Things look like they could get ugly for NASA

[thop]

It was taken on the 5th day but only shown after the whole incident KvH. Don't ask me for details You can probably find more on some isreali news site. Looks strange to me to but Drizzt saw it as well, and even his mother was convinced.

Anyway i'm pretty sure NASA knew of the damage and that there was trouble ahead. How much they knew and what could've done or not done is another question.

[Dr Mordrid]

Personally I think they should orbit near the space station and carry at least a couple of MMU's so the crew can piggy-back to it if the shuttle has a problem.

After that I'd get the CRV ready for independent launch ASAP, then have one on a pad ready to go (preferrably with a solid fuel booster) during shuttle missions for those times when crew evacuation would be necessary.

Problem is that various rescue system concepts have been ignored. One started back in the 60's as GE's MOOSE (Man Out of Space Easiest) concept for a rescue system, but of course it suffered from lack of funding and foresight on the part of Congress and NASA.

MOOSE was very simple, consisting of just an inflatable one-man module with a small engine for doing a de-orbit burn and a parachute system.

http://www.space.com/news/spacehistory/moose_000923.html

Makes you wonder what could be done with todays materials and technologies.

Dr. Mordrid

[K6-III]

Originally posted by KRSESQ
I expended a considerable amount of energy back in the early '90's, fruitlessly lobbying for the resurrection of the Saturn 5.

My logic was that a single Saturn 5, at 250,000 lbs launch capacity, has a minimum of 4 times the payload of an average space shuttle. Modern engineering techniques could get that capacity even higher, AND reduce manufacturing/launch costs. Even with the expendability factor, one Saturn 5 could be cheaper than 4 shuttle launches.

Send high-mass payloads up on expendables and people up on more appropriately designed vehicles. Simple, right? Logical, right?

Friggin' politicians.

Kevin

Saturn V is dead. The contractors and subcontractors that made the nuts and bolts are gone. Most of the engineers are dead. Reverse engineering the Saturn V would be of no use, seeing as it would cost more than designing a new launch vehicle.

As for Vehicles in the class of the Delta IV Heavy, there is the upcoming Atlas 5 heavy, the russian proton, the upcoming russian Angara heavy, the French Ariane 5 ECA, and the upcoming Ariane 5 ECB.

The only nation that seems to be working on a super-heavy lift booster is China. They have some very ambitious plans.

Designing a multistage pressure fed expendable system would be the way to go. Also, the benefit of a very large launch vehicle is that very little on-orbit assembly is actually required.

[KRSESQ]

Saturn V is dead. The contractors and subcontractors that made the nuts and bolts are gone. Most of the engineers are dead. Reverse engineering the Saturn V would be of no use, seeing as it would cost more than designing a new launch vehicle.

Yeah, I guess I knew that already. Can't blame a guy for trying, though. Those things were DAMNED IMPRESSIVE going up. I'd ride on a Saturn V/Apollo vehicle before I'd climb aboard a Space Shuttle.

Anyone know whether VASIMR is a high-thrust engine or a low-thrust, like Ion drive? I know it's variable-specific-impulse, but that's as much as I've found.

I want to say high-thrust, but I originally thought the same thing about Ion engines...

Kevin

[K6-III]

Low thrust, high specific impulse.

With a large nuclear reactor powering it, you get high thrust, high specific impulse.

As for lobbying for a replacement for the Saturn V, now is the time. As for how it should be done, I would advocate for the same policy at NASA as when the Saturn IB was developed: design and build it all inhouse, with zero contractors. This was the most efficient time in NASA's history....

[SteveC]

(Sorry if already posted...)

<IMG SRC="http://www.steve-cooper.co.uk/CNNShuttle.jpg">

Good old CNN

[SteveC]

Can you help NASA - they're asking for anyone with any digital evidence at all (pics/video etc) to post them here - http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/COL_upload.html

[Gurm]

I can help.

Here's what you do:

1. Call up the President. He's a pretty straightforward sort of guy, this one is. Here's what you tell him.

"George, we aren't sending anything else into space... nothing at all... until we get our funding back. Sorry, that's just the way it is. We're all going to just go home and not come back to work until we can do our jobs effectively."

2. Don't bluff - follow through.

- Gurm

[Jon P. Inghram]

Umm... what? They didn't repair Apollo 13, they "just" powered down and used the LM to keep them alive until they got back. Not sure if they could power the shuttle down in the same way, but if they were able to, they probably could have stayed up there for a month or perhaps more, compared to the normal mission duration.

And, even if they were doomed from the moment that foam hit the wing, they still should have inspected it even though it would have been risky, at least they would have known they were SoL. Then they could have said farewells and stuff, even perhaps staying in orbit.

Originally posted by Wombat
... Hell, if they could repair Apollo 13, they could have saved these guys. ...

[thop]

Just news came in that the movie/picture was probably misinterpreted, as it was taken from one of the windows by the israeli astronaut and they say you cannot see the wings (or at least that part of it) from any of the windows. So it is probably another part of the ship.

Also what appears to be crackles could also be cables. Nobody seems to really know though, at least NASA isn't saying anything about it.

On a second though i don't think cables are on the outer side of the shuttle or are they?

[GT98]

If it comes down to that the foam on the external Tank was the cause...I wonder if NASA will go back to using a coating on it like it did on the first couple of shuttle launches. I know for one thing I woudnt be able to live with myself if I was the engineer that gave the OK that the damage wasn't serious enough to cause problems.

[THE_Editor]

Heres the link to that heat resisting paint I was on about earlier in this thread.

HEAT RESISTING PAINT

Hopefully NASA will consider using it for future interplanetary craft ??

Special thanks to Blobrana on Amiga.Org for finding this link (I couldn't)

Amiga thread

[Evildead666]

Kill me if this is silly.

How many ICBM's are there in the world?
Would they be able to send lots of cargo into space, into orbit, and a team would collect them up there, and upgrade the ISS?
Instead of one launch, you make it lots of little ones....

[K6-III]

The russians already launch ICBM's with satellite cargos.

Laws in the US don't permit doing so, such as to keep Lockheed Martin and Boeing alive...

[ZokesPro]

Did they ever mention the names of the astronauts?