Why am I not surprised

Messages
997
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Somewhere in Bremen, an Airbus engineer watched the coverage of the Artemis II launch and waited to be mentioned. She is still waiting. She didn't supply the lemon-soaked paper napkins.. the spacecraft she helped build kept four astronauts alive across a million kilometres of deep space. 33 engines, propulsion, power, oxygen, water, thermal control, the works.. and NASA's commentary managed to convey, with quite remarkable consistency, that this was an American operation that had, in some vague administrative sense, involved paperwork from abroad.
*leans forward slightly, the way one does when a genuinely good grievance has just been placed on the table*
The European Service Module (ESM).. built by Airbus, funded by the European Space Agency (ESA), designed and delivered by people who are, unmistakably, NOT American.. was, in the most literal possible sense, the part that kept four human beings alive in deep space. The bit between the astronauts and the void. You'd think that might warrant a namecheck.
You would be wrong.
NASA's coverage of Artemis II was thorough. Hours of broadcast. Extensive press materials. A genuinely impressive quantity of patriotic music. And somewhere in all of that, ESA's contribution achieved a kind of quantum invisibility: present in every physical sense, mentioned in approximately none of them.
It's not even that they were vague about it. Vague would suggest they'd tried. This was more like a conjuring trick performed in reverse.. instead of making something appear from nothing, they made the most vital part of the entire mission simply... vanish.
*drums fingers*
Airbus delivered the module. ESA signed the partnership. And NASA stood in front of the rocket and said, essentially, "we built a thing," to an audience that had no particular reason to doubt them.
The module was assembled by Airbus in Germany, with contributions from more than twenty companies across ten European countries. Britain, for its part, delivered the inner gimbal motor of the solar array drive mechanism.. the component that actually orients the solar wings so they track the Sun throughout the mission. Which is, when you think about it, rather more important than it sounds. The solar arrays are what power the entire spacecraft. The gimbal motor is what keeps them pointed at the Sun. Without it you have four very expensive decorative paddles.
The trans-lunar injection burn (the one that actually sent the crew toward the Moon) was so precise that two of the three planned trajectory correction burns were cancelled entirely. ESA's own director called it a demonstration of European know-how "to its finest." They had to say that themselves, on their own blog, because nobody else was going to.
The Europeans, to their immense credit, have responded with the restrained dignity of people who know exactly what they did and have decided, for now, to keep that information mostly to themselves and anyone who reads the technical footnotes.
Which is, if you think about it, the most European possible response to being erased from a press conference.
 
The Trumpistas dare not admit that high technology industry is now a global endeavour, lest the mighty Donald decides to "thcream and thcream until he is thick"

(my apologies to Richmal Crompton)
 
Yes, the first I heard of the ESM was that because of the strategic use of the fuel they IIRC something like 6 tonnes of fuel left and if the NASA team had had the foresight of such a bonus they could have retasked the ESM on a mission extension of its own.

The NASA commentary went on to say that on future Artemis missions that is what they would be doing (subject to the fuel would be available as it was this time) NB on this mission occasion the ESM was destined to be burnt up in the atmosphere!

PS in regard to NASA ommiting to say that the Artemis missions are (e.g. akin to the international space station etc so) internationally collaborative does very sadly reflect the Trump narrative re: 9/11 and Article 5 and him conveniently ignoring the 'blood & treasure' losses of other NATO members following that heinous attack :(
 
Last edited:
Somewhere in Bremen, an Airbus engineer watched the coverage of the Artemis II launch and waited to be mentioned. She is still waiting. She didn't supply the lemon-soaked paper napkins.. the spacecraft she helped build kept four astronauts alive across a million kilometres of deep space. 33 engines, propulsion, power, oxygen, water, thermal control, the works.. and NASA's commentary managed to convey, with quite remarkable consistency, that this was an American operation that had, in some vague administrative sense, involved paperwork from abroad.
*leans forward slightly, the way one does when a genuinely good grievance has just been placed on the table*
The European Service Module (ESM).. built by Airbus, funded by the European Space Agency (ESA), designed and delivered by people who are, unmistakably, NOT American.. was, in the most literal possible sense, the part that kept four human beings alive in deep space. The bit between the astronauts and the void. You'd think that might warrant a namecheck.
You would be wrong.
NASA's coverage of Artemis II was thorough. Hours of broadcast. Extensive press materials. A genuinely impressive quantity of patriotic music. And somewhere in all of that, ESA's contribution achieved a kind of quantum invisibility: present in every physical sense, mentioned in approximately none of them.
It's not even that they were vague about it. Vague would suggest they'd tried. This was more like a conjuring trick performed in reverse.. instead of making something appear from nothing, they made the most vital part of the entire mission simply... vanish.
*drums fingers*
Airbus delivered the module. ESA signed the partnership. And NASA stood in front of the rocket and said, essentially, "we built a thing," to an audience that had no particular reason to doubt them.
The module was assembled by Airbus in Germany, with contributions from more than twenty companies across ten European countries. Britain, for its part, delivered the inner gimbal motor of the solar array drive mechanism.. the component that actually orients the solar wings so they track the Sun throughout the mission. Which is, when you think about it, rather more important than it sounds. The solar arrays are what power the entire spacecraft. The gimbal motor is what keeps them pointed at the Sun. Without it you have four very expensive decorative paddles.
The trans-lunar injection burn (the one that actually sent the crew toward the Moon) was so precise that two of the three planned trajectory correction burns were cancelled entirely. ESA's own director called it a demonstration of European know-how "to its finest." They had to say that themselves, on their own blog, because nobody else was going to.
The Europeans, to their immense credit, have responded with the restrained dignity of people who know exactly what they did and have decided, for now, to keep that information mostly to themselves and anyone who reads the technical footnotes.
Which is, if you think about it, the most European possible response to being erased from a press conference.

