Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Space Shuttle Atlantis

Lunar93

By Lunar93
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

Vega

Vega

Posted
Posted

Yep, I will be watching it online... and if the weather permits... have a look outside about 20 minutes after launch as it will be crossing Europe at this time. (usually meaning it's visible from the UK running along the Southern horizon from WSW to E ish). How high in the sky it gets depends on your latitude. It reached about 30-40 deg from my location (+51), not as bright as ISS but easily visible. Heavens-Above doesn't put the very first few orbits up but they still happen!

I wish them a successful mission :icon_jokercolor:

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

Just reading that report on the 2005 July launch delay, which also was due to faulty fuel tank sensors. They were traced to a faulty batch.

Now forgive me if I baulk a bit at this, but this July 2005 flight, was very important in view of the Columbia horror in 2003.

A faulty batch they said. How on earth could this happen. These devices were obviously manufactured specifically for the main fuel tanks supplying the supply to the shuttles engines on lift off. The importance of these sensors don't need stressing, as it goes without saying, yet they actually admitted that a whole batch were faulty. Now in anybody's book, that situation has to be totally unacceptable, and the people responsible for the manufacture of those components, should have been excluded immediately as suppliers of anything remotely connected to the shuttles build. A consequence for not taking their work seriously. There was no quality control, rigorous testing, including test to destruction procedures, otherwise these faulty sensors would never have reached the stores.

Am I being too critical here?. It's just that both shuttle disaster are still quite vivid in my memory, and reading reports that stipulate not one, but batches of faulty components, make my blood run cold.

Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
supernova

supernova

Posted
Posted

Just reading that report on the 2005 July launch delay, which also was due to faulty fuel tank sensors. They were traced to a faulty batch.

Now forgive me if I baulk a bit at this, but this July 2005 flight, was very important in view of the Columbia horror in 2003.

A faulty batch they said. How on earth could this happen. These devices were obviously manufactured specifically for the main fuel tanks supplying the supply to the shuttles engines on lift off. The importance of these sensors don't need stressing, as it goes without saying, yet they actually admitted that a whole batch were faulty. Now in anybody's book, that situation has to be totally unacceptable, and the people responsible for the manufacture of those components, should have been excluded immediately as suppliers of anything remotely connected to the shuttles build. A consequence for not taking their work seriously. There was no quality control, rigorous testing, including test to destruction procedures, otherwise these faulty sensors would never have reached the stores.

Am I being too critical here?. It's just that both shuttle disaster are still quite vivid in my memory, and reading reports that stipulate not one, but batches of faulty components, make my blood run cold.

Ron.

You are Right Ron but the trouble today is the cheapest is the best. I remember one Astronaut saying here I am sitting on top of the Saturn V every part supplied by the cheapest tender and I am going to the Moon on that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

The Atlantis launch has been now abandoned, and the next attempt will take place in January. They have decided I would guess, that the fault is not going to fix itself, so they will now take a long look at the problem, and try to work out why the sensor is being contrary.

I think it's time they had tests available to simulate fuelling up the tank, long before it gets to the pad. It would save them a whole load of bucks, if not time. At least it will give the crew a lot more time to fret. Even though these people are well trained, they have got to be concerned over events like this.

Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beamish

beamish

Posted
Posted

not so much cheap as built without any clear consensus re it's mission and purpose, ever decreasing budgets,and NASA's need to keep too many people "happy" (politically), plus ever changing specifications(contractors constantly being squeezed for more for less). This just meant it was a bit of a cobble job. NASA originally wanted to keep pay loads and crew separate, they felt strongly this was the safer option. Crew in a craft, not too dissimilar to that which they are proposing to build now as a replacement for the shuttle and pay loads to go up and rendezvous with crew. NASA was at the time struggling to avoid extinction following a serious drop in political and financial support after the Apollo missions, bare in mind the government was coming under increasing pressures over Vietnam at the time and public support for this kind of spending was just not there any more. At the height of the Apollo project, NASA was sucking 5% of the USA government annual budget. Cutting out further Apollo missions was one way of reducing the financial burden to Nixon's tenure as President and giving them a fighting chance of securing new ventures.

I can thoroughly recommend the book,very enlightening to all the in's and out's that was thee making of NASA and of course the man that made it all possible.

Karlo

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vega

Vega

Posted
Posted

Not to mention the fact that its also strapped to a big fat red thing filled with a gazzilion gallons of supercooled fuel thats gonna get you from 0 to 22,000 mph in about 8 minutes not leaving a drop left :shock:

The fleet might be getting long in the tooth but I can't help being wowed by these beasts. I love watching the whole thing flex forward in the second before take-off where the main engines cut in, seeing the intense white-blue cone shaped thrust come out of the three engines. Then the SRB's kick-in pounding the ground beneath them like 2 gigantic piledrivers :icon_jokercolor::embarassed:)

Ever watched this live news take-off on youtube taken from 10 miles away.... That thing makes one hell of a racket once it clears the tower :shock: Unfortunately it's columbia taking off 11 days before it's ill fated re-entry, but the sound is simply awesome (especially like the delay as the sound takes a while to reach the viewing site).

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

Not to mention the fact that its also strapped to a big fat red thing filled with a gazzilion gallons of supercooled fuel thats gonna get you from 0 to 22,000 mph in about 8 minutes not leaving a drop left :shock:

The fleet might be getting long in the tooth but I can't help being wowed by these beasts. I love watching the whole thing flex forward in the second before take-off where the main engines cut in, seeing the intense white-blue cone shaped thrust come out of the three engines. Then the SRB's kick-in pounding the ground beneath them like 2 gigantic piledrivers :icon_jokercolor::embarassed:)

Ever watched this live news take-off on youtube taken from 10 miles away.... That thing makes one hell of a racket once it clears the tower :shock: Unfortunately it's columbia taking off 11 days before it's ill fated re-entry, but the sound is simply awesome (especially like the delay as the sound takes a while to reach the viewing site).

Matt

Awesome sight, and sound Matt. Although I was enthralled watching and listening to that launch, and marvel at the raw courage of the people who ride these powerfull machines, it was tinged with a lot of sadness, to remember that those seven people did not return to their homes.

I am sure we can all hope and pray that we never see any more tragedies such as Challenger and Columbia. I only hope that future generations do remember these people, who's pioneering spirit paved the way for the eventuall benefits to mankind, that are going arise from the conquest of the dangerous environment that is space.

Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vega

Vega

Posted
Posted

Here here.. one of the main reasons I never complain about the launch delays... safety first, space exploration second. Tis a shame it's 'that' mission, but I cant find any other launches from that vantage point on youtube.

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.