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.

 

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

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ahnggk
Hope they make it home safe.

Columbia had the worst, they lost a tile I think...

I would make a close inspection of the tile if I were there. Maybe, softly test hammer it with some semi-hard object and see if it moves out of place or something.

Even better, since the Columbia disaster, they should've invented some sort of hand portable x-ray inspection device in case of situations like this..


No, you don't hammer those tiles with anything!
The tiles are fragile, half an inch thick, made of silicon glass. And every tile is individually shaped.

This makes mending them in space very difficult. Walking on the tiles is not a good idea, and more damage could be caused by attempting to mend them than they have already sustained.

This is why the mending of the Endeavour in '07 was so tricky. And this time they would not be docked at the space station while they did it.

It's not possible for the astronauts to take Atlantis to the Russian space station as the orbits are so different it would take more fuel than they carry to get there.

Even sending up the Endeavour to rescue them would be tricky, as they have no way to dock and could easily bump together, damaging both. And the chances are the Endeavour would also sustain damage from falling ice or foam during take-off.

I hope they all get back safely.




posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


Now dont go posting logical coherent thoughts, Thats not what the shuttle program is all about!



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   
It does make me wonder how NASA can mess up so badly when private companies like Armadillo Aerospace can win things like the Lunar Lander Challenge with the total cost to date at only $3.5million. Imagine what could be done with NASA's annual billions!



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I smell insurance scam lol...

Hey is there insurance taken out on the shuttles?

Screw one up retrieve the pilots with a second shuttle for public relations (too many have already died so would not look good to have dead astronauts on top of it too could topple NASA over even if the astronauts are insured)

Collect the insurance money build a new and better shuttle with alternative energies to decrease the cost of each mission etc.

Yes I'm just being funny but am interested if the shuttle does have insurance taken against it other than liability.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Its not like this is the first time hubble has been repaired

There have been four previous servicing missions to Hubble: Servicing Missions 1, 2, 3A and 3B. The upcoming Servicing Mission 4, (SM4) scheduled to launch May 11, 2009, will be the final trip to Hubble
source why all the hype about this one give me a break !!I think we are on the right trail here somthing smells fishy



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by paradiselost333
 



Becase the shuttle safety record was twice as good as it is today is why.

That and the media is bored. Come on Somali Pirates......board something! Britney! We need you......do something crazy.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
the problem is the new 'environmentally friendly' foam they use now.

the same foam that killed the challenger astronauts.

buying into the global warming hoax has consequences.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
It's probably because of the two satellites having collided
that NASA is being naturally cautious,
I don't see anything fishy about that,the Shuttle is in the
danger zone.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I'm trying to find some more info on the damage that the shuttle sustained. Yesterday they said they would review the photos sent back to NASA and report.

A soon as I can find something I'll post it.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Ok, so it seems the damage is extremely minor. Nothing to worry about.


Engineers continue to examine the images captured during Tuesday’s inspection of Atlantis’ thermal protection system and exterior surfaces. During that inspection, mission managers noted one area of damage on the forward part of the spacecraft where the wing blends into the fuselage. Initially it appears to be very minor and of no concern for the mission, and the flight team notified the crew late Tuesday that no focused inspection of that particular area is necessary.


Although I still feel there's more to it than they're letting on!

Time will tell!



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Goathief
 


I don't see what suborbital flights and a lunar lander competition funded by NASA itself have anything to do with a Space Shuttle.


the problem is the new 'environmentally friendly' foam they use now.

the same foam that killed the challenger astronauts.

buying into the global warming hoax has consequences.

Going to make up more?

[edit on 14/5/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darthorious
I smell insurance scam lol...

Hey is there insurance taken out on the shuttles?

...


No, the space shuttles have never been insured.

Shuttle insurance



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0bzz
reply to post by Goathief
 


I don't see what suborbital flights and a lunar lander competition funded by NASA itself have anything to do with a Space Shuttle.


NASA do not fund the entrants, don't try and spin it that way please (they pay $350,000 to the winner). Seems to me like NASA want to see how far the public sector is when it comes to private space flight/exploration, call me cynical if you like.

