[Nuke]

Originally posted by pyro-manic
I've said it previously, but the shuttle fleet had a complete overhaul a few years ago. Everything was replaced or upgraded systems-wise, so they're as good as they can be. They're just a bad design by modern standards.

the systems might be newer but the spaceframe and skin are all quite old and outdated, as are the engines. the frame is mostly aluminum, which is prone to metal fatuige so at some point they will have to rebuild the shuttles. the original shuttle design also included 3 jet engines for a powered descent but testing determined they were not neccisary and they were ommited. what they need to do is not neccisarily chnge the design, but rather rebuild the spaceframe with more modern materials. if you make the ship lighter you decrease the fuel requirements (meaning a smaller fuel tank), you increase glide performance, and you also free up more wight for cargo. perhaps change the design to house the fuel in the cargo bay for missions that dont require a full payload. its also sad to require a full rigging for something as stupid as a crew teansfer mission. perhaps having multiple fuel tank/booster configurations for different missions. it should make the shuttle more economic and versitile.

[Kosh]

what they need to do is not neccisarily chnge the design, but rather rebuild the spaceframe with more modern materials.

Like what?

[Nuke]

CARBON FIBER COMPOSITE!

perhaps not the best choice but put it this way. if there is a super material out there, its probibly classified tech. seriously, you people need to take your brains out of the box.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by aldo_14


I'm pretty sure that modern computer tech isn't manufactured to withstand the same stress levels / power usage / heat level as the stuff used 20 years ago, though.

It is questionable how much processing power you'd actually need, though. 3 networked home PCs with custom written low level / medium level code might be sufficient for the shuttle or indeed general space travel.

[color=66ff00]The guidance computer used to get Apollo 11 to the moon was less powerful than a z80 (original gameboy) and ate a significant amount of power: details.

Given modern cpu's have a fairly limited working temp. range but are proven tech, it's not too far fetched to see a hardened (physically) version of a 8086 being very capable of managing a hefty amount of the workload of a modern space vehicle. Power densities have gone up significantly in batteries (power to volume ratio).

All this means you can fit a significantly larger amount of processing power in the same space as the old units (and more redundancy which improves safety) and you don't need so much space for power provision.
[/color]

[Rictor]

On a vaguely related note, anyone read Warren Ellis' Orbiter?

[Mefustae]

Sorry to quote from so long ago, but i've got to educate you gits!

Originally posted by aldo_14
Oh, and shot Kennedy, because he knew too much.

Aliens had no hand in this, in actuallity, it was the Red Dwarf Crew. They sumbled upon a Time Travel device, travelled back to Dallas during Kennedy's parade, and scared Harvey Lee Oswald into going down one floor to take this shot, which he subsequently missed, causing disruption to the timeline. The Crew then travelled forward in time several years, only to discover that Kennedy had been impeached, and a New President, under the control of the Mafia, had allowed the Sovies to rebuild their missile sites in Cuba - which of course led to a whole world of problems. In an attempt to fix the timeline, the crew snagged this alternate-future Kennedy from a Police Van, told him their story, and proceded to take him back in time, give him a rifle, and have him take a shot from...you guessed it; the Grassy Knoll.
So, you see, the man how actually shot J.F.K, was in fact J.F.K himself...!

Edit: Whoops, forgot the

[Nuke]

no no no, you got it all wrong, kinnedy was assasinated my genetically engineered mice. get your facts straight.

[Taristin]

I always thought it was Lyndon B Johnson......

[Bobboau]

JFK wasn't shot, thats what they want you to think...

[Clave]

I'm pretty sure that modern computer tech isn't manufactured to withstand the same stress levels / power usage / heat level as the stuff used 20 years ago, though.

They just have to use mil-spec chips.  They have a temperature range of -55c to +125c - of course there may not be any 3GHz processors available, but they should find something better than what they have now...

The main problem imo, is the way the whole thing is done.  There must be some better method than flying straight up using all those boosters and stuff.  I mean an SR-71 can almost fly into space, and land again without drama...

[karajorma]

Kennedy killed himself.

[Carl]

yeah, i had figured all of that out by myself one night.

[Nuke]

Originally posted by Clave


They just have to use mil-spec chips.  They have a temperature range of -55c to +125c - of course there may not be any 3GHz processors available, but they should find something better than what they have now...

The main problem imo, is the way the whole thing is done.  There must be some better method than flying straight up using all those boosters and stuff.  I mean an SR-71 can almost fly into space, and land again without drama...

computer speed is no longer about clock cycle. 3ghz is like a brick wall, after that the off die bus cant keep up. even though the thing runs at 3 billion cycles a second, most cycles are just wasted while it waits for data and instructions to go to it. the military, and nasa im sure, only likes to use enough cpu power for a device to do the job it was intended for. why max out a cpu if you really dont need the extra power. they trade off excess speed for reliability. military/nasa computers really dont need to multitask, they can get away with running a single thread. the computer does only what it needs to, of math, rather than stupid **** like making your desktop look cool.

[karajorma]

Not to mention the fact that modern chips are vastly more vulnerable to the effect of cosmic rays than older chips are.

[Lynx]

The whole CEV thing is stupied. The NASA pumps most of it's funds into it, abandoning the development of a successor to the space shuttle and limiting the budget for it's space probe program. When the shuttle is decomissioned, there's no heavy cargo lifter left in service. Incidentially, the ESA cooperates with Russia on developing the Kliper reuseable spacecraft which is similar to the CEV only that it'll have it's first operational flight when the CEV is still in it's advanced planning stages. They should cooperate on that one rather than to put unbelievable ammounts of money into something that's already being developed.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Kosh
Never heard of it.

You're right. But even if they were to build more of same design, that wouldn't happen for many years. The new design won't come into service for many years too. So except for the Russians, the Chinese, and maybe the europeans, we're going to be stuck on the ground for a while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_Star

No offense, but if you don't even know what one of the most revolutionary spacecraft of the 1990s is don't you think you shouldn't be ranting about how the Shuttle is bad and NASA is evil and all kinds of ****?  Educate yourself a little.

[Kosh]

Oh, I remember what that was now. I knew that they were developing a replacement, and that it got canned a few years ago, but I never knew what the project was called.

[EtherShock]

Ah yes, the Venture Star. Who knows, if it was never cancelled, we might've had our shuttle replacement by now.

[Nuke]

that ship would have been the ****, stupid, stupid nasa.

[kv1at3485]

NASA made a prodigious effort to get the X-33 (the lead-up to the full scale Venture Star) working, but was eventually defeated by immature technology.

In particular was the cryogenic hydrogen fuel tank that was to be constructed with composite materials. They could not produce the composite materials that were necessary.  (Either the materials were not strong enough or they made the tank far too heavy.)

It may very well be that even today the X-33 and the VS are impossible, the refinement of technology still being insufficient to solve the more scathing problems.

The X-33 and the VS were great ideas just a little too ahead of their time.  It may be some years yet before the technology needed to make them viable emerges, if that has not already happened.  Even if the technology does exist today, it may not even be possible to resurrect the program (i.e. funding.)

I am sure that the lessons learned from the X-33 will be put to good use in the upcoming CEV.