Posted on 06/12/2007 4:48:53 PM PDT by XBob
Space Shuttle's Left Wing May Be Damaged Meteorite, Space Junk May Have Struck Panels
POSTED: 5:13 pm EDT June 12, 2007 UPDATED: 7:00 pm EDT June 12, 2007 Email This Story | Print This Story Sign Up for Breaking News Alerts WASHINGTON -- A meteorite or space junk may have struck Space Shuttle Atlantis' left wing, according to NBC News space correspondent Jay Barbree.
NASA recorded a hit on reinforced carbon panels 7 and 8 on the left wing. The panels keep heat from re-entry from burning the spacecraft.
...
This is the same area where foam damaged Columbia's left wing and caused it to break up, killing its crew on Feb. 1, 2003.
Yuri Gagarin, or if you must, Allen Shepherd more so.
Didn’t they peg the “O Rings” as cause of the failure? That’s a joke.
The ground crews can be pretty crafty. Let’s hope they can pull a “McGyver” on this and get a fix.
I don't think that's quite the problem. The Soviets/Russians still use Soyuz, which was first fielded in 1967 on top of an SS-6/7 rocket booster that was developed in 1957. For using 1950's/1960's tech, the Russians have done very well although they had their share of mishaps too
Are the Russians using 40-year-old designs, or 40-year-old equipment? Nothing wrong with old designs. Nor even necessarily with old equipment if it's well-maintained and kept in a suitable environment. The Space Shuttles, though, are subjected to considerable stress and are apt to suffer from the effects thereof.
Back in the closet. Please.
We’ll let you know when it’s safe...
It was in '73 or '74 a NASA researcher gloomily observed to me a new milestone for NASA: They'd reached 1 administrator per scientist.
Zoom forward a few decades...
Seems we crossed that point a while back.
You may be right on your overall point, but this can not in anyway be construed as a NASA f^ck up, this same situation could happen to any civilian run space program, you can't stop a rock out there from hitting you with todays tech, not gonna happen.
If you knew how many of my friends grew up to be engineers and scientists because of the Mercury and the Apollo programs...you’d be amazed. Some of them you would know because you use their inventions every day.
“flaws . . . “
People and cargo do not belong on the same launch vehicle.
Good point. The shuttle’s MISSION was designed by congress.
They wanted a Ferrari Dump Truck, with parts made in every congressional district.
China has announced their intention for a manned Mars mission. The benefits are long-term, and include asteriod mining (China did not sign the UN non-commercialization of space treaty like we did).
We really won’t know the benefits until we get there.
How many freezers in Louisiana would it take to stuff all that into? How many art exhibitions of Abu Ghraib torture paintings would that fund? How many Muslim sensitivity training sessions for airport workers would that buy?
I'd rather that money be spent on space exploration rather than the above since it's going to be spent on something -- they'll never give it back once they've got it.
The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever.-- K. E. Tsiolkovsky
1) Open your dictionary.
2) flip to "C."
3) Look up "colonize."
Just think about commodities spot-market movement.
Now an asteroid is going to fly by in a couple years with more copper than the state of Arizona can mine in a year.
Every Joe with a firecracker is going to send something up there. I’m just going to guess it was Democrats who signed that treaty. Want cheaper, faster, and safer? Let the private sector do it.
The ISS is indeed a starting point, and it's still under construction.
It is meant to be a platform to learn how run a factory in orbit, to learn how to build a factory in orbit, build new ships........it's hoped that the ISS will be the true jumping-off point into the solar system.
Personally, I agree with those who say that the shuttle has been an overly expensive diversion from the ISS. However, at the same time, there are several things up there that could not have been launched without the shuttle. The Hubble telescope, for one.
Based on the ISS, you have to figure at least a billion dollars per person to put someone on the Moon or Mars. Better be mining some really good stuff.
Good point. Also, critics said the same thing about early efforts in aviation. Critis asked why anyone would want to fly? They reasoned that there was nothing worthwhile that man go do up there. Others laughed at the dreamers who proposed air trasnport. The reasoning being that it was just too expensive and dangerous to ever amount to anything. Besides, ships and rail could take one anywhere they wanted to go.
As far as the New World is concerned, Europeans saw the New World as a nuisance: it was an obstacle to the Far East. Colonisation began AFTER valuable resources (gold, silver, and certain crops) were discovered.
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.