Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Shuttle Atlantis Docks With International Space Station For the Last Time

Posted by timothy on from the since-we-were-in-the-neighborhood dept.

The BBC reports, with video, that the shuttle Atlantis "has docked with the International Space Station for the final time. The shuttle has brought a year's supply of food and around two tonnes of other supplies and spare parts to the ISS," where the shuttle will remain docked for at least seven days.

18 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. so... by buanzo · · Score: 2

    how are more supplies going to get there?

    --
    Buanzo Consulting - 15 Years of GNU/Linux experience, for you.
    1. Re:so... by ericloewe · · Score: 2

      The same way Mir got them - Soyuz and Progress rockets, maybe the odd ESA rocket, too.

    2. Re:so... by rishistar · · Score: 2

      I believe the Shuttle has a larger cargo bay than standard alternative mechanisms for carrying stuff up to the ISS, which is why this last mission is so mundane in the cargo its carrying.

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    3. Re:so... by Trepidity · · Score: 2

      It's kind of interesting that the Space Shuttle was what was supposed to make going to space reliable and routine, as an advance from the previous single-use capsule technologies, which were expensive and could only be used once each.

      But for a variety of reasons, it turned out that the Space Shuttle remained fairly expensive and complex to launch, while capsules became reliable and cheap enough to be a routine way of getting people and stuff to/from space.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    4. Re:so... by ModernGeek · · Score: 3, Informative

      Look up European ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle)

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    5. Re:so... by Zorpheus · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is a nice list on [a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station#Docking_schedule]Wikipedia[/a].
      It is not only the Russian Progress and the European ATV, but the Japanese HTV, the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft and something called Cygnus. Payloads are 7t for ATV, 6t for HTV, 6t for Dragon, 2.6t for Progress, 2.7t for Cygnus.

  2. russia by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    russia

  3. Here's an idea... by jeffmeden · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why not just leave the shuttle there? It went up with just 4 astronauts, surely a soyuz capsule can bring them back. Let's just leave the shuttle there as a large-scale escape pod and science area. Why not do that with all the shuttles? Do we really need that many of them showing up in museums? Is the shuttle any less space-worth over the long term than the rest of the ISS?

    1. Re:Here's an idea... by ubergamer1337 · · Score: 2

      I'm not an expert, but I don't think the shuttle was designed for staying in space for more than about a month or so at a time. For one thing, it leaks oxygen. I don't think the space station is capable of supplying enough power right now to keep it operational when the power cells on the shuttle run dry.

    2. Re:Here's an idea... by plaukas+pyragely · · Score: 2

      To add: additional mass to move (ie more fuel required) when adjusting orbit. ISS is about 420 tones and fully loaded Space Shuttle Orbiter can weight up to 110 tones (hope I picked up correct figures from Wikipedia...).

    3. Re:Here's an idea... by camperdave · · Score: 4, Informative

      A shuttle is not just something that you can park in space. Certain elements need to be kept warm. Others need to be kept pressurized. That means the shuttle must be kept running. The shuttle gets its power from fuel cells which "burn" hydrogen and oxygen. The standard shuttle (such as Atlantis) can operate for about ten days. Endeavour and Columbia are the only two shuttles equipped with extended duration fuel tanks. There is a system by which the shuttle can be powered from the space station's power, but Atlantis is not equipped with that system.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  4. Re:Taking stock of the decades of the shuttle prog by jeffmeden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is my humble request:

    Taking stock of the 30 years of the shuttle program. I mean, I would like to know the benefits directly linked to the decades of this program.

    The stock should include among other metrics; how much tax payer dollars have been sunk into the program, how else these dollars could have been used, what benefits we've obtained as a nation, any missed opportunities and other benefits if any. Specifically, I would like to see tangible things that can directly be attributed to the presence of the shuttle program.

    Here's my take: There is not much we have benefited. I other words, the USA would not be that worse of if the shuttle program never existed.

    You are *so* right. With the approximately $200 billion that we spent on almost 30 years of space science, we could have bought: One failed insurance company!

    Oh wait, we did. Yeah, given the choice between owning a failed insurance company (AIG in case you hadn't guessed), and contributing 30 years of spaceflight to the world, I think I am going to have to go with the shuttle program on this one.

  5. Re:Taking stock of the decades of the shuttle prog by hedwards · · Score: 2

    Bullshit, this isn't something that you can assign a few bean counters to and end up with a meaningful number. What about the various engineers that got fired up about creating the shuttle? Or the many children that grew up wanting to pilot the shuttle that grew up to be scientists?

    This isn't something that you can readily tally up and deem to be unprofitable. There's areas like battery technology which received a huge boost because of research that NASA was doing, not to mention air and water filtration technology.

  6. Re:Taking stock of the decades of the shuttle prog by MSRedfox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's my take: There is not much we have benefited. I other words, the USA would not be that worse of if the shuttle program never existed.

    Tell that to every scientist that watched a space shuttle launch as a child and was inspired to learn. Not all rewards are obvious and tangible.

  7. Re:Taking stock of the decades of the shuttle prog by ubergamer1337 · · Score: 2

    If you're looking for tangibles, you can try this:
    http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/ten-tech-innovations-nasas-space-shuttle-trickled-down-non-astronauts

    But in reality, the entire benefit of the space shuttle program isn't just in "stuff". Lots of the benefits can't be boiled down into metrics, like inspiring children, boosting national pride, etc. I'm not going to claim that with these benefits the shuttles were worth their cost, but you're missing a lot of the point if you only look at the tangibles.

  8. Re:Taking stock of the decades of the shuttle prog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You gotta love false dichotomies. Either you are for the shuttle or you are for welfare to billionaires. Brilliant!

  9. Standing out last time "News" by prefec2 · · Score: 2

    * Last time Astronauts leaving shuttle and entering ISS
    * Last time reentering the shuttle
    * Last time use of a space toothbrush on a shuttle
    * Last time use of shuttle toilet
    * Last time farted on the shuttle
    * Last time hit by a pillow after farting in the shuttle
    * Last time energy bar picked from astronaut A consumed by astronaut B as a revenge action due to the fart thing earlier

  10. Re:Taking stock of the decades of the shuttle prog by Alioth · · Score: 2

    While I think the Space Shuttle was perhaps not the best way of achieving the last 30 years of US manned spaceflight... it does sound like you know the cost of everything but the value of nothing. A programme like the Shuttle should not be measured purely on tangible profit and loss, there's more to it than that.

    --
    Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows