StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Enlightenment wrote:The shuttle program is basically dead at this point. It will have to be grounded for an investigation but that will take so long (years) that there will be no point in reactivating the fleet afterwards.

There is a very real risk that the space age is now over. The only replacement on-offer (a mini-Shuttle launched on an ELV) is decades away and NASA should lack the public confidence of the US government to be given the money to build a replacement.

There's no need for a replacement, though. We should use this as a springboard, if it's handled intelligently, to focus on the real goal, which is getting to Mars as quickly as possible. We don't need an Orbiter to do that. It was a useless sidetrack, and that makes this tragedy all the worse. The Challenger, too.

The ISS can't keep operating--and certainly can't be completed--in the absense of the shuttle for a prolonged period. The station may need to be abandonded.

The Russians are more than capable of supporting a space station if they had the money to do it; they have the available vehicles and the production lines for them. Indeed, I suspect they could probably send the rest of the ISS into orbit on their boosters.

The problem, of course, is the omnipresent funding. We would have to be willing to provide the Russians with enough cash to do it. I think it is a reasonable expenditure, even if we logically shift gears towards Mars and abandon Orbiters, simply to maintain the permanent space presence, gather potentially useful further data for such a mission, and as a potent symbol.

But we must not let this tragedy blind us to the fact that ultimately the reusable space-plane concept is in truth a dead-end in terms of lifting viable payloads into orbit, or manned exploration of the solar system. I just hope the courage is there not to let these intrepid explorers die in vain; rather that we should press on ahead to bold and fortright endeavours in their name.

You wonder how many of these people grew up saying they wanted to be astronauts, I sure as heck did.

Bush's address to the nation i thought was very good but i'm not 100% sure he should have ended his speech with "and may god continue to bless America"

Typhonis 1 wrote:could this cause the x-33 to be builtsooner?

X-33's been canceled. LockMart couldn't get the fuel tanks to work. Which is really unfortunate, because if the investigation is anything like the Challenger investigation, the fleet's grounded until ~2008.

My theory (from hearing various pieces of data) is that the falling object off the fuel tank damaged something over the port wing landing gear bay. The last message to come through at all was a somewhat garbled message about tire pressure. If the bay door was damaged, the first area to heat up would be the tires, filled with nitrogen. As the gas heated, it would expand, changing pressure. The tire would eventually explode, and quite possibly cut hydraulic lines. High-pressure hydraulic fluid can cut through dense metals, let alone the alumnium/ceramic hull of the orbiter. Additionally, it's flammable, which would cause any fire to spread throughout the orbiter rapidly.

Known facts:
Columbia was traveling ~39 miles in altitude and ~12,500 mph upon breakup
Columbia was in a 57 degree port bank
An unknown piece of debris collided with the port side of Columbia during launch
The last received message included a report of abnormal tire pressure

It's tragic that it takes events like this to remind us that space travel is still an adventure, and that like all adventures, sometimes people don't make it home. Our hearts go out to the families of the astronauts.

When someone told me in January '86 that Challenger had exploded, I didn't believe 'em. This afternoon, I didn't believe it either.

I also remember that Richard Feynman remarked in his book "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" that the shuttle technology was hopelessly outdated. That was during his investigation of the Challenger explosion 17 years ago. He was the one who did the famous o-ring in the ice water test during the hearings. He offered an addition included in his book which ended with his famous remark, "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."

Did anyone else see the statement made by Bush?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

i think the fleet will remain grounded until 2006 not 2008. challenger grounded the fleet for 3 years, this will be about the same, if not less, because its not something that happened in take off and we did have clues here to what happened (tire overpressure)

While I would love nothing better than to see billions pumped into NASA, we do not NEED the space program right now. We do not NEED a colony on Mars, and quite frankly we really don't NEED an International space station. America needs to spend its finite resources on what matters right now, like affordable health care etc. Once we get these problems solved then we can spend the necessary billions on a space program. I don't want the space program abandoned or neglected, but unless the experiments they do in space becomes necesary to medical research etc I wouldn't support any great expenditures in that area.

