IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Return To Flight - Sts-114
Guest_Analyst_*
post Apr 29 2005, 07:21 AM
Post #1





Guests






Contrary to all earlier reports of on pad processing going well, NASA delayed STS-114 two months to July, the next launch window. It took them 2 years and 8 months after Challenger, and now we are close to that number. Will they ever leave the ground? I understand they are very careful, but their will ALWAYS risk. Will we ever leave LEO again (manned) with this attitude?

www.nasawatch.com
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OWW
post Apr 29 2005, 08:33 AM
Post #2


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 708
Joined: 28-September 04
Member No.: 99



From the press release: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?id=37

"The long-awaited Return to Flight of NASA's Space Shuttle fleet has been delayed until at least July "

Note that they use the words 'at least'. mad.gif

"The list of issues was headed by the recently completed DVR analysis, showing around 170 potential debris sources on the new ET"

Ok....WHAT have you guys been doing for the last two years hmmm? Sad, just sad.
I thought the ET always sheds some debris, so when is the risk acceptable enough to fly again?. If this goes on like this, maybe never. After all, they want to go to the moon, but flying a shuttle to the hubble is too risky... rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Marcel
post Apr 29 2005, 08:51 AM
Post #3


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 26-March 04
From: Edam, The Netherlands
Member No.: 65



QUOTE (ObsessedWithWorlds @ Apr 29 2005, 08:33 AM)
From the press release: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?id=37

"The long-awaited Return to Flight of NASA's Space Shuttle fleet has been delayed until at least July "

Note that they use the words 'at least'.  mad.gif

"The list of issues was headed by the recently completed DVR analysis, showing around 170 potential debris sources on the new ET"

Ok....WHAT have you guys been doing for the last two years hmmm? Sad, just sad.
I thought the ET always sheds some debris, so when is the risk acceptable enough to fly again?. If this goes on like this, maybe never. After all, they want to go to the moon, but flying a shuttle to the hubble is too risky... rolleyes.gif
*

Better know for sure, than taking risks unknown. It is sad, because we want to see it roar up again, but i don't want to see astronauts burn up again. I think they should take all the time they need and GO when THEY feel like. It's NASA that has to make this thing fly again. It's NASA that will loose it's last bit of (public and political) credit when a third shuttle will fail. Better know for sure (so you can show you've done everything to prevent loss) and have patience, than losing the shuttle (and the rest of the programm) simply, because we couldn't wait. Another shuttle disaster would be disastrous for manned spaceflight (it would delay next steps to the moon and mars muuuch more severely, than waiting some months now.....).

Let them wait. They surely have a good reason for it (they better laugh.gif )

And, if you know how to launch safely, it does not matter so much if it is into LEO, or beyond. Launch always will be the critical part.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Analyst_*
post Apr 29 2005, 09:07 AM
Post #4





Guests






QUOTE
Launch always will be the critical part.


Or landing (wherever), or interplanetary cruise.
I stand by me opinion: This society, and so NASA as a part of it, is extremly risk adverse. But we can't reassure ourselves 100%. What is acceptable, 99%, 99.9% or 99.99999%?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Marcel
post Apr 29 2005, 09:45 AM
Post #5


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: 26-March 04
From: Edam, The Netherlands
Member No.: 65



QUOTE (Analyst @ Apr 29 2005, 09:07 AM)
QUOTE
Launch always will be the critical part.


Or landing (wherever), or interplanetary cruise.
I stand by me opinion: This society, and so NASA as a part of it, is extremly risk adverse. But we can't reassure ourselves 100%. What is acceptable, 99%, 99.9% or 99.99999%?
*


As a MoSHE (manager of safety, health and environment) i deal with risks daily. What i see, is the contrary of what you say. People (including myself) are bad at estimating risks and most of the time, they don't do it at all. We simply don't have a good sense for it. Therefore, you need to take extra care, in order to get to the level of acceptable risk. And a lot of times, this is NOT what people do. They think everything is fine, and in the end, most risks were not taken into account, most of the time not noticed because it simply did not end up in an accident. Not because it's prevented, but because stochasm did not make it happen. A lot of times people are lucky because of that.

