Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Katrina Impact On Shuttle Processing  
User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 12 months 11 hours ago) and read 1806 times:

With many of the Michoud and Stennis NASA employees now homeless, NASA is looking at how practical a March launch date really is. Consideration is being given to a further 6 month or more slip before the next flight....

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9241242/

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1732 times:

Yeah, I saw this story, and now I'm that much closer to seeking treatment for depression. No stupid thoughts, just nearly overwhelming wonder as WTF I'm doing here in Central Florida.

User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1730 times:

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 1):
Yeah, I saw this story, and now I'm that much closer to seeking treatment for depression. No stupid thoughts, just nearly overwhelming wonder as WTF I'm doing here in Central Florida.

I, for one, have turned off the TV and I'm trying to stay away from the 'net.
I've OD'd on current events......

Looks like Ophelia is going to do the sit & spin thing. If it keeps sucking up heat without moving it may fall apart. Does the gulf stream transport enough heat to keep a stationary hurricane going? I don't know, I hope not.

Keep your head down

regards


User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1685 times:

Looks like SC is in the bulls eye now.

I would imagine that the Gulfstream certainly doesn't HURT the Hurricanes, but I think if it was a more powerful influence, we'd see Hurricanes all year round.


User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1684 times:

More bad news for shuttle (from nasawatch.com)

"NASA is unable to find about 1,000 workers from the Michoud Assembly Facility east of New Orleans where the space shuttles' external fuel tanks are built. The damage to Michoud and another Gulf Coast NASA center will cost the agency about $1.1 billion as it tries to repair buildings and find homes for those who lost everything when Hurricane Katrina hit Aug. 29, Bill Gerstenmaier, a NASA associate administrator, said Thursday."


User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1681 times:

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 4):
NASA is unable to find about 1,000 workers

Presuming the worst; You don't just replace 1,000 people  Sad

At best I imagine it would be 4 years to do that 'properly'.

Maybe it's time to say it's over for manned missions in the STS... and live with what we have. Not that there is a big supply of old ETs; and will take a long time to ramp up ET production anyway, but if we can effectively 'forget' QC because lives aren't on the line, let's just get the rest of the pieces of the ISS up, then park whatever (if anything) is left of the shuttle fleet in museums and be done with it.

I'm stunned I just said that and meant it  Sad


User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1674 times:

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 5):
I'm stunned I just said that and meant it

Don't be so stunned... I'm thinking along the same lines myself....

A couple of options I would consider at this point if I ran things and didn't have to worry about PC or public perception.

1. Halt the shuttle program immediately, as in now. Proceed full speed ahead on CEV/shuttle derived booster. Push whatever ISS payloads I can to EELVs. Buy Soyuz' for interim ISS crew exchanges.

2. Proceed with the shuttle program as is until ISS complete is achieved. Do what work we can on the foam, but don't hold up the program for it. My rationale on the foam is this: a. I don't think there is a good fix short of complete redesign of the shuttle system. b. There has only been one catastrophic event due to foam loss in 100+ plus flights and the effects of that foam loss could have been mitigated had they looked for damage during the mission. c. They've come up with a pretty good TPS inspection system.

regards


User currently offlineBmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1667 times:

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 6):
Halt the shuttle program immediately, as in now.

I wouldn't slam the door on the shuttle just yet. Everyone is in a chaotic spin over what real impact Katrina will have on future shuttle flights.

The 1,000 or so workers at Michoud will show up sooner or later. If Michoud hasn't been critically damaged, operations should start up within 2 months...



The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1664 times:

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 6):

Don't be so stunned... I'm thinking along the same lines myself....

Yes, so am I. Although NASA is now backpedalling on the "next launch not until October 2006" projections, we're still looking at spending $3 Billion or more on STS for FY2006 and getting at best one Shuttle flight for it. There are far more urgent uses for that money right now. It's going to cost NASA at least $1 Billion to repair Stennis and Michoud from Katrina damage, and we'll need both for Project Constellation, so NASA can't simply wash its hands of them. Shutting down STS will probably cost upward of $500 million in contract termination penalties. Add in another half billion to maintain mothballed facilities like KSC and pay Russia for a couple more Soyuz flights. That leaves $1 Billion that NASA could sorely use to jumpstart the CEV or begin full scale development of CEV's launcher..., be it an EELV, Shuttle SRB-derivative, or Falcon 9.

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 6):
Push whatever ISS payloads I can to EELVs.

Unfortunately, that's much easier said than done. No launcher in the world can launch ISS elements except the Shuttle. They're all designed for the attach points, environmental conditions, electrical support, and launch loads of the Shuttle. Putting them on an EELV, Proton, or Ariane 5 will require either redesign of the elements, or some sort of Shuttle payload bay replicator to go on top of the rocket. Both will be complex and expensive. And that'st just to get them into orbit. To maneuver and navigate to the Space Station, we'll need some sort of propulstion/control vehicle. The only available launcher with the payload performance to launch the heaviest remaining Stations elements is the Delta IV-Heavy. But adding in a new complex Shuttle payload bay replicator and a propulsion module will almost certainly raise the payload weight beyond what D-IVH can lift. So now we're stuck having to upgrade a rocket to launch the remaining Station elements. If we decide to do that, it would probably be better to just go ahead and build a Shuttle-derived launch vehicle like the old Shuttle-C proposal. We'll also have to revive the old Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle. There is no way any of these options can be accomplished in less than five years at a reasonable budget level. No matter what choice we make, the only way the Space Station elements are going to get into orbit before 2011 is aboard the Space Shuttle.

So basically, we are now at the point of having to decide whether to continue with Shuttle and Station and defer Constellation for a few years, or throw the Shuttle away, defer Space Station for about five years, and use the downtime to accelerate Constellation. NASA is really in a lose/lose situation here.


User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1621 times:

Quoting Thorny (Reply 8):
NASA is really in a lose/lose situation here.

BOHICA.


User currently offlineBmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1579 times:

Quoting Thorny (Reply 8):
and we'll need both for Project Constellation

Exactly what is Project Constellation?  confused 



The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6484 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1584 times:

Quoting Bmacleod (Reply 10):
Project Constellation?

Shuttle replacement.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Katrina Impact On Shuttle Processing
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
A380 Impact On KC-30 - Leeham Commentary posted Wed Jun 21 2006 16:20:48 by UAL747-600
Shuttle Audio On Scanner? posted Tue Jul 26 2005 21:06:56 by Nwa744
How Much More Lift Does Shuttle Make On The 747? posted Sat Jul 16 2005 15:50:49 by Boeing nut
Impact Of The Pentagon's Tanker Decision On Brac? posted Sat Jun 4 2005 04:08:53 by STT757
Space A Travel On Uscg Aircraft posted Wed Nov 15 2006 23:40:00 by Reedyreed
I Think I Am Almost Over Missing Out On The F-14. posted Fri Nov 10 2006 23:21:56 by 747400sp
Museum C-141 On Sale For Scrap posted Thu Nov 2 2006 18:07:23 by DeltaGuy
Rcaf Order Status On C-17 posted Wed Nov 1 2006 07:13:19 by ZBBYLW
Is This AN AA 747 Carrying A Space Shuttle? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 02:25:45 by Fll2993
Toilets On Military Planes? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 05:18:27 by LimaNiner

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format