Slashdot Mirror
Atlantis Blasts Off On Final Mission
shuz writes "Space shuttle Atlantis lifted off today on its STS-132 mission to the International Space Station — the final flight for the venerable vehicle. The mission involves three spacewalks over 12 days (PDF), during which the team will replace six batteries on the port truss which store energy from solar panels on that truss, bolt on a spare space-to-ground Ku-band antenna, and attach a new tool platform to Canada's Dextre robotic arm."
NASA has video of the historic launch and reader janek78 adds this quote from the mission summary: "Atlantis lifted off on its maiden voyage on Oct. 3, 1985, on mission 51-J. Later missions included the launch of the Magellan probe to Venus on STS-30 in May 1989, Galileo interplanetary probe to Jupiter on STS-34 in October 1989, the first shuttle docking to the Mir Space Station on STS-71 in June1995, and the final Hubble servicing mission on STS-125 in May 2009."
Well that means only one liftoff left to go. Sad day.
Return home safely.
Sent from your iPad.
Cool - 1970s tech is now almost obsolete. If only Musk could get his space launch vehicle upto speed - or even Rutan and his crew's could come up with some cheaper way to get to space it would be good.
Will someone please explain to me why we can't keep the shuttles running for another few years while we figure out how to replace them? Now that Obama has canceled the Constellation manned booster, and he granted a stay of execution to the Orion capsule (but it's still basically on life support) doesn't this leave the United States with no means to get humans into orbit? For several years? How is this give the United States any kind of strategic advantage?
Granted, the Constellation project was controversial within Nasa, but it's a science and engineering project and as we all know, engineering involves risks, trials, and redesigns. That's the way we got where we are today. Simply canceling it because we don't like spending some $6 billion a year to keep it going is ludicrous, given our willingness to pour literally hundreds of billions of dollars into nebulous goals like "stimulating" the economy or propping up banks that deserve to fail.
Even General Motors got some $18 billion in relief, talking about an organization that deserves to fail. Without GM, we'll still have a domestic car industry--Ford, Nissan, Toyota, and Honda are all operating in the U.S. and doing just fine--but without Constellation or the Shuttle, we'll have NO MANNED SPACE PROGRAM AT ALL. This seems like a strategic mistake in the extreme.
To make matters worse, we are planning to rely on our old sometime friends in Russia to get American astronauts into orbit, and we're hoping that private companies will take up the slack and, almost overnight, come out with systems that are certified for human space transport. Given that none of them has done even one manned flight so far, this seems rather premature.
Let's fund the Shuttle program for a few more years and restore Constellation to full funding. So, a few million people won't get free healthcare after all. Honestly, the economic benefits of the space program will more than make up for that. Eventually, tech spinoffs and the overall bigger economy will lift their boats--if they feel like working.
The U.S. can't just cede human space flight to other countries who are eager to take our place up there. We're not quitters; vote this fall and again in 2012 and throw out those who are.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
I know it's an unpopular view here on Slashdot but with the expense incurred on maintenance, launch, etc; the NASA tendency to ignore problems in order to make lofty management-centered goals (which arguably lead to the most recent disaster); and the fact that space just should not be a priority when we cannot afford anything on Earth, it is a wonderful thing to see this dated fleet retired.
I just hope we can keep the space program close down long enough (along with many other ineffective members of the government) so as to get our country back in the black.
As I refresh /. rhythmbox is playing "The final countdown".
Replace six batteries, bolt on a spare antenna and attach a new tool platform? If only my honey do list for tomorrow was that easy.
I worked on mission 51J (first Atlantis flight) and now it's done. Man, I am old...
Speaking of that, the Falcon 9 is scheduled to launch this Sunday (May 16th, 2010). This is one of the potential replacements of which you speak.
"We used to have a way to move things without robots. What was that again? - Ruth Gordon had one....Oh, The Wheel!"
Surely, new == better
FTFY
I always hated that show. *ducks*
60's: Country + Government + NASA = Man on the Moon
10': Country vs. Government vs. NASA = Bum a ride with the Russians
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
How many of us are still driving a 25 year old car?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Born July 1985
Still living May 2010
A few months older than Atlantis and still ticking...
Would have been nice to say for every important mission/launch of Atlantis I had a milestone event in my life...oh well.
If you get a nail in a wooden tire... ...it just holds it together better. If you get a nail in an inflated rubber tire, it's time to buy a new tire. Surely, new = better...
-- Terry
Repaid it with other borrowed/bailout money.
You really have to go beyond the headlines and look at the picky details
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/general-motors-commercial-complaint-bailout-ad-filed-ftc/story?id=10554206
http://cei.org/articles/2010/05/09/gm-deliberately-tried-deceive-americans-letter-editor
bah... I used to work for GM, and was in the UAW, and I *quit*. It was disgusting. Management sucks, those clueless investors suck (can't control their management) and the union sucks, buncha arrogant rednecks. For every one good employee with a clue, they have 50 who couldn't find their ass with a GPS and a map. They are the posterboy corporation that got so big they started believing their own BS. They should have been allowed to crash and burn same as those ripoff derivatives spewing casino banks.
It seems to me that one shuttle (even the Enterprise) is enough museum pieces. The shuttles are fully capable of autonomous flight. The horrendous expense of each flight is at least partly a function of maintaining the man-capable condition/reliability of the machine. So, strip out all the life support, all the seats, and the toilet, and use them as trucks at a greatly reduced cost until they blow-up or crash. Added benefit of greatly increased cargo capacity. Also can possibly use a more efficient launch profile as there would be no G force concerns for the passengers (not sure about this - just guessing). And if you ever need to send up people you can mount a life support module in the cargo bay.
Let's not get all teary eyed just now. Atlantis isn't home yet. And Congress may still extend the program (I'm not holding my breath on that one though) -- they have not approved the new plan and budget.
So basically the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, in which countries we now have a huge moral obligation to fix things, have cost us trillions of dollars, and continue to cost u, that we haven't really paid for yet, and can't afford to pay for.
I'm pretty sure it was John Candy who said, in 'Planes, Trains, and Automobiles', "I've never seen a man helped up by hist testicles before".
Given the kind of "help" we've given them so far, they would probably be better off without our "help" than with it.
-- Terry
This is probably Atlantis' last flight. However:
When she lands later this month, Atlantis won't be mothballed. She'll be put back in the standard post-flight turnaround process to ready her for the Launch On Need (LON) mission STS-335, intended to provide rescue capability if necessary for the last currently scheduled shuttle mission, Endeavor's STS-134. It has been pointed out that, assuming all goes well on STS-134, there will be a bought-and-paid-for STS stack checked out and ready to go... why not use it? STS-335 would become STS-135, and would fly next year with a four-person crew to the ISS, delivering a Multi-Purpose Logistics Module and extra supplies and equipment. Russian Soyuz ships would be used if rescue became necessary.
Source.
After 25 years of maintainance and upgrades, what percentage of this Atlantis, was part of the maiden flight in 1985?
So, when Obama proposed to increase NASA's budget, what social injustice is he intending to redress?
FWIW: I believe it's environmentalism...
He's basically retasking NASA with a lot of work for which NOAA is already responsible and already funded to do. That's what the funding is earmarked for, not for projects that NASA, in its role as the national aeronautics and space administration, have which correspond to its intended mission mandate.
-- Terry
black budget, which has no congressional oversight.
I thought that aiming accuracy was not the least concern in alcohol production.
Apologies, couldn't resist.
Which is what happens when you build a 'platform' and then continually develop it, which is what *should* have been done with Apollo.
To give an example of similar complexity (and whilst I'm not an aviation expert) it's hard to imagine the original 747's released continued to the latest model 747 without any improvements to their systems. When I say 'systems' I don't just mean aircraft systems but ground support 'system', repair procedures fault identification etc.
Now I know that much of the launch vehicle, in Apollo's case, ended up not being re-used when compared to a 747 or the Shuttle but my point is that the ongoing development of the *platform* is what is important. I'm certain that a 2010 model Apollo, had it's development continued, would be every bit as reliable at Soyuz. Now if we accept the design mistakes of the Shuttle and had ground systems that could better mitigate those problems what would a 2010 model Shuttle look like. The answer is, pretty much the same - just more reliable.
This is my frustration, as a keen observer, with the current space proposals. Why isn't choosing Shuttle derived system like Direct a viable option as a platform that has already been invested in? I know that there is a certain degree of politics involved but if that remains the key driver in these decisions then the entire space program will pretty much be over with the retirement of the Shuttle.
I feel this cynicism because if it takes another decade to have a human space program many of the people who have learned the valuable experiences will no longer be involved, this cycle will be repeated and the space program will remain one massive pork barrel.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
"This comment is very ignorant. As I look at the projected budget deficits for the next few years I'm struck by the fact that the vast majority of this deficit is really the war coming due. "
Even with war costs, the vast majority of the budget still goes for entitlements.... social security, medicare, etc.
About 40 percent goes to SS and Medicare. Another 17 percent goes to "other mandatory spending", including current interest on the debt and other social program. DOD is 23 percent of the budget. GDP spent on defense, despite being in a war, has stayed fairly steady. Military spending is nowhere near the levels seen during Ike, Kennedy, and Johnson's times. Defense took 50 percent of the federal budget in the 1950's.
I'm all for cutting some outrageous defense spending... fiascos like the DDG-100 and Joint Strike Fighter come to mind. But blaming our budget problems all on defense is dishonest and disingenuous. It's the entitlements that keep growing and eating more and more of the budget. You could eliminate the military completely, and in three decades the budget will still start coming up short because of social entitlements.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
How many of us are still driving a 25 year old car?
The Air Force is flying B-52's that are on average about 46 years old. The last BUFF rolled off the line at Boeing in 1962. USAF plans on using them another 30+ years. The last ones will be about 90 years old when they're finally retired.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
On behalf of everyone with a long term view, let me say: fuck you you ignorant fuck. My apologies to those few readers who are still sensitive to the word "fuck", but this fucking idiot is trying to promote an error that will fucking kill my fourth generation offspring, their progeny, and my hopes for the survival of mankind. Forgive me for being emotional about that, but if you can't get emotional about the Death of Man, you're dead inside already.
The rise of science occurred in an interglacial age that's lasted barely 9000 years. Our written history is barely 5,000 years. The vast majority of who and what we are (our culture) happened in the last 300 years. 10,000 years ago we were barely animals. When it ends the decline will be swift and violent, and for the 100,000 years of ice age that follows we'll be barely animals again if we survive at all. That end is due. It cannot be prevented no matter what we do. It's an Earth orbital thing. The survival of any mammals to the end of that 100KY, let alone Men, is quite questionable.
If our culture is to survive we need to establish a self-sufficent offspring of that culture in some place where our thermonuclear cruise missiles cannot reach them. That place is off of the Earth, and we need to do it now . "Someday later" is too late. A colony here on Earth won't do because in the decline there will be quite a lot of violence and there is no corner on the planet that won't be at risk. Even if a culture survived the Troubles, they would not have the resources to get us off this rock and so would slowly decline until they were extinct. 100,000 years is a long time. The end is the same. The end of terrestrial civilization is certain. It's inevitable. It's only the end of all civilization, science and culture, all that we have learned, potentially the end of the human genome, if we choose to allow it to be. If we choose that, if we listen to your ignorant mumblings, we deserve our fate and you have won, you ignorant fuck. Still, there will be no more NASCAR.
Mankind is it seems the first terrestrial species that has to choose extinction rather than having it thrust upon us. We could escape it if we wished. We could get off this rock if we cared. We could backup our genome and all of our knowledge offsite - if we so chose. But we won't. If we choose extinction then our supposed intelligence has no advantage over the peanut-sized brains of dinosaurs. It's another failed path in the Darwinist exploration of Life's potentials - tried this time and forgotten only to be retried a billion years hence when our mass has been restirred with the galaxy and given time to stew.
Now please find a convenient fire and die in it before you infect someone else with your idiocy.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Atlantis went off the air like 2 years ago. I think they ended up in orbit over Earth or something.
Mod parent up (and this down if you must, since I wrote the parent and I'm asking for an upmod there). I forgot to click the selfmods, and I think the parent post is worthy of them and I don't want it to be missed in the /. dross so I'm following up with this feeble plea.
Of course if you think the parent sucks, mod it down and this post too, but first please read this.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
We only live about 75 miles north of Kennedy Space Center, and yesterday was a nice, clear day. We went outside and watched the launch, as we do most of the shuttle launches. It was kind of sad, realizing this was the last time that orbiter would be launching.
No matter where you go... there you are.
After 25 years of maintainance and upgrades, what percentage of this Atlantis, was part of the maiden flight in 1985?
In terms of launch weight: ~57%
In terms of landing weight: ~74%
In terms of individual components: ~60%
Not including cargo, crew, food, OMS fuel, or non-orbiter stack components.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.