Can Astronauts now reach aft parts of an orbiter's belly?

[willpittenger]

It's a long way back there -- and you have to go around the wings. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[erioladastra]

If memory serves, they can now reach the vast majority of the orbiter. WHere they can't, the OBSS would be handed off to the station arm and then I think they can get everywhere else. That is how things stand until the IP modules are added - can't reach with them sticking out. So a mini-boom will be developed tat can fit better. Still won't cover everything but will get most things.

 

[willpittenger]

The station would not be of any help on a Hubble Service mission. That is why I asked. I really feel that we at least need to bring Hubble back. It's earned a spot in the Smithsonian. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[erioladastra]

Not sure how that followed but... It would be a waste of a very limited number of shuttle missions. While it is nice sentiment, I doubt anyone would want to spend $400+ million and risk a shuttle/people for a souvenir.

 

[tohaki]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>The station would not be of any help on a Hubble Service mission. That is why I asked. I really feel that we at least need to bring Hubble back. It's earned a spot in the Smithsonian.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>Can a shuttle re-enter the atmosphere with heavy cargo?

 

[erioladastra]

Yes, because if you are launching something like HSt and abort you need to be able to land with it. However, it is more dangerous.

 

[barrykirk]

Well, what would be nice would be if the next HST servicing mission adds a booster to the HST amoung<br />everything else.<br /><br />The idea would be that after Hubble is spent and no longer operational. It should be boosted into an orbit<br />thats good for at least 100 years. Hopefully in 100 years, space travel will be so cheap that it would be<br />cheap and routine to bring HST back to the smithsonian.

 

[willpittenger]

Orbiters have landed with rather heavy cargo before. One was the long term exposure facility that was left in orbit for much longer than the planned year due to the Challenger accident. It was useless if left in orbit. As I recall, when retrieved, it was nearing the point in which it would reenter uncontrolled. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Interesting option. I do not know how big of a booster would be required.<br /><br />I do know that is has no on board thrusters at all (even for pointing) due to one requirement: The astromoners did not want any debris around the telescope. For that reason, the pointing tasks are handled via reaction wheels exclusively. Those astromoners would not be happy if a booster (like the unmanned system that was proposed when O'Keith canceled the service mission) attemptted to boost the telescope while it was still active. On the other hand, it would be OKAY if Hubble were to be turned off after the burn. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[qso1]

The heavier the payload, the longer the landing rollout but the shuttle could land with up to 32,000 lbs IIRC. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[spacester]

<font color="yellow">Interesting option. I do not know how big of a booster would be required.</font><br /><br />The mothballing robot would be well within the capability of a Delta IV Medium+ (5.2) according to this proposal by some wacko here almost a year and a half ago. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <br /><br />(edit: changed the link to a specific post) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>