backtop


Print 26 comment(s) - last by delphinus100.. on Jul 16 at 12:18 PM


Video from Atlantis shows the ISS before docking  (Source: msnbc.msn.com)

  (Source: National Geographic)
With NASA retiring its Space Shuttle fleet, this was an important moment in NASA history, as it may be awhile before another launch takes place

This year has proved to be an important one for NASA, as it has retired two of the three remaining operational orbiters in its Space Shuttle fleet. Space shuttle Discovery made its final mission in February, and Space shuttle Endeavour completed its last jaunt in June. On July 8, the third and final spacecraft, Space shuttle Atlantis, launched into space one last time before its retirement as well. 

Now, NASA is happy to announce that Atlantis made its final docking at the International Space Station (ISS) on Sunday. Two hours after docking, the four-person crew, which consists of Commander Chris Ferguson, Pilot Doug Huley and Mission Specialists Sandy Magnus and Rex Walheim, entered the ISS to hug and take pictures with the six-person crew in the ISS. With NASA retiring its Space Shuttle fleet, this was an important moment in NASA history, as it may be awhile before another launch takes place.

While Atlantis arrived safely to the ISS, the trip up until that point wasn't entirely smooth. Before docking, one of the shuttle's computers failed during a morning power-up. According to Atlantis' Lead Flight Director Kwatsi Alibaruho, the on-off switches need to be flipped on a certain way, otherwise they cause a glitch. The computer was taken offline, allowing the remaining two computers, which work simultaneously for the sake of redundancy, to take over. The shuttle also has two spare computers if needed. 

In addition, Atlantis' mission management Team Leader LeRoy Cain noted that a piece of space junk is expected to come close to the ISS and shuttle on Tuesday, but it is not 100 percent confirmed yet. Cain also was unsure of the size of the piece of space junk, but said that Atlantis could "fire its thrusters to move the station out of the way."

Despite these minor troubles, Atlantis has docked and plans to continue doing what the crew went there to do: resupply the ISS. The 12-day mission (which may now be a 13-day mission due to extra time needed for moving cargo), STS-135, is delivering spare parts, clothes, food and experiments via the Raffaello multipurpose logistics module. The supplies are expected to last through the end of 2012.

Today, the crew is using the station's robotic arm to move the Raffaello multipurpose logistics module out of the shuttle's payload bay and connect it to the ISS to retrieve the cargo. A spacewalk is scheduled for Tuesday, but most of the trip will require the moving of cargo and extra help around the ISS.

While many see the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet as the end, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden assures that NASA is only retiring the "launching-to-orbit business," but has big plans for the future.

"I would encourage the American public to listen to the president," said Bolden. "The president has set the goals: an asteroid in 2025, Mars in 2030. I can't get any more definitive than that."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Sad to see the end of an era!
By TheCastle on 7/11/2011 1:51:01 PM , Rating: 4
Its ironic to me that the whole reason that America got into the space race was because the Russians (our enemies) were threatening to take the high ground and the fear was waging war from space. But it looks like they beat us as 50 years later America has quit going into space and decided to outsource space travel to the Russians. 50-60 million tax payer dollars will be used to pay our former (?) enemy the privilege of flying 4 astronauts a year to the Space Station that we America built with the Space Shuttles.

Its sad to see that America after building the world's only 7+ passenger reusable space plane (japan and Russia both tried and failed), the most advanced space craft ever designed (not perfect mind you). Has given up on space travel.

The whole lets leave it to private industry while an interesting move is really nothing new. None of america's space craft were ever built by NASA. The Space Shuttles were made by Boeing Corporation in Palmdale california, Operated by United Space Alliance, SRB's built by morton thicol in utah, Lockheed martin built the external fuel tanks. Yet the media keeps portraying that space flight needs to go private, as if it wasn't.

I guess Lockheed, Boeing, etc. Can't build a good spacecraft, so were going to turn over america's space future to a web developer who's never built a space ship, that will be re-hased appollo capsule. Some progress there.

To bad America has decided in Space as in many other area's to let Russia, China, India lead and we outsource to our competitors.

America is failing to dream big.




RE: Sad to see the end of an era!
By vortmax2 on 7/11/2011 2:43:30 PM , Rating: 2
Great write-up...couldn't be more true.


RE: Sad to see the end of an era!
By delphinus100 on 7/11/2011 8:53:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess Lockheed, Boeing, etc. Can't build a good spacecraft, so were going to turn over america's space future to a web developer who's never built a space ship, that will be re-hased appollo capsule. Some progress there.


I thought the real proof was whether the thing works or not. By that standard, Dragon looks pretty good, so far. Elon didn't do it himself, he hired rocket engineers, just like anyone else does.

Of course, they're not the only Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) partner with NASA.

There's a still unnamed vehicle from Blue Origin (gee, another Internet guy).

The Dream Chaser, a lifting body from Sierra Nevada Corp. (hey, a 'real' aerospace firm!)

And the CST-100, another ballistic capsule from...(drum-roll) Boeing .

And though not part of CCDev (nor is it quite clear as to how it will be used), the MPCV/Orion capsule is still very much under development by Lockheed-Martin .

It'll be a little while before they fly, but I imagine the last two will ultimately fall into the category of 'good spacecraft'

Happy now?

NASA learned at least one thing from the Shuttle experience: Don't fully depend on one design for all your manned spacecraft needs. If one of the above suffers a serious problem, everything doesn't grind to a halt until investigations and fixes are done. Commercial users of manned space (and there will be, Boeing and Bigelow Aerospace [gasp..inflatable space stations started by a hotel guy] already have serious prospects) will feel the same way.

And just for comparison, the first stage of the Saturn 1B was made by a manufacturer of...cars.

(Chrysler)


By delphinus100 on 7/16/2011 12:18:06 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Sad to see the end of an era!
By Solandri on 7/11/2011 9:20:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess Lockheed, Boeing, etc. Can't build a good spacecraft, so were going to turn over america's space future to a web developer who's never built a space ship, that will be re-hased appollo capsule. Some progress there.

Lockheed and Boeing make lots of great spacecraft. Lockheed makes the Trident and Polaris missiles (suborbital and hopefully we never have to use them yes, but they're still spacecraft. Boeing absorbed the McDonnell Douglas' Delta rocket line, probably the most successful launch vehicle in U.S. history. They also were a partner in the Sea Launch program. Both Lockheed and Boeing worked together for the Atlas series of launch vehicles.

The problem isn't that they suck at making spacecraft. They're some of the most successful spacecraft manufacturers on earth. The problem is that sending humans into space is horrendously expensive with little added value over unmanned craft. The only way you can do it competitively with unmanned spacecraft is with massive government subsidies. That's what the U.S. and USSR did during the Cold War. That's what Russia does now (some of NASA's payments for Soyuz flights are just to keep their manned space program afloat). And that's what China is starting to do.

The space race during the Cold War sidetracked us and probably put us decades behind where we could have been. Instead of approaching the problem of putting people in orbit in a systematic manner (e.g. the X-15 program),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_X-15
we took the horribly expensive shortcut of pure rockets to get people up there ASAP.

The best way towards a successful cost-effective manned space program isn't throwing billions into wasteful launch vehicles which accomplish 1/10th what you could for the same money on unmanned vehicles, just so you can point and brag about how you have a man in space. It's to focus on developing alternate more cost-effective launch strategies, then using them to assist the manned program. The goal shouldn't merely be to have a man in space, it should be to be able to put people in space repeatedly at minimal cost.


"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki