Slashdot Mirror


Shuttle Delayed Due to Cloudy Skies

PunkOfLinux writes "The shuttle won't be coming down until Tuesday, due to a decision by NASA that the weather was not good enough for re-entry. After the first two attempts, at around 4:45 and 6:25 this morning, NASA called off today's landing."

53 of 208 comments (clear)

  1. And by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I woke up at 4 in the morning to watch this...
    Well, let's just hope nothing goes wrong with this.

    I really wanted to see it land...

    1. Re:And by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Great to see it was postponed! I didn't wake up to watch it.

  2. Shoulda gone Canadian by ndg123 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hear they don't mind you landing in bad weather north of the border.

    1. Re:Shoulda gone Canadian by Chaotic+Spyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      pff Survivors in Toronto's crash last week 100% survivors in NASA's last crash 0%...

      not trying to start a flame war here.. But seriously I don't understand how people can not take the fact that when a plane crashes and blows up and EVERYBODY survives it's a good thing...(chalk one up to the engneers who designed the plane so people could get out fast enough) why does the media have to paint such an evil picture on everything?

      So NASA waits a day to land.. good for them.. God knows what will happen to NASA if shit happens to this shuttle...

      --
      Losers whine about their best, Winners go home to fuck the prom queen
    2. Re:Shoulda gone Canadian by Redrover5545 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There's a saying in the airplane industry expressing that idea:

      Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing.

    3. Re:Shoulda gone Canadian by Mark+Hood · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's a saying in the airplane industry expressing that idea:

      Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing.


      And the second half of the saying is: "and if the 'plane can be used again, it was a GREAT landing."

      Mark

      --
      Liked this comment? Why not buy me something nice
    4. Re:Shoulda gone Canadian by Smidge204 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      pff Survivors in Toronto's crash last week 100% survivors in NASA's last crash 0%...

      Not to downplay the survival rate of that particular crash, but let's put things into persepctive:

      Flight 358 had just touched down and failed to stop before running off the runway and into a ditch at less than 90 MPH.

      Columbia was travelling at roughtly 18,000 MPH when the heat basically melted the craft, causing it to disintegrate.

      That's a pretty rough comparison. Having said that, how many commercial aircraft have exploded mid-flight and had any survivors? And none of them were going 18,000 MPH!
      =Smidge=

  3. Good luck to them by janek78 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope they get home safe. When I read about the ISS positioning itself for the first time in two years thanks to the gyros repaired/replaced by Discovery, I realised how amazing this mission was. Not just a prove that shuttles can fly again. MISSE experiment, supplies to ISS, repair works, a new platform. What an achievement! Kudos to all involved. Good luck coming home.

  4. Better safe than sorry by Crixus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's certainly better to be safe than sorry. And NASA is certainly going to be extra careful on this, the first launch after the accident, but I wonder if they would have landed in these conditions before?

    --
    Ignore Alien Orders
  5. Re:I can't wait by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And then you'll keep hearing about how it safely returned/blew up in mid-air. So, either way, it's gonna go on for a long time.

  6. Level of care by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are they being ultra-careful with this, or is this just normal-careful? I imagine that it's the second, but this mission has been weird so far. One of the hazards of being ultra-careful with the weather would be that you reject all the okay opportunities to land and have to take the worst at the end. Or land in Texas.

    1. Re:Level of care by tadmas · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are they being ultra-careful with this, or is this just normal-careful?

      I think they're being ultra-careful. From what I've heard, they would normally land in these conditions.

      However, they really don't want to take a chance. Imagine if something did go wrong: the public outcry would be so big that it would virtually mean the end of manned space flight for a very long time, and that's not something NASA wants to risk.

  7. Guess I chose the wrong day by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 5, Funny

    to give up glue sniffing

    --
    init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    1. Re:Guess I chose the wrong day by ari_j · · Score: 2, Funny

      At least you got over your drinking problem.

    2. Re:Guess I chose the wrong day by blakespot · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bad weather on landing day... When NASA finds out about this, the shit's gonna hit the fan.

      blakespot

      --
      -- Heisenberg may have slept here.
      iPod Hacks.com
  8. They are sh*ting their pants by guruevi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    TFA: The cloud cover, although within NASA's safety limits for landing, was enough to make mission controllers uncomfortable about attempting a Monday touchdown in Florida. They must be really scared. Whole mission long they are scared to land, scared to do this and that because of the previous accident. Get over it! Space is dangerous and if you are scared, don't go there, there are enough chinese/russians/europeans to go there without that fear.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:They are sh*ting their pants by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This isn't a matter of fear - it's a matter of managing perceived risk/benefits. If the shuttle were to crash again it would be a massive PR disaster - as well as somewhat upsetting for the loved ones of those who would die who know and accept the risks

      To give an analogy - if I drive around the block rather than make a dangerous turning then I'm a safe and carefull driver - not a coward.

      --
      init 11 - for when you need that edge.
  9. So what do they do now? by jasohill · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do they haul out the experiments and try and get some work done, or do they surf space porn for the next few hours while they wait? It's a mystery to me.

    1. Re:So what do they do now? by wasted+time · · Score: 2, Insightful

      According to the commentator on NASA TV, they have about 4 hours of shutdown procedures to go through after a wave off. They shutdown many onboard systems to conserve power. They also reposition the shuttle to an inverted attitude again so that the underside of the orbiter faces the sun. This is to keep the temperature of the tires and landing gear up prior to reentry. They will reverse all procedures one again 4 hours prior to the next landing window.

      --
      The Stone Age did not end because humans ran out of stones. - William McDonough
  10. Yeah, but I bet they're trying to make something u by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    Right now the astronauts are sitting in the shuttle, wondering when it's going to land. NASA has probably given them some B.S. story about 'technical difficultys' and passing out free headphones so the passengers can watch the crummy in flight movie.

    Hopefully, some of those astronauts will make a fuss and get their next ticket for free, or, at the very least NASA will upgrade them to 1st class when (and if) they chose to fly NASA again.

    --
    The Internet is generally stupid
  11. Why the mission has been so eventuful by psyklopz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most would likely agree that this mission has been more 'eventful' than many in the past. And I'm sure most would agree that the general public (if they care at all) are getting more and more of a feeling that the shuttle 'just isn't doing it for me anymore'.

    And that may be exactly the point.

    Now, granted, NASA wants a safe mission. But several of these problems may have simply been overlooked in the past because space exploration is inherently dangerous anyway, so some risks are accepable.

    There is actual politcal value in a mission that seems plagued with problems. I'm getting the general feeling from the media that it's almost all NASA can do to get this thing up in the air one more time.

    If enough people get the same feeling, NASA could seem very justifiable to request mroe money for a shuttle replacement. And maybe that's the real goal of this mission.

    that's my conspiracy theory for the day :)

    1. Re:Why the mission has been so eventuful by n-baxley · · Score: 2, Funny

      That kind of plan could easily backfire into a "Why do we need the freaking space program anyway. If they can't even do these simple things right, let's just forget the whole thing." mode of thinking. Not feeling in the least, but it certainly could be one outcome of this mission with all of it's "problems".

    2. Re:Why the mission has been so eventuful by Lipongo · · Score: 2, Funny

      I have heard several times on the radio and know that several articles have been written questioning the space progam's usefulness. We spend countless amounts of money on space exploration and short of the satellites alot of people believe that very little has been gained. Granted I do not feel this way, there are alot of people who do.

      --
      -Certified TechnoWeinie
    3. Re:Why the mission has been so eventuful by karnal · · Score: 2, Funny

      You have a very good point.

      A lot of people also don't see the need for taxes, since it doesn't impact their lives in any way that they can see "directly." Fortunately, there are those of us who know better.

      (note: not saying the tax system is perfect, just making a general point..)

      --
      Karnal
  12. It has always been like this by jurt1235 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A bit of not perfect weather and the shuttle can not launch or touch down, nothing new here.
    Ofcourse they are more nervous, if they have a disaster, it will be the shuttles last flight, and with no new crew launch vehicle ready, the chance that NASA will loose a big part of its funding is very realistic, because why would they need so much money if they can not bring people and equipment to the spacestation anyway (That is the political question, not mine!!).

    Anyway: We can ask the Japanese to build a huge hand http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/ 08/0411205&tid=216&tid=126 which can catch an object the size of the space shuttle. They already have the speed about right (shuttle lands with about 270MPH(??))

    --

    My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
  13. Clouds Delayed Due to Shuttle Landing by Wonderkid · · Score: 3, Funny

    When we see headlines like this, we'll know mankind has grasped true control of the weather.

    --

    O'WONDERWe're working on it.

    1. Re:Clouds Delayed Due to Shuttle Landing by njchick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You'll have to move to Soviet Russia for that.

  14. Rain can damage the tiles. by Shivetya · · Score: 4, Interesting

    NASA did some testing with a P3 Orion to study the effect.

    http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/P-3/HTML/EC 87-0035-001.html

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Rain can damage the tiles. by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder...
      Rain usually only happens at altutudes lower than 5km. At that point, the tiles have already fullfilled their purpose, and eventuall cracking/damage shouldnt alter the shuttles ability to land.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    2. Re:Rain can damage the tiles. by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      and most airplanes can 'go around again' if something happens that doesn't look/feel right.

      The Shuttle is a single shot landing...you don't want to try risky weather when you only get one chance...


      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    3. Re:Rain can damage the tiles. by dildatron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The shuttle is a glider. They have one change to land, unpowered. Better to be conservative.

      --


      If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
  15. Re:How long? by Flounder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They should have purchased that cloud insurance. You just know those clouds are planning something.

    --

    No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

  16. what are they doing... by spectrokid · · Score: 2, Funny

    this morning, NASA called off today's landing. are they flying it in a holding pattern over the airport?

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  17. Too much second guessing? by John+Seminal · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I remember back in the 70's and 80's when test pilots for the air force flew fighterjets that were considered "unstable" and the air force wanted to test different designs. The common understanding was, there is a greater chance of it crashing than landing. Yet, many good pilots wanted the chance to fly. What motivated them even when they knew there was a greater chance of crashing than landing?

    There are some jobs that are very dangerous.

    Can man make a shuttle that is perfect, that will never have a mishap? Does anyone know the statistsics, of how many launches and how many crashes? I am just guessing, but I would think NASA has an over 90% success rate. If that was my college physics class, I would be jumping up and down with joy. It is not like these astronauts took "physics for poets". They studied their topics in great detail, and they know it.

    Getting back to my analogy. If the old air force test fighter pilot program had a failure rate over 50%, and NASA is under 10% failure (just a guess), then perhaps what is needed is a new understanding. Congress did not shut down the test pilot program because of accidents, it was considered too important. What is NASA? Eye candy? Do they want to put on a show, where the first injury causes a shut down? Or do they want to explore space, learn, and understand there will be terrible accidents along the way.

    There is a great quote NASA should try and understand better. Life is the master teacher. Unfortunatly, it gives the tests first, and the lessons second.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:Too much second guessing? by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I remember back in the 70's and 80's when test pilots for the air force flew fighterjets that were considered "unstable" and the air force wanted to test different designs. The common understanding was, there is a greater chance of it crashing than landing. Yet, many good pilots wanted the chance to fly. What motivated them even when they knew there was a greater chance of crashing than landing?

      There are some jobs that are very dangerous.

      That's true - but it's only half the story.

      While they accepted the tests as dangerous - they didn't go out of their way to make them more dangerous. If the weather was bad - the flight didn't take place. If the hydraulic system on the plane was iffy - the flight didn't take place. etc.. etc...

      Can man make a shuttle that is perfect, that will never have a mishap? Does anyone know the statistsics, of how many launches and how many crashes? I am just guessing, but I would think NASA has an over 90% success rate. If that was my college physics class, I would be jumping up and down with joy.
      In the flight test business a sucess rate of only 90% would be considered an utter failure. (Even in the 1950's when the crash rate was at it's highest while we were trying to get a handle on jet engines, supersonic flight, new stability problems etc... etc..) Contrary to popular belief Flight Test isn't about flying in the face of risk - it's about calculated acceptance of risk. Killing pilots teaches you nothing and wastes a trained pilot.
      There is a great quote NASA should try and understand better. Life is the master teacher. Unfortunatly, it gives the tests first, and the lessons second.
      When it comes to iffy weather and aviation, the tests and lessons were completed decades ago. NASA waved off the landing oppurtunity because those lessons are long learned. ("Landing in iffy weather kills - don't do it if avoidable.")
  18. The Folks at Edwards Have Their Fingers Crossed by aquatone282 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know the people at Edwards AFB are hoping for a divert to their location.

    I was stationed at Edwards when STS-111 landed there after several days of bad weather in Florida.

    We piled into the shop truck and drove up to the ridge that overlooks the runway and Rodgers dry lake. We parked at an optical tracking station, which was up and running. The camera operator gave us a bearing to the northwest, towards Santa Barbara, to watch for the shuttle.

    We knew it was inbound when the camera began tracking. It was just a speck, but within seconds it was overhead and the double sonic boom was impressive even by Edwards' standards, where sonic booms are an almost daily occurance.

    It passed overhead and turned once, landing flawlessly on runway 22. From first sighting to touchdown was only fifteen to twenty seconds.

    Later that day, after pre-flighting a jet, we drove out to the taxiway to get a closer look at Endeavour.

    We almost made it before Security Forces chased us down and told us to get the heck out of there. In retrospect, we were lucky we didn't spend an hour or two face down on the concrete.

    --
    What?
  19. What to do? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can anyone point me to a link that describes what the astronauts do with this extra day in orbit? Considering the expense of getting them there, I find it hard to believe that they just sit around for this extra day picking their nose and farting, but it would seem like all of the experiments would have already been stowed.

    Can they make use of this extra day?

    On a related note, I'm well aware that the astronauts have plenty of air+power+water+food for this extra day, but how long could they actually stay in orbit before one of those things ran out? Just curious; mostly to know how conservatively these things are planned.

    --

    --
    $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    1. Re:What to do? by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Funny

      Today is the day they get to shoot lots of file footage. The old stock video of them throwing a carrot across the room as a "missle", bubbles of water floating around, and running on a treadmill while nearly weightless were starting to get data. They also get to bug the commander with "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?"

  20. Hey, clouds can be dangerous! by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Sure, they may not seem like much. But the last crew died because of a piece of foam.

    Time to start sending our engineers to Russia to learn a thing or two about resilent design.

    -Eric

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  21. Lemme make sure I've got this right... by Loligo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Our tanks have targetting systems that can see through smoke and lock onto targets miles away, our troops have glasses that can see at night, and I can go down to the local sporting goods store and buy a laser rangefinder that will accurately measure distances out to a mile or so with a margin of error of an inch or less ... but a SPACESHIP can't land because of a few clouds?

    The cynic in me agrees: This is a publicity stunt. There's no reason to keep the shuttle up there except that clear skies make better photo-ops.

    1. Re:Lemme make sure I've got this right... by pondlife · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're talking only about visibility, but clouds do more than just block your line of sight - they're often associated with air turbulence and various (possibly nasty) forms of precipitation, including icing.

      Bearing in mind that the Shuttle glides in to land, and has no way to go around (ie abort the landing and go around for a second attempt), that means you only have one chance to get it right. So things like cloud cover, wind direction etc will affect the Shuttle much more than they would an aircraft, which can fly around bad weather, land at any number of alternate sites etc.

      p.

    2. Re:Lemme make sure I've got this right... by HD+Webdev · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Our tanks have targetting systems that can see through smoke and lock onto targets miles away, our troops have glasses that can see at night, and I can go down to the local sporting goods store and buy a laser rangefinder that will accurately measure distances out to a mile or so with a margin of error of an inch or less ... but a SPACESHIP can't land because of a few clouds?

      The shuttle can trigger lightning on a cloudy day.

      This could easily disable electronic devices on-board.

      Protecting Space Systems from Lightning article.

      --
      This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
  22. *SPOILER ALERT* by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here's this weeks timeline in advance:

    Monday August 8th 2005: A cloud is in the sky, NASA decides to postpone landing

    Tuesday August 9th 2005: A slight breeze is detected, landing will be pushed back to Wednesday.

    Wednesday August 10th 2005: Wind Chill Factor sited as cause for continued delay

    Thursday August 11th 2005: A small flock of birds is spotted near the runway, landing cancelled due to safety and environmental protection concerns..

    Friday August 12th 2005: Barometric Pressure Non-Optimal, landing postponed.

    Saturday August 13th 2005: Humidity levels cause concern, after some deliberation it is announced that Mission Control will again delay the landing to "play it safe".

    Sunday August 14th 2005: Another cloud is spotted, landing delayed.

    Let's just hope they manage to get perfect weather conditions so they can land the damn thing sometime soon.

    1. Re:*SPOILER ALERT* by outlineblue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      well tuesday and wednesday sound good, but thurday should read as following:

      Thursday August 11th 2005: Crew not responding. Presumed dead from lack of oxygen.

  23. To add insult to injury.... by Monkey+Angst · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Moon People keep holding up "If you lived here, you'd be home now" signs every time the shuttle swings by.

