Falling Window Cover Damages Discovery

Mz6 writes "At 5:30PM EDT, one of the space shuttle's protective window covers fell and struck the left Orbital Maneuvering System engine pod on Discovery today. The window cover hit the carrier panel around the OMS pod. NASA is taking a new panel to the launch pad to replace the one hit by the falling cover. NASA is expected to know by 7 PM EDT if the replacement panel will work and whether launch can proceed tomorrow as planned. The window cover in question is from one of the overhead windows. It fell on its own, not when workers were handling it. The cover was found after it had fallen and hit the orbiter. In addition to the carrier panel that workers plan to replace tonight, engineers are looking for any other damage." Update: 07/13 02:03 GMT by T : RmanB17499 points out a CNN story according to which "the launch of the space shuttle Discovery will go ahead as scheduled Wednesday after technicians replaced two protective tiles damaged near the spacecraft's tail Tuesday, a NASA spokeswoman said."

Comments

It fell on its own?

[nokilli]

Dudes, the question here isn't whether the engine pod is damaged, it's what's going to fall off the shuttle next?

This ain't no beer run these guys are going on, and it ain't like the hood ornament just decided to liberate itself. Most of the shit on the shuttle is like, important, right?

If I was captain of this upcoming mission, I'd be spam clicking the red alert button right about now. Maybe call in sick. Gotta have some unused vacation time coming to me, right? Use it or lose it!

I never liked the shuttle. A bunch of engineers were tasked with the job of building a reusable space vehicle, so they paint some wings on a rocket, give it a windshield, and call it a space plane. So it can return cargo, so what? Name something they brought down back from space that is worth all of the trouble we've gone through to glide back to Earth rather than parachute.

I'm pretty sure the Pan Am shuttle in 2001 could take off on its own. That was the whole point of the cut scene from the monkey throwing the bone in the air to the space vehicle, as if to say, "Look, no rocket boosters!"

And the only thing that fell off of anything in the movie was Frank.

Re:It fell on its own?

[cdrudge]

It was just a temporary plastic protective panel that they place over the actual window while it just sits ready to launch. It's not really "attached" to shuttle like most pieces would be.

Re:It fell on its own?

[ThreeE]

Vital? It was a freaking protective cover that's taken off prior to launch anyway!

More FUD.

Re:It fell on its own?

[Alex P Keaton in da]

My dad, now retired, always talks about when they developed the space shuttle. (He was a SR VP of a space and defense contractor who also had a credit reporting business, so figure out which one...) They were trying to get NASA to go with a solid fuel rocket. You light it and it goes. When the they designed the lunar lander, they had to have something that would work 100% to get off the moon, and they used... a solid fuel rocket.
Why we have this complex, unbelieveably expensive shuttle, I will never know. Whether it is a car or a space craft, the more parts, the more that can go wrong....
I hope that they replace this with a more reliable vehicle...

Re:It fell on its own?

[Mulletproof]

The Saturn V WENT TO THE MOON The mission was orders of magnitude DIFFERENT. Please. These apples to oranges comparisons get old fast.

Re:It fell on its own?

[EnronHaliburton2004]

Why we have this complex, unbelieveably expensive shuttle, I will never know.

One of the major reasons it's expensive is due to unethical space contractors who charged up the wazoo, such as the company that your dad worked for.

This is often done after the bidding process is over, and sometimes companies do this after the project is well underway, and hold the project hostage until NASA agrees to the new fees. NASA often didn't have much choice in these sorts of practices, and it was already too late for other companies to bid on the project.

So, maybe your dad can tell us why so many space and defense contracts are so fucking expensive.

And yes, I agree that NASA probably could be more cost efficient. But it's not like they're selling cookies-- many free market principles don't really apply when you're doing something massive like building massive space vehicles, and when only 1 or 2 organizations can do it at all.

Re:It fell on its own?

[KH2002]

"When the they designed the lunar lander, they had to have something that would work 100% to get off the moon, and they used... a solid fuel rocket."

Wrong. Both stages of the lunar lander used liquid fuel -- hypergolic (self-igniting) propellants. More on that here.

Re:It fell on its own?

[Rei]

In fact, to further that point, I used to work at Rockwell-Collins, which was mandated to use very strict time reporting procedures while I was there. Why? They were caught (thankfully!) after several years pulling one over on the government with the Shuttle contract. Whenever any Rockwell project ran overbudget, they charged the hours to the Shuttle. There were so many people working on the shuttle project that even with all of that "dot the i's and cross the t's" paperwork that NASA is famous for, they still couldn't prove that the company was cheating them for several years. Eventually they got a full audit, Rockwell got punished, etc.