Did they do all this for free or did Airbus just get paid to do a job, like any of the other jobs they do?

It was there job, why would they get a pat on the back?
 
Did they do all this for free or did Airbus just get paid to do a job, like any of the other jobs they do?

It was there job, why would they get a pat on the back?

I was just thinking the same thing, basically werent they subcontractors? Did the microchip manufacturers in China expect a callout too? Maybe the parents of the astronauts for producing the semen and ova that created them?
Ok, that last one might be extreme but seriously, I do a job, I do it well, yeah nice when you get a special mention but I don't expect it.
 
...yeah nice when you get a special mention but I don't expect it.
"Bind not the mouth of the kine that tread the grain" ... and don't pretend you did it all yourself?
 
"Bind not the mouth of the kine that tread the grain" ... and don't pretend you did it all yourself?
I literally have no idea what that means so Im afraid it's completely wasted on me.
 
Everyone who takes part in a project should benefit from the fruits of the project.
... and by extension, the people who are cheating, will harm everyone, because the kine (oxen) who don't get their share will starve and die, leaving no one to grind the corn and feed the village.
 
So, did they not get paid for their work then, kept / created jobs etc?
Another ancient saying, which comes in various forms, is along the lines of "Man liveth not by bread alone".

The corollary of this is that everyone should be given the praise they deserve, because only the meanest hearted person, would shower praise on a few, rather than on all who contributed to a success.
 
Last edited:
This thread is a shambles. :D My cousin is a project leader in Airbus he thought this was hilarious. He didn't have any involvement in the ESM-4, but should he have been credited as he works for the company that worked on it?

Nobody cares that Airbus did some work on it. Did Airbus credit all the people that made the parts for them? Do they credit any of their employees? Nope.

Do Airbus credit all of the companies that help them with other projects? Nope.

Did the cleaner get a mention? Nope.

Did they credit the company that provided toothpaste etc. Nope.

Land Rover didn't credit Ford when they used their engines, Toyota don't credit BMW when they use their engines. When I shoot a wedding I don't credit Sony.

Airbus were very well paid for the work that they did.

An absolute shambles of a thread this, purely concocted to to use as a beating stick for the yanks and Donald Trump.
 
Last edited:
An absolute shambles of a thread this, purely concocted to to use as a beating stick for the yanks and Donald Trump.

I have to say that's exactly what I thought, not that I support Trump, I think he's a complete moron and a dangerous human being, as are his zealots, but that's another "debate".
 
Shambles definition:
1 archaic : a meat market
2: slaughterhouse
3a: a place of mass slaughter or bloodshed
the battlefield became a shambles
b: a scene or a state of great destruction : wreckage
the city was a shambles after the bombing
c(1): a scene or a state of great disorder or confusion
an economy in shambles
(2): great confusion : mess

I think your shambles is a shambles. :LOL:
 
Shambles definition:
1 archaic : a meat market
2: slaughterhouse
3a: a place of mass slaughter or bloodshed
the battlefield became a shambles
b: a scene or a state of great destruction : wreckage
the city was a shambles after the bombing
c(1): a scene or a state of great disorder or confusion
an economy in shambles
(2): great confusion : mess

I think your shambles is a shambles. :LOL:
There's the Shambles in York...

 
There's the Shambles in York...
There's also the two volume "Bloody Shambles" by Christopher Shores and Brian Cull, which I gather is regarded as one of the best analyses of the Allied deployment of air power, in World War Two.
 
Hopefully this wasn’t a derogatory comment about the way language is used in Northern Ireland but who knows. Shambles here means mess, simple as that.
 
Hopefully this wasn’t a derogatory comment about the way language is used in Northern Ireland but who knows. Shambles here means mess, simple as that.
I think we were just clarifying the use of the word and providing useful alternative uses.

Of course, few of us have brothers, sisters, cousins (of both sexes) and whatever, in every possible field of human endeavor that gets mentioned here. We just make do with referencing what we consider to be reliable sources, to extend the discussion.
 
Everyone who takes part in a project should benefit from the fruits of the project.

True..but it's not benefit per se that's the issue here but acknowledgment. I mean, it really is some achievement as were all the other missions.

I have no idea,of course but maybe Trump had an input and the word went out..no credit to be given to. Europe. He loathes the EU as does Vance and,no doubt others in the Administration.
 
Describing a discussion as a mess seems bizarre to me.
Therein lies the issue. Gotta remember, 'tinternet is indeed "world wide" and therefore there will be some sayings / words that may not translate accross as readily as others. I got it, but then Im also Irish so...
 
Back
Top