NASA: Debris Hits Shuttle 104 Second Into Launch. Leaving 21 inch Scratch. * UPDATED

NASA: Debris Hits Shuttle 104 Second Into Launch. Leaving 21 inch Scratch. * UPDATED

abcnews.go.com

No text yeto follow.

(visit the link for the full news article)

here's what NASA have to say, they don't sound too alarmed.

www.nasa.gov...

Heat Shield Survey Continuing
Tue, 12 May 2009 07:19:51 PM GMT

The inspection of the shuttle's heat shield is continuing. Today's mission status briefing with Lead Flight Director Tony Ceccaci is scheduled to begin at 2:30 p.m. EDT on NASA TV. Afterward, NASA TV will air the ISS Progress 33 docking to the International Space Station, expected at 3:23 p.m. The post-MMT briefing with MMT Chair Leroy Cain is set for 5 p.m.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by kiwifoot]

Will Update as more info is released.

Visit link for press confernece from NASA:

I just hope this isn't as bad as Columbia.

They seem to be just carrying on with the Hubble mission as planned. I admire the professionalism of the astronauts that are up there. I just hope it's repairable or minor damage.

As soon as I know more I'll update this thread.


abcnews.go.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by kiwifoot


OK appologies for the messy start to this thread, was misled by ABC! I thought the video was a recording but it was live!

Here is a bit of info from ABC:

The Atlantis astronauts have uncovered a long stretch of nicks on their space shuttle, the result of launch debris.

They were inspecting their ship Tuesday for signs of launch damage when they came across the nicks. Mission Control informed the crew that it's a 21-inch stretch of nicks over four to five thermal tiles on the right side of Atlantis. The damage is where the right wing joins the fuselage.

And a link to the full article:

abcnews.go.com...

I seriously hope nothing comes from this damage.

Will keep this updated as I learn more.

"FLAGGED" and starred.


Thanks for keeping an eye on the situation. I'm going to see whats going on on the Tube. Keep us posted if anything else comes of this.

Ruh oh.....Guess its a GOOD thing they have a backup shuttle on standby!

Starred and Flagged also, needs a steady eye.

Really hope nothing messes up, god it'd be awful.

It is time to end the shuttles. They cannot seem to get off the ground without damage to the vehicle. I wonder why this seems to be such an issue over the last few years and not so much in the previous decades. Good thing a spare is ready to go. Just a scratch boys pretty sure you will make it ????????

It is too bad that they did not think much ahead and it will be at least five years before the Orion class is ready.

Reminds me of my GM car with its broken window motors and electrical malfunctions. No wonder they are going out of business. American engineering at its best.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by timewalker]

reply to post by timewalker


OH come on.
That's a cheap shot.

They are older than dirt yet still more advanced than anything else available at the moment I think the old girls have a few more flights left in them.
I say not bad for 70s era engineering!

reply to post by SLAYER69

Maybe so, but I am just saying that why are we so behind. It upsets me. We should have been getting the Orion's ready before now. We are getting our Gluteus Maximus' smeared on the final frontier.

Also makes me think about the commercial airplane that I flew on this year that still has ashtrays. An old bird for sure. I wanted off that thing as soon as possible.



[edit on 12-5-2009 by timewalker]

I was watching this live on Nasa tv. Just a human perspective on what was said during the conversation...while the nasa control stated they don't think it was serious necessarily the underlying tone was that this wasn't good. The crew while handling it as routine seemed to understand the implications involved in the information.

My second thought was like someone posted above good thing they have a second shuttle on standby. But as I reflected further I'm like hmmm.

1. Most dangerous mission since going to the moon
   
2. second shuttle on standby
   
3. shuttle fleet about ready to be decommissioned
   
4. lots of workers about ready to be laid off from Nasa
   
5. Nasa funding to be decreased
   
6. UFO disclosure is starting to occur across governments of the world
   

Did I miss something? Is this a set up mission? God I hope not but after reading this forum and information that is leaked through various sources I do tend to always question the seemingly circumstantial events that lead to something larger. I hope my gut is wrong on this.

reply to post by SLAYER69
Why do the Russians go into space so frequently and there's no problems? Is it in their space ship designs or their excellent engineering?

Originally posted by ExPostFacto

UFO disclosure is starting to occur across governments of the world


Did I miss something? Is this a set up mission? God I hope not but after reading this forum and information that is leaked through various sources I do tend to always question the seemingly circumstantial events that lead to something larger. I hope my gut is wrong on this.

Just imagine this scenario, the shuttle is stranded in space, the only way they can be rescued is by the backup shuttle. Unfortunately there is a technical problem with this one too. The situation is hopeless until an alien spacecraft come to the rescue, bringing the astrnauts to earth. There's your disclosure!

Originally posted by bismarcksea
Ruh oh.....Guess its a GOOD thing they have a backup shuttle on standby!

