Slashdot Mirror
Discovery Set to Launch July 13
An anonymous reader writes "The US space shuttle is set to launch July 13 for the first time in nearly two and a half years, after being grounded following the 2003 Columbia disaster, NASA said today. NASA experts held a final 'flight readiness review' meeting on Wednesday and Thursday to make a final decision."
What about the fact that NASA failed to meet three vital safety recomendations Tuesday?
I mean granted, I'm sure they know what they are doing but what happens if we lose Discovery too? We haven't launched in over two years due to Columbia blowing up and I can't even imagine what would happen to the space program if we lost Discovery. Even more so if it is because of one of the failed safety checks.
From my link:
The panel said that NASA had failed to satisfactorily eliminate losses of foam and ice from the shuttle's external fuel tank. Additionally, the agency could not adequately strengthen areas of the spacecraft that are at risk of being damaged by the impact of stray debris. The astronauts who are a part of the return to flight mission did not have reliable repair kits, the panel pointed out.
I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
july 13? this cant be good.
We vacationed every summer in FL. It was always part of the trip to visit Cape Canaveral (Cape Kennedy). I have fond memories of it. Hot faced from too much sun, beach clothes and sandals, and seeing those incredible rockets towering into the sky as my dad drove us onto the compound. Little did I know of the history, for I was born in 1968 and at the time was a child. My dad was really into it and took all the time to explain the details of the thing. To me, he was everything, and so was my country. He bought me a Space Shuttle model, and I remember clearly the towering building wherein it all was assembled -- labeled with our nation's flag. I remember the juggernaut machine that traveled at one or two miles an hour which moved the rockets into place. I remember the launch pad, the museum displaying the Apollo crafts and astronaut suits. My dad took lots of pictures. He taught me to believe in our country and in its projects. There was so much pride in me then. I was proud of my dad, our country, our achievements.
My dad is gone now, and I'm not sure what he would think about things now. I think he would be sad. We have angered countries, lost landmarks and shuttles have fallen. I would not want him to know these things, and I bear them now in his memory, but maybe, just maybe, we can regain our standing as a nation and in space....
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
They were going to leave on July 4th, but someone pointed out the space highways would be crowded then, and liquid NOX prices would be higher.
So they decided to go surfing for a week before, to beat the crowds.
Will in Seattle
...more immediately and IMO more interestingly, Deep Impact is going to do its stuff in about 4 days.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
They did run an experiment with the AERcam sprint on Columbia in '97. I believe the RF link only worked within the cargo bay so a belly insection would be out of the question.
It appears that they have a new model AERcam in development for use on ISS and shuttle inspections though.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Its quite strange. Most of the major news agencys reported recently that NASA had confirmed that the Shuttle could be launched in July, as it was within an "acceptable" bracket of safety.
Yet less than a week later, the same news networks were saying that a major commission had concluded that NASA infact hadn't met their targets, lumped with a whole lot of criticism of the space agency as a whole, too.
But as this topic confirms the launch will go ahead apparantly regardless of what this commission found? I wondered if anyone could clarify the situation at large? (I'm not trolling or anything here, just geniunely puzzled about the table of events leading up to Discovery's launch.)
Why doesn't anyone ever seem to realize that all of the scientific advancements that have come through manned spaceflight have come at a risk? Astronauts are strapped into a rocket capable of accelerating the space shuttle (no small object) to 10.7 km/s, many miles in the air (above the atmosphere) and then have to re-enter the atmosphere and land safely after slowing down from many times the speed of sound. With manned space flight, sh-I mean bad stuff has got to happen, and it's a wonder that more hasn't gone wrong.
True enough- but there are broad lessons that can be learned. The lesson from Challenger was that they needed better inspection on the ground before launch, not just of the O rings, but of everything- as well as a way to escape an aborted launch. The lesson from Columbia was that they needed in-orbit inspection *before* returning to Earth- especially of any air-control surface (which is basically the whole shuttle- it does become an huge glider on re-entry). Each broad lesson learned doesn't just eliminate the specific problem- it elminates a whole slew of possible problems.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
The Canadarm on its own cannot reach to the places required, however, the Canadarm creators (MD Robotics have come up with an extension boom for the shuttle.
In orbit, this attaches to the end of the Canadarm and is able to inspect the entire surface.
They have a rather cool animated walkthrough and some images here.
liqbase
sigh. Is it really necessary to point it out?
More people have died, but the shuttle program has lasted much, much longer than any of the previous programs and has flown many more times than all the other manned missions combined.
So (# deaths)/(length of program) is lower, and (# deaths)/(# flights) is lower, thus making it safer on average than any of the previous projects.
Maybe not
People wouldn't watch a channel devoted to science. They wanted crap. These same people are doing the voting for people making the decisions about space flight. Sometimes the limitations of a representative democracy is all to apparent.
A hundred probes a year? A thousand, if we mass produced them?
I hate NASA and the culture of "we must put people in space no matter how wasteful and useless it is."
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
That gives me an idea for a sure-fire space program that will enjoy the full support of the American public:
Create two teams each comprised of a combination of rocket scientists and washed-up hollywood celebrities. Pit them against each other in a battle to create the next manned space launch system. Each team is given a workshop, a silo full of old ICBM parts, a '71 Dodge Challenger and 3 Harley-Davidson motorcycles. The first team into orbit wins $50,000 and a chance to try for a major defense contract. The contest starts at T-minus 21 days.
Nobody died in Apollo 13.
" No, I'm not superstitious or nothing like that.... honest."
Thank goodness for that. Everyone knows it's bad luck to be superstitious!
The U.S. really needs an English to Wisdom dictionary.
When I moved to Florida one of my friends gave me the number. It's great for knowing when to watch for a launch here--not just shuttles, but any launch from Kennedy Space Center.
:)
If you call you'll hear in the first 10 seconds of the recorded message that the launch is currently targeted for July 13th. The message said the same as last time I checked a week or two ago.
Definately a handy number to have
1-800-KSC-INFO for anyone that didn't see the subject.
(The following is from a slashdot story I've tried submitting variations on a few times over the past few days, which has gotten rejected repeatedly for whatever reason. Since it's relevant to the topic of what NASA's planning on doing once the shuttle is retired, I'm posting it here)
At a recent talk, Michael Griffin outlined NASA's plans for helping to generate a robust and competitive commercial market in orbital spaceflight. The speech and Q&A transcripts from the talk are available. In a move reminiscent of the US government kickstarting the early airline industry by purchasing airmail services, NASA plans on purchasing cargo delivery services to the International Space Station from commercial providers, followed by crew transportation after the systems have proven themselves. Unlike traditional government contracts, sellers wouldn't see a profit before the services are delivered and the emphasis will be on actual performance instead of process and specifications. Non-traditional space companies such as SpaceX and t/Space have found Griffin's remarks encouraging, and Aviation Week has some commentary.