Space Shuttle to fly again tomorrow

[Dis]

Unless we find a faster way to get to mars, I'm against it.

It may be possible to survive and reach mars. But what of the mental stability of being locked in a can for over a year? I have seen reports of the mental stability of that cosmonaut who was trapped aboard the space station Mir for a very long time. And a report that mental confusion may have led to a crash of a docking module with Mir.

[reds4ever]

At what cost? A manned Mars mission would cripple NASA for the next 20 years. I'd much prefer go with the probes and get a good idea what our solar system was like rather than spend a fortune to send men to take samples of iron oxide (that a probe could do anyway).

[reds4ever]

DP

[Odin]

Originally posted by Dis
mars isn't realistic. I'm against any manned missions to mars.

We have to take the first steps towards colonization somehow.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Odin


We have to take the first steps towards colonization somehow.

how about we fix our planet insted.

hasn't history shown the ill effects of colonization on native people's and lifeforms?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Odin
We have to take the first steps towards colonization somehow.

Yes, by building an infrastructure, not sending individuals on pointless missions to Mars.

A permanent lunar base

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Yes, by building an infrastructure, not sending individuals on pointless missions to Mars.

A permanent lunar base

permanent lunar bases!

heck, how about some lagrange point space stations? that would be an even easier and extremely useful bit of infrastructure. Unlike these crappy temporary low earth orbit space stations.

[Kuciwalker]

Yeah, lagrange point bases too

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Dis
It may be possible to survive and reach mars. But what of the mental stability of being locked in a can for over a year?

This is also a field of study for the Mars mission. The space agencies are very aware of the problem. And though this problem is tolerable on the ISS (because the astronauts remain only a few monthes), it will be unbearable on a Mars mission. This is why they have now decided to actually act on the problem, by studying it, and by hopefully becoming able to stop them.

Incidentally, the tackling of such psychological problem is a necessary element of the creation of living conditions in extremely hostile environments.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Yes, by building an infrastructure, not sending individuals on pointless missions to Mars.

A permanent lunar base

IIRC, it's one step in the mission to Mars, as per NASA guidelines.

[Winston]

Moon, Mars & Beyond

And, just for old times' sake...

[Winston]

So, the launch is still on for 10:39 EDT tomorrow, that's 16:39 CET. It seems everything is proceeding according to plans.

If interested, you can watch the launch live at NASA TV

Here's an excerpt of the latest news release from www.nasa.gov:

NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, along with the Mission Management Team (MMT) announced at Sunday afternoon's launch readiness press conference that Discovery is on track for a Tuesday launch.

Wayne Hale gave a show-and-tell presentation of a fuel sensor module and described how they're used in the External Tank. "We have completed all of our ambient temperature checks. We have run every test we could think of and so far no repeat."

Hale went on to say "If the problem recurs and under very closely defined circumstances in sensor #2 or sensor #4 then we will do some more tests and if we are comfortable that we have a good understanding then we can go fly ... We are ready to go launch Tuesday morning. If things go our way we'll see our first Space Shuttle launch in 2 and a half years."

Shuttle Weather Officer, 1st Lt. Mindy Chavez, reported that the development of cumulus clouds, stray showers or anvil clouds could be a concern at launch time. The chance of Kennedy weather cooperating for the launch remains at 60 percent.

Flight systems and ground support hardware are ready and the flight crew and support teams are eagerly looking forward to a successful launch on Tuesday.

The countdown clock came to life at the T-43 hour mark and immediately began counting down toward a liftoff Tuesday at 10:39 a.m. EDT.

Go Discovery

[DanS]

Originally posted by reds4ever
At what cost? A manned Mars mission would cripple NASA for the next 20 years. I'd much prefer go with the probes and get a good idea what our solar system was like rather than spend a fortune to send men to take samples of iron oxide (that a probe could do anyway).

I daresay that $16 billion per annum, with regular step increases, should be enough to do both.

[korn469]

I'm going to be there tommorrow, hopefully NASA will launch it!

[DRoseDARs]

I'm sure the anti-shuttle / space program naysayers will love this...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050726/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle

NASA May Bend Rules to Launch Discovery

By MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer
10 minutes ago



CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - With the countdown entering its final hours and a fuel gauge problem still unexplained, NASA said it is prepared to bend its long-standing safety rules to launch the shuttle Tuesday on the first flight since Columbia's doomed mission 2 1/2 years ago.

Discovery and a crew of seven were set to blast off for the international space station at 10:39 a.m., after a two-week delay caused by a malfunctioning hydrogen fuel gauge in the spaceship's giant external tank.

Nature, rather than the fuel gauge, could ultimately decide whether Discovery takes off. Forecasters put the odds of good launch weather at 60 percent, with rain and storm clouds both posing threats.

NASA had the paperwork ready to go in case the equipment trouble reappeared and the space agency's managers decided to press ahead with the launch with just three of the four fuel gauges working. That would mean deviating from a rule instituted after the 1986 Challenger explosion.

"It's an acceptable risk and actually it's quite a low one," NASA Administrator Michael Griffin said in an interview with The Associated Press late Monday afternoon. If the same fuel gauge problem occurs, "we would be good to go," he said. "If we see some other signature than what we saw before, then we're not going. We're absolutely not going."

The fuel gauges are designed to prevent the main engines from running too long or not long enough, in case the fuel tank is leaking or some other major breakdown occurs. An engine shutdown at the wrong time could prove catastrophic, forcing the astronauts to attempt a risky emergency landing overseas, or leading to a ruptured engine.

Griffin noted that multiple failures would have to occur in multiple systems for the worst-case scenario to come true.

Only two gauges, or sensors, are needed to do the job. But ever since NASA's return to space in 1988, the space agency has decreed that all four have to work to proceed with launch.

NASA test director Pete Nickolenko said he did not remember the last time one of these launch rules was waived. But he expressed confidence in NASA's game plan and said the space agency had done everything to understand the fuel gauge problem, which first cropped up during a test in April and resurfaced during the launch attempt July 13.

Over the past few days, NASA rewired two of the sensors to try to diagnose the trouble and repaired faulty electrical grounding aboard Discovery in hopes that would solve it.

"We have addressed everything we know on the shuttle that can go wrong that we have the technology to fix," Griffin told the AP.

But a retired agent in NASA's inspector general office, Joseph Gutheinz, said the space agency does not appear to have learned its lesson with Columbia.

"It is clear to me that NASA continues to put mission over safety," Gutheinz said. "I fear that if NASA is wrong this time, as they were for Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia, manned space missions may be halted for a very long time in the United States."

Randy Avera, a former NASA engineer who helped develop the shuttle's inspection program, also questioned the space agency's willingness to bend the launch rule. He said it reminds him of the thinking that led to the Challenger accident, which was blamed on a cold-stiffened O-ring seal in a booster rocket and NASA inattention to safety.

Columbia was doomed by a a chunk of foam insulation that broke off the fuel tank at liftoff and damaged the wing. The shuttle disintegrated during its return to Earth on Feb. 1, 2003, killing all seven astronauts. The accident was blamed, in part, on NASA's "broken safety culture," or a tendency to downplay risks.

Some family members of the fallen Columbia astronauts planned to return for launch try No. 2. The VIP list was topped by first lady Laura Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, her brother-in-law.

Discovery has only until the beginning of August to fly to the space station on a 12-day supply and repair mission; the next launch opportunity will not come until Sept. 9.

The launch window is dictated by the space station's position and NASA's insistence on a daylight liftoff to provide good views for the more than 100 cameras that will be checking for any Columbia-type launch damage.

While in orbit, Discovery's crew will inspect the most vulnerable areas of the spacecraft, using a new 50-foot, laser-tipped boom, and practice repairing samples of deliberately damaged thermal tile and panels.

Griffin said only two other shuttle missions in the history of the program were as significant: the first one in 1981 and the 1988 return to flight after the loss of Challenger.

"If we were to lose another shuttle, I think obviously the shuttle program would be out of business and the United States would be years away from putting another crew of people in space," he said. "The initiation of President Bush's call to return the U.S. to the moon and go to Mars would be delayed. And of course — of course, of course, of course — seven people would be killed. So there's a lot riding on this launch."

___

On the Net:

NASA: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov