ComplexHiAv8r
Well-Known Member
News in Cleveland is saying that the fleet of Shuttles have been grounded, but as usual its a tease to watch the 11pm news. Anyone know of anything?
Shuttle Fleet Grounded
- Thread starter ComplexHiAv8r
- Start date
cessna2351
Well-Known Member
What channel?
Maybe they just need to replace the traffic segment after all of those traffic helicopters got trashed by those storms yesterday.
Maybe they just need to replace the traffic segment after all of those traffic helicopters got trashed by those storms yesterday.
ComplexHiAv8r
Well-Known Member
NBC (3) website is saying its due to foam coming off again. I saw it when they did the launch, but it didnt hit the shuttle.
pilot602
If specified, this will replace the title that
[ QUOTE ]
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Florida (CNN) -- NASA has grounded its space shuttles until engineers solve the recurring problem of falling debris, NASA's mission managers said Wednesday.
Pieces of debris tore away from the shuttle Discovery during liftoff Tuesday -- despite NASA spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to prevent a repeat of the problem that caused the 2003 Columbia disaster.
A piece of insulating foam falling from the external fuel talk during Columbia's launch was blamed for the deaths of its seven crew.
NASA officials say they do not believe falling foam actually hit Discovery.
"Until we fix this, we're not ready to go fly again," shuttle program manager Bill Parsons told reporters at Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. "You can say that means they're grounded."
Wayne Hale, deputy shuttle program manager, added: "We are treating it very seriously. Are we losing sleep over it? Not yet."
Discovery is due to return to Kennedy Space Center August 7. A date for the next planned mission has not been set.
Earlier Wednesday NASA lead flight director Paul Hill said that, based on engineers' "first-blush" analysis of falling debris, there was "no significant problem" with the orbiting shuttle.
Hill spoke to reporters after astronauts, using a robotic arm equipped with a camera and laser, spent "one hell of a day" poring over every inch of Discovery for surface damage.
Of the Discovery's seven-member crew, three spent the entire day operating the 50-foot robotic arm and its 50-foot boom extension. Other members who had a spare moment from their tasks "were also there helping to look out the windows and look at camera views," Hill said.
NASA was analyzing data from the launch and from the robotic arm to decide what steps to take next.
"We should start seeing the jury coming in on those decisions by the end of the crew's day tomorrow," Hill said.
Although the search for damage was already included as part of the mission, video from an array of cameras raised concerns after showing a piece of debris falling away from the orbiter's underside during Tuesday's liftoff.
NASA officials said the debris could have broken off from a tile near a door covering the nose landing gear. Space shuttles have shed tile during previous missions without consequences.
The February 2003 Columbia disaster prompted NASA to ground the shuttle fleet and make safety-related activities a priority.
NASA flight operations manager John Shannon said the debris that broke off may be the tile covering rather than the tile itself. He said that initial estimates show it was about 1.5 inches long.
Footage from Discovery's launch also showed a piece of debris falling from the external fuel tank at the time it separated from the orbiter. That debris did not strike the orbiter, he said.
Footage also showed that the external fuel tank's nose cone hit a bird about 2.5 seconds after liftoff -- when Discovery was probably traveling too slowly to sustain any damage, he said.
As the orbiter approaches the international space station for a scheduled Thursday 7:18 a.m. ET docking, the station's crew will photograph Discovery to look further for any damage.
Shuttle crew members plan to test repair techniques during three scheduled space walks by astronauts Steve Robinson and Soichi Noguchi of Japan. The astronaut pair also plans to service the space station.
Since Columbia, NASA has developed contingency plans for astronauts to try to repair damaged shuttles so they can return to Earth. In the event a spacecraft cannot be repaired, plans call for the crew to take refuge in the space station until a rescue mission can be launched.
CNN's Miles O'Brien, Marsha Walton and Kate Tobin contributed to this report.
[/ QUOTE ]
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Florida (CNN) -- NASA has grounded its space shuttles until engineers solve the recurring problem of falling debris, NASA's mission managers said Wednesday.
Pieces of debris tore away from the shuttle Discovery during liftoff Tuesday -- despite NASA spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to prevent a repeat of the problem that caused the 2003 Columbia disaster.
A piece of insulating foam falling from the external fuel talk during Columbia's launch was blamed for the deaths of its seven crew.
NASA officials say they do not believe falling foam actually hit Discovery.
"Until we fix this, we're not ready to go fly again," shuttle program manager Bill Parsons told reporters at Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. "You can say that means they're grounded."
Wayne Hale, deputy shuttle program manager, added: "We are treating it very seriously. Are we losing sleep over it? Not yet."
Discovery is due to return to Kennedy Space Center August 7. A date for the next planned mission has not been set.
Earlier Wednesday NASA lead flight director Paul Hill said that, based on engineers' "first-blush" analysis of falling debris, there was "no significant problem" with the orbiting shuttle.
Hill spoke to reporters after astronauts, using a robotic arm equipped with a camera and laser, spent "one hell of a day" poring over every inch of Discovery for surface damage.
Of the Discovery's seven-member crew, three spent the entire day operating the 50-foot robotic arm and its 50-foot boom extension. Other members who had a spare moment from their tasks "were also there helping to look out the windows and look at camera views," Hill said.
NASA was analyzing data from the launch and from the robotic arm to decide what steps to take next.
"We should start seeing the jury coming in on those decisions by the end of the crew's day tomorrow," Hill said.
Although the search for damage was already included as part of the mission, video from an array of cameras raised concerns after showing a piece of debris falling away from the orbiter's underside during Tuesday's liftoff.
NASA officials said the debris could have broken off from a tile near a door covering the nose landing gear. Space shuttles have shed tile during previous missions without consequences.
The February 2003 Columbia disaster prompted NASA to ground the shuttle fleet and make safety-related activities a priority.
NASA flight operations manager John Shannon said the debris that broke off may be the tile covering rather than the tile itself. He said that initial estimates show it was about 1.5 inches long.
Footage from Discovery's launch also showed a piece of debris falling from the external fuel tank at the time it separated from the orbiter. That debris did not strike the orbiter, he said.
Footage also showed that the external fuel tank's nose cone hit a bird about 2.5 seconds after liftoff -- when Discovery was probably traveling too slowly to sustain any damage, he said.
As the orbiter approaches the international space station for a scheduled Thursday 7:18 a.m. ET docking, the station's crew will photograph Discovery to look further for any damage.
Shuttle crew members plan to test repair techniques during three scheduled space walks by astronauts Steve Robinson and Soichi Noguchi of Japan. The astronaut pair also plans to service the space station.
Since Columbia, NASA has developed contingency plans for astronauts to try to repair damaged shuttles so they can return to Earth. In the event a spacecraft cannot be repaired, plans call for the crew to take refuge in the space station until a rescue mission can be launched.
CNN's Miles O'Brien, Marsha Walton and Kate Tobin contributed to this report.
[/ QUOTE ]
NJA_Capt
Well-Known Member
At the risk of sounding anti aviation....I think they should be grounded permanently.
It was supposed to achieve a launch turn around time of 2 weeks. It has NEVER achieved that goal in 24 years! Park'em.
Tile is for bathrooms not space vehicles...something new has to have been developed in the last 24 years.
It was supposed to achieve a launch turn around time of 2 weeks. It has NEVER achieved that goal in 24 years! Park'em.
Tile is for bathrooms not space vehicles...something new has to have been developed in the last 24 years.
Not to be the naysayer, but it's not exactly like scaled composites launched a crew of seven with a payload of satellites.
It might help a lot, however, if NASA moved from a "space travel is safe and fun" attitude with the general public, back to a "Hey, this sh*t is dangerous and we're blazing new frontiers".
But I'm just a layman!
It might help a lot, however, if NASA moved from a "space travel is safe and fun" attitude with the general public, back to a "Hey, this sh*t is dangerous and we're blazing new frontiers".
But I'm just a layman!
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
so let me get this straight....they're grounding the fleet for a few falling pieces of debris, but the shuttle was sent up 2 days prior to a meteor shower.
in order to see these meteors flash across the sky they both have to be:
1.) fairly large
2.) on a path from space, through the orbit of the shuttle, into the atmosphere
hmmmm.
i'd be more worried about the meteors
in order to see these meteors flash across the sky they both have to be:
1.) fairly large
2.) on a path from space, through the orbit of the shuttle, into the atmosphere
hmmmm.
i'd be more worried about the meteors
[ QUOTE ]
Not to be the naysayer, but it's not exactly like scaled composites launched a crew of seven with a payload of satellites.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well they just started. They put a man in space in a very small amount of time. it took NASA longer than that. They need to see past the x prize though and make something bigger/better. Then sale it to NASA and become rich. Well richer I mean.
Not to be the naysayer, but it's not exactly like scaled composites launched a crew of seven with a payload of satellites.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well they just started. They put a man in space in a very small amount of time. it took NASA longer than that. They need to see past the x prize though and make something bigger/better. Then sale it to NASA and become rich. Well richer I mean.
Sean_S
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Well they just started. They put a man in space in a very small amount of time. it took NASA longer than that. They need to see past the x prize though and make something bigger/better. Then sale it to NASA and become rich. Well richer I mean.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wonder if NASA taking longer to put a man into space had anything to do with the fact that they were inventing the technologies? Do you really think Scaled Composites would have been able to complete the task back in the 60’s quicker then NASA?
Well they just started. They put a man in space in a very small amount of time. it took NASA longer than that. They need to see past the x prize though and make something bigger/better. Then sale it to NASA and become rich. Well richer I mean.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wonder if NASA taking longer to put a man into space had anything to do with the fact that they were inventing the technologies? Do you really think Scaled Composites would have been able to complete the task back in the 60’s quicker then NASA?
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Since the inception of the reusable shuttle, how many great leaps have we made in manned space flight. We were going to the moon, now we can barely make it into ORBIT without something going wrong. The international space station? Yeah, not much of that is gonna happen until the US gets its #*&^ together. Last I checked, we got stuck with a majority of the check on that one anyway.
I'm all for scrapping the shuttle program and using that money for something that might actually get us passed the 1970s. When the shuttle launched the other morning, the announcer was saying something about us returning to the moon and on to Mars, and I was thinking "Not in that thing."
Maybe NASA should call Estes since they are pretty much the only other people that use solid rocket fuel, albeit on a much smaller scale.....
I'm all for scrapping the shuttle program and using that money for something that might actually get us passed the 1970s. When the shuttle launched the other morning, the announcer was saying something about us returning to the moon and on to Mars, and I was thinking "Not in that thing."
Maybe NASA should call Estes since they are pretty much the only other people that use solid rocket fuel, albeit on a much smaller scale.....
Considering the technologies that Scaled Composites used were from technologies produced over 40 years (more?!) of space flight, I think it's a little myopic to think that a group disappeared into a dark room and magically came up with self-discovered research, technologies and didn't take a lot of data from the X-plane program.
I'm not saying what Scaled did was anything less than brilliant, don't get me wrong, but in retrospect, it's a civilian version of the X-15, isn't it?
I'm not saying what Scaled did was anything less than brilliant, don't get me wrong, but in retrospect, it's a civilian version of the X-15, isn't it?
flyover
New Member
Agree with you Doug.
The problem is that even with that attitude the shuttle isn't viable. Hasn't been almost from the start. It's so antiquated/fragile it's as if you had to go to work and fly a DC-4 5 legs a day. It might be fun from a nostalgia standpoint, but it's no way to run an airline or a space program.
They've pretty much admitted the shuttle is through and they have to move on. Right now they're just trying to pretend they still have a manned space flight program.
The problem is that even with that attitude the shuttle isn't viable. Hasn't been almost from the start. It's so antiquated/fragile it's as if you had to go to work and fly a DC-4 5 legs a day. It might be fun from a nostalgia standpoint, but it's no way to run an airline or a space program.
They've pretty much admitted the shuttle is through and they have to move on. Right now they're just trying to pretend they still have a manned space flight program.
flyover
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Wonder if NASA taking longer to put a man into space had anything to do with the fact that they were inventing the technologies? Do you really think Scaled Composites would have been able to complete the task back in the 60’s quicker then NASA?
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't know about that but I know someone that definitely could have done it in the 60's. Kelly Johnson and his crew at the Skunkworks. If we had turned our space program over to him instead of Van Braun and the other Germans it's hard to imagine what we'd be flying into space now.
Our "space race" was a rocket race between us and the Russians with their Germans. It was more about developing ICBMs than going into space.
Wonder if NASA taking longer to put a man into space had anything to do with the fact that they were inventing the technologies? Do you really think Scaled Composites would have been able to complete the task back in the 60’s quicker then NASA?
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't know about that but I know someone that definitely could have done it in the 60's. Kelly Johnson and his crew at the Skunkworks. If we had turned our space program over to him instead of Van Braun and the other Germans it's hard to imagine what we'd be flying into space now.
Our "space race" was a rocket race between us and the Russians with their Germans. It was more about developing ICBMs than going into space.
