Skip to comments.
NASA Will Have Space Shuttle on Standby for Rescue Mission When Flights Resume
The Associated Press ^
| Feb 19, 2004
| Marcia Dunn
Posted on 02/19/2004 4:21:11 PM PST by yonif
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-34 next last
1
posted on
02/19/2004 4:21:12 PM PST
by
yonif
To: yonif
Ah, they want to launch in January, the coldest month of the year, yet again. I knew it. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. I hand it to NASA, they really know how to learn from their mistakes.
To: yonif; XBob; bonesmccoy; wirestripper; anymouse; Gracey; NormsRevenge; RightWhale
I guess NASA reads Free Republic. This (obvious to the most casual observer) idea was posted almost a year ago on bones's thread.
3
posted on
02/19/2004 4:37:17 PM PST
by
snopercod
(When the people are ready, a master will appear.)
To: yonif
> January 2005
I cannot believe they are still talking about midwinter launches. They don't learn.
We should default on the stupid space station commitments.
4
posted on
02/19/2004 4:58:48 PM PST
by
old-ager
To: old-ager
if you go to the shuttle web site, the first date listed is sept 12-2004
5
posted on
02/19/2004 5:08:16 PM PST
by
fedupjohn
To: old-ager
From long experience, there's plenty of days in the 60's and 70's on the east coast of Florida. The minimum temp for the entire month of Jan. 2004 was 46 degrees in Cocoa, FL (close enough). Average temps were in the 60's.
6
posted on
02/19/2004 5:15:19 PM PST
by
alancarp
(NASCAR: Where everything's made up and the points don't matter.)
To: yonif
Somehow having a rescue vehicle wouldn't make me feel more secure.
7
posted on
02/19/2004 5:18:39 PM PST
by
VRWC_minion
(Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
To: KellyAdmirer
Yea, it's know wonder they support the "Global Warming" theory. They're stunned every time spring rolls around.
8
posted on
02/19/2004 5:32:48 PM PST
by
Falcon4.0
To: yonif
But will we have a rescue shuttle to rescue the rescue shuttle?
9
posted on
02/19/2004 5:43:24 PM PST
by
George W. Bush
(It's the Congress, stupid.)
To: snopercod
3 - "O'Keefe said five or six potential launch dates are available in January. "
That's it NASA, plan on launching another frozen popsicle.
10
posted on
02/19/2004 6:10:30 PM PST
by
XBob
To: alancarp
6 - "From long experience, there's plenty of days in the 60's and 70's on the east coast of Florida. The minimum temp for the entire month of Jan. 2004 was 46 degrees in Cocoa, FL (close enough). Average temps were in the 60's."
===
There are lots of days in the 80's too, and frequently some in the 20's, and on occasion in the teens. It depends on where the jet stream is going. Some years there is no 'winter', others we freeze our tails off.
Most of The thousands and thousands of acres of orange groves have been frozen off, except right by the rivers and coasts.
11
posted on
02/19/2004 6:25:40 PM PST
by
XBob
To: VRWC_minion
>>>> The rescue shuttle will not necessarily be on the launch pad, but will be ready to fly to the space station within 45 to 90 days <<<<<
What rescue vehicle?
Not if your on the shuttle and have a problem!
Dam! Everyone above Tech. should be Fired!
To: yonif
This is clearly a political ploy to placate Congress. I predicted last year that the "long pole in the tent" of getting the shuttle flying again was not technical but rather political. NASA has the challenge of regaining Congress' confidence that it can guaranty success of the next shuttle flight. Given that so many things can go wrong (and their are an endless number of Monday morning quarterbacks/space engineers willing to say that a thousand things can go wrong) it may be an impossible task, if Congressional whims cannot be satisfied.
Clearly we could have technically flown the shuttle last Spring, but not politically. All of the contingency hoops that NASA is jumping through right now is merely window dressing to placate Congress.
13
posted on
02/19/2004 9:58:36 PM PST
by
anymouse
To: yonif
The rescue shuttle will not necessarily be on the launch pad, but will be ready to fly to the space station within 45 to 90 days Quick! Name the last STS mission that had a 90 day supply of life support necessities on board.
If there were a shuttle ready to fly a rescue mission in 45 days to rescue the crew of Columbia last year, all they'd have brought home would have been corpses. I recall NASA stating that the Columbia crew would have lasted 2 more weeks with what they had on board when they poo pooed the idea of a rescue vehicle last year. What changed?
14
posted on
02/19/2004 10:34:25 PM PST
by
Bloody Sam Roberts
(The way that you wander is the way that you choose. The day that you tarry is the day that you lose.)
To: Bloody Sam Roberts
What they should do is modify the shuttles so that they are able to dock with the space station in an emergency and also be able to have space walks off of it in an emergency.
15
posted on
02/19/2004 11:07:03 PM PST
by
yonif
("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
To: Bloody Sam Roberts; yonif
What changed? The orbit the shuttles will have to able to attain.
The article states that 45-90 day window is what the ISS can support.
Ergo, I assume the shuttle missions must be capable reaching it...
So, what happens if NASA still kisses the rumps of the Clintonista/Algore/Nader supporters? What if John Edwards' lawyer
buddies still channel the spirits enough, so that tried and true and future products (hard foam, asbestos
o-ring joint compound, etc) can no longer be made or used without the threats of law suits?
To: XBob
No - I lived in Orlando and Melbourne for 33 years and there was exactly ONE day in the teens. It was 18 degrees in 1980. The twenties are still rare -- and that's almost unheard of on the coast. And for Pete's sake, why is everybody thinking that NASA will launch at dawn???
Don't sweat it (no pun intended) folks -- NASA's got a whole lot more to worry about than temperature: and their post-Challenger guidelines are (I think) no launch under 45 degrees or so.
17
posted on
02/20/2004 7:14:34 AM PST
by
alancarp
(NASCAR: Where everything's made up and the points don't matter.)
To: yonif
Ahem. All of the remaining shuttles do have the ability to dock to the space station and the astronauts can go EVA via the space station airlock or in an emergency through the shuttle docking module's airlock. We were in the process of upgrading Columbia to be able to dock with the station and it too would have had an emergency EVA capability.
18
posted on
02/20/2004 9:24:02 AM PST
by
anymouse
To: alancarp
17 - Well, i grew up on Merritt Island, the home of the shuttle, and live there off and on, most all of my life.
The challenger was launched after enduring 7 days of off and on freezing in 1986.
Where did all the thousands and thousands of acres of frozen orange groves come from, in the 80's? Oranges have just about disappeared from Orange County. (note this requires sustained temps of 28 degrees).
One other thing, we are dealing with cryogenic fuels, hundreds of degrees below zero, and when you have the whole shuttle system, prefrozen/precooled near freezing, it doesn't take much more.
Remember those excellent pictures of the saturn launches, from the launch gantry, with all those pieces falling off, as it slowly rose in launch. That was ice.
Some years there is no freeqing. Some years there are numbers of freezes.
19
posted on
02/20/2004 10:43:50 AM PST
by
XBob
To: Bloody Sam Roberts
I believe they are assuming that the shuttle would be docked on the ISS, inspected, and then if problems were discovered the crew would live on the ISS until the rescue ship arrived.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-34 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson