Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Countdown Begins for 100th Shuttle Launch

Posted by michael on from the don't-forget-the-duct-tape dept.

tewl writes "Saw this on http://cnn.org/2000/TECH/space/10/03/spaceshuttle.ap/index.html "NASA clocks began counting down early Tuesday for the 100th space shuttle flight, a space station construction mission." " They're finally getting serious about assembling the space station.

4 of 11 comments (clear)

  1. Re:strange... by Eric+Smith · · Score: 2
    Hey, if spending a few hundred (or even a few thousand) dollars on designing and manufacturing patches helps with employee morale, I'm all in favor of it. The last thing we need is NASA employees going postal.

    I suppose you probably complain about your employer wasting money on T-shirts for the employees, too.

  2. Re:strange... by TOTKChief · · Score: 2
    Actually, only a hundred launches seems about right. We sometimes forget in our post-spacerace society exactly how complex, difficult, and downright dangerous these missions are.

    Yeah, this is #100. FYI, the originally-predicted failure rate for STS launches was around 2%. STS-51L (Challenger) was one. I get nervous with every launch these days, some because of that value, the other because I work on a payload to go to ISS and know that STS explosion==me out of a job.

    That's why every single mission-that's right, every one- has its own mission patch (by the way, you can see STS-92's patch at this location. They call them "missions" for a reason: they are as intricate and dangerous as any military action. The slightest mistake can cost billions of dollars and even irreplaceable human lives, as has already been demonstrated in our history.

    Stupidly, there's a movement afoot at NASA Public Affairs Office (PAO--I refer to it as the "Perfect Asshole Office") to even kill mission patches. Consider NASA Administrator Dan Goldin's desire to eradicate the NASA "worm" logo. Specifically, this link, which states in part:

    "Astronaut mission logos are an important part of NASA activities. They should continue to be used as they have been, since they are an established form of visual identification for a particular mission. However, in terms of media awareness and overall visibility to the public, the use of the 'meatball' should take precedence over the use of mission logos."

    I mean, this is really just a Mickey Mouse agency. -sigh- Yet I work as a contractor.


    --
    --
    -- Geof F. Morris
  3. Re:strange... by Mark+Programmer · · Score: 2
    Hard to believe theres only been 100 launches. Seems like more that that, especially when you think of the timescale.
    Actually, only a hundred launches seems about right. We sometimes forget in our post-spacerace society exactly how complex, difficult, and downright dangerous these missions are. That's why every single mission-that's right, every one- has its own mission patch (by the way, you can see STS-92's patch at this location. They call them "missions" for a reason: they are as intricate and dangerous as any military action. The slightest mistake can cost billions of dollars and even irreplaceable human lives, as has already been demonstrated in our history. To see just how complex this stuff is, check the source. Star Trek and other sci-fi makes this stuff look too easy; space travel is the hardest thing humans do. Okay, maybe maintaining world peace is the hardest, but space travel is right up there! Take care,
    Mark P.S: If you think missions are hard, look at the history of extra-vehicular activities. Hmmm...bundling myself up like a kid in winter and stepping out into a near-zero pressure environment where the sunlight alone could vaporize me in an instant... sounds like fun!
    --

    Take care,
    Mark

    There is a solution...

  4. ...what would be nice to know by tolan's+my+name · · Score: 2

    Presumably this things going to be extremely automated, ie run by a computer.
    It would be interesting to know what sort of hardware they're packing, i would presume energy efficiency, reliability and long life time are the major criteria for a space station processor, what are they running?
    What sort of operating system? Ok its going to be highly customised, but it must be based on something Also what sort of fail-safe system do they have, Is the computer in contact (ie satilite network etc) with a ground based computer, if so is this computer isolated from the internet? if not, could they hack the shuttle?.

    I presume these things arnt classified anymore, maybe i'm naive again.......