Spaceshuttles seem to end up in pieces and a fireball more than once. If you decide that you want to fly the thing again, at least you have to show everyone, that you have tried as hard as you can to take everything into account. And this takes time. A lot of it.

Don't think that i don't understand what you mean. I do. At a certain level of safety one should accept the rest risk. But considering the spaceshuttle, too much has happened. It's not only rocket science, it also became politics. Statistics leaves us with a 96 % chance, considering launching a rocket into space succesfully. That is a 4 % of total loss expectancy. No enterprise in the public or private sector will ever get away with that. NASA will (simply because launching a spacecraft is risky), but they have to show that they did everything to minimize the risk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cIclops
post Apr 29 2005, 03:16 PM
Post #6


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 126
Joined: 29-January 05
Member No.: 161



STS-114 launch delayed two months due to icing problems on fuel lines and other technical issues. Next launch window opens mid July.

Griffin also announced that preparatory work on a Hubble servicing mission will begin.

(source NASA Press conference, April 29)


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gpurcell
post Apr 29 2005, 05:24 PM
Post #7


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 242
Joined: 21-December 04
Member No.: 127



QUOTE (cIclops @ Apr 29 2005, 03:16 PM)
STS-114 launch delayed two months due to icing problems on fuel lines and other technical issues. Next launch window opens mid July.

Griffin also announced that preparatory work on a Hubble servicing mission will begin.

(source NASA Press conference, April 29)
*


So now we can only launch STS during the day, in the summer in Florida.

Sigh.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MahFL
post Apr 30 2005, 06:27 PM
Post #8


Forum Contributor
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1241
Joined: 8-February 04
From: North East Florida, USA.
Member No.: 11



QUOTE (gpurcell @ Apr 29 2005, 05:24 PM)
QUOTE (cIclops @ Apr 29 2005, 03:16 PM)
STS-114 launch delayed two months due to icing problems on fuel lines and other technical issues. Next launch window opens mid July.

Griffin also announced that preparatory work on a Hubble servicing mission will begin.

(source NASA Press conference, April 29)
*


So now we can only launch STS during the day, in the summer in Florida.

Sigh.
*



Thats not correct, the first 2 launches are to be in daylight to see what the debris shedding is like, ice will form on the O2 pipes in summer or winter (they are going to try heaters on them to prevent this.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jaredGalen
post Jul 6 2005, 11:33 PM
Post #9


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 18-December 04
Member No.: 123



Cripes, hope hurricane Dennis doesn't scupper rtf plans and result in a rollback.
After getting this close to the launch window it would be terrible. sad.gif

Hopefully it'll keep heading west. unsure.gif


--------------------
Turn the middle side topwise....TOPWISE!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jaredGalen
post Jul 7 2005, 09:00 AM
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 18-December 04
Member No.: 123



The outlook is getting a bit better.
Forecast winds are in the 40 - 50 knot range which apparently is acceptable.

Fingers remaining crossed all the same. smile.gif


--------------------
Turn the middle side topwise....TOPWISE!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alan
post Jul 8 2005, 04:16 AM
Post #11


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1869
Joined: 20-November 04
From: Iowa
Member No.: 110



Countdown starts July 10 for launch on the 13th
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/news/r...2005/54-05.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jaredGalen
post Jul 8 2005, 08:55 AM
Post #12


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 18-December 04
Member No.: 123



Yesterday, they started preperations for a rollback. They started disconnecting the ordinance, I guess the explosives for seperating the SRB's and things.

After a meeting the preperation were suspended. It's pretty unlikely there will be a rollback at this stage.

Hope the weather says right.


--------------------
Turn the middle side topwise....TOPWISE!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Analyst_*
post Jul 8 2005, 12:19 PM
Post #13





Guests






Looks like a rollback is not needed, the storm is heading more to the west:

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_a...1832.shtml?3day
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Analyst_*
post Jul 8 2005, 01:23 PM
Post #14





Guests






Now it's official - no rollback.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 10th December 2019 - 05:23 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.