It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SCI/TECH: Rescue Mission Readied for Space Shuttle Launch

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Following the breakup of space shuttle Columbia in 2003 NASA has now for the first time had to put in place a backup rescue mission for the now scheduled launch of Discovery in May. If for any reason the spacecraft is damaged or has serious troubles a four man rescue team will be fully trained, equipped and ready to go in short notice. The shuttle for the rescue mission if needed will be space shuttle Atlantis.
 





WashingtonTimes.com Full Article Link

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) -- When the Space Shuttle Discovery is launched in May, a four-man rescue squad will be on standby just in case the spacecraft becomes seriously damaged or encounters other trouble.

"It's a place where we don't want to go. We're training for a mission we never want to fly," said the team's commander, Air Force Col. Steven Lindsey. A rescue mission, which might require the president's approval, is fraught with complexities:



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


According to reports from NASA the rescue mission could have to be done quickly without the normal pre-launch tests and in itself could put the crew of Atlantis in harm's way.

Also according to reports the basic plan would have the damaged shuttle (Discovery) dock with the international space station, the damaged spacecraft would have to be pushed away and at some point fall into the ocean. Making room for Atlantis to dock at the space station and rescue the crew of the failed Discovery. According to NASA; Never before in 44 years of human spaceflight has NASA gone to such lengths to have a spaceship ready to rush to another's assistance.

News From The Past:

Remember Columbia?



Saturday, Feb. 01, 2003

Seven astronauts, including the first Israeli in space, were lost Saturday when the space shuttle Columbia broke apart in the skies of Texas. The incident occurred at an altitude of some 200,000 feet, shortly after reentry and 15 minutes before Columbia had been scheduled to land at Cape Canaveral.

Space Shuttle Disintegrates On Re-Entry

Related Current News:

NASA plans Discovery launch May 15

[edit on 20-3-2005 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:46 AM
link   
I would have expected them to have some kind of contingency plan for the emergency rescue of astronauts in a distress situation. However, the rescue teams couldn't have done a thing for the challenger. Had they known there was a problem, they wouldn't have let it take off. In the case of the Columbia, I'm not sure if they were aware of any problems that might result in the ship breaking up as it did. Once again, I doubt if they could have done anything to stop it.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Here, I thought all along they had some type of this plan in place. I know that the preparations for a space shuttle flight are lengthy but I thought, I guess naively, that they could have pulled something off. It makes one wonder, if they would have known that the Columbia was in grave danger after take off, could they have done anything at all?



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
In the case of the Columbia, I'm not sure if they were aware of any problems that might result in the ship breaking up as it did. Once again, I doubt if they could have done anything to stop it.


In regard to Columbia NASA knew there was a problem on the launch, they did know that a chunk of debris struck the craft's left wing at liftoff, however they had no way of knowing how bad the damage was. It ended up being the cause of the breakup of Columbia on re-entry.

And there were some within NASA who warned that the damage to the left wing could be a problem on re-entry.. However at that time there was in reality NOTHING that could be done about it.

In the end what was found is that a chunk of insulation from the center fuel tank struck Columbia's left wing during liftoff, knocking off the protective tiles, and during re-entry the heat was able to get inside the wing, everyone could see what was happening on the ground, but at that point it was too late.

The lessons learned from the fate of Columbia could possibly save the lives of future crews.

But I wonder.. Is the space shuttle still a viable means of space travel for the U.S.A.?

After all it is quite old technology, and the cost in the billions now just to get back in orbit.. Worth the risks?

Only time will tell.

[edit on 21-3-2005 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I'm hoping they will delay the May 15th date at least a day so I'll be in town to see the launch. I made plans on the earlier window of May 15th to June 3rd hoping for a little luck. Not the whole purpose of my trip but would be a nice extra. On the plus side, I now have my ham shack capable of communicating with the shuttle from home. One has to have VHF and UHF to transmit and recieve.

AC



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   
nasa as far as i can see has never had any contengency plans. it was you go up hope you make it back. i felt releaved when the international space station was to have an escape systom, (an apaparantly new idea in space exploration appart from sci-fi). does anyone know if the escape ship is in place?

one thing that has always intriqued me. why don't they launch a space vehicle from a high altitude mothership? would this not save millions on launches as well as increase the safty factor at launch? not to mention cutting down launch turnaround times?

i admit i am no rocket scientist but i have always loved aircraft. this just seems like basic logic to me. or am i missing something?



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by drogo
nasa as far as i can see has never had any contengency plans. it was you go up hope you make it back. i felt releaved when the international space station was to have an escape systom, (an apaparantly new idea in space exploration appart from sci-fi). does anyone know if the escape ship is in place?


What? NASA has all kinds of contigency plans, all of which the crews are trained on. There are plans for (among other things) loss of main engine, loss of SRB, loss of computers, loss of oxygen pressure, loss of hydrogen pressure, etc. Those are just a few from the launch sequence alone. For every action point of a mission plan there are always multiple backup plans and systems.



one thing that has always intriqued me. why don't they launch a space vehicle from a high altitude mothership? would this not save millions on launches as well as increase the safty factor at launch? not to mention cutting down launch turnaround times?


Cost. Lack of payload weight. Size limits. etc...



i admit i am no rocket scientist but i have always loved aircraft. this just seems like basic logic to me. or am i missing something?


I highly recommend that you visit the NASA website and read the return to space plan. There are numerous web based sources that can answer every question that you posed here.



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 01:51 PM
link   
The problem with Columbia is taht there was no way to repair the tiles in orbit even if they found a problem. I suppose they figured it was better to go ahead then inspect the tiles and wait in orbit until they ran out of oxygen



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Now I have heard that these crews didn't die right away and if NASA had knowlege that there was no way for the crew to return safley why not include a pill for each crew member to decide if they want to end it. I certinly would rather be cremated dead then alive.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join