    --
    stripShow - Where WordPress meets webcomics
  24. Re:NASA is afraid of... FLUFFY, FLUFFY CLOUDS !!! by Guppy06 · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you were going to be in an unpowered descent through a vertical distance of around 250 miles (not to mention the horizontal distance), you'd be a little concerned, too.

    Here in nearby Daytona Beach, we've been having near-daily thunderstorms. The clouds caused the abort of the landing because, once you do your deorbit burn, Houston can't say "Oh, wait, it's raining now, better turn around and go back into orbit."

  25. Re:NASA? by wasted+time · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know you were joking, but it surprised me to learn that they use Outlook for email services onboard. Watching NASA TV, I lost track of the number of times Capcom instructed the crew to reboot one of their machines in order to fix sync problems with Outlook.

    --
    The Stone Age did not end because humans ran out of stones. - William McDonough
  26. Re:Daytime landing preferred. by wasted+time · · Score: 2, Informative
    Not so. According to Wayne Hale, Space Shuttle Deputy Program Manager, most of the shuttle commanders prefer night landings due to generally better weather conditions and less distraction from visual stimuli on approach. He made this statement while responding to a query from a reporter during a press briefing at the Johnson Space Center.

    The reporter phrased his question in a way that made it sound like NASA had intentionally scheduled a night landing to avoid a live televised disaster. What a prick. Hale responded that landing windows are a technical decision based on orbit and not something that they could just pick for convince.

    --
    The Stone Age did not end because humans ran out of stones. - William McDonough
  27. This Shuttle Mission was Like My Last Vacation by vjmurphy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let's see:

    * I ended up leaving late, because my car was having problems.
    * I finally got to where I was going, and my Dad made me look all over the car, to make sure it was still working correctly.
    * When I found a problem, he made me fix it.
    * When I went inside, my Mom made me take out the garbage.
    * On the way back home, traffic was so bad, it prevented me from getting home at a reasonable time.

    I'm like an trip in space away from being an astronaut! I think I'm fully trained now.

    --
    Vincent J. Murphy
    Spandex Justice
  28. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  29. More accurate headlines please by mbeckman · · Score: 5, Informative

    I expect dopey headlines from the traditional media, but Slashdot should do better. Announcing "Shuttle Delayed Due to Cloudy Skies" is like saying "Airliner Crash Due to Ticket Sales." The headline incorrectly gives the impression that the weather problem is not significant. Cloudy skies are not the issue -- the shuttle lands with cloudy skies all the time. The issue is unstable weather with low ceilings (as low as 500 feet). This is a much more serious condition, as any pilot can confirm. For the shuttle these are marginal conditions. They require conducting the landing under instrument flight rules, with the possibiity of losing visibility just before touchdown. At the shuttle's high speeds, this is much more serious than for commercial aviation. Attributing the delay to timidity, a publicity stunt, or wanting better photographic conditions is just stupid.

    1. Re:More accurate headlines please by thehemi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Attributing the delay to timidity, a publicity stunt, or wanting better photographic conditions is just stupid. Although I could absolutely understand why they would want to delay the landing until better conditions for photographic reasons. I'm sure NASA has thousands of variables they want to monitor and watch during the landing and having high resolution photographs of the shuttle in-flight are probably part of that data. Look how important photography is on take-off? I can only assume it's almost as important on landing.

      --
      Scott M
  30. Attention span by DragonHawk · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Most would likely agree that this mission has been more 'eventful' than many in the past. "

    No. Anyone who has studied the space program will tell you that every single mission is eventful. The difference is that this flight has had more attention. The astronauts on STS-114 can't break wind without getting mentioned on a news report or weblog. Hell, look at Slashdot here, we've had more coverage for this space flight then I think we've had for any other single event, ever.

    Why? Because the last shuttle ended in disaster, and everyone wants to be first to report on this one. Everybody's watching. If this flight goes off without a hitch and STS resumes flight again, the next one will get moderate coverage, the next after minor, and then people will move on to the next big thing.

    The same thing happened with Apollo. The Apollo 11 landing broadcast had the biggest audiance of all-time. When Apollo 13 exploded, most people didn't even know we had a mission up there.

    Senstationalism gets attention. A larger share of attention means the media can sell more advertisements. Like water and electricity, money follows the path of least resistance.

    --

    dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
    I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.