Slashdot Mirror
Gouge Found on Shuttle Endeavour's Underside
SonicSpike writes " NASA has discovered a chunk missing from the underside of the space shuttle Endeavour. It was discovered after the shuttle docked with the ISS earlier today. Technicians theorize it may have been caused by ice ripping free of a fuel take during takeoff. From the article:'The gouge — about 3 inches square — was spotted in zoom-in photography taken by the space station crew shortly before Endeavour delivered teacher-astronaut Barbara Morgan and her six crewmates to the orbiting outpost ... On Sunday, the astronauts will inspect the area, using Endeavour's 100-foot robot arm and extension beam. Lasers on the end of the beam will gauge the exact size and depth of the gouge, Shannon said, and then engineering analyses will determine whether the damage is severe enough to warrant repairs. Radar images show a white spray or streak coming off Endeavour 58 seconds after liftoff. Engineers theorize that if the debris was ice, it pierced the tile and then broke up, scraping the area downwind. Pictures from Friday's photo inspection show downwind scrapes."
I wonder how many times this kind of thing happened in the 20-ish years before the Space Shuttle started monitoring its underside like this. Surely this can't be the first time (ignoring Columbia) falling foam has taken a chunk out of the shuttle's heat shielding. IMHO, this is a nearly inevitable side effect of the idiotic design of the shuttle, putting the astronauts next to the fuel and not above it. These kinds of tests and precautions can only be good, but if NASA had stuck with what worked up to that point (astronauts on top of the assembly) instead of changing things up, the tests and worries wouldn't be necessary, and lives would have been saved in 2003, and possibly 1986. Here's hoping this turns out to be inconsequentially small, or at least easily repairable.
Those who anthropomorphize science and/or nature already believe in an intelligent designer.
You know what bugs me? Ok? They have this 100-foot robot arm but they don't have the 250-foot robot that it must have come from. I mean if it has lasers on its ARM, imagine what else it has lasers on. Like, for example, on it's frikken head.
Which it's important to know if theres a 250-foot frikken robot with frikken lasers on its frikken head out there roaming around all mad because NASA ripped its arm off.
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
"Whaddya mean you forgot the Duct Tape?"
Table-ized A.I.
Yeah, that's it. That's why NASA has sent up tile repair kits with the crew, and made sure they dock at a space station capable of supporting the astronauts for an extended stay. I'm sure the crew of the Endeavour is quite doomed.</sarcasm>
Failure is not an option!
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
3 years of reloading slashdot every day finally comes to fruition.
:-)
Think that's hard, next try to get your First Girlfriend
Table-ized A.I.
(http://slashdot.org/...id=44091&cid=4592270)
I will never socialize with a Slashdot user. Sorry guys
Blame yourselves. Coming from an 80's sitcom's muppet's genitals, that hurts.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
NASA: the new Star Trek.
Please help metamoderate.
I once had a little Corolla like the shuttle. Every time I took the car out for any sort of drive I had to re-inflate one of the tires, so eventually I just bought one of those lighter powered air compressors. Eventually I got the money and replaced the tires and soon after the car.
You would think that with billions of dollars and thousands of talented engineers they could come up with a way of launching the shuttle without having to resort to repairing the damn thing before they can return home again.
Here's a non-sensationalist summary of the situation that's not just yanked from AP:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5195
The damage is likely minor, but the media loves jumping on these things.
Actually it depends a lot on the shape and mass of the piece of debris. When the piece of debris separates from the fuel tank it has the same velocity as the shuttle. Then it interacts with the atmosphere. For a piece of foam, it will slow down extremely rapidly in the lower atmosphere so that there is a large difference in velocity when the Shuttle rams it. In the upper atmosphere which is much more diffuse the difference in velocity will be much slower. For a piece of ice which will have a high mass and possibly a streamlined shape, it would not slow down nearly as much as a piece of foam. But the ice might have a greater mass. Depending upon the situation the kinetic energy (1/2*mv^2) may be higher for the foam due to the square of the velocity term.
For these reasons a loss of foam in the upper atmosphere when the Shuttle is traveling Mach 15 (for example) is not as serious as a loss of foam in the lower atmosphere when the Shuttle is traveling Mach 1. The point of maximum damage for a piece of foam or ice will occur when the slowing down of the debris relative to the speed of the shuttle is at a maximum. The piece that doomed Columbia broke off when Columbia was traveling roughly 1700 mph at about 80,000 ft. It was estimated that the piece struck with a difference in velocity of about 530 mph. This is relatively close to Max Q. Any impact within about 30 seconds of Max Q is very dangerous.
The Discovery was given remote landing capability in 2006. I would be shocked if the Endeavour didn't have this same capability.
3 0/0458246&from=rss
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/
If mission control thinks a manned landing too risky, they'll just hook up the remote system and send down the can without the spam. Another Shuttle will be sent up in 6 or 8 weeks and take the whole lot of them home.
This would probably be another large setback to the ISS and to the astronaut corps. The "rescue mission" would probably depart with just 2 or 3 astronauts. And if the Endeavour was lost on re-entry, it would probably doom the shuttle program.
Sucks to be an astronaut these days. Chances of dying, 1 in 59, and you're lucky to get a single ride every 10 years.
On the other hand, SpaceX may get be getting some rush orders for Falcon 9's and Dragons.
Not necessarily. The terminology 'gouge' could be the result of the overcompensation for the Challenger and Columbia tragedies. Reading the NASA articles carefully, it seems that there 'could' be damage to a heat shielding plate based on computer imaging. If inspection shows damage, then I am sure the ISS crew will be more than happy to host the Astronauts until the repairs are completed, and re-entry has been shown to be safe in the most conservative of minds. My prediction; the Endeavor will arrive home quite safely.
Too bad NASA doesn't have access to any Rocket Scientists.
Maybe they could find some way to overcome whatever this treacherous material is that they've codenamed: "Styrofoam."
Although the new cameras do give us much nicer pictures of the things they decided were too hard to fix.
I have some somewhat offtopic questions I was hoping someone here might be able to shed some light on.
Does anyone know how/if NASA handles things like micrometeorites? Now, I know that for the most part they're just tiny specks of debris, and *very far* and *very few* between, but do they have any kind of contingency plan for fixing either parts of the shuttle or the ISS in a case of impact? I've seen and heard a lot of times that even a small speck at those speeds can punch a rather large hole in even thick aluminum/steel/etc plating. Can a spec of dust truly do that much damage, or are they exaggerating and really talking about something more along the size of a pebble or even a grain of sand? It wouldn't surprise me to learn that a tiny speck of debris could indeed punch a huge whole, but it also wouldn't surprise me that even the scientific/educational* shows I've seen this on could be exaggerating for effect. (* I use scientific/educational loosely, as even stuff on the Discovery Science channel is still entertainment, especially more so now than ever it seems)
Also, how would an event like the Perseid meteor shower change the odds? Again, I realize that even during a meteor shower, the actual meteors and objects are extremely sparse. What I'm wondering is, do they (statistically speaking) increase the likelihood of an impact, or are they still so sparse as to have very little consequence?
And finally, about what is the lower limit for NASA and other agencies when it comes to tracking space junk and meteors that orbit the Earth? I know they have some kind of tracking system, but I'm wondering what its limits and capabilities are. Are they making efforts to curb space junk, since I imagine there's more stuff in orbit now than ever? Are the number of launches increasing with time as well, or have they sort of leveled off or even dropped off now that we have a lot of communication, research, etc satellites in orbit?
Apologies for asking here instead of googling, but I figured it might make for good discussion. Or at the very least, expand my knowledge a bit.
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
Because doing what you suggest cost money, taxpayers money. It is an election year (ah, democracy were goverment is paralysed for months before and after an election every two years, might this be the REAL reason countries like Japan, Korea and now China raced ahead of the west so fast?) and you are calling for an increase in spending, and therefore taxation.
It might be possible to get setup a campaign with that but you would also be the first person in history to actually end up with a negative amount of votes.
Not saying you are not right, just ain't gonna happen. Not until the Chinese space program becomes news and the US suddenly realizes that it is loosing face and it starts another space race (by setting a goal they can achieve quickly and then loudly shouting that was the goal all along for everyone and claim victory even if some doubters question the actual results (was the US/USSR space race "won" by landing on the moon OR did the russians with the their continued space pressence with MIR really have the most succesfull program?)).
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I agree with you 100%. That was the point of the sarcasm tag. ;-)
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I understand why you might say that, but it's a little bit unfair to cast your net that wide.
At one time in my long and sorted career I participated in a NASA sponsored symposium on UBE engines. Have to admit, there was a rush to riding the bus that had NASA written on it, and I had a NASA badge. It was really something, just being associated with that acronym.
My point is, the young lads and lasses that work for NASA are just pumped to be there. Don't disparage them for feeling that way. It's the older bunch that should know right from wrong, and that's where you have a point, they don't always act like they do.
NASA has a unique problem engineering-wise, which is that the very name psyches out the people that work there. Anywhere else, a highly qualified young person would feel protected to call bullshit, but not at NASA.
If I could give any advice to a 20-something working at that place it would be: don't act like you work for a legendary establishment. Act like you work for ACME spaceships Inc. Call it like you see it, and if you find it hard to do think of this: if NASA turfs you out, there are plenty of opportunities for people with those 4 letters on their resume to make obscene amounts of money. So, theres absolutely no reason to worry about your future. Do the right thing.
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
I have nothing comical or insightful to add. I just hope that everything turns out for the best. I want to add my voice to that.
Especially since there is a teacher on board.
"Flag on the moon. How did it get there?"
Only just before this mission (STS-118).
r eless_scanner.html
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/news/wi
Basically it's a close-range imager for cracks in the tiles, to reduce the need for manual inspection. Little detail in that link, but the question is: Was it was made for the ground crew or the shuttle crew to inspect the tiles?
Still, at least they have the SSPTS (Station-to-Shuttle Power Transfer System) available and working, which gives them a few more days in orbit to evaluate and fix things.
Meteor showers are the BEST times to send shuttles into space!!
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
I've been reading slashdot since about 1998 or 1999, I forget which. My reader number is not quite accurate because I deleted my original slashdot registration after several months to change the handle name (and then someone named a movie after my new handle name, which is really irritating because I got the name swordfish from a Marx Brothers movie).
Anyway, that's the funniest post I've seen on slashdot so far, although I gave up reading the feedbacks for 99% of the articles a few years ago. So thanks for that. You've made my day. Well expressed, good timing, nice wording and smooth syntax. Too bad there isn't a hall of fame to aggregate the best feedback posts!
I was up too darn late watching the Nasa TV press conference. Questions were asked about maybe the debris source being space junk from an old rocket;
- sci-shuttle11aug11,1,1712330.story?coll=la-headlin es-nation&ctrack=2&cset=true
"NASA also revealed that Endeavour came within a mile of a piece of floating space junk during the launch. The garbage was an old Delta rocket body that has been orbiting for years, NASA said".
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la
Tracked back to a '70s launch apparently, though I can't confirm this apart from what I heard.
Nico M, London, GB.
What am I missing?