European Space Agency grits teeth, preps contracts for SpaceX Galileo launch The European Space Agency (ESA) is looking to SpaceX for its next set of Galileo satellites. Previous satellites in the constellation were lofted on either Soyuz launchers or the Ariane 5. The former is no longer an option due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and the latter was retired in favor of the Ariane 6, which is beset …
Do we not agree there's no point in a hospital run solely for the staff?
That's not how I would express it.
It's how I would.
Indeed Minister.
How would you express it Humphrey? At the end of the day, one of a hospital's prime functions is patient care.
One?
Until we have the money for nursing and medical staff, it's a function we can't pursue In 18 months or so.
18 months? We can open some wards.
No, it's got to be now.
I suppose we could form an inter-departmental committee to examine the feasibility of monitoring a proposal for admitting patients earlier.
How long would that take to report?
Not long.
How long?
About 18 months.
I suggest we get rid of all the staff there and use the money to open closed wards in other hospitals, when we can afford it, we open St Edward's with medical staff.
Do that and you'll delay the opening for patients for years, you talk as if the staff have nothing to do!
What do they do?
Really, Minister! There's a large number of extremely busy departments. Firstly, the Contingency Department for fires, strikes, air raids, nuclear war, epidemics, food or water poisoning.
In such a crisis, the hospital is a key centre for survival. Then, the Data and Research Department, conducting a full-scale demographic survey of the catchment area.
We have to anticipate the future requirements for maternity, geriatrics, paediatrics and the male/female balance.
Thirdly, there's Finance - projected accounts, balance sheets and cash-flow budgets. Then, the Purchasing Department for purchasing medical equipment, examining estimates, looking at price lists and catalogues...
Purchasing what?
Everything, Minister. Everything from brain scanners to Brasso! May I continue?
Be briefer.
Would that I could, Minister, but you need to understand. Fifth, the Technical Department for evaluations. Sixth, the Building Department dealing with Phase 3 plans, costing and so forth for the final
phase to be completed by 1994.
Then, there's Maintenance, Cleaning and Catering, Personnel in charge of leave, National Health Insurance, salaries, as well as staff welfare officers to look after the 500 employees.
And finally, Administration.
Administrators!
More administrators administrating other administrators!
This is important work, Minister. The typing pool, stationery, office furniture and equipment. Liaison between departments.
Are you being serious or not?
What do you mean?
There are NO patients!
That is what a hospital's for. Patients! ill people! Healing the sick!
But all these vital tasks must be done with or without patients.
Why?
Why?
Why?
I don't understand.
How else can I express it? Why?
Would you sack the army because there's no war?
Completely different! A hospital must produce results.
We don't measure our success by results but by activity. Those 500 people are seriously overworked. The full establishment should be 650, may I show you the paperwork?
No, Humphrey. Enough is enough. Sack them!
Out of the question, Minister.
We need administrators or the hospital will never open.
Sack the ancillary staff.
The unions won't wear it.
Sack half and use the money to get doctors and nurses and open some wards!
No, Humphrey, that's my last word. My last word! You may go!
Very well, Minister. I shall have a word with the unions....
@Fr. Ted Crilly: How To Run A Hospital | Yes Minister | BBC Comedy Greats
Unfortunately, the stonking success of Ariane 5 led many at ESA to take their eyes off the ball and then it got political, very political with decisions delayed and revised until things got so bad that they had to let the engineers get back to work. The horsetrading in Europe can be so depressing but then you read the stories of what happens in the US and you realise it happens everywhere. NASA did the right thing in giving SpaceX the money to build cheap and reliable launchers but we can already see what the megalomaniacs make of all those unregulated resources, or who think they can revoke contracts at a whim.
There is a lot to be said for the two supplier principle and this should soon be economically for satellite launchers.
Considering how fast SpaceX seem to be able to set up a launch site, it makes one wonder how much it might cost to have them build a launch site in Kourou and ship a few rockets over there :-)
Of course, then there's the US red tape on what can and cannot be exported.
I wonder if that option has been considered?
Really crank up that stupidity. Instead of a 747 carrying a 30t Launcher One imagine an aircraft capable of carrying 550t of Falcon 9 and propellant (Mriya=190t). This super plane flies south west to get closer to the equator and leave a stretch of ocean to the east so a launch failure does not crash into Spain. Next the aircraft pulls up and remains vertical for 30ish minutes while transferring propellant to the Falcon 9 because Falcons cannot support the weight of their propellant while horizontal.
That is the easy bit. The New Zealand government jumped through hoops to get permission to launch a small US rocket from Mahia. That level of agility is far beyond the UK government's dreams.
"The lost opportunity was not that, it was HOTOL."
Makes you wonder where Reactions Engines would be with Shotwell leadership and Musk-level financial backing, but not Musk, of course!
(Or maybe it's just the engineering that's hard and slow and not related to money at all)
What would it take to configure a drone ship as a launch platform? They already land on them, so run a mission that lands on the drone ship and then refuel and attach a second stage on top while out at sea. In international waters.
Simples.
(I wonder how many people will miss the icon)
Because Russia won’t supply the rockets. As noted above, militarily-sensitive payloads were launched using Soyuz rockets that were shipped to French Guiana and launched from there; Roscosmos provided launch support crew, but had no access to payloads. Four days after Russia invaded Ukraine, Roscosmos terminated that arrangement, leaving a launch from Baikanur as the only option for using Soyuz, and that was obviously a non-starter for something like Galileo.
In any case, last March ESA voted unanimously to suspend all partnerships with Russia.
Incidentally, the article implies otherwise, but the UK remains a full member of ESA, because ESA is not in any way an EU organisation. (Norway and Switzerland are also full ESA members, and Canada is an associate member). The UK is no longer part of the Galileo project, because that is an EU-funded initiative, procured from ESA, but UK suppliers still work on the non-sensitive aspects of Galileo.
ESA is structured as a kind of “buyers’ club” for space programmes: each member puts money in, and then its businesses are allowed to bid for the contracts that come out of the programmes. The UK consistently gets more out than it puts in, and this keeps UK high-tech and aerospace businesses working at the cutting edge of space science... so I suspect the Tories will want to leave ESA as soon as they discover that they didn’t already do so.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
