BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:12 am

Well, the shuttle should launch in just over 1 hour.  Smile

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5146866.stm

I hope you will all join with me in wishing the crew good luck, a good mission, and a safe trip home Big grin



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:13 am

Columbia was the perfect opportunity to retire the out of date, too heavy, expensive, pointless and unsafe shuttle. Let's just hope NASA can have a new vehicle launched before the shuttle claims even more lives.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:14 am

Here's NASA's live television feed.

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html
Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
 
YYZflyer
Posts: 3516
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:54 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:21 am

I wish the crew of STS-121 good luck in their mission and a safe trip home.

What a fun day for americans, a shuttle launch and fireworks at night.  Smile
Avoid hangovers, stay drunk.
 
BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:23 am

Quoting YYZflyer (Reply 3):
What a fun day for americans, a shuttle launch and fireworks at night

Yes, I wish I was there Big grin



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:26 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 1):
the out of date, too heavy, expensive, pointless and unsafe shuttle.

"I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft.

... But in a very real sense, it will not be one man going to the moon-if we make this judgment affirmatively, it will be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him there."


- John F. Kennedy, May 25, 1961

Space travel continues to be an impressive yet daring adventure, that will always carry an element of risk, but the benefits are far reaching.

Good flying to Discovery.
International Homo of Mystery
 
aerobalance
Posts: 4309
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:35 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:28 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 1):
Let's just hope NASA can have a new vehicle launched before the shuttle claims even more lives.

Great slam against the people who are working so hard to make this a safe flight, I being one of them. Shame on you.
"Sing a song, play guitar, make it snappy..."
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:29 am

NASA926 was cruising around Cape Canaveral at 60000 feet. I assume he's checking the weather. It's a WB57.

http://mek.kosmo.cz/pil_lety/usa/sts/sts-114/wb57.jpg
Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
 
dc-10 levo
Posts: 3376
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2001 3:22 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:35 am

Good luck to all the crew onboard STS-121!

DC-10
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:40 am

Good luck!  bigthumbsup 
 
MYT332
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 7:31 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:44 am

Hey thanks for the link Lee.

I'm watching the launch now but just a quick question. Did I just hear the pilot was R. Kelly? Is this a remix to ignition ?

All the best to Discovery.
One Life, Live it.
 
MattRB
Posts: 1358
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:49 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:47 am

Godspeed, STS-121!

Quoting dumb a.net 'Post is too short' message:
Your post should be relevant to the topic discussed.
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
 
sean377
Posts: 1128
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2001 1:18 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:53 am

Good luck from me too. I'll be watching it live on TV.
Flying is the second greatest thrill known to man... Landing is the first!
 
BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:08 am

Well, 30 mins to go  Smile



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
MYT332
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 7:31 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:10 am

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 13):
Well, 30 mins to go

You lie, it's 27 mins to go.
One Life, Live it.
 
BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:11 am

Quoting Myt332 (Reply 14):
You lie, it's 27 mins to go.

Well, you are the smartass after all  Wink



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:11 am

Quoting Myt332 (Reply 14):
You lie, it's 27 mins to go

Wrong. It's 26 minutes.  Smile
Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
 
KevinL1011
Posts: 2858
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 3:48 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:24 am

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 2):
Here's NASA's live television feed.

CSPAN has it as well.
474218, Carl, You will be missed.
 
vaporlock
Posts: 3528
Joined: Sat May 19, 2001 9:22 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:29 am

My prayers go with them!!!

Good Luck!!

Phyllis  bouncy 
 
BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:31 am

Counting Down Big grin

T minus 8  bigthumbsup 



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:46 am

8 minutes in and everything is fine. Good luck and God Speed to the shuttle/crew for the rest of the mission.

Quoting Aerobalance (Reply 6):
Great slam against the people who are working so hard to make this a safe flight, I being one of them. Shame on you.

Just ignore him, Aerobalance. He's trying to get attention by pissing people off. Ignore the jackass like most others are.




-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:47 am

Tank is away... have a good flight and a successful mission!
 
BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:48 am

Well, off she goes Big grin

Was a fantastic takeoff Big grin

External tank seperation confirmed  Smile

Come back home safe guys  Smile



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
MYT332
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 7:31 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:49 am

Impressive, very impressive. Just watched the takeoff on Fox News, good stuff.
One Life, Live it.
 
CVG777
Posts: 1211
Joined: Tue May 02, 2000 6:42 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:52 am

This makes me wish I was in Florida right now.

Godspeed Discovery! See you in two weeks!  bigthumbsup 

Mike
 
YYZflyer
Posts: 3516
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:54 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 19):
T minus 8

wrong, lift off has happened and they're now in space  Wink
Avoid hangovers, stay drunk.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:53 am

Picture perfect! WTG Discovery, NASA, and all those who made this possible.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:53 am

You can track the shuttle and space station here:

http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/realdata/tracking/

You can also find out when you can see them passing overhead.

Mark
Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
 
User avatar
mke717spotter
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:32 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:55 am

Great launch! The coolest part ndoubtly must have been when those main engines fired up! Man that was cool!
Will you watch the Cleveland Browns and the Detroit Lions on Sunday? Only if coach Eric Mangini resigned after a loss.
 
vaporlock
Posts: 3528
Joined: Sat May 19, 2001 9:22 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:02 am

Quoting Mke717spotter (Reply 28):
Great launch! The coolest part ndoubtly must have been when those main engines fired up! Man that was cool!

dido

Phyllis  bouncy 
 
Traindriver
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:02 am

I'm down in the southern end of Brevard County and it was somewhat
cloudy down here. However, we did get to see the launch fly over the
house for about two mins. Impressive as always.

Good luck to the crew of STS-121!
 
sprout5199
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:26 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:35 am

Was great here in Palm Beach County. Saw the "Rockets' Red Glare" real good. Nice way to celebrate the Fourth.

Good Luck and Godspeed

Dan in Jupiter
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:53 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 5):
"I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft.



Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 5):
Space travel continues to be an impressive yet daring adventure, that will always carry an element of risk, but the benefits are far reaching.



Quoting Aerobalance (Reply 6):

Great slam against the people who are working so hard to make this a safe flight, I being one of them. Shame on you.

It's not a slam against the engineers, or a slam against the space programme. I support the US space programme more than most. I wish more money were spent on it, rather than on pointless wars.

That being said, the shuttle has always been a bit of a flawed vehicle, both financially and safety wise. In the 60s and 70s, the Saturn V launched 13 payloads, without ever losing one. The Apollo 1 fire had nothing to do with the launch vehicle. In the 80s to present, out of five shuttles (four originally), two have been destroyed, in different ways.

Allowing the heat shield to be hit by inevitable foam debris is a design flaw, however you spin it. The ceramic tiles are susceptible to damage, and they're difficult (expensive) to replace. Everyone knows about the SRB O-ring.

Launch safety has dramatically decreased. In the Saturn V era, any significant problem pre-launch resulted in the escape tower carrying the crew to safety. Now, the shuttle crew are expected to release their belts, open the door, run across the gantry and zip wire down to a safe bunker in a cage! All while wearing a bulky suit.

Does anyone seriously suggest an RTLS abort would work? The shuttle would have to fly backwards, using the main engines to slow down. Eventually (and after a lot of plummetting) the engines would carry the shuttle forwards again, back to the launch site. When the fuel was expended, the external tank would be jettisoned and the shuttle would glide to a landing.

Compare that to turning an 'abort' handle and letting the escape rocket carry you away from the Saturn V, with parachutes letting you land.

Any problem with the SRBs would be instantly fatal. The main engines (and the Saturn V engines...) can be shut down, or throttled down. The SRBs are essentially big fireworks. Despite original thinking that they could be shut down, this couldn't be achieved. Jettisoning them whilst they were still burning would likely send the shuttle into a spin from which it wouldn't recover, or break up the vehicle.

The shuttle had projected incremental costs per launch (in today's dollars) of $36 million. In fact, the incremental costs per launch is closer to $55 million.

The shuttle was intended to be a cheap, easy to use platform that would be launching at 24 times per year. In fact, it has never risen over 9 launches a year (in 1985), and the launch rate is significantly lower now. It is far too expensive for what it does, and has killed far too many Americans.


All these points were raised in the Columbia report. It's my opinion, and the opinion of many others, that the shuttle should have been scrapped then, and a new vehicle commissioned. There should be no pissing about, as was seen in the 70s, with no clear engineering goal, cost or mission objective.

The plans for two new vehicles, one larger one for unmanned missions and one smaller one for manned missions, seems to be the right way to go. Hell, had development of the Saturn V continued into the 80s and 90s, the space programme would likely be further ahead and costing less than it does today.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:14 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 32):
It's not a slam against the engineers, or a slam against the space programme.

When the shuttle is described as "pointless", as you did in your original post, I'm sure how you can see how that could be taken by others. It does serve a purpose, and it was a crisis for the Space Station when it wasn't allowed to fly.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 32):
All these points were raised in the Columbia report. It's my opinion, and the opinion of many others, that the shuttle should have been scrapped then, and a new vehicle commissioned. There should be no pissing about, as was seen in the 70s, with no clear engineering goal, cost or mission objective.

I agree that any expenditure should be made with clear goals and objectives, and at least try to come in on budget.

One of the commentators covering the launch today said that NASA is trying to stay within their budget and both launch shuttles to take care of business that needs to be attended to, and develop new vehicles simultaneously. In the meantime, I don't think it's possible to just ground the entire fleet while we await for something new, but I'm not an expert on it, and have to leave it to the judgment of those who are.
International Homo of Mystery
 
Christa
Posts: 1215
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 9:37 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:18 am

Godspeed on a safe journey to the ISS and on a safe return to Earth.

Regards,
Chris
Croeso i Faes Awyr Rhyngwladol Caerdydd - Welcome to Cardiff International Airport
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:31 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 32):
That being said, the shuttle has always been a bit of a flawed vehicle, both financially and safety wise. In the 60s and 70s, the Saturn V launched 13 payloads, without ever losing one. The Apollo 1 fire had nothing to do with the launch vehicle. In the 80s to present, out of five shuttles (four originally), two have been destroyed, in different ways.

Yes, 13 successful payloads. No flaws eh?

Well, let's see, Apollo 1...granted, not on a Saturn V, and not lost due to launch vehicle? So what? That capsule is where the astronauts are supposed to sit tight, and three were burned up on the ground due to several design flaws! Apollo hadn't flown yet and it killed three astronauts already!

Now, the glorified Saturn V:

Apollo 6: Unmanned, but nearly lost due to the Pogo Effect. pfffft, that was solved...no biggie!*

Apollo 12: struck by lightning...not due to the nature of the vehicle itself but important for illustrating the hazards of spaceflight...it's not routine! Keep that in mind!

Apollo 13: S-II stage center engine cutoff...due to *Pogo Effect...so much for the fix... Ask Jim Lovell about it...a man who on one Apollo mission alone was nearly blown up during launch phase, suffocated in transit to the moon, frozen to death in transit back to Earth, burned up on reentry due to a possibly cracked heatshield, and nearly crushed on hard impact with the Pacific Ocean had the frozen chutes failed. Damnit! Cancel the Apollo program! It's killed three Americans and nearly took three more! It's so damn unsafe!

13 sucessful flights...STS had a better run on its first 13 flights...trouble didn't flare up in a big way till flight #25.

Point being, it's all relative. STS by design was going to have many flights, vs. the slow paced Apollo. More flights (and more carrying capacity ie 7 astronauts instead of 3*) heightens the chances of loss of life.

*If CEV were to be designed to carry say 10 astronauts...and one blew up...would you whine about the number of astronauts killed? By that logic, A380 and 747 are death traps...one of those suckers goes down and you can wipe out 500 like that!

Now note, while I admit I probably came off as a pedantic ass (I am an Aerospace Engineer, hence my blood can boil easily when I see "program bashing"), I should note that the STS DOES have serious flaws! (The line between flaw and necessary design compromise/risk is hazy at best)

But spaceflight is still in its infancy. It is still primative. It (DAMNIT, ITALY JUST SCORED! GAAAAAAAA) is dangerous. Arguing that one spacecraft is a deathtrap is just a joke. (DAMNIT! THEY SCORED AGAIN!)

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 32):
All these points were raised in the Columbia report. It's my opinion, and the opinion of many others, that the shuttle should have been scrapped then, and a new vehicle commissioned. There should be no pissing about, as was seen in the 70s, with no clear engineering goal, cost or mission objective.

