Slashdot Mirror
Discovery Launch Delayed Due To Engine Issue
An anonymous reader writes "The launch of Space Shuttle Discovery was originally slated for February 12th, has now been postponed to February 19th — at the earliest. The change of launch dates were decided by NASA managers during a review of the shuttle's flow control valve in the main engine. The new date is pending further analysis of the flow control valve and everything checking out okay for pre-flight tests. Discovery's STS-119 14-day mission will deliver the station's fourth and final set of solar arrays, completing the orbiting laboratory's truss, or backbone. The arrays will provide the electricity to fully power science experiments and support the station's expanded crew of six in May."
... for 20 now? How many miles on it?
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
I feel that manned space flight for the last thirty years or so has been more or less stagnant. I'm hoping the introduction of private sector space initiatives will change this. Only time will tell though.
The ISS is having trouble with a 'mysterious' vibration that occurred last time they tried to fire the engines for an orbital adjustment.
My guess is the Shuttle engine delay is just an excuse to postpone things while they try to find a way to move the ISS without it shaking itself to pieces.
Managers actually making a smart decision about not pushing a shuttle out the door before it was ready?
I suppose this can be attributed to the fact that this isn't a time sensitive flight, or a race against the reds or something. I really got tired of reading about the blunders of management in NASA during my engineering ethics class back in the day. Now I just read about it happening elsewhere in my spare time. At least now I'm only paying an exorbitant price for internet instead of tuition.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
It only took NASA my entire lifetime to come to that conclusion, but they have. Of course, they also decided to let us go for a few years without being able to put people in orbit, so like a lot of things they could do the switch over less retardedly.
but where do you put the ground wire?!
That means all the people that can't get a coupon to buy a digital TV converter won't be able to see it launch. Maybe they'll have to delay the analog TV shutdown.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
You guys have been keeping count on the horsepower of the shuttle engines.
The trouble now, I guess, is to get 500,000 horses and attach them to Discovery.
Did you know the Space Shuttle is comprised of 2.5 million parts making it the most complex machine ever built? Of these parts, steel valves are considered critical and of the highest order to resolve before launch. It's shameful that NASA has so technical snafu's that result in launch delays but one must be reminded the Shuttle program is nearing extinction and suffered severe underfunding and mismanagement since 2004. There is no story here, we're not dealing with "go fever" or lack of engineering ethics. This is simply a sensible delay called by a beleaguered but pragmatic administration responsible for human lives and a machine that still gets the job done. The shuttles help construct the ISS, launches satellites, documents space/Earth observation and serves as a taxi service and escape vehicle for astronauts and cosmonauts. Yes, all it takes is one part in a million (or two) to bring the shuttle and the entire program to an instant extinction faster than a legislative body can do by simply denying funds. In life there is risk and only in risk is there achievement and glory. The entire program was a risk. As we learn of yet another delay, one should never forget the great endeavor which was and for now still is the Space Shuttle.
that qualifies as acceptable. I say this from the stand point of that there are more than enough Congressmen who look at the NASA budget as source of funds and would love to abscond with this money all under the cover of "protecting life". Someone will always eventually found to assign blame to but in the end it comes down to dollars. The amount spent on the shuttles outweighs the payoff. Throw in a few high profile accidents and the "reasonable side" will come out screaming how these billions could be better spent elsewhere. They would gladly let the private side spend the money and assume the risk because if its successful it opens a new revenue stream of fees and taxes.
I would love to see more, but in an era where the only thing stimulated is special interest groups that deliver votes can we really expect NASA to continue getting money? Science and Math don't deliver votes. They are however a convenient mechanism to divert money to organizations that sound as if they would improve those areas but rarely if ever do.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
crummy "space station" solar panels for "6-man" crew. Wowza! Somebody pinch me! HAL is crying for sure!
Did you know the Space Shuttle is comprised of 2.5 million parts making it the most complex machine ever built? Of these parts, steel valves are considered critical and of the highest order to resolve before launch.
Though the Shuttle has a huge amount of redundancy, there are an amazing number of parts which are "must work' devices, i.e. failure of the part would almost certainly lead to catastrophic loss of the vehicle. The main engine flow control valves are of course one of these, but there are many others which are not so obvious, such as the payload bay latching mechanism. If this doesn't work, you're stuck in orbit with an open payload bay and cannot re-enter. The explosive bolts that secure the payload are also must-work devices, if they fail due to vibration on launch you might have the payload come loose inside the bay during ascent - a very bad thing to happen. Also, they must not fail to work when releasing the payload, or the payload might become lodged half in and half out of the Shuttle, preventing re-entry.
And tell me you wouldn't be shitting your drawers if the space station you were on was shaking like that. Even gentle turbulence on a plane will make some people sweat. A ratting space station is seriously panic time.
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
From the article: "The valve is one of three that channels gaseous hydrogen from the engines to the external fuel tank."
See, there's your problem right there. Valve's installed backwards. Now where's my maintenance contract, NASA?
A decade ago, when the economy was awesome, we could expect several 100 response on this. Maybe more. Now, it is less than 100, while discussions about the global economy as well who is at fault garner 500-1000 responses.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Our missions to the moon before can be compared to what others did in moving from Europe to Americas. Basically, exploratory at first, followed by settlement later. We probably have spent far too long on the ISS, but many lessons have been learned. Probably one of the most important is the cost of doing this is expensive and needs to come down. Part of that is by recycling. That is what is happening NOW with the last few trips and the next few. Once we recycle air and water with little loss RELIABLY, then we will see costs drop. While mars will be about cheap none solar energy, the moon will be all about reliable recycling systems. The energy will not be cheap, but much more so than mars. The moon will use solar on the poles with nukes to follow. But to be honest, I have been wondering if thermal would be a better idea. JTEC strikes me that it can use temp differences just in the soil at the poles. For example, storing heat on one side of berm of over 100C, while on the other side of the crater would be -200C. That is a pretty good differential.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
NASA wanted to re-do it in the 80's as well as 90s. Remember the x-33?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.