Shuttle Lanch!

[lukemax 0]

Shuttle Discovery Launching Wednesday

The Space Shuttle Discovery is expected to launch Wednesday afternoon around 4:00 pm from the US East Coast. You can watch the live webcast if you'd like to join in. Hopefully everything goes smoothly.

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html?skipIntro=1

Max

[Katzelowski 0]

By the way, it is the return to flight since the Columbia accident in 2003!

[Balschoiw 0]

Scientist claim that up to the end of the shuttle program there is a 50 percent risk of loosing the remaining shuttles for technical reasons at launch or in space or at the reentry. CNN yesterday reported that they had another malfunction on the shuttle. Since cold war´s over NASA has been cut it´s budget a lot and technical issues like the reason for the last crash were simply ignored. There were technical issues on almost every shuttle flight. Some minor, some bigger ones. During the first 25 flights there were heavy malfunctions that were never made public by NASA with the background of the cold war and the Reagan space-race.They knew that something had gone wrong, but they didn´t find it worth investigating. Just like the Challenger accident where a technician warned them about the issues with the cold temperatures at the launch day and the technical malfunctions that will happen. Well he was right, unfortunally.

I really do hope that the launch goes well today. Nethertheless the days of that oldtimer are counted.

Edit:

Incident yesterday:

Quote[/b] ]At about 5 p.m. EDT Tuesday at Launch Pad 39B, the cover of Discovery’s window #7 fell approximately 60 feet and struck a carrier panel on the orbiter's left Orbital Maneuvering System pod, damaging several tiles. A replacement carrier panel was quickly located and successfully installed on the orbiter. Work on the panel took approximately one hour, slightly delaying tonight's planned 7 p.m. rollback of the pad's Rotating Service Structure. No other issues are being tracked by the Launch Team.

Unfunny memories come up...

[[aps]gnat 28]

No matter how much money and "current technology" is thrown at it, space flight will never be "Safe" in our lifetime. But that part of the Adventure

Example, Air Travel, 60-80 years ago it was always dangerous to fly. These days the odds of being killed in an air crash is very low.

In 50+ years Space Travel will be "acceptable" for the general public ........ but hell, I way willing to take a ride today anyway

My disappointment is that if the space program hadn't been dropped in the early '70's I'd be considering a joy ride to the moon now and watching pictures of a mining colony on Mars.

[hellfish6 7]

I don't know that there is a lot of "current" technology involved in our space programs. The shuttles are nearly 30 years old now, as are most of the rocket and booster designs.

[hellfish6 7]

Launch cancelled for today - problem with a fuel sensor.

[Colossus 2]

to earth again.

[red oct 2]

i wasn't expecting the launch to go through anyway, there was supposedly a 60% chance weather would have cancled the flight anyway.

[Supah 0]

A fun analogy once told to me by a ex NASA test pilot

"We are sending up a vehicle that is so old, if it were an airliner it would have been scrapped 10 years ago" It's time for something new but short sighted politicians like to cut budgets of anything that doesnt come to fruitition during their term in office so they can claim the honor for it. The ISS has been cut back to the point of being useless too. All the money is going towards cheap "more bang for a small buck" unmanned robotic missions Sure it makes sense but its also boring. If we arent planning on sending people there, why bother IMHO?

[mr burns 133]

Launch cancelled for today - problem with a fuel sensor.

And me was looking at the sky hoping to see it ..

[Akira 0]

Interesting fact...Shuttle's computer contain less memory than a 1984 Macintosh...

[hellfish6 7]

i wasn't expecting the launch to go through anyway, there was supposedly a 60% chance weather would have cancled the flight anyway.

That's normal for Florida in the summer. Indeed, my parking lot flooded in about an hour this afternoon.

Quote[/b] ]If we arent planning on sending people there, why bother IMHO?

We will send people eventually.

Quote[/b] ]And me was looking at the sky hoping to see it ..

I was. I can see launches from my office.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Interesting fact...Shuttle's computer contain less memory than a 1984 Macintosh...

Space computers need to be very simple and "robust" as they are exposed to things that no high tech computer would survive.

They look bulky and old-fashioned, but there is a reason for that.

[red oct 2]

Deep Impact's computer was most likely the same. pretty impressive what Nasa is capable of w/ the current technology.

[blackdog~ 0]

i wasn't expecting the launch to go through anyway, there was supposedly a 60% chance weather would have cancled the flight anyway.

That's normal for Florida in the summer. Indeed, my parking lot flooded in about an hour this afternoon.

Quote[/b] ]If we arent planning on sending people there, why bother IMHO?

We will send people eventually.

Quote[/b] ]And me was looking at the sky hoping to see it ..

I was. I can see launches from my office.

Your parking lot?

What do you mean 'your' parking lot? Is it actually physically yours or do you just use it?

I think this is a good topic for debate.

Oh, and the whole shuttle thing, yeah, uh... yup.

[EiZei 0]

http://science.slashdot.org/article....0&tid=1

This too happened before they discovered the faulty sensor.

Those astronauts sure are hell lot braver than me.

[red oct 2]

anybody watch any of the take off videos? they have a great video from the external fuel tank but im unable to view any of the multimedia links on the nasa's official site. anybody have any alernitives?

http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/multimedia/index.html

[Acecombat 0]

Nasa grounds space shuttle fleet : BBC

Quote[/b] ]The US space agency Nasa has said it is grounding the space shuttle fleet while engineers investigate debris which fell from Discovery during its launch.

A spokesman said a large chunk of insulating foam broke off the fuel tank during Tuesday's lift-off, but is not thought to have damaged the shuttle.

The Columbia shuttle was destroyed in 2003 after a similar incident.

If the shuttle is damaged, its crew could wait in the International Space Station until a rescue craft arrives.

They are definitely NOT taking any chances with this one   .

Btw they also have some launch vids and fuel tank side ones too.

Debris falling off video (booster rocket side cam)

[red oct 2]

im pretty sure it'll be fine. they installed a 50ft orbital boom to insepct any possible damage orbiter, and have tools to repair any damage in space. besides just amagine how many times things fell off the fuel tank before they installed these external camra's and in the past 30 years the fleets been in service only 2 were lost. that's alot better than passenger liners.

[DracoPaladore 0]

that's alot better than passenger liners.

Not really. There's less space craft than passenger airliners, and I'm sure they're helluva more expensive

[Colossus 2]

Discovery taking a loop (Press 'Neste' for next pic and 'Start' for looping the pics)

[Supah 0]

in the past 30 years the fleets been in service only 2 were lost. that's alot better than passenger liners.

Actually no, held against airline standards the space shuttle has a horrible safety record. Take into account the number of flights made (113) and the number of accidents (2) That makes a 1 in 66.5 accident ratio. That is nowhere near the safety airliners offer. The thing is getting way to old, a replacement should have been ready ages ago but pbb was budget cut to oblivion. Politicians dont like programs that dont come to fruitition during their period in office because the succesor will be claiming their glory. So long term projects are the first to be cut by short sighted politicians. Maybe now that bush wants to go to mars serious work will be made of a replacement of space shuttle but I doubt it.

Edit: Alternatively look at its safety record like this, half of all factory built space shuttles have had catastrofic failure so far, one being built of spare parts to replace the first loss.

[denoir 0]

Yeah, civilian airliners have been around long enough that most of the design flaws have been eliminated. The first generation of aircraft weren't much safer than the space shuttle - but they developed far more rapidly.

Speaking of which:

Airbus vs. Cows 1-0

Quote[/b] ]

Plane hits cows on Nigeria runway (BBC)

 

An investigation has been launched after a plane ran into a herd of cows at Nigeria's Port Harcourt airport, officials say.

The Air France plane, with 196 people on board, ploughed into the cows as it touched down at Port Harcourt in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

No-one on board was hurt, but the collision left seven cows dead and the runway was soaked with their blood.

Port Harcourt is the centre of Nigeria's huge oil industry.

The return flight to Paris was cancelled and the airport was closed for several hours.

A spokeswoman for Air France said the Airbus A330 was checked by technicians, but was not damaged during the incident.

Passengers waiting to fly to Port Harcourt from the commercial capital, Lagos, on Wednesday said they were told that airport crew were chasing five cows around the airport.

Aviation Minister Mallam Isa Yuguda has summoned airport officials to explain the security breach, local newspapers report.

[The Frenchman 0]

I believe the planned new model for the space shuttle has alot of potential. It looks like it can hold alot of cargo.

I hope it doesn't get scrapped in the coming years.  

[hellfish6 7]

I just wish we could go for the simplest solution. A space shuttle with a million parts boosted by two giant rockets and a huge fuel tank that is left in orbit doesn't seem incredibly cost effective to me, especially when such small things like a strange fuel guage (with three additional redundancies) can ground a launch.

I'd rather use smaller craft that were easier and cheaper to build and maintain with a quicker turn-around time. Why send up one shuttle carrying 10 tons every six months for $1 billion per launch when you can launch two smaller craft carrying a ton each every month for $50 million?

Of course I made those figures up, but I think you get my drift. I seem to remember reading that the technology was there for cheap (relatively speaking) and efficient spaceflight. Maybe reserve the bigger shuttle for rare occasions when you need a bigger cargo capacity (like a new Hubble or ISS module), but the vast majority of the trips and experiments can be conducted by smaller craft, I imagine.