Slashdot Mirror
Space Shuttle Heading Home
Reuters is reporting that the shuttle has been prepping for a return to Earth, stowing gear and checking systems. Their expected return is tomorrow morning, around 9am EDT. From the article: "During tests on Sunday a leaking power unit for the shuttle flight control system appeared to be in good enough shape for landing and the jets that steer the spacecraft worked fine, NASA engineers said. The shuttle crew was still awaiting word on whether Discovery's heat shield had passed a final inspection performed on Saturday, but scans conducted with cameras and sensors throughout the flight had so far turned up no damage."
If most of the mission is making sure that the shuttle they sent up can land safely (at least that's the impression we get from the news coverage), doesn't the whole ordeal become pointless?
Well, their cojones are in free-fall while in orbit; once they're back on earth and under gravity, then obviously they weigh more.
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
I don't consider myself courageous. Yet even right after the two disasters, I would have paid someone all the money I have in my checking account to go up on the next flight. I don't think I'm alone.
SpaceFlightNow has a detailed timeline of the re-entry - not sure if it will still be dark enough to capture a glow across the Western US with the 9:14AM EDT first landing time ... but my guess is a LOT more camera's will be watching it come back into the atmosphere.
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
That just shows you value MONEY over other things in life. You sir are PETTY.
I would have offered my first born if I had any kids.
Of course I'll be glad to hear here what they -actually- do besides the routine of flying the shuttle and assuring safe return, but even more I'll be glad to hear why no media write about it.
Because shuttle flight is pretty mundane when it comes down to it. Not to take away the technical hurdles of every flight. I'm a bit more optimistic then others. Only because NASA has been so succesful in making shuttle launches seem so mundane do we all flip out when a disaster occurs and start questioning NASA's capabilities.
As far as mankind's position in space exporation, I think we're at this point: Study long term effects of weightlessness on humans. That's what the space station is for. Once mankind figures out a propulsion method to get to things quicker, or a way for the human psyche to contend with long term space travel, then we can set out farther then the moon.
If you look at the maps you'll see they're not passing over the western US this time. Here's wishing them the best, even if not may people can see what's happening until the final stages.
I, for one, applaud anyone with the bravery and skill to be a part of the space program. Also, it makes me sad that we never hear about any of the good progress anymore. All we hear is tile this, re-entry that. How about a news story about some of the unique experiments and projects have happened in space, or the international cooperation that goes into building the space station? It's also amazing how the media plays off images from Mars as a trip to the park. Shame on people. This stuff is paving way for the future. When we do screw up this planet for good, there's only one way to go and that's up. I guess since it's not all shiney lights and space babes like Star Trek, no one seems to care.
I would have offered my first born if I had any kids.
Yes, it's proven a wise strategy to send a monkey up first to see if it's safe.
BOOM!
"Uh, guys, can I interest you in my second born?"
KFG
Oooops ... yea, it's gonna be really hard to see this in the Western US - bad assumption on my part it was a similiar re-entry track - thanks for the correction.
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Sorry it's not going over the west coast. It's traking over Mexico to the Gulf of Mexico and then Florida.
I'm hoping we'll get a look-see here in Houston.
Somewhere on NASA site is the Ground Tracks to see the flight path. I'm to lazy to Google it.
I don't want a pickle; I just want a Motor-Cycle! A four foot cop arrived with a five foot gun!
Now did/will the shuttle do anything beyond that? Any delivery? Any research? Any discoveries? Anything more than launch, orbit, landing?
They also delivered supplies and performed vital repairs on the ISS. Also they dropped off a third crewman, who will spend the next few months on the station, and tested out a new extension to the shuttle's robot arm, which should make it easier to perform repairs to the underside of the shuttle.
So it was more than just going into space, then landing again.
From TFA:
Discovery launched with seven astronauts on board, but left one of them -- Germany's Thomas Reiter -- at the space station where he will stay for six months.
The Discovery delivered a 3rd crew member to the ISS. Without shuttles it were impossible to have 3 people on board.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
So how do you do space walks then to fix things (etc.)? Silly comment...
That's because the risk is still abstract to you. I'm sure you'd feel differently if you'd been friends with the deceased and if there really was a way to trade your checking account for a ride.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Nice to know that they want all of us to realize what the shuttle is doing every step of its journey like something bad is going to happen. I mean really, the anticipation is just nuts...
"This just in, shuttle is to do a barral roll in space for up comming landing... Now watch as the shuttle goes through the atmosphere, drama unfolds in the cockpit as the astronauts try to reassure NASA that everything is okay... Now lets play the landing in slow motion so as to gather info on a leaky brake... Now we will postpone all future flights until the leaky brake fluid is analyzed and tested relentlessly, next flight, 'eventually'..."
