A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Shuttle
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rescue shuttle planning update



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 30th 04, 02:17 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rescue shuttle planning update

http://www.floridatoday.com/news/spa...3004rescue.htm

Anyone know why they decided that returning 3 crew aboard soyuz early on is a
bad idea? That fascinates me. No matter what the crew is stranded. Better to
get the life support load dropped ASAP.

Beyond which it appears they have given up all thoughts of salvaging the
shuttle prefering to ditch it in the pacific. A irreplaceable orbiter.

Does soyuz have auto dock capacity like progress?

What they really need are a couple soyuz always ready for launch within a month
or less waiting in inventory.

Send 3 crew back onboard the at station soyuz, and launch two adfditional
unmanned soyuz to return the others.

Thuis news story raises lots of new questions
Hey this is my opinion
  #2  
Old March 30th 04, 02:28 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rescue shuttle planning update

Rescue shuttle planning update

Another question. If we ditch one of the remaining orbiters intentially in the
ocean should we really be concerned with long term station operations?

Can a fleet of TWO still support ISS?


Hey this is my opinion
  #4  
Old March 30th 04, 04:28 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rescue shuttle planning update



You spend months and months whining about "irreplaceable" the astronauts are
(even though you seem to know none, and have no idea what risks they are
willing to assume, or to not assume), and how they should launch the


Hey, Save the crew first! But avoid destroying a orbiter unnecessarily.

They should be upgraded to full unmanned landings.

Then if theres a bad failure you fix it as best possible and send it home
unmanned.

I accept that
your opinions are crap. I just wish you'd decide which version of crap they
are.

DF




Same back to you. If a orbiter was intentionally ditched you would be here no
doubt talking of how to continue the program with just 2 vehicles.

after all its a jobs program.
Hey this is my opinion
  #5  
Old March 30th 04, 04:30 PM
jeff findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rescue shuttle planning update

(bob haller) writes:

http://www.floridatoday.com/news/spa...3004rescue.htm

Anyone know why they decided that returning 3 crew aboard soyuz early on is a
bad idea? That fascinates me. No matter what the crew is stranded. Better to
get the life support load dropped ASAP.


The obvious reason is that the crew on ISS need to stay there because
they're trained to keep ISS going. You couldn't send back three
people from the shuttle, because they're not trained on Soyuz (and
would lack the properly fitted Russian spacesuits and custom seat
liners necessary). Besides, once a rescue shuttle arrives, if there
isn't a Soyuz at ISS, you've got to bring everyone home on the
shuttle, temporarily abandoning ISS (again leaving it without a crew
that knows how to fix things).

Beyond which it appears they have given up all thoughts of salvaging the
shuttle prefering to ditch it in the pacific. A irreplaceable orbiter.


Because they're finding it difficult enough just to get the crew back
home alive.

Does soyuz have auto dock capacity like progress?


This has been discussed before. Soyuz has flown unmanned in the past,
but the ability to do this with the current design is questionable.
You'd have to ask the Russians.

What they really need are a couple soyuz always ready for launch within a month
or less waiting in inventory.


If NASA were willing to *pay* for this to happen, the Russians would
surely do just about anything. Again, paying the Russians *cash* has
been discussed in the past. This is a difficult thing for the US
(NASA) to do. There are a *lot* of political roadblocks to overcome.

Send 3 crew back onboard the at station soyuz, and launch two adfditional
unmanned soyuz to return the others.


Again, not practical unless everyone has the proper training. I'm
sure NASA would prefer to do the rescue themselves.

Thuis news story raises lots of new questions
Hey this is my opinion


We all know what that's worth.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.
  #8  
Old March 30th 04, 07:40 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rescue shuttle planning update


In this case, intentional ditching is the alternative to a Columbia
like disaster with shuttle pieces raining down over several states.
Ditching the shuttle is safer for the people on the ground. The
Pacific Ocean is a whole lot of nothing. Dumping a shuttle on Texas,
California, or Florida in a futile attempt to recover it won't win
NASA any respect, especially if it kills someone on the ground.

This only shows that "human life" is only important to you if its NASA
astronauts. Your approach would be to save the all important NASA
astronauts, then damn the people on the ground by flying a broken
shuttle over their heads with no crew on board to help control it.

Your lack of logic and compassion for the general public is
appalling.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.


This has been discussed before. There are alternative landing sites that
wouldnt endanger people.

besides if theres a 4% chance of a breakup on reentry would you ditch it in the
pacific?
Hey this is my opinion
  #10  
Old March 30th 04, 10:15 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rescue shuttle planning update

bob haller wrote:
Anyone know why they decided that returning 3 crew aboard soyuz early on is a
bad idea? That fascinates me. No matter what the crew is stranded. Better to
get the life support load dropped ASAP.


Nop. The escape pod is there for a reason: in case of emergecy. A Shuttle
stranded at ISS isn't an "emergency" per say. They can stay there for quite
some time. But should there be a medical emergency, they need this.

Also, consider the progress crashing into Mir. It was the Soyuz that saved the
day because they were able to use it to re-orient the station so that solar
panels could produce sufficient power to reboot get station restarted
(especially computers that make the arrays track the sun for continued
electricity production.)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA to update media on results of key space shuttle summit Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 0 February 17th 04 06:46 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 February 2nd 04 04:33 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Manifest Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 October 6th 03 02:59 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Manifest Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.