Re:It fell on its own?

[Planesdragon]

Best on the planet? Yes.

Best dual-purpsose heavy-lifter and crew transport? Well, yeah.

But it's not a good enough heavy lifter that it replaced rockets. And it's not a good enough crew transport that everyone else is trying to build one.

I've heard that some of the shuttle engineers even balked when told of their budget cuts. They argued--quite rightly--that doing it right the first time would save money over the long run.

If only, if only, if only.

Re:It fell on its own?

[Rei]

Not only that, but so many here seem to have the following stupid notion: that you can just "toss junk out the window" in space, or whatnot. To get junk off of, say, ISS, you have to apply significant delta-V to it. That means, bare minimum, you'd have to develop a rocket system that is safe to operate near ISS, and a way to load your trash/experiments into. Soyuz can't keep up with ISS waste; it's cargo return is minimal.

I don't have the exact numbers offhand as to how many satellites (let alone tons of waste) the shuttle has returned, but I recall that it was in the range of 30-40 (many of those being experiment satellites whose design was to have them returned - engineering reentry survival into all of them would have cost an utter fortune).

As for "glide back to earth rather than parachute", I think you should ask the crews of Soyuz 23 or Soyuz 18-1 what they think of parachute landings. This is, of course, ignoring the fact that making capsules reusable is a lot harder than spacecraft, because there's almost always some deformation (and/or saltwater corrosion, depending on the landing site) on impact.

Re:It fell on its own?

[dmadole]

When the they designed the lunar lander, they had to have something that would work 100% to get off the moon, and they used... a solid fuel rocket.

No, the lunar lander used liquid-fueled engines, powered by nitrogen tetroxide and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine, for both the ascent and descent stages.

More information on the lunar module and the fuels it used is widely available, as is information on thier development.

Re:It fell on its own?

[Pollardito]

What are they worried about - falling birds?

they're worried that the protective cover on the nose cone will fall off on its own and hit the windshield

Re:It fell on its own?

[Oriumpor]

It does say much to the integrity of the entire shuttle that something as small as a thin-plastic window cover can damage the shuttle's heat shielding. What if, oh I don't know, a seagull hit the shuttle during liftoff?

Re:It fell on its own?

[damiam]

Chances are good that you drive a car, which is a helluva lot more dangerous than this is

Let's not exaggerate too much here. 1 out of every 56 shuttle launches/landings have ended with the death of the crew and loss of the shuttle. If you had a 1/56 chance of violent death every time you accelerated/braked your car, I think you'd think twice about driving too.

Re:It fell on its own?

[snuf23]

The Saturn V was also used to place the Skylab Space Station in orbit. The Saturn V was also intended to be used to do the "heavy lifting" for future space station work, with the Space Shuttle handling logistics and assembly of components. Funding was cut for the Saturn V program leaving the U.S. without a launch vehicle capable of the Saturn V's tremendous capacity.
In comparison the Saturn V had a lift capacity of 118,000 kg to low Earth orbit vs. 28,800 kg for the Space Shuttle.
I agree the shuttle and Saturn V were made for different purposes, but I do believe if you are strictly dealing with putting stuff in orbit the Saturn had lower cost per kilogram. That comparison isn't really worth much because it ignores the flexibility of the Space Shuttle and its uses beyond just shuttling cargo.

Re:It fell on its own?

[cdrudge]

What are they worried about - falling birds?

Some engineer spent several hours cleaning the windows with Windex and putting Rain-X on. The last thing they want to do on a million mile roadtrip is to leave with a dirty windshield.

Seriously though, they are there likely for enviromental protection. The shuttle sits outside for close to a month and in that time, it likely will rain, possibly hail, dust, acid rain, etc.

Re:It fell on its own?

[RexDart]

So the shuttle was possibly damaged by a crashing windows patch? ;) Best add the BillBorg icon to this story.

Re:It fell on its own?

[JFitzsimmons]

If you were a seagull, I think the massive roaring white thing with fire coming out its ass would be something that you would AVOID. And it isn't exactly a stealth jet either, you've got plenty of advance "notice".

Re:It fell on its own?

[tomhudson]

I call BULLSHIT big time. Poster wrote:

When the they designed the lunar lander, they had to have something that would work 100% to get off the moon, and they used... a solid fuel rocket.

Both the descent and ascent rockets on the Lunar excursion module were powered by liquid propellants - specifically Nitrogen Tetroxide (N204) and Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine ((CH3)2NNH2)

Look here for a cutaway diagram where you can see both the fuel and oxidizer tanks on the LEM.

More about both fuel and oxidizer here

Nitrogen tetroxide became the storable liquid propellant of choice from the late 1950's. Nitrogen tetroxide consists principally of the tetroxide in equilibrium with a small amount of nitrogen dioxide (NO2).
....
Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine ((CH3)2NNH2) became the storable liquid fuel of choice by the mid-1950's. Development of UDMH in the Soviet Union began in 1949. It is used in virtually all storable liquid rocket engines except for some orbital manoeuvring engines in the United States, where MMH has been preferred due to a slightly higher density and performance.

The need to use o-rings in the SRBs was because of pork-barrelling the contract. The winning contractor (Morton Thiokol) had to fabricate the boosters in sections so they could be shipped by barge, rather than fabricating them in one piece, which would have eliminated the o-ring that failed.

Re:It fell on its own?

[demachina]

"And we are capable of building better crew and cargo boosters...It's happening now."

As far as crew boosters go why don't you wait until they actually build something for CEV and see how "better" it is, before you start doing your NASA fanboy thing and shouting how great it is. At the moment all NASA has is a massive exercise in bureaucracy called an RFP(Request for Proposal) and Boeing and Lockheed have a couple sets of weak artists conceptions. Lockheed, last I saw. was proposing a mini-me shuttle which has a pretty good shot at being worse than the shuttle especially if you want to get out of LEO. Boeing was just regurgitating Apollo elements with the notable and critical absence of the Saturn V.

As far as cargo boosters go, NASA still hasn't really matched Saturn, 40 years later. The Shuttle stack might do OK assuming you get rid of all the dead weight that is the Shuttle.

The initial Titan/Delta Heavy proposals for CEV were decidely weak, and you were going to have to have multiple launches to get all the stuff in orbit you need to get to the Moon where Saturn did it in one launch.

Re:It fell on its own?

[Mr. Maestro]

The guys who ran NASA in the sixties must be rolling over in their graves. They ran a safe ship, to be sure. But they also KNEW that space flight was an dangerous business.
They accepted this risk because of the rewards of doing things like going to the moon. Now however, where is the reward in seeing a routine shuttle complete it's flight plan?
Don't get me wrong, I am a big proponet of manned space flight. I think an astronaut, (and the public) were accepting that someone could die attempting to land on the moon.
But to die attempting to er..um..uhh...The average joe isn't sure what the shuttle is doing besides going up and down. (sometimes)

Re:It fell on its own?

[zippthorne]

I can remember a couple of holds for "flocks of birds" over the no-fly area and one for moron in a cessna who got too close. FYI they scramble fighters for that kind of thing. I think one actually had to be scrubbed because of a boat in the no-boating area. When I used to go down to see the launches it was about 50/50 whether they would launch that day or not..

As long as there aren't any birds immediately surrounding, I think they're above "seagull flight ceiling" pretty quick.

Re:It fell on its own?

[pegasustonans]

The shuttle would then conveniently evenly distribute the mass of the seagull across a broad area with a thickness of several hundred atoms thus providing a further layer of protection (heretofore known as the 'rouge Seagull-layer') for reentry.

Re:It fell on its own?

[6th time lucky]

you'd think a 747 would be a big, noisy, 4 engined thing to "notice" and stay the hell away from too, but birds hit them all the time...

The 180? db noise of those engines would also literally scare the shit out of said bird, making a mess on the window anyway...

Re:It fell on its own?

[Kombat]

My dad, now retired, always talks about when they developed the space shuttle. They were trying to get NASA to go with a solid fuel rocket.

NASA did go with a solid fuel rocket. 2 of them, actually. That's what the booster rockets are. SRBs. Solid Rocket Boosters. Once they're lit, there's no way to turn them off.

I saw a program on rocket science, and they indicated that the use of solid fuel is virtually mandatory in order to achieve the fuel energy density required to lift the fuel itself plus a payload into space. Almost every launch program out there relies on solid fuel for at least part of the launch. Those that don't either don't need to reach the higher altitudes, don't weigh much, or are experiments in how to shake the dependence on solid fuel (mainly due to its rather significant drawback of not being able to be turned "off" once lit).

Already fixed

[cdrudge]

CNN is reporting that NASA has already given the go ahead for Discovery to launch. The damaged tiles on the tailfin have already been repaired.

Re:Already fixed

[cujo_1111]

I hope the glue and dope that holds the balsa and tissue paper together is dry in time for launch...

Re:Already fixed

[Guy LeDouche]

It should be, the rubberband that they are winding up is going to take a while.

A sign, maybe?

[8086ed]

Does ANYTHING go where NASA wants it to?

Funeral

[Selfbain]

Why don't they just hold the astronauts funerals before they launch so they can attend.

Re:Funeral

[Anonymous Coward]

this calls for the rarely used but often called for "+1 Tasteless" mod

Vulnerable

[fembots]

If a fallen window cover can damage the space shuttle, isn't it very vulnerable once it's in the Space?

Re:Vulnerable

[Inominate]

"Damage" to the space shuttle is common.
Heat tiles are frequently found to be missing when the shuttle lands. Small minor damage is not uncommon. What brought down columbia was more a case of a golden bb than anything else. (Plus it was a heavy object traveling quite fast)

That said, space is a pretty easy environment to survive in. It's the part where you're burning a few thousand tons of explosives, and slowing down from 20,000mph using the atmosphere that are the dangerous parts.

The damage that occured to the space shuttle here is trivial.

windows this, windows that

[ne0n]

all i ever hear is whining about windows here! ;)

If God Had Meant Man to Go Into Space

[the eric conspiracy]

He would have given us something better than a space shuttle.

Re:If God Had Meant Man to Go Into Space

[r_cerq]

Yeah, and if that same "God" had meant us to cross the oceans 500 years ago, he should have given European powers a couple of jets to avoid scurvy and mutinies out of boredom.

Transportation technology and exploration missions have always started out with rudimentary technology, prone to risk and with lots of fatalities paving the way. Crossing the oceans, crossing the continents, going to the poles, the mountains and the abysses have always been dangerous undertakings, and we've gotten better at it over time. Space is just another frontier, and another learning curve.

Re:It Fell off?

[cdrudge]

It's a plastic cover that comes off before launch. It would never have even gone up in orbit anyways.

Fallen window ...

[sk999]

A falling window knocked out the shuttle? Geez, those things are supposed to keep the cabin pressurized in space, and one just fell out?

... oh wait, a window cover.

How NOT to write a headline

[iminplaya]

Here's the story I saw.
Cockpit window falls from Discovery, hits engine pod...
Is this what you would call "sensationalistic"? Jeez, and I thought the Star was bad.

Hey, be kind to them.

[jd]

They don't use rubber bands on the space shuttle, the water wheel is quite sufficient.

Again with the shuttle?

[tono]

I'm afraid I have to echo the sentiment here. I don't care if the cover was designed to come off, the problem is it FELL off no human interaction required. They had to repair tiles on the tail from where the bit of plastic hit the shuttle. If I were an astronaut, that wouldn't exactly inspire confidence in me. Christ, who puts these things together, the guy down the street with the beat up pinto? It's time to retire the shuttle and just pay the russians to launch us until there is a suitable replacement. Remember people, the simpler the design the fewer points of failure there are. Seems like if Burt Rutan can get it right NASA should be able to too.

Re:Again with the shuttle?

[Tyler Eaves]

NASA is 30 years behind NASA.

slashdot, the AP regurgitator

[SuperBanana]

This was on my local newspaper's homepage hours ago.

Why is it that virtually everything I read on slashdot, I've already seen on the AP/Reuters wire stories from my paper?

I don't come to slashdot to read news wire stories; back in the very late 90's I came here to read stuff that you couldn't find anywhere else. I certainly don't come here for the insightful commentary (judging from the 20 comments that all say "dude, who cares about the window, what fell off and damaged it?", a number of which have been modded up, instead of modded down as redundant).

Re:slashdot, the AP regurgitator

[Quirk]

"Why is it that virtually everything I read on slashdot, I've already seen on the AP/Reuters wire stories from my paper?"

The short answer is you've got too much time on your hands.

I put in 12/14 hour days, too often 7 days a week. I'm a quick study and an experienced researcher, but, even with those skills I only manage to stay abreast with news out of /. and the Reg. I read the headlines from a few feeds, but have to steal the time to read the full articles.

You and the others who jump on /. for lagging behind your reading must do not much else but casually surf the web satisfying your whimsy. Alot of us can only find the time to choose one or two sites to keep us informed. Contrary to the /. critics /. does a fine job of keeping me informed about "stuff that matters."

cheers

They aren't safe enough!

[stefanlasiewski]

Obviously these new safety measures aren't safe enough!

I hearby propose that NASA create a new covering to cover the existing "window-cover", to ensure that the existing "window-cover" isn't damaged while it's protecting the actual window.

Re:They aren't safe enough!

[mendaliv]

I'll support your proposal, so long as the cover-cover is manufactured entirely in Knoxville, TN at Gimbal-Wingnut Aerospace in a Gov't-funded factory expansion with a sufficiently large tax break.

The Vomit Comet and protocol

[gardyloo]

Some of my colleagues here have flown several times on one of the KC-135s that NASA has used (until it gets replaced relatively soon) for micro-g experiments. The testing that their research equipment had to go through to even be allowed on the flights were really very rigorous. Each aluminum stay had to withstand so much torque, each bolt had to be tightened just so, the electronics had to take such-and-such a shock, tools have to have velcro on them, and the frame had to have so much of the opposite-gender velcro so that things could be anchored, etc.
What amazed everyone is that one group was not required to pressure-test their pressurized vessel, and a window blew out during one of the flights, sending nice bits of glass all over. Now, how can all of these other (arguably over-specified) aspects of the experiments be so rigidly-controlled (with carefully-worded protocols for everything), and they leave out PRESSURE TESTING GLASS WINDOWS?

Can we see it fall from 107 angles?

[loddington]

Where is the footage? I expect to see images of the cover falling off from the 107 cameras they recently installed.

True, but...

[jd]

...it does indicate a slight... negligence on the part of the engineers doing the final prep work. Right about now, I'd be inspecting the shuttle for all the things that the engineers DIDN'T come clean over. (People treading on something fragile, that sort of thing.)

So, true, the Shuttle isn't falling apart at the seams. However, the indication is that the engineers either rushed some of the prep work or failed to set adequate precautions in place. In either case, they may have messed up elsewhere and not said.

If you were up there, knowing that the world's media was focussed on your every twitch, knowing that any delay would finish any chance of you having a future but that any unconfessed and unobserved error on your part would be utterly untracable, would you be willing to take the fall?

Given that kind of pressure, I'm not confident that other accidents haven't happened. All I can do is HOPE they haven't and that NASA will take the time to verify as best they can in the time that they haven't.

Re:True, but...

[Rei]

(sarcasm)It's not like the craft and launch assembly have hundreds of thousands to millions (depending on how you measure) of often precision-engineered individual parts or anything...(/sarcasm)

Getting to anything orbit (as opposed to suborbital) is a huge task. Getting a huge, man-rated craft to orbit is a Herculean one. You better believe that almost every one of those engineers has been sacrificing their personal lives to try and make their "baby" as safe as possible. Seriously, talk to a NASA aerospace engineer some time about the craft that they're working on; you'll find people who do things like build a spectrometer for a probe who dote on it more than they do their own children.

There's going to be a lot of missed breaths when that countdown nears zero.

Time Warp?

[Stelminator]

"NASA is expected to know by 7 PM EDT"
posted: 8:21PM

anyone else think that maybe we could've had an update before this hit the front page?

Protective Windows

[mschaffer]

So, what exatly are the window protectors protecting the shuttle from? Peeping-Toms?

I mean, honestly, aren't the shuttle's windows supposed to be fairly durable because of all of the debris in orbit with the shuttle?

Re:Protective Windows

[Detritus]

They are commonly used on vehicles with expensive windows to protect them from accidental damage and foreign materials. It keeps them from getting scratched and covered with bird shit or other atmospheric contaminants. The Air Force has similar problems with their aircraft. A window or canopy can be polished or refinished to remove scratches, but it is time-consuming and expensive.

Here's a head-scratcher...

[jpellino]

"The lightweight plastic cover on one of Discovery's cockpit windows came loose while the spaceship was on the launch pad, falling more than 60 feet and striking a bulge in the fuselage, said Stephanie Stilson, the NASA manager in charge of Discovery's launch preparations. No one knows why the cover -- which was held in place with tape -- fell off, she said. "

Maybe it fell of because IT WAS HELD ON WITH TAPE!

Who's in charge over there - Red Green?

Not a big fan of the space shuttle, but...

[mclaincausey]

could the inclement weather have had something to do with the item falling off? Some pretty stiff winds there...

Ironic & scary

[amavida]

Yeah I know all the intellectual reasons for why this is not a big deal but you have to admit that it's ironic they spend so much time & money trying to stop shit falling offf this baby at a zillion miles a second and then some shit just ups & drops off it while it's standing still...

If I was about to be strapped into it my bowels would be loosening right about now...

Re:Ironic & scary

[Beolach]

Actually, while I don't think it's the case here, often things that are designed for high speeds have troubles when standing still. Just one example, the SR-71 Blackbird's fuel tanks expand due to the heat produced by air friction when it's in flight. The way they were designed relies on the fuel tanks expanding - when it lands, its fuel tanks contract as they cool, and often have problems leaking fuel, so the fuel has to be drained ASAP after landing, so it isn't wasted.

Re:FTUA

[the_quark]

And, Lord knows, this was a slashdot-specific story, and you certainly couldn't have gotten details anywhere else before you opened your mouth.

In Other News:

[VectorSC]

In other news, the space shuttle launch was canceled early this morning when an errant piece of seagull excrement struck the shuttle directly on its ceramic heat shielding and caused a 16 square foot hole.

Shuttle commander Eileen Kahlins saw the bird dropping strike the orbiter while talking with the media about her confidence in NASAW's (1) ability to meet tomorrow's launch window. Amid the rain of ceramic tiles and structural members around the podium she was speaking from, she was heard commenting to NASAW director Sean O'Keeth, "I thought you said you fixed that, you a**hole."

A heated arguement ensued, live, on national television, but was cut short when O'Keeth was struck down by a full HWSU (2) container falling from the orbiter. Kahlins immediately left the scene, telling reporters she had some vacation time coming.

(1 NASAW: National Association of Stupid Aerospace Wankers)
(2 HWSU: Human Waste Storage Unit, Solid)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Problem is fixed and they're go for launch

[Nefarious Wheel]

...weather gods permitting. It's in TFA, link supplied in parent post.

Waitaminit...

[dpu]

Excuse me, "fell off on it's own"???

In 200 years when every Tom, Dick and Harry has a little space romper, that's all fine and dandy - lots of things have fallen off various vehicles I've owned in the past, and I doubt it'll be any different for people in 5 or 6 generations.

But right now, the shuttles are arguably the most complex electro-mechanical constructions mankind has ever built. If something "just falls off", then it ain't ready to send people thousands of miles above their landing zone!

RFID tags on tiles

[brian0918]

Why don't they put RFID tags on all the tiles? A cheap solution, and they'll know the instant one of them is removed or severely damaged.

Re:RFID tags on tiles

[Traf-O-Data-Hater]

Oh great. So when the shuttle goes out shopping and walks into a store, all the alarms are going to go off!

Shuttle Man - The Musical

[Bad to the Ben]

With apologies to Elton John's Rocket Man:

They slashed the funds last night pre-flight
Zero hour nine a.m.
And something else will fall off by then
I miss the earth so much I risk my life
The tech is out of date
On such a priceless flight

And I think it's gonna be a long long time
Till NASA comes around again to find
They don't have funds to get my back to home
Oh no no no I'm a shuttle man
Shuttle man, 107 cameras but no rescue mode

ISS ain't the kind of place to sit for weeks
In fact it's cold as hell
And Atlantis might not work if you did
And all this budget I don't understand
It's just my job five days a week
A shuttle man, a shuttle man

And I think it's gonna be a long long time...

What color was it?

[buckhead_buddy]

What I want to know is what color these protective covers are. It could give a whole new meaning to the term Windows Blue Screen of Death.

Obligatory Armageddon Quote

[http101]

"Hey Harry."

"Yeah."

"Did you know we are sitting on 2 million gallons of fuel, a nuclear weapon and a thing with 270,000 loose parts that was built by the lowest bidder. Kinda makes you feel good dont it?"

JKXXMXN

You need a dream

[bluGill]

You need to dream a little.

If NASA came to me now with the offer to go up in this flight I would go, even if the catch was a 99.999% chance of failure on re-entry. That is the other 6 crew are going to stay on ISS and take the rescue shuttle home, I'm there to push the autopilot button to get it out of the way. (and a .001% chance that I also get to lower the landing gear)

That won't happen of course. Even if they would, I couldn't get there before the launch window closes, even if I drove my car to a plane waiting on the runway. You bet I'd go though.

Of course I don't have a family to take care of. Many people would love to go, but have kids to take care of.