANATION OF THE ACRONYM!!! Shouldn't NBC's "expert" know these things? And SHAME on him for his little statement at the bottom about how a source (unnamed of course) told him that there have been an increase in accidents lately due to overworked employees. Hmmmmm. They stacked the Solid Boosters some time ago, the ET got there last week and it's been so bad that people are working quadruple shifts. Sorry pal, I'm not buying in that easy. But it was a nice way to lay yourself an "I-told-you-so" foundation if something, God forbid, happens on this next flight.

Now these sensors may be bad and have to be replaced. And the launch might push until July. But am I the only one who detects a large amount of pre-mature naysaying and alarmist approaches? The shuttle folks are quite upfront that this is very premature. If there is indeed a problem, they will fix it. No need to put the cart before the horse for the sake of a news story. But wow, if someone with an anonymous source in a foreign country that hasn't exactly wowed anyone in space says there is a problem, then stop the presses!!! Might as well cancel the May launch date because of it.

Incidentally, there are 4 of these sensors. The original launch criteria stated only 3 of the 4 needed to be operating to be within launch limits. They changed it to all 4 during the post-Challenger safety melee. Which is fine; requirements can and should be updated as we learn. The fact still remains though: the shuttle is the most complicated machine ever built. The ET may be essentially a gas tank, though it is a gas tank with a 1/2 million parts. And one of those parts gave a goofy reading during a test. Yes, things break. No, you will never launch with everything working perfectly (that's why there are 4 sensors in the first place). I think the media would do well to cut the agency a little slack. These people go to work every single day paranoid of making a good old fashioned mistake.

I also find it entertaining that only one news source really quantified the problem. One of them stated that it was "out of phase" and "off by 2". 2 what? 2 phases? 2 radians? 2 gallons? 2 miles? 2 widgets? Hell, a simple "it does not work" or "it's broke" or "it didn't act right" would be fine. By the way, one source (in an effort to overload the readership with technical jargon) did say 2 ohms. Although it didn't mention what were the acceptable limits (or what constitutes off-nominal if you like the big words).

I'll wrap it up echoing something our Captain hit squarely between the eyes in a comment to my Grrrr earlier. This not-yet-an-issue thing with the ECO stuff is a good way of seeing the "experts" don't necessarily know what they're talking about. Now they are news folks and NASA has done some pretty underhanded things in the past to keep things quiet, so their professional news "guts" are telling them to dig. Great. Just do yourself a favor and do a little research before you open your damn mouth and embarrass both you and your organization. One of the few ways I found comfort in the days following the Columbia break-up was laughing at the "experts" on the news. I left my job at NASA the day after Columbia launched, so I still felt involved 13 days later. A lot of fellow residents of America's Rocket City and I were amused at the experts on national news channels & shows (it was weirdly comforting to walk into any bar that evening and see the same look on everyone's face. I'm sure I had it too). These morons talking about how Columbia was on its way back from the Moon or that it had just left the Space Station (it couldn't go to either of those places; the average shuttle orbital altitude is about 1/1000th the distance to the Moon) on national TV were somehow funny. The sad part is that's where people "learn" about the nation's space efforts. Most folks don't know such things and now they apparently have nowhere reliable to look. Rest assured, I'll be laughing at them as May (or July) approaches. If you hear something that sounds stupid and/or ridiculous, it probably is so feel free to laugh yourself silly.