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."

17 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. Well done, Atlantis... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Return home safely.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
  2. Re:And one to go by Admodieus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love the shuttle program, but I would never wish something to go wrong on a mission just so they can launch another shuttle.

    --
    "It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"
  3. Re:And one to go by sh00z · · Score: 5, Informative

    Uh, actually two more

  4. 12 days? by ivandavidoff · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

    1. Re:12 days? by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 3, Insightful

      More like "without up or down".

  5. Re:Why, oh why? by CasualFriday · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'll say what I said in an earlier reply: 1980's tech. I had a class with some of the guys who work in the firing room, and they are honestly amazed the shuttle still flies. My dad used to install the thermal tiles, he says that the safety violations and corner-cutting out at the cape are horrendous. Pair that with the old tech, and it's seriously time to replace/upgrade.

    --
    Raters gon' rate.
  6. Re:It doesn't come soon enough by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    when we cannot afford anything on Earth

    We can afford most everything on earth. We just simply can't pay billions of dollars that we don't have to failing businesses, ruin health care and do a million other things.

    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.

    The problem is, how are we going to get ahead in technology then?

    If the US government released all taxpayer-funded studies to the public to jump-start private businesses, that is one thing. But in reality everything is so classified that private businesses are starting from 1950s-era technology with very little funding.

    The US needs to take a clear stand and do one thing or another.

    A) Let a private company buy-out NASA and release all information for free to any US business or individual with an interest in producing spacecraft.
    or
    B) Continue to spend money developing new spacecraft and using taxpayer money to do great things.

    We can't continue to have an under-funded NASA. If Obama wants to waste taxpayer money on bailouts and such thats one thing, however then let the taxpayers have their money spent in research fulfilled, let a private company take over all of NASA and release information to the public. We can't move on with a crippled NASA and a crippled private sector. It just doesn't work.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  7. Re:Obsolete ! by Volante3192 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, curse old technology. Why haven't we moved on from this 'wheel' shape, by the way? Surely, new = better...

  8. I outlasted Atlantis by Brett+Buck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I worked on mission 51J (first Atlantis flight) and now it's done. Man, I am old...

    1. Re:I outlasted Atlantis by Brett+Buck · · Score: 3, Informative

      All due respect but I must jest: Tell us a story grandpa!

      Are you one of those kids I chased off my lawn last night?!

      What did you do for NASA? ./ is curious!

            I was an MCC console analyst on the mission control team for the payload. So I didn't work for NASA, but a contractor working for our governmental customer.

            A lot of people don't realize this, but NASA is not the biggest player in the space business. Some individual DOD and other government customer *programs* have budgets rivaling NASA, and there are a pretty good number of programs.

              Brett

  9. Falcon 9 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Falcon 9 by confused+one · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Been pushed back to no earlier than May 23, according to this

  10. Re:It doesn't come soon enough by morgauxo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's so sad that some people think this way. The space program is not stopping the country from getting into the black. The money required to pay off all the debt and solve the counties problems is orders of magnitude greater than the money required to properly fund the space program to do great things. Complaining that we shouldn't be spending money on a space program is like complaining that some kid playing on the beach shouldn't remove a bucket full of water from the great lakes because global warming has lowered water levels. It is ridiculous.

    Poverty will exist so long as mankind is mankind. There will always be good, hard working poor people so long as there is greed. There will be lazy poor people so long as there are people who are neither motivated to better their lives or crafty enough to cheat. There will be disease so long as there is life. There will be natural disasters so long as we live on a planet. To wait for humanity to solve all it's problems before expanding into the universe is to wait for extinction.

  11. 1960' and 2010's space flight equations by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!
  12. Re:Why, oh why? by caseih · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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. Things like the health bill don't even figure in (the CBO calculates the health bill is paid for from other budget savings). 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.

    The republicans are big on the idea of tax cuts, but they are traditionally the ones who run up spending and increase government size (goes back to Reagan). The hypocrisy coming out of that party is mind-blowing. Bush simultaneously decreased taxes, increased spending by a staggering amount, and increased the size of reach of government by an unprecedented amount, more than at any other time in recent history. The party of small government I think not.

    Honestly, if we had plowed even some of the money we've wasted in Iraq over the years (IE if we'd not gone to war) into things like NASA, we could have paid for constellation several times over and covered social programs and other important things easily. Scientists are clamouring to send new robotic missions to the planets. As one scientist involved put it to me, 3 days of war in Iraq and Afghanistan could pay for an entire mission to Europa. Three days!

  13. Atlantis' First Last Flight by TrekkieTechie · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  14. Re:Why, oh why? by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'll say what I said in an earlier reply: 1980's tech.

    To what specific 1980's tech are you referring? The SSME's were upgraded in the 90's and early 2000's, as were the AP-101 flight control computers. The original 'steam gauge' cockpit was also upgraded to a fully modern 'glass' cockpit in the same time frame. The airframes have been well maintained and many smaller parts/systems have been replaced or upgraded as needed as well.
     
    Seriously, saying "80's tech" is nothing but FUD. There's plenty of places where 80's (or even older) tech does just fine.
     
    Heck, just a couple of miles from me the shipyard still uses a lathe installed in the 1940's. The forging furnace a few buildings over (modulo a few overhauls) basically dates from the 1930's. A few miles in the other direction is the submarine base, where the hydraulic valves in the submarines are basically unchanged since the 1950's. The missiles they carry are built with 80's technology in their electronics - and the still can achieve a CEP of [a classified but very small number] of feet. The submarines navigation system uses computers designed in the 1970's.
     
      Don't be misled by consumer culture into believing that 'old == useless'.