Space Shuttle's "Return to Flight" - Page 4

Ghoulish Delight · 07-27-2005, 11:00 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8720825/

So far so good. They've done a couple preliminary damage assessments and aren't too concerned yet. The consensus from visual inspection of the chipped tile is that it's no big deal, but they have the option of using the new boom-mounted laser to inspect it in detail later. Also, as they approach the space station, the shuttle is going to do a backflip to allow the astronauts on the station to get a good look at the underside as yet another visual inspection. And later they'll be doing a space walk to test out new repair techniques on the thermal tiles.

Sounds like they're doing a good job of taking sensible (and down right cool) steps to get realistic damage assessments.

Ghoulish Delight · 07-27-2005, 04:47 PM

Ugh, here we go again.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8720825/

All missions have been put on indefinite hold. Not because of the chipped tile, but because of the chunk of foam.

This does not bode well. They spent 2 1/2 years, primarily trying to resolve this exact problem...and here we have a near instant replay. Fortunately this time it seems the variables worked to prevent the kind of damage that doomed the Columbia, but the fact is this really has to be viewed as an abject failure for NASA.

Stupidly, they still seem comitted to these ancient beasts. It would probably take longer to develop a new generation craft, but it would seem to me a better investment of money and time to develop something new that will last another 25 years than duct tape an old design that's showing its age and flaws.

Matterhorn Fan · 07-27-2005, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I've never even had the opportunity to get up to Edwards to see one land, let alone witness a launch first hand. It's on my long list of spectacles I really hope to see.

Me too. If only I'd had the day off, I would have tried to convince someone to go out there with me. I don't know where the public can watch from, but I want to see it actually leave the ground. With the rumbling and the fire and all that. (Except not the exploding Challenger-like stuff. That was bad enough on TV. I'm not sure how I'd hold up witnessing something like that live.)

No one here seems interested, though. It's an attitude of "oh, they're doing that again."

Silly native Floridians. I wouldn't think something like a shuttle launch would really ever get "old." It's not that commonplace.

scaeagles · 07-27-2005, 06:30 PM

It is most certainly time for something new. The shuttle program served the country well, but there are certainly better ideas on the drawing board....there have to be. I have seen concept drawings of potential replacements for the shuttle, but i wonder if the military is using them and they are therefore classified.

TigerLily · 07-27-2005, 08:22 PM

Not to long ago they were test flying a small plane type craft that made it to the no gravity stage and made it back twice. They could improve on this design and get something better.

I was hoping they would get away from the old school shuttle and desgn something better. We have the engineering and know how, but maybe they don't want to commit the funds...

Ghoulish Delight · 07-27-2005, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TigerLily

Not to long ago they were test flying a small plane type craft that made it to the no gravity stage and made it back twice.

That was private and had nowhere near the capacity for either crew or cargo/experiment equipment necessary for NASA's purposes, unfortunately. It barely had enough room for the pilot.

scaeagles · 07-28-2005, 06:03 AM

Interestingly, though, the guy who designed it - the legendary Burt Rutan, who has a picture in side the queue of Soarin over CA, has just partnered with the Billionaire founder of Virgin Atlantic Airlines - Branson, I think? - in a business venture to make space vehicles. I will be curious to see where this goes. Definitely the brains and the financing to make something cool.

Ghoulish Delight · 07-28-2005, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I will be curious to see where this goes. Definitely the brains and the financing to make something cool.

Cool yes, but I believe they are focusing on a tourist vehicle, something that can carry a handful of passengers. While that would be inredible and a big step forward, it's still a far cry from the thousands of tons of cargo carrying ability that the shuttles have, or the physical space necessary to perform experiments.

Prudence · 07-28-2005, 08:32 AM

I think we need the "tourist vehicles" to magnify public interest. Shuttle launches have become rather blase, no? Successful launches had become mere footnotes on the evening news. Average citizens do not marvel that we have an actual, honest-to-goodness SPACE STATION where people can LIVE for months at a time.

The shuttle was so cool at first -- partly because it looked more "plane-like." It came in for landings like an over-powered glider. Even given its age it's still astounding technology, but we're ho-hum about it.

Not only are we ho-hum about successful flights, but when the flight ends in tragedy we're shocked. Stunned. We watch the footage repeat all day as if it were as surprising as a commercial jetliner crash on American soil. We no longer think about the enormity of risk involved in space flight as we've grown accustomed to it just being something that people do. Some people go to work in an office building, some people go to work in space.

We don't have the drive to race to the moon or build a recoverable, reuseable space vehicle any more. There isn't a clear goal in sight. "Build a better shuttle." Whoopie. Who cares? Most people don't. We went to space, it was fun, let's move on. The public doesn't see the impact of space flight (and the opportunity to conduct experiments in a weightless environment) on collective scientific knowledge. I imagine many people see NASA as an expensive, and possibly obsolete, toy.

The X Prize was kind of exciting and brought the space geeks out of the closet. But if there's going to be public pressure to continue innovating, the public has to buy into the dream. And if we have to take a time out and grow the space tourism industry for that to happen, fine by me.

sleepyjeff · 07-28-2005, 08:57 AM

Frankly, I am happy that we will be grounded for awhile...........if we draw too much attention to ourselves the aliens may see us as a threat(in a cancerous sort of way, not military) and opt for our removal

07-27-2005, 11:00 AM	#31
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8720825/ So far so good. They've done a couple preliminary damage assessments and aren't too concerned yet. The consensus from visual inspection of the chipped tile is that it's no big deal, but they have the option of using the new boom-mounted laser to inspect it in detail later. Also, as they approach the space station, the shuttle is going to do a backflip to allow the astronauts on the station to get a good look at the underside as yet another visual inspection. And later they'll be doing a space walk to test out new repair techniques on the thermal tiles. Sounds like they're doing a good job of taking sensible (and down right cool) steps to get realistic damage assessments. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

07-27-2005, 04:47 PM	#32
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Ugh, here we go again. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8720825/ All missions have been put on indefinite hold. Not because of the chipped tile, but because of the chunk of foam. This does not bode well. They spent 2 1/2 years, primarily trying to resolve this exact problem...and here we have a near instant replay. Fortunately this time it seems the variables worked to prevent the kind of damage that doomed the Columbia, but the fact is this really has to be viewed as an abject failure for NASA. Stupidly, they still seem comitted to these ancient beasts. It would probably take longer to develop a new generation craft, but it would seem to me a better investment of money and time to develop something new that will last another 25 years than duct tape an old design that's showing its age and flaws. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

07-27-2005, 06:30 PM	#34
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	It is most certainly time for something new. The shuttle program served the country well, but there are certainly better ideas on the drawing board....there have to be. I have seen concept drawings of potential replacements for the shuttle, but i wonder if the military is using them and they are therefore classified.
	Submit to Quotes

07-27-2005, 08:22 PM	#35
TigerLily Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Lancaster, CA Posts: 101	Not to long ago they were test flying a small plane type craft that made it to the no gravity stage and made it back twice. They could improve on this design and get something better. I was hoping they would get away from the old school shuttle and desgn something better. We have the engineering and know how, but maybe they don't want to commit the funds...
	Submit to Quotes

07-28-2005, 06:03 AM	#37
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	Interestingly, though, the guy who designed it - the legendary Burt Rutan, who has a picture in side the queue of Soarin over CA, has just partnered with the Billionaire founder of Virgin Atlantic Airlines - Branson, I think? - in a business venture to make space vehicles. I will be curious to see where this goes. Definitely the brains and the financing to make something cool.
	Submit to Quotes

07-28-2005, 08:32 AM	#39
Prudence Beelzeboobs, Esq. Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Gavel - I haz it Posts: 6,287	I think we need the "tourist vehicles" to magnify public interest. Shuttle launches have become rather blase, no? Successful launches had become mere footnotes on the evening news. Average citizens do not marvel that we have an actual, honest-to-goodness SPACE STATION where people can LIVE for months at a time. The shuttle was so cool at first -- partly because it looked more "plane-like." It came in for landings like an over-powered glider. Even given its age it's still astounding technology, but we're ho-hum about it. Not only are we ho-hum about successful flights, but when the flight ends in tragedy we're shocked. Stunned. We watch the footage repeat all day as if it were as surprising as a commercial jetliner crash on American soil. We no longer think about the enormity of risk involved in space flight as we've grown accustomed to it just being something that people do. Some people go to work in an office building, some people go to work in space. We don't have the drive to race to the moon or build a recoverable, reuseable space vehicle any more. There isn't a clear goal in sight. "Build a better shuttle." Whoopie. Who cares? Most people don't. We went to space, it was fun, let's move on. The public doesn't see the impact of space flight (and the opportunity to conduct experiments in a weightless environment) on collective scientific knowledge. I imagine many people see NASA as an expensive, and possibly obsolete, toy. The X Prize was kind of exciting and brought the space geeks out of the closet. But if there's going to be public pressure to continue innovating, the public has to buy into the dream. And if we have to take a time out and grow the space tourism industry for that to happen, fine by me. __________________ traguna macoities tracorum satis de
	Submit to Quotes

07-28-2005, 08:57 AM	#40
sleepyjeff Go Hawks Go! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Parkrose Posts: 2,632	Frankly, I am happy that we will be grounded for awhile...........if we draw too much attention to ourselves the aliens may see us as a threat(in a cancerous sort of way, not military) and opt for our removal __________________ River Guardian-less
	Submit to Quotes