STS-121 Update Thread: Part Two

[SpaceKiwi]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>How bad does the weather forecast have to be before they don't even get the astronauts into the shuttle or fill the external tank?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Well, a partial answer to your question might be as bad as the weather is likely to be tomorrow.<br /><br />As I understood it, they were originally going to attempt a third time tomorrow before then standing down for a day. They've obviously weighed up the chances of good weather tomorrow versus an opportunity to re-top the Orbiter Fuel Cell tanks, so that they might still get that extra on-orbit day, and decided to go with the latter. Therefore, I'd say tomorrow was/is obviously looking crap enough for them not to even seriously consider a launch attempt. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[anoolios]

Of course it'd be best if they had got off on time, however I have been secetly hoping for a July 4 launch. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[bobw]

Thanks for the heater info. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[scottb50]

With tomorrow available it might be a good idea to get some pictures if not a visual inspection of the known problem areas on the tank. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[kane007]

Looking more like 4 July. Fingers crossed wont contribute too much to the fireworks.

 

[ozspace]

Bill Harwood of CBS has just reported engineers finding a 4 to 5 inch crack in tank insulation on the feedline bracket area at the top of the LOX feedline where it attaches to the hydrogen tank...<br /><br />http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html

 

[earth_bound_misfit]

*profanity deleted*! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>

 

[j05h]

Profanity could be appropriate to the situation, if not this forum. Shuttle workers must be extremely frustrated, and this puts political pressure on the Administrator and Congress. Even if foam cracks are perfectly normal during tank cycling, this doesn't look good to others. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[spayss]

Shuttle workers ultimately work for taxpayers. As a taxpayer I'm fed up with these incompetent boobs. <br /><br />NASA's Shuttle performance is pathetic.

 

[earth_bound_misfit]

"As a taxpayer I'm fed up with these incompetent boobs."<br /><br /><br />That is a bit tough, there's alot of competent staff working at Nasa.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>

 

[spayss]

My pet gerbil could accomplish as much...ZERO and do it without the billions and billions of dollars down the toilet. He also would have kicked the bucket sooner and saved 3 dead-end decades. <br /><br /> I must live in a bubble in this country. The voters in my district would fry any senator or congressman who called for increase funding for NASA when there are other issues pressing. NASA's incompetency has been a disaster for the hope of meaningful resources to be put into manned exploration. Enthusiasm among the taxpayer has evaporated beyond a few polyanish space keeners....and even most of the space community roll their eyes over the word 'Shuttle'.

 

[haywood]

Way to go spayss!<br /><br />What an absolute load of bellicose bullduram.<br />

 

[tplank]

The problem is our mass media political culture of a zero risk society.<br /><br />It is valid to criticize the Shuttle on the basis of it not being the best choice of design. The discussion of whether it was in a broad sense designed according to a political agenda and all that is educational, but not germane to what is occurring today.<br /><br />What has happened to us is politics. Back in the 60s and 70s we all knew that astronauts were putting their lives on the line. We thought it was a brave and noble thing to take those risks for the advancement of mankind. We are a lot less tolerant of risk these days and that reverberates through all aspects of our society. And it isn’t a good vibration at all.<br /><br />What we need is to have some grown-ups in leadership in our country. You know, the kind of people that actually give a flying schnitzel about doing the RIGHT THING and not so much about protecting their incumbency. The kind of people that will appoint NASA administrators with the courage to stand at the podium, look us in the eye and say, “Hey, this is a high risk enterprise. Brave men and women are likely to die just like they did in the great age of exploration that gave us Columbus, Magellan, and the Jamestown Colony.”<br /><br />Unfortunately, because of funding realities the whole endeavor has become highly risk intolerant. Any risk realized will probably end the entire program and the people in charge understand this. It isn’t a good position to be in if you are at Nasa.<br /><br />I for one applaud the courage of going forward in spite of the well publicized issues.<br /><br />Can private enterprise do things better? Undoubtedly so—eventually. In the mean time, it is what it is warts and all. Let us pause to celebrate the engineering accomplishment rather than just casting accusations of incompetence. I totally agree that we need to take a tough hard critical look for the purpose of learning and moving forward. But calling names at accomplished professionals j <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>The Disenfranchised Curmudgeon</p><p>http://tonyplank.blogspot.com/ </p> </div>

 

[haywood]

Excellent post tplank. Well said.<br />

 

[gsuschrist]

Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush. If the fault is with the government then it's time to shut down government funded spaceflight. Change of government and which parties lead the two Houses makes no difference to the incompetency we see at NASA.<br /><br /> My support dried up when the nabobs at NASA didn't kick some butt after the Columbia disaster. Instead of getting down to specifics they proclaimed it was the culture of NASA at fault. That was the height of bureaucratic weasel words. The place needed turning upside down. Incompetents should have been identified, booted and it made clear that failure was not an option or there's the door. What matters is results and not another dozen excuses for failure.