There isn't any pissing about...hence Ares.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:45 am

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 35):
Well, let's see, Apollo 1...granted, not on a Saturn V, and not lost due to launch vehicle? So what? That capsule is where the astronauts are supposed to sit tight, and three were burned up on the ground due to several design flaws! Apollo hadn't flown yet and it killed three astronauts already!

If you're going to be arsey about it, fine. Apollo killed three astronauts. The shuttle programme has killed fourteen. That's four and a half times as many. The Apollo programme essentially destroyed one vehicle, the shuttle programme has lead to the destruction of two out of five launch vehicles.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 35):

Apollo 6: Unmanned, but nearly lost due to the Pogo Effect. pfffft, that was solved...no biggie!*

Yup, an unmanned test, something the shuttle never had. Thank god the heatshield problem on STS-1 wasn't fatal. This shows the lack of engineering forethought (reduced funding?) and the failure to develop a system that could be tested fully before risking lives.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 35):

Apollo 12: struck by lightning...not due to the nature of the vehicle itself but important for illustrating the hazards of spaceflight...it's not routine! Keep that in mind!

Remember the flimsy ceramic heatshield on the shuttle is exposed during launch. If lightning (or, say, foam) were to hit it at the wrong point, the results would be catastrophic. The command module heatshield was fully enclosed during launch. Essentially another flaw with the shuttle design.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 35):

Apollo 13: S-II stage center engine cutoff...due to *Pogo Effect...so much for the fix... Ask Jim Lovell about it...a man who on one Apollo mission alone was nearly blown up during launch phase, suffocated in transit to the moon, frozen to death in transit back to Earth, burned up on reentry due to a possibly cracked heatshield, and nearly crushed on hard impact with the Pacific Ocean had the frozen chutes failed. Damnit! Cancel the Apollo program! It's killed three Americans and nearly took three more! It's so damn unsafe!

At this point, Apollo still had a realistic purpose - to get to the moon. Post Columbia (and after the deaths of 14, not three) the only thing really left for the shuttle was ISS work and Hubble repairs.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 35):
Point being, it's all relative. STS by design was going to have many flights, vs. the slow paced Apollo. More flights (and more carrying capacity ie 7 astronauts instead of 3*) heightens the chances of loss of life.

That can't excuse the loss of life, which is four and a half times greater with the shuttle programme! Thirty years after the Apollo era, spacetravel is less safe!

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 35):
Now note, while I admit I probably came off as a pedantic ass (I am an Aerospace Engineer, hence my blood can boil easily when I see "program bashing"), I should note that the STS DOES have serious flaws! (The line between flaw and necessary design compromise/risk is hazy at best)

I'm an aerospace engineer too. What annoys me is budget cuts leading to flawed designs. The shuttle is flawed, as shown by its dire safety record. Tell me, would you honestly sit through an RTLS abort?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
ThereandBack
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 11:26 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:49 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 1):
Columbia was the perfect opportunity to retire the out of date, too heavy, expensive, pointless and unsafe shuttle. Let's just hope NASA can have a new vehicle launched before the shuttle claims even more lives.

I couldn't agree with you more.
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:51 am

Hey everyone, a lady I work with at the FX AUS rampsent me these pics. Her brother and sister fly F16s and F15s in the Air Force. Vicki sent me these photos that were sent to her by her siblings. Enjoy!  bouncy 

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c291/ringo3727/Hodeeovershuttle.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c291/ringo3727/PadandVAB.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c291/ringo3727/OverVAB.jpg
 
MYT332
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 7:31 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:59 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
That can't excuse the loss of life, which is four and a half times greater with the shuttle programme!

That aside, they knew the risks and they go willingly.
One Life, Live it.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:04 am

Quoting Myt332 (Reply 39):
That aside, they knew the risks and they go willingly.

Nonetheless, the space programme should be as safe as possible. It is less safe now than in the late 60s.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:06 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
If you're going to be arsey about it, fine. Apollo killed three astronauts. The shuttle programme has killed fourteen. That's four and a half times as many. The Apollo programme essentially destroyed one vehicle, the shuttle programme has lead to the destruction of two out of five launch vehicles.



Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
That can't excuse the loss of life, which is four and a half times greater with the shuttle programme! Thirty years after the Apollo era, spacetravel is less safe!

Again...orbiters seat more astronauts than Apollo...it's like saying a 747 is a death trap in comparison to an ERJ-145 because of how many would be killed in a crash. If space travel is to advance to the dreams that many have...high capacity space craft will have to be built...and as a result the loss of life could increase in the meantime as well.

You're essentially saying air travel is less safe now than in say 1910 by comparing number of deaths like that. More people fly today than in 1910.

Finally comparing vehicle numbers is pointless. You don't need as many orbiters as they're reusable. Once Apollo is done, it's off to a museum.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
Yup, an unmanned test, something the shuttle never had. Thank god the heatshield problem on STS-1 wasn't fatal. This shows the lack of engineering forethought (reduced funding?) and the failure to develop a system that could be tested fully before risking lives.

And the same problem crept up on Apollo 13...that was manned last time I read...or were the three astronauts mannequins? Indeed, STS-1 shed more than an acceptable amount of tiles...but tile loss has been reduced since.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
Remember the flimsy ceramic heatshield on the shuttle is exposed during launch. If lightning (or, say, foam) were to hit it at the wrong point, the results would be catastrophic. The command module heatshield was fully enclosed during launch. Essentially another flaw with the shuttle design.

And had lighting hit Apollo 12 in a different spot, it could have created one spectacular fireworks show. In addition the instruments were nearly blown out...VERY BAD medicine during launch phase.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
At this point, Apollo still had a realistic purpose - to get to the moon. Post Columbia (and after the deaths of 14, not three) the only thing really left for the shuttle was ISS work and Hubble repairs.

Hold on! We already beat the Russians to the moon two flights prior. Going to the moon has yielded about the same scientific gain as ISS, if not less. Hubble on the other hand, with its ability to peer into the out reaches of the galaxy, is still considered unrealistic? At least the shuttle has two potential objectives. Apollo had the moon. Now I personally hold all three in the same regard, but I'd watch what you call pointless.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 36):
I'm an aerospace engineer too. What annoys me is budget cuts leading to flawed designs. The shuttle is flawed, as shown by its dire safety record. Tell me, would you honestly sit through an RTLS abort?

"dire" safety record for a vehicle that does something few other vehicles can withstand...right. I can sit through an RTLS abort about as well as I could sit through an launch escape tower abort. But it's nice to see a fellow AE on these boards.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
BMIFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:08 am

Quoting FXramper (Reply 38):

Great Shots Drew Big grin

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 40):

Don't you ever quit?  Yeah sure



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:15 am

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 41):
You're essentially saying air travel is less safe now than in say 1910 by comparing number of deaths like that. More people fly today than in 1910.

No. Using that analogy, it's like airliners in the 1910s having better reliability, seat belts, fire extinguishers and less crew than airliners today.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 41):
Finally comparing vehicle numbers is pointless. You don't need as many orbiters as they're reusable.

Comparing LOST vehicles numbers is releavant. And comparing cost per launch is relevant too. The shuttle is just too expensive. It's not the reusable, cheap vehicle it was intended to be.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 41):
I can sit through an RTLS abort about as well as I could sit through an launch escape tower abort.

But just look at the risks involved in an RTLS abort, compared to using an escape tower! Look at the risks involved if something goes wrong on the pad.

I don't think you can deny that the shuttle is less safe than Saturn V.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:17 am

I'll give you another example of modern day NASA blundering. They're planning on using SRBs for a stage (the first one?) of the proposed Ares V launcher! They can't be shut down, or throttled, and are inherently more dangerous than traditional rocket engines. Has anything been learnt from the shuttle?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:35 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 43):
No. Using that analogy, it's like airliners in the 1910s having better reliability, seat belts, fire extinguishers and less crew than airliners today.

That's the point, they don't...but they also carried less, and flew much, much less. But again, if an A380 should crash, it's 555 people dead in standard config. It would take many, many Boeing 247s crashing to get that amount...not that many crashed however...nonetheless, airliners today aren't derided as death machines.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 43):
Comparing LOST vehicles numbers is releavant. And comparing cost per launch is relevant too. The shuttle is just too expensive. It's not the reusable, cheap vehicle it was intended to be.

It is IRrelavant in this case...otherwise every Apollo capsule should be counted as a loss, and that hurts the Apollo program's standing even more. Each orbiter is still good for another flight on landing...the Apollo is just junk. And while not cheap...at 32 flights, Discovery, and her sister orbiters ARE reusable.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 43):
But just look at the risks involved in an RTLS abort, compared to using an escape tower! Look at the risks involved if something goes wrong on the pad.

Do you have dilusions of flying to space being as uneventful as wedging yourself behind an IFE screen, and jetting off to Raleigh-Durham?

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 43):
I don't think you can deny that the shuttle is less safe than Saturn V

Not only can I deny it, but I can also be certain that the opposite of what you say can be debated. Had Apollo continued, eventually we'd loose more astronauts. Does that make Apollo a death trap? Nope. Does it prove space flight is dangerous? Yes. Had Apollo continued and killed some astronauts due to a cracked heatshield...would you be in here demanding the program be cancelled because it's outdated '60's crap with no real purpose? Oh, you bet.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 44):
I'll give you another example of modern day NASA blundering. They're planning on using SRBs for a stage (the first one?) of the proposed Ares V launcher! They can't be shut down, or throttled, and are inherently more dangerous than traditional rocket engines. Has anything been learnt from the shuttle?

Oh gee, don't forget CEV's launch escape tower...the magic bullet that makes any problem with a rocket go away.  Yeah sure And yes, first stage on Ares I, and two twin boosters on the Ares V.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:51 am

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 45):
That's the point, they don't...but they also carried less, and flew much, much less. But again, if an A380 should crash, it's 555 people dead in standard config. It would take many, many Boeing 247s crashing to get that amount...not that many crashed however...nonetheless, airliners today aren't derided as death machines.

And yet no Saturn Vs were lost in flight. This isn't about the number of people the vehicles hold. This is about inherent safety.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 45):
Discovery, and her sister orbiters ARE reusable.

After too much time and too much money is spent on them.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 45):
Do you have dilusions of flying to space being as uneventful as wedging yourself behind an IFE screen, and jetting off to Raleigh-Durham?

You're the one deluding yourself by suggesting that an RTLS abort is as safe as an escape tower abort.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 45):
Had Apollo continued and killed some astronauts due to a cracked heatshield...would you be in here demanding the program be cancelled because it's outdated '60's crap with no real purpose? Oh, you bet.

Had there been life threatening flaws with Apollo, along with no real purpose, then I would have called for a replacement, yes.

Don't believe me that the shuttle is unsafe? Well, talk to these guys:

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...866_RTRUKOC_0_US-SPACE-SHUTTLE.xml

At what point was there any significant worry over an Apollo flight? Even the serious pogo problems could be essentially solved with throttling the engines or shutting one down. The underpressure that resulted in the centre engine of the S-II shutting down did stop the pogoing, and saved the flight, even if it wasn't ideal.

You can argue til you're blue in the face. The fact remains that there have been two design flaws that have cost the lives of crew on the shuttle. Even now, the foam issue hasn't been solved. Even now, the SRBs can't be shut down prematurely, or jettisoned before they've shut down. Even now, an RTLS abort would likely result in the deaths of the crew. The solution to a Challenger-style plummet? A pole extending out of the aircraft for the crew to slide along before jumping off (!). Compare that to the very safe, reliable, cheap escape tower which worked.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:06 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
And yet no Saturn Vs were lost in flight. This isn't about the number of people the vehicles hold. This is about inherent safety.

After a mere 13 flights, no Shuttles were lost either...

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
After too much time and too much money is spent on them.

Making sure a vehicle that's about to leave the earth is ready is too much time and money? It's not like an Apollo was blasting off every week.  Yeah sure

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
You're the one deluding yourself by suggesting that an RTLS abort is as safe as an escape tower abort.

You're the one demanding impeccable safety in an activity that is essentially unsafe...

One vehicle lost on Apollo vs. two on STS. Not very different...then factor in that STS has done ten times the amount of missions...suddenly the scale tips in STS's favor.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
Had there been life threatening flaws with Apollo, along with no real purpose, then I would have called for a replacement, yes.

Human spaceflight has no real purpose? So what was the deal with Apollo then?

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
Don't believe me that the shuttle is unsafe? Well, talk to these guys:

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...866_RTRUKOC_0_US-SPACE-SHUTTLE.xml

At what point was there any significant worry over an Apollo flight? Even the serious pogo problems could be essentially solved with throttling the engines or shutting one down. The underpressure that resulted in the centre engine of the S-II shutting down did stop the pogoing, and saved the flight, even if it wasn't ideal.

You're right...no one shed a bead of sweat when "Houston, we've had a problem" pierced the silence of the cosmos...  Yeah sure Return to flight on Apollo 14 had the same naysayers as before...and with legit worry...what to do when the space ship explodes while in transit!?

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
You can argue til you're blue in the face. The fact remains that there have been two design flaws that have cost the lives of crew on the shuttle. Even now, the foam issue hasn't been solved. Even now, the SRBs can't be shut down prematurely, or jettisoned before they've shut down. Even now, an RTLS abort would likely result in the deaths of the crew. The solution to a Challenger-style plummet? A pole extending out of the aircraft for the crew to slide along before jumping off (!). Compare that to the very safe, reliable, cheap escape tower which worked.

Likewise...the Pogo effect was never fully resolved. An escape plan should another Apollo 13 style explosion occur was never developed aside from using the LEM...which barely saved 13's crew. And what of Apollo missions that weren't moon bound...where's the "Lunar lifeboat" now? Important to consider especially when most spaceflights do not end at the launch phase. And what of a launch escape tower failure...you say reliable...but how can that be when it *luckily* was never used. Even on Apollo, anyone connected with that program admitted that there were thousands of things, different things that could go wrong. Same goes for Shuttle. Same goes for Ares...and beyond...SRBs or not.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:16 am

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
Making sure a vehicle that's about to leave the earth is ready is too much time and money?

According to NASA, yes. Read the Columbia report.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
One vehicle lost on Apollo vs. two on STS. Not very different...then factor in that STS has done ten times the amount of missions...suddenly the scale tips in STS's favor.

But the shuttle missions are 30 years after the Apollo missions! You have to resort to dubious stats to try and back up your claim that the shuttle is safer than Apollo. As a launch vehicle, the shuttle isn't as safe as the Saturn V. As a crew vehicle, the Apollo CM was much more capable.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
Human spaceflight has no real purpose?

I didn't say that.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
An escape plan should another Apollo 13 style explosion occur was never developed aside from using the LEM...which barely saved 13's crew

Barely, but it did, and was planned before hand.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
you say reliable...but how can that be when it *luckily* was never used

It was used on every Apollo flight...the tower was jettisoned on each flight. You can't say the risks involved with an RTLS abort are less than with an escape tower.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
Even on Apollo, anyone connected with that program admitted that there were thousands of things, different things that could go wrong. Same goes for Shuttle.

And we come to this again. You use anecdote and the rather weak argument 'well Apollo MUST have been less safe!!". But the fact remains that no Apollo flight ended in disaster. No Saturn V flight ended in disaster. The lessons were learnt from Apollo 1. The Apollo design meant the changes needed could be acomplished. The shuttle design is such that foam was STILL impacting the shuttle on this very day.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 47):
Same goes for Ares...and beyond...SRBs or not.

Another weak argument. 'Spaceflight is dangerous' is no excuse for poor engineering! SRBs are dangerous - more dangerous than conventional rocket engines. By using SRBs in the shuttle, safety was compromised for cost.

We're going in circles. You can cry for as long as you want that the shuttle is safer than Apollo. Yet no Apollo flight was lost.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
pbottenb
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Good Luck Space Shuttle Discovery / STS-121

Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:22 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 46):
You can argue til you're blue in the face. The fact remains that there have been two design flaws that have cost the lives of crew on the shuttle. Even now, the foam issue hasn't been solved. Even now, the SRBs can't be shut down prematurely, or jettisoned before they've shut down. Even now, an RTLS abort would likely result in the deaths of the crew. The solution to a Challenger-style plummet? A pole extending out of the aircraft for the crew to slide along before jumping off (!). Compare that to the very safe, reliable, cheap escape tower which worked.

Hey thanks - youve ruined a great thread.! Something pretty cool and newsworthy is done by an international group of adventurers and a thread is started to wish them luck and you smear it with shit. Perhaps you could take a break from this site for a few weeks and give us all a rest?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], L410Turbolet, salttee and 10 guests