Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Goober5000 on June 12, 2009, 10:05:47 pm
-
Coming just a month after the Hubble mission, and tying the record for the longest planned shuttle mission. NASA is back in the shuttle groove. :)
Launch is now July 15th at 18:03 EDT (GMT-4).
Linkage:
SpaceFlightNow (http://www.spaceflightnow.com/) (informal)
NASA SpaceFlight (http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/) (technical)
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-127)
NASA TV (http://www.nasa.gov/ntv) (official)
-
It's really a bummer that they're ending the Shuttle's lifespan now. I know we'd probably lose more orbiters and crews if they kept flying, but...grr. They're romantic beasts.
-
Bleh. Launch scrubbed, due to the same problem that originally scrubbed STS-119. They'll try again on the 17th.
-
And that problem was?
-
A leaky attachment between the launch pad and the fuel tank.
-
Ooh. That could have been like the Challenger all over again. Good thing they caught it.
-
I thought Challenger was brought down because the rings on the Solid Rocket Boosters had contracted.
-
Yep...not like Challenger. Still something to check into!
-
I thought Challenger was brought down because the rings on the Solid Rocket Boosters had contracted.
That is what happened. What I meant was is that in both situations there was a fuel leak. On Challenger, that fuel leak ignited. Sorry for the confusion.
-
Ahhh, okay
-
Has anyone here actually seen a shuttle launch directly?
-
You mean, in person? I haven't. I'd like to, though.
They think the hydrogen leak was due to a bad seal. It's the type of seal that deforms into place as it's being mated, and doesn't spring back once deformed. Since they had to reposition the probe during the preparations for tanking, one of the leading theories is that the seal was jostled slightly out of place. Since it was deformed in the wrong location, it didn't fit completely in the proper location. They've replaced it and are going to restart the countdown, and the new launch attempt will be June 17th at 5:40 AM.
There was some speculation on the NSF forums that this might be a symptom of the impending shuttle program shutdown. Since there's going to be a six-year gap in the workforce, the best workers are leaving early to find other jobs. Consequently, specialized tasks like this aren't benefitting from the skilled oversight they need. :sigh:
-
Picture of the work area:
(http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/images/large/2009-3712.jpg)
Animation:
(http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/sts-127-gucp-work-061409.gif)
-
You have to be four miles away from the launching shuttle (I think) or you die.
Certainly if you're closer than two miles
-
That's if it explodes. The Saturn V rockets contained the explosive force of a nuclear warhead fully fueled, which is why the control room is 3 miles away from the launch zone and made out of heavily reinforce concrete. You don't want your highly-trained control staff to die in the same explosion as your highly-trained astronauts.
-
:bump:
They've fixed the hydrogen leak, and weather looks 70% good for this window. I think we'll see a launch tonight. :)
First post updated with new launch time.
-
It's really a bummer that they're ending the Shuttle's lifespan now. I know we'd probably lose more orbiters and crews if they kept flying, but...grr. They're romantic beasts.
Especially when they glow as they're burning up on reentry because they're so old a small piece of foam can damage the heat shielding.
-
At those speeds, anything that has more mass than a marble will do catastrophic damage to anything. The age is irrelevant in the instance unless it is the cause of said foam piece coming off in the first place (granted it was, but the age of the shielding was irrelevant).
-
Especially when they glow as they're burning up on reentry because they're so old a small piece of foam can damage the heat shielding.
You seem to have the impression that the foam was light, fluffy, and harmless. Not so. It weighed about 1.67 pounds and hit the shuttle at a relative speed of 775 feet per second, or 530 mph.
As Scotty said, the failure was not that the shuttle couldn't withstand the strike, but that the foam came off in the first place.
And yes, age is irrelevant. The shuttle gets a new tank for every single flight, and its leading-edge wing panels are replaced after every eight flights.
Know something before you act snarky.
-
Aaaaaaannnd, scrubbed for today due to bad weather.
-
Nearly last-minute too. Argh. :(
-
Yeah, my mom was down there to watch, and we were going to watch from the roof of the condo I get to stay in for the next two weeks (:D). It's only about 50 miles south of where I am at the moment.
-
Man, they just cannot get this one off the ground.
-
I know. If I didn't know better, I'd say the thing is cursed.
-
Does anyone know when it's supposed to launch today?
-
i think iif im not wrong it is due to launch around 18:50 local time ...19:13 lift of so 23:13 gmt
-
Just looked it up, you were pretty close.
6:51 Local, 22:51 GMT
-
why do i suddenly have the urge to rename this thread "nasa has trouble getting it up"
-
It's not so much that they have trouble, it's that they can't do it at all.
Scrubbed again.
-
It's not NASA's fault; it's the weather. The only problem on the Shuttle itself was the leak, and they fixed that on July 1.
-
That's the problem with having your launchpad at the lightning capital of the USA. :(
-
they still cant get it up :D
-
They're trying again in about 30 minutes. Looks like the weather might cooperate. :)
-
It did. Just saw it from the roof of where I'm staying.
-
Thanks to Goober's update, I got to see this in all its glory on HDNet. Took them long enough, but it was worth it.
-
they still cant get it up :D
:lol:
The should name one of the shuttles 'Viagra' ;)
-
they still cant get it up :D
:lol:
The should name one of the shuttles 'Viagra' ;)
Hah, reminds me of an advert where there was this spacecraft with an old couple in it, and it was trying to rotate upwards to the vertical, but kept falling down. I didn't know what they were trying to say until it said 'Erection problems?'. :lol: