NASA confirms shuttle delay to mid-May
Hurricanes, technical redesign force postponement
Updated: 4:23 p.m. ET Oct. 29, 2004
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - NASA said Friday it is aiming for a mid-May launch of the first shuttle flight since the Columbia tragedy almost two years ago.
The launch window, extending from May 12 to June 3, was the latest of several set by the space agency, and just as subject to change.
Until this month, NASA had hoped to resume shuttle flights as early as March, with Discovery making a space station supply run and a test flight of new inspection and repair techniques. But four Florida hurricanes in quick succession damaged the space agency’s buildings and hindered the launch preparations.
NASA spaceflight chief Bill Readdy conceded that technical challenges and “some unknowns” could thwart a mid-May launch date, in particular the need to prevent any dangerous pieces of foam from coming off the fuel tank during liftoff.
“We’re as confident as we can be in establishing that target date,” Readdy said. “Right now, it looks as though the milestones we have remaining, they’re all things that we can accomplish between now and May.”
Lots of work yet to be done
Columbia was brought down in February 2003 by a chunk of insulating foam that broke off the external fuel tank during liftoff and slammed into the left wing. The three remaining shuttles have been grounded ever since.
Considerable work remains on many of the technical improvements urged by the Columbia accident investigators.
Readdy said “first and foremost” is the redesign of the external fuel tanks. All the work on Discovery’s tank should be completed in time for a delivery to the Kennedy Space Center by year’s end, a crucial step in meeting a May liftoff, he noted.
No. 2 on NASA’s list of challenges, Readdy said, is development of an inspection boom for detecting any crevices in Discovery’s wings or belly. No. 3 is development of repair methods.
How many more flights?
Discovery’s crew will be able to mend only those wing gashes that are smaller than the one that doomed Columbia.
For now, NASA plans 28 shuttle flights in order to finish building the international space station by around 2010, the station completion and shuttle retirement date set by President Bush in his moon and Mars exploration plan.
The space agency has been looking at how many of these shuttle flights can be dropped from the schedule.
So this retirement of the Shuttle that's mentioned, is there a replacement in the works or is the Shuttles life going to be extended indefinatly ala the CF's Sea Kings?
It just seems that the replacement of the Shuttle doesn't seem to be getting much of a priority.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
Money is far more useful going towards combating the terror in the war on Terror that we now live in. You honestly think space travel compares to trying to eradicate a military tactic innate in society?
Admiral Valdemar wrote:Money is far more useful going towards combating the terror in the war on Terror that we now live in. You honestly think space travel compares to trying to eradicate a military tactic innate in society?
Actually I agree with you. I view the space program as a massive waste of taxpayer money. It doesn't seem to generate any returns in the form of usable technology. I really don't care how vegatables grow in space for example. Fortunatly the Canadian governmet doesn't spend much of my money on this sht. Canada arm aside.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
Admiral Valdemar wrote:Money is far more useful going towards combating the terror in the war on Terror that we now live in. You honestly think space travel compares to trying to eradicate a military tactic innate in society?
Of course, you're probably thinking "terrorism" when you say "a military tactic innate in society", in which case the "War on Terror" will never end, so it's kinda pointless in my opinion to continuously devote more and more money to a problem that will always be with us no matter what.
We should just keep spending how much we are for both initiatives for the moment.
For the record, I was being sarcastic. I know there are those that can't see justification in the space programme (despite it having plenty of spin-off technologies used today), but even they can't deny that a war on an ideal that is as intangible and widespread as anger is inherently useless. Neo-cons seem to think terror is an actual thing that can have its armies attacked and destroyed and its nation invaded.
Space exploration, is very much real and achievable.
Cpl Kendall wrote:
It is. But what are we getting out of it? Other than an increased understanding of how the universe was formed and operates.
There is a very good and comprehensive list on the technologies and other aspects of space travel that are now used in modern day life from Velcro to UV resistant sunglasses.
Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Space exploration, is very much real and achievable.
It is. But what are we getting out of it? Other than an increased understanding of how the universe was formed and operates.
Just a question, are you actually thinking this one through? You seem to be ignoring things like satellites which very much make the world today what it is, and the myriad things we can do. Why care how vegetables grow in space? Duh; orbital hydroponics to pick up the slack of dry land that isn't usable anymore for that! Why care how much energy the sun outputs? Solar panels can be alot bigger in Null!
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
SirNitram wrote:
Just a question, are you actually thinking this one through? You seem to be ignoring things like satellites which very much make the world today what it is, and the myriad things we can do.
Actually satelites had slipped my mind. But they certainly made my life in the military easier what with GPS to help me navigate. I guess I never really put much thought into how much space programs make a difference.
Why care how vegetables grow in space? Duh; orbital hydroponics to pick up the slack of dry land that isn't usable anymore for that!
That would be an interesting way of feeding Earth's hungry. But wouldn't we need a rather large facitlity to produce this stuff? NASA's having enough trouble as it is finishing the ISS.
Why care how much energy the sun outputs? Solar panels can be alot bigger in Null!
Well I've seen proposal's for solar power plants based in space and beeming the energy to Earth via microwazes. But we run into the problem of construction. As I noted above NASA is having problems finishing the ISS.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
SirNitram wrote:
Just a question, are you actually thinking this one through? You seem to be ignoring things like satellites which very much make the world today what it is, and the myriad things we can do.
Actually satelites had slipped my mind. But they certainly made my life in the military easier what with GPS to help me navigate. I guess I never really put much thought into how much space programs make a difference.
And these are just the direct. The needs of NASA accelerated computer improvements.
Why care how vegetables grow in space? Duh; orbital hydroponics to pick up the slack of dry land that isn't usable anymore for that!
That would be an interesting way of feeding Earth's hungry. But wouldn't we need a rather large facitlity to produce this stuff? NASA's having enough trouble as it is finishing the ISS.
Because no one's actually putting money on the table. That's the problem; everyone is cutting NASA's funding for crap down here, because 'it's just NASA, what did they ever do that's useful? Who cares how vegetables grow in space?'. Not trying to mock you, trying to get across how this attitude is the reason the space program has produced dick lately.
Why care how much energy the sun outputs? Solar panels can be alot bigger in Null!
Well I've seen proposal's for solar power plants based in space and beeming the energy to Earth via microwazes. But we run into the problem of construction. As I noted above NASA is having problems finishing the ISS.
Because no one actually wants to pay for it when they could be siphoning money off to some pet project. Very annoying.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
SirNitram wrote:
And these are just the direct. The needs of NASA accelerated computer improvements.
I always chalked up computer advancement to the efforts of the military. A personal bias. But I imagine NASA must require huge amounts of computer power just to calculate their orbits.
Because no one's actually putting money on the table. That's the problem; everyone is cutting NASA's funding for crap down here, because 'it's just NASA, what did they ever do that's useful? Who cares how vegetables grow in space?'. Not trying to mock you, trying to get across how this attitude is the reason the space program has produced dick lately.
No offence taken. Perhaps with the awarding of the X-Prize than commercial space travel and explotation will take off. Then we might see things like orbital farms. After all I imagine there's money to be made.
Because no one actually wants to pay for it when they could be siphoning money off to some pet project. Very annoying.
The wonders of government. See my above on the commercial explotation of space.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
Putting a man on the Moon, as technically challenging as it was, never really achieved much in the public eye other than pride in being able to conquer another barrier with science. Moon rocks don't hold much respect for the Average Joe, so why should he give money to a programme that is only going to look into space dirt?
What NASA lacks is a good PR campaign. People want to fund stem cell research because everyone knows or has seen a critically ill person who can't be cured with conventional medicine. People want to buy shares in the computer industry because we'd be hard pressed to do any of what we can today without better, more efficient and stable electronic devices and software. Space? Who's going to be able to afford or even be alive when you can pop off to Mars for a holiday?