For sure... and about time this started being SOP.

With space shuttle Atlantis on its way to upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope, that leaves one shuttle, Endeavour, at the ready on the other launch pad here.

And that's where everybody at NASA wants it to stay.

"We have high confidence that we're just having that thing over on pad B to make it look nice," said mission flight director Tony Ceccaci.

Endeavour is far more than a postcard picture -- it's on standby in case something goes seriously wrong with the Atlantis mission. For example, NASA has estimated there's a 1-in-221 chance the shuttle could be struck and crippled by orbiting space debris.

www.cnn.com...

Originally posted by ufoorbhunter
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Why do the Russians go into space so frequently and there's no problems? Is it in their space ship designs or their excellent engineering?

Both why do you ask?

Originally posted by timewalker
It is time to end the shuttles. They cannot seem to get off the ground without damage to the vehicle. I wonder why this seems to be such an issue over the last few years and not so much in the previous decades. Good thing a spare is ready to go. Just a scratch boys pretty sure you will make it ????????

It is too bad that they did not think much ahead and it will be at least five years before the Orion class is ready.

Reminds me of my GM car with its broken window motors and electrical malfunctions. No wonder they are going out of business. American engineering at its best.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by timewalker]

You hit the nail directly on the head. Why all of the issues now? I understand the increased awareness since the two tragedies, but all-of-a-sudden [ or so it seems ], each mission is thrice as risky as the last.

As regards the new 'fleet', it is long overdue. Look at the technological advancements, in general, since the current fleet was developed, let-alone launched.

My biggest gripe is the fact that the government, in all probabilty, has enough advanced [and covert] technology to make all of this crap unnecessary. Are you seriously trying to tell me that we could put men on the moon in the sixties, yet today we don't have the technology to get them safely off of the ground, put in orbit, and returned to earth?
NASA, today, is nothing more than a joke cover for the hidden technology that the government is in posession of, and that it is unwilling to let the public [ and other world parties ] be aware of. In the meantime, America's astronauts [including CIVILIANS], the one's down-range on the firing line, are at risk to keep the secrets from view.

Disgusting...

reply to post by SLAYER69
It's just a little odd the trouble NASA has with sending ships up there compared to the Russians. Maybe the Russians hide the accidents like the old Soviet days.

reply to post by timewalker


I'm all for the next generation.
I'm of the view that they don't have to be flashy nor expensive either.
In space flight reliability, durability and affordability will be the winning combination.

The shuttles are old and they are technology of a by gone era yet they fly. I was not surprised to find out that there was a 600 pound weight reduction between the first and the last being a direct result of smaller and faster computing hardware on board. I'm also questioning these continuing hits by debris, it always seems to be from the launch platforms and not an issue with the shuttles themselves.

This seems pretty fishy to me, with having a second shuttle ready to go and all.

Peace

reply to post by kiwifoot


OK here is a longer article from ABC:

abcnews.go.com...

Astronauts onboard Atlantis have discovered a 21-inch scratch on the starboard side of the shuttle, the result of debris that hit the shuttle 104 seconds into launch.

They uncovered the damage during a thorough examination of Atlantis' thermal-protection system that surveyed the shuttle's wings, nose and underbelly.

The area in question is where the wing meets the underbelly on the orbiter's right side. The scratch stretches across four thermal tiles.

At a news conference this afternoon, lead flight director Tony Ceccacci said initial reports are that the scratches do not appear to be significant.

"To my untrained eye, I would think they are minor but, again, let those folks look at it," he said, referring to tile experts.

Imagery will be downlinked tonight and NASA will have a full report Wednesday. The astronauts initially had trouble downloading the best photos from the external tank camera.

...further in the article:

Full-Scale Rescue Mission Ready if Needed

But the mission is also the riskiest one ever attempted by the space program.

Not only could debris hit the orbiter during launch, which was what happened to Columbia, micro-meteorites could imperil the shuttle while the astronauts fix Hubble.

Hubble orbits about 350 miles above Earth, in an area with a higher density of debris. Two satellites collided over Siberia earlier this year, which has increased the risk even more, as junk from that collision drifts lower.

As soon as Atlantis fixes Hubble, and releases it back into orbit, it will immediately maneuver to a lower altitude to reduce the chances of getting hit by space junk.

The most dramatic step NASA has taken to reduce risk is the preparation of a full-scale rescue mission.

In the event that Atlantis sustains damages the crew cannot repair, a second space shuttle, Endeavor, is standing by on another launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center to rescue crew members.

STS 400 can be ready in three days if a rescue is necessary.

reply to post by billybobh3


Yes, it seems to me that it is a deliberate destruction of our credibility. Of course I don't have proof to back me up but it just seems fishy too me. Same with GM, who was one of the biggest technological contributors to the Apollo program. Again very fishy.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by timewalker]