Space fantasy meets reality as shuttle carries lightsaber

There's only one word that describes my reaction to this article...
Why?

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

They should say they jettisoned it, then sell it on eBay.

KNBC: Auction: Marilyn Monroe's Prescription Bottles[...]

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

Get Lucas to underwrite the space program out of his petty cash fund.

Yeah, why is a good question.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

Yes, why? With all the space junk up there, it will be just another useless object that something could run into. And how long will it remain in orbit? Take up Darth Vader's Tie fighter, fit it with thrusters and science instruments so it can do some useful observations.

__________________
I'm not a scientist, but I play one on the internet.
http://www.rrac.org

It doesn't make sense to you to jettison a lightsaber, but it makes sense to you to get a potentially defunct model that was meant for the silver screen (and not, indeed, for ACTUAL space flight) and use it as a real ship?

plus, his TIE fighter was built a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. which means it has logged a lot of miles and needs some routine maintainance, and has long since been superceded by superior models.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Get news coverage?

__________________
As above, so below

For the record, Darth Vader didn't even have a Tie Fighter. He had a Tie Bomber, going by the Tie Fighter videogame.

Good things, those. Could take up to 8 full laser blasts.

I doubt these publicity stunts can do any good. I think people [like me] prefer objective results from the space program.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

Bingo, that's my point.

How much acceptance can be gained from this? I would be willing to guess that you would lose as many people as you would gain.

And; the types of people that you would lose would be far more important than the ones you gain. In other words, I would rather have the support of one person who says "lets concentrate on science" rather than ten that say "Cool".

And; the fact that the public is so far removed from the decision, I'm not sure the gain will make any difference. This ain't Jedi Postal stamps where people are directly spending for it.

It seems like the movie people have SOOO much more to gain from this than NASA does, that there may be some underhanded stuff going on.

But; I don't want to point fingers, because the publicity people may have just been suckered, and convinced it would be cool for NASA.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Update: no details, but the there's a 2:20 video of the handover at the airport (with no narration or anything)
Chewbacca delivers lightsaber

It looks more like halloween at the airport.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

I don't have problems with publicity stunts if NASA gets something out of it, but I do have a big problem with the idea of adding more space junk. Also, I'm sure there are a lot of people that would like to have that prop. It seems sad to just throw it away like that.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Take it to the moon on the next manned flight. Just prop it up on a boulder. It would be there for thousands perhaps millions of years. And no danger of another spacecraft running into it.

__________________
I'm not a scientist, but I play one on the internet.
http://www.rrac.org

It's the NASA marketeers (er, uh, "Publicity Team") running roughshod over cooler heads who realize there are serious protocols in place to prevent the loss of a simple screwdriver because of the potential damage it could do.

And they're going to launch a light-saber? What if it accidentally activated and sliced through the shuttle?

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.

I would like to qualify that as "NASA gets the majority of the benefit".
If it weren't the 30th anniversary of the movie, and all the marketing going around it, then I wouldn't mind.
At least without some scientific basis for it.
Which is why these auctions occured in the first place. Somebody willing to spend the money on it would take the time to preserve it. (At least that was the explaination for the ST auction)

Now; why would somebody spend all that money for the light saber at an auction to just give it away to be destroyed? Another good indication that NASA has less benefit than others.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

i'm sure they took the batteries out. or whatever powers them..
what does power a light saber, anyways?

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

I guess nukeliar powerrrr!

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

The force of course.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Okay, I'm a fan of Star Wars and a space enthusiast, and I have to say, WTF?

Seriously, how does this do anything for anyone?

Publicity for NASA by tying it to the Star Wars anniversary? By doing a stupid PR stunt? That makes sense?

Publicity for Star Wars by having a movie prop fly in space? And then burn up? Huh?

I'm scratching my head hard on this one.

Maybe we need to start an internet campaign - Save the Lightsaber! Save some dignity!

i look at it like this- NASA is staffed by people that grew up with Star Wars and maybe were even inspired to look up and wonder how they could help get us up there.
the Skywalker Ranch is probably staffed with people that have friends that work at NASA, and some people that would be there if they weren't so good at making movies.
this is more to keep the workers at both places happy- it gives each group a boost in morale to know that the people at the other place are into what they are doing.
if Russia can have a guy hit a damn golf ball off the porch of the ISS for a few million $$$, then why can't NASA let a bunch of geeks (i mean that in a good way) have a little fun, too?
they've looked at the risks, and gave it the go ahead.
how long will it take for the guys at ILM- or even some kid at home- to doctor the footage of the release in such a way to make it look like it is activated before letting it go?

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Because; Russia is not bound by the same rules for raising funds.

I'd like to see how that is hitting the budget. If the costs of doing this are in the employee-benefits column, then I might be swayed into that thought.