Anyway, it has everything to do with space shuttles and NASA in general - space flight is space flight, yes or no? We then compare operating budgets and what has been achieved; if the general public can create moon landers, commence suborbital flights and the like with a total cost of a paltry $3.5million (in the grand scheme of things) over the course of four years I'd say that beats NASAs achievements of the last four years with a budget of approximately $66billion! Oh, and we haven't got to the DoD & NSF's figures yet. Does that not make you want to question what NASA is spending the money on and why everything seems to go wrong? After all, it's not like space shuttles are new technology, far from it, they've been in operation for decades.

What do you reckon?



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by DohBama
the problem is the new 'environmentally friendly' foam they use now.

the same foam that killed the challenger astronauts.

buying into the global warming hoax has consequences.


NASA was exempted from the freon ban in 2001.
Freon free foam was not on the Challenger's exterior fuel tank because of environmentalists, it was on because NASA chose to use it.

As the earliest shuttle flights had exactly the same problem with foam coming off*, there is no reason to believe the foam had anything to do with it.

*Since the problem lies deep inside the foam rather than at its surface, an outer coating of paint would do little to stop this process. NASA records support this conjecture since the first two missions flown with a painted External Tank suffered just as much foam loss as those with an unpainted tank. Indeed, it is more likely that an extra coating on top of the foam would end up creating an even bigger problem by adding chunks of paint to the debris threatening the Orbiter.
Space Shuttle External Tank Foam Insulation

Only the earliest shuttle trips used a painted fuel tank.

The foam comes off for two reasons:
1. Air pockets in the foam expand and pop chunks of foam off,
2. Ice forms under the foam , melts during take-off and lifts foam off with it.

These both happen with any type of foam.


The biggest trouble with freon, by the way, was its destruction of ozone, causing enlargement of the whole in the ozone layer. Since its use was discontinued, the hole has been shrinking.



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Anyway, it has everything to do with space shuttles and NASA in general - space flight is space flight, yes or no?

Space flight is space flight - however their are obviously varying levels of it, the same way a paper plane is different to a stealth fighter. I dare say, their is a rather large difference between an airplane that zoom climbs to 100 kilometres on a ballistic trajectory, and one that can lift 25,000 kilograms into permanant orbit.


We then compare operating budgets and what has been achieved;

It would be more accurate to compare the programme costs for various programmes. This is because it's not NASA's obligation to create suborbital flights and moon landers - but very broad research (ATC systems, for example).


if the general public can create moon landers, commence suborbital flights and the like with a total cost of a paltry $3.5million (in the grand scheme of things) over the course of four years I'd say that beats NASAs achievements of the last four years with a budget of approximately $66billion!

Sure relative to the money spent private companies can acheive far more. However the actual acheivements are on a whole different scale. Unless I'm mistaken NASA's budget is less than 18 billion.


Oh, and we haven't got to the DoD & NSF's figures yet.

Sure, but they are not aimed at space exploration.


Does that not make you want to question what NASA is spending the money on and why everything seems to go wrong? After all, it's not like space shuttles are new technology, far from it, they've been in operation for decades.

What exactly has gone wrong?

[edit on 14/5/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Ok latest from ABC News, they ae going to use the booom to inspect the underside of the shuttle:


"We are going to inspect the vehicle to the same standards as a [space] station mission," Altman told ABC News before the launch. "We are doing that by using the boom out there with the sensors on it." A boom attached to the end of the shuttle's robot arm was moved slowly over Atlantis' wings and underside Tuesday, with a camera and laser to look for potential damage.


abcnews.go.com...

Lets hope it comes up blank. I really do admire those guys up there!



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Hahah I find it quite funny and sad at the same time. Not only can we as human beings manage to destroy and pollute our own planet but we have managed to destroy and pollute space as well to the point where we can't even fly one space ship up there without hitting "space junk". Human beings are pathetic.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 




# Crew Completing Tile Survey Fri, 15 May 2009 12:27:03 PM GMT Astronaut Megan McArthur is powering up the shuttle's robotic arm to do a quick survey of some tiles on the shuttle's underbelly that were missed during the Flight Day 2 inspection. It's an exercise to just to complete the imagery. There are no issues. The survey should last about 45 minutes.


Still looking good. Hope it all goes well.

www.nasa.gov...



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


UPDATE*UPDATE*UPDATE

Ok so it's been a while since this thread has had any relevance, howver it won't be long until they are re-entering the Earth's Atmosphere. According to NASA:


Late inspection of Atlantis' heat shield is scheduled to begin at around 12:51 p.m. EDT.


So we will find out if there are any problems associated with the scratch suffered once and fro all.

www.nasa.gov...



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join