If the public knew what offshoots we got from the space race, as with most wars which are equally good at generating new R&D budgets, then we'd likely not be facing a waning interest in space exploration compared to China which is pressing ahead simply to compete with American and Russian marks in the history book.
And one more thing that should make space travel everyone's best friend, right now we only have one planet. If it gets fucked up we're screwed. But if we go into space we can have 2 planets, then 3, then 4 till eventually we have enough planets that as a species we're basically impossible to erradicate and nothing short of the heat death of the universe will kill us...
Admiral Valdemar wrote:Putting a man on the Moon, as technically challenging as it was, never really achieved much in the public eye other than pride in being able to conquer another barrier with science. Moon rocks don't hold much respect for the Average Joe, so why should he give money to a programme that is only going to look into space dirt?
Exactly, as an average Joe, I don't care about moon roocks. How does Moon science affect me?
What NASA lacks is a good PR campaign. People want to fund stem cell research because everyone knows or has seen a critically ill person who can't be cured with conventional medicine. People want to buy shares in the computer industry because we'd be hard pressed to do any of what we can today without better, more efficient and stable electronic devices and software. Space? Who's going to be able to afford or even be alive when you can pop off to Mars for a holiday?
Well personally I think that if commercial companies got involved there would be more progress. Government agencies seem to stagnate.
If the public knew what offshoots we got from the space race, as with most wars which are equally good at generating new R&D budgets, then we'd likely not be facing a waning interest in space exploration compared to China which is pressing ahead simply to compete with American and Russian marks in the history book.
NASA needs to make it's benfits public, all this secrecy is not gaining them any points. I'm sure the Chinese populace is interested now. But if they allow their space agency to stagnate like the Russians and the USA have then the people will lose interest.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
Commercial spaceflight exists. Commercial companies use big Titan rockets to put their payloads up. There's no sudden, magic wand that makes spaceflight cheap and easy from the 'Free market' getting involved, and people need to wake up to this fact. It takes more than just 'Ooo, commercial spaceflight' to get things running well.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Commercial spaceflight exists. Commercial companies use big Titan rockets to put their payloads up. There's no sudden, magic wand that makes spaceflight cheap and easy from the 'Free market' getting involved, and people need to wake up to this fact. It takes more than just 'Ooo, commercial spaceflight' to get things running well.
So you don't think that the X-Prize competition will inspire a revolutuion in commercial sapaceflight like they were hoping?
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
Commercial spaceflight exists. Commercial companies use big Titan rockets to put their payloads up. There's no sudden, magic wand that makes spaceflight cheap and easy from the 'Free market' getting involved, and people need to wake up to this fact. It takes more than just 'Ooo, commercial spaceflight' to get things running well.
So you don't think that the X-Prize competition will inspire a revolutuion in commercial sapaceflight like they were hoping?
When winning the prize recouped half their construction cost? Unlikely. We'll probably see more people heading out there, but I am not being optimistic. Virgin Galactic strikes me as not being able to make it, but hey. I hope I'm proven wrong.
In the meantime, I'm going to continue crunching numbers on how to make a NTR-powered craft that would carry folks to orbit and back. Maybe if I can find some rich backers I'll take that puppy to the X-Cup.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
SirNitram wrote:
When winning the prize recouped half their construction cost? Unlikely. We'll probably see more people heading out there, but I am not being optimistic. Virgin Galactic strikes me as not being able to make it, but hey. I hope I'm proven wrong.
In the meantime, I'm going to continue crunching numbers on how to make a NTR-powered craft that would carry folks to orbit and back. Maybe if I can find some rich backers I'll take that puppy to the X-Cup.
Hey, that's lucky. I've some old Uranium fuel rods out the back I've been trying to shift for months. You can have them for cheap if you want.
SirNitram wrote:
When winning the prize recouped half their construction cost? Unlikely. We'll probably see more people heading out there, but I am not being optimistic. Virgin Galactic strikes me as not being able to make it, but hey. I hope I'm proven wrong.
So they spent 20 million and only made ten? What was the point of the whole thing if they didn't make any money? I got the impression that their hoping to attract alot of rich folks that'll pay 100,000$ a pop to go to the edge of space. I figured if they can generate enough interest than that can fund other commercial projects, like your space farm or a solar power plant.
In the meantime, I'm going to continue crunching numbers on how to make a NTR-powered craft that would carry folks to orbit and back. Maybe if I can find some rich backers I'll take that puppy to the X-Cup.
What's an NTR? Some kind of nuclear powered craft?
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
SirNitram wrote:
When winning the prize recouped half their construction cost? Unlikely. We'll probably see more people heading out there, but I am not being optimistic. Virgin Galactic strikes me as not being able to make it, but hey. I hope I'm proven wrong.
So they spent 20 million and only made ten? What was the point of the whole thing if they didn't make any money? I got the impression that their hoping to attract alot of rich folks that'll pay 100,000$ a pop to go to the edge of space. I figured if they can generate enough interest than that can fund other commercial projects, like your space farm or a solar power plant.
It was a dream. People with a vision do crazy shit. I agree with this sort of mindset completely, because the first time you do something, it's never profitable, even with a cash prize.
In the meantime, I'm going to continue crunching numbers on how to make a NTR-powered craft that would carry folks to orbit and back. Maybe if I can find some rich backers I'll take that puppy to the X-Cup.
What's an NTR? Some kind of nuclear powered craft?
Nuclear Thermal Rocket. Basically, supply heat to your reaction mass by fission instead of burning your reactant. Superior OOMPH behind your ass.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Cpl Kendall wrote:
In the meantime, I'm going to continue crunching numbers on how to make a NTR-powered craft that would carry folks to orbit and back. Maybe if I can find some rich backers I'll take that puppy to the X-Cup.
What's an NTR? Some kind of nuclear powered craft?[/quote]
Nuclear Thermal Rocket. Think NERVA, a project years ago by the USAF and NASA to have a hydrogen fuelled rocket that was powered by a fission pile.
SirNitram wrote:
It was a dream. People with a vision do crazy shit. I agree with this sort of mindset completely, because the first time you do something, it's never profitable, even with a cash prize.
Understood. I can identify with that.
Nuclear Thermal Rocket. Basically, supply heat to your reaction mass by fission instead of burning your reactant. Superior OOMPH behind your ass.
So what's stopping NASA from using this kind of rocket. I get the impression from your and Valdemar's description that it's better than a conventional rocket.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
Nuclear Thermal Rocket. Basically, supply heat to your reaction mass by fission instead of burning your reactant. Superior OOMPH behind your ass.
So what's stopping NASA from using this kind of rocket. I get the impression from your and Valdemar's description that it's better than a conventional rocket.
'OMFG NUKULAR ENDJINN! NUKE BAD! NUKE BAD! NO NUKEY IN SPACEY!'
You know. That kind of stupid shit.
Interestingly, the one thing President Bush has done which I don't consider idiotic was the creation of Project Prometheus, which is investigating nuclear engines again.(The better to propel the BC-303, of course)
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
SirNitram wrote:
'OMFG NUKULAR ENDJINN! NUKE BAD! NUKE BAD! NO NUKEY IN SPACEY!'
You know. That kind of stupid shit.
Right. Because a nuclear engine is the same thing as a warhead. Moron's.
Interestingly, the one thing President Bush has done which I don't consider idiotic was the creation of Project Prometheus, which is investigating nuclear engines again.(The better to propel the BC-303, of course)
Well he's not entirely useless then. I did think that his "plan" to go back to the Moon and Mars was interesting. ALthough it seemed to be short on details, and had no specific dates.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
No offence taken. Perhaps with the awarding of the X-Prize than commercial space travel and explotation will take off. Then we might see things like orbital farms. After all I imagine there's money to be made.
Moron's.