Slashdot Mirror
Space Shuttles Survive Hurricane Frances
maggeth writes "In an update to a previous story, NASA damage assessment teams have begun work at the Kennedy Space Center, which was hit by Hurricane Frances. It appears that there was no damage to any of the space shuttles, according to the first word from NASA. Although more details still are to be released, we know that Frances died down in strength before making landfall, limiting the amount of wind damage."
Reader knix writes, though, that "It looks like NASA did have quite a bit of damage from Hurricane Frances," pointing to an AP story which adds some detail, and noting that besides a knocked over Mercury-Redstone rocket, the massive VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building) had 1000 panels missing after the storm hit. According to the AP, "The holes left by the missing panels created 40,000 square feet of 'open window' on two sides of the building."
This is extremely good news! As I said previously, if we had lost any of the orbiters, the shuttle program would be over. And if the shuttle program is over, manned space flight as we know it would be over. While many think that the shuttle is a very poor vehicle (actually it's amazingly engineered, but always lacked a real purpose), having it around pushes Congress to fund something simpler and cheaper.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
40,000sqf = almost an entire ACRE!!!!
wow
From what I've heard the maintenance budget probably won't even cover replacing the torn off panels.
Given the safety cord and lack of oversight, it is good that if this had to happen, that it happened now, rather than when the shuttles were on 'active duty.' Now at least there isn't the pressure of a pending mission, and hopefully the engineers can have some time to thoroughly go over the orbiters to verify that there has been no damage.
My
Manned spaceflight is essentially over as the shuttles survived and will further suck money and life out of NASA. As for losing the shuttles being the end of the space program I would disagree. Sure having them means we have "manned missions" but they also put us at an increased risk of having NO MORE. If one more shuttle goes, then what???
It is an amazingly engineered vehicle, over engineered. It also is nothing more than a jobs program for NASA and a bunch of support companies who all are based in areas with important Congressmen shoveling money for votes.
Kill the shuttle, I just wish nature had so an accident didn't. It would be better to have 3 orbiters for display around than the country than 2 or less.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
The closer to the equator you are, the less additional power you need for taking off (don't get me wrong, you still need a huge amount).
That is why ESA launches from French Guinea[sp] instead of the UK mainland and the USSR launched from Kazachstan[sp] instead of Russia itself.
You can see the effect the speed has on you when you're on a merry-go-round. When standing on the edges you are pushed off of it by the centrifugal forces, but when you're standing near the center you don't have to worry about it.
bash$
Another side question - is it possible to fly Space Shuttle easily and safely on earth? Like flying to another state?
IIRC the shuttles never really "fly" even in Earth's atmosphere... they only glide back to earth. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Here's a good link regarding the choosing of Florida for the space program.
Pete Carr Owner Chatmag.com
So the space shuttles survived Frances, huh? Good. But now, another hurricane looks to be barrelling down on them. Hurricane Ivan looks like it might be making an appearance in Florida next weekend. Shoot, at this rate, one hurricane per week, the shuttles may have a dozen or so hurricanes by the time hurricane season is over. If they can survive all of that, I'll be really impressed.
Weren't there any protection to somehow shield these expensive vehicles? Or is it because they didn't think any natural disaster may hit Florida?
They were protected, hence why the Shuttles were undamaged.
The VAB was damaged, which is unsurprising as its a big (3rd largest by volume in the world) square building, and as such catches the wind a little.
Well, the X-Prize folks haven't gone anywhere yet and the Russians can barely afford their current feeble effort and don't seem to have any plans to pay for the design and development of new spacecraft or missions outside LEO.
(I'm deliberately discounting that little coast up to 60 miles. I want to see the private sector put payloads on the order of at leat 100 tons in orbit. That's the kind of capability we need to actually go somewhere.)
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
The problem isn't the wind, the problem is the big objects traveling at 100+ MPH carried by said wind. Moreover, hurricanes tend to spawn tornados. One of those could do some real damage to an orbiter. Now we just have to hope that Ivan either misses Florida, or also manages to not do any damage.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
Reading the AP article regarding the fallen rocket there is a photo with the caption: "A rocket similar to this was used to launch Alan Shepard on the first unmanned suborbital mission.
That's why it's so incredibly stupid to include tons of dead weight in the form of wings, landing gear, 1st stage engines and extra heat shields to protect them all in addition to the payload.
The specfic protective measures on the shuttles (and other return-to-earth vehicles) are to overcome the problems with regarding the heat when returning to earth and to make sure that the vehicle doesn't explode due to lack of outside pressure. It doesn't have any specific protection against tiles from buildings being blown against it, from SAMs being shot against it etc.
It's like complaining to Ford that your car got wrecked because a tree fell on it. Cars don't provide protective measures against falling trees. Period.
bash$
Clearly you had far, FAR cooler merry-go-rounds in your youth then I ever had... Best mine did was break down and make off-tune organ noise...
Hate me!
Each of them a unique size and shape, no doubt.
Eric in Seattle
Unfortunately you can't plan out that far for hurricane hits at this time, so instead of flying them out for every false alarm they take a chance with the orbiters in Florida.
Besides it's safer to have the orbiters buttoned down well in Florida, than have them caught off guard by a fast storm like Andrew with one of the orbiters still in process to be mated with the aircraft.
I think it was proven early last year that the space shuttles can't handle mild impacts all that well.
If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
Aerodynamically, the shuttles are essentially maneuverable bricks. During its return from orbit, the pilot can control the direction and angle of its descent, but that's about it. The wings cannot produce enough lift to gain altitude, certainly not from a standing start on the ground using the onboard engines (and with what fuel?).
This is why the shuttles have to be ferried atop a 747 back to Canaveral when (usually due to weather conditions) they instead land at Edwards AFB in California. So if NASA wanted to evacuate the orbiters, they'd probably need to, um, shuttle them out one at a time on the jumbo jet.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Florida was about as far south as the US could go, while still being able to launch over the ocean (instead of a populated area). ESA was able to go further south. The same reasoning is what lead Boeing to set up Sea-Launch, which operates out of Long Beach, but sails the launch vehicle down near the equator and launches it from a floating platform.
Interestingly enough, the cost per pound to put something in orbit was significantly lower for the (expendable) Saturn V than for the (reusable) Space Shuttle. Even when you take inflation into account.
Guam
Saipan
The US Virgin Islands
Peurto Rico
American Samoa
Nah, the USA dosen't have any colonies...
The damn things are designed to go 18,000 miles an hour. If 140mph wind caused problems, I'd want my money back.
"It appears that there was no damage to any of the space shuttles, according to the first word from NASA. " said by the same people who said," don't worry it was just foam"......
A simple capsule design can be reusable; just slap a fresh heat shield on the bottom an launch it again. The Gemini capsules were initially designed for reuse. They were going to use a parasail to glide to a landing on a runway on extendable skids. They only used splashdowns on the actual missions because parasails weren't fully debugged by 1965; that probably wouldn't be an issue today. The Soviet Union also test-flew a reusable capsule design.
The bulk of the shuttle system isn't very "reusable" anyway. The huge fuel tank that helps to orbit the extra dead weight costs as much as many smaller rockets by itself. I saw a blurb somewhere that claimed that it costs more to recover and rebuild the solid boosters than fresh ones would cost. The high-strung liquid fuel engines also require hugely expensive overhauls at regular intervals.
Bottom line is that the space shuttle serves mainly as a glaring example of the old phrase "Penny wise, Pound foolish".
I may be on the left coast, but not the left coast of North America. Plus the left coast of Australia is geologically stable.
If the left coast of the USA gets an earthquake soon, Chicago, Detroit and New York get hit by a massive blizzard, a few tornadoes in the south, can we start to assume that the higher beings hate the US?
If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
What they didn't report is that those panels were designed to pop out. They are like punch-out panels and they worked exactly as planned!
0 08 53.jpg
2 000-000 614.jpg
;-)
When a hurricane comes there is a serious drop in pressure... well with a building that large (one of the most volumous buildings in the world) this creates a serious pressure differential and if parts of the building do not give, or of there is not some sort of equalization, then the whole thing would explode from the pressure.
So they built a few thousand of these punch panels designed to pop out during a hurricane in order to save the building. I dont know why that wasn't in the article. These panels are on the north and south faces of the building and can be viewed here:
http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/LARGE/GPN-2000-0
(the brownish panels in the center section)
and here:
http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/MEDIUM/GPN-
Also if you don't think the building is all that large, look at the second photograph and notice the water tower
I grew up in Orlando and knew many many people that were engineer types; I feel very fortunate.
When I was in the Boy Scouts (yes I am an Eagle), I actually got a tour of the SSPF, the VAB, the SPF, and LP Complex 39-A. On this tour I learned about these panels.
This wasn't the normal tour though. One of our Scoutmasters was in charge of designing the lav and the escape hatch for the SS and had basically unlimited access. We essentially got the VIP/Congressional tour. I actually got to touch, (and yes I mean physically touch), Columbia as I walked underneath it and around it. I was 5 ft from the SRBs, I got to stand on the launch pad, on the crawler, 5 ft from the Michealangelo module for the SS, and underneath one of their 205k ton cranes.
That tour was something I will never forget for the rest of my life.
Libertas in infinitum
Maybe you haven't been paying attention. The only thing that would be FORCED if we lost an orbiter or two, would be the cessation of all funds related to manned space travel. Congress hates our expenditure on NASA. If you give them a reason, they WILL shut it down, and it will never restart.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade