Slashdot Mirror


Fewer Heat Shield Dings on Shuttle Discovery

According to NASA, the amount of damage to thermal tiles noted on Discovery was significantly lower after the latest mission. According to the report, there was a 33% reduction in the number of dings on the belly of the orbiter and an almost 50% reduction in the number of hits greater than one inch. This would seem to indicate that the new foam is working better. "The vehicle looked very good," Thomas Ford, a member of NASA's ice-debris inspection team at Kennedy Space Center, said Wednesday. "It's definitely gratifying."

118 comments

  1. A flight every 6 weeks by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wouldn't that be great. I really like this new administrator.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Wouldn't that be great. I really like this new administrator.


      Currently only Russians are able to do that. Shuttles' turn-around time is way too long and even though there's less damage it still takes one person a week per tile to repair.

    2. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by Jartan · · Score: 1

      What would be great is if we grounded all the shuttles and canceled all the shoddy projects and put all of Nasa's money into making a shuttle that doesn't cost so much to launch.

    3. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nah. The shuttle was a bad idea in the first place. They need to finish the job they promised to do and then scrap it. Then they need to offer prizes and contracts to industry for competing launch services (note: actual products, not bids, not designs) to seperately launch humans and payloads.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    4. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Currently only Russians are able to do that. Shuttles' turn-around time is way too long and even though there's less damage it still takes one person a week per tile to repair. It's a good thing that NASA has more than one shuttle, and a good thing also that NASA has more than one employee! :-)

    5. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by grozzie2 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The US is already teetering past the edge of bankruptcy. Launching a shuttle every 6 weeks would seal the deal in a few months, and send the country the rest of the way down the tube into the world 'third world debttor countries'.

    6. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The cost of a Space Shuttle launch range from $55 million to $1.3 billion depending on how it's calculated.

      I would say this is pretty small compared to the $1 billion that is allocated to the Pentagon every day, no?

    7. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by Kouroth · · Score: 1

      I've been thinking they should attach the tiles to a panel that latches into sockets that can be manually disengaged from inside. It seems to me that any new project should consider such a system. That why if a panel is damaged they can simply eject it and replace it. Have a stockpile (yea expensive) of the tiles most likely to be damaged on the space station. Then just pop one out and put the new one in. Just use a mechanical lath system to lock them in place or even an electric failsafe locking system. As I understand it you don't even need something in between the panels because air gets pushed into the gaps between the panels and acts as a buffer. Just have an internal crawl tube that gives you access to each release or a control panel. It'd add weight to the vehicle but could greatly improve safety. Heck, why not attack some sort of shield to the outside that would protect the tiles during launch? (Probably weight restrictions)

      --
      Thermal depolymerization - Lazy recycling.
    8. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by 14CharUsername · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, government contracts, all the efficiency of a government bureaucracy combined with the profiteering of private industry. With any luck the space program will soon be as efficient as the rebuilding of Iraq.

    9. Re:A flight every 6 weeks by TommyBear · · Score: 1

      What's the average cost per flight for a shuttle?

  2. What about... by darkrowan · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... the bleeps, the creeps, and the sweeps?

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:What about... by Stephen+Tennant · · Score: 1

      WHAT IF THEY GET JAMMED!?

      --
      I spend most of my time in bed, darling.
    2. Re:What about... by kcbanner · · Score: 1

      Only one person would use the strawberry...

      --
      Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
    3. Re:What about... by Edward+Scissorhands · · Score: 1

      LONE STAR!

    4. Re:What about... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      The what, the what, and the what?!?

    5. Re:What about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misquote, That is
      "Only one person would use the raspberry..."

    6. Re:What about... by darkrowan · · Score: 1

      Further misquoted: "Raspberry. There's only one man who would dare give me the raspberry: Lone Star!"

      --
      AccountKiller
  3. the only explanation by User+956 · · Score: 2, Funny

    According to the report, there was a 33% reduction in the number of dings on the belly of the orbiter and an almost 50% reduction in the number of hits greater than one inch.

    Clearly they didn't let the female astronaut make the return trip. I'm guessing they also didn't find any rubbermaid garbage cans crushed under the rear wheels, right?

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:the only explanation by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, it's true, statistically women put a lot more dings in the vehicle than guys, but I'm afraid the guys blow them up a lot more.

      And it's a cheap shot against women to make fun of them for it. Their notorious inability to judge distances is all the fault of the guys in the first place.

      They keep telling them that this:

      _________________________________________

      . . .is twelve inches.

      KFG

    2. Re:the only explanation by njchick · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, a female astronaut commanded the Return to Flight expedition, also aboard Discovery, which was also a very "clean" flight in terms of the tile damage.

    3. Re:the only explanation by irm · · Score: 1

      I heard that NASA had introduced a new training simulator: http://www.springfrog.com/games/asteroids/.

      I guess the real question is whether or not this counts as a weapon in space.

    4. Re:the only explanation by grozzie2 · · Score: 1

      Ahh, it's that metric mix up again. They guys are mixing up inches and centimeters again...

    5. Re:the only explanation by Monkeys!!! · · Score: 1

      *crtl + scroll*

      Yep, thats about right.

      Now if I could only do that in real life....

    6. Re:the only explanation by andrewman327 · · Score: 1

      At a low enough resolution it really is 12 inches!

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    7. Re:the only explanation by j79zlr · · Score: 1

      Its all relative, that why I date midgets....

      --
      I'm not not licking toads.
  4. One sparrow does not make a spring by malchus842 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But, we can hope! If they can make the launch every 2 months or so, that's going to be amazing - they have fewer orbiters than before, so it's pretty agressive. The question is, what comes next?

    It looks to me that the Asian countries are going to take over real space exploration. That's both good and bad. China isn't exactly known for sharing information, but at least they are doing it.

    1. Re:One sparrow does not make a spring by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "amazing"? NASA was promising this level of launches over 20 years ago.

      --
      Engineering is the art of compromise.
    2. Re:One sparrow does not make a spring by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Yeah right. China recently announced they would not only be exploring the Moon, they'd also be exploring Mars. They might as well claim they're going to explore Jupiter or the Kepler belt or Alpha Proxima. Private individuals have paid for trips that went further and stayed longer in space than any Taikonaut.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:One sparrow does not make a spring by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. And in 1985, they had 9 launches in 12 months. Then they had the Challenger Accident and shut things down from about mid 1986 to late 1988. From 1989-2002, they averaged a little over one every two months. Then they had the Columbia Accident that shut things down from early 2003 to mid 2005.

      So I'd say that, barring accidents, NASA has managed to launch one every two months.

    4. Re:One sparrow does not make a spring by awehttam · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It looks to me that the Asian countries are going to take over real space exploration. That's both good and bad. China isn't exactly known for sharing information, but at least they are doing it.

      No, China is known for sharing information with allies.

      Companies from the United States are not well known for sharing their technology. .

      In fact, the United States is known to be susceptible to private interests affecting their "foreign policy".

      No offense, but every Country in the world deserves to be on equal footing. Military might be damned, and don't be surprised if you see some "competition" as a result.

    5. Re:One sparrow does not make a spring by susano_otter · · Score: 1
      No offense, but every Country in the world deserves to be on equal footing.


      I disagree. I think that individual human beings have certain rights, but deserve no more than the consequences of the actions they choose, and whatever good or bad luck comes their way. If a bunch of individuals want to band together, form a nation-state with borders and a foreign policy and whatnot, more power to them. I don't think they deserve to be on an equal footing with any other nation-state or other entity, though.

      I think nation-states deserve no more than whatever good will or grudging respect they can earn; through whatever combination of diplomacy, economic incentives, and military might best suits their available resources and general disposition. And if they don't have the resources or the will to enforce their statehood? Then its formation was ill-advised, and its citizens should disband it and join a more competitive and successful society post-haste.

      Beyond that, I don't think nation-states deserve anything at all. I don't think America deserves anything. I don't think France deserves anything. I don't think China deserves anything. I don't think the Apache nation or the Aztec Empire deserved anything. I don't think the Rome deserved anything. I don't think South Africa deserves anything. I don't think Cuba deserves anything.

      The world isn't a fair and just place, with some kind and loving Superbeing bringing justice to the downtrodden. It's a harsh and unforgiving realm, where good things come only as a result of hard work and good luck, and nobody is entitled to a piece of someone else's pie.
      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  5. Can we say... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Better foam, less ding! Coming to you at your local Starbucks!

    1. Re:Can we say... by freemywrld · · Score: 1

      The next sequel to come out... "Snakes on a shuttle!"

    2. Re:Can we say... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      "Are you happy to see me or is that a snake in your space suit?" :P

  6. no liner? by MoFoQ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I still don't see why they can't put like a protective liner or coating on top of the fragile graphite/ceramic tiles to protect it.....of course, the coating will harmlessly burn away on re-entry (I was thinking LineX...as they advertise it as being really strong and I think it was Dateline or 60minutes where they showed a concrete cinder block that was coated that survived a 2 story drop)....maybe even make a coating that when it does burn, it leaves a thin carbon film for added heat protection (and fills any micro-cracks in the heatshield).

    Or add a second layer of the super-light tiles that are half the total thickness (not half the protective black but of the backing material).

    o well...maybe it's a cost thing...but I would think the cost of lives far outweighs the cost of the materials, not to mention the cost of the shuttle itself that is saved.

    1. Re:no liner? by Burdell · · Score: 1

      If you have liner burning away, you are now exposing the tiles to flaming debris. Nothing burns perfectly away, so there will be large chunks.

      Also, you've got to fasten the liner somehow, which would mean holes in the tiles.

    2. Re:no liner? by kfg · · Score: 1

      If you use colored dope, rather than clear, on your model airplane, guess what happens?

      It doesn't fly as far.

      KFG

    3. Re:no liner? by Jboost · · Score: 5, Informative

      The heat shields are shaped so the hot regions of the gas are kept away from the shield.

      The problem isn't the heat, but the pressure (that causes this heat as a side effect).
      During re-entry, the shuttle travels supersonic thereby preventing the air to get out of the way fast enough.

    4. Re:no liner? by njchick · · Score: 1

      It would probably more effective to spray the orbiter in mineral oil. The oil would cause the chunks of foam to roll on impact and slip away instead of grinding into the tiles with their hard edges. I don't think the oil would protect against brick-sized chunks, but neither would any liner. The upside of oil - no debris shedding in orbit and on the way back. Possible downside - more heat penetrating the shield through the oil-soaked gap fillers.

    5. Re:no liner? by evanbd · · Score: 2, Informative
      That would be called an ablative heat shield. It's been done quite successfully -- Apollo, Soyuz, and almost every reentry vehicle except the shuttle.

      That said, ablatives aren't easy, especially if you want aerodynamic control as you come in -- it's exceedingly difficult to get them to ablate evenly, which results in weird and unpredictable forces on the lifting and control surfaces.

      If the shuttle had been a capsule reentry system, ablatives would have been fairly obvious. With wings, it's much less clear. What is clear is that it's cheaper to replace the damaged tiles than it would be to do the R&D to give the shuttle an ablative heat shield. And you can't just retrofit it on with an extra layer.

      BTW, I think the choice of a winged orbiter was a mistake in the first place, and that a capsule and ablatives would have been better.

    6. Re:no liner? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      cheaper? so the lives of astronauts has a dollar value?

      well..what about a second layer of the same tiles? so if the top layer is damaged....the second one should be able to handle it. Think of a snake shedding it's skin or a shark replenishing its teeth with a backup

    7. Re:no liner? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I still don't see why they can't put like a protective liner or coating on top of the fragile graphite/ceramic tiles to protect it.

      I can think of one amazingly obvious reason why they don't do it: weight (or, more precisely, mass). Every pound of stuff you put on the tiles to protect them is a pound less the shuttle can carry into orbit. It already can't carry very much (compared to unmanned rockets that are far less expensive to operate), so slapping a few hundred (or perhaps thousand) pounds of stuff on the tiles to protect them is not going to work.

      Now perhaps you'll say that such a coating wouldn't have to weigh much because it could be thin. I will remind you that the foam that brought down Columbia slammed into the wing at about 550mph relative to the shuttle's speed. Any coating that's going to do any good would have to be able to withstand such an impact or it's not worth the weight of the coating. I think you should now realize that any protective coating would have to be (a) very thick and (b) very heavy in order to do any good, which would therefore (c) make the shuttle's cargo-carrying capacity more pathetic than it already is.

      It's a bad design. You can keep applying band-aids all you want, but having the heat tiles exposed to debris damage during ascent is a fundamentally bad design than can't readily be corrected. Ever see a Saturn V launch? Tons of ice shed from the ascent stages, crashing all over the place, yet no Apollo mission was ever in any danger whatsoever because of it. The "valuable" part of the stack was at the top, away from debris, and the heat shield itself was tucked away inside the stack. Until we come up with a way to launch things without cryogenic propellants, this is going to be the preferred arrangement for getting stuff into space.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    8. Re:no liner? by michrech · · Score: 1

      Also, you've got to fasten the liner somehow, which would mean holes in the tiles.

      You missed the parents point.

      Google for "LineX" or "Rhino Lining".

      You are most likely correct, though, about the lining burning away and possibly causing more damage, though.

      --
      bork bork bork!
    9. Re:no liner? by mrxak · · Score: 1

      I don't know of many snakes that hurtle themselves at many times the speed of sound from high Earth orbit to the ground. What happens when the outer layer of tiles gets damaged and starts shedding? My guess would be quite a bit of damage to the inner layer. The heat shield is just fine the way it is.

    10. Re:no liner? by WhiplashII · · Score: 1

      You really just have no concept of the velocities involved. At these velocities, a piece of lightweight foam blew right through a few centimeters of the strongest material we can make, baring daimonds. (And it is a form of the same material as diamond!)

      When rentering, the air touching the wings is several thousand degrees. But the air in front of the wings (as in the air being pushed away by the air in contact with the wings) is several tens of thousands of degrees. So any change in the wing, such as a deep pit which dusturbs the airflow, can move that ultra-hot air so that it touches the shuttle's wings. And there are no materials that can survive that! Not even solid tungsten! (As an example of how sensitive this is to details, a smooth surface will stay much cooler (about one tenth the heating) than a rough surface in this ambient).

      The solution to rentry heating is to make sure that you spaceship never touches the hot stuff (thats why the shuttle has a round nose, not a sharp one), and then try to deal with the much cooler air (still thousands of degrees) that gets through.

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
    11. Re:no liner? by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Yet another slew of reasons to develop a force field already.

        Jeez, according to sci-fi magazines dating back to the 50's, we should have had them for decades. The future is really disappointing isn't it?

    12. Re:no liner? by evanbd · · Score: 1
      While I'm reluctant to put a dollar value on lives, they clearly have *a* value -- we as a society repeatedly decide to risk the lives of our members for societal gain, be they astronauts, firemen, soldiers, or even just people commuting to work on the freeway.

      The development project required to do substantial changes to the heat shield would be massive. You can't just attach another layer of tiles, for several reasons. Weight is the obvious one -- it cuts into payload capacity, probably quite substantially. Structural concerns are also very real -- those tiles are exceedingly weak, and it wouldn't surprise me if they couldn't support another layer if it was merely glued on. Providing supports through the existing layer would take a lot of work. And lastly, if the outer layer is damaged, it changes the aerodynamics. Probably not enough to affect control, but quite possibly enough to cause localized heating that the tiles underneath can't withstand. If that's the case, then you haven't bought nearly as much redundancy as you'd hoped for, since the failure modes are linked.

      Just to be clear -- none of these things are impossible. They would just take time and money. And, my guess is they would take enough time and money that it would be better just to spend the money speeding up the CEV development project. And once you do that, you're back to the current question -- keep flying the shuttle fleet as is while waiting, or retire it now and have nothing in place until the CEV appears. Yes, you could argue that redoing the heat shield would provide an intermediate solution. I argue that it would be so short lived and so expensive as to be a waste of money that could be spent on other things.

    13. Re:no liner? by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      That would be called an ablative heat shield [wikipedia.org]. It's been done quite successfully

      Man, you owe me an afternoon. That was a thumping good read...

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
  7. 50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by Ant+P. · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does any other country's space program have a farce^Wproblem like this, and if so why aren't we getting 10 articles a month about them too?

    1. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No other country has a machine capable of what the shuttle can do, though. Nothing has the sheer payload capacity of the shuttle, not to mention the manipulation capabilities once it's in orbit.

    2. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Does any other country's space program have a vehicle that can support seven astronauts for up to a month, can return with tons of cargo, has an airlock, grappling system, etc.?

    3. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      How about the ISS and a dozen Soyuz trips per month?

    4. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by edflyerssn007 · · Score: 1

      The shuttle put the ISS in orbit.

      -ed

      --
      So you see what had happened was....
    5. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, until the new CLV is created, we're stuck with the Shuttle.

      The Saturn V was the most reliable heavy-lift vehicle ever built with the largest payload capacity. Too bad they scrapped it.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    6. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by ToasterofDOOM · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exactly. The more complex anything is, the more likely it is to be susceptible to many complex problems. We happen to have, for better or worse, a more complex space program than pretty much anyone else. Also, the more complex the support infrastructure that is needed, the more opportunities there are to screw up royally. While we should move on from the shuttle, It should by no means be dead yet. As the late Guss Grissom said, "If we die, do not mourn for us. This is a risky business we're in, and we accept those risks. The space program is too valuable to this country to be halted for too long if a disaster should ever happen." While this is adifferent time, his words still are as true and pertinent today as they were almost a half-century ago.

      --
      I am Spartacus
    7. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theres only one other country with a manned space program. A hangar roof collapse destroyed their only shuttle that reached space, killed 8 people. The rest of their incomplete shuttles were auctioned off.

      We made 7 shuttles, put 6 into space, and lost 2. They made 5, got 1 into space once, and lost all of them on the ground to things like a collapsed roof and rot. Which is the farce again?

      Soyuz? They've had 96 flights, lost 2 crews, nearly lost a 3rd. The US space shuttle has had 115 flights, lost 2 crews.

    8. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      [...] and a dozen Soyuz trips per month?I'm not sure where this comes from.

      There have been 12 Soyuz missions to the ISS since the first one in 2001. Where do you get the "dozen Soyuz trips per month."? Even if you add in 22 Progress launches, that's still nowhere near a dozen Soyuz trips per month.

    9. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by OldBus · · Score: 1

      Other than Russia and China, no-one *has* a manned space programme and currently neither of their programmes are as sophisticated as the US's. The shuttle may be causing some headaches, but if it hadn't been tried, people would still be demanding it was tried: "why are we sending up these space rockets and burning them up on re-entry. Why don't we try and save money and materials by building a re-usable vehicle? Added bonus: we can retrieve things from space as well as put them up there." With hindsight, it didn't really work (i.e. it cost too much), but no-one knew that at the time.

      As for non-manned space programmes, the US is also doing pretty well. Russia recently blew up something like 18 satellites and my country (UK) recently had the disappointment of a probe that decided to explore the interior of Mars, rather than the exterior :(

    10. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      >The Saturn V was the most reliable heavy-lift vehicle ever built with the
      >largest payload capacity. Too bad they scrapped it.
      And then they lost the plans so they can't even build new ones.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    11. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      And then they lost the plans so they can't even build new ones.
      Fortunately, the plans are not lost. Unfortunately, even with the plans, it's not possible to build new Saturn V rockets.

      Here's what the SpaceFAQ (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/space/controversy/) has to say about the "lost" Saturn V plans.

      From the FAQ:

      WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SATURN V PLANS

      Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, the Saturn V blueprints have not been lost. They are kept at Marshall Space Flight Center on microfilm. The Federal Archives in East Point, GA also has 2900 cubic feet of Saturn documents. Rocketdyne has in its archives dozens of volumes from its Knowledge Retention Program. This effort was initiated in the late '60s to document every facet of F-1 and J-2 engine production to assist in any future re-start.

      The problem in re-creating the Saturn V is not finding the drawings, it is finding vendors who can supply mid-1960's vintage hardware (like guidance system components), and the fact that the launch pads and VAB have been converted to Space Shuttle use, so you have no place to launch from.

      By the time you redesign to accommodate available hardware and re-modify the launch pads, you may as well have started from scratch with a clean sheet design.

    12. Re:50% less bits of foam falling off!!! by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Yay - Good news. Thanks for that Mr Anonymous Coward.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  8. Shields up by Andrew+Kismet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can anyone explain to me how, as the article suggests, less heat shield dings = better foam? I understand that foam falls off and CAUSES these problems, but surely, in orbit, there are a lot of other small things flying around? Like that spatula?

    1. Re:Shields up by nlinecomputers · · Score: 1

      Most all the damage to the shuttle's tiles is caused by foam shedded during launch. Once in orbit any debris they might encounter would strike them at such a high speed that tile damage would be the least of their worries.

      --
      Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
  9. The REAL Test by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...blah blah blah this new stuff works great...

    I paraphrased a little there, but the REAL test of this stuff would be to park the shuttle in Walmart's parking lot for a few hours. See how it looks after that.

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
    1. Re:The REAL Test by A+Brand+of+Fire · · Score: 1

      A Wal-Mart parking lot on

      Black Friday.

      --
      [End of Line]
    2. Re:The REAL Test by gardyloo · · Score: 1



      A Wal-Mart parking lot on

      Black Friday.


            Pfft. Now you're just being silly. An M1-Abrams couldn't take that.

  10. A sad sign of the times.. by dud83 · · Score: 1

    NASA really been letting everyone down the past few years. So many silly accident and subsequent failure to fix it. This is NASA FFS, they're supposed to be... Well rocket scientists and pretty much overall the brightest people on the planet.
    I remember growing up and feeling NASA were a magical place where anything could happen and that it was just prime ace, the place to be.
    Now where it's at is Google and... erm, where else? Perhaps like PriceWaterHouseCoopers? IBM? I dunno... My point is, that NASA should have been just magically able to fix things like these in a jiffy. It's what they do! Bright minds that fixes things and explores the universe in the process! :/
    Better shape up before Virgin Glactic and the rest of the bunch whoops your sorry asses hehe...
    Even ESA, China National Space Administration and Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency seems more exciting than NASA recently! :o

    1. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by belligerent0001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know a guy who is a subcontracter at one of the research centers. He is an IT technician. I get to hear all sorts of stories about these so call 'brilliant rocket scientists'...stuff like "what do you mean I shouldn't store my email in the deleted items folder?" or "my laptop doesn't work when I hit the power button" meaning the power button on the monitor that isn't even connected to the laptop. He also relayed a story of a conversation that happened around the lunch table, they were talking about the mission to Mars. After some debate about "they could do this or that" he had this to say "You know the engineers and scientist that we work with? You do realize that THEY are the ones working on this stuff? Having worked with most of them...you can have my seat on that rocket...". Remember that these are also the people that 'forgot' to convert metric to standard messurements once. It's one thing to 'forget' to do laundry but to forget to translate metric or forget to even include it in the checklist?!?! Until space travel/exploration becomes a private venture there will be slow progress. NASA doesn't get sued when it's human cargo get vaporized, a private company...will.

      --
      "...a civilian some of the time, a soldier part of the time and a patriot all of the time." -Brig. Gen. James Drain
    2. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by hobbesmaster · · Score: 1

      So, what does your friend that is a "brillian IT technician" know about chemistry, physics and engineering?

    3. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by Karthikkito · · Score: 1

      Except a private entity - Lockheed - DID lose the Mars orbiter in question. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric. 02/

    4. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by belligerent0001 · · Score: 1

      A. I never said he was brilliant B. my point was that the people designing and developing these platforms, who are supposed to be the 'billiant minds,' have no common sense. I am not suggesting that a rocket scientist is well educated. I am suggesting that they don't have the sense to pour piss out of a boot, with the instructions to do written on the sole. And I am not suggesting that they all are lacking common sense either. BTW: Would YOU step into a spacecraft that was designed by a guy that stored his 'important' files in the recycle bin on his computer?

      --
      "...a civilian some of the time, a soldier part of the time and a patriot all of the time." -Brig. Gen. James Drain
    5. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      Remember that these are also the people that 'forgot' to convert metric to standard messurements once.

      TBH, given that:

      1. The entire scientific world uses standard metric measurements
      2. Everyone in the world except the US uses standard metric measurements

      I'm really amazed that NASA use imperial units at all... it just seems crazy.

    6. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by imperious_rex · · Score: 1

      *sigh* Okay, I can understand a certain level of frustration with NASA, as the manned space program has been rife with a lot of problems for the past few years. But as troubled as our manned space program has been, it's still way better than the dark days after Apollo and Skylab. For seven long years the US had absolutely no manned presence in space at all.

      Despite NASA's flaws, the one bright spot in our space program has been the Jet Propulsion Lab and the unmanned exploration program. In the past 3 decades we have almost single-handely mapped the solar system, had *4* successful Mars landings (with more to come!), and peered into the universe like never before. As for other nations' space programs, only the former Soviet Union's space exploration program comes close, with successful probe landings on the moon, Mars, and Venus. The ESA comes in at a distant third, Japan at a barely noticeable 4th place, and other than a copy of the Mercury program, China has done practically nothing.

    7. Re:A sad sign of the times.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know that singing the gospel of free enterprise as a solution to all problems of the world is very chic right now, but ...

      You can dream about Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin all you want, but doing small 100-km-jumps in the desert is still waaaaay off from going orbital with seven astronauts, spending weeks in space and landing the whole thing at an airport, possibly with tons of cargo. That is just way beyond any kind of commercial capability, at least for the time being.

      BTW, one of your infallible private enterprises (SpaceX) just forgot that launching a rocket with a fuel leak is a bad idea ... hmm ....

  11. How is this significant? by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful
    They're comparing the most recent flight against a (the) single previous flight.

    Where's the data on all flights prior to that one? What are the maxima/minima and standard deviation? A 33 or 50% variation might be expected.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:How is this significant? by 42Penguins · · Score: 1

      You're calling for a confirmation of statistical significance? You must be new here...

  12. Hmm by cheese-cube · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...number of dings on the belly of the orbiter...
    Dings? That's a tad un-technical. Just imagine what things must be like in the control room.
    Can we please have a report on the landing wheelie thingos? I think there was a ding on one of the balancy thingamajigs.
  13. UFO during Shuttle launch STS-114 by Chemkook · · Score: 2, Interesting



    Check out the UFO on the latest shuttle launch ... ( 1 min 20 sec )

    It's not much, but it's another one NASA missed.

    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-91074674 70463643727& q=ufo+sts

    1. Re:UFO during Shuttle launch STS-114 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're probably all pissed off that we've stopped responding to mind control and are no longer building pyramids for them.

      And Stargates.

  14. so we could have reduced cost a long time ago by TwoFarWest · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So the foam has been damaging tile for a long time. Would we have had better turn arounds with fewer tile repairs if we had fixed the foam a long time ago? And saved lots of $$$ in the mean time?

    1. Re:so we could have reduced cost a long time ago by ebvwfbw · · Score: 2, Interesting
      So the foam has been damaging tile for a long time. Would we have had better turn arounds with fewer tile repairs if we had fixed the foam a long time ago? And saved lots of $$$ in the mean time?

      The foam has been damaging tiles since they switched away from CFCs to make it in an effort to appease the environmentalists that swore the ozone was being depleted as a result of CFCs. Clearly they compromised safty. Can read about it here - http://flyawaysimulation.com/article1564.html .

  15. Ironically, 100 Years from now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ironically, 100 years from now, China may be the preserving force of Western Civilization. Holding the fort, so to speak, against the Muslim Caliphate.

  16. Space by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think maybe what we're going to see is a rather serious shift in how we think about space travel. I'll bet China is going to come up with some very innovative ideas as they develop their space program. There's the vast amounts of existing expertise available in NASA, the ESA, and what's left of the Russian space program. The ESA and NASA are still pumping out cool new ideas. And now we have the private sector trying to get its foot in the door. With all of this knowlege, skill, imagination, and toil, the dam is probably getting close to bursting, ushering a new age of space exploration and technology. History has shown rather clearly that when you get this much competition (or cooperation -- in science, they're basically the same thing) going on, big stuff happens.

    1. Re:Space by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      I'll bet China is going to come up with some very innovative ideas as they develop their space program.

      I bet they'll use dragons.

  17. Farce by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    Well, you have to admit, the shuttles seemed like a good idea. They haven't panned out as promised, but it still makes sense to try and get as much return on that investment (if only scientific return) as possible while waiting for NASA's next generation of launch vehicles to be designed and built.

  18. Fixing by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thinking of fixing, there was a famous incident in WW2 where a supposedly ruined American aircraft carrier was repaired to battle-worthiness in three days. Its presence in a subsequent engagement created enough confusion among the Japanese commanders to cost them the battle. And you know, America really did once have a reputation for precisely this kind of engineering awesomeness, which helped build America into the industrial giant it is. Could America ever regain this prestige? Maybe... if they'd ditch their hero worship of illiterate business school and start celebrating their genius Scientists and Engineers again, if they tried to be the kind of Country that Einstein immigrated to, rather than the kind of country he emigrated from, if the very idea of someone having a degree other than an MBA didn't make the average American vomit with an intense anti-illectualist rage.

    1. Re:Fixing by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      "... if the very idea of someone having a degree other than an MBA didn't make the average American vomit with an intense anti-illectualist rage."

      Of course the irony here - the fact that with this sweeping generalization you've employed about as much actual thought as this hypothetical "average American" you're railing against - has most likely totally escaped your notice.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Fixing by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

      Ironic as it may be, it further supports his claim, especially if he himself is an 'average american'. ;-)

      --
      --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
    3. Re:Fixing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti-intellectualism is very much well and alive in the US, though. My local public high school, for instance, budgets over 3 times more to the football program alone than the entire science department. That gives the science department less than $9/child/year to buy all their textbooks and experiment materials, as opposed to the football program's over $200/child/year. And the math department gets far less than the science department.

    4. Re:Fixing by mark99 · · Score: 1

      The business of america has always been business. Engineers and Scientists have always been second best, and are most admired if they sucessful businessmen too, like Thomas Edison.

      And I am sure that the NASA engineers would do a much better job if they thought that their own lives and families depended on them doing the best job they could. It is just that we are all so rich and bloated now. That is the price of sucess.

      I often wonder how Rome pulled off being top dog for so long. I don't think America's dominance will last anything like that long.

  19. How about they use the old coolant by Racine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This was never a problem until NASA had to change to a non-freon coolant in the 90s, in order to comply with EPA regulations. Can't NASA get an exemption from this? Is freon that so bad that we can't even afford to allow the Shuttle to use it, at the expense of a kludgy workaround that has, to date, claimed 7 lives?

    --
    Tcl my Pico! There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
    1. Re:How about they use the old coolant by grozzie2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, this has been a problem since the first launch. Maybe you are to young to remember, but there was a lot of tension for the first shuttle re-entry, because there were tiles missing, apparently lost/damaged during launch. It all worked out ok, so, the attitude became 'oh, lose a few is no big deal'. Eventually it became a big deal.

    2. Re:How about they use the old coolant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority of lost tiles on the first shuttle launches were the tiles that were on corners and things, such as the OMS pods, not the underside and therefore not due to foam shedding. If tiles had fallen off the underside you can be pretty certain the orbiter woulda crashed.

    3. Re:How about they use the old coolant by ebvwfbw · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Actually, this has been a problem since the first launch. Maybe you are to young to remember, but there was a lot of tension for the first shuttle re-entry, because there were tiles missing, apparently lost/damaged during launch. It all worked out ok, so, the attitude became 'oh, lose a few is no big deal'. Eventually it became a big deal.

      Actually loosing a tile or two doesn't matter. Actually when they switched, tile damage went up dramatically. Read about it here - http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4448 .

      Environmentalists have lied to us for years. Here is a link to the founder of Greenpeace exposing what he has put us through - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html . I admire his courage for coming clean in such a public manner. Unfortunately there are still a lot of anti-nuke nuts out there. Looking at my electric bill, I wish they would go away.