One of the mission goals was to set up a -80 C freezer on the ISS. We have a couple in our lab (most bio labs do) -- they're primarily used to store biological samples. The -20 C freezer and 4 C refridgerater are also standard operating equipment in biology (or chemistry, I suppose), so it looks like they're gearing up to do some life sciences work.
Now, this brings up an interesting issue -- How do you operate refrigeration equipment in space? Especially that -80 C...it's a real power hog and probably outputs a lot of heat (in a closed air environment, is this a problem?). Does anyone know how cooling is done in space? Is it still based on condenser coils? Can they somehow utilize the "cold" of space for this purpose?
It is not at this time believed that the shuttle can be landed without a human pilot for the simple reason that the autopilot is not good enough to land on a runway.
Well, that's just wrong.
This mission is actually the first where the shuttle can be landed remotely, as reported here. Basically a cable was built that allows the ground to actuate some functions that orginally the crew had to do switch throws for.
What is interesting about the cable is that (if I recall correctly) it only cost a couple hundred thousand to fabricate, which is all that was keeping the orbiter from being able to land unmanned. The orbiter autopilot is quite capable of landing automatically as long as the crew drops the landing gear, and has been since the first flight in 1981.
I've flown in the motion based simulators the crew uses for training (I work for NASA), and have witnessed the autopilot land the orbiter. In fact, even when the thing isn't engaged it's providing the cues on the HUD for the pilot to follow down to the runway. The orbiter is surprisingly easy to land because of all of this help.
For some reason, the capability of the orbiter to do this was little known. It's not that surprising, though. Aircraft have been able to land themselves for some time. The crew typically lands the orbiter because it reduces failure modes and they are better able to cope with malfunctions.
Worst...sig...ever!
The shuttle can land itself without any hassle whatsoever. What prevents this from being done is the fact that the landing gear is manually activated. This was an intentional design element, as once the landing gear is activated there is no way to reverse the process. The fear was that if the computers fouled up and dropped the landing gear early, the excess drag would cause the shuttle to fall short of the runway. For this reason, they wait until the last minute (approx. 300 feet) to activate the system. As far as I know, the landing gear still requires an actual human to give the command, but the cable they installed allows this to be done remotely if the need should arise.
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
Does it appear to anyone else that most of the time the astronauts are in space is spent determining if they can get back to Earth?
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
How do you know I don't?
We were friends with Rick Husband, who as you know was the captin of the ill-fated Columbia. However, I would still be willing to go into space on the shuttle. There's a risk, sure, but there's more of a risk driving to the airport and flying to Florida than there is going up on the shuttle.
It follows along the lines of the fact that if you lost someone you were firends with in a car accident, would you get into a car again? The answer is yes, as the risk is minimal enough to not worry you every time you drove.
NeoThermic
Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
But you'd think about the risk more. And it might be different if it was a motorcycle.
But.. um.. could you describe the mechanism by which you came to the conclusion that it's safer than the airline flight and drive?
'cause it seems to me that if these guys are right about the "per trip" statistics, and you figure drive, flight, drive, your odds of being in a fatal accident on the way to the pad are something like, 3.8 million to one against, whereas the odds of being in a fatal trip to space and back have a historical record of something like 50 to one against.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
there have been 2 full loss accidents in just over 100 missions.
going on that data the risk per mission sounds quite high to me. certainly worse than driving to the airport and taking a flight.
now the risk per mile is very low but thats mainly a result of the insane number of miles done in the relatively safe LEO environment, its launches and landings that are dangerous (for any spaceship not just the shuttle).
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
From a recent interview with NASA Discovery team maintenance staff member:
"Yep, them there space trucker fellers been flyin' Ol' Betty since way back when, yessir. Now she may not have all them new silly-cone chips or them there onboard DVD players folks always talkin' 'bout, but you take her for a spin, I dare say she'll surprise you. Got some bite under the bonnet yet, that's what ol' Mark Kelly said when he first flew her. Jerry Morgan, he chimes in, he says, 'Yep, that's from when we picked up them snakes infestation back in Florida!' He ain't too impressed with Ol' Betty. Says flying a shuttle on a Commodore 64 is just plum wrong. Heh, o' course the gang always up to their li'l tricks. They put a bumber sticker on back says: 'My Other Shuttle's The Enterprise!' Had a big ol' laugh about it 'til ol' Mikey Griffin comes along. 'Boys,' he says, 'You better take that sticker awf.' Well, Lisa, she got quite the outspoken way of putting things. She say, 'Boss, we better not do that. That right there is a load-bearing bumper sticker!' Yessir. I daresay pretty soon we'll all be gettin' replaced by them new-fangled unmanned probes the Reds been cookin' up. I don't much care for that. Nossir, I don't..."
A printer? Even in space, where supplies are insanely expensive to deliver, the paperless office is a dream of the future!
NASA probably wishes it could get normal (almost empty) ink cartridges for only $60.
I bet the ISS is getting plastered with Dilbert cartoons.
10.6 cubic feet
79.3 gallons