But, in my mind, even if it is used to boost morale, I still disagree with it because there is more benefit being given to commercial ventures than it is to the morale. That's putting into the endorsement catagory which crosses the line.
It's almost like saying, NASA is making a commercial for IMG, but it's ok because the employees want to watch the commercial.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

NASA has been known to launch satellites for private companies before. there have been experiments on board the shuttle and ISS for private companies before. ever seen a Dell laptop conveniently float in front of a camera that just happens to be doing a live down link that is being shown on NASA TV?
how is throwing afoot long movie prop off an orbiting space ship any different than that?

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Not a whole lot of choices there, and things in orbit are rather important to NASA.
Experiments are fine... ISS we start to get into grey areas because of international agreements.
And who is gaining what money from who? Not only that, the laptop is an essential part of what's going on, and I don't know of any evidence that this is intentional. If it is, then where are the disclosures?

Now; things may have changed over time. But; If NASA is not allowed to sell ad space* and get some benefit in exchange, then why should they go with a publicity stunt like this.

* I can't find specific references, but that's what I've always understood.

What I can find, is the NASA Innovative Partnership Programs.
How does this light saber thing fit this directive?

It sounds to me like NASA is freely giving up some good income potential. If there's publicity to be had outside of NASA, then why not gain from it?

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

well, they can gain some good PR by having something other than drunk or psychotic astronauts or damaged heat tiles on the shuttle mentioned on the evening news.
this is something that doesn't hurt anybody- unless they accidentally activate it on board- and connects NASA with something that "feels good" in the hearts and minds of the people that foot the bill.
of course, there are always going to be the people that wish they were running the show so they could do things "right"..
for those people, i say start your own club. seems there was a thread around here somewhere recently about another option for conquering space better than NASA could ever do..

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

My issue is the balance of PR. The SW marketing people have a much bigger PR gain than NASA.
You're reading way too much into this. I disagree with this action only. That does not mean I have problems with NASA.

Call it opinion...but I have a very low tolerance for public entities providing free publicity to private entities. It's the same way that I have low tolerance for publicity stunts done just to get free publicity out of the news media.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

I have only seen the linked news articles. However, I expect there is some financial arrangement whereby Lucasfilms is paying for this event. Moviemakers rented NASA facilities (such as the Vomit Comet) before. They used the water training facilities in Armageddon. I do not think this is a financial expenditure for NASA.

That's part of my objection. I am one of those geeks staffing NASA that grew up with Star Wars. I'm on committee to run a science fiction convention in Houston, for gosh sake. But I don't get this. It is dumb.

My complaint is not NASA doing something for PR. My complaint is that what they are doing does not seem to me to be a positive PR move. It's at best a silly stunt. It's one thing to launch DVD's of Firefly to ISS so the crew can watch them any time they want* (which was done), it's another to throw a movie prop off the station because somehow letting it "into space" and then burning up some time later somehow sounds like a good attention getting device. Heck, I'd be less annoyed if they flew the lightsaber to ISS, then returned it to the ground. We do that all the time with tidbits and trivialities (flag patches, mission patches, etc) that are given out as souvenirs. That makes a lot more sense to me. 1) The lightsaber has been in space, so that tick mark is checked. 2) No space debris is added, so that is safer. 3) The lightsaber can be returned to the ground, then auctioned to fans not only as a high dollar movie prop souvenir, but one with a certificate of authenticity of having been "in space".

Throwing it overboard is dumb, it makes no sense, and it is contributing to the attitude of adding random junk to LEO. What seems like a good PR stunt to link NASA to Lucasfilms and Star Wars can just as easily turn out to be bad PR when taxpayers react with a "Why are they wasting time/money doing that? Shouldn't they be doing some science or something?" Just look at the reaction to the announcement NASA was going to fund a book to rebut the moon hoax claims. "NASA is spending several thousands of dollars to prove they've been to the Moon. Your money at work."
-----
*That is any time they want during scheduled free time.

If this is PR for NASA, then why can't I find it mentioned anywhere on a NASA site?

Every source that I did find was according to Collectspace.com. (thier lightsaber page here)

Even on thier page, which says that it will be displayed at JSC through labor day, loses the trail at the airport. If it actually went to JSC, I would think that would be publicized somewhere.

I'm beginning to smell a rat.

One good thing though, it is coming back and not going to be space junk. (Well, at least not orbiting space junk)

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Funny, I haven't seen any Space Center Houston ads mentioning this, and they typically get some TV slots for their promotional events. Maybe the time schedule was too small?

So now we find out more details, and they are not going to "jettison it in space", but rather fly it to ISS and then return it. Sounds like the original article got garbled.

Nothin' to see here, carry on.

I heard they wanted to launch it atop Delta II, but it was too heavy and they wanted to orbit it in two launches.

Signed, Dan Goldin

It's in case the Sith attack ISS, ding-dong! ;-)

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek