Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Shuttle Discovery Set To Buzz Washington, DC

Posted by timothy on from the crane-your-neck dept.

coondoggie writes "Barring bad weather, NASA said the space shuttle Discovery mounted atop the space agency's 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft will make a series of low passes — 1,500 ft. — around parts of Washington DC on April 17 between 10-11 am eastern daylight time." Discovery will be on its way to the Smithsonian from Florida; this is a rare chance in the post-shuttle era for people to still see a shuttle in flight; I'm planning a marathon drive to reach the parking lot at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center for what NASA's calling Shuttle Fly-In Day, in hopes of catching a glimpse.

20 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. "...to still see a shuttle in flight". by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · · Score: 3, Informative

    I had the chance to see the Enterprise atop the 747 upon its successful drop tests back in the 80's. Truly a magnificent sight.

    However, this was not -- and yours will not be -- a chance to still see a shuttle in flight. You'll witness a 747 in flight carrying the Space Shuttle. It will be gutted and turned into a shell of its former self leaving the US to outsource manned spaceflight to the Russians for years to come.

    --

    To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.

    1. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by tibit · · Score: 2

      Ekhm, ekhm, SpaceX would disagree with that.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Once SpaceX actually put someone into orbit, then lets talk - but trumpeting them now is just getting ahead of yourself.

    3. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by vlm · · Score: 2

      ...leaving the US to outsource manned spaceflight to the Russians for years to come.

      To the best of my knowledge COTS demo flight 2/3 is still on in 20 days. I am excited about this flight. Its the last test before regular scheduled space-x cargo flights begin.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COTS_Demo_Flight_2

      The proposal deadline for CCDev 3, which now has some hopelessly goofy new name that I can't be bothered to search for and doesn't matter anyway, was only something like 2 weeks ago according to the article I read when the deadline passed. The deadline was somewhere around the Ides of March. From a technical standpoint you don't have to do a heck of a lot different to shove a person into COTS 2/3. I guess testing the escape capsule would be really nice, but we flew the shuttle a hundred times without a realistic escape plan so I wouldn't freak. I'd stowaway on a cargo flight and worry more about the TSA reaction to my daring to travel without being humiliated by them than about surviving the flight itself. From an administration and contract awarding and paperwork standpoint it will be years before a person is stuffed into a COTS2/3 capsule, as seen above. Tech is advancing much faster than the paper pushers can possibly keep up.

      Its sort of like asking how long it takes for a manned jet flight to Hawaii. Well, in theory, I as a private citizen could leap into a tin can right now and be there somewhat before a late dinner. Actually with timezones it might technically still be lunch time when I arrive, I need to think about that. If I'm the govt, I need to work to save up the money (+ years?), get probed by creepy control-freaks at the airport (+2 hours), I have to propose competitive bids (+ months) then evaluate the bids and select them (+ months) then possibly court fights with those who don't get selected (+ years) then some more R+D flights under the new contract to "prove" what has already been done before (+ years). Finally some traditional scheduling issues (+ months). This is how a private citizen can fly to Hawaii before dinner, but NASA will not get there until at least 2030.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

      I had the chance to see the Enterprise atop the 747 upon its successful drop tests back in the 80's. Truly a magnificent sight.

      Let me second that - seeing the 747/Shuttle combo come in view and land is truly magnificent - eclipsed only by an up close look.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by ZankerH · · Score: 2

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Dragon
      Both have had successful flights, and their first flight to the space station is launching in a few weeks.

    6. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · · Score: 3, Informative

      agreed. Remember, SpaceX is only going after the re-supply business right now; and they haven't actually done this yet. Even the Russians messed this up -- twice. There's a big difference deliverying supplies and launching an astronaut and bringing him safely to earth. The Russians knew this. That's why they raised their prices when the US announced the end of the Shuttle program.

      --

      To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.

    7. Re:"...to still see a shuttle in flight". by tibit · · Score: 2

      You underestimate them. They were the first private entity ever to launch a spacecraft into orbit and later retrieve it. First as in first in the world. They pulled off something that only governments could do before them. They did it for slightly more that it cost to build the useless Orion service tower.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  2. Re:Showing off what was possible in times long gon by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So we have nothing to learn from the past? It's those very past glories that give incentive to keep improving so we can have that better future.
    And I think it's pretty easy to compare the 70's to today. Let me give an example: 1970's had Led Zeppelin, 2010's has Justin Bieber. See, comparison is easy!

  3. Back in 1987, over Montreal. by dannycim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I saw it back in 1987 over Montreal. Not only was it really neat to see the shuttle "in person", it was magnificent to see a 747 flying so low over my town.

    If you're there, don't miss it!

  4. Re:Showing off what was possible in times long gon by tibit · · Score: 2

    Space Shuttle ended up being everything to everybody, and when that happens you usually get mediocre performance. Many of its missions made no financial sense. For the cost of the Hubble repair missions they could have launched 2 or 3 more up there.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  5. Don't shoot! by onyxruby · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear itchy trigger finger types in the nations capital.

    Don't shoot! She's a homeless vet that has seen her glory days fall behind her. Just because she has an explosive / rocket filled history doesn't mean she's about to go go off again. they are taking her to a group home where they take care of her kund. She wont hurt anybody in her wheelchair, she's just touring the sites like any other tourist.

  6. Shuttles in Science Fiction by Conchobair · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It really hit home how sad this was when I was watching Stargate SG-1 and they had to send up a space shuttle to get Jack O'Neil and company out of a stranded alien space craft in orbit. I then realized in current times, the use of a space shuttle would be part of the science fiction.

  7. What of the carrier 747? by tibit · · Score: 2

    I wonder what will happen to the final carrier plane. The other one was retired for parts and whatnot, per wikipedia. It probably had not very many cycles nor hours while used by NASA, although they didn't exactly buy it new either.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  8. Re:Seems foolish... by Ogive17 · · Score: 2

    Yeah, because planes that are flying at 30k feet never crash either...

    --
    "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
  9. This just in... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 3, Funny

    F16 shoots down space shuttle approaching White House!

  10. Re:Seems foolish... by nschubach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At 30,000 feet you have a bit more time to recover and glide than you do at 1500.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  11. Re:Showing off what was possible in times long gon by dpilot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They tested the mirror - the problem was that they inserted some pin backwards, and the tests were done wrong. Something was in the wrong position for the tests.

    Sure, you could have loaded 50 backup gyros - assuming you knew that the gyro was going to be the part that would fail. Could you launch with 50 backups of every part that could possibly fail?

    Hindsight is generally more accurate than foresight, or at least better in assigning blame. Plus accurate foresight is seldom credited.

    The alternatives are:
    1 - Design for on-orbit repair.
    2 - Design with the correct backups and on-orbit sparing.
    3 - Design it cheap, to just be replaced.

    Pick one, and generally everyone who picked one of the other two will criticize your choice.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  12. MUSTANG THIS IS GHOST RIDER by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 2

    Request permission for flyby...

    --
    Who did what now?
  13. Re:Headline by trout007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've watched many landings at KSC. Even here it's very difficult to see it. The way it lands is there is an imaginary cylinder in the sky that is tangent to it's path and the runway. It heads towards this at a predetermined altitude. When it flies into the cylinder it can be as high as 50,000 ft. It's a little speck in the sky and there is no vapor trail. It's glide slope is about 20 degrees and they basically fly it like they are trying to dive head first a couple hundred yards shy of the runway. At the last few seconds they pull into the flare. It's a pretty impressive thing to see.

    http://wiki.ssm-fans.info/landing

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.