 

[rogers_buck]

The problem could well be that they traded a virtual problem (Saturdays emergency landing weather) for a real problem (thermal cycling of the tank). If they had lit the fuse on Saturday they would be docking today. If for some reason they had to abort to KSC I am dubious that the weather would have been much of an issue for crew survival. The TPS could be totally destroyed by flying through an anvel cloud and they would still be able to land OK. Is the theorty that the vehicle has to be prestine if they abort to KSC? I don't get it... <br /><br />I would dearly like to see the data regarding foam shedding vs. thermal cycling. I can't imagine that it won't be a 100% correlation.<br />

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">Back in the 60s and 70s we all knew that astronauts were putting their lives on the line. We thought it was a brave and noble thing to take those risks for the advancement of mankind. We are a lot less tolerant of risk these days</font>/i><br /><br />I concur about the culture being adverse to risk, but another side of the problem is the value that you get for the risks. In the 1960s every year some major new step in space was accomplished, and the space race was seen as a proxy for the cold war. That is, this approach to winning the hearts and mind of the world to our political way of thinking sure beat many of the alternatives.<br /><br />This Shuttle launch is about using 7 humans to deliver cargo to low earth orbit.</i>

 

[llivinglarge]

I hate how paranoid the Shuttle program has become... This is sickening... JUST LAUNCH THE DAMN THING!<br /><br />What ever happened to acceptable risk? The less we worry about trivial things, the better off we are.

 

[hurricane4911]

Re: JUST LAUNCH THE DAMN THING!<br /><br />In principle I agree with you. Nothing bugs me more than paralysis by analysis.<br /><br />However...<br /><br />I recall a similar statement by NASA to Morton Thiokol engineers on cold morning in 1986.<br /><br />I'm just glad I don't have to call this one. Stepping back and looking from afar, polically, it is really tough to justify this launch after losing Columbia due to foamm and having pieces fly off Discovery last year. <br />

 

[barrykirk]

I second that tplank... Excellent post.<br /><br />While, as everybody here who follows my posts knows. <br />I'm a great fan of LOX/Kerosene and private enterprise,<br />I'm still looking forward to this launch.<br /><br />NASA is filled with large numbers of highly talented<br />engineers, technicians, and all of the other disciplines <br />required to launch a rocket.<br /><br />What they have done with what they have been given<br />is a true miracle and I applaud their efforts.<br /><br />The actual manifestation of what the shuttle is today is<br />a combination of politics, both inside and outside of<br />NASA, and history. It is what it is, and for what it is, it<br />is a marvel of engineering and dedication. (Did that make any sense?)<br /><br />Is NASA heading in the right direction? Absolutely yes!!!<br /><br />Is Mike Griffin doing an outstanding job? Absolutely yes!!!<br /><br />Would I do anything different if I had the NASA budget<br />in my control and had absolute say in how it was spent?<br /><br />You bet. But, that is not the reality at hand.<br /><br />The reality is they are dealing with trying to keep a large<br />number of people, including congress happy while <br />trying to run a space program. So, while they may not<br />have perfectly optimized engineering. They aren't far<br />off of that mark.<br /><br />End of rant.

 

[strandedonearth]

I agree, if it wasn't for the crack they found, I'd say light those candles too. But having found a crack in a dangerous area, they better be sure it won't contribute to a large chunk shedding, or fix it. It seems to me it shouldn't be that hard to fix.

 

[superluminal]

Replying to all here.<br /><br />The shuttle is the most complicated technology that exist for the moment to allow humans the ability to orbit Earth.<br /><br />For it, or against it, you have to admit one simple fact. <br /><br />That fact is, that the safety of the crew comes above and beyond anyones opinion of what is or isn't best for the overall status of STS-121 or any other shuttle mission.<br /><br />It's easy to show disgust and blame Bush, NASA or any other person or group you want to blame.<br /><br />That solves nothing.<br /><br />The thing to do here is, to allow those competent people in the know, the ability to do their jobs. <br /><br />You , I, nor anyone else here on this forum, wouldn't want one single astronaut to die because of inpatients and complete assurance that the shuttle is absolutely as safe as possible.<br /><br />I say, let the good people at NASA do their important jobs.<br /><br />If it takes another year to launch this or any other shuttle, that's fine with me.<br /><br />As long as I awake tomorrow and those 7 and other astronaut crews are safe, I'll be satisfied.<br /><br />They're in good hands... . . ....<br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><br /><strong><font size="3" color="#3366ff">Columbia and Challenger </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="3" color="#3366ff">Starships of Heroes</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[SpaceKiwi]

Well, I see it didn't take long for the Shuttle-bashers to recover from their recent bout of 'laryngitis'. Along with the others, I add my support for tplank's calm and reasoned post. The reality is that NASA are working a known problem now, as we would all expect a responsible organisation to do.<br /><br />In as far as I know, nothing definitive has been decided yet with regard to any possible repairs or delays. Weather continues to be challenging over and above this new issue anyway. Let's save the hand-wringing until they've decided a course of action at least. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[gsuschrist]

Crap. you are so naive. Big Brother doesn't always know best. (WMDs in Iraq?) NASA officials are paranoid about their own personal positions and are in a blind corner with the Shuttle. If they do 'more of the same' fools continue to defer to their 'expertise'. <br /><br />There is a cost for being incompetent. It's billions of dollars wasted, years wasted and goodwill wasted.

 

[CalliArcale]

First part of the thread is here: STS-121: Launch target May, 2006 - Griffin. It exceeded the thread length limit. Please continue the discussion and exciting mission updates here. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>