Discovery orbiter

[Boroda]

I have heard rumours that here we have a hysterically-swift preparation for at least 3 Soyuz spaceship launches. I have heard this from 3 different sources that have absolutely no connection, and all three are not from Internet.

Rescue operation?

Space Shuttle autonomy is 14 days IIRC?

If they'll burn Discovery - it will mean a huge step back in space exploration I hope it's only a rumour

[1K3]

Originally posted by Boroda


If they'll burn Discovery - it will mean a huge step back in space exploration I hope it's only a rumour

Yes its a setback for future exploration but late generation "Soyuz" (manned capsule) and "Progress" (cargo) should keep the ISS alive and well.

According to my "guestimates", 3 simultaneus lanuch of Soyuz rockets cost as much as launching a space shuttle.


EDIT: The shuttle cost 30x more than launching a "Soyuz"!

[1K3]

btw where the heck is our shuttle replacement??????

NASA and Lockheed really fudged up the so-called X-33 programme.

The X-33 was supposed to replace the aging space shuttle.   The Space Shuttle costs somewhere around $600 million dollars per launch, which is 30 times more than costs which are associated with the comparatively safer Russian Soyuz rocket that took Dennis Tito and a crew of two other cosmonauts to the lone remaining international space station back in April of 2001.   Peculiarities emerged from how NASA handled the X-33 program, such as its controversially having awarded the entire contract to one lone provider (Lockheed Martin) back in 1996, here in a country where competition usually is the chosen path.   The X-33 also involved a lot of unproven, "high risk" technologies that predictably did not yield worthwhile dividends.  It was almost as if decision-makers did not want the X-33 to succeed and thereby bring down the cost of launching from the $10,000 per pound that taxpayers pay to launch people on the Space Shuttle.   Coincidentally, perhaps, Lockheed also operates the Space Shuttle (through its United Space Alliance joint venture with Boeing).  

 It is worth noting that aerospace companies' government contracting profits are presently still based on a "cost plus" system.   In other words, government contractors are compensated for the costs of what they produce for the government, and they also receive an additional percentage of the gross sales price.   This percentage gives them something resembling what's known as a profit in far more capitalistic systems.  The higher the costs, the bigger the "profits".

more on http://www.spaceprojects.com/x33/

[Boroda]

Originally posted by 1K3
Yes its a setback for future exploration but late generation "Soyuz" (manned capsule) and "Progress" (cargo) should keep the ISS alive and well.

The problem is that we don't have enough Soyuz vessels on conwayor. Technological cycle is about 2 years IIRC.

And I worry about the people on Discovery. If they'll be evacuated by Soyuz "life-boats" - they have 14 days, maybe more. One Soyuz can take three cosmonauts down, but it needs a trained pilot, so - only two passengers.

Rumours I mentioned said that experienced pilots including Vladimir Dzhanibekov who docked with an uncontrolled Salyut-7 station are called from "reserve".

I may only hope that a situation is not that dramatic.

Originally posted by 1K3
According to my "guestimates", 3 simultaneus lanuch of Soyuz rockets cost as much as launching a space shuttle.

It's not true, it's much cheaper. 1kg delivered to orbit by Soyuz is 10 times cheaper then by Space Shuttle.

Hmm. I don't know how many R-7 launch tables we have at Baikonur, and noone to ask - my Father is on a vacation in Kislovodsk now There are launch facilities at Kapustin Yar (near Volgograd [former Stalingrad]) and Plesetsk, but Plesetsk is used for launches to polar orbits, and there were no manned launches from KapYar...

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Boroda
The problem is that we don't have enough Soyuz vessels on conwayor. Technological cycle is about 2 years IIRC.

And I worry about the people on Discovery. If they'll be evacuated by Soyuz "life-boats" - they have 14 days, maybe more. One Soyuz can take three cosmonauts down, but it needs a trained pilot, so - only two passengers.

Rumours I mentioned said that experienced pilots including Vladimir Dzhanibekov who docked with an uncontrolled Salyut-7 station are called from "reserve".

I may only hope that a situation is not that dramatic.

 

It's not true, it's much cheaper. 1kg delivered to orbit by Soyuz is 10 times cheaper then by Space Shuttle.

Hmm. I don't know how many R-7 launch tables we have at Baikonur, and noone to ask - my Father is on a vacation in Kislovodsk now There are launch facilities at Kapustin Yar (near Volgograd [former Stalingrad]) and Plesetsk, but Plesetsk is used for launches to polar orbits, and there were no manned launches from KapYar...

I read today on MSNBC that there was a varitable "scavenger hunt" going on in discovery today.  They were getting anything of life sustaining value that discovery could share off the orbiter and onto the ISS.  The article summed it up as basically they arent going to get resupplied for a while.  I read into it as Discovery is "stuck" there.

[Chairboy]

...Not to mention that there have been no manned Soyuz launches from Plesetsk yet.  Future manned launches from there are supposed to be carried up by Zenit rockets anyhow, so no infrastructure in place.

Second, there's no need to have a pilot aboard the Soyuz, the spacecraft can fly and dock automatically, after all, they have the KURS system, which only fails when a cash bonus is available to the Cosmonaut for 'fixing' a messed up docking approach.  

So each Soyuz can bring down 3 passengers, no pilot needed for the way up.

Finally, there's no immediate countdown, the Shuttle crew could hang out at the ISS for a while, as long as there's Progress resupply.

It'll sure be nice when the European ATV  comes online.  The Progress is great, but getting some more supplies per shot would be nice.

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
I read today on MSNBC that there was a varitable "scavenger hunt" going on in discovery today.  They were getting anything of life sustaining value that discovery could share off the orbiter and onto the ISS.  The article summed it up as basically they arent going to get resupplied for a while.  I read into it as Discovery is "stuck" there.

I've been listening to the feeds from NASA, and that's not what it sounds like yet.  They've added another day to the mission to do more work on ISS, yeah, but I'm not convinced they're about to chuck the shuttle.

I sure hope they don't, that would be a terrible waste.

[rpm]

L A Times link

HOUSTON -- In their first interview from space, astronauts aboard the shuttle Discovery said Friday they were disappointed to learn that large pieces of insulating foam fell off the orbiter's external tank during Tuesday's launch, but remained confident the orbiter is safe enough to fly them home in another week.

"All of us on the crew were very surprised" about the foam loss "after so many good people have worked so hard" to solve the problem, said mission specialist Andrew Thomas.

"It wasn't what we expected," said Discovery commander Eileen Collins.

That didn't shake her faith in the shuttle. "We know Discovery is going to get us back to Earth safe," she said.

Engineers also grappled Friday with another problem that has surfaced with the shuttle: two protruding gap fillers between heat-resistant tiles on the underside of the orbiter.

Each of the gap fillers, which perform the same type of function as caulking between bathroom tiles, is sticking out about 1.2 inches.

NASA managers said they were considering, but had not yet decided, to send a space walking astronaut out to cut or shave the gap fillers.

One problem that seriously concerned space agency earlier in the week, a chipped insulating tile near the landing gear door, seemed to recede in importance Friday when engineers figured out that the damage was only a third of an inch deep. The tiles in that area are almost two inches thick.

While feeling confident that Discovery was not seriously damaged during launch, NASA officials said they will know for certain by Saturday or Sunday at the latest if Discovery is safe to fly home.

That decision will come after reviewing all the pictures, sensor data from the wings and laser images taken with the boom sensor Friday.

The temporary halt in future shuttle flights prompted a request that the crew's 13-day mission be extended one day to allow further transfers of equipment and supplies to the space station to prepare the facility for a protracted delay in the resumption of shuttle flights.

Sounds like it's not nearly as bad as it could have been. After the spacewalk we should know if it's serious.  I think she'll RTB safely.

[FiLtH]

Its a cool concept..but its gotta die sometime. How many astronauts are onboard? If more than 2-3 why?..for a first run after the last tragedy?


    I would think that a cargo box, with a small re-entry vehicle, strapped to engines would make alot more sense than holding on with pride, something that has already proved itself unreliable and unsafe.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

It isn't that the space shuttle itself is unsafe, it's that NASA has been screwing the pooch on safety for about 25 years now. Neither of the shuttle accidents were due to the design of the shuttle itself, but rather seperate component failures that would easily have been prevented had certain people been doing their job. The o-rings were a known problem, engineers at Morton Thiokol told their superiors and NASA both not to launch at those low temperatures. Arrogance and stupidity prevailed. Same thing with the foam. The foam wasn't a problem until some genius:rolleyes: at NASA decided to use a more expensive, more "environmentally friendly" foam, when NASA could have gotten a waiver. Again, arrogance and stupidity prevailed. They're STILL using the "new"  foam, and STILL having problems they didn't have before.

Yes, the space shuttle is old technology, and yes we should be flying something better. But, had the morons not gotten stupid and arrogant, the shuttle would likely have a clean record, instead of two tragedies that could have been easily prevented.

[SOB]

Damn, if only you and your rolleyes emoticons had been at the helm of NASA over the years, Virgil, nothing would have EVAR gone wrong!

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

I wish. The space program is something I believe in, and it pisses me off to see them do stupid things that get people killed when it just shouldn't happen. Those shuttle disasters were not unforseen, they knew a problem existed, and they knew the risks were excessive and unnecessary.


But the fact remains, what happened was stupid, they knew they had problems and they ignored them. There are risks, and there are stupid risks. It's the stupid ones that got people killed in this case.

All they had to do was wait until the temperature came up, no Challenger disaster. Same thing with the foam. They knew better. It's one thing to take a risk that you can't control. To take a risk over something you can control is inexcusable.

[Hoarach]

They also have to look how old the space shuttles we are using now are and it maybe time to build either a new design or build more shuttles of the design we are using now.

[ASTAC]

The sad thing is the prototype replacement was 85% complete when cancelled in 2001. NASA cancelled every replacement project in 2001. Now we have a aging dangerous vehicle and have to start from scratch..so we are looking at like probrably 10 years before a replacement is ready.

[Chairboy]

Virgil, can you cite a source for the foam thing?