Regularly Scheduled Geekery
with Adam Fast

Posted Feb. 7, 2010, 2:06 p.m. by Adam Fast

While I hoped to see Endeavour launch this morning, I have no regrets in a scrub or the lost time. While it's easy to say "oh dang" when a scrub like this happens, it's for the best.

As a private pilot, I have some experience in the weather factor stress, though not to the degree involved here. But I've experienced many times the unwritten rule that if a pilot makes a no-go call on weather, it is unconditionally accepted, no questions asked - at least by fellow pilots. (A questionable go is fair game if you disagree, and pilots will see that as simply an effort to keep the pilot population from decreasing by one that day) I learned this a few minutes after taking off to fly nearby for my checkride to prove my competency to an examiner. I turned back because I didn't like the clouds I was seeing enroute. I nervously called the examiner once back on the ground and apologized that I needed to reschedule and for wasting his time. His answer shocked me: "Son, a pilot never apologizes for the weather. It's beyond our control, and we have to make safety decisions as we see them. If you felt unsafe continuing, you made the right call, and that's most of what your training is about anyway. See you tomorrow."

Luckily for the launch director and weather officers the necessary criteria was decided years ago. The document I've seen is and dated in 1999. If current conditions don't match that document, it's not on the LD or Weather officer or any of us to make a judgment call as to whether it's safe - a committee of people with far more experience and knowledge than the vast majority of us have already made that call. Mission Control merely enforces the standard, and if you don't like the standard take it up with the policymakers. Subjective calls are impossible to make impartially when you're under stress or have a lot of people wanting you to make it one way over another. In the spacevidcast chatroom last night there were several people upset that NASA was wasting ~$1.4 million by scrubbing. Let's be frank - if the astronauts have only $250,000 life insurance policies, a stupid launch call already cost more than that. Then add the cost of the equipment lost, the severe anguish that anyone who worked on the mission would go through, the lost goodwill with the "average" citizens, a scrub is way cheaper than the alternative. Let's keep our people safe up there and not fret over 4 tenths of a cent per US resident. NASA builds these into their budget anyway.

I've similarly adopted weather standards I require before going on a flight. They're mostly mental, but they're law to me. I revisit them occasionally as my experience grows or proficiency increases or lapses to ensure I'm always operating safely - but revisits and changes with a particular flight in mind are NEVER allowed, nor are they allowed within a few days of a trip. This removes the emotion and "get-there-itis" that causes fellow pilots to lose their lives in an aviation accident.

We as the Space Tweeps want nothing but the maximum safety available for our astronauts and equipment - so I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir, but this is how I see it. I applaud the Launch Director for seeing something outside of parameters and doing the right thing - scrub. My sincere appreciation to those at KSC who did / are now or will be working the crazy hours to undo launch preparations only to redo them in a few hours. We appreciate you.

Most importantly, I'm happy to see that this morning we saw another display from Mission Control that they remain tough and competent.