Jesus

I where out of contact and I just heard about this.

OMG

News update: Pres. Putin stressed the importance of space exploration in a call to Bush.

Despite the fact that I hate his KGB ass, I say: go Putin.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:

Enlightenment wrote:The shuttle program is basically dead at this point. It will have to be grounded for an investigation but that will take so long (years) that there will be no point in reactivating the fleet afterwards.

There is a very real risk that the space age is now over. The only replacement on-offer (a mini-Shuttle launched on an ELV) is decades away and NASA should lack the public confidence of the US government to be given the money to build a replacement.

There's no need for a replacement, though. We should use this as a springboard, if it's handled intelligently, to focus on the real goal, which is getting to Mars as quickly as possible. We don't need an Orbiter to do that. It was a useless sidetrack, and that makes this tragedy all the worse. The Challenger, too.

The ISS can't keep operating--and certainly can't be completed--in the absense of the shuttle for a prolonged period. The station may need to be abandonded.

The Russians are more than capable of supporting a space station if they had the money to do it; they have the available vehicles and the production lines for them. Indeed, I suspect they could probably send the rest of the ISS into orbit on their boosters.

The problem, of course, is the omnipresent funding. We would have to be willing to provide the Russians with enough cash to do it. I think it is a reasonable expenditure, even if we logically shift gears towards Mars and abandon Orbiters, simply to maintain the permanent space presence, gather potentially useful further data for such a mission, and as a potent symbol.

But we must not let this tragedy blind us to the fact that ultimately the reusable space-plane concept is in truth a dead-end in terms of lifting viable payloads into orbit, or manned exploration of the solar system. I just hope the courage is there not to let these intrepid explorers die in vain; rather that we should press on ahead to bold and fortright endeavours in their name.

Well a ship going to mars is probably going to be too large to be assembled on the ground. You need the orbiter to assemble it in space.

EVEN THOUGH I MORN FOR ALL THE SEVEN WHO WERE KILLED IN THIS HORRIBLE ACCIDENT If the space fleet is grounded to 2006-2008 or whenever it is grounded till. does any one have an idea if there are still people in the space station? if so how do we get them down?



i would also like to point out that living in the uk and not having sky or anything this is the only way i have found out what is going on apart from the shuttle exploding with a loss of all life

Hitch Hiker wrote:EVEN THOUGH I MORN FOR ALL THE SEVEN WHO WERE KILLED IN THIS HORRIBLE ACCIDENT If the space fleet is grounded to 2006-2008 or whenever it is grounded till. does any one have an idea if there are still people in the space station? if so how do we get them down?

Soyuz if need be.

Hitch Hiker wrote:does any one have an idea if there are still people in the space station? if so how do we get them down?

Not this again..

The ISS has three crew. It also has a lifeboat with three seats.

The limit to the size of the ISS crew is the number of seats available in the lifeboat.

I would just like to apologise if my last entry seemed a little insensitive again my apologies And also may they rest in peace

I hope this won't be the end of the ISS.
The Europs are decades away from sending men to space and the russians don't have the money.

I'm watching the NASA announcement now, and it seems like the failure began in the left wing...

Cpt_Frank wrote:I hope this won't be the end of the ISS.
The Europs are decades away from sending men to space and the russians don't have the money.

The long-term (and likely permanent) grounding of the Shuttle is basically curtains for the ISS.program. While it's possible to reboost, supply, and recrew the ISS using Russian and soon-to-be-developed ESA hardware it's not possible to complete ISS construction without the Shuttle.

Even if the Shuttle was grounded only for a fairly short period (e.g. two or three years) it would not be practical to resume ISS construction as at that point the core components of the station would have significantly exceeded their design lives by the time the final ISS components could be installed.

It is my personal opinion that the era of US manned space flight is over. There will be no more Americans put into orbit (or beyond) on NASA hardware.

DAM I for one hope they dont stop the maned flights into space else mankind will probably run put of places to explore on the earth i think theres only the sea left after space

Enlightenment wrote: The long-term (and likely permanent) grounding of the Shuttle is basically curtains for the ISS.program. While it's possible to reboost, supply, and recrew the ISS using Russian and soon-to-be-developed ESA hardware it's not possible to complete ISS construction without the Shuttle.

Even if the Shuttle was grounded only for a fairly short period (e.g. two or three years) it would not be practical to resume ISS construction as at that point the core components of the station would have significantly exceeded their design lives by the time the final ISS components could be installed.

It is my personal opinion that the era of US manned space flight is over. There will be no more Americans put into orbit (or beyond) on NASA hardware.

Well they just said on TV the US government stated that this will not be the end of the space program.
Although a break of a few years is probably inevitable....

I'm still hoping for the Europeans to finally send men to space, but they're still decades away from that.

Cpt_Frank wrote:I hope this won't be the end of the ISS.
The Europs are decades away from sending men to space and the russians don't have the money.

"The Europs"?

ESA is planning to go to Mars sometime next decade and the UK is sending the Beagle 2 to Mars soon for a more thorough examination of the planet.

CSA is also in the race, they may be aiming for the Moon as of yet, but we all start somewhere.

Like it or not, this is setting NASA back and there is nothing to say ESA or CSA can't takeover.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

Cpt_Frank wrote:I hope this won't be the end of the ISS.
The Europs are decades away from sending men to space and the russians don't have the money.

"The Europs"?

ESA is planning to go to Mars sometime next decade and the UK is sending the Beagle 2 to Mars soon for a more thorough examination of the planet.

CSA is also in the race, they may be aiming for the Moon as of yet, but we all start somewhere.

Like it or not, this is setting NASA back and there is nothing to say ESA or CSA can't takeover.

Hey calm down I'm a European myself
I don't doubt we will get there eventually, but I fear by the time we do the ISS is only good for scrapping.

Cpt_Frank wrote:Although a break of a few years is probably inevitable....

That's the ISS gone, then.

I'm still hoping for the Europeans to finally send men to space, but they're still decades away from that.

The ESA ATV is about 19 months away from being operational. It's a one-way cargolifter but going from there to a crewed vehicle could be done in a decade or less if the political will existed.

Cpt_Frank wrote:

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

Cpt_Frank wrote:I hope this won't be the end of the ISS.
The Europs are decades away from sending men to space and the russians don't have the money.

"The Europs"?

ESA is planning to go to Mars sometime next decade and the UK is sending the Beagle 2 to Mars soon for a more thorough examination of the planet.

CSA is also in the race, they may be aiming for the Moon as of yet, but we all start somewhere.

Like it or not, this is setting NASA back and there is nothing to say ESA or CSA can't takeover.

Hey calm down I'm a European myself
I don't doubt we will get there eventually, but I fear by the time we do the ISS is only good for scrapping.

Yeah, right now the ISS is a liability to the space programme. It has 3 scientists up there, now they can get down by another shuttle launch, unlikely as it may seem. Or they could use a Russian escape capsule that was going to be replaced by another NASA design of lifeboat which was cutback.

However, the station can operate on its own and will not suffer any real ill effects until the orbit degrades from atmospheric drag due to its fairly low orbit. We can keep boosting it up, but the shuttle is the best for that, no other rocket has the power I think. If we do somehow boost it up then we may buy some more time, but boosting it too far up will mean wasting more fuel to reach it anyway. Too little and the thing becomes the world's most expensive fireworks display, and a lot of countries are going to be pissed at losing those billions.

Well how long is it anyway until the ISS enters the atmosphere.

Cpt_Frank wrote:Well how long is it anyway until the ISS enters the atmosphere.

I'm trying to find that out now, should be a while I'd say, but it will eventually. Right now Sir. Newton is flying that thing.