      Envoronmentalists have also helped us a great deal. For example eliminating Tetra-ethyl-lead ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra-ethyl_lead )- a catalyst used to slow down the raction of gasoline burning (a catalyst either speeds up or slows down a reaction by definition). They have also done a lot of other good like taking CO (carbon monoxide) out of the atmosphere from gasoline engines. They said convert it into harmless CO2, a gas that plants need, a gas that promotes life. A "greenhouse" gas and that is a good thing. Plant trees too. Now they are telling us that CO2 causes global warming and it must be eliminated or we all die!

      So the real trick is knowing if they are lying to us or they have something to what they are saying. Take a stand, ban di-hydrogen monoxide! See http://www.snopes.com/science/dhmo.asp

    4. Re:How about they use the old coolant by sholden · · Score: 1

      Envoronmentalists have also helped us a great deal. For example eliminating Tetra-ethyl-lead ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra-ethyl_lead )- a catalyst used to slow down the raction of gasoline burning (a catalyst either speeds up or slows down a reaction by definition).

      A catalyst "by definition" lowers the activation energy of a reaction, how you manage to translate that showing down a reaction I don't understand. The other part of the "definition" is that the catalyst is unchanged at the end of the reaction, but tetra-ethyl-lead is decomposed and the by-products help reduce knocking (but you linked to a description of that...) and is not reformed by the end of the reaction.
    5. Re:How about they use the old coolant by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1
      A catalyst "by definition" lowers the activation energy of a reaction, how you manage to translate that showing down a reaction I don't understand. The other part of the "definition" is that the catalyst is unchanged at the end of the reaction, but tetra-ethyl-lead is decomposed and the by-products help reduce knocking (but you linked to a description of that...) and is not reformed by the end of the reaction.

      Looks like wikipedia strikes again with yet another incomplete/misleading entry. At least I hope I'm not unfairly accusing you of looking at the wiki. A catalyst is anything that speeds up or slows down a reaction. Increasing the reaction is how it is almost always used and a lot of people (myself in the past) don't know that it can also mean slowing down the reaction - a negative catalyst is also known as an inhibitor. TEL acts as an inhibitor in this case. To be fair the wiki does mention inhibitor, however I don't think they give it enough of an explanation.

      You have me worried about the second part, it not being changed as a result of the reaction. Could I have been taught wrong? This question was actually one that I got wrong in college chemistry. I didn't think it was a catalyst and I got into an argument with my prof. over it for the same reasons you mention as I recall. The professor is long gone - old age. As I recall, she said that it is an additive and also a catalyst in the reaction to do with gasoline and oxygen. The fact that the TEL doesn't actually have something to do (chemically) with the gasoline reaction to being oxidized makes it a catalyst. That is, you will still get the normal reaction of gasoline with the oxygen though it is more controlled. The fact that the TEL is destroyed in the process didn't seem to concern him. She mentioned something about the heat and not a chemical reaction with the gasoline causing it to decompose and that is the key. If the gasoline somehow combined or reacted with the TEL then it would simply be an additive. You would have to be able to show the chemical reaction between the gasoline, TEL and oxygen and the subsequent energy released (or not released) and such. Wiki shows the reaction that TEL has with the head and decomposing as you mentioned, they also don't show a reaction with gasoline.

      Don't take this as gospel, however. I'm not a chemist. If you have access to a professor it might be worth asking him about this if you are interested. Otherwise you may get more info on TEL than you ever cared to know about.

    6. Re:How about they use the old coolant by sholden · · Score: 1

      I was actaully going from memory from my chemistry days at uni - back before I made the switch from chem eng to comp sci. But a google gives:

      http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/ bp/ch22/activate.html#rate
      http://www.chem.brown.edu/chem12/catalyst/catalyst .html

      and of course at some that don't state the speed must be increased:
      http://wine1.sb.fsu.edu/chm1046/notes/Kinetics/Cat alyst/Catalyst.htm
      http://www.purchon.com/chemistry/catalyst.htm

      So yes I guess people do call inhibitors catalysts - learn something new every day I guess...

      As for TEL being a catalyst, I'd still argue it isn't because it isn't the TEL that does anything, it's the products of its decomposition which would be classified as catalysts assuming the link you have is correct (I don't know the details - chem eng was about the cat cracking side of petroleum, not the burn it an engine part :)

  20. Yippee! by zestymonkey · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Let's keep throwing money at band-aids for an antiquated space program. After all, we have a station that needs a shuttle and a shuttle that needs a station. We can't just ignore the obscene amounts of money already spent at creating this uncorruptible symbiosis.

    What's wrong with this country? Why do spending budgets have such inertia?

    --

    return;
  21. Wow by countach · · Score: 1

    So there is a 50% less chance of dying in a fiery ball of rocket fuel.

    Why do I not feel that comforted?

    1. Re:Wow by grommit · · Score: 1

      Probably because you have a horrible grasp of statistics concepts.

    2. Re:Wow by RCO · · Score: 1

      Well, I can understand countach not getting the warm fuzzi,,, um, never mind.

      --
      'And all the monkeys aren't in the zoo Every day you meet quite a few...'
  22. Yet, I couldn't believe by rbanffy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yet, I couldn't believe they never inspected the orbiter fully while still in orbit until after they lost Columbia.

    I always imagined someone did a spacewalk (even as spacewalks are dangerous) during one of the first flights to inspect the spaceship for damage done during lift-off. This is not the way to do engineering - building something extremely complex and expensive and not learn every tiny bit it has to teach.

    The sad part is that lives could have been saved.

  23. Build a space bus. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 2, Insightful

    NASA needs to scrap the shuttle. Then scrap the CEV. Then with the freed up money build a 'true space exploration vessel' that will be docked and serviced at the ISS. You use the current crop of heavy lifters to get the parts and supplies up there and the Soyuz to transport the people up and down. Why wast money reinventing what we have already.

    1. Re:Build a space bus. by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      NASA needs to scrap the shuttle. Then scrap the CEV. Then with the freed up money build a 'true space exploration vessel' that will be docked and serviced at the ISS.

      After you scrap the Shuttle and CEV.....by the time you get anything else large enough up there, the ISS will be a pile of unhabitable rubble.

  24. I think we should all unite our voices and say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Gimme Dat Ding!

  25. Generalization by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone generalizes all the time. If you didn't generalize about absolutely everything, you'd be incapable of any action or thought whatsoever. Generalizing about the majority, of course, is particularly appropriate, since the majority is precisely the group about which generalizations are accurate. And reality is that Americans are an extraordinarily anti-intellectual people. Not at the nearly the same level as the totalitarian regimes of the 30s and 40s (where intellectuals were sometimes jailed or killed) or modern Islamic states (where intellectuals are consistently jailed or killed), but definitely far worse than other modern industrialized western nations. Some nations actually put scientists on their currency. I think Fermi would look quite smashing on a $50 bill, don't you? Edison could be on $100, Tesla could go on dollar coins (heh). Feynman, being an accomplished safecracker as well as a scientific genius and brillian teacher, could get the $1000 bill. It makes a lot more sense to celebrate these people that actually improved the world in a very real way, rather a bunch of jackasses whose only redeeming quality is that their lies were relatively consistent and easy to fall for.

    1. Re:Generalization by bytesex · · Score: 1

      "modern Islamic states (where intellectuals are consistently jailed or killed)"

      Journalists maybe, or activists. But engineers, rocket scientists or nuclear physicists (whose very usefulness you seem to imply) ? Name one such state. I don't mean to apologize for modern Islamic states, but I fear that rhetoric has got the better of you. You should not let that happen to you, unless, of course, you could prove me wrong.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    2. Re:Generalization by Ana10g · · Score: 1

      Okay, gross estimation here, but, if one of those people refused to work on the project that their government told them to work on, then they would be killed or jailed (and tourtured too!!!). Iraq did this (even with soccer players!) under Sadaam.

      --
      just an analog boy living in a digital age.
    3. Re:Generalization by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Taliban consistently was running around executing schoolteachers as "intellectuals". What they really meant to do was wipe out the "intellectual elite" which could give rise to there being some sort of other elite rather than the imam's.

    4. Re:Generalization by jafac · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And now, the salafists are free to run amok, and kill barbers and torch their shops because the koran forbids hair cutting.

      Yeah.

      Iraq is so much better off now.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    5. Re:Generalization by Alakaboo · · Score: 1

      You may already know this, but perhaps not everyone does. Your comment about Fermi reminded me. Before the euro, Italy had the lira, and they did indeed choose some scientist types for their paper currency:

              * 1,000 lire, Maria Montessori (physician, educator, and scientist)
              * 2,000 lire, Guglielmo Marconi (engineer, inventor of the radio)
              * 10,000 lire, Alessandro Volta (physicist, inventor of the battery)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Lira

      The other portraits are of painters, composers, sculptors, etc.

      I wonder if any other country's currency displays such a trend...

    6. Re:Generalization by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

      Didn't Israel put Einstein on one of their bills?

  26. what are you talking about by someone1234 · · Score: 1

    The russians just lost 18 satelites at launch.

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  27. New Foam? Not. by LooseChanj · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This would seem to indicate that the new foam is working better.

    The foam itself hasn't changed at all, so that comment is misleading. What's been changed is where the foam is applied.

    Oh, and there's two types of foam btw. There's the stuff that gets sprayed on the acreage areas of the tank (which is applied by machine), and there's the foam that's hand applied to stuff that needs a bit more precision. The acreage foam is the new environmentally friendly stuff you hear blamed for the Columbia accident. Which is ironic, because it's the other foam, the hand applied variety, they've had so much trouble with. And guess what? It's the older, non "evironment friendly" type, and it's also the type that caused Columbia's disaster.

    --
    Mix the failings of Usenet with the shortcomings of the World Wide Web and the result is slashdot.
  28. China is not a leader in space by amightywind · · Score: 1
    It looks to me that the Asian countries are going to take over real space exploration. That's both good and bad. China isn't exactly known for sharing information, but at least they are doing it.

    How do you figure? China has launched 2 missions in 4 years, for a total of 7 days in space. They are flying a rocket/spacecraft that is a virtual clone of a Soyuz which they purchased. They haven't developed anything fron scratch. . They have no heavy lift capability. They have never launched an unmanned exploration mission. They are practically begging the US to be allowed to dock with ISS. Aren't you being a bit premature?

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:China is not a leader in space by mrxak · · Score: 1

      Yeah, pretty much they've been buying their way into technological advancement. How do you think they've been modernizing their military? Heavy use of espionage and buying up hardware on the black market to reverse engineer it.

  29. don't use statistics for this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh good, only half of the dents were smaller than an inch. how many were smaller than an inch on the shuttle that disintegrated?

    It is my feeble understanding that IT ONLY TAKES 1 'BIG ENOUGH' DENT TO DESTROY THE SHIP along with the people inside.

    all those geniuses and they can't innovate another latching system that doesn't involve explosive chunks of debris at mach 7?

    on the other hand, they must think they are talking to complete retards.

  30. Rome by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    It was the slaves. As soon as you lose the slaves, it's all downhill.