Yes. It. Does.
NASA has scrubbed away as much foam as they think they can off of the tank in areas prone to sloughing off, and as a result of this strike event, they’ll modify the tank assembly AGAIN. You say “fix the problem” - the fix requires iterative testing through launch at this point. Analysis didn’t predict this, or did not predict it with a high probability, but reality shows differently. So the tank will be “fixed” in the suspect area. Sometimes, there is no substitute for flight testing, and that is what this amounts to. The analytical “fixes” for the foam shedding has picked up the obvious problems and addressed them.
My objection to your line of thought is that you are embarrassed by something that ONLY the US can achieve at this time. Is it a perfect, IMMACULATE achievement? No. NOTHING IS. It is a gov’t progam, and WILL ALWAYS be bent to political needs.
It is still a wonderful thing, though there is significant risk.
A lot of the risk is reduced or eliminated in the new spacecraft system, but it is still in development. Until it deploys, Shuttle is the way to orbit for this sort of work.
I find your embarassment to be embarassing.”
Really ??? Well this Depends on how you look at it NOW if I was not in the composite business obviously my comments would be different,Plus my decisions Crew oversight, material selections could get someone killed and I could not live with that easily!! Which brings us to this point that you seem to find comical; I do not BTW What I do find ludicrous is the fact that this seems to be a problem NASA can't fix and I do not want to hear the new vehicle thing!! that is saying that keeping the foam on the tank is imposable..Maybe what is needed is a new crew.
I submit that you do not understand the problem, nor do you understand flight testing. I find nothing you have said to be humorous, rather it is quite alarming the level of unreal perfection you and those like you demand on an experimental program.
YES. I said EXPERIMENTAL. The STS is not an operational vehicle, and is not intended to be. Experimental programs carry risk, and would be somewhat worthless if they didn’t.
As for the materials on the tank, it is what it is. I didn’t say I like the funky eco-foam, but there is a constraint involved that is now NOT in NASA’s power to reverse. Halting all flights until a new vehicle with the design flaw eliminated is not an option.
As for the impossibility of keeping the foam on the tank, it is certainly not impossible, but it apparently not something that can be GUARANTEED. As I said earlier, you are confusing an operational program with an experimental flight test program. The development costs and timelines are much longer and more demanding for operational systems. The STS is accepted as an experimental program, and is how flight research has always been conducted.
I can understand your desire to stay away from experimental programs, and I can’t really blame you. But to assuage your falsely-applied sense of outrage, and to address your misplaced sense of embarrassment, please consider that the flight crews and mission specialists know that a STS flight is not a drive to the beach.